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  33 34 [35] 36 37   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/23/2014 2:30:46 PM   
tservello92

 

Posts: 21
Joined: 10/17/2014
Status: offline 		Gents,

I grew up with Harpoon…long hours and too many cases of RC. Finally found a replacement, you guys have put together a top-notch simulation.

I am trying to incorporate more SOF into some scenarios. My personal experience has shown me first hand how the proper employment of a small team of operators can greatly increase the effectiveness of our air or naval power. I am trying to make sense of the way SOF (and infantry in general) is modeled in the game. I do realize that ground combat is not a main feature of the game and that it is something on your list (lengthy I’m sure) to further flesh out.

I would like to post several suggestions for SOF elements, primarily US, but also from other allied nations that I’ve worked with in the past. Before I do so, could I please get some clarification on the following?

- Could you please explain the various “sizes” used with the SOF elements already included in the game? I don’t want to bog the game down with needless minutiae detailing the various numbers of personnel in ODAs, teams, troops, platoons, etc., but a “baseline” to use might help. For example, under the Brits I see this:

Inf Sec (SAS)
Inf Sec (SAS Recon)
Inf Plt (SAS)

I assume that the platoon (a troop in the SAS) is larger than the section (team or patrol in the SAS) just based on the number of 7.62 MGs listed in the entries. What I don’t understand is where/how the SAS Recon (there is a SEAL Recon entry as well) fits in to this?

Strategic reconnaissance, close target reconnaissance or “reconnaissance, surveillance and target acquisition” depending on which unit/service you are dealing with is a primary mission of most SOF forces, so having a separate “Recon” entry seems duplicitous. I can include separate “Recon” entries (I have in the Ranger section as an example) to reflect the difference between assaulters and members of the recce troop (for example) IF the developers feel it is beneficial in any way.

If I may humbly suggest, could we “baseline” things by listing US SOF elements as follows?

Inf Sec (Ranger) – a 4-man fire team, 9-man squad or “chalk of Rangers”
Inf Sec (Ranger Regimental Recon) – a 6-man recon team
Inf Plt (Ranger) – the 40-man Ranger infantry platoon + attachments (7-men), consisting of Plt HQ, 3 x rifle squads and a weapons squad w/3 x 7.62mm MG teams. I have included 1 x 60mm mortar, 1 x Javelin or Carl Gustav team and 1 x sniper (all attached from the Wpns Plt at Company level – this is easier than making a separate entry for Wpns Plt).

Inf Sec (ODA) – a “split team” of 6 Green Berets
Inf Plt (ODA) – the classic “A-Team” of 12 Green Berets
Inf Plt (ODB) – 11-man team; the Co HQ of an SF Co

Inf Sec (Delta) – a 4-6 man team
Inf Plt (Delta) – a ~16-man troop

Inf Sec (DEVGRU) – 4-6 man team
Inf Plt (DEVGRU) – a ~16-man troop

Inf Sec (SEAL) – 4-man team or 8-man squad
Inf Plt (SEAL) – 16-man platoon

Inf Sec (PJ) – 2-3 PJs
Inf Sec (CCT) – 2-3 CCTs

Inf Sec (Raiders) – 5-man team (sub-element of MSOT)
Inf Plt (Raiders) – 14-man Marine Special Operations Team

Inf Sec (Force Recon) – 6-man reconnaissance team
Inf Plt (Force Recon) - 23-man Force Reconnaisance platoon
* true, FRPs are not part of SOCOM, but they conduct SOF type missions

I will address comms/datalinks, weapons, “movement” and “sensors” used by SOF separately.

Thanks again!

(in reply to tservello92)
Post #: 1021
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/24/2014 2:22:54 AM   
Triode

 

Posts: 283
Joined: 9/26/2014
Status: offline 		About Indian Navy:

There is no such things as "Brahmos VLS" or "SS-N-27 Sizzler VLS"
This is one thing: 3R-14UKSK-Kh (aka "UKSK"); 3S-14UE1 is 8 cells version and 3S-14UE2 is 4 cells,3S-14UKE1 is"Containerized"version 8 cells,3S-14UKE2 is"Containerized"version 4 cells ( on #2009 - D 51 Rajput [Pr.61ME Kashin II] -- India (Navy), 2011, BrahMos there is 2x2 cells inclined on-deck launcher 3S-14PE)
http://www.concern-agat.ru/en/production/missile-systems-land-and-sea-based-missile-systems/3r-14uksk-kh-ship-general-purpose-firing-system
it cells can accept five different missiles:
3M-54TE, 3M-54TE1 , BrahMos PJ-10 exists in database
3M-14TE exist in database under name ss-n-30 [3M14 Klub]
91RTE2 torpedo-missile for underwater targets engagement does not exist in the database
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3M-54_Klub
citation:
"91RTE2 - No DOD designation. A surface ship with the VLS launched anti-submarine variant; it consists of three stages, one booster with thrust vector nozzle, one conventional booster, and one anti-submarine light torpedo. Its basic length is 8.9 m (29 ft), with a range of 40 km (25 mi) at supersonic speed. The torpedo has a warhead weight of 76 kg (168 lb). The lightest of all variants, with a launch weight of 1,300 kg (2,900 lb). Speed is Mach 2"
to this I can add only two thing minimum engagement range is 5 km and torpedo is MTT "Paket" (currently in database as Paket-NK)

keep in mind that 3M-54TE1 , BrahMos PJ-10 ,3M-14TE are limited in range by
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missile_Technology_Control_Regime

