Damage Model moreso Time To Disable/Destroy

[StreakerSix]

We all know the Ka-50 gets shot down by a 6 year old with a straw and a spitball currently, my question is why?

From anything I've read or watched on the Ka-50 it is suppose to be like a flying tank, even moreso than the Hind due to it's redundant systems and higher amount of armor plating, yet on most occasions I can take more small arms fire and keep flying in a Huey than I can in a Blackshark. 

Are there any plans to update the damage model in the future to reflect it's true capabilities or are we stuck with a "paper mache" damage model?

The same exact sentiment holds true for the AH-64D Apache but I don't want to create an identical thread in the Apache Forums so if a Dev could please enlighten me as to why these two attack helicopters are disabled so incredibly easy it would be much appreciated. 

Edited October 15, 2023 by StreakerSix

[Hobel]

vor 58 Minuten schrieb StreakerSix:

We all know the Ka-50 gets shot down by a 6 year old with a straw and a spitball currently, my question is why?

From anything I've read or watched on the Ka-50 it is suppose to be like a flying tank, even moreso than the Hind due to it's redundant systems and higher amount of armor plating, yet on most occasions I can take more small arms fire and keep flying in a Huey than I can in a Blackshark. 

Are there any plans to update the damage model in the future to reflect it's true capabilities or are we stuck with a "paper mache" damage model?

The same exact sentiment holds true for the AH-64D Apache but I don't want to create an identical thread in the Apache Forums so if a Dev could please enlighten me as to why these two attack helicopters are disabled so incredibly easy it would be much appreciated. 

 

Hello would you have example of this?   A track or a Youtube video that support your statement?

[StreakerSix]

Let me look through my footage... If I can't come up with anything already recorded give me a few days/week to get some compiled. 

Thanks for the incredibly quick response!

[StreakerSix]

On 10/15/2023 at 9:59 AM, Hobel said:

Hello would you have example of this?   A track or a Youtube video that support your statement?

Dang... It's taking me a lot longer to get around to this than I figured... You're a tester... Check it out, you'll see what I mean! lol

[Hobel]

vor 12 Minuten schrieb StreakerSix:

Dang... It's taking me a lot longer to get around to this than I figured... You're a tester... Check it out, you'll see what I mean! lol

I have and my opinion is the damage model is very good as far as I could observe.
there is only one weak point as I find, the tail breaks after a few 50cal hits or 1-2 hit of 20-30mm weapons simply off.

that seems a little odd to me. is that what you mean?

 

[StreakerSix]

16 hours ago, Hobel said:

I have and my opinion is the damage model is very good as far as I could observe.
there is only one weak point as I find, the tail breaks after a few 50cal hits or 1-2 hit of 20-30mm weapons simply off.

that seems a little odd to me. is that what you mean?

 

On the Apache, yes. It also loses engines incredibly easy. 

The Blackshark also loses engines incredibly easy, the pilot gets killed incredibly easy, otherwise I have taken a SAM to the face in it and flew home safely. It's weird with the BS, not much consistency other than small arms fire taking out the pilot and engines. 

The little bit of testing I did was with Huey, Apache, BS3 and Hind.... 4 AK47 and 2 technical with 12.7, flying face first into them. 

Apache, One engine out before fly over, tail shot off as soon as I passed.

BS3, One engine gone shortly after fly over. I was surprised the pilot wasn't killed on the way through.

Huey was tail rotor shot out shortly after fly over.

Hind.... Well let's just say I got bored with them trying to damage it after 5 fly overs.

 

EDIT: I guess what I'm conveying is if the BS3 and Apache have correct, realistic damage models, NERF the Hind. If it is in fact the Hind has the correct damage model, BUFF the Apache and BS3. I'd prefer the latter as that seems more accurate in my mind.

Edited October 30, 2023 by StreakerSix

[Hobel]

vor 52 Minuten schrieb StreakerSix:

On the Apache, yes. It also loses engines incredibly easy. 

The Blackshark also loses engines incredibly easy, the pilot gets killed incredibly easy, otherwise I have taken a SAM to the face in it and flew home safely. It's weird with the BS, not much consistency other than small arms fire taking out the pilot and engines. 

The little bit of testing I did was with Huey, Apache, BS3 and Hind.... 4 AK47 and 2 technical with 12.7, flying face first into them. 

Apache, One engine out before fly over, tail shot off as soon as I passed.

BS3, One engine gone shortly after fly over. I was surprised the pilot wasn't killed on the way through.

Huey was tail rotor shot out shortly after fly over.

Hind.... Well let's just say I got bored with them trying to damage it after 5 fly overs.

