Volk.

This was originally posted by Szmarty on reddit/hoggit. Specifically their training mission ("TNN") has targets South-West of Kobuleti (that famous "X" everyone loves to use for target practice. This has nothing to do with the other bug reports on contrast locking - purely on ranging, possibly specifically how it affects the cannon. Laser-ranging the 2nd furthest target, or anywhere in the area near it always results in the cannon rounds falling short. This is from a windows-key + home autostart, standard rocket + vikhr loadout, set in manual mode. INU, K-041 and everything else important is on. The laser is not burnt out (not that that matters for cannon ranging). The target is not moving, nor is ground moving target on. Wind is 3m/s from 111, so from the left in the early shots. Without resetting the Shkval - locking up other targets the rounds land accurately. Firing from a stable hover. Ranging far into the distance and locking dirt (no contrast lock, just the 3 second ranging), the shells land accurately. But anything in that patch around that 2nd-from last vehicle lases weirdly. One can also see the ABRIS shows the laser-ranged Shkval gates as looking near the middle of the airfield or closer, rather than on the furthest edge of the runway. After flying to the other side, now my heading is maybe 028, but in a sideslilp with track of 008. Laser-range at 3.9km. It's stopped ranging for a while already when I open fire at 3.2 on that same truck that gets the ranging weird. All shots about 3m off to the right (I don't find this too strange/disturbing - but rather I'm saying now the rounds are neither falling short nor overshooting by far). The wind would have been an absolute crosswind in this situation from the right. Fire again at 2.7, 1 of the rounds hits home, rest very close spread on the right. I've seen areas in DCS where slewing side-to-side without lasing massively spikes the ranging, but that's with the laser off and always in high areas. This is with laser and near sea level and something is very wrong there. In hindsight I should have launched a Vikhr as well, though I'd guess it would follow it's way to the target and the 6 second buffer would cover the ranging error. This particular case is like a small Bermuda Triangle area, but only from one side. Video capture: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZ4odwdMc74 I have a trackfile, but it's 38mb - not from an excessively long flight, but I guess mostly the mission. Can't seem to compress it down to the 5mb limit. Please advise on how to share that.

The last two clips posted were from 3km distance, which is leagues different from most AH gun cam footage from 1km +/- 200m. Not sure if anyone has M230 footage from 3 clicks - would be interesting to see. From what I understand after 1.7km those rounds really go astray. Supposedly the Mi-28, well at least the N or earlier versions didn't have great dispersion, and noted for off-bore lack of accuracy compared, but as others wrote, it's got massive recoil far from the CG. Think it only carries ~250-300 rounds though, all housed inside that fat turret, hence it's slower turning speed. No idea on it's abilities to track/stabilise or make fine corrections. I think the pilots can guide it by helmet, but unsure if they have a helmet display.

Привет, мне интересно, знает ли кто-нибудь, где на этом бесконтактные предохранители? Не могу найти на нем никаких диаграмм. Насколько я понимаю, может быть несколько лазеров - одни в передней части для режима лобового столкновения, а другие дальше назад для обычного всестороннего противовоздушного режима. Большинство источников говорят о 5-метровой близости. Извините, я использую для этого инструмент перевода.

On the left panel near the collective head, there's the K-041, then the Helmet sight switch and then one showing AT/TS. Default on AT gives automatic tracking. Flipping that down boresights your Shkval at a position where your cannon is ranged at 1.1km. I'm hazy if lasing now updates elevation. There is also the black knob near it titled "Cannon" that can be set to fix, but I think that only boresights your cannon, not necessarily your Shkval. ps. If you just lose the HUD, you're usually still able to use the Helmet sight/slewing hat to aim the Shkval, meaning the cannon still aims for you, so you might not need to go full boresight. Typically if you lose the Shkval, then you lose the lasers as well, meaning that boresighted and looking through the HUD, you'll need to estimate bullet drop.

