My impression is that Asobo purposely under-engineered the two helicopters included with the SU11 update in order to not compete with future releases by third party developers. Therefore, I think the obvious physics omissions present, despite platform support, was probably intended.
Both SU helos are more demonstrator models as much as anything else. Hopefully, future third party releases will expand upon the new physics without having to compete directly with Microsoft stock helos.
I never expected the helicopters to be close to real, as they have shown after 2 years many of their planes aren’t.
Most disappointed in lack of grass being blown around, they must have some stiff species in the sim!
Still very happy there is 2 more helicopters to add to my flying collection, the 407 is clearly not complete by far… Lets hope it gets more love.
All default aircraft, with the exception now of the A310, are IMO proof of concept.
The dev team at HPG are already pushing out beta builds of the H145 with the new CFD airflow. The amazing things Dave at HPG has done with the H145 when helicopters we not supported…I can only imagine what the H145 is going to turn into after he works on the new CFD model.
Fascinating to read the responses here. Compelled to chime in because, whilst there will clearly be further development, I think Asobo has done an excellent job in taking their first step.
Someone said they wanted to hear from more IRL heli pilots? I have flown on FlightSims since FS1. It started my career in aviation and then Military aviation. I flew helicopters on FlightSim later on, for seven years, before ultimately jumping from Air Force to Navy IRL to chase the rewards that come with Rotary flight!
Types flown are varied - R-44, As350BA, EC135 etc.
The 407 is similar to the Squirrel - limited stability systems, hydraulic controls, and so on. I have not flown the 407, but I have friends currently flying that machine.
I also spend ridiculous hours flying in VR each week (after work as a PMC SF Pilot in the Middle East) on MSFS and DCS (with every rotary module available).
I agree, you could factor in more immersive effects - vibration, dust etc. Historically, you know that will come in time. Keep in mind that the 407 has a four-blade main rotor too tho - it will always be smoother than a two-blade teetering head system like the Huey.
The flight physics, with assists off, are excellent. I honestly was not expecting too much, but I also agree with an earlier poster - harder does not mean better! VRS in DCS is the stuff of cold sweats and nightmares! I know, IRL, it is easy to get the HIP into VRS. The Hind was drawn from the same initial platform, but heavier and less visibility - it’s worse, and that is probably realistic too.
To get into VRS in an aircraft like the 407 is nowhere near as easy. You have to be mishandling the aircraft or making a mistake. VRS is not instant - it develops like a re-ingested ‘donut’ of air around the outer portions of the disc. You have to be perpendicular to the upwards flow through the disc, with a bit of collective in, for it to start to form. Examples? Accidents in the past, for single turbine helicopters of this size; steep approaches to a confined area with a tailwind (smooth and steady control inputs) or a quick stop with a slight tailwind and a small rate of descent (rolled a sheriffs 407 up in a ball during a display in the US).
The fact that the 407 does not ‘seem’ to get into VRS right now, does not mean that it is not possible. I will fly it and see if I can get that to happen. Now I am curious…. But that’s the point! I have spent hours flying the 407 on the sim already and I have not felt the urge to prove that it won’t do extreme things that you would try and avoid? You are far better off practicing precision hovering, accurate quick stops, 180 degree quick stops, confined areas, slope landings (the 407 is the best sim I have ever flown for accurate response to slope landing techniques!).
I remember when GotGravel came out with their mods - the flight models were/are so incredibly rewarding. There are already performance mods out for the 407. I only hope they don’t make the aircraft twitchy and difficult for the sake of it.
To that end, there are some comments that reveal some gaps in knowledge also regards rotary flying. A poster mentioned ‘no button for trimming the pedal displacement’. That doesn’t exist IRL for a small turbine. When you get into the EC135 and above, yes you start to have all sorts of features (like auto-trim). Those features help for the ‘role’ that the aircraft is to perform, but it becomes far more procedural. A slope landing in an EC135 for example involves a lot of holding attitude, trimming, lowering collective, holding attitude, trimming etc. I much prefer flying the Squirrel. It is more hands-and-feet with the power/reliability of a turbine, and little in the way of stability systems. We would also fly ‘floppy stick’ (no centering) and hydraulics-off circuits. The larger frames like EC135/EC145 run twin engines, FADEC, auto-compensation for engine failures, complex autopilots systems etc. Great for SAR/Medivac for example - but less ‘fun’ IMO. Just a personal preference.
