Missile warning system

luckyhendrix · October 30, 2015

Training Training is easy to say, then show me how to take out the 8 Tunguskas in this area.

Are you trolling ? :o

Sent from my XT1072 using Tapatalk

Avimimus · October 30, 2015

I really don't see much of a need for the RWR in the Shark. You have your ABRIS which incorporates valuable intelligence. It will show you enemy Air Defense positions, as well as a threat overlay. If you use the ABRIS you can most certainly plan a route that will keep you out of range of the SAM/AAA. In my opinion it is 1000% better than having RWR. To my knowledge no other aircraft(in DCS World) has that capability to give you the EXACT location of enemy air defenses, radar emitting or not.

Reaper6

It is really those pesky stingers!

It makes sense to use Vihkrs to engage targets at maximum range (thus keeping the enemy formation in front of you)... and if you need to make a rocket pass - to expend all of your flares during the pass.

So, instead of persisting you basically get one good pass and a bit of sniping. Which is fine unless you are on an escort mission (or your ingress takes you over an ambush point). IRL, a missile warning system is desperately needed by pilots facing MANPADs.

Yes, the Soviets didn't have them in Afghanistan ...but I think that proves the point!

Reaper6 · October 30, 2015

It is really those pesky stingers!

It makes sense to use Vihkrs to engage targets at maximum range (thus keeping the enemy formation in front of you)... and if you need to make a rocket pass - to expend all of your flares during the pass.

So, instead of persisting you basically get one good pass and a bit of sniping. Which is fine unless you are on an escort mission (or your ingress takes you over an ambush point). IRL, a missile warning system is desperately needed by pilots facing MANPADs.

Yes, the Soviets didn't have them in Afghanistan ...but I think that proves the point!

Stingers are Heat seekers, so I am not sure I understand what you are saying? They wouldn't show up on a RWR regardless.

Reaper6

FSKRipper · October 30, 2015

Training Training is easy to say, then show me how to take out the 8 Tunguskas in this area.

Not to mention command guided missiles and laser guided missiles. None of them would show up on a western RWR (like in an Apache of that time). The Black Shark with his laser warning system makes up for at least one threat :music_whistling:

As mentioned before, it's the mission that drives you crazy. Even a modern attack helicopter would never be so stupid to enter an area with half a dozen Tunguskas and SAM coverage in it without proper support from SEAD planes.

Edited October 30, 2015 by FSKRipper

Jafferson · October 30, 2015

Guidance is performed by the target tracking radar, it constantly relays target range, elevation and bearing to the fire-control computer, and on the basis of this data the computer generates the laying commands for the guns or the trajectory corrections for the missiles.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K22_Tunguska

Edited October 30, 2015 by Jafferson

Cik · October 30, 2015

Training Training is easy to say, then show me how to take out the 8 Tunguskas in this area.

cruise missile

strategic missile

artillery barrage

SEAD flight (squadron)

none of these include a ka50 for good reason. the reason is "don't try to jam something that is hard-countered by something else into it and expect to win"

you may as well ask why you aren't able to penetrate a tank with a popgun. if you think the ka50 is supposed to be able to clear that area you are a fool, and in real life you would simply never EVER send it into that environment and rely on strategic missiles instead. pretty much NOTHING in sim, let alone a rather vulnerable helicopter can deal with 8 tunguskas. the mission is a crock. 8 tunguskas is something you task like half a DEDICATED SEAD SQUADRON with for goodness' sake.

domini99 · October 30, 2015

The only real issue is, that the average F15 in Multiplayer operates at an altitude of 10 feet above ground level...

Rogue Trooper · October 31, 2015

To the poster:

Flying the KA-50 is about expanding your mind to cope with the close proximity of the earth, utilizing all the natural and man made obstacles to mask your presence whilst trying to prosecute the enemy.

Achieving this takes time and dedication.

For me, this is the most joyous part of using a high workload intimate precision tool like the KA-50.

Like a great white shark you hide in the shadows like some filthy little rat and hit your prey when least expected... this is how sharks do it.

The Shark does not understand Machismo... it has no meaning.

The KA-50 in any form, requires you to be cautious and use your eyes. Be patient about how you progress into the battlefield to kill your prey. If you are observant enough and low enough all ground radar can be hit before they even detect you.

