Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

[BDukes]

Please add new Indonesian LST L 521 Teluk Lada. Infos including what carry in articles.

https://www.janes.com/article/81460/ind ... nding-ship

Thanks!

[BDukes]

Please Add Pakistani ATR-72 MPA. First received.

https://www.janes.com/article/81839/pak ... tr-72-mpas

Radar infos

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/first-up ... ar.514820/

Thank!

[BDukes]

Indonesia KCR-60M Upgrading

https://www.janes.com/article/81780/ind ... val-weapon

SSM Remove. CIWS add.

More. New Deck Guns

https://www.janes.com/article/77516/ind ... 60m-vessel

Thank!

[BDukes]

Please add GBU-49 Loadout to USMC F-35B from 2018 on so can hit moving target with bomb. US Marine buy for this purpose.

https://www.janes.com/article/79174/gbu ... smc-f-35bs

https://www.janes.com/article/78599/us- ... n-for-f-35

Thank!

[Gunner98]

Could we get DBID #2438 821 Lublin [Pr.767] Poland 1990 made capable of using cargo please?

She is a derivative of the Polnocny class with a similar capacity

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polnocny- ... nding_ship


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lublin-cl ... nding_ship

Thanks

[KranS]

Could you please add the following units to the database?

Flying Forward Observation System (Japanese helicopter UAV)
MU-2/LR-1 (Japanese utility transport aircraft)
LR-2 (Japanese utility transport aircraft)
T-4 (Japanese Intermediate trainer jet)
Type 11 SAM (Japanese mobile short-range SAM)
Kumsong-3 (North Korean ASM {Kh-35 copy?})
Pokpung-ho equipped with 9K38 (North Korean MBT)

Thank you

[orca]

ORIGINAL: Dragon029

One request - the MQ-25 currently only has 6910kg / 15,200lb of fuel, yet the minimum threshold requirement for the real life MQ-25 is to be able to offload 14,000lb of fuel, 500nmi from a carrier.

With the current fuel (and with the MQ-25 burning 20.6kg of fuel per minute at cruise), this means that (assuming instant acceleration to cruise speed after launch and zero fuel burn while loitering / offloading fuel) the CMANO MQ-25 can only provide a max of 12,370lb of fuel (14,000lb - (500nmi/480kts)*(20.6kg*2.2lb/kg))

In addition, all 3 of the MQ-25 competitors (Lockheed, Boeing and General Atomics) claim that their designs not only meet the threshold fuel offload requirement, but also the objective requirement. The objective requirement is still classified / restricted, but it would surely see the 14,000lb figure increased to at least 16,000lb.

Also, the MQ-25's loiter airspeed is a bit high; I might have been doing something wrong, but with its loiter speed at 350kts and an E-2D's military speed at only 335kts, I wasn't able to refuel the E-2D. I imagine a realistic loiter speed would still be around 250kts, but seeing as this is a tanker, perhaps we could drop it to 180kts, also allowing even the refueling of CH-53s like as is done with USMC KC-130s.

Bump this request, particularly on the news that the contract has been awarded to Boeing.

additional DB update requests for MQ-25:
engine is Rolls-Royce AE 3007N with 4500 kg thrust
estimated initial operating capability date 2024

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_MQ-25_Stingray
https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2018/ ... ing-drone/
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/23 ... ompetition

[ARCNA442]

I've identified some possible errors with the ranges for the US MLRS / GMLRS rockets. According to slide 4 of the presentation "Precision Fires Rocket and Missile Systems Portfolio Overview to the Precision Strike Association" (I still can't post links but if you google that title it should be the first hit) the following are the correct ranges:

M30 GMLRS ER: 8-45nm (database 3-35nm)
M30A1 GMLRS ER: 8-45nm (database 3-35nm)
M30A2 GMLRS ER: 8-45nm (database 3-35nm)

MGM-140A ATACMS Blk I: 14-89nm (database 3-35nm)
MGM-140B ATACMS Blk IA: 38-162nm (database 50-180nm)
MGM-168A ATACMS Blk IVA while not mentioned by that name would presumably also have a range of 38-162nm rather than the database's 10-80nm.

[CrazyIvan101]

Would it be possible to the DARPA TERN to the database? It can fit on any platform that is helicopter capable. The program states a minimum 600 NM combat radius for ISR and strike missions. It can carry 4 JAGM/Hellfire missiles and has the same radar and EO/IR Sensors as the MQ-8B/C Firescout.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGoKR-xUa4s

https://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2015-12-28

https://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2016-11-17

[Dysta]

JL-10/L-15 has conducted TL-20 and YJ-9E ordinances firing tests, so it is quite combat effective as a trainer:

https://www.twitter.com/dafengcao/statu ... 6434034689

[BDukes]

Please added Egyptia Sinai-23 AAA/SAM it just ZSU-23 with 4 Strelas. Look like standard optical FCS

https://twitter.com/stoa1984

Thank!

[BDukes]

Please add Egyptian Pohang gunboat P 1000 Shabab Mısr. Korea transfers last year. Ex.ROKS Jinju PCC763

Nice picture

https://twitter.com/boxshipcaptain/stat ... 0279628806

[BDukes]

Please add United Kingdom DDS systems.

https://navaltoday.com/2018/09/21/royal ... -vehicles/

Looks like Astute DDS mod with Mk.8 system (copies from US). Moving to MK 11 SDV system.

THank!

[BDukes]

Please replace JH-7 loadout where 4 big hardpoint taken by big weapon with wingtip PL-5B instead of PL-8. PL-8 too heavy for wingtip. Look like error start in DB 2008 variants. Early have 5b.

