Jump to content

Black Shark 3?


QuiGon

Recommended Posts

LOL Fantasy Ka-50

 

And can you please provide us the official serial production specifications for KA-50 that Russian government issued after the ED had access to KA-50?

Can ED provide those? Likely not if they say that they are doing something they don't know....

 

So again logically, you are just angry against people who are willing to discuss about the possibilities ED has, as well their actions in the past decade not to implement features that many provided them even with photos etc, only stating that the specific prototype they had access at previous time before upgrades and production was in such condition.

 

You really do not get that the ED modeled a one unique version at the time when it was not upgraded to serial production standard, but was still in the condition used to test and define that standard with a couple other versions, that were even updated to newer features.

 

you can have so much hate against people who would want to see a KA-50 as serial production version, that was never produced in hundreds like planned to replace Mi-24 fleet. But do not insist that current KA-50 version in DCS that doesn't anymore exist in reality as it has been upgraded is the only way to do it.

 

As you are now having the stand where you claim that ED shouldn't do a production version of some historical helicopter because their access time was in middle of development phase and not in the final version phase.

So you want prototype that doesn't exist. Others are willing to get final version, or the one from later phase.

 

So do not think you have a ground to insult others in discussion thread that they want fantasies, while they have proofs that KA-50 went far further in technology than our KA-50 port was at the time ED had access to it!

 

[ATTACH]212196[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]212197[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]212198[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]212199[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]212200[/ATTACH]

 

The second one is from 1997, a decade before KA-50 module was released, a military industry expo of the upgraded KA-50 with everything latest and demoed in flight (fully operational helicopter). No HUD because pilot used Marconi targeting helmet etc. That was Port 18.

 

The last three photos are the KA-50 in the production factory, being tested for a TV document made 2008, a year when our KA-50 module was released, after long time the ED has access to Port 25.

 

Your stance is like KA-50 development and production ended like snap of the fingers and that our KA-50 is the latest actual one, while facts are and reality is, our KA-50 is only a one version that was tested in the combat to refine more of the serial production KA-50 standard and it is not modeled to the status that KA-50 would be in DCS if ED would had access to later one or the standard.

 

As we would have the glass cockpit, not a unique old version in the history of development phases.

 

Want fantasies? Stick in your believes that DCS KA-50 is the only advancement there is and everything newer and more modern and feature rich is nothing more than fantasies. There are far more proofs that you are wrong and KA-50 was made far more advanced and feature rich than our KA-50 was in <2006 before ED had access to it (<2007 if even considering ED developed their first KA-50 full fidelity module in less than 1 year, instead more like the typical 4-5 years so we are talking ED having access to KA-50 #25 (that was not even most advanced in the development) at 2003-2004) and that they would have been given even access to Kamov latest military trade secrets to be offered to their potential customers. Instead ED was given access to old version that was in the action, that was used to develop the KA-50 more.

 

The same thing goes for the KA-50-2, some people think that it is just a mockup. Something that a two avid car modders could slap together in a week, by building a complete mockup cockpit with some fabric glass, plexi glass, and welding.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdPRKTwDb6g

 

Yeah, that car is as well a fantasy one. Never existing. Yet, there it is, fully usable, drivable and functional. One of the kind and never come out from serial production.

 

And that same method is used in different phases of the development of all military companies. Field modifications that ends up to serial production, some odd ideas to solve a problem in testing phases that end up to final designs. All kind things from small to big changes. And KA-50-2 was similar to that, fully functional, flight demoed, operational, but one of the kind. As when you enter to a hundreds of millions worth of the competition, you don't go there with a "mockup" that you can't touch, you can't fly etc. You could very well just come there with stack of blueprints or drawings and say "If you pay us 450 million, we build you this in 149 units?". No, you need to go through the evaluation, demo the performance and the capabilities as the people making the decision is directly doing it all from impression of the test pilots and engineers who will get access to the weapon.

 

Do you think that all the countries buy the weapons based the airshow procedure or a weapon sitting there on the parking slot looking pretty? There are huge corruptions going on, big shadow dealings, lots of just idiotic behavior because some weapon manufacturers or even generals just wants to do something.

 

 

 

Well said man! I just want to add that all nation can develop variants based on there needs, the Russian are very well known for their flexibility in advancing variants, look at all the variants found within their arsenal.

 

 

 

 

For me having a prototype Ka-50 with full fidelity is far better than having FC3 style Ka-52! No thanks.

 

 

So allow me to go fly our 'fantasy' Ka-50 XD found now in the game...!


Edited by Murey2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All the endless "it might have had this", "logically they must have done that" and "I can't believe they didn't do it" chatter is just people trying to persuade themselves that they're not asking for the very thing they've condemned so many other people for requesting - make believe features...

 

By that standard, current Ka-50 is already way past fantasy aircraft as none Ka50 with Shkval has seen combat.

The Ka50 is kinda borderline in this discussion, it's the most fantasy airframe in DCS and already past speculations in its current incarnation.

You can't say the same of the majority of the rest of DCS planeset for which more info are available

Whisper of old OFP & C6 forums, now Kalbuth.

Specs : i7 6700K / MSI 1070 / 32G RAM / SSD / Rift S / Virpil MongooseT50 / Virpil T50 CM2 Throttle / MFG Crosswind.

All but Viggen, Yak52 & F16

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So allow me to go fly our 'fantasy' Ka-50 XD found now in the game...!

 

The Ka-50 we have 'now in game' isn't really fantasy though is it. All the systems we currently have are documented and you can see photos of. There was at one time, a Ka-50 that existed with the systems we currently have in DCS World.

 

You can't say the same for an Igla on a 3rd pylon. No documentation, no photos, no evidence of it happening. Will be happy for someone to prove otherwise -then I can buy it without hesitation.

 

I accept ED are making this though, and no doubt it'll make many people happy and generate some revenue for their efforts. I just won't use it or fly with others that use it. I'm fine with that. :thumbup:

Valve Index | RTX 3070 Ti (Mobile) | i7-12700H @ 2.7GHz | 16GB RAM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By that standard, current Ka-50 is already way past fantasy aircraft as none Ka50 with Shkval has seen combat.

 

Two went in combat, both had ABRIS etc.

 

Our is based to that.

 

After that the serial production standard was drafted based feedback pilots gave from the war, then tested and developed in trials, and after all that Russian government approved ka-50 for production.

 

Our KA-50 doesn't anymore exist as that was just one stage in the development, already historical and latest KA-50 is far more modern one.

 

Our KA-50 is like a prototype for F-16A, not even the F-16A. And what was the result from all the tests and trials and combat, was F-16C.

 

Now people here argue that someone wanting that "F-16C" is nothing more than a fantasy, because it's production didn't start as planned in hundreds of units but only a few units were upgraded to it.

 

This our "prototype for F-16A" is not latest, nor the final or what it was to become.

 

And Black Shark 3 should be exactly that, a resemble to what KA-50 was designed to be.

 

Our over 10 years old module is not that, but just a one unique airframe and its phase in development for production KA-50.

 

And those did get built... The KA-50 development did not end 2001.

 

The ED had lots of possibilities to get a KA-50 that is far more advanced than any other helicopter in the DCS, closer to modern KA-52 than KA-50 we have in DCS. And question is only about that do they get access to all that cockpit design chances and upgrades, or not.

 

As 10 years ago when KA-50 was still in development, it is not long time. And likely when it shares systems with KA-52 and Mi-28, you are not going to get that so easily.

 

10 years ago it was difficult to find anything special in anything of those, and even today it is as so even when there is as lot more information.

 

Even today there exist huge information firewall surrounding Russia, and that is not theirs made, it is Western made where we want to make people believe that Russia can't do anything, that they are 20-50 years behind rest of the West etc. Where we build military bases around their borders and then claim that they are flying too close to our bases.

 

Why would anyone give any information for side with such a behavior?

 

This possibility is for ED to get KA-50 upgraded, not to create fantasy.

To fix their lack of information back then.

 

And what does ED get? Attacks that KA-50 is already fantasy and they are doing more fantasy and they have lost credibility to do realism....

 

No matter that people talking about those fantasy claims are staring photos from far more advanced KA-50 than they say there exist. And all that even in the production factory.

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

The Ka-50 we have 'now in game' isn't really fantasy though is it. All the systems we currently have are documented and you can see photos of. There was at one time, a Ka-50 that existed with the systems we currently have in DCS World.

 

You can't say the same for an Igla on a 3rd pylon. No documentation, no photos, no evidence of it happening. Will be happy for someone to prove otherwise -then I can buy it without hesitation.

 

I accept ED are making this though, and no doubt it'll make many people happy and generate some revenue for their efforts. I just won't use it or fly with others that use it. I'm fine with that. :thumbup:

 

 

That's really strange look no further than this photo below

 

 

screenshot-www-youtube-com-2018-06-14-18-56-34.png?w=624

 

 

Guess what you see Igla in the 1st and 6th pylons... that Ka-52 and the Ka-50 can have them as well... since the Igla is a passive weapon and doesn't require other systems or sensors other than what's within the Missile and it's pod it self! you don't believe me I would assume, OK! look at this below!

 

 

SA-18_Grouse_9K38_Igla_missile_portable_air_defense_missile_system_manpads_Russia_Russian_defence_industry_005.jpg

 

 

 

Guys please be real if a 1 little guy can carry it a super high tech attack helicopter won't be able to do it?!?!

 

 

Case closed...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol.gif

 

Guess what... that's not a Ka-50.

 

 

Let me quote my self just for me connecting the dots for you, because you field to do it. I said the following: "that Ka-52 and the Ka-50 can have them as well" and a little guy have it as well (as shown in the photo below).

 

 

So, logically ask your self. If a little guy can have them can a bloody large helicopter have them?! Yes it can.

 

 

 

I can't help you any further sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a little guy can have soft cuddly unicorn can a bloody large helicopter have them?! Yes it can.

 

Same logic. :doh:

 

 

same logic? not really, while I'm being serious and real and you being cartoony!

 

 

Again Ka-52 in the left hand and the Igla Man pad on the right hand and in between the Ka-50 which is still advanced attack helo compared to the new Ka-52!

 

 

Again can the Ka-50 carry a self contained passive weapon platform such as the Igla?! Now seriously I care not about whether you get it or not.

 

 

Have a good time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

same logic? not really, while I'm being serious and real and you being cartoony!

 

 

Again Ka-52 in the left hand and the Igla Man pad on the right hand and in between the Ka-50 which is still advanced attack helo compared to the new Ka-52!

 

 

Again can the Ka-50 carry a self contained passive weapon platform such as the Igla?! Now seriously I care not about whether you get it or not.

 

 

Have a good time.

 

 

Chizh confirmed the third pilon, so ignore them... :thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ehh... Martinistripes...

 

Have you ever seen a soft cuddly unicorn?

 

I mean... we have seen Iglas mounted on helicopters at least. Maybe not quite the right one but one that's "pretty similar"... but... cows are not similar to unicorns. So... Your comment is pretty useless.

 

Don't get me wrong... I'm sympathetic to your point of view... just please use sound reasoning to make it if you don't mind :).

Nvidia RTX3080 (HP Reverb), AMD 3800x

Asus Prime X570P, 64GB G-Skill RipJaw 3600

Saitek X-65F and Fanatec Club-Sport Pedals (Using VJoy and Gremlin to remap Throttle and Clutch into a Rudder axis)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK... but what about it?

 

If the goal of the KA-50 project was, at some point, to have the KA50ED that was a perfectly realistic goal, but then they were like "Hey wait... it would be nice to have a two seater for C&C and stuff, but damn it would have been great if we could have done this with a 1 seater..." then why not do it in a sim environment? I know... your unicorn theory states "Why don't we have 3 engined F16's with Aim 240's on the canopy..." but that's obviously unrealistic. There was never a chance of that.

 

The KA50-ED, however... Likely would have happened (or something SUPER similar) if economic issues hadn't put a huge freeze on development right in the middle of the program.

 

Also... With the Apache and Cobra inbound at some point... We're going to need the KA50-ED :).

 

Like I said... I'm against the F32 with Aim240 Sharks on it's head... but the KA50-ED isn't that beast.

Nvidia RTX3080 (HP Reverb), AMD 3800x

Asus Prime X570P, 64GB G-Skill RipJaw 3600

Saitek X-65F and Fanatec Club-Sport Pedals (Using VJoy and Gremlin to remap Throttle and Clutch into a Rudder axis)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a lot of high-horsery going on in this thread.

