Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

[mikmykWS]

Thanks Jan. Added to our list.

M

[hellfish6]

[UPDATED DB pre-v436]

For the record, I haven't made a DB request in, like, a month. [;)]

I'm playing with Italian FREMMs and I'm surprised to discover that the 127mm Vulcano rounds can't be used in the anti-ship role. A little taken aback by this, I did some research. At least one of the three Vulcano projectiles is advertised to be used in the ASUW role, though it is also the one projectile that isn't included in the database.

Vulcano Data Sheet

The specific round is the GLR/IR guided munition at the bottom of page 2. 80km range, IR terminal guidance, notched (pre-frag?) HE, IMU+GPS guidance.

The other two ammo types are included as IDs 7124-7127. Mount itself is ID 2471.

[Triode]

Ok so I tested 1.07 RC 1 and realy like it

OODA loops for Russian Navy and Army air defence looks generally correct (actually ± 2-3 seconds deviations in some cases)

but there is three DB entry with big mistakes in case of OODA

1.#1645 - SAM Bn/2 (SA-8b Gecko Mod-1 [9K33M3 Osa-AK])
citation from Osa manual(1991) page 249 :
"Missiles to prepare for the launch can be put automatically or manually, in such a way that the meeting with target of first rocket was on the far boundary of the affected area.
Automatic activation of missiles in the preparation is carried out with an automatic upon receipt of the PSA signal "Caution".
Manually enabling missiles to prepare made to ensure the fire at targets suddenly appeared by pressing button "SPK BRT VKL"
Time to prepare missiles for launch is 10-12 seconds"
full manual in russian : https://disk.yandex.ru/public/?hash=BuS ... JQANdn4%3D

so reaction time for OSA-AK is 10-12s

in game this is:
50 seconds (Novice Proficiency Level)
37,5 seconds (Cadet)
30 seconds (Regular)
25 seconds (Veteran)
20 seconds (Ace)

2. #2305 - SKR Admiral Grigorovich [Pr.1135.6M]

On this ship installed air defence system "Shtil-1"
from "ALmaz-Antey" official site:
The reaction time, sec 5-10
http://raspletin.com/produktsija-i-vidy ... ti-shtil-1 in russian

in game this is:
40 seconds (Novice Proficiency Level)
30 seconds (Cadet)
24 seconds (Regular)
20 seconds (Veteran)
16 seconds (Ace)

3.#2310 - SKR Admiral Sergey Gorshkov [Pr.2235.0]

for #2089 - SAM Bn (SA-25 [S-350 Vityaz])with same missiles it is
10 seconds (Novice Proficiency Level)
7,5 seconds (Cadet)
6 seconds (Regular)
5 seconds (Veteran)
4 seconds (Ace)

"Redut without Poliment " on #2308 - MPK Gremyashchy [Pr.2038.5, Improved Steregushchy] and #2306 - MPK Soobrazitelny [Pr.2038.1, Mod Steregushchy]
16 seconds (Novice Proficiency Level)
12 seconds (Cadet)
9,6 seconds (Regular)
8 seconds (Veteran)
6,4 seconds (Ace)

but for #2310 - SKR Admiral Sergey Gorshkov [Pr.2235.0] with same missiles and Poliment radar

40 seconds (Novice Proficiency Level)
30 seconds (Cadet)
24 seconds (Regular)
20 seconds (Veteran)
16 seconds (Ace)
I think this is wrong

[mikmykWS]

ORIGINAL: hellfish6

For the record, I haven't made a DB request in, like, a month. [;)]

I'm playing with Italian FREMMs and I'm surprised to discover that the 127mm Vulcano rounds can't be used in the anti-ship role. A little taken aback by this, I did some research. At least one of the three Vulcano projectiles is advertised to be used in the ASUW role, though it is also the one projectile that isn't included in the database.

Vulcano Data Sheet

The specific round is the GLR/IR guided munition at the bottom of page 2. 80km range, IR terminal guidance, notched (pre-frag?) HE, IMU+GPS guidance.

The other two ammo types are included as IDs 7124-7127. Mount itself is ID 2471.

ok will take a look at for next update hopefully.

