Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post new mods and scenarios here.

Moderator: MOD_Command

mikmykWS
Posts: 7185
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 4:34 pm

RE: S-300 SASS purpose

Post by mikmykWS »

ORIGINAL: Dysta
ORIGINAL: Hongjian

But the question is whether the S-300FM/48N6 has the ability to engage surface targets beyond horizon as well?
IIRC, the DB3000 they are limited to 25 nmi in anti-surface mode, simulating the limitations of LOS-based fire control radars.

Wikipedia at least states that the S-300FM onboard the Kirov-class (and hence also the Type 051C, as they have the same SAM) is equipped with an infra-red sensor as well to make it capable of engaging beyond horizon surface or low-flying/sea-skimming targets.

Your opinion?
Well, this may explain why many military reports aren't concerning about the Russian SAM for anti-ship purpose.

Most of the Surface radar including Tombstone can only detect surface target at 20nm or less. If only rely on them, S-300 will only be as short-legged as ESSM in SASS mode. Also TVM require datalink, thus OECM can jam it as soon as the target can track it. And furthermore, it did not tell if there's MPA or such to illuminate the target for 48N6 to see when it's beyond 20nm.

The bright side is because the TVM only seek the painted target, so the missile itself has no sensor to judge the target, spoofing it will be much harder. I don't know if CEC feature can be implemented by MPA's sensor illumination, but if it does, it will makes OTH SASS for S-300 possible.

This is totally not your discussion string. Please move this to that other string

Thanks

Mike
User avatar
Dysta
Posts: 1909
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2015 9:32 pm

RE: S-300 SASS purpose

Post by Dysta »

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

This is totally not your discussion string. Please move this to that other string

Thanks

Mike

My bad. Reference, reference and reference. None equals string.

I will be more careful for these reports in the future.
DeSade
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 5:08 pm
Contact:

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by DeSade »

ORIGINAL: mikmyk
Does anybody have any information on a Russian aircraft active towed decoy system? The export version is named President-S but not sure what the native name is. I know it was tested in 2007 on a Mig-31 but don't know if it ever went operational. Could one of our good Russian friends look into this abit (Triode)?
Thanks!
Mike

According to Janes, President-S is export version of L370 Vitebsk suite:

http://www.janes.com/article/58967/egyp ... ce-systems

However, although Kret mention possibility of optional towed decoy:

http://kret.com/en/product/10174/

most known implementations are for helicopters:

http://russianplanes.net/id93705
https://russianmilitaryphotos.wordpress ... res-suite/
DeSade
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 5:08 pm
Contact:

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by DeSade »

[UPDATED DB v443]

#1708 - YJ-62 -- 2006, LR SSM

It seems that 280km range in database is limitation of export C-602 version. Domestic one range is approximated as 400+ km, see for example:

http://ndupress.ndu.edu/Media/News/News ... ments.aspx

http://www.janes.com/article/59003/imag ... ody-island

also, last article implies one way datalink equipped.
Hydrolek
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 3:10 am

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by Hydrolek »

[BY DESIGN, NO WEAPONS AVAILABLE]

Su-27sm3 Su-30SM can not use R -77 (Database bulid 442)
ComDev
Posts: 3116
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 1:20 pm
Contact:

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by ComDev »

ORIGINAL: Hydrolek


Su-27sm3 Su-30SM can not use R -77 (Database bulid 442)

Sources/photos please [8D]
Image

Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!
Hydrolek
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 3:10 am

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by Hydrolek »

The problem after updating 442 can not use R-77 by Su Su-30SM 27SM3

Image
Rudd
Posts: 468
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 10:34 am

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by Rudd »

Oh boy...sources/photos of that aircraft with that missile so they can confirm
User avatar
Dysta
Posts: 1909
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2015 9:32 pm

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by Dysta »

ORIGINAL: DeSade

#1708 - YJ-62 -- 2006, LR SSM

It seems that 280km range in database is limitation of export C-602 version. Domestic one range is approximated as 400+ km, see for example:

http://ndupress.ndu.edu/Media/News/News ... ments.aspx

http://www.janes.com/article/59003/imag ... ody-island

also, last article implies one way datalink equipped.
Some even rumored the actual YJ-62 range is 600km from speculation-only rumors in several military forums in China. But after 11 years, I hardly see any other military analysis including ONI, Janes and USI are denying YJ-62 can only reach 280 at all, they all believed 400km at max.

