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: none
  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  81 82 [83] 84 85   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/27/2016 5:26:15 PM   
ComDev

 

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline
Okay I'm re-opening this thread

Please keep requests relevant. We've pretty much reached the max length, width, height and depth for the Command version 1 database. I will only fix reported errors/inaccuracies in existing platforms and only make critical additions, i.e. units needed for a scenario currently under construction. Nice-to-have stuff will not be added.

Emerging projects/platforms that there isn't much reliable information on will be put on hold until enough material is available to create a accurate representation in the database. Hypothetical stuff will not be added unless there are exceptionally good reasons for it.

Also, I will not add the countless tiny navies and air forces around the world. These have been requested but the platforms' limited use doesn't justify the time and energy needed to add them to the database. Sorry guys!

I am re-directed my limited Command time (which is squeezed inbetween family life, day-job, workout, and various other interests) to write code. I've finally started implementing various missing elements needed before I can begin working on the Advanced Strike Planner. If there is a platform or error correction you consider extremely important (...enough to justify spending time on adding / fixing, rather than working on code) then feel free to post. If not then you'll find me buried deep down in the Command game engine.

Thanks!


< Message edited by emsoy -- 2/27/2016 5:29:04 PM >


_____________________________



Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to mikmykWS)
Post #: 2461
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/27/2016 6:27:54 PM   
ComDev

 

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline
Added/updated DB v442, thanks!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Skjold

I just noticed that the Danish don't have their 9x MH-60R while creating a scenario with Denmark. The first one got delivered recently. Not a high priority thing, but would add some neat capability to the Danish.

"The Royal Danish Navy announced its acquisition of nine MH-60R in December 2012. The program, valued at $686 million, was the first European foreign military sale for Team Seahawk. The Danish aircraft are configured for search and rescue or anti-surface warfare operations, including defending Danish interests in the North Atlantic, executing anti-piracy operations, and conducting other missions during international deployments. All nine aircraft will be delivered to the Danish government by 2018." - MH-60 official website.

That sounds to me like they will be using Hellfires for anti-surface operations, but i'll leave that up to you guys.

Designation corrections for Sweden.
  • C (numbers here) Aviocar should be SH 89, the designation is as a comment in-game but shouldn't it be at the start of the name so u can easily spot it as a maritime recon next to the SH 37?
  • Dash 8-300 MPRA has the designation KBV 501. (KustBeVakning, Coast Guard). The three planes are designated KBV 501, 502 and 503 respectivly.
  • RQ-7B Shadow 200 also has its designation UAV 03 Örnen, but its in a comment. Would be nice if it could get its designation.
  • Sperwer UAV should have the designation UAV 01 Ugglan.

    It thinks im spamming phone numbers again. Cheers, Skjold.



  • < Message edited by emsoy -- 2/27/2016 6:31:50 PM >


    _____________________________



    Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

    (in reply to Skjold)
    Post #: 2462
    RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/27/2016 6:31:30 PM   
    ComDev

     

    Posts: 5735
    Joined: 5/12/2006
    Status: offline
    Updated DB v442, thanks!


    quote:

    ORIGINAL: Supreme 2.0

    Updates for platform #2567 - HQ 11 Dinh Tien Hoang [SKR Gepard 3.9, Pr.1166.1E].

    - Replace Cross Dome [MR-352 Positiv] with Cross Round [MR-352 Positiv ME-1]



    - Replace Plank Shave [3Ts-25 Garpun-Bal] with Band Stand [Monolit]

    - Add 2 x 14.5mm MGs (1)

    - Replace all PK-16 DL with 4 x PK-10 DL (1)(2)(Other two launchers located behind RHIB davits)

    - Replace CADS-N-1 [Palma] with CADS-N-1 [Palash]

    - Remove RBU-6000 [Smerch-2] (1)(2)

    http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-438.html
    http://www.typhoon-jsc.ru/index.php/production-and-services/special-purpose/pozitiv-me12
    http://vnexpress.net/tin-tuc/thoi-su/uy-luc-chien-ham-dinh-tien-hoang-cua-hai-quan-viet-nam-2427335-p2.html

    Thanks for time and efforts!

    PS: I'm aware that the team is currently busy working on gameplay stuff rather than its database. Just dropping my requests here for future updates to come. I'm not expecting anybody to include this in the next update! Cheers!

    (Edit: Fixed link)



    < Message edited by emsoy -- 2/27/2016 6:32:15 PM >


    _____________________________



    Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

    (in reply to Vici Supreme)
    Post #: 2463
    RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/27/2016 6:38:44 PM   
    Dysta


    Posts: 1892
    Joined: 8/8/2015
    Status: offline
    Okay, I'm first!

