AeriaGloria

It works fine. The difference is that since last patch the Doppler switch under the map defaults to being off, where it used to default to being on. You just have to flick the switch under the map from OFF to ON and it will work fine. Took a few flights to really make it a habit in my cold start procedure now. I don’t know why it would start working at certain altitude and not below, since patch I’ve only flown to 2,000m AGL/ASL. And when I did, it still worked fine provided i had turned the switch on below the Map. If it happenned ar 3,000m AGL for you it would make me think there is some sort of trigger reversing it’s state. As as 3,000m AGL is suppossed to be the altitude limit

And the engine icing effect. I would just be worried if that is more of a core thing to do with the engines being identical to Ka-50 that may be harder to program/code then a simple trigger. As I’m sure everyone wants. The solution everyone wants the quickest is to have anti icing actual prevent icing. And to have pitot heat actual heat the pitot. Have to keep relying in doppler for approximate speed, and even then Lu have to stay below 3,000m AGL or it won’t work!

I honestly don’t know the majority of the things you refer to. The map works perfect for me. You just have to be conscious of the strict doppler attitude limits, using sea mode when over water, and not using airspeed to DISS mode. Never had a random RBS. Only get engine damage from hits to engine and only get launch failure from hits to the wing, which used to be a lot more sensitive but is better now. The armor around those engines is only 6mm and doesn’t even cover the entire surface, we don’t even have gearbox damage modeled yet. Or Oil cooling/pressure loss. And that post about the AP labels is from shortly after launch, they are correctly translated for a very long time now

Also, icing damage isn’t fixed by repair. So in cold temp/mountain flights, you need a new spawn after every flight, and make your flights short. Eventually they added randomized engine failure after a certain amount of icing. Sometimes one engine dies with second shortly next, sometimes they both fail together. And what’s even worse, if you turn on anti icing the power draw from right engine is modeled!!! Heres a video of engine failure at 2,000m, right before landing. IMG_0745.MOV

Lol, idk your username on rotorheads but I appreciate the thought sometimes I wish I could be less addicted to Mi-24 and rotorheads about to see if their stats can go 5 digits, and have more flight time then most Mi-8 pilots….. I really need to do something about so I can have a real life! But there’s something about, trying to become perfect at rocket runs that always lures me into hopping on and trying my best to do accurate rocket attacks on vehicles as soon as that in launch range light comes on. Someone has got to show the Apache pilots that rockets aren’t paper weights and shouldn’t always be left home in place of ATGM

It is not in the voice lines already present in game files shown on first page. I would be pretty sad if this wasn’t implemented. I don’t think Apache does it? Petro even has the flare panel. I would expect it to be able to flare on its own as well ED obviously thought about it as they did it via triggers in the instant action missions

Inverters have auto mode now??

No. I always fly as low as possible to reduce icing effects

Yeah the mode where, if the Yaw AP channel runs out of authority in heading hold the pedals use the hydraulic SDV-5000-OA dampener to trim them, and you see a yellow cryllic letter in the Right Control + Enter menu signifying this, is now gone. It would trim your pedals. I’m afraid it might be from a bug report I made where I was trying to say it would be nice if it wouldn’t automatically trim my pedals with Pedal Trimmer turned off. Still present in Mi-8 however. After patch I tried to find real life source for this, and I was surprised to find almost nothing directly stating it. The closest to describing it any of my dozens of Mi-24D/V/P/35M manuals got was actually the Cold War Air Musuem manual freely available on line made public by FOIA and originally made by US threat evaluation. Technically for D but with addendums for V/P where there are differences. It says this about Yaw Channel, seeming to call it “Displacement mode,” “ If the pilot’s feet are not on the pedals, the autopilot maintains the preset yaw angle, Switching the directional flight control servo to displacement mode as needed to introduce large corrections. The speed of pedal movement in displacement mode is controlled by the hydraulic pedal damper in the directional control system. The yaw channel includes a relay which prevents the servo from switching to displacement mode if the pedal damper is disengaged. When the pilot’s feet are on the pedals, the sub-pedal microswitches activate and the yaw channel operates in stabilization mode. The yaw rate signal passes through a low-pass filter to prevent the servo from drifting to the stops while executing manual turns with the yaw channel engaged.” Full manual available publicly if you search for it.

