If you could upgrade the Ka-50, what would you do?

[Suchacz]

Ka-50 is not rated for night/lo-vis ops...

[GunfighterSIX]

The Ka-50Sh is rated for night flight and bad weather. I would like that version added to the game.

[wess24m]

I would add more stations for 12 more viks. Then I would add 2 more guns on the pilot windshield one on each side. After that I would put a tin can opener on the front gear.

 

Lastly I would put 4 anti air IR missile pods on the stubs.

 

If you'd like, you can mod the weapons database file so you can equip 12 viks. The additional 12 on the rocket pylons will have to have their angles manually adjusted in the form of pitching the shark prior to launch. Will work on both SP and MP.

[justoc]

Without reading any of your recommendations yet, I would add the 2 hardpoints the Ka-52 has for the AA, I would give it a mast mounted radar, fire and forget capabilities to engage multiple targets at once integrated into the PVI-800. The Shkval could use FLIR as well.

[Galwran]

FLIR, better sensor fusion, RWR.

[Irregular programming]

the BS works for me at night just fine....use NVG, adjust shkval contrast and brightness, switch to manual fire mode.....o yes, the shark works just fine at night......

 

Yeah they really should fix that.

[justoc]

Yeah they really should fix that.

 

I pretty much think they are done with the Ka-50. Haven't noticed any changes in the last few updates.

[Cedaway]

I would update the Black Shark to collide with trees...

[MTFDarkEagle]

I would update the Black Shark to collide with trees...

 

More importantly: inbound missiles too :D (Oh.. and hostile "seeing" you through the trees.)

[Hunden Ynk]

I pretty much think they are done with the Ka-50. Haven't noticed any changes in the last few updates.

 

There was this year old post by Griffin, in turn pointing to a post on the Russian side about the possibility of an upgraded Ka-50. http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1633256&postcount=17

One may have (pipe)dreams...

[Flagrum]

There was this year old post by Griffin, in turn pointing to a post on the Russian side about the possibility of an upgraded Ka-50. http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1633256&postcount=17

One may have (pipe)dreams...

 

Heh, yeah, the OP should add a poll to this thread, too. Something like how much we would be willing to pay for the proposed upgrades (0, 10, 20, 50, 100 ... :o)

[Fishbreath]

I would totally pay $15 or $20 or so for a Ka-50Sh plus a missile approach warning system. The code for FLIR and MAWS already exist, thanks to the A-10; it would have to be adapted for the Ka-50, and the cockpit and external models would need some tweaking. Less than a full module price seems plenty appropriate to me.

[skouras]

I would update the Black Shark to collide with trees...

this

[Grim_Smiles]

1. A dual-mode IR/video targeting system to replace the Shkval sensor.

2. Vikhr support on all four hardpoints.

 

And two upgrades we would want to do if we had the budget:

1. A radar warning receiver/missile launch warning system to replace the laser warning system.

2. A stores management system which allows for selection of individual pylons (maybe use the ABRIS screen to do it digitally, or just add a push button to the current weapons control panel to cycle pylons individually).

 

If the Russians were to upgrade this model of the Ka-50 and I could pick what they did with it, pretty much what you mentioned, specifically the Vikhr on all hardpoints.

 

I would like an RWR in the aircraft, but as I've been downed by MANPADS/Heaters far more than radar guided stuff it isn't a priority. I stay clear of SAMs at all possible, and if you have a fighter coming after you and no friendly air cover, prior knowledge of imminent boning isn't going to save you. But I understand why people would still like to have one, so it would be nice if one could be included.

 

I wouldn't remove the laser warning system though, that has saved me a couple times when I assumed all targets were destroyed, and a vehicle that was hidden behind a smoke column was about to give me a love tap. Tanks hurt and being lit up by a bushmaster auto-cannon isn't much fun either.

 

Biggest thing I'd like to change if I could with the BS is the gun placement. Never liked it being mounted on the right side. If I could, I'd have it mounted underneath the aircraft so that I can cover the left side without having to turn the aircraft.