    #2968 - 053H2 CCG refit. It has 2 37mm turrets at each side instead of 1. Total is 4.

    Also replaced 341 with 347G FCR.





    _____________________________


    (in reply to ComDev)
    Post #: 2464
    RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/27/2016 7:50:01 PM   
    Vici Supreme

     

    Posts: 556
    Joined: 12/4/2013
    From: Southern Germany
    Status: offline

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: emsoy

    Okay I'm re-opening this thread

    Please keep requests relevant. We've pretty much reached the max length, width, height and depth for the Command version 1 database. I will only fix reported errors/inaccuracies in existing platforms and only make critical additions, i.e. units needed for a scenario currently under construction. Nice-to-have stuff will not be added.

    Emerging projects/platforms that there isn't much reliable information on will be put on hold until enough material is available to create a accurate representation in the database. Hypothetical stuff will not be added unless there are exceptionally good reasons for it.

    Also, I will not add the countless tiny navies and air forces around the world. These have been requested but the platforms' limited use doesn't justify the time and energy needed to add them to the database. Sorry guys!

    I am re-directed my limited Command time (which is squeezed inbetween family life, day-job, workout, and various other interests) to write code. I've finally started implementing various missing elements needed before I can begin working on the Advanced Strike Planner. If there is a platform or error correction you consider extremely important (...enough to justify spending time on adding / fixing, rather than working on code) then feel free to post. If not then you'll find me buried deep down in the Command game engine.

    Thanks!


    As long as support of already existing DB platforms is provided, I'm fine with this! One question though: When Mike locked the thread up, some of the most recent requests were appearantly deleted. Are these lost entirely?

    _____________________________


    (in reply to ComDev)
    Post #: 2465
    RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/27/2016 9:13:49 PM   
    Yokes

     

    Posts: 298
    Joined: 3/14/2007
    Status: offline
    The C-17 entry in the database shows the aircraft as having a RWR and a FLIR. According to a pilot friend of mine, the aircraft does not have either of these.

    For the FLIR, was this to represent pilots wearing NVGs? Because they can do that.

    Not a big deal, but I thought I would share.

    Yokes

    (in reply to Vici Supreme)
    Post #: 2466
    RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/27/2016 9:17:27 PM   
    mikmykWS

     

    Posts: 11524
    Joined: 3/22/2005
    Status: offline

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: Supreme 2.0


    quote:

    ORIGINAL: emsoy

    Okay I'm re-opening this thread

    Please keep requests relevant. We've pretty much reached the max length, width, height and depth for the Command version 1 database. I will only fix reported errors/inaccuracies in existing platforms and only make critical additions, i.e. units needed for a scenario currently under construction. Nice-to-have stuff will not be added.

    Emerging projects/platforms that there isn't much reliable information on will be put on hold until enough material is available to create a accurate representation in the database. Hypothetical stuff will not be added unless there are exceptionally good reasons for it.

    Also, I will not add the countless tiny navies and air forces around the world. These have been requested but the platforms' limited use doesn't justify the time and energy needed to add them to the database. Sorry guys!

    I am re-directed my limited Command time (which is squeezed inbetween family life, day-job, workout, and various other interests) to write code. I've finally started implementing various missing elements needed before I can begin working on the Advanced Strike Planner. If there is a platform or error correction you consider extremely important (...enough to justify spending time on adding / fixing, rather than working on code) then feel free to post. If not then you'll find me buried deep down in the Command game engine.

    Thanks!


    As long as support of already existing DB platforms is provided, I'm fine with this! One question though: When Mike locked the thread up, some of the most recent requests were appearantly deleted. Are these lost entirely?


    No deleted them. Will delete anything else annoying too.

    We owe you nothing.

    Mike

    _____________________________


    (in reply to Vici Supreme)
    Post #: 2467
    RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/27/2016 9:19:32 PM   
    mikmykWS

     

    Posts: 11524
    Joined: 3/22/2005
    Status: offline

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: Yokes

    The C-17 entry in the database shows the aircraft as having a RWR and a FLIR. According to a pilot friend of mine, the aircraft does not have either of these.

    For the FLIR, was this to represent pilots wearing NVGs? Because they can do that.

    Not a big deal, but I thought I would share.

    Yokes


    Think Combat Aircraft Magazine was the original source. Not a huge deal to delete it though.

    Mike

    _____________________________


    (in reply to Yokes)
    Post #: 2468
    RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/27/2016 10:14:40 PM   
    ComDev

     

    Posts: 5735
    Joined: 5/12/2006
    Status: offline
    None of the links seem to work, would you mind re-posting? Thanks!

