Jump to content

Black Shark 3 upgrade content


BonerCat

Recommended Posts

As always then, you don't know how to explain your claim that you can "lob" Vikhr when it can't be guided without constant guidance.

 

Please enlighten how are you "lobbin" your Vikhr without guidance?

 

Just For Your nformation its constantly guided but AS ALWAYS you dont get the informations out of my text, okay lets try this ONE MORE TIME just FOR YOU

 

Step1: Find TGT LRF it

 

Step2: Get back in cover

Adjust your guidence beam and stay if possible on the azimuth of the TGT

 

Step3: Fire your Vikhr by overwriting your LA

 

Step4: guide it wowards the TGT until its 3 sec ahead of impact

 

Step5: pop up high enough to aquire LINE OF SIGHT WITH YOUR TGT AND POINT THE CENTER OF YOUR I251 WITH THE LASER STILL FIRING ( YES i dont turn it off halfway trough , ...surpirse surprise....) AND SHACK THE SA8 OSA OR TOR BEFORE IT EVEN CAN POINT ITS TRACK Antenna towards you hope that helps Mr. Frie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the interesting part is another perosn who asked seemd t understood the lean explanation aswell but im always happy to help new players aswell :)

 

Edit: + as im getting tired to always explain you why stuff is as it is i invite you for a mature talk in discord then you can explain me why it "shouldnt " work and i explain you why it does


Edited by Lt_RAzOr_957
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got it before, but to be fair I don't think the assumption was that you turn the laser off, more that it is masked from the Vikhr by whatever it is you have hidden behind...

 

I see both arguments here - I'm just going to give it a try and if it works, happy days. If not then fortunately it's not a real Vikhr I've wasted. Cos they're expensive ;)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Wildcards BlackJack_sml.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to look at those mysterious "specs" of the L-370 that you talk so much about. :)

 

Once, in one fairly authoritative Russian military magazine, I read an article about the MWS, authored by a Russian military specialist who is a professor at the Academy of Military Science. He writes that, for example, the American AN/AAR-54 PMAWS provides detection of facts of missile launch at ranges up to 15km. Reading what you write about the capabilities of the Russian L-370-2 MWS, I involuntarily feel pride in my country. :)

[/Quote]

 

You already have the documentation as you provided it at the long BS3 thread long time ago.

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just For Your nformation its constantly guided but AS ALWAYS you dont get the informations out of my text, okay lets try this ONE MORE TIME just FOR YOU [/Quote]

 

So you are firing Vikhr without locking on anything, like up in the air. And then simply changing aiming point on target when you estimate Vikhr is near target.

 

That is not lobbing. That is just launching Vikhr in normal manner. As launching it doesn't require target what so ever, as Shkval doesn't care where you launch it, as long you meet launch parameters.


Edited by Fri13

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, it only has one control surface, so has to fly a spiral. If it really put in full control deflection, it would just fly a tight spiral with a ballistic average path.[/Quote]

 

Yes, and where I said it has multiple?

Or that it doesn't fly in spiral path?

 

And the missile tries to constantly fly through all beam sectors, if you cut laser off, it will start searching for it by maneuvering.

 

Logically, given the nature of the control surfaces and the flight path, if you're correct and there are 4 zones, I'd imagine they're concentric & give guidance about how hard to turn in to get back to the centre of the beam's scan zone.

 

It doesn't give how much, only to what sector the missile is. The missile has own logic that the beam is 7 meters in diameter, so it tells it how much and what direction it needs to fly to get center of it as it knows it's relation to it. If it loses laser beam after being at given sector, it knows it needs to take tighter turn relative to last known sector and time. And as it can't find the laser anymore, it is spiraling completely off from the straight heading as it doesn't know where is the aiming line.

 

The idea of Vikhr is to swirl around the guidance beam center, visiting each sector constantly until it gets to stable flight in it.

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you are firing Vikhr without locking on anything, like up in the air. And then simply changing aiming point on target when you estimate Vikhr is near target.

 

That is not lobbing. That is just launching Vikhr in normal manner. As launching it doesn't require target what so ever, as Shkval doesn't care where you launch it, as long you meet launch parameters.

 

ok sorry mate

 

in future im not going to interact with you anymore as it is a waste of time because you could just ask if you dont understand something...but you decided to trashtalk like im firing the vikhr with the shkval caged


Edited by Lt_RAzOr_957
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Google Translate

 

You already have the documentation as you provided it at the long BS3 thread long time ago.

As far as I remember, I posted only advertising booklets, as well as information from the manufacturer's website, but I don't remember that they talked about the maximum detection range of 200km, or even about any maximum detection range of the MWS.