 

EDIT: I guess what I'm conveying is if the BS3 and Apache have correct, realistic damage models, NERF the Hind. If it is in fact the Hind has the correct damage model, BUFF the Apache and BS3. I'd prefer the latter as that seems more accurate in my mind.

 

I will look over the aspects again but as I said a short track of this would be best to evaluate this situations

[StreakerSix]

13 hours ago, Hobel said:

I will look over the aspects again but as I said a short track of this would be best to evaluate this situations

Here's a video of what I am talking about and my thoughts on the matter. 
 

 

[Hobel]

vor 5 Stunden schrieb StreakerSix:

Here's a video of what I am talking about and my thoughts on the matter. 
 

 

So first of all AK47s do no damage in DCS against the Apache as far as I have observed.



About the Apache we see in your video 2 heavy machine guns 12,7mm frontal fire on the Apache.     12.7mm is a very dangerous weapon>>> Watch the video
in this scenario you will die in this situation because your engines will be destroyed.

The pilot can survive frontal because between him and the co-pilot is an armored screen that can probably stop such shots and this is also the case in DCS.>> Apache Armor
 

if I shoot from above through the front I can penetrate it and the pilot dies
the Apache is armored exactly where it is supposed to be armored and protects the pilot as expected and where it does not, the 12.7mm gets through and the pilot dies
Look: >>

 

From Top: Dead
Front: Survived
Lateral: Dead

The engine and a part of the hull good to see:


I don't know the exact values of the hull around the engine.

but let's assume that they can withstand a few 12.7mm shots.
^ if we agree that this could be the case, then in the game context the Apache engine should last a couple of shots and then break.

 

In this video we see how the Apache takes a few hits without much happening depending on where it is hit, even parts break off.
We also see that the engine takes a few shots and then broke, as expected.
 

 

After this test with the 12.7mm I have to say that the Apache has a very plausible behavior against this Weapon.
Not everything is perfect yet, but on the whole it fits.

 

It is similar with the KA-50III.
There is only the thing that the tail breaks off after very few shots which is strange, as you can also see in your video a few shots and the tail simply jumps off.
 

 

Edited October 31, 2023 by Hobel

[StreakerSix]

1 hour ago, Hobel said:

So first of all AK47s do no damage in DCS against the Apache as far as I have observed.



About the Apache we see in your video 2 heavy machine guns 12,7mm frontal fire on the Apache.     12.7mm is a very dangerous weapon>>> Watch the video
in this scenario you will die in this situation because your engines will be destroyed.

The pilot can survive frontal because between him and the co-pilot is an armored screen that can probably stop such shots and this is also the case in DCS.>> Apache Armor
 

if I shoot from above through the front I can penetrate it and the pilot dies
the Apache is armored exactly where it is supposed to be armored and protects the pilot as expected and where it does not, the 12.7mm gets through and the pilot dies
Look: >>

 

From Top: Dead
Front: Survived
Lateral: Dead

The engine and a part of the hull good to see:


I don't know the exact values of the hull around the engine.

but let's assume that they can withstand a few 12.7mm shots.
^ if we agree that this could be the case, then in the game context the Apache engine should last a couple of shots and then break.

 

In this video we see how the Apache takes a few hits without much happening depending on where it is hit, even parts break off.
We also see that the engine takes a few shots and then broke, as expected.
 

 

After this test with the 12.7mm I have to say that the Apache has a very plausible behavior against this Weapon.
Not everything is perfect yet, but on the whole it fits.

 

It is similar with the KA-50III.
There is only the thing that the tail breaks off after very few shots which is strange, as you can also see in your video a few shots and the tail simply jumps off.
 

 

 

AH-64: "According to Boeing, every part of the helicopter can survive 12.7-mm rounds, and vital engine and rotor components can withstand 23-mm fire.".

Ka-50: "Extensive all-round armour in the cockpit protects the pilot against 12.7 mm armour-piercing bullets and 23 mm projectile fragments. The rotor blades are rated to withstand several hits of ground-based automatic weapons."

and

"Other survivability features include armour protection for vital aircraft systems, and crash-absorbing landing gear and seats. Also, not having a tail rotor can improve survivability, since the tail boom isn't load-bearing; during testing, a Ka-50 lost its tail, but still managed to return to base without a problem." (As you can see in my video it immediately noses down and crashes.)

Definitely not arguing the Hind's tankiness (I feel it has a believable damage model in the game), as it was designed to withstand 12.7 mm rounds to the blades and cockpit, and anything short of 23mm rounds didn't seem to damage it in the (Soviet) Afghan War (Pretty much what Boeing claims the Apache can withstand.).

