Bs3

[S.E.Bulba]

1 час назад, XPACT сказал:

I think it won't be integrated into ABRIS, but ABRIS display will be used for it, since new switch is right next to ABRIS display common sense tells me that behind there is probably simple video signal switcher, two inputs one output, that will switch MWS video output to ABRIS display when threat is detected, when there is no threat you are switched back to ABRIS automatically, now of course if something bugs out you always have that manual switch to show only ABRIS video out on the display. That would be most realistic way to implement it.

4 questions:

1. Why did you decide that the MWS has a "video output"?
2. How do you intend to connect the MWS and the KABRIS (through which ports and through which channel)?
3. How should the KABRIS process the signals coming from the MWS in order to indicate them on its display?
4. If everything is so simple, then why could not the L-140 LWS be connected to the KABRIS earlier, but had to make a separate indicator for it?

 

Скрытый текст

Original in Russian

 

4 вопроса:

1. Почему Вы решили, что MWS имеет «видеовыход»?
2. Каким образом Вы предполагаете соединить MWS и КАБРИС (через какие порты, и по какому каналу)?
3. Как КАБРИС должна обрабатывать сигналы, приходящие от MWS, чтобы индицировать их на своём дисплее?
4. Если всё так просто, то почему ранее не подключили LWS Л-140 к КАБРИС, а вынуждены были делать для неё отдельный индикатор?

 

[3WA]

Exactly.  I'd rather just have the MWS box zip tied to the frame than this mess of input to ABRIS.

 

We really need glass cockpit, just like Ka-52.  This is why Kamov had to eventually go to it.  To fit everything in.

[Fri13]

18 hours ago, S.E.Bulba said:

4 questions:

1. Why did you decide that the MWS has a "video output"?

 

He was meaning that there is a own box in avionics bay and from there comes a own video feed cable to ABRIS that would behave as a display for it. This to overcome the requirement to have a additional display added to the cockpit for just the threat display.  It is not his job to go such details in hypothetical brainstorming. 

 

18 hours ago, S.E.Bulba said:

1. How do you intend to connect the MWS and the KABRIS (through which ports and through which channel)?

 

As he said, have a switch next to KABRIS that will flip between the main mode or external video feed (the threat display). It is not his job to go such details in hypothetical brainstorming. 

 

18 hours ago, S.E.Bulba said:

1. How should the KABRIS process the signals coming from the MWS in order to indicate them on its display?

 

It is not his job to go such details in hypothetical brainstorming. You have the avionics bay with the proper "black box" that process the data from sensors and only outputs the threat display over video feed to any display. 

 

18 hours ago, S.E.Bulba said:

1. If everything is so simple, then why could not the L-140 LWS be connected to the KABRIS earlier, but had to make a separate indicator for it?

 

You really do not understand the difference between a reasoning and discussion in hypothetical scenario for why something could be reasonable when already gone to "fantasy" (as you like to say).  So why to nitpick about technical details about hypothetical scenario?

 

And maybe the L-140 LWS is so simple device, each optical sensor is directly wired to each corresponding light in the box. When the sensor receives laser energy, it will generate a signal that gets to its own box, and from there that signal is sent to the box where corresponding light will lit up. There is no software in play, there is no graphical user interface to be done as it does not do anything else than just say "Laser energy detected in front left sensor".  There is no logic programmed to tell that what direction or what kind laser energy it is other than ranging or guiding/designating one. It is just "Front sensor got painted by laser energy" and that is it. 

 

So do you know how much challenge it would take to program a digital computer that KABRIS is to receive those sensors signal and present it as some meaningful graphical interface on its screen, when just a small box with four lights in it will get lit up, and maybe is the top or bottom proportion of the sensor (could have a prism to detect the upper/bottom from horizon).

 

 

15 hours ago, 3WA said:

Exactly.  I'd rather just have the MWS box zip tied to the frame than this mess of input to ABRIS.

