MI-24VP

[admiki]

59 minutes ago, LorenLuke said:

The GSh-30 is a fantastic gun. But giving the Hind even something like the exported GSh-23L turret as something for the gunner to have..... the chin gun and the 'coolness' factor that the current Hind lacks. And I believe those two factors would drive sales further than the Mi-24P has. 

There is plenty of stuff to gunner to do even when not on weapons. Problem is that people that fly AH helicopters are interested mainly in killing stuff and they learn only what they have to, to be able to kill stuff.

If you think it lacks coolness you are not using it to its full potential.

I'll quote a friend of mine: Hind will happily let you kill yourself and will laugh at you all the way to the ground.

[LorenLuke]

3 minutes ago, admiki said:

There is plenty of stuff to gunner to do even when not on weapons.

Could you list what comes to mind? I'm not doubting that there is, strictly speaking, I just want to know what you would say there is to do for the gunner, as compared to what I think of when someone says that.

[AeriaGloria]

7 hours ago, Stratos said:

Lots of guns jam when doing long bursts, I learned that ages ago in Strike Fighters Project One, short bursts and never while loading high G's. But yes would be nice to have jamming occuring If not enough care is taken.

BTW: whats that book AeriaGloria?

Yefim Gordon Mi-24. Not as long as other fixed wing books, but still some good info. He can be really wrong sometimes, but it’s only sometimes. 
 

As for CPG having stuff to do, I know Miki said not in combat but there is some big things for the V/VP here 

1. the turret allows bombing using same CCIP radio altimeter system as the ASP-17V. CPG points at target, if low and fast enough the bomb will drop at calculated CCIP. CPG does wind correction themself. There is dials and adjustments to correct changes in radar altitude delta, barometric height, etc, same modes exist for using turret 

2. while CPG can fly, I see this rarely in multi crew flights as pilot can also use auto pilot for help 

3. the CPG has full ARK control, but unfortunetly can only use radio channels of UHF/VHF radio pilot has set. So as long as channels are set, CPG can control comms. This means that while your individual flight lead is your Mi-24, your CPG who doesn’t have much to do may be the actual flight lead making radio calls. So pilot can focus on flying and CPG deals with communicating with everyone else. We have been trying to implement this at BSD, but it is hard and slow to work against tradition 

4. One thing I do as CPG is sometimes check magnetic deviation and correct during transit 

5. Spotting, helping with dead rocking, operating lights, landing gear, using Raduga to spot and visually navigate/recon 

There really isn’t a lot for CPG to do, but V/VP give you the bombing modes and many different ways to fire the turret very accurately, controls pilot doesn’t have to adjust CCIP for gun/rockets 

There is a lot to do depending on how much you are cooperating, how much pilot needs help. I can say, if there was more for CPG to do, I would play it more. Using Raduga and firing missiles is fun, but if we had the turret that would certianly balance it out. 
 

Edited April 3, 2023 by AeriaGloria

[admiki]

2 hours ago, LorenLuke said:

Could you list what comes to mind? I'm not doubting that there is, strictly speaking, I just want to know what you would say there is to do for the gunner, as compared to what I think of when someone says that.

Working radios, navigation, countermeasures, SA.

[Stratos]

How I would like the V in DCS to work, gunner select target and tells me (just like he does now with the missiles) once in range I authorize him to start fire, and tell him when to stop. Start at 50 secs.

 

[AeriaGloria]

On 4/4/2023 at 3:44 AM, Stratos said:

Anyone have a video or a pic of the V cockpits with helo flying? Want to see how it looks

Telling CPG when to stop? it does have a 4,000-5,000 rpm fire rate with only 1,470 bullets if jamming isn’t modeled

Im sure it would work just like George does 

[Stratos]

38 minutes ago, AeriaGloria said:

Telling CPG when to stop? it does have a 4,000-5,000 rpm fire rate with only 1,470 bullets if jamming isn’t modeled

Im sure it would work just like George does 

 

 

Without jamming that mades 20 sec more or less, IIRC a Mustang can use its guns during less than 30 seconds. The V is very interesting to have, isn't it? A loadout I will love to try on the V would be 2 UPK gun pods, the S-8 rocket pods and the AT-6. Thanks for the pics and diagrams.

Edited April 5, 2023 by Stratos

[Stratos]

I could only found this video on YouTube with the Yak gun firing, seems like is a good area weapon, good for supressing fire I think. Of course we need to get better infantry DM.

 

[AeriaGloria]

4 hours ago, Stratos said:

I could only found this video on YouTube with the Yak gun firing, seems like is a good area weapon, good for supressing fire I think. Of course we need to get better infantry DM.

 

Very cool haven’t seen it before. The nose gun CCIP should be pretty accurate. Only real limit other then jamming is that more then 5-10 degrees off your nose the CPG can no longer see the pipper and has to shoot “from the hip”

[Stratos]

Been testing ONE GUV pod against infantry, shooting only the Yak MG, you need a direct hit to kill one of those guys, ED really need to model supression and improve infantry behaviour, is really bad right now.

Found this in one of my books, it also talks on the Yak MG replacement.

 

Edited April 9, 2023 by Stratos

[Stratos]

We also think in DCS terms where we often fight against Bradleys or BMP-2 that are heavily armored. Leaving apart the jamming, how the Yak gun would have performed in real life against the much more common and a lot less armored APCs of the 80's, the M-113 the FV432 and all the trucks and wheeled APC common in NATO forces?

Edited April 9, 2023 by Stratos

[zerO_crash]

On 4/3/2023 at 7:07 PM, AeriaGloria said:

Yefim Gordon Mi-24. Not as long as other fixed wing books, but still some good info. He can be really wrong sometimes, but it’s only sometimes. 
 

