Black Shark 3?

[dimitriov]

No not LOL ;)

 

I did this for the AMX-10RCR, nothing else than dividing the mesh into 3-4 meshes for major components and give them proper names. 5 minutes. No less, no more.

 

Anyway, back to the subject :)

 

For the Vikhr I agree with you, already shot down helis, planes with it quite easily, requires training and ofc that the opponent is not maneuvering a lot (or underestimating you). Still, perhaps do I manage to survive 1 engagement for 4 against fighters (which is IMO quite normal). Against helicopters, except Mistral, well, surprise is everything, and by acting fast enough, you can alone neutralize a whole squad.

Edited June 3, 2019 by dimitriov

[Stratos]

Not with KOM, only OFP2. With HEAT shells, you miss, you miss ;)

 

I know the different warheads in the chopper, but it seems we use different sims.

 

BTW, If we get such a "modern" copter variant, hope they include some current Ka-52 liveries, will be nice to have them once Syria is released!

Edited June 3, 2019 by Stratos

[dimitriov]

Nope OFP2 are not very efficient, still you can do a lot of damage if you're able to group the shots in a +-50m circle.

[Stratos]

Nope OFP2 are not very efficient, still you can do a lot of damage if you're able to group the shots in a +-50m circle.

 

cool to see someone who likes the Ka-50 as much, do you have videos/tutorials showing the S-8 use?

[3WA]

For the Vikhr I agree with you, already shot down helis, planes with it quite easily, requires training and ofc that the opponent is not maneuvering a lot (or underestimating you). Still, perhaps do I manage to survive 1 engagement for 4 against fighters (which is IMO quite normal). Against helicopters, except Mistral, well, surprise is everything, and by acting fast enough, you can alone neutralize a whole squad.

 

 

I agree with the Vhiker actually being a pretty good air to air missile, once you set it right. The problem is the SHKVAL. At least on my machine, it can't lock up any kind of aircraft! By the time you get a heli locked up, it's already gunned you down. I once tried to lock a heli up at range in the clear blue sky. Black copter on clear blue sky. Moving slow. Must have hit lock over 50 times with the gates over it. Nadah. Nothing. And standing there so long at hover, trying to lock it, you're just setting yourself up to be killed by something else. And FORGET fighters. You can't EVER lock those up. We need Iglas. BAD.

[razo+r]

I locked up a F-4 today with it and fired a Vikhr at it. The missile exploded but no damage was done to the aircraft...

[Grodlund]

What? KA-50 cant survive a modern battlefield?

Dude - I have to force myself to fly something else, since it almost feals OP with the Black Shark.

I can demolish an enemy with no problems.

It can fly low and neutralize huge SAM-sites.

SA-3, SA-8, SA-11, SA-10 doesnt matter. If you know what you are doing and have some intel and cautoin - they are doomed!

 

I have shot down Cobras, Hueys, Mi-8's, Mi-24's other KA-50s and Some A-10's

If you set the Shkval to AA mode and use your HMS it is not that hard to get a lock.

 

I mean - it's up to each and everyone, what you want to buy or not buy.

I for one wouldn't cry rivers if we didnt get a FLIR.

The Shkval combined with NVG's is good enough.

It gets the job done

[dimitriov]

cool to see someone who likes the Ka-50 as much, do you have videos/tutorials showing the S-8 use?

 

This video was one of my tactical tutorials for canon/rckts attack :

 

From here you get a first attack. There was an audio issue on this video (some kind of back noise...)

 

In french unfortunately. The aim is to show an example of very dynamic flight without hovering at any moment and keeping the ENI under a relatively dense and constant fire.

 

 

The procedure is made to create a shock in the ENI side. It is not based on real procedures, only on my own experience in the DCS environment, so perfectly opened to (smart) critics.

 

- Optimize angle toward target depending on the Sitac, if you can't fly a bit high (2-300 m), no need to carry rockets cause they will be inefficient except if targeting a very badly defended sector which allows you to fly over it. Select between 3 types of pass : PRB, PRS, PRH (Rocket Pass Low, Rocket Pass with Overflight, Rocket Pass from above-ie 1200 m AGL-). Each of them have their variations but the common part is the following :

- Pop flares in 0-1-3 or 0-1-2 from 6 km to the threat.

- Keep a lot of speed, Ideal is 200.

- Maintain a stable altitude.

- Ignite from 4 to 2.5 km with canon if needed.

- End with rockets. All rockets are usually shot in one pass, or at least 2 pylons.

- Evade.

 

The helicopter SAS must be set in flight director mode in order to grand the best stability for rocket shooting.

 

A nice example of the S-8OFP2 efficiency when used in important quantity :

 

 

Whole convoy got recked.

