AeriaGloria

Hello, playing this, of all Soviet platforms in DCS, this 37mm is the most inaccurate. Looking in LUA, the 37mm has 13.6 mil dispersion for 80% circle, the 23mm is 5.6 mils for the same. 5.6 mils is more common for most guns in DCS it seems, M2 browning is 6.8 mils. Hispano is also 5.6 mils. Even the M61 is 12 mils, and that has 13x the fire rate. Im not saying it’s a bug or making a wish, I just wonder if there is a reason it is so innacurate? Compared to earlier NS-37 it is lighter and has higher rate of fire, but much less muzzle velocity. I found a declassified CIA document about their evaluation of the gun in 1952-54, but they did not list any such accuracy, and I can’t find any purported accuracy values for the N-37, NS-37, or even the P-39 37mm the Soviets had plenty of access too. I would love if there was some information, or pilot notes/reports about the gun having the accuracy of a cannon on a 19th century pirate vessel

If you check new loadout restrictions, you cannot fire S-5 with inboard ATGM loadout. The system thinks UB-32 is a bomb, and bombs don’t work either with inboard ATGM. Rocket arm button only resets rocket controller to re start at first rocket in pod

Yes I was sad to not see this, but if we had a crew chief they wouldn’t even be able to see the cargo like the Mi-8 crew chief can. Insteas of going through the frame it’s a box kindve attached to the bottom, you’d have to open the window/door and stick your head out a lot Even if that’s not the intended purpose, it will be in my head until we have a cargo indicator

One sad thing I thought of is that, I do not know where vertical SPO-15 antennas are in Mi-24. Which makes me wonder if… Like ground crew taking off ASO-2V covers and the rear SPO-10 Antennas with it, perhaps it was seen as “agreeable” to not give it the vertical antennas that feed your up/down arrows. But I’m sure this can be disproven with the right manual or video showing the lights working

my bad, I want a Beryoza so bad

~~ED has said since release in interviews and wishlists that they will not model the L006 Lipa becuase there are no older MANPADS that it will work on in game. Until we have things like Red Eye and original Strela, there is no point. We do have some air to air missiles in game that it would work on, but again that is very little difference for 98% of Hind missions, so it won’t be a priority for ED until those older SAMs also become a priority. If you look at pictures of Russian Hinds, the L006 Lipa has been removed in all 24P models. It was removed becuase it was dead weight unless your opponent has a 40 year old MANPAD. Ukraine is a bit different becuase they have also updated their L006 Lipa to handle newer missiles. Who knows how well it works, but that is why you might see a similar device in Ukraine 24P, but the Russian 24P will look just like our DCS counterpart, with an empty L006 mount~~ I was wrong

Got it, makes sense

Is this saying that memory mode for the missile is 30.72 ms? Less then 5% of a second?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QKrcvIW949R5Iuz6qEcn1nZDneARkHUe/view?usp=drivesdk Here is PDF with EM charts made only using DCS data. It’s very well written, explained, and the diagrams are both complex and very easy to read. Nothing can beat the I-16 when it comes to turn radius of 200m

I wonder how big a bird can fit in the gaps through the dust protector

But there is no way to damage the engine in DCS Mi-24P without icing or birds or other ME failures. You can’t damage it by moving the ECLs or giving “too much” power. I found the approximate numbers. There is a regulator pump that decides how hard the engine is run. It looks for a combination of 120mm of movement to correlate to 100% power. It will not go over it. Throttle twist can +/- 50mm. Collective can do +/-70mm. Each ECL does +/-70 for its individual engine. And yea, 50+70+70 is more than 120. So basically, If you already have twist grip at max, 50mm, and collective fully up, +70, you get 120. The ECL lever shouldn’t increase engine power at all when moved above half of collective is up. You can see this easily in game also by having ECL up/auto, collective up, and try to reduce engine speed with throttle twist. You will notice the engine will stay the same speed for a long time until you turn down the twist grip quote a bit. The ECLs do the same. There is no scenario in regular flight where having the throttle twist set to max, and collective up, and then moving ECL from auto to max should change anything. Auto will automatically give you max engine power as long as twist grip and collective is up. I don’t know what else to say but if you try in DCS, In above freezing temperatures, with birds off, you will not have engine failure or degradation by running the engines hard, moving ECLs, or anything else. Here is a picture of the regulator pump, as long as it sees enough travel from ECL+twist grip+ collective, then moving ECLs up should do nothing. This feature was used in Afghanistan. Pilots would turn down throttle twist grip/ECLs to get extra rotor pitch without throttle, then add in correction during take off run. This was to help reduce dust on takeoff Yes it’s complicated and hard to understand, but the point is the Mi-24 is very smart and well built, and will not allow you to abuse the engine unless you have a crew chief in the cargo cabin flipping switches that don’t exist in DCS.

