WinterH

Strange, just tested now, also FFB2, and I got forces on the stick just fine. Trim too. No stick shake when airframe is buffeting, but FFB was working pretty well for the control feeling. Repair maybe? Or uninstall/reinstall the module?

Actually when we did this, we were comfortably away from AAA range by the time we turned back, felt really safe, but there weren't threats in that practice mission and only tried that once. But the key is, we did the pop-up and the missile shot both many kilometers away from the target area, and we were still some ways off by the time missile impacted.

Just tried, with EB for some reason I have main axes listed with a red ! mark in controls menu and they didn't work. I suppuse it's something with my installation and probably need to clear input folder for EB. With CC, I get some FFB implementation, no stick shake when the aircraft is shaking from maneuvering, but there was some force applied to stick, it centered itself, and as speed dropped stick force decreased. Didn't try trim though. So, FFB is implemented looks like, not up to a warbird or helo level, but then 101 isn't those either I suppose.

GrmlZ! Where are the videos man! People missed them!

I works with S-5 and S-8 rockets. S-13 and S-24 rockets however, are manually aimed, no moving pipper with them. I think Avimimus uses automatic sight for slip/drift correction, as it indicated that quite well. Ballistics of S-5,8,13,and 24 rockets should be somewhat different, at least in longer ranges/shallow angles, and certainly VERY different to 30mm gun. I also like auto sights slip indication capabilities without having to look down on the ball.

Actually, Leatherneck's own summer development report looks promising. I'd say Corsair is probably 2-4ish months away maybe, probably, perhaps :). Most of the importants systems seem to be done, flight model is getting tuned, external looks great, and cockpit's modeling seems fairly advanced, and texturing remains.

It is listed somewhere either on product page or release notes, maybe both. As far as I know, we'll get one tandem HEAT version, and one high explosive version, but not the later extended range ones. Which is ok really, because already Shturm's maximum range is at the edge of Raduga sight's usable distance in my opinion. That's just off the top of my head though, best check the Mi-24's product page

Start the attack run from further up, I was able to get pretty longish shots both with Petrovich and with multicrew usually. At least from quite longer range than most AAA can return fire. Sometimes I am close enough for 23mm AAA to fire just before the missile impact, but being at extreme range they are easy to dodge, or even not accurate at all. You can also try using missiles from hover, or slow flight beyond their range, but it isn't Hind's strong suite, and usually ends up with about as many misses as hits for me when I try it. And doesn't work when Petrovich is gunner, only as an actual behind the guidance/sight. The simplest attack pattern: fly low with decent forward speed, align the sights and keep stable, turn back after the missile impacts. Not always, but usually I can get quite decent standoff to turn back this way, or even get two missiles in sometimes. The key is starting the attack run from decently far away. Another one is apparently from period Soviet or East German manuals: if you know where targers are, line up while behind cover/terrain many kilometers away, pop up with a climb, sight in and launch. Tried this multicrew with me as gunner, and the sight was very, very stable this way, and we already turned back after the hit quite far away from targets.

Hi, I'm pretty sure this is planned, but wanted to voice my desire anyway. It seems we currently have a ammunition belt that is either exclusively, or almost exclusively AP for the 30mm GSh-2-30K. And it is really great in dealing with any sort of vehicle, it can even damage tanks from sides! ...with the caveat of requiring direct hits. I'd really love an ability to switch between ammunition options for the gun when rearming like many other modules do. 30mm HE shells would be really handy to have, especially against softer targets, most noticably infantry. It's almost integral to support gunship kind of roles Hind would be good at.

2 x GUV-8700= 2x 7.62 and 2x 12.7 displays, and it could be lumping 30mms into one perhaps, I think it is sort of like that in Mi-8 but don't exactly recall. But yeah, it could be that 30 is indeed for the GSh-2-30K as well, which would be a lot more useful if it is

Could be for GUV-AP-30 30mm grenade launcher pod too. It'd be nice if it is indeed for the onboard 30mm though.

I am hoping for either an AH-1F or AH-1W, both either 80s or early 90s. They'd be something different compared to Apache, and complement both Huey and Hind greatly. Yeah I'm inclined to agree. Yes, it's graphical level IS showing its age at this point, but what matters for me is the character of the aircraft, quality of the module from system and flight modeling perspectives, and then there's the relatively recent addition of pretty well working multicrew experience. Huey IS still one of the best modules in my opinion, even if it isn't necessarily the best looking these days.