Source

https://twitter.com/stoa1984/status/1021114913547214848

Various Picture:

http://chinesemilitaryreview.blogspot.c ... ghter.html

Very fews pictures of PL-8 but does exist. Never on wingtip or paired with heavy load.

[BDukes]

Could you make OV-10A etc. capable from LHA?

Bronco operate from USS Nassau 1983 in Norwegian Exercise.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File ... _1983.jpeg

https://catalog.archives.gov/id/6430454

Thank!

[BDukes]

Found some Indian SU-30MKI Loadout updates

Griffin III and Lightening III Designator

https://twitter.com/indiandefence11/sta ... 9815950336


KH-29L
https://twitter.com/indiandefence11/sta ... 3697478656

Heavy FAB 250 load (26) 24 in second which is more likely.

https://twitter.com/indiandefence11/sta ... 3289643008

https://twitter.com/indiandefence11/sta ... 9890661377

Heavy FAB 500 load (10)

https://twitter.com/indiandefence11/sta ... 0776833024



Thank!

[BDukes]

Quick Indian Bramos Regiment facility correction

https://twitter.com/indiandefence11/sta ... 3174974465

So 4 vehicles with 3 tubes. Could add command vehicle.

Thank!

[BDukes]

Please added 4 BL-755 loadouts for Indian SEPECAT IM/IS Jaguars.

Picture

https://twitter.com/indiandefence11/sta ... 4399554560

Look like 2 tanks and 4 bombs.

Thank!

[Dimitris]

Cross-posting here a "laundry list" of DB items from a Reddit thread (original here)

I'd like some feedback on these (particularly the ones concerning Russian & Chinese systems) before we proceed on any changes. Thanks.

On weapons guidance channels:

Some modern Navy aircraft should be able to guide the SM-6 (P3I link). https://www.raytheon.com/news/feature/s ... _of_a_kind

It would help to differentiate between weapons guidance channels and targets engaged. Apparently, the S-300 can guide more weapons than it can engage targets.

There needs to be differentiation between the number of channels available for SARH, TVM, and ARH. Based on how ARH missile work they are far less taxing on the datalink than SARH and TVM. I expect late model Patriot and some of the SPY-1 equipped ships to be able to guide far more ARH missiles than currently allowed by CMANO. The SPY S-band datalink can support 1000 times the bitrate of the T2 link (which itself can guide 2 missiles). Do you think it is reasonable for the MPQ-63 to be able to guide the same number of PAC-3 missiles as an MPQ-53 can guide PAC-2 missiles, I don't. I'll leave you with a useful document. (http://techdigest.jhuapl.edu/TD/td2804/Cole.pdf)

On missiles:

All the 5V55 and 48N6 family missiles are far too fast in terms of "game logic". All the other missiles in the game are using their some sort of average speed. This is because the Russian advertise their burnout speed in the brochures while pretty much everyone else lists some sandbagged average over some unknown interval. Simply put, there is no possible way to cram enough propellant into a missile the size of a 5V55 or 48N6 in order for it to average mach 6. The upper bound of 48N6 performance should be lower than the SM-6.

I see no reason as why the AIM-120D is faster than its contemporaries (ex PL-12).

R-27Ex family range is far too high. The missile DLZs have posted online and the range is likely limited by the expenditure of hydraulics (missile loss of control after 60 seconds). Battery or hydraulic "rundown" is a well known limitation of missile range.

I see no evidence that the R-77 seeker has received substantial upgrades. It should be "early 90s technology" based on the development timeline.

40N6 should be marked as hypothetical. Russia has been hyping it since forever yet has never publicly shown even a mockup.

On aircraft:

No publicly shown version of the T-50 can possibly have a frontal and rear that low. The front aspect RCS of the IRST dome alone is enormous (relative to a VLO aircraft). Maybe a future version of the aircraft will fix all the problems but it needs to be marked as "hypothetical".

F-35 likely has a lower front RCS than the F-22.

J-31 needs to be marked as hypothetical since the real aircraft likely doesn't have those stats.

Placeholder values like the supersonic cruise speeds for the J-20 and T-50 need to be changed. What is the likelyhood that the J-20 and T-50 will achieve that level of supersonic cruise even with new engines?

Gripen E can't supersonically cruise at mach 1.6. The F-35 can't supersonically cruise at mach 1.6. No evidence that the J-31 can supersonically cruise.

You should talk a good look at radar max instrumented ranges. For example; the APG-77v1 is easily in the top 3 most powerful radars ever fitted to an operational fighter (by EIRP), why would it's max instrumented range be so low?

It is unlikely that an Irbis-E would outperform any reasonably sized fighter mounted AESA (except maybe the very early ones). Simply put, PESA radars have far more losses between the TWT and the antenna/between the antenna and the LNA. They have worse clutter rejection too. (https://www.slideshare.net/RezaTaryghat ... s-49064300 , page 10-11)

General:

IMO, you should implement a 1 decade tech penalty on post 2010 Chinese electronics and a 1.5 decade tech penalty on Russian electronics. It would give a better result than the current placeholder values. Just check who the leaders are in RF ICs, Imaging IR, logic and memory ICs, etc. None of them are from the PRC or Russia. Russia is so behind that the can't even mass produce an X-band AESA and they had to buy IIR sensors from the French (Catherine systems for their T-90 tanks).

MR-600/650/710 are ancient frequency scanned radars. No way they can perform the way they do.

[BDukes]

Please add Indian-Israeli Hind upgrade.

Looks like 24 got nightfighting and rwr.

https://twitter.com/indiandefence11/sta ... 0861353985

Source say 1998 talk start but look like nothing happen until recent.

http://www.airvectors.net/avhind_2.html

Weapons

https://twitter.com/indiandefence11/sta ... 8480201728

Haha..the movies. Before and after

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peLeGnEUkw8