Ginsu80

BDA is battle damage assessment, generally speaking a pilot will be to focused on post release evasion to watch for a weapon impact. Plus there is always the chance that the truck the JTAC is seeing, and the truck the pilot rolls in on are two different targets. It happens. I had a Cobra make a rocket attack on the wrong range during a CAX when I was on active duty with the Marines. One problem that is impossible to model is the communication during a 9 line is not so cut and dried. Yes the lines are important and given in that order but a good pilot/Jtac will talk more than is modeled. There are some good examples of pilot/Jtac cross talk on youtube. One excellent example of what not to do is cockpit vid of the Matt Hull incident in Iraq 2003. In real life if a target moves, or if a pilot has any extra questions he can always ask the Jtac.

Ah, (palms face). Thanks Nate.

I have a problem with my stall warning audio. They seem to stop working mid mission, with no reason. They work after take off and while flying a bit, but at some point mid mission they stop. Anyone have any ideas?

I turn labels off for screenshots of course, and when I say mine only come on at close range I mean very close. I think I have them currently set at 4km for ground targets, and 10km for air targets. I remember reading Chuck Yeager's autobiography where he claimed to be able to make out the specks of airplanes at almost 50mi. 10km seemed appropriate. Of course with the colors all the same it could be the other section, or it could be a Mig. I tried playing with labels off, and felt like it was unfair. I admit, I play on a laptop so that doesn't help. With labels on, it felt like a turkey shoot. I think I have struck a nice balance of situational awareness and realism. Rolling in on what you think is an enemy tank, zooming in and realizing it's an M1 still happens so it doesn't feel like a cheat to me. And I use my FLIR a lot, with the targets only being labeled as a dot at 4km thats not enough time to set up a Maverick run and well inside of SAM engagement range. Generally I see a label on the ground I back off, I know generally where it was but can't see the dot anymore at 10+km, conduct a FLIR search, ID and roll in hot.

I go with the sorta version. All my labels are the same color, black, and show up at very close range. What I figured a pilot could spot by unaided eye in the cockpit. Still leaves me with questions as to what the dot is, and plenty of fun trying to find targets at range. I have rolled in on a dot thinking it was a target only to discover it was a friendly so ID'ing a target is still a must. I feel it makes up for the fact that I am playing on a small monitor with limited resolution. To me its actually more realistic.

I noticed that some of the user skins feature Russian vehicles as kill markers, but try as I mights I can't find any suitable ones online. Any chance someone can provide a link? Any help would be appreciated.

Stongharm makes a good point, but if my understanding is correct the DTS system is using elevation information based on the current position of the aircraft according to information loaded during the mission start up. I agree that using a SPI is the best option as it gives range/elevation data on the current target and is the most accurate. However, if you are doing a mission with no TGP, and the elevation for the nearest WP is not ground level wouldn't the DTS setting be the best option? I have to admit I have just defaulted to selecting DTS but I dont' want to do that if it isn't in keeping with the actual procedures. I just thought of this, even without a TGP you could make the HUD SOI and use the hud cursor to set a mark and use that as your SPI, if I am correct that will give updated elevation information even without a TGP. I'll have to give it a try later tonight.

I have had a problem like this as well, and though I am not exactly sure why this fix works, or what it does it has fixed the issue for me. Look at your steerpoint on the hud information. Use the UFC to select the info for elevation on the hud it should begin to flash and then use the UFC data selection rocker to change the info until it reads DTS. When starting in the air it is set to DTS, but on a ramp start it defaults to an elevation reading. Hope this helps. Originally Posted by E61-v1T1 The solution for CCIP Invalid is; - HUD SOI, - From UFC Panel: "Pg DATA" Down (at HUD, lower right corner, it shows the elevation of "steerpoint" flashes) - Use "SEL" to change it to DTS End of problem Greetings Edit

I modified my labels.lua file to cut down on the range that I can see ground targets, and both blue and red forces are colored black. I figure it's the general range a pilot could see a vehicle is a vehicle, but you have to be damn near on top of it to identify it. I think it strikes the right balance of situational awareness and compensates for the limitations of the sim.

