R-60 for Mi-24V(/K?)

Mazz
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 751
Joined: Thu 8 Mar 2012 05:31
Contact:

Re: R-60 for Mi-24V(/K?)

Postby Mazz » Thu 8 May 2014 16:00

He's thinking of the R-40, but yeah this is just a bog standard SRAAM found on a few PACT planes already.
Image

User avatar
CantRushThis
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 645
Joined: Sun 4 Nov 2012 18:44
Location: Vienna, Luxemburg.
Contact:

Re: R-60 for Mi-24V(/K?)

Postby CantRushThis » Thu 8 May 2014 16:02

Vasily Krysov wrote:Basic Request
Mi-24V
Yak-B (90pts)
4x R-60M on underwing mounts.
4x Kokon on wingtip pylons.
Change Introduction date to 1985

Helicopter version of R-60M modified to 2625m* Helo and 2275m Jet ranges.

*Let the Super Cobra keep it's range advantage. Asymmetric balance ;)

Absolutely okay with such a thing, but I do think the prices are a problem, especially compared to the Super Cobra, but also in and by itself

The Cobra only has two (albeit better) rockets, yet would cost more.
The infamous Celtics have better rockets but no ATGMs, a weaker chassis with less HP and no gun, yet only cost slightly less
The Tigres don't have ATGMs, but sport stealth and nosegun for a few points more.

I just don't see a justifiable way of this staying at 90 points, really :( Mainly because, at the end of the day, it IS still a Hind, and that means it's rather more surviveable than most other helos, even if it's just by a small amount. So by getting this you'd risk it being, yet again, too expensive, which is a shame.

Now, could they get their regular rocket pods on the wingtips? I could see them going with that, as it would also keep the price down A BIT.

Edit: Compare it to the Sokol, which for a slightly smaller price (15 points off) would get a sidegrade nosegun, no ATGMs, worse AA missiles and a weaker chassis. And that thing's supposed to be one of the reasons to go Warsaw Pact / Poland :/
Last edited by CantRushThis on Thu 8 May 2014 16:04, edited 1 time in total.
Image

admiral9
Lieutenant
Posts: 1035
Joined: Wed 22 May 2013 18:48
Contact:

Re: R-60 for Mi-24V(/K?)

Postby admiral9 » Thu 8 May 2014 16:03

Keep the acc of the R60 in mind... It wont be that strong at all.
Personally prefer rocket pods to kokons though.
Image
daywalkerzyx wrote:Elite inf really aren't a problem.

Seer7
Warrant Officer
Posts: 485
Joined: Tue 4 Jun 2013 07:26
Contact:

Re: R-60 for Mi-24V(/K?)

Postby Seer7 » Thu 8 May 2014 16:05

ch3cooh wrote:Where does another expensive AA-Chopper help USSR?

They need something cheap, like that "Mi-24 Afghanski(?)" that was mentioned somewhere for example.

Jury's out on whether a cheap Mi-8 carrying Iglas is authentic or not, earliest dedicated prototype is 1996 and MadMat hasn't been enthusiastic towards it. He has stated he would consider this proposal though: see these posts for some more info. Iglas aren't out of the question, but R-60Ms would be a better flavour choice given the Kamovs carry Iglas. Mi-28s could carry Iglas too, but it's too expensive an option really. So long as it's priced like a Hind it'll still be a better option than rushing with a Kamov. FYI, both Polish and E-Germans could get this though only the latter arguably need it, and are more likely to get it because it was used in border guarding role.

I've been arguing for this, along with icehawk (the Mi-8 proto was his discovery) and another, for ages. I've suggested 90 points for the Mi-24V being reconfigued into this role in the past, which is the same price as the TY-90 and 5 points more expensive than it is now. Glad to see Vasily's taken up the cause.
Image
Image

User avatar
ch3cooh
Colonel
Posts: 2617
Joined: Thu 24 Jan 2013 14:00
Contact:

Re: R-60 for Mi-24V(/K?)

Postby ch3cooh » Thu 8 May 2014 16:05

Just noticed that Stinger and Mistral only have 4hp.
That would indeed make it very powerful.

So if that got in, I would prefer a lower availability than Nato AA-Helos, because let's be honest, pushing USSR to be equal in Air Assault is not asymmetrical.

User avatar
Vasily Krysov
Colonel
Posts: 2671
Joined: Mon 2 Apr 2012 09:27

Re: R-60 for Mi-24V(/K?)

Postby Vasily Krysov » Thu 8 May 2014 16:08

CantRushThis wrote:Absolutely okay with such a thing, but I do think the prices are a problem, especially compared to the Super Cobra, but also in and by itself

The Cobra only has two (albeit better) rockets, yet would cost more.
The infamous Celtics have better rockets but no ATGMs, a weaker chassis with less HP and no gun, yet only cost slightly less
The Tigres don't have ATGMs, but sport stealth and nosegun for a few points more.

