Wave 4 pics up...

Discuss Mongoose miniatures game here, including Mighty Armies, Gangs of Mega-City One, and Battlefield Evolution.
User avatar
Hiromoon
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 7098
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 3:02 am
Location: TFCT Michael Fleming Folland
Contact:

Postby Hiromoon » Fri May 25, 2007 2:14 am

Also, on a side note, Matt was asking me about the Apache... so maybe next year we might get one. He was concerned because of the apparent mythos built around the beastie was one of an unstoppable killing machine.

Granted, in the right conditions, it's like the left hand of god. Capable of hitting a target and getting back into cover. The blows to that mythos came during Operation Iraqi Freedom (or Gulf War II / III), were we lost a few apaches due to ground fire. Like I told Matt, even the flying tank can be brought down.

Now, I wonder what they'll give the Longbow in game....
ImageImage
Thanks Veon and ScipioAmericanus!
www.zupandevelopment.com
User avatar
Hiromoon
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 7098
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 3:02 am
Location: TFCT Michael Fleming Folland
Contact:

Postby Hiromoon » Fri May 25, 2007 2:16 am

emperorpenguin wrote:So you know better than Agusta Westland? Well I'll be damned, you could have saved their export orders Hiro......
Nope, I don't mak the product. But if I did, I'd certainly have the optional mounting points.
err no that shows how to mount Sea Skua not TOW, again please read what is posted
Really? So if I took those missiles off and replaced them with TOWs? What happens then EP?
ImageImage
Thanks Veon and ScipioAmericanus!
www.zupandevelopment.com
User avatar
emperorpenguin
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5714
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 2:02 am
Location: British in Dublin

Postby emperorpenguin » Fri May 25, 2007 2:19 am

Hiromoon wrote:Also, on a side note, Matt was asking me about the Apache... so maybe next year we might get one. He was concerned because of the apparent mythos built around the beastie was one of an unstoppable killing machine.

Granted, in the right conditions, it's like the left hand of god. Capable of hitting a target and getting back into cover. The blows to that mythos came during Operation Iraqi Freedom (or Gulf War II / III), were we lost a few apaches due to ground fire. Like I told Matt, even the flying tank can be brought down.

Now, I wonder what they'll give the Longbow in game....
I 100% agree with you there, I felt that a "mythos" had built up around Apache. I remember a buddy of mine telling me none of them were lost in Desert Storm, until I showed him the loss figures....

Matt originally said a year ago they would be included then backtracked, buying into the "mythos". I'm glad to see sense prevailed, like you say, everything can be killed.
Into the Fire: 4th place
Wheel of Fire: 9th place
Gaelcon 2006: 2nd place
User avatar
emperorpenguin
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5714
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 2:02 am
Location: British in Dublin

Postby emperorpenguin » Fri May 25, 2007 2:20 am

Hiromoon wrote:
err no that shows how to mount Sea Skua not TOW, again please read what is posted
Really? So if I took those missiles off and replaced them with TOWs? What happens then EP?
according to Agusta Westland they won't fit on Mk9 Lynx or Future Lynx

so apparently nothing happens. Try e mailing them for an answer
Into the Fire: 4th place
Wheel of Fire: 9th place
Gaelcon 2006: 2nd place
User avatar
Hiromoon
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 7098
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 3:02 am
Location: TFCT Michael Fleming Folland
Contact:

Postby Hiromoon » Fri May 25, 2007 2:26 am

Really? Maybe the Brits should find someone else to build their helicopters then....since an Apache can mount a TOW or two and it can't be larger than the Lynx
ImageImage
Thanks Veon and ScipioAmericanus!
www.zupandevelopment.com
User avatar
emperorpenguin
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5714
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 2:02 am
Location: British in Dublin

Postby emperorpenguin » Fri May 25, 2007 2:28 am

Hiromoon wrote:Really? Maybe the Brits should find someone else to build their helicopters then....since an Apache can mount a TOW or two and it can't be larger than the Lynx
but that isn't designed as a transport either
Into the Fire: 4th place
Wheel of Fire: 9th place
Gaelcon 2006: 2nd place
User avatar
Chiwie
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 218
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:36 am
Location: Australia

Postby Chiwie » Fri May 25, 2007 2:29 am

Hiromoon wrote:Really? So if I took those missiles off and replaced them with TOWs? What happens then EP?
exactly!

based off this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Skua

and this:

http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-71.html

the TOW is a smaller missile, and it is (i feel like ive said this 100000 times!) not a big stretch for the army during a conflict in which it is hard pressed to come up with stop gap modifications to allow the FL to carry TOWs.