 

Even a fairly well-known Russian advertising video by the President-S developers says:

Missile launch detection range, km: at all ranges of MANPADS use.

By the way, for example, the maximum range of the Swedish RBS 70 MANPADS is up to 8km.

 

Moreover, in the 10th volume of the Russian encyclopedia "Russia's arms and technologies: the XXI century encyclopedia" [ISBN 5-93799-016-1, pp.457–458], the scanned pages of which you reposted earlier, it is written about the MWS detection range in the ultraviolet band equal to 15km.

 

At the same time, in this encyclopedia, the Vitebsk self-protection system (aka President-S) is for some reason called 'Kolchuga', although it is not surprising, because the 10th volume of the encyclopedia was published in 2005, and the real Vitebsk (President-S) was finalized and entered service only in 2013.

 

Original in Russian

 

Насколько я помню, я выкладывал лишь рекламные буклеты, а также информацию с сайта производителя, однако не припоминаю, чтобы в них говорилось о максимальной дальности обнаружения равной 200 км, либо вообще о какой-либо максимальной дальности обнаружения СПРА.

 

Даже в достаточно известном российском рекламном видео от разработчиков «Президент-С» говорится:

Дальность обнаружения пуска ракет, км: на всех дальностях применения ПЗРК.

Кстати, например максимальная дальность применения шведского ПЗРК RBS 70 составляет до 8 км.

 

Причём в 10-м томе российской энциклопедии «Оружие и технологии России: Энциклопедия XXI век» [ISBN 5-93799-016-1, стр.457–458], отсканированные страницы которой Вы репостили ранее, написано о дальности обнаружения СПРА в ультрафиолетовом диапазоне равной 15 км.

 

При этом в данной энциклопедии бортовой комплекс обороны «Витебск» (он же «Президент-С») почему-то назван «Кольчугой», хотя неудивительно, т.к. 10-й том энциклопедии вышел в 2005 году, а «Витебск» («Президент-С») был окончательно доработан и поступил на вооружение лишь в 2013 году.

 


Edited by S.E.Bulba
update.

Sorry, I don't speak English, so I use Google Translate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
As far as I remember, I posted only advertising booklets, as well as information from the manufacturer's website, but I don't remember that they talked about the maximum detection range of 200km, or even about any maximum detection range of the MWS.

 

 

What is the maximum detection range, doesn't mean it is the detection range when all is detected. You should know that.

 

In the procedures you provided it was stated that 200 km was the maximum possible detection range, as it is not magical that it just suddenly doesn't detect something at specific range. It is just that operational conditions are the limiting factors, not the sensors itself.

 

Analogy, if you stand in a room without windows, the distance you can see something is limited by the room. If that room is filled with smoke, your capability to see something is severely limited, even if all the walls and ceiling would be made from glass.

 

Even a fairly well-known Russian advertising video by the President-S developers says:

 

By the way, for example, the maximum range of the Swedish RBS 70 MANPADS is up to 8km.

 

Yes, I have not said that the system will track everything outside its detection range. As that is the limitation. If the sensors will detect the disturbance in its detection limits, it doesn't care is it at 50 km range or 500 meter range. It will detect it. Once it detects something, it starts to track it and tries to find a answer to question "How far it is and is it heading at it?". If the threat is clearly moving away, it is marked as "false threat". But if the threat is incoming, it is warned the pilots and when the threat is close enough for proper counter measurements effectiveness then automatically it is performed unless pilot has done it earlier.

 

You can think that a President-S is stupid system that will launch all the flares and starts to jam all the detected heat sources, that if a friend launches a missile at 2 km range that is flying parallel it means the vehicle is under an attack and needs to be defended. Or that a MBT fires its cannon below, that vehicle is under an attack and counter measurements are ran.

Or that when the missile is launched at it from 8 km distance, that it is very effective to launch all flares and start jamming at 7.5 km distance all way from launch to impact (RBS 70 flies 5 km in 12 seconds, at 8 km it can reach at 20 seconds in first generation.

 

And the system has zero knowledge is the threat a IR, RF or beam rider. So your idea that the system would have a invisible "opaque walls" magically at the 8 km range and it can't detect any launches further than that.... Or that the system doesn't track the threats and will immediately react to every detection with maximum performance.... You have just rendered your system obsolete completely as first friendly launch near by means you are almost out of flares and your jammers are trying to jam the away flying missile.

