Fri13

And what manual is that?

Quick testing, it was possible to get all buttons and triggers work via VJoy in DCS. But not the right controller mini-stick axis or grip axis (left controller grip is a axis). But the problem is that DCS World will register these inputs properly in bindings, but once you are in the game it will override most with the default actions. But I example managed to get a AV-8B N/A axis registered so that left touch controller mini-stick was a TDC and pressing it down was TDC Action (lock etc). So I could control TV by slewing it with the left touch controller mini-stick and designate targets. Problem was as well that AV-8B doesn't have a support for VR controllers ("shocking", as they have stated in patch notes last december to have been implemented support for it). So for me the Auto_Oculus_Touch -> Autohotkey -> Vjoy (Joystick Gremlin) -> DCSW was a only partially success. But I believe that any of these will capture the touch controllers input, but simply listen it and reacts to it. So DCSW will still read the real inputs and react to them as well. And that can be the main problem.

Well, the animation for the virtual hand to grab the switch is fancy, but it as well feels little off. And in VTOL VR (one of my favorite VR games, so would have hoped to see it in standalone for Quest 2.... Think about playing VTOL VR where ever just with Quest 2.... Oh boy) the cockpit is designed by the VR controllers. Large buttons, well separated big switches and levers. In a real aircraft switches, buttons and levers are placed so that you manipulate them with thumb or you just flip with finger. Like example the MiG-21Bis sidepanel switches are guarded each individually so that you can lay your hand on the panel to feel where your hand is and flip switch up / down with thumb, and then glance that did you flip the proper one and back to looking outside. The landing gear is like you don't look at it, you just get your hand on it and feel it and you operate it in all aircraft. The UFC is such that you place hand to side of it and use thumb to operate it while hand is supported on side. Having a VR hand to perform a "pinch" like in VTOL VR on each widget and knob in the DS could look challenging. It could be a good solution but we would need the virtual hand to go through everything else than these now. I would like to try it as it could be good response but right now it is easy to point virtual hand index finger on thing and get it operated. Problem is that once you do so, the hand continues sending input and widget will keep reacting to input as fast as it can. So you can see switches jumping back and forth at rapid speed etc. That was the old setting. I don't want the beam at all. Just like we have it now. No beam as it is distracting. Just the glove as now is amazing. This means as well that now the invisible beam as it still exist would be visible, you can get it when you point to other side of cockpit in Mi-8MTv2 I noticed... So it seems to be designed so that if you can reach at something the beam is invisible, but if you point something you can't reach, then it is visible!. But I don't want whole beam visible or its function. I want option to have it gone. So options for VR settings for virtual hands: 1) Dynamic laser beam (current) / constant laser beam (old) / no laser beam. 2) On/Off for a capability operate widgets from further distance than touching finger (the end of the laser beam) 3) laser beam visible all the time / only when grip hold down. I think the canopy opening and ejection seat handles etc should require a button click. Not touching. A UFC panel should work with just touching, but you accidentally place hand on ejection seat that's top of you are sitting and BOOM, you are out. Nope, it is requirement to do three times clicking (and should be in all aircraft, as only few does it. Best way to get ejected...). Totally agree. On/Off setting for that too. There was the bug report as well about grabbing those controls even when they were hidden, needs checking that is it still a thing or is it gone. As it was bad when you accidentally moved hand through empty space and suddenly pushed throttle to idle or stick fully to one direction. If invisible = no touch reaction. Actually started to check out for some of the solutions for binding the Touch Controllers and at least this was interesting in one of them: AutoOculusTouch can give you: - index and hand triggers of a Touch, as floats from 0.0 to 1.0. - thumbstick axes as floats from -1.0 to 1.0. - all Touch, Remote and XBox buttons (except the Oculus Home button and remote volume buttons). - all Touch capacitive sensors. - all Touch capacitive gestures (index pointing and thumbs up for either hand). - Pitch, Roll and Yaw of both touch controllers and headset in degrees. - Position of both touch controllers and headset in metres. - Set continuous or limited time vibration effects of different frequencies and amplitudes on either touch controller. vJoy Support Normally AutoHotKey can only generate keyboard and mouse events. vJoy is a driver that emulates one or more virtual joysticks with configurable features. AutoOculusTouch can now send analog axis and digital button values to vJoy. This lets you use Touch (or the remote) as a gamepad in games that support DirectInput. Note: while most of the controls match an XBox controller, it technically isn't one. Any game that uses XInput directly can't see vJoy. Only DirectInput games will work here.

