Black Shark 3?

Yes, BS1 was standalone initially, but AFAIK (can't really find those old announcement articles now) it was advertised as a first in a series of modules

Initially, it was advertised as an addon for Flaming Cliffs. It was later developed and released as standalone product but way before DCS world and modules became a thing.

Then DCSW came together with the Warthog, but instead of the expected integration of BS1 with the Warthog, there was a payware upgrade to BS2.

The A-10 was also released as a standalone product before DCS World (using the same FC1 engine as BS1). Sometime later, a compatibiliy patch allowed BS1 and A-10 users (which were still two separate sims at the time) to play on the same multiplayer servers. BS2 was simply the integration of BS1 into the then new DCS World, which had a generous discount for BS1 owners.

The A-10 AFAIK became part of DCS World for free.

Initially, it was advertised as an addon for Flaming Cliffs. It was later developed and released as standalone product but way before DCS world and modules became a thing.

I've managed to find this post from before the BS was released:

Q: Your press release indicates that Black Shark is the first in a series of DCS modules, with more aircraft/helicopters to follow. How soon will these new aircraft become available?

A: We are already developing the A-10A “Warthog" and AH-64A “Apache” (with planned front-seat / back-seat multiplayer) and other western and eastern aircraft will follow with an approximate interval of every nine months. To annouce these later aircraft now would be premature because plans can often change and lead to delays due to numerous factors such as our work in the equally important military simulation market.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=392208&postcount=21

So, I do remember it correctly that it was advertised as a first module in the series.

Guess I missed that but as someone who bought BS1 on release, I don´t remember any mention of DCS world back then. Interesting find though

Guess I missed that but as someone who bought BS1 on release, I don´t remember any mention of DCS world back then. Interesting find though

It wasn't called DCS World back then, it didn't have a name yet. They just announced with BS that it will be a series of modules (called DCS) which would be integrated together (by sharing a common base I guess).

I understand that developing those modules took some time and the "base" changed considerably by the time the Warthog was released, but still, needing to pay for compatibility changes ($20 USD for the BS2 "upgrade") which should have been thought out better from the start left a somewhat sour taste (plus the even more numerous FC upgrades).

Perhaps this is why they gave all those upgrades to FC3 aircraft for free (FM, 3D cockpits and new 3D models), which, ironically, I feel would have finally been quite worth paying for. :)

I did buy a copy of an FC3 for a friend to compensate for feeling guilty about getting all that for free, but I'd prefer if I could have bought all the separate releases back then in a bundle and transfer him my FC3 serial instead (as the UI would be more convenient for me plus all the missing module missions in the FC3 package).

which would be integrated together

Am I blind - I can't see where it actually says that that … I can see multiple modules, I can't explicitly see interoperability … ?

Am I blind - I can't see where it actually says that that … I can see multiple modules, I can't explicitly see interoperability … ?

It's implied by the term "module".

I mean, what are you suggesting here? That they were announcing a series of standalone single player games when they already had MP in Lock On?

Anyone got any info on the Mercury LLTV being integrated? From what I've been able to find it was proposed but I can't find anything definitive about it actually being tested or used.

We, the normal users and mortals do not know of anything ED has planned for the KA50 besides the communicated fact that the cockpit and exterior of the module will get spit and polish to bring it up to specs with DCSW2.5.

All other stuff is considered rumors, hearsay, fake-news, alternative facts or otherwise not validated non-sense unless it comes unequivocally proven directly from ED itself.

Anyone got any info on the Mercury LLTV being integrated? From what I've been able to find it was proposed but I can't find anything definitive about it actually being tested or used.

Info about all that and history of development in the ka50 Manual in dcs world

Info about all that and history of development in the ka50 Manual in dcs world

There's this

In December 1985, the third V-80 (side number 012) with a Mercury low-level TV

sighting system mock-up was built to assist in the flight performance evaluation program.

and this

Despite this success, there

were a number of shortcomings stressed. The most serious one being that the helicopter

was not capable of night operations due to the drawbacks of the Mercury TV night-vision

system

Were the drawbacks it's performance or did it never get past a mock-up as the drawback was unsatisfactory flight performance?

Were the drawbacks it's performance or did it never get past a mock-up as the drawback was unsatisfactory flight performance?

It clearly says "drawbacks of the Mercury TV night-vision system" and not performance drawbacks based on carrying an extra pod.

It's a passive light amplification system so by definition it's quite limited in performance and not a reliable solution for engaging targets at night (like e.g. a proper thermal imaging system which was not really available at the time IIRC as the Soviets were quite behind in fielding this technology).

I do not want tooo much from our Kamov, Our KA-50 must remain within reality and what we want..... what we really really want is a weapon that can defend itself like the cheap punk Gazelle!

How did such a magnificent weapon end up being compared to a cheap and dirty little punk like the Gazelle!

How did we get here!

How can a massive war machine like the KA-50 be unable to defend her position within the high tech battlefield when the French light weight, low yield weapon can?

If I was Russian, I would be embarrassed that such a mighty but incomplete weapon was being portrayed on the DCS world stage!

