Looking at your chart it gives me R-3M vibes, though that seems small in comparison
1 Like
Illiterate “cz” (do you mean the pistol?) of your text patterns.
Yeah, what all happened and was fought about while I was away?
Not sure, I was gone for a bit too.
General pain, the primary draw of dosh for the Part 107 is the insurance I have to get along with it.
If I had started on this a while ago it would be way less pain due to the price of jet A being way less in the US a few years ago, so the entire event is taking way WAY longer than it really should.
I’ve corrected it for you:
“There is a literal video of Ka-52 flying without with its entire tail intact, only having the vertical stab bent, in Ukraine. It still has all of its avionics intact, it still has its horizontal stabilizers, and it didn’t lose 40% of its mass (which would shift the CoG so severely that it would likely crash straight into the ground). This is an explicit example russian bias.”
6 Likes
Cool, you dont need to auto-rotate with forward velocity, I have a feeling that you dont really know anything of what you are trying to explain given you keep citing the NTSB as some authority of aircraft operation when the FAA exists.
Last I checked the NTSB does not write the book on how to operate rotary wing aircraft, or any aircraft in the US for that matter, you’d have to ask the FAA for that.
Go and get yourself a copy of FAR-AIM and get back to me after you have finished it so you actually have a baseline in basic aircraft operations in modern airspace.
Cool, that is what your statement insinuated, and no, no rotor has full control authority over a rotary wing aircraft, contra-rotating or otherwise, both static and mobile control surfaces on a rotary wing aircraft work in tandem with the anti-torque and main rotor to produce control. Yes said systems have less effect at low speed, that does still however not discount the fact that they are needed.
Cool, now explain to me how a KA-52 can pull a high speed J turn without it with no issue like in the video I posted a while ago.
KA-52, no 50s have been used in the unnamed nation. Quite funny though that you just willingly brush off video proof of slip when providing nothing more than the standard “contra-rotating blades allow helis to do functionally anything” argument, and no stop trying to shift the goalposts, we aren’t talking about a hover or a standstill like you are trying to move the argument to, its normal in game combat speed and the posted video, both of which are high speed.
I have posted multiple examples and thoroughly explained how aircraft actually function. Your response as well as foxo’s have been the same aforementioned contra-rotating rotor cope. The burden of proof are on you and him, of which neither of you have provided anything.
How would it lose 40% of its mass from the removal of its tail section?
Confined Shkval, large and lesser in mobility, lacking FAF munitions, thermals, radar, or the ability to track a target while traveling adjacent to an enemy.
These are all outdone by the A129, EC-665 UHT, and especially the AH Mk.1.
1 Like
Exactly, unless some munitions are added to it that it doesn’t currently have. Which could we see an upgrade of the current Black Shark to the BSIII with three pylons per “wing”?
1 Like
Will we see a Ka-50 with Hermes?
If;
Yes - Other helicopters stand no chance
No - Other helicopters match the range of the Ka-50 and have an edge with sensor capability and performance.
1 Like
I was more thinking of the KH-25 and R-73. But that would be cool too.
Kh-25s are terrifying, they’re pretty much good against everything… I can’t even count the aircraft I’ve killed in my 25T using Kh-25s.
Is this rat is the better version of Vikir but not trigger LWS ?
Its functionally speaking the 57E6 with a different warhead and a different booster, using good ol’l radio command guidance for flight and SALH for terminal.
As of now the system does not really exist in any functional form, but the helicopter launched variant would, per the propaganda numbers have a range between 15 to 20km.
So in reality think of a SALH guided pantsir on a helicopter.
Yeah, but From the cross-section I showed, it looked like it may have been an anti-radiation missile, but I do not know. It looks like that’s what it says, but the letters after look like a MS or MR. Probably the KH-25MP, as it’s a “Modular anti-radiation missile,” I don’t know what that’s supposed to mean, or what’s modular about it.
https://weaponsystems.net/system/175-Zvezda+Kh-25MP
Seeker head I guess.
1 Like
The AGM-179B (-MR variant) & AGM176 are still on par and you get to carry more missiles per station and have multispectral seekers.
Or the Brimstone IIs hitting targets out to 40 or so km, the NLOS can also get out there.
It has no relation to the Pantsir’s missile, with no aerodynamic or sensor similarities.
It uses “good ol’l” TV / infrared terminal guidance with dual-channel SALH. For extended range variants, ranging from 50-100km, they primarily use radio command until they hit their terminal phase.
It’s been tested widely against drones and ground targets, with “various” models passing and awaiting adoption.
It’s an FAF Vikhr with 2-10x range at the cost of half the quantity.
M denotes a tandem warhead.