franze

Well gee .COMmunist, aren't you the enlightened one. Isn't the whole point of SAM systems to attack aircraft? That would mean that RockofSL's systems would directly affect how we make aircraft addons, and as a result of discussion, he can better decide how to make a SAM system that maintains a average effectiveness against all forms of aircraft, which is my basic concern. Frankly, .COMmunist, I don't know about RockofSL, but I enjoy(ed) discussing how SAM systems work and the effects they have on aerial operations. If RockofSL has problems with how we're discussing this, then I'm sure he'll speak up. Til then, please keep your rude comments to yourself.

RockofSL, I'd like to debate more with you but I think I'd be going off topic, so I'll just stick to a couple points and move on. Ok, two points: 1 - Kiowas in '91 were unarmed scout aircraft. 2 - One Apache out of 8? That's not the story I heard. One out of 8 is not a "good pounding". Plus I don't recall there being any losses to the strike package of January 17, consisting of 8 AH-64A and 1 UH-60. The total losses of all coalition aircraft, from the statistics I found for Desert Storm, show only 75 aircraft of all types lost. I doubt all 75 of those were helicopters. In addition to that, the first aircraft damaged on that day was a F-15 due to - if I remember correctly - a SAM. According to most places I've checked out on the net, the helicopter losses were as follows: 5 combat, 18 noncombat. If I'm reading that correctly, that's only 5 helicopters lost to combat action! Considering how many helicopters we deployed in Desert Storm... That's small beans. And I don't even have a clue at how many of the helicopter crews died. I'll copy and paste the *total* losses of all coalition aircraft from Desert Storm (not Iraqi Freedom) Fixed wing, 37 combat, 15 noncombat U.S. losses, 28 combat, 12 noncombat Helicopters, 23 (all U.S.): 5 combat, 18 noncombat It seems to me that the amount of fixed wing aircraft lost greatly outnumbers the amount of rotary wing lost in Desert Storm. Here's the aircraft losses for Iraqi Freedom, March 19 to April 18: Due to Enemy Fire 7 4 – AH-64D (Longbow Apache) 2 – AH-1W (Cobra) 1 – A-10A (Warthog) Other 13 6 out of 7 were helicopters. The reason? Well... AKs and RPGs. Longbow Hellfires can function as AR missiles, so they could function as well as a HARM or similar even with decreased range. In addition, Longbow Hellfires do not require constant designation as with the older AGM-114A and AGM-114K with LD based seekers. But, why should we, for example, use a Footmunch F-16 with HARM against a SAM site, putting this aircraft at risk, when (shameless plug) I could take a AH-64D from behind a hill or other obstacle, bob up, acquire the target, switch to LOAL and blast that SAM radar to bits without it even knowing I was there? On that note, what do you think would be a good average effectiveness rate for all missiles that track aerial targets? On all the SAM/AAMs I've made thus far, I've aimed for a 50-60% hit ratio. Also, how do you ensure a weapon system is effective from a certain direction? I don't know how real world SAMs best target, but I'd presume that tail-on launches would be the best aspect. In OFP I find that most AA missiles function better from frontal or side launches. Honestly, I'm really looking forward to a SA-2 system, as it would prove to be a effective team oriented target. I could imagine throwing a few ZU-57, ZU-23, SA-9, SA-13 around a SA-2 site to provide a very challenging target for helicopters, jets and ground forces to attack. Perhaps if the scripting you intend to use won't work, you could leave it up to a mission maker to incorporate the group links? Sorry again for the thread hijack above, but I was enjoying that debate.

Or make a special "throwing knives" weapon with it's own reloadanimations to simulate it.

