Black Shark 3?

[Avimimus]

For reference.

 

9M120 (9M120F) Ataka Missile [link to the modification with radio command guidance, but the 9M120-1 (9M120-1F) laser-guided modification has similar characteristics].

 

9A4172K Vikhr-1 Missile:

 

Thanks!

 

A quick question: I've seen a photo of a Ka-52 with APU-6 Vikhr racks on both the inner and outer hardpoints (for a total of 24 missiles)! Is this photoshopped/fake?

 

I had assumed it was fake - but the fact that the Ka-52 has flown Hermes missiles on all of the four main hard-points makes me wonder if such a loadout is possible?

[M1Combat]

Damn...

 

 

I can't even imagine how destructive a 24 Vikhr, 4 Igla and full cannon KA50-ED could be...

[3WA]

Well, you couldn't carry Vikhr on the inner pylons, because they can't tilt.

 

 

Unless they had that Ka-50 rigged with the right equipment on the inner pylons, which, considering how experimental the Ka-50 seemed to be, is totally possible.

[finch]

I want to say thank you to everyone that is contributing in this thread, it's very interesting, I'm learning every day something new... please keep it going nice and clean like now

 

 

thanks again

[Fri13]

Well, you couldn't carry Vikhr on the inner pylons, because they can't tilt.

 

 

Unless they had that Ka-50 rigged with the right equipment on the inner pylons, which, considering how experimental the Ka-50 seemed to be, is totally possible.

 

Isn't the tilting a adapter feature instead the pylon itself?

 

But I believe that inner has some problems with proximity to fuselage. So it isn't wired for Vikhr.

 

Yet manufacturer states that ka-50 can carry any combination of the weapons loadouts, like ATGM and AA simultaneously.

[3WA]

Isn't the tilting a adapter feature instead the pylon itself?

 

 

Yeah, it would be what ever the adapter is, and I'm sure they experimented with it.

 

 

I want to say thank you to everyone that is contributing in this thread, it's very interesting, I'm learning every day something new... please keep it going nice and clean like now

 

 

thanks again

 

 

You should use a web translator like Google Translate or Yandex Translate, and read what the Russians are saying in their forums. A good thread on the BS3 in there. That's where the producers like Chizh are hanging out.

 

 

Stuff that's not being said here.

[finch]

Yeah, it would be what ever the adapter is, and I'm sure they experimented with it.

 

 

 

 

 

You should use a web translator like Google Translate or Yandex Translate, and read what the Russians are saying in their forums. A good thread on the BS3 in there. That's where the producers like Chizh are hanging out.

 

 

Stuff that's not being said here.

 

 

yeah, I know, I'm looking there also, thanks

[3WA]

Lol, we should just all move our stuff to the Russian forums, as that's where the real debates are raging. I don't think anyone but English speakers bother looking here.

 

 

Wish I could find a better machine translator than Google or Yandex.

[finch]

Lol, we should just all move our stuff to the Russian forums, as that's where the real debates are raging. I don't think anyone but English speakers bother looking here.

 

 

Wish I could find a better machine translator than Google or Yandex.

 

 

well, I have my personal machine, my wife :megalol:

[S.E.Bulba]

Google Translate

 

On the Ka-50 was not the APU-6. The Vikhr ATGM containers were mounted on the UPP-800 launching device, which was hung directly on the pylon.

 

UPP-800 launching device (YouTube video in Russian shows the work of the UPP-800).

 

 

The APU-6 aviation launcher appeared on the Ka-52 for unification. It allows you to hang the Vikhr-1 on the DB3-UV weapon stations (which you apparently call the ′adapter′) mounted on the pylons, which in turn speeds up the change of weapons on the ground.

 

 

 

Thanks!

 

A quick question: I've seen a photo of a Ka-52 with APU-6 Vikhr racks on both the inner and outer hardpoints (for a total of 24 missiles)! Is this photoshopped/fake?

 

I had assumed it was fake - but the fact that the Ka-52 has flown Hermes missiles on all of the four main hard-points makes me wonder if such a loadout is possible?

I don’t think that Photoshop would be posted on the official website of the JSC Russian Helicopters.