What I'm arguing is the Huey (Which I believe has a very believable damage model) Apache and Blackshark are very akin to each other in the game. Which is 100% false as noted above and in the video.

I mean, your footage is good in static testing, however, as you can see from my testing it is very different outcomes. Do you actually play the game and use these modules on a regular basis? My guess would be you play the game but don't typically fly the Helicopters when playing... If you did you'd definitely agree with my analysis. 

Just trying to help improve the perceived realism and fun factor to the game. 

Thanks for looking into it and I hope the damage models are improved some day.

[Hobel]

vor einer Stunde schrieb StreakerSix:

AH-64: "Accord, every part of the helicopter can survive 12.7-mm rounds, and vital engine and rotor components can withstand 23-mm fire.".

I didn't know that, especially the 23mm for the engine sounds strong.

  I will do another test to see how many 12.7mm actually hit the hull. Even if it is supposed to protect against 23mm a salvo of 12.7 can still hurt the armor and ultimately penetrate, to what extent that is the case in the dcs we will see.   Nevertheless, I view the numbers with caution, are there more sources on this? 

 

vor einer Stunde schrieb StreakerSix:

Ka-50: "Extensive all-round armour in the cockpit protects the pilot against 12.7 mm armour-piercing bullets and 23 mm projectile fragments. The rotor blades are rated to withstand several hits of ground-based automatic weapons."

 Basically that is the case in dcs the front glass withstands 12.7mm .(23mm I would have to test again)  The side  not, I would have to look again to see if this is also armored should be from the rough memory, but I would think that was not the case.

 

vor einer Stunde schrieb StreakerSix:

"Other survivability features include armour protection for vital aircraft systems, and crash-absorbing landing gear and seats. Also, not having a tail rotor can improve survivability, since the tail boom isn't load-bearing; during testing, a Ka-50 lost its tail, but still managed to return to base without a problem." (As you can see in my video it immediately noses down and crashes.)

That's an interesting point. What does "lost" mean in that context.   Is the tail completely broken off as in dcs or has it been severely defomed to uselessness Which in that case could also mean "lost".    I recently saw a ka-52 flying with an extremely deformed tail which could also mean "lost". 

  Do you have any more context or even pictures?  

And as I said the tail simply jumps off in dcs that I don't like it either.

but you can survive the loss of the tail in dcs if you counteract in time

 

 

And yes I play both helicopters regularly and have been hit by such weapons several times and have also survived them after the first tracers you have to react immediately with defensive maneuvers.  Usually I do not come close enough to such weapons that this is a threat to me.

Edited October 31, 2023 by Hobel

[StreakerSix]

59 minutes ago, Hobel said:

I didn't know that, especially the 23mm for the engine sounds strong.

  I will do another test to see how many 12.7mm actually hit the hull. Even if it is supposed to protect against 23mm a salvo of 12.7 can still hurt the armor and ultimately penetrate, to what extent that is the case in the dcs we will see.   Nevertheless, I view the numbers with caution, are there more sources on this?

 Basically that is the case in dcs the front glass withstands 12.7mm .(23mm I would have to test again)  The side  not, I would have to look again to see if this is also armored should be from the rough memory, but I would think that was not the case.

 

That's an interesting point. What does "lost" mean in that context.   Is the tail completely broken off as in dcs or has it been severely defomed to uselessness Which in that case could also mean "lost".    I recently saw a ka-52 flying with an extremely deformed tail which could also mean "lost". 

  Do you have any more context or even pictures?  

And as I said the tail in dcs starts like that I don't like it either. 

but you can survive the loss of the tail in dcs if you counteract in time

 

 

And yes I play both helicopters regularly and have been hit by such weapons several times and have also survived them after the first tracers you have to react immediately with defensive maneuvers.  Usually I do not come close enough to such weapons that this is a threat to me.

FYI I just Google this info... Pick the most accredited answer I can find. Unfortunately, sometimes the only answer I can find is on Wikipedia, in which if it sounds legit I'll use it, if it sounds far fetched I won't. AH-64 was not from Wikipedia but info for the Ka-50 and Hind were.

It does sound strong, yes, but for some reason the Hind damage model actually mimics what I've read and the other two AH's react more like a Utility Helicopter (Damage wise in game).

I take the numbers with somewhat a grain of salt but still use them as a baseline... I've literally had my engines shot out and/or pilot sniped on the Blackshark and Apache from small arms fire (7.62mm rds), no I'm not sending proof, you'll just have to take my word for it as I do play DCS A LOT! lol Now don't get me wrong, multiple shots to the same area would and should penetrate even with 7.62 rds, what I will continually harp on and continually reiterate is the Hind feels legit whereas the other two do not.

