Kaktus29

@zaltysZ .. good points.. i agree, .. only problem i have is Hinds don't do any of those in DCS)) they will move towards the target after firing first missile, then second, then thirds, then switch to guns guns guns and then be blown away by returning fire of the tanks etc.. why is AI so stupid and not circle around for another pass at safe distance and until it uses ALL guided munition and only after that go for other weapon use -like guns ..its beyond me how stupid AI is.. and also, i guess others make good points as well, about whether you are flying above friendly forces thus knowing safely you have your ass covered or not.. if you are flying above friendly forces i guess its safer to hover or move minimally while if not then speed is everything and you have to race across the target or close to the target and wreck havoc in the hopes havoc doesn't wreck you first))

@viper.. i agree.. i mean if AD are down than A-10 is more lethal on the basis of ordnance it carries-it carries much more, but if there is AD lurking below i think A-10 is in bigger danger especially if he is to use his cannon to inflict damage.. if he is using mavericks and other guided munition its different, but cannon speaking i think choppers are better suited to sneak up on the enemy and kill them and hide back into the ground.. A-10 cannot do that.. everybody will see it by looking up in the sky.. and since manpads are proficient its easy to attack it during his gun run.. a chopper much harder to hit since you can't see it with your naked eye at 2-4 km hugging the terrain..while you can easily hear and see the A-10 above you .. and he will have to come in danger zone after each gun pass ..

@cowboy .. yeah, i can imagine this heist of huey)) if i'd fly it, it would be a record short flight.. a engines would start, guards would come in, i would scream into the cockpit "fly motherfu*ker FLY!" .. before all the buttons would be pressed i would be tasered,beaten as i look into the sky and ask WHY, WHY ED whhyy..why no release yet))) and also, from all the fat guards i get the slim one's who are fast runners and got me before i could take off .. my defence in the court would be : "Its ED fault! they made me do it! i had no choice)))" ..

the tension is so high some people make start to helicopter themselves out of their chair )) its dangerous, since god forbid something get wrong and Huey gets delayed for 1 month!!! .. the feeling is like when you are dating this hot chic for 3 weeks already and every time you go out she tells you this is the day/night we do it)) yet,when it comes to it she say,sorry, not just yet, tomorrow okei?)) we might get some people so desperate that they might entertain actual heist of the Huey ))

yeah i guess i see the point in moving chopper being more capable of defensive action than hovering one, plus the fuel saving measure, plus harder target to hit instead if it hovers..but still, the chopper is moving TOWARDS the target so i'm thinking isn't it counter-productive to do that when you are going into the enemy range to hit you?.. if you have some woods or building to hide after you launch your weapon, should loitering be better.. how long is chopper active anyway once they find an enemy.. shouldn't all the action be done in 5-10 minutes and then head back to base for reload anyway? About A-10 guns vs. Ka-50 i would say choppers have advantage since they will not fly over the target after they use the guns, a big important issue where chopper can use the cannon much more and more different targets positioned differently than A-10 or any other CAS plane can,.. after the initial attack A-10 has to circle and this takes time, .. chopper can hover all the time and take 1 target after another... i also believe moving makes the chopper aim better with rockets and guns-especially if the guns are fixed like on some Mi-24's.. so moving and basically strafing the target as if its a plane you are using.. while the moving cannon should give you the advantage to be still while you use it and hit as many target as you can before alerting the enemy of your position and going into evasive action..

yes, if we had Flechette rockets than this changes everything.. you can get even more destruction to soft targets and with much less rockets.. does anybody know why are russian helis always moving towards the target when launching their ordnance ? .. does the Mi-24 seriously need to move forward when they launch their rockets or vikhr/ataka missiles? .. even when they fire cannon they keep moving towards the target? .. to counter the "recoil" ))lol..? don't get it..

yeah i agree, the SM is lesser than TM but its cheaper and its what Russian Air Force is using and will be using ..so in the spirit of flying a Russian Air Force CAS i would choose SM even though TM is better .. i rather fly something that is really flown in real life than some prototype that was discarded.. Same situation is with BS, .. Russian Air Force has rather decided to concentrate on the Black Shark 52 -which is a twin seater than the one seater.. But have no qualms flying the BS one seater, its great chopper and first simulation of co-axial chopper... for that we can be grateful to ED of making it to our virtual world..

yeah, i love the shark's "thump thump thump" sound..it sounds more metalic..like clubbing your victim with an iron bar.. while A-10 sounds like "taking an iron dump" on your enemy.. both are terrifying to the victim of course.. but i like the sharks sound better.. also, does anybody know when do choppers use those useless rockets? ..i mean, they are soo, useless.. why have them.. wouldn't it be better to be armed with gun-pods instead.. or is it impossible to put instead a smaller vikhr design in those pylons instead?.. and are rockets on choppers more of a armour piercing kind or the cluster soft skin kill type?..

