correct as-is The AH-64D is it that bad?

[v2tec]

I found it not easy to fly this helicopter. After a little practice it is ok, but not comparable with the KA-50 with all it's autopilot and trim modes.

Even evading incoming missiles is not as easy as in the KA-50.

Is it the beta status of AH-64D...??? Do we have any real AH-64D Pilots here, who can confirm that the flight behaviour is quite realistic or nonsense?

[Guppy]

oh boy... haha

[GrEaSeLiTeNiN]

I've been following CasmoTV and schoolio64D on YouTube (former Apache pilots). I don't recall feedback from them on the FM unless I missed it somewhere. But they seem to go along fine with what's been modeled. I am curious though.

[RodBorza]

I found it not easy to fly this helicopter. After a little practice it is ok, but not comparable with the KA-50 with all it's autopilot and trim modes.
Even evading incoming missiles is not as easy as in the KA-50.
Is it the beta status of AH-64D...??? Do we have any real AH-64D Pilots here, who can confirm that the flight behaviour is quite realistic or nonsense?

There are some things that need to be addressed here:
1) The biggest misconception about the Apache is that it is a fast, agile helicopter. No it is not, it is heavy and sluggish, made to hide behind hills and to scoot and shoot.
2) Don't use the trim as you do in the Ka-50. In a real helicopter you would press the force trim button, put the helicopter whatever attitude you want, wait it to stabilize and release the force trim. In DCS it only works in the Ka-50. In all others choppers you need to move the cyclic, tap the trim, release control. With time you learn how to get good at it. Don't press the trim release to change attitude, it turns off the SCAS channel and then you have a wild horse on your hands.
3) The SCAS system fights you; it is made to fight any sudden change in attitude due to wind or other factors. However, as you input controls, it will fight you. Again, in real life you would press trim release which would inhibit the SCAS channels but not turn them off completely and the helo would allow you to input the controls as you pleased. But in DCS, as we know the trim release also turns off the stabilization channels and then you would have a wobbly bird. In the Apache, in particular if you input X, mainly on pedals, you need to take out Y, Y being less than X. Let's say you input right pedal, the SCAS system will fight this input by inputing left pedal, it does that automatically. So in order to stop your turn, you need to input left pedal, but less than you had input in the first place. It takes time to figure how to do this well, but with small, gentle controls you'll learn how to work with the SCAS, not against it.
4) and finally, I cannot recommend enough Schoolio64 and Eagle7 channels. The first is a former Apache pilot, the latter is a actual current civilian pilot. Both channels have amazing tips on how to tame this wild beast.

https://youtu.be/Opq23ALBtI0

[M1Combat]

I mean I suppose it's not a Kiowa but I find it to be quite agile...  especially with the rotor unloaded.  It is slower than I expected though.

[pii]

1 hour ago, M1Combat said:

I mean I suppose it's not a Kiowa but I find it to be quite agile...  especially with the rotor unloaded.  It is slower than I expected though.

Yeah, when you see a hail of bullets headed your way is when you realise how slow it is.

[RodBorza]

9 hours ago, M1Combat said:

I mean I suppose it's not a Kiowa but I find it to be quite agile...  especially with the rotor unloaded.  It is slower than I expected though.

Yes, you are right. It is agile but not Kiowa level agile. And as you said, it is slow, and takes long to get it to speed.

[Kharrn]

AFAIK only tilt-rotor or civilian copters are really faster then most military copters.

From OSINT search:

Zitat

The Apache can fly at 293 km/h (182 mph, 158 knots) if required but can cruise 265 km/h (165 mph, 143 knots).

also from german wiki (roughly translated):

Zitat

With FCR (mast) the AH-64D Longbow can reach horizontal ground speed of 265 km/h.

Considering the weight and possible loadout, this is pretty fast IMHO.

 

vor 10 Stunden schrieb pii:

Yeah, when you see a hail of bullets headed your way is when you realise how slow it is.

@pii Unless you are kidding and i didnt notice:

Speed comparison to the rediculous weapon usage of AI ground targets (auto aim; auto lead; ultra fast weapon traverse) is just one thing: wrong

 

K

Edited April 30, 2022 by Kharrn

[pii]

7 hours ago, Kharrn said:

@pii Unless you are kidding and i didnt notice:

No I wasn't kidding and I guess you didn't notice. Cool

[Kharrn]

vor 39 Minuten schrieb pii:

No I wasn't kidding and I guess you didn't notice. Cool

what?

nvm...

