Next DCS Helicopter Wish List

[driver7408]

I'll take an A model AH64 PNVS / TADS and IHDSS, antiquated HARS inertial nav system, and a better flight envelope over that lousy ass KA-40 any day. You would be better off making that your next aircraft in this series, as your current experience and knowledge is obviously and without a doubt, helicopters. Don't appease the public. You have a phenomenal product so far, and no competition. IMO your KA-40 combat sim is better than the multi million dollar mainstream antiquated system the current US Army is training us with. You could likely sell them one of your products some day.

Edited October 18, 2009 by driver7408

[sobek]

I'll take an A model AH64 PNVS / TADS and IHDSS, antiquated HARS inertial nav system, and a better flight envelope over that lousy ass KA-40 any day. You would be better off making that your next aircraft in this series, as your current experience and knowledge is obviously and without a doubt, helicopters. Don't appease the public. You have a phenomenal product so far, and no competition. IMO your KA-40 combat sim is better than the multi million dollar mainstream antiquated system the current US Army is training us with. You could likely sell them one of your products some day.

 

It's called Ka-50 and they already do produce for the US military.

[joey45]

DCS-A10c is a modified version of their TFC [FTS] that the USAF use to train [famileries] with.

[GGTharos]

ED's next product is based on military sales, not on what the public wants to see next. If military sales dry up (which seems unlikely) then which modules appear next might be re-prioritized.

 

Don't appease the public.

[AlphaOneSix]

IMO your KA-40 combat sim is better than the multi million dollar mainstream antiquated system the current US Army is training us with.

 

The AH-64A Combat Mission Simulator that I was lucky enough to get about 25 hours in back in the early 1990's is far and away better than DCS, except for the graphics. Perhaps you are referring to some other system?

[driver7408]

It's called Ka-50 and they already do produce for the US military.

 

My bad, meant KA-50: was half asleep.

 

The AH-64A Combat Mission Simulator that I was lucky enough to get about 25 hours in back in the early 1990's is far and away better than DCS, except for the graphics. Perhaps you are referring to some other system?

 

The one that uses low res virtual reality masks and head tracking and can link up to 6 players.

[Billyjoebob1337]

I was just discussing the Apache module with my friend and we came to the realization. Would it be possible to have two separate players in the same helicopter for both stations? Or would an AI be the gunner the whole time? I'm unsure if this is asked, but its likely to have crossed someone's mind before.

[nemises]

^^ it is the key feature that this module will bring (assuming it is the first multi-pilot module that is!).

From what I've seen / read on these boards over the years, it is very much ED's intention to have a pilot / gunner.

[Shaman]

Hey, I'm looking for AH-64A or maybe even D (doubt there is D available) ;) FLIGHT MANUAL. I am most interested in the "gunner" position, and how things are operated. Please advice if you already know where to look for it. Just to make things clear - FLIGHT MANUAL for the crew, not OPERATORS MANUAL *maintenance, tests, modifications and all* (that I found).

[nemises]

if you find it Shaman, be sure to share..that sounds like some good reading.

[AlphaOneSix]

Hey, I'm looking for AH-64A or maybe even D (doubt there is D available) ;) FLIGHT MANUAL. I am most interested in the "gunner" position, and how things are operated. Please advice if you already know where to look for it. Just to make things clear - FLIGHT MANUAL for the crew, not OPERATORS MANUAL *maintenance, tests, modifications and all* (that I found).

 

There is no such thing, unless you mean TC 1-214, Aircrew Training Manual, AH-64A. But that's not really a flight manual, it's more a list of tasks. The flight manual IS the operator's manual. The operators manual does not cover maintenance or tests, that's covered in the maintenance manuals.

[Shaman]

Then I have found it: http://www.tpub.com/content/ahapache/TM-1-1520-238-10/index.htm

manual for APACHE AH-64A

please confirm this is what you mean

[AlphaOneSix]

Yes, that's the operator's manual.

[herr_LaSk]

http://www.scribd.com/doc/8637634/Operators-Manual-for-Helicopter-Attack-Ah64a-ApacheSha

 

This is a more readable version of the manual, IMHO.:thumbup:

[Hunt3r.j2]

Hey, I'm looking for AH-64A or maybe even D (doubt there is D available) ;) FLIGHT MANUAL. I am most interested in the "gunner" position, and how things are operated. Please advice if you already know where to look for it. Just to make things clear - FLIGHT MANUAL for the crew, not OPERATORS MANUAL *maintenance, tests, modifications and all* (that I found).

The Longbow operator's manual (flight manual, if that's what you want to call it) is classified.

[driver7408]

Chapter 8 of the TM usually covers your operating procedures/pilot checklist. If you can find a copy of the theory of operations, that book is a great description of the systems and how they work. I would start there.

[goldfinger35]

Then I have found it: http://www.tpub.com/content/ahapache/TM-1-1520-238-10/index.htm

manual for APACHE AH-64A

please confirm this is what you mean

 

 

I have looked into this flight manual and it seems that Apache AH-64A only has chaff and not flares. Is that correct?

 

Edit: yes, it seems that it does not have flares. Weird decision:

"The countermeasures control panels (fig 4-20), located on the right side of the pilot instrument panel, consist of the radar/infrared countermeasures panel, the chaff dispens- er panel and the radar signal detector control panel. The flare panel is not used."

Edited October 26, 2009 by goldfinger35

[GGTharos]

The reason is that the exhaust shielding together with the IRCM was considered very effective against IRH missiles.

[enigma6584]

LOL...all you gentlemen are wrong. The next DCS product after the A-10C will be Digital Combat Simulator: AC130U. :smilewink:

 

http://www.thebattlesim.com/

 

Might actually be fun.

[EtherealN]

enigma, a military contract does not by necessity mean that there will be a DCS product of that aircraft. A military contract increases the likelihood of a DCS product, since it includes a transfer of knowledge on the aircraft and gives access to information that would otherwise have been impossible to get.

 

So, as an example, as it stands right now there will not be a DCS:F-16 Block 60, because ED doesn't have the necessary information. However, say they get a contract on it, so they have the information? It's still not guaranteed that we'll see a DCS:F-16 Block 60. They will have to make a judgement call on whether it's a saleable product (on the general market the AC-130 might suffer difficulties there, even though I'd definitely love it) and whether the work involved in moving from the military specification to a commercial product is doable within the frame of expected revenue.

 

That last there is actually very important, since military clients don't usually give a crap about whether their simulation product supports volumetric lighting and employs parallax mapping on the bricks of the buildings. General gamers, however, really do care about the eyecandy. And eyecandy costs a lot of money to develop.

 

So the only thing that you should assume from the AC-130 DTS contract is that they have the information for the IR station, and they have made a simulator for it. Note how it does not mention the pilot but instead "automated flight paths". ;)

[BigVette]

Apaches are cool and all but the AH-1W would have been cool, too - and has been modeled far less than the Apache has. USMC use on LHD's, a mix of old and new, heck the Ka-50 is almost more advanced! Skidz kids!

[Hunt3r.j2]

Apaches are cool and all but the AH-1W would have been cool, too - and has been modeled far less than the Apache has. USMC use on LHD's, a mix of old and new, heck the Ka-50 is almost more advanced! Skidz kids!

The AH-1W sure would be nice to have.

 

Especially when you have to deal with the rotors, which can't take negative G.

 

Hopefully if there is an AH-1W, we get it with a glass cockpit.

[enigma6584]

@EtherealN...I actually only meant this as a tongue'n'cheek reply considering the other posts here in this thread. I'll have to pay more attention to my wording.

 

In seriousness, what-ever the next product, I'm sure it will be good.

[EtherealN]

Ah, fair enough enigma. Text is atrociously bad in conveying precise toungue location. :P Apologies for the misunderstanding.

[driver7408]

IMO, a CH-47 sim would be cool, but I don't think most people would find much fun in a video game that centered around performance planning, slingloads and troop transport. Surprisingly, very few who eventually graduate US Army flight school actually want to fly Apaches as a career, when given the choice. But... as a video game/sim, An AH-64 would be a fun one. Although, per BigVette I think a Cobra is not a bad idea either; preferably a marine version with dual engines. It could be emulated in less than a third of the time an Apache could.