As for CPG having stuff to do, I know Miki said not in combat but there is some big things for the V/VP here 

1. the turret allows bombing using same CCIP radio altimeter system as the ASP-17V. CPG points at target, if low and fast enough the bomb will drop at calculated CCIP. CPG does wind correction themself. There is dials and adjustments to correct changes in radar altitude delta, barometric height, etc, same modes exist for using turret 

2. while CPG can fly, I see this rarely in multi crew flights as pilot can also use auto pilot for help 

3. the CPG has full ARK control, but unfortunetly can only use radio channels of UHF/VHF radio pilot has set. So as long as channels are set, CPG can control comms. This means that while your individual flight lead is your Mi-24, your CPG who doesn’t have much to do may be the actual flight lead making radio calls. So pilot can focus on flying and CPG deals with communicating with everyone else. We have been trying to implement this at BSD, but it is hard and slow to work against tradition 

4. One thing I do as CPG is sometimes check magnetic deviation and correct during transit 

5. Spotting, helping with dead rocking, operating lights, landing gear, using Raduga to spot and visually navigate/recon 

There really isn’t a lot for CPG to do, but V/VP give you the bombing modes and many different ways to fire the turret very accurately, controls pilot doesn’t have to adjust CCIP for gun/rockets 

There is a lot to do depending on how much you are cooperating, how much pilot needs help. I can say, if there was more for CPG to do, I would play it more. Using Raduga and firing missiles is fun, but if we had the turret that would certianly balance it out. 
 

 

 

Do not trust Yefim Gordon´s books. While they are decent leisure read, they certainly contain a fair deal of faults and mistakes. His books on everything from Mi-8 to MiG-21, -25, etc.., have a fair deal of misinformation. I´m afraid it´s also more than "only sometimes". It´s not material that you can in any way consider indicative of, or presumably, source-grade material. Flight/Maintenance manuals are the way to go.

 

1. There are a good couple of videos of Mi-24s (and their derivatives) dropping bombs, yet none where you will see the optic/gun offset so as to indicate it being used as an aid for bomb delivery. While technically, it would be possible, I´ve never come across any document giving any proper solution for that or even indicating such a use. One would need to work out the ballistic settings for each bomb type (they are similar, but not the same). Additionally, you are using the sight in a way it wasn´t meant to be used. In order to get any kind of effect, you´d have to operate the sight near it´s maximum boundary. One swift move (sudden avoidance maneuver when spotting incoming fire), and you need to restart the whole sight. Potentially, even repair it. It really isn´t built for this task.

[zerO_crash]

With regards to the thread, it´s really lucky that we even got the Mi-24P, to be honest. If ED would seek the permission to develop it in these days, I´m pretty sure they would get a "no-go". There are Mi-24Ps being used in Ukraine right now, albeit most, with more updated avionics (not all though). I am fairly sure that we won´t see anything newer, or even a different model from the same era (Mi-24V). The Russian laws have been tightened so much so, that I don´t even see older models being permitted (Mi-24A/D).

[AeriaGloria]

6 hours ago, zerO_crash said:

 

Do not trust Yefim Gordon´s books. While they are decent leisure read, they certainly contain a fair deal of faults and mistakes. His books on everything from Mi-8 to MiG-21, -25, etc.., have a fair deal of misinformation. I´m afraid it´s also more than "only sometimes". It´s not material that you can in any way consider indicative of, or presumably, source-grade material. Flight/Maintenance manuals are the way to go.

 

1. There are a good couple of videos of Mi-24s (and their derivatives) dropping bombs, yet none where you will see the optic/gun offset so as to indicate it being used as an aid for bomb delivery. While technically, it would be possible, I´ve never come across any document giving any proper solution for that or even indicating such a use. One would need to work out the ballistic settings for each bomb type (they are similar, but not the same). Additionally, you are using the sight in a way it wasn´t meant to be used. In order to get any kind of effect, you´d have to operate the sight near it´s maximum boundary. One swift move (sudden avoidance maneuver when spotting incoming fire), and you need to restart the whole sight. Potentially, even repair it. It really isn´t built for this task.

   I’m aware Yefim Gordon gets many things wrong. R-3T, he can’t tell the difference between IFF system designations. And he thinks the Raduga periscope is a FLIR/LLTV. 
 

   Despite his technical inaccuracies, he can still be a very good source in development information and stories and giving access to other 1st/2nd hand information. But yes you need a big grain of salt with him. For example, he has a really good list of every known Mi-24 serial number and country. He’s also the only person I’ve seen that included the pilots description for rapid pitch up at high speed phenomenon and described it, “podkhvaht,” or “pick-up.” If someone being wrong “sometimes” pushed me away, I wouldn’t listen to pilots talk  

   My information of bombing modes do not come from Yefim Gordon, they come from Mi-24D/V manuals. If you go to the post I was replying to, I wasn’t saying my information comes from Yefim Gordon. I merely posted an excerpt from his book the previous page, and someone asked where it was from and I answered. As we were having a discussion about CPG tasks, I then started talking about the bombing modes we don’t have as they give some perspective about the Mi-24 CPG that we don’t have in Mi-24P 

 As for info, Especially the Mi-24V manuals go into a lot of depth and detail about the bombing modes. I can’t post them here becuase they are from 1984-1987, but you can probably find them pretty easily 

   It doesn’t use “ballistics” of each bomb, all it needs to know about a bomb is the characteristic time, or how long it takes the bomb to fall from a certain speed and height.
 

