Avimimus

You'll have no sympathy once you realise how much of a range advantage the AGM114 has on the Igla!

The overall upgrade to modern standards is necessary (e.g. Shkval fixes). The MWS will be quite useful. The Igla will be fun (and was offered as an export option). I'm hoping there will be options to carry less Vikhr per hardpoint... which appears to be a realistic option for range/performance when one only needs to take out a few targets.

Also Mirage 50 I think in the last image? Note also that some effects in Glowing Amraam videos may be added in post (check disclaimer at beginning or end).

I made a mod to fire them from the Mi-8 - and I got pretty good at it - practice helps... firing rockets from helicopters though ...is complex.

So it might be possible on the Mi-28 with 9M120M variants? Interesting. As for the Vikhr - I believe that is just firing two missiles at the same target (both laser-beam riding) in order to increase the PK (probability of kill).... one benefit of having simple missiles that are much cheaper than the AGM114/Brimstone family!

I hope the work on the Apache will benefit other modules (Ka-50, Mi-8/Mi-24, Su-25). It'd also be great to have the CRV-7 added for Canadian CF-18s (with their small number of unusually high energy AP flechettes)!

Just a note: The way cameras see the world is very differently than how the human eye sees it. Different apertures, shutter speeds, sensors sensitivities etc. If you want to know what it should look like - talk to someone whose seen rocket run in real life. That is the only way.

A trick though - one can switch between rockets and gunpods to make the CCIP appear briefly. It won't be accurate (as the ballistic settings are all wrong)... but I find it helps cue me to things like side-slip. I then switch back to the rockets and fire!

So instead of 810 m/s you get 730 m/s and 780-700 m/s? Reduced penetration, but more rounds... and with different amounts of drop (might deal with ranging errors by bracketing a target). Sounds like an interesting option to try. Thanks! This should be useful. It is really important to consider any side-slip, wind, and the additive effect of the velocity of the helicopter when using these (that indicated airspeed is important)!! I personally suspect that the rigidity of the hardpoint mountings are over-estimated in DCS (for the Ka-50 and Su-25 as well)... and gunpods should have higher dispersion as a result. It'd be useful in the case of the grenade launchers to have a bit more lateral spread.

It may well have been those screenshots (showing 4 rather than 6 missiles per rack) - so you may be right that is what I saw. However, those missiles are 9K121/9A1472 Vikhr... not Igla...

Also this thread (where I gather some evidence):

My hope is that they'll have an option for only loading two Vikhrs per rack. One of the early updates on the 3d model showed a rack equipped like that. IMHO, there are a lot of scenarios where 12xVikhr is unnecessary - and having a 4xVikhr option to save weight and increase range would be ideal. There is some evidence this is one in real life and it is certainly an option (the racks can carry 2, 4, or 6 missiles).

My only real wish is to be able to remove the minigun and have a civilianised version... without the missile apparatus or the weight of the gun!

I gave up after early experiences with him flying into hills and also entering VRS if I told him to either hover or descend... these things may have been partly fixed, but I'm willing to wait several more months before trying again... being a missile operator who is constantly worried that one wrong keypress will tell the pilot to put the helicopter into a non-recoverable flight regime just isn't fun... For the record the Mi-24 is my favourite module (worth all the others combined!) and a lot of this is due to the feeling of flight in this particular helicopter - its quirks and capabilities. But I also remember 'Gunship!' - a sim that was almost exclusively flown from the gunner seat and how fun and tense that was - especially since the ground vehicles had the AI from a tank-sim and would be aggressive sometimes - the rainy Northern European landscape with thudding of the rotor blades and the creeping dread that a recon vehicle might be sneaking up on your hovering Eurocopter Tiger from the flank using trees as cover to get within ZNE and attack... was its own kind of experience.

Thanks!

That is a little bit frightening to be honest.

9M120F should be more effective against buildings... and should also be able to damage light armoured vehicles quite effectively... 28% more warhead should be noticeable in its effects. That said I was able to fire the 9M120O and 9M120 from the outer hardpoints, but not the 9M120F from the inner ones... if it never leaves the tube it isn't going to have a use. Petrovitch wasn't cooperating though.

Yeah... but they've often been very low detailed... for instance the Capital of Canada never had all of its rivers - sometimes patches of water in the wider parts of the rivers, but no actual connected rivers - even X-Plane 11 is like this for the second largest river in Ottawa. There is also the issue of size (Terrabytes or Petabytes of data) and having realistic objects for the region - which have to be modelled. I can see mounting existing maps onto a globe - and the creation of larger numbers of maps - but I don't think anything near the quality required for actual military simulations is possible at those scales.

I'm not sure - I personally think that these warheads would perform differently even with the simple damage, penetration, and area of effect modelling we have now. Furthermore, the different ballistics will require somewhat different tactics and skill - especially when it comes to rockets with different motors.

Thank you for finding the thread. Honestly: 1) I really appreciated your in-depth reply (and the other replies). I actually had a note reminding me to return to this thread to thank everyone but got distracted with work. 2) When I looked up control diagrams and original sources I was also convincing myself that it was impossible. What you wrote made sense. That said - I appreciated reading this. If you suspect yourself of going mad, it is nice to at least know that some other people are also going mad with you! Less lonely if it is a mass hallucination!

I totally understand that - however, it is quite impressive. I do hope that this technology might someday grow to better modelling of contrast based locks as well (and be expanded into the visual spectrum as well). It'd be great to sometimes lose a lock for the Shkval or a targeting pod if the target has too low contrast with the terrain!

I somehow doubt that the majority of their market, especially their helicopter market, is multiplayer oriented. Usually ~40% of the active forum users for a flight sim are into multiplayer but only 5%-10% of the actual users of the product are.

When did they state this? I've been kind-of hoping that the Mi-24P is selling well enough that it'll make them reconsider!

Something is going on though:

It'd be neat. If Petrovitch can avoid VRS (or flying into the ground) it'd be a higher priority though - that said, I'm sure that those two parts of development are pretty independent.