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: Pancor

    Hello

    can you add the Pantsir-M is the naval version of the Pantsir-S1

    this specification is in Russian Language
    militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-677

    and
    deagel/Ship-Air-Defense-Systems/Pantsyr-M
    in.rbth/economics/2014/09/05/russian_navy_to_buy_marine_version_of_the_pantsir_aamg_system_38081

    Thanks



    _____________________________



    Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

    (in reply to Pancor)
    Post #: 2469
    RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/28/2016 8:26:08 AM   
    SASR

     

    Posts: 82
    Joined: 3/1/2015
    Status: offline
    [ADDED DB v422]

    Requesting the anti-ship SM-6. For anybody building a China vs US scenario this will be critical.

    DEFSEC Carter announced it when the FY17 Budget was released
    “We are going to create a brand-new capability,” Carter told reporters in San Diego on Wednesday. “We’re modifying the SM-6 so that in addition to missile defense, it can also target enemy ships at sea at very long ranges.”

    Also known as the SM-6 Block IA.
    While the news is out, the question remains as to what modifications the missile will need to be effective against the Raytheon officials told USNI News last month during the Surface Navy Association that work underway on the Block IA program.

    On the actual designation, there is no information, but it will most likely be designated the RIM-174A-2, since like the SM-2 a lettering change in the Block(i.e. Block IA) does not warrant a letter change in the actual designation to RIM-174B

    Deployed by 2018
    In 2013, the deputy defense secretary directed an SM-6 "future capability demonstration," which is expected to involve an at-sea demonstration in FY-16 and operational deployment by FY-18, according to Navy budget documents.

    GPS added
    "SM-6 Block IA is an enhanced version of SM-6 Block I with guidance section hardware and software modifications, and [Global Positioning System] added to achieve common coordinate reference to enable SM-6 to continue to pace the threat," O'Rourke said.

    “The big difference we can talk about is that it adds a GPS capability,” Raytheon said.

    Land Attack capabilities
    The upgraded SM-6 would give commanders another option for striking targets at sea or on land, augmenting current inventories of Tomahawk cruise missiles as well as the planned Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile, said the former official.

    Sources:
    1)Originally this ----->http://defensenewsstand.com/topic/missiles-%26-munitions?page=8
    but the article is not there and was reposted some time ago by someone else here:
    http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=9802.360

    2)http://news.usni.org/2016/02/04/secdef-carter-confirms-navy-developing-supersonic-anti-ship-missile-for-cruisers-destroyers

    < Message edited by SASR -- 2/28/2016 10:18:11 AM >

    (in reply to ComDev)
    Post #: 2470
    RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/28/2016 8:42:30 AM   
    ComDev

     

    Posts: 5735
    Joined: 5/12/2006
    Status: offline
    Thanks! Fixed

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: Dysta

    Okay, I'm first!

    #2968 - 053H2 CCG refit. It has 2 37mm turrets at each side instead of 1. Total is 4.

    Also replaced 341 with 347G FCR.


    _____________________________



    Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

    (in reply to Dysta)
    Post #: 2471
    RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/28/2016 9:46:53 AM   
    Rory Noonan

     

    Posts: 2476
    Joined: 12/18/2014
    From: Melbourne, Australia
    Status: offline
    [ADDED PROBE REFUELLING + NEED INFO, DB v442]

    I've been wanting to request a few additions to the entry for the Australian Hawk 127 LIFT:

    Probe refueling (see below pic)

    30mm gun pod as an option for A/A and A/G load outs. This is a well known and often used weapons system for the Hawk 127 - http://www.airforce.gov.au/Technology/Aircraft/Hawk-Fighter-Trainer/?RAAF-9fFc0zNz47KFOWz+8bfp/DTtS+SDzyxb

    Addition of GBU-12B/B load out. Details are hard to come by, but the RAAF states they are capable of dropping LGBs--and the Hawk is rated for 500lb bombs, so I think the 500lb GBU-12B/B would be logical. I can't find any photos or info about designation though, so I think that this would need buddy designation. - http://www.airforce.gov.au/Technology/Aircraft/Hawk-Fighter-Trainer/?RAAF-9fFc0zNz47KFOWz+8bfp/DTtS+SDzyxb

    Thanks very much for your time.




    Attachment (1)

    < Message edited by emsoy -- 3/13/2016 10:33:06 PM >

    (in reply to ComDev)
    Post #: 2472
    RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/28/2016 10:02:56 AM   
    ComDev

     

    Posts: 5735
    Joined: 5/12/2006
    Status: offline
    Added v422, but not actually fitted to any units quite yet. The weapon records are there so the player can add it to ships manually.

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: SASR

    Requesting the anti-ship SM-6. For anybody building a China vs US scenario this will be critical.

    DEFSEC Carter announced it when the FY17 Budget was released
    “We are going to create a brand-new capability,” Carter told reporters in San Diego on Wednesday. “We’re modifying the SM-6 so that in addition to missile defense, it can also target enemy ships at sea at very long ranges.”

    Also known as the SM-6 Block IA.
    While the news is out, the question remains as to what modifications the missile will need to be effective against the Raytheon officials told USNI News last month during the Surface Navy Association that work underway on the Block IA program.

    On the actual designation, there is no information, but it will most likely be designated the RIM-174A-2, since like the SM-2 a numbering change in the Block(i.e. Block IA) does not warrant a letter change in the actual designation to RIM-174B

    Deployed by 2018
    In 2013, the deputy defense secretary directed an SM-6 "future capability demonstration," which is expected to involve an at-sea demonstration in FY-16 and operational deployment by FY-18, according to Navy budget documents.

    GPS added
    "SM-6 Block IA is an enhanced version of SM-6 Block I with guidance section hardware and software modifications, and [Global Positioning System] added to achieve common coordinate reference to enable SM-6 to continue to pace the threat," O'Rourke said.

    “The big difference we can talk about is that it adds a GPS capability,” Raytheon said.

    Land Attack capabilities
    The upgraded SM-6 would give commanders another option for striking targets at sea or on land, augmenting current inventories of Tomahawk cruise missiles as well as the planned Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile, said the former official.

    Sources:
    1)Originally this ----->http://defensenewsstand.com/topic/missiles-%26-munitions?page=8
    but the article is not there and was reposted some time ago by someone else here:
    http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=9802.360

    2)http://news.usni.org/2016/02/04/secdef-carter-confirms-navy-developing-supersonic-anti-ship-missile-for-cruisers-destroyers


    < Message edited by emsoy -- 2/28/2016 10:10:39 AM >


    _____________________________



    Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

    (in reply to SASR)
    Post #: 2473
    RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/28/2016 10:13:08 AM   
    ComDev

     

    Posts: 5735
    Joined: 5/12/2006
    Status: offline
    That's the SOLL modification, used for SpecOps? Which should carry RWR and FLIR?


    quote:

    ORIGINAL: Yokes

    The C-17 entry in the database shows the aircraft as having a RWR and a FLIR. According to a pilot friend of mine, the aircraft does not have either of these.

    For the FLIR, was this to represent pilots wearing NVGs? Because they can do that.

    Not a big deal, but I thought I would share.

    Yokes



    _____________________________



    Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

    (in reply to Yokes)
    Post #: 2474
    RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/28/2016 10:29:00 AM   
    ComDev

     

    Posts: 5735
    Joined: 5/12/2006
    Status: offline
    Thanks

    Added probe refuelling.

    Do you know which gun pod is used? And it is isn't a very common type, the specs?

    If you cannot find any photos of the a/c carrying GBUs it probably means it isn't actually used

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: apache85

    I've been wanting to request a few additions to the entry for the Australian Hawk 127 LIFT:

    Probe refueling (see below pic)

    30mm gun pod as an option for A/A and A/G load outs. This is a well known and often used weapons system for the Hawk 127 - http://www.airforce.gov.au/Technology/Aircraft/Hawk-Fighter-Trainer/?RAAF-9fFc0zNz47KFOWz+8bfp/DTtS+SDzyxb

    Addition of GBU-12B/B load out. Details are hard to come by, but the RAAF states they are capable of dropping LGBs--and the Hawk is rated for 500lb bombs, so I think the 500lb GBU-12B/B would be logical. I can't find any photos or info about designation though, so I think that this would need buddy designation. - http://www.airforce.gov.au/Technology/Aircraft/Hawk-Fighter-Trainer/?RAAF-9fFc0zNz47KFOWz+8bfp/DTtS+SDzyxb

    Thanks very much for your time.






    _____________________________



    Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

    (in reply to Rory Noonan)
    Post #: 2475
    RE: zhuk-me, updates or issues - 2/28/2016 11:35:50 AM   
    ComDev

     

    Posts: 5735
    Joined: 5/12/2006
    Status: offline
    Thanks! Have updated this one, some questions below:

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: Triode
    also according to annual report of"Granit-Electron":
    http://www.e-disclosure.ru/portal/FileLoad.ashx?Fileid=1106227 in russian
    "Osa-MA" modernized on base of "OSA-AKM1" (basically "Osa-AKM" modernized with "Tor-M2U" electronics, main goal of modernization reduce reaction time of system)
    quote:



    Do you have more info on this upgrade? New missiles? New radar?



    also about #2890 - MPK Vasil Bykov [Pr.22160]

    This ship classification not MPK but Patrol Ship

    quote:



    Oki doki, what would the correct designation be?