emperorpenguin wrote:according to Agusta Westland they won't fit on Mk9 Lynx or Future Lynx

so apparently nothing happens. Try e mailing them for an answer
i may be mistaken but the info you gave told us that the current Lynx Tow rack would not fit, surely they could craft a new one and hell if it can carry the LARGER Sea Skua i dont see how it could not be modified carry the TOW.
Hiromoon wrote:Granted, in the right conditions, it's like the left hand of god. Capable of hitting a target and getting back into cover. The blows to that mythos came during Operation Iraqi Freedom (or Gulf War II / III), were we lost a few apaches due to ground fire. Like I told Matt, even the flying tank can be brought down.
aye i agree ill admit that i love the myths of uberness surrounding the AH-64D, however they have done fairly well in Iraq considering that they are pushing a tank hunter into close in fire fights and despite the often insane amount damage they take from ground troops they take they manage to limp home 99% of the time with a job well done. :)
User avatar
Hiromoon
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 7098
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 3:02 am
Location: TFCT Michael Fleming Folland
Contact:

Postby Hiromoon » Fri May 25, 2007 2:32 am

emperorpenguin wrote:
Hiromoon wrote:Really? Maybe the Brits should find someone else to build their helicopters then....since an Apache can mount a TOW or two and it can't be larger than the Lynx
but that isn't designed as a transport either
So? Are you playing Battlefield Taxi when you're trying to hunt tanks?
ImageImage
Thanks Veon and ScipioAmericanus!
www.zupandevelopment.com
User avatar
emperorpenguin
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5714
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 2:02 am
Location: British in Dublin

Postby emperorpenguin » Fri May 25, 2007 2:35 am

Hiromoon wrote:So? Are you playing Battlefield Taxi when you're trying to hunt tanks?
err the heli is designed primarliy for transport

that's like strapping missiles to a 747 and wondering why it's not an optimum dogfighter....
Into the Fire: 4th place
Wheel of Fire: 9th place
Gaelcon 2006: 2nd place
User avatar
Hiromoon
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 7098
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 3:02 am
Location: TFCT Michael Fleming Folland
Contact:

Postby Hiromoon » Fri May 25, 2007 2:38 am

Actually, they seem to be selling it more as a scout than a transport, EP. Kinda like a Kiowa or Little Bird... they can carry people, but they're supposed to be scouts.
ImageImage
Thanks Veon and ScipioAmericanus!
www.zupandevelopment.com
User avatar
emperorpenguin
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5714
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 2:02 am
Location: British in Dublin

Postby emperorpenguin » Fri May 25, 2007 2:39 am

Chiwie wrote: i may be mistaken but the info you gave told us that the current Lynx Tow rack would not fit, surely they could craft a new one and hell if it can carry the LARGER Sea Skua i dont see how it could not be modified carry the TOW.
sea skua doesn't require bulky launch tubes. Look the proof is there for you to read a couple of pages back. The Lynx Mk9 uses Sea Skua but cannot mount TOW, likewise with FL

again I love that you guys know better than the designers :lol: They haven't designed FL with TOW use in mind because export orders were not forthcoming and Britain didn't want/need them. I said that TOW will not fit on Lynx Mk9 (current Army version and not the ski equipped TOW version which is Mk7) or future Lynx

IF Future Lynx was to be retro-fitted for TOW the wheels would need to be replaced by skis is my understanding
Last edited by emperorpenguin on Fri May 25, 2007 2:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
Into the Fire: 4th place
Wheel of Fire: 9th place
Gaelcon 2006: 2nd place
User avatar
emperorpenguin
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5714
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 2:02 am
Location: British in Dublin

Postby emperorpenguin » Fri May 25, 2007 2:41 am

Hiromoon wrote:Actually, they seem to be selling it more as a scout than a transport, EP. Kinda like a Kiowa or Little Bird... they can carry people, but they're supposed to be scouts.
it's both Hiro, read the press release. transport and scout, but the point is it is not designed as a gunship so your "well they fit on Apache" argument is comparing apples and oranges
Into the Fire: 4th place
Wheel of Fire: 9th place
Gaelcon 2006: 2nd place
User avatar
Hiromoon
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 7098
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 3:02 am
Location: TFCT Michael Fleming Folland
Contact:

Postby Hiromoon » Fri May 25, 2007 2:48 am

Not entirely EP. Just because it's built like a gunship doesn't mean it can't mount TOWs, despite the company's apparent lack of design skill...

I mean:

TOW 2B:
Length: 48.0 inches (121.9 centimeters)
Diameter: 5.8 inches (14.9 centimeters)

You can't mount four of these on either side?
ImageImage
Thanks Veon and ScipioAmericanus!
www.zupandevelopment.com
User avatar
emperorpenguin
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5714
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 2:02 am
Location: British in Dublin

Postby emperorpenguin » Fri May 25, 2007 2:51 am

here I go posting this AGAIN :roll:
The new landing gear scheme prevented the AH.9 from using the same TOW carriage arrangement as the AH.7, and so the AH.9s were not used in the tank-killer role. Westland did consider a new TOW carriage arrangement, optional T800 engines, and a wide range of other enhancements for the AH.9 as the "Battlefield Lynx" for the export market, but nobody bought off on the idea.
The Lynx is now being replaced in the anti-armor role by the Boeing / Westland WAH-64 Apache AH Mark 1 gunship, armed with the more potent Hellfire anti-armor missile, and the anti-armor Lynx will be phased out in the 2005:2010 timeframe, with the machines to be transferred to the light utility helicopter role
The improved Lynx variant is currently known simply as the "Future Lynx". Current concepts see the Future Lynx as fitted with the LHTEC CTS800 turboshaft, raising the Future Lynx's payload to 2,056 kilograms (4,533 pounds), 20% more than the current Lynx AH.9. Some airframe improvements would also be incorporated, most prominently Westland 30-style tailfins. Other improvements include a digital glass cockpit with four large multifunction displays (MFDs); an advanced countermeasures suite; improved IFF and data modem; a nose-mounted electro-optical sensor turret; and laser target designator.

