Helicopters in FPC

[TheWombat_matrixforum]

Yeah, if they're there, they should certainly fire! Though, maybe, like Mongo, for the Vulcans it's a case of "don't shoot them, it'll only make 'em mad."

[DoubleDeuce]

Speaking of Vulcans. When I was in S-3 I know our BN CO mostly planned to use them as Anti-Personal vehicles. Had no faith in their ability to hit anything above ground level.

[rsallen64]

As a former M60A3 gunner in the 68th Armor (Double Deuce, you made me respond with the unit badge!) I will say that we did routinely train to fire at Helo's with the main gun. The onboard computer was capable enough of calculating speed and trajectory, and once you lazed to the target, it only took a second to calculate all the factors you needed. I don't know how effective it would have been in real life, but it was routinely practiced in simulators, and the chopper only needs to be stationary for a few seconds, which is the same period of time it needs to acquire and lock on to its own target. A 105mm sabot round can travel from a main gun to the chopper far faster than a chopper's ATGM can fly in the opposite direction, and HINDs didn't usually have fire and forget ATGMs in the 80s, IIRC.

[battlerbritain]

I too think that Hinds in this game are too powerful.

They don't seem to use the tactics that I'd expect a Hind flight to use.

From the games in Red Storm I've seen that Hinds tend to try and 'Close Assault' enemy heavy armour, usually taking out quite a few platoons in the process.

The articles I've seen on Hind tactics would have the Hinds use their ATGMs at ~3 to 4km range, and as they only had 4 each that wouldn't take long. After the ATGMs had been expended they'd motor-up and fly fast towards the targets, opening up at ~1500m and using the 57mm rockets. They'd close to ~500m before breaking away, generally not closing within 500m as it's too risky for return fire. These tactics aren't too dis-similar to a rotary-winged version of an IL-2 Sturmovik.

The 57mm rockets aren't really much use against heavy armour and are really designed to keep the oppositions heads down and take out any soft stuff.

From that I'd say a flight of 4 Hinds might get lucky and take out a single tank platoon with the ATGMs, maybe some Inf and APCs. I wouldn't expect a single Hind flight to take out multiple heavy tank platoons from point blank.

On NATO anti-air I agree that NATO was sorely lacking in any anti-air worth anything. The Brits were (still are?) poorly equipped for anti-air. I remember before the Falklands that Rapier was lauded for having a 70% chance-of-hit. After the Falklands I think that figure ended up around 5%, or about the same as most Soviet SAMs. As for Javelin - well that really was pretty useless.

The Gepard however is a really useful piece of kit. Those 35mm guns on a Gepard would have Hinds using a 4km avoid distance. The Sov 2S6 Tunguska is similar to a Gepard in that it has 30mm guns, but it actually has quad-barrelled 30mm (there are 2 barrels in each piece of plumbing on each side of a 2S6). So I'd say that the 2S6 guns would be about the same as a Gepard (not counting the SAMs on a 2S6).

I also concur with real tankers above in that the main gun on a tank is useful against helos. I would expect M1's, Leo2's and Chally1's to be able to engage helos head-on within 3km. Tracking shots would be a bit more difficult.

Hope this helps,

B

[Mad Russian]

ORIGINAL: battlerbritain

On NATO anti-air I agree that NATO was sorely lacking in any anti-air worth anything. The Brits were (still are?) poorly equipped for anti-air. I remember before the Falklands that Rapier was lauded for having a 70% chance-of-hit. After the Falklands I think that figure ended up around 5%, or about the same as most Soviet SAMs. As for Javelin - well that really was pretty useless.


Hope this helps,

B

I believe those numbers belong to Blowpipe. Which proved to be worthless. If there is an interest, I can look up the numbers. During the Falklands campaign the Blowpipe proved to be amazingly inaccurate.

Good Hunting.

MR

[kemmo]

The original rapier systems didn't have all weather or night time capability, they could only be used in daylight in good conditions.Not surprising they performed poorly in the Falklands.the later models had the Blindfire radar system which put this right.

[76mm]

Just came back after not playing for awhile; first game had a couple of dozen Hinds. As usual, my Vulcans, SAMS, and Bradleys were pretty much helpless against them, the best defense was M1s, which seems very wrong...

Moreover, while my units couldn't do anything against the Hinds, they had no problem picking off my units while they were moving through urban areas, forests, etc., where it would seem that my units would have great cover against them.

Finally, the Hinds were flying in a heavy rainstorm with 500m visibility--is that right?

[CapnDarwin]

76mm, I'll check on the Hinds vs rain to see what they can do. US AD systems, other than the Stinger are weak. No way around that. I'll look into the cover numbers too versus helos tonight too.

[ultradave]

Going back up to the airburst vs helicopter:

Talk about a lucky (or unlucky depending on who you are) hit! It takes an artillery round 15-30 seconds to travel to its target. Plus time to call in, compute data and fire. You can't target a helicopter with artillery unless you happen to know it's hovering hiding in a certain location. In the minute or more to get the rounds out there the helicopter is bound to be somewhere else.