 

I would be happy for the LWS box being used for it. It would just give a lot off false-alarms when wingman launches or someone even fires a cannon in couple kilometer distance etc. Basically you get warning on everything with that logic, while the President-S whole system logic is that it calculates the range of the launch, the missile direction (toward you, or flying somewhere else) as threat assessment and then it waits that the missile gets close to proper distance before it initiates the counter measurements and jamming process to maximize the effect. 

[S.E.Bulba]

2 часа назад, Fri13 сказал:

He was meaning…

Sorry, but my questions were not addressed to you. Believe me, I would definitely turn to you if I had the time and desire to engage in idle chatter.
 

Скрытый текст

Original in Russian

 

Извините, но мои вопросы были адресованы не Вам. Поверьте, я бы обязательно к Вам обратился, если бы у меня было время и желание заниматься пустой болтовнёй.

 

[IronChancellor]

5 hours ago, S.E.Bulba said:

Sorry, but my questions were not addressed to you. Believe me, I would definitely turn to you if I had the time and desire to engage in idle chatter.

He addressed all of your points perfectly. 'Perhaps' it is the language barrier but your questions were asinine in the first place for exactly the reasons that Fri13 stated.

[S.E.Bulba]

42 минуты назад, IronChancellor сказал:

He addressed all of your points perfectly. 'Perhaps' it is the language barrier but your questions were asinine in the first place for exactly the reasons that Fri13 stated.

Perhaps for you personally, all this is exactly what it looks like, but for me personally, this is nothing more than 'building castles in Spain'. Sorry, but I have not received a specific answer to any of my questions.
 

Скрытый текст

Original in Russian

 

Возможно для Вас лично всё это именно так и выглядит, однако лично для меня это не более чем «строительство воздушных замков». Извините, но я так и не получил конкретного ответа ни на один из своих вопросов.

 

[zerO_crash]

1 hour ago, IronChancellor said:

He addressed all of your points perfectly. 'Perhaps' it is the language barrier but your questions were asinine in the first place for exactly the reasons that Fri13 stated.

No, far off. It’s an irrelevant response that bears no resemblence of truth. Sebulba gives good questions, and as he mentions, they are directed to the original poster. It has nothing to do with language barrier. It has to do with writing paragraphs of useless, non-concrete assumptions, vs. actually giving a factually straight answer.

Edited May 6, 2021 by zerO_crash

[BranchPrediction]

Everytime there is a small warfare in these forums haha. I too would love to have the actual box with the display and buttons in the cockpit, but i guess it would take up a lot of space and decrease ur view. But the info being shown thru the abris is alright, tho probably not how it was irl, altho that is close to not picking

[BranchPrediction]

Chizh said on the ru forum

 

There are no plans to do automatic shooting of traps (aka flares). MWS will indicate threats to ABRIS, but that's about it. The pilot himself will make the decision to shoot traps after analyzing the threat.

 

Pretty cool imo, since the mws will also report friendly missiles and whatnot

[3WA]

Well, if it's like the MWS on the A-10, it just goes nuts and reports every missile on the battlefield, whether it's coming at you or not. 

[Baaz]

Personally, I don't need/want the Pres-S system.  Having a laser and missile warning system is more than adequate.  It's not like the Pres-S is going to guarantee protection anyway.  So, just tell me the direction, and I'll handle the rest.

On 5/5/2021 at 1:43 PM, 3WA said:

We really need glass cockpit, just like Ka-52.

No, no we don't.  Call me old school, but I absolutely hate modern glass cockpits.  

1 hour ago, 3WA said:

Well, if it's like the MWS on the A-10, it just goes nuts and reports every missile on the battlefield, whether it's coming at you or not. 

Agreed!  So you all better get use to saying "Rifle," "Magnum," etc, otherwise you'll be freaking the hell out of a lot of people.