Most of the bindings are there. Trigger = Left Click Trigger (CCW) = Right Click / Middle click to drag knobs around by moving hand. Up = Right click Down = Left click Right = Rotate right Left = Rotate left X/Y = Center VR view A/B = Zoom view (don't really recall which one was which as I don't even remember which side had which without looking a photo, and don't remember which button did what) Grip HOLD = Grab virtual controls as long as hold down. So if something that has changed is possible the trigger acting as LMB when grabbing the stick. I don't recall how it worked back in the day when the virtual controllers gained capability to grab these as I don't use this unrealistic feature (nice to have if traveling with a laptop and VR to fly a simple aircraft like WW2 birds that don't have more than one button in throttle or stick). But that I know that forever you have not had change to bind these buttons and triggers in touch controllers properly in game, what has been wishlist to be changed. One can try to use a DirectInput-to-XInput Wrappers to get things working by the button part by binding them to keyboard etc. Dolphin VR https://dolphinvr.wordpress.com/ Auto_Oculus_Touch https://github.com/rajetic/auto_oculus_touch/releases XOutput https://github.com/csutorasa/XOutput XBOX 360 Controller Emulator https://www.x360ce.com/ The Oculus Touch Controllers should be a DirectInput devices, so you should be able read those inputs and convert them to XInput for standard DirectX inputs. I might try those later today as I am very interested to get more out of them, but I want the hands move in space as now. Personally for me the ultimate is still that no lasers, no crosshairs. Get the virtual hand positioned properly for a real hand and then get each of button/switch etc be triggered only once every X milliseconds (like touch input is registered for same button/switch only once every 200-2000 milliseconds instead like now with as fast and long as finger is on the button/switch).

But they just added things, a lot of things. They have modified many things that are not in the changelog. Like right now the Mi-8 weapon safety light has actual text in it, instead just lamp. We have "VRFree" controller in the VR settings. We have this new hand (and angle and all). Clearly they take these things seriously but need to just do what is required to complete them. Sure that is like realistic thing, but the problem is again in the real controller grip button location being in unrealistic position, why you can't hold cyclic with just two/three fingers as you need to hold the controller in your hand to keep pushing that grip button. Hence it is better to go for press for grab, press for release as then you can fly with holding controller with just two or three fingers like real thing. The current system is as you wanted, in HOLD mode. As long you keep grip button down, as long it is grabbing the virtual controllers. Once you release the grip button, then you release the virtual controls. It is like it was. It is not a Toggle but Hold how it works.

You are not swapping the seats, you are swapping the character. That is the difference. You are in the RPG where you select what AI seat you are playing. You are not flying alone the helicopter but with the AI. So you just "allocate the soul" of the AI. So just like you pretend to be a pilot virtually, you are pretending to be a commander, co-pilot, flight engineer or door gunner.... Again, it is not that you are there to swap seats with some other person. You are allocating just the person in that position. And you are stretching your arm as far you can, but not further. Like in Mi-8 it is for commander easy to flip the weapons safety above his head, in VR you can do that without even looking once you get the experience that in what position it is. It is like in reality that you just reach to it and flip it. But, it is easier for a flight engineer to prepare the weapons by turning weapons safety off from the top left ceiling and then from center top panel and prime the weapons. And commander task is to operate his weapons panel above his head. Actually it is not. I just tested. As long you keep pressing Touch Controllers Grip button, so long you are grabbing the cyclic or the collective. But once you release the grip button, you are not anymore grabbing the virtual controls. So it works exactly as you would want to (I would like to see that option to enable press once to grab, press second time to release). The normal problem is that in Mi-8 you can not bind the weapon release button to mouse - hence you can't just use right controller to fly and use right controller trigger (default left mouse button) to fire. In a UH-1H this is allowed for be binded for mouse, so you can select the LMB to Weapon Release/Machine gun - but you can't still fire with right controller trigger as on that moment the trigger is not recognized as left mouse button.

