Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
nullrick

AH-99 Blackfoot upgrade/second variant

Recommended Posts

Is it me or are there others who think a second variant of the AH-99 Blackfoot should be made for more forward engagements?

The first would be lighter, great for quick gun runs and reconnaissance. The second would be heavier with better armor AND the addition of anti tank abilities. This would be made possible by adding two pylons as seen in the picture below.

http://s30.postimg.org/schq99jsh/image.jpg (138 kB)

With the current AH-99 as the "lighter" variant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Comanche was design as a stealth recon helo that could mark targets for the Apaches, that's why it's armory it's limited.

What's missing is the Apache/heavy gunship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except in real life the comanche had those pylons. They were meant to be punched off if necessary, but since that's complicated in A3, two variants make sense, and should have been made from the beginning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before, I would've said no, but now it makes a lot of sense, you trade maneuverability for firepower. Makes sense.

What we really need is some sort of vehicle loadout customization screen...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree, only because when you use Stealth, the Armor phase is eliminated. You cannot have Armor, and stealth, especially in a Helicopter platform. However, what i could see, is the Ghosthawk/Mohawk with gun pods or rockets. I believe an in game Icon for the Heavy Ghost hawk was available somewhere but no model was ever found. Anyhow... Why not just make an Apache, but with some "Stealth" features, and/or improvements. Much like how they F/A-18 in real life is getting fitted with advanced concealed weapons pods, and conformal fuel tanks on the top fuselage. Or even better yet, why not, just give us the C-192 what ever it's called, in Gunship version. Or something...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyhow... Why not just make an Apache, but with some "Stealth" features, and/or improvements. Much like how they F/A-18 in real life is getting fitted with advanced concealed weapons pods, and conformal fuel tanks on the top fuselage. Or even better yet, why not, just give us the C-192 what ever it's called, in Gunship version. Or something...

Because that's a whole lot of work that isn't likely to happen, and almost certainly won't happen for free at this point.

Why not just upgrade the vehicle we already have in game with some capabilities that its real life counterpart actually had?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since in A3 replaced Apache helicopter by Comanche - an attack variant should be added , like i did on this ticket http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=10809

http://digitality.comyr.com/Comanche/arc/rah-66-blocks.gif

atm the Ah99 cant compete against Mi48 , also the Mi48 has more firepower than Ah99 - so thats the reason why the Ah99 needs his attack version

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole "stealth" thing in ArmA is just cosmetics. As far as I understand, despite of other aspects like low noise emission, stealth is meant to minimize radar signature. As there is no radar system of any kind implemented in ArmA, it's totally non-sense. So I would also like to see a heavy version of the Blackfoot. For scouting and reconnaissance I would prefer a small chopper with special optics like the Kiowa (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_OH-58_Kiowa).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In all honesty here guys, the cheapest, quickest, most realistic thing that Bohemia can do is just take the current Blackfoot and add on the stubby little wing pylons that the real bird had. Ideally she'd have 2 sidewinders on the pop-out racks along with 2 hellfires or rocket pods or something, and then 4 hellfires on each wing for the total of 8 that the real thing had.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For all those who don't agree with this new contenent...

Think about it guys, the idea is cool, we are NOT looking for a single Blackfoot version but actually 2 variants as follows

AH-99 Blackfoot - fast, agile, useful for any type of recoinassance mission, able to take down light targets and infantry

RAH-66 Comanche - heavy, well armored, able to take down both air targets and heavy ground units, slower than his brother and less agile

We are NOT talking about REMOVING the current helicopter and make a new one with external pylons, we are talking about being able to CHOOSE between the 2.

Some people can say "hey, the RAH-66 will be OP compared to CSAT", then! Give something else to Russia aswell, maybe an other helicopter or maybe the same helicopter with a different weaponry, or a MAYBE add the cool feature to change the equipment of the helicopter, assigning the weapons we want in each "STRONG POINT"...there is a sea a solution BUT!

But sending a cool helicopter like the Comanche to fight with no pylons is a CRIME OF WAR!

And, talking about the effort... I really think it's somethig easy, I mean they worked on a brand new helicopter and they can't add 2 surfaces of the same color to the Blackfoot and name it Comanche?

