Chinese anti-stealth sensors

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Chinese anti-stealth sensors

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 >> Chinese anti-stealth sensors

Page: << < prev 73 74 [75] 76 77 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Chinese anti-stealth sensors - 9/9/2015 4:55:42 AM

Dysta

Posts: 1909
Joined: 8/8/2015
Status: offline

I actually not into Jane's military report after 90s, but for this report however, they took it very seriously. Looks like A-star really caught them attentions:

http://www.janes.com/article/53064/beijing-tech-show-highlights-advances-in-chinese-fighter-sensors

Beijing tech show highlights advances in Chinese fighter sensors

Richard D Fisher Jr, Washington, DC - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly

19 July 2015

China's Jiangsu A-Star Aviation Industries Company (A-Star) used the first Beijing exhibition promoting "civil-military integration" to reveal new combat aircraft electro-optical systems, some of which may be slated for the country's fifth-generation fighters.

(More at link)

Update:

I mean really, all the 'generic' stuffs in J-31's database? At least try to rename rather than just leave those be.

< Message edited by Dysta -- 9/9/2015 2:53:11 PM >

(in reply to jun5896)

Post #: 2221

Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 9/9/2015 1:19:07 PM

Mgellis

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

UPDATED ON 9/10/15 AT 11:10 PM EST

Here is some information for platforms from Nicaragua.

There is no rush on these. I hope they can be included with version 441 of the database, and if so, I will definitely find a use for them--lots of possibilities for low intensity conflicts between Nicaragua and other central American nations (or the U.S. Coast Guard)--but it is not urgent.

(At this point, I think most of the platforms are already in the database, so for some of them I think it may just be a matter of adding the entry and the operational dates.)

Many thanks for considering these platforms.

Information from Jane�s Fighting Ships, Wikipedia, and various web sites (listed below)

SF-260W
Operational dates: 1982-1992

General characteristics

Crew: One
Capacity: Two passengers
Length: 7.1 m (23 ft 0 in)
Wingspan: 8.35 m (26 ft 11.75 in)
Height: 2.41 m (8 ft 6 in)
Wing area: 10.1 m� (109 ft�)
Empty weight: 765 kg (1,488 lb)
Loaded weight: 1,100 kg (2,425 lb)
Max. takeoff weight: 1,200 kg (utility) 1,100 kg (aerobatic) (2,866 lb)
Powerplant: 1 � Lycoming O-540-E4A5, 195 kW (260 hp)

Performance

Maximum speed: 441 km/h (236 knots, 276 mph)
Cruise speed: 330 km/h (178 knots, 205 mph)
Range: 2,050 km (1,107 NM, 1,274 mi)
Service ceiling: 5,790 m (19,000 ft)
Rate of climb: 9.1 m/s (1,791 ft/min)

Armament

Two under-wing hard points, each can carry 300 kg (661 lb)
(Loadouts appears to be either 2 x 7.62mm gun pod or 2 x 68mm SNEB rocket pods with 6 rockets each)

Mil Mi-17
Appears to be the standard NATO Hip-H
Operational dates: 1981-present

Mi-25
Appears to be the standard NATO Hind-D
Operational dates: 1981-1992

An-26
Appears to be the standard NATO Curl-A
Operational dates: 1986-present

SAM Sec (SA-7b Grail MANDPADS x 3)
Operational dates: 1983-present

Zhuk-class PB
Pennant numbers: 304, 305, 307, 309, 311, 313, 315, and 317 listed in Janes
Displacement: 50 tons full load
Dimensions (23 m. x 5.2 m. x 1.9 m.)
Main machinery: 2 M50 diesels, 2400 hp, 2 shafts
Speed: 30 knots
Range: 1100 naut. miles at 15 knots
Complement: 17
Guns 4 x 14.5mm MG (two twin mounts)
Radars: Surface search; Spin Trough; I band
Operational dates: 1982-present

