Jump to content

Mi-24P project manager live stream


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Lithion said:
Quote

- Regarding troops transporting/deployment: the Mi-24 team is not responsible for this feature, it's a core DCS thing. So they won't be available on release (if available at all).

That would be really disappointing.

 

 

I hope this might be a translation error. People had been asking for troop embark/disembark to be animated in the past, developing this would be a core DCS thing. Troop transport in DCS is currently just simple scripting and I don't see why they would skip such a key feature.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 170
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Please keep the topic on the Mi-24P Hind please.    As a heavy attack helicopter I have been having fun with it, low and fast attacks at tree top levels require high skill.    than

Dear All,   Join the stream with ED Mi-24P project manager Alex Podvoisky.   You'll get the answers about main and hot questions about the project.    

Thanks! I just gotta learn Russian quickly. brb...

18 hours ago, CrazyGman said:

Question I most want to know: Why Almost 3 years between announcement, and release?

 

Apache gets annouced and has a 6-9 month supposed window till early access

Oh boy, you must be new here 😁

 

2008: 

On 5/5/2008 at 9:42 PM, Wags said:

Correct, we may well add the Hind as a DCS module at a later point. Again... right now we can only commit to the Apache and Hog given those are already in development.

There are people here waiting much longer than just 3 years for an Apache since it first got announced :wink:


Edited by QuiGon
  • Like 1

Intel i7-4790K @ 4x4GHz + 16 GB DDR3 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Lithion said:

Sounds epic, would be really cool to have it get some kind of A2A SP to help it fend for itself in the coming influx of helicopters and just some SP against jets.

 

Hopefully they will actually improve all the IR based sensors and not just the IR missiles.

As Su-27 and MiG-29 IRST is used for ground targets designation (likely hence the circular HUD designator to point the wanted area) and R-27T/ET has been used against ground targets as well (a passive anti-radar missile, ahem....). Challenge just is that you need to fly pretty much toward target as downward visibility is poor.

 

And if any IR seeker can lock on anything, and they add the new heat map for terrains and all objects etc as in their FLIR upgrade, we start to see all kind challenges for targeting and finding anything.

The Mi-24 FLIR is likely not amazing by quality, but should be enough to be able navigate and find some targets ahead, what would be good reason to swap the LLTV camera to FLIR one.

So considering that you can launch IGLA or R-60 etc on anything that emits enough heat and the missile can maintain its lock (missile seeker logic) much can be done elsewhere as well, like get the AV-8B Harrier FLIR HUD Carrot "Hotspot" feature done. It should help to find low altitude flying helicopters as well then, as some ground units, with a lot of false positives.

 

 

 

  • Like 2

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lipa ("Липа") jammer will not be implemented. Alex claims that this system is outdated, hasn't been installed on any Mi-24P for many years, and is useless in DCS (doesn't have any suitable threats).

 

That's again make's no sense at all, by 2021 the Russian Army knows it self there former Soviet MI-24P are not any more up to Date and try to Replace/Update it so far the Rubels rolls. After we getting a Modul that's pargon is soviet MI-24 as it roled from the Factory 1984, what hinders me to make 1985 Mission in DCS where the Lipa was brand new and effective in its Role?

So far read only excuse with dont want to make it? After the IR seaker are redone whats about we make LIPA and bring late one some Threads in form of Redeye and Strela/Stinger first Generation?


Edited by MAD-MM
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Once you have tasted Flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your Eyes turned Skyward.

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

9./JG27

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, unknown said:

That is very nice to do, but unfortunately i don't speek russian. 😬 I hope over the next days our russian friends can tell us some of the news/informations talked about in the stream. 🍻

 

Maybe this helps:

  

2 hours ago, Mike_Romeo said:

 

Hier die Zusammenfassung:


Key moments from the above interview with ED's Mi-24P project manager Alex Podvoisky:

 

- Alex is an ex-military helicopter pilot (1200+ hours on Mi-8). Working at ED since 2011/12.

 

- P ("П") model of the Mi-24 has been chosen by ED because of the real Mi-24 pilots who requested it specifically. Also, the Mi-24P can be flown, and most weapons can be employed, from both cockpits.

- The "average" Mi-24P has been modelled, the most common "domestic" variant, without any exotic stuff or particularly new/outdated systems.