It's not my place to speculate why the Tomahawk-sized YJ-62 can only have such of pathetic range, even less than China-assisted Babur CM. Also, none has said the flight characteristics of C602 at all.

Does 280KM is based on "Lo-lo-lo" flight altitude? Will "Hi-hi-lo" make a difference? None mentioned.

Does C602 potentially reach that far based on the missile length and diameter as Tomahawk? None mentioned.

What reason caused the huge range lags with YJ-62, if 280 is a true maximum range? None mentioned.

Right now, my headache only increases when I keep on searching.
SASR
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2015 2:59 am

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by SASR »

Alright, this weapon might be hard to model and implement, but I'm going to request it anyway because it would make for some very interesting scenarios, and in case it cant be created right now, I will set a baseline here in case you want to implement it when it is easier and there is a more suitable architecture in the game to more correctly represent it. Thank you in advance.

With that being said, the CHAMP, or counter-electronics High-power microwave advanced missile project, has finally entered limited service with the USAF as a contingency weapon. USAF has said that the it has retained a small number of CHAMPs for use in a contingency. Recently, Raytheon has been rewarded a contract to refurb some AGM-86B CALCMs with the CHAMP payload, but with no plans for a flight test. This contract comes right after the USAF was given money from congress to procure a handful of CHAMPs for operational use.

From: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ni-423454/
Speaking to Flightglobal at the Air Warfare Symposium in Florida last month, Air Combat Command chief Gen Herbert “Hawk” Carlisle confirmed that the operational force wants the counter-electronics capability and that some units are being kept as “weapons to use in a contingency”.

From: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ni-423454/
“Our real goal is to take what we learnt in CHAMP and apply it to the next weapon,” he says. “We have kept some, it’s a very small number, so we have some capability with it now. Our intent is to move that to the next weapon, a more advanced weapon, and continue to modernise it.”

From: http://www.janes.com/article/59048/rayt ... n-contract
Ktech, a division of Raytheon Missile Systems' Advanced Missile Systems business, has received USD4.8 million for the refurbishment of two USAF-provided CALCMs and integration of the upgraded payload developed by the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL).....Raytheon's new contract does not, however, contain provisions for flight test.

From: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ni-423454/
The US Air Force has been under pressure from Congress to make use of the technology and has even received extra funding to make a handful of missile available for operational use.

-Uses predictable, directed high-power microwave bursts to disable electronics, with 100 shots per sortie

From: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ni-423454/
Laboratory officials have confirmed that the CHAMP system demonstrated in 2012 was capable of firing up to “100 shots per sortie” to fry military and commercial electronics in a very predictable way.

-The effective range of the bursts is very short, around a mile; The tests had the missile fly directly over the target area.

From: http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/this-s ... 1705441209
CHAMP, which is a Boeing and Air Force Research Laboratory project, was successfully tested in 2012 aboard a AGM-86 Conventional Air Launched Cruise Missile (CALCM). During the test, which occurred over a bombing and testing range in Utah, the CHAMP equipped CALCM flew over a two story building filled with computers and other powered technology and initiated a high-power, directed microwave burst above it as it passed by. The burst knocked out all the equipment inside. The test went on to zap six more targets successfully before the missile crashed itself in a pre-designated area. Other test flights are set to have followed, and even hardened targets were not completely immune to CHAMP’s zapping power.

From:http://breakingdefense.com/2012/10/new- ... crowave-t/
When CHAMP passed overhead and activated its Raytheon-built microwave emitter, the computers went dark — and, a moment later, so did the camera monitoring the test. “Cheers erupted in the conference room,” Boeing spokesman Randy Jackson wrote in a press release published Monday.

-Currently mounted on a conventional AGM-86B.
AGM-86B ALCM [CHAMP Mod] ?


From: http://www.janes.com/article/59048/rayt ... n-contract
Raytheon has received a USD10 million US Air Force (USAF) contract for directed energy activities, including integration of the Counter-electronics High-power microwave Advanced Missile Project (CHAMP) payload onto the conventional variant of the Boeing AGM-86B air-launched cruise missile (CALCM), company executives told reporters during a 23 March 2016 teleconference.

-Waypointed navigation

From:http://breakingdefense.com/2012/10/new- ... crowave-t/
That test, which used the same software as the October test, confirmed that the missile could navigate a complex flight path, selectively turning on and off the microwave.

