Jump to content

Raptor9

Members
  • Posts

    441
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Raptor9

  • Birthday 01/01/1983

Personal Information

  • Flight Simulators
    DCS, and many others...I don't want to list them all.
  • Location
    US
  • Interests
    Anything and everything Aerospace
  • Occupation
    Fling-Wing Pilot

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I haven't watched the video but there shouldn't be a whistle with this era of the 64D. That only became a common thing when they started using blade wedges for track/balance. In the 2005-2010 timeframe trim tabs were still in use. Wedges on 64D's only started becoming prevalent some years later, like 2013-ish IIRC.
  2. Only AH-64E's have Link16, and that only started being equipped several years ago. Link16 is a joint/NATO datalink system, and up until the past decade the Army wasn't as focused on joint interoperability at that level for Attack Aviation. According to Wags' cockpit controls PDF he posted on the forums a while back, it's a 2005-2010 avionics version, not specifically 2008. And based on the equipment seen installed on the aircraft in the videos, it fits that timeframe.
  3. More or less. Kinda like emailing target points, instead of live SPI broadcasting like the A-10 SADL. No clue what the ED implementation of it will be like though.
  4. To change the cockpit to English, you have to change the cockpit type in the Ka50 special tab in options. To make the ABRIS and EKRAN english, you gotta change Avionics language to English in (I think) the Gameplay options tab. As for the voices, I don't know. It's been a while since I've messed with those options.
  5. You can edit it in the mission editor. There used to be (and may still be) an R828 text file in the Ka50 folder where you could do this prior to them adding this ability via the mission editor. But I'm away from my computer and can't say where. You can probably go into Mods>aircraft>Ka50 and just search for "R828".
  6. Personally, I don't see any reason to restrict it to mission editor. Just as we can almost instantly land and refit our fast jets with full external fuel tanks, targeting pods, and full ammo and expendable countermeasures. Especially on the multiplayer side where people will always want that control over their aircraft config. I see the Apache FCR in DCS the same way as a TGP. Click it on or click it off, even though both obviously take a LOT more work in real life to install/un-install than just that.
  7. Oh yeah, and there will be plenty of user skins made I'm sure.
  8. I'm not on the dev team.
  9. Would be cool to have an Mi-28-style paint scheme available in the AUSAF (USAF Aggressors faction). Not that the USAF has any Apaches, but if the livery is fictional, so can the faction inventory. Ha Ha. We already have a Ka-50 painted like a US Army Apache for the US faction, only seems appropriate a fictional Russian Havoc-style paint scheme is an option for the AH-64D module.
  10. As long as such stories don't go into sensitive or restricted topics right?
  11. Don't get the wrong impression, I wasn't trying to shut you down or anything. It's just a common, and an understandably frustrating answer, to hear the standard "it depends" whenever someone wants an answer to a given question, when such an answer could vary widely based on any number of tactical variables. The easiest answer to demonstrate the value of lateral unmasking would be in an urban scenario, where you are trying to peer from behind a building. However, if one were to evaluate the overall risk of such low-altitude, hovering un-masking maneuvers in an urban environment, it would probably be determined the greater risk would be from anyone popping out from a window or an alley underneath you and lighting up your aircraft. A more applicable scenario would be in the rolling hills of some place like central Europe, where you have a lot of varied terrain between forests and open fields. In such an environment, you could find yourself set up behind a treeline, and laterally unmask your sensors through a gap in the trees (or a thin enough area to see through), while still maintaining a background of other treelines or hillsides. This would make it harder to notice the aircraft versus if you were to vertically unmask the aircraft and silhouette a dark aircraft over a bright sky. Plus, the higher you go, the more you can be seen from other directions. So you may still be hidden behind a mask to your front, but you should also worry about exposing your flanks. On the other hand, if just a small OH-58 MMS were to vertically unmask over a treeline, that would also be much less noticeable than vertically unmasking an entire Apache to clear the TADS. So again, it all depends on the environment, tactical considerations, and aircrew proficiency. And as I mentioned, the people in the cockpit are usually what make the difference behind an effective recon platform versus the hardware they are operating.
  12. Not necessarily, only in a very specific tactical scenario. Like most things in military operations where a lot of variables affect which tactics are used...it depends.
  13. This is a common misconception based on a very specific scenario of vertical unmasking. The Kiowa can remain mostly masked while vertically unmasking it's sensor, but cannot remain masked if laterally un-masking. The opposite is true of the Apache while using it's TADS, it has to expose itself to use the TADS in a vertical unmask, but can remain mostly masked while laterally unmasking. So to answer your question about who is better at spotting targets, like most tactical situations when comparing a whole bunch of variables from strictly a hardware perspective, it really depends. The most reliable answer to that question: it depends on what aircrew is more proficient at spotting targets, not the aircraft they are flying.
  14. I do want to clarify that the TEDAC screen isn't one of the AH-64D's MPDs (Multipurpose Displays). The TDU (TEDAC Display Unit, because why not have an acronym inside another acronym), is only for displaying TADS, FCR, or acting as a repeater of the PNVS video. I only clarify this because I think we've all seen how literal some statements are taken on these forums, and then ran with.
  15. The animation yes, but you never have 40 EFPs in DCS actually firing on vehicles.
×
×
  • Create New...