 

Having the sensor mounted in a way to allow full coverage with the gun arc (in a rotating pod) would also be necessary to take advantage of the firing arc, but the current position of the sensor still gives a wider field of view than what the gun can actually cover at the moment (IE to the left of the helicopter). Not possible to put the gun in the nose area because of the landing gear setup, moving it further back along the bottom of the fuselage might not be possible either. But it is still the main thing I'd change if a solution could be found.

 

My understanding is versions of the Ka-52 can mount Igla's on an additional pylon and I've seen photos of this, if possible this would be a nice addition on a Ka-50. Not really that useful, but would still be good to shoot down something like a Blackhawk/Hip with them.

[Flagrum]

If the Russians were to upgrade this model of the Ka-50 and I could pick what they did with it, pretty much what you mentioned, specifically the Vikhr on all hardpoints.

 

I would like an RWR in the aircraft, but as I've been downed by MANPADS/Heaters far more than radar guided stuff it isn't a priority. I stay clear of SAMs at all possible, and if you have a fighter coming after you and no friendly air cover, prior knowledge of imminent boning isn't going to save you. But I understand why people would still like to have one, so it would be nice if one could be included.

 

I wouldn't remove the laser warning system though, that has saved me a couple times when I assumed all targets were destroyed, and a vehicle that was hidden behind a smoke column was about to give me a love tap. Tanks hurt and being lit up by a bushmaster auto-cannon isn't much fun either.

 

Biggest thing I'd like to change if I could with the BS is the gun placement. Never liked it being mounted on the right side. If I could, I'd have it mounted underneath the aircraft so that I can cover the left side without having to turn the aircraft.

 

Having the sensor mounted in a way to allow full coverage with the gun arc (in a rotating pod) would also be necessary to take advantage of the firing arc, but the current position of the sensor still gives a wider field of view than what the gun can actually cover at the moment (IE to the left of the helicopter). Not possible to put the gun in the nose area because of the landing gear setup, moving it further back along the bottom of the fuselage might not be possible either. But it is still the main thing I'd change if a solution could be found.

 

My understanding is versions of the Ka-52 can mount Igla's on an additional pylon and I've seen photos of this, if possible this would be a nice addition on a Ka-50. Not really that useful, but would still be good to shoot down something like a Blackhawk/Hip with them.

 

... in short, you want an Apache! :o)

[Hunden Ynk]

Biggest thing I'd like to change if I could with the BS is the gun placement. [...]

 

But the canon is so accurate, love that thump, thump at low rate of fire!

[Grim_Smiles]

... in short, you want an Apache! :o)

 

LOL! Well, an Apache gun mount at least. I was also sort of thinking of an Mi-24 gun mounting on a Ka-50 (meaning keeping the Ka-50 gun but setup like an Mi-24). In fact, I think I was actually saying that I want an Mi-24 :D

 

But the canon is so accurate, love that thump, thump at low rate of fire!

 

Oh don't get me wrong, I like the cannon itself, just not where it is located on the Ka-50. Long as I keep the target to the right side everything is fine.

Edited September 3, 2013 by TooTall

[ff4life4]

The reason why the cannon is so accurate is because of its mounting system. Since it is semi-rigid it has a higher accuracy than one that is completely movable like the Apache.

 

It's a trade off, with the Apache type mount you have more flexibility in aiming, however accuracy won't be as good. With the Ka-50/52 the cannon has less flexibility but in theory should have greater accuracy.

 

Solution.. have two guns mounted.. best of both :thumbup:

[Grim_Smiles]

The reason why the cannon is so accurate is because of its mounting system. Since it is semi-rigid it has a higher accuracy than one that is completely movable like the Apache.

 

It's a trade off, with the Apache type mount you have more flexibility in aiming, however accuracy won't be as good. With the Ka-50/52 the cannon has less flexibility but in theory should have greater accuracy.

 

Solution.. have two guns mounted.. best of both :thumbup:

 

I see, makes sense and can understand why they mount it there now. I like your solution to the coverage area lol! :devil_2:

[Hunden Ynk]

The reason why the cannon is so accurate is because of its mounting system[...]