An RWR should be something that you should not need if the job is done right, but alas we are all human.

On the subject of the RWR:

I too would dearly like an RWR to be installed.

It would not change the way I fly, but would simply help me to do my job, especially when I am slack.

It would warn me of any radar guided threats scanning the area and dramatically increase my survivability… this would have been a reality if the KA-50 became operational.

Also, and more importantly, it would alert me to the result of any thorough going b*st*rd in a jet "eye balling" the ground for low flying air targets. In this case the RWR would give me enough warning to increase my chances of survivability given the Altitude and location in which I like to operate.

I know that ED chose to model a particular airframe without RWR and that is a clear and valid statement.

However it would be nice if ED could also model one with the RWR and if there is an unacceptable loss to the current KA-50s capability, then both versions could be available at cost.

I also understand that whilst there are those that say “IRL the shark never made it to production”.

I say to them “IVL the 6 bladed warrior is a reality, It is functional and operational within this Virtual battle field of DCS”. It should progress, as it did IRL, to its conclusion (restricted to IRL).

There is no 6 bladed pilot on this forum that would not cherish and love such an asset in his/her virtual pit. If it was to be mounted to the rear left of the cockpit with duct tape and difficult to translate to real flight bearings they would still salivate when looking at it over their left shoulder.

In my dreams we get an RWR.

Edited October 31, 2015 by Rogue Trooper

Isegrim · October 31, 2015

Training Training is easy to say, then show me how to take out the 8 Tunguskas in this area.

I Wont say it cant be done, but it will take a while. And the fact that this mission is older than the feature of movement of the Ground units when being attacked which brings them sometimes in areas where you simply cant see them(Trees/Buildings), makes this mission currently a Bad idea for KA-50 Beginners.

Also we are running a Modified Version of this mission with 4 Tunguskas at =STP= Servers.

But i have another Mission here for you. Should be also a challange:music_whistling: but the Targets are placed a little little less unfair.:D

=STP=_Isegrims_Summer_Heat_1.8.9.7_CA!1.5OB.miz

LFCChameleon_Silk · October 31, 2015

8 of em that's a piece of cake.

more then enough firepower to do that, unless I'm missing something I never feared radar SAM in the Ka50, just stay really low. earlier in the discussion it was talked about lack of RWR and what model they decided to actually go for, we have the prototype Ka50 as in the first ones before the N and Sh variants but what that also means is we have the highest performance Ka50 that was made, ya it might not have an RWR but it has more agility then later models and more agility the the Ka-52.

Edited October 31, 2015 by =LFC=Chameleon_Silk

Isegrim · October 31, 2015

8 of em that's a piece of cake.

more then enough firepower to do that, unless I'm missing something I never feared radar SAM in the Ka50, just stay really low. earlier in the discussion it was talked about lack of RWR and what model they decided to actually go for, we have the prototype Ka50 as in the first ones before the N and Sh variants but what that also means is we have the highest performance Ka50 that was made, ya it might not have an RWR but it has more agility then later models and more agility the the Ka-52.

Sure the KA-50 has enough firepower, on open Areas this is not a Challenge.

The Problem is they are placed very Bad inside Dragons Training mission. (Inside trees)

Edited August 28, 2016 by Isegrim

FSKRipper · October 31, 2015

Guidance is performed by the target tracking radar, it constantly relays target range, elevation and bearing to the fire-control computer, and on the basis of this data the computer generates the laying commands for the guns or the trajectory corrections for the missiles.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K22_Tunguska

It was an example. As stated in your article the missile can also be guided without continous illumination. Another example is the Roland in it's optical guidance mode. You won't even see it coming... The take home message I wanted to give is that no matter what Helo you fly, you will always lack some defensive capabilities.

BTW the link from my first post was not meant for Black Shark Training exclusively...

See http://www.flightsimbooks.com/gunship/

Fri13 · October 31, 2015

RWR does not give range, only direction, as has already been mentioned. Also, RWR does not include launch detection, it can only differentiate between radar frequencies, so it can typically tell if the threat radar is a tracking radar or just a search radar.

Actually SPO-15 will give you the range. It is the radar power strength that will inform you the estimated distances and knowing that even the radar type.