 

This was the problem in the MAWS system in A-10C that pilots were flying at 30 000 ft and their MAWS got triggered by friendlies cannons firing at 30 km distance. The system took it as a missile launches and released counter measurements like crazy for nothing. The same thing was when a friendly A-10 launched maverick at 15 km distance and system went again crazy that it was under a missile attack.

 

That is why President-S is much improvement from the early MAWS as it has capabilities to detect and track various sources and logically estimate ranges and time when the crew needs to be warned. And no it is not the only one, but one that we have for KA-50.

The detection ranges for given spectrum don't have hard definite distances, just as any inverse square law spectrum, you will even see a lit matchstick from tens of kilometres distance unless there is something blocking it (air, water, particles etc). For a given sensor definition you can be limited in the vector, but not by the range for same amount.


Edited by Fri13

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't remember where but It was mentioned here in the ED forum that L-370E50 is for IR missiles, are you sure it's for radar guided missiles?

 

Do you think the MAWS system separates somehow missiles based their seeker type?

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Google Translate

 

What is the maximum detection range, doesn't mean it is the detection range when all is detected. You should know that.

 

In the procedures you provided it was stated that 200 km was the maximum possible detection range, as it is not magical that it just suddenly doesn't detect something at specific range. It is just that operational conditions are the limiting factors, not the sensors itself.

 

Analogy, if you stand in a room without windows, the distance you can see something is limited by the room. If that room is filled with smoke, your capability to see something is severely limited, even if all the walls and ceiling would be made from glass…

I have to repeat that I don't recall the "procedures" I provided that mention the maximum possible detection range of 200km. And I still do not quite understand where you got these specific numbers. Why, for example, not 50km, not 100km, or not 1,000km at all? We are not talking about the detection range in outer space of the launched Space Shuttle engines?

 

In addition, not only atmospheric phenomena or smoke can affect the detection range. A significant role in attenuating the ultraviolet components of the attacking missile signature is also played by the tropospheric ozone, the concentration of which increases somewhat at heights of up to ~3km (the so-called "smog" ozone). By the way, about the passive-ultraviolet missile warning systems was a good article in the Journal of Electronic Defense (JED) No.12/1999, pp.51–54 [ISSN 0192-429X].

 

Original in Russian

 

Я вынужден повторить, что я не припоминаю предоставленных мною «методик», в которых бы упоминалась максимально-возможная дальность обнаружения 200 км. И я всё ещё не совсем понимаю, откуда Вы взяли эти конкретные цифры. Почему например не 50 км, не 100 км, или вообще не 1000 км? Мы ведь не говорим о дальности обнаружения в открытом космосе запущенных двигателей «Спейс шаттл»?

 

Кроме того, на дальность обнаружения могут влиять не только атмосферные явления или задымлённость. Существенную роль в ослаблении ультрафиолетовой компоненты сигнатуры атакующей ракеты также играет и тропосферный озоновый слой, концентрация которого несколько увеличивается на высотах до ~3 км (так называемый «смоговый» озон). Кстати, про пассивные ультрафиолетовые системы предупреждения о ракетных ударах была неплохая статья в Journal of Electronic Defense (JED) №12/1999, стр.51–54 [ISSN 0192-429X].

 

Sorry, I don't speak English, so I use Google Translate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

with the recent syria videos I am even more excited for BS3 and the hind. 2 of my all time favourite choppers with a map tailored for low flying? sign me up. 2020 may be dreadful for most things but it's a good time to be a flight sim rotorhead

RTX 2070 8GB | 32GB DDR4 2666 RAM | AMD Ryzen 5 3600 4.2Ghz | Asrock X570 | CH Fighterstick/Pro Throttle | TM MFDs | TrackIR 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any new update on when the upgrade might hit us? Would be nice to do formation with Hind and get nice pictures.

Current Hangar : A-10C II ¦ AJS-37 ¦ A/V-8B ¦ F-14A/B ¦ F/A-18C ¦ FC3 ¦ JF-17 ¦ Ka-50 ¦ Mi-8 ¦ M2000-C ¦ SA342 ¦ UH-1H

 

Other Modules : Combined Arms ¦ Persian Gulf

 

TRAINED - LEARNING - UNTOUCHED - ABANDONED

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're still trying to model those Igla's. :D

 

Joke aside, I could believe that the challenging part for the "Black Shark 3" is to model a new Shkval and MWS. The Shkval is going to reveive the missing filters for various weather and day conditions, and hopefully they do it properly at once and develop a true contrast detection and tracking system for it, that can then be used with all optically guided systems, from IR/TV Mavericks to TV guided bombs and targeting pods etc.

 

ED is developing new FLIR systems, and they must have acknowledged that they can not do that at all without implementing a true contrast detection system. It can't be otherwise simulated. It can be faked, but not simulated.

