Black Shark 3?

[Dudikoff]

We can at least ask that any fictional additions be made optional so they can be enabled or disabled.

[AlphaOneSix]

Apaches and Sidewinders. Mhmm. I'm pretty sure except for the one or two test vehicles, AH-64D/E only carry Stinger. But please carry on.

[Fri13]

Apaches and Sidewinders. Mhmm. I'm pretty sure except for the one or two test vehicles, AH-64D/E only carry Stinger. But please carry on.

 

They were made capable carry it, but USA didn't authorize it in loadouts as there were no need.

 

That is what is difference.

 

And now they do have the need for sidewinders, the drones. So sidewinders got authorized in USA Apaches loadouts.

 

In many of these things question is not about technicalities, but politics.

[AlphaOneSix]

Just stop. Please. I'm not making this stuff up.

 

Use the Cobra for your Sidewinder dreams.

 

In U.S. service, the E-model can carry Stingers. Export models of the D-model can usually carry Stingers, but not U.S. D-models. Only one or two test vehicles can carry Sidewinders. And those aren't even military, they belong to Boeing. And please believe me when I say that there are technical reasons for that as well, not just "political" ones.

Edited June 22, 2019 by AlphaOneSix

[Fri13]

Just stop. Please. I'm not making this stuff up.

 

Use the Cobra for your Sidewinder dreams.

 

In U.S. service, the E-model can carry Stingers. Export models of the D-model can usually carry Stingers, but not U.S. D-models. Only one or two test vehicles can carry Sidewinders. And those aren't even military, they belong to Boeing. And please believe me when I say that there are technical reasons for that as well, not just "political" ones.

 

So you agree with everything I said....

[AlphaOneSix]

So you agree with everything I said....

 

I am sure that I agree with some of the things you've said, but I can guarantee I don't agree with everything you've said.

[Ghost_Dragon03]

.......

 

[ATTACH]212196[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]212197[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]212198[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]212199[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]212200[/ATTACH]

 

......

 

 

hello Fri13

 

The last image of the cockpit (attachament 212200) comes from a vidéo have you the link ?

 

Thank you

[Fri13]

hello Fri13

 

The last image of the cockpit (attachament 212200) comes from a vidéo have you the link ?

 

Thank you

 

Yes. The all three are actually from it, the KA-50 glass cockpit in the factory installation and testing. The two screenshots are just the close-ups from the MFCD two different pages.

 

[Harlikwin]

Any details on how the president system works?

[3WA]

Good place to look for info.

 

 

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

 

 

Russian forums. Use Google or Yandex Translate to read through them in English.

 

 

Video on the President-S right on the 1st page, but it's in Russian.

 

 

Also,

 

 

http://www.deagel.com/Protection-Systems/President-S_a003126001.aspx

 

 

Looks like it's composed of a bunch of different modules for detecting and jamming IR, radar, and EO.

Edited June 23, 2019 by 3WA

[Weta43]

Next request for the Ka-50 ?

(the Ka-52 has one, it must have been next on the plans for the Ka-50. No photo's is obviously proof it was secretly done !

 

 

[3WA]

I'm sure we can jam it in there somehow! :P

Of course, this will mean we'll also have to mount the R-27ER.

 

 

I also want a mast periscope like on the Apache Longbow.

And a Unicorn head staked onto the front nose.

Edited June 25, 2019 by 3WA

[Fri13]

Next request for the Ka-50 ?

(the Ka-52 has one, it must have been next on the plans for the Ka-50. No photo's is obviously proof it was secretly done !

 

 

 

Why to make such hostile statements about other forum members?

Do you get laughs about your own disrespect toward others?

Do you feel receiving others respect by being such badly behaving?

[Fri13]

Any details on how the president system works?

 

Basically it is more advanced than one in A-10C.

 

The president-S has max detection range of 200 km for missiles launch and flight (missiles generate heat even after rocket is off because friction generated after take-off and acceleration).

 

It has capability to track missiles and calculate their range. That is used to calculate false positives and filter them out. So a friendly SAM launching to other direction doesn't trigger system. Neither does a MBT or a IFV on ground launching missiles toward enemies.

 

So only missiles that ate flying in the helicopter direction gets warned about and then when missile reach the perimeter of selfdefence, the system starts the counter measurements automatically.

 

So you don't get alarmed by missiles that ain't threat to you, but you will get a visual indicators of the launches around you and their ranges and directions.

It is like a visual radar of the battlefield who is shooting and to where.

 

Once the system calculates that missile is threat to you and it reach the range to you, system alarms you, gives the direction and range of threat, as well the time of impact, of you don't react to alarm, automatic counter is started by combinations of flares series on corresponding directions and then laser turrets starts to burn the missile seeker by jamming it with series of frequencies.

 

Questions are like what does the turrets really include, as the system is possible be connected to RWR receivers, and some sources say that turrets can as well generate RF jamming against radar guided missiles, meaning it is not only against IR missiles. Can it do anything for laser guided missiles, as those are optical seekers as well?

