DCS: Mi-24P - What we know + Discussion

Nothing official about the Kiowa. Unless you know something that’s not supposed to be known yet?

Unofficial has "planned 2020?" + teasing from PC + a really strong will to believe not enough... what is happening to these forums? :cry:

You will need to come with us to the heli tournament for a really great spin... maybe you will find your faith as well.

Cant wait till this beast releases just look at that thing.

R-60 can't kill a mosquito, not saying about common fly, so compared to Shturms it is a quite a loss.

If you would have been lucky, you could kill a fighter by Shturm. There were engagements in DCS World, where p00r F-15C was killed by Vikhr fired by Ka-50.

Not saying about dozen of even more pooooor A-10C which died.

 

 

But so far I know nobody who died, being killed by R-60.

Yeah, it not a particularly good missile, probably even worse on a low altitude helicopter. Although I cant see it being all that bad in Helicopter vs Helicopter combat, like the Mistral on the Gazelle. Relatively low speed and and it wouldn't have to make massive trajectory corrections if the enemy helo was to try and evade fire

As far as I know, Mi-24 shouldn't have any sort of automatic target tracking. So unlike the Vikhrs, Shturms won't do too well as anti air.

Also, while its warhead is indeed quite meh, and its range is very short, R-60M does have some saving graces too, as being sorta all aspect-ish and very agile, as well as a very short minimum range.

Although I am not sure if R-60s were really used on Mi-24. Would be cool to have if it was a thing for real.

As far as I know, Mi-24 shouldn't have any sort of automatic target tracking. So unlike the Vikhrs, Shturms won't do too well as anti air.

You're absolutely right! 9M114 Shturm is a SACLOS missile. The gunner has to keep designated target in sight of the Raduga system (sighting device is a monocle periscope on starboard side of the cockpit) constantly for the missile to hit the target. It's sort of RC-equivalent to BGM-71 TOW in that regard. So no automatic target tracking on the Hind, unless we're talking about something, like Mi-35M, and propably allso Mi-24PN.

Although it is possible to hit an air target with a SACLOS missile, like during the Iran-Iraq War, it would prove to be extremely difficult in general, and would entirely depend on specific circumstances to succeed. Circumstances, like the target remaining in a hover, moving at very low velocity, or at least having it's flightpath alligned with yours (so you'd need to get on his 6 o'clock) and generally being completely oblivious, that it's being shot at, so it wouldn't try to evade the missile. MCLOS and SACLOS actually helps with that, as they send no signal for RWR and stuff like that to pick-up, but so do the heat-seekers, like an R-60.

So generally I'd wager, that you get a better chance of scoring air-to-air kills with a dedicated A2A missile, like the R-60, than with ATGMs, potentialy even as modern, as the 9K121 Vikhr, 9M120 Ataka, or the very potent AGM-114L Longbow Hellfire.

Also, while its warhead is indeed quite meh, and its range is very short, R-60M does have some saving graces too, as being sorta all aspect-ish and very agile, as well as a very short minimum range.

Add to that the fact, that helicopter tactics differ quite a lot from those of fixed-wing combat aircraft. In general you don't want to get stuck in wide-open blue skies in a helicopter during a combat situation (assuming, it's a symmetric warfare scenario, as per usuall in DCS, and not the 'Nam- or Afghanistan style anti-guerilla asimmetric one). You want to fly NOE, hide behind a hill, a bulding, tree-line, river beds or watever there is to prevent you from being spotted, locked-on and shot at. From there you want to pop-up, attack your targets with guided weaponry and get behind that cover ASAP. Only after this option is exploited and you still need to destroy something to accomplish your mission, you'd go for a pass with unguided stuff, but it still would be as low, as possible to reduce the time of potential detection.

With tactics like that, R-60 might excell, as it may benefit from being fired at close distances and using its agillity to hit the threat, that just popped-up from behind your cover. You may even get a fast-mover, hitting it in the a... Well, you get the idea ;)

Actually there's a video on YouTube of a guy doing this to a Su-27 with his Mistral-equipped Gazelle.

Although I am not sure if R-60s were really used on Mi-24. Would be cool to have if it was a thing for real.

Back in 1987 Mathias Rust flew from West Germany through Iceland and Finlad to Moscow and landed his Cessna 172 in the Red Square, completelly shaming Soviet air defences. After that "stunt" Soviets gave the Mi-24P an R-60 capabillity. Although I'm not shure, if this was type-wide modiffication, or limited to just a handful of aircraft designated to the air-defence role, one thing remains certain - Mi-24P could carry and fire the R-60.

