Just to clarify, Russian tactics do not allow for hovering in combat with the Ka-50?

[S.h.r.i.k.e.]

I would just like to clarify a point concerning the combat employment of the Ka-50. Russian doctrine does not allow for hovering while in combat, correct?

 

They instruct their pilots to always be moving, right?

 

If so, I have a lot of practicing to do before I'm even close to combat effective... :blush:

 

I guess it makes sense. Even though the pilot would have a much more difficult job killing things, it would significantly reduce the chances of a random shoot down. For example, if you hovered behind a tree line in order to Vihkr some tanks a couple thousand meters off, there could be some infantry close by that you didn't see. I imagine they could do a number on you, even with a couple PKMs, if you were hovering say 1-300m away from them. If they had a MANPAD, you would have no chance.

 

Whereas if you were constantly moving, it would severely mitigate circumstances like that.

Edited May 11, 2010 by S.h.r.i.k.e.

[EvilBivol-1]

There are no restrictions on hovering. It just has not been a very common practice in the real world for various reasons (combat safety, flight efficiency), but can be done if the situation calls for it.

[ericinexile]

Thus: Auto Hover, Turn-on-Target, etc.

[MBot]

According to former East German helo doctrine (for the Mi-24), hover is the safest method to employ ATGM against heavily defended targets.

[Vympel]

If the field manuals are to be believed, US Army attack helicopters are also recommended to attack while at a hover from a previously selected 'Battle Point' or ABF/SBF.

 

It seems that it isn't so much if you hover, but where you hover.

[BKLronin]

I´ve read that hover is the safest mode but only as long as the enemy hasn´t seen you ;)

[MBot]

I´ve read that hover is the safest mode but only as long as the enemy hasn´t seen you ;)

 

Yep, once they call in the artillery you should consider to change battle position :)

[Vympel]

According to the manuals, if the primary position becomes untenable they move to a secondary battle point, or withdraw to a predetermined rally point.

 

The level of detail with which combat encounters are planned - detailed survey of the terrain and enemy position and presumed intentions, carefully planned entry and exit flight corridors, fire support, mission rehearsals etc. etc. - is quite impressive if you're used to just plinking around in a simulator. If DCS were like reality you'd have several hours of preparation before you even pressed 'Fly'.

Edited May 11, 2010 by Vympel

[EtherealN]

Oh yeah, when you're flying 20 million dollars of hardware and have one to two personnel each costing 1-2 million dollars in training you make real sure they plan their missions in detail. :P (And, of course, make sure they have routines for how to handle various improvisation-type scenarios.)

[isoul]

I don't think that Russians discourage hovering!

 

I remember reading that there was a debate about the Vikhr missile and its efficiency with the Su-25T saying that Vikhrs, by not being a fire&forget missile, are much more effective when used by attack helicopters cause it can be launched at hover so it can engage multiple targets while staying at maximum range while the Su-25T, with its speed, by the time of impact it may enter the range of short range anti-air defenses.

 

Still IRL, as EvilBivol said earlier, hover is dangerous cause you are a "floating" duck in the open so it won't be used so often... especially while in enemy territory.

[Rhino4]

Disclaimer: This is kind of a pseudo rant/complaint.

 

