Why didn't ED do the Apache?

[ResonantCard1]

Why didn't ED do the Apache instead of the Ka-50? It'd have been infinitely more popular, more capable, cooler, and better in all aspects. If they can do an Apache, why haven't they done it already?

[Mr.Scar]

Because at the time they did the Ka-50, the Ah-64D was still in active duty. And If I am not mistaken, it still is. The security barricade would have been impossible to penetrate in order to get a 1:1 full fidelity module of the AH-64D. If they did the Apache instead of the Ka-50, it would be severely dumbed down, and that in general is not the point of DCS.

 

The Ka-50 was a prototype, never mass produced and the Ka-52 was created on its basis. So I guess it was "easier" to get hands on the documents of the Ka-50.

 

Despite that, I am quite sure there are still things in existing modules that are probably not modeled because of security reasons.

[ResonantCard1]

The D isn't the only variant of the Apache. They could have done the A, and people would've loved it more than the current Ka-50. Even if it wasn't a 1-1 representation of the actual Apache, it'd be more popular

[QuiGon]

They were actually working on an Apache (AH-64A) at that time. We can only specualte why this didn't work out back then.

 

 

2008

Correct, we may well add the Hind as a DCS module at a later point. Again... right now we can only commit to the Apache and Hog given those are already in development.

 

2007

Q: Your press release indicates that Black Shark is the first in a series of DCS modules, with more aircraft/helicopters to follow. How soon will these new aircraft become available?

A: We are already developing the A-10A “Warthog" and AH-64A “Apache” (with planned front-seat / back-seat multiplayer) and other western and eastern aircraft will follow with an approximate interval of every nine months. To annouce these later aircraft now would be premature because plans can often change and lead to delays due to numerous factors such as our work in the equally important military simulation market.

Edited October 4, 2020 by QuiGon

[Fusedspine33]

While lesser known in the west, it is a single player aircraft, that doesn't have viewports by the feet of the pilot. The Ka-50 lends itself to how this game is played by the majority of players, single player on a single monitor.

[Mr.Scar]

Ow, was not aware of that. But in any case, good point. We can only speculate now.

 

As for the A version, you have a point, however I think again... at that time it was also active duty. So might have been harder to get it right, based on actual documents. Who knows, speculation.

 

Concerning popularity, that really depends and is debatable. Honestly I am both interested in Eastern aircraft, as I am in western ones. They are both fantastic for me, and I would love to fly the Mi-28N for example, although I have not seen a single movie about it, but flew it a lot in Enemy Enganged: Apache vs Havoc. And honestly, I preffered the Havoc 80% of the time in EE. But thats a different story and times, and I can only speak for myself.

Edited October 4, 2020 by Mr.Scar

[SkateZilla]

AH-64A Blk 49 was in development in 2008.

 

Plans Likely changed or got pushed back between 2008 and 2011 when A-10C was released.

 

Then again the same said post also mentioned a dozen modules that have gone on to be new FC3 Aircraft or DCS Modules down the road in some form.

[Harlikwin]

Till they actually figure out a decent multicrew and decent AI helos are mostly pointless.

[S. Low]

Helos are pointless? Damn, I’ve been wasting all my time playing Huey as my primary module. Thanks for letting me know. Lol

[Fri13]

They were actually working on an Apache (AH-64A) at that time. We can only specualte why this didn't work out back then.

 

 

2008

 

 

2007

 

Wow.... Every 9 months or so...

 

So much believes at themselves back then. Considering that how much time it took to get EDGE out.

 

Considering that I see it great thing how long DCS World was "lonely" place as ED was only one providing any modules (first KA-50, later A-10C) and then suddenly we started to see more other modules as well. Now we have multiple studios and multiple modules but it is clear to see that ED is still in development phase for the DCS core features etc. That must have been main reasons to hold back so much things.

[Syndrome]

Ka-50 is awesome. One of my favorite modules. Only requires 1 pilot, so it makes sense that they went with it first. What I'm confused about is why they went with the Mi-24 Hind first instead of the AH-64? They're both 2 seaters, and the Hind seems like a step backward in time. Not that it's not a cool chopper, I'll probably get it too, but imo, the biggest missing element in DCS is definitely the Apache. It would be extremely popular.

[Fri13]

Helos are pointless? Damn, I’ve been wasting all my time playing Huey as my primary module. Thanks for letting me know. Lol

 

Flying Huey with the co-op player.... Sorry.

Flying with a human player that does you the shooting while you fly.... Sorry.

It is amazing experience when you have a human RIO in F-14... Sorry, wrong...

 

You get the point... I hope...

 

Like when the Huey came out, I wanted so much see the Co-Op with couple friends to fly in same helicopter or in two. One player flies, another operates the co-pilot coaxial miniguns, or all sit in one and all weapons are in use.

 

But then again the lack of proper ground threats and targets (infantry, AI accuracy modeling etc) made it just bad idea. It is easier to fire few missiles from 8 km and rockets at 2-3 km than even consider going to fire guns at closer ranges.

 

With a Mi-8 it is nice to jump to door gunner position with a Kord-12.7 as you have capability to actually damage APC's and infantry, but while AI flies it is not so nice as there is just no cooperation as should.

 

This was why I so wanted to see a Mi-24V instead P because in Co-Op you would have a human player firing that 12.7 mm and kill stuff that doesn't require a rocket or missile (IFV/APC and less armored).

 

The Huey was for very long time a "tank killer", you were more effective with its miniguns than with a A-10 GAU-8 cannon (that is still unrealistically effective weapon against MBT and many other front armors etc, waiting the nerfing with proper damage modeling).

 

And considering that one would have a AH-64A with a 30 mm cannon that is not so accurate, you are not so effective as with KA-50 and its 30 mm cannon. But it would be blast to go with a friend where they shoot with cannon and you just fly (or otherway around).

Like example even today the 1996 Hind is excellent modeling of the Mi-24V. In Co-Op you get to do that great thing. With the same studio Apache game you get as well a blast.

And it is nothing as with the AI that can see and target so easily for you and engage targets etc.

 

Maybe the best helicopter experience anywhere I had has been in two scenarios:

1) KA-50 in multiplayer, all humans flying as a shark group. Just amazing thing.

2) Old Gunship! (Gunship 2000) with Co-Op in same cockpit. Again something amazing.

 

The AI just has not never been good enough to create the experience that one does with the human player.

 

Big part of that simply is that AI is "too good" or "just blind" and nothing like humans are.

If AH-64 would ever come, it should be straight in day 1 with a Co-Op capability. Nothing else is good enough. Get a three friends to fly with you and two Apaches becomes something amazing. It should be close to flying four KA-50 with friends, except that you are more "tight" together as you have two pilots instead four and no one would go "lone wolf" so easily.

[Fri13]

Ka-50 is awesome. One of my favorite modules. Only requires 1 pilot, so it makes sense that they went with it first. What I'm confused about is why they went with the Mi-24 Hind first instead of the AH-64? They're both 2 seaters, and the Hind seems like a step backward in time. Not that it's not a cool chopper, I'll probably get it too, but imo, the biggest missing element in DCS is definitely the Apache. It would be extremely popular.

 

I believe it for few things.

 

1) They have great understanding for the helicopter because Mi-8.

2) They get Mi-8 + Mi-24 combination working that covers LOTS of years and scenarios on different maps.

3) They have in the future a MAJOR money flow where to tap.

4) They need to get a AH-64 friend with it, like a UH-60.

5) Another great product to go with AH-64 is M1A1 Abrams...

 

That is why I as well like the idea that AH-1 would come soon after Mi-24, as it would pair great with the UH-1H to make great combinations. It does remove such a need for AH-64 as you get nice attack helicopter for BLUEFOR marines among AV-8B Harrier and all that.

 

And then the most challenging part.... Who has anything for this?

 

 

Like, closest thing that anyone could get is a Left and Right handed VKB MCG PRO, and even then you would need multiplier or two to use it.

 

If someone would come with a custom made HOTAS just for that gunner position, with possibility insert a small display to that center etc. It would be crazy experience that only few few could afford.

 

That is likely the most challenging piece of avionics that ED is up to... Not to simulate it, but how to get it working with all the plyers and their controls!

[ResonantCard1]

Ka-50 is awesome. One of my favorite modules. Only requires 1 pilot, so it makes sense that they went with it first. What I'm confused about is why they went with the Mi-24 Hind first instead of the AH-64? They're both 2 seaters, and the Hind seems like a step backward in time. Not that it's not a cool chopper, I'll probably get it too, but imo, the biggest missing element in DCS is definitely the Apache. It would be extremely popular.

