Gun fighting with a Kamov

[winz]

The AH-64 is not heavily armoured, the KA-50 is. The armor over vital components is rated to withstand 23mm fire. 30mm will penetrate this, but will lose a lot of energy in doing so. Where your shots land also makes a difference. If you land shots in the nose or the tail, you won't hit anything needed to keep the bird in the air. Even if you do hit a vital component, everything needed to keep flying is redundant: hydraulics, engines, electrical circuits; there's two of each.

 

unless you manage to blow the swashplate off or kill the pilot with your first hit, you are guaranteed to need two hits or more for a kill.

Afaik the only things protected are the pilot and the driveshaft+gearbox. Everything else is just regular plate. That cannon was designed to penetrate armor on soviet MTB, it should make minced meat from anything flying.

 

In BS1 I've seen the AI heli pilots perform insane 90 degrees nose-up, flying backwards while aiming and shooting. Wouldn't be surprised if they can still pull it of. One thing the AI is not simulating is the workload of flying a single-seat helicopter.

[159th_Viper]

 

Here's my issue with it:

 

Did the damage take the aircraft down, or was it just the weight of the rounds stuck in it that prevented it producing enough lift?:lol:

 

Sorry but this is not realistic. Armoured? yes. MBT-like? No. It's a farce.

 

 

You need to learn to shoot straighter :megalol: :D

 

OK - herewith yet another attempt at the contrary:

 

This time I extend low and engage the Kamov from the side. In the single-pass engagement I fire once and miss.......I fire again and miss..........again. I fire again and guess what:

 

I saw the Kamov in half! I literally turn a flying tank into the sum of it's parts with my cookie-cutter :huh:

 

Keep in mind that I fired a total of three times, with two misses.

 

Total Rounds expended with two misses and one hit - 120.

 

 

And I saw the Kamov neatly in half: What more is there to do, apart from adding the 'As seen on TV mandatory Epic Fireball' effect?

 

 

 

Track: Kamov Gun Kill #2.trk

 

I tell you what would be a farce: To weaken the Kamov even further. We'll be christening it DCS: Marshmallow :P

Edited August 28, 2012 by 159th_Viper

[Davis0079]

after thinking about it a couple minute, i got one last post then I'm going to stop stirring the pot.

 

my 30mm cannon vs your 30 mm cannon are very equal in the fact that I too have AP rounds that go right through all armor in the game and my HE rounds are like throwing grenades at something....the difference is....you have a shotgun like hit effect in that when you fire 100 rounds not all of them hit. You may score a "hit" on the scorecard, but "in-game" you are not doing 100 rounds of damage....But me on the other hand, when I fire a burst at anything (when properly use the targeting system) I hit 10 out of 10 shells. Its like an automatic sniper rifle. So yes, on the scorecard I can in fact down you with less "hits".

 

The reason I say this is because in game, while flying the ka-50. I cannot take a burst from a vulcan gun. It will cut me in half, and it does every time. But he hits my slow flying airfame with every shell. which leads me to believe that you are not getting as many "in-game" hits on the helo as you may believe.

 

Lastly, in the ka-50, I never use my gun. If I'm close enough to a target to hit it with my gun, I have already lost. the helo is a standoff weapon to be used at a distance and gets shot down very easy. 85% of the time when I take hits, it is devastating. I never get to fly back to base. but I fly very slow and when I get fire at by the ai with guns I get hit alot. I would rather dodge missles then gunfire because if they are shooting at me with a gun I am very close, which means I am very close to death.

 

If you think the damage model is wrong instead of your accuracy, I think we should go ingame and I will fly at high speed so you can come in behind me and get some real hits on target and I can assure you, you will saw me in half.

[winz]

One thing I would like to know - does other than structural/engine damage affect the AI? Can it have i.e. Shkval, weapon system or a AP failure?

Because if not - that might be a reason why the AI Ka-50 might feel a little dmg spongy. You cannot cripple it the way it can cripple you.

