jubuttib

Very much so: The 30x165mm round it shoots is ballistically very similar to the 30x173mm round used by the GAU-8 on the A-10C. Same projectile mass, about 3% lower muzzle velocity. Rate of fire is obviously lower, but it's still a hefty push, roughly equivalent to about 800-1 200 pounds of thrust (depending on the firing rate, don't know where the Ka-50 falls on the 2A42's quoted 550 to 800 rounds/min "high" rate range).

Irrelevant to the discussion (sorry), but I'd wish electric primers would make their way into normal guns too. They won't suit the "apocalypse is coming, I need to be able to scrounge up supplies and load my own ammo" thing that for some reason people stick to, but it WOULD work great for 99% of shooting range and hunting purposes, and could make for absolutely stellar and well adjustable triggers...

Aye, I just haven't ever heard that. The differences aren't always that big (US M830A1 and Korean K280 HEAT-MP-Ts are around 1400 m/s vs. some variants of the M829 family penetrators being around 1600 m/s), and my understanding was that the time it takes for a explosively formed penetrator to form is in the range of hundreds of microseconds, which doesn't sound insurmountable to account for. The muzzle velocities are certainly different, I just always thought that it was mostly because the penetrators tend to be like half the weight of the HEAT rounds, hence easier to accelerate. Clearly more studying is necessary, thanks for your insights! The numbers I've seen quoted have been 4km maximum range (FWIW in-game I never really try to hit anything beyond 3 km in the Ka-50), with about 1.5km effective range for the M230 a bit more for the 2A42. The testing results from the first page though would definitely suggest the M230 is less accurate, if at 2000 meters 9 rounds out of 50 will hit within a 50x50m box. Lower accuracy at range isn't surprising, considering the less substantial mounting and significantly slower projectile velocity on the M230. To my (very limited) understanding the intended purposes of the guns are different as well, with the 2A42 being specifically designed as an anti-armor (if maybe not strictly anti-tank) weapon, and the M230 as a more of an area of effect weapon, so the quoted "effective ranges" could also be for different purposes. As in a heavy machine gun could well claim to have an effective range of 1 km, as could a sniper rifle, but one is "effective for suppression" and the other is "effective for hitting a target". I'm not saying this is necessarily the case for the M230 and the 2A42, just a possibility. Regardless, I'm very much looking forward to the seeing how the gun works in-game. Oh, and you can continuously aim and fire the 2A42 in the Ka-50 by looking too, just not very accurately, hehe.

Hmm interesting. I need to read more about this subject, I've never before heard shaped charge projectiles working worse when at high velocities. At least some modern MBTs (Abrams, Leopard) tend to have really quite high muzzle velocities even for their HEAT rounds.

Very good point. Though you can't really fit much of a shaped charge style projectile into a 30mm gun. One of the reasons why rifle grenades still exist when there are so many great 40mm grenade launchers (both standalone and ones that attach to another gun) is that you just can't make a very effective shaped charge round with a space that small. From what I could quickly gather online, looks like the standard M789 round is rated for about 25.4mm RHA penetration at 50° and 500 meters. The more modern 30x165mm penetrator rounds should be able to match and even beat that at twice the distance and 60° angles. That said all this discussion has kind of made me even more interested in how to effectively employ the M230 in-game. I originally thought it was more of a surgical tool for close up light and unarmored targets, but now that I know it's more of an area effect weapon it piques my interest in a different way.

It's the 30x165mm on that as well, yes. So the same caliber cartridge as the Hind, Su-25T, Havoc, etc. employ (specific round types might vary), ballistically comparable to the 30x173mm used by the GAU-8/A-10. Yeah, the Ka-50's cannon is definitely very useful, able to shred the more lightly armored stuff with ease and even destroy MBTs if you can get close enough to land good shots on the rear deck (IIRC). But based on the accuracy specs quoted above and the significantly weaker cartridge it employs, I wouldn't expect the M230 to be quite as effective. From what data I could find on the 30x113mm and 30x165mm cartridges online, the range on the Apache should be way shorter, the armor penetration much weaker, and the accuracy significantly lower as well. This is of course for armored targets, with how weirdly splash damage works at times in DCS I can't begin to guess how it'll be against infantry etc. Should chow down trucks all day long.

Welp, thanks for the feedback and checks everyone, much appreciated. I'm still hoping it'll eventually be an allowed loadout, it's a really fun layout, but if our model never supported it then that's fine too. EDIT: The fact that the Syria mission has that loadout makes me think I'm not 100% crazy for thinking it used to be an allowed loadout at some point (maybe right after early access started, before any updates?)

If I have, I have no recollection of it, I know you're not supposed to touch them. I'm also pretty sure this at least used to be a loadout earlier in the early access, and I even remember it working properly. Is there a way I can remove edited loadouts, and restore original ones? Also there is at least one easy to find picture of a Hind with this gunpod loadout online:

When you click on the autopilot speed stabilization/speed hold On and Off buttons in the cockpit, they go in and come out when you let go of the button. If you map them to joystick buttons, they get stuck in until you click on them again. YouTube video included to showcase the issue:

When using the preset loadout that includes 4xATGM, 2x grenade launcher gunpods and 2x 12.7mm+7.62mm gunpods, the grenade launchers always fire together with the 12.7mm guns. This happens when the weapon selector is set to grenade launcher only (GM-30 I believe), 12.7+7.62, or 12.7 only. Only the 7.62 can be fired separately. Youtube video included:

With my limited experience of trying to target things with just my head (rather than my eyes), I suspected that, and yet they keep banging on about it...

Learning this really surprised me. Considering how many times I'd heard them go on about how good they can aim it just by looking at a target, I assumed it was going to be a much more precision weapon. But in another thread here it said that the design specs were "1 round out of 50 should hit a 3x3 meter target 84% of the time from 1000 meters away", and "75% of rounds should hit a 50x50 meter target area 75% of the time. Really wasn't expecting 25% of my rounds not hitting within a 50x50 area from 1000 meters away...

That's... That's a lot more spray and pray than I was expecting. =/ Though checking for the muzzle velocity it does start to make sense, it's only a bit higher than on an AK-47 (with of course a longer, heavier, likely ballistically better projectile), combine that with a turret mount and a hovering platform, and it makes sense. GAU-8 is fixed and has about 25% higher muzzle velocity, so it's no wonder that it could be specced to "80% of rounds fired at 4,000 feet (1,200 m) range hit within a 40-foot (12 m) diameter circle"

It is 30mm diameter, yes, but the shell is MUCH shorter, and isn't necked down. I.e. the powder load is very different. The Apache uses the 30x113mm cartridge, where the Hind uses the 30x165mm (same cartridge as used by the Su-25T), which is more comparable to the 30x173mm round used by the GAU-8 in the A-10 in terms of energy. Not sure if effectiveness is as good, since there's more to these kinds of rounds than just bullet size and powder load, materials etc. also play a big part. Some comparison images: Apache, Hind and A-10 cartridges labeled in the image. Some of them look a bit off (might not be milspec), but this gives you an idea. The following pics don't have all three, but are probably more like the actual rounds used by the aircrafts in question: GAU-8 uses #1, Apache uses #3. You can clearly see how big the difference in powder load is going to be. If you'll allow me to exaggerate slightly, it's a bit like comparing a .30 caliber pistol round with a .30 caliber rifle round. EDIT: Btw, some people were clamoring after the turreted version of the Hind, I think that peashooter would have used the #10 12.7x108mm rounds. Comparing #10 to #1 (which is close to the 30x165mm in the Hind), I'm happy we didn't go that way. GAU-8 cartridge on the left, GSh-30-2 cartridge on the right. Those two are much more comparable than the cartridge used by the M230 on the Apache.

I was personally really hoping for the D model, since for me the main thing I like to fiddle with in DCS are the avionics (I'm the kinda guy who'd rather ride backseat in the F-14), and felt that if we were to get a less "advanced", lighter and nimble version of the Apache, I'd honestly rather have a HueyCobra to go all out on the small and light side.

Have now had a chance to fly a bit with this thing, and boy howdy, it really makes a big difference to using a throttle (TWCS in my case, no stiction issues). So much more natural to pull up when cushioning in for a landing, the long smooth range of motion improves accuracy of inputs massively, it's just a lovely feeling. And indeed the device feels solid as heck. There's no slack anywhere that I can feel, any movement that's not pure axis movement feels like I'm bending the metal supports, or rather that my mounting system isn't 100% solid. The 3D printed components really surprised me, very well made. You can of course see the surface finish, and if you run your fingernail across them there's the telltale scratchy noise, but they feel dang solid, I have no worries about their durability. Especially the throttle handle feels really nice and grippy with the texture. If anyone is on the fence about this thing, you enjoy helicopters in sims but are using a throttle, your finances allow it, and you don't want to invest about double the money on a Virpil system or much much more on a Komodo or something, I can heartily recommend this collective. It's a really well built, solid and great feeling device, and K-51 was very clear with his communications and instructions on how to operate it. Really happy with the experience!

