Ka50 insted of ka52?

[amalahama]

I can just see the military making all the intricate details of their current combat helicopters and most modern fighters (especially the F22) available to sim developers for the commercial sim market.

 

Millions of dollars in research etc all to be handed over to the civilian community...that sounds reasonable ;)

 

jk

 

It sounds reasonable, at the end we (civilian) are who put the money over the table to do all of that research...

 

The problem is the world usually don't work with "reasonable" facts...

 

Regards!!

[coder1024]

Not gonna complain, since that will be two DCS flyables.

I'm curious as to how this will work. So say I already have DCS Black Shark and I then install the A-10 module. Will I be able to setup multiplayer missions with others that also have both installed and have some of us fly the Ka-50 and some the A-10? They've talked about them interoperating and all as modules in the series, but I'm curious how tightly integrated they'll actually be. Of course if I install both Ka-50 and A-10 I can fly one or the other, but can I do both?

[Krippz]

Modeling accuracy is one of the factors, but it's also about efficient use of company resources. If ED is already developing something for the military, it only makes sense to "modify" that simulation for the public, instead of splitting for comany workforce between completely separate simulations. Of course, "modify" is quite an understatement. Even when developing off of an already existing military simulation, the amount of work required to make a public version can be extensive. This is true for the A-10C, by the way.

 

As for a Ka-50 military sim:

http://www.1tv.ru/owa/win/ort6_videopage.main?sender=news&p_topic_id=123638&p_video_num=1&counter1_href=287212&counter2_href=id=268366;t=56

 

Thanks for sharing the video. I was under the impression that a desktop military sim was exclusive to the USAF.

[TangoRomeo]

Interesting, didn't know that. I´m curious how the military versions are employed; procedures training, tactical decision making ?

[Frakin Toasters]

They're using X-52 joysticks! I have one of those! That's awesome :P

[spyda]

They're using X-52 joysticks! I have one of those! That's awesome :P

 

i agree x-52 all the way:drunk:

[Malleus]

They're using X-52 joysticks! I have one of those! That's awesome :P

 

Reminds me of pictures of Chinese pilots training with LOMAC also using X-52s ... and this quote: :D

 

That bastard, Ming...he hit the printscreen button while I was blinking. I couldnt find the button to printscreen back so I shot all my flares in his face to slow his system to a crawl. He comes back with this scripted cobra BS and shoots an R-73 at me. Punkass...hes gonna be scrubbing my toilet out with his toothbrush tonight...

[mbolan]

Hmmm. The manual says "...we chose the KA 50 for several reasons:

 

1) It is an interesting and unique attack helicopter due to its single pilot cockpit, co-axial rotor system, sensor system and broad mission range.

 

2) We have a close relationship with Kamov and they were instrumental in providing us the data needed to create an authentic simulation etc

 

These seem like excellent reasons.

 

I'd also guess that for the level of detail that BS contains, modelling two separate cockpits would be pretty crazy and could overdo the number of variables needed to keep the program inside the control of a single player.

 

I have major problems remembering where all the knobs and switches are in the KA 50 as it is so a second cockpit with a different layout and another maze of switches and dials would do little except confuse me I suspect. Jumping from one to the other wouldn't be funny. Simplifying the design would break the simulation from a realistic copy to a fantasy copy.

 

Overall, I suggest that ED has done a brilliant job of meeting their design goals in way that produces a fast and responsive sim that offers the same kind of detailed elements as are present in the real world.

 

The single cockpit design makes total sense to me. I flew Janes Longbow for a couple years and it certainly had many excellent features. The KA 50 offers a different set of features which is welcome, otherwise I'd be repeating my Longbow experiences for which there seems little point.

 

You can download the manuals from the net...they'll answer most of your questions and a whole bunch you didn't know you had. I understand an english manual will be up for sale in June or so.

[EtherealN]

mbolan, in the case of the Ka-52 it would not be two separate cockpits, since the 52 has both pilots sitting next to each other in a double cockpit, pretty much the same way as with a normal car, or a Cessna.

 

On the other hand, getting the AI good enough to work up to spec would be a hurdle, and the classified nature of so many parts of the 52 would be another.

[Dudikoff]

Hmmm. The manual says "...we chose the KA 50 for several reasons:

 

1) It is an interesting and unique attack helicopter due to its single pilot cockpit, co-axial rotor system, sensor system and broad mission range.

 

These seem like excellent reasons.

 

I'd also guess that for the level of detail that BS contains, modelling two separate cockpits would be pretty crazy and could overdo the number of variables needed to keep the program inside the control of a single player.

 

Or was it because the current engine supports only single seat platforms? ;)

[element1108]

It sounds reasonable, at the end we (civilian) are who put the money over the table to do all of that research...

 

The problem is the world usually don't work with "reasonable" facts...

 

Regards!!

 

 

We, civilians put money into the military via taxes etc...but the rewards for that are relative security. The military by nature has ALWAYS, since the dawn of it's existence revolved around secrets...especially with weapons. Technological and tactical advantage in many cases wins wars.

 

Making the data of relevant war tech available to ANY developer with the intentions of selling to the general public is or never WILL be something the military/military contractors will agree to.

 

I just don't understand why people are asking for F22's, KA-52's or Apache Longbow's when it's pretty obvious a good portion machines are still highly classified. (For obvious security reasons).

 

No disrespect intended...i'm just curious to know where the demands stem from.

 

DCS has a business plan for realism, it's stated on their webpage so they're not going to fudge numbers or speculate how even ONE aspect of a radar system works just to model a certain gunship/fighter. You'll get the tech heads screaming how inaccurate it is and bam you've got a forum war going on debating the realism of the flight model/weapons systems.

 

:pain:

[CE_Mikemonster]

Or was it because the current engine supports only single seat platforms? ;)

 

Or was it to prove to potential military customers that advanced helicopter flight models are viable, along with advanced mission scripting, whilst retaining a commercial market for us single-players?

 

As for 'DCS: F-22/Longbow/Ka-52/SR-71/U-2', wouldn't 'DCS: Legacy Fighers Series' be more fun? :thumbup:

[EtherealN]

'DCS: Legacy Fighers Series' be more fun? :thumbup:

 

I'd kill for DCS:A1 Skyraider... :D

[CE_Mikemonster]

I missed a t, and you've gone and immortalised it. I suppose that the Ka-50 IS a legacy fighter lol, but yes i'd love to fly a Sepecat Jaguar.

[joey45]

I'd kill for DCS:A1 Skyraider... :D

 

in RN colours.... yes we did have them...

 

Jag [the British version], Bucc or the tom wuold be good...