 

[BranchPrediction]

2 hours ago, 3WA said:

Well, if it's like the MWS on the A-10, it just goes nuts and reports every missile on the battlefield, whether it's coming at you or not. 

Chizh said that it is indeed just like the a10 mws.

Now i havent seen anything about it, since im only interested in helos but im gonna check it out.

Agreed lws and mws should be pretty damn complete, im no expert but an rwr wont benefit it much at all then no?

[IronChancellor]

 

8 hours ago, S.E.Bulba said:

Sorry, but I have not received a specific answer to any of my questions.

There is a difference between not receiving answers and not reading the answers you recieved.

 

1 hour ago, BranchPrediction said:

Agreed lws and mws should be pretty damn complete, im no expert but an rwr wont benefit it much at all then no?

At the ranges the ka-50 engages targets the mws would detect anything that an rwr would. The only possible benifit of RWR is that it wouldn't go off when your wingman shoots a missile. But since they are linking it to the ABRIS, I suspect it may track the missiles position which may also allow the mws to only trigger on incoming missiles. It will be interesting to see how they model it.

[Mr.Scar]

Im not sure if someone already posted this, but I have been digging around the internet, to find more details about the MWS to KA-50, and how it will work. Now I am not sure how accurate this is, so maybe someone who has better technical knowledge or some better info might put it in a accurate way, but anyway maybe you will find it interesting.

 

This is what i have managed to find:

 

1. The device located in the bottom right corner of that picture which is in Russian but translated to English means "UV direction finder of a missile launch" is the Ka-50 Missile Warning System.

 

2. And how UV MWS works, and I have marked in bold the most interesting stuff i think:

 

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Missile_approach_warning_system#/Ultraviolet-based_MWS

 

Advantages

• Operates in solar blind UV spectral wavelength region and therefore has no natural (sun) false alarms. UV based MAW systems therefore have a much reduced false alarm problem to solve compared to IR based systems.
• Very good probability of warning in high clutter background environments.
• All-weather operation, as it is impervious to solar clutter, and hardly affected by liquid water.
• Wide instantaneous field of view.
• Provide very good AOA information for good decoy dispensing decision making, maneuvering and for pointing DIRCMs.
• Has fast response time against nearby missile launches.
• Is a simpler system than pulse Doppler & IR technologies.
• Does not require cooling and needs only moderate computing power.
• Low life cycle cost.

Disadvantages

• To detect approaching missiles, the rocket motor of the missile must be burning – it requires the high effective burning temperatures associated with solid fuel rocket motors.
• IR-based systems are probably better at altitude but UV is better against surface-to-air missiles.
• Cannot provide actual range information but can derive TTI from the rapid increase in amplitude of the approaching missile's signal.
• Detection range could be limited against future new technology low IR/UV emission rocket motors.

3. Summary:

 

If this information is correct and the way how I understand it works, the missile launch warnings will come from ground threats mostly. So the fear of being spammed by MLW from different sources other than the close vicinity in which the Ka-50 is operating in should be, at least to my understanding, not that big of a problem. As far as MWS going off, when another Ka-50 launches its Vikhr, it will most probably be detected by the MWS aswell.

 

As far as the A10 vs Ka50 Mws comparison, i think for the Ka-50 the MLW will be less of a problem, since helos operate at low altitude, so the detection range should be reduced. But this is just a theory, honestly i have not been testing the A-10 MWS on low alt, since most of the time I was flying very high if there was a SAM rich area. 

 

Anyway, im not totally sure how this will work in DCS, but I do think it does provide some insight.

 

In the end, we will probably more know once the BS3 update drops.

Edited May 7, 2021 by Mr.Scar

[S.E.Bulba]

8 часов назад, IronChancellor сказал:

There is a difference between not receiving answers and not reading the answers you recieved.

Stop doing unnecessary demagoguery.

 

Скрытый текст

Original in Russian

 

Перестаньте заниматься ненужной демагогией.

 

Edited May 7, 2021 by S.E.Bulba