No Radar warning, no radar guidance, no radar SAMs?

[Lobo_63]

... which is exactly why that HAWK would be organically supported by MANPADS and AAA.

 

But you can still carefully peel back the layers of that onion, even with MANPADS and AAA if you have good intel.

[GGTharos]

In DCS, yes. IN reality, they'll see you before you see them, -and- they are mobile.

[Lobo_63]

In DCS, yes. IN reality, they'll see you before you see them, -and- they are mobile.

 

I don't know squat about this stuff in reality, and only a little bit in DCS. I do know that based on the amount of times I die in DCS BS, I sure would not want to do this for real. ...and hats off to those who do.

[GGTharos]

Scary, scary stuff.

 

There was an exercise with, I believe, the British 64D's vs. an IADS containing a patriot battery.

 

The Apache's didn't win that one ... then again, other distraction you'd expect to be there weren't (ie. no 'enemy' aircraft etc). The IADS mopped up the choppers by using their mobile and semi-fixed assets expeditiously.

 

The Avengers roamed and placed themselves in the way of the helis, datalinks providing them with heli positions from surveillance radars, and the patriots themselves, etc etc.

[danger]

Danger, have you read all 21 pages of this thread as well as the god-knows-how-many of the other replicated thread?

 

 

No i have not, if i was to read ALL the posts and All the 121 threads than i would be here for a month of sundays and to be honest, i would rather be flying than reading. Thats why there is this post so late in the thread

[ZaltysZ]

No i have not

 

Most people do the same, that is why this thread is 22 pages long already. The same questions are asked, the same answers and arguments are given; such threads are proof that time flows in circle - everything in the future will be the same as in the past and there will be no end for this. :smilewink:

[tdar]

god, it was really annoying to get constantly swatted out of the sky with no warning today in multiplayer :(

[Thorn]

Guys, I think the point of this sim is to fly very low to the ground and avoid SAM sites if you possibly can. It's too bad that giant stick is in the way though because when the SAMs come flying in at ya it sure would be nice to be able to have that extra space to be able to lean forward to kiss your soon to be cookin Russian *as-prin* goodbye! :-) Well, then again it's not like you'd ever know what killed you anyways. The Ka-50 is a deathtrap in a SAM enviroment and pretty much every war fought in the last 40+ years has had SAM sites - either stationary or mobile.

 

And in real life, I would have refused any orders to fly in this helo if I knew the combat area contained even just 1 SAM site. I'd rather take my chances at standing before a firing squad for disobeying a pointless suicide mission than to even waste my time flying blind to any aerial or ground based threats. Shame they never fully implemented RWR into this platform as I think the Ka-50 is a sexy CAS chopper. I imagine the real life Russian pilots that flew them in combat must have flown half drunk on vodka before straping themselves into such deathtraps.

 

Thankfully this is just a sim though and I don't mind dying 100+ times, but the SAMs are a bit annoying.

[EvilBivol-1]

The Ka-50 is a deathtrap in a SAM enviroment and pretty much every war fought in the last 40+ years has had SAM sites - either stationary or mobile.

Hmm...

Soviet-Afghan war, 1979-1989 - small arms and MANPADS.

Chechnya, 1994-present: small arms and MANPADS.

Other conflicts on the post-Soviet landmass - mostly small arms and MANPADS.

 

Until Georgia last year, Russian helicopter pilots have not had to worry about radars or radar-guided SAMs for the past 30 years of conflicts they were involved in.

 

That's not to excuse the lack of RWR, but I do think it's an important historical consideration.

Edited March 9, 2009 by EvilBivol-1

[Weta43]

god, it was really annoying to get constantly swatted out of the sky with no warning today in multiplayer

A partial solution would be for "fixed" sites to not be hidden by the mission designers & then their threat zones would show on the Abris, varying with altitude...

IRL intelligence - or any fixed wing assets with an RWR would have notified the position of fixed sites anyway..

You can't hide a Hawk site by an airport, so why hide it in the mission ?

 

I-HAWK #2, launchers loaded with missiles on racks to the south east. Western site is empty though:

 

 

Nato Hawk site..

Edited March 9, 2009 by Weta43

[EtherealN]

Agreed on hidden sites, Weta. Permanent installations like that probably don't stand all that much of a chance to remain hidden, as opposed to more mobile assets like shilkas, strelas, tunguskas and so on. To me it would seem that the big nasty sites would serve more as a "denial" weapon for the defender in that they will be an area where they can with a reasonable degree of certainty know the enemy won't quite want to send their choppers - at least not without a SEAD package in the air as well. :P

 

I haven't really analyzed whether there's any such assets that show or do not show in the campaigns though, and I have yet to play any user-made missions that I haven't made myself so not at all sure if it's being a problem.

 

Awesome finds on google earth tho - happen to have the coordinates on the second one?

[mac495]

Ya well flying low would be great except your view is blocked by trees while they are tracking you with radar/visual/laser through the trees and the missles are flying through the trees also....

[GGTharos]

Funny thing; people seem to assume ALL THE TIME that these sites are 'just there', barren, unprotected. They have a ring of SHORAD and MANPADS to protect themselves from eggbeaters and other things that like to fly low ;)

[littlejohn1959]

Ya well flying low would be great except your view is blocked by trees while they are tracking you with radar/visual/laser through the trees and the missles are flying through the trees also....

