.com.unity Forums

.com.unity Forums (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/index.php)
-   WinSPMBT (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=78)
-   -   Question: Helicopter mounted Stingers (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=51461)

whdonnelly January 16th, 2017 09:25 AM

Helicopter mounted Stingers
 
Does anyone have any game experience using helicopters carrying SAMs? So far I've not been able to get them to fire as anti-aircraft missiles. The best I've been able to do so far is to manually fire them at other helicopters.
Thanks
Will

RightDeve January 16th, 2017 09:42 AM

Re: Helicopter mounted Stingers
 
Maybe the thing should not move first, and then it fires in the OpFire phase?
Never tried it though.

Aeraaa January 16th, 2017 09:57 AM

Re: Helicopter mounted Stingers
 
They do work and even better than they should. I shot down two fixed winged aircraft in a battle with AA missiles fired by Cobra gunships (one MiG-27 and one Su-22 IIRC).

Mobhack January 16th, 2017 10:52 AM

Re: Helicopter mounted Stingers
 
Missiles require the firer to be halted (though if they have a stabiliser, you can move as far as the stabiliser rating and still get a (reduced chance) shot - st least for ATGM. I'm not going into the code to see if that also applies to SAM).

Helicopters with SAMs are really just another form of mobile SP-SAM, and were really only there for helo on helo action. But they will pop off at strike air on occasion.

Personally I do not bother - I take the helo with more ATGM or whatever if there is a choice, as I prefer my SP-AA to be dedicated vehicles placed on over-watch and I would rather that any chopper I buy had those few extra anti-tank weapons. In addition in battles you usually either have air superiority (so no enemy air about), or the opposite (so you dont have the helos, bar any campaign core ones!). Air parity is comparatively rare, where both sides get roughly similar number of air strikes at purchase time. Therefore, in my opinion, helos with SM on board are generally a waste of points, since tank or grunt bashing (depending on weaponry) is their prime task - not stooging around as mobile AA systems.

Suhiir January 16th, 2017 11:39 AM

Re: Helicopter mounted Stingers
 
Helo SAMs work just fine, as long as you're stationary the TURN BEFORE opposition aircraft/helos arrive/are spotted.

If you've moved the turn prior to their arrival they rarely fire.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aeraaa (Post 836628)
They do work and even better than they should. I shot down two fixed winged aircraft in a battle with AA missiles fired by Cobra gunships (one MiG-27 and one Su-22 IIRC).

I'm not sure about "better then they should", they seem to hit about as often as any other equilivent SAM. I can't speak for anyone else in the world but the whole reason USMC helos carry SAMs is for defense vs opposition aircraft. Shooting at other helos is kind of a bonus.

Wdll January 16th, 2017 03:56 PM

Re: Helicopter mounted Stingers
 
Years ago I remember a mp battle where my opponent got very upset and stopped playing with me. IIRC I had an AH-64 and shot down a stealth aircraft, I don't remember which one, F-117, B2 whatever. He was so upset lol. I haven't "seen" him since.
It's very rare occurrence though, ever since drones became IMO too powerful (as in too difficult to get shot down), I stopped using gunships with AA weapons, waste of ammo.

Imp January 17th, 2017 01:29 AM

Re: Helicopter mounted Stingers
 
Definitely works just used as air defence, move the obligatory one hex to prevent ATGMs targeting & they fire fine. As stated don't move & there are better ways to provide air defence cost wise.

FASTBOAT TOUGH January 17th, 2017 01:39 AM

Re: Helicopter mounted Stingers
 
First no problems though actually should be more aggressive when jets are in the area. Second they are pretty much standard issue now and in the past for many countries. You must remember the primary purpose of the attack helo is to protect and provide ground support for the troops. The protect part you can attach that descriptive to mean against helos and jets. I hear the the smirks from some corners ;). I honestly wasn't familiar with what group performed the actual test however, I had heard (Or better, came across it quite awhile back...) Operation J-CATCH and now know it was conducted by the USA 20th Special Operations Squadron which was disbanded at some point but has been reactivated. It should be noted J-CATCH wasn't the first nor the last test conducted, however it was the first in-depth test conducted in yes January 1978. So for your further reading entertainment I give you the following...
http://www.wearethemighty.com/articl...ck-helicopters
http://usafhpa.org/20helisq/20hornet...0missions.html


From ref. 2...