Forgive me if I seem a bit dense here, but how are fixed wing assets less vulnerable to a SAM defense compared to a rotary asset? Why wouldn't a fixed position make a good target for attack helicopters? Aside from the obvious reason that it will (probably) have mobile AAA defensive systems around it, what's to keep a helicopter from performing a bob up attack on the target behind cover? Desert is naturally no place for an attack helicopter, but lest we forget, attack helicopters did open up a corridor for the fixed wing aircraft by destroying a radar warning station - which I should also note didn't detect them before they struck, either. I'd have to agree that most attack helicopters are too vulnerable to be used for SEAD; but with attack helicopters similar to the AH-64, would your opinion change any? But that assumes that the helicopter is spotted in the first place, and it assumes theres only one or two helicopters attacking the target. Why should attack helicopters operate with less numbers than wild weasels in the SEAD role? Survival rates between fixed wing aircraft and helicopters has more to do with the fact of what helicopters are: mobile assets that move around to support the ground forces. That leaves a lot more frequency for helicopters than fixed wing aircraft, and with that you're going to be shot at more. I'd say that more helicopters go down from AA guns rather than AA missiles. Get a fixed wing aircraft to operate at low altitudes, with the same frequency as helicopters and I'm sure they'd suffer more losses as well. I'm sure you know far more than I do about SAM systems, I've been more interested in rotary wing aircraft than anything. Although I have to admit for some reason, the SA-9 is a personal favorite of mine. From a pure *gameplay* perspective, I find it much easier to deploy a attack helicopter to destroy SAM systems rather than trying to engage them with jets. I find this especially true with the MCAR SA-9 and SA-8, even if those have unrealistic capabilities; but it also applies to smaller threats as well. If what you propose will enable the fixed wing aircraft a better opportunity, I still don't know what the reason would be not to use a attack helicopter against an area with SAM systems deployed when you can get far better bang for the buck out of a helicopter compared to a jet. (Sorry for the thread Hijack. )

Actually attack helicopters would be ideal for taking out SAM systems, depending on the terrain and conditions of course. Especially if you consider a attack helicopter can take out the major critical systems to a SAM site with precision and speed without being detected. I think this is especially true in OFP, up to the point that AAA systems and shoulder launched missiles are the most effective against any aerial threat (my opinion, of course). Trying to defeat a SAM system, be it MANPADS or a SA-13, in a fixed wing jet is pretty tough, especially when you can't easily just drop into the dirt and hide. In the real world, you also have to consider the fact that SAM systems, especially those that rely upon radar for tracking and guidance, have a hell of a time tracking a object moving through the weeds and various obstacles, compared to one moving at 250+ meters at a speed of 700-800kmh. Naturally this is mostly speculation on my part as I have no experience with SAMs whatsoever, but it seems to me that helicopters would be much better suited to attack air defenses than fixed wing jets, which when we're talking systems like the SA-2, would be exactly what the SAMs like to target. On a different note, I think when it comes to other features, such as RWR, it's far easier, and far more definable to have a mission setup properly to employ those features rather than trying to include them in the addon itself.

He means you use DXDLL which makes things darker than they really are.

Wow, this SA-8 is very cool. The way the missiles fly up on a semi-vertical path is fascinating. How'd you manage to pull that off?

You missed the Falklands Harrier a while back? You couldn't change your direction once in the air but you could take off VTOL style.

There was a upgrade package made for the AH-1W that gives it a laser designator that is compatible with Hellfires. This upgrade also included a FLIR system.

Ah the demo mission won't run for me, missing a editor upgrade, but thats ok. Getting just as much fun outta this guy by having myself a shootout in Provins.

From the readme: It's still quite a big step, we've seen worse limitations.

Personally, I believe when it comes to missile weapons that are designed to track aircraft, there should be no corners cut on lethality. If a aircraft is having problems with a SAM system in the area, then either a different approach or a call to a friendly unit capable of dealing with the SAM should be used. As the AI cannot fly aircraft with as much profieciency as a human, especially those that are designed to attack targets, it makes sense to design SAMs in such a way that they will provide the most challenge to human players. I vote for realistic engagement ranges and missile hit capabilities.

I've seen some photos of WAH-64s carrying both the traditional rocket pods and the ones with aerodynamic covers, so that's why I posed the question. It seems they use both types; but looking at the photos availible, I'd presume that the rounded ones are more common. I don't suppose you know what the main rocket warhead they use is. Otherwise, I'll give the WAH-64 CRV7 FAT rockets as standard.

