No Radar warning, no radar guidance, no radar SAMs?

Hi all,

I'm planning to purchase this game pretty soon.

Some question:

There are no radar guided missiles in the KA50 - are there radar guided SAMs and can I avoid them somehow because I have no radar warning receiver?

What time period is covered with this sim?

Yes. And probably not, even if you are "lucky" enough to see it coming (and no chaff since there is no reason to spoof what you can't detect). Last question=Present (well maybe 2000 since there is no F-22 and there is still the F-117--but close present day).

You can load chaff in the payload screen. I tried it against a SM-2 missle and it seemed to work pretty good....unfortunately the ship had more SM-2's than I had chaff......

I tried tried once to load chaff but it just gave me less flares on both sides, no chaff. I'll try again.

You can call it "lack of realism" when the real Ka-50s in the Russian military are equipped with RWR. Seeing as they are not at this time, let's call it "realism."

If you find yourself tagged by a Radar-Guided SAM in the Helo then you're doing it all wrong - that's why there are Toad-Drivers :gun_sniper:

 

.......back to the drawing board for a refresher on adequate Mission Planning, alternatively a request for transfer to the Quartermaster's office for Supply-Truck drivers' duties :P

So change DCS campaign to anti-insurgency war and do not send us in completely defenseless gunship against NATO air defense! It means DCS campaign is unrealistic or created for virtual kamikaze pilots!

Black Shark includes two campaigns: one COIN and one conventional. If you find the conventional one unrealistic, just don't fly it and allow the rest of us to enjoy a realistic representation of the the Ka-50 as deployed by the Russian military. The war in Georgia was not a "low threat" environment for the Russian air force and yet they used helicopters without RWR equipment. Please forward your complaints about the defenseless Ka-50 to the Russian MoD. ED simply modeled the helicopter as it exists in reality. Edited January 19, 2009 by EvilBivol-1

Really? If so all real gunship pilots except Ka-50 drivers should do all it wrong because all other gunships in the World have RWR , buddy! :megalol:

 

Right..............

 

I do apologise, but I am going to have to insist that I bow out of this conversation - Your Ignorance is beginning to wear me down.....sigh.....just have not the patience that I once had ;)

Really...? :disgust:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=537276&postcount=3

Russia has many. Some have RWR and some do not. That one in the photo, flying combat operations in Georgia - in a real conventional war with real radar-guided SAM systems shooting back did not have a RWR.

 

And neither does the Ka-50.

 

Hello, reality.

Hello, DCS.

Edited January 19, 2009 by EvilBivol-1

In fact Ka-50 with no anti-radar protection at all would be easily destroyed fighting against NATO forces as in DCS campaign.

 

How do you imagine such military operation and what role do you assign to helicopter? I suppose Ka-50 is designed for CAS. It means that standard mission for Ka-50 is not going deep into enemy territory, not SEAD and not even ground attack, because there are other aircrafts which can do these missions better. Air space should be cleaned by fighters, long range SAM killed by SEAD aircrafts and ground attacks (like convoys and fortifications) carried by Sturmoviks. Helicopters should be sticking near their own force providing air support. The main advantage of helicopter over ground attack jet is that helicopter can loiter in the area longer and can work with targets which are hard to spot and hard to kill for fast moving jets. The main threat for helicopters are MANPADS and short range SAMs. As other said, if you have been attacked by long range radar SAM, then you are where you are not supposed to be.

Edited January 19, 2009 by ZaltysZ

And in the real World...:(

 

(Translate by the royfc.com)

 

OAO Arsen'ev Progress Aviation Company (AAK Progress) is concluding production of Ka-50 "Black Shark" combat helicopters, Interfax reports referring to the enterprise's general director, Yuriy Denisenko.

 

"There are two Ka-50 helicopters presently at the enterprise that already have completed the flight test cycle and will be transferred to the defense ministry in 2009. There are no new orders for Ka-50 delivery and now only the Ka-52 will be manufactured," he said.

 

According to the general director, in 2008 three "Black Sharks" were assembled at the enterprise, one of which they transferred to the 344th Center of Combat Usage and Cross-Training of Army Aviation Flight Personnel.

 

"These three aircraft were finished from the production reserve for the Ka-50 at the plant, which earlier had consisted of 10 aircraft, Denisenko recalled. According to him, "everything that it is possible to use technically from the Ka-50 manufacturing reserve in the production of the Ka-52 will be used without fail."

 

The general director also expressed hope that the number of orders for production of Ka-52 helicopters will only increase over time.

 

"I hope that in a year or two we will receive real contracts for Ka-52 delivery," he said. Source: 05.01.09, Lenta.RU

Russia has many. Some have RWR and some do not. That one in the photo, flying combat operations in Georgia - in a real conventional war with real radar-guided SAM systems shooting back did not have a RWR.

 

And neither does the Ka-50.

 

Hello, reality.

Hello, DCS.

 

I would have to say this pretty much sums it up.

Can't argue with the facts unless you don't mind being wrong all the time. :P

 

Out

You are not right. In fact gunships such Apache, Tiger, Mi-24, Mi-28, Ka-50 were designed mainly to fight behind enemy lines in mind! That is why they should have stron ECM suite.

 

If Mi-24 and Ka-50 were designed from the beginning with mind that they will have to fight behind enemy lines and ECM suit will be a must for them, then why base models don't have nor RWR, nor any strong ECM?

Edited January 19, 2009 by ZaltysZ

So only one Mi-24 with removed RWR suite is not any proof to me.

Okay, how many photos is proof? How about 10?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10 (export, for comparison, including one out of four with RWR)

 

As we can see there are RWR equipped gunships in Russia!

As we can see, not necessarily.

because modernized Russian Mi-24PN choppers were also used in Georgia

Please, proof. Edited January 19, 2009 by EvilBivol-1

How about we do it this way (because arguing about how many Mi-24 have RWR systems is pointless as we are talking about the Ka-50)...

 

Can you find one single evidence of an RWR system mounted on any KA-50 built (either production or prototype). 1 image should be enough. No need for 200+ images that wouldn't give any information about the Ka-50.

 

You seem to be quite sure of what you are saying, so, surly, you must have some information about the Ka-50 the developers do not have in hand. I'm sure they would be interested to see those picture or documents you have.

and?

The L370 is not a RWR.

Rokosowsky, please stop telling others that they're wrong without at least providing some evidence for your "facts."

 

There is no public record of any RWR or radar jamming devices tested on any Ka-50. Save yourself the trouble - the photos you refer to will only demonstrate the testing of MAK-UFM missile plume detectors and DIRCM jamming turrets, nothing more.

 

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=93596

Edited January 20, 2009 by EvilBivol-1

Rokosowsky, isn't it time for you stop telling others that they're wrong?

 

According to all public information, no RWR or radar jamming devices were tested on any Ka-50. The photos you refer to will demonstrate the testing of MAK-UFM and DIRCM IR jamming turrents, nothing more.

 

Don't interrupt this important lesson. I'm sure he know more than Kamov...

Yes! I have such images from Polish military monthly "Nowa Technika Wojskowa" December, 2004. In short article by Piotr Butovsky there is brief description of L370 Vitebsk suite and several photos of Ka-50 carrying its elements. Unfortunately I do not have working scanner at this time.

 

Here you are link to this article at Jane's:

 

http://www.faqs.org/abstracts/Military-and-naval-science/Russian-modernized-tactical-UAV-system-enter-acceptance-testing.html

 

 

"L370 Vitebsk helicopter self-protection system, developed by the NII Ekran institute of Samara, Russia, was flight-tested on board a Kamov Ka-50 'Havoc' attack helicopter during the second half of 2004. The system, known as Kotchuga in its export derivative, was designed to protect combat and assault helicopters against anti-aircraft missile systems and fighter aircraft and warns the crew when a threat is detected, activating countermeasures."

 

I wonder why they call it a Ka-50 "havoc"?

If you know them well as I do you should notice there was ready place in this Ka-50 airframe awaiting for Pastel and L370-5 devices. On the other side at least Pastel is for several years in Rosoboronexport offer so it could be mounted on that Ka-50 easily. Maybe entire Vitebsk system was tested on that Ka-50 but secretly. Unfortunately it was not deployed operationally as I noted with unknown reasons...but that's mean Ka-50 are ready to get it and flight-tested it.

Yes, maybe somebody, somewhere, some time in the future will secretly install a RWR on a Ka-50. You can then enjoy that simulation.

 

We'll stick to reality, where the Ka-50, like most other Russian combat helicopters including the Mi-24, does not have a RWR and Russian helicopter pilots - unfortunately - go to war without this valuable equipment.

"L370 Vitebsk helicopter self-protection system, developed by the NII Ekran institute of Samara, Russia, was flight-tested on board a Kamov Ka-50 'Havoc' attack helicopter during the second half of 2004. The system, known as Kotchuga in its export derivative, was designed to protect combat and assault helicopters against anti-aircraft missile systems and fighter aircraft and warns the crew when a threat is detected, activating countermeasures."

Aside from the "Havoc" mistake, the above is technically correct. As tested on the Ka-50, the optical components were designed to detect and jam missile threats. This did not include any radar detection/jamming equipment. Edited January 20, 2009 by EvilBivol-1

In my final post on the matter (until it pops up again), I want to apologize to the rest of the forum for turning this into a chat session.

 

Sorry and I'm out of this one.

In my final post on the matter (until it pops up again), I want to apologize to the rest of the forum for turning this into a chat session.

 

Sorry and I'm out of this one.

 

Hehe, it's interesting chat to me. RK may be blunt, but he's got some points.