I was going through one of our old hulks and ran across this. It's an old Vietnam Era Go NoGo placard. Used mostly to get out of confined areas and flying max loads. Way it worked was, you came to a two foot hover and noted your N1.  If the your hovering N1 was lower than the value on the placard, you were good to go to takeoff without running out of power. Old school flying right there.

THAT'S Cool !!

Very cool. I use a similar method using tabbed data to determine power requirements. It's great for knowing exactly how much power you will use getting into and out of LZ's. Haven't tried it in DCS. I'll try it this morning and report back its accuracy

Doogie, I think you’ll find performance calcs in DCS Huey “close” but somewhat inconsistent.   The modeling of the EGT limits are also a factor.  You might find post #9 here https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=200121 useful.  
I’m lookin forward to plucking your experience.
Indeed, I may harass you and Comanchero to do a formal session or so at some point.

OK. I put myself in a huey on the side of a mountain on the Nevada map at 6,500 feet PA and 20 degrees, QNH 29.92.

Per the UH-1H tabbed data:


my max allowable GW is 7760 lbs, so that's what I set my weight to in the editor.


My HOGE (hover out of ground effect) power required would be 39 lbs torque, and my HIGE (hover in ground effect) power required would be 32 lbs.

My actual HIGE was 32


and my actual HOGE was 36


Not too bad. Obviously, a lot of work has been put into the development of the flight model. It isn't exact, but not bad!

How do the tabs compare to the graphs?
When would you use one over the other?
Is the tab data you used for the composite blades?

And yah, I got a million more.

That tabbed data is a conglomeration of multiple charts pulled together for a single, quick reference. All data is derived from the normal performance charts in the manual. I use Tabbed data for all performance planning as well as in flight, quick reference prior to approaching an LZ. It's truly great stuff. You are able, within a minute or two, to calculate within 1-2 % what your maximum torque required will be. There are rules of thumb we use to adjust the chart numbers (things like wind, surface, etc.). The data referenced in this manual are for metal blades. I was unable to locate a tabbed data chart for composite blades, so I made my own. The aircraft I flew most recently was an HH-1H (only 30 of them made for the Air Force). It had a 703 (Cobra) engine, Fast Fin, Strakes, and composite blades. The tabbed data I derived was pretty accurate, so I'm definitely sold on using it. As a CFI, I do lots of mountain flying instruction, and I'm also a graduate of the Army's High Altitude Aviation Training Site (HAATS)....one of the few Navy guys to go through the course. Some of the best training I've ever received.

Thanks loads.

I have had good results with Tab data for the Huey, but you have to make sure that the aircraft is set up properly in the mission editor. Default engine health is set at 90% and a lot of people miss that. Granted the last time we tested this was a few years ago and DCS has updated engine data since then. I now get some confliction between different PPC software and charts.

I didn't know that about the engine health. Good gouge!

wasn't ment to be sorry.  I have just noted over the years that the dcs Huey engine modeling is great in some areas and not so much in others and it seems to change from time to time.  DCS is not great with explaining all the changes. Chic and I end up retesting the ppc at least once a year it seems.

(HHC/229) GunfighterSIX wrote:wasn't ment to be sorry.

Not following you here.....

(U.S. Navy, U.S. Coast Guard – particularly aviation) Informal information channel; the grapevine; the straight dope; inside information. Gouge is passed on by the gouge train. 'Gouge' fits better on the web page than any of the synonyms above. You can get bad gouge, but this is good gouge!

Had to google it, I thought it meant something else. I am learning all kinds of things lol.

Roger that! I'll be better about using Navy-isms!

I did 2 years of Navy officer training before going to the Army, they did not teach us useful sayings like that. I feel let down