Black Shark 3 official photos.

Google Translate

Four units is within the margin of error of “never”… or something. :P…

If you believe that serial production is characterized only by the number of manufactured products, then you are very mistaken. Unfortunately, I do not have enough knowledge in English to explain to an incompetent person all the nuances of product development and organization of production in Russia.

In addition, in reality, all the Ka-50 helicopters manufactured at the Progress Arsenyev Aviation Company, having serial numbers starting from 01-01, etc., are already serial machines. The Ka-50 with serial numbers 01-01…01-05 are the serial machines of the pilot batch (the machine with serial number 01-05 was not completed, but was converted into the Ka-52).

If you believe that serial production is characterized only by the number of manufactured products, then you are very mistaken.

I'm just quoting your source. Take it up with them. :dunno:

Google Translate

I'm just quoting your source. Take it up with them. :dunno:

I'm afraid that unfortunately you didn't understand anything from what I said.

"There is nothing so hurtful for the brain as splinters of broken rose-coloured spectacles." ©''

There is no easier way to lose an argument than using ad hominem.

There is no easier way to lose an argument than using ad hominem.

Demagogy.

I'm afraid that unfortunately you didn't understand anything from what I said.

Incorrect. Again, if you don't like what your source is saying, perhaps don't bring it up as a source or contact them to change their data to your liking.

Google Translate

Incorrect. Again, if you don't like what your source is saying, perhaps don't bring it up as a source or contact them to change their data to your liking.

You don't understand what I'm talking about.

There is absolutely no difference how many products are produced in serial production. Just as there is absolutely no difference, the aforementioned source is mistaken in counting these products or not.

Even if only one unit of a given product is produced at a factory where serial production of a product is launched, in any case it will be a serial product.

You don't understand what I'm talking about.

Again, incorrect. In fact, I think you've got the issue the wrong way around: the mistake you believe I'm making was not something I actually said — it's something you invented. All I did was quote your source, and then you decided to read all kinds of odd things into this.

Even if only one unit of a given product is produced at a factory where serial production of a product is launched, in any case it will be a serial product.

That's nice, dear. You'll notice that I never actually suggested otherwise.

You are arguing against a position I do not hold. There's a name for this fallacy.

You offered a source to bolster your argument, and then you say the source is mistaken when a different read is offered. That fallacy also has a name.

You're also being quite abusive when your arguments fail to hold up. This fallacy has already been brought up.

Just a tip: if you want to make a strong argument, try relying less on fallacies to prop it up.

Serial production of the Ka-50 has been discontinued since January 2009

Thanks for the translation and the confirmation. Obviously it's not possible to discontinue serial production unless serial production has commenced, so perhaps we can drop the whole 'it was only ever a prototype' argument from the forums ?

I talked about R-73... And I have as well seen as you the evidence that wings are same, and the test reports. So go back to those.

Unfortunately, this is typical of your position through the entire discussion.

Something else was perhaps possible on another aircraft, so surely this means that this thing is possible on this aircraft.

No proof, no evidence, just hypothesisation.

You made Ad hominem by claiming that I want A-A missiles because I am a fictional action helicopter TV show fan and so on so anything to get my fantasy in.

No, I never mentioned tv shows or your interest / non-interest in them (Martinistripes did). What I mentioned was your apparent interest in having fantasy systems added to the Ka-50 so that you could engage in unrealistic employment of the helicopter. If I'd said we should ignore your request because you you were whatever, that would be ad hominum. What I actually said was that the requests weren't grounded in reality - either of the aircraft or its use.

Do you have photos or documents specifically denying that it is impossible to mount IGLA to KA-50/52 helicopters? In all of the variants, units etc?

There's no more reason for Kamov to have produced documents saying that the Ka-50 couldn't carry Igla than for them to have written a document saying that the collective cannot be removed and used as a potato peeler, or that the user cannot attach beer kegs to the hardpoints.

They write documents saying what it can do. If it could do that, they'd have written a document. If you could find a document saying the Ka-50 could carry Igla, we wouldn't be having this circular argument.

6) KA-50 never entered to serial production

(...)

KA-50 NEVER EXISTED AS SERIAL PRODUCTION UNIT!!!

(...)

For long time people here yelled that KA-50 shouldn't be in the game as it is prototype.

See the translation Tippis provided of S.E.Bulba's quote above.

The Ka-50 plainly did enter serial production.

As not even our KA-50 that is in DCS is real, it doesn't exist

You're conflating unicorns and triceratops again.