A British machine would never suffer such embarrassment in DCS world!

A US AH-64 doesn't have any A2A capability, they had it removed because they had no use for it. Foreign operated AH64 may have the Stinger but nothing is set in stone.

All in all, the KA50 was most likely seen to operate in an environment where air superiority was attained.

Perspective.

Back in the day we paid a shedload of money for "Falcon" then we paid again for "Falcon EGA" (though Microprose discounted it for existing owners) then a real massive shedload for Falcon 3.0 and again for Falcon 4.

All the same aeroplane with little or no real enhancement between the first two versions or the last two except improvements to graphics and some campaigns. Did we mind? No, not really, because at the time there wasn't another decent F-16 simulator. In fact there wasn't really another decent military flight sim, and over the years we all recognised that development had to be paid for..

I don't see any difference here. There isn't another decent helicopter simulator out there, and, as has been pointed out lots of times, we've had 10 years out of BS2. Most of the time it's been bloody good - it's only with the new DCS that we've had bugs - and if we get a new release with everything working better and all those infuriating bugs fixed (plus campaigns that work properly and yes, some aircraft enhancements) then I'm happy.

Again, back in the Falcon world Falcon 3 suddenly gave us a slew of new weapons (all real) and therefore lots more tasking options. Plus the aircraft was a later block so we had better electronics, radar modes etc. I'd like to see the same.

I've managed to find this post from before the BS was released:

 

Q: Your press release indicates that Black Shark is the first in a series of DCS modules, with more aircraft/helicopters to follow. How soon will these new aircraft become available?

A: We are already developing the A-10A “Warthog" and AH-64A “Apache” (with planned front-seat / back-seat multiplayer) and other western and eastern aircraft will follow with an approximate interval of every nine months. To annouce these later aircraft now would be premature because plans can often change and lead to delays due to numerous factors such as our work in the equally important military simulation market.

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=392208&postcount=21

 

So, I do remember it correctly that it was advertised as a first module in the series.

Seems wildly optimistic in hindsight :music_whistling:

Just adding my two cents - I've gotten literally hundreds of hours (if not over a thousand) of enjoyment from this and other DCS modules across three separate PCs. Basic fixes should be provided free, but I have no problem with them trying to make some money from their labor. Those of you claiming that software devs aren't charging for incremental updates of a single platform haven't been paying attention because that is exactly where the software industry is going (see: DLC, games-as-service, subscription models for Photoshop, MS Office etc.) The fact that DCS provides us as much as they do is more an outlier than trying to make some money off a product upgrade. Let's not be so stingy people. We got a good thing going here.

Well I don’t see a problem to release a BS3. They just need to keep the current version for the people that want to cry and blame as always for some extra bucks to spend. No problem, you keep the BS2 and Other people using the right of freedom to spend the money will buy the BS3. And everybody happy ( or not, maybe someone still bealeave ED people must work for free which is wrong )

Myself I would prefer not to pay for the same module for a 3rd time

I do understand that some people want to give ED more money, which is commendable

Could I suggest that if you feel strongly about giving ED more money that you

buy several extra modules that you already own and then to a give away in

some competition or something (maybe charity raffle?)

That way ED gets money and you get to feel good by giving them money,

thus helping to keep ED in business the chance to give some free stuff to your fellow pilots,

it is a win win for everybody.

Myself I would prefer not to pay for the same module for a 3rd time

You don't have to ! So don't.

ED is an independent company and you all have only consumers of the modules. The whole games developers do new versions and series most of the time without discount for the older versions holders. ED do this and you all come here to blame and pushing the whole community to do what you want. YOU WRONG! You all follow the whole community because you do freely. You don’t have a contract with the community.

If you don’t find a server with certain version in Multiplayer after the server version is all set, then this situation is because the people by themselves move to the new version. YOU WANT TO KEEP the older version to play you are free to do it. WHERE is the violation there?

You are still able to play BS1 as me right? Where is the violation? Leave ED do what they want with their product made by them and leave the free community do what they want with the money.

Where in this planet you gonna find a company that allow keep up to date the user using discounts. I am still using the FC3 new FLIGHT MODEL up to date only because I hold the FC3 and they didn’t charge the FC3 holders for the new flight model. They still can do it and will be fair, they didn’t.

The work of the people must be paid. You all keep playing BS2 and the other people will keep forward with BS3 after paid the amount for the job made by ED. That’s it, we are free people.

It the update is more than just a cockpit and external textures its already worth and actually fair to be paid for. Especially it if's a simulation of a never version of the Ka-50 with more systems.

I don't understand why people always expect to get things for free. DCS has already a lot of free content. BS2 is really old. Making a new version for sure does not come cheap and requires a lot of effort. At the same time BS2 - will still work, so not that ED is taking something away. You just keep using what you have paid for. If you have BF1 do you expect to get BFV for free?

I don't care if it's free or if we have to pay for an updated module. At this point I just want the updated module instead of all these perpetually half-finished fighter jets that ED keeps spending all of their time on these days. The F18 and F14 have completely consumed this company at the expense of everything else and I can't say I am happy about it.