   There is a dial for the CPG in both Mi-24D/V to adjust this “characteristic time” setting. There is also a switch to turn auto bombing mode on/off, and dial to adjust the bias of the radar/barometric altimeter, in case of pre planned targets or elevation differences. It also knows range from where the turret is pointing and altimeter, and uses that to see when is the right time to drop the bomb according to “characteristic time,” same way it uses altitude + pitch angle to find CCIP range. You have timers also if high altitude is needed, all the horizontal offset for wind correction is manually done by pilot using the drift gauge and numbers for this are given in the manual. But for longitudinal wind, it should use the doppler to correct for this according to manual 
 

1. videos don’t show everything, absence of videos showing such a feature do not prove they aren’t there. Don’t know what you mean about a swift maneuver needing to restart the sight or break. The Raduga gyros might be upset from roll but KSP-53AV turret doesn’t, and it has no “gyro spin up time” like Raduga periscope 

   If you look at pictures I posted above of CPG panel in D/V variants, it is incorrectly translated into English but basically 

  Burst angle: characteristic time setting 

   Burst height: manual setting of  height delta (difference), based off radar altimeter or set airfield elevation.  

  airfield elevation: manual height setting for bombs 

  Gun/bombing switch: selects the gun or bombing mode, with auto/manual modes having its own respective switch 

 It even has its own name, VSB-24 for the aiming computer that handles CCIP/automatic bombing, and is named as handling bombing operations tasks in Mi-24V I.E manual

  Im sure they loved it in Afghanistan,  but I think one of the reasons you have no videos of it is that the Mi-24 proved that even with an automatic bombing computer, a bombing helicopter is of little utility 

I will enclose a picture of the manual I have found that has the best description, many manuals don’t have the full weapons section. If you can find the manual, the instruments/switches/knobs and process are explained in section 6.3 

As for Mi-24VP, in interview before release the head of the team said they wouldn’t do it based off its short 25 unit production run making it very rare. Its only difference to a contemporary Mi-24V would be the gun. As the Gsh-23 is very well documented, i don’t think that would be the issue. In my eyes, the issue is ED not seeing a good market for other Mi-24 variants (A,D, V, VP). 
 

It would be nice eventually if they can re use all the great work they did on Mi-24P, in changing  front cockpit and weapon systems to be able to sell such a module 

Edited October 6, 2023 by AeriaGloria

[zerO_crash]

16 hours ago, AeriaGloria said:

   I’m aware Yefim Gordon gets many things wrong. R-3T, he can’t tell the difference between IFF system designations. And he thinks the Raduga periscope is a FLIR/LLTV. 
 

  Despite his technical inaccuracies, he can still be a very good source in development information and stories and giving acces to other 1st/2nd hand information. But yes you need a big grain of salt with him. For example, he has a really good list of every known Mi-24 serial number and country. He’s also the only person I’ve seen that included the pilots description for rapid pitch up at high speed phenomenon and described it, “podkhvaht,” or “pick-up.” If someone being wrong “sometimes” pushed me away, I wouldn’t listen to pilots talk  

   My information of bombing modes do not come from Yefim Gordon, they come from Mi-24D/V manuals. If you go to the post I was replying to, I wasn’t saying my information comes from Yefim Gordon. I merely posted an excerpt from his book the previous page, and someone asked where it was from and I answered. As we were having a discussion about CPG tasks, I then started talking about the bombing modes we don’t have as they give some perspective about the Mi-24 CPG that we don’t have in Mi-24P 

 As for info, Especially the Mi-24V manuals go into a lot of depth and detail about the bombing modes. I can’t post them here becuase they are from 1984-1987, but you can probably find them pretty easily 

   It doesn’t use “ballistics” of each bomb, all it needs to know about a bomb is the characteristic time, or how long it takes the bomb to fall from a certain speed and height.
 

   There is a dial for the CPG in both Mi-24D/V to adjust this “characteristic time” setting. There is also a switch to turn auto bombing mode on/off, and dial to adjust the bias of the radar/barometric altimeter, in case of pre planned targets or elevation differences. It also knows where the turret is pointing becuase of its electrical connection, and uses that in combination with altimeter measurement to see when is the right time to drop the bomb according to “characteristic time.” You have timers also if high altitude is needed, all the horizontal offset is manually done by pilot using the drift gauge and numbers for this are given in the manual 
 

1. videos don’t show everything, absence of videos showing it doesn’t prove the modes and functions described in every weapon section of Mi-24D/V manuals don’t exist. Don’t know what you mean about a swift maneuver needing to restart the sight or break. The Raduga gyros might be upset from roll but KSP-53AV turret doesn’t, and it has no “gyro spin up time” like Raduga periscope 

   If you look at pictures I posted above of CPG panel in D/V variants, it is incorrectly translated into English but basically 

  Burst angle: characteristic time setting 

   Burst height: manual setting of  height delta (difference), based off radar altimeter or set airfield elevation.  

  airfield elevation: manual height setting for bombs 

  Gun/bombing switch: selects the gun or bombing mode, with auto/manual modes having its own respective switch 

 It even has its own name, VSB-24 for the aiming computer that handles CCIP/automatic bombing, and is named as handling bombing operations tasks in Mi-24V I.E manual

  Im sure they loved it in Afghanistan,  but I think one of the reasons you have no videos of it is that the Mi-24 proved that even with an automatic bombing computer, a bombing helicopter is of little utility 

I will enclose a picture of the manual I have found that has the best description, many manuals don’t have the full weapons section. If you can find the manual, the instruments/switches/knobs and process are explained in section 6.3 

 

 

Yefim Gordon is pretty much the only author writing in English, with any depth (albeit with faults), about the russian aviation hardware. That, outside of actual sources within different military circles in the West (military intelligence) which is non-public access. You use him, because you really don´t have anyone else to default to. Translating documents isn´t good either however, as often, prerogative and context is lost. There are more writers and information in Russian language, for those of us who know the language (I do). At least you get unique pictures in Yefim´s books of the embryonic stages of the design, which already are rare to come by on the western-side of the globe. It´s not about generalizing either, but rather puts more demand on you to discern right from wrong, when studying his works. As to pilots, they are human as well, as such, even SMEs have to be carefully selected, and their information defaulted to a common, as each pilot will "remember" events differently. From psychology, that is one of the main issues within the field of "Memory & Cognition".