 

Final assault on the ENI camp was very complicated because well, I tend to fly alone on tutorials and AI was reacting :

 

Nicolas

 

PS : yes the HUD is a personal modification, not integrity check and I won't publish it because of the "realism team" ^^

Edited June 3, 2019 by dimitriov

[Fri13]

I agree with the Vhiker actually being a pretty good air to air missile, once you set it right. The problem is the SHKVAL. At least on my machine, it can't lock up any kind of aircraft! By the time you get a heli locked up, it's already gunned you down. I once tried to lock a heli up at range in the clear blue sky. Black copter on clear blue sky. Moving slow. Must have hit lock over 50 times with the gates over it. Nadah. Nothing. And standing there so long at hover, trying to lock it, you're just setting yourself up to be killed by something else. And FORGET fighters. You can't EVER lock those up. We need Iglas. BAD.

 

Problem is in the DCS way to model the targeting systems.

 

You are not locking any contrast or tracking any contrast, you are locking and tracking a unit ID. If the unit has ID, it is still alive, and that is why you can't lock on the destroyed unit because its ID has been deleted.

 

With the real Skhval, Maverick, TGP etc, you should be able to lock on anything that has a contrast. That is what is requiring that DCS would have a simple contrast based detection system for targeting systems, simulate it through running actual simple 16x16 pixel resolution contrast tracking and lock. This means you would actually be able to lock on the helicopters and aircrafts easily against sky, or any destroyed unit, a any part of building, even a tree or a telephone pole.

 

What ever that just gives you contrast.

[rrohde]

That is what is requiring that DCS would have a simple contrast based detection system for targeting systems, simulate it through running actual simple 16x16 pixel resolution contrast tracking and lock. This means you would actually be able to lock on the helicopters and aircrafts easily against sky, or any destroyed unit, a any part of building, even a tree or a telephone pole.

 

Agreed! :thumbup:

[3WA]

Yeah, I know. But like you say, it's by "unit". And the things I'm trying to lock are undamaged and perfectly healthy. The EO system in this sim is just screwed. It seems to be only able to lock ground targets, if that. I should be able to lock targets at about 7km out with ease. It gets where I can't even lock them at 2km, and their coming at me FAST! Especially Apaches. They're launching TOW at me from many km's out. They hit me with their 30mm from near their max range. I need iglas for a snap shot and then dive for cover, and hopefully evade them with low cover.

 

 

 

I've got them in my sights, but I can't lock! Vhiker on AA is useless.

[Dehuman]

"I was under the impression it was because they wanted to expand its role as a surveillance and command aircraft"

 

I thought standard procedure was that they would have a specialist Ka-27(29?) in the flight for that role ?

 

 

They're used by Naval Aviation not the Airforce

[Fri13]

I locked up a F-4 today with it and fired a Vikhr at it. The missile exploded but no damage was done to the aircraft...

 

The problem is that Vikhr is not fully modeled in DCS at this moment.

You could expect to see it now when the "BS3" comes out and ED is going to fix all the bugs.

 

The Vikhr is not dedicated ATGM missile, even when it is mainly designed to perform that by penetrating 1000mm RHA after reactive armor, but it is as well designed to be multipurpose missile with secondary warhead.

 

The primary warhead is the tandem charge that has impact fuze.

The secondary warhead is a explosive under fragmentation sleeve on the middle that has proximity fuze.

 

The primary warhead is meant to be used against any hard targets, a MBT, bunker, fortification etc.

The secondary warhead is meant against all kind soft targets like trucks and aircrafts.

 

You program the Vikhr before launch (can't be done after launch, as there is no datalink to missile) via targeting programming panel.

 

 

There you see the A/A and A/A H O buttons.

 

The A/A button programs the Vikhr before launch to use the secondary warhead instead primary, so when you know you are shooting against aircrafts or soft targets, you activate that.

It programs the Vikhr use the fragmentation sleeve and proximity fuze, and now the Vikhr has 5-7 meter kill range on soft target, and once it magnetically detects it is near the target by that 5-7 meters, it will explode the fragmentation sleeve.

This will dramatically improve your capability destroy trucks, aircrafts and such that doesn't get down with impact fuze. Like consider shooting a Vikhr against truck cover canvas? The missile would go trough the truck. And firing one against building would be waste too as the penetrator created by tandem charge would fly straight through the walls, instead blow around.

 

The A/A H O is for "Air to Air Head On" mode, where when you have a air target flying toward you, the proximity fuze is set to blow the fragmentation sleeve as soon as possible so the aircraft doesn't fly past the missile detonation time, as the aircraft is flying at high speed directly toward high speed Vikhr and Vikhr will fly past it and explode.

 

IIRC, There is as well some kind logic built to the Vikhr and targeting system to try better stay directly in the beam with larger control movements, so when your target is flying parallel to you, the Vikhr has better intercept change on it. It is little similar to the "Moving Ground Target" function, but it is possible that the Skhval doesn't try to keep so tight laser beam so that Vikhr has better change to capture its position in the beam.

