Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post new mods and scenarios here.

Moderator: MOD_Command

User avatar
Sharana
Posts: 347
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 9:58 pm

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by Sharana »

Hello, very long post incoming!
I was encouraged to submit requests for whatever I was missing in my scenarios, so here it is.
Before I submit my requests I want to clarify that not all of them are in active service right now, but there are many "near future" platforms or loadouts in the DB already, so it shouldn't be a problem - it can only make those 2020+ type of scenarios a lot more interesting.
Also to make it easier for the loadouts I will include DB IDs if possible.

Generic:

1) Ground Control Station
Image

2) Ground Control Station (mobile)
Image

The UAV Ground Control Stations are pretty important in many scenarios involving UAVs that aim to be more realistic. Not all UAVs are the US Reapers that use satelite (very expensive) - most can operate only 250km to 350km (best case) from their GCS. By using relays (ground based or another UAV) that range gets extended, but rarely goes above 600-700km total. That still makes them vurnable as those GCSs can be located and destroyed or just jammed, neutralising the UAVs in both cases. Adding GCS for each UAV model is too much, so generic GCSs are sufficient for those who are looking for that level of details.
Image

Another thing that is missing for such level of details are the components building IADS (Integrated Air Defense System) - mainly the C2 and C3 elements (Command, Control, Communications). In CMANO all air defenses are "integrated" by default, but in reality they obviously aren't. There are generic bunkers in the DB, but for the extra survivability most are actually mobile. This is example from the russian IADS:
Image
S-400 can't just get information from the AWACS in the sky - that information together with data from early warning radars, ELS and ELINT goes to the Sector Control Vehicle. That fused picture then goes to Air Defense C3 vehicle that controls the regional SAM sites and obviously each SAM site has it's C2 . So to neutralise specific SAM battery one has to destroy their FCR (fire-control radar) and they can no longer shoot, but if one finds and getsthe C2 vehicle as that's the "brains" and it controls up to 8 batteries at the same time (usually 2-4 ) and all those TELs just become cut out from the IADS. Adding so many specific vehicles would be too much work, so few generic ones are good enough and can easily get the job done in such type of scenarios.

3) Mobile Sector Control Station
Image
Image

4) C3 Vehicle
Image
Image

5) C2 Vehicle
Image


Russia:

6) R-77-1 (RVV-SD) missile loadouts for the Su-30SM jets (as Su-35S and Su-27SM3 already havehem). Both mix with older missiles and full R-77-1 loadouts. No there aren't pictures with them yet -well only with the AKU-170 MEU (missile ejection unit) that is needed for them, because they are in very limited supply and reserved" for the A-A platforms (Su-35 almost exclusively), but once they hit the squadrons in mass we will start seeing different loadouts. The AIM-120D and Meteor are still quite rare also, but the loadouts exist for "near future" scenarios, so same should apply for this case.
#4582 Su-30SM 2015 (to not create different version only because of those missiles
- A/A: AA-12 Adder B [R-77-1], DECM Pods, Mixed - should have 2x AA-10 (#1899), 2x AA-11 (#2053), ), 2x AA-12 (#2056)
- A/A: AA-12 Adder B [R-77-1], DECM Pods, Standard CAP - should have 2x AA-11 (#2053) and 6x 2x AA-12 (#2056)


7) Su-34 loadout including the SAP-14 jamming pod. It's spotted in active service (and is in the DB already anyway as pod under #2840 SAP-14 OECM Pod)
#3723 Su-34 2015
- Offensive ECM - should have the #2840 SAP-14 OECM Pod together with 2x AA-11 (#2053) and 2x AA-10 (#1901) as (Optional). Maybe also 1-2x drop tank as the other loadouts (#1524). Should of course also include both DECM pods on the wing tips.
- AS-17 Krypton C [Kh 31P, ARM], Offensive ECM - should have the #2840 SAP-14 OECM Pod together with 2x AA-11 (#2053), 2x AS-17 (#276) and 2x AA-10 (#1901) as (Optional). Should of course also include both DECM pods on the wing tips.