Mike

[mikmykWS]

ORIGINAL: Triode

Ok so I tested 1.07 RC 1 and realy like it

OODA loops for Russian Navy and Army air defence looks generally correct (actually ± 2-3 seconds deviations in some cases)

but there is three DB entry with big mistakes in case of OODA

1.#1645 - SAM Bn/2 (SA-8b Gecko Mod-1 [9K33M3 Osa-AK])
citation from Osa manual(1991) page 249 :
"Missiles to prepare for the launch can be put automatically or manually, in such a way that the meeting with target of first rocket was on the far boundary of the affected area.
Automatic activation of missiles in the preparation is carried out with an automatic upon receipt of the PSA signal "Caution".
Manually enabling missiles to prepare made to ensure the fire at targets suddenly appeared by pressing button "SPK BRT VKL"
Time to prepare missiles for launch is 10-12 seconds"
full manual in russian : https://disk.yandex.ru/public/?hash=BuS ... JQANdn4%3D

so reaction time for OSA-AK is 10-12s

in game this is:
50 seconds (Novice Proficiency Level)
37,5 seconds (Cadet)
30 seconds (Regular)
25 seconds (Veteran)
20 seconds (Ace)

2. #2305 - SKR Admiral Grigorovich [Pr.1135.6M]

On this ship installed air defence system "Shtil-1"
from "ALmaz-Antey" official site:
The reaction time, sec 5-10
http://raspletin.com/produktsija-i-vidy ... ti-shtil-1 in russian

in game this is:
40 seconds (Novice Proficiency Level)
30 seconds (Cadet)
24 seconds (Regular)
20 seconds (Veteran)
16 seconds (Ace)

3.#2310 - SKR Admiral Sergey Gorshkov [Pr.2235.0]

for #2089 - SAM Bn (SA-25 [S-350 Vityaz])with same missiles it is
10 seconds (Novice Proficiency Level)
7,5 seconds (Cadet)
6 seconds (Regular)
5 seconds (Veteran)
4 seconds (Ace)

"Redut without Poliment " on #2308 - MPK Gremyashchy [Pr.2038.5, Improved Steregushchy] and #2306 - MPK Soobrazitelny [Pr.2038.1, Mod Steregushchy]
16 seconds (Novice Proficiency Level)
12 seconds (Cadet)
9,6 seconds (Regular)
8 seconds (Veteran)
6,4 seconds (Ace)

but for #2310 - SKR Admiral Sergey Gorshkov [Pr.2235.0] with same missiles and Poliment radar

40 seconds (Novice Proficiency Level)
30 seconds (Cadet)
24 seconds (Regular)
20 seconds (Veteran)
16 seconds (Ace)
I think this is wrong

Ok we've got a bunch of Russian updates coming so will add these.

Mike

[ClaudeJ]

[UPDATED DB pre-v436 + v437]

FREMM


Sources:
- Toutes les FREMM françaises seront équipées de missiles de croisière | Mer et Marine
- La FREMM Normandie à la loupe | Mer et Marine
- FREMM Aquitaine class multi-mission Frigate | Navy Recognition
- http://visites.colsbleus.fr/visites/fremm.html
- http://navalanalyses.blogspot.gr/2014/0 ... es-of.html
- http://navalanalyses.blogspot.be/2014/0 ... es-of.html
- http://fr.dcnsgroup.com/wp-content/uplo ... GB_DEF.pdf

---

Mounts/Store/Weapons


[*]#1766 - D 650 Aquitaine [FREMM ASW] -- France (Navy), 2013[/color]
[*]#2711 - D 650 Aquitaine [FREMM ASW] -- France (Navy), 2016[/color]

Mounts:

"Armaments, it was intended to replace the A70 and A43 by A50 launchers in order to implement the Aster 30, more important than the Aster 15 scope. Until it emerges the idea of developing a new versatile Launcher, which could both accommodate the MdCN and Aster 30. In this way, the FREMM DA may not only provide solid protection missile and air attacks, but also carry out strikes in depth on ground targets. This, without increasing the number of launchers, which remains fixed at four for a total allocation of 32 vertical launch missiles, consisting of a mix of Aster 30 and MdCN."



