Can we fix Hellfires instead of buffing Ka-50s even more?
1 Like
Let me put this in simple terms so you can understand:
The tail section has a density therefore it has a mass therefore gravity exerts a force on it, the rotor of a helicopter is placed in relation to the center of mass of the overall vehicle.
If you remove the tail section, the center of mass moves significantly, the vehicle thus no longer has the nominal static forces thus the rotor is technically misplaced and in conclusion exerting thrust with the rotor will make the vehicle flip forward.
It’s not a simple case of “you can still control your aircraft”, this would induce an absolute loss of control of the vehicle, however Gaijin’s modeling of the game isn’t accurate especially when it comes to the helicopter damage model so the only way to model that is to kill the vehicle.
Once again, if you question the really basic stuff that I am trying to explain, you are free to jump on a Ka 50, blow up the tail section mid flight and see what happens.
3 Likes
I posted a source where it was indicated that a ka-50 returned to base after losing the tail. Additionally you did not include any real math other than just theory “ka-50 loses tail, in theory it should be uncontrollable”. You did not confirm this with math & research.
Please post math where you confirm that the loss of tail for ka-50 would mean that the helicopter becomes completely uncontrollable, so you can prove that it is against the laws of physics.
You posted a video of a Ka 52 losing the yaw stabilizer, not the tail section.
See the difference:
Moreover in the video the stabilizer seems to be somewhat hanging there still which means the mass hasn’t shifted massively although the pilot seems to be experiencing as expected a rightward force in certain sections of the video.
You think that case two flies the same as an unharmed Ka 50/52, I mean honestly why design a tail at all? Why put all that weight on the back if it’s utterly useless?
Can’t put this in simpler words for you pal.
7 Likes
I don’t remember myself posting any ka-52 videos. Even if i did, the source where i posted about ka-50 still stands.
Your math to confirm that ka-50 can’t be controllable without tail is not 1+1=2. It is not basic* math. It would be extremely complex math and because you would have to conduct real world research for the math because it would include data about the ka-50 and it’s qualities, you would absolutely have to include a source with your math to prove that the data you used is valid. It is not 1+1=2.
No, actually with accurate data on the mass of each section this is a fairly simple calculation and it very much becomes a sum of numbers that a toddler could perform.
I simply don’t care nor consider it useful to research something as basic as this, you ask anybody with even a highschool level of physics they will tell you the center of mass has shifted.
Third time now, you are free to fly a coaxial rotor helicopter with a blown off tail section in order to confirm my “theory”.
4 Likes
So all you can conclude is “mass has shifted” and nothing else. You don’t even know how much the tail section weights so you can’t actually do the required math to conclude wether the ka-50 can fly or not.
I’m going to consider your opinion irrelevant because you are making claims based on “physics” without even knowing the weight of ka-50’s tail. If you don’t know how much the center of mass shifts then don’t make assumptions.
Considering Ka-52 was proven to fly with shot out tail by videos from conflict we cant mention,Ka-50 of same construction should too and was made with that in mind aswell.
With DAMAGED tail?
Land? Definetively.
Limp back to base? Hard to do but not impossible.
Remain combat effective? Actual unironical propaganda.
With tail completly gone?
Unfiltered copium.
3 Likes
There is literally video of it flying with no tail with all weaponry still suspended and getting safely to base. You can scream copium as you want but the fact Kamovs were made with the ability to fly without the tail.
Then by all means provide such video!
Prove me wrong!
1 Like
You can find it on YT yourself,i cba to spend my time proving something to someone whos just gonna reply with cope and seethe,especially not when at work.
Not a buff. Doesnt change the performance of the ka 50s at all.
Despite people whining here the change will remain as it is completely logical.
Anyone complaining should find something else to try and cancel.
“With no tail”
Read as: Without the yaw stabiliser. Again, it needs to be drilled into your head that missing THE ENTIRE TAIL is different from missing the stabiliser.
1 Like
So you have nothing, gotchu.
1 Like
And Kamovs should have to instantly drop all their weapons and limp back to airfield. Not continue fighting like nothing happened.
Sure they can still fly home, but they definitely lose majority of their maneuverability and stability. And that is with just the tip of the tail damaged. Not the entire tail section like in this game.
1 Like
Where are yours? Can you give sources where it says that it can keep engaging enemies without tail?
Don’t you feel trapped right now? Like a little rabbit facing headlights?
3 Likes
If you want to prove gaijin wrong then you have to give them a source. I’m just asking you for that, otherwise you’re not proving anyone to be wrong.