Hook47

Great work, guys!

The transportable box is missing for me as well. Has this feature just been removed???

For some reason the "Transportable" box is missing for me for all relevant units, and I cannot figure out why. Anyone have an idea?

Beyond stoked for another member of the Mirage family... Different dev, but the M2000C is a LONG time favorite for me. Aerges looks to be knocking it out of the park!

+1 on this issue. The Gazelle Minigun gunner seat cannot be accessed in single player or MP. I've checked the bindings and "3 - Gunner" appears in the bindings, but it has no function regardless of key or control used. This function is broken and the Gazelle Minigun is now useless.

I'm sure the real airplane coule be outfitted with this device. I say implement it!

As of 10/2021 I am also experiencing this. I have a very powerful system (3080ti, high end processor, logs of ram, M.2 drive for DCS) and the Quest 2 works great on anything BUT the Hind in Oculus Link. With the Quest 2 I have terrible lag in the virtual cockpit, but if I go to an outside view it is smooth?!

Being a Soviet airframe flyer, I see where your coming from with this question. The 64 doesn't have AP channels like the Hind or Hip, it's a more interegrated stability solution. Like kgillers3 said, you can turn off force trim or cancel one of the hold modes, but you cannot turn off individual stability channels like the roll, pitch and yaw channels like you can on the Hind, Hip or Shark.

Many developers like to blame ED for these types of issues, but in my estimation the issue is much more likely an internal one. The Gazelle has been a mess for awhile know and while Polychop has acknowledged that fact, they haven't fixed it yet. ED has developed a great multicrew back end so hopefully other developers will leverage that.

I am too, sir! I would agree, this is the first true dual pilot chopper (the Hind can be flown from either pit, but the pilot-operator controllers aren't designed for full time flying as far as I understand). The Gazelle is much simpler, and frankly that module is a real mess right now, particularly in regard to multicrew... I'd be honored to go up with you in a 64 once it is released! My virtual squadron is always looking for a few good men if you are interested in finding a good group of guys to fly cooperative missions with!

Ah yes, I did leave out the INU alignment. I would be surprised if INU alignment wasn't modeled, DCS is very detailed!

Sorry, I hadn't checked here for a couple days! I'll break down the start procedure from memory, but remember this isn't word for word per the checklist, nor all inclusive or "by the book" / 1520 friendly... This is how to start it as fast as possible... 1. Battery switch to BATT or EXT POWER (depending on if you are using a GPU or not) 2. APU button (press to start) and watch the UFD while it fires up. APU ON light should come on (on the button) 3. Rotor brake switch OFF 4. Engine 1 start switch FORWARD (to motor engine) 5. Once the Ng temp starts coming up, engine 1 throttle forward to IDLE 6. Watch temp and UFD for a good start on 1. 7. Engine 2 start switch FORWARD (to motor engine) 8. 5. Once the Ng temp starts coming up, engine 2 throttle forward to IDLE 9. Both engine levers to FLT position 10. APU OFF (by pressing APU button) There ya go! A started AH-64 in 10 easy steps. Again, that's not manual friendly but it will get it running. Look's like we have a real steel AH-64 aviator here, so please set me straight if I missed anything major! I was just a crew chief and a Chinook FE, so I don't know as much as a current pilot!

LOL. I applaud your creativity in coming up with a multiplayer solution. It's a shame multicrew in the Gazelle is such a mess, particularly when we now have several aircraft with totally stable and usable multicrew.

This. +1 for ED to look at making this as a feature, it would be a great problem solver for aircraft like this, and hopefully Razbam could leverage it for aircraft like the F-15E, and Heatblur for the F-14.

The Apache doesn't truly do a whole lot of flying "for you" outside of providing stability, and some aspects of it are surprisingly basic, IE start up, or even the navigation systems available. It's a two crew bird for a reason, and flying can keep one of the crew pretty busy. In principle, the Hind and the Apache both use a force trim system that will feel familiar to pilots of either aircraft, and although the Apaches system is decidedly more computerized, the actual flight characteristics with regard to force trim may not differ as much as one might think. Weapons systems are where the Apache takes on a whole different level when compared to the Hind... I actually think the Hind flies incredibly well. Very fast, good agility (for a large bird) and I find it to be quite stable! I have been a long time Hip pilot, however, so I suppose I am well accustomed.

Having had real world stick time on the 64, and having flown other rotary wings as a rotary wing private pilot, I can tell you the Apache isn't difficult to control. The D model is not particularly agile, but it is not a slouch either. I'd put it perhaps a bit more nimble than the Hind in some regimes, but perhaps not as agile as the Shark or Gazelle (although I don't consider the Gazelle FM to be the same quality as an ED product). Start up is pretty easy, she is easy to get into a hover, and the force trim, if used correctly, makes it a breeze to keep going in the right direction. The challenge with the 64 is available power, particularly at high altitudes. The D is heavy and those EFABS are just packed with lots of fancy avionics, and this comes at a cost. Expect to sacrifice load out to reach high places.

Being familiar with these vehicles in my Army service, I too can verify this in inaccurate. The Hinds cannon should be able to massacre them. The M113, in particular, was only going for reliable small arms protection at various ranges. Anything heavier than that was likely to cause damage. Hopefully ED can update the DM.

Not surprising to me. The acceleration is more a question of drag between these choppers and the Hind loses in that regard. The KA 50 has the most advanced stability system, and the added benefit of twin rotors, so it doesn't surprise me to see it looking more stable.

I can do better, I'll upload a deck landing video for ya here in the next day or so.

Not thinking, doing! The Hind is extremely easy to land on ships, more so than the Hip or Huey in my opinion. She is quite stable!

I got a chance to sit in a foreign militaries Hind many years ago while I was TDY in the U.S. Army. From that moment I was in love with this machine... After returning from Afghanistan in 2014 I remember seeing something about (Belsimtech) planned development of an MI 24. It has been a long wait, but absolutely worth it. As a rated rotary pilot I find the Hinds flight model to be very believable, and consistent with what I was told by actual Hind pilots. The bird is just so different from the other choppers in DCS and I love it. You can tell ED put a lot of love into this bird, and I am truly grateful! My only request is to give the Hind the ability to start on ship decks. I know the Hind is capable of shipboard landing in real life, and the MI 8 has had that capibility added, so I'd love to see the Hind get it as well. It's a fairly easy mod, but I prefer to fly DCS with few to no mods whenever possible! Thanks again for this awesome product. I hope it sells like it is going out of style!

I would disagree. I think the Hind handles in a manner I consider realistic, and while I haven't flown the Hind I do have time in a few different rotary wing birds. I think the Hind is well done.

This is easily resolved by mission builders. Simply add flights marked as SOLO FLIGHT and others designated for multicrew.

Awesome video and good translation. Thanks for posting!

I've got nothing against VNAO for having a bug like this, as it's totally understandable and I'm sure you guys will do you best with the flight model. The irony for me is that the BAE Hawk made by a certain (now defunct) third party had the EXACT same bug!!! LOL. They actually had SDK access tho...