Only 6 Helos at Hovercontrol for FSX!!!

[ryanbatc]

Jeeese! Why aren't there many freeware helos for FSX? And I mean true sp2 models....

Anyone know of any up and coming helos?

 

[Daube]

Jeeese! Why aren't there many freeware helos for FSX? And I mean true sp2 models....

Because there are already a lot of FS9 models that work well

Anyone know of any up and coming helos?

Good question. I have to admit that I'm not aware of any helicopter project. There has been some good stuff for payware, but for freeware...

 

[ryanbatc]

They really don't work well, most have the annoying see through rotor issue, and the performance is usually pretty bad because they are not SP2 models...

That's why we need true SP2 models

 

[Lionheart]

Try making an FSX model... :isadizzy:

Plexi alone is 4 pages of tunes, sliders, ticks, adjustments, and 4+ textures.

All new parts animation codes as well...

Very difficult and takes far longer to create.


Bill

 

[icarus]

Next Year we will start a new agusta a109 for fsx

 

[CG_1976]

Next Year we will start a new agusta a109 for fsx

 

[Daube]

They really don't work well, most have the annoying see through rotor issue, and the performance is usually pretty bad because they are not SP2 models...

That's why we need true SP2 models

The rotor see-through is a minor issue that is only annoying in external view. The problem does not occur when you're flying from the cockpit.
When it comes to performance, I have been pleasantly surprised by most of the copters I could try (excepted the stuff from UKMIL, I don't know why...)

 

[pointy31]

Rick Piper is working on a Bristol Sycamore for FSX...:ernae:


http://www.cbfsim.org/cbfsim/cbfsBB/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=10528&sid=be690371710a37c3a73db713f1030b6f

 

[MCDesigns]

I also would love to see more FSX native helis myself, especially some of my favs from FS9 that do suffer from the usual port issues, but it doesn't stop me from flying some of them

Personally I feel that with the community still divided, you have less of a user base and with the development now having extra steps and a new learning curve, that eliminates more developers that just can't/won't be bothered to design for the new sim. As for payware, helis have always had a smaller market than fixed wing which is why I choose to really support those teams that do make helis for FSX.

You could say that same for AI developers, why are there not more true FSX models by now?

I am still waiting for a GOOD FSX native HUEY!! I wish I had Deane Baunton's source files for his FS9 one, would love to add some more detail to it and export as an FSX native one. I was thrilled about the DoDoSim one, but just found they are working on the FSX 206 at the same time now and that will keep it in the workshop longer, BUMMER!

Personally, I'd rather have quality over quantity any day, LOL.

 

[cheezyflier]

mc, i agree 100%

i am also waiting on the dodosim huey, it's really the only one i want.

 

[Panther_99FS]

Six is better than none :mixedsmi:

 

[MCDesigns]

Six is better than none :mixedsmi:

Especially when it comes to beer!! Welcome back P! :ernae:

 

[ryanbatc]

Oh I believe it does take A LOT more man hours to design a FSX model. And that's probably the majority of the issue...

Honestly, I don't have the fastest PC out there so performance and fewer draw calls is important to me, hence why I stay away from FS9 models in FSX...

Also some of the FS9 models have weird cockpit glass effects in FSX, like very opaque, or hard to see through - is there a way to get rid of that?

 

[UKMIL]

you can ALWAYS rely on UKMIL of course, we have already released the Chinook, and have the seaking almost done, BOTH NATIVE FSX.

 

[warbird861]

I also would love to see more FSX native helis myself, especially some of my favs from FS9 that do suffer from the usual port issues, but it doesn't stop me from flying some of them

Personally I feel that with the community still divided, you have less of a user base and with the development now having extra steps and a new learning curve, that eliminates more developers that just can't/won't be bothered to design for the new sim. As for payware, helis have always had a smaller market than fixed wing which is why I choose to really support those teams that do make helis for FSX.

You could say that same for AI developers, why are there not more true FSX models by now?

I am still waiting for a GOOD FSX native HUEY!! I wish I had Deane Baunton's source files for his FS9 one, would love to add some more detail to it and export as an FSX native one. I was thrilled about the DoDoSim one, but just found they are working on the FSX 206 at the same time now and that will keep it in the workshop longer, BUMMER!

Personally, I'd rather have quality over quantity any day, LOL.