 

For the record, consider SR-71 pilots that are still alive. These pilots were truly hand-picked - ultimate form of CRM. Yet, when you listen carefully to them talking about their experiences, how they percieved the jet, the mission, the psychological/physical stress, etc.., you will find discrepancies. That can be a "feel"-factor, but it can also be due to numerous other causes; e.g. pilots having flown different SR-71 models, which all of them behaved slightly differently. As such, there were "better" and "worse" SR-71s, within the lineup, considering their quirks. The same can be said about pilots talking about their experiences in e.g. F-16s or MiG-29s. The disparity is major within an airframe that has been built in multiple blocks, interations, factories. It all comes down to what information you are seeking from the individual. If you ask a pilot what he did two years ago on a specific day, chances are that he won´t remember (unless it was something very specific - stood out.). If you ask a pilot about how the systems on board his plane worked, chances are, he will remember, at least to certain level.

 

I didn´t read the whole thread, only referred to your mentioned comment. I see now that you were refering to KPS-53AV (not KSP-53AV, guess a typo on your side.) earlier, and that is indeed right. I was commenting on Raduga-Sh earlier, but that doesn´t need any further explanation. In essence, KPS-53AV will have settings for bombing in the same way that you have them for the PKV, or more correctly, for the actual drop timing (the PKV is adjusted manually as per tables in the manual). The reason why there´s more to set-up with KPS-53AV, is because it´s movable.

 

* Ballistics is indeed a specific trajectory over distance and time, so yeah, the tables actually contain that info at ground, even if you only use the timer with regards to altitude and speed.

 

I have pretty much all manuals that you can get on everything Russian from Russian side of the internet; the whole Kamov, Mil, MiG and Sukhoi line-ups (much has been taken down since Ukraine 2022). I know these manuals, and btw. you have the Book #2 of that manual ("Kniga II"). Real manuals are the only legitimate source for info to be honest. The official manuals lack way too much info., as well as presenting certain information simpler than it is IRL. I could show you a fair deal of manuals and documentation which you won´t find online for some time now, however let´s not tease #1.16 and ED´s concession to do business. If times change, I might share them. Some of them are specialized manuals on maneuvering, in and out of combat, and one specifically addresses demonstration flights and limitations. The last one is incidentally a manual which would tell you what barriers you "could" break in combat, hypothetically, if it saved your day. That without breaking the airframe, risking rotor collision, or any other catastrophic failiure.

 

One interesting thing about bombing. While helicopters in general aren´t the best carriers for bombs (tactically), it seems that they re-emerged in Syria. Bombs on helicopters, are used per definition in conflicts of low technological level, meaning insurgency. They appear to be much cheaper than even unguided rockets, and with good ballistics algorythms, hit what you aim for. Maybe you can translate this for yourself:

 

https://topwar.ru/150737-rossijskie-vertolety-adaptiruju-pod-primenenie-fugasnyh-bomb.html

[AeriaGloria]

12 hours ago, zerO_crash said:

 

Yefim Gordon is pretty much the only author writing in English, with any depth (albeit with faults), about the russian aviation hardware. That, outside of actual sources within different military circles in the West (military intelligence) which is non-public access. You use him, because you really don´t have anyone else to default to. Translating documents isn´t good either however, as often, prerogative and context is lost. There are more writers and information in Russian language, for those of us who know the language (I do). At least you get unique pictures in Yefim´s books of the embryonic stages of the design, which already are rare to come by on the western-side of the globe. It´s not about generalizing either, but rather puts more demand on you to discern right from wrong, when studying his works. As to pilots, they are human as well, as such, even SMEs have to be carefully selected, and their information defaulted to a common, as each pilot will "remember" events differently. From psychology, that is one of the main issues within the field of "Memory & Cognition".

 

For the record, consider SR-71 pilots that are still alive. These pilots were truly hand-picked - ultimate form of CRM. Yet, when you listen carefully to them talking about their experiences, how they percieved the jet, the mission, the psychological/physical stress, etc.., you will find discrepancies. That can be a "feel"-factor, but it can also be due to numerous other causes; e.g. pilots having flown different SR-71 models, which all of them behaved slightly differently. As such, there were "better" and "worse" SR-71s, within the lineup, considering their quirks. The same can be said about pilots talking about their experiences in e.g. F-16s or MiG-29s. The disparity is major within an airframe that has been built in multiple blocks, interations, factories. It all comes down to what information you are seeking from the individual. If you ask a pilot what he did two years ago on a specific day, chances are that he won´t remember (unless it was something very specific - stood out.). If you ask a pilot about how the systems on board his plane worked, chances are, he will remember, at least to certain level.

 

I didn´t read the whole thread, only referred to your mentioned comment. I see now that you were refering to KPS-53AV (not KSP-53AV, guess a typo on your side.) earlier, and that is indeed right. I was commenting on Raduga-Sh earlier, but that doesn´t need any further explanation. In essence, KPS-53AV will have settings for bombing in the same way that you have them for the PKV, or more correctly, for the actual drop timing (the PKV is adjusted manually as per tables in the manual). The reason why there´s more to set-up with KPS-53AV, is because it´s movable.

 

* Ballistics is indeed a specific trajectory over distance and time, so yeah, the tables actually contain that info at ground, even if you only use the timer with regards to altitude and speed.

