KA-50 Air To Air Capabilities?

I am wondering DCS: Black Shark what the air to air capabilities are of the KA-50

I know of the KA-50 being able to use the Vympel R-73 and I read of it being able to possibly use the 9K38 Ilga.

What is actually modeling into DCS and how should I go about engaging other air targets?

Also I am wondering if the cannon is capable of engaging air targets?

Im no expert, but i know the black shark is not an A2A platform, that said... it is possible to lock up and get missile kills on enemy helos with the shckval , and the same with cannons, tho it seems if you get close enough for the cannon the enemy is already peppering you with cannon fire.(this is all based on in game action only of course) Let the fast movers take care of the skies and we just move mud :)

Officially R-73 and Igla can't be deployed on Ka-50. Officially.

To engage aircrafts you have only Vikhrs and cannon.

I am wondering DCS: Black Shark what the air to air capabilities are of the KA-50

 

I know of the KA-50 being able to use the Vympel R-73 and I read of it being able to possibly use the 9K38 Ilga.

 

What is actually modeling into DCS and how should I go about engaging other air targets?

 

Also I am wondering if the cannon is capable of engaging air targets?

Man on page 3 there is similar thread. :doh: There are older too.

Most of the Shark's A2A capabilities envolve turning around and running away.:music_whistling:

There is, however, a A2A switch that sets the Vikhr warheard to detonate early.

But that is only in the unlikely event you happen to get the drop on another helo or a low, slow flying aircraft.:thumbup:

To save 3+ pages the answers isssss:

Helicopters don't use A2A missiles in real life except for a few special exemptions to the rule.

There are plenty of tests, trials and mock ups of various helicopters with A2A misslies (KA-50 included) but they've never gone past that stage.

To save 3+ pages the answers isssss:

:megalol:

ALT + F4 is AA mode, with Iglas.

Saving that there's the search function lol

I'm finding it increasingly hard not to turn to the dark side. The search button people, press search for as much vympels you can possibly read about in one lifetime :doh: :D

A2A

Ka-50 (like Mi-24) could be a good platform for air policing against slow mover aircraft. Airspeed, patrolling time with external tanks, cannon and Iglas: with AWACS control it's cheaper and more effective than send the A2A guys with their F-15s/16s/18s etc. During a sport etc. event, fighters and combat helos can work together to protect a dedicated airspace.

PS: one 30 mm round is a bit overkill for a Cessna 172... :D

Ka-50 (like Mi-24) could be a good platform for air policing against slow mover aircraft. [...] cheaper and more effective than send the A2A guys with their F-15s/16s/18s etc.

Sorry for a nitpick, but something's wrong up there... :P

Anyway, I think the flaw in the argument is that it would first of all not be more effective, since the Ka-50, Mi-24 and similar aircraft are designed ground-up for an entirely other role, whereas fighter aircraft are specifically designed for the role of controlling the airspace.

If being cheaper is the objective, I'd say a radar-equipped cessna or YAK-52 equipped with Stinger/Igla pylons is the way to go. :)

Ka-50 (like Mi-24) could be a good platform for air policing against slow mover aircraft. Airspeed, patrolling time with external tanks, cannon and Iglas: with AWACS control it's cheaper and more effective than send the A2A guys with their F-15s/16s/18s etc. During a sport etc. event, fighters and combat helos can work together to protect a dedicated airspace.

 

PS: one 30 mm round is a bit overkill for a Cessna 172... :D

:megalol::megalol:

I'm finding it increasingly hard not to turn to the dark side. The search button people, press search for as much vympels you can possibly read about in one lifetime :doh: :D

:megalol:

You made a gray day is now in rainbow colours :D

... whereas fighter aircraft are specifically designed for the role of controlling the airspace...

That's correct, Sir, but I mentioned air policing, NOT 24/7 air defence.

Nowadays a few-seater slow mover craft ( with some home-made explosives) can either be a real threat for an industrial complex or a government building or so. Of course, there aren't a pile of crazy PPL-guys in the air to take revenge on the evil prime minister, so the very most of the "unidentified" planes are getting lost or having radio/XPNDR failure and so on. For those guys a similar slow mover "interceptor" can be a better aid than an Eagle formation whose guys usually aren't well-trained against slow movers; by the way, the first thing is the visual identification which is easier from a helo or a small plane.

I didn't talk about regular air defence helo squadrons: it is a possibility if a situation/event/actual threat etc. requires flexibility in air defence, and it's more reasonable and easier to arm a mil helo (Gazelle/Ka-50/Mi-24 [built-in gun A2A mode] etc.) with A2A stuff if necessary than make some IK€@ Yak-52 AD variant.

I thought that, a Tucano with Stingers. Practical and exciting (like the Skoda adverts).