Thanks. I have also seen that specific site. I didn't go delve in the Lua files, but can't remember if it was Kintex or which source, but one of the ammo stat pages did have meters deviation/spread for the 2A42 & GSh rounds which did seem to imply the GSh had slightly worse accuracy in that regard. But recoil numbers I see all over the place. Some say 30kn, others 65kn. Far more than the 600-ish kg recoil force from most other helo 30mms.

Heh. Only just found this post coz I was trying to do some research on the Ka-50s gun. @fargo007 I don't think the 2A42 of the Shark is quite comparable to the M230. Double the mass of the round & projectile, launched at higher velocity. The gun & mounting are far heavier, fired from the centre of gravity. If I understand correctly the M230 mainly fires M789s as universal AP + HE/I type shells, which are indeed potent (think 5-10 feet kill/lethal radius for standing targets depending on source). The 2A42 shells are dedicated AP or HE/I/Frag. So it carries more stuff dedicated to the task. Of course there's tonnes of stuff in ballistics I don't get in terms of the construction, design & materials that will affect the capability. But outside of how DCS models infantry suppression/area damage, they're quite different cannons, both in the power, burst length and of course the ability to slew around off-axis and have a second guy do it. Ps. not saying the M230 sucks, just it should work differently and be employed differently. Just wish there were more detailed sources on this stuff. Like the M230 3millirad thing is clearly not plausible if you go look at footage and compare it against more stable platforms like the Gau-8 (nevermind angle of employment), but seems all the gun stats have an amount of marketing in them.

Anyone have the specifics on the cannon? By that I mean milliradian spread, recoil force, etc. I've found some conflicting stuff on recoil and projectile+round weight (for the same type of shell), but never anything concrete on spread/dispersion, other than something that alluded to 1mrad, which seems like a selective result taken from the ground maybe. Most sites just list 750 rounds as well... or show the Su-25 stats.

Not in the sim right now, but I have seen that carat/diamond on the HUD this week (in the openbeta at least), so possibly it's something missing from your startup. I think maybe the DT-DH toggle might be in the middle instead of up or down (it's near the AP channel buttons). Otherwise maybe K-041 or INU. Note that heading carat doesn't show your trimmed heading sometimes if you're messing with autopilot modes or especially if the PVI-800 is has a steerpoint selected - then the heading carat reflects the desired heading instead. Also the Shkval pointing somewhere, having a data link target on Ingress or Target Point selected on the PVI puts the HUD into a combat mode, which then shows the target location (think as a circle) instead of the diamond. Hope that helps.

IIRC Barundus mentioned the AH-64 you had about 2 seconds of stick input before it was practically immovable, while in the OH-58D you could still fly it without boost. Boosted also mentioned the Blackhawk was mostly a no-go without hydraulics. Got it timestamped in a video, but they mentioned pressures etc. But by gross speculation, I'd guess the Shark's accumulator should also run dry after some amount of input from collective/cyclic movements. I think only pressing the wheelbrake (but not the act of holding it) currently depletes it.

But also the FCR isn't what you might imagine from marketing material. It's not nearly a clear picture always identifying targets as-is. False positives are very much a thing. So less of parking behind trees and yeeting off 16 hellfires at unsuspecting targets, and more of an occasionally-helps-identify-something-that-may-need-sights-on-it. So maybe, possibly points you to a place, then check it out with the M-PNVS etc to confirm if you're looking at an outhouse or an enemy tank. Then only launch, and more likely a laser-guided Hellfire. ps. I'm not saying the FCR is complete garbage, just not nearly as a perfect-detection & auto-lock system as one would imagine. In terms of sharing data, the Ka-50 already could share targets with 2 button presses, and get sensors-on with 2 buttons. Not sure how much faster you could make that. I'd guess the Ka-52 meant to be the same, but more modern would also have a fast sharing mechanism. If you were to want to argue purely which is the better killer, then sure an Apache probably has better avionics, but at double the probably cost of a Ka-52, nevermind the high cost of Hellfires, I'd probably favour 2 Ka-52s vs a single Guardian. Can't comment on radar accuracy or ranges of the Vikhrs vs Hellfire Romeos as those things get bit classified.