Neither exists now, one used to exist, and you could try to make a realistic model of it based on reality (Ka-50), the other never existed and any model of it is based in imagination (Ka-50 + Igla) This is true even if you imaging the biology of the unicorn to be based on ponies and narwhals (or Ka-52).

(...lots...)

All the rest was - as you yourself said - based on your opinion, not evidence

[edit] This has all been said before, so I will take a break from the discussion.

Thanks for the translation and the confirmation. Obviously it's not possible to discontinue serial production unless serial production has commenced, so perhaps we can drop the whole 'it was only ever a prototype' argument from the forums ?

KA-50 that we have is ONLY a prototype. It is not never been a serial production model.

People here claim that our KA-50 in the DCS is a serial production mode, and that is wrong.

Our KA-50 #25 was build for a BEG (Combat Experiment Group) standard in 25th April 1995.

The signed order was four KA-50's and four KA-29's converted for the target designation.

Four KA-50's and two KA-29's came from Air Force and two KA-29's from Navy Aviation.

Idea was that once the tests are done, KA-50 would receive a new targeting and datalink systems that will join it with all branches.

Based to the command, two KA-50's (#22 and #24) were updated in Arsenyev production plant, and one KA-29 was converted for KSAS and one 2A42 gun, later another KA-29 was added with new navigation and targeting system that was compatible with KA-50's, and KA-29's acted as target sharing and group leadership. Later two other KA-50's (#20 and #21) were delivered for completion. But those two never left the factory.

In 29th November 1999 Deputy Defense Minister issued formation of Combat Attack Group (BUG) and 344 training center had only one upgraded KA-50 survived (#24), and it was decided to assign a fifth prototype model (#25, our airframe) to BUG. That lead to preparations for combat operations and KA-50's were equipped with additional armors, KABRIS and integrate it with new satellite navigation system.

During December 1999 and July 2000 over 150 tests flights (total 100 hours) were performed and 24th November 2000 Chief of General Staff of the Armed Forces ordered BUG to deploy to second Chechen war.

Two KA-50's, one KA-29 and one Mi-8 left Torzhok on 3rd December and arrived to Severnyi 26th December.

BUG personnel was eight pilots and co-pilots, 26 technicians, two experts and nine Kamov personnel.

Because KA-52 was not ready at the time and was only going through the testing, familiarization flights were performed in Mi-24 on 28-30th December.

First KA-50 recon flight was performed at 1st January 2001, and after 6th January the KA-50's started combat missions.

On 16th January the our KA-50 (#25) had damage on one of the wingtips and was pulled out for repairs. Multiple Mi-24's and Mi-8's had flight accidents because the flight conditions, but none of the KA-50's because its design, why it was praised that such mountainous, high gust over 1500m altitude operations should only be fly with Co-Axial helicopters.

The BUG proven the easy of combat operations, easy of flight operations by single manned aircraft, and KABRIS was highly praised as it allowed pilots to see where each of the other flight members were, what were assigned targets and where they were.

After the BUG the pilots recommended few things, like a:

- New cockpit displays

- New data layout

- FLIR for targeting and surveillance

- New CM algorithms

- New Electronic Self-Defense suite

Since then most of those have been introduced in the serial production standard.

On 20th June 2001, Army Aviation Command issued recommendation to extend BUG to three helicopters (completion of #23 airframe) that to be upgraded for the mentioned standard, as well the latest KA-50 at the time (#26) was to be as well completed with the standard. Same time one of the KA-29's was to be upgrade too for the same standard with the SAMSHIT installation to it.

2001-2002 the funding was not granted, and project was halted, only completion was KA-50 flight simulator.

In 2005 Russian Defense Minister S.Ivanov issued command to restart KA-50 serial production and speed up the KA-52 development to replace KA-29's.

It was later decided that KA-50 helicopter is cancelled. No KA-50 was completed with the complete serial production standard.

What I mentioned was your apparent interest in having fantasy systems added to the Ka-50 so that you could engage in unrealistic employment of the helicopter.

 

What you claim is that IGLA has never been implemented on any helicopter, because it is fantasy to have a KA-52 with a IGLA system (because it would be fantasy to even think that KA-52 that shares majority of its airframe and systems with KA-50, would be made so that if KA-50 was to be produced in serial production next to KA-52 and operated in combat field together, that they would share as much as possible of the same weapons and other systems, especially when they share the same wing - where older KA-50 wing doesn't have the third pylon like didn't first KA-52's either, but the upgraded KA-52's did, as well even the KA-50-2!).

 

In other words so it is clear for you, it is fantasy for you that KA-52 and KA-50 would carry same missiles, same bombs, and same cannon both in their latest production standard - IF KA-50 would have been continued!

