Avimimus

Interesting! I wonder if this could open the way to integrate unguided weapons? As planned for initial service versions? Unguided rockets and bombs are fun. Realistic too, if the Cold War had continued.

I'm all for any new rocket option - especially for older platforms that rely on them as a major weapon (the Mi-24/Mi-8/Su-25). So I won't argue too strongly. I do think that adding a greater variety of S-5 warheads (and even S-5 engines/bodies) would actually add the most - since we only have one option for the S-5 rocket. Of course, the S-8 entered production in 1984 and the Mi-24P in 1981... so the time when it was reliant on the S-5 was relatively short (assuming Mi-24P were prioritised for access to S-8 production). Honestly, they should do both. It is a relatively easy feature to add... low cost to develop - and it does add something to the sim.

To be fair... several airforces are operating real jets that are older than 5 years and still have bugs that haven't been worked out.

From the one report I've read... the crews in Afghanistan learned to do it intuitively... like a WW2 fighter-bomber pilot. Some reportedly became quite accurate after they got enough experience. Part of me still wants the MBD racks so we can carry the 10xFAB-100 bomb load that was used occasionally in Afghanistan. I find it particularly amusing as this was the exact bomb load of some bombers which carried earlier versions of the FAB-100 during the Great Patriotic War / WWII...!

Hi, I believe the graphics api is 'Vulkan'. It might be good to use that discussion to avoid people getting excited about the 'vulcan' bomber used in the Falklands etc. Some people might get excited about the wrong thing!

If crew IRL are able to rotate them out of the way - then it'd seem to make sense as an option. Probably more useful than having to set the magnetic compass

Having the option of an elevated attack profile (like exists as an automatic setting on later ATAKA) would be useful for getting over vegetation and berms though - so I think that is a reasonable idea.

Glad you are feeling better (and not just because you are making a Su-17 )

Is this planned anytime soon? I'm surprised more people aren't babbling excitedly about it given the progress on the evident 3d model and research into the systems.

Hello, Is the self-destruct of the 23mm ammunition realistic for the SPPU? I'm finding it hard to use them from medium altitudes as the ammunition tends to self-destruct prior to reaching the target. Thanks!

Ah! Very interesting. The Mi-24 in Afghanistan was sometimes equipped with up to 10xFAB-100s (the payload of a medium bomber in WWII!) Presumably using MBD racks on two of the hardpoints. I was wondering because the wings with the extra hardpoints for the Igla were offered for the Ka-50, Ka-50-2, but seem to have only ever been built for the Ka-52... so I was wondering if the weapon selection system might be form the Ka-52 (even if we can't use many of the weapons used by the Ka-52).

Interesting - that would be fun! I wonder if BS3 - with the new six hardpoint wings, will also have a new weapon management system? A lot of the Ka-52 footage shows asymmetric loadouts (e.g. missiles and a rocket pod on opposite hardpoints) - it'd be interesting. One can currently sort of do this by having the rockets on the opposite inner hardpoint (so Vikhr, Fuel tank, V-80, Fuel Tank loadout) but it doesn't look right It is a lot of fun to use just use a single rocket pod though! The recoil is interesting, and the view is less obscured (no smoke from the opposite side - because there are no rockets coming from the other stub-wing).

The Mi-24 lacked sufficient power to carry both weapons and troops at a usable range... so the original concept never worked out. I'm sure they would've been used for emergency redeployment at some points (e.g. moving troops from one location to another behind the lines), and the passenger compartment definitely is more comfortable for retrieving downed aviators compared to asking them to hang on to the stub wing of an Apache (true story apparently). But the Russian SMEs were pretty clear that the passenger compartment is essentially never used. That said, I do hope we get the option to use it... if we carry no or minimal weapons it could make for some interesting emergency transport missions.

I agree - if it is a feature on the AH-64, then it is worth porting to the Mi-24 and Ka-50. The Ka-50/BS3 needs this in particular, as the racks default to six missiles per rack - which is excessive and not how they are often used in real life (e.g. photos of training, photos of use in current conflicts from Chechnya to the present day)... sometimes we see full racks, but often it is just a two missiles per hard-point (sometimes four, sometimes even one).

Apologies! I somehow remembered the date for the Ka-226

True... but is relatively new and doesn't have armed variants etc. Still cute though. I know! Cute! Multipurpose too - and one of three most produced Soviet helicopter (along with the Mi-8 and Mi-24)

This is really needed for the FC3 aircraft - being able to set the fusing options for the RBK cluster bombs on the A-10A, Su-25 & Su-25T in the loadout screen would really help maintain these modules as cluster-bombs are improved for other aircraft which do have such options (e.g. A-10C).

Yes, that is my assumption too. I'd love something European though... or the Mi-2URP from Poland... it is like an Mi-8 trying to be a scout helicopter! The closest Soviet equivalent to the Bo-105/OH-58/Sa-342! Lots of interesting weapon systems too - and as it is old, out-of-date, and Polish (not Russian), there should be no barriers to researching it!

It is a shame that the night combat variants of the Mi-8 are too highly classified to be included. It'd be interesting to have the Mi-24 and Ka-50 for daylight combat, but the Mi-8 for night-time anti-tank work etc.

I was wondering if this is just because the test-branch is more lenient (they had B8 earlier!) or because they discovered new research. Currently we can mix some of the smaller rockets and still fire them - but the ballistic computer doesn't work.

The thing I wonder about: B-13 rocket pods and V20 rocket pods on the same loadout? Is that supposed to be possible?

I'm with you on that - if the ordinance was cleared for an aircraft - it should be permitted - even if it was never used or was used only on export examples. I'd love to have a UPK-23-250 on the Mi-24 someday or a CRV-7 high velocity rocket pod on the F/A-18/CF-188 someday... even if they were only used on export examples.

The IRST sounds interesting to me. Even if it wasn't that effective and only worked at night (or something) it'd give a bit of that sneak attack capability we're so familiar with from Sukhois and Migs.

So - is the Ford drivable?

There is a mention of potential additional weapons - and I thought I'd add a suggestion for one: The CRV-7 rocket. It is quite unlikely we'll see rockets in the payware EF-2000 module... but if the Cold War hadn't ended (and development was a bit smoother) - it is quite possible that early Eurofighters could have had them integrated (and it does seem to have been planned at one point). The CRV is also interesting due to its unusually high speed. It'd also be nice to have if we could ever get it working with the F/A-18 module (as the Canadian Hornets carry them).