Assuming that it's simply the Sylver A-70 that will be adapted I thus suggest to move the "#133 - Aster 30 PAAMS [GWS.45 Sea Viper]" from the "Sylver A-50" mount to the "Sylver A-70" one.

I *assume* the same system could be applied aboard the Italian FREMM, I just have no source that can confirm it.

Magazine:
(76mm/62 OTO Melara Super Rapid) "Under the bridge, an imposing barrel can hold up to 80 shells ready for use. His resurfacing, possible during a fire sequence, is done manually, with hold a reserve of more than 500 munitions."

I've been unable to find a more accurate figure, there however is a magazine.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aircraft Facilities

[*]#1766 - D 650 Aquitaine [FREMM ASW] -- France (Navy), 2013[/color]
[*]#2711 - D 650 Aquitaine [FREMM ASW] -- France (Navy), 2016[/color]
[*]#2368 - F 601 Mohammed VI [FREMM] -- Morocco (Navy), 2013[/color]

Only one large aircraft is operated in the 18 x 12.5 m large hangar:




-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Properties

[*]#1766 - D 650 Aquitaine [FREMM ASW] -- France (Navy), 2013[/color]
[*]#2711 - D 650 Aquitaine [FREMM ASW] -- France (Navy), 2016[/color]

Please add "Refuel from Port x1 (In)". (Probably from Starboard and Replenish too but can't find a pic.)





http://www.meretmarine.com/fr/content/p ... laquitaine

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Properties

[*]#1766 - D 650 Aquitaine [FREMM ASW] -- France (Navy), 2013[/color]
[*]#2711 - D 650 Aquitaine [FREMM ASW] -- France (Navy), 2016[/color]

Please add "Refuel from Port x1 (In)". (Probably from Starboard and Replenish too but can't find a pic.)





http://www.meretmarine.com/fr/content/p ... laquitaine

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comms

[*]#1766 - D 650 Aquitaine [FREMM ASW] -- France (Navy), 2013[/color]
[*]#2711 - D 650 Aquitaine [FREMM ASW] -- France (Navy), 2016[/color]
[*]#2169 - F 590 Carlo Bergamini [FREMM GP] -- Italy (Navy), 2013[/color]
[*]#2657 - F 591 Virginio Fasani [FREMM ASW] -- Italy (Navy), 2014[/color]
[*]#2169 - F 590 Carlo Bergamini [FREMM GP] -- Italy (Navy), 2013[/color]

- Please delete "#219 Link14".
- Please add "#101 Link1 MIDS6".
- Please add "#252 Skynet SATCOM". (UK/FR/IT SatComm. Skynet/Syracuse/Sicral network.)

Link 22 is planned but I'm not sure of its current status.

http://static1.squarespace.com/static/5 ... 0/1-8c.pdf

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Name

[*]#2657 - F 591 Virginio Fasani [FREMM ASW] -- Italy (Navy), 2014[/color]

Please name it "Virginio Fasan".
http://www.marina.difesa.it/uominimezzi ... ginio.aspx


Hope it helps.


Edit reason: forgot the Comms part.

[Vici Supreme]

Playing around with some new toys from Build 673. I'm encountering a more complex problem with the #3883 TIF-25K Aerostat.

I am unable to put the TIF-25K Aerostat (which is listed as medium-sized aircraft) on HSV 2 Swift's and JHSV 1 Spearhead's flightdeck. The game keeps telling me that the airship exceeds the maximum parking space on either vessel. There's no problem with land-based medium-sized hosting facilities.

Also, since the aerostat carries no fuel..., it has to RTB Bingo about 2-4 seconds after launch, inhibiting to change altitude. Further, once launched, it will stay in the air all the time. There's no ready time for the AEW laodout hence I'm not sure if you designed this type of aircraft for being recovered.

When launched from a moving naval platform the aerostat can't follow the host unit. Maybe it's possible to make ship-launched aerostats automatically inherit their parent units speed to simulate being towed by it?

Supreme

[Dimitris]

ORIGINAL: Supreme 2.0

Playing around with some new toys from Build 673. I'm encountering a more complex problem with the #3883 TIF-25K Aerostat.

I am unable to put the TIF-25K Aerostat (which is listed as medium-sized aircraft) on HSV 2 Swift's and JHSV 1 Spearhead's flightdeck. The game keeps telling me that the airship exceeds the maximum parking space on either vessel. There's no problem with land-based medium-sized hosting facilities.

