borchi_2b

nähh, the acedemies have them already written a couple of times. But it makes sence to ready tactical stuff now and then. You will adopt it without thinking of it.

@MBot Well the mechanised troops of any army work the same way. It is for the german army of the cold war time the same. Both sides were evenly matched and both used similar tactics. Everybody knew, an invasion would be worth nothing as they new from thier own tactics the weak links of it, what the opponent new too. Maybe that is one reason why we never faced the WW3. About the MANPADs, well, you have to see the targets to fight them. If you get hits on a few tanks from different postions in a few seconds, you have to stop to get the MANPADs out of the vehicle. Which makes you vounurable. The helos dug down and hide while thier missile fly and as soon they are spotted it is too late. Plus you have many helos and most of the time more then 1 squad of 4 operating agains a battilion. For real warfare the intel is most vital, cause you have to plan the attack on the invading armys to stop thier momentum. Enviroment also helps to plan. critical bridges for example that need to be crossed can be blown up and you have the army stopped for awhile and intel can do its job. You get the info where they are in which structure and start to plan you moved. Wargames a re a bit like chess, just with a diffrent outcome of casualties, cause chess is not payed with blood. You can plan you mission with manpads too. Make the unit stop when one of the vehicles is destroyed and may get the MANPADs deployed. Then you see they will move slow afterwords, or should move slow, if they will move at all. Have not planned any mission for awhile. The slower a unit mves the easier it will be to fight the unit. Mechanised troops they are slowed down in thier momentum by getting blown up from helicoters which also reduces the fighting and hitting capabilities. In warfare it is all about slowing the momentum of the opponent to plan and start the counterattack. This is what I sometimes missed in the mssion I played, plus I always missed wreckages of fought battles in a premission that was played before in a campagne. I once made a mission for a buddy of mine and added alotof wreckages from a prior battle, where they would have been aproximately. He came back with the note that he was super confused and it was hard to make out active standing units and sometimes moving units too. That are also factors that add to the equations. So combat is anything then easy and clean like in a simulation. I could wirte books about this topic, what a real combat scenario should look like. cheers Sven

Well infantry is not the kind of target for a HOT3. No matter if manpad or not. Infantry is fought by infantry that uses ambushes. At least that is the doctrine we learned and would have fought the big warshaw army. Guerillia tactics donw by a complete army, well imagine what confusion would have been caused. About real tactics, well we have info from Real Gazelle Pilots and how they implement thier tactics but we were asked not to share names and specifics. So sorry GG Tharos, even if we would have such books we are not allowed to pass that stuff forward. What we can say though is, that most of the HOT3 would be shot hovering at a certain postition and move and fall back again. Imagine destroying one tank of a platoon, maybe the commanding tank. This would slow down the whole platoon and they would reorganise with the other 3 left tanks. Think of this chickenhut like a sniper who kills first the corpsman of a infantry unit and next the officer. That slows down the momentum of that particular unit by hours, not minutes, we talk about hours. That is the same tactic with the little scouts like BO105 and GAZELLE. They ould pin down tankunits one by one and slow down the momentum of the huge army. Maybe that hard that the whole army gets to an hold. No that is where you want to have established air suoperiority and get the tank plinkers into the game like the a10a/c and others. This is how WW3 would have rolled in Germany. We were thought well in our military how this tactical stuff would have rolled. Well at least I can speak for my unit, not for all units in our army. Basic tactics for infrantry also work for helos in certain ways ;-)

Hi guys, Well it was back in late 2015 when I tested a general training mission with Poly_B, but later on I tested the GAZELLE in the exact same mission. It is tricky but not impossibile to fight with her against moving tanks. As I see it from my point of view, the engagement would always start at max ranges in real life. For me as commander I would like to be at a waiting position and let the tanks close into range. I can use my laser distance finder to measure the targets all the way to max distance and make the first shot. As soon I have made the first shot I try to make a move to a different spot and fall behind my other 3 buddies to ensure the next line of fire, as my buddies will do the same. This should be a good tactic and also applies to basic infantry tactics we learned in the german navy. I have not tried to attack targets in a move cause you would have to fly and stear the missiles at the same time. In a dual cockpit this might be a total different ballgame, but we all have to wait for such upgrades at the moment. I for myself recommend haveing 2 GAZELLES working as pair minimum against any target oout there, cause this way you can move tactical against any armour. cheers sven

Yes it has real night fight abilities, do to the fact that you can change the FLIR and can see targets at night and the missile is wired it is not dependand on any light situation .

Hi Hannibal, Wow, that is all I can say. I thought about such setup for myself, but never dared to ask if it would be possible at all. I wrote you a PM About the AH6, my documents do not state how it uses the hellfires, so for me it only has 2 weapons at the moment in use I know of. Miniguns and rockets. The hellfire is supposed to be usable with the MH6, which also has MFDs that might be used for the EOS used in the nose, which is not the AH6. So we have to distinguish the versions here, unfortunately. YES the Gazelle can use its weapon at night :D

And here we would go into a subject that is not part of my desk. That is something Pat can answer but not me, if and how this would be realisable. Plus good info would be needed on the wing and the preformance of it. Before we can go into that part of programming a lot of different steps need to be made, from first license stuff down to modelling etc etc etc. I do not want to go to deep into it, but this all requires time and honest effort and some parts of the develoment will have crucial milestones. If they can not be matched then a project might be near to be cancelled for example. Have seen that be fore and we will soee that in the futre, i am certain on such facts. Any Tornado personal is welcomed to pm me or any other team member.