Yevgenya-class Minehunter
Operational dates: 1984-present
Pennant numbers listed in Janes: 501, 503, 504, and 506
Displacement: 90 tons full load
Dimensions: 26 m. x 6.1. m. x 1.5 m.
Main machinery: 2 diesels; 850 hp; 2 shafts
Speed: 11 knots
Range: 300 miles at 10 knots
Complement: 10
Guns: 2 x 25mm (twin mount)
Radars: Surface search/navigation; Don 2; I-band
Sonars: small sonar (generic?) lifted over stern on crane

Dabur-class PB
Operational dates: 1978-present
Pennant numbers: three currently in operation are GC 201, GC 203, and GC 205
Displacement: 39 tons full load
Dimensions: 19.8 m x 5.5 m. x 1.8 m.
Main machinery: 2 GM 12V-71TS; 840 hp (626 kw) sustained; 2 shafts
Speed: 15 knots
Range: 450 naut. miles at 13 knots
Complement: 8
Guns 2 x 23mm/80 (twin mount); 2 x 12.7mm MG
Radars: Surface search; Decca; I-band

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaraguan_Air_Force

http://www.scramble.nl/orbats/nicaragua/overview

http://www.apnewsarchive.com/1986/URGENT-Officials-Believe-More-Soviet-Bloc-Weapons-Headed-for-Nicaragua/id-e3d946da45c98ec497622945b317d916

http://aircombat.com/about/our-aircraft/siai-marchetti-sf-260/

< Message edited by Mgellis -- 9/11/2015 4:10:17 AM >

(in reply to Dysta)

Post #: 2222

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 9/9/2015 2:04:24 PM

Dysta

Posts: 1909
Joined: 8/8/2015
Status: offline

Also one more Iranian 'non-star' even before the revolution: KC-33A super tanker. Still operational from recent parade:

Wikipedia:
KC-33A � A proposed 747 was also adapted as an aerial refueling tanker and was bid against the DC-10-30 during the 1970s Advanced Cargo Transport Aircraft (ACTA) program that produced the KC-10A Extender. Before the Khomeini-led revolution, Iran bought four 747-100 aircraft with air-refueling boom conversions to support its fleet of F-4 Phantoms.[177][178] It is unknown whether these aircraft remain usable as tankers. Since then, other proposals have emerged for adaptation of later 747-400 aircraft for this role.[177]

Not sure if 110 Tons would be its actual fuel size, but it's definitely worth to add into database.

< Message edited by Dysta -- 9/9/2015 3:06:42 PM >

(in reply to Mgellis)

Post #: 2223

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 9/9/2015 6:08:34 PM

PN79

Posts: 173
Joined: 1/3/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mgellis

Here is some information for platforms from Nicaragua.

...

Aero L-39 Albatros
Appears to be the L-39ZO rather than the L-39ZA, but it is very hard to tell
Operational dates: 1982-1992

...

SA-3 SAM
Appears to be the standard battery
Operational dates: 1986-present

Are you sure that Nicaragua get SA-3? There are some contradicting sources about it:

https://books.google.cz/books?id=4nFA9VByu3EC&pg=PA118&lpg=PA118&dq=nicaragua+%22sa-3%22&source=bl&ots=eNIlzY-BKK&sig=Lth9Cgps4B5tyeQmckpgPp4oe60&hl=cs&sa=X&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAWoVChMI2YXD6MTqxwIVSboaCh3OzAah#v=onepage&q=nicaragua%20%22sa-3%22&f=false

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1986-10-29/news/8603210374_1_mi-sandinistas-diplomats

Nicaragua is not on the list of SA-3 recipients from Hpasp (in documentation: https://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home )

Also I am not sure if Nicaragua get any L-39 at all:

http://wiki.scramble.nl/index.php/Aero_L-39_Albatros

http://www.scramble.nl/orbats/nicaragua/overview

< Message edited by PN79 -- 9/9/2015 7:26:27 PM >

(in reply to Mgellis)

Post #: 2224

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 9/9/2015 8:09:06 PM

Mgellis

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

I stand corrected! Thank you for catching those two errors. The SA-3 data was actually from material collected for a different country--it got mixed in by accident when I edited the Word document I was using this morning. I apologize for the error!

I also did not realize the L-39s had been intercepted. I thought they had been successfully delivered. Again, I apologize for the error.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PN79

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mgellis

Here is some information for platforms from Nicaragua.

