KA50 MWS

MWS missile warning launch System was Photo around with small bull eyes around the Chopper(LWS is present installed), later Kamov added this future, but think still test machine.

All testing but nothing serious.

And lets also have it fire nuclear cruise missiles.

I like where you're going with this! :thumbup:

I mean, I get that some people don't care for that much realism and you are free to play it any way you like, but I rather have the developers working on actual bugs and new aircraft then adding stuff which has no place with the real aircraft. There are loads of arcade flying games out there which are better suited for that.

Honestly though, my requests aren't beyond reason of reality. The Ka-50 we have in the game is a test bed. The full service model would have an RWR because the tanks it would engage are more than likely going to be supported by AA which tracks using radar. If it doesn't have any means to detect or avoid this threat, then the Russians would be using a very expensive combat aircraft as cannon fodder. Just look at its predecessor the Mi-24. They were equipped with an RWR, and chaff.

After what would you model this? would be absolute real fantasy, that's not for what DCS stand's for.

There was various Threads about RWR, Kamov never equipped the Ka-50 with a RWR.

There some reason why the Russian never did this, Ka-50 see only action so far for asymmetric War in Chechnya no Radar equipped anti air defence, the lack of Money in the 90's and now there focusing on the Ka-52. When they start to add this possible that would be still classified

Here look the Forum Post from Member, it's from 2005 but there was not much on-going with Ka-50

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1513472&postcount=2

After what would you model this? would be absolute real fantasy, that's not for what DCS stand's for.

There was various Threads about RWR, Kamov never equipped the Ka-50 with a RWR.

There some reason why the Russian never did this, Ka-50 see only action so far for asymmetric War in Chechnya no Radar equipped anti air defence, the lack of Money in the 90's and now there focusing on the Ka-52. When they start to add this possible that would be still classified

 

Here look the Forum Post from Member, it's from 2005 but there was not much on-going with Ka-50

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1513472&postcount=2

You mean like the fantasy IFF we have? The fantasy radar, the fantasy missiles, the fantasy ballistic weapons, etc.. ? All these are approximations because the real data is classified. Please stop with the realism argument. It's flawed.

ED could choose to meld the various Ka-50 prototypes which probably all had different mechanisms in them such as MWS, RWR, Chaff, AA missiles, and any number of other options, and this would be no further from reality than the approximations in all the other aircraft because it would be an approximation of a finalized product. I fully expect the Ka-50's they're using today have these things albeit more sophisticated versions.

The KA-50 number 24 which is the one that has been modeled in DCS does not have an RWR MWS or wiring to launch the R-73.

Chizh already said that we can be happy to have the ABRIS AMMS and that there will no aditions to the Current KA-50 Module in DCS.

Those Discussions come up in 6 Month Cycles but will lead into nothing.

You should Prey for an 52 instead.

ISE

You should Prey for an 52 instead.

This would be amazing. I'd rather have a KA-52 than any species of AH-64...

This would be amazing. I'd rather have a KA-52 than any species of AH-64...

That would be ULTRA Amazing.:punk:

The KA-50 number 24 which is the one that has been modeled in DCS does not have an RWR MWS or wiring to launch the R-73.

 

Chizh already said that we can be happy to have the ABRIS AMMS and that there will no aditions to the Current KA-50 Module in DCS.

 

Those Discussions come up in 6 Month Cycles but will lead into nothing.

 

 

You should Prey for an 52 instead.

 

 

 

ISE

Hey, you want to know what else I wasn't for the Ka-50? Multicrew!

You mean like the fantasy IFF we have? The fantasy radar, the fantasy missiles, the fantasy ballistic weapons, etc.. ? All these are approximations because the real data is classified. Please stop with the realism argument. It's flawed.

Exactly.

We don't have realistic radars, not realistic missiles (because sensors guiding them are classified!) nor even realistic ground unit behaviors or procedures. A-10C virtual pilots would be flying like flies if there would be realistic systems to fight against them and that they would be using.

And then we have these "it is a fantasy" and straight in the model there is a modeled MWS switch that has even an label "not functional". Like why it was put there in the first place if the unit didn't have it? A 3d modeler created inside joke for customers?

