Force_Feedback

Just let a mech undent the panel, and you're good to go. That's a live R-60 alright, even has the depleted uranium warning sign.

VVS=Military Air Forces (litteral translation) PVO=Anti Air Defence (ditto) PVO=SAM regiments, big expensive radar dishes to see incoming nukes, ABM protection, all defensive, no official attack capability. The Mig-31Ms, Su-30s and others are too part of this. VVS=Air Force, your average cliche air force. The thing is, the Army has its own SAMs (S-300V), the PVO has their own (S-400). So equipment wise they may overlap (as far as function goed, not the characteristics).

Army

That footage was as lame as all those F-22 demos. If you want exciting Ka-50 footage, try to find the one from MAKS 97, that was some flying, this is just a grandma in the pit, or a seriousely stoned pilot. And you can't just hang any A-A missile on a helicopter, as some are not rated to be fired below 350 km/h, so that may mess up the guidance due to oscillations of the missile.

The fans are arrogant as well, so no pun there ;)

Ever seen me in the early Sunday hours? Man, I've been more wasted than those pansies.

I'm a slob, and an easy rider. Man, that film is like a reflective documentary on me. Cool

Old stuff actually. This thing is one of the aspects that gives the F-35 a much greater potential than the F-22, okay, they are 20 years apart, so it's not that surprising. The cool thing is that you can look through the fuselage in infrared

You know what's a fun thing to do, land at slightly below 450 km/h (flaaaat glideslope), add full AB, and, as the cable is slowing you down, you will overshoot, and either end up in the black sea, or barely make it. No wing/half wing landings in the su-33 are nice too, but this trime land at ~400 km/h without and afterburner, then you'll live and save an expensive plane for the Sovie, errm, Russian people.

I've never bought a Steam game which cd key was NOT used, and it's damn annoying having to take pics and send them to some strange email just to prove you actually bought the games. And I always check the packages if they weren't opened before, yet every time someone else already is using the key I payed for. Besides that, all the advertising, massive amounts of sucked up HD space, unexplained hangs and CS installs that stop working all of the sudden, Steam is really great... If there was an alternative, I would happily set fire to all the Steam servers myself. Oh shit...

So you can't make a hovering autorotation? What about the wheel brakes then, do they have an accumulator to allow braking? What speeds are we talking about, 50, 100 km/h? Roling starts are fun, rolling autorotations usually end up with severe rotor damage.

How much time is there to push down the collective before the blade inertia becomes too low and your only option will become the K-37? I've heard that reaction times of 0.5 seconds were not uncommon on light conventional helicopters, and since the Ka-50 has 'rigid' composite blades (not with paper filler like the Mi-26/Chinook), it's interesting how much time you have before the rotors stop spinning. I know it depends on forward speed, let's assume a hover, 200m above ground, how much time is there to get the collective down and pitch forward?

The K-37-800 has a spin stabilized rocket that pulls the pilot out at an angle, just like 'modern' ejection seats, their trajectory will be more or less the same. So the chute has enough forward velocity to deploy safely. The reason the K-37 'does not work' as per your words, is that there was not 1 instance in which the pilot attempted to eject. So, if they didn't try, and payed with their life, how can you say it doesn't work? These helicopters were designed to be flown in a warzone, engine failures are one of the less worrying kinds of failures when machine gun bullets fly your way. So, if let's say a Stinger fancies flying through the rotor, what then? Autorotation? :P That's why there are these two red handles in there, not because autorotation is the better alternative.

The thing is, I forgot where I got these, I'll try searching for them, but I remember it being some Chinese site, not sure though.

That is the datalink view, I have a couple of pics of a real life one

Hey I posted that to keep the fanbois off me, it's a great chopper, but not 'invincible' like the propaganda says, and is probably prone to "engine failures". In NATO, engine failures=shootdown. Iraq is flat and hot, Yugoslavia is mountanous, I'd say the Apache should have performed better in the Kosovo dispute than in Iraq, but Iraq is flat. Afghanistan however is a better example.

There is a switch in front of the pilot, down under the HUD that allows to activate teh proximity fuse, they promised it would be implemented in BS.

No matter what you say, the Ah-64 still is the best, combat proven attack helicopter in the world, and although the Ka-50 is more agile, and can dance in the skies, the Apache can carry 16 Hellfires to finish off 16 tanks or other vehicles.

And yet the Osa AKM was able to shoot down an F-117 in 1991, so that gives us a nice indication why the developments concentrate on drones rather than low radar cross sections now. And with all the datalinking the SAMs were capable of, and with better computing that's extended much further, think ESM systems used to listen to stealth planes, long wavelangth radars for initial detection, and track via missile guidance. So stealth might word against an underequipped oponnent, however, when trying to attack some country that has invested in SAMs, that alone might not do it.

The gun is for spraying? So what, they make the barrel extra short, make the bullets smaller, less powder, heck, isn't there a random generator in the turret control software? What about against medium armored vehicles? Will AP rounds be more effective if they hit the soil in the vicinity of the target? What's next FFARs as an effective way to destroy single tanks? The only reason the Mi-28 was chosen was because uncle Mil has a shitload of its own choppers in the Russian inventory and has a 'name' (ie $$$), and because only 1st class pilots would be allowed to fly the Ka-50, while the mi-28 can offer a ride to second class pilots and trainees, it's also said to be less expensive to maintain.

Yeah, no sane S-300 owner would ever use it against the Apache, as it would be uneconomical, the Tor however, well, feel the thunder and the blow of his hammer I'd say, and RIP for the apache crew. The thing is, vehicles like the Tunguska and Thor are very hard to erradicate, more difficult than an S-300 battery. In Black Shark making a mission with Strela-10s, Tunguska's and Thors would be realistic, too bad the bort nr. 24 Ka-50 has no RWR. Ouch.

Soviet made SADMs (the one that caused a media panic some years ago) weigh like 25kg and have a kiloton yield, now that's a bang for the buck... And dude, the first ka-50 videos WILL include Jack Bauer doing something so badass that you all will piss your pants.

The reason why is because the gun gives a 5000 kg recoil (because it's a BMP-2 gun basically). And don't underestimate Ka-50s agility, that thing can really (aka, been there, done that) reach a climb rate of 30 meters/second for 1.5 minutes, with a combat load (I think in Chechnya it was 2x B-8 blocks), and it does all the aerobatic tricks with suspended ordnance models. However, the only way the ka-50 can turn as fast as the apache cannon is in the pitch, maybe roll axes, thw yaw rate, judging from videos, takes more time to build up.

Besides the target speed in BVR also the target speed should be shown in Vertical Scan (autolock) mode with or without radar (both EOS or radar can give range, so target speed is extrapolated), that's what makes gunzo a bit crappy, but hey, they fixed the pipper.

Strange assumption to think a nation would launch nukes in the first place (contaminating the earth with fall-out, essentially f-ing themselves as well). Just as stupid to think that a single nuclear attack on Moscow/Washington would cause either side to surrender, pfft, the best response would include launching every damn missile at them becasue you're mad (a lot of pun intended). Sorry, considereing even the slightest real use for nuclear weapons means a few things: -you want to create jobs by upgrading your arsenal -you think that having the edge, the other nations will let you go your merry way What you get in return: a new step in evolution, oh wait, there won't be any DNA left, oh, that's a shame, your arrogance killed off mankind, way to go US/Russia/China/GB/France. The only use for such weapons is political, they can as well have green jello instead of plutonium/uranium/other isotopes, too bad there's counter-intelligence out there. BTW, Defcon is a fun game to play.