That is not a trouble for me, that is the realistic experience. You can't in reality reach things = you need multiple people in the cockpit for each person to do different tasks. And that is well done in Mi-8 that you can jump to second seat. At now we can't have a AI keep flying smoothly if you jump to co-pilot seat or flight engineer but need to keep flying even if flight engineer doesn't have controls, but it is better than nothing. Like in reality you can swap controls with the co-pilot when they have better visibility to right side, so you can do that just with a flip of a hat to that side and do it from there.

Instead reversing the work to return new code and hand to old one, it is better just to fix the problem by making the suggested changes. 1) Add option to enable laser beam and crosshair for those who need it (+ adjustment slider to set the laser beam length from like 2 cm to 200 cm) 2) Add option to enable old grip button function to behave that you need to hold it down to have it grabbing the stick/throttle, so when flying you need to keep pressing grip button down. 3) Add option to bind A/B and X/Y buttons as separate functions when holding grip or when not holding grip (and then have opposite as default VR reset, VR zoom, end mission etc) This allows to example set them as trim or shoot/release buttons or just keep them as example left/right mouse button for easy use (and allow trigger to be binded as well). 4) Allow adjusting hand position and angle, as now it is off-axis from the real controller. Trigger by default acts as LMB and when you rotate hand past 12'clock position it acts as a RMB / middle mouse button depending is button/switch target or a knob/dial. That has been problem from the begin that we can't bind those buttons and hats as wanted. Instead we are forced to use what ED decides for them. For flying helicopter I take more gladly that I can just press once the grip to grab the control and then hold gently the controller to fly. I don't need to be keeping grip button down to maintain the grip. Then to let go I press again the grip. Helicopter is Hands On flying, you can't release grip unless you have autopilot like in KA-50 to take care of it, and there you can just release grip as AP doesn't care so much. Flying conventional helicopter without holding the cyclic is unrealistic. And you want to fly helicopter for long periods just by holding controller with two or three fingers instead full grip holding the grip down.

That is similar problem as in many VR games that people don't have space to even flex their hands when they stand, even less to take a side step. So why should those who have space to be limited for standing position and not to be able even move their arms further from their bodies? Sure, return the laser and crosshair as option in VR settings. But allow them to be turned Off separately so that VR hand is required to be used to activate things. I have, like many others too, empty space around the flight chair. There is nothing else than a throttle on left side and stick between legs or at right side (depending settings). I have years moved my hands to operate all the buttons and switches in the cockpits to touch them. This example means in Mi-8MTv2 that I need to swap the seat to co-pilot if I want to operate the right side of the cockpit. If I want to operate the upper panel then it is better be done from the flight engineer seat. It is great we finally have the laser and crosshair gone, but it should be option to turn them back On by those who requires the "extra reach".

All those should be optional in the VR settings. You can disagree but not everyone want laser beams and crosshairs and constantly hold the grip. The old triggers are still there. You just don't get to do it properly as the "invisible laser beam" points at the different direction than your finger does. Mini-stick Up moves switches Up and Down moves Down. Left turns counter-clockwise and right turns clockwise all the knobs. Trigger is still as a left click, and rotating palm around makes a right click on buttons/switches and on knobs it is "grab" and moving hand adjust them. You just need to know where to point the hand to use those things like before.

