Jump to content

Aside from variety, why in the world would you take anything other than 16 Hellfires?

CybrSlydr

By CybrSlydr
in DCS: AH-64D

 Share
Go to solution Solved by S. Low,

Recommended Posts

Gunfreak

Gunfreak

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, CybrSlydr said:

Pretty straight-forward: why?  Those Hellfires give you pretty much 16 guaranteed kills, and the chain gun can dispatch any other light-skinned targets.

When/if the Apache gets APKWS, you'll have close to 76 guaranteed kills on anything short of MBT.

  • Like 2

i7 13700k @5.2ghz, GTX 5090 OC, 128Gig ram 4800mhz DDR5, M2 drive.

Scofflaw

Scofflaw

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Gunfreak said:

When/if the Apache gets APKWS, you'll have close to 76 guaranteed kills on anything short of MBT.

Pretty sure ED said it'll never get APKWS.

  • Like 2

run come save me

  • ED Team
Raptor9

Raptor9

Posted
  • ED Team
Posted (edited)

Rockets can bring a lot more to the fight than people realize, even in DCS. It's not always about how many guaranteed kills you can get.

I almost always carry a few smoke or illumination rockets to help with target marking during day or night. Sometimes you just need to "sight-select your window" and not get sucked into the soda-straw of the TADS.

And like others have said, sometimes you need more power margin with a lighter payload or additional station time. Not everyone finds it useful to load up an A-10 like a B-52 either. That can be downright silly in some cases.

Edited by Raptor9
  • Like 5

Afterburners are for wussies...hang around the battlefield and dodge tracers like a man.
DCS Rotor-Head

iLOVEwindmills

iLOVEwindmills

Posted
Posted

Guys, a full rocket pod is almost 150lbs heavier than 4 hellfires.

Yes rockets are worthless in DCS, until they add some kind of suppresion mechanic or better area damage there isn't much point aside from roleplaying the real thing.

  • Like 14
  • ED Team
Raptor9

Raptor9

Posted
  • ED Team
Posted
Just now, S. Low said:

I thought hellfires were heavier my bad. 

It depends what rocket types are loaded. A rocket pod with 19x M151 rockets are a little less than a Hellfire launcher with 4x AGM-114K missiles. However a rocket pod with 19x M229 rockets is indeed heavier than a fully loaded Hellfire launcher.

Afterburners are for wussies...hang around the battlefield and dodge tracers like a man.
DCS Rotor-Head

Sobakopes

Sobakopes

Posted
Posted (edited)

Rockets give you the feeling of actually playing the game. 

Just Two apc kills with KOM rockets is much more satisfying. 

Edited by Sobakopes
M1Combat

M1Combat

Posted
Posted (edited)

Once you wrap your head around the rocket sight system it's "super" accurate and like a cannon but cranked up to 111.  I was in the same boat wondering why you might take rockets at all (they're no fun in the shark IMO...  they "work" but are hard to make work) but with the way you can change the rocket pod angle with the head mounted sight in the Apache...  I would go more towards the direction of only ever taking enough hellfires to kill all the hard targets +1 or 2 and take as many rockets as I can...

 

 

Edited by M1Combat
  • Like 3

Nvidia RTX3080 (HP Reverb), AMD 3800x

Asus Prime X570P, 64GB G-Skill RipJaw 3600

Saitek X-65F and Fanatec Club-Sport Pedals (Using VJoy and Gremlin to remap Throttle and Clutch into a Rudder axis)

razorseal

razorseal

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Scofflaw said:

Pretty sure ED said it'll never get APKWS.

Would be cool... jf17 has something similar. I remember testing it out when they released it. Very cool... Haven't messed with it since though.

Fromthedeep

Fromthedeep

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, M1Combat said:

Once you wrap your head around the rocket sight system it's "super" accurate and like a cannon but cranked up to 111

SME input made it seem to me that rockets were made for aerial artillery and it was often emphasized that pinpoint accuracy isn't something that can realistically be achieved. If you're correct it seems that there may be some issues with the implementation.

