Military AI Works

Posted: **12 Jun 2015, 08:05**

Many thanks for the information. That's really useful and interesting too.

One more question at the moment. The Army Black Hawks and the USAF Pave Hawks I've modelled have an animated lift built into the model that's triggered by xml code which is designed for runway operations. The lift is only about 15ft with a nose down tilt while the helicopter accelerates forward under the conventional FDE. It's very similar to Nick's Apache. The landing is straight in with a flared approach to the runway.

For the Navy "R" and "S" versions, I can certainly stick with a runway profile, or I could use a ship-board one with a higher vertical lift before the nose down tilt and a vertical descent to the deck when returning. I really only want to have one option because the animation has to be carried through each LOD and with FS9 and FSX models that's quite a bit of work for each option and it makes the choices overly complicated.

So, is the preference for runway performance or ship-board for these two models please?

John

Posted: **12 Jun 2015, 09:17**

For Navy models, my preference is for ship-board performance take off.
With this way, we can use them on vessels, and also on Helistrip (H) on airport, without use the runway).

So, your work is very great ! Many thanks for making these heli (and other aircraft) for the FS community ! Congratulation.

Posted: **12 Jun 2015, 10:07**

for navy ship-board performance take off.

Thanks for your amazing work.

Jeanpy

Posted: **12 Jun 2015, 14:32**

You will still need a 500 ft runway and AFCAD
The vertical effect is an animation of the take off run

Trust me we have been trying all sorts

Cheers

Gary

Posted: **12 Jun 2015, 15:24**

Will you make a version with a bambi bucket for fire fighting ? or with a artillery piece under ? or cargo ?

Posted: **12 Jun 2015, 16:11**

Alas, no, no and no. I think 8-10 models are enough - certainly for me.

John

Posted: **12 Jun 2015, 17:43**

Maybe if we ask nice enough we can convince Nick and John to team up to make the ultimate AI helicopter model:

I kid, I kid

Posted: **12 Jun 2015, 19:47**

Theoretically of course, as your only kidding (thankfully), I was just pondering how to do it. Two options I think. The Black Hawk is linked to the Chinook below ground and only appears when the Chinook lifts off. Alternatively the Hawk is invisible until xml code triggers its visibility at a given radio altitude. The first method would look strange for a few seconds and the second would involve an instant appearance and disappearance of the Hawk.

Enough of that though, back to the "R" model..............

John

Posted: **12 Jun 2015, 20:10**

Or, swing the -60 part of the model like a reverse landing gear so that it extends behind the -47 with an altitude trigger set to the height of the hanging model. That way when the -47 is on the ground the -60 would be on the ground behind it. When the -47 get's to the trigger altitude, the -60 would swing down like a deploying landing gear.

Of course, then you would have some hilarious -60 levitation issues in the transition part.. and some serious redneck action as the -60 gets towed around behind the taxiing -47... and.. OMG WHY AM I ACTUALLY THINKING THIS THROUGH!!!

Posted: **12 Jun 2015, 20:19**

Could you imagine the poly cont on a CH-47 carrying a UH-60?

The Bambi bucket would be the only load that could be staged with the resting aircraft. I completely understand your desire not to do it though. If you added one version of the Bambi someone would probably ask for the different lengths of line. As Bill Belichick would say, "We're on to the R".

Posted: **12 Jun 2015, 23:31**

John Young wrote:Many thanks for the information. That's really useful and interesting too.

One more question at the moment. The Army Black Hawks and the USAF Pave Hawks I've modelled have an animated lift built into the model that's triggered by xml code which is designed for runway operations. The lift is only about 15ft with a nose down tilt while the helicopter accelerates forward under the conventional FDE. It's very similar to Nick's Apache. The landing is straight in with a flared approach to the runway.

For the Navy "R" and "S" versions, I can certainly stick with a runway profile, or I could use a ship-board one with a higher vertical lift before the nose down tilt and a vertical descent to the deck when returning. I really only want to have one option because the animation has to be carried through each LOD and with FS9 and FSX models that's quite a bit of work for each option and it makes the choices overly complicated.

So, is the preference for runway performance or ship-board for these two models please?.