No idea about RL tactics, but my 2 cents about ingame play: Hovering is nice as long as you know where the enemy is and can verify that there aren't any moving targets. Since stationary ground targets don't react to incoming fire, but only fire upon you if you're within their range, as long as you can hover in one spot for 2 or 3 seconds without being fired upon you can hover there for 30 minutes and you'll still be safe (usually). Kind of stupid IMO but hey, I'm not the guy that decided not to put any real AI in the ground targets, so what do I know? Perhaps they had a good reason for making them so oblivious. Anyway, if there aren't any moving targets I'll usually start out at a longer range and hover, scan, shoot anything within range, move in a little closer, hover, wash-rinse-repeat (yawn). If there are moving targets then I'll just figure out which direction their heading (which is idiot proof if they're on a road, and even more idiot proof if they're offroad) and hover off to the side of their route and just shoot them as they come within range. Either way...YAWN. Sometimes if I'm in a hurry I'll fly obliquely towards where I think the enemy is at a slow speed of around 50km, turn on HMS, turn to target, target my shkval out in front of me somewhere, and engage route mode. Then I just look around outside the cockpit and try to pick out enemy targets. If I see one, I just target him with my HMS, wait for my bird to automatically line up the shot, fire, and then target my shkval back in the direction I was heading with my HMS once the target is toast. Because I'm flying ahead so slowly I never have time to enter the enemy's range before my shot lands and I change course back to my original heading. I may fly slowly, but it's faster than hovering every 30 seconds to look for enemies and I make more progress that way. If someone actually does start to lase me or shoot at me, I just hold the trim button, roll inverted and pull the stick until I'm flying the other way at 250km. You lose about 300m when you do that so I usually stay above 400m. Any way you look at it, I've been playing this off and on since BS came out and I have yet to be shot down by anything. I'm actually kind of in hiatus right now waiting for the A-10C to come out. Maybe they'll spice up the ground targets but until then...:yawn::sleep:

[PedroTheGoat]

Wait... So you have NEVER been shot down??? Then please come tackle Georgian Rebels on the (awesome) 104th server with Slug and I.

 

I am not doubting it... Just jealous. I get shot down so much that it makes me shudder in a corner and cry at night.

[Highwayman-Ed]

Disclaimer: This is kind of a pseudo rant/complaint.

 

No idea about RL tactics, but my 2 cents about ingame play: Hovering is nice as long as you know where the enemy is and can verify that there aren't any moving targets. Since stationary ground targets don't react to incoming fire, but only fire upon you if you're within their range, as long as you can hover in one spot for 2 or 3 seconds without being fired upon you can hover there for 30 minutes and you'll still be safe (usually). Kind of stupid IMO but hey, I'm not the guy that decided not to put any real AI in the ground targets, so what do I know? Perhaps they had a good reason for making them so oblivious. Anyway, if there aren't any moving targets I'll usually start out at a longer range and hover, scan, shoot anything within range, move in a little closer, hover, wash-rinse-repeat (yawn). If there are moving targets then I'll just figure out which direction their heading (which is idiot proof if they're on a road, and even more idiot proof if they're offroad) and hover off to the side of their route and just shoot them as they come within range. Either way...YAWN. Sometimes if I'm in a hurry I'll fly obliquely towards where I think the enemy is at a slow speed of around 50km, turn on HMS, turn to target, target my shkval out in front of me somewhere, and engage route mode. Then I just look around outside the cockpit and try to pick out enemy targets. If I see one, I just target him with my HMS, wait for my bird to automatically line up the shot, fire, and then target my shkval back in the direction I was heading with my HMS once the target is toast. Because I'm flying ahead so slowly I never have time to enter the enemy's range before my shot lands and I change course back to my original heading. I may fly slowly, but it's faster than hovering every 30 seconds to look for enemies and I make more progress that way. If someone actually does start to lase me or shoot at me, I just hold the trim button, roll inverted and pull the stick until I'm flying the other way at 250km. You lose about 300m when you do that so I usually stay above 400m. Any way you look at it, I've been playing this off and on since BS came out and I have yet to be shot down by anything. I'm actually kind of in hiatus right now waiting for the A-10C to come out. Maybe they'll spice up the ground targets but until then...:yawn::sleep:

 

I'd say that you should try your hand at mission making and build missions that prohibit this kind of behaviour. The ME is more than capable of throwing several curve balls at you if you have the patience to work with it.

[zdXu]

I'd say that you should try your hand at mission making and build missions that prohibit this kind of behaviour. The ME is more than capable of throwing several curve balls at you if you have the patience to work with it.