Concur with the above. Loss of one engine should itself lead to another being lost. With governors on even max throttle also shouldn't lead to overheating. There's definitely damage modeled in DCS that worsens over time, i.e. you lose an engine a or hydraulics fully only some time after taking damage. My guess would be the right engine did actually take damage, but not enough to knock it out immediately like your left engine. This is assuming there's no icing, dust or hard knocks that took it out. I'm also pretty sure damage can cause engines to have weaker output instead of just on-off, so sometimes it's hard to stay up even with everything shed/jettisoned/launched and lower fuel - you'll have to gauge your lift after dumping to see if you can still keep afloat. And pop gear earlier if you think you'll lose hydraulics.

I can confirm this - accumulator stays at about 80%. The only thing that appears to drain it is each press of the wheelbrake drains it maybe 20-25%. Holding wheelbrake in doesn't appear to drain it (at least not very quickly) and control inputs from cyclic/collective appear to have zero effect on it. So some of the hydraulics loss and accumulator depletion is simulated. Admittedly I popped gear before losing all hydro, though given some people often find they can't get the gear down after both hydraulics are lost I'd assume maybe that does bottom out the accumulator but doesn't quite get the job done, or alternately the gear even on emergency isn't fed from the accumulator. This is with both hydraulic systems dead from damage (not simulated) and all the normal auto-switching from normal startup on to let the flight hydraulics get covered by common if main fails.

What time of day is it on that mission/server when you tried? If it's before 7am, and maybe after 4pm (I'm guessing here), the artificial limiter kicks in to simulate the lack of light and locking range goes down to almost zero if at all.

You need to change Avionics language to English as well, instead of 'default'/'normal' or whatever other setting it is. Think that's in one of the general/gameplay menus.

I've also perceived this. Too lazy to go fetch trackfiles, but recently (i.e. somewhere 2.7+) I've also noticed rounds hitting but causing zero damage. Especially HE rounds on trucks and BTR-80s, where one can see the impact, but no damage. For reference before 2.7, trucks would start burning from one HE direct hit, and BTR-80s from 2.

I've also perceived this. Too lazy to go fetch trackfiles, but recently (i.e. somewhere 2.7+) I've also noticed rounds hitting but causing zero damage. Especially HE rounds on trucks and BTR-80s, where one can see the impact, but no damage. For reference before 2.7, trucks would start burning from one HE direct hit, and BTR-80s from 2. @Flappie HE is up, yes, AP down.

@zerO_crash the S-8 fragment was from an ultra-low attack during the first Chechnyan sortie. Think an ammo dump. It didn't go down - just got some vibrations, landed at a closer airbase/airport/FOB, saw the tip was damaged which they then cut/sanded down, and then flew back to base. It then spent some time out of the fight waiting for a new blade/rotor while #24 kept flying. I may be wrong about #25 being the one in the Black Shark movie though. First time I've seen footage of the rotor intersection you posted there. That was Bort 22 in 1998. There was a another fatal accident w/ Evgeny Laryushin - afaik not rotor intersection, just pushing beyond the limits on V-80-1 (serial 010) in 1985

At what range? Last I checked about September 2020 (pre-2.7), neither the HE nor AP ammo did any damage from 2.8km in the rear of a BMP-3. At 600m with AP ammo, hitting the side turret did nothing, side chassis 27%, rear 26% per hit. From 400m AP to the front did nothing. Not sure from what distance you'd start hurting it between that 2.8km going into 600m in the side/rear, or if there's a range at which AP can pierce the front - my take-home was Vikhr them because of the risk of their retaliation, unless you were really desperate and only facing that one BMP-3 in the area and could sneak up from behind without it turning.