Edited August 28, 2012 by winz

[Davis0079]

to the best of my knowledge the damage/detail level is extremely different when compairing DCS flyables with AI or even the upcoming FC3 aircraft. the devs simply dont have the time to make every aircraft and damage model to the same standards as the ka-50 and a-10 (or upcoming DCS aircraft (come on fast mover)).

[marcos]

 

Next....you are comparing a radar guided " spray a thousand shells in a general direction" AA gun with a Laser Range finder tv tracking system......When the Ka-50 locks on to you and your laser warning goes off....guess what.....99% of his shots are going to hit you....the targeting system leads you perfectly

From 1nm mile range on a target doing 300knots? Sure. The 2A42 fires about 7-8 rounds per second. Even if the aim was perfect in aerial combat with saturation that low you could just get lucky from far closer.

[marcos]

You need to learn to shoot straighter :megalol: :D

 

OK - herewith yet another attempt at the contrary:

 

This time I extend low and engage the Kamov from the side. In the single-pass engagement I fire once and miss.......I fire again and miss..........again. I fire again and guess what:

 

I saw the Kamov in half! I literally turn a flying tank into the sum of it's parts with my cookie-cutter :huh:

Wow. Check out post 12. Welcome to the past. That's the only place that will take it down quickly(ish). Anywhere else and it's like you were firing a .22 pistol at it.

 

 

I tell you what would be a farce: To weaken the Kamov even further. We'll be christening it DCS: Marshmallow :P

Yeah because helicopters should he tougher than tanks? Funny how the Cobras and Apaches come down with a small clip from 23mm SPPU pods.

 

Here's another counter track, which yet again failed to record properly but you'll see it took plenty of rounds twice with minimal damage.

Ka-50 fail.trk

Edited August 28, 2012 by marcos

[marcos]

I hit 10 out of 10 shells.

Only if you live in a complete dream world.

 

One thing I would like to know - does other than structural/engine damage affect the AI? Can it have i.e. Shkval, weapon system or a AP failure?

Because if not - that might be a reason why the AI Ka-50 might feel a little dmg spongy. You cannot cripple it the way it can cripple you.

That's the problem. None of the damage is ever critical until you down it. It's like watching the A-Team; "I took a round in the head but I'm okay now Hannibal."

 

You can fire straight through the windscreen and still it takes like a clip on the left engine or some utter bollox.

 

The tail chop is the only thing that takes it down well (see attached), that or take out a rotor blade. Is it really too much to ask it to be a little more similar to other NATO armoured attack choppers, i.e. realistic, or do we have to put up with the Soviet +80% armour hack on everything from MBTs to ships and helis?

Ka-50 tail.trk

Edited August 28, 2012 by marcos

[159th_Viper]

One thing I would like to know - does other than structural/engine damage affect the AI? Can it have i.e. Shkval, weapon system or a AP failure?

Because if not - that might be a reason why the AI Ka-50 might feel a little dmg spongy. You cannot cripple it the way it can cripple you.

 

It does appear to have a point where it has some type of failure, or merely just gives up the fight so to speak. Now whether that is indicative of a gun-systems/shkval failure or the like we'll never know as it is the A.I. What we do know is that it just drops it's gear and RTB's to the nearest airfield. That said, with the damage taken one could very well argue that the WCS or the like has been knocked out.Bottom-line is the same: He's out of the fight.

 

Herewith track where I 'wound' the Kamov with a couple of rounds. As seen, subsequent to the damage taken it will not engage no matter how good a target I present.

 

Track: Cat and Mouse.trk

[HiJack]

Hmm, should I go for the Ka-50 on the upcoming 1on1 dogfight event? :P

 

(HJ)

[winz]

He had an engine failure and began to descent the moment his left engine burst into flames. So no, that doesn't count, because that's excatly what I was talking about - only structural/engine damage does affect the AI ability to fight.