Russian Navy

accordingly in Russian Navy there is no "SS-N-26 Sapless [P-800 Onyx] VLS" and no "SS-N-27 Sizzler VLS"
it is the same 3R-14UKSK-Kh :3S-14U1 is 8 cells version and 3S-14U2 is 4 cells,3S-14UK1 is"Containerized"version 8 cells,3S-14UK2 is"Containerized"version 4 cells (obviously all thing for Russian Navy is without export E indexes)

The only difference between the Indian and Russian version is range of missiles,Russian missiles not limited by MTCR

for example:

" Twenty-third day of November for the first time carried out a missile test firing a missile system" Kalibr " (Export name=Klub) from submerged submarine" Severodvinsk "is also at maximum range - 1.4 thousand kilometers on the coastal target," - said Chief of the Russian Navy, Admiral Viktor Chirkov, summing up the year.
According to him, an important place in the activities of the Navy this year held trials of new ships, submarines and weapons, not only for the Russian Navy, but also for foreign customers. "In total, during the year conducted 240 tests, including the successful launch from November 22 coastal missile complex" Bastion "(SSC-5 Styx [K-300P Bastion-P] in database) at maximum range of weapons - more than 400 kilometers," - said Chirkov. "
http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20121219/915428088.html#ixzz2FYxCGODo in russian

so range of Onyx=400km (Bastion missiles is Onyx), range of 3M-14= 1400 km (3M-14 only missile in Kalibr "family" that can engaging land targets)
the only thing that is left to find is range of 3M-54T1 anti-ship missile from Kalibr "family"
citation:
"7 June. The structure of the Caspian fleet in the near future will include missile ship "Dagestan". Now the project 11661K ship missile system with "Kalibr-NK" completes the state tests, most of which took place on the Black Sea. This at the meeting with the President of Dagestan Magomedsalam Magomedov said commander of the Caspian Flotilla, Rear Admiral Sergei Alekminsky.
"The test results are positive, -said the commander of the flotilla. - The ship is quite good, with modern filling. Currently, the most powerful in the arsenal of the Russian Navy ship. On it installed missile system, which the firing range at surface sea targets 375 km"

http://www.rosbalt.ru/federal/2012/06/07/990257.html in russian

so the range of 3M-54T1 is 375 км

all other missiles do not differ from export versions,91RT2 and 3M-54T identical in characteristics to 3M-54TE and 91RTE2


Could you please make the necessary changes to the database?

< Message edited by Triode -- 10/25/2014 1:27:28 PM >

(in reply to tservello92)
Post #: 1022
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/24/2014 2:48:00 PM   
schroedi

 

Posts: 30
Joined: 1/10/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: schroedi

Some aircraft speed should be changed.


-The Su-17/22 M4 shouldn't go 950kt, too. Their maximum speed is about 970kt clean, so 950 with weapons is unrealistic.




The same for the MiG-27.

(in reply to schroedi)
Post #: 1023
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/25/2014 2:43:44 AM   
CV60


Posts: 992
Joined: 10/1/2012
Status: offline 		[FIXED]

Minor correction to DB3000 weapon_2055. It is listed as the "AA-10 Alamo A [R-27P, MR ARM] (emphasis added). According to both Janes and Wikapedia, the R-27P has the NATO designator Alamo E. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-27_(air-to-air_missile)

< Message edited by emsoy -- 9/13/2015 8:49:27 PM >

(in reply to schroedi)
Post #: 1024
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/25/2014 1:48:42 PM   
mikmykWS

 

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline 		Items added to our work list. Thanks!

Mike

_____________________________


(in reply to CV60)
Post #: 1025
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/25/2014 2:52:14 PM   
MR_BURNS2


Posts: 974
Joined: 7/18/2013
From: Austria
Status: offline 		E/A-18 Growler

The short range-loadouts have 5 AN/ALQ-99 + 1 480 USG drop tank which afaik is not possible with her hardpoints. I believe only 3,4,6,8 and 9 can carry the AN/ALQ-99, and 4,6 and 8 can carry tanks(?).

So it would have to be either 4 AN/ALQ-99 and 1 tank or 5 and no tanks.

