Viktor_UHPK

Hey Hueyman. It's an old topic, so maybe you have already found an answer. I also find the Mi-8 a great platform! I have asked Alexander from the development team about possible IFR modifications in the future. However it does not look like we'll get them. There might be a way for you to get some basic IFR capability by using Helios - but I don't know much about that either. I have however spotted the user Horus to be using the NS430 with some sort of HSI via Helios. Check it out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kClga4qQLZQ&ab_channel=horus-DCS Maybe that helps! Greetings, Viktor

Hi Doc. Zero-visibility and low level is a no-no for the Mi-24. It's simply not equipped for that. The only time that you should find yourself in somewhat close proximity to ground and in clouds is during an instrument approach. (NDB approach or GCA approach) Viktor

You can really cruise at any altitude that suits the mission, up to ceiling. Recommended cruise speeds: Sea level: 240-280 500m: 240-280 1000m: 240-270 2000m: 210-240 3000m: 210 For turn angles during the enroute part I can not really find any recommended values. If you do precision navigation, then your bank angles will depend on the turn radius that you want to achieve. Generally 15° is a value that you will often find and I see no reason why you should turn with higher bank angles during enroute flight. I'm sure that both the Mi-24 and the Mi-8 can be flown in a more western way. Maybe it's even more effective. It's just not documented and it's not how the Soviets / Russians did/do it. I personally enjoy that part about DCS. Learning the rules, procedures, techniques and basically the flying culture of the former eastern block. But you should also consider that both helicopters are pretty heavy and it simply takes more time to reduce speed for landing. Also, the engines are relatively big and require more time to spool up. That's why you fly them more conservatively and just take your time on approach. I'm sure that a Huey was flown differently than a CH-53 in Vietnam. With the CH-53 being more on the "airplane type approach" side. I hope that helped, guys!

Thank you everyone! Your feedback motivates me to put more work into new video. The next one is online: Vertical landing in ground effect (IGE)

Thank you for the kind feedback! Yes, in fact I planned to make a video that shows the complete startup procedure by the book (it's long!). However some systems still don't work in early access, so I will wait a little longer until they are implemented.

Hi everyone. I have started a new series of videos about the Mi-24P. I know that there are a lot of tutorials around - and that's great. I personally try to stay as close to the real world manual as possible. Depending on demand (and my amount of free time) I will publish more content like this. Enjoy. 1. Running landing 2. Vertical landing in ground effect (IGE)

Hi Jiri (Maverick)! No offence taken! I enjoy the discussions and I'm happy to learn something new! To be honest, I can be mistaken as well and maybe the 25-30 minute estimate was a bit overkill. Maybe it's just 20. I am studying the Mi-24 normal procedures at the moment. In the original Russian handbook it's all plain text with a lot of explanations. That does not give you a good overview, so I am converting all of that into a checklist format. So far it's 600 items that need to be checked, tested, switched or pressed before taxi out - with the list not yet finished. The air bleed flap check comes with 20 items, the autopilot check (performed before taxi) comes with 42 items, the DISS-15 check has 32. Most of this stuff you will not find on more modern types. You'll either not even bother (the system will tell you if something is not right) or run an automated "self test". Of course you can always prepare the helicopter to be ready for a quick departure. But you need to know the whole checklist and the technical details - and this is what I was trying to say. "Lurker" guessed the AH-64 might be more difficult to learn and my response was: "it depends".

Hi Maverick. There are different startup conditions (first flight of the day? flight with external load? flight at high altitude? training flight with operator at controls?) and different operation manuals for the Mi-24 around the world. That is why I have mentioned the "factory manual" ("Instruktia Ekipazhu"). To my knowledge it was used as the standard manual in the Soviet Union. You probably already know this video. Of course it does show some diagrams / cut scenes. But it also misses quite a few (lengthy) checks from the manual. Flight deck inspection, pneumatic brake check, check of voltages of AC system, air bleed flap check, autopilot check etc. All the best, Viktor https://youtu.be/DH_FNrZXgms?t=153

192 RPM - You can adjust it with a spring loaded three position switch on the collective pitch lever.

The manual is called "ТЕХНИКА ПИЛОТИРОВАНИЯ Ми-8МТ" (Mi-8MT piloting techniques). I only have a Russian version unfortunately. Additionally the Mi-24 technique manual states: (sorry for the rough translation) So maybe one additional reason that the VRS feels so "severe" is the slow spool-up. It definitely helps to be ahead of the aircraft and pull collective early in anticipation of lift / power demand.

It depends. While the AH-64 surely comes with more digital systems to learn, I am sure it is also more automated and requires less pre-flight checking and testing. If you want to complete a Mi-24P pre-flight as per factory manual, you will be busy for 25-30 minutes with about 600 checklist items. Btw. Thank you for the very nice feedback everyone. It means a lot to me and motivates me to create more content.

Hey. It's an interesting discussion. I am not a real Mi-8 pilot - but I have somewhat focused on the helicopter in the last years and studied the POHs and technique manuals. The technique manual states: "[on approach] after reaching a speed of 60 km/h and less, the required power increases and the helicopter tends to increase the vertical speed. Therefore, it is necessary to maintain the vertical speed constant (2-3 m/s) by gradually increasing the collective pitch of the main rotor, and then reduce it [the vertical speed] as the forward speed decreases and approaches the ground." The visual / instrument patterns flown on the Mi-8 are designed for a descend at 2-3m/s on final. With this applied you won't ever get into VRS.

I have been following your project since the beginning. It's really a piece of art. The attention to detail, the craftmanship and the solutions you find again and again! A great motivation for the whole community!

Hello everyone. Part 2 is now released. Part 2 - systems and capabilities

It's a good argumentation and I understand your point. You're looking for more options and variety of gameplay. Personally, I'm rather interested in important features that are used on a daily basis and not so much the rare cases - and I think this is also the developer's view. Most importantly that would be proper and more immersive cargo and infantry operations: medevac, paratroops, quick insertions / extractions, fast-roping and hoisting. This is what military transport helicopters are really build for and what they actually do in 95% of the time. Paired with multi-crew and even more realistic flight dynamics (loss of tail rotor effectiveness) would make the Mi-8 an epic simulation of its' real counterpart.