Jump to content

AH-1W


209GREEN

Recommended Posts

I'm not saying the ka50 wasn't the better bird. I was designed 30 years later or so.

 

The F manual I have states it has thermals and the ALE39 RWR. But you are totally right about the tow not having the same range, and it carried fewer.

 

Also I think the DCS tanks are way overmodeled. But that's a whole other issue.

 

 

Yes the manual ihave too references revision for addition of CNITE (thermals) , but it doesnt specifically say it was applied to all AH1F's. Books written on the Ah1F say that CNITE was installed on some, but not entire Ah1F fleet. Which is why CNITE is not a 100% a sure thing for an Ah1F module. I think we will have to wait for feature confirmation from ED to be certain what to expect. Its very understandable why most would want an all weather capable AH1F, than day only Ah1F, and i do hope that does get added.

 

AS for RWR it the AN/APR39 V1 ( or post revision) the AN/APR 39A V1 not "ALE 39".

 

AN/APR39 is the RWR. AN/ALE 39 is a Counter measures dispenser suite ( flare and chaff with various programmable modes) . 2 totally different things.

 

The Ah1F doesn't have AN/ALE39 CM suite , but a single M130 Chaff dispenser unit ( which is only manually dispensed) , whereas the Ah1W does have the ALE39.

 

AN/ALE39 is system that was installed F/A18A and F/A18C hornets up until lot 17 production. Lot 18 and later had AN/ALE47 installed.


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes the manual ihave too references revision for addition of CNITE (thermals) , but it doesnt specifically say it was applied to all AH1F's. Books written on the Ah1F say that CNITE was installed on some, but not entire Ah1F fleet. Which is why CNITE is not a 100% a sure thing for an Ah1F module. I think we will have to wait for feature confirmation from ED to be certain what to expect. Its very understandable why most would want an all weather capable AH1F, than day only Ah1F, and i do hope that does get added.

 

AS for RWR it the AN/APR39 V1 ( or post revision) the AN/APR 39A V1 not "ALE 39".

 

AN/APR39 is the RWR. AN/ALE 39 is a Counter measures dispenser suite ( flare and chaff with various programmable modes) . 2 totally different things.

 

The Ah1F doesn't have AN/ALE39 CM suite , but a single M130 Chaff dispenser unit ( which is only manually dispensed) , whereas the Ah1W does have the ALE39.

 

AN/ALE39 is system that was installed F/A18A and F/A18C hornets up until lot 17 production. Lot 18 and later had AN/ALE47 installed.

 

My bad, didn't have the book in front of me. ALQ APR, at least I got the 39 bit right :)

 

Anyhow, my point is that the F model with FLIR isn't terrible and it served till 1999. Game wise its basically an armored gazelle that can carry 8 tows and hydras and a gun... I mean its an upgrade to the gaz with 4 hots. And at least at night it should be better than a ka50 with no FLIR. Plus we hopefully get some sort of AI gunner. So not bad. Sure I'd like a more modern bird, but if ED can't get docs I doubt Raz can.

 

I don't have a ton of trouble killing things with the hot armed GAZ, and finding targets with the flir is usually easier than the abris, even in daytime. What usually gets me is a tungaska or radar sams that I have no warning of in the KA50. In the gazelle I can usually evade them, though there guns often kill me since it takes 1 round to do it, whereas I can limp a ka50 home after being gunned. So this is in a way the best of both worlds.


Edited by Harlikwin

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My bad, didn't have the book in front of me. ALQ APR, at least I got the 39 bit right :)

 

Anyhow, my point is that the F model with FLIR isn't terrible and it served till 1999. Game wise its basically an armored gazelle that can carry 8 tows and hydras and a gun... I mean its an upgrade to the gaz with 4 hots. And at least at night it should be better than a ka50 with no FLIR. Plus we hopefully get some sort of AI gunner. So not bad. Sure I'd like a more modern bird, but if ED can't get docs I doubt Raz can.

 

I don't have a ton of trouble killing things with the hot armed GAZ, and finding targets with the flir is usually easier than the abris, even in daytime. What usually gets me is a tungaska or radar sams that I have no warning of in the KA50. In the gazelle I can usually evade them, though there guns often kill me since it takes 1 round to do it, whereas I can limp a ka50 home after being gunned. So this is in a way the best of both worlds.

