In cockpit footage of low level rocket and cannon engagement on multiple target types.

[Rabies]

I’m not sure on the current guidelines in posting combat footage from the Ukrainian war, but I find the following footage really interesting. The KA-52 crew passes over the engagement zone multiple times until the inevitable happens. 
 

I find the video does not promote the war in the Ukraine, but shows a pilots view of rocket and cannon engagement and the dangers of passing over known enemy positions multiple times.

 

 

[3WA]

Nice!  Thanks!

[aleader]

I saw this video on YT (Warleaks-Military Blog) and was wondering the same thing about posting it here (what the protocol is for posting war footage).  It's so rare to see this type of footage one can't help but be in awe of it.  You just can't get the 'feel' for what a shaking, lumbering beast an attack helicopter like this is without seeing it in real action.  I know it's war, but I can't help but think that sim developers aren't watching all of this footage to get ideas on how to improve the immersion and realism of their games.  Some of the IFV/infantry footage coming out could have come straight from Squad...

Edited March 20, 2022 by aleader

[Dragon1-1]

It also shows that the Russian pilots could use some hours in DCS.  I think every virtual Ka-50 jock out there knows better than to do what they did. If you keep buzzing the enemy position, they'll find the range sooner or later. You can sometimes get away with it against Syrian militants with AKs and RPGs, but that's about it (and even AK guys can get a bullet into something important if you let them keep trying).

Also, mind the camera effects. The HUD, for example, likely isn't crapping out, but the camera refresh rate makes it look like it's flickering. Shaking can also be exaggerated compared to what you'd notice IRL. The guy has a camera fixed to the top of the helmet, so it shakes a lot, in a real helo you'd feel the shaking (and you can in the sim, if you can afford a JetSeat and/or a Buttkicker), but not quite see it, because your brain will compensate.

Edited March 20, 2022 by Dragon1-1

[razorseal]

I wondered same thing. I noticed something like this is ASKING for you get shot at by every AK, RPG, MANPAD anything on the field.

 

It also made me think of the devastation.... 

 

When I was infantry, I never really worried about air threats in middle east because well... They didn't have any... Firing at this thing will give away you position, only to get chopped down by it's cannon or rockets... scary scary.

 

I also noticed how the altimeter on HUD is showing negative. we don't see this in DCS because everything is perfectly calibrated in a sense.

 

lastly, why no KA-50s? 

[aleader]

Yah, the camera does add to the shake, but compared to the smooth, controlled ride of a jet, it's got to seem like this thing could just fall out of the sky at any moment (as some videos recently show them doing).  It's hard to know for sure without being in the cockpit, but it also seems that the in-cockpit sound is much louder than what we usually get in DCS without adjusting things.  And good question...why no Ka 50's?  I thought the 52 was fairly rare compared to the 50.

I actually tried buying a Jetseat, but their payment system was such a gongshow (Sergei's site...only one available at the time) that I had to refund, which ended up costing me $25 in Paypal fees and I received nothing.

[Dragon1-1]

Ka-52 is actually far more common than the Ka-50. The single-seat attack helo concept didn't really work out, and while it was produced in small numbers and used in a few places, they're far from common. Ka-52 is what they're making now, and it's got a lot of advantages over the old Ka-50. Of course, none of those will help if you fly it like a dork, which is what those guys did.

I'll start with a DIY Buttkicker, I even have an old car speaker for that purpose (a little small, but should be OK for a start).

2 hours ago, razorseal said:

I also noticed how the altimeter on HUD is showing negative. we don't see this in DCS because everything is perfectly calibrated in a sense.

You can easily get this in DCS, just zero the altimeter while sitting on the ramp at a airbase that's not at sea level, and then fly somewhere where the terrain is lower. That's probably what happened here. It's less about things being perfectly calibrated and more about the peculiarities of barometric altitude.

[razorseal]

On 3/20/2022 at 1:31 PM, Dragon1-1 said:

Ka-52 is actually far more common than the Ka-50. The single-seat attack helo concept didn't really work out, and while it was produced in small numbers and used in a few places, they're far from common. Ka-52 is what they're making now, and it's got a lot of advantages over the old Ka-50. Of course, none of those will help if you fly it like a dork, which is what those guys did.

