Night Vision?

[Harlikwin]

12 minutes ago, G.J.S said:

In mid 2000s.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LOL... saw the unedited version. NP... Long sorties must have sucked. At any rate I hope you had the v3 Anvis at that point. 

[G.J.S]

3 minutes ago, Harlikwin said:

 

 

LOL... saw the unedited version. NP... Long sorties must have sucked. At any rate I hope you had the v3 Anvis at that point. 

Awwwww bugger!!

Lol, I typed it all out, then returned after a few minutes thinking “it was one question, and I’m giving everything short of that days lunch schedule!”. 
03:35 here my friend, and I’m whacked. G’night bud.

[ebabil]

+1 for nvg

 

uh-1 and mi-8 already have it. 

 

[zerO_crash]

17 hours ago, Harlikwin said:

 

I mean you're right in the sense that the human eye is more sensitive to greens than any other color (also why many early NVG output phosphors were green). And while shorter wavelengths are more energetic its irrelevant if they aren't amplified by the photocathode.

 

 

For example a photon at 400nm is gonna way more "energy" than one at 800nm. But its entirely irrelevant since the gen 3 PC chemistry won't actually convert it to an electron. So thats the ACTUAL reason why most of the cockpit lighting in modern jets is that funky blue-green color. And that funky blue color is nearly monochromatic, so it can  then be filtered out by bandpass filters in the oculars so the NVG doesn't get blinded. Prior to NVG's you had "red" lights in almost all cockpits say right around 700nm...  Yeah that didn't play well with any NVG...

 

As for the Ka50 and Mi8 gogs, yes they seem to be modeled a bit differently than the other ones, but are still quite badly done IMO.

 

Here is a pro-tip, no aviation goggles that I know of have a gain adjust. Thats a 100% DCSism, so you can't just turn the brightness up or down. It  is what it is and  if you are looking into a cockpit with any level of light visible to the human eye that isn't properly setup (blue/green filtered and your gogs have bandpass filters) you are gonna have a real bad time since your gogs are gonna overload. 

 

 

 

That makes sense. It also explains why we abolished red as cockpit-light, despite working splendid at night to the pure eye. It indeed has a greater wavelength than the UV-spectrum, to which blue is closer.

 

I wonder then if there is any specific preference between blue and green. It would occur that blue should be the best for NVG-operations, but why then do western planes even use green?  Besides the obvious that blue damages the eye (slightly over time) and that it might become distorted at night due to the eye not being able to pick up that part of the spectrum too well (this is without NVG).

[zerO_crash]

20 hours ago, BonerCat said:

While i agree that realism of the NVG's in the Hind is questionable, i don't think the addition of the NVG would be a bad choice game design wise.
If you take a look at the Mi-8 (or any helicopter, really), it comes with NVG's, despite being an older design (in the Hip's case).
The very same points could be made against NVG's on the Hip, and they are valid points, however, there is an alternative.
You could just not use them if you want a more realistic setup.

I do think that giving players the option to have them would be good.
Having the ability to disable NVG's from the ME would also be a great addition.
Just my 2 cents.

 

As we strive for realism, Mi-24 should not have NVG, not the specific version we are getting, for that time. You cannot really argue with Mi-8 having NVG, as these helicopters served a different purpose in general. One is an attack helicopter, and the other is a utility airframe. Therefore, realistically, it´s right that Mi-8MTV2 (which is a later Mi-8 derivative) has it, and Mi-24P (came just after V, it is a relatively early version of Mi-24 compared to what we have today) does not.

 

Just because Apache had helmet mounted sight and HUD, doesn´t mean that OH-58 or UH-60 had one. Things are not that simple IRL.

 

It should also be kept in mind that the Apache version that we are getting is a very late apache model. An Mi-24 model that would correspond to the AH-64D would be a Mi-24PN to give an example. They are from different epochs and as such, have a technological leap. One cannot compare them.

Edited March 31, 2021 by zerO_crash

[Lurker]

53 minutes ago, ebabil said:

+1 for nvg

 

uh-1 and mi-8 already have it. 

 

 

When you absolutely, never ever, read anything written in the thread

[zerO_crash]

50 minutes ago, Desert Fox said:

 

ED: That's exactly why you don't give questionable/fictional stuff to A, because it becomes an argument for questionable/fictional stuff for B.