I've got a question for those of you waiting for the WAH-64/Apache AH Mk1: Do you want the rocket pods with the aerodynamic, curved fronts, or the traditional "flat" faced rocket pods?

Try preloading the helicopter in the CTI mission, along with a wreck for it and see if that helps you any. Our testing in MP was done with usually me as the host (non-dedicated) with the clients. I had hoped to get it tested on a dedicated server before we released but I ran out of time and didn't know how to setup a dedicated server. I'll try to get in contact with you later on if you don't mind seeing if the latest versions will run properly on a dedicated server. I'm sure with thorough testing we can allieviate some of the issues at hand.

I don't know what to say about this; I've tried as hard as possible to ensure this will run well on a variety of systems but as stated in the readme, it can lag depending on specifications. Key notes: -Any more than 8 of these helicopters will definately give you issues in a crowded battlefield environment -Turn off the chopper dust! I can't stress this strongly enough. It was implemented for those who like the eye candy with high and low settings, plus off settings - use it! -If you believe that the scripts are causing all your lag, use the variable fz_ah64scripts = 0 to turn off all scripts. If that doesn't help with your framerates, then I can't offer anything else to help out. Thanks for the info on the rockets and Hellfires; Have you got any idea if they use a designation for the rockets like M229 or whatnot?

What I recommend is to use these variables in your mission: fz_ah64rtrwash = 0 - to turn the rotor wash off, it tends to cause the most lag. fz_ah64cmfx = 0 - turns off the countermeasure flare effects, which can be unnecessary at times. Generally though, turning off the rotor wash makes the most marked improvement. You can also use these: fz_ah64crash = 0 - turns off the crash scripting so you don't get a wrecked script, etc anymore - preloading the wrecks usually corrects any issue with this but it might help you out. fz_ah64arming = 0 - turns off the dynamic arming, although you might want to retain that, but it's another script you can turn off. Hope this helps. I'm afraid we can't really do that as the nature of UserActions means they're being "initialized" after the basic OFP game functions. Of course if there is a way to do it that I'm unaware of, sound off. Let's just say that we have other plans for the snakes at this time.

Most of the differences will be minor, such as different sensors scattered across the aircraft, some armament differences, small MFD page differences. For example, the WAH-64 will have Starstreaks rather than Stingers, etc. EDIT: Speaking of which, maybe someone in the know can PM me some of the various armament differences on the WAH-64 and whatnot. I know they use a different rocket pod and AAMs, but haven't got a clue of the Hellfire types they use or what the standard rocket type is.

Hey Laser, have you got any plans to make additional ground crew and whatnot? Or will that be the crew cheif? I think you ought to look into making a FARP crew set, that would rock!

That's a edited image. This is a real AH-1Z.

Have you seen the OD paint they use on these birds? They aren't exactly glossy, you know. They'll take some bright light in, but when it comes to shining areas, these things don't shine like a polished aluminum aircraft. Example: Photo, AH-64A

Something else to keep in mind that how aircraft are maintained and how they look greatly varies from unit to unit. Some units might only be concerned with how well the aircraft runs, while others might want to make sure it remains in almost factory new condition. For example: AH-64A, worn A bit better maintained AH-64A As we already know, a lot of how a machine looks depends on the conditions it operates in. Since we have a wide variety of terrain and conditions availible to us, we can either make specific "upgrades" to demonstrate various conditions or we can try to get the best fit on just one type. A lot depends on your perception.

As Nodunit is constantly modifying the textures, you'd have to ask him... I only handle the models.

Pretty nice texture, I must say. Only problem is, it's still the same old BIS model. Must be a pretty old project then? Our AH-64's Tail

I can't say I'm a big fan of having a black set because at the very absolute most, it's a rare scheme to go on. However, since it's pretty much Nodunits job, it doesn't really concern me. At the cost of being able to rescue downed pilots, yes. I don't consider it a good price. As Nodunit has been upgrading our pilots, and Laser's pilots are for a different package entirely, we won't be using them. Of course if you want to use Laser's pilots in your missions, that's entirely up to you.