Mi-24 Facing the reality.

[CoBlue]

4 hours ago, Relic said:

 

I apologize, I don't understand your point here. The entire reason for precision armor penetration weapons is because "splash damage" doesn't do anything to armor. Or did I miss something in historical weapons development? If I'm wrong about splash damage in real life then I welcome some education, but my understanding is you need penetrating warheads specifically because a shockwave with small frag isn't going to do anything to armor.

Did you click on the links? I'm talking about rockets/bombs splash-fragmentation damage against soft targets.

[S. Low]

2 hours ago, CoBlue said:

Did you click on the links? I'm talking about rockets/bombs splash-fragmentation damage against soft targets.

No I did not click the links lol  my bad.

[Shmegegge 1-1 Aero]

IMO, the original argument brought up in this thread is valid.  Currently, it feels like DCS favors dropping bombs onto tanks from high up and then returning to base, rather than supporting troops in a dynamic ground battle.  Even in CAS aircraft like the A-10 or the Harrier, missions (usually) feel more like strike missions than CAS missions.  I think DCS just needs a better ground war environment.  Something like Arma or Squad comes to mind.  After all, it is Digital Combat Simulator World, not DCS Airplane.  Whether this entails expanding CA to include more in depth infantry fighting, or a JTAC interface for CA so that players can dynamically assign targets and 9 Lines, or any other improvement to ground ops, the CAS/troop environment in DCS certainly has a lot of potential.

 

In any case, CAS helo's like the Hind or airplanes like the Warthog sort of feel out of place in the current sim.

[ebabil]

I agree with the title of the topic. "Facing the reality" Helicopters have no place in most MP servers. Everything are prepared for fast fixed wings. If you challange and decide to use a chopper, you gotta cruise very long distances and face absurdly placed air defences and sniper infantries. Using choppers "generally" immersion killer.

Since we are getting AH64, Mi24, Bo-105, Oh-58 along with Uh-1, Mi-8, Ka-50, Sa-342 (8 helicopters and maybe more, oh God!) we need helicopter specialized servers

Edited March 29, 2021 by ebabil

[SspectrumM]

3 hours ago, [TF-108] Aero said:

IMO, the original argument brought up in this thread is valid.  Currently, it feels like DCS favors dropping bombs onto tanks from high up and then returning to base, rather than supporting troops in a dynamic ground battle.  Even in CAS aircraft like the A-10 or the Harrier, missions (usually) feel more like strike missions than CAS missions.  I think DCS just needs a better ground war environment.  Something like Arma or Squad comes to mind.  After all, it is Digital Combat Simulator World, not DCS Airplane.  Whether this entails expanding CA to include more in depth infantry fighting, or a JTAC interface for CA so that players can dynamically assign targets and 9 Lines, or any other improvement to ground ops, the CAS/troop environment in DCS certainly has a lot of potential.

 

In any case, CAS helo's like the Hind or airplanes like the Warthog sort of feel out of place in the current sim.

 

Actually, DCS has a pretty good ground environment for a simulator that focuses on air combat, of course there we have Combined Arms but (for now) that's is just a complement. We have A LOT of land and sea units of all kinds and detailed scenarios. Right now, with the mission editor, you can create almost any CAS scenario you want, for the A-10, the SU-25, Viggen, Mi-8, F-5, Huey, every aircraft in the game, even those who feel out of place in the sim. They have no GPS or TGP to find their target? no problem, you can trigger a smoke marker, a signal flare or drop an illumination bomb on the area, you know... how it is done in real life, also a briefing with useful information can be a great help. 

 

Sadly that is not what you will find in most of public multiplayer servers, most of the players just want to drop gbu to a bunch of tanks from 30.000ft or kill some migs. 

 

Of course there are multiplayer missions where you can find a more complete and varied experience (and more realistic) to enjoy that aircrafts that feel out of place, but most of them are private servers. A lot of people think that the Mi-24 don't worth the money and is out of place, same thing with the Viggen, F-5, Mig-21, Mi-8, etc, because most of popular public servers are deathmatch arenas with parking lots of tanks...

Description: Typical gorund targets in multiplayer public servers.

That is why a think that a multiplayer dynamic campaign (done by ED) where you can find realistic scenarios for the different types of aircrafts in DCS, is very important to help people that don't have a group of friends or is part of a private flight group and don't know how to use the editor to create their own missions, have a place where to try different modules in a multiplayer environment.

