isoul

Sorry for resurrecting but Renato71 told me (with a unique way) that I should have answered to his question(see below) @Renato71 : Since you got offended for not answering your question below ...or at least thats what I get when you disapprove my post with the comment "You did't reply on my question about investing 1000 EUR in ED" I think you 'll feel much better if I answer. So, here you are : No, I wouldn't invest 1000euros in ED since I am not an investor! I am but a simple customer. I paid my 28 hard earned euros and that's it! I have a game to keep myself busy and I don't ask much. One point I missed is who forced you to spend so much money in ED or its products or who forced you to rent a server/domain dedicated to LO/DCS? I believe it was your own decision, right? Have you signed any contract with ED or something? Did they cheat you? Whatever your answer is one thing is sure... Its not my fault! I haven't called anyone cheap. I just said that I find the game's price cheap(compared to other titles). I bought one copy of DCS:BS for 28euros but this doesn't make me, or anyone else, an inferior forum member compared to you! Still, if you paid so much for LO/DCS no one can be blamed about it. If you had a contract with ED and they cheated you(which I doubt)... well, search for a lawyer and I hope he will defend your rights in court! Till then stop blaming ED for your poor decisions and respect other's opinions.

Exactly! Only in games you can pit the Ka-50, as is now, against a serious army. Remember? It fought militants in Chechenya... they didn't have serious SAMS like the Tor M-1 or serious AAA like M-163. If it had all the modern equipment it would probably be used in South Osetia too. Actually attack helicopters can deal with AAA and SAMS and usually its part of the helicopter and anti-aircraft crews training process... Now, I don't know many helicopters similar to Ka-50. Like the Mi-24, Ka-50 doesn't actually have an exact western counterpart to be compared with. Besides that Ka-50 has a very unique history/background which someone should know before tag it "insufficient" to deal with X threat.

I was wondering the same thing! Single seaters are OK but what happens if you are the co-pilot/gunner of a two-seater and AI has to actually fly the plane using the realistic flight model? Would it (the AI) be any good?

No worries, point taken/appreciated and indeed it was needed to be said! I have the decency ! Now eat my "obsolete" Vikhrs!!!

I wasnt talking about the most recent versions (like F-4G Wild Weasel Phantom) since much of the modernized equipment would be kept secret, right? Notice that I said most of them are considered absolete, not all of them! To consider something obsolete means that it doesnt fulfill the role you want it to fulfill so you stop using it. F-104 considered obsolete for Greeks 17 years ago, still Italy retired it 5 years ago but in general it stopped being of any real operational use long before.

If you take many things that it is written in here into consideration then one of the most suitable aircraft list would be : A-7 Corsair, AH-1 Cobra, Super Etendar, Mi-24, F-4E Phantom, Mig-21, Mig-23 and so on... All the above have been in active service for quite long(actually most are considered obsolete), they have few classified equipment anymore but still have radar, ECM etc. The only thing we have to wait is a military contract for a simulator development by ED(I wonder who would like a simulator for almost obsolete equipment...) and the good relationship between ED and the manufacturer(like ED and Kamov) in order for enough info to be provided.

But despite the classified info on the Ka-52 its said that when it comes to sensor sytems there are so many options that a "standard" hasn't been decided yet! AFAIK serial production of Ka-52 only started in 2008, that doesn't even count two years 'till present day. Is it possible that we (commercial market) will get a simulator any time(expressed in years!) soon while the first Ka-52 almost haven't reached its first users(Russian Army Aviation)? *You may want to read this article of RIA Novosti

Sry for going off topic but I think, since the matter was discussed, its interesting to report. Actually most of them are reports of neutral media (its interesting sometimes to see how a conflict is broadcasted/received by media in neutral nations such as mine). The first one was the ONE we all know(*1). About the second one there was much confusion(actually it doesn't count as a kill, see below)... The Yugoslavian side, at a later time and after the first F-117 was shot down, (publicly) announced that its air defences hit one more (stealth)aircraft, some even claimed it that the aircraft was a B-2 spirit(*2). They shown parts of an F-117(which later proved to be parts of the first one shot down) on the ground and claimed that FRY forces are searching for the ejected pilot(which proved to be false). NATO initially denied any loss of aircraft that day. With rumors going wild from the FRY side, NATO remade the statement that one aircraft was forced "to cancel its mission due to malfunction and return to base". Some days later NATO officials, under the pressing journalist questions and the (possible) the danger of a made-up crash-site by FRY, they answered that there was an "incident involving a stealth aircraft which had taken hit and forced to cancel mission and that the pilot was safe and well in his health". This was (probably) interpreted, along with a strict request to the media not to record images of returning aircraft long before and after the flights ETA these days, as a another loss by neutral media as no further comment was made(as expected when we have to do with highly classified military matters). I didn't knew that... ...and I have no reason to deny it since I haven't found any convincing material(photos/articles) that it actually crashed. This ofcourse doesn't make it a "kill", especially while the aircraft managed to land but the fact that a stealth bomber was hit was big enough news in the FRY media that day. (*1) To the ones interested about the story behind the first F-117 shot down, follow this link! Its interesting how the commander of the SAM dared to use its radar multiple times to obtain a lock. (*2) There are further claims by neutral journalists that the "second F-117 hit" was actually a B-2 Spirit hit which actually is said was rebuild(so no one can or will confirm such an incident easily). Serbs claims of several "proximity fuze hits" of its SAMs. Still there is little to no "light" on the matter.

Of course Georgian infrastructure was targeted. The two conflicts have deep differences that would take pages and many military analysts to study. Still Russian AF had by far poorer results(in Ossetia) than NATO in Yugoslavia but I think its easy to explain why. Still the difference in military doctrines of US and Russia plays a big part to it.

Russian Air Force lost 4(1 Tu-22, 3 Su-25) aircraft in the recent South Osetian War (Georgian side claims to be 10, there were photos of 2 wreckages only). If we take the fact that Georgia lacks any fighter aircraft into consideration the 4 losses aren't a good outcome. Still, Georgia has quite modern Air Defense Systems capable of dealing with modern air-threats. Bear in mind that in that operation Russia didn't have the initiative neither had conducted any SEAD sorties prior to the main confrontation. Now, in Operation Allied Force(Bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999) NATO lost 5 aircraft to Yugoslavian Air Defenses. If we take into consideration that this was an air campaign that included destruction of air defenses(at least there was an effort), deployment of EW/SEAD aircraft, stealth bombers and even satellites to guide missiles, (EDIT) 4 modern aircraft( 1 stealth included, another one was severely damaged) isn't a too good outcome either. Now if you take the Yugoslavian losses (personnel/armor/aircraft) into account and NATO mobilization in the area, despite the fact that Operation Allied Force (from a political perspective) was a success , the Yugoslavian war machine, eventhought it was targeted, wasn't harmed that much. Actually it was the infrastructure and other targets of political significance that were destroyed and aided to bring Milosevic down. Keep in mind that there a is a difference in US and Russian air force doctrines that impacts the way aircraft are being used. Actually something similar happened at least once in Iraq or Afghanistan! Need to find the link to BBC(if I recall right). This is war! Accidents happen in military exercises, in war its more easy given the stress personnel has in combat!

That would be nice...flying around with all the fireworks!!!

Ooops error...EDITED and corrected!

Actually US pilots have flown more hours of combat sorties against : 1) North Korea 2) North Vietnam 3) Iraq (Operation Desert Storm - Gulf War I) 4) Serbo-bosnians (in Bosnia War) 5) Serbia (in Kossovo War) 6) Afghanistan 7) Iraq (Operation Iraqi Freedom - Gulf War II) Still, only in No1 and No5 airforces considered modern at the time(actually Serbia had good air defensse and only and 14 Mig 29s, the rest aircrafts were old). Its interesting that in No5 (NATO bombing of Yugoslavia) 1000 NATO aircraft were pitted against 140 Yugoslavian aircraft with combat losses counting 5(2 F-117, 3 F-16) and 12(11 Mig-29) for each side respectively!!!

It would be quite interesting to fly around without firing a single shot but at the same time being one of the most important guys in the air(for your friends) or radar's worst nightmare(for your foes)!

