Jump to content

Huey wish list


ebabil

Recommended Posts

  • 3 months later...

AS a fresh Huey guy with fresh eyes I notice the Huey has lots of potential still for a better game experience. Like loading up the chopper with troops or whatever, you can actually see them, would be an experience booster. 

Maybe easier to accomplish would be LIGHTS. Landing and search light is not even close to realistic performance. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think they should go the Black shark III like upgrade/update way for like 15-20$ ?
Revised texture and model
Modernized  Early or late 1990's avionics 
Improved A.I & Co-pilot 
Revised Armament
Add troops movement in and out 
 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes. this bir is more than one decade old. new things and facelift is a must. very outdated

  • Like 2

FC3 | UH-1 | Mi-8 | A-10C II | F/A-18 | Ka-50 III | F-14 | F-16 | AH-64 Mi-24 | F-5 | F-15E| F-4| Tornado

Persian Gulf | Nevada | Syria | NS-430 | Supercarrier // Wishlist: CH-53 | UH-60

 

Youtube

MS FFB2 - TM Warthog - CH Pro Pedals - Trackir 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/17/2024 at 11:50 AM, Obic said:

I still think they should go the Black shark III like upgrade/update way for like 15-20$ ?
Revised texture and model
Modernized  Early or late 1990's avionics 
Improved A.I & Co-pilot 
Revised Armament
Add troops movement in and out 
 

I dont understand about "Revised Armament"... Troop movement in and out has a feature outside of UH-1 Module.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I think a UH-1H MLU absolutely have to include:

1) All switches conform to the current DCS standard; <Left-Click> = switch upward / to the left / forward, <Right-Click> = switch downward / to the right / aft.

2) Dials: <Left-Click> = turn one step to the left, <Right-Click> = turn one step to the right.

3) Scroll-wheel down = turn dial to the left, scroll-wheel up = dial to the right.

1), 2), 3) When a switch or dial has reached its furthest possible movement, additional input does NOTHING, NO TOGGLES, movement only conform to the DCS norms PERIOD.

4) All dials, twist-knobs must be bindable to a physical dial / twist-knob, and (On)/Off switches to simulate using a dial.

5) ALL two or more way switches must be bindable to two or more way switches; for example the Pilot Sight currently only works with a keypress. It has no OFF  or UP state, so it cannot properly use an assignment to a toggle switch.

6) Graphics have to be cleaned up. I use VR (an Oculus CV1 still) and I can only read many instruments and texts by pressing my nose against the instrument panel. Admittedly, the CV1 is now at the low-end of VR equipment, but still, there is much room for improvement, because even on my 2K monitor it's not that much better.

The Cold War Era has been approaching for a long time now, and the F-4E is just around the corner, along with the MiG-29, MiG-23, MiG-(one of the teens {too lazy to look now}], the Kola map... things are moving.

Common ED, don't sleep through this opportunity! It's almost free money!


Edited by Captain Orso
  • Like 4

When you hit the wrong button on take-off

hwl7xqL.gif

System Specs.

Spoiler
System board: MSI X670E ACE Memory: 64GB DDR5-6000 G.Skill Ripjaw System disk: Crucial P5 M.2 2TB
CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D PSU: Corsair HX1200 PSU Monitor: ASUS MG279Q, 27"
CPU cooling: Noctua NH-D15S Graphics card: MSI RTX 3090Ti SuprimX VR: Oculus Rift CV1
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/18/2024 at 8:32 AM, Silver_Dragon said:

I dont understand about "Revised Armament"

Well for starters, you don't need the front hardpoints unless you're mounting the miniguns, yet we only have one option for external hardpoints, either off or on.  We should be able to have door guns with the smaller mounts only and it would be nice to have an options to remove the wire cutters and flare pods separately like we can already with the exhaust deflector.  https://www.museumofflight.org/exhibits-and-events/aircraft/bell-uh-1h-iroquois-huey  Carrying rockets does not require the front mounts either.

image.png

image.png

 

I'm not sure what exactly all is listed in the H manuals, but other items like the dual M60 mounts and miniguns all use the same mounting hardpoint system already present on the Huey in DCS, so those wanting a more Vietnam-esque look could benefit from those additions since it is unlikely we get a B,C, D, etc. version and the system is capable of mounting these whether or not the H ever did.

image.png

image.png

Here's a shot of a Huey with the enclosed 7 shot rocket pod (which is already in game on other modules such as the F-5, A-10, F-16, etc.) as opposed to the bare tube style we have.  Should be an easy addition.

image.png

There's a multitude of other weapon systems that attach to the mounts we have now and should not require any extra work be done in the cockpit.  Other items such as AGM-22's, BGM-71 ITOW, the nose 40mm grenade launcher(the selector switch still shows this although I don't think the H ever used it), and other various things would need a larger rework and probably a different model entirely. 

