Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: FlyingBear

The PL-877 Kilo has no anti submarine weapons of any kind. Can this really be correct, or should the SET-65M be added?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mgellis

I have mentioned earlier the possibility of adding generic suicide explosives as weapons, but I wonder if it would make sense to do it as ships and facilities? Each of them would have a weapon, but one with no range (or maybe 0.001 miles, if it has to have some range to work), and with enough explosive power to destroy the ship/facility itself and any nearby targets.

Suicide Bomber (Terrorist) <-- possibly modeled as the Downed Pilot, but with a warhead?
IED (Terrorist)
Land Mine (Generic)
Anti-Tank Mine (Generic)
Vehicle (Truck Bomb) (Terrorist) <-- 500-lb. warhead?
Vehicle (Truck Bomb, Nuclear) (Terrorist)

And watercraft...

Civilian Boat (Suicide Bomb) <-- 500-lb. bomb for this one and the other non-nuclear ones?
Fishing Boat (Suicide Bomb)
Civilian Dhow (Suicide Bomb)
Civilian Junk (Suicide Bomb)
Container Ship, Feedermax (Nuclear Bomb)
Tanker, General (Nuclear Bomb)

Anyway, it's just a thought. Maybe this would be an easier way to do things?

quote:

ORIGINAL: FlyingBear

Regarding the Kilo: I was referring to the PL-877.

Most or all of the PL-877M, PL-877E and PL-636 in the database have torpedo wire control data links and are equipped with wire guided torpedoes capable against submarines (TEST-71M or some variant of that). The PL-877 has no such data links and cannot use those torpedoes, so I would have expected to see the SET-65M on the PL-877. But it has only got the 53-65K against surface ships and nothing against submarines.

quote:

The F-35’s limited internal missile load-out remains a concern. In September 2008, it prompted Maj Richard Koch, chief of the USAF’s Air Combat Command advanced air dominance branch, to state that “I wake up in cold sweat at the thought of F-35 going in with only two air-dominance weapons.” This shortcoming clearly concerns Lockheed Martin, too, as the company has illustrated a six-internal missile configuration (using a new launcher design and compressed carriage missiles) as part of ‘notional’ Block 5 configuration, for service after 2020.

Jon Lake: Air Forces Monthly Dec 2010 (p. 44-45).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mgellis


Minor point...it occurs to me that if these are added they probably should be named differently so it is not obvious when one encounters one of these things what it is. If something shows up as Civilian Dhow (Suicide Bomb) in the game display, after all, one would probably just sink it rather than let it get close enough to cause damage. :)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mgellis

I have mentioned earlier the possibility of adding generic suicide explosives as weapons, but I wonder if it would make sense to do it as ships and facilities? Each of them would have a weapon, but one with no range (or maybe 0.001 miles, if it has to have some range to work), and with enough explosive power to destroy the ship/facility itself and any nearby targets.

Suicide Bomber (Terrorist) <-- possibly modeled as the Downed Pilot, but with a warhead?
IED (Terrorist)
Land Mine (Generic)
Anti-Tank Mine (Generic)
Vehicle (Truck Bomb) (Terrorist) <-- 500-lb. warhead?
Vehicle (Truck Bomb, Nuclear) (Terrorist)

And watercraft...

Civilian Boat (Suicide Bomb) <-- 500-lb. bomb for this one and the other non-nuclear ones?
Fishing Boat (Suicide Bomb)
Civilian Dhow (Suicide Bomb)
Civilian Junk (Suicide Bomb)
Container Ship, Feedermax (Nuclear Bomb)
Tanker, General (Nuclear Bomb)

Anyway, it's just a thought. Maybe this would be an easier way to do things?

quote:

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

Yeah. Probably keep the NSA from reading our emails too as it is creepy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: hellfish6

Curious. I've got an SPS-77, SPS-49, a STIR and a Mk92 with a 48-cell Mk41 (and 24 ESSM) and I'm still getting the 'Unable to connect to firing unit with mandatory datalink' message in the manual fire dialog.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

quote:

ORIGINAL: hellfish6

Curious. I've got an SPS-77, SPS-49, a STIR and a Mk92 with a 48-cell Mk41 (and 24 ESSM) and I'm still getting the 'Unable to connect to firing unit with mandatory datalink' message in the manual fire dialog.

Try mount 1663 Mk29 Sea Sparrow -ESSM, Add sensors: 1024 Mk95 (not 3746) and a search radar AN/SPS-48E.

This should work

Mike

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatTop

Hey guys, just bringing to your attention that the Italian FREMM Carlo Bergamini (F 590) is of the "general purpose" version and not ASW, as it was the first FREMM built I'm a bit suprised to only see the ASW version in the database whilst the first ship of the latter version was built later on.

Still regarding the Italian FREMMs (both versions), they decided in the end to equip them with "Sylver VLS A-50" cells and not "Sylver VLS A-43" making them able to hold both Aster 15&30 and not only the first one as it seems to me it's in the DB for now.

Thanks for you time, keep up the great work !

Cheers