Jump to content

Avimimus

Members
  • Posts

    1089
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Avimimus

  1. I totally understand that - however, it is quite impressive. I do hope that this technology might someday grow to better modelling of contrast based locks as well (and be expanded into the visual spectrum as well). It'd be great to sometimes lose a lock for the Shkval or a targeting pod if the target has too low contrast with the terrain!
  2. I somehow doubt that the majority of their market, especially their helicopter market, is multiplayer oriented. Usually ~40% of the active forum users for a flight sim are into multiplayer but only 5%-10% of the actual users of the product are.
  3. When did they state this? I've been kind-of hoping that the Mi-24P is selling well enough that it'll make them reconsider!
  4. Something is going on though:
  5. It'd be neat. If Petrovitch can avoid VRS (or flying into the ground) it'd be a higher priority though - that said, I'm sure that those two parts of development are pretty independent.
  6. With Petrovitch and a ~60-80% hit rate: I'm already lined up when I come into range so I can fire immediately. I then angle off with a very smooth turn to my new heading and altitude. It appears that Petrovitch's aim is thrown off by manoeuvres and that gets communicated to the missile (which can cause it to crash)... so I keep the turn as smooth and gentle as possible. I then immediately trim out the helicopter and fly as straight and level as possible - ensuring there are no oscillations that could lower Petrovitch's accuracy. The Gepard will get at least two bursts off, but if I've chosen the flight path while I'll be able to survive without evasive action until the missile hits - I then break away low as soon as it hits and use ground cover for protection as I slink back out of range.
  7. I haven't yet seen an explanation as to why it turns on and off (right-hand light)... there is something about attitude, altitude, maybe even airspeed that I don't understand yet. There should be some range errors of course - but if they are small I generally assume it is due to very small changes in elevation.
  8. I've found I can kill them pretty well - just that I fire as soon as I'm in range and I angle off slightly to make myself harder to range, and break off as soon as the missile reaches the target. It does fire at me... but it doesn't hit - at least most of the time. The Mi-24 isn't immune to the Gepard, and the Gepard is terrifying... but I can still probably take out four before losing an Mi-24... and in real combat that is the kind of exchange ratio which often exists. Now the Tunguska on the other hand - I don't even try. This is especially likely given that they've stated they want to include the R-60 as a fire-and-forget air to ground weapon - but that is dependent on giving ground vehicles heat signatures (and that is a total overhaul that needs to be finished first).
  9. Instinct? Apparently some pilots got enough experience to be pretty good at it in Afghanistan.
  10. 2a42 is definitely closer to the GSh-30-2 (and superior in some ways) with similar ammunition - a bit weaker than the GAU-8 but a lot more powerful than the M230. It should also have much lower dispersion.
  11. I've started wondering about this - what modules have the most commands?
  12. Good points - except this one, which, I think, misses the mark. Based on the data posted by Eagle Dynamics the Su-25 was actually engineered to sustain high turn rates at close to its maximum speed, and could easily be described as much more manoeuvrable throughout its envelope. However, it seems to have sacrificed weapon load to do this (i.e. the A-10 is better in the low-subsonic range and can carry a larger bombload overall relative to its engine power).
  13. Are you getting the lock tone/light (and holding for a couple of seconds)? Petrovitch won't fire unless you have the target in your crosshairs.
  14. The closer the scan/designate cross-hair is to the target the faster Petrovitch will see it - if you put the menu cross-hairs directly over the target he'll even skip the target choice menu and lock the target immediately.
  15. I know! I guess we'll have to wait for the manual to be fully translated. It'd also be nice if Petrovitch called out approximate range estimates - it'd make it quite a bit easier to use the sights properly.
  16. Yeah, I created one mission where the trees always stopped the missile (Petrovitch will fire even if he can't see or hit the target! That might be an issue!). However, with a steady hand, I've gotten three anti-aircraft units in a single attack run using the Shturms... and honestly, I think 55% might be quite accurate for an average gunner in wartime conditions.
