AH-1 S or W? What do you want?

BF what??? :doh:

Helicopter dogfighting: as realistic as a close ship to ship battle between to aircraft carriers...

In the Iran-Iraq war, Iranian Cobras got some Hinds with TOW.

The AGM-122 came into service in the mid/late 80s, at this time the F-8 Crusader was already retired.

I don't think an Ah-1 uses an "optical" version of the AGM-65. I am sure they fired the C or E variant which both are laser guided like Hellfires.

If A-10A could use Maverick own FLIR for target search and flying, why couldn't the AH-1W use it too in similar manner?

Firing a laser guided version doesn't make much sense to me, but can be reason why the tests were not give default set up results for it, instead just capability to carry it as weapon is less useful than Hellfires and tows. But interesting is to know what variant of Maverick did Japan use in their AH-1J firing those 11 mavericks in combat?

I could think it doesn't require much when AH-1W already has MFLCD to give targeting data and controls for gunner.

My RC Cobra is a AH1"W"hisky, so I want the Whisky in game! ;)

You're making things up. AH-1W's do not equip the AGM-122 or AGM-65. Period. Speculation of 'why not' and 'well they could' doesn't make it so. AH-1's are also not A-10's.

The AH-1W uses laser hellfires. They're not fire and forget, but all hellfires use a lofting flight profile.

 

In any case, I'm not part of the team that's going to create this, so anything I say is not terribly reliable :)

As always the threads about AH-1X scattered everywhere.This is from Chit-Chat Release Date topic. Signalman caught a transmission that could be terribly reliable :music_whistling:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2204349&postcount=47

Google translates: PilotMi8's entry as:

will -1W, and not -1G.....

But it has not yet be in the near future, we probably will adjust plans a bit..

I wrote same entry over there but it's more relevant with this topic i guess..

You're making things up. AH-1's are also not A-10's.

:megalol:

I am curious about the AGM-122. You always read that the weapon is no longer in service since only a limited number has been converted from AIM-9C and they have all been used up. But how have they been used up? I have never heard of the Sidearm being used by any fixed wing aircraft. Since this was a Navy project, I would suspect that the Marines AH-1T/W caried it for a short time. Anyone has more insight into this?

Great!

Helicopters can have situations where they engage others, less likely but they don't ignore others and fly by because "not realistic".

 

Have you never shot down a another helicopter in flying a KA-50?

 

I do that often in quick missions as it is easy to cover own ground forces that get engaged by apache. Bad thing just is Vikhr missiles doesn't have the A-A mode modeled so you need couple straight hits or get the tail boom cut off to get helicopter shot down.

 

And some helicopters like Mi-24 under AI control engage even A-10 or Su-25 if you dare to get to range and in good envelope. Too many times I have been shot down with Shturm V missiles fired by Mi-24 when flying A-10C as it is so slow. So getting helicopters away is almost priority mission to get close ground forces they protect.

 

With KA-50/Su-25T the benefit is to have so many missiles that has greater range to keep distance to target and supporting forces.

 

And when flying in urban area, when ground forces call helicopter support, you are dueling between buildings with them. And then you use cannon as it is faster to use than missile if you are not chasing a another. And those moments AH-1W will have the benefit for gunner and more freely turning gutling gun than KA-50 cannon that has limited turning and you need to manage both, flying and firing if you need to search target too.

 

The battlefield game idea of dueling is now laughable by distances but it is still very possible situation.

There was about one(!) engagement on this planet, between Iran and Iraq helicopters until today... simple like that! And it happened more or less by accident.

Helicopters are armed for self defence, yet if you ever "go dogfighting" in a helicopter, well, then you probably are playing BF or CoD! :megalol:

I did not mean "not possible", just that it is a typical kids game scenario from old Comanche times.

In the Iran-Iraq war, Iranian Cobras got some Hinds with TOW.

Yep! By acccident... to clarify that: the task of attack helicopters is not to dogfight other helicopters.

If a helicopter is under airborne attack it goes defensive and should disengage.

The platform is simply not designed for dogfighting.

The Iraqis had the luck to stumble over the Iranians and got them with the element of surprise. Just think about it? TOW (wire guided) against an airborne target.

AIM-9, maybe, but as I said intended for self defence aka "keep the enemy occupied" and get your ass outta here.