The one thing that you could do I suppose is that if you noticed they were going back to a specific location to hide for a bit and then reappear you could target that, however, that's unlikely as doing that is supposed to be specifically avoided as if the other side noticed that they'd have every AA asset pointed ready for you to pop up.

To me it doesn't seem like something worth worrying about adding special code for.

I guess there is always the line of sight shot - Time fuse set to 2 sec and fire directly at a chopper ( sort of like AA flak ). If they get close enough Killer Junior. But if you are in that situation you are probably diving for cover from the Hind [ this section meant strictly facetiously ]

[Alchenar]

As long as this discussion is being resurrected: my impression isn't that helicopters are inherently too powerful, it's that the magical way in which abstracted forward refuel/rearm sites follow HQs around and instantly set up around them means that gunships have far more persistence on the battlefield than seems plausible.

[Mad Russian]

I would agree with that.

In scenarios I currently create, I try to have helicopters and CAS come and go from the battlefield.

Good Hunting.

MR

[deadsunwheel]

In my most recent multiplayer game I was most surprised to see an airburst artillery barrage knock out one of my Hinds. A little off putting when you are not used to it. On the up side the little bit of success, some might say luck, my opponent had caused him to concentrate on trying to swat more out of the sky instead of laying the hurt on my T-64s.

[CapnDarwin]

The game engine takes into account a hovering helo as a target. Moving helos much less of a chance.

[Alchenar]

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

I would agree with that.

In scenarios I currently create, I try to have helicopters and CAS come and go from the battlefield.

Good Hunting.

MR

Oh, and apparently pilots don't need to work out flight plans or anything.

The fact that helicopters apparently don't have to deal with any of the order delay mechanics that any other unit has to deal with is an incredibly force multiplier for them because all you have to do is send them to a corner of the battlefield, dump their ordinance, then return to the HQ for a 30 min resupply before they are ready to go again and the effectiveness of enemy AA is barely an issue because the other side never gets a chance to respond.

[IronMikeGolf]

It was a few years after this timeframe that I saw the "coming real soon now" videos of the MPAT round for the M1. Dunno if tankers were training shooting helos with main gun then, but we sure were in Brads. Had Hind engagements on Table VIII, too.

[Mad Russian]

ORIGINAL: Alchenar


Oh, and apparently pilots don't need to work out flight plans or anything.

The fact that helicopters apparently don't have to deal with any of the order delay mechanics that any other unit has to deal with is an incredibly force multiplier for them because all you have to do is send them to a corner of the battlefield, dump their ordinance, then return to the HQ for a 30 min resupply before they are ready to go again and the effectiveness of enemy AA is barely an issue because the other side never gets a chance to respond.

Not sure what side you have been playing. Soviet/WGerman ADA is extremely deadly. US/UK ADA not so much.

Depends on the actual weapons systems and allotments of the period.

Good Hunting.

MR

[IronMikeGolf]

Playing the US campaign, I have had success with Chap, Vulcan, and Brads. Helps to put the latter in places where the Hinds have to come in close to engage

[Alchenar]

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

ORIGINAL: Alchenar


Oh, and apparently pilots don't need to work out flight plans or anything.

The fact that helicopters apparently don't have to deal with any of the order delay mechanics that any other unit has to deal with is an incredibly force multiplier for them because all you have to do is send them to a corner of the battlefield, dump their ordinance, then return to the HQ for a 30 min resupply before they are ready to go again and the effectiveness of enemy AA is barely an issue because the other side never gets a chance to respond.

Not sure what side you have been playing. Soviet/WGerman ADA is extremely deadly. US/UK ADA not so much.

Depends on the actual weapons systems and allotments of the period.

Good Hunting.

MR

The problem is that you can either avoid the ADA or (more often) kill it with artillery fires because the things put out crazy strong wireless signals.

The point is that once you know where the ADA is, you can plot a course with your gunships that takes them to a blind spot, lets them fire everything off, and return, and the opponent can't so much as tell his tanks to dash for cover or plot a smokescreen, much less adjust his ADA network as the choppers come in to cover the blind spot.

As the game currently stands they are a weapon that does not have an effective counter other than the operator's own mistakes.

I'm not even being hyperbolic: I just finished a game of 'First Strike' where within an hour of appearing on the battlefield, without any input from me, my artillery cleared all the Red ADA units off the map. The moment I realised this the majority of the rest of the battle consisted of shuttling my lynx units to and from fire positions.

[Mad Russian]

ADA is an area of major interest for the next game of the series. FPC is so detailed in so many areas that there is still a lot of room for us to tweak what we think could be better.

Good Hunting.

MR

[duckenf]

The Apaches seem to be rather less vulnerable and more powerful than reality. There was the rather major debacle in Gulf War 2 and a series of concerns in the Kosovo War,etc:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ ... opper.html

The level of damage inflicted the the iraqi RG on that Apache unit would suggest the WP/USSR would dish out rather more.