Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: Parel803
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Mods and Scenarios >> RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues Page: <<   < prev  158 159 [160] 161 162   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/30/2019 6:00:02 PM   
leonardus68

 

Posts: 8
Joined: 12/19/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tookatee

Look I don't understand what's your vendetta against more options, but this discussion is clogging up this thread with irrelevant tangents rather than bugs/issues for the database.

Now, I'm going to restate my point again since you seem to not grasp it in it's entirety, these units I've specified take away from nothing by including them, there is no downsides for them being in the game, I understand the devs must prioritize what they work on and are completely free to do so as this is their software (I've been under the impression that this thread was for such recommendations and have received confirmation from another dev that these were "in the bucket" so to say for consideration to be worked on), but there are only so many military vehicles/weapons in existence and it makes little sense in my eyes to completely exclude the possibility of these items being included as you seem to be suggesting (especially as most of them would either bring armored vehicles to a nation that currently has none, or bring a nation's forces up to date in the database.)

Additionally, you are once again not realizing what I'm trying to say about your comment on unit performance. These units could ALSO be used in THEIR OWN SCENARIOS, independent of other broad reaching scenarios like a East vs West or North V South scenario. You however seem fixated on the performance impact of a scenario author (not CMANO) incorporating these units into one massive scenario, simply adding them to the database will do absolutely nothing to performance.

If you wish to respond further to this please edit your last comment to reflect your response rather than post a new comment as that would continue to flood this thread with more irrelevant posts. I will of course do the same to this comment in regards to this conversation, if you wish to continue it.

Some peoples are just superficial by nature. They are happy with 'how it is' and don't think to an improvement at all. Again, your opinion is fair. Also, as an east european player I found some major missing entries in databases.

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4771
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/30/2019 8:04:39 PM   
apache85

 

Posts: 1467
Joined: 12/18/2014
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: apache85

Hey guys just a friendly reminder that this thread is for requests for platforms that are going to be used in community scenarios, and meaningful corrections to existing platforms. Unfortunately it's not practical for us to dedicate dev time to including sundry platforms simply because they exist(ed).

Also a reminder that references should be somewhat more detailed than a mention of Wikipedia. Include at least a link to the relevant page, please.

And finally, please check the most current version of the DB3k before posting an update request.


Ok guys, enough essay writing. The above is not up for debate.

We make ongoing updates to the DB with player requests and don't ask anything more than to be treated with respect and that you follow the guidelines above.

Don't be the guy who ruined it for everyone.


_____________________________


(in reply to apache85)
Post #: 4772
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/30/2019 9:02:02 PM   
BDukes

 

Posts: 357
Joined: 12/27/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: apache85


quote:

ORIGINAL: apache85

Hey guys just a friendly reminder that this thread is for requests for platforms that are going to be used in community scenarios, and meaningful corrections to existing platforms. Unfortunately it's not practical for us to dedicate dev time to including sundry platforms simply because they exist(ed).

Also a reminder that references should be somewhat more detailed than a mention of Wikipedia. Include at least a link to the relevant page, please.

And finally, please check the most current version of the DB3k before posting an update request.


Ok guys, enough essay writing. The above is not up for debate.

We make ongoing updates to the DB with player requests and don't ask anything more than to be treated with respect and that you follow the guidelines above.

Don't be the guy who ruined it for everyone.



What do you mean ruin? What that mean? Sorry sometime I don't get english language vagueness. Do you mean stop db edits because you get mad at weird posts?

What can other do to help this problem? It seems serious?

Thank!

Bill

(in reply to apache85)
Post #: 4773
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/30/2019 9:13:01 PM   
BDukes

 

Posts: 357
Joined: 12/27/2017
Status: offline
Dear Tookatees please looks at this post for instruction so Apache doesn't turn off db edits for all.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=4616171

Just need reliable source links, photos and nice ways.

Wikipedia ok sometimes but best to find source like Jane's, defense news site (real) or famous author, blogger or twitter that built reputation on reliability.

Stats needed are what is in database form.

