Stratos Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 I will love to see more weapon options for the Ka50, some night equipment would be great as well, but I think the module is considered as finished, so no more upgrades on it. Sadly. I don't understand anything in russian except Davai Davai!
Grand Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 the AT-9 is the Ataka, [...] and the Vikhr is technically an AT-16This.
Isegrim Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 ED has to make a KA-52 to stop this A-A Missile Discussions. I think that would be the best solution. :) "Blyat Naaaaa" - Izlom
Dudikoff Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) *Collective I stand corrected (was too lazy to open the manual to check where it was), but the point was that the controls have such an option which indicates that such an installation was probably planned. Since the Ka-50 is only in limited operational use and in limited numbers, perhaps they decided not to pursue the updates. But, IMHO, that's not the reason enough not to have the option of using them in the game. And I'd expect the work necessary for integration of these missiles is probably minimal (e.g. probably some software update to the WCS only) since the missile's seeker would do all the work (e.g. like on the Su-25). Edited August 5, 2015 by Dudikoff i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg. DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?). Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!
Cybermat47 Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Wikipedia isn't documentation. It can be a start, but it's no proof. It's also NOT what he asked for. How about the source that the Wikipedia article cited, then? http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/ka50-black-shark-helicopter/ [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Isegrim Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) Guys and ... Propably Girls This Discussion comes up now since 2008 more than once per Year. ED already stated that there will be no Significant changes to the KA-50 anymore (exept Sounds / bugfixes etc.) It simply doesnt matter the sources say the KA-50 has been equiped with R73. It will not happen to be available in DCS BS 2.0 ISE EDIT: Same for RWR :) (if somebut gets the idea to open a Thread about that) EDIT2: Ohhh ahm and for sure same for MWS:megalol: Edited August 5, 2015 by Isegrim "Blyat Naaaaa" - Izlom
GGTharos Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Indeed it doesn't matter one little bit, since all those sources have a common source: Advertising. The Ka-50 modeled in game is one that is or was in actual operation. ED got its information from the Army Aviation and Kamov, not 'sources' on the internet. It simply doesnt matter the sources say the KA-50 has been equiped with R73. 1 [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
CASoldier2014 Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Indeed it doesn't matter one little bit, since all those sources have a common source: Advertising. The Ka-50 modeled in game is one that is or was in actual operation. ED got its information from the Army Aviation and Kamov, not 'sources' on the internet. FINALLY! THANK YOU! How hard it is for people to understand that this is a very specific variant of the Ka-50 that is accurately represented in DCS. And it doesn't have A-A capabilities because the real one didn't aswell.. And it really doesn't matter now because this is what's left of the Ka-50 we're talking about: The one that's on the right is the #24 (the exact same one modelled in DCS). It's dead. They might be using those Ka-50s to experiment with new systems, but essentially the Ka-52 is the main aircraft and not the Ka-50. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
outlawal2 Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Here's hoping that ED is secretly developing the KA-52 to release once multi crew is perfected... (One can only hope) THAT would be a day one purchase for me! "Pride is a poor substitute for intelligence." RAMBO
CASoldier2014 Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Here's hoping that ED is secretly developing the KA-52 to release once multi crew is perfected... (One can only hope) THAT would be a day one purchase for me! I agree, but they should finish a lot of projects before this one. :D [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
xaoslaad Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 The one that's on the right is the #24 (the exact same one modelled in DCS). It's dead. They might be using those Ka-50s to experiment with new systems, but essentially the Ka-52 is the main aircraft and not the Ka-50. To be fair that strongly resembles my in-sim Ka-50 after I've had it out for a night of combat...
CASoldier2014 Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 To be fair that strongly resembles my in-sim Ka-50 after I've had it out for a night of combat... Haha! Stuff happens ;) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
CHRISXTR3M3 Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 ED has to make a KA-52 to stop this A-A Missile Discussions. I think that would be the best solution. :) Or the upgrade our module to the ka-50-2 which is a two seater version stacked forward and aft User Files for AV8-B, X55
CHRISXTR3M3 Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) To be fair that strongly resembles my in-sim Ka-50 after I've had it out for a night of combat... Mine too!.....if it were upside down with the pilot hanging out the window lifeless lol Edited August 5, 2015 by CHRISXTR3M3 User Files for AV8-B, X55
WinterH Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Or the upgrade our module to the ka-50-2 which is a two seater version stacked forward and aft That's a version never was. It was offered as a contender in Turkish ATAK project, which took quite long to conclude, needed to be reopened after first winner didn't quite get along as expected etc. In the end, winner was T-129 (well, rather A-129 at the time). Ka-50-2 would have been a joint venture between Kamov of Russia and IAI of Israel. It would have an Israeli made glass cockpit and avionics, and would utilize weapons of both Russian and Israeli origin (like Spike-ER missile). In the end, it didn't win the tender and Ka-50-2 did not proceed any further as far as I know. Wishlist: F-4E Block 53 +, MiG-27K, Su-17M3 or M4, AH-1F or W circa 80s or early 90s, J35 Draken, Kfir C7, Mirage III/V DCS-Dismounts Script
Dudikoff Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) FINALLY! THANK YOU! How hard it is for people to understand that this is a very specific variant of the Ka-50 that is accurately represented in DCS. And it doesn't have A-A capabilities because the real one didn't aswell.. How hard is it to understand that people know this, but would still like to have Igla's on it as it would expand on the module's possibilities? And it's not completely unrealistic because if the Ka-50 really entered service, it could very well have those integrated (which, again, presumably required only minor updates to the WCS). Edited August 5, 2015 by Dudikoff i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg. DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?). Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!