  17. Honestly, flying over convoys looking through the missile sight - I had this sense of how useful it would be to have an off-boresight turret mounted gun for attacking trucks at close range - one could take out three or more in a single pass! So I think it'd be quite useful and fun - even if it jammed after only going through half its ammunition supply. That said - anyone who isn't picking up the Mi-24 because of the fixed gun is being foolish - not only is the cannon effective, the aircraft is such an interesting joy to fly that you don't need any guns. It has quickly become far and away my favourite module (after the AJS-37 and the Su-25).
  18. True, under the current level of modelling the differences wouldn't be as noticeable - however some of the differences would still exist even with the limitations in the current code. S-8D would have a lower blast radius than an S-8OFP1 but do somewhat more damage within that radius. It would also have less penetration than an S-8KOM (but likely have slightly higher damage overall). S-8S would likely have a higher blast radius than the S-8OFP but would do less damage (smaller fragments) and have even lower penetration. S-8 would have more smoke and worse penetration than the later S-8KOM (but would be useful for modelling an earlier time period). ...so even if just damage, blast radius, and armour penetration are modelled (as single values, and without actual fragment modelling) there is still room for quite a bit more variety. Even just making the more primitive first generation S-8 rocket (different propellant, less penetration) would be a nice addition.
  19. It would be great to see more types of rocket/rocket warhead for each type of pod (depicting different eras and roles). Currently we only have on warhead for the S-5 and S-13 rockets, and two warheads for the S-8 (plus smoke and illumination 'warheads'). For instance, it would be nice to have the S-8B (anti-bunker/anti-runway), S-8S (flechette/small fragment), S-8D (FAE/blast) to go along with our S-8KOM (anti-armour) and S-8OFP (modernised multipurpose) warheads.
  20. That is a pretty good list - I might add: 7) More noticeable cues regarding VRS entry 9) Also, I still kind-of want: - MBD racks or a configurable KMGU dispenser sequence (to allow multiple releases of bombs over a larger area when flying slower) - More variety of rocket warhead types (also, continuing to iron out Petrovitch's piloting - mine keeps flying into hills or entering VRS)
  21. I agree entirely. Maybe have the 'scan wide' simulate a Mk1 human eyeball? ...and call out threats too?
  22. Just a generic Wishlist thread for whatever the cheapest and fastest variant with a Yak-b turret is. I honestly would pay for a second module with the turret (after experiencing the effectiveness of the GUV pods and operating the missile sight). If the 23mm gun pods used by some export customers were added for this variant it would also provide an optional increase in firepower. Note: The earlier Mi-24D would also have the turret, and would be a better counterpart to an early AH-1 (if that ever comes about)... however, I think an Mil Mi-2URP would be the best choice if one wanted the MCLOS 9M17 experience... it'd also flesh out the light(er) helicopter role. That said, I also suspect that a Mi-24V would also be a better choice because it would have more systems over lap with the Mi-24P.
  23. Well.... I'll miss the 57mm rockets on the Mi-8... I doubt anyone will accuse me of adding them to try to get an advantage online!
  24. Something of a mea culpa here: I was sure I'd read on the forums that this was possible, and even seen mention of the names of some pilots who managed to do it. But I haven't been able to find the quote on the forum and now I'm wondering if I dreamt that it was possible. So - sorry about this. I must say that the aerodynamics are fascinating, as is the engineering. So if I am dreaming, it is out of love for the module and design. Anyway, I suppose if I want the experience I ought to just fly with the landing gear down. P.S. That said - it might have been that there is a way to adjust the automatic trimming of the flaps while they are down (obviously with the landing gear down)... this could have been mentioned and I might have misremembered it.
  25. KMGU doesn't have to release bombs from all sections at once in real life. It would be more useful if we could control the rate of release of the bomblets when bombing at low speed from the helicopter. It would also be nice to have the MDB racks for the FAB-100 (as used in Afghanistan) so that we could carry eight of them on two hard-points. While bombing, and low altitude bombing, is rare in a helicopter - it was done - and it will be much more enjoyable if we can release multiple small bombs in a row (instead only two or four).
×
×
  • Create New...