Right now the only paid AI asset pack is WW II assets. Arguably there's supercarrier, but I'd say it is more than just an AI asset pack, and a sort of separate-ish category of its own.

Well didn't look up the stats of the gun, but I'm pretty sure it'll be better than other turret mounted options for Hind. YakB and GSh-23L are fine weapons in their own right, but as an attack helicopter gun they are both kinda limited, former being basically a machine gun in the end, and the latter has low muzzle velocity, arcing trajectory, relatively short range, and not particularly great anti-armor capability. 30mm on Mi-24P is great as a gun, but it is a fixed gun in the end. Yes, it fits Hind's "I don't love hovering, I love buzzing around like an attack plane" characteristics, but a movable gun can still be advantageous in many situations.

Sort of, you fire your missile, and once it hits, you turn back and extend for another run. This suits Mi-24's flight characteristics, she likes being fast, and can get out of any incoming thing's way more gracefully when she's already on the move. Since Shturm has ok range, and is a fairly fast missile for its class, you can still be quite safe from most AAA and even short range IR missiles. Being on the move can actually make it easier to dodge long range AAA fire for example. But the downsides are you can't do the "hide and lob all the missiles from a safe position" thing well, and you can do 1, rarely 2 attacks per pass, latter is being rather risky. In many ways Mi-24 is more like a fixed wing attacker than classic anti-tank or attack helicopters. Also, with rockets I totally find Viggen's one-pass-haul-ass tactics to be the correct ones for Hind personally. For example if you are attacking an enemy compound/troop concentration/convoy etc, I usually fire all my rockets from as far away as I can be accurate enough for the target area size, and turn back. If there's still any threatening things alive, I engage them with Shturm, then mop-up with gun. I just find it fun that way But I'm also trying a mission where I tell Petrovich to hold a hover from low altitude on open terrain, and engage a group of self propelled mortars with Shturms. It works, but not nearly as well as Ka-50 or even Gazelle (aside from longer range than gazelle).

But it doesn't anyone who doesn't have an official module featured in a mission, but have another one also in that mission, can happily join and enjoy. Like I've said though, I'm torn myself. When WWII Asset Pack came I was super hostile against the idea. I am still not particularly fond, but DCS installations are already getting crazy huge, and everthing being integrated to every install will get more and more unsustainable, and making these AI units isn't easy or cheap either, so if we want them, and want them now, expecting ED to be compensated for them makes sense. So far Deka Ironworks has added lots of Chinese objects to the sim pro-bono, ED is adding new ones and updating old ones at a steady but not blazing pace, Razbam will add lots for their South Atlantic map, but it isn't clear if they'll go into sim right away or be bundled with map. Heatblur and Leatherneck are also adding a few at some point in future mainly older aircraft carriers, and some aircraft. So things are happening already, but a 3rd part dev specializing on AI asset packs may not be an entirely crazy idea at this point either, it would make it a lot faster for us to get more units in the sim. Especially more niche ones like country and era specific packs.

Paid AI assets so far proven to be unpopular from what I can see. I am torn about them myself. However, the thing about them is, they come with the same problems as mods: if you want to use them for a multiplayer mission, only people who have installed them can join.

I both agree and disagree here, depending on assets to update. I really think bringing up every asset up to the level of latest ones is unnecessary and counter productive, but some of them require it alright. For example, I think old BTR-80 looked quite ok. It wasn't amazing, but it wasn't horrible either, it looked the part. New one looks a lot better yeah, but the effort could arguably be better put into something more sorely missing. Now, I will admit that it is probably because they already had the recently added BTR-82A, and using it as a base a bring up the 'ol BTR to same level wasn't actually as intensive a task, and made sense. But I used it as an example to convey what I've meant. Most of the current BMPs, and most of the MBTs look dated, not jaw droppingly amazing, but quite alright imo. And I think instead of bringing them up to the same level as the latest assets, using that effort to bring really bad looking ones up to par, or better yet, adding some missing stuff would be more helpful. Some like S-300 site objects though, are barely out of 90s, quite important, and would be great to them updated, though I think ED is already working on them as far as I recall. M-60s looked horribly horrible until some months ago, now it's pretty good looking as well. Trucks are getting refreshed too from what I can see.