I once piloted a Blackhawk for 40min. A real privilege. In the hover the QHI progressively disabled the THREE stability augmentations systems until there was just a direct link between my control inputs and the response from the helicopter. At that stage it was a lot more like the DCS Huey than the MSFS EC145;-). Which one of those four flight models would be the ‘correct’ one for MSFS?
The pedal forces in a small turbine helicopter are ( very) light, and there is no centering. You use the pressure of one foot against the other for refined control and in cruise there’s very little displacement required. I use Virpil’s pedals (and cyclic/collective) with the lightest spring centering I can find. I am also designing my own pedals to have the same ‘feel’ as the Squirrel, because the articulation of the pedal is different.
A poster mentioned the dangers of VRS in the V-22? Yes. It has killed people in the past. The real danger there though is the fact that one rotor system will go into VRS before the other, losing lift and initiating a roll/spiral that cannot be recovered if you are closer to the ground. The accident itself; it was found that the pilot, with a fixed wing background, was flying at three times the flight manual limitation to avoid VRS in the first place. I am wary of those comments because many died. The losses are never forgotten; as with the recent Texas tragedy. So incredibly sad…
My advice then? Get a book (wagtendonks principles of helicopter flight is excellent). Study it. Improve your knowledge, understanding and skills. Take a famil flight in a helicopter at your local field. Try some hovering. Use that as a reference. When you get back into the sim, invest is some quality controls and always remember that the most powerful immersion tool is your own mind; your approach to the simulation process in general.
Be patient. The floodgates are about to open with all sorts of amazing rotorcraft, with tremendous immersion features. If you REALLY want a challenge, fly the payware Bell 47. I guarantee, ALL of your rotary performance will improve across the board with that experience.
And thank you so much to the developers at Asobo for getting the intrinsic support for rotor-heads like us into the sim at last 
Great post, the more I read, the more I thought I’d somehow written it myself and forgotten that I had!
I learned the basics with the British Army in the early 80s and flying top cover for patrols in a non-SAS equipped gazelle over Belfast night after night taught me much about VRS and its incipient characteristics as well as full blown recovery techniques when I ignored the warnings.
As you point out, modern helicopters run on rails, my 12 years single pilot on 135s for UK police forces were Childs play in comparison.
I would echo your advice that those new to helicopters should spend their time on perfecting the basics of flight and by the time that’s mastered Asobo and third party providers should be producing ever better updates.
The old adage comes to mind…
At 50 hours you think you’ll never know it all…At 500 hours you think you know it all…At 5000 hours you know you’ll never know it all!
I fully agree with the OP!
It’s basically impossible to induce a Vortex Ring State (VRS) currently in FS2020 with the Bell 407 and also with that little other thing (called “Guimbal”, right?).
I read somewhere that in order to get into a VRS is by having a descent rate above 300 feet per minute and at a (forward) speed below translational lift. But if you do this in both the Bell 407 or Guimbal you’ll never get a descent rate above 300 feet per minute. Generally all you manage is a descent rate of 200 feet per minute or at best you can sometimes get close to 300 (but never exceeding it!).
So can this be the reason or one of the reasons behind this issue?
Another thing I tried is to activate the Aerodynamic Visualization (CFD) and while I’m no expert in air fluid dynamics, I believe I’ve seen situations where the lift was being generated above the main rotor and thus a VRS should be happening but no, nothing happened and all it took was just a little bit of collective to recover.
It’s not a helicopter flight simulation, it’s a simulation of the visuals from inside a helicopter while it’s flying. It’s what they care about the most. Based on real world results.
