Articulating Pylons

[JesseJames38]

After watching the sneak peek videos and the pre-order launch video i have noticed that when using the rocket pods that both pylons are articulated down words.

 

When the weapons are set to the hellfire missiles, only one pylon is articulated down.  I am wondering why one would only have one pylon tilted down while the other is straight when its both the same missile type. One would think that if your going to engage multiple targets that both pylons would be articulated at the same degree.  It would make more since to launch a missile from each side in order to balance weight of the aircraft.

 

So, from the people who do fly the AH-64 in service. Is this truly the case of only one missile pylon being articulated while there other is in the fixed position and then when the missile switches side the articulation  swaps?

 

Or is this some type of small error on ED part.

 

Just my view from the outside world looking in. To me it would make more sense to have both missile pylons articulated at the same degree at the same time when active.

 

Thanks

Jesse.

[odrin]

look in the related videos section, many people have explained it already.

[Sinclair_76]

4 hours ago, odrin said:

look in the related videos section, many people have explained it already.

I honestly haven't seen anything on individually moving hellfire pylons explained yet. 

[Raptor9]

On 10/10/2021 at 11:17 PM, JesseJames38 said:

So, from the people who do fly the AH-64 in service. Is this truly the case of only one missile pylon being articulated while there other is in the fixed position and then when the missile switches side the articulation  swaps?

Or is this some type of small error on ED part.

I would guess it's an error, but I couldn't tell since I don't know what went into making the video.  If you have multiple missile launchers, they should articulate together because, as you say, there would be balanced weapons depletion from alternating wing stations.

When you start getting into in-depth "weaponeering", that's where you have to be picky on what you say and what you just leave to speculation.

[JesseJames38]

Thanks for the input there Raptor9.  I can agree with you on the speculation aspect.   I don't know how it works, these are the things i wonder and like to learn about. Perhaps this is the intended effect of how things work. At same time i cant figure out in my mind why on would make a function to work in this way. That is why i was wondering from of other peoples input.

In case i was not clear on what i was trying to say.  I posted a photo of what i was speaking about in the ED sneak peek hellfire video that shows the two launchers with hellfire at different articulation position.

 

thanks

Jesse.

[N8AHbl4]

42 минуты назад, JesseJames38 сказал:

In case i was not clear on what i was trying to say.  I posted a photo of what i was speaking about in the ED sneak peek hellfire video that shows the two launchers with hellfire at different articulation position.

 

I swear i seen vids with same on modern apaches

[Raptor9]

I would take videos or photos showing such configurations with a grain of salt.  The clip that was posted above was a test firing, and the other wing pylon might have just had dummy Hellfires on board for mass simulators.  If there are no actual (or synthetic) munitions detected onboard the Hellfire launcher or rocket pod, that wing station won't even move from it's flight stow position.

Example, if I load rockets in just one pod, and leave the pod on the other wing empty, only the pod with rockets on board will articulate when actioned.  Same thing with the Hellfire launchers.  It is very rare to carry M34 dummy missiles on board (ie mass simulators) unless for a showcase or sales brochure, or a test of some sort.  Even M36 captive trainers will be treated as a live Hellfire, but the M34 dummies won't even be read by the Apache as being "loaded", so the launcher will be treated as empty and won't be bothered to articulate when missiles are actioned.

Then again, in real-life such an image may indicate the pylon articulation mechanism failed somehow.  Who knows?

@JesseJames38, I understood and I saw the same thing in the trailer.  Like I said, I think it's probably just an error, but I have no way of knowing for sure.  I'm sure we'll find out when the Apache is released.

[Krez]

The biggest issue I have with that video is the title.
McDonnell Douglas, not Boeing.

[Raptor9]

13 minutes ago, Krez said:

The biggest issue I have with that video is the title.
McDonnell Douglas, not Boeing.

Not everyone knows that Boeing bought McDonnell Douglas, the designers of the F-15 and F/A-18 family of fighters.  And if you want to be accurate, the Apache was a Hughes design, not McDonnell Douglas.  The first production AH-64A airframes had already been delivered to the Army by Hughes before McDonnell Douglas bought them.

Edited October 17, 2021 by Raptor9

[Sinclair_76]

52 minutes ago, Raptor9 said:

Not everyone knows that Boeing bought McDonnell Douglas, the designers of the F-15 and F/A-18 family of fighters.  And if you want to be accurate, the Apache was a Hughes design, not McDonnell Douglas.  The first production AH-64A airframes had already been delivered to the Army by Hughes before McDonnell Douglas bought them.

 

As a tribute the pedals still are from Hughes. ED modeled it as well.

[Krez]

8 hours ago, Raptor9 said:

Not everyone knows that Boeing bought McDonnell Douglas, the designers of the F-15 and F/A-18 family of fighters.  And if you want to be accurate, the Apache was a Hughes design, not McDonnell Douglas.  The first production AH-64A airframes had already been delivered to the Army by Hughes before McDonnell Douglas bought them.

 

True. My bias is against Boeing.