Real Black Shark 3

[janitha2]

4 hours ago, amalahama said:

Although I'm absolutely happy with BS3, I think you made a very valid point. Nowhere, neither in the shop page or in the official documentation, it's mentioned that BS3 new features are fictional and non-existing in real life. Since DCS mantra is "as real as it gets" I think it's fair to at least create awareness to the potential buyer that this product deviates even slightly from the regular addon full fidelity policy

I upgraded to BS3 thinking it was "realistic" to have a MWS but now i know... 



I spent 10 usd on BS3 but what if some one spent 70 usd to buy it. The thing is you can choose which version you want in to mission editor but I only fly in multiplayer so i dont get to make that decision. I guess thats the sad reality

[Raptor9]

There are many photos in this very thread that show the Ka-50 with the Missile Warning System, even some without the DIRCM turrets. Here's one from the 2nd post in the thread:

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

12 hours ago, amalahama said:

Although I'm absolutely happy with BS3, I think you made a very valid point. Nowhere, neither in the shop page or in the official documentation, it's mentioned that BS3 new features are fictional and non-existing in real life. Since DCS mantra is "as real as it gets" I think it's fair to at least create awareness to the potential buyer that this product deviates even slightly from the regular addon full fidelity policy

That'd have to be applied to basically every module, though. They all make some deviations for various reasons. Our Hornet doesn't carry the Litening on the cheek mount, for example. Remember: Black Shark first launched in 2008. ED worked with references to a much older example, possibly one even developed from the original V-80s. As posted here, we have Ka-50s from 2007 with the MWS installed.

If this is something that annoys, one can always switch the Black Shark version to 2011 in the editor.

[bkthunder]

I think the point is that yes, the Ka-50 had/has the Missile Warning System, but if so why doesn't ED model the dispaly in the cockpit in a realsitic way as it is on such MWS-equipped Ka-50s?

Second point is: if ED took educated guessing in lack of more info and details, why are they so stubborn on not fixing/changing items in other modules when there is ample docmentation provided by the community that would allow very educted guessing? 

 

It's this dicotomy that throws me a little off. 

 

[jubuttib]

2 hours ago, bkthunder said:

I think the point is that yes, the Ka-50 had/has the Missile Warning System, but if so why doesn't ED model the dispaly in the cockpit in a realsitic way as it is on such MWS-equipped Ka-50s?

Second point is: if ED took educated guessing in lack of more info and details, why are they so stubborn on not fixing/changing items in other modules when there is ample docmentation provided by the community that would allow very educted guessing? 

 

It's this dicotomy that throws me a little off. 

Hypothetical, but when we saw some of the early shots of the BS3, it was looking quite different, had the DIRCM eggs etc. Then the Russian govt got in the way, and things changed. It wouldn't surprise me if they're what's preventing a more realistic implementation, and ED didn't want the work on the systems to go to waste so added a somewhat plausible implementation.

Just talking outta my ass tho.

[M1Combat]

"sold with content being 90% pure invention."

"It's the same level of what if than attaching Rafale wings on a Mirage 3 expecting it to work properly"

"This is an upgrade which is sold as something realistic while nothing about it ever existed"

 

These statements are simply not true sir.  I know you know the arguments so I won't belabor them here but these statements go too far.  90% pure invention??  Swapping wings?  Nothin about it ever existed???  WUT?  There isn't a SINGLE module in this game that is "perfectly" real sir.  You may as well stop acting like there are...  and just enjoy what we have.  You're cutting off your nose to spite your face friend ;).

 

  There is clearly enough evidence to indicate that this was the direction the aircraft was going had development continued.

 

 

[LordMustang]

On 12/21/2022 at 8:08 PM, bkthunder said:

I think the point is that yes, the Ka-50 had/has the Missile Warning System, but if so why doesn't ED model the dispaly in the cockpit in a realsitic way as it is on such MWS-equipped Ka-50s?

 

AFAIK, that's because very little is known about how the MWS was really integrated. Chizh (and others) have posted some pictures of what is presumed to be the indicator, mounted to the left side of the ILS-31. 

 

Spoiler

 

On 12/21/2022 at 8:08 PM, bkthunder said:

Second point is: if ED took educated guessing in lack of more info and details, why are they so stubborn on not fixing/changing items in other modules when there is ample docmentation provided by the community that would allow very educted guessing? 

 

I guess that boils down to what Chizh denoted earlier: since many of the Ka-50s were used as testbeds for future technologies, ED took some liberties to be more experimental with it.

Edited December 25, 2022 by LordMustang

[dimitriov]

On 12/21/2022 at 2:07 PM, Raptor9 said:

There are many photos in this very thread that show the Ka-50 with the Missile Warning System, even some without the DIRCM turrets. Here's one from the 2nd post in the thread:

Nice it's a pic from a 2007 prototype. I'd like to see its cockpit to note what I already know which is that there is no longer an abris aboard.