I can't tell for the UH-1H, but the Mi-8MTV2 is NOT NVG capable and to my knowledge the Mi-24P isn't either.

 

Mi-8MTV2 does, it was more or less random what units got it. Few did, and in those cases, the cockpit wasn´t really adjusted for it. They were given to the crew, and that was that. 

[MAD-MM]

A few Years ago NVG's was basically random in every Modul, even the P-51 get the NVG's what is far from reality. After you had never trouble to use the NVG in every Modul would say they where way to good to be true. Also DCS NVG's future not different Generation's of the Googles itself. Possible the MI-8 NVG is still to good should be far more worse? 

Think it is good choice here not to bring them in the Mi-24.

[Harlikwin]

5 hours ago, zerO_crash said:

 

That makes sense. It also explains why we abolished red as cockpit-light, despite working splendid at night to the pure eye. It indeed has a greater wavelength than the UV-spectrum, to which blue is closer.

 

I wonder then if there is any specific preference between blue and green. It would occur that blue should be the best for NVG-operations, but why then do western planes even use green?  Besides the obvious that blue damages the eye (slightly over time) and that it might become distorted at night due to the eye not being able to pick up that part of the spectrum too well (this is without NVG).

 

The "color" was actually dictated by the type of bandpass filters that could actually be built, there were a few different versions, with the earlier ones being "leaky".

 

[Avimimus]

So:

1) Ground unit finds and marks a target

2) Mi-24 (or Mi-8) fires illumination rockets or bombs all over it

3) Mi-24 tries desperately to see something worth shooting at

4) Mi-24 misses but goes home to report destruction of multiple enemy units

 

I'd ...probably enjoy that.

[Lucas_From_Hell]

There's a nice mission in the Ka-50's "Deployment" campaign set up around that. You're helping an Interior Ministry operation against a local terrorist boss, in the middle of the night. A Su-34 flies overhead and drops a few illumination bombs, everything becomes bright as day for a few minutes, and that's when you strike.

[Harlikwin]

40 minutes ago, Desert Fox said:

Im not very deep into mission building, but wasn't there a script function for battlefield illumination (artillery delivered iirc)?

 

Will give a nice mission: be on target on time, arty will light the battlefield up for you. Or have a few SAB-100 dropped.

 

 

Actually this is a brilliant idea for MP servers... I'm gonna go suggest it to the CTLD guys...

[IcedVenom]

Okay for night vision I'll just use Mi-8 instead. Idk why everyone keeps referring to Afghanistan so much. Mi-24 was used in more countries than just Afghanistan.

[ebabil]

most people don't play at night, most players don't use helicopters in mp servers, mi-24p almost has nothing to attack at night. So, just a few people will use the nvg. I don't think it is a big deal. a simple nvg is not a game changer

Edited April 1, 2021 by ebabil

[Northstar98]

9 hours ago, Desert Fox said:

Im not very deep into mission building, but wasn't there a script function for battlefield illumination (artillery delivered iirc)?

 

Will give a nice mission: be on target on time, arty will light the battlefield up for you. Or have a few SAB-100 dropped.

 

Yeah, you can stick illumination flares to spawn on trigger zones, or you can have an AI aircraft drop illumination bombs.

 

Unfortunately in DCS, we only have generic rounds for artillery (extending to naval artillery too) so no illumination shells.

 

2 hours ago, IcedVenom said:

Okay for night vision I'll just use Mi-8 instead. Idk why everyone keeps referring to Afghanistan so much. Mi-24 was used in more countries than just Afghanistan.

 

Afghanistan was the main combat scenario for the Mi-24, so that's why it keeps getting brought up. Much the same as the Falklands War is going to get brought up whenever anybody talks about the Sea Harrier FRS.1

Edited April 1, 2021 by Northstar98

[randomTOTEN]

9 hours ago, ebabil said:

I don't think it is a big deal. a simple nvg is not a game changer

Then you shouldn't have any issue using a simple mod to enable it.

[ebabil]

I will not be using nvg but I don't mind others using it. Mi24 doesn't become f117 night hawk with a nvg 

[Harlikwin]

34 minutes ago, ebabil said:

I will not be using nvg but I don't mind others using it. Mi24 doesn't become f117 night hawk with a nvg 

TBH, I don't care if its an option on all modules that can be disabled server side for MP. 

