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  13 14 [15] 16 17   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/16/2014 7:10:21 PM   
frosen


Posts: 52
Joined: 1/8/2014
From: Sweden
Status: offline
Request for a scenario: Controlled minefields

I'm working on a Swedish scenario and would appreciate a more developed mine warfare-feature. The Swedes with their littoral warfare depend(ed) greatly on controlled minefields to deny access to vital ports etc. As for now, there are placeholders for controlled minefields but nothing in them (accessable as "imports" under Sweden in DB3000).

Furthermore, I wonder how to utilize the "target discrimination"-feature of the conventional minefields you can create through the reference points?

Thanks for a great game!

(in reply to ComDev)
Post #: 421
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/16/2014 8:31:09 PM   
ComDev

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: gsmith63

This is my third post. I should have started the first by saying that this game is absolutely outstanding, and the support from the CMANO team is probably the best I’ve ever seen. BZ! Now on to business:

I’ve noticed that there are a number of inaccuracies with later units of the US Ticonderoga-class cruisers. For all the sub-variants from CG 52 (USS Bunker Hill) through CG 70 (USS Lake Erie), DB3000 has incorrect figures from 2010 onwards.

Starting in 2009 all surviving units of the Tico class are being modernized to a common baseline under the Cruiser Modernization Program. The basic changes are as follows:
*SPY-1B(V) vice SPY-1A or -1B.
*SPS-49 removed.
*SPQ-9A replaced with SPQ-9B.
*SQS-53A or -53B replaced with SQS-53C .
*SQR-19 replaced with SQR-20 Multi-Function Towed Array (Besides being a regular towed array sonar, the SQR-20 significantly increases range of the active SQS-53C by operating as a bi-static receiver through the SQQ-89A(V)15 system).
*SLQ-32(V)3 replaced with SLQ-32A(V)3.
*61-cell Mk 41 VLS launchers replaced with 64-cell launchers (removal of reloading cells).
*Added ability to carry ESSM, SM-3, and (when available) SM-6.
*Mk 45 Mod 1/2 guns replaced with Mk 45 Mod 4 5-in 62 caliber guns and new GFCS.
*CIWS brought up to Mk 15 Block 1B standard.
*Mk38 Bushmaster 25mm cannons replaced with much improved Mk38 Mod 2.
*4x Mk 53 Nulka decoy launchers added if not already carrying them.
*Cooperative Engagement Capability added.

Modifications to CG 52-58 have already been completed. All US CGs not scheduled for decommissioning are being similarly modified at a rate of ~2-3 per year.

I guess I'm not allowed to post links yet or I would include some with additional details and references. Rag or Mike you can contact me via e-mail if you need more info.

Cheers!

Gregg



Thanks Gregg, all done. Also did the Destroyer Modernization Programme

_____________________________



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

(in reply to gsmith63)
Post #: 422
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 2/16/2014 9:32:26 PM   
Blu3wolf


Posts: 198
Joined: 9/30/2013
From: Western Australia
Status: offline
you, good sir, have made my day. great thing to wake up to.

can I ask if Geoscape use counts as a scenario? all the units I requested, I requested because I'd like to use in the beta for Geoscape.

that covers things like B model hornets because we dont have that many A models... I brought it up because I noted that our Hawk 127s are in there (very appreciative of that!).

if its in the realms of possibility it would be nice to see PC-9s and paluma class ships added, but they are certainly low priority. the challnger CL-604 also comes in that category of "nice to have for GS use, but lower priority".

I dont have very much information on the paluma and leeuwin class vessels. they are certainly not heavily armed. possibly I could resort to using a generic ship In the DB for now.

on the AIM-120s, I have been informed that we had purchases below a threshold reporting value of the missile between 2000 and 2008 but there is no information on what type of missile. maybe it was a C-5 but I have no hard data on that. In 02 we would probably only have had the B model so all good there.

good effort on the 707's btw, I had a brief hunt for information on them but couldn't find much info...