Again, thanks for considering this.
Dimitris
Posts: 15322
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 10:29 am
Contact:

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by Dimitris »

ORIGINAL: apd1004

Thanks for the link to that list. I'm now starting to look at the 2S6 Tunguska and I can already see that it needs some work too.

Aircraft are already given a maneuverability modifier which is applied to AA fire. If your typical AA gun only has a base PH of 1% to begin with, essentially that means the maneuverability modifier is irrelevant and it has no better chance of hitting a C-17 than it does an F/A-18. In Harpoon (not that CMANO is Harpoon, but it is a good guideline) AA guns had anywhere from 10% PH for single gun manual/optical aiming all the way up to 90% PH for the more advanced radar controlled high-ROF systems. With some of the better gun systems their only real drawback is their limited range.

I agree, a complete review of anti-aircraft guns is necessary.

Applied a more elegant solution for this in v1.10, with the gradual improvement of PoK on AAA fire as more shots are fired on a given target. This better represents the fact that the first shot/burst is unlikely to hit, but the more shot opportunities the shooter has the better the aim becomes.
Triode
Posts: 283
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2014 4:18 pm

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by Triode »

ORIGINAL: emsoy

ORIGINAL: Hydrolek


Su-27sm3 Su-30SM can not use R -77 (Database bulid 442)

Sources/photos please [8D]

Actually there cant be photo of Su-27SM with R-77 or R-77-1 for now,
when Su-27SM tested RuAF dont buy R-77 (RVV-AE) , when RuAF finally recive R-77-1 Su-27SM last in a row to get them after S-35S,Su-30SM,MiG-31BM and Su-34
All this thoughts about Su-27SM + R-77 based on Su-27SKM (commercial version of Su-27SM) info and photos:
http://www.knaaz.su.opt-images.1c-bitri ... 2252151006
and
Image
from manufacturer site :
http://www.knaapo.ru/about/history/avia ... 2/su27skm/ in russian
http://www.knaapo.ru/press-centre/gallery/28/

Of course this is not direct proof that Su-27SM can use R-77 or R-77-1
As for Su-30SM obviously this plane can use R-77-1

Sorry for interrupting
Hydrolek
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 3:10 am

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by Hydrolek »

Thx :) Triode

Database 441 Su- Su- 27sm3 30sm can use the R -77 and the 442 is no longer
User avatar
Dysta
Posts: 1909
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2015 9:32 pm

Generic Laser Dazzlers

Post by Dysta »

Making a scenario which is involved with laser dazzling/blinding from non-military side/units, intend to jam their "Mk1 Eyeball"s.

Image

Image

Suggestion:

Generic Laser Dazzler (<10W) -- effective to jam Mk1 Eyeball, but not at other optical equipments
Generic Laser Dazzler (10-50W) -- effective to jam Mk1 Eyeball in longer range, as well as some IR and NV equipments
Generic Laser Dazzler (50-100W) -- same as below 50W class, but potentially damage sensors in close range
CrazyIvan101
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2016 1:14 am

RE: HMCS Provider (AOR 508) missed for DB 3000

Post by CrazyIvan101 »

Would it be possible to add in the GBI's at Fort Greely as new import along with the new AN/FPS-132 UEWR radar at its respective locations? (Beale Air Force Base, California, RAF Fylingdales, United Kingdom, Thule Site J (Thule Air Base), Greenland, Clear Air Force Station, Alaska, and Cape Cod Air Force Station, Massachusetts). These new Radars have range of 3000 miles and "are integrated into the Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS). The upgrades modernized the hardware and software to improve midcourse BMDS sensor coverage by providing critical early warning, tracking, object classification and cueing data." These new Radars are able to directly cue GBI's to a target. However currently GBI's only have a datalink with a range of 220 miles.
Triode
Posts: 283
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2014 4:18 pm

RE: Generic Laser Dazzlers

Post by Triode »

ORIGINAL: Dysta

Making a scenario which is involved with laser dazzling/blinding from non-military side/units, intend to jam their "Mk1 Eyeball"s.