It requires learning to read it but it is very powerful, while only to primary threat.

So if you know possible aircrafts in the air, you can estimate the ranges.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=331701&postcount=10

The limitation really is that You are seeing only primary threat, secondary is shown the directions and you need to visualize the area from that all. Banking your aircraft to filter altitudes and even distances exactly etc.

It takes flying skills to work with SPO. But once you get the SPO-15 way of working, it is a second nature and gives far more valuable information to operate in battlefield at fast situations.

${1}

Fri13 · October 31, 2015

It was an example. As stated in your article the missile can also be guided without continous illumination. Another example is the Roland in it's optical guidance mode. You won't even see it coming... The take home message I wanted to give is that no matter what Helo you fly, you will always lack some defensive capabilities.

BTW the link from my first post was not meant for Black Shark Training exclusively...

See http://www.flightsimbooks.com/gunship/

And almost all Soviet/Russian SAM systems are capable to be optically guided.... You don't see the radar coming until in the terminal phase radar is locked on you and it is just couple seconds(not even few) that missile explodes at your face.

The RWR is useless in helicopter as its distances are so close to threats that it will just go boom.

ZSU-23-4 and ZU-23-2 are dangerous ones as both can be, or are only used with optical aiming. And ZSU-23-4 is badly done in DCS as the vehicle emmits the radar all the time and to all directions, while the radar is only very narrow beam and used for ranging when threat is at further distances. So RWR wouldn't pick up anything before it is already too late when the shells are already flying at your direction. And the spread that comes with such a cannons isn't really easy to avoid.

With SAM like Tunguska it is that cannons use radar but missiles are guided optically so you don't see missile coming either without MWS.

Fri13 · October 31, 2015

No its not similar to every other attack helicopter.
Its similar to civilian aircrafts, who are not prepered for a threat.
And today even some civilian airplains have a radar warning reciver.
So dont tel me every other attack chopper flying without one...

He seems to mean that the tactics are the same. Even with all the latest toys, modern attack helicopter best and often only way to survive is the NOE flight and then sneak around and do pop-up scouting, strafe behind cover or concealment and spend just a dozen second visible and then get back.

The problem is that many DCS pilot don't do that, and CANT do it as DCS doesn't support it at all.

A laser distance metering system doesn't penetrate trees or bushes and gets easily false echoes so ranging is estimation, what means that laser guided ammunition or distance metering doesn't work if there is something between.

NOT A CASE IN DCS!!!

A laser metering or guidance goes trough the trees and bushes so aircraft behind tree line or forest will get hit by AA. And ground unit gets hit by CAS aircraft as it doesn't either have places to hide!

Many missile has proximity or impact fuzes, that would trigger them go off just by going trough a tree or bush. But this isn't a case in DCS!

Many ATGM missiles (basically all except Vikhr and Ataka-V) has a copper cable they are releasing after them to be used receive guidance command, and that is very fragile and thin cable that snaps off with slight pulls if the cable catch to an tree or bush and then the missile is lost.

NOT THE CASE IN DCS!!!

RADAR doesn't get reflected and blocked by trees, bushes and so on, instead you can just rotate your radar inside forest and see everything. Or be targeted by SEAD.

Just rendering everything totally wrong.

The whole terrain in DCS makes everything in DCS unrealistic and far too easy or impossible (negative way)

As there are only two kind cover and concealments: Ground and some of the buildings.

So you need to get a building or ground between you and the target. But if you don't, you are playing in the billiard pool and there is nothing you can do!

In DCS we can't use correct attack tactics with helicopters or CAS aircrafts, and AA systems can't do that either or isn't required to do so. And ground units doesn't have a cover they should have, that would make a hell for any CAS pilot compared to what they are now.

Reason to this is, that if you compare DCS in its history, it is still played like it would be from 90's as Flanker or Flanker 2.0 was.

${1}

It is designed for fighters, and only give a partially working ground combat support.

And it doesn't help that AI cheats, there is no simulation for spotting or moral or reaction times.

What causes situation that when we fly our attack helicopter and pop-up behind the terrain to scout, any ground unit spots and engage us in seconds or two if at the detection range that was programmed to the unit.

There should be simulation to crews in vehicles, spotting capabilities and moral. Just so we can actually ambush targets, sneek close and cause panic with suppressive fire so we can work as it should be possible.