@GG tnx 4D answers.. i meant about real pilot efficency of course, virtual pilots is so-so when it comes to proficiency of pretty much anything from take-off to landing we can see huge discrepancies not even going into more complicated attack runs on ground targets or bvr and wvr fights.. just thought about what you said in dogfight when pilot looks whether its going to a 1 circle or 2 circles turn, and lets imagine both pilots wait for the other to make the move))lol.. wouldn't it be fun to see nobody makes the move, they just pass and pretend this didn't happen)).. then coming back to base and explaining it to superior officers what happened?)) "well, you see sir, i waited for him to move, he probably did the same, so we just kept going and eventually we lost interest in each other")) Also, do you think pilots take low Pk gun shots or rather wait for a better Pk probability since its not like they have lots of gun rounds-especially the russian fighters.. its like you get to have 3-6 "shots" and its empty.. do you think this procedural air-to-air will still be fought by humans in 20-40 years time.. considering the amount of information that 5gen planes will be having and computers making split-second decisions especially in an environment where the tiniest radar blip could prove the way to victory or defeat?.. i can't see how human pilots will be able to take advantage of all that will be happening.. i'm thinking patriot and s-300 series that have computers deciding if a radar blip is a target or not according to algorithms that are advanced enough to make a calculated decision that matters in real life.. the speed of all this will just increase and push people out of the envelope ..until 5gen pilots or 6 gen if they still will be in the plane will just occupy a post where they as a computer technician decide which strategy to implement and how, plus push a couple of buttons..the rest will be super-computers doing the calculated moves, even of the plane when its dodging the missile.. if i look at the f-35 or f-22 and think, what is faster, pilot receiving the alert message that missile is inbound and then takes 0.7 seconds to ACT, or the computer that will act within 0.0 seconds from the time of the alert message?.. i think the human will be pushed out, sooner or later.. the systems are just to complex for him to efficiently employ them.. maybe not 5gen, but 6gen i'm beginning to see lots of pilots on the unemployment list..

@GG how much efficiency do you think there is in an event of gun dogfight? i mean, procedural-wise.. for instance dropping iron bombs on target is also procedural, no wild weird moves, pretty much following a script of altitude, angle, speed and dropping the bombs.. but the ability for 99% of pilots of performing this act within 100% accuracy is pretty huge.. how close to repeating such performance and proficiency is there in gun fights in dogfights?.. i mean, if you pass the enemy and soon start pulling high G turns towards you, the tactic does it change according the enemy plane or doesn't.. and if it does are pilots really trained so much they can make this split second decision and alter their dogfight approach because the enemy plane is different.. like, sometimes even altitude will change the way you dogfight, maybe do less bleeding turns and more altitude gaining if your engines are better, or if the enemy is better with engines maybe dive with low yo-yo.. i don't know.. what i mean is, how efficient are pilots to repeat this on any day.. or is it more of a "feel it" strategy.. still being procedural but not so procedural as your take-off routine or releasing dumb bombs..

i wonder how expensive are this simulators.. they have to be cheaper than those that move the cabin of the pilots but still not quite cheap.. most likely in the millions of USD worth.. damm, if the price could fall to 20.000 dollars i would think of buying one, that is until my bank tells me this is not a loan they would approve ))

i think having darker schemes is for planes that usually fly at night and do the most striking at night-US.. US was the first to have this night capability and to make the planes less visible to the naked eye it makes sense to make darker planes to fit the dark night skies.. While Russian one's were meant to be used by daylight for interception,dogfights, so colours that help you camouflage yourself in the background are preferred .. A grey colour US uses will hardly do magic if the plane flies low and you stumble upon it looking down, while the russian one will blend much more.. but that is during daylight.. if it is during night the US blends great.. for this reason i think Russia also started painting their Su-34,35,etc.. black... and grey..

oh men, what laughs.. can you imagine our pilots eyes, so precise that we can determine a real photo for a LOMAC)) with our eyes and piloting abilities whatever air force would employ us would regret it in the first day of training) .. but yes, Mi-8 is classic.. such a reliable transport chopper that cost-effective and rugged abilities are unmatched .. the repair crews love it, the pilots love it, and troops on the ground who wait for supplies love it..