I have been trying to make some videos like I have seen all over youtube and the website, but I can't seem to make it work. The ingame video editor always leaves me with a mouse cursor on screen, and the file is huge. Is there a better way? There must be. Any help would be appreciated.

Finally was able to semi complete it. Changed loadout to include CBUs as well. I have changed the LUA file so that my labels are all black and cut down the range you can see ground vehicles and indentify them. That didn't help but once I was able to get going it was much better. I tried the fix with checking net ids but that didn't help. Basically I just used my TGP to scan scan on one run in, set a SPI, then attack on the next run in. I can't believe you can't use the TAD to set MGRS coordinates. There has to be a way to do that. I must say that CBUs delivered CCRP in a climb against massed IFVs is outstanding. Able to climb above the range they can engage and turn out before overflying them.

I have to say the overall experience is excellent, but I have some complaints about the first mission in this campaign. In five tries I have only received data once (known issue I know) I have been shot down by a MIG29, by a Shilka, twice by a SA11, and once by a MANPAD. If I had given a 9 line when I was a JTAC that consisted of 2 Zeus 0nm southwest, Zeus 3 SA11 North 1nm, Zeus MANPAD West 2nm I would have gotten unable to comply. Not to mention the weapon loadout is awful, the CAP cover is non existent, and the cloud base is 2000 or 2500 AGL. So I am a little dissapointed with the authored missions. If anyone has some pointers I would love to hear them. 4 hours of solid flight time and still can't make a dent in the enemy.

Ok I finally got the download working and have the guide. Internet in Iraq is a pain in the @*$. Now all thats left is to figure it out. Luckily I have the time.

I have the ED templete off the website, I have photoshop brand new. I can change the paint scheme no problem, I made a really good desert style skin, but I can't figure out what to do with it now. There aren't any textures that I can see to replace. I know RCN_Moose has a tutorial up but I can't download it I have been trying all day. I even tried the link to checksix, no dice there. My question is how do I get my templetes that I have skinned in photoshop into the game. I tried searcing but all I came up with was some vague information about .cdds files. Everyone seems to be a Lock On vet, and I have no idea what they are talking about. Any help would be appreciated.

Whew, Apaches ARE beasts. Hellfires especially. But there is a secret. Bank one way, and kick opposite rudder to put your into a side slip. At about 1.5 k Bank over really hard, almost 90 degrees, if your timing is good you ought to be ok. Oh, and the Vikhr is faster than a hellfire, so if you both launch at the same time your missle will hit first, if it kills him the hellfire will lose lock. Just be sure it kills him. Every Vikhr I had against a Hind was a one shot deal, I had two Apaches survive Vikhrs, two didn't. 50 50 though the sample is small. The Apaches gun is far deadlier than the Hinds but you still have range, or should. Forget AP ammo, I tried it on one run and I didn't think I was hitting, got killed and F2ed to see the Apache, who was all chewed up. But still flying. Same run again with HE rounds, toasted no problem.