M1Combat

M1Combat

Posted
Posted

I mean the sight is super accurate...  not the rockets themselves.  Once you get the hang of the sight it's possible to lay down rocket fire very predictably and in a much more usable way than just "kinda shoot them over there a little" like most rockets are.  

Nvidia RTX3080 (HP Reverb), AMD 3800x

Asus Prime X570P, 64GB G-Skill RipJaw 3600

Saitek X-65F and Fanatec Club-Sport Pedals (Using VJoy and Gremlin to remap Throttle and Clutch into a Rudder axis)

Mr.Scar

Mr.Scar

Posted
Posted (edited)

For the very same reason people avoid SPAMRAAM loadouts on the Hornet. They generate too much Drag even in BVR, and you do not want much drag while defending from a incoming missile. 16 Hellfires loadouts might work in War Thunder, but DCS aint War Thunder. And aside from people wrote already above, several factors.

From my side

1. Depends on the mission. If you know 100 tanks are heading towards your base, and you and your buddy in a second Heli are the only Apaches in the Area, you will probably want 32 Hellfires, to destroy as many as possible. But in my opinion this is a highly unlikely scenario.

2. 8 Hellfires, 300 rounds for the 30mm + Hydras give the best tactical flexibility. You destroy high threat targets with Hellfires (like SPAA) from safe range. Finish off tanks with the rest, and use rockets on light armor targets and even soft targets. You mop up the rest with the 30mm while orbiting at a safe altitude when nothing can hurt you. The 30mm is a fun badass gun, but its used the same way like the 30mm on the A-10. Gun that should mainly be used in low threat/SPAA/MANPAD free environment. 

3. You probably would not want to take 16 Hellfires for the very same reason you would not take 3000 rounds (correct me if im wrong, but i think the Apache can carry so much ammo) of 30mm ammo on the Apache. Insterad of a ammo drum, you take an additional fuel tank for longer time on station. 

4. As a follow up to point 3. Having fuel means time on station. And being able to get somewhere and then back without the danger of running on fumes, is more important than 16 Hellfires that you will not even use, when you run out of juice.

5. Drag and weight. Its up to the Heli pilot to get to a target area, even with waypoints. You never know if you will have to climb a mountain or take a round around them. I would not want to drag 16 hellfires and then just smash into the side of the mountain becuase their weight while mountain climbing made me crash.

6. Helicopters usually work in pairs, and with a flexible loadout they can rain hell. No need for 16 Hellfires on one helo.

7. Helicopters are well helicopters. FARPS are somethings that can be used, not only fly to a target area far away form the airport. So a heli can always get to a FARP, refuel, reload, and quickly get back. 

 

So no, 16 Hellfires are a no go for me, but maybe I am wrong. Anyway, just my 5 cents.

Edited by Mr.Scar
  • Like 2
Tiger-II

Tiger-II

Posted
Posted (edited)

IRL I only ever see them flying with 8 hellfires and whatever they want want on the other stations (usually rocket pods).

Helo combat is a numbers game. This isn't a lone-wolf first-person shooter.

Even in the Shark I often plan for multiple returns for fuel and ammo. I sometimes carry fuel tanks.

Edited by Tiger-II

Motorola 68000 | 1 Mb | Debug port

"When performing a forced landing, fly the aircraft as far into the crash as possible." - Bob Hoover.

The JF-17 is not better than the F-16; it's different. It's how you fly that counts.

"An average aircraft with a skilled pilot, will out-perform the superior aircraft with an average pilot."

Dragon1-1

Dragon1-1

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Mr.Scar said:

1. Depends on the mission. If you know 100 tanks are heading towards your base, and you and your buddy in a second Heli are the only Apaches in the Area, you will probably want 32 Hellfires, to destroy as many as possible. But in my opinion this is a highly unlikely scenario.

This actually is exactly what the Apache was originally designed to do. If Soviets decided to invade through West Germany, you can bet there'd be a lot more than 100 tanks rolling through Fulda Gap. The original, A-model Apache was to throw a wrench in the gears of that plan. Now, I wouldn't try that in current version of DCS, but with multicore support, missions or maybe even dynamic campaign on that scale might become feasible.

  • Like 3
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...