    _____________________________



    Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

    (in reply to Triode)
    Post #: 2476
    RE: zhuk-me, updates or issues - 2/28/2016 12:32:49 PM   
    ComDev

     

    Posts: 5735
    Joined: 5/12/2006
    Status: offline
    Added, thanks

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: Mgellis

    Now that v1.09 is out, I figure it is safe to make a few new requests.

    Iceland

    (Sources include Wikipedia, Janes Fighting Ships, etc.)

    Aegir class Offshore Patrol vessel
    Pennant numbers: Ægir (Aegir), Týr (Tyr)
    Operational dates: 1968-present
    Displacement: 1,214 tonnes, 1500 tons full load
    Length: 71.15 m (233.4 ft)
    Beam: 10 m (33 ft)
    Draught: 5.80 m (19.0 ft)
    Propulsion: MAN 8L40/54 × 2; 2 × 3163 kW (4300 BHP)
    Speed: 20 knots (37 km/h) (Janes says 19 for Aegir and 20 for Tyr)
    Range (full load): 5,500 NM at 12 kts; 3,700 NM at 18 kts (Janes says 9,000 miles at 18 knots; this must be at standard load?)
    Complement: 16-19 (room for 64)
    Radar: Surface Search: Sperry; E/F-band; Navigation: Furuno; I-band
    Sonar: Hull-mounted high-frequency active search

    Armament:
    Version 1: 1968-1990: QF 6-pounder Hotchkiss (57mm)
    Version 2: 1991-2010: 40 mm Bofors L60 auto-cannon
    Version 3: 2011-present: 40 mm Bofors L70 auto-cannon


    ICGV Thor
    Operational dates: 2011-
    Displacement: 3,920 t (4,321 st)
    Length: 93.80 m (307.7 ft)
    Beam: 16 m (52 ft)
    Height: 30 m (98 ft)
    Draught: 5.80 m (19.0 ft)
    Installed power: 2 × 4,500 kW Rolls Royce Bergen diesel
    Propulsion: 2 × 450 kW bow tunnel thrusters and one in the aft; 883 kW retractable azimuth thruster
    Speed: 20 knots
    Range: ????? (I could not find anything for this, but it is meant to replace the Odinn, so should we assume 9,500 miles at 18 knots?)
    Boats & landing craft carried: 2 MOB boats (7-meter boats)
    Complement: 48
    Sensors and processing systems: 1 × S-band radar, 2 × X-band radar, Synthetic aperture sonar
    Armament: 1 × 40 mm Bofors, 2 × 12.7mm machine guns
    Aviation facilities: Helicopter in-flight refueling capabilities (HIFR). (I’m guessing this means pad but no hanger?)
    Notes: Bollard pull: 120 t (132.3 st)



    ICGV Odinn
    Operational dates: 1960-2006
    Displacement: 910 long tons; 1200 tons full load
    Length: 208 ft 11 in (63.68 m)
    Beam: 33 ft (10 m)
    Draught: 18 ft (5.5 m)
    Propulsion: B&W V.B.F 62 x 2 (2096 kW)
    Speed: 18 knots (21 mph; 33 km/h)
    Range: 9,500 miles at 17 knots
    Complement: 19
    Sensors and processing systems: Surface Search: Sperry; E/F-band; Navigation: Furuno; I-band

    Armament:
    Version 1: 1960-1989: QF 6-pounder Hotchkiss (57mm)
    Version 2: 1990-2006: 40 mm Bofors L60 MKIII

    Aircraft carried: One helicopter (I’m guessing pad but no hanger—it seems a bit small for a hanger)


    Aerospatiale AS-332L1 Super Puma
    Operational dates: 1995-present


    F-27-200 Friendship
    Operational dates: 1977-2008


    Dash 8 Q 300
    Operational dates: 2009-present

    Surveillance sensors and SAR equipment
    “The Dash8 Q300 MSA´s primary sensor for long range, large area surveillance and detection is the Elta EL/M – 2022 (V) 3 maritime search radar. The antenna is installed in a randome underneath the center of the fuselage, thus giving the radar a full and unobstructed 360°field of view. Thimynd5_ASs radar is capable of detecting small targets in rough seas as well as larger targets at ranges up to the radar horizon when the aircraft flies at its maximum operating altitude of 25,000 ft. To facilitate closer inspection of targets the MSA is equipped with Wescam MX-15 which provides stabilized day and night imagery. It also allows the operator to read ship names in very low light conditions. The aircraft will also be quickly detect and map any pollution at sea. The aircraft is equipped with a large rear cargo door which can be opened in flight for dropping of life rafts and other survival equipment.” --http://www.lhg.is/english/icg/about-us/air-assets/tfsif/

    “The sole Landhelgisgæslan plane (TF-SIF) uses the same sensor suite as on Sweden's Q300s – an EL/M-2022(V)3 search radar, [7] a SSC/Saab SLAR, a Wescam MX-15 EO/IR turret, and an Argon AA 3503 line scanner, all under a Mission Management System by L-3/IS. The Icelandic Q300 also features the Field air-openable rear door with chutes for air-dropping flares and SAR survival packs.” --http://www.casr.ca/ai-dash8-q300-special-mission-patrol.htm

    Thanks for considering these!