I've killed a few helos in flight with HOT-3 missiles (not MP, but still...) and I figure if you have the skill to get consistent hits with RB-05 on anything, an A-A 9M114 oughta be completely doable :D

-Rahon;3759538']

Back in 1987 Mathias Rust flew from West Germany through Iceland and Finlad to Moscow and landed his Cessna 172 in the Red Square, completelly shaming Soviet air defences.

Yep.

It wasn't a single flight though. ;)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathias_Rust

Okay fair enough, I completely fail to see the purpose but I guess there was something interesting to see in Iceland to take a detour like that in a Cessna 172 :D

It gives you some insight into the mind of a person when they stab and almost kill someone they supposedly like, because they were rejected romantically.

Disregarding the doubtful psychological evidence between stabbing someone and being compelled to visit Iceland... how is this related to Mi-24?

I've killed a few helos in flight with HOT-3 missiles (not MP, but still...) and I figure if you have the skill to get consistent hits with RB-05 on anything, an A-A 9M114 oughta be completely doable :D

Apparently it's even doable to kill 2 An-2s with AK-47 from an UH-1 IRL (yep - it did happen), but I would still argue it's far easier and gives greater chances of success by using dedicated air-to-air weaponry ;)

On a sidenote - here are pics of two new skins, I've made for the Mi-24V:

AFAIK only the new Mi-24PN and Mi-24VM (AKA Mi-35M) can carry those.

Is there any chance to get EA of Mi-24 this year??

I would hope being a hopped up Mi-8 the Hind would be easier to do than most others (probably why it was selected), but then I'm not a coder looking at a stack of blueprints, so it could be harder than it sounds lol

I would hope being a hopped up Mi-8 the Hind would be easier to do than most others (probably why it was selected), but then I'm not a coder looking at a stack of blueprints, so it could be harder than it sounds lol

More likely selected because it's one of the most iconic military helicopters out there, also quite an old model. I take in Russian service the P model has been retired or mostly upgraded to newer systems years ago. (Introduction likely was in the very beginning of the 1980s.) Otherwise they could be looking to create the D model which was much earlier and was already modelled in the fantastic HIND simulator title in the mid-1990s.

Not sure it shares almost anything - even the airframe is somewhat different (eg. wings) and stuff needs to be remade starting from the engines and a completely different cockpit with less crew.

I would hope being a hopped up Mi-8 the Hind would be easier to do than most others (probably why it was selected), but then I'm not a coder looking at a stack of blueprints, so it could be harder than it sounds lol

Well, the FM is propably going to be written from a scratch. Even with the airframe aside, rotor blades have different dimension (notably the length of the blades) between Mi-24 and Mi-8, so the Hind should have somewhat different reaction to controll imputs. For the avionics systems - DISS-15D map case with position marker is something completely new and I'm really curious, about how will it work in DCS. Other new systems would certainly be Raduga-Sh for guiding Shturm ATGMs and ASP-17V gunsight - Those are allso gonna have to be written from a scratch. There are allso major differences in autopilot console. That's from the top of my head. So in general it won't be a simple copy and paste from the Mi-8.

I take in Russian service the P model has been retired or mostly upgraded to newer systems years ago.

Actually, unlike the D and V models, they may still be in service in some numbers, although the general idea is to replace them with more modern veriants. Even if they were retired, it would have happend fairly recently.

(Introduction likely was in the very beginning of the 1980s.)

More, like in the mid '80s - the Mi-24V was formally introduced in 1976 (along with the D), but the aircraft wasn't ready untill 1980 (specifically it's dedicated ATGM system wasn't ready). Later - around 1985 - Mil Design Bureau modiffied all the V's and some D's with more powerful TV3-117V engines. Then the Mi-24P was developed and then the Mi-24VP (IMHO the coolest Hind), although only 25 of those were ever built.

Otherwise they could be looking to create the D model which was much earlier and was already modelled in the fantastic HIND simulator title in the mid-1990s.

That was Mi-24V (or at least that's, what it was closest to). It had Shturm ATGMs, SPO-15 "Beryoza" RWR (much, like the one from MiG-29 i.eg.) and HUD styled to resemble the ASP-17V gunsight - all tell-tale signs, it's a V and not D ;) In comparison Mi-24D had older systems - Scorpion ATGMs, S-3M "Syrena" RWR and PKV sight (much, like the Mi-8 ).