Nvidia RTX3080 (HP Reverb), AMD 3800x

Asus Prime X570P, 64GB G-Skill RipJaw 3600

Saitek X-65F and Fanatec Club-Sport Pedals (Using VJoy and Gremlin to remap Throttle and Clutch into a Rudder axis)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol:

 

Guess what... that's not a Ka-50.

 

Fact 1:

Our KA-50 that is in the DCS, is way older than what the latest KA-50 was (and likely those 15 in the service are) capable. Lots of new avionics and weapons systems.

 

Fact 2: KA-50-2 is from 1997. Before the KA-52 or KA-50 was finalized. Alone that flyable airframe had three pylons wings and new avionics and weapons systems made with the Israel.

 

2.Polnorazmernyj-maket-Ka-50-2-Erdogan.-Avgust-2001-g..jpg

 

Fact 3: Ka-50 wings can be separated for transportation, how much does it takes engineering to attach a wings that has third station?

 

Fact 4: The procedures for KA-50 from 90's includes IGLA as optional weapon, do we have even photos of the KA-50 flying with a FAB-250 or FAB-500? Never happened?

 

Fact 5: KA-50 was upgraded with all kind sensor upgrades, from simple Skhval-V upgrades with FLIR to totally new spherical sensors, even two of them.

 

Fact 6: There are KA-50's without counter measurement dispenser mounted to the wingtips.

 

Fact 7: There are various KA-50's that are lower Port numbers than our (#25) or higher and those as far more advanced systems.

 

27ba8463cb2b35e997e4f27ec71ccd10-1000.jpg

 

Like how about the memory statue of the KA-50 (port #50) that alone symbolizes KA-50 with a Shturm-V missile system, like procedures says as well?

 

1011651.jpg

 

Fact 8: A single IGLA launcher weight is 11kg, with the weapon/launcher it weigth is 17kg. With a two you get weight very low to be mounted on almost anything.

 

What I am interested to know, is from where is the rumor about the wingtip attachment coming from? As well the rumor that you can attach the IGLA in place of the counter measurement dispenser.

 

https://www.airliners.net/photo/Russia-Air-Force/Kamov-Ka-50/1776402/L?

qsp=eJyrVkrOzytJrSgJqSxIVbJSSsxJKs1V0lEqSCxKzC1WsqqGiHimKFkZmhgYGdXWAgDA6BDO

 

https://www.belvpo.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/07.12.16.11.40.jpg

 

Like in that, you can see how the ejector has been removed from the wingtip, so who knows what a soviet/russian engineer has thought at the late night when staring a requirement that KA-50 needs to have a Anti-Air capability.

 

I have as well seen only a couple images where KA-50 has only two Vikhr on mounted, and this is one of them:

 

1366682751_1.jpg

 

both are on the top attachments, unlike in the one where they are top of each others on outerside.

 

ka50_18.JPG

 

d86514dffff33c7c89a3cd2bf4d4c891.jpg

 

So how much would the "Ivana the Clever" invent things further with all these fancy things?

 

KA-52 #41

1482765-kamov-ka-50.jpg

 

 

I have never seen the third station in KA-50 itself, but there really ain't even that many photos of any other than #18, #20, #23, #24, #26, #27, #28, #29 and few of our #25.

 

And most are just the same photos. Even more are about DCS Black Shark than the actual aircrafts.

 

 

Ka50_2.jpg

 

So maybe we should just then talk about the fantasies, like how Mir Bobryshev made 3D models for a some kind film:

 

https://mir_mir_roy.artstation.com/projects/PZrKr

 

He got idea how to get set of IGLA-V system in the inner stations and Vikhr on outer.

And that is how I would consider even accepting them to be used, you replace your A-G rockets with the A-A missiles.

 

But personally I don't care so much about those IGLA's because I want to have Vikhr well modeled. I would probably die if ED decides to upgrade the KA-50 avionics with the three LCD panel glass cockpit for BS3 with payment, and the free BS2 update is the 3D model and retexturing of our current one.