As the pod is already in the DB I will just leave images of it with the Su-34 since 2016 with role "escort jammer" (rumored as 4x such for each regiment, so 4x from 36 in the regiment).
Image
Image


8) Su-35S 2020 based on what was shown at MAKS 2017 show. Stating right away that the representatives on place confirmed that's mockups, but integration is planned with integrating trials starting in early 2018. Don't see reason not to add something like that given that the current DB is far away from "only in active service" toys :)
The new stuff was two twin R-77-1 mounts between the engines, Kh-35U anti-ship missile, Kh-38 missiles and T220 pod (the one developed for MiG-35). As the pod is not yet in the DB some reference:
http://www.npk-spp.ru/deyatelnost/avion ... ya-su.html
Sadly there isn't much on the manufacturer website and the reason is that it's not marketed yet. The targeting pod was developed as part of the contract for MiG-29Ms with Egypt, documents show that along with batch of 22 MiGs there are 22 of those targeting pods going along. There aren't much materials other then some exposition photos + video from the manufacture where it can be also seen:
https://youtu.be/2czdn3cj8-A?t=116 (from 1:56)
The known stuff is the name (T220 targeting pod), the dimensions (2,4m long and 0,37m in diameter) and that it's AN/AAQ-14 like targeting pod, so EO, FLIR (the manufacturer website says Air-Air too) and laser designator. Sensor name is "ОЛС И-220/КЭ СМ" ... OLS I-220. As no real details I guess some generic sensor stats from that 90es era.

Now back to the loadouts:
Su-35S 2020
- A/A: AA-12 Adder B [R-77-1], DECM Pods, Heavy - should have 2x AA-11 (#2053) and 10x AA-12 (#2056). If too OP then 8x, but on MAKS 2017 it was with 2x2 under the belly.
- AS 20 Kayak [Kh-35U Star], DECM Pods - should have 2x AA-11 (#2053), 4x AS-20 (#978) and 2x AA-12 (#2056) as (Optional). Also 1x drop tank as in the Su-34's AS-20 loadout I guess
- AS 20 Kayak [Kh-35U Star], DECM Pods, Long range - should have 2x AA-11 (#2053), 2x AS-20 (#978) and 2x AA-12 (#2056) as (Optional). Also 2x drop tanks as in the Su-34's AS-20 loadout I guess
- [Kh-38MLE] Laser, T220 Pod, DECM Pods - should have 2x AA-11 (#2053), 4x AS-22 (#3130) and 2x AA-12 (#2056) as (Optional) plus the T220 targeting pod.
- [Kh-38MLE] Laser, T220 Pod, DECM Pods, Long range - should have 2x AA-11 (#2053), AS-22 (#3130) and 2x AA-12 (#2056) as (Optional) plus the T220 targeting pod. Also 1x drop tank maybe.
- KAB 500L LGB, T220 Pod, DECM Pods - should have 2x AA-11 (#2053), 4x KAB-500L (#1035) and 2x AA-12 (#2056) as (Optional) plus the T220 targeting pod.
- KAB 500L LGB, T220 Pod, DECM Pods, Long range - should have 2x AA-11 (#2053), 2x KAB-500L (#1035) and 2x AA-12 (#2056) as (Optional) plus the T220 targeting pod.
- KAB 1500L-Pr LGB [Penetrator], T220 Pod, DECM Pods - should have 2x AA-11 (#2053), 2x KAB-1500L (#49) and 2x AA-12 (#2056) as (Optional) plus the T220 targeting pod.
- the existing loadouts in Su-35S 2017
Image
Image
Image
Image


9) MiG-31BM with Kh-47М2 (Kinzhal / Dagger). The only reason I'm mentioning this is because unlike the other wunderwaffen presented this one is claimed with IOC and there are 8x different MiG-31BMs spotted that were modified to carry it (06, 81, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 593). The range is to be taken with grain of salt obviously.
Image
The diagram supposedly shows the shooting at the maximum range.
1. climb, speed subsonic, flight time 8 minutes, distance 125 km
2. Supersonic flight, speed 2300 km / h, flight altitude 15000 meters, flight time 15 minutes, a distance of 575 km
3. rocket launch, angle of attack 10 degrees
4. flight on the ballistic trajectory, the engine running time is 57 seconds
5. altitude 100 km, speed M = 10, inclusion of the homing head. The search area from this height is 285 x 160 km.
6. Destruction of the target with a speed M = 3.8 / 4650 km / h
Warhead probably similar to the Iskander one, so 700kg HE. But that might be too much of guessing even if there other guesstimated weapons or platforms in the DB (like the SA-27 Morfey for example).
Image