Glad to help. Wondering why S-8KOM/S-5KO we’re the most accurate rockets are what got me looking into all the different errors in the auto ranging/CCIP system. That there is more then assuming flat ground. Even if we had laser range finder and could take out level ground as an error, this would still be very significant. It is basically the one thing stopping you from using the 3.5 km max range of the sight depending on weapon. S-8KOM/S-5Ko Can be pretty accurate to 3 km if your fast and dive steep enough for it to be close to boresight. Same with gun, except it not being aimed 1 degree up like rockets hurts it. I always wonder what it would be like to not only have a laser range finder but have the auto CCIP Some sort of loop constantly correcting range by taking to into account CCIP depression. But the real truth likely is, in reality rockets are not very accurate. So the system is “good enough” and not worth sweating the details too much. DCS and it’s damage models are a different story

This is to be expected IMO. There are a few things at play here. One, these tables are actually for 0-10 degrees in the original manual. The numbers are identical. I believe they match mostly for level flight, but not perfect. 2nd, what speed are you doing? Using the numbers for 250 kmh. I have little to no issues. At 250 kmh the nose is only a few degrees down, so you are practically level. 300 kmh is a different story, requiring almost 7-10 degrees nose down. Understand that even if these tables for 0-10 degrees, it’s not nose 0-10 degrees attitude. It’s nose at 0-10 degrees attitude at 0 AOA. And AOA like wind will push rockets. Even if they are truly level rocket tables, the idea implied is that AOA is zero. So if you use 300 kmh numbers. The negative AOA is magnitudes greater then any other speed, pushes the rocket up, and makes them fly farther and land long behind the target. There is likely a Third factor for S-24. S-13 has excellent ballistics, almost always hits near boresight as long as you use faster speeds. But the slower the speed, and the worse the ballistics, the more the pipper is far below boresight. Mi-24 auto ranging is based off of not only assuming level ground, but only measures range based off of where boresight points, not where pipper points. This is why S-8OFP2 always goes long at long ranges, becuase the pipper is so far below boresight, the range boresight is looking at IS WAY LONGER then the actual range the pipper is looking. This means that range calculated by auto ranging is greater then needed. Making the ballistic computer in CCIP think that rocket pipper needs to be lower then it really needs to be, and rockets thus going long. With S-13/24, and using auto ranging, it means you fire way too close for your selected table range(since the range show on pipper is too long, as boresight is looking at point farther away then depressed pipper), and rockets go long. So becuase the lower the pipper depression below boresight, the greater the error, it means that using S-24 and low speeds makes the error largest. So basically, you have a few options. S-13 will always be more accurate. The closer you are, the more accurate you will be, as the closer you are, you can have less pipper depression, and thus less error. Same with speed, the faster the speed, the less error, until you run into the first error where the tables are not counting in the negative AOA needed at 300 kmh. Problem here being while 250 kmh values work pretty well for S-24, you don’t even have 250 kmh values for S-13. So it’s really either 200 kmh and realize they may go a little long, or make your own shooting values. As I want to be able to fire at 300 kmh, I just made my own weapon aiming numbers. You can find them in my weapons guide on the first page. If you want to make your own tables, active pause is best way. Or even stadiametric range finding if target is big enough. Other then that, I have good luck with 250 kmh value on these tables. Aside from that, here is the original tables showing that they are for 0-10 degree dives. S-5/8 tables say same thing. You will see that compared to the table you posted from Chucks guide (which is also in ED QuickStart guide where Chuck likely got it), has identical numbers for the numbers it has There is a reason it was said in pre release interview, that pilots waited until CCIP pipper and boresight were relatively aligned to fire. The same error happens with pipper above boresight, calculated range is too short. But this usually happens at such small ranges, the error is negligible.

That would be pretty crazy if the designer actually either foresaw that application, or modified the control box to have that functionality after Afghan war feedback. If it works that way. I thought perhaps, maybe it is just a caging mode to not damage seekers on the ground. But what you say is cooler!!!

