Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

[BDukes]

Please add Chinese HQ-22 SAM site (2018). Want and Need.

This follow on to HQ-12 and replace many HQ-2 Site

Picture

https://twitter.com/HenriKenhmann/statu ... 0791799808
https://twitter.com/reutersanders/statu ... 2917161985
https://twitter.com/reutersanders/statu ... 0847463424
https://twitter.com/reutersanders/statu ... 8059273217

Missile Data
http://defence-blog.com/army/china-unve ... huhai.html
https://armyrecognition.com/october_201 ... ystem.html

This Hongian post correct explan diff with HQ-9B

fb.asp?m=4172708

[BDukes]

Please Added Pakistan LY-80(HQ-16A) Army. Want

https://quwa.org/2017/03/13/pakistan-fo ... ce-system/
http://www.airdefence.in/weapons/pakist ... le-system/
https://www.armyrecognition.com/china_c ... video.html
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/pakistan ... 50.348350/

[BDukes]

F-16D Barak Loadouts. Want

See picture

https://twitter.com/reutersanders/statu ... 3139293184

[Hongjian]

ORIGINAL: LORDPrometheus

ORIGINAL: Hongjian

Another update on the upgraded Type-051B Luhai-class DDG; according to visitors who asked the sailors onboard the ship during open day and judging from the mounting points ontop the missile cannisters, as well as the official model of the ship, the option for sixteen YJ-12A AShMs still exists. Probably a rare loadout-option only reserved for wartime operations, but still.

The mount does look like you could put a second box on it but notice there are no connections for the electrical and communications links. The outer part of each bracket is clearly a lifting point and the bracket is not identical to the bracket on the launcher frame. I suspect it is not meant to mount a second container on top but rather has the pegs so they can be stacked while in storage. If you look at the Tomahawk box launcher it has the same thing but that was clearly never meant to be stacked

Actually, did some digging through the old photos and found out that it was already confirmed long ago that the YJ-12 cannisters can be stacked to a quad. Question back then was just what sort of missiles these cannisters contained. Now we know that they can both be quad-packed and are indeed YJ-12 and not YJ-18A or any other missile.



So, with 16 of these 400km+ ranged supersonic AShMs, the old Luhai-class instantaniously became the strongest surface warfare asset in the PLAN behind the 055s (once they are commissioned).

[Dysta]

I think the reason to have 8 canisters instead of 16 is mentioned from SDF: YJ-12 is around 3-4 tons, which is many times heavier than YJ-82. While adding 24-36 tons of extra missiles is theorically possible, it will significantly shift the center of gravity upward to reduce seaworthiness. Also, increasing few inches of waterline depth is also not good for flanking speed and fuel mileage, unless the AOR/AOE is come along.

[KC45]

Some satellite for Japan. Is this enough for too less infomation to add?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informati ... _Satellite

[TAAAS]

SPICE 2000 For ROKAF F-16 Fleet?

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... eli-weapon
http://alert5.com/2017/11/30/rokaf-f-16 ... g-15-icbm/
http://apextranslation.co.kr/rokaf-stat ... abilities/

http://news.chosun.com/site/data/html_d ... 01842.html
http://www.koreadefence.net/detail.php?number=3633

[Vici Supreme]

ORIGINAL: apache85


I am currently responsible for updating the DB3k; it's a big task and it's only one of my assigned roles. I prioriitise (generally) like this:

1. Needed platforms with easily available or well presented information
2. Needed platforms with difficult to obtain or scarce information
3. Corrections to existing platforms/weapons etc with easily verified sources
4. Wanted platforms presented with lots of data and easily verified sources
5. Wanted platforms with scarce, unverifiable or missing data

It's a bit more fluid than that but the general idea is that a major new platform with lots of available information is a much better investment of time than a esoteric platform with conlficting, vague or missing data.

The process of adding a new platform can take many hours, so it's not just a matter of plug in info and away we go. Each datapoint has to be verified and then implemented [:)]

Don't know exactly what goes into updating/creating DB entries but wouldn't it make sense to prioritise corrections to already existing DB platforms over adding new stuff?

Supreme

[Dragon029]

I think it comes down to how big the correction is and how important the new system / platform is. If the B-21 and approximate performance data was publicly unveiled today, I'd much prefer that it be prioritised over some incorrect F-16 loadout for instance, while on the flip-side, I'd much prefer to have something like the range correction of a common air-to-air missile prioritised over the addition of something like a 3rd world nation's new COIN turboprop.

[KC45]

For the infomation of Type07 VLA, for akizuki,asahi,maya-class destroyer. range is 30km(16nm) and payload is Type 97 or Type 12 LWT.
I checked Japanese sources and the wiki info is correct.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_07_V ... _group2010
http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/hyouka/ ... shi/02.pdf (Japanese source)

[AceOfSpadeszzzzzz]

apy-9 described as pesa not aesa in database.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_ ... prov=sfla1

[Cpt Black]

The EH-60 Quickfix was never fielded as the EH-60C. Yep, you do a web search and the first hit takes you to a page quoting a book from the very early 90's based on information from even earlier. There was an EH-60B which was a UH-60 modified with longer landing gear and a SLAR stuck underneath. It was never fielded. Because of this the Quickfix II system was often assumed to be the EH-60C.

Before it was fielded, however, the Army decided to revert the final designator to match the airframe itself, not the system. One assumes this is to avoid confusion during maintenance. So it became the electronic warfare version of the UH-60A, not the third version of the EH-60.