 

 

They write documents saying what it can do. If it could do that, they'd have written a document. If you could find a document saying the Ka-50 could carry Igla, we wouldn't be having this circular argument.

 

You have the circular argument, as you do not accept the documents that lists from manufacturers that KA-50/52 platform can carry IGLA systems!

 

How difficult it is for you to understand that there is no documentation that KA-50 would be the only helicopter excluded to carry IGLA-V? Mi-8, KA-52, Mi-28 etc etc are all capable to carry IGLA! When there are evidence where KA-50 is mentioned to carry it, but there are no photographs, you are just arguing that you need to see the photographs or classified documentation that specify everything!

 

See the translation Tippis provided of S.E.Bulba's quote above.

The Ka-50 plainly did enter serial production.

 

So it does carry IGLA system, has FLIR, has glass cockpit, has all the serial production features that were standardized...

 

 

You're conflating unicorns and triceratops again.

 

Ad Hominems, again!

 

You need to proof first that KA-50 would never have received any of the upgraded systems than what we have now in the DCS, IF it would be in production today!

 

You are chasing that KA-50 in DCS should only be what it is exactly right now. Never seeing the serial production standard, never get the FLIR, Glass Cockpit, President-S, IGLA etc etc. Because you do not want to accept that Serial Production standard was never completed and KA-50's are not in operational use like it was meant to be!

 

You are against ED, because you do not accept the ED's actions as you want to fly only a KA-50 #25 from 2000! You don't care that KA-50 design was upgraded couple time after the version we have in DCS, because in your opinion KA-50 is only as it is now in DCS.

 

Remember, I am not wanting IGLA's to KA-50. I am not either bringing them to it!

I don't want R-73's or anything like that.

 

You are claiming that I want some fantasy things, yet you do not understand that I do not want them, but I do partially accept the ED's position as what they are doing is based to reality and evidence and common sense, with just some educated guesses when they can't get all information.

 

Just simple question. Why do you believe that KA-50 would have stayed exactly as it is now in the DCS?

Why would it not have FLIR?

Why no Glass Cockpit?

Why no IGLA?

Why not any of the upgrades that their whole industry has made since the late 90's?

 

Can you provide evidence that why a upgraded KA-50 would not have capability to carry IGLA, when other combat helicopters can? Why would Kamov make KA-50 and KA-52 not to be compatible with each others in production as in field as much as possible?

 

 

You say that is a fantasy?

 

 

And you say that is as well?

 

So what you are saying: "If I would be in chief designer of KA-50 and possibly KA-52, I would never allow KA-50 to be able carry IGLA missile system!"

 

Because this and further developments for KA-50 is "fantasy" in your opinion.

 

Thanks for the translation and the confirmation. Obviously it's not possible to discontinue serial production unless serial production has commenced, so perhaps we can drop the whole 'it was only ever a prototype' argument from the forums ?

Serial production can be ended before it has even been started.

The KA-50 was commanded for Serial Production in 2005, but its funding was cancelled before the production was started.

If you issue order to start a serial production, that is issued command and serial production is hence started on that day command was given.

If you issue new command on very next day that serial production is stopped, then serial production is stopped. Regardless that nothing has really happened than a command papers moving tables and few phone calls made.

How many KA-50's does Russia today pose that has such features as Glass Cockpit, FLIR, President-S etc all in one as serial production order was issued in 2005?

15? 30? Just one? Not even that? So 4 years and not a single KA-50 in operational use with all the serial production features?

What happened to this?

FLIR Yes

ECM No

Glass Cockpit?

Not even LWS!

Again, does it have same standard? Same #18 but completely different setup!

How about KA-52 production line, did it end up like this?

Or like this?

We do not have Black Shark 3 cockpit photos as we don't even know is the current updated (2020) KA-50 cockpit exactly the same that will be in the Black Shark 3 when it gets finished.

What ED is doing, is information based reality with slight touch of their own guesses that if KA-50 would have been continued in production and received upgrades.

because I am a fictional action helicopter TV show fan

Well, he actually said nothing of the sort, he just said your idea isn't realistic. Strawman much?

you do not accept the documents that lists from manufacturers that KA-50/52 platform can carry IGLA systems!

More imaginary arguments that I never made.

Find a single post where I even hint that no Ka-52 could ever launch an IGLA.

The Ka-50 & Ka-52 are different aircraft, and the discussion is about the Ka-50

Because they are different aircraft, commenting on the Ka-52 would be completely irrelevant to the current argument and so there would be no reason for me to raise the issue of what the Ka-52 can, or cannot do.

All I've ever said is that your writing "KA-50/52 platform" does not mean that such a thing exists.