So I was reading a post here somewhere, and someone complained about getting eaten alive by Hinds in Air to Air on a mission, so I decided to run a little test. I set up several engagments with various weapons loadouts for both friend and foe. From an even position with 10k of distance I was able to come out on top with a 4 to 1 disadvantage using guns only. From a position where the enemy had the advantage and a distance of 3k or greater it was about 2 to 1 with guns only. Closer than that and it was a 1 to 1 knife fight. If I could swing around and lock him up with the Shkval quickly I could win, if I had trouble locking him up, toast. Adding missles to the mix gave me an even greater advantage if I had at least 7k of distance. I went head to head with a flight of 5 Hinds and came out on top. The Vikhr works fairly nicely in A to A. I even managed to dodge an AT-6 spiral. Here is what I found. First, set the laser to standby and the engagement mode to AA. Believe it or not it makes it much easier to lock up an airborne target. The HMS is your friend, especially if you have Trackir or something similar. Bring up the HMS, and all you have to do is look where the target is coming from. Keep your zoom out a bit so you can see the Shkval screen and make adjustments on the fly. I actually had better effects with the tracking gates a little bigger than with ground targets. Ussually for ground I keep them small, but here I found it easier to get a lock if they were a little bigger. Make sure your laser is lasing before you fire. You should see TA and the range should be changing, unles of course your not closing with your target. But normally the number will change. Just tapping the lock button quickly well reset the laser, but not cause you to lose your lock, unless there is a ton of movement relative to the target or he goes outside the Shkval FOV. Your gun is bigger and badder, use it. Ever wonder why some guns have long barrels and some don't? The longer the barrel, the more muzzle velocity for a weapon of similar caliber, what this means to you is your rounds will travel farther, and hit harder at a longer range so use that advantage. I found a Hind wouldn't open up on me until he was within 1.5k to 1k. While I could score hits from 2.5k to 3k depending on the deflection. I scored a kill on a hind from 2k with both helicopters moving like bats out of hell from 90 degrees off his wing. Only took 2 bursts. Which leads me to the next point. Remember your gun hits harder. The Hind is known as a flying tank. But your gun is meant to kill actual tanks. Ok well APCs and light armor. But those don't fly, and have more armor. The times I was killed it took 4 to 6 bursts connecting from the Hinds gun to kill me. Ussually 2 or 3 solid bursts did him in. Lastly if you see a burst connecting, and your target starts to fall like a stone, don't fall for it. He's probably just manuevering, he isn't dead. This one caught me a couple time before I figured it out. How do you know he's a lawn dart? Flames, or a big explosion. Otherwise keep him in the Shkval FOV so you don't lose your lock and keep on him. Ok so this isn't a very technical entry, not a whole lot on tactics. But it was much easier than I expected. Sometimes I have a hard time getting the Shkval to lock up a truck, so I expected to have a heck of a time with a fast moving airborne target. But the KA-50 computed distance and lead on airborne targets. The Vikhr worked like a charm I couldn't get it to miss. The only thing I didn't try with it was a firing 90 off a targets wing, but even if the target was jinking I got hits. Next up, Black Shark vs Fast Movers.

So I have been tinkering with the Shkval at night and have noticed that with NVGs, the brightness turned all the way down and the contrast turned all the way up you can make out targets at night in clear weather. I ussually play with labels on but even without labels I could make out tanks and apcs at the maximum Vikhr range. The Shkval wouldn't lock on so no dice hitting a moving target with the Vikhr but I had no problems with stationary targets. I even noticed that the ability of Manpad gunners to engage me at range was greatly reduced. I tried to manually slew the Shkval to hit moving targets but it makes the Vikhr go wild and I can never score a hit. Anyone else done some night time playing?

Hello to all, I am having a problem getting the DCS Max tool to apply the skin I select from it. Anyone know how I can get it to change the skin of my shark?

I am having a blade strike problem while using the trimmer. After trimming a few times in flight, even after using the reset trimmer button, I am having bladestrikes in straight and easy level flight. ANyone have a fix or at least having this problem.

I just wanted to make a post to say that gogamer is the way to go to get DCS. After EBgames pushed back the date I cancelled the order and put a new order in with gogamer. I put the order in at 0800 and had my game in hand, in the middle of nowhere Colorado by 1500 the next day. I would have put in this post earlier but I have been too busy flying.