It takes a lot away from the simulation when we can't use correct tactics, we are not required to do so and many player even abuses those clearly just in the sake of fun.

I would take down 8 Tunguska in the positions if the DCS would support correct simulation of the ground level and terrain.

We don't even have the amount of trees and bushes to offer concealment for either side at ground or up in the air.

Se can spot ground units much further than we should, they can't hide their thermal traces and build complex SAM ambush zones where you can't fly as you don't see anything with anything.....

Make the terrain work as should, upgrading the current map and add with autogeneration lots of trees and bushes to the terrain, every tree blocking lasers, radar and thermal traces and we can start talking what KA-50 can do and can't do. add the moral and other crew simulation and there is even more fun to fly and command ground troops.

Jafferson · October 31, 2015

cruise missile
strategic missile
artillery barrage
SEAD flight (squadron)

none of these include a ka50 for good reason. the reason is "don't try to jam something that is hard-countered by something else into it and expect to win"

you may as well ask why you aren't able to penetrate a tank with a popgun. if you think the ka50 is supposed to be able to clear that area you are a fool, and in real life you would simply never EVER send it into that environment and rely on strategic missiles instead. pretty much NOTHING in sim, let alone a rather vulnerable helicopter can deal with 8 tunguskas. the mission is a crock. 8 tunguskas is something you task like half a DEDICATED SEAD SQUADRON with for goodness' sake.

So you tell me it's not possible and it's foolish to fly against a such rich environment because they never do this in real life. Sorry to say that but DCS world is not real life, its DCS with all his bugs and lags.... Reality is, KA50's flying every day at mp servers in DCS world against this kind of threat. So you call us all fools...

This mission was only a exampel!

Raptor9 · October 31, 2015

Jafferson, most of the posters in this thread have been bringing up discussion points to clarify the role the Ka-50 (and attack helicopters in general) play on, or over, the battlefield. You brought up your frustrations with the lack of defensive systems, and we have provided suggestions and several references in an effort to help you.

I don't understand why you are taking all this so personally. DCS is a game. It contains a lot of high-fidelity simulation of real-world equipment, but it is still a computer software meant for entertainment. Players will play how they want, make missions how they want, throw P-51's against Su-27's over the Black Sea because they think it will be challenging and fun. Does that mean that everything in DCS will be true to real life, no matter the claims of technical accuracy? No...this is a fact of it all.

Would I personally like more defensive systems in the Ka-50 in DCS? Yes, absolutely. Do I need them to go out and be effective on MP missions, to include Tunguskas? No. Am I personally successful on every MP mission I enter. Absolutely no! ;) But am I having fun when I play DCS? Absolutely yes! And that is enough for me :)

Jafferson · October 31, 2015

Jafferson, most of the posters in this thread have been bringing up discussion points to clarify the role the Ka-50 (and attack helicopters in general) play on, or over, the battlefield. You brought up your frustrations with the lack of defensive systems, and we have provided suggestions and several references in an effort to help you.

I don't understand why you are taking all this so personally. DCS is a game. It contains a lot of high-fidelity simulation of real-world equipment, but it is still a computer software meant for entertainment. Players will play how they want, make missions how they want, throw P-51's against Su-27's over the Black Sea because they think it will be challenging and fun. Does that mean that everything in DCS will be true to real life, no matter the claims of technical accuracy? No...this is a fact of it all.

Would I personally like more defensive systems in the Ka-50 in DCS? Yes, absolutely. Do I need them to go out and be effective on MP missions, to include Tunguskas? No. Am I personally successful on every MP mission I enter. Absolutely no! ;) But am I having fun when I play DCS? Absolutely yes! And that is enough for me :)

Thanks for the reply i have the same opinion, DCS is a software and can never be 100% realistic and yes i have fun with dcs too. I realy love realistic games like this and i will buy the new campaign, i dont hate the blackshark. But in my opinion the lack of Missile warning can be a total fun killer and its overdone.

Avimimus · October 31, 2015

Stingers are Heat seekers, so I am not sure I understand what you are saying? They wouldn't show up on a RWR regardless.

Reaper6

Sorry, I was thinking about the L-136 Mak IR warning system (which would hopefully spot a stinger launch and cue the pilot to release countermeasures).