- No movable "Ka-50 like" front cannon as seen on the Mi-24VP: the real one was imperfect, ineffective and not widespread. Pointless to recreate it in DCS.

- No UPK-23 gun pod (not installed on Russian Mi-24P's).

- No laser target designation: not suitable for this particular Mi-24 model. We'll only have optical designator (with a very basic gyro stabilization, so it's gonna be challenging).

- Cockpit shaking due to rotor vibrations will be similar to Mi-8, but less pronounced (as on the real helo).

- A2A missiles (R-60) will be added "later". Another ED team is about to start reworking all IR missiles in DCS, so they'll be able to spot any heated object - not just those airborne. This is required, since Mi-24s in Afghanistan were employing R-60 against ground targets.

 

The AI co-pilot:
* Co-pilot has been deliberately made imperfect and human-like: it will have harder time spotting smaller and low-contrast targets, or those not in its direct eyesight. No x-ray vision, instant spotting or dead-on locking.

* Co-pilot in the Early Access will be limited to basic assisting/targeting and enabling certain systems on pilot's command. Other features (like assisted startup or system checks) will be added later.

* It seems that the AI co-pilot will not be able to land the Mi-24 on its own.

* Co-pilot's menu for the Mi-24 is not yet finalized. Devs are aiming at something similar to the Jester/Iceman menu: radial, controlled via joystick's hat and TrackIR. Users will be able to change speed, heading, altitude, combat modes, and so on.

* Co-pilot's name is still secret, but it will be a Russian one.

* No Jester-like jokes and banter: from Alex' own experience, there's no room for that in a combat or training environments. "On RTB - maybe... We'll think about it later".

* Co-pilot will be available in English and Russian languages at first (users will be able to add their own languages via mods).

* Co-pilot/pilot injuries will not be simulated: "we'll think about it later".

 

Mi-24P in DCS will have the following weapons:

* GSh-30-2 (ГШ-2-30К) 30mm cannon

* Unguided rockets: S-8, S-5, S-13, S-24B
* AG Missiles: 9M114 "Штурм" (AT-6 Spiral), 9M120 "Атака" (AT-9 Spiral-2 - later in the Early Access)

* AA Missiles: R-60M (coming later - explained above)

* Pods: GUVs (same as on the Mi-8)

 

- Lipa ("Липа") jammer will not be implemented. Alex claims that this system is outdated, hasn't been installed on any Mi-24P for many years, and is useless in DCS (doesn't have any suitable threats).

- No President-S RWR/CMS complex for Mi-24 or Mi-8 (no data available). Only the basic ASO-2V dispenser ("АСО-2В").

- A combat campaign for the Mi-24 will be created at some point. No training campaigns or missions planned (at least not for the Early Access).

- In-cockpit (3D) NS430 is unlikely. 2D window - "maybe".

- No night vision goggles: the chosen Mi-24P variant doesn't have them, and is not designed for night flying. There is a remote possibility of an additional "night Hind" variant in the future, tho.

- Onboard, Huey-like gunners will be added "later". Devs don't see them as top priority.

- Regarding troops transporting/deployment: the Mi-24 team is not responsible for this feature, it's a core DCS thing. So they won't be available on release (if available at all).

- Landmines. Technically possible to deploy them with the Mi-24, but this feature is not yet implemented in core DCS. Same stands for the Mi-8.

- Visual icing effects: another core DCS feature, and the Mi-24 team cannot implement it themselves. Systems-wise, the icing will be similar to Mi-8.

- The autopilot system is fully functional.

- DISS (doppler navigation system) is fully functional, with simulated drift and drift correction.

- It seems that the Mi-24 will be very well-optimized: no Tomcat-like freezes on the first load, and, according to Alex: "60-70 fps on my laptop" (his laptop specs and DCS settings unknown).

 

- ED's AH-64D is already flyable: Alex is toying with one of the early builds, and he's quite enjoying it. Longbow is being developed by another ED team.

- Multi-crew for the Mi-8 in DCS: "I would very much like for it to happen, and will personally ask my bosses to allocate resources for this task".

 

- Bonus for those who read through the whole thing: multi-crew for the Mi-24 should be available on day one in the Early Access.