The new American flight glove is interesting (liked the black leather with nice stitching in the upper part too) and it is now better sized IMHO. I was as well happy to see first the beam lasers gone, but there are few problems now. The previous mini-stick Up/Down/Left/Right works as previously, but you just don't see the cross or the laser beam to know that what you are pointing, and it is pointing wrong direction so it is difficult to do without labels. 1) Regardless you have controllers in use, the mouse cursor moves with the HMD in VR. So you get all over the places the buttons labels popping up and away. Very annoying. You can't disable the "Use Mouse" in VR settings as then it turns to HMD centered mouse dot. Like, I want the hands to be only active when I press the grip button (Oculus Touch). 2) I want to see a option to enable/disable the laser beam as here are people wanted to see it. I am more than happy for having it gone, as I want to point things with my finger (have been doing so for long time) instead use a beam/cross. Have a option to hold the mini-stick Up/Down/Left/Right and have its function to be input when you touch the buttons, switches and knobs etc. Now your poke will just trigger mouse left button and you need to point object and utilize the proper function separately. 3) Hand angle and finger direction is wrong. If having hand in controller properly and pointing with index finger straight, the game hand and finger points to right and below from the real hand position. It feels just wrong and bad. So a hand axis adjustment is required to be in the VR settings. There could be automatic one where you point with finger a dot on the screen and press button and the system automatically adjust hand axis to match the real hand pointing direction. Or just have two axis sliders to adjust the hand X/Y off-set. 4) For the touch / pointing to work properly, we need new setting for all cockpit switches. A delay between activation. Right now if you have a switch that moves Up and Down, then touching it with index finger makes it flip Up and Down at rapid speed. You need to try to just barely touch the button from corret position so it wouldn't be touched when it flips to another position. Like have a adjustable 0.5-2 second delay for re-reaction of the touch. So if you hold finger on the switch then it will swap its position only after set delay time has moved, so like after 2 seconds on each flip it will flip again. This would allow to go pressing buttons in the MFCD easily as right now you press button and it will swap between pages on that one OSB as you don't get to move hand away in time. So your only way is to "swipe" finger quickly over the button carefully so you don't touch buttons next to it. Having re-reaction happen example 0.5 second delay would allow to just point the buttons, and it wouldn't even be a problem if required to input multiple times same button like no:8 in UFC for inputting laser code 1688 as 0.5 second would be enough delay to allow second time of pressing 8 to be acceptable (2 seconds would be annoying in there, but not with switches) I might be the only one who is happy for loss of the laser beam and mouse cursor, but IMHO the virtual hand should be usable without either one. Just get the hand angle and repeat delay fixed and at least I am happy!

All the years (7 years here) for the improved clouds has reserved its purpose and meaning. Just got fresh installations done aside of the previous 2.5.6 version (in case if required) and after couple hours I am ready to delete the previous version. Flying got depth, the feeling how you now can speed upward when you have clouds below and above you in multiple layers is amazing. The tactics got better multifold. The requirement to fly to get the opening from altitude between the clouds is as expected - a amazing experience. The lighting changes for the terrain by clouds shadows is just marvelous. And this is just a begin for a completely new DCS World! We just received something that is not just an eye candy as many said clouds to be, but actually about navigation and tactical engagements multiplier. I have just got to try just three profiles for clouds, and can't wait to get to test them all! And then even get the editor for them! Flying at 12'clock at mid day has never been so visually beautiful and interesting.

Don't take a stress about it, as I trust you that you have good starting point to go for the problem source. I have my own opinions what is missing in the Mi-8MTv2, like some kind a "weight" or "grip" that is difficulty to really point out. It can be about the feeling as well how the VRS feels to behave as well, as for some reason it is as well enjoyable as that there could be something off. Doesn't Mi-8 pilots train for a VRS in a controlled and safe fashion at higher altitudes how it happens and how to recover from it? At least I think some would have some experience for it, while no one really want to experience it at all at any altitude. That might be it. I have just the feeling that the mass/inertia is somewhat missing and it can be about that light Mi-8 feels little too easily "going in" without loading it to maximum, and even then it has some odd thing. I believe you might have something there. As if I compare Mi-8 to something else like KA-50 that is heavier than a Mi-8, it has this interesting inertia. It has the feeling that air grabs you. That is missing from the Mi-8. Based to testimonies about KA-50 vs Mi-8 and Mi-24, the KA-50 should be superior at the high altitudes and high cross winds like on mountains. But I don't get that feeling. That is why I am interested to see how Mi-24 behaves as it should be more stable and more "direct". But nothing of that can be trusted than as a opinion and requires more evidence. Edit: Need to point out that I have been flying SA342 for the last couple weeks as primary helicopter, and its Flight Modeling is destructive. It totally is terrible for your capabilities fly any other helicopter. It takes time to get use to when transitioning from others, but you get to use for its game style flying by how wrong it is. And when you come back to Mi-8, as I have now done to prepare for Mi-24, it makes all senses to say "THIS IS WRONG!" as you just got to completely different experience. I don't recall such major problems when going between KA-50 and Mi-8 alone. Or Mi-8 and UH-1 as all those behaves more as expected.

