Attack Chopper

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-04-21 08:45pm

Kenny_10_Bellys wrote:The smooth style and flaring of the engine bays made it almost impossible to stick on a 'black hole' system similar to the Apache, I did try it. What I did realise however is that this design has an added bonus similar to the A10 Warthog, in that the high mounted engine outlets are pretty much hidden from the ground by the rear wings, making a shoulder launched weapon that much harder to lock on. The nozzles are also quite thick, I can say there's a cooling system integrated into it, and I can add 'fins' inside the nozzle that hide the interior from view as well.

Looks to me like any flank shot would have an easy LOS to the exhaust nozzles. You can't keep those cool enough.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-04-21 10:39pm

Sea Skimmer wrote:65mm cannon? If by cannon you mean single shot grenade launcher, maybe. But any real gun of that caliber would rip such an aircraft apart. Theres little point in any case, you could mount eight heavy ATGM's in the same space that would be more effective against armor, and soft targets are better dealt with using rockets.

You mean a Mech-mounted 65mm cannon, then.

Post by **Beowulf** » 2003-04-21 10:55pm

Howedar wrote:
Sea Skimmer wrote:65mm cannon? If by cannon you mean single shot grenade launcher, maybe. But any real gun of that caliber would rip such an aircraft apart. Theres little point in any case, you could mount eight heavy ATGM's in the same space that would be more effective against armor, and soft targets are better dealt with using rockets.
You mean a Mech-mounted 65mm cannon, then.

Seems like it. Scratch the 65mm cannon, Kenny. If you want a big gun, turn the chaingun at the nose into a 25mm gun. The pylons are for missiles and rockets. If you want to shoot something with a gun, you use the nose-mounted one.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2003-04-21 11:05pm

Kenny_10_Bellys wrote:The Comanche???? Don't you mean the Apache?

Just for you guys I added some big guns and missiles and shit, the way you like it. This thing now has a 20mm gattling gun, 4 x 65mm cannon, 2 FFAR rocket pods and 4 x AIM-9P missiles. That should be enough to put the willies up anything that should happen to meet it up a dark alleyway. Since it's partly based on the co-axial Russian Hormone-B Helicopter by Kamov industries I also gave it a NATO codename and a number designation for the near future. Anyone out there got a better 'H' name then let me know.

Others have commented on those 65mm, but bah on the AIM-9P, which is an export-mod version of the Sidewinder. Go for the AIM-9X or at the least, the AIM-9M

Post by **Beowulf** » 2003-04-21 11:09pm

phongn wrote:Others have commented on those 65mm, but bah on the AIM-9P, which is an export-mod version of the Sidewinder. Go for the AIM-9X or at the least, the AIM-9M

I'd recommend the AIM-9X, do to the fact that this chopper is supposed to be from the future, and the 9X is the newest version. However, it's a Russian chopper, so it probably shouldn't be using and AIM-9 in the first place...

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2003-04-21 11:13pm

Beowulf wrote:
phongn wrote:Others have commented on those 65mm, but bah on the AIM-9P, which is an export-mod version of the Sidewinder. Go for the AIM-9X or at the least, the AIM-9M
I'd recommend the AIM-9X, do to the fact that this chopper is supposed to be from the future, and the 9X is the newest version. However, it's a Russian chopper, so it probably shouldn't be using and AIM-9 in the first place...

Well, if it's for the export market that can't get new American goods, then the AIM-9P does make some sense. OTOH, if they can get the AIM-9X then they should do it, since it is a much superior missile.

AFAIK, the R-73 series is larger than the AIM-9 series as well, which might be a reason to use the latter.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-04-21 11:19pm

phongn wrote:
AFAIK, the R-73 series is larger than the AIM-9 series as well, which might be a reason to use the latter.

Larger and heavier, for helicopters the drag penalty can be quite high. A few Russian helicopters can carry R-73, but a twin Ingals launcher much like that for the Stinger is what would normally be used.

The only service which often uses full sized AAM's on helicopters is the USMC, which gives its Cobras a single Sidewinder for over water missions. With nothing to hid behind and ease with which you can spot a helo over water the added range and speed is very valuable.

Kenny_10_Bellys · Post by **Kenny_10_Bellys** » 2003-04-22 08:06am

Jeez, there's no pleasing some people! One minute I'm being abused for not sticking enough big guns on it, now it's the weapons are too big or the wrong make. Let me explain my desicions...

The AIM-9P is indeed an export version, which makes sense as this is a Russian built chopper being operated by non-US forces, so it uses the export version of the missile. People who buy such things rarely have up-to-the-minute gear anyway, and since we're all one big happy family now, I figure the Russians can make a chopper that can use exported US equipment. Most of the helicopter-sims I've played had a couple of AIM-9's as standard in the loadout, they always came in handy for the odd chopper you ran into, so I had no qualms about using pretty air to air missiles on mine.

The cannons are there because people were bleating about big guns and because I think they'd be pretty useful. I was never a fan of unguided rockets in the simulators, they were always pretty crap and difficult to aim and use, so I thought cannons would be a better choice for a multi-role ground attack weapon. You can pretty much piss off any target you like with guns, and the travel time is way quicker. I still included a FFAR rigout as well, just to be conventional. For smaller targets and more flexibility there's always the chin mounted, helmet targeted chain gun.

I wasn't worried about drag so much, helicopters aren't the swiftest form of transport anyway and the mission profiles for ground attack ones are usually very low and slow, never rising more than about 50 feet above the deck and rarely travelling at more than 80 knots. Rise higher and you're a slow moving radar guided missile target, go faster and you risk becoming geography.

Warspite · Post by **Warspite** » 2003-04-22 12:34pm

The AIM9 is too big and heavy for current helicopters (2,87 metres @ 85,5 Kg), the one used by the US Army is the AIM92 (1,5 metres @ 5,68 Kg), an air version of the Stinger. The diference in weight alone is enormous, read fuel efficiency, for basically the same performance.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-04-22 06:05pm

Most helicopters SIM also let you put Stingers on Apaches, despite the fact that the US Army procured about ten of the rails and launchers which where used only for trials. The air launched stinger never received the AIM92 designation.

Kenny_10_Bellys · Post by **Kenny_10_Bellys** » 2003-04-22 07:03pm

Right then, mine carries the all-new AIM-10, the latest and lightest version of the popular air-to-air missile family. Not only is it helicopter rated, it's faster with a better aspect seeker head and leaves a strawberry smell behind when it fires. It's developed sometime around 2012 I believe.

Einhander Sn0m4n · Post by **Einhander Sn0m4n** » 2003-04-22 07:05pm

Kenny_10_Bellys wrote:Right then, mine carries the all-new AIM-10, the latest and lightest version of the popular air-to-air missile family. Not only is it helicopter rated, it's faster with a better aspect seeker head and leaves a strawberry smell behind when it fires. It's developed sometime around 2012 I believe.

ROFLMAO!!!!

Post by **Beowulf** » 2003-04-22 07:10pm

Strawberry smell... right...

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2003-04-22 07:11pm

Kenny_10_Bellys wrote:The cannons are there because people were bleating about big guns and because I think they'd be pretty useful. I was never a fan of unguided rockets in the simulators, they were always pretty crap and difficult to aim and use, so I thought cannons would be a better choice for a multi-role ground attack weapon. You can pretty much piss off any target you like with guns, and the travel time is way quicker. I still included a FFAR rigout as well, just to be conventional. For smaller targets and more flexibility there's always the chin mounted, helmet targeted chain gun.

They'll still rip the helo apart.