 

There are various open source algorithms to look at, how detection and tracking is done, and it can be used to make a own code that is implemented to these targeting systems.

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why, for example, not 50km, not 100km, or not 1,000km at all? We are not talking about the detection range in outer space of the launched Space Shuttle engines?

 

Why? I don't know. But that was the number in the specifications, meaning basically that the sensors are not limitation for the detection of the missile launch (a S-300 launch signature is very huge, as is its missile plume) but the environmental conditions (helicopter altitude, line of sight, rain, clouds etc etc).

 

In addition, not only atmospheric phenomena or smoke can affect the detection range. A significant role in attenuating the ultraviolet components of the attacking missile signature is also played by the tropospheric ozone, the concentration of which increases somewhat at heights of up to ~3km (the so-called "smog" ozone). By the way, about the passive-ultraviolet missile warning systems was a good article in the Journal of Electronic Defense (JED) No.12/1999, pp.51–54 [ISSN 0192-429X].

 

I didn't anywhere say that the system is capable to detect every missile in 200 kilometer range, only that its sensors are not limited to 10-15 kilometers.

 

If you look the system specs, and then you take your common sense and you start using the education your country has given, anyone should come to conclusion that it doesn't make sense that you have just one "magical bubble" at 3km, 5km or 15 km range where detection is binary.

 

Like would the A-10C MWS just ignore a "space shutter launch" because it is at distance? No... It would go crazy about it. But that system doesn't have anywhere in specs about its capabilities of tracking the threats, something that is the one key features in President-S (and Western systems).

 

Like if you would now define the requirements for a new missile warning system, what they would be?

 

1) Detect missile launches at what ranges? Should you detect missile coming at you only at 3 km range or as soon as possible?

2) Threat classification that is difficult part, how you separate missile launch from a cannon fire or a explosion?

3) Designing a pre-programmed best-pattern counter measurements for the threat? Like it doesn't make any sense that you launch half of your flares before friendly MBT fired a cannon 2000 meters below you? Does it?

 

Example, have you ever used night vision goggles? A good ones? Have you used them in the combat scenarios?

In normal night combat scenarios you are disallowed to use any light, light up any fire and so on that can be detected. It goes for so basic things like that a tent is placed in such manner that the possible light leak from the hot wood burner inside a tent at the winter time is not possible be seen from the enemy direction or from above. The ventilation pipe signature is extremely small to FLIR, but it is as well tried to be hide.

 

With a good NVG you can see a burning cicarette from 5-10 km distance, only limited by the line of sight. When the person inhales the cicarette, the burning head will glow like crazy. If you have ever example been observing military troops movements from above, like lets say 800 meters, you can instantly spot where someone is smoking anywhere as long you have line of sight.

If someone is stupid enough to lit up a flashlight, just a small one like a mobile phone light to read a map, it is super easy to find out where they are. That is why you do all the light usage preparations inside a bag. You do not give a possibility for enemy to spot your position at all.

 

If someone makes an fire like very small campfire just to heat up a one cup of water, its glow is tremendous to tens of kilometres distance as it lits up the trees all around you.

 

Then comes a question, have you ever used even a commercial available UV cameras?

Cheap... Very affordable, are available as well just for around 50 €.

Their limitation is the optics, not so great and the FOV is just about 30-45 degree or so depending models, but you will still see to tens of kilometres distance when something sets up a UV radiation like a cars headlight, a normal light bulb indoors etc. Now, if these cheap ones would get filtering to eliminate all unwanted radiation and just reveal wanted spectrum, you wouldn't have a situation where something just "pop-up" at 3km, 6km or 12 km distance.

You would be able see just like any other visible light source at night.

 

The only limiting factor is the conditions where radiation reach your sensor from its source.

 

One of the common false ideas that people has, is that sun is dangerous by its UV radiation only when it is shining from the clean sky. In overcast scenario the UV radiation is penetrating the cloud cover and will hit you. So you can go out and get a tan, without the warming and nice sunlight. Only way to avoid the UV radiation is not to have its source visible, like at night. Why when at night time the UV radiation sources on the ground becomes fairly easy to detect and track, while at day time there can come some challenges for false alarms.

 

If you have changes to even try a simple UV converted cameras, you would start to understand that there is no such thing as "limitation" for the ranges where you can detect something in the sensors technology at 3km, 6km or 12km. You will reach at some point to limitation in the sensor resolution, but then it takes more until you end up to limitation of the individual detector SNR limit where the radiation blends with the noise.