Suggestion:

Generic Laser Dazzler (<10W) -- effective to jam Mk1 Eyeball, but not at other optical equipments
Generic Laser Dazzler (10-50W) -- effective to jam Mk1 Eyeball in longer range, as well as some IR and NV equipments
Generic Laser Dazzler (50-100W) -- same as below 50W class, but potentially damage sensors in close range

+1 , good idea since this weapons starting to appear on warships
systems like 5P-42 and 5P-42-1
fb.asp?m=3951734
fb.asp?m=3951991
22350 "Admiral Gorshkov" ,in case this systems make it into database, should recive two 5P-42 "Filin" station (4 laser each)
User avatar
darkhelix
Posts: 65
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 2:00 pm

RE: Right Click

Post by darkhelix »

[FIXED v1.11]

I'm learning how to use CMANO and the database is incredibly helpful.
I would like to keep it open all the time but if I do, I cannot right click on any units on my map.
Is this me being stupid or is there a way to keep the database open all the time?
I know that there is an online database but I am reliant on the hyperlinking from units on the map to open the correct page quickly.
Thanks,
Toby
SASR
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2015 2:59 am

Flight III Naming

Post by SASR »

[UPDATED DB v443]

The first USN flight III has been named

http://www.bizjournals.com/washington/b ... m-for.html
The Harvey C. Barnum Jr., also known as the DDG 124, is the first destroyer in the fleet built with a so-called Flight III design that includes Waltham, Massachusetts-based Raytheon Co.’s (NYSE: RTN) upgraded Air and Missile Defense Radar. Construction will begin in September 2017 and the ship will be delivered in July 2021.

DB Naming Change :

DDG 122 <Not Named> [Arleigh Burke Flight III] -------------> DDG 124 Harvey C. Barnum Jr. [Arleigh Burke Flight III]
mikmykWS
Posts: 7185
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 4:34 pm

RE: DB String

Post by mikmykWS »

Renaming String so everybody knows what it is.
User avatar
AdderStrike
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 5:25 pm

RE: DB String

Post by AdderStrike »

[NEED INFO]

The USN is moving ahead with the purchase of UAV's to be deployed from subs. This would be an incredible addition to the game. Any chance?

THE PENTAGON — U.S. attack and guided missile submarine are set to field miniature unmanned aerial vehicles that will act as the eyes and ears not only for the boats below water but also help special operations forces and strike aircraft target weapons, the Navy’s Director of Undersea Warfare told USNI News last week.

As part of the Fiscal Year 2017 budget submission to Congress, the Navy is asking for small Blackwing UAVs to be launched from attack and guided missile submarines, the Navy’s director for undersea warfare Rear Adm. Charles Richard told USNI News.

“So there’s 150 small unmanned aerial systems coming in on submarines, so we’re now buying them,” Richard said. “It’s not something that you would [just] see on a PowerPoint presentation. These are fully integrated they’ll go in talk back to the ship, talk to the combat control system and additionally we’ll have 12 of a 21-inch torpedo tube launched vehicles with much longer launched duration.”

2013 PEO Subs Slide on AWESUM Program. NAVSEA Image
2013 PEO Subs Slide on AWESUM Program. NAVSEA Image

According to a follow-on statement provided by the Navy, “the three-inch canister launched UAVs are part of Advanced Weapons Enhanced by Submarine UAS against Mobile targets (AWESUM) demonstrates submarine launch, data sharing and control across the Joint Force.”

The current year budget move is set to further operationalize a years-long program to use small UAVs from attack and guided missile boats.

Naval Sea Systems Command Program Executive Officer Subs briefed the AWESUM program publically in late 2013 and outlined the work with U.S. special operations forces (SOF) and the U.S Air Force.

The briefing slides from late 2013 indicated the Blackwings would communicate with a submarines antennas and could provide third party targeting information to aircraft through Link 16 data links. In addition to the targeting function, the UAVs could also possibly be weaponized as a defensive measure for submarines operating in the littorals.

The miniature UAVs are launched through the boats’ existing systems it uses for acoustic countermeasures and have a flight endurance of less than an hour, according to the 2013 presentation.

NRL's XFC Sea Robin demonstration in August 2013. US Navy Photo
NRL’s XFC Sea Robin demonstration in August 2013. US Navy Photo

In 2013, the Navy Research Lab (NRL) also tested larger Sea Robin UAV, powered by fuel-cell technology and launched from a modified Tomahawk Land Attack Missile canister.

I would post the link, but currently I am unable to do so.
Locked

Return to “Mods and Scenarios”