NeedzWD40

Yeah, it's clear we're playing completely different scenarios and styles. I'm all for a scenario though, it will go in line with the rocket article I'm working on. Give me a couple days and I'll have something. Have to temper expectations and usage parameters. I expect that I'll be saturating an area when using rockets with those platforms and use them appropriately. Sometimes I'll loft from defilade, but the S-8s are really short-legged. A pod of M151 rockets are lighter than 4xHELLFIRE. M229s are heavier. Ah, if only those pesky munition dumps and bunkers would be so kind as to smoke and burn from a HELLFIRE hit... From what I'm gathering from the peanut gallery, it seems that there's a lot of unrealistic expectations from rockets in general, without understanding when, how, where, and why to employ them. That's to be expected with a majority adjusted to fixed wing flight. Search for the M255 flechette and you'll find a lot of info. It's essentially an air bursting shotgun round. It's not anti-armor, but will tear into unarmored vehicles. You could also in theory use it against aircraft. There was a thread on it here: Not exactly. Damage affects speed and at the highest level results in the vehicle moving slowly and no longer utilizing weapons. However, this threshold is pretty low.

Incorrect. My kills ~= mission success. Properly designed scenarios do not tie such to mission success. I've been the bait for a SAMbush, the eyes and ears of a recon force, the designator for laser ordnance, all of which resulted in no kills on my own part. Enabling my team to succeed is task number one. Once again, not every aircraft will have a targeting pod nor the capability to employ GPS guided weapons. The F-14 for example lacks a LST, even though it has self designation, and the INS is rough. Providing a laser for terminal designation is part of the equation and goes beyond just the F-14. A cloud base where self designation puts the aircraft inside a hard deck is a common usage I've found. I've done it a lot, as have many of my friends. This is especially true in situations where the TGP is of limited utility at typical fast jet altitudes. Not every scenario is bright, clear sky weather. Further M2000, F-5, and F.1CE all have the ability to employ laser guided ordnance, yet have no self designation capability. I take it you don't have much experience with directing friendly assets onto targets? It's not as simple as "Coordinates are XYZ, fetch 'em fido!" Smoke rockets are incredibly useful for attracting attention right where it belongs in a number of scenarios, often far better than a convoluted talk on. This is especially true if you have multiple assets in the stack. Why not destroy the most threatening SHORAD pieces with HELLFIRE, then follow up with gun and rockets on the weaker parts? This leaves more HELLFIRE in reserve for other targets, potentially multiple sites, and being able to get in close means you can make 1 rocket = 1 kill. Yes, I've done it many times, from modern SA-10 sites guarded by SA-15 and SA-19, to early generation SA-2 guarded by AAA and MANPADS.. If I pick a pure HELLFIRE loadout, I lack the flexibility to engage nearly as many targets due to lack of ordnance. Those SHORAD pieces can be dangerous in their own right. Leaving them behind can be disastrous for a variety of reasons. You can out range 23mm gun systems with rockets, same with MANPADS. So as long as you're not at pylon elevation limits, you can manually aim above the target to get rockets right on. Just tonight I scored on two MANPADS with one rocket each at 4.5km. You use 1 rocket per target. Get within 500m and offset your I beam a hair, you can get direct hits easy. Even shots are left hand, odd shots are right hand. But you don't have any HELLFIRE left, remember? You shot them all up on the SA-2 site. You now have no engagement capability whatsoever against an armored column. Plus, you're now having to evade ADA that you cannot neutralize. On the other hand, if you had 2xHELLFIRE, 14xM151, and 150 gun left over... You could at a minimum destroy two targets in that column. That's part of what you'd use illumination flares for. Light up an area where you suspect targets may be present, scan with NVG. FM 1-112: "An attack helicopter battalion never fights alone. Attacks are coordinated with other maneuver, combat support, CSS, and joint forces to form a combined arms team." I've found myself in situations where I have requested illumination as well as requests to provide it. Much tighter depending on parameters. The use case would be for area targets such as vehicle depots, assembly areas, ADA, etc. This is possible if one is not well practiced with rockets. From running fire, using M229 rockets against a level ground target, pitch up 22deg with max pylon elevation from 8km out. This will get you very close, depending on rocket dispersion. Pitch will vary for targets significantly lower/higher from the firing point. Fire in pairs for best, most accurate results. It's important to remember that my point isn't that rockets are perfect anti-armor weapons. My point is they are an important tool in the toolbox and neglecting them leaves you with insufficient tools for the job. If you're only concerned with blowing up tanks, then by all means go nuts with HELLFIRE.