I just don't see a justifiable way of this staying at 90 points, really :( Mainly because, at the end of the day, it IS still a Hind, and that means it's rather more surviveable than most other helos, even if it's just by a small amount. So by getting this you'd risk it being, yet again, too expensive, which is a shame.

Now, could they get their regular rocket pods on the wingtips? I could see them going with that, as it would also keep the price down A BIT.

Edit: Compare it to the Sokol, which for a slightly smaller price (15 points off) would get a sidegrade nosegun, no ATGMs, worse AA missiles and a weaker chassis. And that thing's supposed to be one of the reasons to go Warsaw Pact / Poland :/


Those two rockets are very good, and the Cobra carries 8 TOW-2 and can be backed up by OH-58C/S.
I'll have to look into Celtics.
I will laugh at you if you think the Tigre is a bad deal comped to this.

Not possible to put Pods on the wingtips.

Sokol is overpriced.

ch3cooh wrote:Just noticed that Stinger and Mistral only have 4hp.
That would indeed make it very powerful.

So if that got in, I would prefer a lower availability than Nato AA-Helos, because let's be honest, pushing USSR to be equal in Air Assault is not asymmetrical.


Even if the availability matches, in the opening you are still limited by points cost. You could get two OH-58C/S for the cost of one of these Hinds, same for the FRG Bo105P/BSH. If someone puts two cards of them in and spends 8*90=720pts then more power to them.

User avatar
mrgray2011
Sergeant
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu 20 Mar 2014 14:49
Contact:

Re: R-60 for Mi-24V(/K?)

Postby mrgray2011 » Thu 8 May 2014 16:14

Vasily Krysov wrote:
mrgray2011 wrote:Is it HE8 missile? I thought RedDragon supposed to be a raidboss in this game. It will be even more ridiculous than Z-9A.


It has half of that, HE4 :?


Ah, it is Molniya not R40, my bad. Idea is nice, but i still think its a bit too much for single nation. Give those babies to NSWP instead. I dont know what to do with Mi24V.

Seer7
Warrant Officer
Posts: 485
Joined: Tue 4 Jun 2013 07:26
Contact:

Re: R-60 for Mi-24V(/K?)

Postby Seer7 » Thu 8 May 2014 16:17

CantRushThis wrote:I just don't see a justifiable way of this staying at 90 points, really :( Mainly because, at the end of the day, it IS still a Hind, and that means it's rather more surviveable than most other helos, even if it's just by a small amount. So by getting this you'd risk it being, yet again, too expensive, which is a shame.

Yeah? And the Mi-24K is 110 points for no missiles whatsoever, just rockets and the Yak-B. The PAH-2 Tiger is 120 for AAMs and ATGMs not to mention stealth. If the K had no optics it'd be like 65 points, comparing to the rest of the Hind family (and the Mi-24P was 70 points before a nerf).

Hinds are overrated when they can be 2-hit with the Mistral and Stinger A or C, which are mounted on multiple Blufor AA and multirole helos, the former which are often cheaper, not to mention all the air and ground threats. Even small arms fire can stun and panic a Hind when it's supposed to be impervious to rounds smaller than a 14mm.
Last edited by Seer7 on Thu 8 May 2014 16:19, edited 1 time in total.
Image
Image

User avatar
Vasily Krysov
Colonel
Posts: 2671
Joined: Mon 2 Apr 2012 09:27

Re: R-60 for Mi-24V(/K?)

Postby Vasily Krysov » Thu 8 May 2014 16:19

mrgray2011 wrote:
Vasily Krysov wrote:
mrgray2011 wrote:Is it HE8 missile? I thought RedDragon supposed to be a raidboss in this game. It will be even more ridiculous than Z-9A.


It has half of that, HE4 :?


Ah, it is Molniya not R40, my bad. Idea is nice, but i still think its a bit too much for single nation. Give those babies to NSWP instead. I dont know what to do with Mi24V.


In a game with coalitions that can do everything, it is no longer valid to say [USA/USSR] should not do everything.

NSWP is going to be well taken care of in the DLC already I can assure you.

Arglabarg
Corporal
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue 4 Feb 2014 23:12
Contact:

Re: R-60 for Mi-24V(/K?)

Postby Arglabarg » Thu 8 May 2014 16:27

Hind is not impervious to small arms fire, don't be silly. It's resistant to small arms fire but there's only so much you can do to armor an inherently fragile platform like a helicopter even if it's a Hind aka Flying IFV.

Before you respond everyone should know the R-60M:

1750 range
50% accuracy
HE 4

It's a middle range missile and is actually out-damaged by a Stinger, and seriously outclassed by the Mistral and TY-90. I think the problem Vasily wants to solve is the lack of a cheap AA helicopter, so giving USSR another armored chopper with Iglas wouldn't solve the problem at all! Also, it's true Mi-24V has no job to do right now. Wouldn't exactly be on my list of top priority though. :?

Wouldn't it need a new art asset? I don't believe any Hind has such a pylon arrangement currently.
Last edited by Arglabarg on Thu 8 May 2014 16:33, edited 1 time in total.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests