Talk:Kamov Ka-50

Ka-52 Separate page

I think the Ka-52 needs a separate wikipedia page because much more Ka-52's have been produced than Ka-50s at this point. Also i think the two helicopters are different enough to have separate pages. The fact that the Ka-52 was made on the basis of the Ka-50 should not be reason to have them share a wikipedia page because with that logic all of the Flankers (Su-27, 33, 35, 30, 37) should be listed on the Su-27 page yet they all have separate pages. Also the MiG-15 and MiG-17 have separate pages, and the F-15 Eagle and F-15E Strike Eagle have separate pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.77.39.92 (talk) 01:19, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Agreed, The Ka-52 started has a variant of the Ka-50 just like the Su-30 and the su-35 started as variants of the su-27 but became separate air crafts. The KA-52 has different specifications ,systems and design from the Ka 50. UMDP (talk) 03:56, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

AGREED! Reviving this discussion as rescently the page was updated to include specs of one varient only. The Ka-52 has somewhat different performance and capability from Ka-50. Hammer5000 (talk) 12:01, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

No-one opposing or supporting this? Hammer5000 (talk) 15:52, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

I've no problem with splitting off the Ka-52 to itw own article. I actually started doing it a few months ago, but reverted myself as I didn't have time to complete it due to real-life issues, but forgot to get back to it. - BilCat (talk) 18:38, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Agree While Ka-52 is in the same family as Ka-50, it's largely its own thing, with a numerous differences that go far beyond just having two-man cockpit, like the article tries to imply. SkywalkerPL (talk) 08:34, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Range issue

Range: 545 km (339 mi; 294 nmi) Combat radius: 470 km (290 mi; 250 nmi) Ferry range: 1,160 km (720 mi; 630 nmi) with 4 drop tanks

What? How can combat radius be more than half of normal range? What's the source of this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheDestroyer111 (talk • contribs) 14:53, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kamov Ka-50. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151225124803/http://bmpd.livejournal.com/700413.html to http://bmpd.livejournal.com/700413.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:46, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Checked. Redalert2fan (talk) 12:43, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

What does “ГСИ” mean?

  The Cyrillic TLA “ГСИ” appears twice in this article, in the section about the KA-52 variant, but nowhere is it defined or explained.  What does it mean? — Bob Blaylock (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:07, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

It means государственные совместные испытания - state joint trials, with 'joint' meaning joining factory trials and customer trials; such trials would be conducted by specialists of both producer and customer, under the management of state-appointed commission. Russian wiki does not have an article for that, BTW. Yury Tarasievich (talk) 06:08, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Biological species link bogus?

I think the connection with kitefin shark is bogus. That name/moniker wasn't supposed to relate to biological species and would be better translated/approximated by shark of black colour (like, 'more menacing'). Yury Tarasievich (talk) 05:57, 23 January 2020 (UTC) ...same goes for the 'Night shark' nick - 'Shark of the night'. Yury Tarasievich (talk) 06:00, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Too many refs?

Is there any such thing as too many references? If there is, than I think this article has too many. 15 references in an infobox? Every other article I've seen has up to 5 references, but usually just 1 or 2. KingAviationKid (talk) 17:21, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

For multiple refs supporting the same text, that can be overciting. See the essay at WP:OVERCITE for more info. -Fnlayson (talk) 17:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Operational history Ukraine

During the invasion of Ukraine 3 were lost: 8 03 2022 https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html 24.02.2022 https://postimg.cc/jCmC8Nx5 02.03.2022 https://i.postimg.cc/Zqj182jJ/987.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.121.160.252 (talk) 20:22, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

One or two seats [both]

The intro calls it a single-seat helicopter, but the first sentence of the 'design' section says it has two seats? Obscurasky (talk) 23:32, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Ka-50 is the single-seat variant, while the Ka-50-2 and Ka-52 are the two-seat variants. Ka-50 and Ka-52 are both mentioned throughout the article. Regards -Fnlayson (talk) 01:22, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Norhth Macedonia

No matter what the source says, North Macedonia never operated Ka-50. In fact, no example of Ka-50 or any variant of it ever landed on Macedonian soil. Understandably, there's no other source on the internet that makes this claim, there are no photos of Macedonian Ka-50, or anything else really. This is expected since Macedonia never operated this type of helicopter. If a given source says the opposite, that source is unreliable and shouldn't be quoted, because it only contributes to the reduction of Wikipedia credibility. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Filip.vidinovski (talk • contribs) 09:41, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Actually, the source states two Ka-52 Alligators, not Ka-50. Anyway, Wikipedia is not a reliable source, and has never claimed to be. Instead, it cites reliable published sources. You either need to cite a better source that states the existing source was mistaken, or else prove that the existing source is unreliable. BilCat (talk) 04:17, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

...or Bilcat, you know, you could find sources that are more recent than the existing sources cited which are over 20 years old. Citing articles from 2001 and 2003 (resp) is hardly accurate nor reliable at all. As it currently stands, Northern Macedonia, so far, has never taken delivery of a single Ka-50 or -52 to date. Bobbo9K (14.2.105.154 (talk) 05:13, 21 October 2023 (UTC))

In fact the Macedonian MoD denied having bought any Kamov 50/2 helicopters 2603:8081:8AF0:87B0:2224:A9F2:8783:5060 (talk) 13:17, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Syrian possession

The Syrian airforce may possess this helicopter in its arsenal. It was seen in Aleppo city with MI-17 with it. Russian Ka-52s normally have a V or a Z on the sides. Some of them may not have that but they definitely have a red star on the tail and from below. I've got pictures of it that were taken today. I can't confirm if it has a star on the tail or not, but no red star could be seen from below. 188.133.22.107 (talk) 13:21, 11 October 2024 (UTC)