There is the Ka-50, and there is the Ka-52. There is no Ka-50/52.

The Ka-52 evolved from the Ka-50 as the F-15C evolved from the F-15A.

An F-15A with an AESA radar, AIM-120s and a cockpit full of glass panels is not a real F-15A. It is as imaginary as a Ka-50 with a Ka-52 cockpit, 6 hard-points & Igla.

Serial production can be ended before it has even been started.

No.

You're simply wrong.

Logically, it can be cancelled before it has started, but it can't be ended until after it's started.

What ED is doing, is information based reality with slight touch of their own guesses.

Yes, exactly as you would do if you were a vet and you tried to try to come up with a well reasoned - and grounded in science - description of the probable anatomy of a unicorn.

But it would still be a work of fiction.

Google Translate

Again, incorrect. In fact, I think you've got the issue the wrong way around…

I don't speak English, so sometimes it's very difficult for me to understand a Google Translate. Now I am completely confused in what you say. In any case, I personally am completely indifferent whether you will consider that there were only 4 serial Ka-50s, or in fact they were 12. I had a completely different purpose for the conversation. Therefore, I consider the further discussion of this topic completely pointless, because I absolutely do not have time to participate in forum sophistry.

More imaginary arguments that I never made.

Find a single post where I even hint that no Ka-52 could ever launch an IGLA.

You keep calling that IGLA on upgraded Ka-50 would be fantasy, but it is as much fantasy as it is to be on upgraded Ka-52. Not all Ka-52's can launch IGLA, because not all of them have third pylon!

If the IGLA in upgraded Ka-50 would be fantasy, it shouldn't never be possible be carried or launched by a attack helicopter, especially the Ka-52!

But the fact is, IGLA is designed to be carried by attack helicopters and it is used in the Ka-52 (dual-seat version of the Ka-50).

Your claim that upgraded Ka-50 would never carry IGLA is simply illogical.

To IGLA being fantasy, it should never be possible carry it in first place! And that you keep claiming all the time that it is fantasy!

The Ka-50 & Ka-52 are different aircraft, and the discussion is about the Ka-50

Because they are different aircraft, commenting on the Ka-52 would be completely irrelevant to the current argument and so there would be no reason for me to raise the issue of what the Ka-52 can, or cannot do.

Ka-50 and Ka-52 share the wings, the fuselage and mainly only the cockpit is the different part.

You are arguing that Ka-50 never received any upgrades since the #25 in late 2000 and Ka-52 was never designed around the Ka-50 itself, mainly just adding a two-seat cockpit.

Ka-50 and Ka-52 were designed to be interchangeable by the parts as they were doctrinally meant to operate together. Ka-52 as flight lead and Ka-50's as wingmen.

Ka-60 is different helicopter than Ka-50.

Mi-24 is different helicopter than Ka-50.

Ka-27 is different helicopter than Ka-50.

A Ka-52 and Ka-50 are same, with cockpit changed. You can even swap the wings on Ka-52 and Ka-50 as you want as they are mechanically same, difference is in the electronic wiring. And that is what the upgraded Ka-50 "Black Shark 3" should have, compatibility with the Ka-52 by electronics, weapons etc. But that project got cancelled. Funded withdraw etc, regardless it was ordered for serial production, it was scrapped.

But you say that Ka-52 is irrelevant, by your logic it means that it has never existed and it has never been implemented.

 

No.

You're simply wrong.

Logically, it can be cancelled before it has started, but it can't be ended until after it's started.

It can be ended, because it was started. Official order was issued about starting the serial production in 2005.

It was started, it was ended. That is a fact. And you don't need to produce anything between those two orders.

Well, he actually said nothing of the sort, he just said your idea isn't realistic. Strawman much?

He said exactly so, linking that my idea is fantasy.

Yet the facts stands.

Fact: Ka-50 and Ka-52 are interchangeable by the designs.

Fact: Serial Produced Ka-50 was designed to have far more features than our Ka-50 in DCS.

Fact: IGLA system for helicopters is completely proven system that exist and was offered for Ka-50 and as well Ka-52.

Fact: Ka-50 wings are mechanically interchangeable with Ka-52 wings (you can look the detached wing stubs and compare those, they are identical) but difference is in the electronics (wiring).

Fact: President-S is designed to be installed on Ka-50, not just Ka-52 and others.

He does direct claim that everything that ED is doing is nothing more than pure fantasy, fiction and doesn't exist.

He does direct claim that I am fan of fictional TV series and want just Air-to-Air missiles to go Boom Boom so that he can build personal attack that anything that I say can't be taken seriously as I just want Boom Boom.