love the choppers.. just realizing the fact that you are in the air by the power of submitting the air to punishment with your blades is something that is exciting enough.. its such an unnatural way to be in air that i can't get enough of it.. with planes you glide more or less, it makes aerodynamic sense..with helicopters its soo, forced)) like you are waging war on AIR and winning as long as you are in air.. but if blades stop turning you are dead-simple.. the feeling when you hover, think, plan, look at the map, and be close to building while assessing your options is incredible.. very hard to do that in planes where you need to think ahead and act very fast.. but the only thing missing for good chopper sim in dcs is much improved urban environment.. if that happens this thing could rival BF and CoD easy.. but in a much more realistic setup and scenarios and OOB-order of battle.. with buildings that would have damage model realistic and its "get out of here".. i think many people would jump to DCS chopper than planes for seeking blasting the enemy on the ground fun.. for making sure you get to blast anything with a chopper some fighter superiority flying would still be needed, but after that victory in the air, flying a choppa is amazing experience.. as Arnie used to say: "GET TO THE CHOPPAAA!!!" ))

Yak-130 is really nice, just watched some Russian doc about it, it has multiple flight behaviour simulations so the rookie pilot can train as if he is flying with Su-34 or Mig-29 ..or even Tu-160.. i mean the plane starts acceleration slowly, moves, rolls slower or faster according to which plane its simulating )) nice ha..

@marcos.. i've read some military sources were talking about reducing the 2500+ F-35 to a less number like 1250 fighters.. because of the price.. the project surely is complicated to heaven and back.. biggest problem is as @tflash noticed is playing catch up.. SuperBug can be installed new tech very easily compared to cramped and already ridden with problems F-35.. so the longer F-35 is delayed and the more F-18 gets advanced the bigger problem for launching F-35 with some super big advantage compared to SuperBug.. the only thing F-35 will be having is "stealth" for what its worth.. plus higher maintenance over its lifetime..

i guess the Su-25 are learning the highway landing-take off approach .. but doing it while the highway is operating is.. quite something.. i wouldn't mind enjoying the sight of it myself.. worse case scenario..-what a way to go))

i was thinking and writing about same stuff in other threads.. and agree completely.. what is lacking is any real data of how air to ground attack happens, not to mention BVR->merge .. especially since we will be getting some older airplanes where formation attacking was even more important-aka Mig-21,Mig-23, etc.. I mean, i look at the Su-25 in Afghanistan.. and think to myself.. the level of expertise needed to use 1970 navigation system to fly into some mountain looking rock and find 20 mujahadeens firing at your guys while flying 700 km/h at 20.000 feet ..?!?!.. how, .. how in the hell do you do that.. if i'd be the pilot i would circle around the wrong mountain trying to find anything that looks like a target for 1 hour while the guys that called CAS would be killed like 50 minutes ago.. and of course the attack to be effective needs to happen in formation.. like you circle around, find the target, and then the lead aircraft strikes first,you follow in his "footsteps", and the 3rd wingman too.. etc etc.. then egress same way, rinse, repeat etc.. to do this with any kind of proficiency in DCS for most virtual pilots i think would be impossible.. just finding the right spot in the map where you are needed would be a miracle-of course finding it in time that is!- .. i don't know, is it so hard to find out this "basic" manoeuvres and tactics that USSR used and NATO used-i think A-10 had to use some form of formation attacks so they don't end up each for himself diving, egressing and firing weapons all over the place.. and starting like a wingman should be a must.. and only if you "pass" the exams that you are capable of formation flying, and following your LEAD into attack-air-to-ground, air-to-air.. and then re-joining in high proficiency manner-like you could get it right 7 times out of 10 grade to pass.. anything lower than this and you are not qualified to be a wingman)) this should be an option under "Ace" difficulty.. right now, most of us are flying just all over the place...

i calculated the amount of hours i spend playing ED simulations and if each hour would be movie-priced as when i go to the cinema (which is around 4 USD) i would have spent over 8 years 10.000 USD.. yet i spent for the purchase of the game about what.. 150-250 USD?.. 40,60 whatever, its nothing compared to the ability to actually "feel" the chopper how it flies and how good or bad you are at it.. that feeling is priceless.. unless you are an actual pilot or have access to professional heli-simulators this is the only chance we have now.. so the price is hardly an obstacle to me-even though i'm not really rich or anything i don't mind spending 40-60 bucks on this amazing new ED edition..