What ever is changed in the cockpit wouldn't change the flight modeling (weight would be easy to calculate in just like fuel etc) but just avionics etc. And those could be as well be "simulated" like any other thermal vision system, laser range finder, RWR or IFF.

Maybe Mirage 2000C should be removed as it can't be more than 85% realistic (or something like that) what developer said because classifications.

Why not remove all FC3 modules as they are not clickable and have the functions there should be!

I think ED does good job as it's partners, but there should be some revisiting to old modules and even create a new, if based some improvisation and educated guess, just to boost sales and if wanted, keep them as "un-official" by officia status.

So someone wanting a feature added as it is already half-way implemented. I would like to get the wipers working in Windows and get the water going on windows and see the different bad weathers etc. But likely it ain't realistic as they ain't modeled....

There is a difference between adding stuff that was never on the aircraft and approximating (with help of official documents and professionals) the workings of things that are actually on the aircraft.

If you can't see that difference then I don't know what to say.

There is a difference between adding stuff that was never on the aircraft and approximating (with help of official documents and professionals) the workings of things that are actually on the aircraft.

If you can't see that difference then I don't know what to say.

So should we remove all the modules when they have features that real ones doesn't have?

And KA-50 is a very special one, as it is a prototype of single one, that likely never was in a combat and that has a functions modeled but not enabled.

There is a difference of prototypes and production ones....

But thing still is, ED could do more with a KA-50 by releasing a "Black Shark 3" just in the sake of it being a prototype.

KA-50 + Photon torpedoes = ?

Modeling could be an issue here as I don't think they were meant to be fired within the earths atmosphere.

You'd have to slap some thrusters on the hull for control if you figure out how to get it into orbit, hence the great need for DCS cape Canaveral module.

I see major weight gains from new environmental systems for flight in space and re entry could be a bitch.

Reminds me of a very old thread about making Black shark as "good as grand theft auto xx" LMAO that was a good one.

It may have been one of the longest ever here lol.

There is a difference between adding stuff that was never on the aircraft and approximating (with help of official documents and professionals) the workings of things that are actually on the aircraft.

If you can't see that difference then I don't know what to say.

What makes you think a production Ka-50 doesn't have these things?

What makes you think a production Ka-50 doesn't have these things?

Did you read my Post? The Airframe simulated in DCS doesnt have these things.

Did you read my Post? The Airframe simulated in DCS doesnt have these things.

Did you read my post? I'm talking about modeling the systems of a production Ka-50.

There is a difference between adding stuff that was never on the aircraft and approximating (with help of official documents and professionals) the workings of things that are actually on the aircraft.

If you can't see that difference then I don't know what to say.

Pls take a look at the right panel, above ARK-22.

What do you see there?

Did you read my post? I'm talking about modeling the systems of a production Ka-50.

-26 Have been build

-All of them where different

-We in DCS have Number 24 Modeled (IIRC). Which has an LWS an ABRIS AMMS and no R-73 Cabability

-Today all of them have been converted into KA-52

A Ka-50 at MAKS 2005 (that appears to have missed the queue to be "converted into KA-52").

It looks to have both an LWS & a MWS installed...

copyright Richard Seaman

<Edit>From the SIM by way of comparison</Edit>:

& some other views...

KA-52 hat its maiden 97 and is in Produktion since 2008....byebye nmbr.25

KA-52 hat its maiden 97 and is in Produktion since 2008....byebye nmbr.25

What does that have to do with the current discussion ?

After MAK-UFM MWS still is for sure classefied seem's only singel test airframe, other futures like RWR and Jammer never was introduced on the Ka-50 didnt think there is any future Avionik packed that come to enhanced our DCS Ka-50.

I don't think that we're likely to get an MLWS in the DCS.Ka-50, but as there was a wide range of fit-outs, and some did have the system, it's not really possible to state, as was posted earlier, that

"The Ka-50 does not have a MWS"

or that

"....this is a limitation of the Ka-50".

or that

"Kamov never equipped the Ka-50 with a RWR".

& undermines this:

I get that some people don't care for that much realism and you are free to play it any way you like, but I rather have the developers working on actual bugs and new aircraft then adding stuff which has no place

If as Isegrim believes, the airframe we have is 24, then at most you could say '24 has the wiring for a MLWS but didn't actually have one fitted at the point in time it's modelled, however the next aircraft off the assembly line did

That takes the request a long way from photon torpedoes and AMRAAMs

After MAK-UFM MWS still is for sure classefied seem's only singel test airframe, other futures like RWR and Jammer never was introduced on the Ka-50 didnt think there is any future Avionik packed that come to enhanced our DCS Ka-50.