I have read only the first 50 messages (my setting in forum), that is first page of 5....

IMHO:

1) I would pay full price if it would be a KA-50N.

2) I would pay a 20€ upgrade license for Black Shark 3 if it would add the missing Vikhr A-A capability, fix the targeting system from unit ID based one to actual contrast detection one etc.

3) If we ever see KA-50N or any other upgraded model with RWR/MWS, I want that to be a separate module so I can keep flying the older current one.

To be really honest, what the Ka-50 needs the most is outside the helicopter. Better Combined Arms, better (more detailed) terrain etc. These are the factors that stimulate further spending...[/url]

What all ground units, and helicopters as CAS aircrafts needs, is more accurate ground modeling.

Randomly generated (by map designer) foliage, rocks, ground textures etc. So there are lots of small trees, bushes, rocks etc that will allow to conceal the ground units.

And then ground units to have the concealed behavior, concealed ground units with cut off trees etc. To eliminate the thermal cameras capable to see them. To make them extremely difficult to spot next to trees and even on open if the sharp shadows doesn't reveal that.

But that means we need a extremely capable graphics engine to render all such things, and one trick is simply make the vehicles semi-transparent when stationary. Nothing special there. When moving, more opaque, when stationary then semi-transparent and shadow to be more revealing than anything else.

Flying with helicopter means you are having close contact with all ground units, and them "popping out" easily is one of the challenges that all ground units faces as they can't hide so well.

Combined Arms is a key module for everything else in the DCS. And it is interesting to see what ED can do with it now when other features starts to come in place in technology standpoint!

Well, if they came out and said "We are developing and releasing an A-10C suite 8, and HMCS" - I would gladly pay full module price for a new version.

They are substantially different, as to utilize new skill sets and techniques.

So yes, if a new KA-50 comes out - Shut up and take my money!

The A/A and A/A HO switches work just fine with the Vihkrs on an aerial target.

No they don't.

The A-A mode is for re-programming the Vikhr to use its proximity fuze instead impact fuze and use a fragmentation sleeve detonation instead tandem-HEAT warhead.

The big difference is that with the A-A mode enabled, the Vikhr missile is programmed at the launch for the air target instead ground target. Benefits are that you do not require a direct impact but Vikhr proximity sensor triggers it at 5-7 meters from the target, making miss a far less likely, and fragmentation sleeve makes it far more dangerous as it has the expanding rods instead a shaped charge forward only. Meaning it will take down any aircraft or helicopter at 10-14 meter proximity.

The A-A HO (Air-to-Air Head On) switch is to change the Vikhr-M tracking system to be more accurate for fast mover and track them better and make the Vikhr fragmentation sleeve to explode prematurely the target that is flying head on. That so the missile doesn't miss the target by flying past it (or aircraft fly past the explosion). Using that mode simply explodes the Vikhr as soon as possible and this way a head-on flight will get a metal rods front of it and it flies straight in to them, suffering more damage that way.

Neither one has been simulated nor programmed to KA-50 or vikhr because fragmentation simulation has not existed.

The clever thing in Vikhr missile is that you have 2-3 different missiles combined in one, and pilot simply choose what mode he wants to use against the target. Example pilot can use the A-A and A-A HO mode against infantry on ground, by locking on the target at ground and firing at it. The missile will then explode in the air close to the soft targets and have the fragmentation mode do its destruction at area, instead straight a head.

Firing a Vikhr to building has its other advantage, you simply activate the A-A mode but you leave the Head-On disabled, that allows you to fire the Vikhr through a building wall where the fragmentation sleeve is blowed inside the building, instead the tandem warhead just blow straight ahead through the building, using only spalling as the inner damage.

So the pilot would choose which mode to use of the warhead, and which fuze use to blow the missile.

Now question for yourself, as the Su-25T should as well have the same capability, aircraft tracking and warhead programming, why you would need R-60M so much for self-defence when you could use stealthy Vikhr to down a near-by non-maneuvering aircraft from head-on or tail-chase?

What the Vikhr-M system offers in Su-25T and we are missing:

- Target gate memory (after gimbal limits, the Shkval is returned to the last targeted location, similar to ARBS in AV-8B harrier)

and in Su-25TM and we are currently lacking are:

- Automatic laser scanning and lock-on (second source laze the target and the Shkval finds the target and locks on it, helping you to guide missiles there)

- Automatic Shkval activation and locking on the target when reaching the target waypoint (to preprogrammed target locations. You enter example the target area coordinates and when approaching it, Shkval gets activated and pointed at the coordinates, this I have found some sources tell to be already in Su-25T and some doesn't define it is it only Su-25TM or T)

- Automatic target lock on the IR signature targets (a FLIR spotted targets in the area gets locked).

The Su-25TM got nice features that allowed to simply get a ground units laze moving target for you and you get it automatically scanned and locked and you needed to do was to launch Vikhr at it.

And last time I used the KA-50 (haven't fly it for a while as don't have pedals currently) the one last big updates was that cut the Vikhr range from 10km to 8km.

The Su-25T was a very interesting project, just like the KA-50, but IMHO both got prematurely cancelled.