In addition, if you have Petrovich menu up in CPG seat, you can use short right to select crosshairs, point where you want Petro to point noise, then short right again to make Petro fly there. Can be a lot easier and more precise than fooling with long left/right to change heading.

That shouldn’t affect anything. The engine governor looks at a combination of collective postion, throttle twist grip, and ECL to decide how hard to run the engines. For example, you could have ECLs at anywhere from 70-100% and still have full power. Full power might not decrease until say 69%. I don’t know if it’s actually 70%, but they don’t do anything different then being like a separate throttle twist grip for each engine. I have the actual figures somewhere, but basically, all the ECLs will do when turned up is command 100% engine power, no different than when throttle twist grip is raised. Moving the ECLs up will not trigger an emergency mode or any additional power failure (unless your throttle/collective is down). In fact, it seems the emergency power functions of the TV3-117VMA isn’t modeled in this module, so there is no way to trigger the 2400 HP regime that I know of. From everytying I’ve read in Mi-24 manuals, the process should be entirely automatic and invisible to the pilot. The only way to ruin pretty new engines in a real Mi-24 that work perfectly would be if someone in the cargo cabin turned off the governor and the pilot pushed the engines hard after that. But the governor panel in the cargo cabin isn’t modeled either in Mi-24P in DCS. There is also a SPU-8 intercom and a ASO-2V dispense button back there

If all you want is energy maneuverability comparison, here you go https://dcs.silver.ru/74,9,turnrate and another In a PDF that covers more planes I can DM you

It would be, but the V has the advantage of only changing the weapons panel for the pilot cockpit and the front cockpit. But engines would be the same. Also same weapons. In the D you would need new cockpit models for both CPG and pilot. You will have different ATGM system. And most D’s use older body style with wing mounted gun cam/RWR antennas, no dust protectors (though many were added aftermarket). The exhaust isn’t shaped for EVU. There’s quite a few more changes to make. Pilot doesn’t even aim with ASP-17V, but similar to PKI sight that CPG/Mi-8 use. So you have no CCIP, only tables.

I’ll compare to the MiG-29 manual and see what’s it’s best endurance/distance glide speeds are

I would sure love SPO-15, but honestly a paid upgrade with a V model and more weapon variants would be really awesome. I know it hasn’t been that long, but ED doesn’t have many options for other Cold War modules where so much work has already been done

In the future if you want to fly with yaw AP, learn and use MicroSwitch function. I have a section for it here in my autopilot guide, but there are also many threads on it. Section B discusses Yaw channel https://forum.dcs.world/topic/294627-personal-mi-24p-autopilot-and-weapons-guides/

You can fly it along different route, altitude, pitch, roll, all by manipulating AP panel and not touching stick or collective or pedals. I can also take off on hover and land that way. Only flight mode you can’t do is transition between Fast forward flight and hover. Is that not an autopilot? Actually, sometimes the attitude hold annoys me and I only want dampening

I was talking about fantasies and dreams. When it comes to ED, Mi-24V/P is the most modern Hind they can make. And they had a good reason to make P instead of V, so that’s what we have. If it sold like an Apache maybe we would get a V upgrade

Mi-35M circa 2006/7 is likely possible with certain documentation that’s currently available and the limited scope of its update on previous models. What stops it being made is Russian law that affects the Russian employees and connections of ED. A foreign 3rd party may be able to do so but may be more difficult. As for SuperHind, I believe you have two operators and only a couple dozen made? The pool of both documentation and information is likely very limited. I haven’t seen any IRL Super Hind documentation online that isn’t promotional. I’m sure it’s possible if you had the info, but I don’t think it’s very easy to get

It was used a few times. But was it a regular part of the arsenal? It’s a fine line. For example it is easy to find Mi-24 manuals from 1984-1987 that describe S-13/24 use, give you tables, restrictions and such. But not so for S-25. This tells me it’s use was much rarer and more restricted then the others I think in Zambia and Croatia they also added Mk 40/44 torpedoes. I played on a BSD server where we had it missed to exchange bombs for the Mk 40 torpedoes. It’s lots of fun

This is probably still up to date for 4th except for Mirage. It’s some old data but should be helpful. Tacview is very good for analyzing turn rate and radius. https://dcs.silver.ru/74,9,turnrate

Very cool haven’t seen it before. The nose gun CCIP should be pretty accurate. Only real limit other then jamming is that more then 5-10 degrees off your nose the CPG can no longer see the pipper and has to shoot “from the hip”

How did you come to the conclusion in DCS that Eagle has better T:W, turn rate/radius, and CL?