 

 


Edited by QuiGon
  • Thanks 2

Intel i7-4790K @ 4x4GHz + 16 GB DDR3 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jun said:

 

I hope this might be a translation error. People had been asking for troop embark/disembark to be animated in the past, developing this would be a core DCS thing. Troop transport in DCS is currently just simple scripting and I don't see why they would skip such a key feature.

 

Alex wasn't particularly clear, and he also misunderstood one of the questions from the audience. Here's the whole thing:

 

Q: Will there be troops (desant/десант) disembarkment/unloading/releasing? Will these troops be able to interact with the Mi-24?

 

A: Desant disembarkment... Folks, this is not our team's responsibility. I mean, we - the team that is making the Mi-24 - don't do desant. This is another team's task. They're working on it, trying to make it happen. There's a lot of logic involved there, a lot of different types of interactions, a lot of work for programmers. So it's not as easy as one could wish. Desant is somehow working now. I think I also heard a question about desant's visualization... Well, that's something! This is not a first-person simulator... yet. Maybe someday it will become one, and then we'll get back to this question.

 

So, to my understanding, there won't be any actual 3D troopers sitting inside the Mi-24, who then open the doors and run outside. At least not for now. He haven't explicitly said that the Mi-24 will or will not be able to carry troops and then just "spawn" them on ground.

 

I updated the original post.

 


Edited by Minsky
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2

- Dmitriy

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MAD-MM said:

That's again make's no sense at all, by 2021 the Russian Army knows it self there former Soviet MI-24P are not any more up to Date and try to Replace/Update it so far the Rubels rolls. After we getting a Modul that's pargon is soviet MI-24 as it roled from the Factory 1984, what hinders me to make 1985 Mission in DCS where the Lipa was brand new and effective in its Role?

So far read only excuse with dont want to make it? After the IR seaker are redone whats about we make LIPA and bring late one some Threads in form of Redeye and Strela/Stinger first Generation?

 

 

I think they're making an average Russian - not Soviet - variant of the Mi-24P. According to Alex, they've been removing Lipa for years, during planned maintenance. The control panel is still there, but the rest is removed as dead weight.

 

Here's the full reply:

 

Lipa was effective against a few particular IR missiles. All modern missiles cannot be scared by Lipa. So if we make Lipa, it will have no threats in DCS. It makes no sense to model and program the whole system if there's nothing to jam by it. And even if we make such missiles for DCS, nobody in his sane mind will use them. So, for now, it's not rational to spend our time and resources modelling all this.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3

- Dmitriy

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Sabre_Ewan said:

Thanks a lot for the translation and for clearing things up a bit.

+1 @ all 🍻

Modules: KA-50, A-10C, FC3, UH-1H, MI-8MTV2, CA, MIG-21bis, FW-190D9, Bf-109K4, F-86F, MIG-15bis, M-2000C, SA342 Gazelle, AJS-37 Viggen, F/A-18C, F-14, C-101, FW-190A8, F-16C, F-5E, JF-17, SC, Mi-24P Hind

 

System: Win 10 64bit, Ryzen 3800X, 32gb RAM DDR4-3200, Gigabyte Aorus 1080ti XE ,1 x Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 2TB NVMe, 2 x Samsung SSD 2TB + 1TB SATA, MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals - VIRPIL T-50CM and VIRPIL MongoosT-50 Throttle - Oculus Rift S, using only the latest Open Beta DCS Settings PD 1.5

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Fri13 said:

As Su-27 and MiG-29 IRST is used for ground targets designation (likely hence the circular HUD designator to point the wanted area) and R-27T/ET has been used against ground targets as well (a passive anti-radar missile, ahem....).

Historically? When and where? I'm intrigued!

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, unknown said:

Hm, i would have thought it will work like in any other heli right now, clumsy but it will work. But I let myself be surprised.

I've edited my original reaction to the new info: Might've been translation error etc. They were apparently talking about 3d models of passengers, not whether or not the Hind could transport.

T.16000m HOTAS + Pedals || TrackIR5 ||

Win10 64bit || 120+500GB SSD, 1TB HDD || i5 4440 @3.3GHz || 16GB RAM @ 1600MHz || GTX1070 G1 ||

FCIII, L39ZA, AJS-37, Normandy '44, Persian Gulf, Channel

F/A-18C, Bf-109 K-4, WW2 Asset Pack, CA, P-47, F-16

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lmp said:

Historically? When and where? I'm intrigued!


It is in their manuals.

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, metzger said:

No UPK pods for the Mi-24 sounds like a joke... so disappointing considering both ka-50 and mi-8 can carry it and the weapon is already modelled 😞

Even if they don´t add them, it is quite easy do mod them over from the Ka - 50 or Mi 8. Just gonna need to copy and paste some coding lines over to the Mi - 24P and that´s it 

  • Thanks 1

My rig: RTX 2080ti - R9 3900X at 4.1 GHz - 32 GB RAM at 3200 MHz - 970 EVO NVMe M.2 SSD - Rift S

 

a6pXo1q7_700wp_0.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Minsky said:

 

I think they're making an average Russian - not Soviet - variant of the Mi-24P. According to Alex, they've been removing Lipa for years, during planned maintenance. The control panel is still there, but the rest is removed as dead weight.

 

That's weird, I thought they were going to do a Soviet one for Afghanistan - late 70s/early 80s that sorta thing (perfect for the Soviet-Afghan war) and we're getting an Afghanistan map and some point in the future.

 

Quote

Here's the full reply:

 

Lipa was effective against a few particular IR missiles. All modern missiles cannot be scared by Lipa. So if we make Lipa, it will have no threats in DCS. It makes no sense to model and program the whole system if there's nothing to jam by it. And even if we make such missiles for DCS, nobody in his sane mind will use them. So, for now, it's not rational to spend our time and resources modelling all this.

 

Which I also find strange, following this same reasoning I would never use an F-5E-3 if I had a Hornet; for one the AIM-9B is far inferior to the AIM-9L/M let alone X; I would never use an SA-2 when I can put down an SA-11 etc.

 

Hopefully when it goes to preorder the intended timeframe for the variant will be clarified (though from what I gather the only real difference is this IR jammer).


Edited by Northstar98
  • Like 1

Modules I own: F-14A/B, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, F-16CM, AJS-37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, P-47D, P-51D, FC3, MiG-15bis, Yak-52, CA, C-101, Hawk

Terrains I own: Syria, The Channel, SoH

 

System (RIP my old PC): Dell XPS 15 9570 w/ Intel i7-8750H, NVIDIA GTX 1050Ti Max-Q, 16GB DDR4, 500GB Samsung PM871 SSD (upgraded with 1TB Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD)

 

VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro

 

Dreams: https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/mBG4dD

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

Which I also find strange, following this same reasoning I would never use an F-5E-3 if I had a Hornet; for one the AIM-9B is far inferior to the AIM-9L/M let alone X; I would never use an SA-2 when I can put down an SA-11 etc.

 

Yeah, it's a rather silly excuse. Like, they're modelling the old variant (not a modernized PN or something), but according to their excuse they intend for it to be used in the more modern scenarios only, apparently.


Edited by Dudikoff

i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

 

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

 

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys as far as I know those early IR jammers were barely any effective against Redeye and Strela-2 (SA-7). None of which even exists in DCS. Any IR missile currently in DCS will go "yeah, right whatever" when you activate it, perhaps apart from R-3S/AIM-9B. It really isn't like we are going to be missing a lot with its omission, if at all. Perhaps they can add it later on if demand is high, and older MANPADS are added to sim (which they really should have long ago imo). But for now let's cut them some slack until the release.

 

Same goes for the UPK-23 as we will have a GSh-30K on board. For any need of lighter dakka, GUV gunpods with 1x12.7mm YakB and 2x7.62mm GShG each remains an option. But I can see them adding UPK easily if it was used at least on foreign Mi-24Ps without any change of cockpit systems for it etc. 23x115 in DCS is barely effective against even the lighter armor in any case, tested recently myself, and even 12.7 penetrates things like BMP-1s more reliably. It would work better against infantry and light skin vehicles due to its decent HE payload but that's hardly anything that GSh-30K and rockets won't cover better anyway.

Also since we will later on get Ataka missiles as well I don't think they are making a Soviet one, but rather a early Russian one.

Modules:

MiG-21Bis, Fw-190D, Bf-109K, P-51D, F-86F, Ka-50, UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, Hawk T1A, C-101, FC3, A-10C, CA, Mirage 2000C, Gazelle, L-39, MiG-15Bis, F-5E, AJS 37 Viggen, Yak-52, Christen Eagle II, MiG-19, I-16, JF-17, F-14, F/A-18C, Fw-190A8, AV-8B/NA, Spitifre IX

 

Mods:

A-4E, MB-339, Edge 540

 

Utility modules:

Combined Arms, NS 430 GPS

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Dudikoff said:

Yeah, it's a rather silly excuse. Like, they're modelling the old variant (not a modernized PN or something), but according to their excuse they intend for it to be used in the more modern scenarios only, apparently.

 

I can understand them not modelling it initially due to the lack of threats affected by it, but yeah, I agree, the aircraft is very much the older, Soviet-era variant (unlikely to have a 3D in-cockpit GPS, not NVG capable etc). The only thing resembling a more modern one is the lack of the IR system.

 

I just think that if an Afghanistan map is in the works, a Soviet era one would be perfect, and conveniently these older missiles that I'm presuming Lipa is effective against (I'm guessing things like FIM-43 Redeye and Strela-2. Hang on, what about the Strela-1 that we have right now?) are right at home there.

  • Like 1

Modules I own: F-14A/B, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, F-16CM, AJS-37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, P-47D, P-51D, FC3, MiG-15bis, Yak-52, CA, C-101, Hawk

Terrains I own: Syria, The Channel, SoH

 

System (RIP my old PC): Dell XPS 15 9570 w/ Intel i7-8750H, NVIDIA GTX 1050Ti Max-Q, 16GB DDR4, 500GB Samsung PM871 SSD (upgraded with 1TB Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD)

 

VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro

 

Dreams: https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/mBG4dD

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, WinterH said:

Guys as far as I know those early IR jammers were barely any effective against Redeye and Strela-2 (SA-7). None of which even exists in DCS. Any IR missile currently in DCS will go "yeah, right whatever" when you activate it, perhaps apart from R-3S/AIM-9B. It really isn't like we are going to be missing a lot with its omission, if at all. Perhaps they can add it later on if demand is high, and older MANPADS are added to sim (which they really should have long ago imo). But for now let's cut them some slack until the release.

 

Fair enough, though what MANPADs are older than the Redeye and SA-7? I thought they were both 1st generation systems, and that the SA-7 was the first MANPAD system of the Soviet Union, similarly for the Redeye...

 

I wonder about the SA-9 personally.

 

6 minutes ago, WinterH said:

Also since we will later on get Ataka missiles as well I don't think they are making a Soviet one, but rather a early Russian one.

 

Ataka (at least up to the 9M120D) is mid-80s AFAIK, it's still very much Soviet-era.

Modules I own: F-14A/B, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, F-16CM, AJS-37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, P-47D, P-51D, FC3, MiG-15bis, Yak-52, CA, C-101, Hawk

Terrains I own: Syria, The Channel, SoH

 

System (RIP my old PC): Dell XPS 15 9570 w/ Intel i7-8750H, NVIDIA GTX 1050Ti Max-Q, 16GB DDR4, 500GB Samsung PM871 SSD (upgraded with 1TB Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD)

 

VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro

 

Dreams: https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/mBG4dD

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

Fair enough, though what MANPADs are older than the Redeye and SA-7? I thought they were both 1st generation systems, and that the SA-7 was the first MANPAD system of the Soviet Union, similarly for the Redeye...

 

I wonder about the SA-9 personally.

I've meant Redeye and SA-7 themselves with older manpads, as we don't have them in DCS right now. I do think they should be added into DCS, and if they were in there would be more of an argument for including Lipa. As for Lipa vs SA-9, yeah I'm curious as well, perhaps it would work against it.

 

Did Ataka enter service in 80s? I always thought its main intented launch platform was Mi-28, which was in development in 80s, but its real service entry had to be many, many years later. I think of it as developed in 80s, entered service in 90s. I may be wrong though.


Edited by WinterH

Modules:

MiG-21Bis, Fw-190D, Bf-109K, P-51D, F-86F, Ka-50, UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, Hawk T1A, C-101, FC3, A-10C, CA, Mirage 2000C, Gazelle, L-39, MiG-15Bis, F-5E, AJS 37 Viggen, Yak-52, Christen Eagle II, MiG-19, I-16, JF-17, F-14, F/A-18C, Fw-190A8, AV-8B/NA, Spitifre IX

 

Mods:

A-4E, MB-339, Edge 540

 

Utility modules:

Combined Arms, NS 430 GPS

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...