Same thing has happened on the in sailing, iPads and laptops has got to be accepted as official navigation instruments. I believe you still are required to have a paper map in a boat, but not required to use it. about 10-15 years ago it was that you needed to have maps and use them, but you were allowed to use GPS devices as backup (yeah, people used them as primary). I am old school, even when I travel to other countries I love to have a map available for me. I want at least to have a generic paper map (a A4 size etc) to give me easy way to navigate from opposite side of city to otherside etc. If I just can I use phone instead as all I want on the foreign place is a map and watch. But being able to draw on map, make the markings etc. It is extremely handy. But let's face it, flying is about navigation and not so much about searching fancy places where to go for a beer.

No matter count of anecdotal evidences there are, they might not be true. That is the problem with them. Pilots feedback is important, and it can be utilized where the measurements or lack of information creates a oddity. But it can't be used as primary source over technical evidence and material. Like people can experience a feeling that a control device shakes, while there is no measurable shaking happening. And I am not choking anything that memory is fuzzy, just pointing out that human memory is fragile, and it requires other technical evidence and such to be presented. This is not against you, this is against the idea that pilots are critical or important parts of the evidence, as the fact just is that human memory can not be trusted. There I lost Your points, but it is OK. I don't deny them. Okay, that is the point. Sorry, didn't connect the dots in the earlier discussion as didn't read to the end. I read that part about the diagram of the VRS zone and first I was little stunned that how I don't understand it as I was constantly reading the X axis as "vertical speed" and 0, 1, 2, 3 meters made me scratch head that how can a helicopter sink to VRS at 0-1 m/s vertical speed at higher angle than 30 degree... Until after a minute I read it correctly that it was a horizontal air speed... And the discussion about 30 degree being very deep angle, it is. In a Mi-8MTv2 in a DCS, I might have dropped to VRS maybe few times at the first flights. After that I have might gotten to VRS when I have made ridiculous and extreme landing scenarios that would never in reality happen, like having full bomb load on the one side of the helicopter and other side being empty, landing in a crazy 16 m/s wind and testing the flight modeling for various approach angles and speeds. But maybe it is as well about my first flight methods, where usually I put the new modules airframes to extreme tests to just brake them and challenge them. Find the limits and character by the feeling/touch. As then I know better what to avoid before even starting to look a proper values. For a normal flight I don't end to VRS as it feels easy to avoid. But if that 30 degree part etc is proper, then sure, it should be impossible to get into VRS in such approach angles. I have seen only few videos of the Mi-8/Mi-17 ending to VRS, and they have been fairly dangerous looking ones. Again difficulty to say much without more accurate technical data. Edit: I played Mi-8MTv2 last time on the 2D years ago. Since getting the Rift CV1 and going to full VR and building the proper helicopter controls and all, the Mi-8MTv2 flight experience has been totally different. All the helicopters are completely different to fly in VR with proper controls than it is on throttle/short joystick/no pedals or controllers on table and looking game via display. I believe I would be terrible with any helicopter in DCS if I would need to play it from table and display. That I didn't say that it would not be representive or it would be about reality.

