Helicopter Transports

[OrangeFr3ak]

Are helicopters like the Mi-8 and UH-60 included in Black Sea, Afghanistan and Shock Force? I know there's APCs and IFVs but what about assault/transport helicopters? I'm new to Combat Mission and though haven't played any of the titles yet I'm interested in this series.

[LukeFF]

Nope, the helos in Black Sea are there to shoot at targets.

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

Helicopter landings are pretty much suicidal on occupied LZs so transport helicopters have not been modeled.  There's the ability to use the sort of troops that'd arrive on a helicopter, but you set them up on the map beforehand vs fast roping in or something which is about how it should work anyway.  

[MikeyD]

I think the assumption is with the sort of AA assets sprinkled around CMBS you'd be mad to try to fly a troop-filled helicopter over a scenario map. They can be represented abstractly by reinforcements safely appearing on the map edge, and the orders page commenting on helo-borne troops having been offloaded off-map about a half a km away and walking in. 

 

[Oops! I see someone types faster than me!  ]

Edited May 26, 2015 by MikeyD

[OrangeFr3ak]

Alright then. What about Mi-8s with weapons? Even if they aren't used for transport they can be used as gunships too.

[Kieme(ITA)]

If I recall correctly Mi-8 were in CMSF but are not present in CMBS.

[Pete Wenman]

Just to add, as you may not be aware of this, but there is no physical representation of air assets. So no aircraft or helicopters are ever seen rather just their incoming fire

P

[agusto]

Just to add, as you may not be aware of this, but there is no physical representation of air assets. So no aircraft or helicopters are ever seen rather just their incoming fire

P

 

Outgoing AA fire is seen as well.

[A Canadian Cat]

Outgoing AA fire is seen as well.

 

Plus if you hit one and it happens to crash on map - you see that too.  OK you see the explosion and the crater but never the air frame.  Still pretty cool though.

[cool breeze]

I guess the Mi-8 wasn't considered strong enough in the ground attack roll for inclusion.

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

 

 

I guess the Mi-8 wasn't considered strong enough in the ground attack roll for inclusion.

 

It certainly does not offer anything especially "new" vs weapons packages carried by other RU/UKR assets and given the high threat environment simulated, it seems less likely for realistic employment as an attack helicopter.  

[cool breeze]

Yeah more of an anti Afghani in the 80s ground attack aircraft than in a 2017 war vs. USA 

Edited May 26, 2015 by cool breeze

[OrangeFr3ak]

If helicopters and aircraft aren't represented physically then how do players see that they are being employed or their anti-air is engaging them?

[Kieme(ITA)]

AA assets will engage enemy aircrafts as soon as they spot them, usually it's immediate although the chance to kill is not guaranteed, sometimes it will take several shots/turns.

[delliejonut]

You'll hear the sound of them flying overhead. It's very distinct.

[womble]

And you see the tracers in- and outbound for cannon fire. Do bombs have a tracer?

[Mord]

Also you can use your air/artillery/UAV support panel (during your orders phase in WEGO) to find out what's going on.

 

 

Trust me, there's enough immersion between the sound sfx, attack munitions animations and the support panel that you won't end up missing the lack of a visual aircraft. BFC did a good job with the audio, weapons and info cues to make up for it.

 

 

Mord.

[Apocal]

And you see the tracers in- and outbound for cannon fire. Do bombs have a tracer?

Yeah, they do.

Edited May 28, 2015 by Apocal

[stikkypixie]

Also you can use your air/artillery/UAV support panel (during your orders phase in WEGO) to find out what's going on.

Trust me, there's enough immersion between the sound sfx, attack munitions animations and the support panel that you won't end up missing the lack of a visual aircraft. BFC did a good job with the audio, weapons and info cues to make up for it.

Mord.

I never realized the us army used the term "section" :-)

[sburke]

Mord uses it all the time.... section 8.

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

 

 

I never realized the us army used the term "section" :-) 

 

It's also commonly used to refer to smaller than platoon sized elements of tanks (a two tank element is called a "section") or Cavalry sub-elements (a bit more flexible though, so depending on the mission, a six M3 platoon might roll as a platoon, two three Bradley elements, three two Bradley elements, two, one of two, one of four etc etc etc)

[stikkypixie]

It's also commonly used to refer to smaller than platoon sized elements of tanks (a two tank element is called a "section") or Cavalry sub-elements (a bit more flexible though, so depending on the mission, a six M3 platoon might roll as a platoon, two three Bradley elements, three two Bradley elements, two, one of two, one of four etc etc etc)

 

Air controller section HQ is something I tend to associate with how the Brits called their units, but I might be wrong

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

I believe section in British terms generally refers to a "squad" in US.  In US terms generally it's only used for vehicles (tank/scout sections) and sometimes refers to organizations split up below their normal HQ (so if a Battalion was loaned out two artillery pieces, that element of guns would be called a section).

 

US Army does have a fairly confusing set of rules and guidelines for what is a "team" vs "section" and some other ultra-small elements.  If I'd taken better notes I might have even remembered them beyond the "section" stuff I've already written about.

 

Anyway.  Sort of on topic, CM has always done aviation fairly well.  The eyecandy would be neat, but even slow moving planes are going to be a short flash above even fairly large maps, or possibly thousands of feet in the air above the target.  I can't think of many maps that would allow an Apache to work at its normal range to target without it being stupidly close.

Edited May 28, 2015 by panzersaurkrautwerfer

[LukeFF]

What's the U.S. Army's MOS for calling in helicopter support? I know the Marines have their Forward Air Controllers, and the Air Force is the one calling in the jets, but beyond that I am not sure.

[AttorneyAtWar]

What's the U.S. Army's MOS for calling in helicopter support? I know the Marines have their Forward Air Controllers, and the Air Force is the one calling in the jets, but beyond that I am not sure.

 

Apparently you need to be a 13F which is a fire support specialist, there are additional skills that you pick up that allow you to be a "joint Fire observer" and from what Ive read they communicate with Apaches.

 

http://www.army-portal.com/jobs/field-artillery/13f.html