Edited March 29, 2021 by SspectrumM

[Karon]

4 hours ago, [TF-108] Aero said:

IMO, the original argument brought up in this thread is valid.  Currently, it feels like DCS favors dropping bombs onto tanks from high up and then returning to base, rather than supporting troops in a dynamic ground battle.  Even in CAS aircraft like the A-10 or the Harrier, missions (usually) feel more like strike missions than CAS missions.  I think DCS just needs a better ground war environment.  Something like Arma or Squad comes to mind.  After all, it is Digital Combat Simulator World, not DCS Airplane.  Whether this entails expanding CA to include more in depth infantry fighting, or a JTAC interface for CA so that players can dynamically assign targets and 9 Lines, or any other improvement to ground ops, the CAS/troop environment in DCS certainly has a lot of potential.

 

In any case, CAS helo's like the Hind or airplanes like the Warthog sort of feel out of place in the current sim.

With all due respect, I completely disagree. DCS and CA need huge improvements in terms of vehicles damage model and AI and I concur, but you can set up pretty good and realistic missions with what we have since almost 10 years ago. Just stop flying in airquake servers or create unrealistic missions.

 

To give you an idea, this is a GDC with a JTAC embedded (same person) in convoy calling A-10s to clear the way for them, in a 30 players mission, with each asset doing working on its task (CAS, CAP, JTAC, etc). A proper JTAC interface would be very welcome, to avoid the F-10 map, something similar to ArmA, where you can add proper marks and notes, but the result is quite good nonetheless.

 

The video is quite long, so feel free to skip here and there. There are 9-lines, talk-ons, enemy concealed so the FAH had to be changed, restrictions to the space available to the A-10 due to enemy air defences and so on. Quite different from the usual airquake server, isn't it?

I understand this is not feasible for SP only gamers, but I doubt that an AI will ever be capable of playing the JTAC role as a human would do. At the end of the day, it does not really take much, just a couple of friends looking for the same type of experience.

 

Pinging @Rudel_chw and @Northstar98. This is the type of Multiplayer experience I was referring to earlier.

 

Now, back to the MI-24P, the vWing displayed there uses Ka-50s as they use every aircraft they have a squadron for, but a couple of Hind here would be very welcomed in a Cold War setting, especially to get rid of those BMP and other soft targets and leaving the more armoured targets to the A-10s. Just imagine them waiting behind the columns and coming in N-S for a rocket run. I personally can't wait

[Pikey]

11 hours ago, Relic said:

 

I apologize, I don't understand your point here. The entire reason for precision armor penetration weapons is because "splash damage" doesn't do anything to armor. Or did I miss something in historical weapons development? If I'm wrong about splash damage in real life then I welcome some education, but my understanding is you need penetrating warheads specifically because a shockwave with small frag isn't going to do anything to armor.

not answering for him but the complaint on rockets is that they dont achieve their success in DCS because of lack of splash damage AND therefore suppression effect versus soft targets, including infantry grouped.
This is why rockets are fairly useless in DCS, a real life rocket attack on ourselves is terrifying and we are forced to dig a hole 6ft deep (willingly or unwillingly) or run away. I.e. suppression. Infantry in DCS are so basic, show little fear and dont have much end usage. They cannot dig into buildings or occupy areas and so the rocket attack is limited in DCS to actually destroying units, therefore becomes a choice of what weapons actually connect directly, rather than can work whilt "missing".
As a decade long mission designer I dont see any way around making rockets, a fundamental tool of war, more useful for DCS. This is because of the direct control of infantry is such a basic affair. Even suppression in FPS games is not great, some leaps with the shuddering screens and fading of the screen, but.. are you really terrified? no. Coding that has been done with the limited API in the SSE available, it has poor results that dont make sense. It can interfere with the normal action of missions.

[blitzattack]

i think one of the most important thing is AI fix.

Now the ground AI in DCS all "have the rader",whether you go from any direction, they can turn the gun to you and fire accurately, it is unreal.

 

In the real life ,the most advantage of a helicopter is their view,they can find targets in longer range however the ground veichle can`t to that.

 

Now every ground AI is a AA vehicle with god view and ballistic computer, and have no time in OODA,the suprise attack from sky is impossible.

 

Imagine you drive a mi24 to attack a convey ,but the convey have already know your plan and turn the guns to you, just waitting for you get into their range

Edited March 29, 2021 by blitzattack

[Lurker]

Fly on servers which regularly feature a human GCI controller. Fly on servers with the scripted GCI controller. (You can ask it to notify you of incoming enemy air threats) When you get pinged, hide. Fly low, use terrain to mask. Communicate! If you want air cover, asking for it is probably a good idea. Picking up a MANPAD team and flying with them to the mission objective might actually be possible in this Helicopter. Take it slow. Rushing into anything unprepared is probably not a good idea. Scout out your targets before engaging. Flying with this helo on the cold-war servers (and there are a few out there) will be difficult, but certainly not impossible. 

