warlord554 2065 Posted September 16, 2015 Got the updated M countermeasure sensors installed. 6 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wiki 1558 Posted September 16, 2015 Very nice, but how come the "nose" is different? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Alex150201 894 Posted September 16, 2015 OH BEAUTIFUL! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Foxone 1044 Posted September 16, 2015 Holy hell that looks Amazing!!! Keep it up!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marsel013 1 Posted September 16, 2015 Quick peek at some MH60M upgrades.... can you say what is the Difference between the l and the m Version becuse to me they look the same ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marsel013 1 Posted September 16, 2015 can you say if the Fuel rope or think{dont know how its says} will be animated like you wont go Through it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wiki 1558 Posted September 16, 2015 It's called refueling probe :) And the nose of the last pictures is more like the K version. Or can we switch and change the nose? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gruman 123 Posted September 16, 2015 The nose of the MH-60M is similiar to the Kilo version. The Lima had the streamlined version. IMHO the pictures above look just about right: picture Biggest change in appearence is the FLIR Pod. An another change of course the UES (Upturned Exhaust System). Looking great, boss. :) 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warlord554 2065 Posted September 16, 2015 Mike upgrades for ours include the newly updated Multi Mode Radar (different nose) also adds various external sensors, new IR sensors. We have also added the UES (upswept exhaust). Same airframe, but M cockpit, nose and sensor suite upgrade. Make sense? The refueling probe will animate out using action menu, and be fully functional with community made aerial refueling. It will also get the updated FLIR pod camera (not pictured yet) Its RL counterpart.... 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warlord554 2065 Posted September 16, 2015 Sry mag i didnt see your post brother :p lol Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
officeramr 269 Posted September 16, 2015 Just an idea for the Miniguns, it might be good to have an ACOG version, possibly for longer ranges? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
delta3242 399 Posted September 16, 2015 I sort of asked this question a while back, but will you be putting buttons in the cockpit that you press to turn the APU, battery, etc. On? Similar to what the AH60 Longbow mod has. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gilatar 272 Posted September 16, 2015 Just an idea for the Miniguns, it might be good to have an ACOG version, possibly for longer ranges? Not sure how viable ACOGs would be for the type of operations that the 160th SOAR conducts. I would think being in a helicopter that flies fast, low and in darkness you might as well just use a CCO or EoTech. Besides, I believe the miniguns are intended for area suppression rather than accuracy. Just my two cents, though, I'm have no knowledge on how this is done in real life. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wiki 1558 Posted September 16, 2015 Hum, it seems to me that the "M" Blackhawk also has the streamlined version Here: http://www.americanspecialops.com/photos/night-stalkers/mh-60m-carrier.php Also, in the BH pack by EricJ, his "M" version has the same nose as the "L" version - or is he mistaken? Thanks. As for me, I prefer the nose of the "L" version rather than the "K" version, find it more "sexy" for the chopper. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gruman 123 Posted September 16, 2015 Well, the picture also shows the old FLIR Pod and no upturned exhaust system (I know, not all Mike had the UES from the start). A lot of the eletronic countermeasures are missing also. No M-134? Probably an old Lima labeld as a Mike or just an early testing model. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gatordev 219 Posted September 16, 2015 It's interesting to see how they beefed up the MMR mount and also upgraded the FLIR turret from the conventional ball that liked to depart the aircraft on hard landings. Looks much more robust than the old system. Just an idea for the Miniguns, it might be good to have an ACOG version, possibly for longer ranges? The ACOG has a 1.5 inch (slightly more for the lower mag versions) eye-relief. That would be the last thing you'd want on a crew-served weapon, and even more so on an airborne weapon. There's no way you'd actually be able to "see through" it. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
captinbaer1 23 Posted September 17, 2015 Will there be a FLIR MFD in the HUD, and will we be able to rotate FLIR for said MFD? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
delta3242 399 Posted September 18, 2015 Will the rope that is on the helicopter have any use or is it just for show? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theevancat 277 Posted September 18, 2015 The SOAR came to give a briefing for us here at the Point and brought one of their MH47s. Pretty fun to walk around in. Those beasts are sure encouraging kids to sign up for aviation by the truckload. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
b00ce 160 Posted September 18, 2015 Just an idea for the Miniguns, it might be good to have an ACOG version, possibly for longer ranges? As someone who just got done doing aerial gunnery from a blackhawk I can say with great certainty that what sounds good on paper cannot be farther from reality. You don't even use the iron sights; you shoot by feel and have to lag behind a bit so the bullets can "curve" into the target (This happens in ArmA too to a degree). This effect gets worse the more distance between you and your intended target there is. Even if you could somehow have an eye relief of like a foot and a half for an ACOG, you'd be aiming at a target you couldn't even see. Even a red dot sight is less effective than "shooting from the hip". Also in regards to the MH60M, there are a couple technical critiques (More for a Mike model in general, I'm not going to talk about the MH60 specific things cause I'm not a Taskforce guy). The UES is shaped weird on your model, take a peek at some refrences I have on my photobucket to compare. The dragbeam fairings on your model are the Lima varient, the mike model are more square on the bottom to allow for the installation of the LWR sensors. There also shouldn't be a HF antenna going down the tail cone. Though I'm sure those are place holders, your main rotor blades are the Alpha/Lima type. Otherwise great work. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warlord554 2065 Posted September 18, 2015 Yes there are various realism model issues regarding 100% accuracy. I have to weigh time, poly, and my shear desire to finish them. Stuff like rotors etc will be used for all airframes. Now down the road we will look into getting each variant squared away components wise but we have to get the LB and 47 done after these Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
officeramr 269 Posted September 18, 2015 It's interesting to see how they beefed up the MMR mount and also upgraded the FLIR turret from the conventional ball that liked to depart the aircraft on hard landings. Looks much more robust than the old system. The ACOG has a 1.5 inch (slightly more for the lower mag versions) eye-relief. That would be the last thing you'd want on a crew-served weapon, and even more so on an airborne weapon. There's no way you'd actually be able to "see through" it. Doesn't it depend on the speed at which the helo is moving at? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warlord554 2065 Posted September 18, 2015 Regardless of what may or may not work IRL regarding weapon optics. Eotech will be the only available option besides no optics. If you need precise cas engagement then have a DAP escort shadow your transport 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gatordev 219 Posted September 20, 2015 Doesn't it depend on the speed at which the helo is moving at? No. Eye relief is eye relief. The main thing that speed affects is how much you lag the target (as b00ce described). While it might seem antiquated, the old school gunner's reticule really is the best option, as where the rounds fall through that sight helps you adjust your fire, while also just getting in zen with where the rounds are hitting. I understand what b00ce is saying about just shooting from the hip, but with practice, the reticule can get rounds on target faster. Besides, b00ce is Army, and we know they can't hit anything, anyway. Regardless of what may or may not work IRL regarding weapon optics. Eotech will be the only available option besides no optics. At the end of the day, there's your answer. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warlord554 2065 Posted September 21, 2015 When you absolutely need to kill everything in sight...... 6 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
