pepin1234

Well not so fast on this regard. SPO-15 will bring a really good situational awareness compared with the old SPO-10 and the Air Defense with R-60 need some extra attention to the radio features. For example AWACS are extremely capable and have several types of radios on board to do a more spread communication. In this case with Ka-50 we didn’t have the option to get AWACS call, so tell me what you gonna do with your R-60 against fighters if AWACS doesn’t give you the warnings...? That’s why we strongly need SPO-15 as Warsaw Pact units because we are scouts most of the time and AWACS doesn’t help much Look this pool how the user ask to improve what I am talking about AWACS. Also look how the pool already have 2 nop votes. The same here with some against SPO-15... https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=4449616#post4449616

:thumbup::music_whistling:

I prefer something like just add weight to the internal cargo and simulate a specific load. Crates are useful for a load that is too big for internal cargo. I have seen crates in Multiplayer that create a Sam battery with numerous launchers, radars etc. HonestlyI hate this kind of simulation. I have seen helicopters creating an imbalance situation in about 40 minutes doing so.

See tracks you will see what I am talking about. First track is made with override and I launch 2 missiles with slight different interception to ensure wider area for the IR seeker for a possible IR signal on the way. Notice I launch manually in interception and work well when you do well. Second track you can see how delayed is the LA when you wait for missile IR seeker LA still on the pylon without override. You put yourself on risk too close the bandit. I loosed lock in this track because I did a mistake but anyway you can see the missile avoiding maneuvers. R-27ET on the face-1.trk R-27ET on the face-2.trk

You mentioned the not improvement by ED for FC3 as possible reason to not implement SPO-15 in Mi-24P. I will understand perfectly the not implementation for FC3 birds of certain features as full simulated hardware in such basics aircrafts. may you explain what FC3 birds lack in SPO-15? I just figuring out the cause of a possible reaction of the community in case the SPO-15 in FC3 really suck.

S-8 rockets will be great. R-60, Fab-500. and ATGMs they are my fav payload.

Not. You didn't understand or you don't want to... I am telling the guidance to a target with ECM ON/Maneuvering/Countermeasures inside the 50km it is an unrealistic donation and bias by developers codding giving a bias bonus to F fighters to do everything with ECM targets. While russian fighters are designed from scratch to have options to face ECM targets since Mig-23 Era. We found stuck here with a generation ahead seen how developers set ECM absence inside 50km. that's why you can even talk soo quietly about set your idle throttle + flare. Because you even don't get stressed in combat after been test by you all that bias codding to limit the closer combat against a RU fighter inside ECM environment. That's why was made the IR heat R-27ET to face this situation with ECM and we are limited to ignore the use in combat inside ECM and see how developers forced russian pilots throw away such great missile while you easily tell here soo fresh lets set idle throttle to then enjoy how you guide an AA missile in an unrealistic manner against ECM ON target and see how the R-27ET become trash when is not so easy IRL make such representation. But Yes so is the current situation in this simulator and we need to deal with Fanboys kids. PS: ED is giving the bonus to even go relax in a AA combat. your assumption with your post clearly confirm that.

Great Job. I just don't like the logistic. It is soo unrealistic the lua codding with the magic Crates ... how come I am going to drop a light transport when this helicopter have not such capability.

1- I don’t understand well the number one Q. To reduce vibration just avoid the hover in take off and do a run. 2- GPS is a 2D option if you purchase the GPS module. To work as 3D instrument probably will be ready for Mi-24 as 3D in furthers updates. Not a must while you always have 2D as second option. 3- Every full simulated module is In every country does not matter if they officially have it as IRL. About CZ country without Mi-8, Yes it is true, also Finland, Hungary, Bulgaria was found without Mi-8. Weird.

I told you already what you can do. Work with LA override ON and try what I told you before. Try it always as first step in your combat. I recommend use the Su-33 to do that then you have enough R-27 to use.

The SPO-15 addition was more a tactical implementation than a must have. SPO-15 was at the first line of battle in case an European war. Because those Warsaw Pact Mi-24 was the first response and they will be the first to deal with fresh radar guided enemies.

First and very import, you should reach the same altitude of the bandit. Then keep a straight line flight head on and launch the R-27ET without alter your flight path (the goal is put yourself behind the 27ET contrail) When the Aim-120 get active on your RWR hold a little bit and launch another R-27ET and run away leaving the combat. Try not use any Radar guided missiles in this tactic...

Hohoo that’s neat to read that from you. Suddenly The ECM is hard for guided missiles on your opinion when is about R-27 against B-52. When is the contrary Aim-120 against whatever Russian with ECM, then the best way to make the life easy for people don’t use such long range weapon with heat seeker (R-27ET) is removing the ECM impact on guidance inside 50km range as happening in game now. So what is the R-27ET counterpart for F fighters in game? Maybe the absence of ECM in 50km range made by developers? What you gonna tell me next the Aim-120 will catch everything in whatever ECM/maneuverability/Countermeasures condition exist? Let’s think YES that's correct (it is not) what about the accurate information the missile must receive from the launcher radar? So the ECM is a big problem for F fighters without the Magic donation from developers making ECM ineffective in 50km.

Thanks. I was almost convinced the only Helicopters to do infantry transport was Mi-8 and Huey. By the way I did also test the vehicles and work perfect. We can transport infantry in vehicles and that’s something I appreciate a lot and was on my wish list. Good job by ED on this.