 

The system should be able detect as well the cannon fire, so you should be able detect the range and direction of ground forces firing. Using it as passive detection system to generalize area where someone is. But it doesn't react to it. But is it visible to you as "heat" source?

 

It as well detects the ATGM launches, ranges and direction, but it can't do anything else for it, so does it still try counter it, or does it understand from the speed of missile that it is ATGM and only alarms the crew to take maneuvers?

 

There are different variants to different helicopters, and KA-50 has its own one, KA-52 its own and Mi-8 its own etc.

 

And in the Russian forum someone found that KABRIS can be connected to the Shkval television feed, and should be able connect as well the President-S. Our at least ED is going to use it that way. When the warning is issued, it will overlay any mode you have in ABRIS, so you get visual and audible warning and then alarm.

 

So the system should have very good "false positive" filtering and detection capabilities, as well countering missiles.

 

At start they tested the system on a rig that resemble Mi-8 setup. Then they moved to Mi-8 fuselage. And then to real one running on the platform, finally to real one flying.

 

And the system worked perfectly.

[S.E.Bulba]

Google Translate

 

In the Russian onboard defense complex President-S the same principles of operation are used as in the American Suite of Integrated Infrared Countermeasures (SIIRCM) / Common Missile Warning System (CMWS). At the same time, supernatural abilities should not be attributed to these systems. :)

 

Original in Russian

 

В российском бортовом комплексе обороны «Президент-С» используются те же принципы работы, что и в американской Suite of Integrated Infrared Countermeasures (SIIRCM) / Common Missile Warning System (CMWS). Одновременно с этим, не следует приписывать данным системам сверхъестественные способности. :)

 

Edited June 24, 2019 by S.E.Bulba
+

[Johnny Dioxin]

Don't forget that, in wartime, lots of mods are made to aircraft that in peacetime would be unthinkable.

 

For example - in the Falklands: matra rocket pods strapped to Wessex helicopter undercarriage struts. Flare dispensers fitted to Harrier airbrakes!

 

This stuff happens, so just because it hasn't happened in peacetime doesn't mean it isn't possible in war, or at all.

As long as it's feasible...

[Stratos]

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

[Weta43]

I'm sure we can jam it in there somehow! :P

Of course, this will mean we'll also have to mount the R-27ER.

 

 

I also want a mast periscope like on the Apache Longbow.

 

 

LoL

Me too :)

[Weta43]

Why to make such hostile statements about other forum members?

Do you get laughs about your own disrespect toward others?

Do you feel receiving others respect by being such badly behaving?

 

I'm not being hostile - maybe facetious...

 

Do I find tis funny ? - I have found some of the arguments made in defence of the 6 pylon Ka-50ED with needles funny, and I hope to point out why I find them funny by applying similar arguments to other aspects of the Ka-50 that people might also like to have.

[Fri13]

I'm not being hostile - maybe facetious...

 

Do I find tis funny ? - I have found some of the arguments made in defence of the 6 pylon Ka-50ED with needles funny, and I hope to point out why I find them funny by applying similar arguments to other aspects of the Ka-50 that people might also like to have.

 

You just use a sarcasm with hostile tone toward other people in the forums, who have used the official sources as existing material to prove that things exist and they are plausible features.

 

You don't add anything constructive to the discussions than talks about fantasies.

[Fri13]

Don't forget that, in wartime, lots of mods are made to aircraft that in peacetime would be unthinkable.

 

For example - in the Falklands: matra rocket pods strapped to Wessex helicopter undercarriage struts. Flare dispensers fitted to Harrier airbrakes!

 

This stuff happens, so just because it hasn't happened in peacetime doesn't mean it isn't possible in war, or at all.

As long as it's feasible...

 

There are different sides:

 

One side that wants only the authorized, official and likely historical weapons, systems, combinations etc. Who really can't accept anything else than that is documented, like example in a Vietnam. Most of them do not accept anything that was not even fielded in big numbers, like even if there was 30 units in operation it was not reason to use that over other that was used in 400 units. Or if the module is made from the USAF version instead USMC version and lateral had the feature, it is not accepted. It the ED job to produce the very specific, narrow unit that was operated at very specific time. They take everything literally.

 

One side that can approve anything that has been produced or made and used, so it doesn't matter is it a 30 units or 400 units, but needs to fit to the country or the specific version like Block 32 instead Block 22, as it is the mission designer task to fit the loadout and unit features to the mission/campaign. So as long it has been used, it is OK.

 

One side that can approve anything that has been produced or made, but needs to have possibility to be fitted, so it was tested and found functional, only not being fielded by political decisions or because there was no need, or that the country decided not to buy the weapon at the time of module release or it was used in limited numbers. Be it a on-field modifications like flare dispensers or sandbags or extension of the switch via tube, it is plausible and so on suspect of the mission designer and developers will to add them.