_____________________________

Windows 7 64; Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 920 @ 2.67GHz (8 CPUs), ~2.7GHz; 6144MB RAM; NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970;



(in reply to mikmykWS)
Post #: 1026
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/25/2014 6:40:08 PM   
Mgellis


Posts: 2054
Joined: 8/18/2007
Status: offline 		In case it helps, here are some more sources on the Chinese Type 55 destroyer...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_055_destroyer
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/china/ddg-x.htm
http://snafu-solomon.blogspot.com/2014/08/chinas-new-type-55-destroyer.html
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/heres-an-even-better-look-at-chinas-giant-new-cruiser-d3a03bbbbdb9
http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/navy/type-055-ddg-plans-next-generation-destroyer-thread-3-6480.html
http://forum.pakistanidefence.com/index.php?showtopic=103099
http://china-pla.blogspot.com/2013/11/the-future-of-plan-destroyers.html


(in reply to MR_BURNS2)
Post #: 1027
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/25/2014 6:59:18 PM   
Triode

 

Posts: 283
Joined: 9/26/2014
Status: offline 		[UPDATED DB v440]

About "Poliment-Redoute" [3K96] system (in database Poliment-K AESA radar + SA-N-21c Growler VLS ) and 9m96 missiles "family"

Here is "Almaz-Antey" annual reports:

http://www.almaz-antey.ru/_files/13/371/ 2010 annual report Page 59
http://www.almaz-antey.ru/_files/13/1033/ 2011 annual report Page 95
http://www.almaz-antey.ru/_files/13/1817/ 2013 annual report Page 96

Version of system

So, according to "Almaz-Antey" annual report 2013
citation:
"On the head of the project 22350 frigate delivered prototype
3K96-2 products."

also Amur shipyard (they currently build 2 project20380) procurement of 3K96-3:
http://zakupki.gov.ru/223/purchase/public/purchase/info/common-info.html?purchaseId=668930&&purchaseMethodType=ep

From GSKB Raspletin report in 2012:
"Product development 3K96-2 (Poliment-Redoute)

- Manufactured prototypes of devices 3P96-2 products for preliminary bench tests; (3P96-2 = Poliment-K AESA in database)
- Preliminary testing devices 3P96-2 products;
- Prepared and conducted preliminary bench testing products and 3P96-2 3SCH96-2;
- Fabricated experimental units and prototypes of devices and products 3SCH97.2-2 3SCH97.2-2 products in general, conducted the IT;
- design documentation products designed 3I97 for Project 22350;
- Manufactured and delivered the prototype product 3I97;
- Initiated joint testing of the product with the product 3K96-3 9M96 under preliminary testing of the complex."

In the first issue for 2013 of the corporate newspaper "Strela", published by the "Head System Design Bureau Concern PVO" Almaz - Antey "Academician AA Raspletin" (GSKB):
http://www.raspletin.ru/press-centre/2013/01-13.pdf
"On the theme 3K96 in 2012 made ​​a significant amount of work which allows to speak with confidence about the completion of the 2013 trial izd. 3K96-3 on ships 20380 and delivery samples of the products of the Navy, as well as to conduct preliminary bench test sample shipments izd. 3K96-2 on the lead ship of Project 22350, its installation and testing."

Results of work Centre MNIIRE "Altair" (information from a deleted from the site "Almaz-Antey" "annual report GSKB Concern PVO" Almaz-Antey "in 2011. Part 2"):
"Among the works included in GWP-2015, in 2011 the works on R & D 3K96 ["Poliment-Redoute"] within which is being developed modular construction of naval air defense system 3rd generation. Created under R & D 3K96 system 3K96-2 and 3K96-3 are designed for installation on ships under construction perspective projects 22350 and 20380."

So there is two variants of system: 3K96-2 "Redoute with Poliment" for 22350 and 3K96-3 "Redoute without Poliment" for 20380

Missiles


from àrticle "Ship complex air defense 3K96 "Redoute":

"During the briefing, which took place in the framework of the MAKS-2013, CEO of Concern PVO "Almaz-Antey" noted that the test of a new air defense system were interrupted in 2012 because of a fire on SKR "Soobrazitelny" (20380). This year, the ship arrived after repairs to resume trial SAM. He also said that on the head of the project 22350 frigate "Admiral Gorshkov" test "Redoute" will begin no earlier than 2014, upon the readiness of the ship. In this set of missiles 9M96, 9M96D 9M100 and ready for testing."
http://vpk.name/news/98961_korabelnyii_kompleks_pvo_3k96_redut.html

from "Almaz-Antey" annual report 2010 :
"ongoing testing component
parts ZRAS "Poliment-Redoute" ground testing products 9M96
conducted manufacturing of products 9M96D and 9M100;"

from "Almaz-Antey" annual report 2011 :
"As part of the izd. 3K96 delivered prototype SAM "Redoubt"
on the first serial "corvette" 20380, initiated joint
Flight tests of ship management and izd 9M96,
completed preliminary tests of the main constituents
ZRAS "poliment-Redoute", its elements are placed on the head
"Frigate" project 22350.
A pilot batch izd 9M96D, initiated autonomous
flight tests in a ground polygon, constructed and
Preliminary testing of the main parts
izd 9M100."