Edited by cancan69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're never going to get a "RAH-66", cancan. Never. IF we get anything out of this, which I highly highly doubt, it will be another version of the Blackfoot, same name, more ordnance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We're never going to get a "RAH-66", cancan. Never. IF we get anything out of this, which I highly highly doubt, it will be another version of the Blackfoot, same name, more ordnance.

I know what you mean, it was just an idea to name the attack version in a different way just not to make confusion... I mean the 2 choppers are basically the same, only the name changes due to (I don't know why, maybe licenses?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure you could add the external pylons by modding it in. If you look at this thread you will see that there is a boat lifting frame on the back of the hemtt. I might look into trying it out and see how effective it works as I do feel that another version of the AH99 is greatly needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I flown this quite a bit, I've always found the DAGRs can take a T-100 out in 4 shots. Given that it's generally a recon heli. I think that's fairly stronk.

That said, I wouldn't say no to a pylon variant. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's hope somebody up there hear us and starts working on it....as I said, sending the Blackfoot with this equipment is a crime of war

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having worked the RAH program the exteranal wing stores were meant to give the helcopter more stowed kills when it did not need to be stealthy. So eight Hellfire or twenty-four more DAGR would be appropriate for a "Heavy" version. By the way "stealth" and "open rotors" are an oximoron. By 2035 wthout the help of a hacker it is a joke.

As a note of irony the US Army is now going to use the Apache to do the Scout mission.

Somone wants an Army 2030 unobtainium, take the Blackfoot fuselage, turn the tail rotor 90 degrees and put close coupled coaxial rotor on top. 230 knots cruise and level body decel... yum.

Edited by Yasotay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Since in A3 replaced Apache helicopter by Comanche - an attack variant should be added , like i did on this ticket http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=10809

http://digitality.comyr.com/Comanche/arc/rah-66-blocks.gif

atm the Ah99 cant compete against Mi48 , also the Mi48 has more firepower than Ah99 - so thats the reason why the Ah99 needs his attack version

I disagree with the AH-99 not being able to compete? The last time I saw an MI-48 and AH-99 In the sky at the same time, the AH-99 was always the victor. Why? Because it has Air to Air missiles and the Kajman does not. The Ah-99 has the Kajman beat already just by Air Superiority factor. Secondly, the MI-48 has 8 guided rockets... The AH-99 has 24 a guided rockets. Though, the Kajman has 32 free fire, and the Ah-99 has no free fire. So does it even out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I disagree with the AH-99 not being able to compete? The last time I saw an MI-48 and AH-99 In the sky at the same time, the AH-99 was always the victor. Why? Because it has Air to Air missiles and the Kajman does not. The Ah-99 has the Kajman beat already just by Air Superiority factor. Secondly, the MI-48 has 8 guided rockets... The AH-99 has 24 a guided rockets. Though, the Kajman has 32 free fire, and the Ah-99 has no free fire. So does it even out?

I've always preferred the blackfoot over the kajman. While it's not the tank that the Kajman is, it is much more of a multi-role gunship, while the kajman is really just a re-imagined hind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've always preferred the blackfoot over the kajman. While it's not the tank that the Kajman is, it is much more of a multi-role gunship, while the kajman is really just a re-imagined hind.

Would it be for somebody a problem if that helicopter we are talking about has something more, making it more "versatile" in different situations? is it too much to ask? I don't think so, and if it's not balanced you can always add more weaponry to the Mil 48

---------- Post added at 11:07 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:26 PM ----------

I just posted an other Ticket, under "Feature Request"

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=20929

Let them hear our voice!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's really quite a big problem right now. I don't think people understand how much it needs to change. Right now it carries 24 DAGR missiles.

DAGRs are a system developed by Lockheed-Martin which consists of a kit that can be used to turn the commonly used M151 2.75" Hydra 70 rockets into Semi-Active Laser Homing missiles.

The M151 is a 10lb HEDP warhead, the standard and most commonly used warhead for the Hydra 70 rocket. It is a simple impact-fused warhead which carries 1kg Composition B-4 HE explosive charge.

Now lets look at the DAGR in game: It is a light, highly maneuverable off-axis tracking missile. Because they are so small, they are carried in quantities of 24 per AH-99. A simple test reveals that one single DAGR can take out a T-100 Varsuk MBT.