The whole reason they use dumb rockets is because they can throw a HE warhead a ways and they have no recoil. Heavy guns do and their time to target does not matter with the kind of things a dumbfire rocket and dumbfire support from a chopper in general does.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-04-22 08:04pm

Kenny_10_Bellys wrote:Right then, mine carries the all-new AIM-10, the latest and lightest version of the popular air-to-air missile family. Not only is it helicopter rated, it's faster with a better aspect seeker head and leaves a strawberry smell behind when it fires. It's developed sometime around 2012 I believe.

The number 10 is already taken in the US military designation system for missiles, it was the CIM-10 Bomarc. Currently the US is already up to 165, with the RGM-165 Land Attack Standard Missile. If you want a weapon from 2012, you should be looking a something more in the 180s-190s range. Likely higher.

Post by **Beowulf** » 2003-04-22 08:14pm

Call it the AIM-200.

Kenny_10_Bellys · Post by **Kenny_10_Bellys** » 2003-04-22 08:15pm

OK then, they're now officially AIM-10s, it's the Russian designation for the AIM-9ZZ.

I've de-ubered the guns a bit and added a quick and dirty tricycle undercarriage, I went for this format rather than the 2 large wheels at the front cos then it'd look too much like an Apache from the front. Still smells of Strawberry though...

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-04-22 09:05pm

I wouldn't worry too much about resembling real aircraft, the South African Rooivalk and Franco-German Tiger look highly similar yet where developed completely separate of each other. With such a short tail a tricycle system is really the only option anyway.

Warspite · Post by **Warspite** » 2003-04-23 07:46am

Kenny_10_Bellys wrote:OK then, they're now officially AIM-10s, it's the Russian designation for the AIM-9ZZ.

I've de-ubered the guns a bit and added a quick and dirty tricycle undercarriage, I went for this format rather than the 2 large wheels at the front cos then it'd look too much like an Apache from the front. Still smells of Strawberry though...

http://www.axeman3d.com/posts/helo11.jpg

Argh! It looks ugly... just like a helo should look.

Setzer · Post by **Setzer** » 2003-04-24 04:35pm

Sea Skimmer wrote:65mm cannon? If by cannon you mean single shot grenade launcher, maybe. But any real gun of that caliber would rip such an aircraft apart. Theres little point in any case, you could mount eight heavy ATGM's in the same space that would be more effective against armor, and soft targets are better dealt with using rockets.

Aww fuck, you beat me to it.

Post by **weemadando** » 2003-04-24 08:12pm

Warspite wrote:
Kenny_10_Bellys wrote:OK then, they're now officially AIM-10s, it's the Russian designation for the AIM-9ZZ.

I've de-ubered the guns a bit and added a quick and dirty tricycle undercarriage, I went for this format rather than the 2 large wheels at the front cos then it'd look too much like an Apache from the front. Still smells of Strawberry though...

http://www.axeman3d.com/posts/helo11.jpg
Argh! It looks ugly... just like a helo should look.

My thought was: "That thing can get airborne how?"

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-04-24 08:39pm

weemadando wrote:
My thought was: "That thing can get airborne how?"

JATO packs, lots of JATO rocket packs.

Kenny_10_Bellys · Post by **Kenny_10_Bellys** » 2003-04-24 09:02pm

Not get airborne???? What's your point caller?

Anyway, more detail and a Russian style camo job in the works...

Einhander Sn0m4n · Post by **Einhander Sn0m4n** » 2003-04-24 09:47pm

Kenny_10_Bellys wrote:Not get airborne???? What's your point caller?

Anyway, more detail and a Russian style camo job in the works...

http://www.axeman3d.com/posts/helo12.jpg

Just ignore that...

That helo Pwns anyway!

EDIT: Hey Kenny, did you get my emails?

Kenny_10_Bellys · Post by **Kenny_10_Bellys** » 2003-04-25 08:05am

E-Mails???? I think you better start using all my mail addresses when you write to me, there seems to be something wrong somewhere. Sing Hosannahs though, I get my new broadband connection on a new ISP on 8th May!!!!

No more mail and connection problems hopefully.