Jump to content

Korshtal

Members
  • Content Count

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Korshtal

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. They most certainly do, if you go back and read the Mi-24 interview with HeliSimmer most of the questions were regarding things that were "possible" to be mounted on the helicopter, and most of the answers from the team were "No, it's not worth doing" or "That never really happened". It has nothing to do with politics. It's clear that the Russian team has a different standard for what the simulation should or shouldn't include over the teams working the F-16 and F-18 projects who stretch what's possible with features. That's.... entirely untrue. The LITENING II pod is only ever
  2. Better question: Why would he not mean Human GCI?
  3. I've seen several former apache drivers say that they're not capable of carrying them (even though the general consensus is that the electrical hardware is there), and ED's decision to not include it makes perfect sense. "Technically correct" doesn't really mean "should be simulated." ED's team that's working on the Mi-8 and Mi-24 seem to have much different standards than the Hornet/Viper teams when it comes to what should and shouldn't be there. The Mi-8MTV never saw use of the S-5 or S-13 rockets, and while it's possible to use them IRL, it's not simulated because nobo
  4. Unfortunately the in-field reloading is a myth. The Mi-24 in high and hot Afghanistan was severely weight limited with regular/light combat loads so carrying extras in the internals is a no-go. There aren't even really any provisions for securing said ammo in the back of the hind anyway, and a rearm would require pilots to land, turn the engines off, get out, rearm, and then start back up again. Why would you do that when you can just go back to wherever you took off from and rearm safely? Rearming in the field just wasn't something that happened, and it would be very unsafe to do so.
  5. 12.7mm seems REALLY good until you realize that the AI gunner is going to be a hell of a lot more accurate than you are about it. I'm hoping that we'll see some greater use of the GUV pods on the Hind. As far as the YakB turret goes, It's most likely going to be an even worse version of the Huey's flexible sight without the benefit of having thousands of rounds of 7.62 on board. You would have to manually range and lead the target and aim using tracers, and at somewhere around 2000-3000 RPM you're gonna end up out of 1,200 rounds of 12.7 very quickly.
  6. This exactly. The AH-64D exists in the same world as a bajillion vipers/lightnings/mudhens to protect it. You have to remember that attack helicopters were never intended to be operated in the same theater/time where hostile air would see you as a major threat, they should be focused on your own fast movers coming to get them. It makes sense for a scout helicopter like the Kiowa to have ATAS in the event that some random Syrian fitter or hind or whatever gets too close while they're out doing their scouting thing, but for a dedicated attack platform it makes much less sense. I'm not aware how
  7. Unfortunately you're going to be left hanging in both of these items. The Russian devs said in their January interview with HeliSimmer that the R-60M was the only air to air missile coming to the Hind, as the Igla V was an "exotic loadout". And wasn't worth their time to simulate. However with significant closure rate I can see the R-60M ending up being quite a threat to fast movers in a self defense situation. As for the Apache: There will be no stingers. Plain and simple, the American Block II+ AH-64D was never equipped with stingers, and it's been confirmed by various ED employe
  8. Is there a confirmation on how much ammo load will be available for the Mi-24P in DCS? I've been looking around online and have seen sources quoting both 250/260 and 750 rounds, but no real official documentation.
×
×
  • Create New...