I'm more worried of the godlike ability of enemy AI air-defenses to detect and shoot at you, this includes small arms fire to which the Hind will still be vulnerable, than any perceived threat from fast movers. 

[Shmegegge 1-1 Aero]

5 hours ago, Karon said:

With all due respect, I completely disagree. DCS and CA need huge improvements in terms of vehicles damage model and AI and I concur, but you can set up pretty good and realistic missions with what we have since almost 10 years ago. Just stop flying in airquake servers or create unrealistic missions.

 

To give you an idea, this is a GDC with a JTAC embedded (same person) in convoy calling A-10s to clear the way for them, in a 30 players mission, with each asset doing working on its task (CAS, CAP, JTAC, etc). A proper JTAC interface would be very welcome, to avoid the F-10 map, something similar to ArmA, where you can add proper marks and notes, but the result is quite good nonetheless.

 

The video is quite long, so feel free to skip here and there. There are 9-lines, talk-ons, enemy concealed so the FAH had to be changed, restrictions to the space available to the A-10 due to enemy air defences and so on. Quite different from the usual airquake server, isn't it?

I understand this is not feasible for SP only gamers, but I doubt that an AI will ever be capable of playing the JTAC role as a human would do. At the end of the day, it does not really take much, just a couple of friends looking for the same type of experience.

 

Pinging @Rudel_chw and @Northstar98. This is the type of Multiplayer experience I was referring to earlier.

 

Now, back to the MI-24P, the vWing displayed there uses Ka-50s as they use every aircraft they have a squadron for, but a couple of Hind here would be very welcomed in a Cold War setting, especially to get rid of those BMP and other soft targets and leaving the more armoured targets to the A-10s. Just imagine them waiting behind the columns and coming in N-S for a rocket run. I personally can't wait

I totally agree, CAS missions are possible, but in the current sim I feel like it takes too much scripting, which doesn't allow for dynamic scenarios between aircraft and the ground.  Also, to be fair, that mission that you posted was only possible because the entire server was cooperating on one mission, which works for squadron missions.  I guess I was thinking more about public servers with scattered ground targets and objectives, or even single player missions.  If you were to attempt that missions in singleplayer, it would be very complicated and require a lot of scripting.

 

Maybe I am just on the wrong servers though.

Edited March 29, 2021 by [TF-108] Aero

[Karon]

Just now, [TF-108] Aero said:

I totally agree, CAS missions are possible, but in the current sim I feel like it takes too much scripting, which doesn't allow for dynamic scenarios between aircraft and the ground.  Also, to be fair, that mission that you posted was only possible because the entire server was cooperating on one mission, which works for squadron missions.  I guess I was thinking more about public servers with scattered ground targets and objectives, or even single player missions.  If you were to attempt that missions in singleplayer, it would be very complicated and require a lot of scripting.

Indeed, but what is stopping you from joining in a virtual wing? I don't want to derail the thread entirely but scripting something like that simply cannot be done. Look at Jester for the F-14: no matter how HB tries (in reasonable terms, of course), it will never be close to a human because it cannot be as proactive as a human. Therefore, an A-10 pilot expressing concerns and asking for different FAH or following a talk-on is simply not possible.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not excusing ED for the lack of a proper single player experience (e.g. aircraft AI is still the same of LOMAC, it does not even follow the same physics rule of the player) but the tools to have a great experience are available since years ago.

 

Speaking of Jester, Petrovich is so much easier to put together and the F-14 RIO, as it does not have to command the pilot as much as a RIO would do.

[Avimimus]

On 3/28/2021 at 11:57 AM, CoBlue said:

With antitank-missiles, it may be effective, but still challenging coz of the periscope-sight, time & high-speed to aim, according to the lead developer PilotMi8.

 

With the current splash-fragmentation damage the rockets won't bring much in terms of semi-realistic combat scenarios.

 

Right now DCS is only semi-realistic with precision weapons:

In terms of combat effectiveness even against light-armored enemies I'm setting my expectations very low.

 

Yes, that was what I was thinking about myself... if only they'd enhance the rockets a bit when facing 'soft' vehicles like trucks.