If you ask me or read my weapons guide I have all the aiming tables you could possibly want the Russian quick start guide and it’s English translation on user files has tables also, but I prefer my custom made ones, as they take into account the negative AOA needed at 300 kmh. And I pretty much just fire at that one speed, the regular stock 250 kmh tables in the manual (which you will be forced to use at higher altitudes and temperatures) work pretty well. But for some reason the 300 kmh expect your nose to be nearly level and then there’s the fact that these tables also sometimes say they are 0-10degrees, and work better for some angles then others. Find out what profile works the best for you, and fire in active pause Mine are for 300 kmh, 300m altitude for S-24 and 250m for S-13, and for firing at max range light turning on at 2.2 km for sake of simplicity and that being a good middle ground (you can still use the auto ranging with them). That way I am exposed to fire the least while still having pretty good accuracy.

Power switch is to be expected. But ground and air switch? Also, pylon selector has 4 position. Idk if that means we can take four on two double racks, or take 8 on 4 double racks. Considering I do not think you can carry them on dedicated ATGM pylons, but double pylons have been seen. I hope it is removed and added with missiles. As it would be shame to have it obstruct view when not using R-60

More realistic sure. But what’s great about our Mi-24P, many people still operate it in that spec with little to no upgrades. In the modern day I don’t see it stopping anyone from printing out any map and using it. The manual has instructions for how to cut out a map and place it correctly. Im just glad this thread is marked/tagged as later in project, so there is some intention to make the map more comprehensive, and both modes to work in all maps

[Wish I could delete misunderstood] S-13/24 implementation is complete. Have been since launch If you are referring to them not working with auto CCIP, that is true to life. They do not and always require manual ranging. They were both Afghan war modifications. Even S-8 rockets did not have auto CCIP during Afghan war, I think CCIP for S-8 wasn’t added to Mi-24V/P/VP fleet until Chechnya war It’s likely not an easily updated system

There is of course Molevitch’s video of the pedals he got from an Mi-8, also shared in Wolfpack’s video, showing the amount of pressure involved with his hands, let me know if it doesn’t play right IMG_0563.MOV

Spent a few minutes looking through my technical manuals and drawing. They do not say anything about the amount of pressure involved. It merely says the surface is a rotating trigger mechanism supported by a small spring. The Cold War Museum manual available online does say this in its yaw Autopilot section “ If the pilot’s feet are not on the pedals, the autopilot maintains the preset yaw angle, switching the directional flight control servo to displacement mode as needed to introduce large corrections. The speed of pedal movement in displacement mode is controlled by the hydraulic pedal damper in the directional control system. The yaw channel includes a relay which prevents the servo from switching to displacement mode if the pedal damper is disengaged. When the pilot’s feet are on the pedals, the sub-pedal microswitches activate and the yaw channel operates in stabilization mode. The yaw rate signal passes through a low-pass filter to prevent the servo from drifting to the stops while executing manual turns with the yaw channel engaged.” My understanding from this is that, if feet are on pedals, even if still, micro switches are almost certainly engaged. I certianly wouldn’t want to turn with heading hold on Here is a technical drawing and it’s translation from a 1976 Mi-24D/V manual

I would! I mean they don’t just activate when you move the pedals. They activate just by resting your feet on them. Pretty sure you have to consciously lift your feet to release them Here is an excerpt from the manual on flight maneuvers, specifically the horizontal flight section, “For automatic heading stabilization, the steady-state flight mode (without turns) at a safe altitude shall be executed applying weakened pressure to the pedals (without pressing on the pedal tops).” Which makes it sound like, if you’re not turning, and want heading hold, only way to rest your feet on the pedals (without pressing micro switches) is to consciously only press the bottom, where there is no micro switches In addition, under the section for hovering using autopilot, it says “For heiicopter stabilization in hovering in a selected directíon, it is necessary to remove feet ťrom the pedaltops after AFCS activation.” I just get the impression, it takes very little pressure if where you place your feet is important. I mean, your not always moving the pedals throughout an entire turn after it’s constant and coordinated. And not all heading changes need pedal movement. It would be awkward to have it trying to hold heading while in a steady turn not moving the pedals

What I would love is a “Toggle” option. Keeping toe brakes/button held is awkward, but if I could press toe brakes quickly/move axis back and forth to “toggle” modes I think that would work great, just like having the current bind that needs to be held also made into a toggle/or seperate toggle bind would be very nice.