10) Orion UAV 2018. That's Predator sized russian UAV, probably the biggest that is close to being completed (with all the trials etc). This is the manufacturers website and their presentation on MAKS 2017:
http://kronshtadt.ru/products/bespilotn ... a/orion-e/
https://vk.com/video-134327038_456239036
Image
So from the data they provided:
Lenght: 8m
Wingspan: 16m
Height : 3m
Maximum takeoff weight: 1000kg
Maximum payload: 200 kg
Maximum altitude: 7500m
Endurance: 24h
Cruise speed: 200 kmh/h

The standard loadout is TV/IR Sensor with laser designator and TESAR type radar. That payload can be exchanged for EMS and SIGINT suit
http://www.npk-spp.ru/deyatelnost/avion ... stema.html


11) 9M82MD missile that is missing from the S-300V4 SAM. The details are sketchy, but representative from Almaz-Antey said during Army-2016 that the 3rd missile for S-300V4 is ready too and namely 9M82MD. The range is stated as 350km (even if it was said to be 400km in other places which is suspicious already). Fits in the 9A82M TELAR, adds just "D" to the 2nd missile name that is already in the DB (9M82M) and increases the range from 200km to 350km. That actually makes it the longest range SAM in their inventory, because 40N6 isn't fielded yet. Also not to be confused with the 40N6 for S-400 as that's different rockets from different manufacturers.
http://tass.com/defense/898884
https://www.ruaviation.com/news/2016/9/9/6820/?h
Image


12) Fix the damn S-400 already :D Seriously, 40N6 is not fielded yet - as of 3. April 2018 they are entering "final stages" of testing and might be declared IOC this summer. But even then they will never be the only missile, so the S-400 in CMANO doesn't and won't exist. The reason is that the missile is just too big and heavy in order to fit 4 of them on 1 TEL. Just look at the S-300V4 that has long range missile - they are mounted as 2x instead of 4x:
Image

40N6 as last announced will be the main missile of the upcomming S-500 that is expected around 2020. And it has different TEL that is designed for those bigger and heavier missiles:
Image
Image
Image
Image
https://iz.ru/725373/nikolai-surkov-ale ... cii-400-km

So the current 12 TELs with 4x40N6s each are pure sci-fi. Given that it's expensive there will probably be 2 TELs out of the 8 in the battery that use it in 2020 type of loadout. Their simple existence will force stand off jammers and ISR planes to stay 450-500km away (just to be on the safe side) and that is enough to make them close to useless. No one plans to shoot everything that flies with the 40N6 missile. It has other role.
And while such sci-fi is implemented another very real feature is missed - namely the 9M96 and 9M96D missiles that are smaller and can be packed as 4 meaning a single TEL can carry 16 missiles which is great when facing zerg of cruise missiles for example.
Image
Image
Image

Based on that I propose to delete there current 2017 loadout or mark it as hypothetical. Instead make 2020 one where out of 8 TELs 2 are double ones with total of 4 40N6s (to keep the big planes away). Another 2 with (4x4) 16 9M96/9M96D missiles each for self defense basically and 4 TELs with the standard 48N6E3 to engage aircrafts. That would be a lot more realistic then the current full 40N6 loadout and players can shuffle the amount of each missile, kind of like filling VLS which was the idea behind S-400 that didn't materialize yet (they still field 48N6Es only).


13) Pantsir-S2. Upgraded version over the S1. Main difference: new SOTS S-band search radar increases detection range from 36 km to over 40 km with 360° coverage. The system can now track in excess of 40 incoming targets up from 8-10. Also the new missile of Pantsir-S2 will increase the system’s range of fire from 20 to 30 kilometers.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/russia_r ... 05164.html
Image
Image


14) 40V6MT Universal Mobile Mast. The threat posed by low flying cruise missiles (and planes too ofc) was obvious long ago. There are radars designed for that purpose even for the older S-300 systems. This article in english is pretty good source on the matter:
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-40V6M-Mast-System.html

At least add the last version 40V6MT that comes with the S-400 system - it's radar mounted on 38.8m high mast. That allows the complex to detect low flying targets (esp cruise missile) on much longer ranges compared to other radars. Given that cruise missiles scenarios are popular such important tool shouldn't be left out of CMANO.
Image
Image
Image
Image


15) Avtobaza-M Ground-based ESM/ELINT system. Details from Rosoboronexport:
http://roe.ru/eng/catalog/air-defence-s ... vtobaza-m/
Image