    _____________________________



    Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

    (in reply to Mgellis)
    Post #: 2477
    RE: zhuk-me, updates or issues - 2/28/2016 1:15:18 PM   
    ComDev

     

    Posts: 5735
    Joined: 5/12/2006
    Status: offline
    Okay will add if needed for a scenario

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: Mgellis

    Another country worth adding...

    Chad

    (As far as I know, all of these aircraft are already in the database, so I just tracked down dates of service.)

    Mi-24V Hind
    Operational dates: 2008-present

    Su-25 Frogfoot
    Operational dates: 2008-present

    AS350/550 Fennec
    Operational dates: 2009-present

    MiG-29A
    (exact model not known, but purchased from Ukraine, so likely it is the MiG-29A)
    Operational dates: 2014-present

    PC-7
    Operational dates: 1985-present

    SF.260W
    Operational dates: 1988-present

    Thanks for considering these!



    _____________________________



    Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

    (in reply to Mgellis)
    Post #: 2478
    RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/28/2016 1:34:12 PM   
    Rory Noonan

     

    Posts: 2476
    Joined: 12/18/2014
    From: Melbourne, Australia
    Status: offline

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: emsoy

    Thanks

    Added probe refuelling.

    Do you know which gun pod is used? And it is isn't a very common type, the specs?

    If you cannot find any photos of the a/c carrying GBUs it probably means it isn't actually used


    The gun pod is a 30mm ADEN pod; I'm sure I've seen it in the DB already. As for the LGBs, you're right. Pics or it didn't happen

    (in reply to ComDev)
    Post #: 2479
    RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/29/2016 1:56:13 AM   
    Anathema


    Posts: 93
    Joined: 10/4/2013
    From: Australia
    Status: offline
    [UPDATED DB v443]

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: apache85


    quote:

    ORIGINAL: emsoy

    Thanks

    Added probe refuelling.

    Do you know which gun pod is used? And it is isn't a very common type, the specs?

    If you cannot find any photos of the a/c carrying GBUs it probably means it isn't actually used


    The gun pod is a 30mm ADEN pod; I'm sure I've seen it in the DB already. As for the LGBs, you're right. Pics or it didn't happen


    You can see the gun pod and practice bomb loadout here and this says the Hawk uses an Aden 30mm Mk4 Cannon.

    < Message edited by emsoy -- 3/13/2016 10:36:53 PM >

    (in reply to Rory Noonan)
    Post #: 2480
    RE: zhuk-me, updates or issues - 2/29/2016 3:21:40 PM   
    Triode

     

    Posts: 283
    Joined: 9/26/2014
    Status: offline

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: emsoy



    Do you have more info on this upgrade? New missiles? New radar?



    about OSA-AKM1 (9A33BM4) :
    "increasing the reliability and performance of electronic equipment, the replacement of TOV (TV Optical Vizir) by electronic-optical system with a thermal channel , improving habitability conditions of the crew, etc. To do this, BM is equipped with air conditioning, a thermal imager, a system of passive radar system L-150(RWR) , a complex optical-electronic suppression "Purga"(smokescreen/chaff) On request, the BM can be equipped with control and recording equipment KZA-058, OU-1 distraction device for protection against ARMs and improved launcher for use a target complex "Saman-M"

    missile is 9M33M3, radar like on OSA-AKM(9M33BM3) , new digital managment system based on Tor-M2U

    modernized OSA-MA( upgrade based on OSA-AKM1 ) inteded for MPK project 1124 / 1124M

    OSA-AKM1 (with "Saman-M" target):

    OSA-AKM :


    notice difference in optical stations above radar



    quote:



    Oki doki, what would the correct designation be?


    PK Vasili Bykov [pr.22160]

    (in reply to ComDev)
    Post #: 2481
    RE: zhuk-me, updates or issues - 2/29/2016 4:08:53 PM   
    Hongjian

     

    Posts: 814
    Joined: 1/2/2015
    Status: offline
    [NEED MORE INFO]

    http://www.popsci.com/new-chinese-ballistic-missiles-crashes-battlefield-party-with-cluster-munitions

    since some improvements on chinese missiles are announced, is there a chance for a DF-16 (and other SRBM/MRBM) variants equipped with both guided and unguided cluster warheads for runway cratering and destroying groups of mobile soft-targets? It seems that this capability has been confirmed of some sort for the 1000km ranged DF-16B.