IIRC #25 was one of the two that went to Chechnya, did an ultra-low strike in the mountains on an ammo dump and clipped it's rotor with an S-80 fragment from going so low/close. Made it to a nearby base with that vibration where they cut/sanded/shaved the messed up rotor tip, flew to home base and spend a while waiting for a new rotor/blade. It was also the one in the Black Shark movie. And yeah, it's had a few paint schemes over time. Think in Chechnya they removed side numbers for pilot safety. Think somewhere in the range 2007-2011 it tested the missile warning system and directional infrared countermeasure system. MWS worked well enough fairly early on, DIRCM took another year or two to get right amount of performance. Not aware of it ever having had 3 pylons or firing IGLAs. Technically it also never got the upgrades for laser designation, so while you could mount Kh-25s, you wouldn't be able to designate for them. ps. the Ka-52 only got the 3rd pylon some time into development, unsure if it coincided with receiving the newer, more powerful engines.

The place you need to click is the same as the original position (of the paddle/lever tip) when the filter was down. So if you brought the filter up, and you want to lower it again you'd need to click slightly higher up than the tip of the paddle. In this clip if I were to move the mouse cursor away it would go yellow, and then moving back to that spot near the top of the lever mechanism the HUD filter popup would appear and the cursor turns green. I'm assuming VR would work similarly. HUD.mov

The post 2000 FLIR would be boss. The #018 GOES-330 below for targeting and TOES-520 above for night navigation from the MAKS 2007 airshow would be, pardon the pun, ballin'. And as far as I know none of those are used in the Ka-52, so they might be old/unused/possibly-maybe outdated and declassified. No idea how good those systems were, but that would be a pretty sweet BS3. Would gladly sacrifice MWS, Kh-25 designation and IGLA capabilities (from yellow #25, yellow #24 and ???? respectively) for that option.

Why do you need "an opponent" to the Apache? It's not like Mig-15bis dogfighting the Sabre. They kill tanks and lighter armoured strike targets. Killing other helos is a distant afterthought - on has L band radar you switch to, but then need to guide in a slower direct-hit only Hellfire, while the other lacks radar but has a much faster missile with proxy fuse. Neither are ideal for that job, and weren't meant to be. Russians turned down a radar + full A2A variant of the Ka-50I. Americans could easily have hooked up the wiring to fire Stingers but they didn't. It's just not the ideal place for this type of weapon system. Are they perfectly balanced equal-power equivalents? No. Black Shark's development funding got cut as the single seat concept was just too alien, even though it performed well in combat with a scout. Just like Ka-52 struggled with sales partly because the side-by-side cockpit layout they chose based on feedback from Afghanistan vets seemed alien as everyone just used tandem. Fall of the union and interference from the competition loser throttled the Ka-50's development which was meant to be produced far earlier in greater numbers, with all-weather+night capability. It was close, but ultimately they got practically no funding. And by the time the economy recovered, the idea was still too foreign and the Ka-52 showed promise making it the go-to. Ka-50 is a sniper/shooter that does best following a FLIR-capable scout or Ka-52 commander, and possibly costed a third of the then-day Apache equivalent. On it's own, never had the Night Attack approved for full distribution and lacking a second front seater with off-axis gun and FLIR it'll suck at COIN. I'd love to see the Ka-52 in DCS. Outside the systems, I'd imagine it has a ridiculously good view from the cockpit - short rounded nose, no sensor obstructing your forward view and no chubby avionics cheeks. That and doing all the spotting and fire directing to Ka-50s (in a fantasy setting obviously) would be some nice coop. Think both Ka-52 and Mi-28N are the only 'equivalents' to an Apache - some cheaper in price, can't comment on the quality of stuff like the true capabilities of their radars or avionics. But for the Ka-50, I don't need it to be the "Russian Apache". It's a unique take on an attack chopper, doesn't leave you bored at any time and lets you have all the fun. Get the Apache for the multi-crew and more modern FLIR & helmet displays, and get the Ka-50 if you want the more Tomcat experience. Russians don't have as much a problem having their airframes, but don't like simulation-level emulation of their stuff. Hence something that attempts realism like DCS isn't allowed to do it. So even if you didn't have a bunch of coders physically near Moscow, Kamov/Russian Helicopters co simply wouldn't give you the charts, SMEs and intel you need to accurately proxy it.