Of course we can do whatever we do in a SIM for fun. No problem with that.

Was just pointing out it is not very realistic, as he made it sound like Helicopters are regularly "dogfighting" each other in conflicts. No more, no less. :)

They can be 'used up' just by sitting there and outliving their shelf lives with no spare parts being available.

AGM-122 was an interesting attempt at creating a small ARM, but that created its own issues:

The seeker was small, so there's a limit of what types of radars you can engage (probably not a huge issue because they are also the types of radars that will guide bang bangs onto you).

The space for electronics was also small, and it was required to change out physical components to 'tune' the missile to attack a different type of radar (note: The physical part is AFAIK, so don't quite me on it), so you'd leave base with a pre-set capability of what you could engage. How limiting that was is hard to tell, but the missile was essentially deemed useless (As you can tell by the lack of further production).

There was an AGM-122B planned (or maybe it existed) which had EEPROMs built in, so you could program it. Whether that alone could change the target type, hard to tell.

I am curious about the AGM-122. You always read that the weapon is no longer in service since only a limited number has been converted from AIM-9C and they have all been used up. But how have they been used up? I have never heard of the Sidearm being used by any fixed wing aircraft. Since this was a Navy project, I would suspect that the Marines AH-1T/W caried it for a short time. Anyone has more insight into this?

According to a report:

AGM-122(Sidearm)-- This new short-range weapon will provide an effective, inexpensive self-defense system for a variety of aircraft. Consisting of a Sidewinder body with a modified AIM-9C antiradiation seeker, the missile has been designed for use in close air support operations against heavily defended targets.

It can be employed with little or no aircraft modification.

Although the Sidearm is compatible with all naval attack aircraft and helicopters, it will be used primarily on Marine Corps' AH-1s, AV-8Bs, and OV-1ODs.

From: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a187382.pdf PDF page 195

You're making things up. AH-1W's do not equip the AGM-122 or AGM-65. Period. Speculation of 'why not' and 'well they could' doesn't make it so. AH-1's are also not A-10's.

" The Super Cobra can carry both TOW and Hellfire anti-armour missiles and is being qualified to carry the Maverick missile."

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/supcobra/

There are other sources saying same thing, and states how AH-1J has used maverick.

But no one is saying it is in their official loadout, just that they are specified to launch such.

And everyone know AH-1 isn't A-10, but to launch maverick all you need is video link to missile to see what it see, and then controls to guide its seeker, lock and launch. That is why Maverick is so awesome missile that you don't need much from launching craft targeting systems as there are variants that can be fitted to many platforms so easily. You can't launch maverick without operator assigning a target first, but that is it all is required, just see the IR seeker video feed, move reticle on target, lock and fire. If someone would give the specs for the videofeed and controls, it is highly probable that even a skilled teen could hack a android device to control and fire maverick.

There is zero evidence that the Marine AH-1W is operationally capable of using the AGM-65, or that it is even desired.

There has been testing, and that's it.

As for 'all it needs' ... yeah, sure. And no one wanted to pay for that cabling. See how it works? :)

There was about one(!) engagement on this planet, between Iran and Iraq helicopters until today... simple like that! And it happened more or less by accident.

Helicopters are armed for self defence, yet if you ever "go dogfighting" in a helicopter, well, then you probably are playing BF or CoD! :megalol:

I did not mean "not possible", just that it is a typical kids game scenario from old Comanche times.

And you say you fly by every helicopter in DCS? Do you as well command all helicopters in editor not to engage with other helicopters?

Should ED remove the capability from helicopters to engage other helicopters?

Should AT missiles designed to be used against slowly flying air targets not to be used against slowly moving air targets?

Because F-22 and Su-27 (or any variant of it) has never been in dogfight, should we say they will not do it?

How about F-15 and Su-27?

So tell, why you will fly by an enemy helicopter instead destroying it with you cannon/gatling gun/missile?

Because it has not happen than one time in western military history?

Yep! By acccident... to clarify that: the task of attack helicopters is not to dogfight other helicopters.

If a helicopter is under airborne attack it goes defensive and should disengage.

Under airborne attack of what?

If it is a fighter that is targeting helicopter, sure then get out of there to cover.