 

JSC Russian Helicopters >> Military >> Ka-52.

 

There are no technical limitations for the suspension of various weapons on the weapon stations, provided that this allows the max takeoff weight.

 

Another thing is how many guided missiles does a weapon system of an aircraft allow to control? If, for example, the weapon system has 16 information channels providing the transmission of target indication signals for the homing heads of the guided missiles, then regardless of how many missiles will be suspended on the aircraft, in any case, it can only fire at 16 missiles. ;)

 

Original in Russian

 

На Ка-50 не было АПУ-6. Транспортно-пусковые контейнеры с ПТУР «Вихрь» устанавливались на подвижную пусковую установку УПП-800, которое подвешивалось непосредственно на пилон.

 

Подвижная пусковая установка УПП-800 (YouTube-видео на русском языке показывает работу УПП-800).

 

Авиационное пусковое устройство АПУ-6 появилось на Ка-52 для унификации. Оно позволяет подвешивать «Вихрь» на балочные держатели ДБ3-УВ (которые вы видимо называете «адаптером»), установленные на пилоны, что в свою очередь убыстряет смену оружия на земле.

 

Thanks!

 

A quick question: I've seen a photo of a Ka-52 with APU-6 Vikhr racks on both the inner and outer hardpoints (for a total of 24 missiles)! Is this photoshopped/fake?

 

I had assumed it was fake - but the fact that the Ka-52 has flown Hermes missiles on all of the four main hard-points makes me wonder if such a loadout is possible?

Не думаю, чтобы фотошоп выкладывали бы на официальном сайте АО «Вертолёты России».

 

АО «Вертолёты России» >> Военные >> Ка-52.

 

Технических ограничений для подвески различного вооружения на балочные держатели нет, при условии, что это позволяет максимальная взлётная масса.

 

Другое дело, сколькими управляемыми ракетами (УР) позволяет управлять система управления вооружением (СУВ) летательного аппарата (ЛА)? Если, допустим, СУВ имеет 16 информационных каналов, обеспечивающих передачу сигналов целеуказания для головок самонаведения УР, то вне зависимости от того, сколько ракет будет подвешено на ЛА, в любом случае стрелять он при этом сможет только 16 ракетами. ;)

 

Edited June 28, 2019 by S.E.Bulba
correction.

[Avimimus]

Thanks! That is pretty neat.

 

I assume that the 16xHermes loadout is also limited by weight (rather than just the control electronics)? If it wasn't for weight and it was only limited by having electronic for 16 missiles, it would seem that all of the missiles could have been mounted on two hard-points!

 

P.S. I always assumed (based on how it was modelled) that the UPP-800 just had electronics in it which switched between tubes... and central electronics on the Ka-50 just controlled the elevation of the rack and sent firing signals to either the left or right racks (or both) as needed. But this is just an assumption.

 

P.P.S. Is there a designation (e.g. 9Axxxx) for Hermes-A known yet?

[S.E.Bulba]

Google Translate

 

Thanks! That is pretty neat.

 

I assume that the 16xHermes loadout is also limited by weight (rather than just the control electronics)? If it wasn't for weight and it was only limited by having electronic for 16 missiles, it would seem that all of the missiles could have been mounted on two hard-points!..

Right. The weapon stations are designed for suspension arms of caliber up to 500kg inclusive.

 

I know that on helicopters of the previous generation, for example, on the Mi-24, the analog weapon system had a limited number of data transmission channels, which in turn limited the number of guided missiles used to 8. Chizh says that on modern aircraft with a digital weapon system there are no more such restrictions.

Обычно ограничения идут по СУВ. Просто количество каналов передачи данных ограничено.

Это особенно касается ЛА прошлого века. На современных цифровых бортах таких ограничений уже нет.

Usually restrictions come from the weapon system. Just the number of data channels is limited.

This is especially true of aircraft of the last century. On modern digital boards, such restrictions no longer exist.

However, I am not sure that the internal Ka-52 pylons have control channels for ATGMs, in fact, like on previous-generation helicopters. Probably this technical limitation is made in order to exclude the probability of a decrease in the gas-dynamic stability of the engines when launching ATGMs in the hover mode.