AGM-22 still utilizes the standard mount we have in game although it would need cockpit modifications

image.png

ITOW- note the camera pod in the bottom left side of the nose

image.png

image.png

40mm grenade launcher

image.png

Of course the H probably never carried a large portion of the weapons used by the Huey in Vietnam, field-modded or not (although it did see service towards the end of the war), but it would be very interesting to get a more well rounded picture of the Huey's combat service to include a facelift and ideally an earlier variant that can utilize all the weapons mentioned above that the H never did (or couldn't).  Especially once ED starts work on the Vietnam map they have said they will do in the future.

Just some thoughts and wishes as this is after all a wishlist thread.  Hopefully ED will at least give us a rework with the proper door gun mounts (for doorguns only use) and allow various hardpoints to be removed separately like the line cutters, flare pods, and forward minigun mounts.  That at least would be much appreciated and proper for our H model.

  • Like 2

Aircraft: F-14A/B, F/A-18C, F-16C, F-5E, FC3, AV-8B, Mirage 2000C, L-39, Huey, F-86, P-51, P-47, Spitfire, Mosquito, Supercarrier

Maps: Persian Gulf, Syria, NTTR, Marianas, Normandy 2, Channel

Upcoming Modules Wishlist: A-7E, A-6E, F-4, F-8J, MiG-17F, A-1H, F-100D, Kola Peninsula

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If ED doesn't have any update plans, at least they can give this task/opportunity to the modders or 3rd party developers. 

FC3 | UH-1 | Mi-8 | A-10C II | F/A-18 | Ka-50 III | F-14 | F-16 | AH-64 Mi-24 | F-5 | F-15E| F-4| Tornado

Persian Gulf | Nevada | Syria | NS-430 | Supercarrier // Wishlist: CH-53 | UH-60

 

Youtube

MS FFB2 - TM Warthog - CH Pro Pedals - Trackir 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really think they would do that. It would require ED giving their source code out-of-house, and I cannot imagine any software house making such a move.

  • Like 1

When you hit the wrong button on take-off

hwl7xqL.gif

System Specs.

Spoiler
System board: MSI X670E ACE Memory: 64GB DDR5-6000 G.Skill Ripjaw System disk: Crucial P5 M.2 2TB
CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D PSU: Corsair HX1200 PSU Monitor: ASUS MG279Q, 27"
CPU cooling: Noctua NH-D15S Graphics card: MSI RTX 3090Ti SuprimX VR: Oculus Rift CV1
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

FC3 Update released out of blue. Maybe they also have some plans for our ancient birds

  • Like 1

FC3 | UH-1 | Mi-8 | A-10C II | F/A-18 | Ka-50 III | F-14 | F-16 | AH-64 Mi-24 | F-5 | F-15E| F-4| Tornado

Persian Gulf | Nevada | Syria | NS-430 | Supercarrier // Wishlist: CH-53 | UH-60

 

Youtube

MS FFB2 - TM Warthog - CH Pro Pedals - Trackir 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/24/2024 at 2:15 AM, Stackup said:

Of course the H probably never carried a large portion of the weapons used by the Huey in Vietnam, field-modded or not (although it did see service towards the end of the war), but it would be very interesting to get a more well rounded picture of the Huey's combat service to include a facelift and ideally an earlier variant that can utilize all the weapons mentioned above that the H never did (or couldn't).  Especially once ED starts work on the Vietnam map they have said they will do in the future.

Just some thoughts and wishes as this is after all a wishlist thread.  Hopefully ED will at least give us a rework with the proper door gun mounts (for doorguns only use) and allow various hardpoints to be removed separately like the line cutters, flare pods, and forward minigun mounts.  That at least would be much appreciated and proper for our H model.

I think ED has made it very clear, that they are not going to make fantasies or grafts in the post of gameplay, no matter how much a map of Vietnam comes (examples on F-16/18/AH-64/future CH-47F)

If someone wants a version with said weapons, let some 3rd party make a B/C/D module based on a 1960s UH-1 and not "disguise" an H version as a B/C. Same with a Twin N, naval or marine version.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

We do like to revisit older modules occasionally, but it very much depends on having free dev time available, and currently our teams are very busy. 

We have no plans to change the spec of our UH-1H. 

thank you 

smallCATPILOT.PNG.04bbece1b27ff1b2c193b174ec410fc0.PNG

Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status

Windows 11, NVIDIA MSI RTX 3090, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 64GB DDR @3200, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, HP Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Silver_Dragon said:

F-16/18

I was under the impression based on some stuff I've seen in various places that there was a large debate on whether or not the F-16 could carry fire all 4 HARMs it can carry and whether or not it should have the Litening II or the LANTIRN pod.  Fantasy vs. reality seems to be up for debate depending on the exact date and block number being modelled.  Some things I've seen about the F-18 seem to say that it shouldn't have some versions of the AGM-84 that it does.  And then some additions to the Ka-50 also have caused sketpicism as to what is really supposed to be there and what isn't.  Not saying these are incorrect, but I have seen information in various posts that seem to have it both ways so who's to say that certain items aren't fantasy?  Is it ED because they make the modules?  Or is it up to the various SMEs and manuals that may also have conflicting information to the aircraft as presented.

