AH-1 S or W? What do you want?

[GGTharos]

That depends.

 

Attacking an aircraft if you don't have some dedicated GBAD travelling with you is an entire procedure described in field manuals. Everyone sets up an ambush and attacks together, filling the spot the 'baddie' will fly through with lead when they are commanded to.

 

But if that isn't the case, and you have a heli trying to mess you up from 2-4km away (never mind further), you pop smoke and take cover. You're probably not going to be able to put effective fires on that heli.

 

Your job is to deal with other tanks, infantry, and vehicles. It's the GBAD's job to nail the flying things. You're not very useful if you're trying to shoot down helis with your anti-tank weapon. You're very unlikely to hit, and you're now exposing yourself to many potential threats instead of defending and surviving the attack.

 

If the helicopter attacks at you platoon or it is threat to units you are supporting, you will engage that attack helicopter. You don't sit in cover waiting it finish off and fly away, or do you?

 

Unless you get rules of engagements that you are not allowed at any circumstances to engage enemy helicopters, then it is different story.

[shagrat]

If the helicopter attacks at you platoon or it is threat to units you are supporting, you will engage that attack helicopter. You don't sit in cover waiting it finish off and fly away, or do you?

 

Unless you get rules of engagements that you are not allowed at any circumstances to engage enemy helicopters, then it is different story.

Of course You Do exactly that! Only if he does see you, you'll try a desperate last ditch to shoot him. At least that is what is trained in the army! You did serve, did you?

[Fri13]

That depends.

 

Attacking an aircraft if you don't have some dedicated GBAD travelling with you is an entire procedure described in field manuals. Everyone sets up an ambush and attacks together, filling the spot the 'baddie' will fly through with lead when they are commanded to.

 

But if that isn't the case, and you have a heli trying to mess you up from 2-4km away (never mind further), you pop smoke and take cover. You're probably not going to be able to put effective fires on that heli.

Sure if it is further than you can hit (2-3km isn't nothing really for low and steady flying targets) but of you need to get cover you do it.

 

With attack helicopters if you are supporting a column of unarmed or lightly armed vehicles and enemy attack helicopter pop-up and engages ground forces, do you flee or do you try to take down it or get it away? You are the only support they got and you should just sit there, believing enemy will not fire upon you or you should then around and seek cover?

 

If you are on route and you see enemy attack helicopters flying somewhere, you don't engage them but you report them and continue mission.

 

If you are leaving a area where is lightly armed ground forces and you see enemy attack helicopters flying there, you might need to do call do you engage or do you let them to complete their mission and return to home, depending what is your mission priority and type.

 

 

It isn't that you seek enemy helicopters in expense of you mission, same thing with any situation. But if the moment comes and you can do it or you need to do it, then you do it,

You don't sit flying around because the ground forces you support is engaged by enemy helicopter.

 

If you have only a half magazine and one hand grenade while being only man left from your platoon, no one is expecting you to seek and engage enemy main battle tank that is driving past you. Sure you could but it would be foolish.

 

Same thing is if you are flying helicopter and enemy fighter jet comes to area, you are not expected to try dog fight with it, but hide and flee.

[outlawal2]

Give it a rest, please...

 

Shall we get back on track and talk about the MODULE please..?

[Fri13]

Of course You Do exactly that! Only if he does see you, you'll try a desperate last ditch to shoot him. At least that is what is trained in the army! You did serve, did you?

That is exactly what is the point even battlefield or cod (I don't play those stupid IMHO games) helicopter duels. Small maps, supporting ground forces etc.

 

Same thing is with DCS and real life that you will engage enemy if you can and need. You don't go around seeking enemy if it isn't your mission and there isn't anyone else capable to do it better.

 

That is the thing that one asked that he wished to see those TV targeting duels. and AH-1 is capable to do it, is it W,Z or just G variant. We can engage in game or reality if it is required. It isn't like some people claims that you flee enemy attack helicopter or you don't engage it no matter of what.

 

You pick fight you can win, but sometimes you need to pick fight from where you can't return to base, just so you can complete your mission. And you don't fight as guide books say or tell. You fight to survive and to deny enemy taking YOUR LAND. You don't fly around the world to attack on other countries or take your soldiers in ships to other seas, as that is invasion and terrorism.