    < Message edited by emsoy -- 3/14/2016 8:05:14 AM >

    (in reply to Triode)
    Post #: 2482
    RE: Harpoon Block II+ - 2/29/2016 4:18:39 PM   
    SASR

     

    Posts: 82
    Joined: 3/1/2015
    Status: offline
    [ADDED DB v443]

    New air-launched Harpoon variant for the USN, the Block II+

    http://www.seapowermagazine.org/stories/20151119-harpoon.html

    Designation: AGM-84N Block II+
    Platforms: F/A-18E/F Super Hornet
    IOC: 2017

    Loadouts with the AGM-84N will probably the same as with the previous harpoon variants

    Additions over previous Harpoon variants are a datalink and GPS guidance kit.

    From: http://www.seaforces.org/wpnsys/SURFACE/RGM-84-Harpoon.htm

    "On 18 November 2015, the U.S. Navy tested the AGM-84N Harpoon Block II+ missile against a moving ship target. The Block II+ incorporates an improved GPS guidance kit and a net-enabled data-link that allows the missile to receive in-flight targeting updates. The Block II+ is planned to enter service in 2017."

    Also, I found a link to .mil site citing the range of the AGM-84L as 100 nautical miles (its 75 miles in the DB), so this new Harpoon should be the same in terms of range

    From: http://www.hill.af.mil/library/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=5712

    "The air-launched version is designated AGM-84. It is powered by a Teledyne/CAE J402 turbojet and has a maximum range of around 100 nautical miles"

    Thank You

    < Message edited by emsoy -- 3/14/2016 8:00:32 PM >

    (in reply to Triode)
    Post #: 2483
    RE: Harpoon Block II+ - 2/29/2016 9:57:52 PM   
    SuaveWatermelon

     

    Posts: 65
    Joined: 1/3/2014
    Status: offline
    [UPDATED DB v442]

    Hello

    I have recently been looking around for any resources that mention F-35 EFTs (or CFTs) but have been unable to find any from anything newer than 2013
    (That link here)

    When looking through weapons testing, I have also noticed the conspicuous absence of any EFT drop testing or any other kind of EFT testing for that matter.

    On top of this, while searching through f-16.net, I have heard many say that no EFTs have been ordered by any of the F-35 countries.
    Search results here.

    I even searched the LM site and the only thing that popped up was this:

    https://www.f35.com/search/site/search&keywords=External+Fuel+Tank/

    The article that comes up is a January 2016 response to a DOT&E report and in listing the accomplishments of the F-35 Development program mentions two things

    1.
    quote:

    " As of Dec. 31, the program completed 80 percent of SDD test points and is on track for completion in the fourth quarter of 2017."


    2.
    quote:

    "Completed GAU-22 25mm ground gun fire testing and began airborne testing on the F-35A.

    - To date, completed 90 weapon separations - GBU-12, GBU-31, GBU-32, AIM-120, GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb, U.K. Paveway IV, and first F-35 AIM-9X. This includes 18 for 18 successful live fires of AMRAAM, JDAM, and GBU-12s.

    - To date, completed 17 Weapon Delivery Accuracy events (GBU-12, GBU-31, GBU-32, and AIM-120)"[Notice: no fuel tank separation tests]


    I know this isn't definitive but I don't think there is any evidence to suggest that any variant of the F-35 will be using EFTs

    Perhaps this might be grounds to consider removing them from all variants of the F-35 currently in DB 3000?

    Does anyone else here know whether or not the F-35 will be receiving any EFTs?

    Also another note:

    Noticed that in DB 3000, F-15K has AGM-130A in some of its loadouts, but I'm fairly certain that AGM-130 is only a USAF weapon.

    While the F-15K AF Technology and Boeing pages says the F-15K can carry the AGM-130A, there doesn't appear to be any pictorial or other evidence to suggest that the ROKAF uses it. Wikipedia also says that AGM-130 is only a USAF weapon.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-130#Operators

    Boeing Documentation for the F-15 Strike Eagle and AGM-130 make no mention of the ROKAF purchasing AGM-130

    http://www.boeing.com/resources/boeingdotcom/company/key_orgs/boeing-international/pdf/koreabackgrounder.pdf

    http://www.boeing.com/history/products/gbu-15-agm-130-weapon-system.page

    Perhaps not definitive either, but I can say that I am confident that ROKAF does not have any AGM-130 if even Boeing's pages don't mention an actual sale.

