Electronic Flux Attenuation Modulation System

Evaporation Fabulation Apparatus (Money Sucker)

Eccentric Flying Abbreviation Manual Syntax

This is not a clear ticket, do you really expect the devs to google everything you can´t be bothered to write out, just because it makes you feel so knowledgable and "simulation fevered" that you know an abbreviation?

No offense, but this is not helpful.

An Electronic Flux Attenuation Modulation System would be way too arcade!

A decent dose of Eccentric Flying Abbreviation Manual Syntax could however be realistic for arma's future scenario. Who knows, how syntax will evolve in the next twenty years!

What the F are you talking about?

EFAMS stands for External Fuel and Armament Management System. What this basically does is it adds additional weapons to the vehicle. This is already in the game, as you can see on the KA-60 Camo (Rockets, Gatling gun, etc.). I would like to see more customization of the vehicle armament, as the MI-48 is useless against air targets, and the AH-99 is useless against ground targets.

@gutsnav

And the 24 guided air-to-ground missiles are nothing?

@OP

Okay, so you want customisable weapons for helicopters?

I'd want to have a few additional variants AH-99 with attached wings and more armanent.

We need more customization options for vehicle payloads, not just the AH-99 Blackfoot.
Adding stub wings with extra weapons would be good, but in its current state, the Blackfoot is strong enough. It has A2A missiles and 24 guided missiles which can also be used unguided effectively. Adding even more missiles would make it very overpowered.

I saw in the latest live stream there were two versions of the jet, CAS and AA. This probably means select-able loadouts won't be implemented.

I'd say for a sort of authenticity and balance, the blackfoot should have wing stubs. If DAGR were to take a hit in the damage they do to become more like what they actually are IE guide FFAR, then the helicopter would be unable to take out heavy armored targets such as tanks, the 20mm and rockets just wouldn't be up to the task unless it hits them in the specified weak points.

Meanwhile the kajiman is rocking with a bigger gun (fair enough) rockets BUT also anti tank missiles, With the wing stubs a few additional anti tank missiles could be employed.

Or DAGR could be re-loacated to the wing stubs and the hellfire misisles could go into the bay doors, giving it six as opposed to the kajimans eight, keeping assymetry between their capabilities and function but balancing it just a bit so that both are capable of similar things.

True the RAH-66 never flew with wing stubs in our reality, but neither did it pass into any service. In Arma 3 it's being used and tested with a newer (or perhaps proven in that timeline?) weapon system, so the blackfoot must have been in some form of service, they wouldn't shove 2 experimental aircraft onto the field because they would insufficient in numbers, you lose both and then what?

I think that the Blackfoot and Kajiman should have an AA and AG support model. I'm truly disappointed that there isn't. I really thought that we were just getting the opposites on the 2 factions on the beta but the full release would have both variants. It just doesn't make sense to me but then again I'm not a scholar when it comes to why the devs do what they do.

PLEASE add an AG variant to the Blackfoot and an AA variant of the Kajiman.

^ ^ ^
This. The AG Blackfoot could have the stub wings with Hellfires on them (or whatever it it in Arma 3) and maybe a laser designator to guide the missiles. Same with the Kajiman.

24 DAR missiles is sufficient even if they take 3 rockets for a MBT,
you still got 4 AA missiles and the Canon, which is the part that should be upgraded.
24 Dar == 8 ATGM and even better distributable

Also keep in mind this thing flyes like a longer LB version and not nearly as bad as the Apache from A2 which is not that much heavier than the comanche especially on full load.

Don't get me wrong i like Rocketpods, but it would break the stealth theme and this thing climbs slow as molasses and yet is agile. I even recall the Comanche had alot of trouble with engine power, so maybe you do tradeoffs for example swap the AA rockets for dumbfire HE.

N3croo, if you are talking about agility, Comanche isn't nearly as agile and maneuverable in Arma 3 as it was in real life, in fact it's very badly and improperly simulated.
The Comanche's stealth cover doesn't give any effect in the game at all, it's as easy to spot and lock on as any other vehicle in the game and this was probably made for balancing (radio reflective covers / shapes are not simulated in Arma 3).
I see no problem with Comanche's engine power in the game, you can simply slightly increase it's force while changing config.cfg file, to give us an alternative more combat version of comanche with stub wings

Edit: I just checked datasheet of a real Comanche and it's actually the fact that it should be capable to carry stub wings with additional rockets or fuel tanks.

I find the agility of the Blackfoot to be very agile and maneuverable with rotorlib advanced flight enabled. One can do the snap turns with the assistance of adjusting the collective to assist the tail rotor with main rotor counter-torque.

I don't think it's a realistic expectation to expect realistic flight without rotorlib enabled.

As for the armament, I agree that it should have optional hellfires as the Commanche had the ability to use.

I also think the stealth is a joke, which really sucks due to the fact that, without stealth, it's at a severe disadvantage to the Kajman, with a far deadlier cannon, and other aircraft which the AA missiles from the Blackfoot never hit; And without hellfires it must remain exposed for longer periods of time to take out hard targets.