...

Aero L-39 Albatros
Appears to be the L-39ZO rather than the L-39ZA, but it is very hard to tell
Operational dates: 1982-1992

...

SA-3 SAM
Appears to be the standard battery
Operational dates: 1986-present

Are you sure that Nicaragua get SA-3? There are some contradicting sources about it:

https://books.google.cz/books?id=4nFA9VByu3EC&pg=PA118&lpg=PA118&dq=nicaragua+%22sa-3%22&source=bl&ots=eNIlzY-BKK&sig=Lth9Cgps4B5tyeQmckpgPp4oe60&hl=cs&sa=X&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAWoVChMI2YXD6MTqxwIVSboaCh3OzAah#v=onepage&q=nicaragua%20%22sa-3%22&f=false

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1986-10-29/news/8603210374_1_mi-sandinistas-diplomats

Nicaragua is not on the list of SA-3 recipients from Hpasp (in documentation: https://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home )

Also I am not sure if Nicaragua get any L-39 at all:

http://wiki.scramble.nl/index.php/Aero_L-39_Albatros

http://www.scramble.nl/orbats/nicaragua/overview

(in reply to PN79)

Post #: 2225

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 9/9/2015 8:26:15 PM

Mgellis

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

Nicaragua does appear to have the SA-7, since at least 1983 (operational dates: 1983-present). There is some disagreement in the sources I found if Nicaragua has the SA-14 and the SA-16 as well, but all agree on the SA-7. Since the SA-7B appeared in 1968, and the Nicaraguans probably would not have purchased it until at least 1979, it seems likely they had SA-7B MANPAD variant.

Wikipedia is the primary source here, but I'm also relying on Military Balance.

(in reply to Mgellis)

Post #: 2226

RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 9/9/2015 10:12:26 PM

kgambit

Posts: 72
Joined: 1/9/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: emsoy

Thanks for the details kgambit. Are these high-priority items that you need for a scen?

No rush on those at the present. :)

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 2227

RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 9/10/2015 2:01:10 AM

SASR

Posts: 82
Joined: 3/1/2015
Status: offline

Quick Question. What is the baseline RCS for which the DB radar range numbers are set?

(in reply to kgambit)

Post #: 2228

RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 9/10/2015 4:04:46 AM

ComDev

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

Not sure I understood the question, can you please elaborate

_____________________________

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

(in reply to SASR)

Post #: 2229

RE: Russian hypo weapons and renewal information - 9/10/2015 4:40:25 AM

ComDev

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Broncepulido
for me Mk.54 HAAWC should be clearly a glider/torpedo/ASROC type torpedo-carrier. seven to ten miles gliding range stated here: http://www.militaryaerospace.com/articles/2015/09/flying-torpedo-asw.html

Have updated this torpedo to using a glider body to the target. Range is 8nm.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Broncepulido)

Post #: 2230

RE: Russian hypo weapons and renewal information - 9/10/2015 4:43:06 AM

ComDev

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

Thanks everyone for your input. The requests for new platforms are added to my to-do list but have very low priority. Some fixes/corrections are being made, but will probably not be released for some time.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 2231

RE: Russian hypo weapons and renewal information - 9/10/2015 4:44:45 AM

ComDev

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

Mark, on the Nicaraguan corrections, could you update the original post please? That way I only have to link to a single platform request which reduces the chanses of error.

Thanks!

< Message edited by emsoy -- 9/10/2015 6:37:59 AM >

_____________________________

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

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 2232

RE: Russian hypo weapons and renewal information - 9/10/2015 4:47:13 AM

ComDev

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: jun5896

quote:

ORIGINAL: emsoy

Noted, thanks! Will add to my to-do list, but none of these have very high priority right now. Please see announcement at the top of the page

Do you have more info on the various aircraft variants?

Thanks again.

I see. It's Okay.