 

Also, dynamically spawning and despawning infantry (and even earthworks) would be a really nice addition... it'd give the Mi-24 rocket and bomb loads more things to attack.

Edited April 7, 2021 by Avimimus

[Charly_Owl]

On 3/27/2021 at 3:23 PM, Rudel_chw said:

 

and people find Multiplayer fun?  .. I'd rather keep flying by myself.

 

Depends what kind of server you go on. The traditional airquake servers are totally not suited for helicopters, and I tend to stay away from those since I don't find them much fun at all.

 

There are servers where helicopters are well integrated in "plausible" scenarios, though. Blue Flag is a great example. I typically prefer to fly redfor and I've personally had a lot of amazing times with fellow rotorheads. Of course, you'll sometimes get sniped by a pesky Amraam once in a while, but having a fighter or two providing CAP typically keeps the enemy Hornets/Vipers busy enough to let you work. It's amazing what a few Mi-8s and Black Sharks can accomplish if they work together. Any time the frontline moves, an airfield is captured or a FARP is repaired... odds are that a bunch of players had to cooperate to make it happen. 

 

Some of my all-time greatest DCS memories include an assault on Incirlik with 3 Mi-8, 2 Black Sharks and a Su-25... we literally blasted aircraft on their takeoff roll and inserted infantry in their hangars. What a rush of adrenaline that was! I also remember fondly of an epic night with a bunch of Mi-8 players spent "building" (thanks to CTLD scripting) an intricate network of SAM sites in the valleys South of Beirut... grinding a Blue offensive to a halt. There's plenty of potential in multiplayer, provided you find the right bunch of people to fly with and a scenario that's appropriate for your mission type.

Edited April 18, 2021 by Charly_Owl

[Lucas_From_Hell]

Between Syria At War, Low Level Hell and the SAR server, there's plenty of multiplayer options.

[Lace]

On 3/28/2021 at 10:21 PM, Relic said:

 

I apologize, I don't understand your point here. The entire reason for precision armor penetration weapons is because "splash damage" doesn't do anything to armor. Or did I miss something in historical weapons development? If I'm wrong about splash damage in real life then I welcome some education, but my understanding is you need penetrating warheads specifically because a shockwave with small frag isn't going to do anything to armor.

 

Splash damage is more than capable of a mobility kill by knocking off a track, or damaging delicate IR sensors, optical sights, comms equipment, kill an unbuttoned TC, effect crew morale etc, all of which will reduce the effectiveness of heavily armoured MBTs even without a penetrating definitive 'kill'.  Sadly this is something which is not (yet) realised within the DCS World environment.  These things can all be repaired IRL which is why a more an absolute kill is preferable, but are more than enough to at least temporarily attrite the enemy forces.

[Silver_Dragon]

6 minutes ago, Lace said:

 

Splash damage is more than capable of a mobility kill by knocking off a track, or damaging delicate IR sensors, optical sights, comms equipment, kill an unbuttoned TC, effect crew morale etc, all of which will reduce the effectiveness of heavily armoured MBTs even without a penetrating definitive 'kill'.  Sadly this is something which is not (yet) realised within the DCS World environment.  These things can all be repaired IRL which is why a more an absolute kill is preferable, but are more than enough to at least temporarily attrite the enemy forces.

 

ED plan build Vehicle Damage modeling after modern aircraf DM. If them work as the actual aircraft DM. They can be damage systems and equipment.

[Mars Exulte]

On 3/27/2021 at 1:56 PM, BioZ said:

 If you look at the most popular servers those are usually the ones where you; take off -> spam aim-120 -> die -> repeat. 

 

  It's no different in the Arma community... or any other, really. The majority of servers compete for the lowest common denominator @@ If you came here expecting the DCS community to be appreciably different, sorry to disappoint you )

 

  You'll have to go for quality over quantity servers, or ideally, join a clan that focuses on gameplay you're interested in. Some have higher requirements, some are more casual, but that's your options in this and every other game.

 

  Pub : take your chances

  Clan : still take your chances, but much better quality of experience. Usually.

 

  As for ''why Hind''? Because it's a Hind and you want to learn about it. That's literally the only reason to have anything in this game. Or do you intend to immediately stop flying everything but the Eurofighter when it comes out, because it's objectively ''better''? Play for the experience, not the K/D.

Edited April 7, 2021 by Mars Exulte

[CrazyGman]

On 3/27/2021 at 11:56 AM, BioZ said:

Cold War era theme are usually unpopular

Your kidding right? Alpenwolfs cold war server 1947-1991 is one of the most popluar servers during peak times, it needs a few more people from North America to fly on it so that it becomes busy in the evenings in the Americas, but look anytime around 2-3pm Eastern time and the server will easily have 30-50 plus people on.