 

… P.S. I always assumed (based on how it was modelled) that the UPP-800 just had electronics in it which switched between tubes... and central electronics on the Ka-50 just controlled the elevation of the rack and sent firing signals to either the left or right racks (or both) as needed. But this is just an assumption…

Yes, almost everything is correct.

 

… P.P.S. Is there a designation (e.g. 9Axxxx) for Hermes-A known yet?

This information is not available in open sources, as well as on the official site of its developer.

 

Original in Russian

Thanks! That is pretty neat.

 

I assume that the 16xHermes loadout is also limited by weight (rather than just the control electronics)? If it wasn't for weight and it was only limited by having electronic for 16 missiles, it would seem that all of the missiles could have been mounted on two hard-points!..

Верно. Балочные держатели рассчитаны на подвеску вооружения калибра до 500 кг включительно.

 

Я знаю, что на вертолётах предыдущего поколения, например на Ми-24, аналоговая система управления вооружением имела ограниченное количество каналов передачи данных, что в свою очередь ограничивало количество применяемых управляемых ракет до 8. Чиж говорит, что на современных летательных аппаратах с цифровой системой управления вооружением таких ограничений больше нет.

Обычно ограничения идут по СУВ. Просто количество каналов передачи данных ограничено.

Это особенно касается ЛА прошлого века. На современных цифровых бортах таких ограничений уже нет.

Однако я не уверен в том, что внутренние пилоны Ка-52 имеют каналы управления ПТУР, собственно как и на вертолётах предыдущего поколения. Вероятно это техническое ограничение сделано для того, чтобы исключить вероятность снижения газодинамической устойчивости двигателей при пуске ПТУР в режиме висения.

 

… P.S. I always assumed (based on how it was modelled) that the UPP-800 just had electronics in it which switched between tubes... and central electronics on the Ka-50 just controlled the elevation of the rack and sent firing signals to either the left or right racks (or both) as needed. But this is just an assumption…

Да, практически всё верно.

 

… P.P.S. Is there a designation (e.g. 9Axxxx) for Hermes-A known yet?

Данная информация отсутствует в открытых источниках, равно как и на официальном сайте его разработчика.

 

[Rogue Trooper]

Thanks for the President S system explanation, I'm really looking forward to see what can it do.

 

 

 

It will definitely be interesting to see how nap of earth flying affects it... I can't wait to find out.

[Fri13]

Lol, we should just all move our stuff to the Russian forums, as that's where the real debates are raging. I don't think anyone but English speakers bother looking here.

 

Wish I could find a better machine translator than Google or Yandex.

 

I sometimes read the RU side, but I am not going to comment anything on there as it would be then in English, and if translated, it would likely just get mixed.

 

Reading the Google translation (automatic) is easy when doing it fluently, but some words gets slightly odd, but primarily some phrases doesn't make the sense in English, but you can figure things out, as long it is not too technical ones that makes it more like a puzzle.

 

It is sad that the RU side of the forum is going "in the shadows" and it doesn't get "promoted" but requires little time to go find it.

[Fri13]

It will definitely be interesting to see how nap of earth flying affects it... I can't wait to find out.

 

I would be interested to know what is the FOV of those IR/UV sensors. But they are slightly angled downward, so I believe that is reason to get the bottom of the helicopter covered completely, and this way making the top of the helicopter vulnerable for the undetected launch and missile.

 

I would guess that there is around 70-80 degree angle to top, so if threat comes from deep dive, or you just happen to keep flying rolling to that direction that much, system doesn't see it.

 

Then the other two challenges are that I see, the jammer turrets, as they are just front of the rear wheels and almost under the wings, that is the blind spot, so straight forward and slightly above, and straight about 9:30 and 2:30 directions and above, behind the wings.

The tail doesn't seem to cause much trouble as it is thinner, but possibility is that there is blind spot as well to above.

 

Then the third one, that is current one. The CM dispenser angle to have possibility to launch the CM above the ground for a moments.

 

Other things I am interested is the close-up flying as how quickly can those turrets turn and start their jamming? And how long does it really require to be jamming until the missile is deflected? The President-S sample video gives some idea, but answer would be nice.

