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  76 77 [78] 79 80   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 9/26/2015 5:53:39 AM   
Mgellis


Posts: 2054
Joined: 8/18/2007
Status: offline 		[NO IOC, MANUFACTURER'S DESIRE ONLY]

150-kw laser loadout for the Predator C.

Please, please figure out how to get this into the next version of the database! Seriously...flying killer robots with lasers. What's not to love? :)

It looks like this one is designed to hit ground targets as well as surface naval targets. Maybe for an initial version, until more data is available, just use the COIL as a template but add ground targets to the list of possible targets?

http://www.defensereview.com/new-laser-weapons-coming-to-a-drone-near-you-general-atomics-predator-c-avenger-getting-150-kilowatt-laser-weapon-and-rheinmatall-developing-80-kilowatt-gatling-laser/

I'm not sure how the 80-kw gatling laser is meant to be used...is it for ground vehicles in the AAA role?

May I also suggest, for hypothetical platforms, the ACL-130X Thor (i.e., a C-130 armed with a couple of these lasers...it's got enough space onboard for the power system) and maybe even the MVL-22X Osprey Terminator (i.e., an Osprey with all its cargo space eliminated so it can carry the power system for one laser...just the thing for taking off from an amphibious warfare ship, flying in low and fast, and taking out a few terrorists)?

Thanks for considering these ideas.







< Message edited by emsoy -- 10/10/2015 11:34:57 AM >

(in reply to mikmykWS)
Post #: 2311
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 9/26/2015 7:24:09 AM   
Dysta


Posts: 1909
Joined: 8/8/2015
Status: offline 		Laser arm race will go extra ugly if OPFOR (for US) got them operational as well.

1980s' Star Wars hypocrisy will surely reborn.

(in reply to Mgellis)
Post #: 2312
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 9/26/2015 3:10:38 PM   
Excroat3

 

Posts: 436
Joined: 1/24/2015
Status: offline 		[CONCEPT ONLY, NO OPERATIONAL]

New loadout for MQ-9:

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/new-maritime-capability-developed-for-mq-9-417133/

< Message edited by emsoy -- 10/10/2015 11:35:35 AM >

(in reply to Dysta)
Post #: 2313
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 9/26/2015 6:33:04 PM   
e2204588

 

Posts: 170
Joined: 7/12/2013
Status: offline 		[WAD, SENSOR IS ON PENETRATOR]

No sensor on #2868 - YJ-18 [3M54E Klub copy]
It is useless without any sensors.

< Message edited by emsoy -- 10/10/2015 11:36:24 AM >

(in reply to Excroat3)
Post #: 2314
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 9/26/2015 10:37:54 PM   
Rudd

 

Posts: 1501
Joined: 7/10/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: fool12342000

No sensor on #2868 - YJ-18 [3M54E Klub copy]
It is useless without any sensors.

Seems to work just fine for me, sensors are on the penetrator I believe

_____________________________


(in reply to e2204588)
Post #: 2315
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 9/27/2015 12:57:13 AM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mgellis


150-kw laser loadout for the Predator C.

Please, please figure out how to get this into the next version of the database! Seriously...flying killer robots with lasers. What's not to love? :)

It looks like this one is designed to hit ground targets as well as surface naval targets. Maybe for an initial version, until more data is available, just use the COIL as a template but add ground targets to the list of possible targets?

http://www.defensereview.com/new-laser-weapons-coming-to-a-drone-near-you-general-atomics-predator-c-avenger-getting-150-kilowatt-laser-weapon-and-rheinmatall-developing-80-kilowatt-gatling-laser/

I'm not sure how the 80-kw gatling laser is meant to be used...is it for ground vehicles in the AAA role?

May I also suggest, for hypothetical platforms, the ACL-130X Thor (i.e., a C-130 armed with a couple of these lasers...it's got enough space onboard for the power system) and maybe even the MVL-22X Osprey Terminator (i.e., an Osprey with all its cargo space eliminated so it can carry the power system for one laser...just the thing for taking off from an amphibious warfare ship, flying in low and fast, and taking out a few terrorists)?

Thanks for considering these ideas.








My engineering opinion on this is that it is mostly marketing with still unproven abilities. The power capabilities of a drone, even one that size, is very limited...possibly impractical for maybe another 10 years.

