Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Lascar12F

  • Birthday January 25

Personal Information

  • Flight Simulators
  • Location
    Brest, France
  • Interests
    Flying and ****ing

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Hi, Ground units are invisible to petrovich if they are placed near a ME placed static object like a house or workshop. This is a bug that is reproducible 100% of the time. I have included a track file as well as the mission file for you to try. There are two groups of two S-60 AAA. the one on the left has structures next to it and is invisible to petrovich, and the one on the right has nothing next to it and is visible to petrovich. I encourage you to try this .miz for yourself if you haven't experienced this bug. petro no track.trk Petro tracking test.miz
  2. @BIGNEWY @NineLine still no answer, when i've provided the documents you requested. Can we get an answer or what ??
  3. @NineLine I added the document you requested in my post above
  4. That's good to hear, thank you very much for taking the time to respond, and I'm looking forward to seeing it changed in game !
  5. I mean the 9M120 ataka has an air-air proximity fused variant. That would indicate to me a certain willingness to shoot down at least helicopters. @NineLine Also, I've joined a picture of the manual for the export version of the Mi-24P, the Mi-35P, which is virtually identical, and it explicitly states that killing air targets is one of it's missions, and later in Book 2 section 6 describes guiding a missile towards airborne targets. Find pages 6-5 and 6-6 attached. Really hope this gets the "correct as-is" tag removed, and this implemented !
  6. Hi, I believe this issue has been raised before, but I think this deserves another post. The weight of a loaded dual rack of 9M114 missile is 230kg exactly in game. The game itself lists the weight of a single 9m114 missile as 40kg. This doesn't seem too wrong as most online sources list between 31 and 32 kg The weight of an empty rack is 13 kg in game. This seems plausible as it is a relatively small and beefy metal frame. So adding 2x40+13 we get 93kg. Obviously that doesn't take into account the tube in which the missile is housed. There is a 137 kg difference here. So either the tube in which the missile is housed weights 68.5 kg empty, or there is a problem with the weight of the twin rack with 9m114. I believe ED got this info from the manual for the export Mi-35P that is freely available online and very very close to our Mi-24P. Doing a bit of math from the manual's max fuel per loadout you get an individual masse for each loaded twin launchers of 241kg. see attached picture for detailed math. Personally I highly doubt that this weight is correct. I do no know how to explain how heavy the manual thinks these are, but I believe it might be taking additional equipment into consideration. I would love a source on the actual weight of the loaded twin rack by itself and not as a larger fuel calculation for the hind. I don't buy that the weight of the launch tubes is 137 kg. It just doesn't make sense. If ED uses a different source than the one I've assumed, I'd love for them to share it. Here is a video of two men handling empty launch tubes on a 9P149 tracked atgm carrier. I don't think those weigh 68 kg and they are tossing them around like nothing.
  7. just tested it, and even if they don't show up they still make a difference. Flying head on and not maneuvering: - with the suppressor box ticked, stingers will launch at 0.8 nm and go for flares. - without suppressors box ticked, stingers will launch at 0.85 nm and ignore the flares and hit the helo. See tacview files for proof. Without suppressors.acmi With suppressors.acmi
  8. I don't think it's a leftover. the mass is different from the ones on the Hip. You can check for the in the .lua for the hind, all the way at the bottom. My best guess is they don't have a model for it yet, as it is a bit different from the Hip one. Not sure if it actually reduces IR signature right now either, might be a useless toggle. Although it does add the weight right now in DCS even if you can't see them.
  9. It is what I inferred. I was looking for any info. You provided info that it's not a russian modification and hence we will never see it in DCS. I was thanking you for straight to the point, correct info about why this is wrong.
  10. +1 the igla is essentially useless right now. It just flies straight and will never hit even a hovering, non flaring target. Please fix.
  11. bumping this topic so it gets acknowledged by ED. With all the new helos getting in DCS manpads are more important than ever. Igla-s is litterally worse than nothing right now. please fix it. you can't expect to release apache and kiowa with no red manpad can you ?
  12. Thanks for the info Ikaros. This is exactly the kind of knowledge what I wanted.
  13. The exhaust IR suppressor are coming to the hind in DCS. it's confirmed and the toggle is already in the mission editor. But that's not the question I'm asking. My question is was this used on soviet 24P and if yes, are we getting it.
  14. It seems this has been tagged as "need track replay" which I just don't understand why a mod would do that for something that is 100% reproducible every single flights on every server. You want a track file I'll give you one, but you can do this yourself. Would have appreciated an actual answer rather than just a tag but it is what it is.
  15. Don't know if this has been posted here before but here is a pic of what appears to be a standard none upgraded 24P with igla launchers mounted under the ATGM tip launcher. This would be insane, and it makes me all tingly just thinking about it !
  • Create New...