 

Again, as simple as it is, Russian Federation President S never was coded and integrated in a 1980' civilian finnish computer. I would have thought it to be quite obvious.

 

I perfectly get other people points that it does not this much matter etc. I myself fly irl and dcs is a game in my view. But as noted by other users some peoplr are kinda surprised to learn about the way it was really handled AFTER having bought it. And since the only way for them to learn about it is to read an english or russian forum... Man it's not fair.

 

Nicolas

Edited December 25, 2022 by dimitriov

[default762792]

So...if I'm understanding this right, I can upgrade to BS3 and disable the fictional/overly-speculative features (MWS and Igla) in the mission editor, and essentially have BS2 with improved internal and external models, openable maintenance access panels, etc., and be able to fly a broadly realistic iteration - as broadly realistic as other mainstream Eagle Dynamics modules like the F-16C, F/A-18C, etc. - of one of the, what, 19 or 20 Ka-50s ever made? In other words, when those features are turned off in the ME, how much of what is left is "fictional", beyond the reasonable educated guesswork ED, or any other developer for that matter, has to do any project?

Edited December 28, 2022 by default762792

[janitha2]

22 hours ago, default762792 said:

So...if I'm understanding this right, I can upgrade to BS3 and disable the fictional/overly-speculative features (MWS and Igla) in the mission editor, and essentially have BS2 with improved internal and external models, openable maintenance access panels, etc., and be able to fly a broadly realistic iteration - as broadly realistic as other mainstream Eagle Dynamics modules like the F-16C, F/A-18C, etc. - of one of the, what, 19 or 20 Ka-50s ever made? In other words, when those features are turned off in the ME, how much of what is left is "fictional", beyond the reasonable educated guesswork ED, or any other developer for that matter, has to do any project?

 

yes you can turn it off in ME but 90% of players play for multiplayer and in multiplayer you cant choose

[default762792]

Haha, thanks kindly for the reply, but of course I already bought it. I bought the original in a physical copy in 2008 and that sent me down a path I'm on to this day, so how could I not?

[grimm862]

On 12/28/2022 at 11:33 PM, janitha2 said:

yes you can turn it off in ME but 90% of players play for multiplayer and in multiplayer you cant choose

Wait you think 90% of the DCS player base is playing multiplayer?

[grimm862]

On 12/19/2022 at 3:59 AM, dimitriov said:

This is not plausible arrangement because you lacked for a number, a variable or the exact shape of a vertice line on your MFD. This is an upgrade which is sold as something realistic while nothing about it ever existed and its arrangement in the cockpit with other already really existing systems is utterly incoherent. The level of plausibility and realism is the same than for an X-Wing module. The difference between a partial simulation and an invention is not only about semantics. 

 

I simply state that it should be written in the module description when you buy it. Else it's consumer misleading if not a pure and simple lie. And I litteraly and morally don't and can't buy this. When you sell something telling it's realistic while you know that you literally made up everything about it, you're in a kind of business scheme which does not lead me to want to work with you. Therefore they must write it, this is everything I say, as this is morally the right thing to do. 

 

So instead of this "DCS: Black Shark 3 is a further development of the well-known Black Shark and Black Shark 2 projects, which are dedicated to the Russian Ka-50 attack helicopter."

 

Write this : DCS: Black Shark 3 is a fictionnal further development of the well-known Black Shark and Black Shark 2 projects, which are dedicated to the Russian Ka-50 attack helicopter.

 

As actually, you tell me "don't buy it", if I was not to know about this stuff I would buy it thinking it's an actual real thing, further misleading my judgment on the value of my investment. This is an elementary worldwide business rule and is even decorrelated from the actual product which is in question. A good deal is a fair one. Anyway I go back on 3DS max, forum chat never changes anything ^^

 

I am struggling to imagine being this worked up over a video game helicopter. It's a video game.

[okopanja]

On 12/25/2022 at 3:56 PM, dimitriov said:

Nice it's a pic from a 2007 prototype. I'd like to see its cockpit to note what I already know which is that there is no longer an abris aboard.

 

Again, as simple as it is, Russian Federation President S never was coded and integrated in a 1980' civilian finnish computer. I would have thought it to be quite obvious.

 

I perfectly get other people points that it does not this much matter etc. I myself fly irl and dcs is a game in my view. But as noted by other users some peoplr are kinda surprised to learn about the way it was really handled AFTER having bought it. And since the only way for them to learn about it is to read an english or russian forum... Man it's not fair.

 

Nicolas

 

Hi Nicolas,

I see no point at argueing this with you anymore. After so many posts, the only thing left is to ask ED for a refund.