I suspect I'm up for a good day of classes if this is how it starts : D

_____________________________

To go up, pull back on the stick.
To go down, pull back harder...

Speed is life. Altitude is life insurance.

(in reply to ComDev)
Post #: 423
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 2/17/2014 1:58:29 AM   
Anathema


Posts: 93
Joined: 10/4/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
Here are some links and info regarding the RAAF purchase of AIM-120-C7s, mostly they are about the Super Hornet purchase, but the AIMs were ordered at the same time and are mentioned in each.

quote:

The US DSCA announces [PDF] Australia’s formal request to buy up to 110 AIM-120C-7 AMRAAMs, 10 AIM-120C-7 Air Vehicle-Instrumented (tracking telemetry replaces warhead), 16 AIM-120C-7 CATMs (has seeker, no motor), plus containers, weapon system support equipment, support and test equipment, site survey, transportation, repair and return, warranties, spare and repair parts, publications and technical data, maintenance, personnel training and training equipment, and other forms of support.
SOURCE: http://www.airforce-technology.com/news/news120740.html


http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/australia-to-buy-24-super-hornets-as-interim-gapfiller-to-jsf-02898/
http://www.asiapacificdefencereporter.com/articles/10/Super-Hornets-Industry-Support-for-the-RAAFs-Rhinos
http://www.dsca.mil/major-arms-sales/australia-%E2%80%93-aim-120c-7-advanced-medium-range-air-air-missiles ( I can't open this, but I am assuming this would be the most reliable source.)

(in reply to Blu3wolf)
Post #: 424
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 2/17/2014 11:12:58 AM   
Blu3wolf


Posts: 198
Joined: 9/30/2013
From: Western Australia
Status: offline
Thanks for the links, I was aware of the FMS purchase in 2011 of the C-7 slammers, but pinning down when we first got C model slammers has been more difficult.

in 1998 we got the B model slammer, and we had purchases between 2000 and 2008 of some model slammers... just no sources that state which model....

Been trying to work that out in aid of the beta Geoscape campaign, but for now what is important is knowing roughly how many slammers we had, and the type is not really important given the current loadouts available.




Emsoy - if time permits, it would be really appreciated if you could add the B model hornet to the DB for Aussie use - at present this would be immediately added to the GS campaign.... but it would be used in most future scenarios I will make.

If time does not permit, thats cool. thanks for all done so far!

The PC-9 comes under the same category but lower priority - again something I'd be using in a number of scenarios, including GS use, albeit less frequently than the B model hornets.

< Message edited by Blu3wolf -- 2/17/2014 12:59:51 PM >


_____________________________

To go up, pull back on the stick.
To go down, pull back harder...

Speed is life. Altitude is life insurance.

(in reply to Anathema)
Post #: 425
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/17/2014 2:21:17 PM   
ComDev

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Russian Heel


quote:

ORIGINAL: emsoy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Russian Heel

emsoy

Thank you for adding an unhealthy obsession on mine the Yak-141(41). I pick up every English and Russian language source talking about this program. Messing around in the editor it 'feels' right to me, except I'm not sure where you got your loadout information. Here is the actual planned/designed load-outs and mission range:

Click here

Source for this is Крылья Родины issue 6 from 1994 which sources the information from the official project, which I concur.

You can prob figure out by the numbers what is what but if not just ask me. (Top is air -air, next anti-ship, then air to ground.)




Thanks! But is that combat range or radius? There are no details on profile either, so the stats don't really say much. Sorry!

Hi-Hi-Hi at optimum alt and speed will easily produce twice the range of Lo-Lo-Lo with mil dash on target, etc.



Oops, it says 'combat radius' at the bottom, I forget not everybody speaks Russian and not everything is as obvious as I think, I apologize for that. It doesn't have profile details and neither does any of the public project data I have only these radius numbers.

But, it was certainly planned for the a/c to carry the R-77 (AA-12) Kh-31 (AS-17) (Both A and P variants) Kh-35 (AS-20)and Kh-25 (AS-10) (As well as the Kh-27 ARM variant you have added) Also planned were 6 freefall bombs of the 250kg class, 4 rocket pods, or 4 gun pods (UPK-23-250)

With only the Kh-29T you have taken away stand-off ASM capability which was a major point for the Soviet Navy moving into the 90s. They required all fixed wing strike fighters to have a stand off anti-ship capability. It is why the Kh-31 and kh-35 were developed.



Okay taking another stab at this one, with more missile types etc.

If possible, digging up info on profiles and possibly even reserve fuel calc methods would help tons


_____________________________



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

(in reply to Russian Heel)
Post #: 426
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 2/17/2014 6:44:44 PM   
ComDev

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Blu3wolf

you, good sir, have made my day. great thing to wake up to.

can I ask if Geoscape use counts as a scenario? all the units I requested, I requested because I'd like to use in the beta for Geoscape.

that covers things like B model hornets because we dont have that many A models... I brought it up because I noted that our Hawk 127s are in there (very appreciative of that!).

if its in the realms of possibility it would be nice to see PC-9s and paluma class ships added, but they are certainly low priority. the challnger CL-604 also comes in that category of "nice to have for GS use, but lower priority".

I dont have very much information on the paluma and leeuwin class vessels. they are certainly not heavily armed. possibly I could resort to using a generic ship In the DB for now.

on the AIM-120s, I have been informed that we had purchases below a threshold reporting value of the missile between 2000 and 2008 but there is no information on what type of missile. maybe it was a C-5 but I have no hard data on that. In 02 we would probably only have had the B model so all good there.

good effort on the 707's btw, I had a brief hunt for information on them but couldn't find much info...

I suspect I'm up for a good day of classes if this is how it starts : D


Added the following:

A 04 Paluma -- Australia (Navy), 1989
Pilatus PC-9/A -- Australia (Air Force), 1989
F/A-18B Hornet -- Australia (Air Force), 1986
F/A-18B Hornet -- Australia (Air Force), 1991
F/A-18B Hornet -- Australia (Air Force), 2002
F/A-18B Hornet -- Australia (Air Force), 2004
F/A-18B Hornet -- Australia (Air Force), 2007
F/A-18B Hornet -- Australia (Air Force), 2010

Enjoy

_____________________________



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

(in reply to Blu3wolf)
Post #: 427
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 2/18/2014 6:47:46 AM   
incredibletwo

 

Posts: 102
Joined: 2/8/2009
Status: offline
Hi all!

I'm looking for RAAF RF-111C in the db but can't see him. High priority as I need it for my scen
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_F-111C#RF-111C

And the RAAF Canberra B20:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Electric_Canberra#Royal_Australian_Air_Force

JMSDF PS-1 ASW flying boat:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shin_Meiwa_US-1A#Specifications_.28US-1A.29
http://www.airvectors.net/avps1.html


Also, is this where I ask for older units to added to the DB3000? I'm writing a scen which has older platforms retired pre-1980 actually modernised and kept in service. There are quite a few. Plus, hypothetical platforms, especially Soviet. Is this possible?





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by incredibletwo -- 2/18/2014 11:18:22 AM >


_____________________________

"Fortune favours the bold"

(in reply to ComDev)
Post #: 428
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 2/18/2014 12:16:50 PM   
mikmykWS

 

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline
Sure please do post

_____________________________


(in reply to incredibletwo)
Post #: 429
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 2/18/2014 1:38:01 PM   
Mgellis


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

Hypothetical weapon...

Laser (airborne cannon)
This is simply the airborne COIL laser that is already in the database, but modified to fire downwards and at short range against surface targets. Range is limited because it is firing down through thicker air but, because it is fired at altitude (probably Medium at a minimum), it can attack ground targets (soft), mobile units (soft), and surface ships; I imagine it can also fire at aircraft and missiles, too, but once again the range is limited to 10 miles (like the ship-mounted laser system). I'm assuming the laser is not powerful enough to zap tanks, bunkers, etc., although I could be wrong about that.





(in reply to mikmykWS)
Post #: 430
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/18/2014 2:54:54 PM   
xavierv


Posts: 517
Joined: 7/10/2013
Status: offline
emsoy or mikmyk,

Do you have an estimate on when these would be added ?

edited to add links for each class
quote:

ORIGINAL: navyrecognition

Could you please add these very recent classes (some of them already in service)
Khareef class OPV - Oman
Al-Ofouq-class OPV - Oman
Baynunah class Corvette - UAE
Abu Dhabi class Corvette - UAE
Falaj 2 class Stealth Patrol Vessel - UAE
Kalaat Beni-Abbes LPD - Algeria

SIGMA 10514 PKR Frigate - Indonesia
22DDH Izumo class - Japan

I have links for those, but i can't post them yet

quote:

mikmyk


Just in: Specs for the RMN future "LCS"
http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1576

< Message edited by navyrecognition -- 2/18/2014 3:59:29 PM >

(in reply to xavierv)
Post #: 431
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/18/2014 3:17:01 PM   
mikmykWS

 

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline
Kareef,Baynunah,Ozumi already released in beta. Rest still on our work list which we would like to complete but have no deadline on.

_____________________________


(in reply to xavierv)
Post #: 432
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/18/2014 6:50:25 PM   
blh42

 

Posts: 233
Joined: 7/10/2013
Status: offline
Mortar plt ID #2059 can run at 30kts. I don't believe you can run that fast with mortars. However, Sweedish steel is something different.

blh

(in reply to mikmykWS)
Post #: 433
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/18/2014 11:44:38 PM   
mikmykWS

 

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline
Various requests logged or updated. Thanks guys!

Mike

_____________________________


(in reply to blh42)
Post #: 434
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 2/19/2014 5:58:59 AM   
Blu3wolf


Posts: 198
Joined: 9/30/2013
From: Western Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: incredibletwo

Hi all!

I'm looking for RAAF RF-111C in the db but can't see him.

just so you know, you can edit an F-111C to give it the extra sensors on the RF-111C. that was my solution to added them to Geoscape, anyway.

might be nice to have but you can probably do your scen with the current DB I suspect : )



< Message edited by Blu3wolf -- 2/19/2014 7:06:43 AM >

(in reply to incredibletwo)
Post #: 435
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 2/19/2014 6:03:42 AM   
Blu3wolf


Posts: 198
Joined: 9/30/2013
From: Western Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: emsoy

Added the following:

A 04 Paluma -- Australia (Navy), 1989
Pilatus PC-9/A -- Australia (Air Force), 1989
F/A-18B Hornet -- Australia (Air Force), 1986
F/A-18B Hornet -- Australia (Air Force), 1991
F/A-18B Hornet -- Australia (Air Force), 2002
F/A-18B Hornet -- Australia (Air Force), 2004
F/A-18B Hornet -- Australia (Air Force), 2007
F/A-18B Hornet -- Australia (Air Force), 2010

Enjoy

thank you very much, I intend to!

_____________________________

To go up, pull back on the stick.
To go down, pull back harder...

Speed is life. Altitude is life insurance.

(in reply to ComDev)
Post #: 436
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 2/19/2014 9:40:28 AM   
NickD

 

Posts: 163
Joined: 2/14/2014
Status: offline
Is there any chance that the Pacific-class patrol boats operated by most of the navies/maritime police forces in the South Pacific could be added? These 22 small patrol craft (which were donated by Australia and are funded by Australia, New Zealand and the US) are the main - and often only - seagoing craft operated by these forces, and it would be interesting to design a scenario based around the fisheries patrols they conduct.

(in reply to Blu3wolf)
Post #: 437
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 2/19/2014 1:11:20 PM   
incredibletwo

 

Posts: 102
Joined: 2/8/2009
Status: offline
Kinda tough to do with the current db. I'll be posting a list of hypothetical and pre-1980 platforms that HOPEFULLY will be added to DB3000 so I can complete my work. The RF-111C is one of many!
The list is not yet complete. Getting there though...

Cheers!

_____________________________

"Fortune favours the bold"

(in reply to NickD)
Post #: 438
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 2/19/2014 5:18:22 PM   
SuaveWatermelon

 

Posts: 65
Joined: 1/3/2014
Status: offline
Howdy

Noticed something about F-35B in current DB

F-35B CANNOT fit JSOW in its internal bays

http://i619.photobucket.com/albums/tt271/SpudmanWP/SideBySide1_zpsa680032d.jpg

The GBU-32 (the JDAM pictured) is 119.5in long while the AGM-154 JSOW is 160in long (and thus wont fit)

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-154_Joint_Standoff_Weapon

(in reply to incredibletwo)
Post #: 439
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 2/19/2014 5:26:04 PM   
ComDev

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: NickD

Is there any chance that the Pacific-class patrol boats operated by most of the navies/maritime police forces in the South Pacific could be added? These 22 small patrol craft (which were donated by Australia and are funded by Australia, New Zealand and the US) are the main - and often only - seagoing craft operated by these forces, and it would be interesting to design a scenario based around the fisheries patrols they conduct.


Hi Nick, would be great if you could post some more info on these, incl web links. Saves us a ton of time on research. Thanks!

_____________________________



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

(in reply to NickD)
Post #: 440
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 2/19/2014 5:30:39 PM   
ComDev

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: SuaveWatermelon

Howdy

Noticed something about F-35B in current DB

F-35B CANNOT fit JSOW in its internal bays

http://i619.photobucket.com/albums/tt271/SpudmanWP/SideBySide1_zpsa680032d.jpg

The GBU-32 (the JDAM pictured) is 119.5in long while the AGM-154 JSOW is 160in long (and thus wont fit)

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-154_Joint_Standoff_Weapon


Good find, thanks! Means it cannot carry 2000lb JDAM either.


_____________________________



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

(in reply to SuaveWatermelon)
Post #: 441
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 2/19/2014 10:01:01 PM   
NickD

 

Posts: 163
Joined: 2/14/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: emsoy
Hi Nick, would be great if you could post some more info on these, incl web links. Saves us a ton of time on research. Thanks!


I'd really like to, but because I'm a new user the forum software isn't letting me post links... The Wikipedia article on these patrol boats is very comprehensive, and (possibly more usefully) includes links to the manufacturer's summary of the patrol boats specifications and data on them in the various guides to warships. I think that all 22 are still active (and have been recently refitted), so recent editions of Jane's Fighting Ships and the like will also have data on their individual configurations.

< Message edited by NickD -- 2/19/2014 11:04:03 PM >

(in reply to ComDev)
Post #: 442
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 2/20/2014 4:15:02 PM   
Af1352pasha

 

Posts: 308
Joined: 9/17/2010
Status: offline
Request for adding YF-23,

Know never mass production, but great to be modeled in database.

(in reply to NickD)
Post #: 443
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 2/20/2014 8:02:25 PM   
ComDev

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: incredibletwo
I'm looking for RAAF RF-111C in the db but can't see him. High priority as I need it for my scen
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_F-111C#RF-111C

And the RAAF Canberra B20:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Electric_Canberra#Royal_Australian_Air_Force

JMSDF PS-1 ASW flying boat:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shin_Meiwa_US-1A#Specifications_.28US-1A.29
http://www.airvectors.net/avps1.html


Added all three

_____________________________



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

(in reply to incredibletwo)
Post #: 444
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 2/20/2014 8:07:18 PM   
ComDev

 

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

ORIGINAL: NickD

quote:

ORIGINAL: emsoy
Hi Nick, would be great if you could post some more info on these, incl web links. Saves us a ton of time on research. Thanks!


I'd really like to, but because I'm a new user the forum software isn't letting me post links... The Wikipedia article on these patrol boats is very comprehensive, and (possibly more usefully) includes links to the manufacturer's summary of the patrol boats specifications and data on them in the various guides to warships. I think that all 22 are still active (and have been recently refitted), so recent editions of Jane's Fighting Ships and the like will also have data on their individual configurations.


Thanks, looked at the boats in Wikipedia and there is a whole bunch of smaller nations operating these (some I don't even think I've heard of before hehe). May I ask exactly which countries you need these boats for, so that I can add those?

< Message edited by emsoy -- 2/20/2014 9:08:30 PM >


_____________________________



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

(in reply to NickD)
Post #: 445
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 2/20/2014 8:14:25 PM   
ComDev

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: SuaveWatermelon

Howdy

Noticed something about F-35B in current DB

F-35B CANNOT fit JSOW in its internal bays

http://i619.photobucket.com/albums/tt271/SpudmanWP/SideBySide1_zpsa680032d.jpg

The GBU-32 (the JDAM pictured) is 119.5in long while the AGM-154 JSOW is 160in long (and thus wont fit)

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-154_Joint_Standoff_Weapon


Have updated the database, thanks! Also fixed the RN F-35B

_____________________________



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

(in reply to SuaveWatermelon)
Post #: 446
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 2/20/2014 8:15:00 PM   
ComDev

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: papa_Hausser

Request for adding YF-23,

Know never mass production, but great to be modeled in database.



Request added

_____________________________



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

(in reply to Af1352pasha)
Post #: 447
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 2/20/2014 8:16:41 PM   
ComDev

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: frosen

Request for a scenario: Controlled minefields

I'm working on a Swedish scenario and would appreciate a more developed mine warfare-feature. The Swedes with their littoral warfare depend(ed) greatly on controlled minefields to deny access to vital ports etc. As for now, there are placeholders for controlled minefields but nothing in them (accessable as "imports" under Sweden in DB3000).

Furthermore, I wonder how to utilize the "target discrimination"-feature of the conventional minefields you can create through the reference points?

Thanks for a great game!


Thanks for your input Frosen, these are on my list (for WW3 in 1985 scens off the Norwegian coast) but will take a bit of time and effort to get to work right...

_____________________________



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

(in reply to frosen)
Post #: 448
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 2/20/2014 9:48:56 PM   
NickD

 

Posts: 163
Joined: 2/14/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: emsoy
Thanks, looked at the boats in Wikipedia and there is a whole bunch of smaller nations operating these (some I don't even think I've heard of before hehe). May I ask exactly which countries you need these boats for, so that I can add those?


Papua New Guinea, the Federated States of Micronesia, the Solomon Islands, Tonga and Fiji (in that order of priority) would be great.


From memory, the Solomon Islands' boats were involved in the domestic fighting which took place in the mid-2000s. PNG may have also used their Pacific-class boats in combat during the long-running insurgency on Bougainville island.

Thanks for adding the RF-111C by the way!

(in reply to ComDev)
Post #: 449
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 2/20/2014 11:26:38 PM   
SuaveWatermelon

 

Posts: 65
Joined: 1/3/2014
Status: offline
Howdy

Does this mean you also added the other things to the F-35 that currently aren't in the DB (the LRASM, JSM, AARGM, SDB, SDB II, WCMD, etc.)? Not to be pushy, but I would be greatly appreciative if the F-35s could get their armament list completed

http://www.kongsberg.com/en/kds/products/missilesystems/jointstrikemissile/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Range_Anti-Ship_Missile

http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/01/21/idUS152956+21-Jan-2009+PRN20090121

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-53/B







Also noticed something with ROK FA-50, the real thing is AMRAAM and WCMD capable but not in the DB

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KAI_T-50_Golden_Eagle

(in reply to ComDev)
Post #: 450
Page:   <<   < prev  13 14 [15] 16 17   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  13 14 [15] 16 17   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

1.047