Why can't the Ah-64 engage air targets with its ATGMs like the kamov?

[Rusvolk 10]

Ive made a test mission with 1 flying KA-52 and 3 other AH-64Ds flying in front of each other at a distance of around 1KiloMeter with me watching in the bottom as a Rifleman, and the KA-52 destroyed all 3 Apaches with it's Vikhr missiles, because the AH-64Ds seemed to just try to gather height and only fired with machineguns (with totally no accuracy), then i tried it with those AH-1Z Cobras and they destroyed the KA-52 withing seconds with their missiles, but why cant the AH-64D use it's missiles? is it a bug? i have Combined Operations and installed patches=AO version 1.59 and A2 version 1.10, ArmA 2 itself came in version 1.06 allready. Please help me with this bug/issue/ or whatever.:confused:

---------- Post added at 09:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:54 PM ----------

Ive made a test mission with 1 flying KA-52 and 3 other AH-64Ds flying in front of each other at a distance of around 1KiloMeter with me watching in the bottom as a Rifleman, and the KA-52 destroyed all 3 Apaches with it's Vikhr missiles, because the AH-64Ds seemed to just try to gather height and only fired with machineguns (with totally no accuracy), then i tried it with those AH-1Z Cobras and they destroyed the KA-52 withing seconds with their missiles, but why cant the AH-64D use it's missiles? is it a bug? i have Combined Operations and installed patches=AO version 1.59 and A2 version 1.10, ArmA 2 itself came in version 1.06 allready. Please help me with this bug/issue/ or whatever.:confused:

I dont really consider it as a bug since a few months ago the AH-64D worked fine, i have no addons installed.

[Beagle 684]

It's a overdone feature, not a bug. The Kamov 52 is believed to be able to use Anti-Tank 9M127 missiles against air targets...well...since ArmA II does not know about avionics or missile burn time or seeker limits these missiles are in turn able to kill any air unit on the map within "tab" range at all angles.

The Apaches in ArmA come without the AIM-92 Stinger missiles on the wings that one would exspect there, while the AH-1Z carries 2 Sidewinders AIM-9.

[ryguy 10]

I don't believe the AH64s are equipped with sidewinders by default!

[Beagle 684]

I don't believe the AH64s are equipped with sidewinders by default!

No... not by default and that makes it the inferior Helicopter in ArmA 2 to both the AH-1Z and Kamov-52.

The stock Kamov-52 is a "Ãœberkiller" in ArmA 2, best is to not use it at all as the missiles performance is way over the top and in simply words "pure fiction".

btw: how did my answering post get on top of this thread???

[Rusvolk 10]

I don't believe the AH64s are equipped with sidewinders by default!

Yeah, its just that i got confused since in the bonus Eagle Wing campaign the AH-64D has Sidewinders and in the editor it doesnt. My bad, lol, anyways is there a way to equip it with Sidewinders?

[ryguy 10]

You need to script it to have AIM9 missiles and launchers, which you can find in the classnames for A2. It uses addweapon and addmagazine

[max power 21]

I'm changing the topic title to 'Why can't the ah-64 engage air targets with atgms like the kamov?' The current title is misleading, which is against the spirit of the Q&A forum.

[Rusvolk 10]

You need to script it to have AIM9 missiles and launchers, which you can find in the classnames for A2. It uses addweapon and addmagazine

Thanx, it worked, i can finally use the AH-64D against other helicopters (how it should be) but it would be really nice if BIS did a small update adding just a few AIMs in case of a small enemy aerial threat, still keeping the AH-64D as a "Air-to-Ground" chopper and leave the main Air-to-Air combat to the AH-1Z cobra. :rolleyes:

[RocknRoll86 1]

The Apache was never designed to handle air targets. It's meant to be a ground pounder, relying on the Air Force to handle the air. Or Patriot, Avenger, etc.

Apache fills the role of a heavy duty VTOL tank buster. I'm not even sure there's hardpoints for sidewinders on it unless you swap out the hellfire mounts for sidewinder mounts. But, ultimately, not much of a need with all the other assets available.

The Cobra has to be able to take down air targets as the Marines, typically, don't have as many assets to rely on. They have to take what they have and make it as universal as possible. I'm no Marine, but I'm pretty sure I hit the nail on the head there.

As far as the game goes... If you want sidewinders just mod them in. I think the Apache outclasses the Cobra in just about every aspect but I can't disagree with the Marine doctrine of making everything you have cover as many roles as possible.

I could live with a pair of sidewinders on an Apache. Just don't touch my eight hellfires.

And as far as missiles go... The hellfire is big and fat. It's probably slow, too, compared to the Sidewinder. I'd imagine it doesn't have the range or mobility that a sidewinder has, either. Even if hellfires could lock onto air I probably wouldn't try to hit with one. Jets are nimble, tanks are not. Different roles, once again.

[kireta21 13]

Real life AH-64D can carry AA missiles on wingtips, either 2 Sidewinders or 4 Stingers in twinpacks.

Also yeah, I don't understand why 9K121 Vikhr can engage flying targets while AGM-114 Hellfire can't, when both missiles have similary limited air-to-air capability

[max power 21]

Real life AH-64D can carry AA missiles on wingtips, either 2 Sidewinders or 4 Stingers in twinpacks.

Also yeah, I don't understand why 9K121 Vikhr can engage flying targets while AGM-114 Hellfire can't, when both missiles have similary limited air-to-air capability

(Quote emphasis mine).

They do not. One was designed to have AA capability, even in the design of its warhead, and one was not.