 

I believe the Mi-24 is just a prototype for the Apache. Once they have the AI Gunner/Multicrew thing down, they'll probably "abandon" it and move on to the Apache. The Mi-24 isn't gonna be a top seller, so wether or not the thing is 100% finished or had vital features missing for most of its life isn't that important. When the Apache drops, ED would have already nailed the MC/AI Gunner thing, which will help boost the (already massive) sales. It's basically free extra points.

[Fri13]

I believe the Mi-24 is just a prototype for the Apache. Once they have the AI Gunner/Multicrew thing down,

 

And what would deny using Mi-8MTv2 or UH-1H for that?

Because the guided missiles?

 

From the AI perspective, it doesn't matter does the AI guide a missile, or does it try to shoot with a machine gun an target from the move. There is no difference. In either case the AI needs to hold the target in its sight, and what comes to AI, that is easy to do perfectly.

 

The challenge is to make the AI spot things like humans does, because AI does know everything. And that challenge really is that you need to get the AI act with the same limitations as humans does.

That is how it has been done this far. AI knows everything and pretends to be "blind".

 

Now with the Mi-24, they might actually try something else. That AI is blind by default, and then perform various search patterns, spotting mechanics and so on to simulate an human. So various elements would be counted in like targets movement, colors, sun position, shadow lengths, backgrounds and so on.

 

And if so, it might lead to another problem what is that the AI becomes too stupid. That the pilot sees an unit and can not by any meaningful way to tell AI what and where is spotted. But needs to wait AI to scan the areas and to try spot something. And if that doesn't happen expected manner, player gets frustrated. Similar thing happens when AI spots things that human can't spot and then player gets frustrated.

 

One of the mechanics that likely will be required is communication with AI by using a similar HMS as Su-27S or MiG-29's does have. As an pilot (or gunner) you get a circle on your screen that you point at something that you have seen and you command the AI to do something for it.

 

- Enemy 2'clock, two kilometers!

- Fast mover, 9'clock!

- Get Low and slow, hover there!

- Search enemy at 11'clock high.

 

 

Human just looking at position of interest and using a simple 4-way hat or something to issue commands for AI where it should focus its efforts. As there would be moments when AI can't see a thing and you as human need to be able to "inform" AI that what you see.

 

The similar thing should be with AI, that it can talk you to the spotted things. Just like a human would do.

 

- 11'clock, factory, right side third tree

- Straight ahead, far side of river, ridge of forest.

- Enemy HELO, 3'clock, hovering on treetops right of the opening.

 

Considering that in AH-64 the gunner is basically staring everything through a straw, far more than any other does. The pilot has all the responsibilities to observe surroundings. And this allows for AH-64 to make the AI as gunner far more easier job as they can just be scanning the environment ahead of them and player uses their IHADS to call positions for the AI, similar way as now in A-10C with Scorpion helmet. Just put the "that on that" and press a button.

 

That is one of the great things in the KA-50 that player can actually use HMS to look at given position, range it for the KABRIS and then send it over datalink to AI pilots in other black sharks and command whole flight through that.

 

Flying around and you spot something somewhere, HMS there > Store target type and GTFO.

Fly to better position and recall the wanted target type and unit from KABRIS and automatically slew Shkval near that position.

But no matter how great the HMS+Shkval is in BS, the problem is when your wingman makes a call, as you are so blind for anything that is called as soon after "Defensive" comes the unwanted call "Ejecting".

 

When we get A-10, F-16 and F/A-18 communicate together with A-G modes and their helmet targeting systems and all, there is nothing on the REDAIR side that would compete with it than KA-50 own intern datalink between flight.

 

Flying a Mi-24 with an AI will likely feel so stupid that it either can see too well or can't see anything. Little bit like a JESTER on F-14, that loses a lock soon as you launch a missile, but is perfectly capable track the target before that no matter the time.

 

And if the ED would "drop the Mi-24" as soon as possible to get a Apache going, it would get many angry people, claiming ED to really promote more of the NATO units than anything from WARSAW PACT.

[Ryanwtod]

Back in in the day Janes had the Apache too, so there was competition

[sobek]

The Mi-24 isn't gonna be a top seller

You are caught in your own bubble.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

The Mi-24 isn't gonna be a top seller

 

That's up there with the White Star Line claiming the Titanic was unsinkable.