Exactly. You can train and become expert in things, but it doesn't mean that everyone can do it, even with training. Actually there are people who can do it. About 2% of the population can do two simultaneous tasks excellent manner. But that is it, very minor amount of population. Like driving a car at begin is that you concentrate for everything and you need to alternate concentration from one task to another. But in time it becomes natural thing to do, until you hit to point where you are in situation that is not experienced. Like a emergency situation. In a high attention demanding jobs you can improve the performance by training, but only up to a point when your limitations are the end. That has been demonstrated to be just a way of thinking that one can learn very quickly, once they itself know what is going to happen. You can get average person to describe properly the process of X even when they do it at first time while they are doing it, but it is as well question that how accurately they need to describe things. It can be trained in daily life in normal tasks to get to that state of mind. That is the interesting part in the experience that how people's skills get better via training. You see them do something first time and then they get better with just few repeats. Doesn't work so easily for everyone, but most get to it. But when it comes to very complex phases, let's say to perform a over 100 proper functions in correct order and timing, it becomes very complex. And there are really just handful of people who can do that, who can example listen a song first time in their life and repeat it. Actually tasks that you do without thinking are likely those that will kill you. That is the most dangerous part of the in daily live. The mind being somewhere else because body goes by automation for something that has been trained and trained to level. The requirement to concentrate for the doing is challenging. Yes, it is surprising percentage that how many drops from being in the specific position. That is as well reason why it is wrong to say "Everyone has a change to get where they want to be in their lives" as it is totally wrong. And interesting part is, that even those will not train or experience everything even at the basic level as they don't need to. Well, let me put it this way.... When you are at the war and you have pilots dying all around you. You lower your standards. There is no any other way. The idea that you can just have a handful of extremely highly trained pilots to win the war is just wrong. Unless of course you can have thousands and thousands of such people. That is why even today militaries fund a lot of research projects that sounds like a Sci-Fi, where one could transfer one's experiences to a another person. Almost instant training. From years you could cut to days or even hours. As there is a genetic memory, and if it could be found how to copy and implement memories... I just wanted to point out that regardless what level pilots there are, there are majority still that can not transfer their knowledge to a simulator without doing proper questioning and proper context and environment to give the pilot a better understanding that what is the goal of the simulator to be. Like you can't have a helicopter pilot have same experience of flying with a just joypad and display. They can read the instruments and if some remembers things correctly then know if some things are going wrong like RPM is too high or aircraft doesn't stop at proper time based to instrument. But that is again more about why giving different testing environment gives different results. Pilots are humans. They forget things and they remember things wrong etc just like anyone else. Military has done a lot of studies and research for this as well among civilians for decades, and only in the decade or two has them started to be taken seriously and applied to the practice. The problem is as well that more you recall the memory, more you rewrite it. And when you learn even how to do it, you can wipe your own memory of events. These are not simple topics, but for comparing it analyzing and understanding VRS that is simple topic, it is still required to be more scientific and tested than memory based feeling.

If someone would ask that what person needs to do to drive a simple car from home to work, it is very difficult task to actually explain in detail that how much they need to turn the wheel or how much they need to push pedals or what gears they needed to switch in what order and at what speeds. Even if the person has drove that same route weekly for last 20-30 years. Human mind is very fragile and forgets many things, and it is very easily filled with false memories, information and doubts with simple suggestions. That is why these days ED should use a simple custom made "blackbox" to register all the aircraft movements if not just from cockpit, then from outside having them mounted there. They literally are gopro size devices that measure all accelerations and so on all G forces, roll rates etc. They can be used to measure with camera recording from cockpit instruments to check some values. Record the control devices positions and all movements etc.

Aaaand this is reason why requiring a track file for a bug report doesn't usually work as the track file on your computer can show the bug, but it shows nothing wrong on the developer computer. This is why every bug report should be detailed by the steps how to produce it so that bug tester can actually understand that what is tried to be done and then repeat it various means. And regardless that, it is better to have a video recording of the gameplay so it can be seen without relaying to track system or to someone else testing it. The track system is at best for generating some fancy movies and other things that does not require repeatable action in accuracy. It can't even be used for a game save feature where you would take control from moment you want to continue the game, as there is possibility that doesn't happen properly as replay system doesn't work right.

Well of course AI can be firing and guiding it. But if you are going to fly alone the Mi-24 as in all seats, you want to have AI to fly helicopter when you guide the missile. As you can not do both same time. This is reason why example the SA342 has unrealistic autohover so that you can sit as a co-pilot and guide missile while looking through optics, as otherwise you crash on the ground as you can't have right hand on the joystick to guide missile and on cyclic same time. In DCS you can bind them to same joystick and fly and shoot same time, but it is just unrealistic. In Mi-24 the WSO has both hands on the controller and eye on the optics and can't fly, so either use auto hover or AI to fly around. When the AI WSO spots something and is ready to launch ATGM, you as pilot need to turn helicopter toward that sight position so your gunsight shows the crosshair the WSO has aimed, and then you have aligned the missiles flare to be spotted by the SACLOS system and command guidance automatically. It is like flying Mi-8MTv2 and giving the commands and angles to the door gunner with Kord. Except in that you don't have any control for the gunner that what target it should engage or it doesn't tell you if something is spotted.