Edited October 15, 2014 by Fri13

[MBot]

The fact that combat between attack helicopters has been seldom in the past is more an indicator that hostilities between opponents both fielding such helicopters have been rare. If both sides are fielding attack helicopters in large numbers and they are all converging in the front area, I find it rather unlikely and awkward that all would try to avoid each other. Much more probable is that highly aggressive combat pilots will take every opportunity to destroy any enemy asset that is a significant threat to the ground forces he is supposed to support. Should a helicopter pilot fly out to actively hunt other helicopters? No. But he doesn't have to, when the US Army and the Red Army converge in the Fulda Gap, helicopter clashes are simply bound to happen.

 

I wonder where this idea that attack helicopters should avoid other helicopters even comes from. Having read various field manuals and tactics papers from the period when helicopter combat was most likely (the Cold War), I do not get that impression at all. Actually, with the growth of the Soviet Hind fleet, helicopter-helicopter combat seemed to enjoy an increasing importance.

 

Perhaps the term "dogfight" seems to cause some confusion regarding helicopter air-air. Quite obviously helicopters would not engage in maneuvering combat with each other. Why would they have to? Since tactically, attack helicopters are closer to ground vehicles than to aircraft (the AH is basically a fast all terrain IFV), combat between helicopters is more akin to combat between tanks. And this is anything but unusual.

[NineLine]

Give it a rest, please...

 

Shall we get back on track and talk about the MODULE please..?

 

+1 Lets get back to discussion of the -1W module....

[Chappie]

Is the Hind so super-secret or is it just not a worthy entrant to the DCS world? Russian helo for crying out loud!

[outlawal2]

Is the Hind so super-secret or is it just not a worthy entrant to the DCS world? Russian helo for crying out loud!

 

You might want to spend some time searching for appropriate threads regarding the HIND.. Belsimtek has said that they are looking into the HIND and I believe it is already on the long term list to be built.. As for "Russian Helo for crying out loud" you should aslo take a few minutes and count how many helos are available for DCS... There are already 2 RUSSIAN HELOS available in DCS so another western ride simply evens the playing field a bit...

 

Search is your friend..

Please stop spamming this thread that is SPECIFIC to the Cobra and find the appropriate thread(s) regarding the HIND or the helicopter wish-list..

[Stratos]

+1 Lets get back to discussion of the -1W module....

 

So the W is official?

[shagrat]

 

You pick fight you can win, but sometimes you need to pick fight from where you can't return to base, just so you can complete your mission. And you don't fight as guide books say or tell. You fight to survive and to deny enemy taking YOUR LAND.

Ok, so you never served in any armed forces. No offense, but

you need to understand real armies work way different from what is presented in movies or even mist "documentations".

The first thing a soldier needs to learn is to obey to orders. Second, his personal needs and wants are secondary to the job. He may want to heroically kill a helicopter threat to his side, but he Gould be able to suppress that urge and act calm and logical.

A Helicopter differs to an IFV or tank in an important point. It is commanded at brigade or even higher levels.

The reason is: there are very few helicopters available compared to Armor and just one or two helicopters can easily tip most tank battles in favor of your side.

Would a pilot pull a stunt to heroicly rescue one tank platoon with a stupid attack and survive, he would get grounded and face a court martial.

Anybody shall fight as he pleases! It's a SIM, just don't enlist and try that for real.

 

I'll leave it at that, we really are way of topic...

 

I am happy to see the AH-1W coming and if BST manages to give us a variety of weapons would be nice... <HINT>Flechette? </HINT> :D

[Pilot-Nix]

I regret mentioning the word "Dogfight" here.

 

This is a sim, but for the most part, It's a video-game. We can do what we want ;)

Edited October 15, 2014 by Pilot-Nix
I forgot words

[Lucky]

I voted for the W variant. My question is, how much of a delay does this add?

[cichlidfan]

I voted for the W variant. My question is, how much of a delay does this add?

 

Unknown Release Date + Unknown Delay = Unknown Release Date

 

Therefore the delay will be zero. ;)

[kontiuka]

Unknown Release Date + Unknown Delay = Unknown Release Date

 

Therefore the delay will be zero. ;)

love it

[Fri13]

The fact that combat between attack helicopters has been seldom in the past is more an indicator that hostilities between opponents both fielding such helicopters have been rare. If both sides are fielding attack helicopters in large numbers and they are all converging in the front area, I find it rather unlikely and awkward that all would try to avoid each other.

 

That is a case and has been even in DCS as there hasn't been change for players go head to head and dogfight as there was only a KA-50. But AI does still engage unless otherwise commanded. Now the AH-1W will give change to that. And other bad missing feature has been the terrain, no cover from trees that is the main coverage for helicopters so we have had less than half of the helicopter tactics available.