16) Add the 9M100 short-range surface-to-air missile. It will be used in the 3K96 Redut VLS and in S-350. It's small missile that was last showed on MAKS-2017 and 4 of them can be packed in the spot of one 9M96D missile.
http://www.deagel.com/Defensive-Weapons ... 80001.aspx
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
Sharana
Posts: 347
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 9:58 pm

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by Sharana »

USA, China, Israel and few others to follow when I get more time for them.
Image
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 »

Sharana that is a very time-consuming effort you have here just for Russia part. Can't wait for China and US because I am tired of using weapon change and other tricks to make 2025+ campaign.
orca
Posts: 545
Joined: Wed Nov 06, 2013 4:59 pm

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by orca »

would it be possible to add facilities to simulate China's Spratly island defenses?

hardened missile shelter
gun fortification

both are buildings with either light or special armor (whatever developers feel is most appropriate), relatively small buildings with not overly high damage points

thanks for considering

https://amti.csis.org/chinas-new-spratl ... -defenses/
User avatar
Dragon029
Posts: 78
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 11:41 am
Contact:

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by Dragon029 »

When I've created Spratly island bases, I've either used airbases (where applicable) and docks, along with any weapons systems I think are applicable, or (because CMANO may think some islands are underwater) I use (drilling) platforms and/or hypothetical unit mobile airbases.
gosnold
Posts: 248
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 5:37 pm

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by gosnold »

I fully agree with Sharana's proposed S-400 rework, currently the in-game S-400 is overpowered and will engage small fighter at 400km, with 40N6 missiles which are probably not maneuverable enough to do that. In addition to having less 40N6 per battery, the default ROE for the missile should be restricted to engage only large recon planes or bombers, so that it does not expend its limited supply on less important targets.
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: gosnold

with 40N6 missiles which are probably not maneuverable enough to do that

I disagree, the missiles used for S-400 (40N6 and 48N6) are using thrust vectoring rocket engines, they have substantial High-G steering compare to older variants.
User avatar
Gunner98
Posts: 5951
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 12:49 am
Location: The Great White North!
Contact:

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by Gunner98 »

Cargo issue:

DBID #4339 - DHC-5D Buffalo (Kenya -1978)

Loadout for Trooper works fine. the two Cargo Loadouts do not allow addition of any cargo however.

Thanks

B
Check out our novel, Northern Fury: H-Hour!: http://northernfury.us/
And our blog: http://northernfury.us/blog/post2/
Twitter: @NorthernFury94 or Facebook https://www.facebook.com/northernfury/
User avatar
Gunner98
Posts: 5951
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 12:49 am
Location: The Great White North!
Contact:

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by Gunner98 »

Another Cargo issue:

DBid 2273 UH-1N Huey (United States - 1995)

All loadouts works fine except 'Marines, 4x, Hydra 70mm Rockets' does not allow the load of pers

DBID 516 CH-53 Super Stallion (United States -1982)

Loadout 'Cargo, 12 tons, Slung Load (Light Armored Vehicle) will not load a LAV - problem is that Mass of the LAV is 13 tons and limit for the loadout is 12.

DBID 2072 - LCP United States

No cargo capacity - should be 36 troops, 4 tons, ~30m sq - its really just another, older, version of the LCVP
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/we ... large.html



B
Check out our novel, Northern Fury: H-Hour!: http://northernfury.us/
And our blog: http://northernfury.us/blog/post2/
Twitter: @NorthernFury94 or Facebook https://www.facebook.com/northernfury/
ExNusquam
Posts: 530
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2014 11:26 pm
Location: Washington, D.C.

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by ExNusquam »

ORIGINAL: gosnold

I fully agree with Sharana's proposed S-400 rework, currently the in-game S-400 is overpowered and will engage small fighter at 400km, with 40N6 missiles which are probably not maneuverable enough to do that. In addition to having less 40N6 per battery, the default ROE for the missile should be restricted to engage only large recon planes or bombers, so that it does not expend its limited supply on less important targets.
That's a WRA issue, not a database issue.

Gratch1111
Posts: 422
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 10:21 pm
Location: Sverige

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by Gratch1111 »

The Lightning F.3 uses the Red Top missile but the text is for the Hawk SAM missile while the data is from the Red Top

Czech Republic(2005), Thailand(ok), Hungary(2003) and South Africa(ok) all uses the JAS 39 Griffin C/D

Brazil has ordered the Gripen NG operational from 2019, they are also interested in a aircraft carrier version(Hypo)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_JAS_39_Gripen

New sub(2 at least, might be 3), A26 delivered in 2022, 2024, ?

A19 Gotland(Gotland+Halland) to be improved to almost A26 class by 2018-2019

Sweden to use Patriot PAC 3, starting in 2020 https://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.a ... el=6816242

Sweden should have these Hypo units

Visby Corvette with Umkhonto SAM(Hypo)







User avatar
KLAB
Posts: 483
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 5:24 pm

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by KLAB »

https://pp.userapi.com/c840323/v8403237 ... q89BTM.jpg

Just in case it doesn't migrate from the News thread courtesy of Triode,
Can we update the SU-30SM with the R-77-1 load outs please?
The link photo is a Russian Navy SU-30SM but presumably the R-77-1 is being carried by all Russian Su-30SM's now?

Thanks for consideration and for a great sim.
K
Zaslon
Posts: 298
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2015 8:52 am

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by Zaslon »

ORIGINAL: KLAB

https://pp.userapi.com/c840323/v8403237 ... q89BTM.jpg

Just in case it doesn't migrate from the News thread courtesy of Triode,
Can we update the SU-30SM with the R-77-1 load outs please?
The link photo is a Russian Navy SU-30SM but presumably the R-77-1 is being carried by all Russian Su-30SM's now?

Thanks for consideration and for a great sim.
K
probably before 2018, don't you think?
Image
Kids think about Iran and Amateurs think about Russia, but professionals think about China
User avatar
KLAB
Posts: 483
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 5:24 pm

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by KLAB »

ORIGINAL: Zaslon

ORIGINAL: KLAB

https://pp.userapi.com/c840323/v8403237 ... q89BTM.jpg

Just in case it doesn't migrate from the News thread courtesy of Triode,
Can we update the SU-30SM with the R-77-1 load outs please?
The link photo is a Russian Navy SU-30SM but presumably the R-77-1 is being carried by all Russian Su-30SM's now?

Thanks for consideration and for a great sim.
K
probably before 2018, don't you think?

I'd like to think so and agree that it's been implied as a key weapon from the outset but TASS announced in March that the SU-30SM had only just been declared "fully Operational" implying the R-77-1 was up and running. Is it just a coincidence that a few weeks later the first R-77-1 equipped photo appears?
I'd be happy with R-77-1 from when the first cheque for a production run was signed in about 2015. I'd have to go and check threads for exact dates.
K
Gratch1111
Posts: 422
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 10:21 pm
Location: Sverige

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by Gratch1111 »

India - Viraat Carrier

1 Hangar 50 Aircraft
1 Open Parking 60 Aircraft

Had between 25-37 Aircraft/Helicopters at any time

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Hermes_(R12)

https://www.militaryfactory.com/ships/d ... Viraat-R22

http://www.military-today.com/navy/viraat.htm
Hongjian
Posts: 841
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2015 1:11 pm

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by Hongjian »

JD-15/J-17 carrierborne EW plane has flown. Basically just like the JD-16 already in the database, just carrier-capable.

Image

Updated with a clearer picture. The ELINT pods have been modified compared to the JD-16...
User avatar
tjhkkr
Posts: 2431
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 11:15 pm
Contact:

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by tjhkkr »

I have been asking for a Arapaho conversion for a long time; I did not know you implemented it with the RO/RO.
Thank you very much!
Remember that the evil which is now in the world will become yet more powerful, and that it is not evil which conquers evil, but only love -- Olga Romanov.
BDukes
Posts: 2664
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 12:59 pm

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by BDukes »

Hello

Marine F-35B get GBU-49 loads

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



Don't call it a comeback...
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: Hongjian

JD-15/J-17 carrierborne EW plane has flown. Basically just like the JD-16 already in the database, just carrier-capable.

Updated with a clearer picture. The ELINT pods have been modified compared to the JD-16...
Speaking of ELINT, there's a discussion about J-15D and J-16D/J-17 are capable to simultaneously jam and collect hostile electronic emissions, because they are installed with antennas to receive them.

The difference is, J-15D is using more efficient one-blade antenna on top of a pod, compare to J-16D's separated antenna fins for different bandwidths.

Image
User avatar
hellfish6
Posts: 695
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2008 2:09 am

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

Post by hellfish6 »

Could we have a single unit port, sorta like the single-unit airfields? Maybe small (1-2 commercial ships), medium (3-6), large (6-10) and commercial-sized (11+) versions.
Locked

Return to “Mods and Scenarios”