The KA-50 development and research was ended before it went to production.

What there is are bunch of prototypes that were meant to be put in the production model.

What we have, is one of the prototypes that was used to make the final production model in the future.

A prototype, a prototype, a prototype. Not a final production.

That prototype isn't what KA-50 would have been or would not have been, it is just one of the prototypes that was used to make the final one.

The prototype we have, has modeled MWS in it. It is known it was planned to be capable carry R-73 missiles (not known would it be final or just one of the prototypes) as KA-50 was used as well to design KA-52 that can carry those, and has all those other features.

DCS World modules are all full of "Educated guesses" and "Pure Fantasy". There is no realism to be used as point to deny future possibilities that KA-50 would get "BS3" that has the features based educated guesses and newer models, specially because some of the features are already modeled in the BS2 but not activated! It is like leadership yelled "Okay boys (coders), KA-50 is good enough, now go to A-10C project and NTTR map!".

And would it be easy money to make a DLC/Upgrade packages for existing modules that requires the base module and previous modules for it?

Think about it. When the airframe doesn't change, or it is very very minimal change (like example Mirage 2000C new external flare/chaff dispenser that by manufacturer, doesn't affect flight performance) but just the avionics system, then it should be easier way for producers to make money when there is no need to touch the flight modeling or so little that it is not a problem. And for mission designers and multiplayer it would be amazing just to be able limit the aircrafts to their corresponding eras. As each module is by their previous versions fun to fly than the latest ones, like have a Mirage 2000C instead Mirage 2000-5. Just like KA-50 would be if it would be finished module in the first place, even to its prototype version.

It is not like (some like to joke) that KA-50 should get photon torpedos or something, but simply the features that were planned for it, tested with it and make the KA-50 as "Production model".

After all, currently DCS World is having a KA-50 that ain't production model, it is one of its kind (unique, single airframe!) and yet we have fleets in the DCS, we have prototype in the combat, that no army would really do!

So if we want realism card to be played, lets remove the KA-50 once and for all, as there is no place for a prototype attack helicopter!

That would end at once all the discussions about finalizing the KA-50 (MWS, Windshield wipers, heating systems, Vikhr fragmentation and A-A mode etc).

It ain't like asking a MMW radar top of the mast and shoot phasers.....

But I agree that we do not come to see a upgrade to KA-50, it is done for years. It would benefit a lot from revisited cockpit model and textures but even those were't fixed years ago so any hope to see anything to be finalized in that module is gone. KA-50 is ED prototype for DCS World module system about prototype helicopter. And must be a inner circle joke about so.

I Just don't care anymore

I'm tired listening to all those "Realism" junkies ....

They don't realize that half of the stuff in DCS isn't close to realism but educated guesses and they start throwing fits if they think otherwise

W/e ...

After MAK-UFM MWS still is for sure classefied seem's only singel test airframe, other futures like RWR and Jammer never was introduced on the Ka-50 didnt think there is any future Avionik packed that come to enhanced our DCS Ka-50.

Lets think what the MWS would be.

Would such system be possible simulate like 99% accuracy? No. Never.

Would such system be possible just simulated like it would be realistic? Yes... Totally.

A-10C has MWS system, it is nothing more than a single light bulb in a cockpit and a switch:

It doesn't have any other purpose than just light up when a missile is launched. It doesn't know from what direction, by whom or against what. And how deeply does people think that is simulated? Like is there a change it is as basic as is our "radars simulation"?

So why not use that same educated guess and "level of simulation" that is used in any other module, and just make that switch in the KA-50 cockpit operational, add the MWS light or how it should have been shown (should have enough sources to hint that) and change the external model to have those few sensors? Or did ED burn bridges (contacts) to Kamov back in the day that they couldn't do Black Shark 3 from KA-50 #27 or the last model? After all we are talking about prototype unit that ED could very well use as prototype and do what ever they like for it, almost.

But must be impossible as likely the windshield wipers weren't wired either in that prototype when developers were around it or highly classified.