 

I have pretty much all manuals that you can get on everything Russian from Russian side of the internet; the whole Kamov, Mil, MiG and Sukhoi line-ups (much has been taken down since Ukraine 2022). I know these manuals, and btw. you have the Book #2 of that manual ("Kniga II"). Real manuals are the only legitimate source for info to be honest. The official manuals lack way too much info., as well as presenting certain information simpler than it is IRL. I could show you a fair deal of manuals and documentation which you won´t find online for some time now, however let´s not tease #1.16 and ED´s concession to do business. If times change, I might share them. Some of them are specialized manuals on maneuvering, in and out of combat, and one specifically addresses demonstration flights and limitations. The last one is incidentally a manual which would tell you what barriers you "could" break in combat, hypothetically, if it saved your day. That without breaking the airframe, risking rotor collision, or any other catastrophic failiure.

 

One interesting thing about bombing. While helicopters in general aren´t the best carriers for bombs (tactically), it seems that they re-emerged in Syria. Bombs on helicopters, are used per definition in conflicts of low technological level, meaning insurgency. They appear to be much cheaper than even unguided rockets, and with good ballistics algorythms, hit what you aim for. Maybe you can translate this for yourself:

 

https://topwar.ru/150737-rossijskie-vertolety-adaptiruju-pod-primenenie-fugasnyh-bomb.html

I have translated it myself and I also enjoy many Soviet manuals.
 

  But if you had read the manual I linked you would have no doubt about the existence of automatic bombing. Our Mi-24P has no adjustment of using barometric or radar altimeter, setting altitude data, or setting elevation used for bombing, neither can you set characteristic time or turn on or off a specific bombing computer. I’m sorry but there’s nothing more to say except that it absolutely exists, wether you assume it doesn’t or not 

I agree with everything you said about Yefim Gordon, SMEs/pilots, and manuals. I have read flight/weapons/performance/limits manuals for Mi-24A/D/V/P/35M, and even read maintenance manuals 1-10 for them. I have read everything about limits and breakage. 

If I haven’t been able to convince you, maybe some excerpts from the manual? Here is section describing CPG switches and components in section 6 I mentioned….

“The VSB-24 shooting and bombing computer is designed to calculate firing parameters and generate control signals that ensure targeted fire from a machine gun and bombing. To ensure work with the computer on the right front On the operator's panel there is a parameter sensor panel DP-V1 and mode sensor panel DR-V1. The parameter sensor is designed for manual input characteristic time of bomb fall, height above bomb burst point over target  The mode sensor is designed to turn on the bombing and dead reckoning channel,”

“Switch, WORK - CONTROL. When set to “work,” the computer solves bombing problems 

“RELIEF SWITCH for entering into computer the elevation of the target relative to the bomb release point, has three positions HIGH - PLAIN - LOW”

”switch for entering height in VSB-24. Has RADIO - MANUAL ENTRY provisions. When the switch is set to the RADIO position, the altitude value is supplied from RV-5, and in the MANUAL INPUT position, the altitude is entered manually on the Parameter Sensor”

”AUTO - MAN switch, for setting automatic or manual release of bombs” 

“LAMP to indicate health of bombing computer” 

Under “Working with the system” we have…..

“The operator can carry out bombing using the computer or without”

Hmmm this only describing the system not how to use it… maybe we should go to section 7.6 “bombing from horizontal flight”, 

“When bombing from a horizontal flight by an operator with the VSB-24 computer turned on, the aiming task is to ensure that the helicopter, at the moment of dropping the bomb, takes a position in space relative to the target that ensures that the bomb hits the target….

The problem of aiming at range is solved automatically in the computer. The operator places the center point of the KS-53 collimator sight on the target and holds it on the target until the bomb is dropped….” (“KS-53” is not a typo. That is how it is spelled in the manual, interchangeably with KPS-53AV.” 

That seems pretty clear to me that automatic bombing not only exists, but all CPG needs to do is turn it on and point at target, and pilot can correct for wind if needed. Other parts of those sections talk about how airspeed/DISS-15 are fed into it, so it knows airspeed and groundspeed. For manual operation it is identical to Mi-24P, set sight depression, timers as necessary. And drop bombs are right altitude and speed. None of the switches described could help with that or affect it, and neither could a bombing computer and switches for bombing help with the turret mounted gun 
 

Is that all a translation error? Have I mistaken it for something else? What mistake have I made with all this information? Is there some other explanation for why there is a computer that solves bombing issues and switches to control it and a section talking about automatic and manual bombing? Is there a better manual I am supposed to reference? If you have read then can you let me know? 

Edited October 7, 2023 by AeriaGloria

[Sobakopes]

Speaking of 23mm turret gun it has its drawbacks. Ballistics are literally worse than a 12.7. Effective range listed as 2km. I REALLY doubt it. More like 1.2 km

You can test use the gun on hip and l39. Its really nothing close to what is currently installed on a hind. The 30 at 2km hits just as well as a 23mm does at 1.2.

it has its pros and cons. To be fair what we have is more effective i think. Hard to decide between hind weapons 

Edited October 31, 2023 by Sobakopes

[Sobakopes]

В 09.04.2023 в 12:40, Stratos сказал:

Been testing ONE GUV pod against infantry, shooting only the Yak MG, you need a direct hit to kill one of those guys, ED really need to model supression and improve infantry behaviour, is really bad right now.

Found this in one of my books, it also talks on the Yak MG replacement.

 

 

Eventually the yakbM version was issued and it increased continuous burst to 750 ammo. Still only half of originally planned 1500 ammo capacity buf the gun needs not be underestimated ofc lol.