 

If EDGE gives a good cover (trees) then it will change everything as helicopters becomes more deadly, but target acquisitions comes harder as ground unit can hide under trees. And that affects other modules/planes too like Su-25T and A-10C as unit can really hide and get cover from targeting systems. For ground commanders it is even more demanding as AA units need to get line of sight for radar use, so welcome to situation where helicopters become far more crucial and effective. No more just ground blocking the radar but trees too, so flying over the treeline becomes much more dangerous as you don't get radar warning so easily until you are in NEZ.

 

If EDGE allows as well to have a more rough ground adding small hills and ridges to current "billiard table" with 2x higher mesh, it will change ground units usage and possibilities. Why I am hoping some day we would see updated map with mesh being added with some noise to make it have more cover.

 

I wonder where this idea that attack helicopters should avoid other helicopters even comes from. Having read various field manuals and tactics papers from the period when helicopter combat was most likely (the Cold War), I do not get that impression at all. Actually, with the growth of the Soviet Hind fleet, helicopter-helicopter combat seemed to enjoy an increasing importance.

 

Attack helicopter pilots have been trained (or should at least) for helicopter dog fights. Just same basic training and tactics to fly, get to other back or use terrain and ambush when being chased or how to chase a another without getting ambushed as it is more like a fastened hide and seek with vertical maneuvering possibilities.

 

There is as well reason why AT missiles for attack helicopters were designed to be able engage helicopters or even low flying aircrafts. Not that they are moving SAM platform suddenly, but because they will allow to eliminate enemy close air support easily when enemy has air coverage with them.

 

It just seems that the idea helicopters to engage each other sounds too many as fantasy or arcade game like CoD and BF games make it sound, but those are just arcade games with small maps and continual action by design.

 

Flying AH-1W in future DCS will be totally different than in those two titles, but others need to be sure that pilots and gunners will engage other helicopters if needed.

 

Perhaps the term "dogfight" seems to cause some confusion regarding helicopter air-air. Quite obviously helicopters would not engage in maneuvering combat with each other. Why would they have to? Since tactically, attack helicopters are closer to ground vehicles than to aircraft (the AH is basically a fast all terrain IFV), combat between helicopters is more akin to combat between tanks. And this is anything but unusual.

 

I believe that is what many does, believing that helicopter dog fight means pilots end up to fly and circle each other 50-100m distance of each other like mating butterflies. Or as it happens in BF. Instead get that it can be in couple kilometer distance, popping out, flying NoE behind trees, hills and ridges to get to flank or rear of enemy with cannon or get to position where missile can get target out as it has no place to hide.

 

We can see now what happens in future as AH-1W does have better avionics to engage targets than AH-1G and carries better missiles to engage them even when moving.

Might be that we see many fleeing from area back to base or doesn't engage to other helicopters as it is "disallowed" or "unrealistic". But we will see it as soon there is two attack helicopters.

[Fri13]

Ok, so you never served in any armed forces. No offense

 

It is offensive already that you imagine things that other has not revealed. You are allowed to believe many things but don't assume if someone doesn't answer to something, it means what you believe it means.

 

If you would be in service, you would know that never assume anything.

[Fri13]

I regret mentioning the word "Dogfight" here.

 

This is a sim, but for the most part, It's a video-game. We can do what we want ;)

I believe it will happen that as now western attack helicopter is being added there comes helicopter "dog fights" between players more often. But it isn't as many would visualize from movies or game titles like Battlefield and Call of Duty (if you can even fly helicopter in it... No exp from those).

 

AH-1W will be awesome module alone, not to forget future Co-Op possibilities and EDGE updates. Better choice than AH-1G that I wish will come later as it would be like a A-10A is to a A-10C, both have their fans and scenario wizards would love it.

[shagrat]

I was in service for 8 Years. Learned about combined arms warfare and tactical decisions or the implication of high value assets etc.

If you are in service or did serve, you should know that, as well.

There are a lot of troops that are to retreat in case of contact, rather than attack. Unless attack is the best defensive option.

As GGTharos said, most of it is doctrine. Maybe in 10 years we have hundreds of AH per batallion and thus can easily put them into heli-to-heli engagements, but I doubt it.

As long as helicopters are vital for quick reaction (CAS) the foremost task is to keep these assets alive and operational.

I'm not saying if helicopters regularly meet each other on the battlefield they won't fire at one another!

Just they are supposed to not go into pursuit and "fight it out". Fire a AA missile to have the enemy break off his attack etc., but don't go into a dogfight and see who wins.