Also, since the aerostat carries no fuel..., it has to RTB Bingo about 2-4 seconds after launch, inhibiting to change altitude. Further, once launched, it will stay in the air all the time. There's no ready time for the AEW laodout hence I'm not sure if you designed this type of aircraft for being recovered.

When launched from a moving naval platform the aerostat can't follow the host unit. Maybe it's possible to make ship-launched aerostats automatically inherit their parent units speed to simulate being towed by it?

Supreme

Thanks, logged issues.

[hellfish6]

ORIGINAL: Supreme 2.0



When launched from a moving naval platform the aerostat can't follow the host unit. Maybe it's possible to make ship-launched aerostats automatically inherit their parent units speed to simulate being towed by it?

Supreme

Can Aerostats be used from ships underway? I only ask because our aerostats in Iraq had to be pulled down and stowed seemingly any time we had a moderate breeze.

[mikmykWS]

DB listed updated to this point.

[F4U7Corsair]

[UPDATED DB pre-436]

Hello,

ALL Mirage 2000D
— SPIRALE CDM consist in 2 LCI (Internal Cartridge Ejector) of 1*8 flares each, 1 LLE (ECLAIR Flare Ejector) of 6*8 flares, 1 LLC (Spine Flare Ejector) of 6*8 flares, for a total of 112 flares.

ALL Mirage 2000N, D
— Rubis FLIR nav pod has never been used outside trial and testing campaigns. Not part of the inventory. Crews rely only on the Antilope 5TC for terrain following ops.

ALL Rafale B, C, M
— 1700L fuel tanks does not exist in the Rafale's inventory. Fuel tanks available are : RPL 701, 1250L supersonic fuel tank, and RPL 751, 2000L fuel tank.
— Suggesting modification of loadouts 9263 & 17309 with standard 2000L fuel tanks
— Suggesting modification of loadouts 11074 & 17310 with supersonic 1250L fuel tanks
— All remaining 1700L fuel tanks shall be replaced by 2000L fuel tanks

#12, 20 — Mirage 2000-5F
— R.550-2 MAGIC II Mk2 not in the inventory anymore. Fully replaced by MICA IR.

Remark to Jan's suggested modification concerning #71 — Mirage 2000C (not effective yet)
— SPIRALE ICD (112 chaffs) shouldn't be deleted. It is removable and shall be used in wartime engagements.

Changes for clarification purposes only:
#1005, #175, #1116 — Mirage 2000-5 (respectively Qatar, Taiwan, Greece)
— #1005 should be renamed Mirage 2000-5EDA
— #175 should be renamed Mirage 2000-5Ei
— #1116 should be renamed Mirage 2000-5EG

[mikmykWS]

Added to our list.

Thanks!

Mike

[ClaudeJ]

[UPDATED DB pre-436]

ORIGINAL: F4U7Corsair
Mirage 2000C
Remark to Jan's suggested modification concerning #71 — Mirage 2000C (not effective yet)
— SPIRALE ICD (112 chaffs) shouldn't be deleted. It is removable and shall be used in wartime engagements.

Interesting. Could you please post a picture showing the "SPIRALE ICD" on an operational Mirage 2000C?

As far as I know, they are protruding at the Karman type wing root and are very visible on the N, D (as illustrated below) and -5 but the C airframe have not been adapted, nor the cockpit wired, to fit them (that's why the Armée de l'Air have developed the "Eclair M" that is mounted instead of the brake chute if need be).



To make sure we are one the same page, the "SPIRALE ICD" is named "Internal chaff dispenser tube (ICDs)" on that MBDA's illustration:

[F4U7Corsair]

This is kind of annoying because I cannot post links as my registration is too fresh.
As for the 2000C, all RDI can mount the ICD, afaik. You can find a pic on the English wiki page of the 2000, the first one, showing a 2000C during Allied Force. The cockpit has been adapted with the installation of a small box panel on the left glare-shield, allowing the pilot to manually or semi manually releasing chaff and flares.
As for the 2000-5F, all of them can mount the ICD, and they usually always do (for a simple reason : the -5F were updated RDI from the S5 batch).