MiG-31M; it was cancelled project. Maybe it would procure in 1990's - now MiG-31BM is more advanced.
Yak-43; only project. it promised a considerable improvement on the Yak-141M.
MiG-23K; It was a carrier-borne fighter variant based on the MiG-23ML.(it is for DB 3000 and CW. maybe need to add some soviet CV project for DB 3000 .)
MiG-23A; It was multi-role variant based on the "MiG-23K" However, cancellation and subsequent redesign of the Soviet aircraft carrier project also caused cancellation of the MiG-23A and MiG-23K variants and sub-variants. It was planned to develop the MiG-23A into three different sub-variants:
MiG-23AI was to be a dedicated fighter.
MiG-23AB was to be an attack-dedicated variant.
MiG-23AR a dedicated reconnaissance variant.

Above MiG-23 series are more matching 70~80's era Soviet Union carrier plan(ex : Project 1153 Orel).

MiG-21-97 and MiG-23-98 or MiG-23-98-2 are replace old MiG fighters and add for Russia.

MiG-29M(Project 9.15) 90's MiG-29 upgrade program. and it advanced MiG-29M2; It introduced in 2005.

Su-27M; Soviet era project, Improved demonstrators for an advanced single-seat multi-role Su-27s derivative.

Su-27PU; Soviet era project, Two Seat version of the Su-27P interceptor, designed to supprot with tactical data other single-seat Su-27P, MiG-31 and other interceptor aircraft in PVO service. Later prototypes renamed Su-30 by Russia.

Su-30M/Su-30MK; Next-generation multi-role two-seater. A few Su-30Ms were built for Russian evaluation in the mid-1990s, though little came of the effort.(for mid-90's Russia)

Su-27SM; Mid-life upgraded Russian Su-27S, featuring technology evaluated in the Su-27M demonstrators.(Also for mid-90's Russia)

Su-27KUB; Essentially an Su-27K carrier-based twin-seater with a side-by-side cockpit, for use as a naval carrier trainer or multi-role aircraft.

So if add above aircraft, also need USSR 70's~80's carrier and suggested Su-33 other proposed variants and MiG-29K and Su-50 PAK-FA naval variant. Thus, I propose to add mid-2010 tech for Russian hypothetical carrier Ulyanovsk.

Umm. I found some aircraft information for hypothetical USSR-Ruissa side.

P.S> I read before thread, I correct RF-16C full naming is RKF-16C(it based KF-16C on Blk 52)

Thanks for the info Jun. The upgraded South Korean Blk 52 is named RKF-16C in the database

_____________________________

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

(in reply to jun5896)

Post #: 2233

RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 9/10/2015 4:54:07 AM

SASR

Posts: 82
Joined: 3/1/2015
Status: offline

Nevermind I got it now. I was confused on whether the radar ranges in command were based on a specific RCS value or whether the listed range was the maximum possible detection range of any target.

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 2234

RE: Chinese anti-stealth sensors - 9/10/2015 5:30:33 AM

ComDev

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

There was a big discussion earlier on whether the J-31 should be included at all. It seems awfully prototypish and some sources suggest it may be developed for export only.

If you feel like compiling a list of the sensors that J-31 is likely to use, please post it here and I'll update the database. An educated (and sober!) guess on capabilities would be nice too.

Thanks!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dysta

I actually not into Jane's military report after 90s, but for this report however, they took it very seriously. Looks like A-star really caught them attentions:

http://www.janes.com/article/53064/beijing-tech-show-highlights-advances-in-chinese-fighter-sensors

Beijing tech show highlights advances in Chinese fighter sensors

Richard D Fisher Jr, Washington, DC - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly

19 July 2015

China's Jiangsu A-Star Aviation Industries Company (A-Star) used the first Beijing exhibition promoting "civil-military integration" to reveal new combat aircraft electro-optical systems, some of which may be slated for the country's fifth-generation fighters.

(More at link)

Update:

I mean really, all the 'generic' stuffs in J-31's database? At least try to rename rather than just leave those be.

< Message edited by emsoy -- 9/10/2015 6:33:33 AM >

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Dysta)

Post #: 2235

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 9/10/2015 5:36:57 AM

ComDev

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

The Iranian tanker variant is already there (of course!)