 

I dont know If ED cant get documentation or not, I dont recall it ever being communicated that was the reason. In fact no exact reason was stated why they decided with AH1F

 

IF i can find AH1W documentation ED most certainly can too.

 

Most people speculate its because the they wanted something akin to a western companion/contemporary to the soviet MI24P, rather than something more modern. But honestly theres really no true contemporary. Mi24 is its own beast. ITs a Hybrid of a Gunship and transport.

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont know If ED cant get documentation or not, I dont recall it ever being communicated that was the reason. In fact no exact reason was stated why they decided with AH1F

 

IF i can find AH1W documentation ED most certainly can too.

 

Most people speculate its because the they wanted something akin to a western companion/contemporary to the soviet MI24P, rather than something more modern. But honestly theres really no true contemporary. Mi24 is its own beast. ITs a Hybrid of a Gunship and transport.

 

Well, the level of documentation required tends to go well beyond what's in a flight manual in general. And yes I'm speculating that it might be more of a problem for a more recent helicopter like the W series.

 

And yes I think if we look at the way BST has done modules in the past, they tended to come as a "matched set" (mig15/F86) (huey/Mi8 ) (F5E/L39). So Mi24V (E) and AH1F are generally 'ish speaking cold war era gunship rivals. Also, from what I understand the DCS Mi24 won't carry troops, which is a shame as it was an interesting air assault capability. Though given what "air" assault currently looks like in the game its a bit limited.

 

I agree the W (marines) would be a better fit for the current "carrier/amphib" centric DCS world development though. Then again alot of folks want more cold war era stuff, which will also be coming with the F4E/F8 modules. And honestly I think ED can do a more realistic job of simulating cold war era "small wars" than more modern conflicts given the limitiations of the engine/sensor modeling.

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As we see, most users are looking to simulate today's battles. For example, buy modules F-18 and MiG-29 and K-52 f-16 and.. we have new systems in our day, like abrams,merkava,s-300,patriot and advance tanks. Is it true that when our defense systems are so new in Ed, are we going to fight them with an old weapon? For example attack to t-90 by ah-1f ?

System : i7 7700HQ , 1050ti , 16GB RAM , 256 SSD , HTC VIVE VR

Whishlist : AH-1W , F-4E/D , CH-47 ,AH-64D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As we see, most users are looking to simulate today's battles. For example, buy modules F-18 and MiG-29 and K-52 f-16 and.. we have new systems in our day, like abrams,merkava,s-300,patriot and advance tanks. Is it true that when our defense systems are so new in Ed, are we going to fight them with an old weapon? For example attack to t-90 by ah-1f ?

 

Respectfully, most users don't have a clue about modern warfare for the most part from what I've read here. And DCS does an abysmal job of "simulating" modern warfare. EW model, a joke, IADS, also a joke. Hey how about an actual dynamic FEBA? Nope, can't do that. Modeling supply lines for planes to strike, nah too resource intensive. Bridges, nah... How about actual tank tactics and non-sniper AI gunnery. Nahh. How about camouflage for all the stationary targets? Oh too hard for "gamers" to spot. How about a JTAC that's worth a crap? How about coordinate errors in TPODs or INS that drifts. GPS jamming? Datalink Jamming? Datalink targeting (that's a fun one), jammed comms? Nope nope nope. How about realistic NVG's or FLIR, nah too hard... And all we mostly get is faff about "secrecy" which to a point is real, but none of the things I've mentioned are even modeled to a 1970's or 1980's level. At best what DCS does best is simulating dropping million dollar bombs onto 20dollar mud huts, and even there it generally strains credulity. Yes ED makes shiny videos with modern looking hardware, being blown up by modern looking planes, but there are a metric ton of problems, many of which aren't even being worked on. And don't even get me started on the state of online play.

 

As for a AH1F, well considering the last ones left service in 1999 they very well could have gone up against the T90, at least in some bizzaro hypothetical scenario. And really the T90's of the 1990's really were just barely upgraded T72's with a name change so export buyers would actually buy them after the bad rep the T72 got in the 80's and gulf war.

 

But I guarantee it would be easier for ED to model a T64 or T55 (the current model, you guess it a joke with a 105mm gun). And an AI that tries to hide from attack helos rather than take them head on (what most tankers would actually prefer to do). Rather than model an actual modern high intensity battlefield.


