Lucas_From_Hell

The way the question was worded, they meant a training campaign like the 'Kursant' one for the L-39.

The map is actually modelled in the mid-1990s. The addition of Georgia, Abkhazia and South Ossetia was finished internally before the conflict started, and hit the public build two months after it.

We will have that, but that doesn't touch the Mi-24 too much. The Mi-24P was introduced in the 1980s. By then most client states of the US and the Soviet Union already employed the AIM-9P and R-60, while IR SAMs were being replaced by the Igla and Stinger.

Leaving this here

IDDQD правильно сказал. Но если подумать, на серверах в котором есть ограничений количество оружии это тоже был бы полезно. Например, лечу я один на разведку, у нас в аэродроме только 16 ракеты. Моя задача не требует больше 4 против ПЗРК, ЗСУ и т.д., но сейчас я должен либо брать 6 (и рисковать потерять их всех), либо идти без них вообще. Совсем некритичная ситуация, но раз в сто лет это мешает.

No work in Russia until the 11th January, don't hold your breath until then

Можно ли будет загрузить ракеты по одному (кстати, тоже актуально для акулы)?

You too, Chris, and good luck with the cockpit build!

A large part on the nickname comes from the comparisons with the previous holder of the nickname, the Il-2, due to its close support role, ungainly looks and high survivability compared to its peers.

The correct maximum amount is 8. Standard loadout if 4, a pair per wingtip, but the outermost wing pylons can also carry them.

It's heavier than the UH-1, but also a lot more powerful. Since most attacks will be at high speed you'll be working with wider turn circles hugging the ground, something Viggen pilots will be well acquainted with.

On early access release as far as I know it will only have weapons that currently exist in game including the 30mm HE and AT shells, S-5, S-8 and S-24 variants, GUV pods, FAB and RBK bombs, plus the Shturm and Ataka missiles with HEAT warheads. After that, they plan to add missing bomb models and warhead options.

Fri13, S.E.Bulba has been one of the few people here who's regularly provided sources about the Mi-24. It's not his fault nor burden to provide even more arguments or proof to support opinion of active duty aircrews, the Russian Army Aviation planners and the Russian Ministry of Defence, who retired the Mi-24V due to its inadequate firepower but still actively deploy the Mi-24P to combat zones like Syria or Nagorno-Karabakh.

...and in the context of DCS today, where infantry is very limited and does not react like it would to being suppressed by an HMG, the YakB is nearly useless. Those who want to get a feel for the 30mm cannon in DCS can experiment with the Ka-50's fixed gun mode. It does a brilliant job at eliminated vehicles and infantry, particularly if employed with the tactics used by Russian Army Aviation - fire rockets when in range, then press closer and do a gun run in the same pass.

Rockets do deal splash damage in DCS. Part of the problem lies in the oversimplified ground unit damage model, but the other is entirely human error - people usually pick up rockets with HEAT warheads, which have a much reduced frag radius compared to HE and frag ones. On top of that, they sometimes expect fragmentation damage to do anything to armoured vehicles, and that's just not happening. Here are some effects of splash damage from near-misses by the S-8OFP2 on the first two images, then the S-5KO, and the S-24B.

"The community" doesn't prefer the V. Some members, most of which know little about the weapons system, like it. Mostly the very vocal but also very small share of people who play online and with a friend on the same aircraft. I can tell you that, from the people I know, most are actually a lot happier they went with the P since it means serious firepower and not having to rely on AI to use the gun or wasting pylons on cannon pods.

Same problem here, crashes instantly

According to the project lead, since the WW2 damage model is still a work-in-progress in testing, the Mi-24 will release with a 'traditional' damage model, which will be replaced by a new one once that has matured.

That's a mock-up target drone, not an actual Mi-24. You can see it due to the three blades instead of five, and pseudo-taildragger fixed gear arrangement. Cross examination of Soviet and CIA data shows that around 60 Mi-24s were hit by a Stinger, for a total of 18 aircraft lost or written off. A 30% success rate in the case of impact, compounded with the rather poor hit rate (more or less 10% according to most sources) is nothing to write home about.

[ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","data-tempid":"temp_263583_1606082654586_66","title":"xIPO5Mj.png"}[/ATTACH]​ [ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","data-tempid":"temp_263584_1606082669258_572","title":"J4O8ze3.png"}[/ATTACH]​ [ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","data-tempid":"temp_263585_1606082681203_302","title":"9eqOtwI.png"}[/ATTACH]​ [ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","data-tempid":"temp_263586_1606082693096_706","title":"KQ03phY.png"}[/ATTACH]​ [ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","data-tempid":"temp_263587_1606082707295_230","title":"IjBxwT1.png"}[/ATTACH]​ [ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","data-tempid":"temp_263588_1606082717935_466","title":"X9JAOO5.png"}[/ATTACH]​ [ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","data-tempid":"temp_263589_1606082727231_886","title":"hAFE6Km.png"}[/ATTACH]​[ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","data-tempid":"temp_263590_1606082736372_550","title":"h1lgXvl.png"}[/ATTACH]​[ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","data-tempid":"temp_263591_1606082773864_171","title":"eF4pjKm.png"}[/ATTACH]​ [ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","data-tempid":"temp_263592_1606082781749_566","title":"ioHiNmU.png"}[/ATTACH]​ [ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","data-tempid":"temp_263593_1606082790728_578","title":"bUwxi9e.png"}[/ATTACH]​ [ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","data-tempid":"temp_263594_1606082807957_274","title":"X5tm9yN.png"}[/ATTACH]

You can see its flight characteristics, including hovering.

Avimimus is correct. Plus, you don't have to look that far - if the Soviet Union wanted numbers over quality and didn't care about losses, they wouldn't have adopted the Mi-24 or its original project in the first place. The entire design philosophy around the Mi-24 was to provide an assault helicopter that was survivable, because it was felt that American helicopter losses over Vietnam were unacceptable and aircraft protection was inadequate.

The Mi-24A was exported to the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan