RE: Cold War Database 1946-1979 Platform Requests

RE: Cold War Database 1946-1979 Platform Requests (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Mods and Scenarios

Message

jimmyblond -> RE: Cold War Database 1946-1979 Platform Requests (9/19/2020 11:20:19 AM)
Some of the later american Galveston class cruisers (CLG 3 to 8) in the DB have an open parking space with a capacity of 24 large aircraft attached. That seems a bit odd. In fact they never had that capability. Therefore it should be a parking space for just one large aircraft (helicopter) instead.

.Sirius -> RE: Cold War Database 1946-1979 Platform Requests (9/19/2020 11:24:32 AM)
Noted

jimmyblond -> RE: Cold War Database 1946-1979 Platform Requests (9/19/2020 4:40:53 PM)
Can we get the OV-1C Mohawk please? It is the most numerous version built and has a very useful IR sensor built in. In contrast to the JOV-1A there was no armament. Thanks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_OV-1_Mohawk

jimmyblond -> RE: Cold War Database 1946-1979 Platform Requests (10/3/2020 2:56:50 PM)
Someone managed somehow to forget coal burning power stations in both facility DBs. So please add them.

jimmyblond -> RE: Cold War Database 1946-1979 Platform Requests (10/3/2020 3:04:52 PM)
All versions of the venerable F-100 had four 20mm M39 cannon except the F-100F which had only two of them. So please change this accordingly.

jimmyblond -> RE: Cold War Database 1946-1979 Platform Requests (10/3/2020 3:14:05 PM)
#597 - F-100F Super Sabre in the DB has the AN/ALQ-71 DECM Pod listed in the loadout name at #2847 and #2846. But it's actualy not part of the loadout.

.Sirius -> RE: Cold War Database 1946-1979 Platform Requests (10/3/2020 9:02:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jimmyblond All versions of the venerable F-100 had four 20mm M39 cannon except the F-100F which had only two of them. So please change this accordingly. The F-100 All versions except F,RF and Q have 4 20mm already

.Sirius -> RE: Cold War Database 1946-1979 Platform Requests (10/3/2020 9:04:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jimmyblond #597 - F-100F Super Sabre in the DB has the AN/ALQ-71 DECM Pod listed in the loadout name at #2847 and #2846. But it's actualy not part of the loadout. Fixed

.Sirius -> RE: Cold War Database 1946-1979 Platform Requests (10/3/2020 9:04:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jimmyblond Some of the later american Galveston class cruisers (CLG 3 to 8) in the DB have an open parking space with a capacity of 24 large aircraft attached. That seems a bit odd. In fact they never had that capability. Therefore it should be a parking space for just one large aircraft (helicopter) instead. Fixed

.Sirius -> RE: Cold War Database 1946-1979 Platform Requests (10/3/2020 9:05:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jimmyblond Someone managed somehow to forget coal burning power stations in both facility DBs. So please add them. Fixed

.Sirius -> RE: Cold War Database 1946-1979 Platform Requests (10/3/2020 9:05:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jimmyblond Can we get the OV-1C Mohawk please? It is the most numerous version built and has a very useful IR sensor built in. In contrast to the JOV-1A there was no armament. Thanks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_OV-1_Mohawk Added

SunlitZelkova -> RE: Cold War Database 1946-1979 Platform Requests (10/7/2020 3:08:28 AM)
Hi, awhile ago I posted a bunch of requests for fixes to Soviet nuclear weapons platforms and said I needed to ask for a few more things. I have finally gotten around to getting the info together. I originally said I would request some changes to the Tu-95Ks, but they are rather miniscule and have a small effect on performance so I won't for now. I also said I needed to research the fuel loadouts for the Tu-4 and Tu-95M. I haven't been able to find any info on it, so I will leave it up to the DB manager for the loadouts I requested. One thing to make sure though is that the Tu-95M has enough range to get from Anadyr to the entire continental US. It is available in the DB3000 import/export files that come with the game, so if you load it up you can measure the distance. I also said I would ask for different variants of the Tu-95 and Tu-16 due to one having nuclear weapons capability and the other being a conventional bomber. However there is little tangible difference in the game apart from the loadouts, so this is not necessary. The Tu-16 bomber we have in game should become the Tu-16A and the Tu-95M should become the Tu-95MA however. Here is my request for the R-9 ICBM. SSM Bn (SS-8 Sasin) -- Soviet Union [-1991] (Red Army), 1965-1978 Category: Building (Surface) Damage Points: 0 Length: 0 Width: 0 Area: 0 OODA Cycle: Same as DBID #1673 SSM Bn (SS-6 Sapwood) Missile Defence: 3 Harpoon/SLAM/Maverick equivalents General Armor: None Mast Height: 0 meters Vehicle/Component Dispersion Radius: 80 meters Mount/Stores/Weapons: Mounts/Guns/Launchers/Ejectors etc.- Mount- 2x SS-8 Sasin [R-9A] TEL Capacity- 1 Launch Interval- 15 Armor- None Onboard Sensors- None Weapons (Per Mount)- 1x SS-8 Sasin [R-9A, 2.5mT Nuclear] Info for the SS-8 Sasin [R-9A, 2.5mT Nuclear] weapon- SS-8 Sasin [R-9A, 2.5mT Nuclear] General Data- Type: Ballistic Missile Length: 26.5 meters Span: 2.68 meters Diameter: 2.68 meters Weight: 74389 kg Burnout weight: N/A Cruise altitude: Unsure, I will leave this up to the DB manager (no data available) Climb rate: Unsure, I will leave this up to the DB manager (no data available) Launch altitude: N/A Launch speed: N/A Target altitude: N/A Target speed: N/A Range for anti-air, anti-surface and anti-submarine is not applicable Range (anti-land): 5562 nautical miles Air PoH, Sub PoH, and Surface PoH/Reliability is not applicable Land PoH/Reliability: 70% CEP, Surface (nominal): N/A CEP, Land (nominal): 8000 meters Signatures- Unsure, I will leave this up to the DB manager (no data available) Properties- Ballistic Missile (ICBM/IRBM/SRBM) Weapon - INS Navigation Warhead - Single Reentry Vehicle (RV) Level Cruise Flight (The SS-6 Sapwood (R-7) has this, I am unsure if it should really be there or not) Warheads- SS-8 Sasin RV [2.5mT Nuclear] Valid targets- Land Structures (Hard) Land Structures (Soft) Mobile Units (Hard) Mobile Units (Soft) Runways Weapon Release Authorization [DEFAULT], Propulsion, and Performance Details are identical to DBID #1590 SS-7 Sapwood [R-7] Fuel should be amended so as to allow for the range given in the General Data section Default carrier platform is only the one I suggested Now, DBID #81 MiG-17 Fresco A has an ahistorical issue. It has too much speed. It uses a VK-1F engine, which in real life was not used until the MiG-17F variant. The version DBID #81 represents is the MiG-17 with no letter suffix, the first production variant that was also the most widely produced. It used a VK-1 engine (also with no suffix). However the MiG-15bis also used the VK-1 engine, and because the way CMO models aircraft performance is based on the engine and not the airframe this creates a problem. So I propose that DBID #81 be changed to the MiG-17A. This version was virtually identical to the MiG-17 with no suffix and had identical performance. It used a VK-1A engine which had a better lifetime. This would allow for the MiG-17 to have its historical speed without messing up the MiG-15bis. The following changes will be made- Rename DBID #81 MiG-17 Fresco A -- Soviet Union [-1991] (Frontal Aviation [VVS]), 1952 to MiG-17A Fresco A -- Soviet Union [-1991] (Frontal Aviation [VVS]), 1952, MiG-17 Create a copy of the Klimov VK-1 #1 engine from DBID #797 MiG-15bis B Fagot, renamed to Klimov VK-1A #1. The data for this new engine is- type is turbojet, and the max speed should be 602 knots. This engine should replace the current engine on DBID #81. Everything else is unchanged, apart from one thing- the 8x S-21 rocket loadout should be reduced to 2x S-21s. All of these requests are needed for scenarios I plan to make. Thanks!

jimmyblond -> RE: Cold War Database 1946-1979 Platform Requests (10/9/2020 3:21:25 PM)
The Israeli version of the Skyhawk the A-4H, had 2 x 30 mm DEFA cannons with 150 rpg instead of the 2 x 20 mm MK12 cannons. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_A-4_Skyhawk

jimmyblond -> RE: Cold War Database 1946-1979 Platform Requests (10/9/2020 3:23:29 PM)
The North American F-108 Rapier had no gun armament at all. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_XF-108_Rapier http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/F-108A_Rapier_SAC_-_12_June_1959.pdf

.Sirius -> RE: Cold War Database 1946-1979 Platform Requests (10/9/2020 8:16:54 PM)
Hi all on the to do list

.Sirius -> RE: Cold War Database 1946-1979 Platform Requests (10/12/2020 4:52:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jimmyblond The North American F-108 Rapier had no gun armament at all. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_XF-108_Rapier http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/F-108A_Rapier_SAC_-_12_June_1959.pdf I was using poetic licence to add them [:)]

BuckDashing -> Cruisers with abstract capacity but real fuel use (10/17/2020 2:47:55 AM)
There's a whole chunk of mostly American cruisers that have their fuel capacity/fuel efficiency messed up. On the DB list, between CA 124 Rochester and CBMG 1 Alaska, 90% of the ships have the lower, simplified ~40 ton capacity (not their real capacity), but use their real-life fuel efficiency. There are a few of them that have their capacity updated to the true value, but most of them have extremely high fuel usage to their capacity. Most of these ships now have less than 1 day endurance. Ideally, they should have their actual efficiencies and capacities, but a short term fix should be just to reduce their fuel usage to abstract it like many other ships.

lumiere -> RE: Cruisers with abstract capacity but real fuel use (10/17/2020 4:58:57 PM)
(CWDB Build 472) #2249 CVA-7 Hornet Hull number mistaken: it should be "CV(A)-8" instead (CV-7 is Wasp).

boogabooga -> RE: Cruisers with abstract capacity but real fuel use (10/18/2020 9:58:12 PM)
I've noticed that almost all F-105 Thunderchief versions in the current CWDB have 2x J75 engines. The F-105 should have only one J75: https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Visit/Museum-Exhibits/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/196044/republic-f-105g-thunderchief/ https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Visit/Museum-Exhibits/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/196054/republic-f-105d-thunderchief/

Para87 -> RE: Cruisers with abstract capacity but real fuel use (10/23/2020 8:24:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BuckDashing There's a whole chunk of mostly American cruisers that have their fuel capacity/fuel efficiency messed up. On the DB list, between CA 124 Rochester and CBMG 1 Alaska, 90% of the ships have the lower, simplified ~40 ton capacity (not their real capacity), but use their real-life fuel efficiency. There are a few of them that have their capacity updated to the true value, but most of them have extremely high fuel usage to their capacity. Most of these ships now have less than 1 day endurance. Ideally, they should have their actual efficiencies and capacities, but a short term fix should be just to reduce their fuel usage to abstract it like many other ships. This issue was pointed out over a year ago but unfortunately has never been fully addressed.

.Sirius -> RE: Cruisers with abstract capacity but real fuel use (10/23/2020 1:55:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lumiere (CWDB Build 472) #2249 CVA-7 Hornet Hull number mistaken: it should be "CV(A)-8" instead (CV-7 is Wasp). Fixed

.Sirius -> RE: Cruisers with abstract capacity but real fuel use (10/23/2020 1:57:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Para87 quote: ORIGINAL: BuckDashing There's a whole chunk of mostly American cruisers that have their fuel capacity/fuel efficiency messed up. On the DB list, between CA 124 Rochester and CBMG 1 Alaska, 90% of the ships have the lower, simplified ~40 ton capacity (not their real capacity), but use their real-life fuel efficiency. There are a few of them that have their capacity updated to the true value, but most of them have extremely high fuel usage to their capacity. Most of these ships now have less than 1 day endurance. Ideally, they should have their actual efficiencies and capacities, but a short term fix should be just to reduce their fuel usage to abstract it like many other ships. This issue was pointed out over a year ago but unfortunately has never been fully addressed. All fixed

Anzu -> RE: Cruisers with abstract capacity but real fuel use (10/25/2020 8:33:28 AM)
Hello, some additions to the Finnish Navy Cold War Database: The mine layer/mine sweeper Keih�ssalmi was launched in 1957 and served until 1994. It served as the navy flagship and also as a training ship later in the career. She had a displacement of 360 t, length of 56 m, a beam of 7,7 m and a draught of 2,2 m. The propulsion was two W�rtsil� diesels of 800 hp each, which gave a speed of 15 knots. The equipment was originally quite spartan, with navigational radar and only optic gun fire control + a search light but was later updated with gun fire control radar. Original equipment -Decca 707 #3760 -Generic Optical Sight -- Anti-Air & Surface #1020 -Generic Searchlight #251 -Generic Mechanical Cable Cutter Mine Sweep #4657 -Generic Magnetic Mine Sweep Original mounts and weapons (1957-1975) -3 x 40mm/60 Single Bofors -- Generic #993 -2 x 20mm/60 #1027 -2 x mine rails for a total of 100 mines -2 x Depth Charge Rack [12 DC] #200 -2 x Depth Charge Throwers [12 DC] #1109 Equipment 1957-1975 -Decca 707 #3760 -Drum Tilt [MR-104 Rys] -- 25mm & 30mm GFCR #1545 -Bell Tap RWR #1434 -Generic Mechanical Cable Cutter Mine Sweep #4657 -Generic Magnetic Mine Sweep Mounts and weapons (1975-1994) -2 x AK-230 30mm/65 Twin #234 -2 x 20mm/60 #1027 -12.7mm/50 MG -- Facility/Ship, No Anti-Air Capability #561 -2 x Depth Charge Rack [12 DC] #200 -2 x Depth Charge Throwers [12 DC] #1109 Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_minelayer_Keih%C3%A4ssalmi http://www.forum-marinum.fi/fi/nayttelyt/museoalukset/miinalaiva-keihassalmi/ -------------------- In 1962 Finland purchased the Royal Navy anti-aircraft frigate HMS Porlock Bay (#26) and renamed her Matti Kurki. In the Finnish Navy she primarily was a training ship, but also had a combat role. She was scrapped in 1976. Mounts/Stores/Weapons -2 x 102mm/45 Mk16 Twin -- RN, 4-inch #1017 -2 x 40mm/60 Twin Bofors #205 -2 x 40mm/70 m/48 Single Bofors #1792 -2 x 20mm/60 #1027 -1 x Mk15 Hedgehog Trainable ASW Mortar #1988 -2 x Depth Charge Rack [12 DC] #200 -4 x Depth Charge Throwers [12 DC] #1109 Equipment -Type 276 Radar -Type 285 GFCR -Type 293Q Radar #2574 -Type 974 [Decca 12] #4498 -FH-4 HF/DF #740 -Type 147 sonar #1411 Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Porlock_Bay_(K650) https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koululaiva_Matti_Kurki ------- In 1964 Finland also purchase two modified Soviet Riga-class Frigates (#550), Filin (renamed Uusimaa) and SKR-69 (renamed H�meenmaa). They were operated together as the H�meenmaa-class until 1979 when the H�meenmaa was rebuilt as a mine layer and the Uusimaa scrapped for parts. They were quite similar to the Soviet ships, but there were some small differences: Mounts/Stores/Weapons -3 x 100 mm/56 single #477 -2 x 40mm/70 m/48 Single Bofors #1792 -1 x AK-230 30mm/65 Twin #234 -1 x 533mm Triple TT #2212 -2 x Mk15 Hedgehog Trainable ASW Mortar #1988 -2 x Depth Charge Rack [12 DC] #200 -2 x Depth Charge Throwers [12 DC] #1109 Equipment: -Buck Toe [GAS-572 Pegas 2] #1364 -Slim Net [Fut-N] #1566 -Hawk Screech [Yakor] -- GFCR, 45mm, 57mm, 76mm, 100mm #1540 -Drum Tilt [MR-104 Rys] -- 25mm & 30mm GFCR #1545 -Decca 707 #3760 -Watch Dog B [Bizan] -- Jug Pair, adds omni #1100 In 1980 Uusimaa was scrapped and H�meenmaa rebuilt as a mine layer, where some of the equipment were removed, exchanged or updated. The Hedgehog racks and and torpedo tubes were removed and mine rails for 200 mixed naval mines added. Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_frigate_H%C3%A4meenmaa https://puolustusvoimat.fi/documents/1948673/9261842/PEVIESTOS_Laivaston+sanomat+2018.pdf/c2e71f59-d9bb-653a-b998-06c011fc10bb/PEVIESTOS_Laivaston+sanomat+2018.pdf (pages 34-37)

BDukes -> RE: Cruisers with abstract capacity but real fuel use (10/25/2020 4:47:44 PM)
Hi RN trial Jaguar for carrier ops in 1971. Could we have hypothetical Jaguar for aircraft carrier? https://www.reddit.com/r/MilitaryPorn/comments/jfyohh/a_jaguar_comes_in_for_a_landing_trials_1971/ Thank! Bill

.Sirius -> RE: Cruisers with abstract capacity but real fuel use (10/25/2020 6:36:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BDukes Hi RN trial Jaguar for carrier ops in 1971. Could we have hypothetical Jaguar for aircraft carrier? https://www.reddit.com/r/MilitaryPorn/comments/jfyohh/a_jaguar_comes_in_for_a_landing_trials_1971/ Thank! Bill No issues Bill [:)]

miller7219 -> RE: Cruisers with abstract capacity but real fuel use (10/26/2020 3:09:33 AM)
CWDB v478 Reviewing US torpedos. A few comments and notes: 1. #603 Mk35 - Check PoH. Reads as 64%. Mk37 (the successor to the Mk35) has a much lower PoH. Typo? 2. #1650 Mk27 - Check Sensors. The Mk27 was passive only. Current DB has it listed as active/passive. 3. #1650 Mk27 - Unimportant, but it listed as in service 1946-1980. It was taken out of service in 1960 (as was many late war torpedoes) with the introduction of the Mk37 Mod 0 (1957) and Mod 1 (1960) 4. #1650 Mk27 - More research may be needed, but although the Mk27 was surely designed for (and used in WWII accordingly) as an anti-ship weapon, some references mention it was used as a stop-gap anti-submarine weapon post-war until the introduction of the Mk35/Mk37 in the early and late 1950's. Current DB lists surface targets only. 5. #166 Mk37 Mod 1 and #165 Mk37 Mod 2 - The Mk37 was a single wire (send only). Both are listed as dual wire in error. 6. #166 Mk37 Mod 1 - Unimportant, but its most likely service date was 1960, not 1961. 7. #165 Mk37 Mod 2 and #707 Mk37 Mod 3 - Unimportant, but some sources have the introduction of these upgrades in 1967. DB lists 1969 as beginning of service date. Default load outs may need to be reviewed and platform dates modified accordingly. Overall though, very pleased with the progress of the US submarine portion of the DB. Thank you for you efforts!

Broncepulido -> RE: Cruisers with abstract capacity but real fuel use (10/26/2020 3:22:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BDukes Hi RN trial Jaguar for carrier ops in 1971. Could we have hypothetical Jaguar for aircraft carrier? https://www.reddit.com/r/MilitaryPorn/comments/jfyohh/a_jaguar_comes_in_for_a_landing_trials_1971/ Thank! Bill Related and probably of interest, French Aeronavale Jaguar Marine story and demise (in French): https://www.pilote-chasse-11ec.com/jaguar-marine/

Rory Noonan -> RE: Cold War Database 1946-1979 Platform Requests (10/28/2020 6:34:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: boogabooga Aircraft 3073 and 4049 (at least)-U.S. 1967 and 1968 versions of the F-4D Phantom II- seem to be missing the AN/APQ-109 radar (or any radar for that matter) as of CWDB 478. As a result, they can't use Sparrows, detect targets, etc. I don't believe that this was a problem as of CWDB 466. To reproduce: Build a quick battle with F-4Ds (not Cs) as the escort using this: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=4900701 Or just check with the database viewer.

.Sirius -> RE: Cold War Database 1946-1979 Platform Requests (10/28/2020 6:42:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rory Noonan quote: ORIGINAL: boogabooga Aircraft 3073 and 4049 (at least)-U.S. 1967 and 1968 versions of the F-4D Phantom II- seem to be missing the AN/APQ-109 radar (or any radar for that matter) as of CWDB 478. As a result, they can't use Sparrows, detect targets, etc. I don't believe that this was a problem as of CWDB 466. To reproduce: Build a quick battle with F-4Ds (not Cs) as the escort using this: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=4900701 Or just check with the database viewer. Hi Rory thanks I'll see what I can do

boogabooga -> RE: Cold War Database 1946-1979 Platform Requests (10/28/2020 9:21:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: .Sirius quote: ORIGINAL: jimmyblond All versions of the venerable F-100 had four 20mm M39 cannon except the F-100F which had only two of them. So please change this accordingly. The F-100 All versions except F,RF and Q have 4 20mm already quote: The F-100 All versions except F,RF and Q have 4 20mm already I think he meant that the F-100F only had 2x 20mm rather than 4x 20mm as is in the DB now.

Page: << < prev 29 30 [31] 32 33 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.328125