 

The UV sensors detection ranges are not magical like in DCS where their ranges are binary. And this is problem in real world that you can not really give simple answer for questions like "range" when there are multiple factors that changes them. And eventually when you take it all and you put it in the context and purpose of the device, does it matter if you do not detect something that happens far far away from you and is not a threat to you? The important thing is that once you detect it, what do you do with that information? You can't just start launching flares and chaff if you don't know is it a threat to you or not. Because false-flags will render the system unusable and unworthy to be carried at all.

 

Like if we take this to a analogy of radars, a radar is not so useful if you would never get the range but only direction. It would be better than nothing like in WW2 where first radars gave early warning and heading to threats minutes before they would found without. But when you got range information included, it became far more valuable information that where you are going to intercept the threat.

 

The similar thing is with UV spectrum missile warning systems. You can't just have a launch or approach warning, that is better than nothing, like if it tells pilot "Launch at 60 degree right side" and pilot could look at the right instead left or somewhere else. But if you want a more proper and useful automatic counter system, you need to know the distance. You need to know is the detection a threat or not. Just taking a simple triangulation like your aircraft altitude, pitch/roll attitude, detection angle and you get the approximate for the launch distance just by assuming launch happens at same ground level. Does it help much if the launch is above you as there is no such information for distance then? No... Why you need to start tracking the detection to find its range. And if you are going to automate counter measurements against detected threats, you need to know their distance, but as well are they really threats to you or not. It is like a missile avoidance by maneuvering in SEAD missions, if you time your maneuver badly, you are dead. Why you need to wait and wait that missile is heading at your direction and then time your maneuvers correctly.

Similar thin is with chaff, flares and IR jammers etc. It is no use if you release chaff and flare at missile that has been launched at you from 15 km distance when the missile is not even caring about those thins at all.

And if you even look at the President-S marketing materials and especially their test launch videos, the key is in the detection-tracking-evaluation-reaction. The missile is not reacted until it is evaluated by tracking it to get it at proper distance.

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Black Shark 3

 

Any new update on when the upgrade might hit us? Would be nice to do formation with Hind and get nice pictures.

 

I saw Chizh responded to question once and said that BS3 will not happen this year. I can't locate this comment now as he makes a lot of them.

 

This, however, corresponds to the official roadmap that put BS3 on the list of passive development --

Projects that are in the passive development phase (waiting for a 3D model delivery, developers allocation, reference gathering stage or one of the current active project to be finished first)

 

(...)

 

Modules:

(...)

Ka-50 Black Shark 3

(...)

 

 

Intel i7-13700KF :: ROG STRIX Z790-A GAMING WIFI D4 :: Corsair Vengeance LPX 64GB ::  MSI RTX 4080  Gaming X Trio  :: VKB Gunfighter MK.III MCG Ultimate :: VPC MongoosT-50 CM3 :: non-VR :: single player :: open beta

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw Chizh responded to question once and said that BS3 will not happen this year. I can't locate this comment now as he makes a lot of them.

 

This, however, corresponds to the official roadmap that put BS3 on the list of passive development --

 

feelsbadman

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My guess is the team is busy with Mi-24. Looking forward to it as well.

Intel i7-13700KF :: ROG STRIX Z790-A GAMING WIFI D4 :: Corsair Vengeance LPX 64GB ::  MSI RTX 4080  Gaming X Trio  :: VKB Gunfighter MK.III MCG Ultimate :: VPC MongoosT-50 CM3 :: non-VR :: single player :: open beta

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They couldn’t wait to put BS3 on the last of the list to move forward and prioritize A-10 V2 with also New forum opened:

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=765

 

Tell me what...

 

My thought exactly. It really looks like any Fixed Wing project will systematically take over any on going RW one. The Mi24 was announced way before all the Fxxx modules that came up first. BS3 will suffer the same fate. Proof is that no special forum was opened when they announced BS3. It took a few hours for them to open one for the A10 v2. It looks like ED will really start to work on it only if they are completely running out of ideas to satisfy the FW community. Helicopters modules look like they are just some free time projects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well. ED never wanted to share this. But after 11 years of flying DCS choppers in various squadron, I would say at least 80% to 90% are flying fixed wing because that's the easiest to fly and quickest way to achieve some kills. RW squadrons are extremely rare and most of the time ultra confidential. Most active are in EU and they are close to non existent in US. Don't know much about the APAC area. Since we are such a minority, we are usually keeping low profile and that doesn't help our cause. The DCS community is extremely prejudiced and toxic against whoever dare to raise their concern or even wishes for RW modules.

The Mi24 and OH58D is probably the last hope to stand out a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...