But if it is a another helicopter.... Case proofed that helicopters DO engage other helicopters, otherwise you would just fly by any helicopter and only avoid collision with a another. Or then BOTH goes defensive and flee if they see enemy helicopter on area.

So what it is?

A) attack helicopters can/do engage other helicopters?

B) attack helicopters does fly by other helicopters?

C) attack helicopter flee other helicopters?

Attack helicopters avoid other attack helicopters, unless necessity dictates otherwise. It's doctrine.

Engaging other helis is done by GBAD or aircraft better equipped to do so. The goal of the heli is to bust up enemy armored formations, and support their own infantry. They're not out there to seek out other helis or engage them; their fuel and weapons are there for a different purpose.

There is zero evidence that the Marine AH-1W is operationally capable of using the AGM-65, or that it is even desired.

 

There has been testing, and that's it.

 

As for 'all it needs' ... yeah, sure. And no one wanted to pay for that cabling. See how it works? :)

You say there is ZERO evidence it was even desired.... Still it was tested long period and it was USED in combat.... And it is said that there is capability to use it. Nothing else.

If it would not been desired to have that capability, there wouldn't have been any tests or any use and there would not be any sources saying AH-1W is certified to launch it.

AH-64D is certified to use stinger missiles, but only Japan AH-64DJP carries those. It doesn't mean it isn't possible or there is no evidence Apache can carry stingers.

That's all. If that is "ZERO evidence" by your opinion, I don't know what is then a evidence of something to you.

C) Like GGTharos said... if you would go hunting other attack Helis and it gets to the brass you likely get court martialed and never fly a Helicopter again.

Unless in mutual self defence you should avoid other attack helicopters wherever possible.

Mi-24 Hind ... vote option missing!

Mi-24 Hind ... vote option missing!

That is because the next helicopter was already set, just not the exact revision... There was no HIND option because it isn't relevant to the question at hand...

C) Like GGTharos said... if you would go hunting other attack Helis and it gets to the brass you likely get court martialed and never fly a Helicopter again.

Unless in mutual self defence you should avoid other attack helicopters wherever possible.

An attack helo driver may not go looking for an AA engagement, but I know if I had the bounce on an enemy helo I wouldn't hesitate to engage them (unless it somehow compromised my primary objective). If I were a squadron commander, I would expect the same aggressiveness out of all of my pilots.

...or put it this way: German Leopard tank crews trained to shoot down "slow moving helicopters" with the laser supported main gun in simulators, all the time. Still you would never, ever actively go out "hunting" a helicopter. If the helicopter did not see you, you stay low and pray. You fire and miss, you probably die.

You say there is ZERO evidence it was even desired.... Still it was tested long period and it was USED in combat.... And it is said that there is capability to use it. Nothing else.

I said is, not was. They tested it, so they had some ideas.

there would not be any sources saying AH-1W is certified to launch it.

What sources say it's 'certified'? Who cares if it is? The official training plans don't even mention the maverick.

AH-64D is certified to use stinger missiles, but only Japan AH-64DJP carries those. It doesn't mean it isn't possible or there is no evidence Apache can carry stingers.

And?

That's all. If that is "ZERO evidence" by your opinion, I don't know what is then a evidence of something to you.

Like I said: There is zero evidence that the AGM-65 is used or even desired to be used with the AH-1W. I suspect it's going to be a 1W, not a 1J, or any other variant - much like you wouldn't put stingers on a US AH-64D because they're not even wired for it. Doesn't matter if they're certified.

The official training documents and courses for the AH-1W maintenance include even AGM-122, but there's no mention of AGM-65.

In other words, zero evidence that it's used or desired on that heli in an operational capacity. All you have is some testing, and that's it.

...or put it this way: German Leopard tank crews trained to shoot down "slow moving helicopters" with the laser supported main gun in simulators, all the time. Still you would never, ever actively go out "hunting" a helicopter. If the helicopter did not see you, you stay low and pray. You fire and miss, you probably die.

If the helicopter attacks at you platoon or it is threat to units you are supporting, you will engage that attack helicopter. You don't sit in cover waiting it finish off and fly away, or do you?

Unless you get rules of engagements that you are not allowed at any circumstances to engage enemy helicopters, then it is different story.