Didn't have wiring in the US ones. Easy to do, but they just didn't. Brittish Apaches I think mighta been the only ones that did that. Maybe with the Apache also using a contrast lock system the code the base tech to update the Shkval. No idea which system locks better IRL though. Might all be flakey.

@Fri13 some small corrections/additions. You mention 'our' #25. Not sure if you mean 'our present BS2', but the current BS2 one is modeled off yellow #24 that also went to Chechnya and flew there a bit more as it didn't clip it's own rotor with an S-80 fragment. #24 is the only one that received funding to upgrade the Shkval/Prichal laser to also allow designation for Su-24s etc. So by extension it should be the only one that can self-laze Kh-25s or buddy laze Kh-25s for other Sharks. Inherently we should lose the designation part if we were to receive any other Shark with any other features. Not a big loss though. #25 went on to test the Missile Warning System and DIRCMs. MWS performed well enough in 2009, but DIRCM only got approved as working well enough in 2011 to then get deployed on Ka-52s etc. You're right that Ka-52s didn't initially have a third pylon. Also probably from adding then ~500kg for the 2nd seater and still using the same engines. Not sure if the third pylon was added at the same time as upgrading the engines. I don't know about full glass, but the -52 prototypes seemed to have more MFD type displays from the start than the Ka-50. Only the final Night Attack shark conversion Ka-50Sh had a full glass cockpit renovation. Ka-52 wasn't fully on the cards from the start. They knew they had to make a 2 seater trainer, but it wasn't conceived as it is now. They wanted a Kiowa-equivalent Ka-60 - which Kamov conceived as a 4 tonne thing, MoD or such wanted 6.5 tonnes, it ran into issues finding the right engine and was eventually budget cut. Then they made plans to convert Ka-29s with the Rubicon system and FLIR sensors. One Ka-29 was converted thus and escorted #24 and #25 to Chechnya. The group did well, but they found the Ka-29 couldn't quite keep up with the lighter streamlined Ka-50 (also revamped rotor system). Between the MoD simply losing interest in the single seater concept (successful deployment, but the concept was still probably just too alien), and choosing to replace that Ka-29 scout with a better Black Shark, the Ka-52 was adapted from the Ka-50 and then just eventually fully supplanted it. Once the Ka-52 showed an ok mockup it got all the scant funding while the Ka-50 got zero. What they've shown thus far of the exterior of is a Black Shark with MWS, so yellow #25, but DIRCM removed - eh, think I'm fine with that. Can't comment on anything I've seen about it having working IGLAs or a third pylon. @Mike_Romeo Erdogan Ka-50-2 was only a mockup - not a functional airframe. It was also based on the then-prototype Ka-52, so it's not strictly speaking a 6-pylon Ka-50. Also it had a bunch of other weird mods in addition to the tandem layout, including making the gun store on the side and then flip down to become a turret, think the turret became 20mm as well. Think it was also going to have avionics from partners etc. - but somewhat removed from a Ka-50 is what I'm trying to say.

@3WA you're right in it being a beamrider and the cone. But note you do not need a lock. Locking is purely a contrast (or at least in the sim fake-contrast) lock from the Shkval system and has nothing to do with the laser. All it's doing is ensure the laser keeps pointing at a moving target. Automatic mode you can use medium/long burst to fire 2 Vikhrs by holding down weapon release and it will only fire the laser after the second launch. Manual mode it fires the laser immediately, but you can fire a second one with a different timing, e.g. 6 second delay which will of course ride that same beam. By extension you don't even need to aim at the target at time of launch. It rides the beam. That's also why moving target isn't really relevant to the Vikhr - if your laser guides it to the target, it's likely to hit and doesn't calculate lead. You can even loft Vikhrs if you do so manually and skillfully. As long as you're gentle with your movements in guiding it onto target, otherwise it will detect itself at the edge of that cone/lose the laser and then veer off too strongly trying to re-acquire. It does like a ranging though so it knows how to grow the laser over time.