So for 3K96 there is three missiles:

1)9M96/9M96E
exists in datatabase with wrong range of 30nm
should have 40 km (22nm)
from MAKS-2013 9M96E,9M96E2 and 48n6E characteristics
http://bastion-karpenko.ru/kartinki/9M96_MAKS-2003_05.jpg

2)9M96D/9M96E2
9M96E2 range 120 km (75mile) speed 1,000 m/s max target altitude 30 km
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-300_%28missile%29 from missiles specifications
from MAKS-2013 9M96E,9M96E2 and 48n6E characteristics
http://bastion-karpenko.ru/kartinki/9M96_MAKS-2003_05.jpg
9M96E,9M96E2 and 48n6E in dimensions
http://obiekt.up.seesaa.net/image/9M96E_9M96E2.jpg

and befor we move to next missiles, 9M96E and 9M96E2 have unified ARH head and we know the diameters of missiles 240mm so ARS cant be bigger
than about 200mm there is only two ARS can fit this criteria
all soviet/russian ARS for anti-air missiles made in NII "Agat" so it can be 9B1103M (Lock-on range, (target RCS - 5 m2), km 20) or 9B1103M-200 (Lock-on range, (target RCS - 5 m2), km 25)
citation from ""AGAT" teaches to fly missiles":
"One of the latest achievements of the institute is to create a family seeker 9B-1103M for missiles caliber from 150 to 400 mm, the characteristics of which are not inferior to the most advanced foreign counterparts. These ARS standardized for use in anti-aircraft and in aircraft missiles."
most likely it is 9B1103M-200, 9B1103M created in 1993 for R-27 and 9B1103M-200 created in 2001
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Legacy-SAM-Upgrades.html Agat Active Radar Seekers for SAM Upgrades
of course it can be some supersecret ARS about which no one heard nothing but it is really doubtful since 9M96E and 9M96E2 aproved for export


3)9M100
short range missile (10-12 km) fast (some sources claim 900m/s max speed) IR head
little information about this missile,as there was no permission to export and no promotional information
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/attachment.php?s=cfb227ad86a5c841cd331f9c609ce876&attachmentid=189532&d=1288567606

VLS

Here is patent for VLS by "KBSM"
http://www.findpatent.ru/img_show/901/9019355.html
http://www.findpatent.ru/img_show/9019356.html
http://www.findpatent.ru/patent/237/2374591.html

as you can see in 1 cell can fit 1 big missile (9M96/9M96E,9M96D/9M96E2) or 4 small missiles (9M100)


And last thing is Vityaz (#2089 - SAM Bn (SA-25 [S-350 Vityaz]) -- Russia [1992-] (Air Force), 2017, 8x TEL in database)
here is photo from MAKS-2013
http://ic.pics.livejournal.com/bmpd/38024980/741376/741376_original.jpg
citation:
"composition
battle management post 50K6E
Multifunction radars 50N6E (up to 2)
launcher 50P6E (up to 8) with 12 SAM medium range 9M96E2"


so missile for Vityaz is 9M96E2
there is no "Poliment-K AESA" but 3P96-2
there is no SA-N-21c Growler VLS
Redoute VLS can use 9M96/9M96E,9M96D/9M96E2 or 9M100(4 in 1 cell)
Also 9M96/9M96E range is 40km(22nm) not 30nm

Could you please make the necessary changes to the database?


< Message edited by emsoy -- 7/19/2015 4:18:16 PM >

(in reply to Mgellis)
Post #: 1028
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/25/2014 7:06:03 PM   
mikmykWS

 

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline 		Added to list. Type 055 entry updated.

Thanks!

Mike

_____________________________


(in reply to Triode)
Post #: 1029
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/26/2014 12:15:08 PM   
decaf

 

Posts: 91
Joined: 8/1/2008
Status: offline 		<moved here from Tech Support...>

This is with Build 573.

I was having some trouble playing Under African Skies. The P-8/SLAM-ER
combo would frequently miss. This is strange, since the AGM-84K
is reputed to be "fire and forget" as well as allowing "man in
the loop" guidance.

After some digging, and playing around with a toy scenario, I
see that P-8A (#2705 and #3685) in Command does not have any
provision for a AN/AAW-9/13 Missile Datalink to support
the AGM-84K.

This is not too bad, in that a Super Hornet, for example, will
carry a AN/AAW-9/13 Datalink Pod (instead of having an inherent
datalink capability) when carrying SLAM-ER.

I request that you either:

1) add a AN/AAW-9/13 Datalink Pod to the SLAM-ER loadout, or
2) add a AN/AAW-9/13 Missile Datalink to the P-8A's

whichever you feel is most appropriate.

Thanks.

(in reply to mikmykWS)
Post #: 1030
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/26/2014 1:32:07 PM   
mikmykWS

 

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline 		Added to our list. Thanks!