"In January 1978, the 20th became involved in a program called J-CATCH. J-CATCH, for "Joint Countering Attack Helicopters", was to develop tactics to counter a growing threat from attack helicopters. Concern over the increased helicopter firepower and numbers in potential adversary nations led Tactical Air Command to outfit 20th UH-1Ns and CH-3Es as aggressors, creating a force that simulated Soviet attack helicopter capabilities and tactics. Scenarios included helicopter-to-helicopter tactics, and helicopter-to-fighter tactics. The J-CATCH helicopters were painted with special camouflage schemes and configured with Mini-TAT chain guns mounted under the fuselage, which were aimed by the co-pilot's hand controlled sight. The weapon system was loaned to the Air Force by the Canadian government. The 20th's aggressor force was known as "Red Force" and adopted a red scarf, which is still worn by the unit today. The red star on the unit patch today is a reminder of the J-CATCH mission, which successfully concluded in 1979."

and...

"The 20th remained busy with J-CATCH in 1979. They also experienced problems with the weapons system on the CH-3E. Spent brass from the guns was ejected overboard, where it entered the aircraft's slipstream. The slipstream carried the brass into the tail rotor, causing damage to tail blades. The 1st SOW developed a solution and implemented it, preventing damage to aircraft and possible loss of aircraft and lives."

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/apache/

From ref. 3 read the weapons section you'll see a standard fighter mounted AA missile is part of it's inventory and the "bold" I added...

"The Longbow Apache carries the combination of armaments chosen for the particular mission. In the close support role, the helicopter carries 16 Hellfire missiles on four four-rail launchers and four air-to-air missiles."

Unit history ref. 3 covers the mission in more depth...

http://usafhpa.org/20helisq/20HIST2.pdf
http://pavecave.com/
http://pavecave.com/history/red-scarf-history/
http://pavecave.com/history/20th-spe...icial-history/


Finally from the USA...
In Phase I/II is when the 5:1 kill ratio was established with the helos using just the onboard MG's. The lessons learned from this were applied in the latter phases but, in terms of the improved fighter tactics you'll have to agree the kill ratios really aren't that good as noted in the below ref. from the USA and it notes the fact at no time were the helos armed with any AA missiles (And you need to read the assessment of if they had been.). This is a good read and the helicopters used then would be no match against today's helo. And as the APACHE background ref. above shows, the USA learned from this document when the APACHE D was fielded in 1989.

If you want to skip the preliminaries go to PDF Pg. 25 of 61/or Pg. 17 of this document. With the advanced AA weapons, FCS/radars, IR protection, maneuverability/speed and improved defensive systems, I would think the odds would favor the helo especially against most ground attack aircraft in particular. Anyway...
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a180904.pdf

Finally a newer source but more a USA FM, in particular FM1-112 ATTACK HELICOPTER OPERATIONS for this discussion see PDF Pg. 258/or Pg. F-12 of this document.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...12/fm1-112.pdf

The ground attack variations diagrams follow the pages above. It covers multiple and paired attack ops against tanks. This kind've covers an older topic of if you will, to mimic real life ops more closely we should have to buy them in pairs then we could eliminate those single AH slots from the most advanced countries i.e. U.S., UK, Russia, Germany etc. etc. Though I suspect this might be a PITA to do, I don't know? And remember I'm a strong advocate for these in the game and before I get "trounced" by the reading audience, I normally will buy a pair and make them a part of my "core" unit as soon as possible.

Improved AIM-92/ATAS test from 2011.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyLUZuSUTEE

Good Night/Morning!

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

whdonnelly January 17th, 2017 08:49 AM

Re: Helicopter mounted Stingers
 
Thanks everyone. Not moving helicopters is something I'd never thought of, mostly because of ATGMs. But I finally had 2 stingers launch themselves today. Nice, but perhaps it will take some getting used to.

shahadi January 17th, 2017 02:54 PM

Re: Helicopter mounted Stingers
 
I don't use them because I only have a few slots and I want to load up my helos with ATGM. My helos are to defeat armor and suppress infantry.

I use inf SAMs and other dedicated SAM units to provide AA cover.

=====


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:24 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2024, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.