DCS: Blackshark Radar

[Arts]

Hi All,

 

I have a Question, is the KA-50 not equipped with a Radar? No Air/Ground or Air/Air Radar?

Targeting just by visibility?

 

Regards

Thomas

[ZaltysZ]

Hi All,

 

I have a Question, is the KA-50 not equipped with a Radar? No Air/Ground or Air/Air Radar?

Targeting just by visibility?

 

Regards

Thomas

 

Optical autotracking or manual targeting only; laser range finding and target designation.

[Arts]

Hello

 

Thank you for this Info, im wondering a littlebit. this looks to me not realy up to date for a modern attack helicopter. Can a Helo like this perform against modern weapon systems?

 

Then the KA-50 depends on a good Information Network.....

 

Regards

Thomas

[Raz_Specter]

there is a post about this debate already which is in excess of 11 pages.

 

Have a search of the forums.

 

Mithandra

[Lightning]

Hello

 

Thank you for this Info, im wondering a littlebit. this looks to me not realy up to date for a modern attack helicopter. Can a Helo like this perform against modern weapon systems?

 

Then the KA-50 depends on a good Information Network.....

 

Regards

Thomas

 

 

Modern attack helicopter ?

As far as i know the Ka-50 was designed in 1980 and the very first Version was build in 1982. In 1995 it was the first time in active duty in the Russian army.

 

So please dont call that helicopter modern :smilewink: :pilotfly:

But very positive thing is the ejection seat ... not cheap but necessary to save the pilots butt.

Edited March 16, 2009 by Lightning

[topol-m]

Modern attack helicopter ?

As far as i know the Ka-50 was designed in 1980 and the very first Version was build in 1982. In 1995 it was the first time in active duty in the Russian army.

 

So please dont call that helicopter modern :smilewink: :pilotfly:

But very positive thing is the ejection seat ... not cheap but necessary to save the pilots butt.

 

Well, helicopters are not like cars, to be released every year like a "new" generation of an old model. And btw Ah-64s first production helicopter was out in 1983 making it not very modern too. You may say, yeah but Apache has seen a lot of improvement from the first production version. And so is Ka-50. Ka-52 should be considered the most modern helicopter following your logic as it is yet to be produced in higher numbers for the russian army.

[GGTharos]

No, the Ka-50 hasn't seen a lot of improvement in service.

The AH-64 has.

 

Further, the AH-64 was already superior to the Ka-50 in terms of avionics from the start. The Ka-52 is not the Ka-50, much like the F-18E isn't an F-18A/C ... it just kinda looks like them ;)

[EtherealN]

Yeah, you could say that the Ka-50 and Ka-52 have about as much in common (give or take) as the Mi-28 Hind and Mi-8. The 28 is based on the Mi-8 airframe and powertrain and there are sections of the two aircraft that are identical - but one would never say they were the same or that the 28 is a new version of the 8.

 

Similarly for the UH-1 Huey and AH-1 Cobra. They have the same "1" designation because they actually have a huge amount of components in common - basically different cabin/cockpit and obviously the Cobra has avionics and systems for weapon deployment, but powertrain and so on is identical. (Obvious caveat there though - this really only goes for early generation UH-1's and AH-1's, they've both been independently developed afterwards and there isn't much commonality anymore between an AH-1Z and a recent UH-1 model.)

[topol-m]

No, the Ka-50 hasn't seen a lot of improvement in service.

The AH-64 has.

 

Further, the AH-64 was already superior to the Ka-50 in terms of avionics from the start. The Ka-52 is not the Ka-50, much like the F-18E isn't an F-18A/C ... it just kinda looks like them ;)

 

Well a lot of the improvements integrated in the longbow version of the apache in comparison with AH-64A are similar to those in Ka-52 in comparison with the ka-50. One big % of Ka-52s systems are the same. Anyway my point was that we are not in WW2 where tanks were becoming obsolete with 1-2 years of service and newer and better models were constantly designed and tested. I dont think ka-50 is obsolete. Its a very capable heli despite the few limitations that it has - mainly the avionics. The russian are still widely using mi-24s. And why the hell should they produce huge quantity of ka-50s when russian helis have not entered a serious war since afganistan. Just to say, yeah we have 300 ka-50s and 100 ka-52 fear us! Nope. Its not like they are fighting talibans and al-qaeda and evil beavers all around the world (like some other guys). So they just dont need such numbers. Instead of wasting the money for helis, they could build more topol-ms, or iskanders, or S-400. So IMO ka-50 are pretty good for what Mother Russia needs them for now. This could change though so the guys are working on new prototypes and modifications (KA-90, Mi-28NM).