[Mr. Big.Biggs]

Seems to me that since servers are developed by individuals, that scenarios can be created for any contingency. 
If your a whirlybird nut, create a server with helos and A-10s only and there ya go. There is really nothing “forcing an imbalance “ except supply and demand. Current servers exist because people created them and continued to populate them. Fly a helo in a “ non air supremacy” environment at your own risk. As inclusive a society as we all would love, that doesn’t include making the environment safe for your choice of aircraft! 
Make ya a helo server, and whirlybird nuts will come! Or they won’t......

 

 

Edited April 8, 2021 by Mr. Big.Biggs

[VS461]

Hey,

 

I got your point, but the situation is complex. Think out of the game for some moments, and you may find the usefulness and uselessness of the Hind in the game too.

 

Sending them against a full-scale, multi-layered, integrated air defence? No responsible commander would do that. Anyway, what would be the task for a Hind? 

 

Cold War is over, but not many nations replaced the old stuff to 5th generation fighters and so on - defence budget is low for a lot of countries. They found out how to improve the capabilities of the old gear for "pennies" - installing NVIS, buying GPSes and later iPads etc. A government defines and re-defines its goals regarding defence and the military defines and modifies its doctrines accordingly. Then the branches, units will create and modify SOPs, TTPs etc. Of course, a good and continuous intel helps a lot.

 

From the 90s, no one could imagine major tank battles on a European battlefield anymore. After 9-11, non-conventional warfare became the thing, so full-scale tactics needed to be thrown out of the window and on-station/on-call CAS/CCA became common in the two major battlefields. A Hind could and can do that out of the box - a radio, a 50k map and 2 pairs of Mark One sensors are enough for operations. Change some bulbs in the cockpit, install NVIS and an iPad and you are good to go for the vast majority of the missions with a well-trained JTAC. All you need is to think about your capabilities and weaknesses, know your enemy, modify your tactics and play accordingly. The Afghan "ragheads" (with 3rd party some help) did this in the last two major wars against world-class armed forces and literally "won" both. Well, sort of.

 

When a big portion of the Iraqi air defence fell during the first HARM salvo in the first night of Desert Storm, it turned out that they did not read Jane's books have proper intel, they did not know the anti-radar capabilities of the US military. Some years later, a Serbian air defence commander managed to shoot down an F-117A - he knew the US RWRs and HARMs well enough to modify the SA-3 radar system's characteristics and made the stationary system portable to avoid getting killed - and he also learned how to identify a stealth aircraft on the radar screen. "Improvize - Adapt - Overcome" as Clint Eastwood says in Heartbreak Ridge.

 

Out-of-the-box Hungarian Hinds managed to have "kills" during practice dog fights against USANG F-15Cs equipped with JHMCS and AIM-9Xs - if you can't see something, you can't acquire it. Also, do what works best for you. Here's an article about that, unfortunately you need to throw it into the Google Translator.

 

Concerning DCS: I read the replies and, although I don't play multi on public servers, I understand the situation. Sending a Hind flight into a Viper CAP's killbox - not a good idea. But, if it is necessary, then let's suppress them. Let's send our own Vipers. Fly undetected - AWACS and AMRAAMs can't see through mountains. SA-8s and Shilkas around the target area on flat terrain? Don't go there until they are suppressed or eliminated.

 

Hinds can be flown not only in a Cold War scenario - but you need to find the proper tasking for them. You need to know their capabilities too - including current DCS capabilities and weaknesses  . And you need to support your mission with necessary assets - in the air and on the ground. And, I guess you need to find a good community to play with.

 

Cheers!

Andy

[Rogue Trooper]

21 minutes ago, VS461 said:

Hey,

 

I got your point, but the situation is complex. Think out of the game for some moments, and you may find the usefulness and uselessness of the Hind in the game too.

 

Sending them against a full-scale, multi-layered, integrated air defence? No responsible commander would do that. Anyway, what would be the task for a Hind? 

 

Cold War is over, but not many nations replaced the old stuff to 5th generation fighters and so on - defence budget is low for a lot of countries. They found out how to improve the capabilities of the old gear for "pennies" - installing NVIS, buying GPSes and later iPads etc. A government defines and re-defines its goals regarding defence and the military defines and modifies its doctrines accordingly. Then the branches, units will create and modify SOPs, TTPs etc. Of course, a good and continuous intel helps a lot.