What ordnance does the AH-64 carry that can destroy an ammunition bunker? How about a warehouse? How many trips will it take to ferry enough HELLFIRE to knock out a vehicle depot? Why would you not request other assets with the proper tools to more efficiently deal with the targets? Why should my personal kills matter? If I've enabled my team to win, regardless of kills, have I not completed my objective? Example: You have an SA-2 site. This site needs to be destroyed in order to allow friendly aircraft freedom of motion. This site is protected by equivalent SHORAD: ZSU-23-4, ZU-23, SA-9, SA-13, and MANPADS. If you use exclusively HELLFIRE, will you have enough to destroy all of the SHORAD pieces plus the actual site itself? Why would you not destroy key threats with HELLFIRE and then finish up with rockets at close range? Further, what if you come across more targets of opportunity that are easily serviced with gun and rockets, but have one or two pieces of ADA that prohibit leveraging those weapons? Properly leveraged, you can potentially knock out the critical components of the SA-2 site with rockets alone. You can do so without even having a line of sight to the target. Not all aircraft have laser spot capability. How do you vector a C-101 onto a target? An F/A-18 without a TGP? Ignoring that coordinates take time to read back and enter, how do you direct specifics? Is it not easier to place a smoke rocket right on the target versus a complicated talk on? How do you see cold vehicles on FLIR? How do you assist friendly forces that may only have NVG capability? This can be corrected by adjusting your sight (assuming manual range or target point rather than coop). You can throw rockets out to ~10km under the right conditions. Have you tried defilade fire with rockets?

I see this sentiment a lot and I always get the impression that it comes down to misunderstanding how to use rockets, particularly from helicopters. The AH-64 has incredible flexibility when it comes to rockets and they are one of the best weapons you can employ when used correctly. Don't get me wrong: there are a number of issues with the current mechanics as implemented, especially in regards to fragmentation damage and ballistic calculations, but that doesn't make them useless. Rockets can act as your own personal MLRS battery or your lightweight quick fix for lightly defended targets. They give you extra room to operate between the gun and the HELLFIRE. They can provide illumination at night and mark targets for friendly assets. When we get the more advanced warheads like M255 and M261, they'll become even more flexible in these capacities. There's so many different ways to use them within the context of DCS that I'm surprised there isn't more out there on just a few of the key ways to employ them.

MPD main menu > UTIL > COLL channel to off.

M151s if I have to go for extended ranges/endurance and can get close for direct hits, M229s if I need more of an arc for defilade fire and an anti-infantry focus.

The only solution I've found is to reset your manual range setting. For some reason the system remembers the last laser range and when you sight select the HMD it doesn't go back to the manual range setting.

Not exactly, since the Vikhr is basically just following the sights, not the designation point. Per the issue at hand, the problem I notice is that it seems the bounding box for the laser is pretty tiny, so you can have a pretty good track on a target but the actual area that the laser must hit is pretty narrow. Mostly noticeable with aerial targets.

Won't do it in-game either, thus the LGB comment. For those guys in ODS, they didn't really destroy it as much as they degraded it.

Good writeup! A few other notes: - The AI will rarely miss with their ATGMs. If you get a missile launched at you, get to solid cover pronto. They have no limitations or constraints outside of LOS and it doesn't matter how much you jink or move, they will hit. Sometimes it's possible to break LOS with trees. You only have seconds to react to a launch as it only takes ~15 seconds for most OPFOR missiles to cross 5km. - The AI will instantly know your position as soon as you get LOS and are in range. They instantly know how far you are and know exactly where to aim to hit you. This is part of why a BMP-2 is more threatening than a ZSU: the BMP-2 has an ATGM that won't miss and a gun that is incredibly accurate and longer ranged than 23mm, aimed as if it were already cued and guided by radar. It only takes a few seconds for the AI to generate a "lock" to shoot from acquisition. By contrast, it takes an SA-8 about 20 seconds to generate a firing solution. - All typical modern red DCS MBTs pack ATGMs capable of reaching out to 5km. If you're operating in the presence of T-72s and their upgraded variations, knock them out from beyond 5km. BMP-2s can reach out to 4.5km with their ATGM. Don't press closer than this 5km boundary unless you've got a lot of support and/or cover. - Learn to love defilade fire. Mark your targets, find a good spot, lob weapons from behind cover. Rockets and cannon are cheap, life is expensive. Use this with buddy lasing as well: get one ship to hang back and lase outside of threat range, then have another ship fire from closer and behind cover. This is an incredibly powerful capability that I rarely see utilized.

No, unless the bridge is really flimsy, an AGM-114 won't do much to it. Better have a fast mover with LGBs on call if you want to knock out a bridge.