(in reply to Mgellis)
Post #: 2316
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 9/27/2015 3:22:44 AM   
Dysta


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

ORIGINAL: thewood1

My engineering opinion on this is that it is mostly marketing with still unproven abilities. The power capabilities of a drone, even one that size, is very limited...possibly impractical for maybe another 10 years.

Agreed.

People usually forget about the optic-chemical amplifier underneath the laser turret, which is the core of the laser energy generator. For an energy to destroy a commercial quadcopter in 5 kilometers, it would need a big container of amp to generate such of power, like this picture below:



The much smaller laser platform will not guarantee its lethal energy output, but still can generate strong IR jamming beam, or focus many lasers to heat generator to produce power. These are viable options for a small platforms.

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 2317
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 9/27/2015 7:46:16 AM   
e2204588

 

Posts: 170
Joined: 7/12/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rudd


quote:

ORIGINAL: fool12342000

No sensor on #2868 - YJ-18 [3M54E Klub copy]
It is useless without any sensors.

Seems to work just fine for me, sensors are on the penetrator I believe


You're right, it is not DB problem.
For some reason, penetrator is not released sometimes.
I can not reproduce it again.


< Message edited by fool12342000 -- 9/27/2015 2:36:49 PM >

(in reply to Rudd)
Post #: 2318
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 9/28/2015 2:04:59 PM   
conforoa


Posts: 29
Joined: 10/1/2013
Status: offline 		[SOME ALREADY THERE, MINOR MODS DB v441, OLDER TYPES ASSIGNED TO PAUL]

Hello, Early French Strategic Missile, MSBS M1 have a Nuclear (not Thermonuclear) warhead MR.41 of 400 kt (in french sorry )

MSBS M2 a Nuclear MR.41 of 500 kt

MSBS M20 a Thermonuclear warhead TN.60 of 1 mt


For all here, good job !!!

< Message edited by emsoy -- 10/10/2015 11:44:58 AM >

_____________________________


(in reply to e2204588)
Post #: 2319
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 9/28/2015 2:20:26 PM   
conforoa


Posts: 29
Joined: 10/1/2013
Status: offline 		[ALREADY THERE, MINOR MODS DB v441]

Not recent French Strategic Missile in DB
For all (another in french )

MSBS M4A

MSBS M4B

MSBS M45

and the most recent MSBS M51


< Message edited by emsoy -- 10/10/2015 11:44:29 AM >

(in reply to conforoa)
Post #: 2320
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 9/29/2015 7:48:00 PM   
Hongjian

 

Posts: 834
Joined: 1/2/2015
Status: offline 		Speaking about nukes.

While testing the effectiveness of the US national ABM against a Chinese nuclear attack, I've discovered that China actually has no nukes capable of reaching the continental US from the RL positions of the DF-5A/B silos in inner and northern China, even though the DF-5 series is among China's longest ranged liquid fueled ICBM. A look in the DB reveals that the DF-5 series of ICBM only gets 4200nmi range (~7700km), which is quite a bit shorter than widely cited range of 12.000 (DF-5A) to 15.000km (DF-5B).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DF-5


(in reply to conforoa)
Post #: 2321
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 9/30/2015 1:16:25 PM   
Dysta


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

ORIGINAL: Hongjian

Speaking about nukes.

While testing the effectiveness of the US national ABM against a Chinese nuclear attack, I've discovered that China actually has no nukes capable of reaching the continental US from the RL positions of the DF-5A/B silos in inner and northern China, even though the DF-5 series is among China's longest ranged liquid fueled ICBM. A look in the DB reveals that the DF-5 series of ICBM only gets 4200nmi range (~7700km), which is quite a bit shorter than widely cited range of 12.000 (DF-5A) to 15.000km (DF-5B).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DF-5


I believe it's due to the lower fuel mass of liquid-fuel ICBM than solid fuel in same size. It may looks like a massive tube that looks bigger than commercial rocket for orbiting a satellite, but remember, size means weight and air friction as well.

If US speculators believe DF-5 series won't give a damn to US continents, then it's more likely by the easier interception under the US' ABM capability, rather than the inability to reach to the window of White House by range (since nobody can actually give a pinpointing range to ballistic weaponries). But think again, huge tube with liquid fuel is really a 70s tech of propulsion, and wouldn't do much of improvement with newer engines. So giving the same range of DF-5 is forgiving, but also little unrealistic.