Hey you do not have to excuse for an assumption. We did not take it as offence in any way, me, or maybe we, like to smile and to not put to much value into postings that inherit assumptions, cause nobody besides the team can know what we plan or work on, so it is allright when people come up with assumptions. We do plan to bring updates now and then but want to release some stuff soon. After our first release we can speak and plan on stuff like what if and what will be further the line. I´d like to say more but right now it would not be of a good choice to spill at all, cause we want to focus on the gazelle release right now and after that on the bo105 release. Plus a Tornado would probably take 2 - 3 years to be developed proper and function correct as desired, which incorporates a lot of support from your guys in a way of patient waiting times. Most people do not realise how complex the tornado itself is, but think of a flightmodel that will be alternated by any setup you make on the wing position in degrees on your own, cause it is not automated. cheers sven

:crazy:I forgot about the ADV:crazy: And yes, first things first, but future planning should be done too. As my grandfather said, "there is always something that can be done, so move grandson and take the brom" edit.: did we ever state anywhere what we are really interested in? wondering right now if, and if that is the case, something like heavy metal, a good beer and good food should be written :drink::thumbsup::juggle:

Does there has to be a specific differentiation between british and german tornados ? From my point of view not. Systems differ but the design does not, so if british, german, italian or saudi tornado, tornado stays tornado, no matter what. Or do we differ between dutch and dansk f16 too ? I do not get it why we see a ids not the same way we see a gr4, although both are the same planes :unsure::detective::hmm::spam_laser:

Hi, if a plane is realisable always depends on the informations available. As stated before we decided to put her on hold for the moment as we have not received all information that would be available. The order is still pending and I hope we get that solved within the next few month. After that we would have to review all the available material and translate a lot of it too, cause many documents will be available in german too. As soon it is translated we can give the data to our lead programmer and he can decide if it will be possible to realise the project or not. I assume that the development of this plane will at least last till end of 2017 cause we have a lot of preparation that needs to be done for the plane, like the translation of the documents and many other issues. Any info that is available is welcome so if you have anything you think is valid for posting as info feel free to post or pm me. Cheers :pilotfly: Sven

Well imagine a pack that has escorts of me109 and fw190. I guess that would finally be a job for all the WW2 geman fighters that are flying in DCS.

Do to the fact that the discussion started, would you like to have more civil planes in DCS? Could the name DCS still work if it could replace simulation titels like FSX? What are your thoughts on this. I myself think that the civil sector is a huge market and as it was posted, for helicopters there are a lot of missions planable in a civil enviroment.

Do to the nature that this is a BO105PAH1 threat Fragger probably would like to keep t that way so we should move this discussion to a new threat?

The more complex systems in terms of helicopters are the military once, so there is also more to break then in a civil version. About airbus planes, like the a319 and higherfor example, well it does not matter, if something breaks it break. but maybe, if the community grows more money would be available for a more stable system ?

Nice ideas shagrat. well you guys should see it from a financial enviroment too. the bigger the customer enviroment the more can be produced, combat and civil areas. How do you aquire customers in a niche marcet? you have to open the field of variations. Imagine what would be possible, well you could split up combat and non combat server or both combined. This is a huge community and I know of so many people that fly civil flightsim, which ius a huge market too. Same for WW2

@Silver_Dragon: Horten is still on hold as I have not ordered the documents yet. Something I will look into again in January also. Alot of planning for the start of 2016 @Strut: ;)

I sign your last sentence, as FSX is dying and not seeing and further development DCS could fill a huge gap that is sure to come soon. I am still thinking about a solution how we could manage to give the DCS community a globe as playground.

Ja du wirst den Heckrotor trennen müssen. Alles was nicht gespiegelt werden kann musst du dann als einzelstück anfertigen. Denke aber daran, dass die schnittpunkte passen müssen da man am ende alles wieder miteinander verheiratet. Und ja man zieht so die Form Stück für Stück.

About Tornado, yes we are not sharing anything at the moment for good reason. We are not planning to start a Tornado ;-) What I can say though is, that we are solving everything right now to get her lifted in the future. @Strut: Also to you a wonderful christmas. Hope we have a little talk next year. And hey, I am working my ass of atm with a modern fixed wing and another rotary that you do not like a lot, but please do not reveal which one we both talked about ;-)

But we do have a RWR in our Gazelle and we already stated what we had to change to give you guys an RWR in the gazelle cause it is classified. So there are ways to handel certain things and not violate any laws or restrictions. Sure fact is, you will not get the permission to model a F22 raptor with all systems to 100%, but maybe to 80%.

Why later? I think the SA342M fits to any other combination, even to ah64 and others, so I am not really sure why anything cool should be pushed further down the road, which is not a statement to anything on our production line, but imagine you can fly in an sr71 tomorrow but would also like to fly an t38 before but the offer for the t38 is next week, would you wait for the talon and let the sr71 flight pass by? I would not

In general we can say every military equipment has some classified part

Why do people always think that projects are not entirely possible cause there is some part or some avionic classified do to some code or frequenze ? I figured that much more is possible then we assume it could be. ;-) Maybe that gives a little push to the speculatons ?

I have not seen any Bo105PAH1 with flare dispencers or even chaff. I guess Olli will be able to answer that in detail but as far I have seen them live, none of them had flares.