Peace

Bill

(in reply to BDukes)
Post #: 4774
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/30/2019 10:03:03 PM   
ProdigyofMilitaryPride

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 4/17/2015
Status: offline
*Sees recent posts*

No more requesting ground units for me at this rate.

I'll just stick with air and naval units. Especially with what I'm hoping to see with Mexico in DB3000. Otherwise I'd have to continue scrounging around for what could amount as stand-ins for those ships in scenarios I wish to develop.

If you need more info on the ones I request...

http://www.navsource.org/archives/05/863.htm
https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/mexico/navy-equipment.htm
https://efacico.com/2015/07/01/los-destructores-clase-fletcher-en-la-armada-de-mexico/

_____________________________

"The courageous must protect freedom." - Dwight D. Eisenhower
"Anything built by human hands can be destroyed. This is no exception." - Kei "Edge" Nagase, Ace Combat 5: The Unsung War

(in reply to BDukes)
Post #: 4775
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/30/2019 10:21:27 PM   
BDukes

 

Posts: 357
Joined: 12/27/2017
Status: offline
Ok back to regular scheduled programs

Ok look like US Navy give Virginia new VLS-VPM Module to help replace SSGN. This make sub 84 feet longer.

Intro infos: Block IV initially first to get

https://news.usni.org/2013/11/04/navy-selects-virginia-payload-module-design-concept

Update on accelerate program:

https://news.usni.org/2015/02/25/navy-looking-at-accelerating-vpm-design-to-allow-earlier-production

Official US congress report on Virginias (June 2019) page 7 have good stuff

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL32418.pdf

quote:

Virginia Payload Module (VPM)
The Navy plans to build the second of the two boats procured in FY2019, the second and third
boats requested for procurement in FY2020, the second of the two boats planned for procurement
in FY2021, and all subsequent Virginia-class boats with the Virginia Payload Module (VPM), an
additional, 84-foot-long, mid-body section equipped with four large-diameter, vertical launch
tubes for storing and launching additional Tomahawk missiles or other payloads.
The VPM’s vertical launch tubes are to be used to store and fire additional Tomahawk cruise
missiles or other payloads, such as large-diameter unmanned underwater vehicles (UUVs).20 The
four additional launch tubes in the VPM could carry a total of 28 additional Tomahawk cruise
missiles (7 per tube),21 which would increase the total number of torpedo-sized weapons (such as
Tomahawks) carried by the Virginia class design from about 37 to about 65—an increase of about
76%.


Diagram of VPM

http://www.gdeb.com/news/advertising/images/VPM_ad/VPM.pdf



(in reply to BDukes)
Post #: 4776
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/30/2019 11:17:12 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
Of course, the reason I never included links was because I was actually not allowed to do so. You can't include links in any of your posts until after 11 days had passed from your seventh post (now that that time has passed I will of course try to include links to as many sources as possible in any future requests.)

And you've seen my requests on here, most of them include relevant information for the database and even pictures where applicable.

< Message edited by Tookatee -- 6/30/2019 11:25:43 PM >

(in reply to BDukes)
Post #: 4777
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 7/1/2019 7:39:26 PM   
Dimitris


Posts: 11282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Tookatee
Just found a gamebreaking error, whenever you try to fire the Wan Chien Anti-Runway Cruise missile (a Taiwanese weapon for the F-CK-1D aircraft) all simulation stops and doesn't progress no matter the time compression (even if you open a new scenario.) This means you have to close and reopen the program (while also losing all your progress in the current scenario because it won't actually save the scenario, it may show that it had completed the save cycle but when you reopen the program the scenario is how it was when you last saved it or the new save file you created won't exist.)


Can you please make a new thread on the Tech Support forum for this, with a suitable save for investigation? Thanks.

_____________________________


(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4778
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 7/1/2019 7:45:27 PM   
Dimitris


Posts: 11282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tookatee
Another bug I just found, the warheads for the all variants of the nuclear Agni TELs (#2496-2499) function exactly the same as the conventional version of those facilities. No nuclear detonation occurs when the warhead impacts and it functions exactly the same as its conventional counterpart (no ability to choose a high altitude detonation), even saying that the conventional warheads had impacted the selected target despite the facility stating that the warheads are nuclear.


Can you please create a new thread for this on the Tech Support forum so that it can be investigated. Thanks.

_____________________________


(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4779
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 7/1/2019 7:50:28 PM   
Dimitris


Posts: 11282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ARCNA442
While I have long thought that min altitudes in the this game are rather conservative (eg in game an Argentinian A-4 has a min altitude of 300' over water when in real life they were attacking from below 50') and likely contribute to the problem of unrealistically effective defenses,


IIRC we fixed that very edge case in "Sea of Fire" by making the min altitude skill-dependent and setting the pilots as aces? Is it still an issue in the current version? If yes, please open a thread in the Tech Support forum. We are not omniscient, so if you don't give us a heads up we won't see it. Thanks!


_____________________________


(in reply to ARCNA442)
Post #: 4780
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 7/1/2019 7:53:09 PM   
Dimitris


Posts: 11282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tookatee

Another weapons system that's missing are the conventional variants of the AS-16 Kickback, both an anti-ship variant using inertial guidance and an active radar seeker (the KH-15P, entered service in the late 80s) and a ARM variant with a passive radar seeker were produced (the KH-15S, developed into the early 90s). In fact in the description for the nuclear variant that's already in the database explicitly references these by both name and purpose. The warhead for the nuclear variant should be 350 kilotons, not 200.

Another issue concerning the Kickback is it's missing launch platforms; the SU-33, SU-34, and the Tu-95MS-6 (6 missile capacity) could all carry the Kickback.

Source: Wikipedia article for the AS-16.

Here is a picture describing the attack pattern of the ASM variant.





I personally searched that extensively a few years back (including _buying pricey books_) and the Kh-15/AS-16 was only ever fielded in the nuclear version.

Wikipedia can be useful, but as a primary source it can be extremely hit-and-miss.


_____________________________


(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4781
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 7/1/2019 7:53:56 PM   
Dimitris


Posts: 11282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tookatee

The KH-41 Moskit is missing from the database. It is the air launched variant of the P-270 Moskit anti-ship missile and it entered service in 1990. It's weapons platforms are the SU-33, SU-34, SU-30MKI, SU-30MK, and SU-30MKK (all had a maximum capacity of one missile carried in the center-line pylon under the aircraft.) It has a maximum range of 250 km and a minimum range of 10km. It had either a conventional 150kg explosive or a 120 kiloton nuclear warhead.

Source: Wikipedia article for the P-270 Moskit and the Deagle dot com article on the KH-41.

[image][/image]





Never fielded.

_____________________________


(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4782
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 7/1/2019 8:14:04 PM   
stilesw


Posts: 1011
Joined: 6/26/2014
From: Hansville, WA, USA
Status: offline
Tookatee, Dimitris,

This has been fixed for the next DB release. The nuclear TEL had been inadvertently mounted with a non-nuclear 1000lb warhead. Has been replaced with 15kT nuclear one.

(For Dimitris, MANTIS entry 13014

-Wayne

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 4783
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 7/1/2019 8:14:53 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
Well, it cited two editions of Jane's weapons systems so I thought it would be reputable. Not to mention, looking through other websites I found that they all reference the other variants of the AS-16, the KH-15A Antiship variant and the KH-15P ARM. Also the issue of the missing weapons carriers and wrong nuclear warhead yield still stands.

Here are just a few of the other sources I found on it: https://weaponsystems.net/weaponsystem/HH08%20-%20AS-16%20Kickback%20(Kh-15).html , https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/as-16.htm , and http://www.deagel.com/Offensive-Weapons/Kh-15_a000869001.aspx

And here's another diagram describing how the ARM version operates

As for the Moskit, is it not possible to add a hypothetical loadout? While it may not have been fielded it still seems like it's possible for these aircraft to equip the Moskit at anytime with little modification and the company seems to have produced the missile in some quantity (with several if not all sources that I can find indicating that it is in fact operational.) The previous sources I listed in the original post in addition to these are some examples: https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/moskit.htm , https://missiledefenseadvocacy.org/missile-threat-and-proliferation/missile-proliferation/russia/p-270-moskit-ss-n-22-sunburn/ ,
and http://www.testpilot.ru/russia/raduga/kh/41/moskit.htm

< Message edited by Tookatee -- 7/2/2019 2:58:30 PM >

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 4784
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 7/1/2019 8:15:18 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
Nice!

(in reply to stilesw)
Post #: 4785
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 7/1/2019 8:26:55 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
Just posted that new thread in the tech forum. Although, because the bug prevents you from saving after it has occurred the scenario is just as it would be had you simply plopped down a unit and a target to test on your end.

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 4786
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 7/2/2019 6:57:56 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
The MK 67 Submarine Launched Mobile Mine (#876 and #662) do not function as they should. Instead of functioning as a launchable mine attached to a torpedo that can be fired and laid a significant distance from the original craft, it functions as any other mine would and is only able to be released on the launch platform's location. You can not manual fire the weapon to a location and units equipped with them will not automatically fire the weapon into a designated mine area when in range.

Here is an image describing how the future Improved SLMM (to be based off of the Mk 48 torpedo) operates, as it is essentially the same as the current SLMM.


In addition both variants of it currently have no default weapon carriers (it's a 533mm torpedo designed to be fired out of any standard 533mm torpedo tube, which includes many classes of American submarines since its deployment in 1985), meaning the editor must be used to forcibly equip it onto any submarine and it cannot be loaded onto any submarine from a naval base without the forced creation of the weapon record.

< Message edited by Tookatee -- 7/3/2019 4:55:52 PM >

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4787
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 7/2/2019 7:48:45 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
All variants of the MK 45 torpedo (#2730-#2732) have an incorrect explosive yield of 10kt instead of 11kt and is missing any default weapons carriers.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_45_torpedo, http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WTUS_PostWWII.php, https://1991-new-world-order.fandom.com/wiki/Mark_45_nuclear_torpedo, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W34_(nuclear_warhead), and http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Weapons/Allbombs.html



< Message edited by Tookatee -- 7/2/2019 7:49:55 PM >

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4788
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 7/2/2019 8:33:44 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
N/A

< Message edited by Tookatee -- 7/2/2019 10:11:06 PM >

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4789
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 7/2/2019 8:53:01 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
N/A

< Message edited by Tookatee -- 7/2/2019 10:06:27 PM >

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4790
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 7/2/2019 10:03:58 PM   
BDukes

 

Posts: 357
Joined: 12/27/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tookatee

The new Admiral Gorshkov class frigate is missing from the database.


There are two versions of this ship in the database.2017 and 2019. Look for SKR Admiral Sergey Gorshkov.

If you open old scenario it open old database. This could be issue with keep asking for things that already exist. Or maybe you chew strange gum.

Hope helps!

Bill

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4791
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 7/2/2019 10:06:03 PM   
BDukes

 

Posts: 357
Joined: 12/27/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tookatee

The Russian Kirov class battle cruisers Pyotr Velikiy and Admiral Nakhimov (currently undergoing modernization, trials begin in 2020) are missing from the database, the two Kirov class cruisers currently included (two variants of the RKR Kirov at different dates) are of an outdated configuration and the ship itself is no longer in serivce and is being scrapped. See sources for exact armament/sensor differences, a prominent example is the addition of the 3M22 Zircon missile on the Admiral Nakhimov.


Admiral N has 2019 Version. PV has 2023 version. Look ok

Bill

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4792
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 7/2/2019 10:07:53 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
Thank you for pointing that out, I didn't see it because I searched up Admiral Gorshkov and its Russian project number (Project 22350) which don't reveal that ship in the database when used as search terms. I've been using the latest database, but I guess these search terms weren't what were picked up for each unit. The same thing happened for the Kirov as I used "Kirov" as the search term for the ships, as both the Admiral N and PV are Kirov class battle cruisers.

< Message edited by Tookatee -- 7/2/2019 10:15:34 PM >

(in reply to BDukes)
Post #: 4793
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 7/2/2019 10:54:30 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
The #430, #665, #4840, and #1518 A-6E Intruders and all the A-6F Intruder II's are missing the ability to load up to three of the B43 (all variants of the A-6E/F Intruders are missing the ability to load this), B57, B61, or B83 (this bomb is specifically stated in the description in CMANO for the A-6E, but is not backed up by the following sources) nuclear bombs.

Sources: http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/A-6E_Intruder_(TRAM)_SAC_-_November_1979.pdf and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_A-6_Intruder

< Message edited by Tookatee -- 7/3/2019 2:41:46 PM >

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4794
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 7/2/2019 11:53:55 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
The Jaguar S models (#4628, #1292, and #1293) are all missing the ability to load AA missiles (two Matra Magic missiles or two Sidewinders) as apart of their loadouts. This is due to the fact that the aircraft were given overwing missile rails as a standard feature, allowing them to carry their normal payload of bombs in addition to two AA missiles. They also were able to carry a dedicated loadout of up to four AA missiles by combining the overwing pylons and the two outermost standard pylons on each wing, substituting ground ordinance for additional missiles.

Sources: https://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=92 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEPECAT_Jaguar#cite_note-WAPJ11_p111-122

< Message edited by Tookatee -- 7/3/2019 2:22:31 PM >

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4795
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 7/3/2019 5:19:17 AM   
ProdigyofMilitaryPride

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 4/17/2015
Status: offline
Here's an image of the ARM E-01 Cuitlahuac (one of the Mexican naval platforms I requested for DB3000, should I quote the others I've requested if you want?)...





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by ProdigyofMilitaryPride -- 7/3/2019 6:19:46 AM >


_____________________________

"The courageous must protect freedom." - Dwight D. Eisenhower
"Anything built by human hands can be destroyed. This is no exception." - Kei "Edge" Nagase, Ace Combat 5: The Unsung War

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4796
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 7/3/2019 7:24:35 AM   
lumiere

 

Posts: 93
Joined: 3/19/2019
From: Japan
Status: offline
Some request for Iranian Phantoms.

TISEO wing EO Sensor variant of F-4E.
Google books - Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat
F-4E Images from Airlines.net

SUU-23A 20mm Gunpod for F-4D.
Google books - Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat
F-4D illustlation with SUU-23A gunpod

quote:

Weapons

Iranian Air Force used various weapons options in conjunction with its F-4 Phantom operations. They included general purpose bombs; such as 500lb. Snakeye (x12) to 750lb. (x6) and 1,000lb. (x6) GP or retard versions. AIM-7E Sparrow and AIM-9P/J Sidewinder missiles were also carried regularly for air defense and fighter escort missions. Other weapons included the AGM-65A Maverick used in conjunction with TISEO electro-optical sensor, BL 755 cluster bomb customized for low-altitude delivery, Napalm tanks and LAU-61 rocket launchers. Iranian F-4Ds also used the SUU-23 gun pods to good effect.
Two Iranian F-4D Phantoms were tasked with striking a logistically important bridge near Basreh on September 29, 1981, employing LGBs. They used a buddy-lasing tactic, one acting as target designator at about 13,000ft equipped with AVQ-9 Pave Light laser designator. The target was hit, but a short time later an SA-6 missile homed in on the designating aircraft. Both crew ejected as the aircraft was destroyed.

http://www.iiaf.net/f4/


Give SUU-23A to South Korean F-4D too.
F-4D images from xairforces.net
Google search results of "F-4D ROKAF"

Thanks! (BTW, should I post same request for CWDB thread?)

Edit: US F-4D has CAP loadouts with SUU-23A (#16921/#16922). I don't care at all the AIM-9J or AIM-9N difference.

< Message edited by lumiere -- 7/3/2019 8:08:05 AM >


_____________________________

The first casualty when war comes is truth.
US Senator Hiram W. Johnson (?)

(in reply to ProdigyofMilitaryPride)
Post #: 4797
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 7/3/2019 10:09:42 AM   
SakiNoE

 

Posts: 35
Joined: 11/15/2018
Status: offline
Malay, Singapore, Thai Changes
Note: All proposed loadouts are based on the capabilities and loadouts of the aircraft or similar aircraft as currently represented in DB.

New F/A-18D versions to be added for Malaysia:

3 new versions of the Malaysian F/A-18s should be added to the DB, these represent capability upgrades undertaken over the aircraft’s 22 year service period with the RMAF, with the first upgrade being in 2007. Where possible, I have written the new loadouts that would have to be added with each entry along with how previous entries would have to be modified, along with locating related DBID entries.

[NEW] F/A-18D, 2007.
This version acquired the ability to fire the AIM-120C-5 AMRAAM missile, whether this replaced AIM-7Ms entirely is unknown due to the small stockpile of C5s ordered, for this reason I’d recommend carrying the AIM-7Ms CAP loadouts over to this and the 2011 version [see below].

New Loadouts:
A/A: AIM-120C-5 AMRAAM, Heavy - 6x AIM-120C-5 AMRAAM, 2x AIM-9M Sidewinder, 2x 330USG Drop Tanks (DBID: 1566, found on USN F/A-18C #1070)
A/A: AIM-120C-5 AMRAAM, Light - 2x AIM-120C-5 AMRAAM, 6x AIM-9M Sidewinder, 2x 330USG Drop Tanks (DBID: 1569, found on USN F/A-18C #1070)
A/A: AIM-120C-5 AMRAAM, Standard- 2x AIM-120C-5 AMRAAM, 2x AIM-9M Sidewinder, 2x 330USG Drop Tanks (DBID: 12036, found on USN F/A-18C #1070)

In addition, all other loadouts [except Sparrow A/A] would need to be modified to have AIM-120C-5s instead of Sparrows.

[NEW] F/A-18D, 2011
This version acquired the ability to deploy Mk8X bombs equipped with the JDAM strap-on guidance package. Due to the lack of information regarding which JDAM variants were exported I have elected to use the USN variants, as those are used by the DB’s other Hornet variants. Furthermore, since Malaysia has, to my knowledge, never operated the Mk83 with its F/A-18Ds I have excluded Mk83 JDAM loadouts from the loadout list:

New Loadouts:
GBU-31(V)2/B JDAM [Mk84] (Standoff Strike, Land) - 1x AIM-120C-5 AMRAAM, 2x AIM-9M Sidewinder, 2x GBU-31(V) 2/B JDAM [Mk84], 1x NITE Hawk Pod, 2x 330USG Drop Tanks (Closely related loadout: DBID 4110, found on USMC F/A-18D #451, requires removal of TINS Pod and addition of 1 AMRAAM)
GBU-38(V)2/B JDAM [Mk82] (Standoff Strike, Land) - 1x AIM-120C-5 AMRAAM, 2x AIM-9M Sidewinder, 2x GBU-31(V) 2/B JDAM [Mk82], 1x NITE Hawk Pod, 2x 330USG Drop Tanks (Closely related loadout: DBID 7934, found on USN F/A-18A+ #2086, requires removal of ATFLIR pod and addition of NITE Hawk)

[NEW] F/A-18D, 2016
This was an extensive upgrade, giving Malaysian F/A-18s the capacity to carry the AIM-9X-2 SRAAM, the AIM-120C-7 AMRAAM and the AN/ASQ-228 ATFLIR. The ATFLIR system most likely replaced the old NITE Hawk pods in RMAF service. While the B-2s were delivered in 2015 I have chosen to consolidate the upgrade into one, 2016, entry. Furthermore, I would recommend removing AIM-7M loadouts from this version. No new loadouts would be needed, but all loadouts would need modification to take advantage of the ATFLIR, C-7 AMRAAM and X-2 Sidewinder capabilities.

Singaporean Changes
[NEW] A330 MRTT, 2018:
Singapore ordered 6 Airbus A330 MRTTs in 2014, and the first was unveiled in September 2018. This would be a clone of DBID #3888.

[NEW] SAMP/T SAM Bty, 2017:
Ordered in 2013, with first delivery in 2017. Clone of #230.

[NEW] M142 HIMARS, 2010:
Ordered in ~2007-2008, first live-fired by Singaporean Army forces in 2010. Near-clone of #1968, but ATACMS capability should be removed due to the fact Singapore has never ordered the ATACMS missile.

Singapore F-15SG Changes
These changes reflect capabilities that were either present at the beginning of the SGs service life or have been since added since

F-15SG, DBID 2925
The F-15SG was acquired during the Peace Carvin V program, along with the equipment already present in this DB entry. Additionally, AAQ-33 Sniper Pods were provided for use with the F-15SGs.I believe, based on SIPRI, that this was used instead of LANTIRN, with LANTIRN being used solely on F-16s until several years later. With this in mind, the proposed loadout changes are listed below;
DBID 15612-15621, replace LANTIRN with Sniper
DBID 19850, 19851, replace LANTIRN with Sniper

Additionally, AGM-154A and C JSOWs were acquired by Singapore, which, according to SIPRI, are used by the F-15SG. Therefore, the following loadouts should be added to DBID 2925:

AGM-154A JSOW (Standoff Strike, Land) - 2x AIM-120C-7 AMRAAM, 2x AIM-9X Sidewinder, 2x AGM-154A JSOW, 1x AAQ-33 Sniper, 1x Tiger Eyes Pod [FLIR, CCD TV + TFR], 1x Tiger Eyes Pod [IRST], 2x 750 USG CFT (Closely related loadout: DBID #22848 on ROKAF F-15K #4514, requires replacing C-5 AMRAAM with C-7, Taurus 350 with A JSOW and LANTIRN with Sniper]
AGM-154C JSOW (Standoff Strike, Land/Naval) - 2x AIM-120C-7 AMRAAM, 2x AIM-9X Sidewinder, 2x AGM-154C JSOW, 1x AAQ-33 Sniper, 1x Tiger Eyes Pod [FLIR, CCD TV + TFR], 1x Tiger Eyes Pod [IRST], 2x 750 USG CFT (Closely related loadout: DBID #22848 on ROKAF F-15K #4514, requires replacing C-5 AMRAAM with C-7, Taurus 350 with C JSOW and LANTIRN with Sniper]

[NEW] F-15SG, 2013
SIPRI Arms Transfer suggests that AIM-120C-7 capability would have been available for the F-15SG and F-16C/Ds after 2013. Therefore, if this capability were to be added, a new DB entry for 2013 would be required, with all loadouts needing to be modified to replace the C-5 with the C-7 model.

[NEW] F-15SG, 2016
Singapore acquired 20 AIM-9X-2s in 2016, it’s likely these can be equipped with their F-15SGs. Due to the small number acquired I would recommend only replacing A/A loadouts with these missiles.

[NEW] F-15SG, 2019.
Singapore is currently being supplied with GBU-39 Small Diameter Bombs, thanks to a contract signed in 2017, however a delivery date is at present unknown. I based the date off the time taken in historic SAF contracts from order, in this case, 2017, to delivery. The following loadouts would be needed for this aircraft;

GBU-39/B SDB, Sniper XR Pod [FLIR] (Standoff Strike, Land) - 2x AIM-120C-7 AMRAAM, 2x AIM-9X Sidewinder, 8x GBU-39/B SDB, 1x AAQ-33 Sniper XR, 1x Tiger Eyes Pod [FLIR, CCD TV + TFR], 1x Tiger Eyes Pod [IRST], 2x 750 USG CFT (Closely related loadout: DBID #2777 on USAF F-15E #4291, requires replacement of AIM-9M with AIM-9X, as well as the removal of LANTIRN to be replaced with the Tiger Eyes FLIR/CCD and Tiger Eyes IRST pods]

GBU-39/B SDB, Sniper XR Pod [FLIR], Long-Range (Standoff Strike, Land) - 2x AIM-120C-7 AMRAAM, 2x AIM-9X Sidewinder, 4x GBU-39/B SDB, 1x AAQ-33 Sniper XR, 1x Tiger Eyes Pod [FLIR, CCD TV + TFR], 1x Tiger Eyes Pod [IRST], 2x 750 USG CFT (Closely related loadout: DBID #12283 on USAF F-15E #4291, requires replacement of AIM-9M with AIM-9X, as well as the removal of LANTIRN to be replaced with the Tiger Eyes FLIR/CCD and Tiger Eyes IRST pods]

Singaporean F-16 Changes:
Peace Carvin II-IV [DBID: 900, 1532, 3530, 3531, 2966]
These aircraft were equipped from the beginning with the AIM-9S, replacing the earlier AIM-9P-4s used by the SAF. No new loadouts would be needed for these aircraft, but all loadouts would need modification to use AIM-9S.

Thai Changes:
[NEW] F-16A/B Block 15 MLU, 2012
The RTAF undertook an MLU program for 18 of their F-16s in 2010, replacing the AN/APG-66A ADF radars with the AN/APG-68(V)9 [found on DBID #762], replacing the AN/ALE-40(V)4 countermeasures deployment system with the AN/ALE-47 [found on DBID #3273] and added the ALQ-213 ECM system [found on DBID #3685].

[NEW] EC.725 Caracal, x8, 2010
First delivered in 2010, have received 2 more since, with 6 more planned for 2021. Clone of #4089.

Sources:
SIPRI Arms Transfer Database
United States Defence Security Cooperation Agency
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2018-09-02/singapore-officially-unveils-a330-mrtt
https://defense-update.com/20080301_singapore08_radars.html
https://www.defensenews.com/land/2018/03/29/singapore-confirms-delivery-of-aster-30-missile-with-video-post/
https://archive.is/20120805101251/http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/publications/cyberpioneer/features/2010/jan10_fs.html
https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-releases/en/2018/09/royal-thai-air-force-expands-fleet-with-additional-h225m-order.html

SakiNoE

< Message edited by SakiNoE -- 7/4/2019 3:08:55 AM >

(in reply to lumiere)
Post #: 4798
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 7/3/2019 3:16:56 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
The B61 and B83 nuclear bombs are missing many of their launch platforms. These include all variants of the American F-15E Strike Eagle, all variants of the American F-16, all variants of the American F/A-18, all variants of the American AV-8, and the Mod 12 variant of the B61 is missing from the F-35 and F-22 (which can be carried both internally and externally.)

In addition several variants of the B61 are missing from the database, all of which have differing yields and standard carriers


Sources: https://web.archive.org/web/20141207170603/http://www.defense.gov/npr/docs/2010%20Nuclear%20Posture%20Review%20Report.pdf , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B61_nuclear_bomb , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_F-15E_Strike_Eagle , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_F-16_Fighting_Falcon , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B83_nuclear_bomb , http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Weapons/B61.html , and https://fas.org/blogs/security/2011/06/b61-12/

< Message edited by Tookatee -- 7/3/2019 11:11:47 PM >

(in reply to SakiNoE)
Post #: 4799
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 7/3/2019 4:21:21 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
All variants of the AV-8B in the database are missing the ability to load the AGM-65D/H/G/K variants of the Maverick, x7 FFAR, x19 FFAR, and four x4 Zuni rocket pods (and any combination of those rocket pods/missiles.) The Night Attack + varaints are also missing the ability to fire the Harpoon ASM and AGM-88C HARM (a maximum of two for both).


In addition, it is capable of carrying up to four 300, 330, or 370 lbs fuel tanks rather than the two the database limits it to.


All the British Harriers (except for the Sea-Harriers) are also missing the ability to load a maximum of four SNEB rocket pods.


Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_AV-8B_Harrier_II , https://www.military.com/equipment/av-8b-harrier-ii , https://web.archive.org/web/20110707095644/http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/harrier/ , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawker_Siddeley_Harrier

< Message edited by Tookatee -- 8/3/2019 12:22:10 PM >

(in reply to leonardus68)
Post #: 4800
Page:   <<   < prev  158 159 [160] 161 162   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Mods and Scenarios >> RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues Page: <<   < prev  158 159 [160] 161 162   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.185