    < Message edited by emsoy -- 3/13/2016 10:38:04 PM >

    (in reply to SASR)
    Post #: 2484
    RE: Harpoon Block II+ - 3/1/2016 6:29:18 AM   
    FTBSS

     

    Posts: 194
    Joined: 8/25/2014
    Status: offline
    Just wondered if you increased the range of the SM-6ERAM I see multiple sources with range exceeding 200 miles (250 being the most quoted) in the next db update

    (in reply to SuaveWatermelon)
    Post #: 2485
    RE: Harpoon Block II+ - 3/1/2016 4:03:16 PM   
    Pancor


    Posts: 60
    Joined: 6/18/2015
    From: Indonesia
    Status: offline
    [ADDED DB v442]

    Hello Everyone

    Emsoy i repost the link back

    Here is the link

    This one is in russian:
    http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-677.html

    While the rest of the specification are on english

    http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/year-2015-news/july-2015-navy-naval-forces-defense-industry-technology-maritime-security-global-news/2868-kbp-unveiled-pantsir-m-naval-variant-of-pantsir-s1-for-surface-ship-air-defense.html

    http://www.kbptula.ru/en/productions/air-defense-weapon-systems/pantsir-s1 <--- it should be the same

    http://www.deagel.com/Ship-Air-Defense-Systems/Pantsyr-M_a000019002.aspx

    http://in.rbth.com/economics/2014/09/05/russian_navy_to_buy_marine_version_of_the_pantsir_aamg_system_38081

    http://www.janes.com/article/52766/russia-to-launch-production-of-naval-pantsyr-m

    And it has been rumor that the modernization of Admiral Kuznetsov is armed with it
    link
    http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/2209133

    At last Pantsir-S2
    link
    http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/2251029


    I think that should be it but i will search for more info
    and please don't take it seriously just set this request for low priority
    thanks guys



    < Message edited by emsoy -- 3/14/2016 8:05:31 PM >

    (in reply to FTBSS)
    Post #: 2486
    RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 3/1/2016 4:28:56 PM   
    Yokes

     

    Posts: 298
    Joined: 3/14/2007
    Status: offline

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: emsoy

    That's the SOLL modification, used for SpecOps? Which should carry RWR and FLIR?



    Ahh, that's it! Thanks! Sorry for the false alarm.

    Yokes

    (in reply to ComDev)
    Post #: 2487
    RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 3/1/2016 8:44:37 PM   
    mx1

     

    Posts: 76
    Joined: 1/16/2014
    Status: offline
    [UPDATED DB v443]

    Polish Navy Orkan class entries should be corrected:
    1. The Orkan class before modernization (#1551) did not have STING-EO weapon director. First ship entered service in 1992 not in 1994.
    2. Then there was sensor modernization in 2006 which replaced NUR radar with Giraffe, SRN radar with CRM-200 and added STING-EO weapon director so the #2415 should have the same sensors #1552 has and start of service year is 2006 (not 2000).
    3. In 2008 one of the vessels (ORP Orkan) has been equipped with RBS-15 Mk2 missiles, so there should be additional entry for that version (#2415 + Mk2 missiles). Two other vessels were not equipped with missiles.
    4. Finally last year all ships have been equipped with RBS-15 Mk3 missiles. So the #1552 should have start of service set to 2015.

    All source are in Polish:

    http://gbc.org.pl/dlibra/doccontent?id=265&dirids=1 (pages 36-38)
    http://www.rp.pl/artykul/1172966-Okret-Orkan-ma-ostre-pazurki.html
    http://dziennikzbrojny.pl/artykuly/art,7,36,2412,marynarka-wojenna,uzbrojenie,pocisk-rakietowy-rbs15


    < Message edited by emsoy -- 3/14/2016 8:11:37 PM >

    (in reply to Yokes)
    Post #: 2488
    RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 3/2/2016 1:12:12 AM   
    Schr75


    Posts: 672
    Joined: 7/18/2014
    From: Denmark
    Status: offline
    This should be a quick fix, but I feel it is pretty important.

    The SS-N-3 and SS-N-12 series missiles can be fired from 50m depth, enabling submerged launch, when this was a strict surface launch missile.

    Attached is a save game showing the issue, but this should be a DB issue.

    S



    Attachment (1)

    (in reply to mx1)
    Post #: 2489
    RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 3/2/2016 4:52:04 PM   
    blh42

     

    Posts: 233
    Joined: 7/10/2013
    Status: offline
    Tupolev-160M2 in the makings. Major improvements seem to be longer action range of additional 1000km.

    http://www.janes.com/article/53102/russia-s-future-pak-da-bomber-to-be-delayed-by-tu-160m2-production

    (in reply to Schr75)
    Post #: 2490
    Page:   <<   < prev  81 82 [83] 84 85   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  81 82 [83] 84 85   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

    0.223