Check the aerosoft Huey 205 they are making Aerosoft Huey

Remember that this is still in very early stage of development

 

[JT8D-9A]

Excellent freeware:http://www.flight-team-bremerhaven.de/

 

[Daube]

I also would love to see more FSX native helis myself, especially some of my favs from FS9 that do suffer from the usual port issues, but it doesn't stop me from flying some of them

Same here

I am still waiting for a GOOD FSX native HUEY!!

I am still waiting for the good freeware Huey and would not require a 2D panel to work. In that cae, I would really not care if it was FSX-compatible or FSX-native.

Personally, I'd rather have quality over quantity any day, LOL.

200% agree. I can't speak for paywares, but for freewares, the good helos are really few.... in fact, I don't know any that has a complete virtual cockpit for example (I mean, a VC that would make 2d panels and key combos useless)... appart from the FSX/FS9 default ones of course...

 

[IanP]

200% agree. I can't speak for paywares, but for freewares, the good helos are really few.... in fact, I don't know any that has a complete virtual cockpit for example (I mean, a VC that would make 2d panels and key combos useless)... appart from the FSX/FS9 default ones of course...

However much certain members of this hobby don't want to believe it, there's a reason for that - the fact that putting the amount of effort in to create what people want, for free, is a colossal commitment that very, very, few people will be prepared to do.

Many payware teams have refused point blank to develop for FSX, because it takes so much more work than FS9 to achieve what people demand. If the payware groups won't, you can guarantee that the freeware groups won't and FSX is showing it.

The VC and the flight dynamics are the most difficult bits of an already difficult procedure, so you get fewer models, from fewer developers, that have these parts done accurately. As helicopters are a small niche of the hobby, that number gets smaller again until you end up with the numbers we have.

It's unlikely to change, unfortunately, and will probably get worse with FSXI, if the amount of work required to generate an add-on increases again.

FS9 probably was the heyday for variety and mass of add-ons. You're unlikely to see that again.

Ian P.

 

[Lionheart]

However much certain members of this hobby don't want to believe it, there's a reason for that - the fact that putting the amount of effort in to create what people want, for free, is a colossal commitment that very, very, few people will be prepared to do.

Many payware teams have refused point blank to develop for FSX, because it takes so much more work than FS9 to achieve what people demand. If the payware groups won't, you can guarantee that the freeware groups won't and FSX is showing it.


FS9 probably was the heyday for variety and mass of add-ons. You're unlikely to see that again.

Ian P.

Well put Ian. That does sum it up quite logically.


Bill

 

[MCDesigns]

However much certain members of this hobby don't want to believe it, there's a reason for that - the fact that putting the amount of effort in to create what people want, for free, is a colossal commitment that very, very, few people will be prepared to do.

Many payware teams have refused point blank to develop for FSX, because it takes so much more work than FS9 to achieve what people demand. If the payware groups won't, you can guarantee that the freeware groups won't and FSX is showing it.

The VC and the flight dynamics are the most difficult bits of an already difficult procedure, so you get fewer models, from fewer developers, that have these parts done accurately. As helicopters are a small niche of the hobby, that number gets smaller again until you end up with the numbers we have.

It's unlikely to change, unfortunately, and will probably get worse with FSXI, if the amount of work required to generate an add-on increases again.

FS9 probably was the heyday for variety and mass of add-ons. You're unlikely to see that again.

Ian P.

I do agree with lots of this Ian, but from what I see also I feel that quite a few refuse to design for FSX because they either don't want to put in the extra work or can't get their heads around the changes in the SDK. I see lots of examples of freeware scenery guys saying that designing for FSX is to hard, there is nothing hard about it compared to FS9, just differences and if you choose to do the research, there are more "options" that you can add in addition to what could be done for FS9..

One problem I see is so many that design freeware do it for some sort of gratification or accolade rather than for their own personal sense of achievement. In doing it this way you are at the mercy of what simmers want/ demand and we all know how demanding many of us can be, LOL.

I have actually designed 3 helicopters when I was using FSDS for scenery in FS9. It was more of a learning experience and I knew that even though I had a good external model , animations and a basic VC, it would never live up to my personal expectations based on the amount of work I knew it would take to get the VC there and the fact I had no idea how to do the gauges and air files