 

As the Vikhr is beamrider that tries to stay in Shkval created beam. The Skhval optically adjust the beam width so that it is about 7 meters wide on the missile tracked position (position is calculated based the missile time of flight) and so on at the launch

 

 

And that will make the laser beam so undetectable by the LWS as the energy the Skhval is emitting on target is so low power that the LWS can detect the energy maybe only just before the Vikhr reach it, as the beam width is very wide at the launch time, and then beam is optically tightened and laser strength increased based timer.

 

(Side note, when you launch the Vikhr in pairs, the laser is started to be emitted only after the second Vikhr, so the first Vikhr is flying in a wider and weaker beam just front of the second. And this is reason why if you launch new Vikhr after a while, you can't guide first one as the Skhval will automatically reset the beam width and power back to newly launched Vikhr and the one at the long range will simply lose track of the beam.)

 

DCS doesn't model the secondary warhead in the Vikhr at all. As DCS doesn't model the fragmentation even in the DCS.

 

So our Vikhrs in DCS are very much nerfed by effect against any air targets, as what we have is just a high velocity javelin that we are throwing at the enemies and we need to get a direct hit to do any damage. Near miss is not counted, there is no explosion from close-by, no fragmentation sleeve being the destructive force etc.

 

Why we see so often how example AH-64 or Mi-24 can withstand a Vikhr directly on them, and you should try to get hit on the tail boom to cut it off with direct hit. Or that A-10 survives from the impact or few.

 

Once ED implements fragmentation simulation and the Vikhr secondary warhead explosive capability and programming, we should expect to see radically improved Vikhr performance against air targets, as well weakened performance against soft targets if not using the A/A mode on the ground even.

 

And pilot is required to confirm that target position is not Head On if it is fast mover.

[Fri13]

They're used by Naval Aviation not the Airforce

 

The Chechnya war BEG (Combat Experimental Group) was formed just after official KA-50 tests were ended, that went there to test the KA-50 in war conditions.

 

The order was to send four KA-50 and four KA-29 converted for target designation. The four KA-50 and two KA-29 came from Air Force and Army Aviation fleet, and two KA-29 came from Navy Aviation.

 

All were installed with ABRIS before mission etc.

 

Two KA-50 were completed for the mission with first serial production standard, #22 and #24. And one KA-29 was converted for the ABRIS and communication kit. The second KA-29 was laetr as well added with those and same targeting system that KA-50 had.

 

KA-29 operated as recon and designation helicopter and command the flight.

 

Later two additional KA-50 prototypes were sent back to factory to be upgraded to the standard, #20 and #21, but were never finished.

 

After it the two KA-50 and one KA-29 were tested and they were to be modified based the pilots feedback (FLIR, IR detection/jammer kit, reordering avionics etc) and form the upgraded standard. To what #23 and #26 were to be upgraded too, forming four KA-50 with new serial production version.

 

Our KA-50 is second in the first serial production line, funded by KA-50 itself. But because lack of money, two other KA-50 were not upgraded to production version. And after the testing all four were meant to be upgraded to revisioned, second serial production model, but funding never arrived and it was halted.

 

The KA-29's features were as well halted, as later when KA-50 project was funded, the order was to finish the KA-52 project as well, and that replaced then KA-29 and KA-50 combination, with few KA-50 in operation and rest are KA-52's.

 

KA-29 variant for the command task was so on quickly cut loose as KA-52 did its job.

 

Likely the idea was as well that KA-52 is the flight leader while the KA-50's are the wingmen. This way KA-52 pilot workload was distributed to two, one pilot and fight, second to command flight and assign targets to everyone.

 

It is like the two seater Mig-31 idea, the backseater was to be a general or other high ranking officer who was responsible to strategical decisions, leading the flight of four Mig-31's.

[Fri13]

Perhaps it just enables some other systems - like perhaps it turns on a lock tone from the Igla seeker that you wouldn't want whining away every time something hot crossed your path, or maybe it starts the cooling of the seeker head (if it has that). Maybe it marks a boresight on the HUD or schval screen that you wouldn't get from the ballistics computer.

 

Any number of things that have nothing to do with a third set of pylons...

 

If the ballistic computer can put boresight for the cannon, why it can't put it for the IGLA?

Why would you put a new weapons configuration function to station selector switch, when on everything else it is elsewhere?

 

Your 'No one has ever seen a Ka-50 with a third set of pylons, but I personally can't think of a better reason for a third switch position than another pylon, so it must exist' argument isn't really convincing me.

 

Then you have misread me.