 

Imho the whole problem lays in that the AI really supports only the old lock-on/flaming cliffs damage modeling, where engine/structural/ruptured tank were basicaly the only problems you could get. Therefor the AH-64 is easy to shot down, it just takes a few round anywhere.

 

The damage modelling on DCS planes is much more complex. You get more system damage that will cripple you, but you need damage to specifical places to bring you down. Both the Ka-50 and A-10C can generaly take more punishment then the FC planes before going down.

The problem is that AI is unaffected by system damage, it doesn't depend on AP to keep the bird flying&fighting, it doesn't depend on the hud, the skhval or any other system. The only time you see AI give up a fight is when is has engine/structural/ruptured tank damage and is trying to limp back to base.

[marcos]

He had an engine failure and began to descent the moment his left engine burst into flames. So no, that doesn't count, because that's excatly what I was talking about - only structural/engine damage does affect the AI ability to fight.

 

Imho the whole problem lays in that the AI really supports only the old lock-on/flaming cliffs damage modeling, where engine/structural/ruptured tank were basicaly the only problems you could get. Therefor the AH-64 is easy to shot down, it just takes a few round anywhere.

 

The damage modelling on DCS planes is much more complex. You get more system damage that will cripple you, but you need damage to specifical places to bring you down. Both the Ka-50 and A-10C can generaly take more punishment then the FC planes before going down.

The problem is that AI is unaffected by system damage, it doesn't depend on AP to keep the bird flying&fighting, it doesn't depend on the hud, the skhval or any other system. The only time you see AI give up a fight is when is has engine/structural/ruptured tank damage and is trying to limp back to base.

Whereas, it hits you, and bingo, by magic, your gun is out first time round.

 

Anyway, it wants to pretend it's a tank, fair enough::lol:

 

(Strange thing is, only the rotorblades and wing came off??? I'd have expected nothing but debris rain.)

Edited August 28, 2012 by marcos

[159th_Viper]

I'd have expected nothing but debris rain.

 

For that you need a 2000-pounder :P

 

rISQpRVhe4Y&hd=1

[marcos]

So hit one with a sidewinder, see first shot, then cannon see second, then it landed safely.:huh::)

[marcos]

For that you need a 2000-pounder :P

 

rISQpRVhe4Y&hd=1

I did that to a Tu-160 while it was landing with a GBU-12.:) If you can do it with a Mk-84 I'll be surprised.

[ARM505]

Is this a damage model argument, a 'the AI is ludicrously accurate with moveable cannons/MG's', or both? Just trying to classify it into a standard sim argument box.... :)

 

Seriously though, the AI is stupendously accurate with cannon fire (try vs the Hind, or anything that has a cannon/MG that can pivot), locks you up instantly, and always sees you if you're within sight. This has been brought up before....

 

Sure, you *can* kill them if you're religious about employing the precisely correct tactics, but the point is that the AI will always outperform a human who is tasked to do this particular thing, ie slew the camera around, lock up an air target, which we all know is terribly hit or miss and time consuming, and move the helo into weapon constraints. The hit rate on you from the helo will be incredibly good (beyond what would actually be achievable with a real world system IMHO), and you are fired upon the instant it is physically possible to be fired upon in almost all circumstances. This affects the above discussion IMHO.

[marcos]

Is this a damage model argument, a 'the AI is ludicrously accurate with moveable cannons/MG's', or both? Just trying to classify it into a standard sim argument box.... :)

 

Seriously though, the AI is stupendously accurate with cannon fire (try vs the Hind, or anything that has a cannon/MG that can pivot), locks you up instantly, and always sees you if you're within sight. This has been brought up before....

 

Sure, you *can* kill them if you're religious about employing the precisely correct tactics, but the point is that the AI will always outperform a human who is tasked to do this particular thing, ie slew the camera around, lock up an air target, which we all know is terribly hit or miss and time consuming, and move the helo into weapon constraints. The hit rate on you from the helo will be incredibly good (beyond what would actually be achievable with a real world system IMHO), and you are fired upon the instant it is physically possible to be fired upon in almost all circumstances. This affects the above discussion IMHO.

