Why a UH1H Model

[sn00ze]

I'm missing something here regarding this new release. If the new release was meant to fly in the 60's or RVN war theater I should tell you we did not use D's or H's as gunships, they weren't rigged or designed to be used as gunships. The only known used variant was an Australian version that did rig their aircraft to use gunship weapons. Originally the D and H did not have hard points to mount pylons for weapons, the center of gravity was so bad it would be very dangerous to even fly, they don't auto rotate well with all the weight behind center, the only safe configuration for the Australian versions had special hard points added so that the rocket pods could be mounted far forward, so far that the end of the tubes were almost even with the pilots doors. I haven't seen the theater this new release is intended to fly in, but as a former gunner on a UH1A,B and C it seems very odd to see an H in that role.

The Army experimented with the Chinook being utilized as a heavy gunship, in a role that it could protect it's own, 5 were in combat 5 were lost! I just can't see that big bulky UH1H as a gunship, it's too big and is not a bottom feeder like the A B and C. The C was the larger used in my time but it was low to the ground and made you still feel like it was a smaller A or B.

Very nice simulator regardless of the decisions made to hi light an H.:thumbup:

[EtherealN]

The "new release" wasn't meant to "fly in the 60's or RVN".

It's a study simulation of the UH-1H.

Where you fly it is up to you.

[streakeagle]

That still begs the question, why UH-1H? The C in DCS is for combat, and the UH-1B/C variants were the gunships. Why not focus on an equally common variant that was for a time THE gunship. As opposed to providing a transport version and then dressing it up as a minor gunship variant and then painting it to look like UH-1B/C gunships. Flaming Cliffs could have been delivered with four major aircraft: C-130, An-12, C-5, IL-76. They are commonly used military aircraft of both the USA and USSR, but for some strange reason LOMAC and its FC sequels remained focused on frontline combat aircraft and not some rare variant like the F-15 S/MTD.

 

I will be more than happy to fly the UH-1H (already purchased and downloaded), but I just might have been happier with an authentic gunship.

[EtherealN]

This isn't marketed as "DCS: Gunship".

 

This is "DCS: UH-1H".

 

Which is the version most commonly used today. Even my own airforce has used it! (And we were always allergic to helicopters.)

 

DCS is a combat environment, but as you are probably very well aware, a combat environment includes aircraft that do not engage in combat themselves. CSAR, transports, AWACS, AAR, VIP etcetera.

[EtherealN]

Let's put it like this, for an idea:

 

Play an MP mission, you've got A-10's on your side.

One of your mates get nailed and ejects.

Now you can detail a player flight to conduct CSAR.

[astrospud]

Let's put it like this, for an idea:

 

Play an MP mission, you've got A-10's on your side.

One of your mates get nailed and ejects.

Now you can detail a player flight to conduct CSAR.

 

This is quite a cool element to add to missions. I foresee that I will be very familiar with the passenger compartment in the Huey over the coming months...

 

EDIT: Future releases; Any chance ejected pilot models could have a smoke function for pickups?

Edited May 1, 2013 by astrospud

[SUBS17]

The Army experimented with the Chinook being utilized as a heavy gunship, in a role that it could protect it's own, 5 were in combat 5 were lost! I just can't see that big bulky UH1H as a gunship, it's too big and is not a bottom feeder like the A B and C. The C was the larger used in my time but it was low to the ground and made you still feel like it was a smaller A or B.

Very nice simulator regardless of the decisions made to hi light an H.:thumbup:

 

The British SAS, SBS and 1 Para used Chinooks equipt with weapons successfully to rescue some hostages in Operation Barras. There was also some Hinds and Lynx gunships used in the Operation.:thumbup:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barras

[104th_Crunch]

I am the first to say, why is there no mutil role jet in DCS? Why are there these other projects coming out first? At the end of the day it is ED's and 3rd parties decision to make, however. I just hope it is the right one for them.

 

It is not my cup of tea, but all the more power to ones that will enjoy this work. Have fun. I am jealous and waiting.

[sobek]

I am the first to say, why is there no mutil role jet in DCS?

 

Probably because it's unproportionally more work and other groundwork needs to be laid out first for a fast mover to be financially profitable.

[Lucas_From_Hell]

We do have a MRF - P-51D :D

 

EDIT: Just saw the word jet now... If the tail's on fire does that count?

[sn00ze]

All the answers here have been appropriate for me, but maybe in a future update or fix a different skin for that H model might work better, The Cav may be insulted with a slick painted with war paint. As far as landing for a rescue it was forbidden for a gunship to do that. There were a few incidents where a gunship did jettison it's pods and make a rescue, I guess it always remains with an aircraft commanders decision, even a 4 star general cannot give an order that would jeopardize a crew or aircraft for anything outside the basic mission, A/C is the last word in what happens and don't happen. Radios were more important than armament and it was the first thing you grabbed or destroyed if you were down, the guns were second. I think all the final work in DCS is very nice and believable, I have the Black Shark but in the very near future I will come back and start getting a few more things. I think my tally for destroyed Ka50's with my takeoff skilz is about 50......I should give serious consideration to staying in the back seat of that UH1H

[159th_Viper]

EDIT: Just saw the word jet now...

 

Crank the cockpit, three cans of lighter-fluid, a zippo and you're good to go.....afterburner!

 

Oh yes, hang on tight :D

[Scarecrow]

I was just thinking about the answer to this just five minutes ago. Huey is an official Bell product, belsimtek have access to Bell data and I'm hoping we see more Bell products coming soon.

So why release the one with the weakest armament first? Who's gonna buy it if you release it 2nd?:smilewink:

[DieHard]

Let's put it like this, for an idea:

 

Play an MP mission, you've got A-10's on your side.

One of your mates get nailed and ejects.

Now you can detail a player flight to conduct CSAR.

 

Quite a few folks purchased it already, including me. I wanted to see how the Huey with a spinning tail rotor compared to the Ka-50, is the only reason I purchased it. I figure if I ever do fly this thing respectively will improve my Shark piloting, too.

 

I would also like to see the UH-1H used as a pilot rescue resource in SP and MP missions.

 

The 74th Tyger (UK) squad has a custom made mission in MP where a single, dedicated, Ka-50 fulfills this role as a resource for pilot rescue and RTB .

[DieHard]

I am the first to say, why is there no mutil role jet in DCS? Why are there these other projects coming out first? At the end of the day it is ED's and 3rd parties decision to make, however. I just hope it is the right one for them.

 

It is not my cup of tea, but all the more power to ones that will enjoy this work. Have fun. I am jealous and waiting.

 

The F/A-18 will be out shortly.

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=F/A-18&client=firefox-a&hs=m9K&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=w_KDUZDVJujD0AHVtYHwBg&ved=0CAoQ_AUoAQ&biw=1920&bih=844

Edited May 3, 2013 by DieHard

[104th_Crunch]

The F/A-18 will be out shortly.

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=F/A-18&client=firefox-a&hs=m9K&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=w_KDUZDVJujD0AHVtYHwBg&ved=0CAoQ_AUoAQ&biw=1920&bih=844

 

Let's hope so! DCS: F/A-18 will be the pinnacle of flight simming in my opinion. It has been a long wait already :)

 

I don't want to dwell on this though. ED are obviously very hard at work, and I appreciate their efforts. Eventually we will get there.