[wolfbite 8]

The main problem is that vikhr is still really effective against fast flyers.... I dont think helicopters are a problem for it due to its speed but it should have lowere accuracy against fast flyers....

[PuFu 4600]

(Quote emphasis mine).

They do not. One was designed to have AA capability, even in the design of its warhead, and one was not.

the vikhr in arma doesn't have 2 different types of warhead simulated, plus one would have to manually guide the missile on target, much like the AGM works. It is not a fire and forget missile like sidewinders in any case (this is the current behaviour)

[max power 21]

the vikhr in arma doesn't have 2 different types of warhead simulated, plus one would have to manually guide the missile on target, much like the AGM works. It is not a fire and forget missile like sidewinders in any case (this is the current behaviour)

None of the missiles in ArmA 2, including the aim-9, work anything like they do in real life.

The person I was replying to said they both have similar anti air capability, which is patently false.

[Rubber Grunt.dk 10]

Hellfire was used against (slow moving?) enemy air :)

"On 24 May 2001, a privately-owned Lebanese-registered Cessna 152 flew into Israeli airspace and was intercepted by two Israeli AH-64s, one of which shot down the Cessna with an AGM-114 Hellfire missile, killing the pilot."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_AH-64_Apache#Israel

[kireta21 13]

Similary M830 HEDP have no anti-air capability in ArmA for the sake of ballance, while it does have such in real life. T-90 in ArmA does not have Arena. I find those perfectly okay, otherwise due to how ArmA works M1 would turn into AA vehicle, and Arena would turn T-90 into either vehicle untochable to missiles, or would be nearly useless.

Many systems have some functions cut for sake of ballance, otherwise would create wierdness, like Vikhr blowning off the sky everything with effectiveness putting dedicated AA weapons in shame.

[PuFu 4600]

like Vikhr blowning off the sky everything with effectiveness putting dedicated AA weapons in shame.

reason is that it has the damage output setup so it can blow up armored vehicles, while all AA weapons have a lower one.

Not even gonna go into why AA heat signature weapons can target ground units that iRL would be close to impossible..

The point is: if you cannot simulate a certain weapon properly, then just at least make sure you don't turn it into a overkill...

anyways, no matter of the vikhr complains, things remained the same since A1 days, although all that is needed is ONE config line removed.

[.kju 3245]

Vote this ticket:

CIT - Feature #8890: Vikhr Missiles CfgAmmo should be changed to make the Vikhr Ground-Attack only

[kotov12345 10]

If BIS will do it in realistic way also should be done many other things one of them there not TAB key in choppers nether Americans or Russians :) and no radar showing ground vehicles.rockets speed in game too fast and reloading time to quick.

I wish will be veterans setting with no locking and no radar while killing tank is not such trivial as in game now.

Also according wiki

http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%B0-50

Kamov can be equip with 4 igla rockets and many other weapons which not in vanilla config.

Edited December 7, 2011 by kotov12345

[dm 9]

there not TAB key in choppers nether Americans or Russians

Oh not this shit again.

Yes, for AH-1, Ka-50/2, Hind etc, TAB locking is indeed wrong.

But, the Longbow system (so relevant to the Apache in this case) works by detecting (up to 128), classifying and then organising according to threat the top 16 targets. These 16 targets are then presented to the gunner (or pilot) to select with MFD/grip buttons. So in the case of the Apache Longbow, TAB targeting is reasonably realistic. Not perfect, but definitely not as unrealistic as people claim...

[kotov12345 10]

Oh not this shit again.

Yes, for AH-1, Ka-50/2, Hind etc, TAB locking is indeed wrong.

But, the Longbow system (so relevant to the Apache in this case) works by detecting (up to 128), classifying and then organising according to threat the .

yes - this shit again

no way that this chopper can detects ALL possible TARGETS AND FIRE same methods as in game.

Every system has response time,Sensitivity and many other parameters.

I understand you most players want some kind of cheating system like we have now but I'm try tell you that vet mod should be more realistic.

[-=seany=- 5]

hmm quite a lot of misinformation in here. The Vikhr is supposed to be able to engage air targets, using it's proximity fuse (the same way a Sidewinder etc does). the Hellfire can't do this.

Perhaps the missiles are too effective, but that doesn't mean its ability is wrong.

And anyway, I thought this was the kind of game where that kind of balancing is not needed. Eg making all similar classes of vehicle the same, but with different models and skins- no thanks. Just make missions that make sense.

Maybe people trying to top gun in their AH64 should consider making missions where the Apache does not have to attack air targets..much the same as in real life.

[Beagle 684]

hmm quite a lot of misinformation in here. The Vikhr is supposed to be able to engage air targets, using it's proximity fuse (the same way a Sidewinder etc does). the Hellfire can't do this.

Perhaps the missiles are too effective, but that doesn't mean its ability is wrong.

And anyway, I thought this was the kind of game where that kind of balancing is not needed. Eg making all similar classes of vehicle the same, but with different models and skins- no thanks. Just make missions that make sense.

Maybe people trying to top gun in their AH64 should consider making missions where the Apache does not have to attack air targets..much the same as in real life.

The problem in ArmA II is that the 9A1472 Vikhr flight profile is wrong, it flies straight instead of

and much to fast and manouverable and can not be evaded even by Jets.

So far the Vikhr is onyl know for having shot down a remote controlled non manouvering bomber for test purposes.

[kireta21 13]

Best solution would be simply add missing AA missiles on wingtips to both Ka-52 and AH-64. But that would require model changes, and this is last thing I would expect to happen.