does anybody know what is the distance that SAM launchers can be from the tracking radar? ..is it only 500 m, or can it be with data-link or plain wire-data-link-to prevent any kind of jamming from tracking radar to launcher and make this distance up to 50 miles? .. if so, wouldn't that make targeting SAMs extremely difficult? .. i mean, you might see the tracking radar 200 miles from you, but the launcher could be 5 miles from you.. so, SAM could potentially out range any ARMs and planes that attack it.. i know, F-35 can detect the launch of the missile, and we are back at protecting this or camouflaging it.. i was thinking either of having 10 decoy launcher in the vicinity of the real launcher, the real one is of course more hidden then the fake one.. after the launch the launcher moves away to a prepared "hide out" while the fake one's get hit by retaliation.. my idea is about kinda hit-and-run tactics.. as soon you attack one launcher another one fires at you, and draws you inside other rings of fire..the point is, the launcher that would fire first, and therefore destroy a plane that costs 100 million of dollars... now i don't think 1 launcher costs even 2 million dollars, so in worst case scenario 1 plane for 1 launcher the SAM wins.. about decoys, yes, thats a tough one, you can send cheap drones immitating attack, so you need to fire at them or something..and thus exposing your launchers.. but i guess not all hope is lost, this drones could be hit by air force that could use the EW, track radars that would be protected as i said.. @GG you said its impractical.. so, it could theoretically work..but its not practical.. now, if F-35 can approach the EW at 5 miles than maybe it can be destroyed, or cruise missiles made to penetrate 2 m of heavy armour,but such a missile would be radically much bigger and slower and expensive than todays ARMs are.. about Pantsir inability to shoot down missiles and even bombs, so far no info yet to prove this, while many tests were done under heavy ECM and pantsir shot down everything from LGB, to Bombs, to cruise missiles, and other low-flying fast targets.. you could try to "overwhelm it" but you don't know where it is, and anyway, you are not targeting pantsir but the EW or Tracking radar of long range SAMs.. pantsir and other hidden units around it are there just in case you send 10.000 pounds of massive ordanance to finally knock this heavily protected EW out.. unless we get stealth cruise missiles that no radar can pick up i can't see how easily can one knock this contraption i made.. as far as i know SA is very important, so how come having your EW survive most of what will be thrown at it is not something that is strategic and very important.. AWACs for instance if better than EW on the ground, it can move, yet in a way its worse off, it can't really accelerate fast and change direction fast.. while my second idea of having EW reinforced so it doesn't brake under huge acceleration one can make it tracked on tracks hidden under the grass and make a last ditch move that moves it 500 meters away thus avoiding a hit..this is the second tactic of not having armour protection for EW but would be protected by mobility and evasive manoeuvres that even the most agile missiles couldn't hit.. so, in the end you get yourself good SA even under heavy fire, thus most of your defensive elements keep working close to 100% efficiency .. but i guess ,nobody wants to take a chance like this, since its really out there, this idea of mine, they rather go the safe way, try to make it more stealthy, more low frequency as GG said, and thus it all ends up in tech-war-competition who makes the more ultra silent electronics while my tactics is more dangerous since it either works and its revolutionary move or it doesn't and all your EW and other tracking elements are destroyed ever more easily than before..

omg, just thought of something even more simple.. and it exists already.. the SILOS version of protection.. basically having space under earth for the EW to drop in and then covered on the top by heavy armoured doors.. after enough time(that is calculated from detecting incoming ARMs to logically hitting the position) the shield opens, EW pops up from the ground like miracle come true and operates without a hitch.. as far as i know those blast doors at SILOS are so strong that nothing short of a point blank nuke will take it out.. so, something "cheaper" for the ARMs, and SDB, and other small potatoes could be designed relatively cheap.. the most expensive part comes by installing generators underneath the earth, providing link with electricity and other forms of power.. why the hell hasn't nobody thought of this.. are ARMs so unreliably that nobody saw the need to do this, or am i so smart? and i know i'm not, i'm just saying, its weird that at least in publications i haven't seen anything in this lines.. of course, i reserve the right that this my idea could of course be so stupid it is beyond imagination.. i would only like to know why.. i know it has to be a stupid idea, but i want to debunk this "defence idea" more easily.. like, the armour is too heavy, the engines don't exist to move this, the armour can be penetrated by new generation of armour piercing warheads..or something along those line.. so far i haven't seen any of such arguments to make this crazy idea of mine well, retarded..which i hope it is, because if its not then allot of highly paid scientist are wasting time with all those chaff and crap they have to save the EW from ARMs attack..

well, defeating SDB and other SLOW ASS ordnance is foolishly easy with short missile defence systems such as Pantsir and other designed for point defence.. and this guys would be taking them out in case as you said lots of stuff would be dropped on the shielded EW position.. again, you assume EW would have closed for a long time, i didn't say that.... seeing the incoming missile is possible, meaning, all that you need to do is make the shield that comes from the ground up and envelopes the EW.. assuming HARM doesn't do a HARRIER in mid air to wait for the shield to go down-i don't see how HARM will damage the shield.. i hope you can use your imagination to understand what kind of shield i'm thinking, .. not something like 2 inches of steel, but something along the lines of 2000 mm of armour ..composite, ballistic, you name it.. so, whatever you are throwing into it, it can bounce off like nothing... unless you want to spend thousands of missiles by firing at that location to make the EW "hide" for the duration of 1 hour so you can make the mission i the tactic would work just nice.. i think you are seeing this mechanization as a slow shield that takes 20 minutes to close the EW)).. no, i'm thinking something along the under 1 seconds CLOSURE rate.. Fragmentation warheads will do nothing, heck even Tank fire will do nothing.. what you need to have is such a massive weapon that blind people will detect it long before it reaches the EW , meaning it will be targeted long before it comes into contact with EW position.. Another idea i had of protecting this very important sites is, having them on "tracks".. imagine small tracks, the tracks go in a circle of diameter of 1000 m, .. as ARMs race in to the "location" of the EW, or tracking radars, this thing accelerates along the tracks to another position and ARMs fail to adjust for one its only Air-to-ground missile anyway.. while the EW on forced tracks could be designed to make such rapid change in course and position that its impossible for missile to strike it EVEN if it would have Amraam or R-77 maneuverability .. the "tracks" would be hidden from plain sight, so you can't make a plan of assuming where the EW will "blitz" .. all in all, i think EW protection is actually much more easily to be obtained than what we sadly see in DCS where that thing is looking like glutton of punishment .. )

@GG about EW protected by amour..no, i didn't intended to have it "mobile" .. its if you think of it, EW being stationary ..but then you have build into the ground this heavy duty armour that would come out of the ground and envelop the EW or tracking radars, and after the rain stops(ARMs all slam into the armour) it goes back into the ground exposing the EW to the sky to work again.. what would make this move? the armour? generators built underground, providing power etc.. moving and closing and opening such an armour in-time (modern radars i believe notice the ARMs in the air in time to shut their radars, but it doesn't help since you are still there in the same position) ..so time for the massive armour to enclose this could very easily be made with such a speed(under 2 seconds) and voila, HARM can HARM no one anymore.. and if you send something massive enough to penetrate the shield than SAM can knock it off easy anyway..

canards? wait a minute, isn't this all the craze about not being stealthy.. or is it only if russian and chinese have canards that they are un-stealthy ..here they become stealthy.. strange.. but planning 6 gen. today is really a waste of resources, building newer generation of planes takes more and more time because they are much more complex then before.. look at F-4 jump to F-15 in about 10-15 years, and then we have jump from F-15 to F-22 that took 30 years or more to some extent.. same will be with 5 gen to 6 gen.. it will take even longer.. unless we are talking 5gen++ variants.. but thats different altogether.. but i say, if pentagon has resources by all means, spend spend spend))

i guess we need more strategic targets that would then be heavily defended by complex SAM system nets and fighter coverage that would call for a B-2 to be put in use..right now, whatever setup you put you can knock it out with F-16 armed with 2 ARMs..) after that you can go to this "important" strategic target and knock it out with mk-82.. maybe new form of Ci4 or other C&C complexes that would end up being the actual place where you can for instance use the favourite F10 button view and if they get destroyed off goes your ability to use F10.. then i would like this idea.. for you will need to heavily defend this place, but also the option should be to actually find this CC place in the first place.. so DCS would be perfect with some planes involved in EI missions, electronic intelligence missions that would "fish" out any signals or whatever, and closer you are to the emission more info you get etc etc.. somehow simulate this inteligence gathering, and if you are successful at it, you might get some cordinates where your intelligence officers suspect the CC is hiding.. and then you call the B-52 off mape as exorcet said to finish it off either with cruise missiles of B-2 .. it would make a whole sub-mission where much more is involved than just sending a bomber to bomb airfields or tanks..