Big Helicopters - Page 38 - ED Forums


View Poll Results: big choppers yes or no
Yes 446 82.44%
No 95 17.56%
Voters: 541. You may not vote on this poll

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-19-2019, 02:25 PM   #371
Senior Member
AG-51_Razor's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,799

Originally Posted by Tobi1304 View Post
I‘ve seen enough CH-53 and CH-47 flying to tell you they are far from non-maneuverable.

Absolutely +1, especially since the MH-53 would fit perfectly with the Tarawa and the Harrier.
CH-46 would be cool also.

I could not possibly agree more with this sentiment but unfortunately, we will be hard pressed to use the CH-53 on board the Tarawa until either RAZBAM or ED fixes the spawn points for helicopters.

Having said that and knowing the development cycle for something as complicated as the -53 is going to be a long one, I am very hopeful that the problems with helicopter operations on the Tarawa will be fixed by the time the Super Stalion appears.
AG-51_Razor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2019, 10:11 PM   #372
rjetster1's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Studio City, California
Posts: 781

Sorry, been away from this thread for a bit… what is the verdict on the overwhelmingly favorable pole on big choppers? Wasn’t there a little tease on the 53 somewhere?
rjetster1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2019, 05:55 AM   #373
Richard Dastardly
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Europe
Posts: 318

Originally Posted by rjetster1 View Post
Sorry, been away from this thread for a bit… what is the verdict on the overwhelmingly favorable pole on big choppers? Wasn’t there a little tease on the 53 somewhere?
Quite some time ago now ( like, 2017? ). I don't think many people are going to turn down a big heli, my personal opinion is that it needs a unique feature though ( hence why I was backing the MH-53 over the CH ). Would put a ( Naval ) Lynx over a big chopper though, myself.
Most Wanted: the angry Naval Lynx | Seafire | Buccaneer | Hawker Hunter | Hawker Tempest/Sea Fury | Su-17/22 | rough strip rearming / construction
Richard Dastardly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2019, 07:05 AM   #374
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 411

Ch 53
River is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2019, 07:06 PM   #375
Junior Member
HawgDawg4Life's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Wichita
Posts: 93

The truth of the matter is that if you build it, they will buy! That being said, I would LOVE to see a UH-60 in Blackhawk, Seahawk, Pave hawk, and Jayhawk variants. Be nice to consider some coast guard options for S&R. The differences between variants is relatively minimal. Of course, would love to see the Chinook, CH53, CH46, and even the old MASH Unit CH47 with passenger baskets.

Is it obvious that I am a helicopter guy?
HawgDawg4life of

HawgDawg4Life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2019, 08:16 PM   #376
sadjad-vosoul's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Imperial State of Iran (Before 1979)
Posts: 105

CH-53E Super Stallion, or the Chinook

CPU: i5 7500 @ 3.8GHz + watercooling / Mainboard: ASUS STRIX H270F Gaming / Ram: 16gig 2400 / GPU: ASUS DUAL GTX 1060 6G OC /Monitor: ASUS VG278HE 27" 144Hrz / Headtracker: homemade track ir / HOTAS :Logitech 3D pro / Mouse & Keyboard: CoolerMaster Devastator 3

WISH LIST : KC-707 & KC-747 / F-5F Tiger II / F-4D/E Phantom II / T-45C Goshawk / AH-1J Intl. Cobra (209) / BELL 214A ISFAHAN / BELL 206 JETRANGER / Boeing CH-47 Chinook
sadjad-vosoul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2019, 12:50 PM   #377
Junior Member
Threeps's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 9

I like the idea of the Chinook, the Black hawk and the Stallion. DCS troop AI and general functionality of units needs to be updated. From what I've read, a single soldier on the ground takes up just as much server resources as an aircraft carrier so hauling troops in MP would need some code rework.

I'd love to sling some tanks/internal haul troops though.
Threeps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2019, 05:44 PM   #378
Junior Member
Wakeshift's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 86

I would buy a CH-47 Chinook before others, because of the tandem rotor design. I think this would be a unique pilot experience in DCS. I agree with comments about improving infantry/AI to get the most out of it.

Suppose a CH-46 would check the same box; seems like Chinooks used by more countries/services and produced in greater numbers, while Sea Knight was primarily USMC. Still, amphib ops, Tarawa etc...
i7 9700k | GTX 1080 | 32 gb | X55 + ProFlight pedals | TrackIR | Win10

Caucasus | Nevada | Persian Gulf | Normandy | Channel | Syria
A-10C | AV-8B | F/A-18C | F-16C | UH-1H | SA342 | Mi8 | Ka50 | FC3 | CA | SC | Kiowa
Wakeshift is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2020, 05:12 PM   #379
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Scotland
Posts: 189

+1 from me on a big helo. There's just something about big and powerful beasts that makes you feel good.

Any big helo would do for me but tandem rotor would certainly be good for variety and a Sea Knight would go really well with the Tarawa.

Mi-26, CH46 or CH47, CH53 or MH53. It's gotta be BIG! Puma ain't big enough
Hunter_5E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2020, 07:06 PM   #380
ebabil's Avatar
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Turkiye/Istanbul
Posts: 3,597

chinook looks like a taco with 2 giant rotors. But ch53 is one of the sexiest thing on earth
FC3 | UH-1H | Mi-8MTV2 | A-10C | F/A-18C | Ka-50 | F-14A/B | F-16C | F-4E
Persian Gulf | Nevada | Syria
NS-430 | Supercarrier
Wishlist: C-130 | UH-60 | AH-64

Z390 / i5 9400F / Gtx1070 / 16 GB Ram / 500 gb SSD and 1 tb HDD // CH Fighterstick - MS FFB2 - TM Warthog Throttle and Stick - CH Pro Pedals - TrackIR 4
ebabil is offline   Reply With Quote

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 03:47 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.