And now you have done the strawman attack.

You can try as much you want to deny his claims that I want a Air-to-Air fighter as that is his claim.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4245914&postcount=115

That I have never stated anywhere that it is what I want, just the opposite that is something that I do not want!

But he finds illogical that

1) Ka-50 has been upgraded from the version from late 2000 that we have in DCS.

2) IGLA is proven system for combat helicopters and exist for compatible airframe.

3) President-S is proven system and offered for Ka-50.

4) Ka-52 is compatible with the Ka-50 by its proven design and not entirely different airframe.

What he can keep doing is call few Russian Heroes as illogical and liars and ignore all the evidence there is given to him as he has asked. I don't care anymore.

He can keep calling everyone else what ever he wants but doesn't do so for ED, because he doesn't accept that what ED is doing not by a bit, and he doesn't want to find the logic that what ED has even found and can justify their decisions to do Black Shark 3, and that is not just because "People in forums has been screaming so much about fantasies" but because there has been offered too much evidence that various system upgrades has been done for Ka-50 and would be in its Serial Production version if it would have ever been continued to this date.

What ED does is that they take 1+1+1+1 = 4. And how they do it is completely logical and valid, but they likely do some of the stuff that is not so. So I repeat once more some things that I do not accept (because there is not much information about it):

1) President-S EW page added as KABRIS page, instead known dedicated display.

2) Third Pylon Indicator to existing two pylon version (in the Ka-52 and Ka-50 upgrade design it is digital on MFCD) by modifying weapons selector panel

If ED would implement a Glass Cockpit (that they don't!) it would be understandable that they have all needed information, but again the problems that I have are In-Cockpit implementation, not external modeling and features.

But there are few people that does everything in their power to keep Ka-50 in DCS as it is now, trying to eliminate all the logical possibilities and technical possibilities based any evidence. Because last thing they want is Ka-50 to be updated from its current state. And if they can't accept something, they start to call it "mock-up" or "irrelevant" and such things.

And that is their mission, get the Black Shark 3 if not cancelled, then ignored by the community as they get its status then to be "Fantasy helicopter without purpose of serious simulator of DCS standards based facts".

Yet, all they do is fly a "Once a upon time" Ka-50 #25 from late 2000, that is nothing more than a prototype used for developing new tactics, new technologies and new whole doctrine.

I am nothing more than a Juror no:8.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050083/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

Evidences are listed multiple times that what ED is adding is completely possible, but they are entitled for their opinion that "Black Shark 3" is nothing more than fantasy based nothing more than fantasy weapons, systems and capabilities.

TL;DR

Can't be arsed with a wall of textual rambling. But does an exact BORT# exist, or has one ever existed, that had this implemented? Because if not, just forget about it.

Google Translate

… But the fact is, IGLA is designed to be carried by attack helicopters and it is used in the Ka-52 (dual-seat version of the Ka-50).

Your claim that upgraded Ka-50 would never carry IGLA is simply illogical.

 

To IGLA being fantasy, it should never be possible carry it in first place! And that you keep claiming all the time that it is fantasy!

 

 

 

Ka-50 and Ka-52 share the wings, the fuselage and mainly only the cockpit is the different part…

Funny logic. The Ka-27 and Ka-29 helicopters have almost the same airframe, and differ only in the cockpit. The Ka-29 can use the Shturm-V ATGM. Consequently, if you hang the Shturm-V ATGM on the Ka-27, is it likely he will be able to use them too? :)

… A Ka-52 and Ka-50 are same, with cockpit changed. You can even swap the wings on Ka-52 and Ka-50 as you want as they are mechanically same, difference is in the electronic wiring…

It turns out that the whole problem is only in the "electronic wiring"? Apparently, it does not matter at all that the Ka-50 and Ka-52 helicopters have completely different the PrPNK piloting, navigation and targeting systems (including combat and navigation onboard computers, etc.), which in turn have completely different subsystems, and in particular different the SUO weapon systems? :)

TL;DR

 

Can't be arsed with a wall of textual rambling. But does an exact BORT# exist, or has one ever existed, that had this implemented? Because if not, just forget about it.

Hi msalama,

Perhaps I mis-understood your question but please follow the link below for yellow 25 photographs, you probably have seen them before.

This is yellow 25 beautifully photographed... I believe she is our girl.

The "Balls of Fate" are not specifically shown in any photographs but can be seen just out of shot with most rear landing gear photos.... obvy they had something to hide.

https://walkarounds.ru/index.php?/category/aviation-ru-kamov-ka-50

Nice to see a Kamov with balls between her legs!

Crazy westerners

:)