Map doesn't care about GPS jamming because it doesn't have GPS. A digital map doesn't care about GPS jamming because it doesn't care about GPS. The tablet in the military aircraft is not for the digital navigation system, it is for digital map. It is totally realistic to have a tablet as kneeboard that will digitally show you the map, the flightplan, the markings and all. You just don't use its networking capabilities to tell you where you are, as you are going to use the aircraft navigation system for that. And if the GPS is jammed, it means that your aircraft is forced to fly in INS mode, and that means you anyways need to have a map and flight plan visible so you know at what direction and how long etc you are need to fly etc. For a civilian flight the GPS is nice to have as your aircraft likely doesn't have so sophisticated instruments anyways, but regardless of that you still need to know how to use the map be it a digital or paper, and you need to have your flight plan drawn on it. A tablet for navigation is excellent tool, until you run out of battery or it gets broken. That is why you need to have a paper map somewhere for emergency reasons so you can pull it out and start figuring things out. These days they are plugging batteries and all kind gizmos to "future soldier" and they are mostly trash, as if the batteries die (for what ever reason) their equipment goes crazy. Like Russians are testing a battery powered body heaters for their soldiers. Where soldier has a controller cable coming from their sleeve to adjust the heater power. Like, from where are the soldiers going to recharge the system when in war and they are going to spend next 3-5 months in the forest?

Need to remember that we don't benefit from the 9M120M with 8 km range at all, as we are limited to 3x and 10x optical sight magnification. The 10x magnification offers likely about 110-120 meters wide FOV at 1000 meters. So at 5000 meters you are looking about 550-600 meters wide scene. At 8000 meters you would be looking about 1000 meters wide scene. You just are not going to get a shot at that and if you would manage to get the large vehicle (a truck with tarp) on clear contrasty scene (sitting in yellow the crop field in direct sunlight) you likely are going to miss as I don't think the sight and system can by any means deliver accurate guidance commands at those ranges to even spot the missile. So you would need a much higher magnification and improved targeting systems to utilize such ranges. Even with a KA-50 and its 7x and 23x magnification it is challenging to engage targets at 8 km range. The 7x is too narrow for KA-50 use in many cases, why it is great we have 3x in the Mi-24 as you don't have contrast lock and automatic target tracking, but need to keep pointing the stabilized sight at the target.

I recall that it is a modern one as said that lately the LIPA SOEP-V1A IR jammer has been in process to be removed why we don't have it simulated, a system that is stated to be ineffective against anything newer than blowpipe, so 60-70's era missiles.

Why those are major game changes for everyone as You say. That might be the major future new element for the helicopter flying to get the AI work nicer than now. Like it is not so fun in UH-1H when suddenly your commander starts spraying miniguns all over the places as he did spot a infantry soldier at maximum distance somewhere front between the buildings, while you are focused to support own ground units while just overflying them. We are again in the interesting phases where major changes are coming with the new and improve features. Like if this "Petrovitch" turns to be great later on when it is developed futher, I totally want to see it in the other helicopters like KA-50 wingmen. As it is as much about Mi-24 Co-Op with AI as flying with AI wingmen and so on all other helicopters. So for some period it can be the first major difference maker for Single Player elements how Mi-24 changes it to better by having a more aware AI with you. Is there information about is the "Petrovitch" just for your helicopter AI or is it as well used for your wingmen?

I don't have either problems supporting ground troops. And again I am not thinking about buying Mi-24, as I already did. And I did not buy it by thinking its capability in battlefield.... What I quoted was the OP created topic of the Mi-24 fitting to the DCS World. He is the one who is requesting discussion about how it fits to DCS world, how it can support ground units, is it only good for using ATGM against some ground targets etc. Topics can be discussed without doing it only from own opinion point of view. I can defend someone's opinions even when I don't share them. I can counter someone's opinions even when I share them. In discussions it is not about person, it is about the topic.