Edited March 17, 2009 by topol-m

[GGTharos]

No, actually, they wouldn't produce huge quantities of Ka-50's because they're single-seaters. Yes, the airframe is capable, but avionics and engine upgrades are needed.

 

This is why the Ka-52 isn't really a Ka-50 ... I mean, let's start with the number of seats and avionics package. Functionally, the Longbow and 64A are 'the same', if you discount datalinks and the radar.

You can't really say the same about the Ka-50 and Ka-52, as seen in service.

[topol-m]

No, actually, they wouldn't produce huge quantities of Ka-50's because they're single-seaters.

 

But as i`ve read the production plans are for every ka-52 - several ka-50s, so there will be wings of ka-50s with much less ka-52s with command and guiding role. Unless some other priorities have come up.

[GGTharos]

New news to me:

 

Ka-52 will only be used by internal security forces, a small number of Ka-50 for support of special forces army operations, and Mi-28 for general army aviation.

 

At this time, no more Ka-50 production, AFAIK.

Edited March 17, 2009 by GGTharos

[EtherealN]

Topol-m, I believe I have read the same documents you have, and that is basically old plans that they later changed. There was an idea for the 52 to be a command & control companion for the Ka-50 (similar in tactics to the Kiowa for Apaches, I believe) but the ending of production and development of the Ka-50 has changed that around a good bit.

 

I am personally unsure of what the remaining use for the 52 is and will defer to GG on that.

[GGTharos]

If the Ka-52 really is being used by internal security forces, then it truly -is- a 'Black Helicopter' ... if you see one hovering nearby you're screwed! :D

 

You're 'evidence'!

[AlphaOneSix]

(similar in tactics to the Kiowa for Apaches, I believe)

 

That whole idea has pretty much gone away. There was a time when units were made up of a mix of Kiowas and Apaches (originally Cobras), but these days, units are either pure AH-64A, pure AH-64D, or pure OH-58D. There is no longer a mix of airframe types at the battalion/squadron level or below.

[topol-m]

I never got to know why mi-28 suddenly came up as a main combat helicopter. What can it do better than ka-50, if its just for the night capabilities ka-50H can do that too? If the problem is in the fact that its just 1 pilot in ka-50, well than we have ka-52 that IMO will blow away mi-28 and a lot of other modern combat helis. I just dont get it. Ok maybe the price of production is the key but why not have less and better than more and worse?

[boris putin]

No Radar is a good thing. The idea was to have a squad of KA-50s with one KA-52. The Ka-52 has the radar and uplinks to AWAC etc.It then sends target info via the datalink to the ka-50s. Having a radar turned on is like putting on a search light. It gives you away and also act as a magnet for HARM and other active radar seeking missiles.

I think many people are just too used to Hollywood's verison of warfare.

Almost all modern Airforces are starting to use a drones for the same reason. i.e. one drone out infront of the fighters/bombers etc to id targets and feed them back to the planes so they don't have to turn on their radar.

This is why computer viruses will be at the frontline from now on. The idea is to somehow insert a virus between the drones and the planes.

 

Yep us Nerds are the frontline in modern warfare.

