AH-1Z Viper

[GDLlong]

We need AH-1Z Viper. Now the Apache mission function of DCS is too simple. The crew is equipped with Thales' "Top Eagle" helmet sight. The M197 of AH-1Z is different from the M230 experience of AH64D. The M197 of AH1Z can fight APDS, and the rocket can fight APKWS just like Apache, In avionics, except that there is no radar, its modernization degree is similar to that of AH64D, which will make players fly comfortably and more suitable for the current battlefield mission environment of DCS

[Hunter Joker]

Instabuy, same for Ka-52 or Mil Mi 28

 

[Dragon1-1]

The AH-1Z would be too close to the Apache. AH-1W, maybe an earlier Super Cobra, yes, but the -1Z is way too similar to the Apache.

[GDLlong]

AH1W pilot seat，I think the best thing about DCS is that both AH1W and AH1Z can experience different avionics, which is excellent for players

[Furiz]

1 hour ago, Dragon1-1 said:

The AH-1Z would be too close to the Apache. AH-1W, maybe an earlier Super Cobra, yes, but the -1Z is way too similar to the Apache.

So what?

 

I mean if you do some cold war version wouldn't it be too similar to Mi-24? other than Mi-24 transport capability.

[Dragon1-1]

Mi-24 is very different by virtue of being a Russian helo. A Whiskey Cobra would be good, still analog, but slightly more advanced, and equipped with Hellfires and TOWs.

[fargo007]

Sadly I think the Cobra has already been hard nacked. But one can dream.

[Swift.]

10 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

The AH-1Z would be too close to the Apache. AH-1W, maybe an earlier Super Cobra, yes, but the -1Z is way too similar to the Apache.

I disagree, but I've been spending long enough researching the Zulu to see it's intricate differences. I guess it would be the same way F16, F18 and A10 might all appear as very similar aircraft to an outsider.

[Gunnar81]

5 hours ago, fargo007 said:

Sadly I think the Cobra has already been hard nacked. But one can dream.

Say it aint so? I bought the Apache and its a great module but I've been holding out hope for the Cobra in some capacity, preferably the 1W. I always chose the Cobra over the Apache in Gunship 2000 as a kid, don't ask me why but I just liked it better!

[exhausted]

The Cobra can be seaborn and the Apache really is just an army toy. Either the W or Z would be an instabuy, but I'd get bored bobbing over trees which is why I avoided the Apache.

All in all, the Cobra and the Apache are nothing alike, and their use doctrines are totally different. You will rarely see Cobras below 100 kts in a combat zone, whereas you see Apaches just sitting still, lobbing missiles away. Yes, give me the Cobra because I'm yawning at the Apache.

[Swift.]

5 hours ago, exhausted said:

The Cobra can be seaborn and the Apache really is just an army toy. Either the W or Z would be an instabuy, but I'd get bored bobbing over trees which is why I avoided the Apache.

All in all, the Cobra and the Apache are nothing alike, and their use doctrines are totally different. You will rarely see Cobras below 100 kts in a combat zone, whereas you see Apaches just sitting still, lobbing missiles away. Yes, give me the Cobra because I'm yawning at the Apache.

Don't confuse doctrine of the era with doctrine of the airframe.

A lot of the Tow Cobra tactics from the 70-80s are based around low and very slowly for high threat environments.

100kts tooling around is how to get smacked by a radar SAM. But it's fantastically effective against AAA, tanks, small arms etc.

[WinterH]

On 11/8/2022 at 6:10 PM, Furiz said:

I mean if you do some cold war version wouldn't it be too similar to Mi-24?

Yes, it would be an excellent counterpart to Mi-24, and a unique experience compared to AH-64D, a Western Cold War attack helicopter. Z would be a huge shame imo.

[exhausted]

3 hours ago, Swift. said:

Don't confuse doctrine of the era with doctrine of the airframe.

A lot of the Tow Cobra tactics from the 70-80s are based around low and very slowly for high threat environments.