So you may expect why many medias wouldn't give as much 'threat alarming' to DF-5 series than 'carrier killers', which is smaller, but solid-fuel propelled and much agile ASBMs.

TO DB3000 developers: I understand your numerous database enrichments and tweakings cost you lots of time, and nobody can expect it to be both realistic and perfect. However, at least giving a little in-depth of data checking before just adding into DB3000. If improved DF-5 won't give any extra range, then enlighten us with descriptions.

< Message edited by Dysta -- 9/30/2015 2:23:57 PM >

(in reply to Hongjian)
Post #: 2322
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 9/30/2015 1:44:06 PM   
Hongjian

 

Posts: 834
Joined: 1/2/2015
Status: offline
quote:

I believe it's due to the lower fuel mass of liquid-fuel ICBM than solid fuel in same size. It may looks like a massive tube that looks bigger than commercial rocket for orbiting a satellite, but remember, size means weight and air friction as well.


Actually, liquid-fuel usually has higher energy than solid fuel, giving you more range with the same mass. Solid fuel has the advantage that it can be stored within the missile, making it ready to launch at any time, while liquid fuel missiles take some time to be fueled, lowering their response time.

Well, and the reason why the DF-5 isnt hyped up is because it is in the Chinese nuclear arsenal since the mid 80s. Seriously, this rocket is larger than the Minuteman III and called "the Chinese SS-18 Satan". Generally, nuclear ICBM deterrence isnt hyped up, since everyone knows that noone is going to use them. The US never hyped up the DF-31/A solid-fuel road-mobile ICBM as well, even though it is a much larger leap for the PLA 2nd Artillery in terms of range and deterrence factor than the ASBMs are.

People are only hyping up the ASBM, because it is a conventional tactical weapon that is not aimed at strategic deterrence, but made for actual warfighting purposes.

Anyway, the 4200nmi range for the SS-18-sized 32m long DF-5A/B liquid fueled ICBM is severely understated, no matter how you look at it.

(in reply to Dysta)
Post #: 2323
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 9/30/2015 3:11:20 PM   
Dysta


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

ORIGINAL: Hongjian

quote:

I believe it's due to the lower fuel mass of liquid-fuel ICBM than solid fuel in same size. It may looks like a massive tube that looks bigger than commercial rocket for orbiting a satellite, but remember, size means weight and air friction as well.


Actually, liquid-fuel usually has higher energy than solid fuel, giving you more range with the same mass. Solid fuel has the advantage that it can be stored within the missile, making it ready to launch at any time, while liquid fuel missiles take some time to be fueled, lowering their response time.

It is have higher thrust with liquid-fuel than the solid one, but again, it's the lower mass and easier combustion made it initially have higher speed, but not as much at mid-course when ran out of fuel faster than solid fuel.

Whatever it is, DB3000's next update will be late as they're finalizing v1.09 first. This may take time, but I surely hope they will make them have more reasonable range.

(in reply to Hongjian)
Post #: 2324
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/1/2015 10:06:12 PM   
butch4343

 

Posts: 327
Joined: 3/26/2015
Status: offline 		Hi
Wondered if it would be possible to consider adding the conventional version of the submarine launched SS-N-21 Sampson SLCM?

The weapon is in used as a conventional land attack missile broadly comparable to the Tomahawk TLAM.

I have attached what I hope is a useable template, but in reality the nuclear granat is already in the database therefore its really just changing the warhead to an HE one.

Cheers

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by butch4343 -- 10/1/2015 11:06:53 PM >

(in reply to Dysta)
Post #: 2325
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/2/2015 3:08:22 AM   
ComDev

 

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline 		The reason we don't have a conventional SS-N-21 is because there is no info that confirms such a weapo actually exists. Only rumors and speculation

_____________________________



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

(in reply to butch4343)
Post #: 2326
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/2/2015 4:24:36 AM   
ComDev

 

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline 		I'm sorry for not responding as frequently to database requests. I'm busy working on code for 1.10 Will return to database stuff when the new features are ready for testing.