 

 

It was considerably more expensive & USSR/Russia had run out of cash (Look at all the AESA radars the Russians built for the Su-27 & offered for export versions, but could never afford to field themselves - it wasn't because the Su-27S radar was better, just they couldn't afford to spend more than they absolutely had to and lots of slightly inferior was better than very few excellent), and it faced resistance from conservative elements within the armed services (a bit like those groups within the USAF hierarchy that fought the F-16 because they objected to the light single engine - 'no redundancy' concept)

 

In the end Kamov decided against fighting the system & existing prejudices and put another pilot in.

 

KAMOV did fund the first two production KA-50's by itself. It couldn't fund the second set of two because KAMOV didn't have funding.

 

And when the state was ready to fund it, they cancelled the project because they gave Mil the change to make Mi-28, even when Kamov was winner. And later then DoD was required to come back to Kamov to put full production to KA-50 serial production and speed up the KA-52 two-seat variant.

 

The extra you put on the KA-52, did payback itself over KA-50.

[Fri13]

"I was under the impression it was because they wanted to expand its role as a surveillance and command aircraft"

 

I thought standard procedure was that they would have a specialist Ka-27(29?) in the flight for that role ?

 

 

There you can see the Chenchen BEG attack group, two KA-50's and one KA-27/KA-29.

[martinistripes]

Interesting posts Fri13. I'd +1 you if we still had the reputation system. Would be great to get those fragmentation sleeves fixed.

[Harlikwin]

 

Once ED implements fragmentation simulation and the Vikhr secondary warhead explosive capability and programming, we should expect to see radically improved Vikhr performance against air targets, as well weakened performance against soft targets if not using the A/A mode on the ground even.

 

Have they said they are actually going to do this? It would do alot for improving CBU's and other bombs/rockets in general.

[3WA]

I believe it is on Silver Dragon's DCS "to do" list. Let me see if I can find it.

 

 

EDIT: I don't see it in there, but I do see Flak. I think it is probably going to come somewhere under the damage modeling.

 

 

Here's the list if anyone wants to look at it.

 

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=116893

 

 

xx

Edited June 4, 2019 by 3WA

[Weta43]

If the ballistic computer can put boresight for the cannon, why it can't put it for the IGLA?

Why would you put a new weapons configuration function to station selector switch, when on everything else it is elsewhere?.

 

Why are the Su-33 AoA index lights set up the opposite way to every other aircraft - including those in the Russian AF ?

 

"Why would you do it this way" is in no way or means actual evidence that the something isn't actually done that way.

 

My guess ? Let's say you're right that putting the Igla on a pylon does get the bore-sight circle onto the HUD & give you the audio cue. You don't want to have to hold the nose pointed at the target while you decide whether to launch / wait for the target to get in range / manoeuvre to an optimal launch position, maybe that forward A2A switch un-cages the seeker & at the appropriate time you launch.

[3WA]

Personally, I think the A-A switch is for the third A-A rail with the Iglas. Possible R-73 if the Russian are trying to mimic the Apache's and Cobra's abilities. I'm betting this same switch or something VERY similar to it is on the Ka-52 collective.

 

 

Makes total sense to me. Fighter moving in on you. Hit A-A selector. Igla selected as weapon and Igla boresighted as SOI. Move the plane till small circle is over target and you hear high pitched lock tone. Uncage the Igla, and make sure the seeker head is now following the target. Fire. Hard dive for cover and outta there.

[Weta43]

There is no "third A-A rail" with the Iglas.

 

It's been asked repeatedly, but if anyone can find an image of a Ka-50 with a third rail - please show it, everyone is waiting (& wondering why people keep insisting it exists).

 

Even the initial Ka-52 didn't have it.

 

Saying that an aircraft that was derived from the Ka-50 received it at some much later date means that the Ka-50 must have had it too is like insisting that the F-5E should be able to carry mavericks because the F/A-18C can.

 

For those who think it activates the invisible third pylon - what do you think you push to uncage the seeker ?

[Dehuman]

For those who think it activates the invisible third pylon - what do you think you push to uncage the seeker ?

 

The same button to uncage Shkval... which changes function if you're in AA mode perhaps.

 

I've seen the news, you don't need evidence to back up your beliefs when Russia is involved, just believe what you wish to be true; third pylon ftw!! :smilewink:

[MAD-MM]

Read some Time ago, but never was able to find it again, the Wingtips Countermeasure can repleaced with a third Row Hardpoint.

 

 

But after as Weta sad, there is no evidence for it, never know how plaussible the Sources are...

[Dudikoff]

Read some Time ago, but never was able to find it again, the Wingtips Countermeasure can repleaced with a third Row Hardpoint.

 

Doubt it as the third pylon is attached on the wing before the wingtips, so I guess it actually requires a different (bigger?) wing with an extra attachment point.

 

I'd expect that the throttle A2A control doesn't do anything as it was probably intended for a future modification (3-pylon wing) which never came about on the Ka-50, but was installed on production Ka-52.