I have absolutely zero surprise that the long awaited helicopters are arcade mode facades.
The helicopter flight model in MSFS still needs significant work in most areas. Hope it will be improved in the next sim update. All third party helicopters are affected by this, including Cowansim which currently has the best helicopters for MSFS. Will stick with X-plane for helicopter flying for now.
I agree the buit-in flight model still seems to need a lot of work from Asobo before 3rd parties like Cowansim can provide really good helicopters.
Until then, FlyInside’s custom flight model implementation is probably the best way to enjoy helicopters in MSFS. Their 206 is really good (as far as I can tell, I am no expert), and their 47G should be getting an update soon to bring it to the same standard.
Force feedback and/or force trim are must. I don’t touch helicopters after I made a few tries at the first release.
Personally, I feel the Asobo implementation is off to a good start.
The FlyInside helicopters are my least favorite of the flight models at this point. Not bad, just least favorite.
I find that the Cowansim models fly almost identical to their Xplane twins…and both sims fly very much like the real world versions I have flown that I can compare.
Yes, there is more work to be done, but progress is being made.
The G2 is really good. The 407 is much improved from initial release, and the core rotor simulation is robust enough for a good 3rd party launch.
Systems modeling is where MSFS needs the most attention.
Hi Belatu, I always like reading your feedback and watching your videos on YouTube.
What do you think of the reports that after the SU12 update the torque effect is far too weak and anti-torque pedals are almost unecessary? (See the latest posts in the 407 thread in the official feedback forum).
I haven‘t tried it out yet myself.
I’m not super hyped for 100% data accuracy. So much is done SOTP in real helis, I just like the model behaves as I expect it to and I can look at a spot and get it there like I thought it would. Sometimes things are modeled on a screen leaving you chasing what you are seeing that would be otherwise completely subconscious as a pilot. Drive 5 miles down a road and then have someone ask exactly what you did to get there. Lucky if you can remember actively dodging a pothole. I don’t want the flight model nerfed, I just want to feel connected, where I can glance around while flying and not return my view to center and find chaos.
I wonder if you set up a gauge to measure pedal pressure when flying straight and level on a flight last week, then ask a pilot to replicate the position with zero feedback on the ground on a set of plastic pedals, and see if they hit the same numbers.
https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/bell-407/554987/847?u=belatu42
I think the B407 is pretty good. It flies believably like a helicopter. It behaves as I would expect, but is still very distinct from the Cowansim B206, MD500E & H125.
Maybe you should try and yank the cyclic and see what happends…
I would expect large, abrupt control inputs to have adverse effects on the rotor disk. Bad things happen when you yank the controls. Or bad things have happened, and now you are yanking on the controls…
Smooth, small, deliberate corrections is what rotorcraft flying is all about.
Maybe you should yank the cyclic just to see if it behaves realistic.
Maybe you cant tell a bad FM from a good if you just feather the controlls.
I am really tired of this, how hard can it be to start a flight with the 407 ( or any of the mscenery choppers) and pull the cyclic up or down, without compensate with tail rotor, and see where it goes?
It goes very hard to the right, instead if down/up.
And this I would say is not realistic, the pull to the right is probably realistic, but the amount/force/speed it does it in is certainly not, and it starts a very bad circle of spinning to the right since all other cyclic movements will pull it even more right.
So now everybody on all kinds of threads that tries to teach me how to fly this thing anyway and think I cant fly it, please stop that and try upsetting it instead and lets fix this thing!
There was a huge problem with gran turismo a few years back and MR cars just wasnt driveable, but there was this group claiming thats how these cars was in the real world! They where hard to deive and you would have to learn and adapt, ”its you that is the problem, not the physics model”.
Wel it turned out that they had swapped the tires around on all MR cars so they had tiny ones in the back and very fat in the front, making them turn in extremly well but not back end grip…
Its was very apparent!
Still people defended it!
