Kev2go

The "nearly as good" or "comparable to" F15E resolution comes from the manufacturer claims with the APG73 Phase 2 upgrades, which were specifically made to adress shortcomings from Medium resolutions SAR and upgrade it to "High resolution SAR". That being said the APG70 itself got A/G further enhanced to " very high resolution" SAR capabilities circa 1997ish, so the F15E likely very well does have even better ground mapping capabilities relative to the Phase 2 series APG73 I think what we might ended up in DCS judging by the quality is only the APG73 Phase 1. Phase 2 could certainly do better quality SAR maps than what was presented in DCS. From a 2003 paper https://www.omgwiki.org/hpec/files/hpec-si/HPEC-SI_CIP_Demonstration.pdf

Yea I agree Same. Reallly looks more like EXP2 with artificial magnifiation. the earlier WIP screenshots EXP 3 seemed to show much greater magnification and a crisper image relative to what was presented in wag's latest video. Then again It was never clarified by wags or any team member if they were modelling the APG 73 Phase 1 or the APG73 Phase 2 radar. That and it also depends on the distance a given target is being mapped from. The closer one is, the more sharp the resolution should be gradually getting. I mean hell even in Real beam mode without any EXP modes utilizied you can't even make out an airstrip , but would will eventually see it fairly clearly within 10 NM. or rather under modeled, if it behaving more like DBS EXP 2 with extra magnification rather than SAR. Then again this is still EA, so i think we can expect will be more fine tuning, and of course more A/G radar updates pertaining to adding in other modes are needed for completion.

No it wouldn't The UH1Y may as well be a completely different beast to the UH1H. Its an a newer design, newer production helicopter with totally different avionics. Dont let the UH1 nomenclature, or even a semblance of visual similarity of its exterior airframe design fool you.

I already described why it shouldnt get them. , and Skatezilla in more detail in particular technical manner already debunked the 100% polug and play a few pages ago

that video is advertising not the original Sniper ATP/XR which came into service for f16s circa 2005/2006ish ( which is what our circa 2007 F16 would get) , but the Sniper ATP-SE a next generation improvement. So of course it would be superior to the litening 2 AT from 2003. I dont know what the stats are from the Original Sniper ATP, but the Litening 2 AT has a CCD resolution of 1024x1024, a FLIR resolution of 640X512, 2 levels of FOV, and 9 levels of zoom. If the original ATP doesn't exceed such specs than it probably isn't better. But also realize that IRL there are newer generation Litening series Targeting pods to compete with lockheeds TGP's, so Northrup is by no menas behind in the curb. In fact they themselves had succeeded the Sniper ATP in capability in 2008 with the Litening 2 G4. That being said overall our ED's TGP's have too crisp resolution when utilizing zoom that they should have.

Ah yes APKWS for everyone, not just UH1H but also including the ww2 warbirds. Cuse why not, and " bruh 100% dumb n easy plug n play integration, no technical challenge amirite?"

I mean Razbam is officially working on the Super Tucano. So that will be close enough i guess.

i get the point your trying to make but the Uh1H variant in question is to new for vietnam anyways. Given the airframe is a post vietnam UH1H production version given it mounts for RWR sensors ( shame they didnt give it the actual APR 39 RWR), and post production modifications such as Radar altimeter, Night vision compatible cockpit, composite rotor blades, in addition to countermeasures suite firmly places the Uh1H into a 1980s setting at the very least, with said Huey's still flying actively into the 1st gulf war.

the radar and datalinks ( UAS and TCDL) did quite alot to enhance tactics. But even without the radar, or even ignoring the datalinks what makes the AH64D more intuitive is the Glass cockpit and HOCAS setup. That being said the AH64A's were indeed refitted with GPS in the late 90s ( technically EGI) , but nevertheless the longbows navigation suite is superior since as opposed to the Ah64A's A10 style CDU for navigation management, The longbow has something along the lines of A HSI/SA type pages you can access via multipurpose displays like you have Hornet although more advanced as it could utilize moving maps of various sorts ( chart, digital terrain , as well as 3D) at least if talking block 2.Block 1's had older hardware , and monochrome displays.

AMASE/DIRCM is a modification adopted and only used on Royal Neatherlands Air force Longbows. it is not in use with the US Army based Longbows. when the AH64D block 3 ( that has since 2013 been re-branded as the AH64E Guardian) starting coming about the US army went with a new protective suite that included AN/AAR57 Missile warning system, with sensors mounted into the airframe rather than needing wingtip pods to be installed to do the same thing without the aerodynamic penalty. That being said there exists what is the Ah64D "extended"block 2 " which were series of improved avionics retrofits and interim modernizations until Block 3 came about. IRRC the Extend block 2's arent upgraded production block 2's but 96 AH64A's converted into these more capable block 2's. I don't have anything concrete in terms of documentations besides some photos or general information , but those "extended" block 2's do have an IR MWS, although with a physical control panel to the suite compared to the block 3/E models. So that being said unless ED is specifically modelling a Dutch Apache, no we wouldn't get AMASE/DIRCM system.