You have to distinguish two cases where the ICD are not mounted : the first is when, as you said, the airframe is not adapted, and this is true for the very first 2000 (the RDM). In that case, the trailing edge Karman is curved, as you show in your Mirage 2000 post on the previous page.
The other case is when the aircraft can mount the ICD but they are not installed : in that case, the trailing edge Karman is straight.

[ClaudeJ]

[UPDATED DB pre-436]

ORIGINAL: F4U7Corsair

This is kind of annoying because I cannot post links as my registration is too fresh.
As for the 2000C, all RDI can mount the ICD, afaik. You can find a pic on the English wiki page of the 2000, the first one, showing a 2000C during Allied Force. The cockpit has been adapted with the installation of a small box on the left glare-shield.
As for the 2000-5F, all of them can mount the ICD, and they usually always do.

You have to distinguish two cases where the ICD are not mounted : the first is when, as you said, the airframe is not adapted, and this is true for the very first 2000 (the RDM). In that case, the Karman is curvy, as you show in your Mirage 2000 post on the previous page.
The other case is when the aircraft can mount the ICD but they are not installed : in that case, the Karman is straight.

Good catch!

Well, then it could stay on the "#71 - Mirage 2000C -- France (Air Force), 1996" but as the pic shown, it wasn't there in 1991 so I believe the ICD should still be removed from the "#2079 - Mirage 2000C -- France (Air Force), 1989".
http://i.gyazo.com/e396c3d641b547baf51ace1ddc1a8dc1.png
http://i.gyazo.com/5323287355b16b57fb5c57b52ad1dcea.png
http://i.gyazo.com/6350c8ca1931d900425ce67c029a2326.png

ORIGINAL: F4U7Corsair
ALL Mirage 2000D
— SPIRALE CDM consist in 2 LCI (Internal Cartridge Ejector) of 1*8 flares each, 1 LLE (ECLAIR Flare Ejector) of 6*8 flares, 1 LLC (Spine Flare Ejector) of 6*8 flares, for a total of 112 flares.

Could you please confirm it was operational on the Diesel?

I've only found the below pictures in "Dans le repaire du mirage 2000D" de Alexandre Paringaux et Frédéric Lert. It's obviously a training loadout, could even be a testbed (Marc Scheffler doesn't mention it for example).


By the way, if you are on C6:
http://www.checksix-forums.com/viewtopi ... 9&t=187844

Changes for clarification purposes only:
#1005, #175, #1116 — Mirage 2000-5 (respectively Qatar, Taiwan, Greece)
(...)
— #175 should be renamed Mirage 2000-5Ei

I second that [;)] tm.asp?m=3436106&mpage=42&key=#


It's great to have another fana around! [:)]

[F4U7Corsair]

[UPDATED DB pre-436]

I'm on C6 (under the nick _12F_Corsair), I have seen that topic when it was published and was searching for it now, thanks

So, let's try recap this mess :
2000D
— pre R2: 112 chaff (LPI) and 16 flares (LCI) - AdA-designed ECLAIR mounted in Bosnia, bringing up flare cap. to 64 (from Matériels de l'Armée de l'Air, 2000D)
— post R2: 112 chaff (LPI) and 64 flares (LCI, LLC) - ECLAIR-M not seen on operational aircraft on R2 standard aircraft yet, but mountable (would bring up flare cap. to 112).
2000C
— RDM: ??
— RDI (#71): 112 chaff (LPI) and 16 flares (LCI)
2000-5F
— 112 chaff (LPI) and 16 flares (LCI), with the ability to mount the ECLAIR-M as seen during Harmattan, bringing up the flare capacity to 64 flares
2000N
— pre K2-4C: 112 chaff (LPI) and 16 flares (LCI)
— from K2-4C standard, ability to mount the ECLAIR-M, bringing flare capacity to 64 (source: Les Matériels de l'Armée de l'Air 2000N)

[Dimitris]

