isoul

This is acceptable too! I don't know how the hell an attack helicopter pilot get warning/info about the situation in the air BUT he has to get that info somehow, right? The system I 've seen was for command & control purposes, at least in peace-time. @ <51>Case: Triggers are good and can make a scenario more realistic but I wasn't referring to triggers. In RL you can't have constantly 40 F-15 in the air defending the same area. You will have a whole front-line to defend and various targets on the front-line and deep in friendly territory rather than a single/few target area. If you consider hardware/personnel limitations, repair needs, reserves for emergency, combat losses etc, the number of units you can spare to defend a single area at a given is limited unless alarm has been raised. This situation can't be simulated.

By the way... in my short service in the army aviation (don't get too excited I was a signaler!) I remember that in "Operations Room" of the brigade there were some monitors showing what is happening in the air all over the country. This image was taken from air force's radars and was represented graphically on the monitors. So... I believe that in war time the Operations Room could inform any helicopter pilot of the situation in the air, who is who up there, where he is and where he is going(with speed, altitude, heading etc ). Wouldn't it be possible that the Ka-50 pilot could contact the ATC and request "picture"?

@Eddie : Mate you can't expect DCS and FC2.0 take a step backwards! You can't negate the compatibility of these two products because Su-27s and F-15s are on top of the "food-chain". People tend to like the role of the hunter better than the role of the prey. So what if DCS:Multi-role Fighter ever come true? Most people will go for the multi-role fighter and all together will hunt down the poor Shark. You admit that for yourself above! Attack helicopters have better chances to survive in RL than in the virtual DCS/FC2.0 environment. In our virtual environment you may have 39 F-15/Su-27 pilots flying over the same target area and 1 poor Ka-50 trying to reach it. In RL this would never happen! As nemesis posted on page#1 these are necessary mission design compromises that must be there in order missions to be fun for all. Get along with it mate... unless someone manages to create a simulation that models, apart from aircraft buttons and behavior, real military tactics and the various limitations in unit deployment on the battlefield... this won't change any time soon.

Someone can't handle the AP behaviour..?:pilotfly:

I think that in RL helicopters use simpler methods to remain undetected. To anyone that has the spare time and "courage", read below : REAL LIFE Flying low between mountains/hills is the simplest but best way. At all times the helicopter pilot and tacticians will have to plan routes accordingly in order to keep a low profile and not to attract the attention of enemy fighters and anti-air defenses. Attack helicopters are depending heavily on the terrain morphology. Apart from this, attack helicopters, being deployed from FARPs, are usually quite close to the front-line. They can go in and get out quite fast. Their attacks(performed by well trained pilots) usually takes only a little time, given that the helicopter pilot followed a stealthy route to get in and out, so the enemy has a rather narrow time "window" to detect them and react . In RL there is one gold rule... you never deploy a helicopter if the enemy has established air superiority, even temporarily. If enemy fighters overfly the target area or patrol in close proximity the helicopter would be in grave danger. So it would be better to stay on the ground! Russian Army doctrine, in particular, wants all army branches to work close together, covering each other. This means that Ka-50 would be deployed close to their lines(when not in covert op's) where SAMs would discourage enemy fighters to hunt it down freely. Even in worst case the helicopter pilot will be warned about possible threats in the surrounding area from friendly radars and flying aircraft. He never flies depending only on his eyes and the protection of God. IN GAME Some of the above can't be guaranteed or followed for many reasons while in game. The best way to stay out of harm's way is what Ethereal suggested(given the doppler effect won't be modeled accurately any time soon), fly between hills and mountains while the area is not overflown by fighters and having a friend watching your "back".

Why the 160 knots and extremely low(15ft~5m?) flight will keep fighters away? Would it make you invisible to their radars? I don't believe so!

Good post BUT I think that reacting convoys, for example, is a hard thing to do... I would like to see an improved wingman AI first.

Actually the design of this helicopter doesn't allow to mount Vikhrs on inner hard-points. Another thing that may aid you a little to aim rockets is the Shkval camera. How to do that? 1) Switch on your laser range finder. 2) Set the Automatic tracking/gun sight switch(left panel next to Moving Target Button, AA Target Button etc) to GS position. 3) Be sure to set the Ballistic Switch(auxiliary panel next to your right shoulder) to the correct rocket type you are carrying/firing. This way you "slave" the Shkval camera sight to the calculated impact point of your rockets. Of course this is not a remedy since the camera sight follows the rocket cross hair movement. So any non-gentle movement of your aircraft will result you to lose sight of the calculated impact point. This "solution" won't make your rockets more accurate but it gives you a mean to aim them better! To summarize things up, I agree with previous posts and I never managed to use rockets for accurate attacks.

Actually I remember myself having locked a target with Shkval beyond Vikhr's max range. The transparency of objects at range, IMHO, simulates quite well the low visibility conditions in the atmosphere! (You can change that by tweaking for_param1 and fog_param2 in ...\CONFIG\graphics.cfg but then it may seem a bit unrealistic.) The Shkval display resolution in RL shouldn't be high! Its not designed for a photography contest after all! Have you ever see any video footage? Check this (at 0:44) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPfahDdIjgk. Apart from this keep in mind that, even with a good resolution display, atmospheric conditions affect the quality of the image and spotting targets like tanks, that are usually camouflaged, is quite hard.