Personally I like both BS2 and BS3, and will keep enjoying them.

[trevoC]

1 hour ago, grimm862 said:

I am struggling to imagine being this worked up over a video game helicopter. It's a video game.

Video game my ass, I purchased one of the few KA-50's from the former soviet union with my Pepsi points and I'm struggling to learn how to fly it.

[grimm862]

42 minutes ago, trevoC said:

Video game my ass, I purchased one of the few KA-50's from the former soviet union with my Pepsi points and I'm struggling to learn how to fly it.

Just use the auto start shortcut.

[janitha2]

13 hours ago, grimm862 said:

Wait you think 90% of the DCS player base is playing multiplayer?

yes 

[grimm862]

1 hour ago, janitha2 said:

yes 

That's hilarious. If the playerbase consisted of 90% multiplayer users that'd be mean DCS has a userbase of about 1000 people. If there's only 1000 people buying modules for DCS this games done yesterday.

[trevoC]

15 hours ago, janitha2 said:

yes 

I've been playing DCS since LOMAC and my first MP session was today. I'm betting there are low single digit numbers of people playing MP.

[janitha2]

5 hours ago, trevoC said:

I've been playing DCS since LOMAC and my first MP session was today. I'm betting there are low single digit numbers of people playing MP.

 

20 hours ago, grimm862 said:

That's hilarious. If the playerbase consisted of 90% multiplayer users that'd be mean DCS has a userbase of about 1000 people. If there's only 1000 people buying modules for DCS this games done yesterday.

i have been playing since 2020 and so far i have come across a ton of people that play multiplayer and not single player but if im wrong hey i accept that

the problem i have is that i cant choose to have the laser warning pannel under the data link, i like old aircraft you know  

[trevoC]

2 hours ago, janitha2 said:

 

i have been playing since 2020 and so far i have come across a ton of people that play multiplayer and not single player but if im wrong hey i accept that

the problem i have is that i cant choose to have the laser warning pannel under the data link, i like old aircraft you know  

Well for some perspective since you are fairly new to the community, LOMAC is probably around 20 years old.

Most of the long time community users here came from a single player environment and that is how they play. MP is sort of the new kid on the block from a historical perspective. I've never been interested personally. They dynamic campaigns kind of change this for me though.

[Tiger-II]

I've been flying DCS online pretty much since BS1 was released. There is no better way to fly it IMHO. SP is great for just flying around, experimenting, and learning, but MP is where the action is.

Edited January 2, 2023 by Tiger-II

[trevoC]

14 hours ago, Tiger-II said:

I've been flying DCS online pretty much since BS1 was released. There is no better way to fly it IMHO. SP is great for just flying around, experimenting, and learning, but MP is where the action is.

 

When I started playing lomac and then flaming cliffs and bs1 I was much younger and had all the time in the world to hop on a MP server.

Now, although I do find the time to play, I also have the option of pausing when one of the other 6 members of my family have an "emergency". < about every 30 minutes or so if I'm lucky.

Campaigns give me the option to pause and come back (sometimes hours later) to a session.

Secondly, I'm coming at DCS from a different perspective than some I'm guessing. I've played lots of MP games over the years (FPS's for example) and enjoyed online play more than anything. DCS however was never viewed in that regard from me. I had a PPL and flew gliders when I was younger and have always had a huge interest in all things aviation. DCS for me was sort of like a history book. Instead of reading about the A-10 (as I did a lot as a kid) and other military aircraft, DCS allowed me to dive into the systems.

I enjoyed DCS purely from a systems learning perspective. I've read more than half of the manuals (even the giant ones) of the 30 modules I own and once I start one I usually can't put it down. Then I like learning the systems in cockpit until I know every nuance of the real aircraft and how it relates to DCS. Then the flight characteristics etc... In fact even single player campaigns were secondary to the Aircraft themselves for me.

I never really looked at DCS as a MP game from the get go. It was just a way for me to experience and learn about military aircraft in a different way.

There is no better way to fly DCS than MP, for you.

I just started Enigmas server and am enjoying it, but it will hardly replace what brought me to DCS in the first place. It will just be another reason to boot it up for some change from the norm.

[Tiger-II]

@trevoCI don't fly MP as some do which is part of a regular online squadron. I just find it offers more variation than loading a mission (I find re-playability a problem). I tend to fly solo or fly support for others.

[trevoC]

Don't get me wrong, I've enjoyed my few sessions on Enigma's server, I just find it difficult to play most of the time as I can't pause the mission. Its the biggest problem that was immediately apparent when I first jumped online. < wife walks into the room and wants to talk about whatever it is she's mulling over and unlike a mission where I can pause and give her 5 minutes, I start panicking because I'm flying an su-25 on an ingress to industrial at 20m above sea level with no autopilot.