ORIGINAL: Triode

Ok so I tested 1.07 RC 1 and realy like it

OODA loops for Russian Navy and Army air defence looks generally correct (actually ± 2-3 seconds deviations in some cases)

but there is three DB entry with big mistakes in case of OODA

1.#1645 - SAM Bn/2 (SA-8b Gecko Mod-1 [9K33M3 Osa-AK])
citation from Osa manual(1991) page 249 :
"Missiles to prepare for the launch can be put automatically or manually, in such a way that the meeting with target of first rocket was on the far boundary of the affected area.
Automatic activation of missiles in the preparation is carried out with an automatic upon receipt of the PSA signal "Caution".
Manually enabling missiles to prepare made to ensure the fire at targets suddenly appeared by pressing button "SPK BRT VKL"
Time to prepare missiles for launch is 10-12 seconds"
full manual in russian : https://disk.yandex.ru/public/?hash=BuS ... JQANdn4%3D

so reaction time for OSA-AK is 10-12s

in game this is:
50 seconds (Novice Proficiency Level)
37,5 seconds (Cadet)
30 seconds (Regular)
25 seconds (Veteran)
20 seconds (Ace)

2. #2305 - SKR Admiral Grigorovich [Pr.1135.6M]

On this ship installed air defence system "Shtil-1"
from "ALmaz-Antey" official site:
The reaction time, sec 5-10
http://raspletin.com/produktsija-i-vidy ... ti-shtil-1 in russian

in game this is:
40 seconds (Novice Proficiency Level)
30 seconds (Cadet)
24 seconds (Regular)
20 seconds (Veteran)
16 seconds (Ace)

3.#2310 - SKR Admiral Sergey Gorshkov [Pr.2235.0]

for #2089 - SAM Bn (SA-25 [S-350 Vityaz])with same missiles it is
10 seconds (Novice Proficiency Level)
7,5 seconds (Cadet)
6 seconds (Regular)
5 seconds (Veteran)
4 seconds (Ace)

"Redut without Poliment " on #2308 - MPK Gremyashchy [Pr.2038.5, Improved Steregushchy] and #2306 - MPK Soobrazitelny [Pr.2038.1, Mod Steregushchy]
16 seconds (Novice Proficiency Level)
12 seconds (Cadet)
9,6 seconds (Regular)
8 seconds (Veteran)
6,4 seconds (Ace)

but for #2310 - SKR Admiral Sergey Gorshkov [Pr.2235.0] with same missiles and Poliment radar

40 seconds (Novice Proficiency Level)
30 seconds (Cadet)
24 seconds (Regular)
20 seconds (Veteran)
16 seconds (Ace)
I think this is wrong

This may not be necessarily incorrect.

My understanding of these references (very nice BTW) is that they focus on the time to prepare the missiles themselves for launch (so things like spinning up gyros, charging capacitors, run built-in tests etc. etc.). The OODA value however addresses the entire time it takes for the parent platform's combat system to transit from "initial detection" to "can issue fire order to weapon" (and all the intermediate stages; confirm target track, confirm target hostile, pass target data from search sensors to fire-control sensors, confirm target is within engagement envelope, assign target priority, assign weapons etc. etc. On a not-entirely-automated combat system this can take _a lot_).

I don't have the source handy right now, but I distinctly remember reading a couple decades back on a Greek defence magazine that while the SA-N-7 (Shtil) missile itself could be readied very rapidly for launch, the Sovremmeny's combat system had a minimum reaction time of about 1 min against sudden (not pre-announced) threats because of its very low level of automation (reportedly they were still using vertical perspex plots on the CIC at the time), and that this was judged as the chief handicap of this otherwise remarkable destroyer class.

A western analogue to Shtil, Standard SM-1MR, likewise had a very fast preparation/warm-up time (1 sec, a very large improvement over the Talos/Terrier/Tartar systems) but its actual reaction time depended on the parent platform's combat system, which ranged from bad/horrible (older Tartar ships) to OK-not-great (Perry FFGs). In comparison, early version of Aegis have a reported detection-to-fire time of just 6 secs in full-auto mode.

Not saying that these and other numbers may not need revising, but given what we know about combat system integration on western and eastern platforms, it is very reasonable that at least until very recently western platforms usually had a decisive advantage in this regard.