[Rogue Trooper]

Indeed, but I guess if you are successful enough at flying NAP then perhaps the jamming turrets are not so important, but for sure those jamming turrets will be quick to get on target... split second. How good is the software at bringing those turrets to action will be a nice problem to work with.

 

 

On release I will take her red on red to gauge whether she is fit for purpose... nothing comes close to Ruskie ground air defence in my book.

 

 

But the chance of being aware of the battle field will increase my time to weapons release beyond belief.

Edited June 29, 2019 by Rogue Trooper

[Fri13]

 

But the chance of being aware of the battle field will increase my time to weapons release beyond belief.

 

The capability to see the direction of the missile will be very valuable alone. No more sudden AIM-9 or Stinger. So only those magical LAV-25 gunners with their perfect firing accuracy is a challenge.

[3WA]

Hey guys, go post on the Russian forums. I think they are currently debating whether certain wires on the REAL Ka-50 were actually green or blue. :lol:

 

 

I just told them we want to see GOES-451 FLIR ( like on the Ka-52, also since we now know Shkval was dumped), and some people also want to see RWR ( since it's promised to be on the President-S).

 

 

You want anything else, THAT'S the place to post it.

 

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=242082&page=26

 

 

x

Edited June 29, 2019 by 3WA

[Fri13]

I wouldn't expect at all to see the GOES-451 as KA-50Sh or KA-50N. Sure it would be amazing surprise, but I just can't see it unless ED has access to them, as it would give us the glass cockpit as well.

 

I just can't see ED to make a such big upgrade and then offer a huge upgrade bonus for BS2 owners....

 

The system that makes the President-S, has different parts for different aircrafts, Mi-8, KA-52, KA-50 etc. And it is question that can the version that is in KA-50 be able be connected with RWR antennas.

Of course if the RWR connectivity is shared between all the versions, then one could expect to see a RWR wiring done for KA-50 like for KA-52. But if that has not been planned, then not possible.

Edited June 29, 2019 by Fri13

[Weta43]

Hey guys, go post on the Russian forums. I think they are currently debating whether certain wires on the REAL Ka-50 were actually green or blue. :lol:

 

Yep - god forbid they should want the simulated aircraft to resemble the aircraft that it's supposed to be simulating.

 

I guess though that at the point where we ask for imaginary pylons and weapons, rivet counting does become a bit of a :lol: joke..

 

 

I just told them we want to see GOES-451 FLIR ( like on the Ka-52, also since we now know Shkval was dumped), and some people also want to see RWR ( since it's promised to be on the President-S).

 

 

You want anything else, THAT'S the place to post it.

 

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=242082&page=26

 

 

x

 

 

Hooray !

It's Grab-bag time again, and here we are asking for laser cannons again...

 

Everyone go over to the Russian forum and wind them up.

 

It's a Hilarious sport.

Really gives them a feel for the level of discussion on the English boards.

[Avimimus]

I don't know about 'fluent' machine translation... "И рыбку съесть, и на ёлочку залезть вряд ли получится." becomes "And it’s unlikely to climb a fish and climb a Christmas tree."

 

Right. The weapon stations are designed for suspension arms of caliber up to 500kg inclusive.

 

I know that on helicopters of the previous generation, for example, on the Mi-24, the analog weapon system had a limited number of data transmission channels, which in turn limited the number of guided missiles used to 8. Chizh says that on modern aircraft with a digital weapon system there are no more such restrictions.

 

 

However, I am not sure that the internal Ka-52 pylons have control channels for ATGMs, in fact, like on previous-generation helicopters. Probably this technical limitation is made in order to exclude the probability of a decrease in the gas-dynamic stability of the engines when launching ATGMs in the hover mode.

 

 

Yes, almost everything is correct.

 

 

This information is not available in open sources, as well as on the official site of its developer.

 

Original in Russian

 

Верно. Балочные держатели рассчитаны на подвеску вооружения калибра до 500 кг включительно.

