Mi8MTV2 armament expansion

[zerO_crash]

Mi-8MTV2 was certainly able to carry s-5 rockets, why not add these as possible loadout? The more, the merrier.

 

I am also fairly sure that S-24 was utilized (seen it both being written about, as well as pictures), just not sure if the MTV2 could do it. Possible to research that for you Belsimtek?

 

Great module, ever since release, but if there is more realistic loadout for it, then why not add it?

 

Fuel tanks... why are they not in?

Edited August 15, 2016 by zerO_crash

[terence44]

And guided missiles or 9M114 ?

 

[zerO_crash]

And guided missiles or 9M114 ?

 

 

Uhm nope, that`s a MTV5 (we got MTV2). That`s for a different helicopter, not the model we got. But otherwise good taste ;)

[terence44]

Ah ok :(

[Domcho]

In the manual it says the S-5 are retired from service in Russia and that's why they aren't present in DCS. But Russia is not the only country that has Mi-8, and some ex Warsaw Pact countries still use the S-5, so why not put it there along with fuel tanks?

[zerO_crash]

Yes, now they aren`t, but in late 80´s they were.

[GaryIKILLYOU]

I think the most valid reason is that even up to the mid-nineties a lot of export countries still used the S-5 with the Mi-17 (Mi-8MT) and variants - My question though is, when will the MTV2 be able to carry 30 troops when it can only carry 24 in the ME? Part of the selling point of the MTV2 was the bump from 24 to 30 troop carrying capacity.

Edited August 18, 2016 by GaryIKILLYOU

[Askerov24]

... Mi-17 (Mi-8MT) ...

 

:)

[zerO_crash]

I think the most valid reason is that even up to the mid-nineties a lot of export countries still used the S-5 with the Mi-17 (Mi-8M) and variants - My question though is, when will the MTV2 be able to carry 30 troops when it can only carry 24 in the ME? Part of the selling point of the MTV2 was the bump from 24 to 30 troop carrying capacity.

 

Well we are talking about a domestic Mi-8, not a foreign one. And S-5`s are still being used to this day by foreign export customers (countries) - [ame]

[/ame]

(Doesn`t matter that it`s mi 24, they are being used for training of Mi-17 crews). But this is now, I´m thinking of when Mi-8 MTV2 was released, they were still used to Russia.

Edited August 17, 2016 by zerO_crash

[ebabil]

guided rockets would be game changer.

hip's armament quite useless, you need to get very close to the operation area and they make you potato till you engage

[Askerov24]

guided rockets would be game changer.

hip's armament quite useless, you need to get very close to the operation area and they make you potato till you engage

 

Well, for guided armament we need MTV-2RN !

 

 

 

 

It's just modernized Mi-8MTV-2 :)

[Fri13]

No matter what variant could carry those ATGM, but it would turn Mi-8 totally different caliber in DCS. Like even having 4x ATGM it would have possibilities to give some more support if needed.

 

But who knows all those variants and when they have done and what differences they really have related to each other.

 

Mi-8MTv2

Mi-8MTv2RN (Mi-8MTv-2RN?)

Mi-8MTv5

 

what ever...

 

But why? Why should they make a variant of it?

[GaryIKILLYOU]

Well we are talking about a domestic Mi-8, not a foreign one.

 

There are nations in DCS that use the MTV2 other than just Russia. I understand the MTV2 designation is just for Russia, however we don't have the luxury of different nomenclature for export variants. So in my opinion the fact that you can fly the Mi-8MTV2 for other nations, and those nations still used the S-5 all the way up into the mid nineties is proof enough that S-5s at the least should be added. As far as ATGMs I think adding them in would be quite a pointless act since we are eventually supposed to receive the Mi-24. BST might as well release that than to essentially release another variant of the Mi-8. The changes I imagine it would require would warrant a new variant, so instead of that, why not receive a HIND! :D

[firmek]

One point that should be probably also considered is the licencing. We don't know if there was any licence agreements between Belsimtek and Mi-8MTV2 manufacturer and if yes what was included in the scope.

[zerO_crash]

There are nations in DCS that use the MTV2 other than just Russia. I understand the MTV2 designation is just for Russia, however we don't have the luxury of different nomenclature for export variants. So in my opinion the fact that you can fly the Mi-8MTV2 for other nations, and those nations still used the S-5 all the way up into the mid nineties is proof enough that S-5s at the least should be added. As far as ATGMs I think adding them in would be quite a pointless act since we are eventually supposed to receive the Mi-24. BST might as well release that than to essentially release another variant of the Mi-8. The changes I imagine it would require would warrant a new variant, so instead of that, why not receive a HIND! :D

 

 

Well, not quite, just because you can fly any module for most countries (there are some restrictions here), doesn`t mean that it should vandalize realism. It is a weird choice that for instance Ka 50 can be flown under the banner of US, that seems more like a choice to make up for rather, well, simplistic alliance system.

 

Keep in mind that if you start explaining such "design choices" as reason to insert unrealistic features and the likes, you might as well remove "Simulation" from the name of DCS. This case is pretty much the same as with the RS-2US, KH-66 GROM, etc...of the MiG-21Bis. Keep in mind that it`s not only a name thingy, Mi-8MTV is exclusively Russian, export models do get reduced weapon capabilities as well as avionics suite (certain components).