Exactly. Nothing stopping Longbows from working in conjunction with Kiowas. Especially in this case serving alongside a Longbow makes more sense since Polychop has verified that this n fact a very late life Kiowa circa 2017, which coincidentally also happened to be last year of the OH58D's use in active duty service. https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4448717&postcount=213 As for Hellfires thers 2 generations of laser based hellfires https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/wsh2012/132.pdf The AGm114K hellfire 2's are more resistant against smoke and other obscurants, has electro optical counter measures, re programmable autopilot. IT has a dual tandem warhead making it capable of dealing with thicker armor in particular with late cold war- post cold war Russian tanks that have Explosive Reactive armor addons, that would largely negate the generation 1's. Also Don't know if they do a modern enough longbow but APKWS would really be nice to have.

Out of curiosity can polychop clarify a general time frame that the OH58D is representative of? It looks like a very late life variant. From my own research i've done it seems this is a very least 2012 but very likely later period Kiowa given certain characteristics such as : replacement of the monochrome displays with color displays, AN/AAR47 V2 MWS and the availability of APKWS.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4448012&postcount=1286 "HUh" what are those longbows doing there? ;)

2:04 ( when video starts) to 2:20 . There goes Wags teasing us again ;) Yet another pointer that the Apache will be the next "eagerly awaited aircraft"

They haven't announced anything officially, so there is nothing to comes to terms with yet. I mean when ED first said they were doing the cobra, it seemed clear it was going to be the Ah1W super cobra, then it was vietnam era Ah1G, then it became Ah1S, then they changed the plans yet again with wags confirming it was in fact going to be the Ah1F variation, and since that time its become apparent the Ah1F is not going to be done immediate foreseeable future , rather put on hold long term hold like F4E project was due to all the other projects they have to get done, and with other " ground breaking mind melting next upcoming module" that they are supposed to eventually announce. That was supposed to be announced in summertime i think it was, but in turn are waiting until Q4 2020 before making said official announcement of the next upcoming mystery project, even if the Apache is a likely possibility.

ED already has experience doing multimode radars, DL, HMD. All stuff in basic foundations that exist in the gen 4 fighters, and especially with the new HMD+ tgp sensor technology being integrated with scorpion HMCS the A10C 2.0 further expanding on existing capabilities within the game engine. Yes different in how they work and are integrated, not the same but you get the point. If they really want to push some boundaries and make something that can genuinely be called the next flagship rotary based module, rather than just another helicopter then the Ah64D is the way to go. In the same way how the A10C was flagship for its day, and the same way how the F/A18C is ED current fixed wing flagship due to the new technologies and changes they needed to introduce to the game engine. To this day the KA50 ( minus 2 person crew coordination that mi24 needs ) is still the most advanced helo that ED has done.

In that specific GR interview he didn't really deny ED ever doing Ah64D. He just said it would be more complicated and difficult module to develop relative to the AH64A model. As an analogy by the same line of reasoning thing would be true that an F16A would have been simpler to develop than an F16C blk 50.

Then i don't know.... Im only talking about TAD/SADL related symbols. You are certainly referencing additional pages using a newer revision or publication. Because unless im blind this particular publication i managed to find only has 8 pages worth dedicated to showing SADL symbols.

Bump. A reminder about this important AA gun since the Syria map release is around the corner.

Because thats the radar our in game hornet has. Thats something a mission designer can't change. Considering that the N019 is basically just a further evolution of the Saphir's 23 series radar yea..... no. it is not superior compared to a next generation fully digital mech plannar array radar with PSP. This exactly why even before the collapse of the USSR started to develop N011 "bars" radar as sucessor to the N001 in the Su27 and the Zhuk radars to succeed the N019's in the Mig's. Also ED isn't considering a possibility of the 9.13 but the 9.12 as a module.

radar itself still matters for BVR. APG73 > APG65 > N019. Not to mention MIg29A lacks ECM

I dont think we are getting ahead of ourselves. Asking for an Apache, even its the more capable Longbow variant is not the same as asking for latest stealth fixed wing aircraft like the F22 or F35. sure those are still flying, but so are the F/A18C Hornets and the F16C blk 50 Vipers. WE need a helicopter that is preferably useful in modern scenarios ( especially in contested environments and not just low intensity warfare) , and that can plausibly fit for the maps in question we currently have in DCS or that upcoming in the near future and not for a conflict in a 1 specific given time period many decades ago for which we do not have the map or other supporting assets or sister modules for. ID rather have a helicopter that fits in a given environment than getting a orphan aircraft, and its clear from recent interviews that ED is not doing a Vietnam era anytime soon. From helicopters look at poly chop. They are doing an Oh58D . Itl be sad if polychops mere scout helo would remain to be the most advanced western helicopter, and ends up being misused as a dedicated attack helo purely due to the lack of an actual dedicated attack helicopter from a comparable time frame in team blue. OH58D would be a great complimentary partner to an Apache as from a doctrinal POV its primary job would have been to scout and work in conjunction with Apaches.

I think its irrelevant how many were exactly produced when it comes to mission creation. I mean there were only 10 F/A18C lot 20's produced and perhaps taking this line of thinking to an even more extreme level perhaps servers should only allow 1 F/A18C lot 20 at any given time because the BUNO # specifically is 165407, a particular individual air frame? I think not.

I prefer the more modern fighters. It should be up to mission designer to simply limit armament. Want 80s or early 90s scenarios ? you can reduce AC capabilities and close enough emulate by not using link 16 and removingthe likes of aim9x and Amraams as armament options.

Considering your career, this may be case for you since you are probably utilizing a post 2012 publication of the A10C dash 1 and the extra symbology pages are for the HMCS related bits ;)