WinterH

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.

As far as I know, no. Although we have pylon lights on the weapons panel, so makes one wonder.

If you mix different rocket types, they won't work. Exceptions are: - S-5 and S-8 together works, but only manual aim is possible - Different types of S-8 works, but again, only manual aiming will be available. With this out of the way, if you carry different S-8 types, how to switch between them? Well you load them under different wings. Like S-8KOM under the left wing and S-8OFP2 under the right wing. Then you can choose which to shoot with rockets left/right/both switch on pilot's weapons control panel.

I think there's also an "enable FFB" setting under general options, did you check that? Also I had to go to FFB tune and click all 3 of the checkboxes there. But it works for me now. My stick is MS FFB2 though.

From what I feel like so far: 1 - Hold Petrovich up (W by default) to order him to align with your sight so that you'll get launch authorization. Advantages: - This is how Mi-24 is generally meant to employ its missiles - Works at more or less any range/altitude - Helicopter will be steady, guiding the missile will be easy and smooth - Missile will fly straight at target, won't go wonky Disadvantages: - You'll be flying towards the target, and any threats around it - Can't be used in any fashion other than "glorious charge towards enemy!", though turning back is usually easy, and Shturm is a fairly fast missile 2 - Throw the "DIAFR OPEN" switch, to the right of the "OBSERVE" switch on the sight control box. This is more or less a launch authorization override. Advantages: - No need to align the helicopter with the sight, you can fire at almost any angle - Therefore, can be used from hover as well - Allows Mi-24 and Shturms to work like traditional attack/anti-tank helos when needed - You can potentially fire multiple missiles in succession from same or relatively same position, whereas the option one will mean you'll have to turn back after every 1-2 missiles Disadvantages: - Missile will dive down pretty heavy for first 150-200ish meters or so, and then you have to bring it up before it hits any obstacles - Can't be used from close ranges, missile will either crash, or overshoot before you can rein it in - Can't be used from low altitudes, missile will crash - Seems guidance is more wonky overall - More susceptible to helicopter's movements, especially from hover as the Hind will usually go wobble-wobble-wobble there, so guiding can be more involved - This may or may not be realistic/intended, it may or may not go away in a future patch 3 - Shoot the missile straight even if the target is below the helicopter's boresight, than bring the missile down. Advantages: - No need to align the helicopter - Missile won't be as suicidal as the option 2 - Can be used from more or less any flight regime too - Apparently used by skilled operators IRL as well - If you are extra very super duper skilled, you may achieve top attacks as well, theoretically Disadvantages - Harder to pull of reliably than either - From closer ranges you'll almost certainly overshoot - You won't be seeing your target for a good bit of time before you bring the sight down again - Reticle's smoothness will depend on how stable the helicopter is, obviously When flying from the pilot seat, and Petrovich is the gunner, 1 is the only opyion. When flying with a good human pilot, 1 is still pretty damn good, but the other options also become attactive depending on siutation. However, I have found option 2 to be a little more prone to desync issues. When Petrovich is pilot and you are operating the sight from gunner seat, I have found options 2 and 3 to be more or less necessary most of the time, especially if you want to keep standoff disntance. One thing I haven't tried yet is launching with the override, then switching it off again after the launch, if that works, maybe it'll make it less wonky in flight.

Hence my calling it "sort of suppression". But more than mobility, I consider it making the units unable to return fire to be worth calling suppression, and not only against infantry. Your rocket salvo from 3.5 kms didn't kill but somewhat dinged that Shilka? Great, now you can attack the trucks and infantry from closer and better accuracy for example.

The gun's trajectory is so flat, gyro sight is usually unnecessary, or actually a distraction. So I'd agree front seat's simple sight being functional would give operator ample opportunity to employ the gun if need be. I personally find fixed sight to be the actual tactically useful way to employ Hind's unguided weaponry, and the CCIP sight to be more of a nice mop-up tool once threats are clear. It can give decently accurate solutions in right conditions, but only at very close ranges, and on fairly flat terrain.

That isn't fully correct actually. There sort of is suppression in DCS. Sort of. If you get a unit's health bar below half, they won't shoot anymore for example. First the movement speed is reduced, then they can't shoot, and then they can't move at all, progressively depending on damage level. It's not ideal yeah, but an attack run that doesn't achieve kills or only get a few, is still achieving things usually, just not immediately visible.

Did you choose a missile slot from the missile selection/power box to the left of the scope? That's what I was forgetting. Though, yes, normally the sight should be pointing right at aircraft boresight to get launch authority, Petrovich forward long while in CBTM mode orders Petrovich to alight the helicopter for launch on where your sight it pointed at. However, with DIAFR. OPEN switch jojo linked above you can override and get authorization from any angle, which I find very helpful when using the missiles with Petrovich as pilot. Just know it'll end up with missile hitting the ground if you are very close to target or really low altitude when using the missiles with that switch up though.

Is it fully normal or intended or not, can't say. But known issues already listed something like "combining multiple weapon types will confuse the system, use preset loadouts, note that is true for real aircraft too".

They more or less always did as far as I recall, at least for a few years I feel like. Not that they can hit much, thankfuly :P. Though caught a direct hit from a BMP-1's main gun a few days ago, so unexpected can happen :))

That photo has been discussed ad nauseum as far as I can recall it is an OPFOR bird used by US Army, and those are mounted by them, and aren't even missiles. And yeah, we will get R-60Ms anyway, which I would overall prefer to Iglas. Especially Igla as it is in DCS right now. More often than not, MANPADS Igla misses a hovering and non-flaring helicopter right now

The thing with terrain masking and Hind's ballistic computer is, if you are unmasking behind something like a hill, and your targets are below your level (which they most likely are), then the computer will be inaccurate. It's ideal when used over mostly level terrain. Did you carry other weapon types besides Shturm + S-8? If so, ballistics computer may have went nuts. Any loadout other than default presets may cause either buggy or realistically broken behavior from what I understand. I had it once when I tried to have both S-8 pods and GUV-8700 gunpod for example.