 

Я знаю, что на вертолётах предыдущего поколения, например на Ми-24, аналоговая система управления вооружением имела ограниченное количество каналов передачи данных, что в свою очередь ограничивало количество применяемых управляемых ракет до 8. Чиж говорит, что на современных летательных аппаратах с цифровой системой управления вооружением таких ограничений больше нет.

 

Однако я не уверен в том, что внутренние пилоны Ка-52 имеют каналы управления ПТУР, собственно как и на вертолётах предыдущего поколения. Вероятно это техническое ограничение сделано для того, чтобы исключить вероятность снижения газодинамической устойчивости двигателей при пуске ПТУР в режиме висения.

 

 

Да, практически всё верно.

 

 

Данная информация отсутствует в открытых источниках, равно как и на официальном сайте его разработчика.

 

Thanks :D

 

It is a bit off-topic - but since you seem knowledgeable I had a question about the Mi-24... I've read that the Mi-24 sometimes carried 10xFAB-100 during the Afghan war. I've always assumed that the two inner hardpoints each carried four bombs using an adapter (i.e. something like the MDB-4 rack used on the Su-25)... it seems the only solution which makes sense... however, I've never been able to find photographs or more information.

 

Have you heard anything?

[3WA]

I don't know about 'fluent' machine translation... "И рыбку съесть, и на ёлочку залезть вряд ли получится." becomes "And it’s unlikely to climb a fish and climb a Christmas tree."

 

 

LOL, yeah, I had a real laugh over that last one! I'm guessing there was some real errors in words there. If you use Yandex Translate, it shows that there are usually a couple of different words that you're English could be translated into. I'm sure it's the same for Russian.

 

 

After I get translation in Russian, I again reverse translate it back to English, and then start kicking out words that don't make sense, and looking for new Russian words to replace them, until it comes out "readable".

 

 

@Weta - Go ride you're Unicorn! :D

 

 

Some good comments there, and looks like people realize that this thing was never produced and realize what we want is a MODERN version, that would have been produced. Of course, some of the problems such as secrecy and access are pointed out, but hopefully, ED can at least get some info on the Ka-52 control systems. The only other system I REALLY want is the GOES-451, so we can get FLIR. Shkval was dumped for GOOD reasons. I know a lot people here say they want RWR, so I mentioned that too. But really, that should be a part of the President-S system.

 

 

 

Hooray !

It's Grab-bag time again, and here we are asking for laser cannons again...

 

 

 

Hey, Red Wolf is Coming!

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wv4n50yu2Hw

 

 

 

 

x

Edited June 30, 2019 by 3WA

[martinistripes]

I just told them we want to see GOES-451 FLIR ( like on the Ka-52, also since we now know Shkval was dumped), and some people also want to see RWR ( since it's promised to be on the President-S).

 

 

You want anything else, THAT'S the place to post it.

 

When you say "we", I hope you clarified that means "you", and perhaps a few other dreamers.

 

Some good comments there, and looks like people realize that this thing was never produced and realize what we want is a MODERN version, that would have been produced. Of course, some of the problems such as secrecy and access are pointed out, but hopefully, ED can at least get some info on the Ka-52 control systems. The only other system I REALLY want is the GOES-451, so we can get FLIR. Shkval was dumped for GOOD reasons. I know a lot people here say they want RWR, so I mentioned that too. But really, that should be a part of the President-S system.

 

Hey, if you come back in 10 years perhaps ED will have released DCS Ka-52 Alligator. Then you'll have all the systems you've been wishing for! :thumbup:

[Weta43]

Hey, Red Wolf is Coming!

 

LoL - yes, that's the one ;-)

 

 

Some good comments there, and looks like people realize that this thing was never produced and realize what we want is a MODERN version, that would have been produced.

 

I think what you meant was:

"Some good comments there, and looks like people realize that this thing was never produced IN QUANTITY and realize what Some people want is a MIGHT HAVE BEEN version, that was never produced."

 

 

Obviously the one we have modelled was actually produced, because there are photos of it on the internet:

Edited June 30, 2019 by Weta43

[Stratos]

Returning to serious chat, hope we can get updated skins for the new 3d model as all the old skins will be useless now. I really hope they add some hacks for Ka-52 skins as used in Syria, you know, the new Russian markings. Will love that.