I agree with everything here. Small map sizes would be nice, but if it’s any consolation I believe all modules suffer from not having maps of certain sizes. I think using the ALT map for zoomed in map when not available (such as flying outside caucuses) would be nice. Amazing would be an option to select ALT or current Navigation map. Though I like the navigation map, and would love to have the small scale. Which seems available if you zoom in on Syria in F10, but is not added to certain modules yet

This is what their Russian quick start guide translated to english says, and has not been consistent with the module, however I have not used S-8 in a few months so I cannot say for certain. This lines up with what I have read in Mi-24V manuals. It seemed to me when I used S-8, that number of rockets fired in salvos is identical for UB-32 S-5 pods and B8V20A S-8 pods

Yes. Assuming that take off conditions such as weight, temeprsture, and altitude are the same. There is a mode that heading hold goes into when it runs out of authority called “displacement” mode. It uses the SDV-5000 hydraulic dampener that slows down pedal movement to move the pedals by themselves when the Yaw AP is already maxed out. Before this patch and in Mi-8 you can see this happen by a yellow cryllic letter appearing next to the Yaw channel in the Right Control + Enter menu. It seems to have been removed. I’m afraid it might’ve been one of my bug reports, where I attempted to say that it would be nice to not have it automatically trim pedals when “Pedal Trimmer” was not selected, as it would trim your pedals whenever activated and thus required constant trim resets if using yaw AP throughout flight. Maybe it will Come back maybe not who knows. I won’t make a bug report on it. I already got what I want, and won’t bug ED further

In reality, the manuals says to have Yaw AP on from before take off until after landing. It is said that you should only fly without pitch, roll, and yaw AP when you are flying for the purposes of training and learning the helicopter. With feet on the pedals, the Dampening Mode is only assisting you, it may technically fight very fast quick movements for a short moment, but that also assists you to make all yaw movements smooth and gradual. As soon as yaw rate is consistent, it centers in dampening mode. I also wish there was a way to bind it to a true toggle button that didn’t have to be held down. My switch in my warthog throttle is old and doesn’t work perfect, despite the switch holding itself in place sometimes it deactivates and I notice my helicopter jerk as the Yaw AP goes into heading hold and resists my turn. Glad to have helped. That is my goal all along! Happy flying! Wolfpack also just came out with this video. Probably better he did it and not me as I would’ve made it 20 minutes long with detailed descriptions of AP logic saying what’s proportional to what As Wolfpack mentioned also special thanks to @molevitch, he sent me the same pedal video Wolfpack used. Initially I thought it was a random video but apparently it is an Mi-8 set being used for his simpit, and is identical to Mi-24 pedal in micro switches physical function. Molevitch has also provided me with lots of research that helped assist me to put some puzzle pieces together. There are some things you don’t figure out until you read 3 different translations of different things

Damn this is interesting thank you for the test! I thought of trying the disable by pedal movement like your set up, but I’m happy only having ONE thing that I COMPLETELY control change the modes So basically, 1. If micro switch logic is set to disable by pedal movement, it relies on pedals moving at a fast enough rate to disengage heading hold. I.e, slowly moving pedals won’t affect heading hold being on 2. Micro switches/pedal trim button (keyboard Y), when pressed changes mode of Yaw AP as long as it is pressed. As long as it is pressed, pedals cannot change mode. If button is released, control is returned to pedals on decision of Yaw AP channel mode. Is it possible that’s what happening? But man. This whole pedal movement option really is for the experimenters, seems to me if you were happy with it before keep in disable by setting pedals to nuetral. And if like me just want manual control with a switch, just set automatic off and assign bind to switch.