Mike

_____________________________


(in reply to decaf)
Post #: 1031
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/26/2014 2:11:29 PM   
Dutchie999


Posts: 117
Joined: 10/8/2014
Status: offline
I noticed a couple of things missing:

1) SAM decoy systems, http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-SAM-DefAids.html#mozTocId671771
2) BrahMos and BrahMos II anti-ship missile, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrahMos and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrahMos-II
3) Pelena-1 AWACS jammer, http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-REB-Systems.html#mozTocId595151
4) Signal Topol E E-2 Hawkeye jammer, http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-REB-Systems.html#mozTocId595151
5) GPS jammers against guided munition's, a lot of info here: http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-GPS-Guided-Weps.html

(in reply to mikmykWS)
Post #: 1032
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/26/2014 2:22:59 PM   
mikmykWS

 

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline 		Added to list.

Brahmos is there. Brahmos II we'll have to dig up some more data.

Thanks!

Mike

_____________________________


(in reply to Dutchie999)
Post #: 1033
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/26/2014 3:01:20 PM   
Dutchie999


Posts: 117
Joined: 10/8/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

Added to list.

Brahmos is there. Brahmos II we'll have to dig up some more data.

Thanks!

Mike


Sorry Mike I was not clear enough. I meant that I missed the Brahmos missile on mobile launchers like the indians for example have. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BRAHMOS_Launcher.JPG. And according to wikipedia the missile can also be used against land targets. I also would love, if the BrahMos II gets added in the future for it to have the boost feature (according to wikipedia all the way to mach 7) in the terminal fase of the attack. Then you would only need half the anti ship missiles in an attack to overwhelm the Aegis system (because it can guide only so many missiles at one time towards threats, if this is ofcourse modelled in C:MANO).

Maybe another nice idea is adding dummy's to the database. Although I guess some people will laugh at this since it is basically WWI technology I still think it is very relevant today. If you got a high quality modern dummy, with 90% identical looks both optical and thermal, active heat output, same IR and radar signature https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fd03J_zHcFI then you can basically double your military's assets (from tanks to aircraft, submarines and ships in port, radars and sam etc etc) to double the targets your enemy needs to hit. This gives the defender great possibilities to stretch his enemy's assets to (or over) the limit.

I think implementing this feature shouldn't be really hard. Maybe (but I am guessing ofcourse) it should be as easy as creating a copy of every asset in the database and then renaming it to 'Asset (decoy)' and removing all weapons and sensors from it.



< Message edited by Dutchie999 -- 10/26/2014 4:03:43 PM >

(in reply to mikmykWS)
Post #: 1034
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/26/2014 6:05:42 PM   
Triode

 

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

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

Brahmos II we'll have to dig up some more data.


Mike


Finding traces of 3M22TE (aka Brahmos-2,aka export 3M22/Zircon-S) wow
not an easy task

(in reply to mikmykWS)
Post #: 1035
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/26/2014 7:14:40 PM   
Vici Supreme

 

Posts: 558
Joined: 12/4/2013
From: Southern Germany
Status: offline 		IDAS, what an awesome missile!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IDAS_(missile)
http://defense-update.com/20120214_idas-submarine-launched-surface-to-air-missile-system.html#.VE1CYvTuLIQ
http://www.fsi.no/sfiles/7/14/8/file/idas_ger-nor-cooperation-in-practise.pdf
http://www.diehl.com/fileadmin/diehl-defence/user_upload/flyer/IDAS_07_2008.pdf


taken from a german forum:

Weight: 118kg
Diameter: 0,18m
Lenght: 2,45m

Four missiles fit in one 533-mm launching container. Once loaded into a torpedo tube, there seems to be no way to recover the IDAS container and relaod the tube with a torpedo. The only way to make room for a torpedo is to eject the container.

Pre-launch target aquisition is done by visual/radar/esm detection through the sub. During flight the missiles imaging IR seeker passes data through an fibre-optic cable to the submarine, enabling the operator to target threats with high accuracy and switch between them. IDAS is capable of attacking surface vessels, soft-armored targets (buildings and vehicles) and fixed radar/comms sites.

< Message edited by Supreme 2.0 -- 10/26/2014 8:16:31 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Triode)
Post #: 1036
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/26/2014 7:27:18 PM   
mikmykWS

 

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline 		Thanks Supreme added to list.

Mike

_____________________________


(in reply to Vici Supreme)
Post #: 1037
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/26/2014 7:43:26 PM   
mikmykWS

 

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

ORIGINAL: Dutchie999

quote:

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

Added to list.

Brahmos is there. Brahmos II we'll have to dig up some more data.

Thanks!