GGTharos Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 It did enter service and it did so without any AAMs, like so many other helicopters. And it's not completely unrealistic because if the Ka-50 really entered service, it would have those integrated (which, again, presumably required only minor updates to the WCS). [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Dudikoff Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) It did enter service and it did so without any AAMs, like so many other helicopters. I said *really* entered service. Dozen or so airframes in Russian Army doesn't really count as something serious (i.e. they won't get upgraded and would probably get withdrawn from service when a more advanced type enters service for real). Mi-28N was selected instead AFAIK. Edited August 5, 2015 by Dudikoff i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg. DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?). Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!
GGTharos Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Yeah, it *really* entered service. It participated in real military action, which I'm pretty sure counted as quite serious for all involved. There are only 20 B-2's around ... did they fail to *really* enter service? Are they 'nothing serious'? But back to helicopters. Guess what - US Army AH-64 ... tested with Stingers, tested with Sidewinders, too. It *really* entered service without any of that. So it is actually quite realistic for the Ka-50 to not have weapons that it did not have in *reality*. I said *really* entered service. Dozen or so airframes in Russian Army doesn't really count as something serious. Mi-28N was selected instead AFAIK. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Dudikoff Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) Yeah, it *really* entered service. It participated in real military action, which I'm pretty sure counted as quite serious for all involved. There are only 20 B-2's around ... did they fail to *really* enter service? Are they 'nothing serious'? But back to helicopters. Guess what - US Army AH-64 ... tested with Stingers, tested with Sidewinders, too. It *really* entered service without any of that. So it is actually quite realistic for the Ka-50 to not have weapons that it did not have in *reality*. Yes, let's keep it real by comparing the numbers of a billion dollar bomber with an assault helicopter. Do you think you're telling anybody something new here? US Apache's don't carry them as they don't operate where the Air Force is not providing the air cover and they're not exactly defenseless with their cannons. If the operational situation changed, they could probably be added as a field mod, just like the Igla's could probably be integrated on the Ka-50's in the field if the Russian Army deemed it necessary. I never said it would be realistic to have them; only that some people would appreciate them and it wouldn't be completely unrealistic (i.e. the Igla module is developed for helicopter usage, but they had no need for it on the limited service KA-50s so they never finished the integration; it even has a switch for those for god's sake). Let's say tomorrow there's an AH-1W module with Sidewinder missiles included. Wouldn't it be cool to have an Mi-28N on the opposing side? Sure, but we don't have that. We have Ka-50 only which was a dead end so the missiles will never be really integrated even if it's minor modification only. OK, never mind as long as it's realistic. But, wait, when did the AH-1W and Ka-50 actually fight? I suppose we can't have unrealistic campaigns neither.. So, my point is, I prefer alternative and balanced scenarios compared to fish in a barrel realistic ones and just think it would be nice to have those available on the Ka-50 as an option. In reality, the campaigns available in DCS World never happened, but I don't see that stopping people from playing them. Edited August 5, 2015 by Dudikoff i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg. DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?). Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!
159th_Falcon Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 But, wait, when did the AH-1W and Ka-50 actually fight? I suppose we can't have unrealistic campaigns neither.. Both fought in 2001.:book: As for this whole thread, please close it already. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] The keeper of all mathematical knowledge and the oracle of flight modeling.:)
Dudikoff Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) Both fought in 2001. On the opposing sides (it seems rather obvious from the context of realistic campaigns)? But, yes, the thread is pointless currently, but I can't resist bumping it in hope that ED might change their mind e.g. if Super Cobra is made by Belsimtek. Edited August 5, 2015 by Dudikoff i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg. DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?). Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!
CASoldier2014 Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 How hard is it to understand that people know this, but would still like to have Igla's on it as it would expand on the module's possibilities? And it's not completely unrealistic because if the Ka-50 really entered service, it could very well have those integrated (which, again, presumably required only minor updates to the WCS). Are you serious?! Too bad I'm not alowed to swear in here. THE KA-50 THAT'S IN THE GAME IS EXECTLY THE SAME ONE AS IN REAL LIFE AND IT DOESN'T HAVE AAMs!!! Maybe other Ka-50 variants have had them, but this variant didin't so neither the one that's in the sim. So stop living in these 'I'm sure that they would've' dreams and have a good day. By the way, the Ka-50 isn't even in proper service anymore, It's dead. Please close this thread.. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Dudikoff Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) Are you serious?! Too bad I'm not alowed to swear in here. THE KA-50 THAT'S IN THE GAME IS EXECTLY THE SAME ONE AS IN REAL LIFE AND IT DOESN'T HAVE AAMs!!! Yes, we all know this as it was mentioned ten times before you came on the scene. But, that's not the point here if you care to notice. MiG-21bis module came with Kh-66 missiles which it couldn't use in reality (AFAIK). That's potentially much more unrealistic than the (probably) considered/planned/whatever Igla option for the Ka-50, but I didn't see you shouting on that forum. Or at least threatening to swear. By the way, the Ka-50 isn't even in proper service anymore, It's dead. That's exactly my point, too (or more precisely, that it was always a stillborn). Edited August 5, 2015 by Dudikoff i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg. DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?). Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!
CASoldier2014 Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Yes, we all know this as it was mentioned ten times before you came on the scene. But, that's not the point here if you care to notice. MiG-21bis cam with Kh-66 missiles which it didn't use in reality. That's much more unrealistic than this (probably once) planned option for the Ka-50, but I didn't see you shouting on that forum. That's exactly my point, too. Okay, let's settle this. The DCS Ka-50 doesn't have this feature as the variant that it was developed from never did aswell. And I think that adding it to the current DCS Ka-50 would be unrealistic because it wouldn't represent the real aircraft. That's it. As for the Kh-66, I really don't know the backstory, so.. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Recommended Posts