To be clear, I only want them to add proper door gun mounts (for doorguns only use) and allow various hardpoints to be removed separately like the line cutters, flare pods, and forward minigun mounts.  These are verifiably UH-1H capabilities and as such should be added to the module as development time permits.  Why they weren't added in the first place, who knows... 

As for the other stuff, sure make a new version, I want a period correct version just as much as the next guy, which I also said that in my post but apparently you ignored that part.

10 hours ago, Silver_Dragon said:

I think ED has made it very clear, that they are not going to make fantasies or grafts in the post of gameplay

Well they have, take the F-5 for instance.  The AIM-9J has been in DCS since last year and yet we are living in a fantasy world where the DCS F-5 doesn't have access to the AIM-9J when it verifiably had access to it in real life.  I would classify not having it as a fantasy.  I mean they added the AIM-9P3 to it and that one is newer in game than the J.  Then there's the debate on gun dispersion and the accuracy of the gunsight.  There's also the various issues with AI weapons like the S-3B.  In what world did the S-3B ever field the USAF variants of the AGM-65 like the D?  It didn't, it used the Navy versions, which despite being in game already aren't available to the S-3 and instead we get the USAF ones which it shouldn't have.  Definitely a fantasy addition.

ED can say whatever they want, but actions speak a whole lot louder than words.  Simple fixes like adding another correct Sidewinder to the F-5 or correcting the Mavericks on the S-3 are just ignored or take forever to fix leaving those aircraft in a fantasy state.


Edited by Stackup
  • Like 1

Aircraft: F-14A/B, F/A-18C, F-16C, F-5E, FC3, AV-8B, Mirage 2000C, L-39, Huey, F-86, P-51, P-47, Spitfire, Mosquito, Supercarrier

Maps: Persian Gulf, Syria, NTTR, Marianas, Normandy 2, Channel

Upcoming Modules Wishlist: A-7E, A-6E, F-4, F-8J, MiG-17F, A-1H, F-100D, Kola Peninsula

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was under the impression based on some stuff I've seen in various places that there was a large debate on whether or not the F-16 could carry fire all 4 HARMs it can carry and whether or not it should have the Litening II or the LANTIRN pod.  Fantasy vs. reality seems to be up for debate depending on the exact date and block number being modelled.  Some things I've seen about the F-18 seem to say that it shouldn't have some versions of the AGM-84 that it does.  And then some additions to the Ka-50 also have caused sketpicism as to what is really supposed to be there and what isn't.  Not saying these are incorrect, but I have seen information in various posts that seem to have it both ways so who's to say that certain items aren't fantasy?  Is it ED because they make the modules?  Or is it up to the various SMEs and manuals that may also have conflicting information to the aircraft as presented.
To be clear, I only want them to add proper door gun mounts (for doorguns only use) and allow various hardpoints to be removed separately like the line cutters, flare pods, and forward minigun mounts.  These are verifiably UH-1H capabilities and as such should be added to the module as development time permits.  Why they weren't added in the first place, who knows... 
As for the other stuff, sure make a new version, I want a period correct version just as much as the next guy, which I also said that in my post but apparently you ignored that part.
Well they have, take the F-5 for instance.  The AIM-9J has been in DCS since last year and yet we are living in a fantasy world where the DCS F-5 doesn't have access to the AIM-9J when it verifiably had access to it in real life.  I would classify not having it as a fantasy.  I mean they added the AIM-9P3 to it and that one is newer in game than the J.  Then there's the debate on gun dispersion and the accuracy of the gunsight.  There's also the various issues with AI weapons like the S-3B.  In what world did the S-3B ever field the USAF variants of the AGM-65 like the D?  It didn't, it used the Navy versions, which despite being in game already aren't available to the S-3 and instead we get the USAF ones which it shouldn't have.  Definitely a fantasy addition.
ED can say whatever they want, but actions speak a whole lot louder than words.  Simple fixes like adding another correct Sidewinder to the F-5 or correcting the Mavericks on the S-3 are just ignored or take forever to fix leaving those aircraft in a fantasy state.
 
Yeah... the "ED lies"....

Before make some claims.... check what armament implement make BSK on the UH-1H module and what never was implemented..... M60 guns was modeled but never implement, as others. And other "funtionality", never was confirmed by BSK.
The AI discussion has very funny.... we dont know what age version was builded on the S-3B, the ASW version or the post only ASuW version... when has some weapons, no implemented yet as Mk46 asw Torpedoes, and other, as the Maveriks. On fact, the 3D modelers make a ASW version with the sonobouys antennas and MAD boom..., and the AI builders has "imported" the old lomac configuration with the wrong armament ASuW.
Capturadepantalla2024-03-05002447.thumb.png.218e7b11c69cfb4ddf691e3099d666c6.png


Edited by Silver_Dragon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...