The Royal Navy is also interested in a variant of the BLUH designated the "Surface Combatant Marine Rotorcraft (SCMR)", with possible orders of 40 to 60 machines. The Lynx SCMR would be armed with the new "Future Anti-Surface Guided Weapon (FASGW)", which would be a follow-on to the Sea Skua light antiship missile and would feature greater range. The FASGW is expected to enter service in 2012.
http://www.vectorsite.net/avlynx.html
Into the Fire: 4th place
Wheel of Fire: 9th place
Gaelcon 2006: 2nd place
User avatar
emperorpenguin
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5714
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 2:02 am
Location: British in Dublin

Postby emperorpenguin » Fri May 25, 2007 2:54 am

As I also stated earlier and referenced on another site, the Lynx has no mast mounted target acquisition system, making it a poor choice for attack copter.
This is also why France has hastily scrapped its plans for half its Tiger HAPs in favour of the mast equipped HAD variant
Into the Fire: 4th place
Wheel of Fire: 9th place
Gaelcon 2006: 2nd place
User avatar
Hiromoon
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 7098
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 3:02 am
Location: TFCT Michael Fleming Folland
Contact:

Postby Hiromoon » Fri May 25, 2007 2:58 am

Woopie-doo there EP. Let's see, so they did make a variant capable of using wheels...and your information comes from a source similar to mine, and so should be taken with a grain of salt.

And so, if they use the mounting configuration they came up for the Battlefield Lynx, they can certainly mount it on the Future Lynx. Maybe they're not as incapable as I thought they were. It's just a case of simple economics...
ImageImage
Thanks Veon and ScipioAmericanus!
www.zupandevelopment.com
User avatar
emperorpenguin
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5714
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 2:02 am
Location: British in Dublin

Postby emperorpenguin » Fri May 25, 2007 3:04 am

Hiromoon wrote:Woopie-doo there EP. Let's see, so they did make a variant capable of using wheels...and your information comes from a source similar to mine, and so should be taken with a grain of salt.

And so, if they use the mounting configuration they came up for the Battlefield Lynx, they can certainly mount it on the Future Lynx. Maybe they're not as incapable as I thought they were. It's just a case of simple economics...
no they planned one but didn't make it, and I have other links which say the same thing so you can take any or all of them with salt if you wish

so where is the mast rotor/scout helis?

Could it be done? Yes with time, money etc
Did Mongoose plan it that way? No I don't believe for one second it wasn't an error
Would it be a good idea? Not IMHO

you'll accept it as a retcon, I won't but hopefully no one else will try and argue FL is designed with TOW in mind and I can let this rest.
Last edited by emperorpenguin on Fri May 25, 2007 3:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
Into the Fire: 4th place
Wheel of Fire: 9th place
Gaelcon 2006: 2nd place
User avatar
Hiromoon
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 7098
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 3:02 am
Location: TFCT Michael Fleming Folland
Contact:

Postby Hiromoon » Fri May 25, 2007 3:10 am

What? In game? I'm not entirely sure they really need to do masted scout helis.

As for the Lynx, you don't need a mast to scout, EP. Frankly, that damn Apache is working it's mythos in this regard too.

There was a time when there would be only one or two Longbow Apaches in a detachment, spotting for the other Apaches.

Kids these days, never satisfied with using the nose optics...
ImageImage
Thanks Veon and ScipioAmericanus!
www.zupandevelopment.com
User avatar
emperorpenguin
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5714
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 2:02 am
Location: British in Dublin

Postby emperorpenguin » Fri May 25, 2007 3:17 am

Hiromoon wrote:What? In game? I'm not entirely sure they really need to do masted scout helis

As for the Lynx, you don't need a mast to scout, EP. Frankly, that damn Apache is working it's mythos in this regard too.

There was a time when there would be only one or two Longbow Apaches in a detachment, spotting for the other Apaches.

Kids these days, never satisfied with using the nose optics...
nope in real life. as I said hence France changing its Tiger order to get masted versions

nose optics are fine for naval use but in 3D terrain you have to expose the heli. Doesn't make for a good attack chopper
Into the Fire: 4th place
Wheel of Fire: 9th place
Gaelcon 2006: 2nd place
User avatar
Hiromoon
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 7098
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 3:02 am
Location: TFCT Michael Fleming Folland
Contact:

Postby Hiromoon » Fri May 25, 2007 3:20 am

That makes is a piss-poor scout copter then too...unless they'll have a version that actually mounts it.

Though, in the desert, you might as well be out on the ocean....
ImageImage
Thanks Veon and ScipioAmericanus!
www.zupandevelopment.com

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests