DmitriKozlowsky

EPLRS weapon inhibit if target is friendly. Should appear as blue in GeorgeAI CP/G target menu .

Is it really a sacrifice of IHAADS when using NVG? Seems natural that two systems would be fused, so IHAADS overlay would work at night with light amp NVG.

IHAADS azimuth switch between flight azimuth and head looking azimuth If such an option exists in real AH-64D

Option for AI CP/G skill level Right now AI skill level is for crew. For two crew Apache allow option to set CP/G skill.

In Mission Editor there is a FAC task function that, in effect , turns a unit into JTAC. ED could consider adding FO(forward observer) and/or FiST(Fire Suppourt Team) in same manner. In CA there is MLRS FDDM vehicle. SP howitzers, like M109A6 Paladin and towed artillery have Fire Direction Center that get fires calls from FO and FiST, prioritize them, and distribute fire missions to individual guns in batteries. A U.S. Army Stryker Brigade or armored cav brigade combat team would have one or two M109A6/7 batteries as organic assets. Lighter infantry teams would have towed M198 or M777 gun batteries. Higher level division or Corps level would have MLRS as organic fire support. Attack helicopters are a division or higher level assets. As are JTACs which are assigned as needed to advance units. MLRS and howitzer batteries main missions are counter battery fires, forward air defense SEAD suppression, followed by direct support of friendly units. Enemy MLRS, howitzers, heavy mortars, and forward short range air defense are priority targets for friendly , then enemy maneuver elements such as armor, mech, and infantry.

Just add ED: Garmin 430 module.

For Combined Arms and AH-64D , allow AH-64D crew to call for artillery fires. If MLRS FDC friendly unit is available , allow Apache crew to call for indirect fire. Most useful for air defense threat suppression. Contact could be FDC itself, mission tactical commander, or JTAC as relay. Granted that Apache itself is flying artillery itself, it is vulnerable to air defense.

Yes it does. Thank you. So even with crossfeed to NORM , crew has to manually shift fuel from aux tank to main tanks. Actually that makes sense tactically, if main tanks got perforated, shifting fuel to the damaged tank would just cause it to be lost. With AUX tank removed ammo bin storage rises to 1200 rounds. Just a tad higher then 1180 of A-10C.

I wanted to experiment with low fuel states and fuel starvation, and see how auto fuel management work. Flew around a bit until both front and aft tanks got below 100. The center ('feed tank') remained at three digits. At front tank at 20, and aft tank at 30, the center was still three digits. Few minutes later, front tank displayed empty E and aft tank showed low two digits, one engine died. With only one turning I began a rolling quasi autorotating landing, as second engine died 20 feet AGL, but rotor kept turning and rolling landing went fine. I was busy with low power aircraft thus do not recall exact fuel state in center tank, but I do recall that there was fuel in center tank. Yet both engines starved out. So is the center feed tank not usable fuel below a certain level. With fuel management on automatic, wouldn't the system feed starving engine from another tank ,where there is fuel.

I forget, what is DTC again?

OK. Noted all points. However on slaving-deslaving-slaving. If I do not, George won't progress to next target, or takes forever to do so.

That's interesting. Because I find that if UNLOCK tailwheel, I am unable to lock it for rest of mission

Aerodynamically that is correct behavior.

Apache controls are messed up. Trim system is easy to saturate, and find yourself in an odd attitude, where controls no longer work, and zeroing trim throws helicopter in crazy oscillations. Most often when evading fire. Combined with semi-retarded GeorgeAI that cannot tell friendly ground units from enemy, in a fast paced environment. Things go south easily. I have all the rotary mods for DCS, except MI-24 and MI-8. Oddly the best handling one , as far precision and stability is freeby UH-60L. Second best is Gazelle. UH-60L/M and AH-64D/E in real world have same engines, similar rotors, and similar handling. DCS Apache flight behavior is nuts, and would never be accepted into US Army for combat duty in such state. So I have little faith in DCS interpretation of AH-64D Apache flight model in its current state. But mine, is one man's opinion.

If no LOS, then why is George telling "Lasing"? LOS does not have to have helicopter elevation above the target. I can see the target in TADS IR. This thread has failed top answer my basic question. Why is George announcing "Engaging" or "Firing", then does not do it.