1 HEDP rocket taking out a whole tank? I'm not talking about forcing the crew to bail - a shot to a T-100 causes the tank to explode within several seconds. All 7 of the A-164's AP (yes, they are actually Armor Piercing for some odd reason) rockets can't even get close to doing this. Point blank to the rear, these can at most knock out the engine and render the cannon broken. Something is off here.

What we need is for the DAGR missiles to be changed drastically - they need their nonexistent indirect hit damage and range to be significantly boosted to properly simulate a high explosive general purpose warhead, and they need their effectiveness against all armor to be significantly reduced (down to the damage of DAR rockets, which should have the exact same damage properties since they are based off of the same rocket). Perhaps do this to 1/2 of the missiles, and change the other half into a Flechette Anti-Armor warhead type, for added effectiveness against light armor such as MRAPs and light IFVs/APCs.

Once DAGRs have been fixed, we need the heavy attack variant that is being discussed here, with at least several AGM-114 hellfires or equivalents. It's simply ridiculous being able to kill 24 main battle tanks without having to rearm. I have yet to see a mission where 24 main battle tanks are even used by one side. As much as I hate to say this, it's not at all fun or fair for this to happen, and some balancing (yes, I know..) has to occur. Imagine if you drive a tank half way across altis, slaughtering the enemy, only to get killed from 2km away by a weapon that you have absolutely no defence against. If suddenly tanks had Goalkeeper CIWS on top or Active protection, it would ruin the game for the helicopters, just the way that the tank crew's games are being ruined by the AH-99's magic DAGRs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's really quite a big problem right now. I don't think people understand how much it needs to change. Right now it carries 24 DAGR missiles.

DAGRs are a system developed by Lockheed-Martin which consists of a kit that can be used to turn the commonly used M151 2.75" Hydra 70 rockets into Semi-Active Laser Homing missiles.

The M151 is a 10lb HEDP warhead, the standard and most commonly used warhead for the Hydra 70 rocket. It is a simple impact-fused warhead which carries 1kg Composition B-4 HE explosive charge.

Now lets look at the DAGR in game: It is a light, highly maneuverable off-axis tracking missile. Because they are so small, they are carried in quantities of 24 per AH-99. A simple test reveals that one single DAGR can take out a T-100 Varsuk MBT.

1 HEDP rocket taking out a whole tank? I'm not talking about forcing the crew to bail - a shot to a T-100 causes the tank to explode within several seconds. All 7 of the A-164's AP (yes, they are actually Armor Piercing for some odd reason) rockets can't even get close to doing this. Point blank to the rear, these can at most knock out the engine and render the cannon broken. Something is off here.

What we need is for the DAGR missiles to be changed drastically - they need their nonexistent indirect hit damage and range to be significantly boosted to properly simulate a high explosive general purpose warhead, and they need their effectiveness against all armor to be significantly reduced (down to the damage of DAR rockets, which should have the exact same damage properties since they are based off of the same rocket). Perhaps do this to 1/2 of the missiles, and change the other half into a Flechette Anti-Armor warhead type, for added effectiveness against light armor such as MRAPs and light IFVs/APCs.

Once DAGRs have been fixed, we need the heavy attack variant that is being discussed here, with at least several AGM-114 hellfires or equivalents. It's simply ridiculous being able to kill 24 main battle tanks without having to rearm. I have yet to see a mission where 24 main battle tanks are even used by one side. As much as I hate to say this, it's not at all fun or fair for this to happen, and some balancing (yes, I know..) has to occur. Imagine if you drive a tank half way across altis, slaughtering the enemy, only to get killed from 2km away by a weapon that you have absolutely no defence against. If suddenly tanks had Goalkeeper CIWS on top or Active protection, it would ruin the game for the helicopters, just the way that the tank crew's games are being ruined by the AH-99's magic DAGRs.

I agree with you, I didn't test it but if you say that one DAGR can take down a whole T-100 then they should be nerfed, maybe keeping the locking on ability but making them drastically less powerful, as they should be (it would be like shooting FFARs to an enemy tank)

Once this is done we can proceed with an attack version of the AH, with AGMs for anti-tank role

-----------------------------

EDIT: Just checked, but with Real Armor Mod, looks like you need at least 6 DAGRs to kill a T-100, looks pretty balanced no?