As for cockpit glass with 12.7mm rds it is my understanding from what I've read and presented that is the threshold for all 3 of the AH's (Front and sides is how I interpret it seeing as it states, at least on the Apache quote, "every part of the helicopter can survive 12.7-mm rounds")

If we want to be really real and not care about how it "feels as a game", and with all the information that is I'm sure in manufacturer's theory for survivability theory.... I either watched or read something on the Ka-52 (Same basic helicopter as Ka-50, just a two man, like the F-15E is to a F-15C) where Russia is deploying the Ka-52 like a lot of us would play it in DCS, close in attack instead of (only) stand off precision guided missiles, and that is why they are taking such heavy losses (IRL) with that platform. The US on the other hand had initially planned to use the AH-64 in the same manner but quickly found out (can't remember what war, skirmish, battle, conflict it was) they suffered heavy losses with them also in close in support, which is why they changed their tactics to longer range stand-off in most cases. Now these losses are generally (but not specifically) due to Anti-Air missiles or RPG's and not typically due to small to medium arms fire.

Why are we circling around the fact (in game) the Hind is a flying tank (in comparison) and the other two just a couple UH's with a lot of guns and advanced weapon and targeting systems? 

Edited October 31, 2023 by StreakerSix

[StreakerSix]

1 hour ago, Hobel said:

That's an interesting point. What does "lost" mean in that context.   Is the tail completely broken off as in dcs or has it been severely defomed to uselessness Which in that case could also mean "lost".    I recently saw a ka-52 flying with an extremely deformed tail which could also mean "lost". 

  Do you have any more context or even pictures?  

And as I said the tail simply jumps off in dcs that I don't like it either.

but you can survive the loss of the tail in dcs if you counteract in time

 

 

 

Forgot to reply to this... If you watch my video you can see I almost immediately pull back on the cyclic and there was little to no affect.

Lose probably does not imply sawed off like in DCS (which it's a game, they can only recreate what they can recreate for reality) I'm sure, but for game sake and due to it's limited realism, should imply that as that is pretty much all we get for damage modelling at this point. 

Overall I feel ED and their Third Party Model creators do a very good job at simulating what they can, but there are definitely areas where it can be improved by slight tweaks to coding. (As far as I know, especially when it comes to damage model thresholds)

[Hobel]

vor einer Stunde schrieb StreakerSix:

As for cockpit glass with 12.7mm rds it is my understanding from what I've read and presented that is the threshold for all 3 of the AH's (Front and sides is how I interpret it seeing as it states, at least on the Apache quote, "every part of the helicopter can survive 12.7-mm rounds")

The cockpit glass feels very accurate should not necessarily   withstand 12.7mm even if "it says everywhere".  That's one of the reasons why the seat is so well armored.  

https://www.ppgaerospace.com/getmedia/9a556385-c535-491c-bbce-e332a8ca63bf/boeing_apache_-AH64-12021Final.pdf?ext=.pdf

https://forum.dcs.world/uploads/monthly_2021_08/9167e6b7d0a20cf42496e18f61094b36adaf9945.jpg.4fd132a9deb336f19cc74fcc26863918.jpg

[StreakerSix]

28 minutes ago, Hobel said:

The cockpit glass feels very accurate should not necessarily   withstand 12.7mm even if "it says everywhere".  That's one of the reasons why the seat is so well armored.  

https://www.ppgaerospace.com/getmedia/9a556385-c535-491c-bbce-e332a8ca63bf/boeing_apache_-AH64-12021Final.pdf?ext=.pdf

https://forum.dcs.world/uploads/monthly_2021_08/9167e6b7d0a20cf42496e18f61094b36adaf9945.jpg.4fd132a9deb336f19cc74fcc26863918.jpgFetching info...

Okay, so when does the Hind damage model get NERF'ed down to that of a Utility Helicopter like the others?

Seeing as the two others are so extraordinarily accurate as is.

[Hobel]

vor einer Stunde schrieb StreakerSix:

Okay, so when does the Hind damage model get NERF'ed down to that of a Utility Helicopter like the others?

Seeing as the two others are so extraordinarily accurate as is.

You can't compare the two helicopters that easily.   Even if the armor values between all 3 helicopters were absolutely equal, the Mi-24 would have a better survival probability than ka-50 or apache.  One of the reasons is that the engines of the Mi-24 are not so dispositioned but rather hidden.  The engines of the other two are very exposed.   What are the main reasons for their crashes as I observe it, especially with apache is the loss of the engines?

[StreakerSix]

16 minutes ago, Hobel said:

You can't compare the two helicopters that easily.   Even if the armor values between all 3 helicopters were absolutely equal, the Mi-24 would have a better survival probability than ka-50 or apache.  One of the reasons is that the engines of the Mi-24 are not so dispositioned but rather hidden.  The engines of the other two are very exposed.   What are the main reasons for their crashes as I observe it, especially with apache is the loss of the engines?

Yes and no... The Ka-50 pilot gets sniped from head on a majority of the time and the main reason for the Apache is the tail boom and/or rotor.

Does the Hind have some sort of mystical tail boom that only breaks 5% of the time a rocket hits it or takes 500 7.62 minigun rds and/or an inset and armored tail rotor that is more hidden than the Apache? 

I stick to my guns saying they should be WAY closer in damage models.

Regardless, I'm going to play the game and enjoy it with or without having actual legitimate feeling Attack Helicopters. 

I sincerely thank you for all your time on this matter. I think we've both spent enough time presenting our view points.

[MoleUK]

On 10/31/2023 at 5:48 PM, Hobel said:

You can't compare the two helicopters that easily.   Even if the armor values between all 3 helicopters were absolutely equal, the Mi-24 would have a better survival probability than ka-50 or apache.  One of the reasons is that the engines of the Mi-24 are not so dispositioned but rather hidden.  The engines of the other two are very exposed.   What are the main reasons for their crashes as I observe it, especially with apache is the loss of the engines?

Small arms impacts aside, I will say sometimes it feels like the Hind can tank more rockets than it should, depending on where it's hit.

 

[Hobel]

vor 9 Minuten schrieb MoleUK:

Small arms impacts aside, I will say sometimes it feels like the Hind can tank more rockets than it should, depending on where it's hit.

yes this should not be, or it is a MP recording and it could be due to the network that not a single hit was registered, if this is still in the SP you can make a report in the Hind area

[MoleUK]

3 minutes ago, Hobel said:

yes this should not be, or it is a MP recording and it could be due to the network that not a single hit was registered, if this is still in the SP you can make a report in the Hind area

It's a MP recording, I always thought hit reg was client side however.

The Hind has always been this way re: hydras, at least to some extent. Some areas are vulnerable, others are incredibly resistant.

Edited November 12, 2023 by MoleUK

[MoleUK]

25 minutes ago, Hobel said:

yes this should not be, or it is a MP recording and it could be due to the network that not a single hit was registered, if this is still in the SP you can make a report in the Hind area

On asking around the consensus seems to be that hit reg is client side, if it impacts and explodes on the client screen it should register. Hits to the canopy/nose with hydras often seem to result in little to no effect, at least in my experience.

[StreakerSix]

On 11/12/2023 at 3:48 PM, MoleUK said:

Small arms impacts aside, I will say sometimes it feels like the Hind can tank more rockets than it should, depending on where it's hit.

 

Apache and/or BS would never take this amount of punishment in either SP or MP. Just another example of the large imbalance between AH-64/Ka-50 compared to the Mi-24 in DCS.

[AeriaGloria]

My perspective from reading IRL stuff was this 

Ka-50 prioritizes armoring the pilot. Almost all the armor is around the cockpit and the fuel tanks. 
 

The Mi-24, has less armor around the pilots, but puts armor on the sides of the engines, gearbox, and hydraulic systems. 
 

That being said, it’s been clear to me there are other aspects of the Mi-24 DM that are unfinished. For example, I have never had a fuel or hydraulic or oil leak in it that effected the systems, it was only ever a visual effect. That needs to be done 

I think the DCS damage model(with exception of warbirds) also doesn’t do a good job of accounting for empty space. With Ka-50, your vital systems are packed very closely and there is little open space. If something can breach the skin, it’s hitting a vital system. Whereas for Mi-24, if it hits the cabin door area, or fuel tanks beneath it, DCS only sees those non vital areas being hit and end up with no damage “passing through” or around it, in addition to the fact that the fuel leak doesn’t seem to be implemented or fire from fuel tanks, as the DCS Mi-24 seems to be modeled without the polyurethane foam inserts. 

[Hobel]

vor 15 Stunden schrieb AeriaGloria:

Ka-50 prioritizes armoring the pilot. Almost all the armor is around the cockpit and the fuel tanks. 

and what's wrong with the DCS Ka-50?

I agree about the tail breaking off, and what else?
 

 

Edited December 6, 2023 by Hobel

[AeriaGloria]

2 hours ago, Hobel said:

and what's wrong with the DCS Ka-50?

I agree about the tail breaking off, and what else?
 

 

 

I have no idea, but it seems to me and I would assume it has a more mature and finished damage model. It has been claimed to be able to fly without the tail, so that’s the devs reasoning