Your right this topic has swerved slightly askew of what I originally intended. As to the development cycle of the KA-50, from what I can gleam from online sources was basically a development of attack helicopters with the idea of replacing the venerable HIND, much like the MI-28 HAVOK. Unlike the HAVOK however, the Black Shark appears to be a victim of it's only uniqueness and economic circumstances otherwise today it would probably be seen in much greater numbers. Just look at the RAH-66 project on the American side and you can see what may have happened to the Apache if it's development cycle had taken it through the mid 90s instead of the 80s. Now specifically on the subject of a RWR I think it's very likely that it would not have been included on production Black Sharks, despite being tested. I feel that American designs differ due to design philosophy, as untill recently the Apache was viewed as a deep strike option to open up the battle space to higher commands, where as from what I understand of Russian operations, and it is not a great understanding, but as I understand it they operate thier helicopters less as a penetration weapon and more of a direct manuever/fire support option employed in support of ground units. I can speak directly to the lack of emphasis in the US Army of helicopters as a close support option. In 4 years of service with the Marines I participated in 4 seperate training missions involving helicopters in a live fire enviornment. In 5 years of service with the Army, including 2 years on active duty during deployments I have yet to ever have, train with, or at the very least include in planning operations the possiblity of helicopter support. That isn't to say it is not done at all. It just isn't emphasized the same in the two branches. You do pose a very good point on the inclusion of a FAC with the Black Shark. I have been reading that the KA-52 Edrogan, sorry if that is misspelled, is being pitched as a recon element to the KA-50 attack element. Many countries have employed this methodology in thier operations and it is an interesting operational concept but I am not sure if it is one accurate, or two could be modeled successfully with the campaign software. Correct me if I am wrong but only the aircraft in your own flight can data-link information to you correct? I think in reality the data-link system is capable of recieving information from many sources, including those outside of your flight. Much like the American FBCB2 or blue force tracker. If this is true a KA-52 or other recon element with supperior optics and a smaller work load could download data to the Black Shark attack element and this may be what is envisioned for the future. As for the improvements in NATO MBT armor, in the end history always proves out that the weapon beats out armor. It is true that the chobbam armor on NATO tanks is considered by many to be nigh invulnerable to enemy fire, but I can assure however that the insurgents have found ways to defeat even that, and with far less resources than are available to a nation state. Even the humble Vikhr, which I have been told by armor officers could never ever penetrate the front armor on an Abrams, can still score kills by hitting the top, or rear armor. In warfare if 75 percent of your armor becomes a mobility kill on the battlefield you have still lost 75 percent of your mobile firepower and are no longer to affect the battlefield outside of your current position. And I think your are correct, the simple expedient of modifying the Vikhr for top attack, or even applying the lessons learned to a new weapon would probably see the KA-50 with the ability to destroy all Nato armor.

Just an interesting point I want to note. The two pilots rescued by Marines were rescued by 3rd LAR out of 29 Palms California. There is a mural comemerating the event, or so I am told. This is a very interesting article, I am going to have to take some time to read it. One of the things I am amazed at, and if I can ever find the time to research properly and publish is how fast tactics techniques and procedures are being modified do to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Not to mention the rate at which new equipment is being fielded by US forces. I believe it constitutes a huge shift in both how we fight, and with what we fight with. I must admit my interaction with aviation forces in country is rather limited, but I have noticed and increased focus on smaller elements and working closer with ground troops. However I can not explain this as a consequence of lessons learned, or simply a shift into low intensity operations from the more conventional opening stages of the war. Also, I must admit a personal bias, if you haven't guessed I began my military career in the Marine Corps, and have always believed that the army places too high an emphasis on shaping future engagements with massed formations of helicopters. I have always preferred the Marine Corps' philosophy of close support of ground units with small teams of rotary winged aircraft. But I have to admit that this is as much of a personal bias as a professional belief, and the argument is there for both. Now if I can only find a reliable after action report or summary of helicopter operations from Chechneya or South Ossetia. I want to try and get a feel for the Russian side of things and I find the tactics section of the manual to be rather less that up to the task.