[probad]

tbh i dont care if dcs is world of warcraft as long as it can all be disabled

[VpR81]

2 hours ago, Harlikwin said:

TBH, I don't care if its an option on all modules that can be disabled server side for MP.

As long as server admins dont try to balance stuff by not disabling the unrealistic gimmicks. If one chooses the Hind (or any other less advanced aircraft in terms of NVG, Datalink, SATNAV etc.) for MP, he should stick with its disadvantages. But the tendency is that most servers dont care and let players (especially REDFOR) have the stuff they wouldnt have in the real thing. Best example is unrestricted SATNAV. Dont get me wrong, i´m playing REDFOR too, but i´m more than happy to deal with some the disadvantages that comes with it. And since there is no option to restrict the NVGs on the Mi-8, i dont think this will be an option for the Hind anyways.

[Harlikwin]

Just now, VpR81 said:

As long as server admins dont try to balance stuff by not disabling the unrealistic gimmicks. If one chooses the Hind (or any other less advanced aircraft in terms of NVG, Datalink, SATNAV etc.) for MP, he should stick with its disadvantages. But the tendency is that most servers dont care and let players (especially REDFOR) have the stuff they wouldnt have in the real thing. Best example is unrestricted SATNAV. Dont get me wrong, i´m playing REDFOR too, but i´m more than happy to deal with some the disadvantages that comes with it. And since there is no option to restrict the NVGs on the Mi-8, i dont think this will be an option for the Hind anyways.

 

I just think ED should make NVG's a tickable item whether you have it or not from the server perspective, then its up to the owner. I play on servers that restrict a bunch of stuff, and the one pain in the ass we have is restricting things like DL for the F18/16. Or if we did night stuff NVG's would be another issue.

[DimSim]

Related to this topic...

 

Mi-24s still serving in Eastern Europe
https://dfnc.ru/en/journal/2020-5-64/mi-24s-still-serving-in-eastern-europe/

 

Mentions NVG use by some customers with some variants since 2005.

Otherwise interesting to see how many mi-24s in military service and that a bunch were sold to independent operators.

 

Edited April 2, 2021 by DimSim

[VpR81]

12 hours ago, Harlikwin said:

I just think ED should make NVG's a tickable item whether you have it or not from the server perspective, then its up to the owner. I play on servers that restrict a bunch of stuff, and the one pain in the ass we have is restricting things like DL for the F18/16. Or if we did night stuff NVG's would be another issue.

Not only NVGs, all the more modern items/functions should be tickable so we can have real late cold war scenarios with F16/F18. I'm not an expert on wich items were available during certain periods, but i doubt they had i.e. Link16 and JHMCS back then.

[VpR81]

24 minutes ago, DimSim said:

Related to this topic...

 

Mi-24s still serving in Eastern Europe
https://dfnc.ru/en/journal/2020-5-64/mi-24s-still-serving-in-eastern-europe/

 

Mentions NVG use by some customers with some variants since 2005.

 

From wich period is the Mi-24 we're getting in DCS? 2005? No, afaik the Hind we're getting is from the 80's and there were no NVGs for the Hind. Also, the countries (except for Serbia) mentioned in your link are NATO members and are getting NVGs due to the NATO modernization program for new members (all payed by NATO fundings) and the NVG friendly cockpits are mostly installed by an israeli company named Elbit Systems. A lot of the modernisation work is contracted to ukrainian companies as well. Without that program, they'd propably be still flying without NVGs and these Hinds have nothing more in common with russian made hinds except for the airframe and engines. Their avionics are NATO standard now. And by that article, serbia is still waiting for the Mi-35 to be delivered - nothing beeing in use yet. In short terms, this is in no way related to this topic/the Mi-24 we're getting for DCS.

Edited April 2, 2021 by VpR81

[Northstar98]

We're getting a 90s RuAF Mi-24P though the only difference between that and the original Mi-24P is the inclusion of the 9M120 Ataka ATGMs and the removal of Lipa, everything else is completely identical AFAIK (and all of that comes from the Mi-24V anyway, which is late 70s).

 

And to make a Soviet 80s(?) variant, all they would need to do is leave out the 9M120 and put Lipa back on the model (there's not much point implementing it if we don't have the missiles present that it's effective against).

 

I don't think the aircraft is NVG capable and the aircraft is only really designed to be used in daylight.

Edited April 2, 2021 by Northstar98