100kts tooling around is how to get smacked by a radar SAM. But it's fantastically effective against AAA, tanks, small arms etc.

Actually it's not about doctrine of era, it's about integrating service doctrine into the airframe. The Apache -D is designed to pogo around from behind trees. The Cobra is designed to keep moving around fast. 

[Swift.]

11 minutes ago, exhausted said:

Actually it's not about doctrine of era, it's about integrating service doctrine into the airframe. The Apache -D is designed to pogo around from behind trees. The Cobra is designed to keep moving around fast. 

Im very interested to hear where you learnt this from. Seeing as every source I can find indicates that the tactics you employ depend on the threat: An Apache pogoing around in Afghanistan will get slapped just as hard as a cobra moving around fast under a SAM umbrella.

 

[exhausted]

34 minutes ago, Swift. said:

Im very interested to hear where you learnt this from. Seeing as every source I can find indicates that the tactics you employ depend on the threat: An Apache pogoing around in Afghanistan will get slapped just as hard as a cobra moving around fast under a SAM umbrella.

 

In Hammer From Above (formerly Hammer from the Sky, back when I was wrong), the Cobra pilots talk about moving around despite the perceived SAM threat. It's literally in USMC doctrine not to slow down in a threat environment. 

Edited November 10, 2022 by exhausted

[Swift.]

6 minutes ago, exhausted said:

In Hammer From the Sky, the Cobra pilots talk about moving around despite the perceived SAM threat. It's literally in USMC doctrine not to slow down in a threat environment. 

I can't find Hammer From the Sky on Google, is that a novel? I'm seeing a fiction piece by Don Pendleton called Sky Hammer, is that what you mean?

[exhausted]

I misquoted the title, but I edited and acknowledged

[Swift.]

38 minutes ago, exhausted said:

I misquoted the title, but I edited and acknowledged

Ok thanks, that looks like an interesting read I'll be sure to check it out.

In the meantime I did some research about what the threat picture looked like in OIF (assuming you are talking about the first part, going off of the description of SAMs). It seems that there were spatterings of SA-2/3/6/8s, A great number of SA-7s and a tremendous number of Air Defence guns.

Now you'll have to forgive me for applying my theorycrafting is such liberal strokes here:

Taking what we know about those RF SAM systems, you could imagine that aircraft operating below ~150ft or so would be relatively safe from most of those systems. 

However, those AD guns will prove lethal for anyone caught out low and slow like that, so whilst the FW guys just started climbing above the SAM threat. RW couldn't do that. So instead I imagine a RW pilot in that situation would probably strive to be below the SAM WEZs and fast enough to avoid the worst of the gunfire. So as you said, 100kts.

And to my point that its threat driven not doctrine drive. You also see the same tactics being applied to Apaches in OIF, namely in the Karbala Gap attack made famous by the film 'Apache Warrior'.

And finally, an AH-1W Manoeuvres Description Guide from 2003 describes terrain flight, as a term used to describe any helicopter flight structured to counter a "sophisticated threat environment". Going on to describe the use of terrain, vegetation, and man-made objects to degrade the enemy's ability to detect a helicopter. And finally describing NOE as flights below 50 ft AGL and less than 40 KIAS.

That same guide describes Masking and Unmasking within that AH-1W, which describes vertical or horizontal "pogo" (as you would put it).

 

So to conclude. As I said, the mode of flight is dependant on the threat being presented. Not on whether its a Cobra or Apache, or whether its Marine vs Army. Different helicopters placed in the same environment will behave basically the same.

[exhausted]

20 minutes ago, Swift. said:

So to conclude. As I said, the mode of flight is dependant on the threat being presented. Not on whether its a Cobra or Apache, or whether its Marine vs Army. Different helicopters placed in the same environment will behave basically the same.

This conclusion is probably flawed, as it ultimately comes down to unit training and mission priorities. Nobody is saying the Apache HAS to stay still, we are saying the Army wants it to stay still; nobody is saying the Cobra CAN'T stay still, we are saying the Marines want them moving for a variety of reasons. Manuals do not tell the whole story; people use experience to make adaptations, and the Marines made adaptations to their Cobra doctrine the Army has not in its Apache doctrine. 

