Slitherine

5001=  A-D band 5002= E+
Type | Front | Side | Rear | Top
5001 | -18.2 | -16.0| -18.2| -15.6
5002 | -28.2 | -26.0| -28.2| -26.0

quote:

ORIGINAL: KnightHawk75

wildcolonialboy - Please note also there is the matter that the DB browser doesn't show what the baseline is in the actual database so, it only shows the result of the calculation based on the last loadout listed in the browser. This can at times explains many oddies one might see in the DB browser between what appear to be or are known to be extremely similar aircraft in terms of rcs.

For example the DB Browser may show different values for UK # 1095, and UK#4669 and UK#4947, while all 3 actually have identical baselines, the difference you see in the browser is the difference in the various last-listed-loadouts. Also the baseline in the db for those 3 is the same for the Italian ones #4697,#4698,#3786 and #3787 - You just have no way of seeing it without a raw database viewer. For example the 'browser' difference between USMC-F35B #4701, and say UK #4947 who have identical baselines in the DB is additional rcs calculations to the baseline for the the Storm Shadow External loadout on the UK, vs the GBU-56(V)4/B LJDAM external loadout out on the USMC one.

If you want actual baseline values UK|IT|USMC-B's f-35's (blk 3+) they are ALL the following in dBsm:

5001=  A-D band 5002= E+
Type | Front | Side | Rear | Top
5001 | -18.2 | -16.0| -18.2| -15.6
5002 | -28.2 | -26.0| -28.2| -26.0

Facebook
Twitter

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dimitris

"Hi guys, I've been observing some of your RCS figures, in DB3K vXYZ, and I suspect there may be some inaccuracies present".

Start with that, and then we can talk.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thewood1

"Are you seriously telling me"

"And absolutely laughably"

"give me a brake"

"You're seriously telling me"

"This is an urgent fix"

This has to be one of the more disrespectful bug reports I've seen in a few years. A few points:

1) I think maybe taking it down a notch might on the aggressiveness factor might win you a few points

2) Post it in the database error reporting thread

3) Post the database you are referring to. There have been a number of database updates and the F-35 issue was reported before, I think.

D beat me to it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dimitris

quote:

ORIGINAL: KnightHawk75

wildcolonialboy - Please note also there is the matter that the DB browser doesn't show what the baseline is in the actual database so, it only shows the result of the calculation based on the last loadout listed in the browser. This can at times explains many oddies one might see in the DB browser between what appear to be or are known to be extremely similar aircraft in terms of rcs.

For example the DB Browser may show different values for UK # 1095, and UK#4669 and UK#4947, while all 3 actually have identical baselines, the difference you see in the browser is the difference in the various last-listed-loadouts. Also the baseline in the db for those 3 is the same for the Italian ones #4697,#4698,#3786 and #3787 - You just have no way of seeing it without a raw database viewer. For example the 'browser' difference between USMC-F35B #4701, and say UK #4947 who have identical baselines in the DB is additional rcs calculations to the baseline for the the Storm Shadow External loadout on the UK, vs the GBU-56(V)4/B LJDAM external loadout out on the USMC one.

If you want actual baseline values UK|IT|USMC-B's f-35's (blk 3+) they are ALL the following in dBsm:

5001=  A-D band 5002= E+
Type | Front | Side | Rear | Top
5001 | -18.2 | -16.0| -18.2| -15.6
5002 | -28.2 | -26.0| -28.2| -26.0

That is an excellent observation, thank you! It does sound like a bug in how we manage the last-loadout values in the DB viewer. We'll definitely have a look.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ultradave

Exactly what I was going to ask of <wildcolonialboy>. After noticing these things the first thing to try would be to set up some identical scenarios with just one or two aircraft and try to determine if the numbers that you are seeing in the DB viewer are actually having differing in game effects WITH THE SAME LOADOUTS. Or is it just an artifact of how the DB viewer displays information to you and the aircraft do actually perform the same. Very quick and easy to do. When I do this, >90% of the time I answer my own question.
Dave

quote:

I'm not sure I entirely understand you.

quote:

But when I DB'ed them, they both had the same.

quote:

If the database is taking into account a kind of average

quote:

ORIGINAL: wildcolonialboy
Well, if we were mates then maybe I'll take a different tack. I'm sorry if I offended you.

quote:


However you should keep in mind that your customers pay significant money (including the upgrade from CMANO to CMO) in order to access the must up-to-date and accurate naval and air-warfare simulations available. I didn't mean to pique your irritation but to motivate your sense of pride over your creation.

Facebook
Twitter

quote:

ORIGINAL: KnightHawk75

My bottom line beyond "actually test it in game", was that if you want actual starting points grab a sql-lite browser and open the database as read-only and look at the DataAircraftSignatures table for the given DBID of the unit you are interested in, that's where I pulled the data in my last post from.

quote:

ORIGINAL: wildcolonialboy

I've just been looking at some of the Radar Cross Section inputs and they are absolutely ludicrous, or someone wasn't paying attention or just entering whatever.

The UK's F-35B has an RCS of 0.065m2. The identical Marine Corps version has 0.15m2. I can only assume they meant 0.015m2 because that's what the Italian F-35B is rated at for low-band radar. Are you seriously telling me that the UK's F-35B has an RCS four-times that of the Italian F-35B, but half that of the Marine Corps? That the Royal Navy that has spent hundreds of millions of pounds integrating weapons and developing doctrine getting ready for "clean" internal carriage of 2 Meteor missiles and 8 Spear 3 or Spear EW missiles (swarms) per air aircraft for "kick the door down" first day operations, and then external carriage (as every other air force is planning) once the threat level lowers, that somehow they (who build 15% of every F-35 including radar absorbent sections) don't know how to maintain their own aircraft? Or was it a mistake?

And absolutely laughably, the Su-57 PAK-FA has an RCS of 0.035m2 (i.e. about as stealth as the F-117.. give me a brake). You're seriously telling me that the PAK-FA, which is a complete dumpster fire that doesn't even had integrally hidden fanblades or DSI, and for which it only has fairly basic primary stealth shaping from the frontal angle and very little evidence of stealthy Radar Absorbent Material (precisely the reason the Indians pulled out... it's about as good as a Super Hornet Block III), is as stealthy at the F-117, which despite its age, remains a pack leader because while angular shaping isn't great for aerodynamic stability, it's still the best when it comes to the primary stealth shaping (as opposed to radar absorbent materials and clever EW management of exposure to enemy radars from which directions)

Also, the difference between high band and low band observability has gone from orders of magnitude to a tiny step down. For the Marine Corps F-35B, it's 0.15m2 for low band radars, 0.14,2 for high band radars. For the British F-35B, it's 0.065m2 to 0.0065m2.

This is an urgent fix on all stealth aircraft as they are absolutely essential to any modern warfighting scenario (and please don't rely on AusAirPower for anything related to the F-35, F-22 or stealth generally... they're good on their knowledge and access to Russian missile and other technology, but they are infamous for being F-35-hating cranks in Australia)

quote:

So ... is there a table in the SQL DB for signature modifiers for each loadout?

quote:

have '0.0' for the weapon signature entries.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dimitris

We are currently beta-testing a change in the DB-viewer that clearly shows the "final" RCS values per-loadout. Example screenshot:



The green background indicates that this loadout has the same RCS values as the baseline ones (ie. the A/C does not carry external stores). This makes it easier to quickly focus on the loadouts that do change the RCS.

quote:

ORIGINAL: KnightHawk75

0.0 is ~1sqm when it comes to the 2 radar bands, invisible = doesn't have an entry for the band type, or -10000.00 if I recall, 0.0 for the ir\eo bands would mean invisible.