Mike


Sorry Mike I was not clear enough. I meant that I missed the Brahmos missile on mobile launchers like the indians for example have. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BRAHMOS_Launcher.JPG. And according to wikipedia the missile can also be used against land targets. I also would love, if the BrahMos II gets added in the future for it to have the boost feature (according to wikipedia all the way to mach 7) in the terminal fase of the attack. Then you would only need half the anti ship missiles in an attack to overwhelm the Aegis system (because it can guide only so many missiles at one time towards threats, if this is ofcourse modelled in C:MANO).

Maybe another nice idea is adding dummy's to the database. Although I guess some people will laugh at this since it is basically WWI technology I still think it is very relevant today. If you got a high quality modern dummy, with 90% identical looks both optical and thermal, active heat output, same IR and radar signature https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fd03J_zHcFI then you can basically double your military's assets (from tanks to aircraft, submarines and ships in port, radars and sam etc etc) to double the targets your enemy needs to hit. This gives the defender great possibilities to stretch his enemy's assets to (or over) the limit.

I think implementing this feature shouldn't be really hard. Maybe (but I am guessing ofcourse) it should be as easy as creating a copy of every asset in the database and then renaming it to 'Asset (decoy)' and removing all weapons and sensors from it.




Thanks. Yeah just noticed that land mount isn't there nor is any other Indian SSM. Will add to our list.

Adding dummy records for every facility in the db would cause more problems than the one it would solve. In the meantime there are a couple of approaches you take to this.

1) Find the existing item. Click weapons and then remove the weapons from the mounts. Repeat if the unit has a magazine.

2) Add a generic unit like a truck, car, building and add the sensors to it.

Only a few clicks and accomplishes about the same.

Thanks!

Mike

_____________________________


(in reply to Dutchie999)
Post #: 1038
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/26/2014 8:57:24 PM   
Tomcat84

 

Posts: 1952
Joined: 7/10/2013
Status: offline 		What I did in Red Flag 2017 was place a bunch of single cars and rename them to "Decoy". Then if the player strikes one, in the weapon log it'll state something like:
4:00:39 - Weapon: GBU-31(V)1/B JDAM [Mk84] #1054 has impacted Decoy

Had not thought of placing emitters on them yet though. Brilliant and it works like a charm. Will be doing that for my next one

_____________________________

My Scenarios and Tutorials for Command

(Scenarios focus on air-warfare :) )

(in reply to mikmykWS)
Post #: 1039
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/26/2014 9:07:41 PM   
Dutchie999


Posts: 117
Joined: 10/8/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

Adding dummy records for every facility in the db would cause more problems than the one it would solve. In the meantime there are a couple of approaches you take to this.

1) Find the existing item. Click weapons and then remove the weapons from the mounts. Repeat if the unit has a magazine.

2) Add a generic unit like a truck, car, building and add the sensors to it.

Only a few clicks and accomplishes about the same.

Thanks!

Mike


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tomcat84

What I did in Red Flag 2017 was place a bunch of single cars and rename them to "Decoy". Then if the player strikes one, in the weapon log it'll state something like:
4:00:39 - Weapon: GBU-31(V)1/B JDAM [Mk84] #1054 has impacted Decoy

Had not thought of placing emitters on them yet though. Brilliant and it works like a charm. Will be doing that for my next one


O.... my... god. Haha why didn't I think of that. It is so obviously simple. Thanks guys

Edit: Only one problem now that I think of it. After the simulation is finished the user usually looks at the list of spent ammunition and destroyed assets. On this list it looks like the player destroyed a lot more targets then he really did. Because after all some of them were dummy's or decoy's. A way around this is to create another side simply just for the dummy's and decoy's. So they can be identified even after the simulation.

< Message edited by Dutchie999 -- 10/26/2014 11:03:21 PM >

(in reply to mikmykWS)
Post #: 1040
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/26/2014 11:22:34 PM   
mikmykWS

 

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

Could just write a note in the scenario notes saying all cars are decoys.

We're also working on something now that might give an opportunity for more scoring variables anyways.

Mike

_____________________________


(in reply to Dutchie999)
Post #: 1041
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/27/2014 12:24:50 AM   
tservello92

 

Posts: 21
Joined: 10/17/2014
Status: offline 		As promised, following up with more info on SOF. This quick note covers the comm/datalink portion.

Every US SOF element (at this point, every major Western SOF element) carries secure HF (PRC-104, 137 or 150) and SATCOM (PSC-5, PRC-152 or 117) radios.

(in reply to mikmykWS)
Post #: 1042
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/27/2014 3:45:17 PM   
tservello92

 

Posts: 21
Joined: 10/17/2014
Status: offline 		Gents, as part of my suggestions for SOF, could you please add the following weapons to the database. I will reference most of these in my next post detailing how the various SOF elements should be armed. A couple of these will also be used in edits I will request for conventional forces later down the line.

I modeled the rocket-based systems on #2807 (RB 57 MBT LAW) and the “gun” based systems on #2263 (M3 Carl Gustav) and #2435 (MK 19). Defer to the developers on the damage points assigned to each of these, but I based the DPs on other weapons in the DB.