The thread title said MWS not RWR ...hence my confusion. An IR or UV MWS is much more valuable than an RWR for a combat helicopter.

Reaper6 · October 31, 2015

Sorry, I was thinking about the L-136 Mak IR warning system (which would hopefully spot a stinger launch and cue the pilot to release countermeasures).

The thread title said MWS not RWR ...hence my confusion. An IR or UV MWS is much more valuable than an RWR for a combat helicopter.

Yeah I was a little confused where the thread was going myself. But here is the supposed system that the Shark would use. It is able to detect IR missles as far as I know. And although this system would be nice, I doubt ED has any plans of ever putting this in game.

http://www.rg.ru/pril/article/40/03/99/zashita.jpg

Reaper6

Fri13 · October 31, 2015

Yeah I was a little confused where the thread was going myself. But here is the supposed system that the Shark would use. It is able to detect IR missles as far as I know. And although this system would be nice, I doubt ED has any plans of ever putting this in game.

http://www.rg.ru/pril/article/40/03/99/zashita.jpg

Reaper6

THAT is the thing I would demand to be implemented!

RWR not so much, while it would be nice for specific cannons, but able automatically launch flares would be like a dream.

And that system even burns the IR seeker....

FSKRipper · October 31, 2015

THAT is the thing I would demand to be implemented!
RWR not so much, while it would be nice for specific cannons, but able automatically launch flares would be like a dream.

And that system even burns the IR seeker....

And it will be for sure not implemented in our Black Shark. These helicopters are a nice test platform and we have one. They were never build in such numbers to justify expensive upgrade programs.

If some day we will see a DCS:Mi28 or a DCS-AH64D we can expect a lot more sophisticated defense systems but at this point...

We all know that this is not 100% realism but this would be the situation of a 80's Shark pilot thrown into a high risk combat area. Learn to adapt or fly another module/mission :music_whistling:

Remember, the missions in which you encountered such Problems are not historical missions, they were made to challenge your skills.

Edited October 31, 2015 by FSKRipper

Avimimus · October 31, 2015

It'd be great to have an FC3 level Ka-50 variant with some different electronics though (e.g. basic coding for LLTV and MWS implemented similarly to how they are in the Su-25T).

After all - we have the A-10C and the A-10A in DCS right now...

rrohde · November 1, 2015

I found this
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/ka50-black-shark/
Countermeasures

The Ka-50 is fitted with a radar warning receiver, electronic warfare system and chaff and flare dispenser.

Why not in DCS???

Nothing is stopping ED from upgrading our beloved Ka-50 to include something like this. I would certainly pay for such a module upgrade.

Jafferson · November 1, 2015

Yeah I was a little confused where the thread was going myself. But here is the supposed system that the Shark would use. It is able to detect IR missles as far as I know. And although this system would be nice, I doubt ED has any plans of ever putting this in game.

http://www.rg.ru/pril/article/40/03/99/zashita.jpg

Reaper6

I found some more about this Picture...

I see a

-Laser warning receiver

-Radar warning Receiver

-Missile approche warning System

-Optical jammer turret

-Radar Jammer

-Chaff/flare dispenser

http://aviation-arab.net/showthread.php?t=4511

The Pastel / SPO-32 / L150 (RWR) was produced 1983, its not imposible the KA50 from the 80s is without one.

http://aerospace.boopidoo.com/philez/Su-15TM%20PICTURES%20&%20DOCS/Overscan's%20guide%20to%20Russian%20Military%20Avionics.htm

Here are some more informations about the L370 Vitebsk System.

http://www.airtalk.org/vitebsk-self-protection-suite-receives-ka-50-helicopter-test-vt13714.html

So we can see this Systems are real :)

Edited November 1, 2015 by Jafferson

Sign In

Missile warning system

Recommended Posts

luckyhendrix

Avimimus

Reaper6

FSKRipper

Jafferson

Cik

domini99

Rogue Trooper

Isegrim

LFCChameleon_Silk

Isegrim

FSKRipper

Fri13

Fri13

Fri13

Jafferson

Raptor9

Jafferson

Avimimus

Reaper6

Fri13

FSKRipper

Avimimus

rrohde

Jafferson

Recently Browsing 0 members