It’s not what I want. It is the physics and technological limitations of air warfare that in some point are disbanded. I know is hard. That’s why I choose this simulator because I like challenges. Just seem to me we are at the limit (the Russian pilots here) Something could change to get this challenge back again.

At this point do you think me or we have hopes to get anything...? I will become Mi-24 pilots and will get ready with some stones in my pocket for A-A defense. Just kidding. Sr. All we want have been mentioned in my first post.

@Airhunter make your own research buddy. Don’t be so pissy broo... You are not the king here to ask everyone certification for every single new hair you find on the body...!

About the R-27P it was confirmed by Russian high military statement this missile exist for long time without given any specific date. Now if we need picture of the head seeker as the fanboys want, then that’s a different animal. I am pretty sure you can find the information that was public. I just don’t care if you are willing to add this new no so new missile. I just telling you what is in internet and sound very interesting for everyone that love military technology as we do :thumbup:

About the Aim-9X example I mentioned. I was quoting @Airhunter. So was a specific answer for him. You all guys answer automatic on his name. There are too much stress or you are scared to lose the air superiority in the F-18??:D:D:megalol: Relax a bit please don’t take everything soo personal. Have fun or take a refreshing drink. God

If you make that question. Then you find that information irrelevant for any implementation in DCS? The information for guidance is very interesting compared with what we got in DCS, specially the T and ET version. Also the R-27P is something confirmed by the armament industry of Russia (I would need to make a research for that to send you the information already made public) and media as you can se the export company show them for export. I am wrong with that...? Or they are speculating with fake weapons? I guess not, do you? I guess if the Patriot system become a module for sale you will need to remove the Kh-58 anti-radar missiles cuz suddenly we can find a lack of proof and information for a passive anti-radar head seeker. they are my guesses. Not take me wrong.

playing with current Mi-24 AI I was playing with the Mi-24 in mission editor and I got to make embark/disembark with 4 RPG units. I think I tried that before without success. Probably they are testing some adds with the current old model for mission editor? Embark disembark RPG in Mi-24V.miz

seem to me you want to dictate as a standard of proof documentation for Russian weapons what we have seen with Aim-9X in video tests and documentation/pictures. This is absolutely unaccepted. The manufactured represented company of Russia for export weapons is what you see in that site. and because you want to dictate a specific standard for documentation you want to limit the Russian weapons developing in DCS on your own way... That is really deep...

you're right. Also what said Fri13 above on some point make sense.

Of course this production line is Russian made. All information there is for export weapons... I notice they designate the R-27 family with number 1 at the end, that should be because this line is not build with Ukrainian hardware for export only as before and have been improved. All the A-A missiles they produce: http://ktrv.ru/production/voennaya_produktsiya/rakety_klassa_-vozdukh-vozdukh/ R-27ER1 and R1: http://ktrv.ru/production/voennaya_produktsiya/rakety_klassa_-vozdukh-vozdukh/rakety_r-27r1-_r-27er1.html R-27ET1 and T1: http://ktrv.ru/production/voennaya_produktsiya/rakety_klassa_-vozdukh-vozdukh/rakety_r-27t1-_r-27et1.html R-27EP1 and P1: http://ktrv.ru/production/voennaya_produktsiya/rakety_klassa_-vozdukh-vozdukh/rakety_r-27p1-_r-27ep1.html RVV-MD (improved R-73 with ~75 degrees): http://ktrv.ru/production/voennaya_produktsiya/rakety_klassa_-vozdukh-vozdukh/raketa_rvv-md.html and more...

The guidance description is very clear described by the manufacturer. 1- Manufacturer description guidance ER version: missiles pursue their targets in accordance with an update proportional navigation method both in the inertial/radio-corrected flight trajectory phase and in the semi-active homing phase after locking on target en route. 2- Manufacturer description guidance ET version: The missile guidance system employs an updated proportional navigation method with the target lock-on accomplished on the suspension under the carrier. (Is very clear it is updated and lock on by the sensors that will send the updating guidance. In any moment they mentioned the Heat IR head seeker is the lock on sensor...) of course the position of the head seeker will be updated to get the heat IR signal by itself at the last phase. What make think to ED is a lock-on from the head seeker from the rail? Then is not updated for ED and is what the 80s export first batch got. Not updated guidances. Why they wanted be directed from the information found by western in the discovered information of the first export batch of this missile? Instead of look what manufacturer tell and offer now for the same 80 aircraft model. 3- The Pandora box here: P/EP version: Управляемые авиационные ракеты класса «воздух-воздух» средней дальности действия Р-27П1, Р-27ЭП1 – унифицированные ракеты с пассивной радиолокационной головкой самонаведения предназначены для поражения радиоизлучающих воздушных целей в любое время суток, в простых и сложных метеоусловиях, в переднюю полусферу, в том числе на фоне различных подстилающих поверхностей, обеспечивая поражение самолетов, ставящих активные помехи РЛС для прикрытия своих самолетов In this last case is very clear explained that missile can be launched from the MiG and Su fighters in any case they mentioned is a last generation aircraft only. It is a passive guidance that only will need direct the passive head seeker to the enemy emission (Radar or ECM). What kind of information they need then...? The warehouse Where they are located?