John

My thoughts are that there are much more activity in an Navy Air Station, military base and general aviation airports than at the back of a ship, many versus one. For a ship landing/take off operation, you can always approach on a 90 degree angle (yes I know) it is not the way it works in real life, but we need to remenber that these models are for AI only. In test performed with the Pavehawk, I have found that it makes great spot landings and take off using very small airfields. Lewis

Posted: **13 Jun 2015, 03:20**

Honestly, I'd say for the Navy helos, you should just model a landbased takeoff profile. Come up to the hover, pause for hover checks, and depart. As Lewis said, there's going to be a lot more people doing ai spotting at landbases than they will watching helos depart from ships. And the departure pattern for a helo off a smallboy flightdeck isn't just a matter of coming up to a higher hover before departing. The helo would have to come to a hover and then slip to the side before nosing over to depart. I think the much greater effort isn't worth it for the tiny number of people who might end up seeing one of the Romeos depart through the top of a ship.

And as mentioned, the helos with colors are the squadron CO's birds (typically sidenumbers X00). The rest are almost always just shades of gray.

Chris

Posted: **13 Jun 2015, 06:43**

I'll stick with a low lift and tilt then. The advantage of that is that the helicopter will stay in the traffic viewer window.

The "R" is coming along well. A lot of surgery required, but my favourite so far.

John

Posted: **14 Jun 2015, 10:36**

dworjan wrote:I think the much greater effort isn't worth it for the tiny number of people who might end up seeing one of the Romeos depart through the top of a ship.

Completely Agree. And this is only in FS9 with a static ship anyway. You aren't going to be getting scheduled AI traffic to come and go from moving AI ships in FSX/P3D -- unless somebody wants badly to place static ships and create AFCADS for them. I am not aware of this method being used widely.

Posted: **14 Jun 2015, 16:04**

Question about the "R" to those that know. In this photograph, the foreground aircraft is armed with Hellfires. The one in the background has a torpedo:

The one with the torpedo has the ports for 25 sonar buoys in the external panel aft of the window. In this configuration, there is a rack of sonar buoys in the cabin that align internally with these ports, according to another photo I have.

The Hellfire armed aircraft has a completely blank panel aft of the window with no ports. Does that mean that the sonar buoy rack is not present in the cabin of that aircraft please?

John

Posted: **14 Jun 2015, 20:18**

My vote would be to make it easy and continue with the same animations for all models, the normal take off. Real world a 10' hover is generally what all H-60 operators use for hover power checks prior to transitioning on the take off.

For your R pic, yes the buoy launcher is removable as is the dipping sonar reeling machine. A cover is then installed over the hole in the fuselage. In practice we normally only carried a torp on the right rack (as shown) and removed the left drop tank (just in-case the copilot hit the wrong button...I guess it happened).

Posted: **15 Jun 2015, 06:43**

Thanks Chris.

Posted: **19 Jun 2015, 15:59**

The Navy birds are all done for FS9 and FSX.

This is the "S" model:

This is the "R" with 4 Hellfire missiles:

This is the "R" model again, but with a Mk54 torpedo instead of the Hellfires. It also has a dipping sonar:

The cable on the sonar runs right up through the inside of the rotor hub to get the maximum extension below the fuselage in a straight line when the sonar lowering animation is triggered (by a given forward speed of the helicopter):

It's the maximum I can deploy it because of the cable length, although I could have a longer one if a visibility (on/off) switch was used instead.

Polygon count in LOD1 is slightly higher than in Nick's Chinook, but about the same in LOD2 and decreasing faster through LOD3-7. Draw calls are slightly lower, so performance should be fine.

Next job is the Coastguard Jay Hawk and then finally the Presidential White Hawk........

John

Posted: **19 Jun 2015, 16:40**

That is really great work John. Can't wait to see these in the sim.

Posted: **19 Jun 2015, 16:47**

Outstanding job John, great addition to the rotary world. Looking forward for the J's and White's. Lewis

Military AI Works

AI BlackHawk

Re: AI BlackHawk

Re: AI BlackHawk

Re: AI BlackHawk

Re: AI BlackHawk

Re: AI BlackHawk

Re: AI BlackHawk

Re: AI BlackHawk

Re: AI BlackHawk

Re: AI BlackHawk

Re: AI BlackHawk

Re: AI BlackHawk

Re: AI BlackHawk

Re: AI BlackHawk

Re: AI BlackHawk

Re: AI BlackHawk

Re: AI BlackHawk

Re: AI BlackHawk

Re: AI BlackHawk

Re: AI BlackHawk

Re: AI BlackHawk