I have been pounding the "tubes" trying to get a line on reliable information concerning the employment of russian attack helicopters. Specifically their tactics and methodology. Sadly no luck. But I did find an interesting note on wikipedia under the attack helicopter entry. Granted wikipedia is not the most learned of sources. It matches nicely with what we have been talking about. " Lessons learned about limitations of independent attack helicopters On March 24, 2003, US V Corps launched a raid, by 32 Apache helicopters, against Medina Division armor in Karbala, with an attack plan that would fly through the Karbala area. "Army officials now believe that the aviation assembly areas the Army established in the Iraqi desert had been under surveillance by enemy observers, who noticed battle preparations on the night of the 24th." The corps commander told reporters that post-strike analysis revealed that the Iraqi observers had alerted the defense using cellular telephones.[7][3] As they approached, the power grid in Karbala was shut off, and the night went dark. The Apaches were taken under heavy antiaircraft fire. One was shot down (with the crew captured by Iraqi forces. They were later recovered by US forces), and enough of the others were damaged such that the raid was aborted. Two days later, the Army again used Apaches to carry out another nighttime deep attack. Tactics used, however, were quite different than those on March 24.[4] The damage done, "The results of the attack were respectable, if not spectacular: seven Iraqi air defense guns destroyed, along with three artillery systems, five radars, and 25 vehicles or other weapons systems. Not one Apache was shot down. Shortly afterward, the 3rd Infantry Division slashed through the Medina on its way toward Baghdad."[7] On March 26, other systems supported the attack, beginning with a four-minute artillery bombardment to distract the gunners. As the helicopters moved through the Najaf area, the lights again went off, and the intensity of antiaircraft fire increased as they approached the target. Two different things were done. "The Apaches fired back on the move—rather than using the Army’s typical tactic of hovering over the battlefield. That made them harder to hit from the ground but reduced their accuracy." Also, fixed-wing fighters protected the Apaches' flanks and suppressed more air defense. As the helicopters moved in, they radioed the locations of air defense targets to the fighters.[7] The March 24 raid is still being analyzed, with Air Force officers suggesting that the AH-64 alone is simply not effective for deep attack without support from conventional aircraft. Other analysts think this mission was poorly planned and the Iraqis had good intelligence on their route of attack. Nevertheless, the Apache mission generally changed from deep attack to direct support of troops. One of the most important lessons learned about the abortive raid on Iraqi tanks in Karbala, Iraq, was that the AH-64 is resilient enough to function effectively even when damaged. It was also made clear, however, that attack helicopters, without coordinated SEAD (Suppression of Enemy Air Defense), cannot penetrate an alerted defense."

It is fairly nice. I am not a very big fan of laptops in general, but I have been building and modding desktops since I was about 16. I guess because I never got into cars. I have always dreamed of being a helicopter pilot so I am salivating over getting Black Shark in a few days. I even went for the Trackir 4 system. As long as I can get decent framerates with the cockpit on, and have trees and buildings and mountins that are fairly believable I will be happy. I am not looking for photo realistic. Just about what I have seen on youtube and the producers notes, maybe not even quite that good but close.

Interested in hearing from those of you who have some experience running the game. I am wondering what to expect performance wise running BS with a laptop, since frankly because of where I work I am out of options. Here is a quick rundown of what I have Video/Graphics Card: Dual 512MB NVIDIA® GeForce® 9800M GT – SLI Enabled Display: 17" WideUXGA 1920 x 1200 LCD (1200p) with Clearview Technology – Black Processor: Intel® Core™ 2 Duo T9300 2.5GHz (6MB Cache 800MHz FSB) Memory: 4GB« Dual Channel DDR2 SO-DIMM at 667MHz – 2 x 2048MB Operating System (Office software not included): Windows Vista® Home Premium (64-bit Edition) with Service Pack 1 I am hoping to get medium settings with decent framerates. Where you can see the trees and moutins look like mountins and not just blocks. Something flyable with the cockpit.