_____________________________



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

(in reply to ComDev)
Post #: 2327
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/2/2015 9:41:38 AM   
Dysta


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

ORIGINAL: emsoy

The reason we don't have a conventional SS-N-21 is because there is no info that confirms such a weapo actually exists. Only rumors and speculation

Looks like a lengthy research from lots of websites is required.

(in reply to ComDev)
Post #: 2328
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/2/2015 12:47:15 PM   
butch4343

 

Posts: 327
Joined: 3/26/2015
Status: offline 		[ADDED DB v441]

quote:

ORIGINAL: emsoy

The reason we don't have a conventional SS-N-21 is because there is no info that confirms such a weapo actually exists. Only rumors and speculation



Thanks for the reply Emsoy, I appreciate that your busy with other things

Could I ask that it be looked as a adding a hypothetical loadout?

There is a precedence for adding hypothetical weapons to CMANO (AIM152 and the YAL-1 Airborne Laser), further to this it wouldn’t be a unrealistic system, given that the AS-15 Kent was successfully fielded with both conventional and nuclear warheads.

Cheers


< Message edited by emsoy -- 10/10/2015 11:50:21 AM >

(in reply to ComDev)
Post #: 2329
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/4/2015 3:43:08 AM   
DESRON420

 

Posts: 57
Joined: 9/30/2015
Status: offline 		[UPDATED DB v441]

Russia Facility #2443 - Radar (Big Bird D [91N6]) has Big Bird C [64N6] instead.

< Message edited by emsoy -- 10/10/2015 11:55:30 AM >

(in reply to butch4343)
Post #: 2330
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/4/2015 2:31:03 PM   
AlanChan

 

Posts: 68
Joined: 5/17/2015
Status: offline 		read this 东风五号甲洲际导弹研制纪实
this was written by former deputy of second art. Read between the lines, expecially, about what DF-5A was aimed to reach.

(in reply to Dysta)
Post #: 2331
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/4/2015 5:37:14 PM   
Zaslon

 

Posts: 283
Joined: 6/14/2015
Status: offline 		[ADDED DB v441]

Russian loadouts in Syria.

In spanish but the photos are very clear.

Su-34 with a pair of KAB-500S from the same source.

< Message edited by emsoy -- 10/4/2015 9:16:26 PM >

_____________________________


Kids think about Iran and Amateurs think about Russia, but professionals think about China

(in reply to AlanChan)
Post #: 2332
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/4/2015 6:55:52 PM   
mikmykWS

 

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

ORIGINAL: Dysta

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hongjian

Speaking about nukes.

While testing the effectiveness of the US national ABM against a Chinese nuclear attack, I've discovered that China actually has no nukes capable of reaching the continental US from the RL positions of the DF-5A/B silos in inner and northern China, even though the DF-5 series is among China's longest ranged liquid fueled ICBM. A look in the DB reveals that the DF-5 series of ICBM only gets 4200nmi range (~7700km), which is quite a bit shorter than widely cited range of 12.000 (DF-5A) to 15.000km (DF-5B).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DF-5


I believe it's due to the lower fuel mass of liquid-fuel ICBM than solid fuel in same size. It may looks like a massive tube that looks bigger than commercial rocket for orbiting a satellite, but remember, size means weight and air friction as well.

If US speculators believe DF-5 series won't give a damn to US continents, then it's more likely by the easier interception under the US' ABM capability, rather than the inability to reach to the window of White House by range (since nobody can actually give a pinpointing range to ballistic weaponries). But think again, huge tube with liquid fuel is really a 70s tech of propulsion, and wouldn't do much of improvement with newer engines. So giving the same range of DF-5 is forgiving, but also little unrealistic.

So you may expect why many medias wouldn't give as much 'threat alarming' to DF-5 series than 'carrier killers', which is smaller, but solid-fuel propelled and much agile ASBMs.

TO DB3000 developers: I understand your numerous database enrichments and tweakings cost you lots of time, and nobody can expect it to be both realistic and perfect. However, at least giving a little in-depth of data checking before just adding into DB3000. If improved DF-5 won't give any extra range, then enlighten us with descriptions.


Ah the things people say over the internet that they'd never say face to face.

Thanks for the report. We'll definitely address this in a future update.

MIke

_____________________________


(in reply to Dysta)
Post #: 2333
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/4/2015 6:56:55 PM   
mikmykWS

 

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

ORIGINAL: Dysta


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hongjian

quote:

I believe it's due to the lower fuel mass of liquid-fuel ICBM than solid fuel in same size. It may looks like a massive tube that looks bigger than commercial rocket for orbiting a satellite, but remember, size means weight and air friction as well.


Actually, liquid-fuel usually has higher energy than solid fuel, giving you more range with the same mass. Solid fuel has the advantage that it can be stored within the missile, making it ready to launch at any time, while liquid fuel missiles take some time to be fueled, lowering their response time.

It is have higher thrust with liquid-fuel than the solid one, but again, it's the lower mass and easier combustion made it initially have higher speed, but not as much at mid-course when ran out of fuel faster than solid fuel.

Whatever it is, DB3000's next update will be late as they're finalizing v1.09 first. This may take time, but I surely hope they will make them have more reasonable range.


Much better. Yes

_____________________________


(in reply to Dysta)
Post #: 2334
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/4/2015 8:25:35 PM   
ComDev

 

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

ORIGINAL: Dysta

TO DB3000 developers: I understand your numerous database enrichments and tweakings cost you lots of time, and nobody can expect it to be both realistic and perfect. However, at least giving a little in-depth of data checking before just adding into DB3000. If improved DF-5 won't give any extra range, then enlighten us with descriptions.


For brand new systems, stats are educated guessimations at best. We've been doing this for 20 years and experience tells us it is smart to use sober values at first. This avoids cases where scenarios are being built around platforms with initially over-optimistic stats that are later scaled back, ruining the scenarios. Are many examples where this has happened.

If you have detailed & reliable stats on the above systems, please post up

< Message edited by emsoy -- 10/5/2015 8:50:19 PM >

_____________________________



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

(in reply to Dysta)
Post #: 2335
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/4/2015 8:26:58 PM   
ComDev

 

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline 		By the way, I've added the SS-N-30 [3M14 Kalibr] cruise missile

quote:

ORIGINAL: butch4343


quote:

ORIGINAL: emsoy

The reason we don't have a conventional SS-N-21 is because there is no info that confirms such a weapo actually exists. Only rumors and speculation



Thanks for the reply Emsoy, I appreciate that your busy with other things

Could I ask that it be looked as a adding a hypothetical loadout?

There is a precedence for adding hypothetical weapons to CMANO (AIM152 and the YAL-1 Airborne Laser), further to this it wouldn’t be a unrealistic system, given that the AS-15 Kent was successfully fielded with both conventional and nuclear warheads.

Cheers




_____________________________



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

(in reply to butch4343)
Post #: 2336
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/5/2015 10:18:35 AM   
Dysta


Posts: 1909
Joined: 8/8/2015
Status: offline 		I do searching for a while, but you are right, it is not an easy task at all. My apology for hasty response about range issue.

Keep it up devs, you all are doing great and I am still content in this game.

(in reply to ComDev)
Post #: 2337
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/5/2015 7:49:58 PM   
ComDev

 

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline 		Thanks Toned down my post a bit hehe.

_____________________________



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

(in reply to Dysta)
Post #: 2338
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/6/2015 5:26:56 AM   
Stratos_MatrixForum

 

Posts: 84
Joined: 7/5/2005
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!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------




[ADDED DB v441]

Ok, a couple of platforms for Uruguay.

First the Pilatus Pc-7. the Uruguayan Pilatus were received in 1992 for a total of 6 machines. Working in dual role for trainer/light attack they were usually armed with 2x7.62 MAG MG pods + 2 LAU rocket pods with 7 2'75" rockets each. Can carry drop tanks as well

[image][URL=http://s20.photobucket.com/user/Capitanstratos/media/Aviation/pc715rsx_zpsewrypcxd.jpg.html][/URL][/image]

The Ia-58 Pucarà, armed the same as they argentinian brothers with the usual mix of mg pods, rockets and bombs, received in late 1980. 6 in number.

[URL=http://s20.photobucket.com/user/Capitanstratos/media/Aviation/Cruzex_IV_2008_Natal_-_RN_-_Brasil_zpsurxhnppa.jpg.html][/URL]

And finally the Westland Wessex received during the 90's. Cannot found the exact number, but can be six AFAIK of HC.2 version for both the navy and air force users, there's one in action still in the navy.