In my research I did find a discrepancy. There is an entry in the CWDB, #1001562 - Carl Gustav recoilless rifle (84mm) that lists it as a Rocket (not a gun) with AP ammo. IMHO this entry can be deleted as it contradicts the other two Carl Gustav entries (#2263 and #1001028) that seem more accurate.

Demolition Charge – this one stumped me. There is an entry in #885 (US Navy SEAL) that includes the “SEAL Saboteur” - that looks to be 25kg of C4. It looks like this unit carries 6 of these and it lists the range as 8 nm? Ragnar, could you explain how this works? In a perfect world this capability would be represented by the M183 satchel charge (8 x M112 blocks of C4 – ~9kg of C4) and/or the M3A1 demo shaped charge (13.2 kg of C4). Obviously the SOF element has to be ON TOP of the target to use it. Any chance this could be modeled…a weapon that is fired from .00001 nm and then detonates 5 – 10 minutes later doing full damage?

Anti-Material Rifle (12.7, 14.5 or 20mm)
Type: Gun
Rng: 1 nm
CEP: 30
PK%: 99
Warhead Type: AP
Damage Points: 1 (might seem high, but the Mk211 round is impressive)

40mm GL (M203, M320, M32)
Type: Gun
Rng: .2 nm
CEP: 30
PK%: 99
Warhead Type: HE Blast/Frag
Damage Points: .2

Mk47 Mod 1 automatic grenade launcher
Type: Gun
Rng: .8 nm
CEP: 30
PK%: 99
Warhead Type: HE Blast/Frag
Damage Points: .2

M4 Carl Gustav (HEAT) - this is the newest model of the Goose just entering service. Damn this thing is light!!!
Type: Gun
L: .95 m
S: .084 m
D: .084 m
W: 9.8 kg
Rng: .5 nm
CEP: 30
PK%: 99
Warhead Type: Shaped Charge
Damage Points: 1

M4 Carl Gustav (HEDP)
Type: Gun
L: .95 m
S: .084 m
D: .084 m
W: 9.9 kg
Rng: .5 nm
CEP: 30
PK%: 99
Warhead Type: HE Blast/Frag
Damage Points: 3.1

M-72A7 LAW
Type: Rocket
L: .71 m (30”)
S: .066 m
D: .066 m
W: 3.6 kg
Rng: .15 nm
CEP: 30
PK%: 99
Warhead Type: HE Blast/Frag
Damage Points: 1

FGM-172 SRAW
Type: Rocket
L: .71 m
S: .14 m
D: .14 m
W: 9.7 kg
Rng: .3 nm
CEP: 30
PK%: 99
Warhead Type: HE Blast/Frag
Damage Points: 3.1

AT-4-CS
Type: Rocket
L: 1.02 m
S: .084 m
D: .084 m
W: 6.7 kg
Rng: .15 nm
CEP: 30
PK%: 99
Warhead Type: HEAT Shaped Charge
Damage Points: 1

M141 SMAW-D
Type: Rocket
L: .81 m
S: .083 m
D: .083 m
W: 7.1 kg
Rng: .15 nm
CEP:
PK%:
Warhead Type: HE Blast/Frag
Damage Points: 3.1

Mk 153 Mod 2 SMAW (HEDP)
Type: Rocket
L: 1.37 m
S: .083 m
D: .083 m
W: 11.75 kg
Rng: .25 nm
CEP: 30
PK%: 99
Warhead Type: HE Blast/Frag
Damage Points: 3.1

Mk 153 Mod 2 SMAW (HEAA)
Type: Rocket
L: 1.37 m
S: .083 m
D: .083 m
W: 12.21 kg
Rng: .25 nm
CEP: 30
PK%: 99
Warhead Type: Shaped Charge
Damage Points: 1

(in reply to tservello92)
Post #: 1043
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/27/2014 7:37:29 PM   
decaf

 

Posts: 91
Joined: 8/1/2008
Status: offline 		Found a weapon system misspelling. (AAW --> AWW)
This is a tangential issue to post #1030, this thread.

All references to:
AN/AAW-9/13
AN/AAW-9
AN/AAW-13

should, instead, be spelled as:
AN/AWW-9/13
AN/AWW-9
AN/AWW-13

http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/aww-13.htm

This will involve datalinks:
AN/AAW-9/13 Missile Datalink --> AN/AWW-9/13 Missile Datalink

and datalink pods #571 and #1861

Assuming you only need to change the names (and not numbers),
I hope that would flush through the rest of the database.

Aside from the datalink pods, it will show up in weapons:

#452 -- AGM-84K SLAMER-ATA
#621 -- AGM-84H SLAMER
#1866-- AGM-84E SLAM

#1862 -- AGM-62B Walleye II ER/DL
#1057 -- AGM-62A Walleye I ER/DL

and, maybe, others.

Also, pods are used in loadouts for aircraft such as

A-7
F/A-18
F-15K Slam Eagle
F-15SA
F-16E Desert Falcon
F-16F Desert Falcon
P-3
S-3
P-8 (pod needs to be added)

http://www.deagel.com/Navigation-and-Targeting-Systems/ANAWW-13_a001953001.aspx

By the way, I also noticed that

#452 -- AGM-84K SLAMER-ATA
#621 -- AGM-84H SLAMER

should be referred to as:

#452 -- AGM-84K SLAM-ER (ATA)
#621 -- AGM-84H SLAM-ER

http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=2200&tid=1100&ct=2

These are just cosmetic changes to the database.
No functional change expected.

(in reply to tservello92)
Post #: 1044
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/27/2014 9:04:55 PM   
mikmykWS

 

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline 		Updated list. Thanks guys!

Mike

_____________________________


(in reply to decaf)
Post #: 1045
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/27/2014 9:40:28 PM   
Tomcat84

 

Posts: 1952
Joined: 7/10/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

Add a generic unit like a truck, car, building and add the sensors to it.



Just to make sure my brain isn't missing something:

- if I take a car on the enemy AI side and add for example a Tall King sensor to it to be a decoy and turn it on, my player side will get the emissions, but the enemy will actually get the sensor info too, right? It will be a working Tall King that produces data? There isnt a way to have the sensor emit the signal but not actually produce useful info?

It's not a big problem but if there is a simple way then I am interested in knowing :)

_____________________________

My Scenarios and Tutorials for Command

(Scenarios focus on air-warfare :) )

(in reply to mikmykWS)
Post #: 1046
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/27/2014 11:21:10 PM   
Mgellis


Posts: 2054
Joined: 8/18/2007
Status: offline 		A few more future platforms that I'd love to see added, even if they are only "guesstimates"...

French Barracuda-class submarine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Barracuda-class_submarine
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/barracuda.htm
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/frances-future-ssns-the-barracuda-class-02902/
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/barracuda/
http://worldmaritimenews.com/archives/70440/france-barracuda-class-submarines-to-feature-cathelcos-afs/
http://navaltoday.com/2012/12/03/uk-cathelco-supply-anti-fouling-systems-for-barracuda-class-submarines/

Arihant-class submarine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arihant-class_submarine
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/arihant-class/
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/india/atv.htm
http://us.india.com/loudspeaker/ins-arihant-indias-first-indigenous-n-submarine-to-operate-from-2015-11457/
http://www.makhol.com/indias-nuclear-submarine-ins-arihant_features-weapons/
http://www.ipcs.org/article/india/ins-arihant-a-giant-stride-for-india-4519.html

INS Vishal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INS_Vishal
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/india/r-vishal.htm
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-navy/56681-nuclear-ins-vishal-cost.html
http://curiousindian.com/2014/01/06/behold-mighty-ins-vikramaditya-arrives/

Project 17A-class frigate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_17A-class_frigate
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/india/f-project-17a.htm
http://defence.pk/threads/from-p-17-to-p-17as-next-generation-stealth-frigates-of-indian-navy.200840/
http://china-pla.blogspot.com/2009/06/project-17a-of-indian-navy_25.html

Kamorta-class corvette
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamorta-class_corvette
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/kamorta-class-asw-corvettes/
http://canadianpower.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Kamorta-class_Corvette
http://www.deagel.com/Corvettes-and-Missile-Boats/Kamorta_a002738001.aspx
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/india/p-28.htm








(in reply to Tomcat84)
Post #: 1047
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/27/2014 11:29:24 PM   
mikmykWS

 

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline 		These are already on our list.

Sorry Mark we'll get to them.

Mike

_____________________________


(in reply to Mgellis)
Post #: 1048
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/28/2014 12:10:59 AM   
mikmykWS

 

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

ORIGINAL: Tomcat84


quote:

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

Add a generic unit like a truck, car, building and add the sensors to it.



Just to make sure my brain isn't missing something:

- if I take a car on the enemy AI side and add for example a Tall King sensor to it to be a decoy and turn it on, my player side will get the emissions, but the enemy will actually get the sensor info too, right? It will be a working Tall King that produces data? There isnt a way to have the sensor emit the signal but not actually produce useful info?

It's not a big problem but if there is a simple way then I am interested in knowing :)


No that would definitely be an issue with that method.

Mike


_____________________________


(in reply to Tomcat84)
Post #: 1049
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/28/2014 12:27:10 AM   
Mgellis


Posts: 2054
Joined: 8/18/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

These are already on our list.

Sorry Mark we'll get to them.

Mike


No problem. I just wasn't sure if those platforms had been requested or not--I thought some of them might have been requested already, but when I checked using the forum search engine, I did not get any results. I must have just done something wrong when I searched. Sorry about that.




(in reply to mikmykWS)
Post #: 1050
Page:   <<   < prev  33 34 [35] 36 37   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  33 34 [35] 36 37   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

6.715