Developer confirms Littlebird AH-6/MH-6 will never come to DCS due to classification. - Page 3 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-23-2018, 09:43 PM   #21
Bearfoot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 1,060
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stryker2000 View Post
I think helicopter development should be above the baseline of the UH-1 and Gazelle. I can't imagine a Littlebird would sell that well anyway. Or troop carriers for that matter. If Combined Arms was comparable to ARMA or even Battlefield 2, I could see some value in light but relatively fragile scouts as well as troop movers. A.I. assets are another thing, but also a different level of production.
You might need to check your vision

The OH-6 would be a first-day buy for me. As would any troop carrier: in fact, I would rather have a UH-60, CH-47, CH-53, V-22, etc. over the Hornet any time, any day, in a heartbeat.
Bearfoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2018, 01:22 AM   #22
smallberries
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 225
Default

Why choose?
smallberries is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2018, 05:02 PM   #23
fargo007
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 437
Default

I don't understand exactly what could possibly be so "classified" about it (MH-6/AH-6).

It's not a very sophisticated helicopter in terms of flight control systems at all. In fact it's rudimentary. And they are used by other countries as well, not to mention civilian versions readily available to examine. My friend flies one for a sheriff's office.

Most of us would want to put miniguns on it, and/or hang dudes off the side and insert/extract them. If there's some other classified system they've added in there that doesn't have to do with shooting or carrying peeps, I for one wouldn't care if it wasn't modeled.

I just don't accept "It can't be done" in the case of the little bird.
__________________



You dig rotorcraft? Training, Quals, Missions, & FUN. Ask me about joining the Black Sharks!
fargo007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2018, 05:17 PM   #24
outlawal2
Senior Member
 
outlawal2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: WISCONSIN USA
Posts: 1,590
Default

LOL... Yeah we don't understand what could be classified on a classified platform? Since we have never seen one and won't see one we really have no way to determine WHY it is classified and that is they way they want it.. And the one your friend flies for the police is definitely not the same bird as the classified one..

With all of that in mind, I don't know what could be on that bird to make it that sensitive.. But that is kinda the point of making it classified in the first place isn't it?
__________________
"Pride is a poor substitute for intelligence."
RAMBO
outlawal2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2018, 05:52 PM   #25
fargo007
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 437
Default

The point is, anything that is classified on it almost certainly isn't going to be interesting for a simulator.

I of course don't mean they are "exactly the same," but I would say - substantially similar enough for DCS development purposes.

There are a lot of things that are FOUO, and all kinds of classified for no very good reason. Malaysia and South Korea use this platform, and it's hard to imagine we would export something that is so tremendously classified.

Most of what is needed to be learned or approximated about it can be learned open source.
__________________



You dig rotorcraft? Training, Quals, Missions, & FUN. Ask me about joining the Black Sharks!
fargo007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2018, 06:13 PM   #26
Scrape
Member
 
Scrape's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Las Vegas Nevada
Posts: 273
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fargo007 View Post
The point is, anything that is classified on it almost certainly isn't going to be interesting for a simulator.

I of course don't mean they are "exactly the same," but I would say - substantially similar enough for DCS development purposes.

There are a lot of things that are FOUO, and all kinds of classified for no very good reason. Malaysia and South Korea use this platform, and it's hard to imagine we would export something that is so tremendously classified.

Most of what is needed to be learned or approximated about it can be learned open source.
Classifications are never for no good reason. For those who's career is to find out secrets the clues to prevent spies from learning information that the good guys want secret is the reason a classification system is in place. Like was said earlier, if you don't know why its classified then the system is working. Japan has the F-15J, but the F-15J and the F-15C are not the same jet. Like a car, the chassis might be the same, but when you change the engine, radiator, turbocharger, suspension, tires, and brakes you can end up with a completely different vehicle. Like a car just about anything can be swapped out on the airframe to change its capabilities. From the outside looking in it's going to be just as difficult to know what those differences are because people don't want other people to even know that there is a difference. As long as they think its for no good reason then mission accomplished.

ED could attempt to model a civilian version to get around some things, but there are other things to consider.
__________________
"It's amazing, even at the Formula 1 level how many drivers still think the brakes are for slowing the car down."

Scrape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2018, 07:01 PM   #27
fargo007
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 437
Default

Of course we don't "know" why it's classified. I suspect it's to forestall capabilities assessment when you consider max range, MTOW, actual max speed, etc. Such info could be used to accurately box the aircraft into a certain envelope and plan against it.

What I am pointing out is, for sim purposes - hard information on those classified portions really aren't necessary, and the dna from the civ model can be substituted in just fine. Would likely be undetectable.

We also haven't been told by whoever alleged that it is classified (I haven't seen a FOIA denial or anything else) what level of classification it supposedly has. Malaysia and South Korea are flying this helicopter. That tells me any government who wanted information about this helicopter certainly already has it.

I totally disagree that everything that is classified is so for a good reason.

There are definitely things that are, or remain classified for no good reason. To protect someone politically, to kick back a favor to a company and help keep their intellectual property secret for as long as possible, or "we don't know - let's make it classified just because."
__________________



You dig rotorcraft? Training, Quals, Missions, & FUN. Ask me about joining the Black Sharks!
fargo007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2018, 07:15 PM   #28
zhukov032186
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Fort Worth, Tx
Posts: 1,439
Default

I can think of many examples of pointless classification. The government is a bureaucracy, first and foremost, and moves ever so slowly.

As for the AH-6's classification, since they mentioned JSOC, I believe virtually everything associated with JSOC and "black ops" units by definition is classified, just on the basis of its association with them.
__________________
I do solemnly swear to strafe every pilot I shoot down, destructible or not, circumstances permitting, because reasonz. Opponents are advised to assume the position upon landing, or preferably, while still in the air.
zhukov032186 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2018, 08:16 PM   #29
Scrape
Member
 
Scrape's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Las Vegas Nevada
Posts: 273
Default

What would be an example of pointless classification?
__________________
"It's amazing, even at the Formula 1 level how many drivers still think the brakes are for slowing the car down."

Scrape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2018, 09:26 PM   #30
fargo007
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 437
Default

https://www.brennancenter.org/blog/c...-not-automatic


"And officials sometimes find it easier to conceal entire documents — including pages of harmless information — rather than spend time segregating the sensitive parts from the non-sensitive ones. All of this feeds massive over-classification. Experts of all political stripes say nine in 10 secret documents should not be classified."

Are you taking the position that in every case someone, somewhere in the bureaucracy actually had a factually justifiable reason to classify everything that is classified?
__________________



You dig rotorcraft? Training, Quals, Missions, & FUN. Ask me about joining the Black Sharks!
fargo007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
ah-6, ah6, littlebird, mh-6, mh6

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:01 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.