 

Does it being closer to the COG also have an influence, I'm thinking it will be less affected by recoil that way?

[Davis0079]

thats exactly why it was put there.....closer to the COG mean more predictability and controllability = better accuracy

[BigOHenry]

i want DCS Ka-52...

... 6 slots for weapons and more :-)

[Fishbreath]

The Ka-52 does improve upon the Ka-50 in a lot of ways, but as much fun as it is to two-seat helos in Arma, I like the single-seat idea too much in DCS. One of my friends was a big advocate of the two-seat layout, but after getting into the Ka-50, he thinks it's a little overrated, and says that any strike aircraft can be single-seat, given late Cold War-era avionics and automation.

 

Having played Ranger79's Operation Piercing Fury mission #1, I'm no longer so sure that's the case—I would frequently find myself with too few hands to do target acquisition and flying at the same time, and in low-intensity counterinsurgency sorts of environments, that's not an uncommon mission parameter. It might be better with a wingman, given loose formations, good use of the datalink, and overwatch (so one guy can use his eyes and the other guy can fly).

[Hadwell]

ka-50 could use automatic countermeasure systems like the a-10c, better infrared/thermal imaging, and with todays technology i bet they could bring its weight down a lot, put, smaller, lighter electronics, and more powerful engines... the ka-50 is an old machine... uses 80's and mid 90s components mostly...

 

as for the single seat/two seat thing...

 

since the ka50 doesn't really have much in the way of guided weapons, not so much in the way that it can shoot any other direction than in that tiny box on the HUD its almost pointless, since the pilot is doing 90% of the aiming anyway, whats 10% more?

 

the one drawback to single seaters is when you're focused on your target you lose sight of the big picture... while your shooting missiles at a tank, someone can fly up on ur rear and shoot you outta the sky, but more advanced electronics "could" help with that...

 

for something with a turret that can move in all directions, sorta like the huey with its miniguns or apache with its nose mounted turret, it makes a lot more sense, since then the pilot can focus on whats around him, keep his situational awareness, and the gunner can be 100% focused on hitting his target without having to worry about what the machine might do while he's busy.

Edited September 12, 2013 by Hadwell

[Fri13]

1) Vikhr racks size updated from 6 to 8

2) Vikhr racks possible to mount on any pylong (4x8!)

3) Add a mast mounted camera/laser(?) like Kiowa Warrior with a IR capability, with 360 degree rotation.

4) Radar warning system and IR missile warning system

5) Warning panel updated to have 12 directions

6) HUD to fill whole front window

7) Skhval TV replaced with a 18-20" MFCD what is positioned just top of dashboard so it is directly below front window.

8) Link PVI-800 and ABRIS

9) Updated Skhval targeting algorithms so there is auto lock like Su-25T.

10) Add a switch what gives auto-pilot a 50-60% override of controls instead 20%

11) Keep 7x/23x step but add two steps more, a 1x step for close range engagements/spotting (you do want to pop-up behind hill just 300m from target and shoot it!) and 50x step for long range scanning/spotting.

12) Have a better (automatic) air target locking with Skhval with a larger targeting gate. It should be possible when most often air targets are clearly visible against sky (and this with IR camera especially possible).

13) Have a improved laser cooling system.

14) Have a pylons to rotate +-5 degree and level +15/-30 degree to allow a linked rocket targeting/aiming with a Skhval and engagements below without huge dives or while flying toward target nose down.

15) Add a button to stick what allows pilot easily mark spotted targets positions to ABRIS.

16) Possibility to carry a Ataka-V missiles, guided to target with radio with view what the mast camera could see (think about flying away after launch, mast rotating at target direction).

 

And most important:

 

17) Try K.I.S.S

Keep It Stupid Simple

 

Just like now, flying and operating KA-50 is damn simple.

 

Oh, and a almost forgot, a rear camera to replace those two submarine periscopes above pilot. With a press of a button MFCD would show feed from it, even better if it would be IR camera as well (think how small space those can be build today).

 

The mast mounted camera system of course would not be alone, I would still keep Skhval system below fuselag as secondary but add a updated KA-50 camera ball there so you can see below if wanted.