At this point the concept of machine guns on attack helicopters became obsolete and the improved version was kind of late

[Sobakopes]

В 09.04.2023 в 14:08, Stratos сказал:

We also think in DCS terms where we often fight against Bradleys or BMP-2 that are heavily armored. Leaving apart the jamming, how the Yak gun would have performed in real life against the much more common and a lot less armored APCs of the 80's, the M-113 the FV432 and all the trucks and wheeled APC common in NATO forces?

 

Here s a quote for translation

Пулемет по праву считался грозным оружием — его внушительный залп обладал мощным поражающим действием и по живой силе, и по машинам в душманских караванах, разнося даже полуметровой толщины дувал, непробиваемый ракетами С-5. При нормальной работе пулемет заслуживал у летчиков самых положительных отзывов. Андрей Маслов, летавший оператором на Ми-24В в 50-м полку, так описывал свои впечатления от работы с пулеметом: «Скорострельность у него такая, что машину разрезает пополам. Бронебойно-зажигательные пули даже БТР прошибают, дашь очередь — и вдаль уносится рой красных светлячков, даже днем хорошо видно. Не дай бог попасть под его очередь — от человека только руки-ноги летят. Бьет точно, мы как-то нарвались на «бородатых» на горушке, я заметил «духа», сидевшего у входа в пещеру и успел опередить, выстрелил в него навскидку. Очередь прошла прямо сквозь него, а дальше я не видел, песок фонтанами, и вся пещера вскипела от пыли. Когда выходишь на боевой курс, в перекрестье прицела дрожит цель и после нажатия гашетки в кабине пахнет пороховой гарью, почему-то вспоминаются фильмы про войну и кажется, что это не с тобой, а с кем-то посторонним...»

From here https://topwar.ru/21468-vertushki-afganistan-mi-24.html

Good read on mi8

https://topwar.ru/20920-vertoletnaya-voyna-afganistan-vosmerka.html

[Sobakopes]

В 06.10.2023 в 00:51, AeriaGloria сказал:

   I’m aware Yefim Gordon gets many things wrong. R-3T, he can’t tell the difference between IFF system designations. And he thinks the Raduga periscope is a FLIR/LLTV. 
 

   Despite his technical inaccuracies, he can still be a very good source in development information and stories and giving access to other 1st/2nd hand information. But yes you need a big grain of salt with him. For example, he has a really good list of every known Mi-24 serial number and country. He’s also the only person I’ve seen that included the pilots description for rapid pitch up at high speed phenomenon and described it, “podkhvaht,” or “pick-up.” If someone being wrong “sometimes” pushed me away, I wouldn’t listen to pilots talk  

   My information of bombing modes do not come from Yefim Gordon, they come from Mi-24D/V manuals. If you go to the post I was replying to, I wasn’t saying my information comes from Yefim Gordon. I merely posted an excerpt from his book the previous page, and someone asked where it was from and I answered. As we were having a discussion about CPG tasks, I then started talking about the bombing modes we don’t have as they give some perspective about the Mi-24 CPG that we don’t have in Mi-24P 

 As for info, Especially the Mi-24V manuals go into a lot of depth and detail about the bombing modes. I can’t post them here becuase they are from 1984-1987, but you can probably find them pretty easily 

   It doesn’t use “ballistics” of each bomb, all it needs to know about a bomb is the characteristic time, or how long it takes the bomb to fall from a certain speed and height.
 

   There is a dial for the CPG in both Mi-24D/V to adjust this “characteristic time” setting. There is also a switch to turn auto bombing mode on/off, and dial to adjust the bias of the radar/barometric altimeter, in case of pre planned targets or elevation differences. It also knows range from where the turret is pointing and altimeter, and uses that to see when is the right time to drop the bomb according to “characteristic time,” same way it uses altitude + pitch angle to find CCIP range. You have timers also if high altitude is needed, all the horizontal offset for wind correction is manually done by pilot using the drift gauge and numbers for this are given in the manual. But for longitudinal wind, it should use the doppler to correct for this according to manual 
 

1. videos don’t show everything, absence of videos showing such a feature do not prove they aren’t there. Don’t know what you mean about a swift maneuver needing to restart the sight or break. The Raduga gyros might be upset from roll but KSP-53AV turret doesn’t, and it has no “gyro spin up time” like Raduga periscope 

   If you look at pictures I posted above of CPG panel in D/V variants, it is incorrectly translated into English but basically 

  Burst angle: characteristic time setting 

   Burst height: manual setting of  height delta (difference), based off radar altimeter or set airfield elevation.  

  airfield elevation: manual height setting for bombs 

  Gun/bombing switch: selects the gun or bombing mode, with auto/manual modes having its own respective switch 

 It even has its own name, VSB-24 for the aiming computer that handles CCIP/automatic bombing, and is named as handling bombing operations tasks in Mi-24V I.E manual

  Im sure they loved it in Afghanistan,  but I think one of the reasons you have no videos of it is that the Mi-24 proved that even with an automatic bombing computer, a bombing helicopter is of little utility 

I will enclose a picture of the manual I have found that has the best description, many manuals don’t have the full weapons section. If you can find the manual, the instruments/switches/knobs and process are explained in section 6.3 

As for Mi-24VP, in interview before release the head of the team said they wouldn’t do it based off its short 25 unit production run making it very rare. Its only difference to a contemporary Mi-24V would be the gun. As the Gsh-23 is very well documented, i don’t think that would be the issue. In my eyes, the issue is ED not seeing a good market for other Mi-24 variants (A,D, V, VP). 
 