[URL=http://s20.photobucket.com/user/Capitanstratos/media/Aviation/csar3_zps1yzcockl.png.html][/URL]

< Message edited by emsoy -- 10/10/2015 12:28:57 PM >

(in reply to ComDev)
Post #: 2339
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 10/6/2015 3:50:12 PM   
Skjold

 

Posts: 240
Joined: 9/29/2015
Status: offline 		[ADDED / UPDATED DB v441, GROUND STUFF ASSIGNED TO MIKE]

I am aware that little work is done on adding new things to the DB, but i think that the top two naval additions and the TOW capable helicopter would add alot to the Swedish scenarios (out of which i am building several for public release). This represents an alternative universe where our swedish goverment actually cares about the armed forces and put SAM's on the Visby class. I also added some less important additions, such as ground units. Apparantly i can't post links here becouse i am new, which is quite the problem so i can't provide proper source links.

Visby class corvette
I want to mount the cancelled 8x (1 cell) Umkhonto SAM's on the Visby (2013) class missile frigate as a hypothetical unit. The Umkhonto SAM system is already in-game on the 2009 version of the finnish Hamina PCFG and the 2009 version of the Hämeenmaa ML.

Sources & Justification

"Swedish Navy: The Swedish government has expressed interest in the Umkhonto-IR Block 2 system for five Visby class corvettes for at total cost of about 1 bn SEK. Due to budgetary constraints a decision was taken in 2008 to delete the SAM requirement." - Wikipedia

"8 × Umkhonto SAM(cancelled)" - Wikipedia

"The Visbys will not initially be fitted with an air-defence missile system. But space has been allocated for Surface-to-Air Missiles (SAM)." - Kockums Official PDF (Naval Yard)

"Forecast International reports external link that Sweden has decided to equip its 5 Visby Class stealth corvettes external link with Denel’s Umkhonto-IR external link anti-aircraft missile system at a total cost of about SEK 1 billion (currently about $149.6 million)." - Defence Industry Daily

Bevakningsbåt typ 80 (Tapper class patrol boat) 1993-present 12x
Length: 23 m
Width: 5,4 m
Draught: 1,8 m
Top Speed: 25 knots
Displacement: 62 tons
Crew: 8 men
Engine: 2 x Deutz MWM 1200 HP Diesel Engines.
Weaponry: 6x depth charges, 4x ASW Grenade launchers with 36 grenades total, 2x HMG 12.7mm.


Hkp 10 (Eurocopter AS332 Super Puma) 12x 1988-present
Almost exclusivly SAR duty.

Hkp 9A (MBB BO 105 CB-3) 20x 1987-
Armed with 4x TOW missiles, local designation Rb 55.

Hkp 3C (Bell 204B) 24x
15x Army (transport), 9x Air Force (SAR)

Hkp 6A (Bell 206A Jetranger)
22x Army (transport)

Hkp 6B (Bell 206A Jetranger)
10x Navy (ASW) Armed with 1x ASW Tp 451

Sources: Swedish Armed Forces official website & Soldf, a veteran community.

Ground Forces
On the backburner, i would also like to request these things: (Note, not very important at all due to the limited simulation of ground forces but thought i'd ask)

  • Add the Swedish Armored Plt Centurion from the Cold War DB to DB300. (Used until mid 1990s activly, also their designation should be Strv 104 judging by it having rangefinder.)
  • Add Bkan 1C self propelled artillery piece. 155 mm. (1980s-2003)
  • Add Strv 103C tank, 105 mm with laser rangefinder and 3x GMG. (1980s-1997)
  • Add Pbv 302 Mech Inf Plt, 4x Pbv 302 with 1x Hispano 20mm, (1966 to 1990s, would fit CW DB aswell.)

    Note: The Swedish CV90 Mech Inf Plt seems to be the only one in the game with infantry weapons somewhat modelled, seems weird.

    This would essentially complete Sweden as a faction entirly, and would make me a very happy bunny.
    Thanks for reading.

    < Message edited by emsoy -- 10/10/2015 1:35:28 PM >

    (in reply to Stratos_MatrixForum)
    • Post #: 2340
    Page:   <<   < prev  76 77 [78] 79 80   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  76 77 [78] 79 80   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

    0.641