Edited by cancan69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with you, I didn't test it but if you say that one DAGR can take down a whole T-100 then they should be nerfed, maybe keeping the locking on ability but making them drastically less powerful, as they should be (it would be like shooting FFARs to an enemy tank)

Once this is done we can proceed with an attack version of the AH, with AGMs for anti-tank role

-----------------------------

EDIT: Just checked, but with Real Armor Mod, looks like you need at least 6 DAGRs to kill a T-100, looks pretty balanced no?

Perhaps try it without the mod.

Somebody else told me that even with vanilla weapons it took a similar amount of DAGRs, so I am going to conduct more tests. My test was executed from 100m away at 5m elevation, directly to the engine compartment.

EDIT: Been testing a bit more, and it does look like it takes more DAGRs if firing from longer ranges (for some reason). However, this is essentially beside the point. HE rockets should not be capable of destroying a main battle tank. But for some reason, in this game they are configured this way. A DAGR delivered amidst a group of infantry does not kill anybody, even if a man is within 3m of the blast. The rockets are labeled "HE," and yet can't kill an infantry without hitting him directly. Theoretically, the DAGR should be identical to the DAR rocket in terms of damage behavior, as the DAR is supposed to roughly represent an M151 Hydra 70, which is the rocket used by Lockheed Martin to make the DAGR. But it seems the DAGR are set up in some sort of odd HEAT configuration, perhaps replicating the M247 HEAT warhead for the Hydra 70.

My point is that we need dedicated anti-tank missiles, and change the DAGR back into plain old guided HEDP missiles. Perhaps one half of them could be Flechette anti-tank missiles, for added effectiveness against MRAPs and light armor (ATGMs are overkill for these, HE is too weak in many cases).

Edited by the_Demongod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Perhaps try it without the mod.

Somebody else told me that even with vanilla weapons it took a similar amount of DAGRs, so I am going to conduct more tests. My test was executed from 100m away at 5m elevation, directly to the engine compartment.

EDIT: Been testing a bit more, and it does look like it takes more DAGRs if firing from longer ranges (for some reason). However, this is essentially beside the point. HE rockets should not be capable of destroying a main battle tank. But for some reason, in this game they are configured this way. A DAGR delivered amidst a group of infantry does not kill anybody, even if a man is within 3m of the blast. The rockets are labeled "HE," and yet can't kill an infantry without hitting him directly. Theoretically, the DAGR should be identical to the DAR rocket in terms of damage behavior, as the DAR is supposed to roughly represent an M151 Hydra 70, which is the rocket used by Lockheed Martin to make the DAGR. But it seems the DAGR are set up in some sort of odd HEAT configuration, perhaps replicating the M247 HEAT warhead for the Hydra 70.

My point is that we need dedicated anti-tank missiles, and change the DAGR back into plain old guided HEDP missiles. Perhaps one half of them could be Flechette anti-tank missiles, for added effectiveness against MRAPs and light armor (ATGMs are overkill for these, HE is too weak in many cases).

that is an unbalance problem with the game itself, and to be honest, as I read you tried to blow up an EMPTY T-100, who is so fool to approach to a fully operative T-100? the only MG can tear you apart instantly... an helicopter should be DISTANT from his target, come out from a hill, shoot an High AGM missile and go back to cover, at least 1km away or even a light vehicle can destroy you with a couple of shots

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
that is an unbalance problem with the game itself, and to be honest, as I read you tried to blow up an EMPTY T-100, who is so fool to approach to a fully operative T-100? the only MG can tear you apart instantly... an helicopter should be DISTANT from his target, come out from a hill, shoot an High AGM missile and go back to cover, at least 1km away or even a light vehicle can destroy you with a couple of shots

It's with the game itself but still related to the issue at hand. HE rockets should not be able to kill tanks - pretty simple. The DAGRs' damage model should be replaced with the DAR, and we should have some dedicated hellfire-like AT missiles added.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty good idea, never knew that the Comanche had pylons that could be taken off for stealth operations.

Hopefully, if John Spartan and Saul's FA18X black wasp wins MANW in the addons category, then Bohemia could use the service menu on all of it's aircraft? Now THAT would be quite something.

Maybe we better call Saul, and just tell him to put the service menu on every aircraft as well...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×