"Taking what we know about those RF SAM systems, you could imagine that aircraft operating below ~150ft or so would be relatively safe from most of those systems. "

But Hammer from Above has the Cobras flying between 300-600 ft, in the parts I have read. 

Edited November 10, 2022 by exhausted

[Swift.]

8 minutes ago, exhausted said:

This conclusion is probably flawed, as it ultimately comes down to unit training and mission priorities. Nobody is saying the Apache HAS to stay still, we are saying the Army wants it to stay still; nobody is saying the Cobra CAN'T stay still, we are saying the Marines want them moving for a variety of reasons. Manuals do not tell the whole story; people use experience to make adaptations, and the Marines made adaptations to their Cobra doctrine the Army has not in its Apache doctrine. 

"Taking what we know about those RF SAM systems, you could imagine that aircraft operating below ~150ft or so would be relatively safe from most of those systems. "

But Hammer from Above has the Cobras flying between 300-600 ft, in the parts I have read. 

 

Did it describe which SAM was doing the threatening? SA-2s and SA-3s would allow that kind of flight.

[GUFA]

I really want a Cobra G+S(single). A 'G' for Rockets + Minigun + Grenade Launcher. And an S for TOW. I wouldn't say no to a T or a W but after Granddad & his younger brother

[Swift.]

4 minutes ago, GUFA said:

I really want a Cobra G+S(single). A 'G' for Rockets + Minigun + Grenade Launcher. And an S for TOW. I wouldn't say no to a T or a W but after Granddad & his younger brother

I'd love all the Cobra variants, but if we could only have one it would have to be the Zulu. If we didn't I'd just be annoyed everytime I look at a lovely little AH1T or AH1J or something.

I think the Zulu is definitely feasible, I've personally researched everything other than the specifics about how the SCAS handles. But I imagine a process similar to Apache using the SME feedback would have to be employed there.

The advantage to the Zulu, in my eyes, is that you also get a massive chunk of a UH-1Y out of it. Seeing as they have nearly identical avionics, bar the UH-1Y having an additional ARC-210 (and the control head in the cabin), and the difference in sensor turrets between the two. And I guess you could argue the weapon pages are different on account of the cobra having 7 stations and the Huey having 4.

I think the biggest obstacle to an AH-1Z would be the sell-ability of it. For most people it would just appear too similar to the apache. But then again, ED did bring out a Viper only a couple of years after a Hornet, and the level of difference is similar if not greater for the Cobra.

[GUFA]

I see the 'single' as very much a fundamentally different and unique aircraft over the 'Marine" Cobras and as such the 'Cobra's' really deserve (at least) 2 modules no matter who develops them. Reason I would like a G/S is that there really need to be something to compete with the MI 24 in that 70s time-frame and see Belsimtech has already got the UH-1H so they are part of the way there. But you are right in regards to the UH-1Y.One thing I would like for a AH-1Z is the ability to use AGM-122 and possibly TOW, but how to go about that...

[SkateZilla]

IMHO,
4 Blade Twin Engine Marine Cobra is the way to Go, dont need the Latest but this would be a nice addition w/ the Apache, have a land based modern Helo, and a LHD Based Helo.

[Swift.]

9 minutes ago, SkateZilla said:

IMHO,
4 Blade Twin Engine Marine Cobra is the way to Go, dont need the Latest but this would be a nice addition w/ the Apache, have a land based modern Helo, and a LHD Based Helo.

Man after my own heart!

AH-1Z circa 2008, thank you very much. The avionics are so advanced and slick, its lovely. You do lose some niceties that apache has though, like no FCR and no IDM. I'd still take that trade though, for a faster, lighter, more modern aircraft (and its got TACAN!)

edit: And Sidewinders, combat rated fuel tanks, a really nice AFCS system, and some really cool navigational features to aide with seaborne stuff!

Edited November 10, 2022 by Swift.