Filter on '747' in the database viewer and you'll find it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dysta

Also one more Iranian 'non-star' even before the revolution: KC-33A super tanker. Still operational from recent parade:

Wikipedia:
KC-33A � A proposed 747 was also adapted as an aerial refueling tanker and was bid against the DC-10-30 during the 1970s Advanced Cargo Transport Aircraft (ACTA) program that produced the KC-10A Extender. Before the Khomeini-led revolution, Iran bought four 747-100 aircraft with air-refueling boom conversions to support its fleet of F-4 Phantoms.[177][178] It is unknown whether these aircraft remain usable as tankers. Since then, other proposals have emerged for adaptation of later 747-400 aircraft for this role.[177]

Not sure if 110 Tons would be its actual fuel size, but it's definitely worth to add into database.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Dysta)

Post #: 2236

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 9/10/2015 6:00:03 AM

Dysta

Posts: 1909
Joined: 8/8/2015
Status: offline

Strange, I can't find it by typing 'KC-33A'.

But well...

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 2237

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 9/10/2015 6:05:52 AM

ComDev

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

In my post it said '747'

The KC-33A was a different variant of the aircraft. Thus the Iranian tanker isn't using the US designation.

< Message edited by emsoy -- 9/10/2015 7:09:30 AM >

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Dysta)

Post #: 2238

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 9/10/2015 6:43:57 AM

Dysta

Posts: 1909
Joined: 8/8/2015
Status: offline

Well that's kinda awkward, Iran have 4 of these before the revolution, so I think it should had at least a different name for an airliner with a refueling broom.

Maybe you're right, it was just an experiment after all.

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 2239

Airbus walks away from Japan tanker RFP - 9/10/2015 8:58:41 AM

jun5896

Posts: 216
Joined: 1/17/2015
Status: offline

[ADDED DB v441]

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/airbus-walks-away-from-japan-tanker-rfp-416540/
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/08/airbus-group-japan-defense-idUSL4N11E35Q20150908
http://www.defenseworld.net/news/13633/MRTT__Aegis_Destroyer_In_Japan___s__40_Billion_Defense_Budget_For_2016#.VfFEbnDtmko

Japan will selects conclusively KC-46A in 2014-2018 Mid-Term Defense Program. It will secure budget in 2016, and procure three new airborne refueling aircraft until 2018.

< Message edited by emsoy -- 9/13/2015 5:58:47 PM >

(in reply to Dysta)

Post #: 2240

RE: DB Correction to Su-27 loadouts. - 9/10/2015 9:30:00 PM

KLAB

Posts: 355
Joined: 2/27/2007
Status: offline

[ADDED DB v441]

Nice update again with 440,thank you for the amended PL-8B.

Could I ask for a correction to the Su-27 load outs please, as its a significant type and used somewhat more than Honduran patrol boats?

I appreciate there has been much debate over whether the AA-10D is operational but....

The link is to photos taken from a Norwegian P-3 which appear to show what is an operational Su-27 over the Baltic in 2014 with a pair of R-27ETs (AA-10D Alamo D) on the relevant No2 and No10 pylon (the only ones I believe have the necessary equipment for the IR cooling?).
The missiles are too long to be R-27T's based on the corresponding length of the R-73's in comparison.

http://errymath.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/russian-su-27-intercepts-nato.html#.VfHtI6OFP4Y

Can an additional load out please be added to the Russian/Soviet Su-27 entries (all SU-27 versions with 10 pylons)
#2155 Su-27P
#603 Su-27S 1992
#2370 Su-27S 1994
#134 Su-27 USSR 1987/1991

I would suggest for pre-1998:

#1901 2 x AA-10A/R-27R
#1899 2 x AA-10C/R-27ER
#1101 2 x AA-10D/R-27ET
#1896 2 x AA-11/R-73
#2540 2 x L-005S pods

And for later models:
#847 Su-27SM2/3

Suggested load of:

#1901 2 x AA-10A/R-27R
#1899 2 x AA-10C/R-27ER
#1101 2 x AA-10D/R-27ET
#2053 2 x AA-11/R-73M
#2540 2 x L-005S pods.

The Su-30(all Russian/Soviet era models) would presumably also be carrying the Alamo D?

