Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dragon029

As far as I'm aware, they're holding off HARM integration until the AARGM-ER variant is ready. For SEAD a Block 4 F-35 will be able to use SDB-IIs which have a similar range and arguably better targeting capabilities (although obviously they do lack the AARGM's speed). The JSM will also be integrated in Block 4 (and Australia's helping develop a passive RF capability for SEAD), though I'm not aware of anyone other than Norway and Australia being customers. AARGM-ER's combination of speed and range will be what drives integration.

Edit: Also there currently isn't a timeline available for TALD / MALD integration; it might arrive in Block 4, but it might otherwise have to wait until Block 5 in the late 2020s+. The F-35 also doesn't have much of a timeline for external fuel tank integration either (with Israel being the only really pushing for it), so you've got a fair point there.

quote:

Also on the Su-35S is IR station be ob- attacking missiles and warning of laser irradiation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

quote:

ORIGINAL: hellfish6

Is the ROK Daegu-class FFG (FFX-II) on the list? The FFX-I Incheon-class in the game, but the improved -II variant would be fun to have.

Its been there for awhile but can't find much on the new SAM. Any clues?

Mike

quote:

FFX-II

quote:

FFX-II batch II is not fitted with Mk 41 VLS buth with KVLS meaning it will deploy Korean missiles (most probably designed by LIG Nex 1 such as the Cheolmae-2 medium-range air defense missile, Hong Sang Eo anti-submarine rocket, and possibly the Hyunmoo-3 series of land attack cruise missiles).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Scar79

You mean all these shapes, composites and RAM coating are applied to 2235 and 2038 just "for fun"?!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Scar79

I fail to understand what these political cool stories have to do with my initial question about radar/ECM mechanics and RCS of the said units in CMANO.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Filitch

Next question about #1766 D650 Aquitania, #363 F 330 Vasco Da Gama (in 1991 she had smaller RCS than 2038.0 in 2017), #2169 F 590 and so on indefinitely... Why new Russians ships have RCS more bigger (not within the error) then all these ships?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Scar79
P.S. BTW, check #506 CVN 78 Gerald R. Ford - you will be stomped by the Truth. Its RCS even smaller than RCS of pr.22350 frigate. Yeah, baby! Do you feel all this realism, fidelity and unbiased approach??? Do you feel it, *****?!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Filitch

We can place more than six (6) hulls of 2235.0 at the flying deck of the CVN 78, but never mind! 1/6 of square of flying deck has RCS bigger than whole deck.

Question to DEVs and database editors. I really don't know. Is anywhere any mentions about composite deck for CVN 78 or RAM for it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Scar79

You never stop amaze me, gentlemen.
...
SRSLY?!

quote:

The Pentagon wants to take a weapon originally designed for offense, flip its punch for defense and demonstrate by 2018 the potential for the Army and Navy to conduct missile defense of bases, ports and ships using traditional field guns to fire a new hypervelocity round guided by a mobile, ground variant of an Air Force fighter aircraft radar.

quote:

The system was designed to provide both tracking of an incoming warhead, and command guide the outgoing projectile to ranges of 25 kilometers. The project demonstrated critical technologies associated with the command guided weapon system. Demonstrations included cross range precision CEP of 18 centimeters at 24.8 kilometers, tracking of hypervelocity projectiles fired at up to 2 kilometers per second (6.561 feet per second or Mach 5.87), and developing and communicating with a miniature g’s hardened transceiver at 25 kilometers. Tracking of the hypervelocity projectiles was performed using a binary phased coded waveform.

quote:

ORIGINAL: hellfish6
That's one way to come across as an asshole.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Filitch

In fact, this is a question of the quality of the goods. We all paid money for the game. But it turns out that not everything in the game is the quality for which it is worth paying money. And sellers for some reason keep silent, when they are asked - why some of the product is spoiled. Guys, you made a great game, but do not spoil the reputation of a realistic simulator and your reputation for honest people. And if there is an accidental error or deliberate distortion - then an honest person should speak directly, and not keep silent, taking away other people's money.
I would really like to see the answer of Sunburn, mikmyk to the simple questions asked above.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Scar79

quote:

ORIGINAL: Filitch

We can place more than six (6) hulls of 2235.0 at the flying deck of the CVN 78, but never mind! 1/6 of square of flying deck has RCS bigger than whole deck.

Question to DEVs and database editors. I really don't know. Is anywhere any mentions about composite deck for CVN 78 or RAM for it?

Sad thing is that we, community, can't change this absurd. Ironically, people who used to make DB's for Harpoon won't let us to do the same for CMANO.

quote:

Database Editing

Does the simulator come with a database editor?

There are pros and cons in supporting third-party databases for a simulator that is being actively maintained by the developer. Our current view is that the disadvantages are more profound. So Command does not come with a database editor.

The ability to modify a database has been taken from a stand-alone programs and integrated into the Scenario Editor. You can customise platforms in the scenarios by adding/removing mounts, magazines, sensors and comms gear as well as changing weapon types and quantities, but you aren’t able to add units or otherwise edit the database. This gives you the ability to do some new nifty things e.g. stick a Club-K container on an innocent merchant ship. And there is nothing stopping you (well, except common sense) to equip a Perry-class frigate with the SS-N-19 complement normally reserved for a Kirov. The scenario design section of the manual explains how you can do this either through the editor or via templates.

There are many reasons why databases in Command are not directly editable.

First and foremost we did not want to repeat the database mess/confusion observed in Harpoon. The scenario authors handled more than their fair share of support mails on database/scenario mismatches for that game. So for Command we wanted to shift all focus to scenarios. Command is pretty much a ‘scenario sandbox’ that started out as a scenario editor and evolved into a simulator. Everyone on the Command development team have a long history of scenario design behind them, mainly for Harpoon2/3, and we wanted to make the ultimate scenario editor for ourselves and other naval war gaming fans out there – without the noisy database element.
As such, in Command there is no need to copy/overwrite database files or edit configuration files, followed by odd behaviour and crashes if database and scenarios don’t match one hundred percent. Command scenarios know exactly what database they were built with based on the database’s checksum (!), and a scenario will pick the right database upon load. We have received much positive feedback on this solution, as the players only have to care about what scenario to play rather than worrying about whether the scenario will crash with the currently installed database or not.

Second, the database for Command is very complex. Anyone who has spent time in the Harpoon2/3 database editor will immediately notice the increased number of parameters when they look in the Command DB Viewer. Editing or leaving out the wrong parameter could have rather negative impact on gameplay, generating a ton of unnecessary support tickets for the developer.

Third, having multiple user-created databases makes continued expansion of Command far more difficult. Any schema changes would also have to be applied (correctly!) to any 3rd party databases, each of which may or may not have been abandoned by its author at that point in time. There would also be the risk of making associated material (scenarios) unusable. The Command database schema & enum tables are updated regularly and keeping all database hobbyists up-to-date would be a monstrous task, both on the dev end and on the 3rd party end. It would not take many weeks (or days!) before a new db author simply would give up.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Filitch

In fact, this is a question of the quality of the goods. We all paid money for the game. But it turns out that not everything in the game is the quality for which it is worth paying money. And sellers for some reason keep silent, when they are asked - why some of the product is spoiled. Guys, you made a great game, but do not spoil the reputation of a realistic simulator and your reputation for honest people. And if there is an accidental error or deliberate distortion - then an honest person should speak directly, and not keep silent, taking away other people's money.
I would really like to see the answer of Sunburn, mikmyk to the simple questions asked above.