 

Offtopic:

If i am correct you have also a mission in work. Just for interest: when will it be released?

[isoul]

Actually hover in real life would take just a few minutes. A Shark can deliver all their 12 ATGM in a few minutes and an Longbow Apache can deliver all Hellfires in even less time using its radar... In so little time a tank won't even come close to its attacker!

 

Now the fact that stationary targets won't pursuit you even if you hover for half an hour is not annoying to me. I strongly doubt that tanks will think to pursuit a helo in RL! The best think they can do is to get in cover and call in the fighters.

 

If you want to exploit AI behavior you can do so much that probably none can prevent you unless he manages to recreate real word at every detail.

[Evil Koala]

According to the manuals, if the primary position becomes untenable they move to a secondary battle point, or withdraw to a predetermined rally point.

 

The level of detail with which combat encounters are planned - detailed survey of the terrain and enemy position and presumed intentions, carefully planned entry and exit flight corridors, fire support, mission rehearsals etc. etc. - is quite impressive if you're used to just plinking around in a simulator. If DCS were like reality you'd have several hours of preparation before you even pressed 'Fly'.

 

I wish it were even possible. There's only so much one can brief from a single low res map image and a bit a text. "We take off from here, bad guys here. I cant read any text on the map so we'll just fly north until we see this big ass river and hope we find the target."

 

Blackshark really needs better mission briefing tools. Something like Falcon would be sufficient. At the very least and interactive map with overlays.

[HitchHikingFlatlander]

^All down to how good the mission builder is. Besides its much easier to point out flaws in a simulation than its strengths. I have to disagree with your take on Vympel's claims, I've flown a fair amount of different missions with great briefings and situations that can change depending on triggers, and I don't come to the same conclusion. But to each their own.

[Rhino4]

I'd say that you should try your hand at mission making and build missions that prohibit this kind of behaviour. The ME is more than capable of throwing several curve balls at you if you have the patience to work with it.

I do build missions every now and then, but knowing what's coming just isn't any fun for me even with the randomization possible with the new ME. I play online missions too, and while those are sometimes more challenging, as long as you have the patience to avoid jumping into the pot with both feet you're generally safe. I'd say the only thing I really worry about online is long range radar guided missiles, but I haven't run into too many of those online so....

 

I DO enjoy some user made single player missions, especially those made by Mbot and Ronht where time is a consideration and you're forced to work quickly to complete objectives, but there are so few really good mission builders out there...Like walking into a library filled with books and only five worth reading...

[Vympel]

^All down to how good the mission builder is. Besides its much easier to point out flaws in a simulation than its strengths. I have to disagree with your take on Vympel's claims, I've flown a fair amount of different missions with great briefings and situations that can change depending on triggers, and I don't come to the same conclusion. But to each their own.

 

I'd say there is an element of truth to both points of view.

 

It would certainly be nice to have a richer briefing capability in the mission builder. Mostly this wouldn't actually require additional functionality per se, so much as a richer symbology and labeling capability. Primarily the ability to designate (effectively just label and assign a meaningful symbol to) waypoints and routes as holding areas, rally points, battle points, ABF/SBF's, flight paths etc. A good deal of material is available in US Army Field Manuals that would allow this to be done in a quite realistic manner.

 

I'd say that - at least for SP - the main obstacle is that the primary tactical unit for most attack helicopters seems to be the company (usually six aircraft), and that the interaction between them is quite complex, and would be very hard to reproduce by means of AI. Of course this isn't an issue with MP missions.

 

I guess the difficulty is reconciling realism with an entertaining and accessible simulation environment. Realistic missions would require a fair deal of preparation and online coordination, and a good deal of demanding and not terribly exciting disciplined flight movement. But there is nothing in the simulation that stops one from doing this.

Edited May 14, 2010 by Vympel

[Vympel]

If you're interested, then reading this manual (especially chapter 3) might make it a little clearer what I'm on about:

 

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/docs/1-112.pdf