Regards

Karl

< Message edited by emsoy -- 9/13/2015 6:26:28 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to jun5896)

Post #: 2241

RE: SM-3 Maximum Engagement Speed - 9/10/2015 9:46:08 PM

SASR

Posts: 82
Joined: 3/1/2015
Status: offline

Currently SM-3 Block IA maximum target engagement speed is is set at 8000 knots, and SM-3 Block IB/IIA is currently 12000 knots. In 2008 the US shot down a damaged satellite with a SM-3 Block IA travelling a reportedly 17,500 MPH, or 15200 knots. So maybe can you bump up the maximum engagement speed to 15200 kts? I want to fiddle with some SM-3 ASAT operations on command

From : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA-193 (The reference to the speed of the satellite on the wiki page is a DoD new release but when I click the link nothing appears on the defense.gov page)

"On February 21, 03:26 GMT an SM-3 missile was fired from the Ticonderoga class missile cruiser USS Lake Erie, and intercepted USA-193 about 133 nautical miles (247 kilometers)[25] above the Pacific Ocean. The satellite was travelling with a velocity of about 17,500 mph (around 28,000 km/h or 7.8 km/s). The velocity of the impact was about 22,000 mph. The Department of Defense expressed a "high degree of confidence" that the fuel tank was hit and destroyed.[27]"

http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/stories/u-s-navy-missile-defense-operation-burnt-frost/

"Although the SM-3 Blk IA was not designed to shoot down ICBMs, the margins are sufficient to perform that mission as demonstrated in the satellite shoot-down in 2008."

(in reply to jun5896)

Post #: 2242

RE: DB Correction to Su-27 loadouts. - 9/10/2015 9:48:57 PM

Tomcat84

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

Karl, I have a question: why would they carry 2 of the A model and not just 4 of the C model? Is there any reasoning for this?

_____________________________

My Scenarios and Tutorials for Command

(Scenarios focus on air-warfare :) )

(in reply to KLAB)

Post #: 2243

RE: Russian hypo weapons and renewal information - 9/11/2015 3:11:30 AM

Mgellis

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

Original post updated.

quote:

ORIGINAL: emsoy

Mark, on the Nicaraguan corrections, could you update the original post please? That way I only have to link to a single platform request which reduces the chanses of error.

Thanks!

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 2244

RE: SM-3 Maximum Engagement Speed - 9/11/2015 5:38:43 AM

Dysta

Posts: 1909
Joined: 8/8/2015
Status: offline

As far as I know ASAT missiles have to lead the satellite's approach, rather than chasing it.

(in reply to SASR)

Post #: 2245

Brazil and Sweden sign financing contract for Gripen NGs - 9/13/2015 8:33:47 AM

jun5896

Posts: 216
Joined: 1/17/2015
Status: offline

http://www.janes.com/article/53828/brazil-and-sweden-sign-financing-contract-for-gripen-ngs
http://www.defenseworld.net/news/13858/Brazil_Signs_Funding_Contract_To_Acquire_Gripen_NG_Fighter#.VfU0RXDtmko
http://www.janes.com/article/45013/brazil-signs-for-36-gripen-e-f-fighters

Brazil's contract for 36 Gripen E/F fighters makes it the first export customer for the type.
As well as signing for the aircraft, Brazil and Saab have agreed a 10-year industrial co-operation deal.
Deliveries for the 28 single-seat Gripen E and eight twin-seat Gripen F aircraft will begin in 2019 and run through to 2024.

(in reply to Dysta)

Post #: 2246

RE: Brazil and Sweden sign financing contract for Gripe... - 9/13/2015 3:29:05 PM

Vici Supreme

Posts: 558
Joined: 12/4/2013
From: Southern Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jun5896

http://www.janes.com/article/53828/brazil-and-sweden-sign-financing-contract-for-gripen-ngs
http://www.defenseworld.net/news/13858/Brazil_Signs_Funding_Contract_To_Acquire_Gripen_NG_Fighter#.VfU0RXDtmko
http://www.janes.com/article/45013/brazil-signs-for-36-gripen-e-f-fighters

Brazil's contract for 36 Gripen E/F fighters makes it the first export customer for the type.
As well as signing for the aircraft, Brazil and Saab have agreed a 10-year industrial co-operation deal.
Deliveries for the 28 single-seat Gripen E and eight twin-seat Gripen F aircraft will begin in 2019 and run through to 2024.