That would be nice but how someone would ensure that 3rd parties would keep the same level of quality and accuracy ED does? Imagine a scenario were you have to fly the Ka-50 with ED's ultra-realistic flight model and abilities while I ride a AH-64 with non-so accurate flight model and abilities(developed from a 3rd party) in the same server! That wouldn't be fair.

Yeah, maybe! Anyone can make you look like a banana-eater with the appropriate "arguments"! So be it... But in-case you are wondering if Boeing is a sticker-company I can assure you that its paper helicopters flew a few meters over my head while I was standing next to some fake tanks made of wood we bought from Rosoboronexport!:P Now, where was that little paper-note with the address of the local Mental-Inability Hospital?:pilotfly:

Warning extra-long post...(sorry) Indeed, the catalogue I 've red is a commercial brochure from Rosoboronexport*, which is a Russia's state company responcible for most(all since 2007) exports/imports of military equipment of Russia(I 'll post a few company details below). If you think this source unreliable its ok! Its not mine afterall. Let me be clear on this, I haven't asked ED to implement anything like a FLIR,RWR,A2A or whatsoever in DCS and I am not "motivating" anyone else to do anything like that neither I claim that Ka-50 in active service today are equiped with more equipment than ED has already modelled. Everyone is free to read what I 've red and reject it! (actually, sometime ago, I once asked the mast-mounted radar in the "Wish List" but you explained the criteria of what is being and what isn't being modeled in DCS and I understood that and backed off. I didn't knew back then, I am terribly sorry!) I think you understand too that I wasn't relied on sites/forums/blogs in general! I usually refer to printed material(issues of military&defense press, books regarding nation's arms etc.) or if it sites I usually prefer the ones from companies or organizations related to the development/production, export or use of specific military equipment instead of blogs or forums. As a last source od evidence I would refer to newspaper articles as "claims", since sometimes these info/claims may be denied by officials. Considering your own example, even if Sukhoi site doesn't mention the use of R-77 by Su-33 this doesn't mean that it DOES NOT use it, unless Sukhoi or Vympel states that clearly somewhere else. I believe that I 've learned at lest the fundamentals of research in university. As long as I am not considered an expert, I never come to a conclusion myself. Even if I have 10 references leading to a reasonable enough conclusion there might be 20 more, that I am not aware of, that leads to something else. I always try to find reference/evidense even to conclusions. If someone reads that(see quotes below), he would probably think that you are talking to someone with mental inabilities! My country ordered military equipment from this "online advertising banner" called Rosoboronexport and all the stuff were delivered(!). Even US goverment applied diplomatic pressure to Greece for some orders placed to that "banner", including S-300. Actually this online banner advertising entity was more reliable/accurate to delivery dates than McDonnel-Douglas/Boeing was. Come on guys, you may think that I am stupid but I am not THAT stupid! I do not use online advertising banners neither pop-up window advertisements nor chain-mail advertisements as reference. I won't try to place any further arguments on the matter(you have my word on that) but there is no need to make me look stupid in the forum! ************************** References ************************** 1. Rosoboronexport Aerospace Systems Export Catalogue (page 45) Copyright © Rosoboronexport 2005 (Corporate publication.Not for sale) 2. Военный Парад 2001-2002/Russia's Arms 2001-2002 (page 302) Copyright © 2001 Military Parade Ltd. About (for whoever wants to check) Rosoboronexport - Rosoboronexport State Corporation is a federal state unitary enterprise acting as the sole Russian state intermediary agency for export and import of military and dual-purpose products, technologies and services. The Enterprise was established by Russian President's Decree No. 1834 dated 4th November 2000. It carries out foreign trade operations related to defence products in pursuance of the governmental policy in the sphere of military-technical cooperation of the Russian Federation with foreign states. Rosoboronexport State Corporation is supported by the Russian state providing governmental guarantees for all its export operations. Rosoboronexport State Corporation is the sole supplier of the whole range of armaments and military equipment nomenclature produced by Russian defense enterprises and authorized for export. Rosoboronexport State Corporation is firmly positioned among world's leading arms exporters. Rosoboronexport, as a legal successor of the state arms exporters existed in the ex-USSR and present-day Russia, has cooperated with more than 60 countries. "ROSOBORONEXPORT" State Corporation 27, Stromynka Street, Moscow, 107076, Russian Federation Fax: +7 495 9632613; +7 495 9648311 http://www.roe.ru/ Publicing House Military Parade - Publicing House "Military Parade", along with magazine "Military Parade", are part of Military Parade Ltd. which specializes in press coverage of Defence Indusrty matters. Military Parade Ltd. 35 Mosfilmovskaya St., Bldg. 1, Moscow 117330, Russia Phone: (095) 143-9650, 143-9654 Fax: (095) 937-9632 http://www.milparade.com E-mail: military@milparade.com

All I 've asked is to give me a source or reference... I am shocked with the overwhelming response! Assembly line have been closed before and resumed production. Now this may be done in favor of another assembly line. I don't expect to know the whole truth when comes to military matters but at least, EtherealN, you mentioned a source! Mentioning the date of this statement would be extra appreciated. Now, I can't believe that anyone in here can guarantee that assebly line won't or will resume. So, how can we be absolute on such matters? Its not disrespect mate! Its only my attitude to prefer, when I read something, to have a source so I can crosscheck, continue my research etc. If tomorrow I'm gonna tell another guy the <X,Y,Z-Fact>, at least I should say that I found it <in this valid source> rather than saying "A guy named isoul in a forum told me!" On my package? Where? Now, I don't mean that ED lies to us nor that Igla carrying Ka-50 is in service somewhere BUT being absolutely negative(without referring to a source) on future/possible features while other valid-sources claims the opposite is at least confusing right? With all respect to you mate I don't want to believe these too since this forum is one of the best I 've seen! Isn't this a conversation? Have I offended someone? I just disagreed with the way info is posted! Lucas, the Igla matter is not of significance to me! I just can't accept that someone can deny any possibility without any reference. You know I can say anything without any reference... right? At least, when I claim something I usually post my source, a photo or say that its unsure/non-crosschecked. Is that bad? Haven't denied that! Ka-52 benefit for one reason that I posted earlier, if I am wrong just point me to the right-path(give me a source!). Closing comments... all these was an effort to excuse myself! It wouldn't be needed if someone posted some links of press articles or book titles! If you still believe I showed disrespect to anyone with my writings I want to apologize and to say that this wasn't my intention. Thats all I had to say!

The airframe of the Ka-50 is newer than AH-64 but the last is still in service, who says the first one is old? Ka-50 is still serving in Training Squadrons, why is that if no one is supporting the, supposed to be replaced, single-seat Ka-50? If you can't answer directly these you may just say your sources so we can find out, read and evaluate it ourselves. Till then all such info stays un-confirmed, non-crosschecked and probably just a personal opinion/speculation posted in bold. Rosoboronexport isn't just an "export page". To me its one(if not the most) reliable source of info till someone provide me,us or the whole community with a better one! ...till present day that is! Same went for Apaches and Stingers till Japan ordered them, right? It may remain (operationally) that way if no serious(in military technology terms) conflicts occur in the near future!

Quote: Originally Posted by funkee 12. chaff for Ka50 (dunno if this is realistic, but I can't imagine that poor russian bird trying to escape from AMRAAM) Quote: Originally Posted by joey45 Cos the BS has no RWR how can you tell that a radar has you locked on and a Radar Guided missile is inbound...??? The Ka-50 is reported that it carries chaff/flare CM pods. I dunno how chaff would be useful since there is no RWR on the Ka-50 but there are claims that L-150 Pastel were tested on Ka-50. These claims doesn't sound as unrealistic/impossible to me! The lack of RWR and Chaffs, when seen from the gamer's view, will create imbalance to any FC2.0+DCS server and Ka-50 won't be flown that much in such environments.

WARNING Long Post As far as I know Ka-50 is still being tested with various equipment, don't forget that from AH-64A to D version there were B and C upgrade programs which were canceled and resumed with even more upgrades as the D version we all know. The use and armament/equipment of Ka-50 in Chechnya doesn't say anything at all for its future! In Chechnya the Ka-50 was counting 4-5 years of active service... it was brand new and production resumed, after being paused for some years, only a few years after USSR dissolved. Ka-52 Alligator is still considered as the AFAC of a Ka-50 flight (1 Ka-52 & 3 Ka-50), this is the unit composition that is suggested to Russia's export customers. I don't know where have you red/found that Ka-50 will be replaced by Ka-52 but even Rososboronexport officials underline the fact that Ka-50 meant to be a low cost attack helicopter and Ka-52 its operational complement. Similar ideas are used from Greek Army concerning the Ah-64D/AH-64A+ after all. Actually Rosoboronexport's Aerospace Systems Export Catalogue 2005 reports clearly (page 45) that Ka-50 can carry four Igla-V missiles. Maybe Igla-V have never been deployed till now but Ka-50 can carry it. We may deny it or not but Rosoboronexport knows better! If you have better or more updated sources you can announce them to us! It still is as far as I know(see above) but if you have more reliable/updated sources I think you can tell us where to look. Again I 'll say that Ka-52 plays the same role for Ka-50 as AH-64D Longbow Apache does for simple AH-64D or AH-64A+. The tricks can be implemented, this is military technology we are talking, features can be added and stuff can be upgraded several times in an asset's active service! AH-64A doesn't have the tricks for today's modern combat but it have been upgraded, same for B-52 or the few F-4 still in service. Same goes for other military equipment including the Ka-50, you just can't say... history will show! The main attack helicopter for Russian Army will be the Mi-28 with Ka-50/52 filling more specific demands(cooperation with special forces). Do you remember some time ago that you were claiming that Apache can't carry Stingers? It proved that, despite that the 800 US Army Apaches probably can't(your sources) the Japanese ones can and I have proved that with photos. As I am coming to a close, I wouldn't discourage people to READ AND EVALUATE all available info(its not that much after all). People should go over to more reliable sources than forums and personal opinions. You know, there are people in various forums saying that "Ka-50 airframe is of old design", still this opinion must be evaluated and be discarded/upheld accordingly.

Most articles (depending on the author and sources) has some useful info but may contain some non-accurate things since Ka-50 is still evolving, after a long pause, and Russians tend to keep many of their plans and prototypes secret for long time to outsiders. One just have to check many different sources and judge by himself of whether some things worth to be believed or not. GGTharos, you are not wrong about Chechnya War being the major source of operational info on Ka-50 but you can't judge Ka-50's equipment from Chechnya War only! Last large scale operations in Chechnya took place 10 years ago(1999-2000) and Chechnya Wars wasn't the type of conflict which demanded state-of-the-art equipment. Usually the equipment that is carried from single soldiers to helicopters and planes is decided after you have observed the enemy equipment and depending of the mission you 've undertaken. There is no reason, for example, to be on a rush to develop an RWR for Ka-50 to use in Chechnya, to send an EA-6 Prowler in Afghanistan today or to carry an Exocet while fighting Somali pirates! All these doesn't mean that the equipment doesn't exist or doesn't being developed. Still there are some very good sources online(such as military&defense press issues/books or sites) that are worth of reading!

... Flight Director should be disengaged too!

Exceptional work ZaltysZ! Looks like the S-13 is S-13OF afterall. Since ED states "Warhead 33 kg, explosive 7 kg + fragments" I have no reason to believe that there is done something by mistake. The number 33 may mean anything and of course can't translate to TNT mass unless a dev says so! The file is interesting to investigate further... wanna check S-8KOM and OFP2!

If S-13OF is modeled the in-game 3D-model is correct but the dimensions, weights and warhead(equivalent to 32.5kg of TNT which are stated in encyclopedia) aren't correct. S-13OF is HE/Frag rocket with 7kg explosive material and 450 fragments (25-35gr each). I haven't found anywhere that this rocket has any significant penetration capabilities as some are stating in the forums(may be have been misled if it was S-13T before patch). Still the blast shown in-game seems extraordinary big for a 7kg HE rocket. Any word from "ED officials" on the matter?