[Triode]

Well it seems there is litle clarification is needed ))


"Uragan" on 956

from "Standby" mode time of reaction - 16,5-19 sec
in this : 12 sec for ready missile and load launcher(4-5 second to "warm up" and test missiles and 7-8 sec for load launcher) + 4,5-7 sec for target data input in missile

but in real life,citation:

"Time of input target data in missile was 12 sec"
Y.N. Romanov Capt 1 rank former captain of pr.956 "Boevoi"

so in real life for pr956 "Uragans" it is something like 12sec+12sec=24 sec (19-20 sec for all missiles after first)firing cycle



"Shtil" on 11356 "Talwar"

"Shtil" on 11356 more advanced anti-air defence complex than "Uragan" on 956

here is good video about his real work:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XRaA_QXREg

so,from this video, time for load same 12 sec but from command "fire" to launch of missile (interval for input data in missile) there is 7 seconds ("Sigma" FCS seems working realy good)

not impressive if compare to "theoretical" 4,5 sec of "Uragan"
but if compare "real" 12 sec of "Uragan" to "real" 7 sec of "Shtil" it is good improvement

So for "Shtil" it is:

12 sec for ready missile and load launcher(4-5 second to "warm up" and test missiles and 7-8 sec for load launcher)
+ 7 sec for load target data in missile
= 19 sec (14 sec for all missiles after first) firing cycle


"Shtil-1" on 11356M (aka #2305 - SKR Admiral Grigorovich [Pr.1135.6M] in database)
fire control systems of Russian 11356 are practicly the same as on Indian "Talwars"
only diferences is launcher, for 11356M it is 3S90E.1 VLS

as you can see on this picture of almost ready "Grigorovich" and there is no "arm-launcher":
http://files.balancer.ru/forums/attache ... g-0208.jpg

"Shtil-1" VLS
http://bastion-karpenko.narod.ru/9M317M ... 11_004.JPG
http://bastion-karpenko.ru/MVMS-2013/MVMS-2013_095.JPG

So, there is no need to move missiles somewhere to launch
purely theoreticaly firing cycle for "Shtil-1" looks like 4-5 second to "warm up" and test missiles + 7 sec for load target data in missile = 11-12 sec
which is in general matches information from "Almaz-Antey" site about 5-10 sec reaction time


most funny thing in Database , "Talwar" with "arm-launcher" OODA looks like:
16 seconds (Novice Proficiency Level)
12 seconds (Cadet)
9,6 seconds (Regular)
8 seconds (Veteran)
6,4 seconds (Ace)

and for 11356M with VLS it is like :
40 seconds (Novice Proficiency Level)
30 seconds (Cadet)
24 seconds (Regular)
20 seconds (Veteran)
16 seconds (Ace)

did you seriosly think "arm-launcher" 3S90 have higher ROF and shorter time of reaction than 3S90E.1 VLS?



How i see Proficiency system in "CMANO"

there is "technical" capabilities of system so as example time of reaction 10 second
"Ace" can achieve this ,but for "Veteran" it is 10 second + some n modifier and so on
If system highly automated differences between "Veteran" and "Novice" modifiers should be smaller
If system doesn't have automatization at all it should be really big gap between "Veteran" and "Novice"
also proficiency should have an impact on probability of hit

as example let look at "Kirov" S-300F trials
citation:
"S-300F in 1982, came on the final stage of state tests. The bulk of the test, of course, took place in the Black Sea, but, of course, take into account the shooting and flyby conducted on NF(firing at high altitude targets in OECM environments can be made only in NF). Chairman of the Government Commission for acceptance tarkr "Kirov" Admiral Bondarenko GA, as Vice Commander of the Navy for military training in some cases just announced regiment of naval aviation combat alarm and thus provide loitering in the air up to 30-40 aircraft simultaneously. Of course, such conditions in the Black Sea could not be.
In fact, the complex was conceived as part of the continued protection of naval forces in the common air defense system, but in those years the emphasis was on reflection attacks low-flying targets, so the first shooting TARKR "Kirov" was carried out on the target RM-15, flying at an altitude of 300 meters. In the south, were crews already had experience shooting with such targets. Practically they kept on lock on boat launches target missile during takeoff and move lock on to missile after launch. In the North experienced crew were not, therefore, acting on a tip of "industry" sailors was not as nimble and missed the target (they just have not been able to tear lock on from boat launched it). Knocked it with complex "OSA-M". Admiral Bondarenko, having learned about the reason for missing the target, said that from now on the ship and his team will work as in combat. Subsequently, no one but the admiral and the captain did not know from which direction, and what the target will be launched. Just play alarm and solve simple task - to shoot down everything that appeared in the air. After some fuss in the first shooting in personnel gained confidence and it is proposed by Admiral regime, led to the fact that almost the entire volume of firing at the final stage of tests was carried out for 12 days.
August 25, 1983, has made the last shooting at the test program, the ship returned to Severomorsk. Admiral played alarm, staff flee to action stations. It turned out that the Deputy. Commander in chief of combat training of its reserve decided to give another target RM-15M. The boat shot out of the coast of the Kola Peninsula, and in the sea, on which the ship was going, it was not less than 5 points. I was on the bridge, and I was not myself when opened hatches launcher and wave at this time covered the fire deck. The rocket passed without comment, and then everything went normally. People grumbled: "Well, who still have to knock?" More shooting was not."