+1

Might be too early but this is also on my list of things I need for a scenario.

_____________________________

(in reply to jun5896)

Post #: 2247

RE: Brazil and Sweden sign financing contract for Gripe... - 9/13/2015 4:26:57 PM

Af1352pasha

Posts: 308
Joined: 9/17/2010
Status: offline

Can you revised SU-34 load out base on wiki specification to use various armament?

Actually SU-34 can be fire Kh-35 (AS-20) anti-ship missile and other missiles.

Missiles:

R-27 (AA-10) air-to-air missile
R-73 (AA-11) air-to-air missile
R-77 (AA-12) air-to-air missile
Kh-29L/T (AS-14) air-to-ground missile
Kh-38 new generation air-to-ground missile with a range of 40 km
Kh-25MT/ML/MP (AS-10) air-to-ground missile or anti-radiation missile
Kh-59M (AS-18) air-to-ground missile
Kh-58 (AS-11) anti-radiation missile
Kh-31 (AS-17) anti-radiation or anti-ship missile
Kh-35 (AS-20) anti-ship missile
P-800 Oniks missile (SS-N-26 Strobile) anti-ship missile (version for the Air Force). Version he named "Alpha"[82] weight of 1500 kg with a range of up to 300 km and a speed in the range of numbers M = 2.2-3.0. Officially not in service.[82][83]
Kh-65SE or Kh-SD cruise missile

Regards

(in reply to Vici Supreme)

Post #: 2248

RE: Brazil and Sweden sign financing contract for Gripe... - 9/13/2015 4:53:55 PM

ComDev

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

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEVELOPER'S NOTE: Database development slow-down!

Hey guys,

Just wanted to let you know that I have now re-directed my limited Command time (which is squeezed inbetween family life, day-job, workout, and various other interests) to write code. My code contributions have been rather limited lately and I need to add several new features and fix a few bugs before I can start working on the Advanced Strike Planner.

This means 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 (that no-one will ever use in a scenario anyway haha) will not be added.

If there is anything you consider extremely important (...enough to justify spending time on adding / fixing, rather than having me working on code) then feel feee to post. If not then you'll find me burried deep down in the Command game engine.

Thanks!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks, do you have photos showing operational Su-34s carrying these weapons? Thanks

< Message edited by emsoy -- 9/13/2015 6:39:18 PM >

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Af1352pasha)

Post #: 2249

RE: SM-3 Maximum Engagement Speed - 9/13/2015 5:36:54 PM

ComDev

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

Hmmmm not entirely sure what to do here... thoughts?

quote:

ORIGINAL: SASR

Currently SM-3 Block IA maximum target engagement speed is is set at 8000 knots, and SM-3 Block IB/IIA is currently 12000 knots. In 2008 the US shot down a damaged satellite with a SM-3 Block IA travelling a reportedly 17,500 MPH, or 15200 knots. So maybe can you bump up the maximum engagement speed to 15200 kts? I want to fiddle with some SM-3 ASAT operations on command

From : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA-193 (The reference to the speed of the satellite on the wiki page is a DoD new release but when I click the link nothing appears on the defense.gov page)

"On February 21, 03:26 GMT an SM-3 missile was fired from the Ticonderoga class missile cruiser USS Lake Erie, and intercepted USA-193 about 133 nautical miles (247 kilometers)[25] above the Pacific Ocean. The satellite was travelling with a velocity of about 17,500 mph (around 28,000 km/h or 7.8 km/s). The velocity of the impact was about 22,000 mph. The Department of Defense expressed a "high degree of confidence" that the fuel tank was hit and destroyed.[27]"

http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/stories/u-s-navy-missile-defense-operation-burnt-frost/

"Although the SM-3 Blk IA was not designed to shoot down ICBMs, the margins are sufficient to perform that mission as demonstrated in the satellite shoot-down in 2008."