Edited by Harlikwin

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Respectfully, most users don't have a clue about modern warfare for the most part from what I've read here. And DCS does an abysmal job of "simulating" modern warfare. EW model, a joke, IADS, also a joke. Hey how about an actual dynamic FEBA? Nope, can't do that. Modeling supply lines for planes to strike, nah too resource intensive. Bridges, nah... How about actual tank tactics and non-sniper AI gunnery. Nahh. How about camouflage for all the stationary targets? Oh too hard for "gamers" to spot. How about a JTAC that's worth a crap? How about coordinate errors in TPODs or INS that drifts. GPS jamming? Datalink Jamming? Datalink targeting (that's a fun one), jammed comms? Nope nope nope. How about realistic NVG's or FLIR, nah too hard... And all we mostly get is faff about "secrecy" which to a point is real, but none of the things I've mentioned are even modeled to a 1970's or 1980's level. At best what DCS does best is simulating dropping million dollar bombs onto 20dollar mud huts, and even there it generally strains credulity. Yes ED makes shiny videos with modern looking hardware, being blown up by modern looking planes, but there are a metric ton of problems, many of which aren't even being worked on. And don't even get me started on the state of online play.

 

As for a AH1F, well considering the last ones left service in 1999 they very well could have gone up against the T90, at least in some bizzaro hypothetical scenario. And really the T90's of the 1990's really were just barely upgraded T72's with a name change so export buyers would actually buy them after the bad rep the T72 got in the 80's and gulf war.

 

But I guarantee it would be easier for ED to model a T64 or T55 (the current model, you guess it a joke with a 105mm gun). And an AI that tries to hide from attack helos rather than take them head on (what most tankers would actually prefer to do). Rather than model an actual modern high intensity battlefield.

 

1) most of that is due to lack of knowledge of the classified stuff or simply in game limitations

 

2))

There is INS drift, in at least some modules.

 

It becomes very noticeable in the F14 after long flights, or if you damage INS.

 

I once Over G's ( had AFCS turned off) and whilst i didn't snap a wing, or kill na engine, my INS broke. Was literally drifting by wide margins, that even after landing and imputing new coordinates, and realigning INS, it was still drifting.

 

In aircraft like the Hornet or upcoming we shouldn't really be experiencing any noticeable INS drift. because even though its not EGI system , They do have INS + GPS system, the GPS does communicate with INS, and fix errors. You just cant display a blended solution and have to view INS mode, and GPS mode separately.

 

 

 

3) if you have been following the news FLIR technology is being reworked. New and reworked FLIR mechanics will debut with the ATFLIR TGP, which will then be applied to other TGP's.

 

 

 

For how " terrible" DCS is a simulating "modern air war" its still arguably the best sim at doing so to date. The only other sim people would argue was better ( ive heard it all before) is that Viper Centered one with the Dynamic campaign system. The only feature that DCS is missing to already complete out do it, in spite of all the nitpicks you listed.


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) most of that is due to lack of knowledge of the classified stuff or simply in game limitations

 

2))

There is INS drift, in at least some modules.

 

It becomes very noticeable in the F14 after long flights, or if you damage INS.

 

I once Over G's ( had AFCS turned off) and whilst i didn't snap a wing, or kill na engine, my INS broke. Was literally drifting by wide margins, that even after landing and imputing new coordinates, and realigning INS, it was still drifting.

 

In aircraft like the Hornet or upcoming we shouldn't really be experiencing any noticeable INS drift. because even though its not EGI system , They do have INS + GPS system, the GPS does communicate with INS, and fix errors. You just cant display a blended solution and have to view INS mode, and GPS mode separately.

 

 

 

3) if you have been following the news FLIR technology is being reworked. New and reworked FLIR mechanics will debut with the ATFLIR TGP, which will then be applied to other TGP's.

 

 

 

For how " terrible" DCS is a simulating "modern air war" its still arguably the best sim at doing so to date. The only other sim people would argue was better ( ive heard it all before) is that Viper Centered one with the Dynamic campaign system. The only feature that DCS is missing to already complete out do it, in spite of all the nitpicks you listed.

 

Look, I'm not trying to be nit-picky, "modern" warfare is 100% about sensors, sensor integration and EW. "Full spectrum warfare" is the buzzword from the early oughts. Its all about figuring out where the enemy is based on emissions they make and then exploiting that to suppress them or kill them.