Now its just as easy to see that this 407 is all wrong, but still somehow its me thats the problem…
Yank the cyclic people! THEN tell me it behaves like it should!
I literally did respond to this in the other thread…
Again, do you want Solutions or Comfort?
https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/bell-407/554987/829?u=elasticsack182
The controls are all related. If you abruptly move the cyclic and don’t adjust the anti-torque pedals or collective, the helicopter will abruptly pitch and yaw in response. Every control movement, requires an equal movement of the other two.
This is expected and realistic behavior.
With my setup, the B407 is responding to a full range of control inputs the way that I would expect. I have flown it on the edge of extreme maneuvering, beyond what I would feel comfortable doing in a real machine I was sitting in, and it behaves like I would expect. I haven’t been able to recreate a situation where the helicopter does something wildly unexpected in response to my control inputs.
I don’t own any of the Mscenery products, so I don’t know if they are realistic or not.
It is a little disappointing that folk with no IRL helicopter experience are commenting and critiquing elements that they clearly don’t well understand.
I have flown helicopters in the Military for years; civilian heli experience too. I really enjoy DCS helicopters and THAT has been the marque to live up to for quite some time.
I recently bought the Allouette III on MSFS - and it is extraordinary! Not because of how it looks (though that too is extraordinary), but the flight model!
So far I have purchased, and extensively flown, every payware helicopter on MSFS2020. From that experience, several truths are evident. The developers are getting a better and better take on how to develop a type-appropriate flight model for MSFS! By that I mean, a semi-rigid rotor, versus a teetering head, versus fully articulated…. the products are coming ahead in leaps and bounds with every new release.
I will have to test further but one ‘observation’ that I have made relates to the behavior of any helicopter when you are trying to land just one skid/wheel on an object (e.g. pinnacle) and how that triggers ground effect. In every helicopter to date it seems to trigger from a single activation point immediate below the center of rotation of the main rotor. That means that if you are trying to place your right skid on a Rocky outcrop, for example, you will experience none of the ground effect that will, IRL, try to repel you gently like a reverse magnetic field…. instead you get no ground effect until you move that one, central trigger point over the same surface (hover too far over the outcrop) at which point you get ALL of the ground effect at once and the heli launches 20’ into the wild blue yonder.
I thought that was down to the MSFS flight model restrictions in development until I flew the Allouette III. They seem to have solved this!! And I am thrilled that they have. I need to test it some more, but so far I am gobsmacked by the realism - again, as a real world helicopter pilot also flying helicopters in the sim since they were available (in fact, after seven years of flying helicopters in the sim I bit the bullet, switched uniforms from Air Force to Navy and flew helicopters off ships IRL! Love helicopters still!!!)
It is still not perfect. I still can’t pick up the ‘repel’ of the ground effect when hovering with part of the main rotor over an obstacle. For example, when crossing over the stern for a deck landing on a ship at sea, the increased ground effect wants to push the main rotor back and you have to gently overcome that reaction to maintain a smooth forward trajectory for the deck landing. DCS models this well.
BUT, as the latest releases show, it is getting better and better. Right now it is incredible. And it is a simulation. Fly it like the real thing and you will be rewarded. Want to look out the window? Then fly something with an autopilot, or select a simple helicopter model instead. Turn on the assists.
When I climb out of the Allouette and into the Longranger, I have to change the way I fly. Instead of the small, progressive and precise moves of the cyclic in the Allouette, I have to do the ‘teetering head dance’; very small movements in a number of directions to herd the main rotor in the direction I want it to go. Literally in your head it’s “1-2-3, 1-2-3, 1-2-3,….” Like a dance. And this is COMPLETELY REALISTIC.
Yank the cyclic? I think they mean yank the collective? Yes you will get a massive yaw - left or right depending on the helicopter - and this too is realistic.
Take ANYTHING for granted and any aircraft will bite you. A helicopter though, will bite you and not let go!!
Cheers to the developers. You rock. Simply cannot wait for Blackbird to get their UH-1 and UH-60s out there now!!!