Raptor9

Both the PNVS and TADS turrets are limited in their slew speed. Although the PNVS max slew rate is twice that of the TADS, you can still "outrun" it if you jerk your head about quickly enough. This reflects real-world behavior.

Hello @JFisher. When tested, the only desync we experienced in testing was when one player tuned a Preset into STBY, the 5-character Call Sign and DL Net number (if present) was not entered into the STBY slot of the other player in multicrew, even though the frequency was entered for both players successfully. However, tuning a Preset into the Primary slot of any radio worked successfully. Please provide more information and a track replicating this issue.

Hello @JFisher, we could not reproduce this issue. Regardless of whether the Target point was present at mission start or entered by a player from the cockpit, and regardless of whether the Target point was the same T## index number set as the receiving aircraft's DIR or not, the received point was able to be stored. If you are still encountering this issue, please attach a short track replicating the precise conditions it occurs. Thanks.

Neither the symbology nor the sensor video underlay rotates in the real IHADSS to account for head tilt/roll. This is realistic to the real AH-64D functions, and this bug has been resolved.

As a friendly reminder for all forum users, please avoid discussions of real-world topics that are sensitive in nature; which may include, but are not not limited to, tactics, procedures, specific sensor or weapon capabilities/limitations, or defensive systems.

If the A/S button is set to SAFE, the missiles (or any weapon) and the laser won't fire. If you set the A/S button to SAFE after a missile is launched, you won't be able to fire the laser; so if you are using the laser-guided missile variants the missile won't hit the target anyway.

@Terrifier, no one is saying the flight model is perfect or without its flaws. As I already said, the devs are working on it. Further, ED has several AH-64D pilots that they have been communicating with to refine the flight model. Casmo is indeed a valuable community member and content creator, but there have been a few instances in which he has stated things about the AH-64 that are not accurate. I am not speaking ill of him because I have talked to him on numerous occassions and he is a respectable and well-meaning individual with many years of experience and hours of real-world helicopter flight time. However his experience in the AH-64 was quite limited compared to his time in the OH-58. There are a couple of AH-64D SMEs that provide feedback to ED regarding the DCS AH-64D's flight model which have over 5000 hours of combined time flying the AH-64, one of which is myself. So believe me, the flight model is being addressed, which is a monumental task. The AH-64D flight model is not abandoned; it is being worked on as we speak. If you don't or won't believe that when it has already been made very clear, then there is nothing else that can be said on the matter.

It's an AH-64D in the video, but keep in mind that there is no information regarding the environmental conditions or gross weight that existed prior to them landing. Further, it looks like they are doing a cross-country flight and stopping for gas at that airport, so it is also very likely they were light on gross weight toward the end with less fuel on top of the fact they have no munitions loaded. Maybe after some of the future flight model tweaks are made and the yaw offset is reduced there might be less drag on the DCS AH-64D, but a pilot shooting the breeze with an interested stranger at an airport somewhere is hardly a reliable or data-driven testimonial.

My "heavy" loadout I go to often in DCS is FCR, no IAFS, 16x AGM-114 (mix of each type), 50% gun (600 rounds), and 80% fuel (~2000 lbs of gas). It gives you all the sensors and firepower you need to stomp a significant ground force while retaining a little power margin. For example, with that configuration at 2000 feet altitude and 20 degrees C, if I burn off 700 lb of fuel while enroute to the objective area, my PERF page predicts it will require 93% torque to hover out of ground effect. If I'm smart about it, I can easily work with that power margin, and I'll still have enough station time to do what I need to do before I need to head back to the FARP. If I need to spend additional time trying to hunt around for my intended target, then I can either drop a couple missiles or some of my ammo to take more fuel, or just top off on fuel in the first place, perform a rolling takeoff to get airborne, and assume that I will have burned off that additional fuel by the time I find my targets anyway and regain my power margin. As you say, if you plan out what you need and what you don't need, and think about how and when your fuel and munitions are likely to be expended throughout the mission, you can easily get around a limited power margin. And if you are bringing some wingmen with you, it may be smart to distribute the required munitions across your team (plus a little extra for contingencies) instead of weighing everyone down with more munitions than may be necessary to accomplish the mission.

I never said the flight model doesn't need improvements. Quite the opposite actually; if you see my comments on these forums or in the DCS discord, I have been very open and honest about what and where the flight model deficiencies are within the DCS AH-64D, since day one. I'm just not going to re-hash it all here since I've already written countless detailed posts about it elsewhere, and it really wouldn't make a difference anyway. But I do tend to dispel misconceptions when they are thrown out there because they tend to spread and create false impressions of how real helicopters fly. In the end, I'll say what I know to be true and that is the flight model is being worked on in an in-depth manner and it is not something the devs are simply throwing together, rather it is about quality of work. I'm confident they'll provide a product that is equally as impressive as the other aspects of the module.

While I am certainly impressed with your commitment in expressing your thoughts, I don't understand what you would expect we could say on this topic besides what we've already been saying repeatedly in our various community channels, which is the flight model is being revised and has been for some time now. However, let me address a few misconceptions. First, the AH-64 is a very smooth-flying helicopter. Granted, it does shake a little when experiencing Transverse Flow Effect or when pulling hard out of a dive; but unless the rotor track needs refinement, it is a very smooth-flying helicopter. Second, the power of the AH-64D is not "robust" as you claim. Most helicopters will lose rotor RPMs if you pull the collective lever as high as you can. And if you overload the gross weight for the given envrionmental conditions, you will not have sufficient power-to-weight ratio for aggressive maneuvers or even hovering out of ground effect. This is a reality for all helicopters as well, not just the AH-64D. The amount of excess power that you seem to be implying the AH-64D should have is not realistic. Our roadmap has already stated that further refinements are being made. I don't think many understand the complexity of the task that our flight dynamics team is undertaking to accomplish this. It will take time and you will need to be patient. Thank you for your feedback.

From page 578 of the DCS AH-64D Early Access Guide (Frequently Asked Questions): Manual range is the most reliable range in the circumstances described above because it gives the crewmember direct control over the range source without incurring inaccuracies that would be present when using an Automatic range whenever the target is at a different elevation than the ground directly beneath the helicopter.

The navigation automatically switches to the next waypoint in the route sequence without aircrew interaction.

ZOOM is for target sorting when several target symbols are clustered together and it is difficult to distinguish between them. It works the same in GTM and RMAP, so it won't have terrain video underlay.

This is a known limitation of the radar simulation that we would like to address in the future. The terrain will be drawn beyond buildings, but targets will not be detected if line-of-sight is obstructed by structures or trees.

@salsantana, in addition to some of the FCR videos by Wags, I highly recommend you read the "Sights and Sensors" section in the Tactical Employment chapter of the DCS AH-64D Early Access Guide (page 291/292) to understand how sights are used in the AH-64D and how to switch between them. Then I recommend you read the Fire Control Radar chapter starting on page 340. The EA Guide has a lot of information that explains how to employ the FCR.

As before, if you keep encountering the issue, please provide a track file so we can review it. Without that, it could be any number of factors that is causing your issues. I was using the FCR just yesterday and it was working fine. So for us to see what you are seeing, please provide us with a track file. If not, then there is nothing that can be done.

Just to double-check, you are aware the FCR page will only display the 16 highest-priority targets? So even if the total target count in the top right corner of the FCR page says 42 or something, only 16 targets will ever be displayed on the FCR page. Just wondering if that is a detail that was missed, since changing the scan size, the scan area, changing the priority schemes, or activating fire zones may yield different results on the FCR page.

RMAP functions identically to GTM, it just displays the data in a different format along with terrain. GTM: PPI format with PFZ/NFZ but no terrain underlay. RMAP: B-scope format with terrain underlay but no PFZ/NFZ. This is why you can perform a scan in one and then switch to the other without needing to perform another scan. In each mode, the radar is functioning the same; only the FCR page is changing appearance.

Hello @Snipes1702, we do intend to revisit the A-10C manual in the future, with some corrections and needed updates to cover new features. The manual writer is currently occupied with updating the F-16C manual. However, once this is complete, the intent is to update the A-10C manual as needed and to add some quality-of-life features to hopefully make it more user-friendly.

If you encounter an issue, please post a track file. There could be any number of factors that effect detection of units. EDIT: And yes, I meant after the previous update from last week, not the one just released today.

@Recluse (and anyone else), feel free to try again after the latest update from last week. There were substantial improvements to the FCR elevation control logic so you should see improved behavior.

@Recluse, George will land if you set his altitude in H-B to 0. But you will need to be patient as he will do it slowly.

@SunDown, I watched your track but did not see anything wrong. When you activated the PFZ, it correctly prioritized each of the targets inside the PFZ over the vehicles outside the PFZ, even though the vehicles outside the PFZ were closer in range.

This was reported and was seemingly fixed in the update released on Friday. Please ensure you have updated to the latest version, remove any mods you have installed, and if it occurs again please post a track file.