It would be nice eventually if they can re use all the great work they did on Mi-24P, in changing  front cockpit and weapon systems to be able to sell such a module 

 

Actual quote from the same link above about the bomb sight

Действия экипажа при нормальной работе прицела здорово упрощаются. Оператор накладывает марку прицела на цель, включает режим и сопровождает цель, удерживая на ней марку. У летчика на его прицеле индикатор указывает положение цели, слева или справа, и тот старается вести вертолет на боевом курсе по указаниям индикатора точно через цель, держа скорость и высоту (визуально ему цель не видно, так как она сразу уходит под вертолет). Вычислитель в нужный момент дает зуммер, и оператору остается только нажать кнопку сброса. Когда набьешь руку, не нужно расходовать бомбы на «пристрелку» и даже разговоры в эфире лишние не нужны с группой целеуказания и наводчиком».

Some hinds P had laser rangefinder 

Часть пушечных машин несла лазерный дальномер, сопряженный с вычислителем прицела. Довольно компактное устройство было изготовлено на базе морского бинокля, приспособленного для этих целей. Дальномер существенно улучшал условия решения прицельной задачи, выдавая на прицел дальность до цели вместо прежнего «глазомерного» способа определения дистанции стрельбы, что положительно сказывалось на точности огня.

[AeriaGloria]

2 hours ago, Sobakopes said:

Speaking of 23mm turret gun it has its drawbacks. Ballistics are literally worse than a 12.7. Effective range listed as 2km. I REALLY doubt it. More like 1.2 km

You can test use the gun on hip and l39. Its really nothing close to what is currently installed on a hind. The 30 at 2km hits just as well as a 23mm does at 1.2.

it has its pros and cons. To be fair what we have is more effective i think. Hard to decide between hind weapons 

 

According to tables Gsh-23 does have larger bullet drop then YakB (YakB does have higher muzzle velocity),but I have no idea what you mean about it having shorter range then YakB

In the manual documentation for Mi-24V, it is recommended for operator to not open fire until around 1-1.3 km. The Gsh-23 also has HE shells that are useful at long range where the AP/API 12.7mm shells of YakB would lose their effectiveness from slowing down 

In addition, the manuals for Mi-24 stop at 2 km for YakB, and stop at 3 km for Gsh-23 the same as most rockets and 30mm armament. 
 

Better ballistics? Sure. Gsh-23 being shorter range than YakB? I don’t believe that. If you mean accuracy, Gsh-23 is a relatively accurate gast gun and the YakB is a Gatling gun with quite large spread and rate of fire to saturate an area. If you are having trouble hitting things with Gsh-23 with Mi-8/L-39 from long distance I don’t blame you, but does not make it shorter range then YakB 

In the end, we have BlackShark, if ED ever wanted to make an upgrade/separate module it shouldn’t be difficult to make both V and VP options, as they should only differ in the turret. The KPS-53AV is limited to 2 km range either way 
 

These same Afghan war accounts we are reading here have a passage where it is said “GUV pods were taken only under threat of punishment” and that the Gsh-23 was an extremely welcome upgrade, able to destroy targets that even S-5 couldn’t 

 

As for bomb sight using KPS-53AV, luckily I am not the one in need of convincing but maybe if official documentation won’t convince zero crash, war memoirs might

Edited October 31, 2023 by AeriaGloria

[zerO_crash]

On 10/6/2023 at 10:08 PM, AeriaGloria said:

I have translated it myself and I also enjoy many Soviet manuals.
 

  But if you had read the manual I linked you would have no doubt about the existence of automatic bombing. Our Mi-24P has no adjustment of using barometric or radar altimeter, setting altitude data, or setting elevation used for bombing, neither can you set characteristic time or turn on or off a specific bombing computer. I’m sorry but there’s nothing more to say except that it absolutely exists, wether you assume it doesn’t or not 

I agree with everything you said about Yefim Gordon, SMEs/pilots, and manuals. I have read flight/weapons/performance/limits manuals for Mi-24A/D/V/P/35M, and even read maintenance manuals 1-10 for them. I have read everything about limits and breakage. 

If I haven’t been able to convince you, maybe some excerpts from the manual? Here is section describing CPG switches and components in section 6 I mentioned….

“The VSB-24 shooting and bombing computer is designed to calculate firing parameters and generate control signals that ensure targeted fire from a machine gun and bombing. To ensure work with the computer on the right front On the operator's panel there is a parameter sensor panel DP-V1 and mode sensor panel DR-V1. The parameter sensor is designed for manual input characteristic time of bomb fall, height above bomb burst point over target  The mode sensor is designed to turn on the bombing and dead reckoning channel,”

“Switch, WORK - CONTROL. When set to “work,” the computer solves bombing problems 

“RELIEF SWITCH for entering into computer the elevation of the target relative to the bomb release point, has three positions HIGH - PLAIN - LOW”

”switch for entering height in VSB-24. Has RADIO - MANUAL ENTRY provisions. When the switch is set to the RADIO position, the altitude value is supplied from RV-5, and in the MANUAL INPUT position, the altitude is entered manually on the Parameter Sensor”

”AUTO - MAN switch, for setting automatic or manual release of bombs” 

“LAMP to indicate health of bombing computer” 

Under “Working with the system” we have…..

“The operator can carry out bombing using the computer or without”

Hmmm this only describing the system not how to use it… maybe we should go to section 7.6 “bombing from horizontal flight”, 

“When bombing from a horizontal flight by an operator with the VSB-24 computer turned on, the aiming task is to ensure that the helicopter, at the moment of dropping the bomb, takes a position in space relative to the target that ensures that the bomb hits the target….

The problem of aiming at range is solved automatically in the computer. The operator places the center point of the KS-53 collimator sight on the target and holds it on the target until the bomb is dropped….” (“KS-53” is not a typo. That is how it is spelled in the manual, interchangeably with KPS-53AV.” 