Just took delivery of mine today! It actually arrived into the country last week, but customs and postage took ages to send it forward. Like nPulse said above me, feels very nice. I'd heard it felt sturdy and smooth, but it still feels better than I expected. If it weren't for the 3D printing and shall we say "not quite Apple level of industrial design" you'd think this was made by a big company dedicated to these things. Top job K-51!

Quick question: Anyone else finding that the rocket and A-G gun pippers (A-G gun pipper as activated by pushing the MFD button above A/G in the SMS screen, on the top left) are nowhere near as accurate as the CCIP pipper for bombs? Unless you happen to be at the correct distance by accident, I pretty much always have my rockets fly way short of where the pipper would indicate, and the gun seems to most reliably hit the TVV when diving at targets. Could well be known, I just couldn't find info with my feeble google-fu. Anyway, really enjoying mod so far, looking forward to seeing it develop!

I'm also wondering how to get them, if you do the training missions they include at least the Startup one actually has them equipped, but they sure as heck don't show up in my mission editor. I mean sure, they don't work yet, but still.

Sweet, so only about another month+ for me as well (April 13th, during a rush as well). Excitement is rising, I also managed to get a friend into flying helis in DCS.

Unfortunately can't comment on what Deka has officially said, but at least when I was asking around online I had people tell me that it's always been that way. Might be worth asking Deka if you have a contact there? (Sidenote, not directly related to your guide: It can be a bit annoying with the JF-17's targeting pod when it loses POINT track (due to masking, visual obscuring due to clouds, etc.), because it seems to default back to the waypoint SPI. If I intend to fly away to get some standoff, I have to make sure I'm in area track mode to make sure the SPI stays where I want it to.)

Hola! Been getting to grips with the JF-17 recently, and noticed a couple of things that (at least in the current state of things) seem to be either different from the guide, or missing from the guide. Different: CM-802AKG datalink requirements. Your guide only mentions the datalink pod for the CM-802AKG in the Manual + Man in the Loop mode, but it would appear that currently at least the Direct mode, and very likely the Coordinate mode as well do require the datalink and terminal guidance from the player. If you don't have the datalink pod onboard when shooting the CM-802AKG, very soon after launch the missile goes stupid and starts doing loops. If you have the datalink pod onboard but don't provide terminal guidance, the missile won't hit anywhere near the SPI (in my experience it flies over the target area, because it's not aligned directly at the SPI, but to get to the area of the SPI. So having the datalink pod and providing terminal guidance is mandatory. I haven't yet tested COO mode, but have tested many a variation in DIR mode. Missing: Slow INS alignment procedure. There doesn't seem to be any mention of how to perform a slow INS alignment, just the fast one. From looking at other people's tutorials and testing in-game, the difference seems to just be that you need to turn the mode switch to GC, don't need to add the heading manually, and after alignment is done turn the mode knob back to NAV mode.

Ah sorry, I missed your post while quickly glancing through the thread! I originally saw the images on a completely other website. Thank you for the information, please add me to the list as well. Shipping to Finland. EDIT: Is there any way to source those boards, that's available to the general public?

Hello! I'd like to ask a quick question before pulling the trigger: Can industrious individuals, with components lying around, easily add buttons etc. to the button box/make their own box with more inputs? I noticed in one picture that there are a few headers free on the board.

Heya. Was there an update to the server today or something? I had to sign in to my account again when starting (auto-login didn't work), and when I launch the server, the window comes up, it shows up in my profile when checking "My Servers", but I can't configure it on either local web GUI or via the profile. Just says the following: So far when trying to set this up I've checked options.lua and serverSettings.lua, and options looks a bit empty (only seeing "auto-login"). EDIT: Ah, figured out what happened. I had copied over some Tacview settings to options.lua from a forum, and didn't notice that ONE of the settings included text styling markup (specifically tags for bold text). That broke the options.lua, and it wasn't built properly afterwards. Wiped options.lua, started server, closed server, added settings properly, everything works.