 

If you lose an AH-64 out of 4 attached to support your batallion (if at all) you lose 25% of your CAS and quick reaction capability!

A brigade commander would be careful to even send his AHs into a high threat situation until absolutely necessary.

The AH-1 in particular is, well let's say "fragile", thus the pilot has to consider in each engagement the threats to his aircraft vs the mission goal.

If it is pretty exposed on top of enemy ground forces in good cover and taking heavy fire you should disengage and replan your attack or call in support (artillery, if available or air with bombs etc.)

[MBot]

but don't go into a dogfight and see who wins.

 

Even a dedicated air superiority fighter should not fly by that principles, so that says mighty little if helicopter air-air is advisable or not :)

 

As injection of some hard data, I invite all participants to read FM 1-112 ATTACK HELICOPTER OPERATIONS, APPENDIX F - AIR COMBAT:

 

http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/docs/1-112.pdf

 

From this document the position of the US Army on air combat in the imediate post-Cold War era becomes quite clear and it is a lot more differentiated than "don't go into air combat". The Army's doctrine is indeed defensive to limited offensive:

 

The Army's defensive air combat doctrine is to avoid, evade, threaten, and/or engage the threat. The order in which this doctrine is presented shows an increasing level of involvement with a persistent threat--a best-case to worstcase scenario. It is the desired, not the mandatory, approach to the threat. Avoidance may not be an option. For instance, circumstances may require that a threat be engaged immediately or that a combination of evading and threatening be applied simultaneously.

 

It is interesting to note that the ATHK should primary be concerned about preserving its capability to fulfill its primary mission. If the presence of enemy helicopters in its area of operations threaten this mission, it might as well be necessary to engage it offensively. Ultimately it is up to the commander to decide how to employ his helicopters, and by US Army doctrine this specifically includes the possibility for limited offensive helicopter air-air operations (a classic example would be helicopter escort in deep operations). I think the presented document is quite clear about this.

 

 

To put this all in context with the upcomming AH-1W, I think the fact that Cobras have been employed operationally with AIM-9 on their primary hardpoints tells us that helicopter air-combat is a real possibility. The frequency of such actions is highly dependet on the specific circumstances. Historically it has been rare, most likely by the fact that the USA and the USSR have never gone to open war between each other.

[Suchacz]

The big problem in DCS is not so much the lack of collision detection with trees, it's the fact that the AI can see through them while players cannot.

It is worst, they can shoot and launch missiles through them (so can you, but as you said, you are not able to see them) - this is for me the main purpose for implementing tree collisions :huh:

 

But this is an issue only in large forrest areas which are present in the current map, but (imho) not in the upcoming maps we currently know about, which are mainly covered by desert (Nevada and Strait of Hormuz)

Edited October 16, 2014 by Suchacz

[MBot]

Trees have never been considered a primary source of cover or concealment for helicopters. Terrain features are used as cover, meaning hills.

 

I am surprised by that broad statement. Knowing that you have some real world expierience in this field, would you be willing to elaborate on this?

 

The cover provided by trees surely must be depended on tree density. While a single tree will be penetrated by almost everything, additional layers of vegetation should provded addtional protection (especially against missiles).

 

And I would assume that vegetation is an excellent source of concealment for helicopters?

[kanami314]

I am surprised by that broad statement. Knowing that you have some real world expierience in this field, would you be willing to elaborate on this?

 

The cover provided by trees surely must be depended on tree density. While a single tree will be penetrated by almost everything, additional layers of vegetation should provded addtional protection (especially against missiles).

 

And I would assume that vegetation is an excellent source of concealment for helicopters?

 

while I am not the guy your respond to, I would think that the effects densely forested areas would be obvious.

 

first, limited or fully obstructed los on targets for both radar and opitical systems.

two, missles and rockets would have a very poor if it does exist flight path while retaining good accuracy and effect. also many rockets and missles detonate on impact so you might not even be able to shoot through them.

 

that said, most autocannons firing ap round should not have a problem if you know where the target is. but that really is a big if.

[Ryback]

Poll can be ended i guess..AH-1W it is.

 

AH-1W

[tobaschi]

Trees are great if they fit into your plan and their placement cooperates with your intentions. I generally find that trees are a limiting factor.

 

From FM 1-112:

 

 

 

It is my experience that trees/forests generally fail in the areas I've highlighted in bold.

 

well, it's depending on the doctrine. BO-105 PAH pilots for example, love tree's : )