Commented this on their Facebook too but. Thanks ED, for giving us Mi-24, and doing it in great way. I've waited for a good Hind sim since mid to late 90s, not exaggerating! Been using DCS this past week probably more than last two-ish years combined I now have a sore neck from DCS + head tracking, yeah, was a slow week from work perspective I'm already loving it in early access state (which, to be fair, is the just right amount of it, "early access done right" level if I may!) and looking forward to its future!

I'll play the devil's advocate, and say that assest cost a lot to make, and don't directly pay back. So I understand the pace we get them, but we are getting them. For British assets, Razbam is making South Atlantic map, and are modeling a lot of AI assets for both UK and Argentina, ships, some planes, not sure but I think vehicles too. I believe the thing we are most sorely missing is an assortment of technicals: pickups with .50 cals, 23mms, recoilless guns, and rocket launchers strapped on their back. Especially since we now have lots of helicopters and COIN type aircraft. Some older MANPADS from both blue and red sides would be very welcome as well, though, to be fair, Igla-S now only works about as good as a Redeye or Strela-2 should I've read technicals are planned, also ED will take a look at the Igla bug I've mentioned. They're doing as much as possible I'd say, DCS is a huge beast after all. In the meantime, there are some community mods to help. French pack adds lots of French vehicles, as well as some older Soviet era tanks like T-62, T-64, and some low poly technicals with machine guns, and lots of base building static objects like sheds, tents, walls, HESCO blocks etc. Of course, mods will mean if you are making the mission for multiplayer, everyone who wants to join must have them installed, but they help with diversity while ED and 3rd parties add more stuff to the sim.

DIAFR OPEN switch, to the right of observe switch on the sight switchbox in gunner's cockpit. Some weirdness will follow though, at close ranges a hit is unlikely, and from a low altitude, or with lots of obstacles around like buildings/trees/powerlines, missile may hit them before it's reined in by the guidance. But, the option is there. Another option is to fire the missile directly ahead, and then bring it smoothly down onto target, and this is apparently done IRL by operators as well. Takes some skill though. So YoYo is partially right, Mi-24 doesn't particularly like attacking from hover like most helicopters, it can only hover when it is light, not at high altitudes, and it isn't too hot, and it can get more wobbly than what the sight gyros can handle when doing that, so it's extra workload on the operator with still a decent chance to miss. But, it is possible, and right now you have at least two different ways of achieving that. Now, I don't know if DIAFR OPEN thing is realistic, or something that will get removed in future with a fix, but it is possible to use it as a launch authorization override now. Finally, these only work with a human in the operator seat, if you are working with Petrovich as operator, you will need to follow the actual intented method for the Hind, and align the boresight with the missile sight, and fly towards target.

Ok, just tested, and KOM under one wing, and OFP under the other works. Tested: Left only, right only, both, and they all fired. However, the difference to what you have described seems to be that I had KOM under BOTH of left wing pylons, and OFP under BOTH of right wing pylons, and you have tried only one hardpoint per wing from what I understand? I've tested with a ground hot start helo as opposed to a cold start, but that shouldn't make a difference. And yes, I think they are modeling real world limitations. As far as I know you are not supposed to take more than 2 types of unguided weapons on Su-25 either for example, and only one type on Mirage 2000C etc, this is quite common actually for aircraft from 70s-80s from what I can see. S-13s being only valid for outer pylons, and can't take even bombs under inner pylons was a little sad for me, would love 8 shturms and 2 S-13 pods for example, but oh well, it is what it is :). It'd probably be too heavy anyway.

I have tried with illumination rockets under one wing, and OFP under the other as far as I recall, and it worked. I do think it would work with KOM + OFP too, but maybe not, difference is probably they both normally work with automatic ballistic computer, with different trajectories, so having both on may confuse the system perhaps. Will try soon, got me curious. But then, it's really strange if mixed KOM +OFP on both wings work, but separate version doesn't.

I've been led to my virtual by Petrovich so far in: Perfectly fine level flight Hovering at low altitude Wanting him to maybe slightly turn thataway Having the audacity to ask him change altitude Showing the temerity to ask for a speed change All good tho... Virtually dying is part of fun I suppose and early access, and to be fair in some of them the situation was not ideal for the helicopter

In 2000s, even some of 2010s, export models were the actual hot stuff anyway. If they become a possibility, I'd love Su-30MKI, MKM, MKK, or MiG-29K for example. But a- their operator countries on average seem even more paranoid about their military hardware data, b- types still have lots of Russian equipment that may prove problematic for ED if they are the ones to make the module.