I'm not really sure above that. If I aim at an airborne target doing 300knots with a gun that only fires 7-8 rounds per second, the target area saturation is very low, so even if I aim perfectly there's good chance that all of a 1s burst will miss.

 

A high fire rate is always a huge plus in air combat regardless of a moving turret. This is why Aircraft Carriers have systems like Phalanx, Goalkeeper and Kashtan/AK-630. If it wasn't an absolute living fact, they'd all just have Kamov 2A42 turrets on the side of the ships shooting cruise missiles out of the air with pin-point precision from 1nm range.

[Bushmanni]

I'm not really sure above that. If I aim at an airborne target doing 300knots with a gun that only fires 7-8 rounds per second, the target area saturation is very low, so even if I aim perfectly there's good chance that all of a 1s burst will miss.

 

A high fire rate is always a huge plus in air combat regardless of a moving turret. This is why Aircraft Carriers have systems like Phalanx, Goalkeeper and Kashtan/AK-630. If it wasn't an absolute living fact, they'd all just have Kamov 2A42 turrets on the side of the ships shooting cruise missiles out of the air with pin-point precision from 1nm range.

 

Cruise missile coming in at 900km/h or even supersonic is quite different target compared to A-10 at 500km/h. You will also need to blow up the missile to small enough pieces to not get damaged by the debris of the missile. All it takes to kill A-10 is cut his wing or kill the engines which doesn't need that much hits.

 

Ka-50 and Apache are both pretty much similarly easy to kill with 30mm in DCS in my experiments. Couple hits to cockpit or tailboom and they are done. Center fuselage is bit tougher as there's more material to chop off and you can kill both engines easily only from above behind.

 

The biggest problem is like said that the AI is super good shooter. He's even better than the lead calculating systems in Ka-50. The weapons computer in Ka-50 doesn't consider closing velocity if the target is coming straight at you at the same altitude but AI gunner can still take this into account. The super good AI can also shoot WW2 plane's guns as accurately as a modern radar equipped fighter could. My experience is that it's very hard to judge helicopters velocity vector unaided if it's doing anything else but flying level and straight.

 

Other thing is that pilot in Ka-50 has very poor visibility up and would most likely lose sight of the fixed wing attacker if he flew above him or at least would have to work very hard to keep him padlocked. Most likely the Ka-50 pilot wouldn't know when the aircraft dives.

 

Some time ago I tried dogfighting with Ka-50 against A-10s and P-51s online and the Ka-50 was pretty much the superior machine to my surprise. While you couldn't catch anyone it was relatively easy to kill anyone who tried to shoot at you. You could always force a head on engagement as you could turn on dime (literally :lol:) and do that very quickly and would most likely win as you can aim with HMS and correct your aim very fast and hence get a hit on enemy from longer range. The fixed wing opponents mostly missed unless they got to fire from very close but basically nobody managed to get close enough from front sector before getting killed or having to turn away to dodge the shells. If anyone tried to come down from high you could make a properly timed turn and spoil the aim and he wouldn't have time to correct before having to pull up. All this was possible though only because of labels as you can't see anyone coming down from high or behind otherwise.

[marcos]

Cruise missile coming in at 900km/h or even supersonic is quite different target compared to A-10 at 500km/h. You will also need to blow up the missile to small enough pieces to not get damaged by the debris of the missile. All it takes to kill A-10 is cut his wing or kill the engines which doesn't need that much hits.

Pretty sure that just one hit to a cruise missile from a 30mm HE will cause a structural failure and a crash. The size of a cruise missile is about the same as that of a GAU-8 and the 2A42 can hit that everytime.

 

The tail is definitely a weak point, as is the rotor assy. The cockpit not so much, and nothing ever seems to hit it, which is weird. Somehow a headlong burst of 70-140 rounds will always wing one engine but hardly any bullets ever hit the pilot.