Edited April 30, 2022 by Kharrn

[pii]

21 minutes ago, Kharrn said:

what?

nvm...

 

Short memory?

[BIGNEWY]

just cut it out guys, no need for the back and forth. 

- -- -

To the OP, as with any early access project we work with best available public data and with real pilot SME's, during early access tweaks will be made but we are very happy so far with progress. 

If you think there is a bug or an issue please supply track replays as short as possible showing a problem and any evidence you have supporting the claim, a PM if you need to if the evidence breaks our 1.16 rule, we will be happy to check. 

thanks

 

[S. Low]

To my knowledge the hold modes are a mixture of not implemented and heavily WIP. It's early access (and a good one at that). Fly the KA-50 without the hold modes and trim it up. There you go. 

What's OP's specific issue? 

[poochies]

 

I think the ATT hold is much much better in a hover it actually holds the hover and I can ascend descend and it holds the yaw as well much more enjoyable now before it would go all over the place and the helicopter would all of a sudden bank hard left or right as if a big wind hit it , it's rock steady now , big improvement for me at least ...

[dburne]

27 minutes ago, poochies said:

 

I think the ATT hold is much much better in a hover it actually holds the hover and I can ascend descend and it holds the yaw as well much more enjoyable now before it would go all over the place and the helicopter would all of a sudden bank hard left or right as if a big wind hit it , it's rock steady now , big improvement for me at least ...

 

Good to know that is the case now, I will have to give it a try because I suck at holding a manual hover a few feet off the ground.

[poochies]

3 hours ago, dburne said:

 

Good to know that is the case now, I will have to give it a try because I suck at holding a manual hover a few feet off the ground.

Be aware if you're drifting right or left fore or aft it will keep that drift in att hold, try to get the best hover you can before hitting att hold...

[dburne]

4 hours ago, ApacheLongbow said:

If you're having difficulties holding a hover, try this little trick that solved it for me.

For every input on cyclic that you make, return it to center immediately after. This means that every correction that you make, it starts from and ends on the center of the cyclic travel range.

Will do thanks.

[Mogster]

If the AH-64 was fast and agile why have the US Army spent so much time money and effort trying to procure a fast/agile (cheap…) scout helicopter?

The AH-64 is an ATGM truck and world leading in that role.

[agamemnon_b5]

On 5/1/2022 at 9:06 AM, Mogster said:

If the AH-64 was fast and agile why have the US Army spent so much time money and effort trying to procure a fast/agile (cheap…) scout helicopter?

The AH-64 is an ATGM truck and world leading in that role.

And have failed to procure a scout, and thus the Apache being pressed into service in the Cavalry squadrons for an armed reconnaissance role.

Still flabbergasted at how the ARH program failed.

Edited May 2, 2022 by agamemnon_b5

[Raptor9]

I think Mogster was referring to the FARA program.  However, it remains to be seen if that program will be any more successful than the failed LHX, ARH, or the AAS programs.

It's all relative though.  Is the Apache fast/agile? Maybe, it depends what you compare it to.  Compared to an Mi-24, it's certainly more agile but not nearly as fast.  Compared to an OH-58D, it's definitely faster but not as agile. However, for a combat-loaded 9+ ton helicopter, it's quite maneuverable in the right hands.  Heck, even a monster like the CH-47 is able to yank and bank in the NOE environment when flown by a well-trained aircrew.  But will you get a 9 ton AH-64D to stop on a dime like a 2 ton OH-58D? Of course not.

But the maneuverability isn't a reason why the Apache isn't ideal for scouting work.  The logistics footprint in fuel and parts to support a company of 8x large multi-engine gunships would stress a brigade combat team much more than if they had a troop of 10x small single-engine scout helicopters.  Logistics win wars, and it's a lot cheaper to purchase small scout helos that put less stress on your supply lines in the long term.  Not every hole needs a backhoe to dig it, some just need a shovel in the right hands.

It's the same reason why the USAF has been investing in the Light Air Support program.  Not all air support needs an A-10, as awesome as that is.

Edited May 3, 2022 by Raptor9

[S. Low]

Well if we had a Cayuse to pair with our future Cobra we could do some very very awesome Hunter/Killer team missions. It's not quite comparable but in ARMA I really enjoy and prefer the light scout role. 

Suppose this is off topic at this point though. The AH64 is awesome. OP should practice. 

Playing a Liberation persistent campaign with some friends here. 3 Platoons of armor / pc's dead, reload, then attacked airfield. It's gamey yes but this should sufficiently counter OP's criticisms. 