 

 

Amd 9850+, MSI 9800GTX, 4GB Hyperx 1066. Free Track( If you dont have it, make one)

Edited March 17, 2009 by boris putin

[EtherealN]

As a quick note, in my previous post I borked myself by saying "Mi-28 Hind", I obviously meant "Mi-24 hind". >.<

 

As for why the 28 was chosen as the main chopper for the future and not the Ka-50, I'm not entirely sure why and we outside of the decision making cadres of generals and politicians can most likely only give educated guesses at best, but:

 

Apparently the Mi-28 does have a small space where they can carry personnel. Not anything like the cabin of the Mi-24, but apparently the Afghan campaigns made the top brass decide it was real good being able to pick up downed aircrew without the use of additional transport helos.

 

Also, the Ka-50 and 52 are made by Kamov, who traditionally supplied the fleet and not the army. The Mi-28 like the Mi-24 is made by Mil, who traditionally supplied the army but not the fleet. Some articles I have read has placed a great emphasis on this, indicating that it may very well be down to the same kind of "sentimental" decision making that can make an air force opt for F16's instead of Mirages, Eurofighters or Gripens just because they've always bought american and people (even in high positions) tend to go with what they know.

 

Boris Putin, read about the US Air Force's cyberspace command? The future is already here. :)

[EtherealN]

As an addendum to that, it is possible that the traditional ties of Army Aviation and Mil allowed the Mil design buerou to keep more of it's funding when the USSR broke up, whereas Kamov as reliant on the comparatively less important navy might be starved. This would have allowed Mil to continue development of the 28 at a higher pace than the 50 and 52 at Kamov. This in turn could have caused the 28 to be a product that is closer to completion when the Russian armed forces got some money again and it would then be easier to get it up-to-date and operative.

 

That includes a whole lot of speculation from my part though.

[sobek]

Additionally, the Ka-52 design with the old engines negates a lot of the airframes virtues due to additional weight, has less armor (remember that russia likes flying tanks from the mi-24 on) asf.

[nemises]

I found it really intereting to read (and perhaps the Apache drivers on this forum can confirm?) , that , at least in Afghanistan, and as relates to the british Apache Mk1 drivers , they have the mighty Longbow radar, but do not even use it , or need to use it, and do everything by laser designation and mk1 eyeball.

[EtherealN]

Well, in Afghanistan you're mainly engaging irregulars, which means you are more likely to have a use for the autocannon and rockets than anti-tank action, which would naturally diminish the requirement for the Longbow radar.

 

It can be however good it wants to be, but it's made to search for and lock on tanks and such vehicles, not guerilla doodz with RPG's running around.

[nemises]

...which I guess goes for the lack of radar on the KA50 , which is only designed to combat "...guerilla doodz with RPG's running around" :)

 

as for in afghanistan, I'd hazard a guess that the Mk1 Apaches only have laser guided hellfires as opposed to radar guided models ? ...or do "radar guided" hellfires also use a laser spot for homing, and the longbow is just for aquisistion ?

[slug88]

...which I guess goes for the lack of radar on the KA50 , which is only designed to combat "...guerilla doodz with RPG's running around" :)

 

Actually the Ka-50 was designed as tank hunter. The difference is that it was designed as such more than two decades ago. Compared to its contemporaries back then, it would have been quite capable. As has been said already in this thread, however, it's contemporaries received 20 years of upgrades, while the Ka-50 design remained mostly stagnant for obvious reasons.

[2GvSAP_Dart]

...and then found a home with special operations.

 

You gotta admire the Russians on this one. I guess the USA equivalent would be the AH-6, which we have very few of (and do special ops stuff), but it's awfully expensive to keep a small number (under 30 Ka-50's, IIRC) of unique birds operational.

 

Parts for the Ka-50 have got to be rediculously expensive, as there isn't a regular production run for them. The crew chiefs and mechanics are probably the some of the most inventive, creative guys in the aviation world and no strangers to a machine shop. Chances are in the USA they would long ago have been chopped up for scrap (except one for a museum).

 

I'd also hazard to guess that the pilots don't hotdog with the Ka-50. Fly it like it must be flown in a mission, yes, but otherwise safe and easy is most likely the name of the game.

 

I seriously doubt they would perform a ferry mission if there was any way to avoid it, preferring to stick it on a truck, train, ship or plane.

Edited March 17, 2009 by 2GvSAP_Dart