 

So tell me how a "sim" that claims to be "ultra-realistic" can make that claim while generally either not modeling huge chunks of that or when they do model it its pretty poorly done.

 

I'd much rather they step back to an era that's perhaps less restricted and do those parts right rather than try to be make claims about this that or the other being ultra modern. Right now DCS has a 50s/60's era battlefield with late 90's or early 2000's plane sets.

 

1. This is red herring, you can type electronic warfare into amazon and get detailed books on the subject, the gold standard being published by China Lake (naval air warfare center). So I call BS on the classified claim, yes some bits on the most modern stuff are, but DCS isn't even modeling techniques used in WW2. I'd be happy with 70's and 80's era "tech" which all the modern pods can do. Nothing much classified about FLIR and NVG's of the early 2000's at least.

 

2. Yes some aircraft, notably HB ones have it modeled. As for the GPS/INS on the hornet and harrier, tell me what happens when that GPS is jammed or spoofed? Plus GPS tends to be less accurate than people like to think it is. Reference the harrier tpod paper (Again open source) for all the juicy details on GPS accuracy, TPOD accuracy (or lack therof).

 

3. I've heard talk about this since I've joined, still haven't even seen a screenshot. Just like the dynamic campaign and half a dozen other things. And yeah it takes time, but I can't think of a major engine improvement since I've been playing (and yes it hasn't been all that long). Unless we reference the much hyped "VR upgrade" which is at best a "boondoggle".

 

Part of the whole thing about ultra-modern that bugs me is that its very "munchkin" oriented aeroquake set that say: yay I've got a superweapon in the JDAM and the JSOW, but I'm too lazy to punch in coordinate sets etc.

 

If we want to steer this back on course and look at helos. How well did they perform in the 2003 invasion in a not so modern combat environment with some outdated IADS network (think cell phones). And that answer is quite badly, in the attack on karbala, against mostly antique IADS, the US army literally had a 100% casualty rate. 2/31 crashed/shot down and of the remaining 29 every single one was deadlined for combat damage making the entire unit combat ineffective for the remainder of the campaign. And not a single shilka, tungaska, or manpads on the Iraqi side just old school poorly visually aimed AAA AT NIGHT.


Edited by Harlikwin

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look, I'm not trying to be nit-picky, "modern" warfare is 100% about sensors, sensor integration and EW. "Full spectrum warfare" is the buzzword from the early oughts. Its all about figuring out where the enemy is based on emissions they make and then exploiting that to suppress them or kill them.

 

So tell me how a "sim" that claims to be "ultra-realistic" can make that claim while generally either not modeling huge chunks of that or when they do model it its pretty poorly done.

 

I'd much rather they step back to an era that's perhaps less restricted and do those parts right rather than try to be make claims about this that or the other being ultra modern. Right now DCS has a 50s/60's era battlefield with late 90's or early 2000's plane sets.

 

1. This is red herring, you can type electronic warfare into amazon and get detailed books on the subject, the gold standard being published by China Lake (naval air warfare center). So I call BS on the classified claim, yes some bits on the most modern stuff are, but DCS isn't even modeling techniques used in WW2. I'd be happy with 70's and 80's era "tech" which all the modern pods can do. Nothing much classified about FLIR and NVG's of the early 2000's at least.

 

2. Yes some aircraft, notably HB ones have it modeled. As for the GPS/INS on the hornet and harrier, tell me what happens when that GPS is jammed or spoofed? Plus GPS tends to be less accurate than people like to think it is. Reference the harrier tpod paper (Again open source) for all the juicy details on GPS accuracy, TPOD accuracy (or lack therof).

 

3. I've heard talk about this since I've joined, still haven't even seen a screenshot. Just like the dynamic campaign and half a dozen other things. And yeah it takes time, but I can't think of a major engine improvement since I've been playing (and yes it hasn't been all that long). Unless we reference the much hyped "VR upgrade" which is at best a "boondoggle".

 

Part of the whole thing about ultra-modern that bugs me is that its very "munchkin" oriented aeroquake set that say: yay I've got a superweapon in the JDAM and the JSOW, but I'm too lazy to punch in coordinate sets etc.