I'll start with a DIY Buttkicker, I even have an old car speaker for that purpose (a little small, but should be OK for a start).

You can easily get this in DCS, just zero the altimeter while sitting on the ramp at a airbase that's not at sea level, and then fly somewhere where the terrain is lower. That's probably what happened here. It's less about things being perfectly calibrated and more about the peculiarities of barometric altitude.

What I'm trying to say is it's already calibrated in the game. I have flown vast lands and haven't seen this happen in the game. 

Flying King airs and other planes it was pretty normal for us to be within just 75 feet or so of barometric altitude. From one airport to the next pressure would be diff.

 

I'm not sure if dcs simulates dynamic weather with changing barometric altitude? 

 

I don't even know how to check a metar in dcs. When I get in the game it's set. Possibly because it's always 29.92 in the game lol

[Dragon1-1]

It's possible to change the METAR in DCS, many higher quality campaigns set it differently for each mission. Some information is in the briefing, although not a full METAR unless the mission designer cares to provide one (some even have ATIS on the radio). Default QNH is 29.92, and if the designer doesn't care, that's what you'll get, but it doesn't have to be that way. Dynamic weather is not a thing yet, but it's planned, right now you have static weather conditions through the mission.

Also, 29.92 is the QNH, which you're rather unlikely to go ever below (unless we get a Dead Sea map, that is ). If you set QFE on the ground instead, it's quite possible to go into negatives, although you'd have to fly very low or land somewhere else, since most DCS airfields have nearly the same elevation, anyway. Most of DCS aircraft have radar altimeters, so there's no real reason to use QFE, but you can if you want.

Edited March 22, 2022 by Dragon1-1

[Los]

So much for using the standoff capability....

[Apok]

On 3/20/2022 at 2:30 PM, Dragon1-1 said:

It also shows that the Russian pilots could use some hours in DCS.  I think every virtual Ka-50 jock out there knows better than to do what they did. If you keep buzzing the enemy position, they'll find the range sooner or later. You can sometimes get away with it against Syrian militants with AKs and RPGs, but that's about it (and even AK guys can get a bullet into something important if you let them keep trying).

Also, mind the camera effects. The HUD, for example, likely isn't crapping out, but the camera refresh rate makes it look like it's flickering. Shaking can also be exaggerated compared to what you'd notice IRL. The guy has a camera fixed to the top of the helmet, so it shakes a lot, in a real helo you'd feel the shaking (and you can in the sim, if you can afford a JetSeat and/or a Buttkicker), but not quite see it, because your brain will compensate.

 

They had to overfly, gun and run because they are supporting the takeover of that airfield. There were bunch of Mi17 there that need to land ASAP. If they hovered they would end up like that Apache in Yemen. Everything there is hostile.

 

[Dragon1-1]

Ka-52, just like Ka-50 and the Apache, is perfectly capable of hovering out of range of the defenders and peppering them with the gun and missiles. They flew it like a Hind, and the Ka-52 isn't a Hind. If you want a Hind, get a Hind or a Havoc, which can do a similar job. Ka-52 is not nearly as survivable in the same role. Also, if you do have to make such runs, you have to break away before you overfly the enemy position. Flying right over their heads in straight line gets you shot down. Make a pass, turn away, turn back in.

[DmitriKozlowsky]

Soldiers fight as they train. This is what Russian KA-52 crews train to, and that is what they doing. Using KA-52 as IL-2. Fly very low, and engage close-in with gun and rockets. Perhaps they do use stand off for guided weapons, footage of which Russian MOD would censor. Its also more compatible with propaganda war of showing heroism under fire , of RUssian helicopter crews fighting up close and personal.

[DmitriKozlowsky]

On 3/25/2022 at 12:09 PM, Dragon1-1 said:

Ka-52, just like Ka-50 and the Apache, is perfectly capable of hovering out of range of the defenders and peppering them with the gun and missiles. They flew it like a Hind, and the Ka-52 isn't a Hind. If you want a Hind, get a Hind or a Havoc, which can do a similar job. Ka-52 is not nearly as survivable in the same role. Also, if you do have to make such runs, you have to break away before you overfly the enemy position. Flying right over their heads in straight line gets you shot down. Make a pass, turn away, turn back in.

MI-28N Havoc is likely more compatible with NATO / 'Western' attack helicopter tactics of hiding the platform behind tree line, terrain mask, anything to prevent LOS. Becouse of its mast mounted sensor. MI-28N is most analogue of AH-64D, with Apache having more sophisticated sensors.MI-28N is heavier then AH-64D, due to crew cabin being more heavily protected, and Havoc gun system being heavier. Both use 30mm , but not compatible ammunition.

Hind has no analogue in West, with maybe possible exception of special forces support MH-60 DAP Blackhawk. But those exist in small numbers assigned to US Army 160th SOAR (The Nightstalkers) . Hind using rocket salvoes in high speed strafe is more like USAF and USN A-1 Skyraider , in application adopted for very short or vertical landing ability of Hind. Given how vulnerable Hind's powerplant (engine , transmission, main rotor) to MANPADS, as shown in Soviet Afgan, and RuAF Ukr , campaigns, may not be the best way. Given RuAF losses of KA-52 fleet, may not be best use of KA-52 either. 

[3WA]

On 3/20/2022 at 8:30 AM, Dragon1-1 said:

I think every virtual Ka-50 jock out there knows better than to do what they did.

THIS!  I was wondering how they thought they were going to survive their mad little run through the hostile armor.

Whoever trained these pilots should have their head examined.  Since we have the video, I guess the Russians were able to save the heli, and the two idiots piloting it.

[rcjonessnp175]

4 hours ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

MI-28N Havoc is likely more compatible with NATO / 'Western' attack helicopter tactics of hiding the platform behind tree line, terrain mask, anything to prevent LOS. Becouse of its mast mounted sensor. MI-28N is most analogue of AH-64D, with Apache having more sophisticated sensors.MI-28N is heavier then AH-64D, due to crew cabin being more heavily protected, and Havoc gun system being heavier. Both use 30mm , but not compatible ammunition.

Hind has no analogue in West, with maybe possible exception of special forces support MH-60 DAP Blackhawk. But those exist in small numbers assigned to US Army 160th SOAR (The Nightstalkers) . Hind using rocket salvoes in high speed strafe is more like USAF and USN A-1 Skyraider , in application adopted for very short or vertical landing ability of Hind. Given how vulnerable Hind's powerplant (engine , transmission, main rotor) to MANPADS, as shown in Soviet Afgan, and RuAF Ukr , campaigns, may not be the best way. Given RuAF losses of KA-52 fleet, may not be best use of KA-52 either. 

we never got to ride in the back of a DAP no room....  so doesn't fit the hind equivalent in that case.

[Dragon1-1]

52 minutes ago, rcjonessnp175 said:

we never got to ride in the back of a DAP no room....  so doesn't fit the hind equivalent in that case.

It kind of does, in practice the Hind carries either people or armament, just like the Blackhawk. AFAIK, one thing the DAP can't do is act as an emergency evac helo when winchester. In theory, in a chilly, low altitude theatre, the Hind's transport capability would've been more usable than it was in Afghan, but even then, it wouldn't be its primary use.

5 hours ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

MI-28N Havoc is likely more compatible with NATO / 'Western' attack helicopter tactics of hiding the platform behind tree line, terrain mask, anything to prevent LOS. Becouse of its mast mounted sensor. MI-28N is most analogue of AH-64D, with Apache having more sophisticated sensors.MI-28N is heavier then AH-64D, due to crew cabin being more heavily protected, and Havoc gun system being heavier. Both use 30mm , but not compatible ammunition.

My reference to Mi-28 was because of its armor. Due to this, close-in strafing is a slightly less boneheaded idea than it'd be in Ka-50 or a Western helo. It's basically a more streamlined Hind successor, and if flown in a similar manner, should do no worse. They're all vulnerable to MANPADS, but flares and proper battlefield assessment would help mitigate them.