IMHO, after 1 month of AH-64D self training, and having all other DCS helicopter mods except MI-24, I think that flight control system in KA-50 is far far more developed. AH-64D flight control is imprecise, especially on yaw axis. Flying Apache in its current state is like walking on a trampoline. Wobbly and unstable. In flight press R-Ctrl + ENTER twice. Second press brings up Stability Augmentation display. You can see the channels playing back and forth. Perhaps part of the problem is Logitech X-56 Rhino signal that sent via USB, and Thrustmaster TM pedals signal. But even so AH-64D should filter that signal, and that is not does appear to be so.

I tried all that. Same same. No matter what I do, neither CPG nor me (pilot) cannot fire the rockets. Target in TADS, range about 500m, pilot WAS RCKT COOP, Trigger guard UP,ARM on, trigger fire with either 1st or 2nd detente. No fire. CPG states "Engaging" then does not fire.

GeorgeAI_CPG fails to fire Hellfire after announcing ENGAGING This makes absolutely no sense to me. In range, TADS is on target, ARM, lasing, good range. Helicopter is in stable hover more or less. GeorgeAI announces "Engaging" or "Firing" then does not do it. Of the few times George does fire in LOAL with High trajectory. The Hellfire flies up high and to nowhere. If the TRK file shows crashes, then TRK files cannot be trusted, and are of limited value as to troubleshooting. MIssion is Instant Action/Syria/Firing Range AH64D_CPG_fail_to fire_Hellfire.trk

Probably the trigger guard is the issue. I have it binded. But as there is no positive feedback as to its state in cockpit. I can't state for sure whether its up or down.

Well then the whole thing is one big mess! If the track cannot even play back reliably, then what is the point of posting. I replayed it three times. Two times it played correctly, as I recall it. One time track generated flight into terrain, which makes no sense.

Problem is back. I thought I had it licked. But it is not. Rockets won't fire. Either by CPG or pilot override. To me! It is completely unpredictable and unreliable. I don't what conditions I am failing to meet for rockets to fire. Track is attached. This is a messed up implementation. Pilot should always be able to override fire control on gun and rockets. Right now I am unable to do so. AH64D_CPG_fail_to fire_rockets.trk

Which one do I prefer KA-50 or AH-64D Following is totally original "Comparing Peking Duck to French Roasted Duck. Two different dishes yet I like them both." "Dalin' I only give the best duck."

UH-1Y Venom would be welcome but , I fear, is a bridge too far. Venom has lengthened fuselage, larger interior, completely different rotor system,powerplant, gearbox, and avionics. It only superficially resembles UH-1. Its a very modern maritime and amphibious assault helicopter.

Right. https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=RIQzITsF&id=2A315019DAEA58DCA45609A723F4380CC4CD3EEA&thid=OIP.RIQzITsFny0JJ67QrM3LmwHaFj&mediaurl=https%3a%2f%2fth.bing.com%2fth%2fid%2fR.448433213b059f2d0927aed0accdcb9b%3frik%3d6j7NxAw49COnCQ%26riu%3dhttp%3a%2f%2flh6.ggpht.com%2f_4xLi6KmWWQA%2fTHmDTBnkwRI%2fAAAAAAAABo4%2fqlzLmZjQJnQ%2fs800%2fHH-1N%2b158551%2bcockpit%2b(2).JPG%26ehk%3dXbwr7%2b5jJ%2ff599ybYqbmxCo8k9bZJAgCz17vscUy5qY%3d%26risl%3d%26pid%3dImgRaw%26r%3d0&exph=600&expw=800&q=UH-1N+Instrument+panel&simid=608031639947063215&FORM=IRPRST&ck=E1986E0703586E3C18BC85695B9896A4&selectedIndex=11&ajaxhist=0&ajaxserp=0 Otherwise it looks very similar to 1H. I am curious if the Twin engines are derated or power is limited by governors so that each engine lasts longer and has higher time between overhauls. Full power on each plant would be provided when one engine fails, hot'n'high operation, near max GW.

Modernize UH-1H to UH-1N Twin. Would it be too much of a stretch to consider that ED would not have to too much re-coding to create UH-1N module by starting with current UH-1H? There were two varieties of UH-1N. With Stability Control Augmentation System, and without SCAS. SCAS equipped UH-1N did away with stabilizer bar, but otherwise rotor system remained Bell semi-rigid. DCS players are likely to be just as happy with non-SCAS equipped UH-1N. Biggest difference is that UH-1N got two engines. So dual fuel systems, and engine power quadrants to supplement collective twist grip throttle.