Helicopters Avoiding Risks Mode

Rattler

Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2004
Messages
157
Reaction score
0
Location
Spain
Country
llGermany
From what I read on current doctrine both for Hinds and Apaches, though different, the trend seems to go for consciously avoiding ground fire on ferry by a) flying above range for ground small arms or b) ducking into any terrain cover availiable to avoid MANPADs.

This IMHO could be well implemented in TacOps by adding something that works similar to the "Defilade Mode" for vehicles:

By clicking on the "Defilade = Avoiding Risks" button if

- on NOE chance for getting hit by MANPADs is severly reduced, also chance of getting hit by small arms ground fires from more than 250 mtrs away (i.e. to have a chance of getting hit you have to be more or less on top of it, conceptually assuming that MANPAD carrying troops or small arms carrying troops or vehicles dont get a valid enough visual on helo)

- on MED ALT chance for getting hit by small arms ground fire is reduced to zero (helo flies conceptually above small arms effective range), MANPAD risk unaltered to what we have now.

In case of the Avoid Risk Mode the aggressive capabilities of the helo that uses it get reduced:

- on NOE only targets within 500 mtrs can get attacked no matter what effective range the weapon system emplyed has (conceptually ferry mode, no agresssive pop ups, no valid firing solutions due to lack of visual, etc)

- on MED altitude only missiles can be used effectively against ground targets (helo above range for his MGs etc.)

I think employing something like this would make transport/ferry/insertion/recon missions much more realistic compared to the current high helo vunerability with regard to the chance of losing the helo in question.

What do you guys think?

Rattler
 
Last edited:

dhuffjr

Forum Conscript
Joined
Jul 23, 2004
Messages
781
Reaction score
0
Location
Ohio
Country
llUnited States
Interesting thoughts. There definitely needs to be a "high" altitude at the very least to remove the smaller arms threat. I'd have to look and see the altitudes 20,23,30 mm rounds can reach before any judgement is made on them.

A couple more elevations and the hopefully new maps that would occur would improve the helo scenerio I feel as it would allow for even more terrain masking.

With both options I'd probably still suck when employing helos. :D
 

GCoyote

Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2004
Messages
457
Reaction score
0
Location
Laurel, MD, USA
Country
llUnited States
I'm also in favor of an additional aircraft altitude to model helicopters/UAVs a bit more accurately. But Rattler has the problem summarized pretty well.

Another thought, at least in US doctrine, NOE generally refers to the Arcft flying with about 2 - 4 meters of ground clearance. No if tank, SP howitzer, or AVLB gets additional cover from being in rough terrain, shouldn't the same thing apply to NOE flight? Or perhaps only NOE hover?
 
Top