[Worrazen]

The D isn't the only variant of the Apache. They could have done the A, and people would've loved it more than the current Ka-50. Even if it wasn't a 1-1 representation of the actual Apache, it'd be more popular

 

I believe the Mi-24 is just a prototype for the Apache. Once they have the AI Gunner/Multicrew thing down, they'll probably "abandon" it and move on to the Apache. The Mi-24 isn't gonna be a top seller, so wether or not the thing is 100% finished or had vital features missing for most of its life isn't that important. When the Apache drops, ED would have already nailed the MC/AI Gunner thing, which will help boost the (already massive) sales. It's basically free extra points.

 

You're making it sound as if we wouldn't want Ka-50 or something else for the sake of diversity and choices if something else got done first.:huh:

 

Popularity and sales is all relative and biased anyway, plus the userbase of the sim, if the world events turned differently it would be the other way around.

[Mars Exulte]

the Ah-64D was still in active duty

 

Utterly irrelevant. Or did you not realise A-10s, F-18s, F-16s, and Harrier are still in service? These are all 2000s versions, in other words very current. Seriously, think first @@

 

@OP They had a special arrangement with cooperative Kamov at the time, they're also a Russian company originally. The world does not revolve around Team USA contrary to what many think. And lastly it really doesn't matter, it's the same with every ''why this instead of this'' because they can't do them all and had to pick something they actually wanted to spend several years of their lives making.

[Dragon1-1]

And what would deny using Mi-8MTv2 or UH-1H for that?

Because the guided missiles?

Because they have side by side seating, which introduces additional challenges for making them multicrew. Neither the Cobra nor the Hind have this problem, with their crewmembers in separate compartments and with entirely separate controls. From what I've gathered, having a switch which can be flipped by either player is actually a serious challenge.

[ResonantCard1]

Considering that in AH-64 the gunner is basically staring everything through a straw, far more than any other does. The pilot has all the responsibilities to observe surroundings. And this allows for AH-64 to make the AI as gunner far more easier job as they can just be scanning the environment ahead of them and player uses their IHADS to call positions for the AI, similar way as now in A-10C with Scorpion helmet. Just put the "that on that" and press a button.

 

That is one of the great things in the KA-50 that player can actually use HMS to look at given position, range it for the KABRIS and then send it over datalink to AI pilots in other black sharks and command whole flight through that.

 

 

The Apache actually has a way more advanced HMCS than the Kamov. The Kamov's only allows for Shkval steering, while the Apache's is, just like the SCORPION, a mini HUD mounted on the helmet. It can also project FLIR images I think. So the Kamov, at the end of the day, is way more blind than the Apache.

 

 

And if the ED would "drop the Mi-24" as soon as possible to get a Apache going, it would get many angry people, claiming ED to really promote more of the NATO units than anything from WARSAW PACT.

 

 

Seeing how they've handled the Kuznetsov, and how sweet of a deal the A-10C 2 upgrade is, it is my opinion that they're in fact promoting more the NATO side than the red side. But we can't blame them, that's what sells

[TheGuardian]

The D isn't the only variant of the Apache. They could have done the A, and people would've loved it more than the current Ka-50. Even if it wasn't a 1-1 representation of the actual Apache, it'd be more popular

 

I find this statement to be both parts truth and comically false given recent history. Sure they have said an A variant of the Apache is what is most likely for them to do, but I think they would want to bring the most realistic features and capabilities to the module. I don't see how you can honestly say it would've been more loved then the KA-50. There is simply no way to prove that statement. Given recent modules being removed from EA, added to EA and planned modules from ED and other 3rd party devs, our lovely little community would rip them apart for it not being accurate. We have done it before. To me it makes more sense for ED to back away from the Apache back in the day, as this allows them now to bring us a more in depth, feature complete Apache today/in the future.

 

I also can't buy into ED "abandoning" the Mi-24 just because they figured out how to make the Apache better midway through Hind modeling. Sure, those of us from Western countries would want more NATO, but we aren't the only customers ED has. It just doesn't really fit with everything ED has done up to this point.

[TheGuardian]

 

Seeing how they've handled the Kuznetsov, and how sweet of a deal the A-10C 2 upgrade is, it is my opinion that they're in fact promoting more the NATO side than the red side. But we can't blame them, that's what sells

 

True, but we also have to remember the limitations ED has with some Russian equipment. They don't seem to have the same problems from the NATO side. I am talking only about ED though, as 3rd Party (they have said) doesn't face those same limits from the Russian government.

[Glide]

That makes perfect sense. If it's freely available on the web, then you can model it. If someone doesn't want their brands in a game, then don't model it. The software that ED makes doesn't make a helo fly. It just creates the illusion of that.