These are normally detailed in charts because it varies depending on conditions. Fuel load, weapons, gross weight, air temp, altitude, etc. The PERF page will eventually give real-time data for these figures. Nominally, max endurance will be 60-90 KTAS, max range 120-130 KTAS. Can't help for other figures like max climb and best climb angle.

Sort of. It's not as aggressive as it used to be, but it's still there. The collective SAS channel is still not quite where it needs to be, so I'm still killing it on startup. This results in the message and tone fairly regularly.

If you haven't, duplicate the back seat controls and axis bindings in the front, except for the WAS. You want the TEDAC WAS bound rather than the stick WAS so you can use rockets in cooperative mode. For TEDAC/TADS mode, LMC/Linear Motion Compensator is a must-have bind, along with SLAVE. MAN TRK/Manual Track will be the primary way to control the TADS, so you'll want that on a ministick if possible as a 4 way is kind of hard to use. RHG LRFD Trigger second detent for full laser capability; if you have the buttons, you can add the first detent, but I only use the second. Lastly, LHG TADS FOV switch bound to a four way, at least until we can get a toggle. A binding to cover the DTV/FLIR toggle is useful if you have the space, but it isn't a requirement. That covers the essentials for operating the TADS. As I use a modifier, what I do is sight select TADS, then set GHS as my sight source. I then shift over to my TADS/TEDAC mode and my sight selector becomes FOV selector, my cursor axis becomes my TADS manual track, and everything else remains the same. In an emergency, I can quickly switch my mode back to standard flight and sight select HMD without taking my hands off the stick and throttle.

Quickest way is to load up in single player, jump in the front seat, and take control over from George. Use a modifier on your controls for swapping between generic flight and TADS. Start off by using attitude hold to steady a hover while you run the TADS, then graduate to Ka-50 style operation. It's not that different from running a jet with a TGP once you get the hang of it.

Edit this file: DCS World OpenBeta\Mods\aircraft\AH-64D\Cockpit\Scripts\Computers\CIU\device\CIU_Messages.lua Under the tones table, find the first instance of "Tones/flt-ctrl" and set it to "" which will remove the SAS saturation warning sound. Relevant thread:

So thought I'd bring this up to show an oddity: It seems that the L/L decimal is pretty accurate, but the MGRS coords are offset quite a bit in the longitudinal axis, to the tune of ~250m compared to the world coordinates. Latitude is off by about 20m, which is a bit large but not quite as bad. On the instant action Caucasus runway start mission I cross referenced this with starting position and waypoint entry. Because of this, I can't help but wonder if part of the issue could be some kind of coordinate conversion error and why manually entering coordinates seemingly gives huge offsets.

Single crew with the crash test dummy balancing the front.

This is an inherent problem with the warehousing system. Aircraft and munitions are not updated in the mission properly after an update; the only way to fix it is to set unlimited resources for munitions and aircraft for the warehouse, save the mission, then go back and rebuild the list(s).

For me, it was a multiplayer mission with a cold start aircraft. Started up, waited until INU aligned, rearmed and refueled, then performed a deep strike on an enemy FARP. Returned back to my own FARP, set down, zoomed in the TSD and turned on the cursor info bar. Hovering the cursor over my ownship icon, I compared the readout with the external view data. This was all in approximately one hour real time.

The INU drift is still present from what I gather, as I just put in an hour and my position coordinates were off by hundred of meters despite INU reporting accurate and aligned (along with GPS correction). Longitudinal drift was in the realm of 300m while Latitude was 30m.

Since IZLID isn't planned, it may be possible to add an IR laser capability via scripting. We can get the relative position of the gun, along with the animation states in elevation and azimuth, so in conjunction with createInfraRed you could actually get something close enough.

You would think so, but after extensive playing around with it recently, all AI skill is equal in capability. I was trying to bring some AAA guns down to size with an accuracy reduction via script, but it's not possible to override AI targeting parameters unless you set the target groups to invisible. It's actually pretty realistic with the scripting because it's simply using getPoint and getVelocity coupled with fireAtPoint, making the guns shoot a large area in front of where the target is going, but having to set groups to invisible can break other parts of the game.

I've noticed on cold start aircraft in multiplayer, any coordinates generated will be off by greater than 10m. I can input coordinates for a unit and the actual coordinate location will be offset to the tune of hundreds of meters, even though my alignment is good and my positional accuracy is very narrow. I don't see this same issue in single player or hot starts.

For the ground AI, the only difference from bottom skill to top skill is their reaction speed. Their accuracy is unchanged and an average skill unit is just as headshot capable as an excellent skill unit. Boosting the skill level just means they react quicker and get to that perfect aimpoint in a fraction of the time.