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

Well, what I want to see is what the Ka-50 would have been now, if it had been truly produced. And that is a Ka-52 with a single cockpit. With whatever it needed to be the attack arm of the Ka-52 Group Leader.

 

 

At LEAST Ka-52 style wing, Ka-52's FLIR / Shkval, President S, Igla's / possibly R-73, RWR?, Ka-52 level of cockpit, FIX the shkval's lock problems ( Can't lock a black heli against a clear sky at 8KM ).


Edited by 3WA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel this discussion is derailing a bit.

The question has never been if its physically possible to attach Igla's to the fuselage of the helicopter. Of course you can. With enough ductape you can attach Iglas, R-77 and everything you need.

 

The question though, is, can it be integrated into the Helicopters systems.

Your logic that án infantry guy can carry an igla doesnt hold.

Are you suggesting you can just bolt it to the wing, and then the pilot is supposed to open the door and pull the trigger?

And how is he supposed to hear the lock-tone from inside the cockpit over the noice of the rotors?

 

I am 100% sure you could stick Iglas to the wing of a KA-50. you could,probably even do the wiring to get it integrated

 

but there are still no proof, no anectdotes, no photos, nothing - that this has ever been done.

and that is where this discussion really should end.

 

Now. we ARE appearantly still getting this fantasy feature - so again. What are we really discussing?

"Your pumping days are over, Megatron!" -Optimus Prime

"This calls for a very special blend of psychology and extreme violence" -Vyvian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"but there are still no proof, no anectdotes, no photos, nothing - that this has ever been done."

 

But why do we have to stop there? We know why the Russians had to stop there unfortunately... but why do WE have to?

 

So... Lets just say for a moment that the argument that it hadn't been done wasn't going to be used...

 

What's another argument?

 

I mean like I said above I can certainly see why we don't have F32's with Aim240 sharks on the canopy but... Nobody ever planned to do that and then had their funding cut.

 

The KA-50ED was basically planned based on what appears to be a good deal of anecdotal evidence. I know... It's not hard evidence but none of the people who are looking forward to the KA-50ED are trying to say there was actually a produced KA-50 of this configuration.

 

It does seem like something VERY SIMILAR to the KA-50ED was the goal of the project.

 

So... The fact that they never had a chance to finish it doesn't seem to me to be a reasonable reason why ED shouldn't. It just doesn't make sense.

 

Yes... Adding R73, Heat seeking bullets and Laser AMS with tactical nuke options is likely a bit much... but when the manufacturer pitched the idea of the end goal of the KA-50 to the RU gov it was not the same KA-50 that we have. We have a prototype that was produced while striving to get to what the KA-50ED would have been...

 

 

Aside from "It was never finished"... What else do you have? Because as long as the goal was realistic... I don't see how that's a valid argument against having it in a SIM... As long as ED try to faithfully re-create what the manufacturer was actually capable of and would have done given a completed contract...

Nvidia RTX3080 (HP Reverb), AMD 3800x

Asus Prime X570P, 64GB G-Skill RipJaw 3600

Saitek X-65F and Fanatec Club-Sport Pedals (Using VJoy and Gremlin to remap Throttle and Clutch into a Rudder axis)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now. we ARE appearantly still getting this fantasy feature - so again. What are we really discussing?

 

 

Read back about 5 pages, and you can catch up.

 

 

@M1 - Really don't see myself carrying 2 R-73s, as I think it would be an expensive waste. MUCH rather carry six igla's. However, if both the Apache and the AH-1 can carry Sidearm and Sidewinder, why wouldn't the Ka-50 be able to carry the R-73?


Edited by 3WA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My personal opinion has never been in question.

But since you asked. Of course I anticipate the update. I will throw my wallet at the screen the second it goes on pre-order.

 

And I wwill probably use the Igla's one way or another. Either on my wings or as part of a squadron.

The relevant question was always if this was real or imagination.

And It seemes we have come to the conclusion that it is the latter.

Although, which I can agree to, a possible "logical end-game" of what could have or might come.

 

Personally - that is not what I look for in DCS. But I am not arguing for a personal agenda.

 

Edit: I feel i still must comment on the 3rd pyon crazyness though.

The argument that the two helicoters have detachable wings and it's "easy" to just swap them around shows you clearly have no clue what you are talking about.

