Just read Helisimmer's interview with developer Torsten Hans about helicopter, and I am both happy and unhappy

Just out of curiosity: what's the difference of sense of control between a real helicopter and a RC model?

Quote from ftp2leta

I don't own you RC version, but as a real RC heli pilot (and real pilot also)I can't tell you if it's good enough...

I also have 20 hours on a real R22

Ben

Thank you so much for the explanation. Really appreciate your devotion to realism. Still I wish as a start we could have a helicopter with simplified physics, and you can add more realistic effect in the future, if that's possible. I think the default R22 of FSX has hardly the extent of realism you have described, which makes the control very easy for beginners while it is still fun.

In fact a full scale simulation of the helicopter can be daunting to control for anyone except the very devoted players with extra hardware equipment. So I suggest you might consider developing a helicopter with simplified physics and simplified control to fill up the gap of your aircraft lineup. It can be just a free bonus instead of payware quality as your excellent A320 and Q400 which requires long time of development.

The purpose of my proposed helicopter of simplified physics can mainly serve as sightseeing, because the spectacular scenery of AFS2 deserves one. I am very afraid we will never see a helicopter in AFS2 if you want to achieve the full realism you have described. It would be better to have a simple helicopter than nothing. Afterall it is hard to be simpler than the default FSX R22, which had given me so much fun. I believe your RC model physics is better than that.

Quote from Jet-Pack

RC helicopters typically feature electronically assisted stabilization. At least for the tail rotor. Most RC helis have symmetrical airfoils and no twist in the rotor blades.

A helicopter like the R22 doesn't have that any assistance for example and you need to use the tail a lot more. Also RC helis are way more powerful compared to their takeoff mass as well. That and aerodynamics are a little bit different at greater Reynolds numbers (more particles and less honey like viscosity compared to the size of the blade) and fully sized helicopters have transonic effects on the rotor blade that advances into the wind (part of the air is going super sonic in fast forward flight). It's this high impact velocity on one side of the helicopter's rotor which causes a lot of drag and increases the power demand and the other side of the rotor has to fight great angles of attack and even reversed flow direction in the inner part as well as stall effects. RC helis don't have that much of a problem with their higher rotation speeds or at least I think it is, have not actually run the numbers yet.

And when you fly down low the rotorwash physics could be expanded, also when you are descending though your own downwash that should be simulated better as well I think. Don't know how far the RC physics are simulating this.

If we want to create a realistic implementation of helicopter physics for full scale machines we're eventually will have to implement the transonic effects as well as more advanced ground interactions, maybe some turbulence when cutting through the own tip vortexes or when transitioning from hover to forward flight. At some point you're leaving the air mass around you that swirls around because you pushed it downwards before and you get into fresh air that is much smother, thrust increases, etc. I don't think the RC physics model that yet, there the effect might not be noticeable since your headspeed is much higher and your pitch is much smaller and air-ground-friction is greater compared to the size of the helicopter...

So yeah there are numerous differences, mostly we want to get the helicopter physics as realistic as possible for a fully sized helicopter.