 

If we want to steer this back on course and look at helos. How well did they perform in the 2003 invasion in a not so modern combat environment with some outdated IADS network (think cell phones). And that answer is quite badly, in the attack on karbala, against mostly antique IADS, the US army literally had a 100% casualty rate. 2/31 crashed/shot down and of the remaining 29 every single one was deadlined for combat damage making the entire unit combat ineffective for the remainder of the campaign. And not a single shilka, tungaska, or manpads on the Iraqi side just old school poorly visually aimed AAA AT NIGHT.

 

 

 

Yes I have read about the beating those apaches took in iraq in 2003.

 

And the short answer the army gave was adjust with tactics based on lessons learned. The operation was rushed without any further adequate air support,They had inadequate intelligence,and any helicopter is going to vulnerable operating in a dense urban environment hovering over areas wher2 they can take concentrations of small arms fire and random manpad.

 

Now if that's the sort of casualty rate longbow took, it's not gonna be an easier on a ah1f. If put in similar circumstances

 

Without going OT, as you just admitted yourself, utilizing the iraq example not all modern era combat is going to be against "a near peer" adversary.


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I have read about the beating those apaches took in iraq in 2003.

 

And the short answer the army gave was adjust with tactics based on lessons learned. The operation was rushed without any further adequate air support,They had inadequate intelligence,and any helicopter is going to vulnerable operating in a dense urban environment hovering over areas wher2 they can take concentrations of small arms fire and random manpad.

 

Now if that's the sort of casualty rate longbow took, it's not gonna be an easier on a ah1f. If put in similar circumstances

 

Without going OT, as you just admitted yourself, utilizing the iraq example not all modern era combat is going to be against "a near peer" adversary.

 

Later in the war they did do better, and they never tried a deep strike like that again, but it was a pretty hard slap to the face.

 

As for other helo ops, of course helos have served well in low intensity and asymmetric conflicts, which DCS at least does an "ok" job of simulating IMO, but then the name should change to Digital Permissive Enviroment Simulator ;) .... And on that note I think the Mi24 will come with Afghan map, so that should be interesting to see how they will handle that since its "close enough" to that era.

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Later in the war they did do better, and they never tried a deep strike like that again, but it was a pretty hard slap to the face.

 

As for other helo ops, of course helos have served well in low intensity and asymmetric conflicts, which DCS at least does an "ok" job of simulating IMO, but then the name should change to Digital Permissive Enviroment Simulator ;) .... And on that note I think the Mi24 will come with Afghan map, so that should be interesting to see how they will handle that since its "close enough" to that era.

 

 

 

To have a contrast comparison from 1991 Gulf war , do you know which aircraft struck the first blow? THe AH64A Apache. 4 AH64A Apaches were responsible for the first action of the AIR war, in the early hours of January 17th 1991, guided by Pave lows acting as path finders.

 

 

They had the right intelligence, extensive mission planning, striking with element of surprise, and while it was dark. That mission came out with 0 casualties and resulting in complete success ; destruction of a Radar Complex ( which was protected by AA guns) 30 miles south of Saudi Border. This destruction of the site allowed a 20 miles wide gap in Iraq's Radar network permitting the first strike package of F15E's and EF111 Ravens, to slip by through and perform their own assigned mission. All perfectly synchronized, occurring 22 minutes before H hour ( 3 am).


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To have a contrast compare from 1991 Gulf war , do you know which aircraft struck the first blow? THe AH64A Apache. 4 AH64A Apaches were responsible for the first action of the AIR war, in the early hours of January 17th 1991, guided by Pave lows acting as path finders.

 

 

They had the right intelligence, extensive mission planning, Striking with element of surprise, and while it was dark. That mission came out with 0 casualties and resulting in complete success ; destruction of a Radar Complex ( which was protected by AA guns) 30 miles south of Saudi Border. This destruction of the site allowed a 20 miles wide gap in Iraq's Radar network permitting the first Strike package of F15E's and EF111 Ravens, to slip by through and perform their own assigned mission. All perfectly synchronized, occurring 22 minutes before H hour ( 3 am).

 

Yeah, quite familiar that strike, and most of the first gulf war in general. And honestly I think the Iraqis learned a lot from their defeat in the first gulf war. Which was quite different from their experiences in the Iran/Iraq war where they picked up "bad habits" lets say.

 

I think we are on the same page about ISR/EW and overall battlefield intelligence being a critical functionality. Which again, DCS doesn't really do well either, aside from the capabilities for the viggen for hoovering up emmiter locations.


Edited by Harlikwin

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...