But story do not end here [:)]

"Whatever it was, all project documents was sent to Defense Minister Marshal of the Soviet Union DF Ustinov to represent to the country's leadership. And he did not believe the successful completion of trials and ordered the entire program firings repeat. If you mention that rocket 5V55R while cost about 300 thousand rubles, the Air Defense Forces - main customers of missiles - howled. Navy only with ammunition of existed at the time the ships completely took away eighteen months production, but there is also the absence of any savings.
Order of the Minister to challenge no one, but again only a reflection of the attack six targets RM-6. DF Ustinov did not believe a successful outcome and ordered to transfer to NF entered into operation RKR "Slava" (Project 1164), and conduct a series of joint shooting. As a result, all of the additional firing 96 missiles had been spent. Observers from all regulatory authorities carefully watched, that only Navy sailors working on stations. The result of each shooting to report to the Minister of Defense, other ministers with bated breath followed the events in the north. Our department for this shooting did not go, URAV Department of the Navy was represented by department of training. All shooting gave 100% success rate. Only after receiving such brilliant results, the minister finally signed the documents and submitted them to court. In addition, without waiting for full registration of adopting it urgently recommended to apply for the award of the Lenin Prize for the development. I have not heard that anyone else for two weeks before the release of the decision to award the Lenin Prize so quickly agreed this question. But, nevertheless, the prize was awarded before the complex was adopted."

So this is what i can called a "Ace" crew that can operates at edge of ship technical capabilities! 96 missiles ! 100% success rate!

but is it difficult to manage such system?

"In the air defense forces, each school trained officers to work in a particular sector. Coming into account, the lieutenant, sitting in a chair in front of such a serious instrument as S-300 system,they get up out of it, receiving the rank of lieutenant colonel and served in that position for minimum about two years.
And this is not a whim of developers, because in order to completely feed all the channels of the system is necessary to accurately press in a row 72 (seventy two) button. That is, you have to be Gilels or Rachmaninoff on the remote control. And imagine the conditions of the battle, when you are shooting at, and must maintain absolute calm, not to lose. Maybe not quite calm, but certainly not only a mental automatism, but muscular when hands doing it by themselfs."

And what result will looks like when you send "Novice" crew to operate such system [:(]

"Not so in the Navy. While there were tests, officers did not touch. All their actions are having such a great experience firings, including in OECM environments, have been worked out to automaticity. No nervous breakdowns - calm, confident. Tests of basic and additional finished. After their completion, start moving, as commanders of the groups and battery commanders maximum lieutenant and it was time to translate them into higher positions.
The following year, the field operators were hardly prepared people. All shooting combat training plans have been Failed with glitter. The success rate - zero. Education had to start anew, and industry begin to rush throughout the fleet."

Zero success,total failure for "Novice" crew [:(]

from "Historical Sketches of Captain 1st Rank Vladimir Kirillovich Pechatnikov" (former officer from Office of missile and artillery weapons of the Navy)


So,this is my wall of text.What do you think about it Sunburn?

[Triode]

sorry for double posting

[RoccoNZ]

[UPDATED DB pre-436]

The Griffin missile (LCS) has a problem with its range. Currently set to 0.2NM. Correct range for surface mode should be longer (maybe 2.5nm?)