That seems pretty clear to me that automatic bombing not only exists, but all CPG needs to do is turn it on and point at target, and pilot can correct for wind if needed. Other parts of those sections talk about how airspeed/DISS-15 are fed into it, so it knows airspeed and groundspeed. For manual operation it is identical to Mi-24P, set sight depression, timers as necessary. And drop bombs are right altitude and speed. None of the switches described could help with that or affect it, and neither could a bombing computer and switches for bombing help with the turret mounted gun 
 

Is that all a translation error? Have I mistaken it for something else? What mistake have I made with all this information? Is there some other explanation for why there is a computer that solves bombing issues and switches to control it and a section talking about automatic and manual bombing? Is there a better manual I am supposed to reference? If you have read then can you let me know? 

 

I'm currently AFK., but I'll come back on this point. You are practically correct, with the exception of smaller pieces of information missing - that is on the point of bombing with the V/VP. Some parts of the manual are non-readable due to m text being compressed (error during scanning). 
 

Beyond that, according to the manual on Mi-24V/P, there are three ways to perform a bomb dropping procedure: a manual deployment by the operator, a automatic deployment by the operator and a manual deployment by the pilot. Yes, it is described in the manual that the pilot can deploy the bombs all by himself. The wording completely excludes the operator with his tools (auto/manual). As such, there should be a table or a method to utilize the pilot sight and the watch to time it properly. Again, I'll be AFK. for some time now (professional reasons), as such, I won't have the chance to look at it for some time. I'll raise this issue at a later point.

[Sobakopes]

23 часа назад, AeriaGloria сказал:

These same Afghan war accounts we are reading here have a passage where it is said “GUV pods were taken only under threat of punishment” and that the Gsh-23 was an extremely welcome upgrade, able to destroy targets that even S-5 couldn’t 

You read the abovementioned war memoirs?

For me the most impressive part is how sone hind p had laser rangefinder 

Flechette rockets on hind. Very high on wishlist for me

Уничтожение живой силы оставалось первоочередной задачей противопартизанской войны: в дело шли НАР С-5С и С-8С, начиненные блоками стальных оперенных стрел по 1100 и 2200 штук соответственно. Стрельба ими, однако, требовала тщательного выдерживания дальности, чтобы пучок «картечи» сохранял убойную силу и не разлетался впустую. Применение боеприпасов, «неизбирательно» решетивших все на своем пути ливнем стрел, тоже противоречило ряду международных конвенций, из-за чего командование ВВС 40-й армии, руководствуясь «спускаемыми сверху» распоряжениями, то запрещало их, то вновь разрешало, хотя летчики высоко ценили это оружие «местного массового поражения». Вертолетчикам в Файзабад зимой 1981 г. однажды привезли полсотни ящиков с С-5С. Расстреляли их за день, запросив еще. Вместо боеприпасов примчался начальник службы вооружения полка, потребовавший немедля вернуть все ракеты с «гвоздями» обратно. Из шестисот штук ему смогли предъявить лишь две, «кривоватые», которые залежались только потому, что не лезли в стволы.

Edited November 1, 2023 by Sobakopes

[AeriaGloria]

1 hour ago, zerO_crash said:

I'm currently AFK., but I'll come back on this point. You are practically correct, with the exception of smaller pieces of information missing - that is on the point of bombing with the V/VP. Some parts of the manual are non-readable due to m text being compressed (error during scanning). 
 

Beyond that, according to the manual on Mi-24V/P, there are three ways to perform a bomb dropping procedure: a manual deployment by the operator, a automatic deployment by the operator and a manual deployment by the pilot. Yes, it is described in the manual that the pilot can deploy the bombs all by himself. The wording completely excludes the operator with his tools (auto/manual). As such, there should be a table or a method to utilize the pilot sight and the watch to time it properly. Again, I'll be AFK. for some time now (professional reasons), as such, I won't have the chance to look at it for some time. I'll raise this issue at a later point.

I see, there is a table for bomb drop from pilot seat, but it is very limited due to only 17 degree depression of ASP-17V pipper and no timers 

 

1 hour ago, Sobakopes said:

You read the abovementioned war memoirs?

For me the most impressive part is how sone hind p had laser rangefinder 

Flechette rockets on hind. Very high on wishlist for me

Уничтожение живой силы оставалось первоочередной задачей противопартизанской войны: в дело шли НАР С-5С и С-8С, начиненные блоками стальных оперенных стрел по 1100 и 2200 штук соответственно. Стрельба ими, однако, требовала тщательного выдерживания дальности, чтобы пучок «картечи» сохранял убойную силу и не разлетался впустую. Применение боеприпасов, «неизбирательно» решетивших все на своем пути ливнем стрел, тоже противоречило ряду международных конвенций, из-за чего командование ВВС 40-й армии, руководствуясь «спускаемыми сверху» распоряжениями, то запрещало их, то вновь разрешало, хотя летчики высоко ценили это оружие «местного массового поражения». Вертолетчикам в Файзабад зимой 1981 г. однажды привезли полсотни ящиков с С-5С. Расстреляли их за день, запросив еще. Вместо боеприпасов примчался начальник службы вооружения полка, потребовавший немедля вернуть все ракеты с «гвоздями» обратно. Из шестисот штук ему смогли предъявить лишь две, «кривоватые», которые залежались только потому, что не лезли в стволы.

 

the Mi-24P with laser sounds great. Apparently the laser had a radiation marker in the second cargo cabin window it was mounted on, but I have found no pictures of it or mentions other then Afghan accounts, and no mentions of what happened to them or where they are now. So while it may have existed. I doubt it could ever be implemented in DCS as we have nothing more then recounted memories as far as I know