Black Shark 3 official photos.

Yeah the BS3 thread is quite a mess by now.

I love the features that are coming and they will make the helo much more survivable, but id like ED to keep it real too xD

On the Russian forums, they said they were going to add a third pylon to the wing, and you could carry up to 4 iglas.

WAIT WHAT ? we get 6 pylons? :D:D:D:D

WAIT WHAT ? we get 6 pylons? :D:D:D:D

YepYep :)

... I find the speculation to be incredibly unhelpful, but that's just my opinion.

Not just your opinion.

Just wondering - will the President-S system's display added to ABRIS, as I didn't see the extra display mounted in the new render.

That is a good question really. And very unlikely really to see the third panel in BS2.

As that display is meant for Mi-8 and such without extra displays. Where KA-50 already got a full glass cockpit that would get that system integrated in them like it is in KA-52. And there the system is integrated to EW suite itself.

And last word I have read from ED is that system is integrated to KABRIS by the ED itself by making a new page for it, that likely will pop-up automatically when radar, laser or UV(IR) emissions are detected that threatens the KA-50, as the system is triangulating the threats, tracking the missiles and warns the pilots from the range, heading and altitude when it is detected that KA-50 is target (not a false-alarm like cannon firing on ground, missile flying to another direction etc) and takes automatic actions if pilots do not react to the warnings.

That is something I do not approve from ED if there is no known data about its integration to KABRIS, like there are for all their other new features and modifications.

The screenshots we have now from the released Black Shark 2 updated cockpit are just for it, nothing about the "Black Shark 3" itself. But not to expect anything major, it would be huge thing if otherwise.

From what I have read in the Russian forums (It's been a while), the new Shark is going to be the Ka-50ED, and ED is going to do some educated guess work at what a Modern Ka-50 would look like. Third rail ( why would you make two different wings for Ka-50 / Ka-52?), modern upgrades such as MWS, etc.

Current Ka-50 has no defense against modern jets, not even A-10 / Su-25, not to mention it has no night-capabilities.

Not something you want to fly on a modern battlefield.

I'd want a FLIR to fly in a modern battlefield!

Yes, I know… I know…

But still. If we have a chimera, my (not-so)educated guess would be to have night capability ;)

So Sexy!

There is no modern in DCS, the most "modern" is late 90s early 2000 at most.

I think we all tacitly endorse this definition.

"Modern" as in 90s early 2000 tech, not contemporary (that would never happen in a "hardcore" sim).

The КАБРИС is modern in that sense but no combat-Garmin GTN 750.

At least that was my point about the possible FLIR tech (even if that won't happen for our beloved Ka-50) (Ka-50N/Sh level of "modern", not Ka-52 current "modern").

But, displaying the Пресидент-С screen on the КАБРИС would imply an intricate level of compatibility both hardware, software and specifically designed UI for the LCD display.

I doubt the КАБРИС has been developed with that compatibility in mind.

At first I thought the display would replace the CM control box (upper right), but it's probably too big to fit there.

Its really interesting what ED will come up with. Id like for the features to be real features that any ka50 has had, but i wouldnt be super upset if its fantasy. Because these features really makes the black freaking shark even stronger.

From what I have read in the Russian forums (It's been a while), the new Shark is going to be the Ka-50ED, and ED is going to do some educated guess work at what a Modern Ka-50 would look like. Third rail ( why would you make two different wings for Ka-50 / Ka-52?), modern upgrades such as MWS, etc.[/Quote]

 

The wings are same, only the third pylon added to it is new and its wiring.

And by any logic they would simply put same wings on both, as they already did so. It is same otherwise.

 

Current Ka-50 has no defense against modern jets, not even A-10 / Su-25, not to mention it has no night-capabilities.[/Quote]

 

Our KA-50 DOESN'T exist anymore. It was only at that long time ago and before two serial production standards. The upgraded standards did exactly improve that capability by adding IGLA capabilities as R-73 was limited success. The president-S mode has radar jammer, IR jammer and all in one kit. Part of the first serial production standard.

 

Not something you want to fly on a modern battlefield.

The upgraded standards did exactly improve that capability by adding IGLA capabilities as R-73 was limited success

To the Ka-50 ?

Source ?

Images ?

Generally, a helicopter is not something you want to fly on a modern battlefield where you don't have control of the airspace, or effective CAP.

If you don't have those, you wouldn't be flying to engage the enemy.

What you seem to want is a helicopter that's an A2A fighter, and that's not what they're built as or used as.

Hello ED, can you guys please fix the Shkval Slew with the the BS update ? It ie still horrible compared to other modules. Thank you.

What you seem to want is a helicopter that's an A2A fighter, and that's not what they're built as or used as.

To much Airwolf

 

What you seem to want is a helicopter that's an A2A fighter, and that's not what they're built as or used as.

Dont be so assumptious.

But, displaying the Пресидент-С screen on the КАБРИС would imply an intricate level of compatibility both hardware, software and specifically designed UI for the LCD display.

I doubt the КАБРИС has been developed with that compatibility in mind.

It's an LCD panel, even an amateur can solder in a second video source and a mechanism to switch between the two. As complicated as it gets is if you have to change between analogue and different digital formats. Hardly insurmountable, simple plug-in-line devices which do this have been available in consumer tech stores for years.

To the Ka-50 ?

Source ?

Images ?

[/Quote]

 

Go back to original thread for those. Not going to post them to you forth time.

 

Generally, a helicopter is not something you want to fly on a modern battlefield where you don't have control of the airspace, or effective CAP.

If you don't have those, you wouldn't be flying to engage the enemy.[/Quote]

 

Stop repeating my sayings to me.

 

KA-50 is a recon/attack helicopter. Part of its design is to operate behind enemy lines where air support is limited, especially low altitude, mountain area. It is as well a hunter-killer against other attack helicopters. Why Vikhr was designed to have A-A mode so that you don't need A-A missiles against helicopters or low flying aircrafts.

 

What you seem to want is a helicopter that's an A2A fighter, and that's not what they're built as or used as.

 

Stop ad hominems.

It's an LCD panel, even an amateur can solder in a second video source and a mechanism to switch between the two. As complicated as it gets is if you have to change between analogue and different digital formats. Hardly insurmountable, simple plug-in-line devices which do this have been available in consumer tech stores for years.

Military instruments are far from consumer technology.

Typically own kind standards, connectors and when it comes to connectivity, it is like someone wanted to go through it hard basic way.

Military technology is own branch that got separated from consumer technology in the 40's and had rapidly gone further in 60's and 70's. Only after 90's has it have been tried brought back to closer that consumer side as there is more technology to tap in to.

If you want to make a change, you are going to sit front of committee asking permission to change one cable...

Go back to original thread for those. Not going to post them to you forth time.

I've only ever seen you post pictures of the Ka-52 & say 'if this had them, that could have'.

That's only speculation, not proof.

If you had photos of Ka-50 with Igla, could you kindly link them ?

Oh, and that wasn't an 'ad hominem'.

Ad hominem is attacking the person, not the idea.

I didn't say your idea was bad because you were a bad person, I said your idea was bad because it was unrealistic.

Again - If you had photos of Ka-50 with launchable Igla, could you kindly link them ?

I've only ever seen you post pictures of the Ka-52 & say 'if this had them, that could have'.

That's only speculation, not proof.

If you had photos of Ka-50 with Igla, could you kindly link them ?[/Quote]

 

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.

 

Oh, and that wasn't an 'ad hominem'.

Ad hominem is attacking the person, not the idea.

I didn't say your idea was bad because you were a bad person, I said your idea was bad because it was unrealistic.[/Quote]

 

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.

 

You have zero information about that. But I give you some lessons now, ready?

 

I have seen only the trailer of that TV show years ago, and don't care about it at all. I don't know what makes that show good or bad, as I don't have any other information that that trailer that I faintly remember.

And you very well know that I have multiple times told you that I am not interested at all about A-A missiles on KA-50 because I want only the real Vikhr performance and capabilities with the Shkval system. So simply put it for you (again),

 

1) I don't want IGLAs

2) I don't want R-73's

3) I don't want third pylon

 

That is my personal opinion about the topic. Explained to you now final time.

 

Again I give you another lesson:

 

It doesn't matter what I have as personal opinion to the discussion when evidence does show that Kamov designed KA-50 to carry A-A missiles because it was found to require those by the pilots in the BUG, those were tested on it, carried on it and even offered for sale for it and listed as possible weapons loadout.

 

What you are claiming is that:

1) KA-50 was never designed to carry any of them.

2) KA-50 never carried them

3) KA-50 never was tested for them

4) KA-50 never had been offered/listed to carry those

5) KA-50 development ended to full stop to specific 2001 #25 model we have in DCS.

 

 

Again - If you had photos of Ka-50 with launchable Igla, could you kindly link them ?

 

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?

 

As here we come again to the main problem, that you do not accept:

 

1) Our KA-50 #25 is from 2001, when it participated BUG as test unit

2) After that KA-50 design was changed to meet the recommendations from BUG (FLIR, A-A missiles, EW suite, IR jammers, new cockpit instruments layout).

3) after development trials with new modifications, KA-50 first serial production standard was drafted. Tests were performed and trialed. New second serial production standard was drafted and accepted by MoD.

4) KA-50 was designed to operate by the KA-52 as flight lead, that was not a replacement to KA-50 but just two seated variant, both were on development process simultaneously and meant to operate together. Sharing same parts as much as possible (everything else than forward section, aka cockpit, but even in there all displays, buttons, instruments etc).

5) KA-50 was radically developed further (like KA-52 as well) in time from the design that we have in DCS, and there are evidence of all kind additional features all over the internet and even official statements, offerings and even photographs etc.

6) KA-50 never entered to serial production because funding was delayed, ignored and finally cancelled by MoD, until they found that their chosen Mi-28 can't perform as KA-50 was able to, and KA-52 was already in the same state as KA-50 so they opted only for that, so KA-50 did get final nail to coffin. The KA-52 doesn't replace Mi-24 fleet like it was planned for KA-50 to do, it is special helicopter for special missions that Mi-28 and Mi-24 can't perform. In other words, doctrine changed in the helicopter aviation branch.

 

Your main problem is that you are demanding evidence of single KA-50 unit that has everything in it, like that whole project would be public domain and easily accessible and there is that one unit somewhere that has all the latest whistles. As that is the evidence you accept.

 

But you do not accept the facts that KA-50 was further developed in various units, in various different times, combined with the KA-52 project and all the evidence there is are in pieces, that you need to put together just like anything else. There are evidence of X in unit 1, Y in unit 2, Z in unit 3 etc. So only thing you really are against of all, is that all that would be picked up and joined together in the educated guessing method, that those would finally been together in KA-50 like they are in KA-52....

 

In other words, there is a puzzle and final image is unknown. And you are screaming "fantasy! Heresy! Blasphemy!" because ED picks up the pieces and puts together a image by trying out all the pieces fitting together by acknowledging that there is technical real world evidence of those all systems.

 

You are trying to pit ED for building fantasy helicopter with fantasy features, completely ignoring the facts and evidences, only because you didn't see the final picture of the puzzle first before the puzzle building started.

 

Want that hard logic and evidence again?

 

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

 

You know that very well. Now repeat it aloud few times....

So lets go by your wishes and your arguments, REMOVE KA-50 FROM THE GAME!

 

That is really what you are after. As not even our KA-50 that is in DCS is real, it doesn't exist, it was changed as it was nothing else than a one test unit for short period of time before it got disassembled and modified for something else, improved and better.

 

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

They are yelling that specific weapons, like triple launchers shouldn't be in F-16 because official weapons loadout rules do not include them to be in operational use, regardless that they were tested, accepted and used, but because someone in the office of USA military decided that tripple launcher is not too be used and removed it from the list, that it should not be in the game.

Completely ignoring that it might get to be used in war if situation calls. Or someone in some position will change their mind and decide it will be taken in use. They are arguing for "if it was never in operational use VS it is technically possible VS fantasy if no photo!" threads because it is their hobby!

 

So for your information!

 

I have personal opinion that some things that I do not accept from ED in black shark 3, based to my ignorance of the reality and what ED is doing based their knowledge, and those are these few things:

 

1) How PRESIDENT-S interface is implement in KA-50. As if ED just creates a new page in KABRIS to operate it, without real information, I have problem for that. As that system likely requires the own display mounted (photos exists) or it requires a glass cockpit upgrade (first serial production standard) that is likely out of ED access and plan to do. So if it is KABRIS new "EW page" by ED, I have a personal opinion about that.

 

2) How third pylon selector is made. As it requires MFCD operation, as the physical own LED display panel was removed and it was implemented in serial production with MFCD page. Physical weapons settings panel was maintained for ejection etc, but what pylon is active, what weapons it's selected and what is count of unused ordinance, that all was moved to own MFCD page.

 

In other simple manner, my personal opinion is that if ED didn't get access to variant or information v how those evidential weapons, pylons, ECM systems etc gets implement in the cockpit itself, by either making glass cockpit upgrade OR following some designs that we do not know but has been done, I am not glad for it.

 

I can't say what ED can or can't do. I can only express my opinion.

But denying evidence of the weapons development and designs simply because you can't go and "download NATOPS telling how things operate" is just illogical.

 

Heck, even Kamov has presented KA-50 with ATAKA missiles, just like KA-52 as well. Yet I have never seen photo of KA-50 with iron bombs, cannon pods and likely not even with S-13 rocket pods, even less switch Kh-25 family missiles.

 

Are you ready to demand those to be removed from KA-50, and any other feature you can't find to be in operational use with photos and videos?

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

<…>

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

<…>

https://russianplanes.net/planelist/Kamov/Ka-50 (in Russian).

Will there be night vision for the Shkval TV? I hope so!!

Not a chance, imho.

It would require reworking the cockpit as the Shkval TV is designed for the Shkval camera and systems.

Unless Yuri can also slap a FLIR on top of the Shkval optics and rewire everything required to display the picture, control the targeting, etc. Just like he would if he rigs the KABRIS to display the President-S data ;)

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

 

https://russianplanes.net/planelist/Kamov/Ka-50 (in Russian).

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

For reference, from that page:

“Based of the operation of the Ka-50, a decision was made to start production on a dual-seat version - the Ka-52.

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

The [use of the] Ka-50 was discontinued in 2012.”

Four confirmed serial-built unit exists in the list, all of them in storage.