BTW: I'd take Mi-24V over P anytime ;)

Not sure it shares almost anything - even the airframe is somewhat different (eg. wings) and stuff needs to be remade starting from the engines and a completely different cockpit with less crew.

Some systems are similar. Particularly the gauges and the way, they work - that's essentially copy-paste. That is allso much the case for switches - they are positioned differently, but they switch basically the same stuff on and off.

As for me - I'm really curious, how the gonna handle the map case, and will they add mirrors in the pilot cockpit?

Rahon...Thx a lot for your very interesting explanations...!!! :thumbup:

No problem, mate! :)

Rahon...Thx a lot for your very interesting explanations...!!! :thumbup:

Oh yes that was quite nice point-to-point info :thumbup:

I'm a bit surprised if the P model in fact is so recent and still in service. (My info was sketchy at best.) Could mean there's some hope of getting a high-fidelity Mig-29A or Mig-25 in the years to come.

Oh yes that was quite nice point-to-point info :thumbup:

 

I'm a bit surprised if the P model in fact is so recent and still in service. (My info was sketchy at best.) Could mean there's some hope of getting a high-fidelity Mig-29A or Mig-25 in the years to come.

Let us look first check the result of the Mi-24 Hind P...

And of course I will not give any comments regarding the progress of this module :music_whistling:

But indeed, after the arrival of the F-14 A/B, it could be interesting to see a realistic MIG-25...

I wouldn't get my hopes up for the Fulcrum anytime soon and that's not necessarily the case of it being too modern ;) ED already has MiG-29 and they sell it in both the FC3 package or as a stand-alone add-on. Soon it will allso be sold, as part of MAC. The way, I see it (and I guess, that's pretty much the same way, they see it) is that making full-fidelity DCS: Fulcrum would not be economically viable.

Let's face it - most folks just wanna fly and are not as interested in all the "switchology" and systems being unique for a specific aircraft. In addition, once you've learned one aircraft and wan't to switch to the other, you have to learn it all-over again. So there's that, plus I'd argue, it's more difficult to operate the systems in DCS (or any other sim with interactive cockpits for that matter), than it is IRL, where you can just memorise, where the switch is, reach for it and flip it without ever looking at it.

So for people like that FC3 is going to be more appealing way to go. One is that you don't have to learn every individual switch and gauge and it's function in the cockpit. Two - once you've learned, how to operate systems in one FC3 aircraft, you've learned them all, plus LOMAC/FC always did a preatty good job at making the US and Russian tech 'feel' different from each other, despite being operated the same way, by the same key combinations. Thirdly, reaching out for ctrl+alt+something doesn't require from you to break your current line of sight, while trying to press something, like autopilot buttons in Ka-50 or Mi-8 actually does.

Finally there are folks, to whom the price is the determing factor and that's perfectly understandable - if you're on limited budget, would you rather spend $49,99 for a full-fidelity MiG-29, or $14,99 for the FC3 MiG-29 so-called "A" and MiG-29S? or would you take those $49,99 and buy FC3 with a total of 8 aircraft?

Now don't get me wrong - I'd love to see a full-fidelity DCS: MiG-29 Fulcrum. I'd allso love to see all FC3 aircraft being brought to standalone full-fidelity DCS modules. What I'm trying to say here is that ED may consider this as too much effort for not enough profit out of it, because only a fraction of a fraction of their customer base may actually be interested in buying those. Particulary, if they already bought either the FC3, or one of it's aircraft.

On the other hand, they shurely wouldn't licence any 3rd party to make it, because again it would take some profit from them and their FC3 products.

Still there are some aicraft, that share some tech with Mi-24, like MiG-23 (but that's already covered by Razbam) or Su-17/Su-22.

Maybe in ten years when they need to update it again

I thought something with a rotor was being discussed here :D

-Rahon;3775577']

 

 

That was Mi-24V (or at least that's, what it was closest to). It had Shturm ATGMs, SPO-15 "Beryoza" RWR (much, like the one from MiG-29 i.eg.) and HUD styled to resemble the ASP-17V gunsight - all tell-tale signs, it's a V and not D ;) In comparison Mi-24D had older systems - Scorpion ATGMs, S-3M "Syrena" RWR and PKV sight (much, like the Mi-8 ).

 

Any image of the gunsight/HUD?

Just google "ASP-17V". You'll find plenty images.