 

From the 90s, no one could imagine major tank battles on a European battlefield anymore. After 9-11, non-conventional warfare became the thing, so full-scale tactics needed to be thrown out of the window and on-station/on-call CAS/CCA became common in the two major battlefields. A Hind could and can do that out of the box - a radio, a 50k map and 2 pairs of Mark One sensors are enough for operations. Change some bulbs in the cockpit, install NVIS and an iPad and you are good to go for the vast majority of the missions with a well-trained JTAC. All you need is to think about your capabilities and weaknesses, know your enemy, modify your tactics and play accordingly. The Afghan "ragheads" (with 3rd party some help) did this in the last two major wars against world-class armed forces and literally "won" both. Well, sort of.

 

When a big portion of the Iraqi air defence fell during the first HARM salvo in the first night of Desert Storm, it turned out that they did not read Jane's books have proper intel, they did not know the anti-radar capabilities of the US military. Some years later, a Serbian air defence commander managed to shoot down an F-117A - he knew the US RWRs and HARMs well enough to modify the SA-3 radar system's characteristics and made the stationary system portable to avoid getting killed - and he also learned how to identify a stealth aircraft on the radar screen. "Improvize - Adapt - Overcome" as Clint Eastwood says in Heartbreak Ridge.

 

Out-of-the-box Hungarian Hinds managed to have "kills" during practice dog fights against USANG F-15Cs equipped with JHMCS and AIM-9Xs - if you can't see something, you can't acquire it. Also, do what works best for you. Here's an article about that, unfortunately you need to throw it into the Google Translator.

 

Concerning DCS: I read the replies and, although I don't play multi on public servers, I understand the situation. Sending a Hind flight into a Viper CAP's killbox - not a good idea. But, if it is necessary, then let's suppress them. Let's send our own Vipers. Fly undetected - AWACS and AMRAAMs can't see through mountains. SA-8s and Shilkas around the target area on flat terrain? Don't go there until they are suppressed or eliminated.

 

Hinds can be flown not only in a Cold War scenario - but you need to find the proper tasking for them. You need to know their capabilities too - including current DCS capabilities and weaknesses  . And you need to support your mission with necessary assets - in the air and on the ground. And, I guess you need to find a good community to play with.

 

Cheers!

Andy

This is DCS, the cold war just went hot and it's resulting war is ageless and timeless.

War against low technology enemies knows no borders in DCS.

 

What history offers us has little bearing in DCS except for superb weapons in which to prosecute the enemy..

During the Iraq/Iran war, Hinds were mauled by the Iranian AH-1s, once the Iraqi Hinds worked together with their Gazelles the AH-1s started to be shot down.

 

Hind will be superb!

The optically guided weapons give no warnings when inbound.

[Mars Exulte]

2 hours ago, Rogue Trooper said:

The optically guided weapons give no warnings when inbound.

  This is actually something I'm very interested in attempting to exploit. By carrying only these, it greatly reduces weight, making hover sniping a viable tactic. Even if the target sees them coming, they can't be decoyed (although hitting an evasive target will probably be very difficult). It's not limited by laser burnout or a flakey optic tracking system. And for in close gunfighting? I mean, damn, it's got a 3000rpm, high velocity, BRRRT gun.

 

  It's not got the fancy tech of an Apache, or the maneuverability of a Ka-50, but it's hardly ''without options''.

[Rogue Trooper]

Every weapon in DCS has an advantage...... it is what makes DCS so damned Fu(king cool.

[Lace]

11 hours ago, Mars Exulte said:

Even if the target sees them coming, they can't be decoyed (although hitting an evasive target will probably be very difficult).

 

Smoking and moving.  If of course, as you rightly say they see them coming.

 

 

[Apok]

14 hours ago, Rogue Trooper said:

This is DCS, the cold war just went hot and it's resulting war is ageless and timeless.

War against low technology enemies knows no borders in DCS.

 

What history offers us has little bearing in DCS except for superb weapons in which to prosecute the enemy..

During the Iraq/Iran war, Hinds were mauled by the Iranian AH-1s, once the Iraqi Hinds worked together with their Gazelles the AH-1s started to be shot down.

 

Hind will be superb!

The optically guided weapons give no warnings when inbound.

 

"Mauled" is not the  proper word. It was more tit for tat. AH1 didn't have advantage against Hind there. It was who sees who first. Hind+Gazelle was combo to fight armoured targets not air ones.

 

Here they are in same unit, still best of buddies.