 

that may be a feature mate .

for the other side ,though .

lots of things in this sim are ,,realistic. but theres a few important things that are not .

to be able to fly right through a forest ,, seems ,, well ,,, odd ,, to me .

nice secenery though . if you are into that kind of thing .

learn to live with it , im thinkin .

its a frustratingly /fun , sim , all the same .

think ill give it a ,, whrillllll.:joystick:

cheers from here .

[mac495]

Well I can excuse the collision detection with the trees (barely)..

But the all seeing ai (if you can call it that) that target you thru the trees is a bit....

 

That and the insta-lock when you come over a hill is kinda bull..

[rawtoxin]

Interesting thread here.

 

I can understand boths sides, on the one hand ED can't simulate something that doesn't exist or wasn't proven.

 

On the other hand its kinda frustrating getting shot out of no where without any warning. I also asked myself why would KA-50 run against Nato AA Systems like Patriot and co. Thus parts of the campains look indeed unbalanced to me. However and this has also been answered a couple of times: feel free to edit.

Now i can't edit hidden units can i? Sry iam an editor n00b :doh: :megalol:

 

Besides, DCS BS is an outstanding plattform and i am looking forward for tons of campains/ missions done by the community. :thumbup:

[tusler]

How do you imagine such military operation and what role do you assign to helicopter? I suppose Ka-50 is designed for CAS. It means that standard mission for Ka-50 is not going deep into enemy territory, not SEAD and not even ground attack, because there are other aircrafts which can do these missions better. Air space should be cleaned by fighters, long range SAM killed by SEAD aircrafts and ground attacks (like convoys and fortifications) carried by Sturmoviks. Helicopters should be sticking near their own force providing air support. The main advantage of helicopter over ground attack jet is that helicopter can loiter in the area longer and can work with targets which are hard to spot and hard to kill for fast moving jets. The main threat for helicopters are MANPADS and short range SAMs. As other said, if you have been attacked by long range radar SAM, then you are where you are not supposed to be.

 

Its not the role that matters, you just have to find a pilot with stones the size of a goats to fly the mission! :megalol:

[Distiler]

Ka50 pilots are 80% balls and 20% human!

[rawtoxin]

:matrix:

[2win_TOWR]

Doesnt the most radar guided systems lose the track, if you are below 60 feet? (or 20 m)

Keyword: "GT.sensor.min_alt_finding_target = 20"

 

Whenever i enter an Area, where Radar-guided SAMs are reported, i never climb over 20-30 m and till now i was never shot down by a radar-guided Missile.

 

Its a bit different when you face a fighter armed with radar-guided missiles. But even if he were only armed with a few gun rounds or some Zunis, as a heli, you are dead Meat against a AI fighter-jockey. So make sure, either you go into a clear area, or make sure to have a proper CAP above yourself.

 

I do not fear any Radar-SAM´s, more problematic are scattered IFV´s and ZU´s, they can kill you at 0m flight altitude.

Edited March 10, 2009 by 2win_TOWR

[JimMack]

Standard procedure for a helo pilot when he/she is alerted that there is an enemy fixed wing aircraft around.

Hide in a hole. Drop down to a valley, and stay stationary. Even land.

There was an interesting documentary on UK TV about training Royal Navy helo pilots, and what do to do when the enemy (in this case RAF hawks) were trying to track them.

If the terrain is appropriate, it is very difficult for a fixed wing to get a helo, except if you are over a flat terrain, such as a desert, then you are dead meat.

 

 

Doesnt the most radar guided systems lose the track, if you are below 60 feet? (or 20 m)

Keyword: "GT.sensor.min_alt_finding_target = 20"

 

Whenever i enter an Area, where Radar-guided SAMs are reported, i never climb over 20-30 m and till now i was never shot down by a radar-guided Missile.

 

Its a bit different when you face a fighter armed with radar-guided missiles. But even if he were only armed with a few gun rounds or some Zunis, as a heli, you are dead Meat against a AI fighter-jockey. So make sure, either you go into a clear area, or make sure to have a proper CAP above yourself.

 

I do not fear any Radar-SAM´s, more problematic are scattered IFV´s and ZU´s, they can kill you at 0m flight altitude.

[MBot]

There was an interesting documentary on UK TV about training Royal Navy helo pilots, and what do to do when the enemy (in this case RAF hawks) were trying to track them.

If the terrain is appropriate, it is very difficult for a fixed wing to get a helo, except if you are over a flat terrain, such as a desert, then you are dead meat.

 

Even over flat terrain it can be difficult to get a helo if it is making itselfe a difficult target. During the Falklands War a RN Lynx was cought over the open sea by a pair of Argentine Daggers. They tried a couple of guns passes but the Lynx could evade each time and got away unharmed. That training definitely payed off.

[Weta43]

If the terrain is appropriate, it is very difficult for a fixed wing to get a helo, except if you are over a flat terrain, such as a desert, then you are dead meat.

 

Don't tell GG - I think he's looking forward to sending anything with a rotor crashing to the ground once ED gets a fast mover into DCS :-)

[159th_Viper]

Don't tell GG - I think he's looking forward to sending anything with a rotor crashing to the ground once ED gets a fast mover into DCS :-)

 

:megalol:

 

How many Helo's before someone grabs him by the Throat and sends a Vikhr up his Tail-Pipe?

 

:D

[GGTharos]

Probably as many as my post count. ;)