 

Edited May 3, 2022 by S. Low

[Mad Dog 762]

Don't press the trim release to change attitude, it turns off the SCAS channel and then you have a wild horse on your hands.

 

Really, it turns the SCAS completely off?  As in I would need to go to the MFD page and turn it back on?  

[DmitriKozlowsky]

On 5/2/2022 at 5:34 PM, Raptor9 said:

I think Mogster was referring to the FARA program.  However, it remains to be seen if that program will be any more successful than the failed LHX, ARH, or the AAS programs.

It's all relative though.  Is the Apache fast/agile? Maybe, it depends what you compare it to.  Compared to an Mi-24, it's certainly more agile but not nearly as fast.  Compared to an OH-58D, it's definitely faster but not as agile. However, for a combat-loaded 9+ ton helicopter, it's quite maneuverable in the right hands.  Heck, even a monster like the CH-47 is able to yank and bank in the NOE environment when flown by a well-trained aircrew.  But will you get a 9 ton AH-64D to stop on a dime like a 2 ton OH-58D? Of course not.

But the maneuverability isn't a reason why the Apache isn't ideal for scouting work.  The logistics footprint in fuel and parts to support a company of 8x large multi-engine gunships would stress a brigade combat team much more than if they had a troop of 10x small single-engine scout helicopters.  Logistics win wars, and it's a lot cheaper to purchase small scout helos that put less stress on your supply lines in the long term.  Not every hole needs a backhoe to dig it, some just need a shovel in the right hands.

It's the same reason why the USAF has been investing in the Light Air Support program.  Not all air support needs an A-10, as awesome as that is.

 

I don't see how Army Aviation branch could not take a good modern,  in-service,  helicopter and turn it into manned scout platform. Of course I am talking about UH-72A Lakota light utility platform in use in Army National Guard as medevac, and utility to replace National Guard UH-1N helicopters. 

Another option , in the interim, is for Army to buy or lease some Marine AH-1Z CobraVenom airframes. For armed scout roll.

Lease Eurocopter Tiger, or Mangusta from our NATO Allies. As an interim solution .

Least palatable is to resurrect RAH-66 Comanche program.  The rotary equivalent of F-35. But I fear it is too expensive.

 

[Raptor9]

2 hours ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

Another option , in the interim, is for Army to buy or lease some Marine AH-1Z CobraVenom airframes. For armed scout roll.

Lease Eurocopter Tiger, or Mangusta from our NATO Allies. As an interim solution.

Just because a platform is lighter, smaller, or advertised as cheap to procure, does not mean it's cheap to operate. Look at the Tiger. That thing is very expensive to operate and maintain, which is one of the reasons Australia is getting rid of it in favor of the Apache.

The AH-1? That isn't much different than the Apache when it comes to its mission capabilities, but the cost of adding an entirely new airframe built for a different mission than FARA would be a money pit for low pay-off.

Any of these "interim options" would incur more costs to the Army than just using AH-64's as they are already.

[DmitriKozlowsky]

5 hours ago, Raptor9 said:

Just because a platform is lighter, smaller, or advertised as cheap to procure, does not mean it's cheap to operate. Look at the Tiger. That thing is very expensive to operate and maintain, which is one of the reasons Australia is getting rid of it in favor of the Apache.

The AH-1? That isn't much different than the Apache when it comes to its mission capabilities, but the cost of adding an entirely new airframe built for a different mission than FARA would be a money pit for low pay-off.

Any of these "interim options" would incur more costs to the Army than just using AH-64's as they are already.

With all respect to our NATO Allies in Europe, and to our Pacific allies, Australia's decision on AH-64D/E , which I agree with, has more to do with interoperability with Australia's prime  allies. UK and US.  Both UK and US operate AH-64D and AH-64E (which India ordered). AU operates UH-60L/M as does US . All three operate CH-47 family. Japan ordered license built AH-64D later upgraded to E. Singapore and Taiwan (ROC) ordered the platform. 

Tiger is a COSMIC helicopter. It has earned a good availability and lethality (to enemy) in AfPak and African theaters. Going from French assessments.

Scout target recon and designation mission is substantially riskier then attack mission. In high end peer vs. peer warfare (NATO vs. Russia or vs. China) with high density air defense, expected loss rates among scouts are 2-3X then attack platforms. To give crew max chance of mission success and survival, speed, small size, and nimbleness are required.  Army thought that scout on 21'st century battlefield needs to have low observables in radar and IR/UV. Hence the RAH-66 Comanche program.