 

And then is the unicorn side, that is ready to throw non-existing features like AIM-233 III on aircrafts that has killer sharks and gay-bombs. They are ready to accept even nuclear powered jet fighters.

[Weta43]

You just use a sarcasm with hostile tone toward other people in the forums, who have used the official sources as existing material to prove that things exist and they are plausible features.

What I have pointed out is that some of the things that have been claimed in this thread to have existed, did not. specifically, any version of the Ka-50 with IGLA.

We (mostly) seem to have moved past trying to argue that they did exist, and be confining the discussion to 'if they had existed, they'd probably have been like this'.

That's an honest 'fair enough' conversation, and I have no issues with that (beyond my disappointment at the appearance of the Ka-50TE (TE =Thin Edge).

 

You don't add anything constructive to the discussions (other?) than talks about fantasies.

My intention is to point out the reality of the situation, and - as you are unhappy about - differentiate between that reality and fantasy.

 

Sometimes my frustration at people's inability to separate wishful thinking from fact has come out as sarcasm, but pointing out the difference is intended as a constructive addition to the conversation.

 

Arriving at the truth must be a good thing on balance for the community (even if some are not happy with that result)

[Avimimus]

The ATGM 9M120-1 (9M120-1F) Ataka modification, which is part of the ATGW Shturm-VU, has laser guidance throughout the entire flight path, similar to the ATGM Vikhr. It was developed as a replacement for the ATGM Vikhr, which probably still cannot find solutions to some problems, despite the fact that this ATGM was tested in combat operations in Syria.

 

In addition, the ATGM Ataka and the ATGM Vikhr have almost the same armor penetration (800mm), however the ATGM Ataka is much cheaper because of its poorer speed characteristics and shorter range.

 

Original in Russian

 

Модификация ПТУР 9М120-1 (9М120-1Ф) «Атака», которая входит в состав комплекса «Штурм-ВУ», имеет лазерное наведение на всём пути полёта, аналогично ПТУР «Вихрь». Она и была разработана как замена ПТУР «Вихрь», на котором вероятно до сих пор не могут найти решения некоторым проблемам, несмотря на то, что данная противотанковая ракета испытывалась в боевых действиях в Сирии.

 

Кроме того ПТУР «Атака» и ПТУР «Вихрь» имеют практически одинаковую бронепробиваемость (800 мм), однако ПТУР «Атака» значительно дешевле из-за своих более худших скоростных характеристик и меньшей дальности действия.

 

Very interesting - thank you!

[S.E.Bulba]

Google Translate

 

Very interesting - thank you!

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:

<…>

<…>

[Harlikwin]

Basically it is more advanced than one in A-10C.

 

The president-S has max detection range of 200 km for missiles launch and flight (missiles generate heat even after rocket is off because friction generated after take-off and acceleration).

 

It has capability to track missiles and calculate their range. That is used to calculate false positives and filter them out. So a friendly SAM launching to other direction doesn't trigger system. Neither does a MBT or a IFV on ground launching missiles toward enemies.

 

So only missiles that ate flying in the helicopter direction gets warned about and then when missile reach the perimeter of selfdefence, the system starts the counter measurements automatically.

 

So you don't get alarmed by missiles that ain't threat to you, but you will get a visual indicators of the launches around you and their ranges and directions.

It is like a visual radar of the battlefield who is shooting and to where.

 

Once the system calculates that missile is threat to you and it reach the range to you, system alarms you, gives the direction and range of threat, as well the time of impact, of you don't react to alarm, automatic counter is started by combinations of flares series on corresponding directions and then laser turrets starts to burn the missile seeker by jamming it with series of frequencies.

 

Questions are like what does the turrets really include, as the system is possible be connected to RWR receivers, and some sources say that turrets can as well generate RF jamming against radar guided missiles, meaning it is not only against IR missiles. Can it do anything for laser guided missiles, as those are optical seekers as well?

 

The system should be able detect as well the cannon fire, so you should be able detect the range and direction of ground forces firing. Using it as passive detection system to generalize area where someone is. But it doesn't react to it. But is it visible to you as "heat" source?

 

It as well detects the ATGM launches, ranges and direction, but it can't do anything else for it, so does it still try counter it, or does it understand from the speed of missile that it is ATGM and only alarms the crew to take maneuvers?

 

There are different variants to different helicopters, and KA-50 has its own one, KA-52 its own and Mi-8 its own etc.

 

And in the Russian forum someone found that KABRIS can be connected to the Shkval television feed, and should be able connect as well the President-S. Our at least ED is going to use it that way. When the warning is issued, it will overlay any mode you have in ABRIS, so you get visual and audible warning and then alarm.

 

So the system should have very good "false positive" filtering and detection capabilities, as well countering missiles.

 

At start they tested the system on a rig that resemble Mi-8 setup. Then they moved to Mi-8 fuselage. And then to real one running on the platform, finally to real one flying.

 

And the system worked perfectly.

 

Neat! that's pretty cool. Now looking forward to the paid upgrade.