fargo007

This is how everyone does it. At least for a substantial period of time.

Good post. I'm unable to get an AI F-15C to fire BVR on me while in a Mistral. They'll shoot but only close up. Like you said, once fixed wings come in close, they are stupid simple to kill in a mistral by just masking until they overfly and pull up into the sky, usually with AB's too, which doesn't help them. I agree J-CATCH is old, but it's still a foundational experience that still influences doctrine. And it's evolved both ways. Air to air missiles have improved on the FW end, and RW are now armed with A2A missiles, when they were not at the time. Even so, it's clear the conclusions of J-CATCH still hold true.... A fighter aircraft can expect to get shot down more often than not if it decides (other than with complete surprise) to come in close and engage in a turning fight with an attack helicopter or missile platform like the Mistral. There's no example of air tasking I can find where a modern fighter aircraft has been expressly tasked to search for and engage enemy helicopters, so it seems like a very rare or even moot circumstance outside DCS.

Of course. I'll write as many as I choose to. Where exactly have Helicopters "fared quite poorly" against fighters in general? Please show the statistics or other supporting documents you rely on. In fact, I've yet to see a single piece of actual data to support anything at all that you've claimed, no less any easy to furnish proof you can do in DCS that which you purport you can. You're already here telling the Air force and Army how flawed and meaningless their studies are. And no surprise here - also with no evidence at all.

I think you're making a lot of assumptions about what's "claimed" with the pulse doppler radars here versus what their actual capabilities are. The ground clutter I'm referring to is any combination of structures, trees, and terrain. Most of this absorbs radar, and much of it will directly mask. So I question the ability to detect, lock, and engage a low flying RW actively evading you at great distance anyhow IRL, especially when he knows you're there way before you can find him. I haven't seen any evidence that the trees/veg in DCS absorb radar like they should. Your radar will show us exactly what direction you're coming from on the RWR. So we'll always know which direction to mask from, and routing will be managed accordingly. We'll also know when you are nose hot, and nose cold, and can plan accordingly. Besides - if helicopters know there are enemy fixed wings there (which means a whole lot of other things have failed to an absurd extent), we're not going to be transiting in a straight line across flat ground. So yeah you'll shoot from far away, but I doubt you'll actually bring an aircraft down before it's time for you to go home. The overarching point here, and one you seem to indirectly support is that a FW aircraft that comes into the WEZ of a properly equipped helicopter is at a supreme disadvantage. That's what J-CATCH ultimately concluded: "Your arms are too short to go in and box with RW. " And that's what's borne out in DCS too; nobody's out there actively hunting and killing RW with SPAMMRAMs. DCS is all we've got, so with the R-60's coming for the hind, and Iglas for the BS3, it makes sense to begin experimenting, and I sure will. Tactics don't really matter at this point, it's just BVR, and all about the implementation of the radar and missile.

I'd actually love to test this someday. Recreate J-CATCH in DCS. Once we get some longer range AA missiles on RW anyhow. The Mistral is pretty capable as is. Aside of the vagaries of whether or not the FW radar we have would IRL accurately be able to pick out and lock a helicopter that was flying literally below treetop level against a massive amount of ground clutter - most of it cheerfully absorbing radar.

Wow! It seems you know way more than the Army and the Air force. Good luck with all that.

I still have a problem with Petrovich HITTING targets after he eventually finds them. Saw in the changelog to try disabling pitch altitude, and this does help a little. Also tried holding trim down which instantly zeroes all AP channels. Even starting the attack run from 7-8km out, trimming the helicopter and choosing an altitude such that the reticle is centered and I am totally hands-off produces misses, almost always over the top. Most misses are going to be high, over the top but some do go short. I reported this before, and for SURE, not everyone has this issue. This may to some extent also be target-specific. With T-55's, he has a very high miss rate even with this tactic. With T-72's less so. I did get a 7/8 once. If this is hitting you, you'll be lucky to kill four T-55's with eight SHTURMs or ATAKAs. Tried all three flavors. It's not hamfist flying either. Have MC'ed with multiple pilots for comparison and "steadiness gut check," and with a front seater reliably 8/8. When one of them hits on the first try, it's kind of like an exciting surprise.

Come chase after us RW in fixed wings all you want. We'll make you get real low and real slow. Most likely you'll be led right to manpads. We can carry a big handful of them around in the back. And this is before we have a true, high G air to air missile available. The most dangerous thing about a helicopter isn't always what's up front. It's what's in the back that kills the most stuff. RW vs FW was tested extensively. J-CATCH. The conclusion was that fighter and attack FW should stay far the F away from RW. https://www.wearethemighty.com/articles/army-air-force-pitted-jet-fighters-attack-helicopters/ If real life has a vote anyhow.

That's why the best strategy is to go ultra low and force them to disengage and overfly you before they crash into the ground chasing you with their reticle. Because they immediately pull full afterburner and shoot up into the sky, making them a perfect target for a heat seeker. This was my Mistral strategy and it worked every single time as long as they didn't get a head on shot on me.

I Also say KA-50. Generally. Ask yourself - are you really more concerned with very basic flight maneuvers, or do you need to learn to fight in the helicopter, and manage the navigation, weapons, and data systems involved? The KA-50 is almost like a single seat, steampunk version of an AH-64. Yes, the coaxial rotor is a little different, but not so dramatically that it matters in the big picture IMO. If effectiveness in missions is considered, the transition from KA-50 to AH-64 will be easier than UH-1H to AH-64. Hands down.

I see we can create them and they do run back 'n forth quite well in MP. They also seem to throw hit/dead events at some level, but these aren't accessible as far as I can tell. --- onChatMessage--- RED AI in T-90 killed BLUE unknown in Locomotive with nil I cannot make them respond to waypoint actions of any kind. They also don't draw enemy AI fire, or make triggers fire. Is there anything I am missing at this point?

I just ordered this exact arrangement having seen it endorsed here, and also by a squaddie. Added the chair/collective mount too. Super excited. I've been using a warthog throttle, and I use the ever lovin' sh1t out of all the buttons and hats on the grip itself. the Alpha-L seems to have even more, and I get an extra modifier to work with as well with the second pinky lever.

Might come in handy for autorotation practice....

Almost certainly this will be an AI (George) function. Will be interesting to see how it's implemented.

Very similar. These functions got exposed to scripters in the API before they had ME controls. An example attached.

This is already possible via scripting and is also built into the excellent "GameMaster" script by Cake/Sorbus. You can type stuff into map marks and make it all happen. In MP, in realtime.

And when you get into Mission Design, and beyond that really being able to control AI behavior via scripting, you literally never run out of cool stuff to do or experiment with.

Which of us hasn't left a dent in that damn wall?

Please backtrack and let us know if this works. I've stood off of a collective because I didn't see one with what I felt was enough mappable controls on it. What you're showing here blows that limitation out of the water.

Gotcha, I don't have that aircraft and had no idea how it worked.

The animation is cool, but is that actually including pilot-created data that was never in the original miz file?

I'm sat here with a gob on waiting for more sneak peek content.

Check out map.army. Has a 3d Viewer on it that lets you look at the terrain quite nicely. MAP.ARMY

Nuttin fa nuttin' but an animated marshal would be a huge immersion boost across the entire RW estate of DCS. Like was done with the supercarrier/deck guys.