AA cannon would be a no-no though in a city?

Agreed with Mike there - a Tucano would be the thing you want there, or indeed any trainer aircraft beyond the basic introductory ones used by air forces.

And VS461, I'd like to get a sourcing on how interceptor pilots are not "well-trained" against slow movers. It seems counter-intuitive seeing as how they are often tasked to intercept helicopters who are the very definition of the ultimate slow-mover. You need a Storch or AN-2 to be slower than that. :P

As for cost, sure, in an emergency an impromptu solution would probably be it. But do remenber that in the case of the Ka50 you're burning fuel in two turbines to reach velocities that will make it possible but not necessarily easy to intercept a suspicious Cessna. That is NOT cheap in any way.

On the other hand, a Tucano as well as many other trainer-oriented aircraft would be able to fullfill that role out-of-the-box - and those aircraft are already in the inventories of the air forces that would need them. (Several air forces even use these aircraft as the main component, since "real" aircraft are too expensive while the trainers at least give them the capability to patrol the airspace.)

Heh you say the Ka-50 is not cheap to fly, fuel wise... I can only wonder how that compares to an F-15. F-15 takes off, flies 2 hours, lands... $30,000? Ka-50 takes off, flies 2 hours, lands... $5,000?

Compare it to an aircraft like the Tucano next. ;)

Or a Robinson, for that matter.

Also, if you want to give proper number comparisons I don't think personal guesstimates qualify, as well as take into consideration the facts that the F-15 will be able to cover a much greater distance and has BVR detection capabilities whereas the Ka-50 is eyeball only.

To have the same detection probability and area coverage with Ka-50's as you had with that F-15, how many Ka-50's do you have to send up?

EDIT: Oh, and how much in the way of payload are you able to bring in a Ka-50 that you want to have staying up for two hours? I suspect it might be possible to stay up that long if you carry the full complement of four droptanks, but I haven't actually tested that myself. I do know a one hour flight with a combat load and no external tanks does leave you with very small margins.

The bottom line is: the Ka-50 is designed for something entirely different than what is being proposed for it here. It's a mudmover built for the CAS and Anti-Tank role, with it's practical applications so far having been solely counter-insurgency against opposition that does not possess an air force. There ARE however many aircraft well adapted for the role being proposed, aircraft that vary in price from barely above a private two-prop to fully fledged interceptors.

GA aircraft are generally intercepted using an helicopter already anyway. Helo comes flying side by side and a sniper use the side door to blow the engine or the pilot's head (your choice :-) ).

I have read an article about a mirage 2000 intercepting GA aircraft. Mirage's pilot was saying that he doesn't need to open fire on the aircraft. He just need to cut the light airplane's path with post combustion, and the blast will be enough to blow the plane into pieces.

Bit like the method used by some RAF pilots in the war to "shoot" down V1 rockets - they noticed they could upset the gyros in the V1 if they just flew up next to it and nudged it. :D

OT: I think if you were good, you could do similar with the AI Blackhawks lol

TBH, I want a littlebird. That thing is just awesome.

Its time this repetitive discussion grows up. I think we should all agree on the following.

Facts:

- There is footage showing a Ka-50 flying with an inert R-73

- No live footage of a Ka-50 firing this weapon has been seen (by me)

- The official documents claim it has the ability to carry the Igla (otherwise unconfirmed)

- The Ka-50 cockpit has a second A2A mode switch on the joystick itself (modelled by ED but inactive for lack of published references).

- Almost all types of attack helicopters are built to carry AAMs

- The Oh-58 regularly sports ATA in service, the Mi-24 was modified and put into limited service as a Cessna interceptor (but the R-60 wasn't satisfactory)

- Many smaller countries are much keener to have AA abilities on their helicopters and it makes sense to have a self-defense/opportunistic snapshot AAM capability for at least one aircraft in a group of helicopters under a variety of combat conditions - although helicopters aren't ideal platforms for air combat.

TBH, I want a littlebird. That thing is just awesome.

+1 Give me an MD500 anyday, the best Heli ever.

Aye, it's a shame the best "sim" of it is Flashpoint...

A random thought crossed my mind this morning:

- If you are in a typical Black Shark mission, CAS, or similar, but you know for sure you're going to fly near enemy helicopters, what would you prefer as ordnance, 2 R-73, or 12 Vikhr?

Even in an escort mission, where you probably will find the biggest threat against the escorted elements is another attack helicopter, would you sacrifice all your long range AG firepower, just to carry 2 AA missiles, wich can be spoofed with flares? Would you risk loosing an encounter with enemy armor?

The only scenario in wich those missiles are more useful than a Vikhr, is hunting slow moving, low fliying planes. And that work is done by other planes, not by sitting ducks.