Systems needs to be integrated into the avionics and fire control sysems. It's not F-ing LEGO we are talking about. Not gonna comment anymre on that. It's so stupid it makes me laugh.

Not as much as the "infantry guy can carry an Igla"argument thoug.

 

Sometimes you guys crack me up :D


Edited by Grodlund

"Your pumping days are over, Megatron!" -Optimus Prime

"This calls for a very special blend of psychology and extreme violence" -Vyvian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

" It's not F-ing LEGO we are talking about."

 

That's pretty funny :)... and yeah... it wouldn't be easy but it would be possible and was likely the end game plan :).

 

"However, if both the Apache and the AH-1 can carry Sidearm and Sidewinder, why wouldn't the Ka-50 be able to carry the R-73?"

 

Because this isn't call of duty... If you can show that it's likely that the R73 was part of the end game of the manufacturer or the RU Gov then maybe I'll jump on your band wagon but just saying because one military carries some sort of something means that this one should carry something is pure call of duty BS. And I don't mean Blackshark.

 

That kind of comment is why people take such a hard stance against allowing any sort of "fantasy" at all... because then people make dumb assed comments like that.

 

Seriously... That's as bad as the unicorn argument.


Edited by M1Combat

Nvidia RTX3080 (HP Reverb), AMD 3800x

Asus Prime X570P, 64GB G-Skill RipJaw 3600

Saitek X-65F and Fanatec Club-Sport Pedals (Using VJoy and Gremlin to remap Throttle and Clutch into a Rudder axis)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL, "Vastly Superior".

 

I would totally question that, and I'm an American.

 

 

Probably what both Napolean and Hitler were thinking when they made the mistake of invading Russia.

 

 

Again, why wouldn't the Ka-50 be able to carry the R-73? We see it on the old Ka-50-2. And that's no mockup.

 

 

 

Personally, I think some Western Fanboys are just terrified of the Truth that the Russians are at least equal in our technology, if they care to build it. Russian Black Eagle tank, anyone?

 

 

 

Ka-52 leading a wing of Ka-50's = AWESOME System.

 

 

x


Edited by 3WA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright... I'll edit the post but I meant on a general scale. Yes, they're pretty close in many areas but as a whole package... yes I'll stand behind my statement :).

Nvidia RTX3080 (HP Reverb), AMD 3800x

Asus Prime X570P, 64GB G-Skill RipJaw 3600

Saitek X-65F and Fanatec Club-Sport Pedals (Using VJoy and Gremlin to remap Throttle and Clutch into a Rudder axis)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You really do not get that the ED modeled a one unique version at the time when it was not upgraded to serial production standard

 

Oh I realise that E.D. modelled a version - of a specific, actual aircraft of which only a few similarly configured aircraft were built.

 

The difference between the limited number of aircraft configured in the way DCS.Ka-50 is currently configured, and the version that you're so keen to see, is that the version that you're keen to see was never built at all.

 

It is a fantasy aircraft.

 

The only evidence you can put forward that it might have been built is that there's a position on a switch that you think implies an intent to build such a version at some time, and that some completely different other aircraft have similar weapons systems.

 

Your suggestion that E.D. prove that there were none of the fantasy version you're awaiting (which they're hardly likely to spend time sourcing given they've already explicitly said it's a fantasy aircraft they're making "because we want to"...) is a logical error - you can't prove a negative by giving an example, the onus is always on the person making the positive claim - in this case that a 6 pylon, Igla carrying Ka-50 (not Ka-50-2, Not Ka-52) actually existed, and so far, you've presented nothing but various very long ways of saying "I think it might have happened, and I'm going to present my wishful thinking as evidence"...

 

I don't mind that you're keen for a more capable aircraft, I'm slightly disappointed that E.D. have decided to follow that path, and I'm surprised that some of the people posting in favour of adding fantasy weapons systems to the Ka-50 have been very self righteous in other threads about denouncing aids for the casual player (such as labelling the ability to mark your position on the moving map without resorting to dead-reckoning navigation a 'cheat').

 

What annoys me is all the contorted words from people trying to pretend to themselves that what never happened happened, that wishful thinking is proof, and that people aren't just happy to get a laser cannon added to their aircraft.

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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