The real Shkval on Su-25T has only two modes(zoom levels)! The Search Mode(8x Zoom) and Targeting Mode(23x Zoom). The truth is that the Su-25T, given the speed it has, NEEDS to target things at a distance. Targeting at long range gives the pilot the opportunity to launch Vikhrs at max(or almost max) range, keep a lock on target from a "safe" distance while missile is in flight and, once missile hits the target, break your attack from further away. The 0x Zoom doesn't help much in this. The only thing the 0xZoom is good at is locking targets at closer range. But if you target closer, till Vikhr's impact, you will get too close to the target area if not overfly it! So 0x Zoom in real life is useless, and not without a good reason, for the Russian designers. Why should we, in FC2.0, have such inaccuracy once we know how the real stuff works? Personally I can do my job and I think I can do it better because I am forced to lock targets from longers range.

THX Mustang!

I suspect that too..!

I think I 've seen once a thread about making the pilot's body visible by default(without pressing RShift+P) and/or making mouse look+cursor default without pressing LAlt+C... I can't find it anymore... any ideas? It must be possible...

AP is a tricky thing to get used to! Try FD, as Frederf suggested, to get used of the flying behavior of the Shark. Use Trim all the time as you would in the a real Ka-50. After you get used to fly with FD and Trimming you can disengage the FD. AP channels and ALT and HDG Hold channels is a lot of help once you have mastered them. Personally I use ALT Hold too most of the time. In combat, and when the situation demands faster and more free movement of the Shark in all 3 dimensions, I use FD to negate the Hold function of the AP channels. I hoped this helped.

@Ethereal : Apache Longbow was just an example. The actual question is which army would fund a military simulator for old aircraft? You people say that a contract is needed for DCS-fidelity simulator... I haven't said otherwise! I just doubt that an army would fund a simulator for older models and that if it funded a sim for quite modern aircraft it wouldn't possibly like the idea of having some info "leaked" through the commercial market. I believe a "golden middle" is what we need. Nor too old neither too modern... something like Ka-50 (Not UH-1 and not a AH-64D). So, all in all I have to say that : I don't expect any army is interested for an A-7 simulator contract. I don't expect an F-22 or F-16CJ army contract to be allowed for commercial use. I would expect a contract for a Mirage2000 for example. Why? Its not too old(like the A-7) neither too classified(like the F-22)... so the possibility that a military client is interested in it is higher and the possibility that you 'll get the license to use it for a commercial product high enough too. Now, if USAF wants an F-22 simulator and has no objection with it "going commercial" its more than OK with me! Still the possibility of this happening is quite close to zero. Am I still wrong?

Who would like a military simulator for older models like Mig-29A or F-16A? Most of these models are being replaced or are quite old so no army would like to train pilots for such old aircraft using new simulator(developed by ED). I believe that more possible aircraft for DCS would be a non-surpassed but still not at the "very edge of military technology"(which would remain classified). So I wouldn't expect AH-64D Longbow Apache,for example, but the AH-64A or an AH-64A+... don't expect F-16CJ but the C variant is more possible.

Never happened to me...

Good work Haril!

In game I haven't seen any way to set salvo length but I believe in real life there should be a way to set it.

Unfortunately the wingman AI is bad! The weird thing is that even in quick mission the friendly Mi-24's are more helpful than your own wingman. Friendly Hinds fly around hitting targets with missiles and cannon while your wingman will engage always at hover which makes him a sitting duck above the battlefield. Maybe next patch will improve wingman AI...

That sounds reasonable. In a post of mine above, I mention that short burst can be used against single vehicles. By saying vehicles I meant lightly armored or unarmored ones. Personally I don't expect to destroy a tank with rockets at all. Even in real life I don't know if someone could be sure that a rocket launched from a helicopter can hit a tank at a specific part of the armor with a desired angle to score a kill. Although I 've seen footage of helicopters launching rockets in pairs I doubt that the target ever is a tank. Most of the time single rockets are aimed against buildings or other soft targets.

The best way is to release flares every now and then. IRL this will give hard time for the stinger operator to obtain a lock. In game setting a program like 323 or 333 from both sides and punching the button every now and then is good enough I think. Flares are dropped most of the time to distract sensors rather than missiles. See a strike aircraft in youtube... most drop flares not because they are attacked but because they want to avoid being attacked. Don't hesitate to launch flares. Normally the fight will end before you deplete your flare stock.

Flight Director mode is very useful when deploying rockets. Burst size (salvo quantity) must be used wisely. Short burst is better for hitting a vehicle in the open or when engaging large soft targets (such as non-hardened buildings). Med Burst size is wanted when you are attacking targets with close proximity from one to the other (like truck convoys). Med burst size is useful when you want to hit something dangerous at range, perhaps a ZU-23, and you have to do it with rockets. Long Burst? You have infantry hiding in forested area (like in the campaign mission #2 where you escort a convoy), you see the tracer rounds but can't see the enemy itself and you have your S-8OFP2 hanging from your little wings! Fire a long salvo... the best thing you can do! The rockets will scatter and probably kill most of the infantry in the trees.

I do believe that S-8KOM are best suited for lighter armored targets rather than modern main battle tanks. Personally I don't expect two rockets, being fired from 2km away, can effectively defeat a MBT's armor such the one on M-1 or T-80. Rockets are considered artillery and are quite inaccurate. To destroy a MBT with only 1 or even 2 direct hits is considered a "lucky hit" and rarely if ever happens to me. For MBT I prefer Vikhrs, I 'll use S-8KOM if the MBT is my only or last target.

To me scalability when comes to flight model isn't a desired thing. Learn to fly in easy flight model and you just did one step backward from point "zero" in learning to fly the Ka-50 in realistic FM. Easy flight model IMHO doesn't give you anything in the long term. The helicopter is so easy to handle and you get the wrong impression. When I started flying with the Shark (without enabling realistic flight model) I thought "I was born for" this since I handled the helicopter precisely in zero time. When I realized that this was not the realistic one and switched it on I felt the full potential of this simulation.