It was fielded and officially designated the EH-60A Quickfix II (Quickfix I was on a UH-1 platform).

Source: Me and a couple of thousand flight hours operating an EH-60A [;)]

[Zaslon]

ORIGINAL: Zaslon

ORIGINAL: Gypsy661

Please Add Buddy store loadout to the
Rafale fighter jet and the Mig-29M / Mig-35 Fighter jets

Add Mig-29m2/35 to Egypt's Airforce

It was reported twice since January here and here, but at least we have plenty of Hypothetical US units!

Another interesting loadout for M/M2.



2 Kh-38M
2 R-77
1 PTB-1500 Fuel tank.
1 T-220 Pod
2 Decoy launchers

Source

An additional source:

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... force.html

https://www.janes.com/article/83976/egy ... 1-missiles

Thanks

[KLAB]

#4231 Su-25SM3
Principle sensor is the: SOLT-25.
This is currently only shown as a laser designator.
SOLT-25 has both TV and Thermal IR channel in addition to the laser designator.
P96. Airforces Magazine. NOV 2018 Su-25 Operators Part 1.Alexander Madlenov.
Also:
http://www.algora.com/Algora_blog/2017/ ... s-in-syria
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ZzUNohz6Vy0/ ... AEQwZL.jpg
http://alejandro-8.blogspot.com/2017/05 ... u.html?m=1

Plus having checked DB:
I'd personally question if the Vikhr is in use by the SM3 at this stage and there's no operational photos of any SM3 using it yet.
The SM3 is capable of using the R-73 so are load outs with R-60TM valid?
As requested previously it seems operationally the pylon previously used by AAM is now predominantly used for ECM pods.
The
K

[PN79]

ORIGINAL: PN79

ORIGINAL: 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)

Regarding Czech JAS-39:
- the first JAS-39C were received in 2005 with incomplete ECM suite and armed only with AIM-9, they were however immediately pressed to air policing duties due to withdrawal of MiG-21 that year
- from 2007 have Gripens full ECM suite and also AIM-120C-5 were received that year
- Czech JAS-39C and JAS-39D lacked software for ground attack till 2017 software modernization

So I propose for DB update this for Czech Gripens:
JAS-39C and JAS-39D from 2005 to 2007 armed only with AIM-9M, no ground attack possibilities, incomplete ECM suite
JAS-39C and JAS-39D from 2007 to 2017 armed with AIM-9M and AIM-120C-5, no ground attack possibilities
JAS-39C and JAS-39D from 2018 - added ground attack possibility with GBU-12 and possibly unguided Mk.82 and possibly also with Litening 4i pod as these are ordered with delivery at the end of 2018

Notes:
Czech Air force has bought and ordered only GBU-12 sets for L-159 and JAS-39 - 30 training sets of GBU-12 delivered in 2006 for L-159 and another 180 sets (live and training) to be delivered now.
Further Mk.82 without GBU-12 sets are considered to be bought so unguided Mk.82 armament for JAS-39 can be considered. L-159 pilots are training to use unguided Mk.82.
Four Litening 4i pod are ordered to be delivered this year - only for JAS-39.
Air to air missiles are AIM-9M-2 (from 2002), AIM-9M-9 (from 2005) and AIM-120C-5 (from 2007).
CRV-7 (C-15) rockets with LAU-5002 are used only by L-159. I have no informatin regarding their availability for JAS-39.

Regards,
Pavel

Hello,

There is one article in English regarding Czech order of Litening 4i (I can now say that the first two were delivered):
https://www.janes.com/article/79211/cze ... capability

Regarding the proposed years for JAS-39 with AIM-120C-5 I would recommend actually to give it in the database from 2008 as it took some time before it was operational.

The ground attack ability should be given from 2019.

Otherwise standard loadout with AA weapons were originally two or four Sidewinders. I saw only once six Sidewinders on Czech Gripen.

From 2008 it is usually two AMRAAMs and two Sidewinders or just Sidewinders (two or four) as there are only few AMRAAMs.

Regarding the first Gripens with incomplete ECM suite I would recommend to add them to the database without ECM and also without RWS. This was installed additionally during 2006-2007. For simplification there can be Gripen from 2005 to 2007 (no ECM, no RWS, just Sidewinders). Then standard Gripen from 2008 to 2018 with ECM and RWS and with AMRAAMs (but also with only Sidewinders as option) and Gripen from 2019 with anti-ground capability with Litening 4i and GBU-12.

[SeaQueen]

Great data on Chinese mines:

https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cgi/v ... -red-books

[Sharana]

Hello,
I'm working on scenario involving the newly delivered syrian S-300 and the Israeli Air Force, but I noticed that IDF is not up to date to say at least and I can't make the scenario "realistic" and fun to play without some of the missing assets. Here is a quick list of what is really missing in that scenario:

1) SDB heavy loadout on F-15I and F-16I.
Both F-15I and F-16I have loadouts where they can carry 4 Mk-84 bombs. Nothing prevents them from having 4 x 4 each = 16 SDB loadouts.
For F-16 that means no drop tanks, but it can still carry enough fuel with the 3rd drop tank under the belly plus the 2 CFTs that the F-16Is have. Here Rafael shows it's weapons and I don't see a reason why all 4 weapon stations can't be with SDB - overkill for dialy use, but useful in special circumstances like the mentioned scenario.




F-15 can even carry 20 SDBs without sacrificing it's drop tanks, AAMs and pods (targeting and self defense).


2) The Rafael Shyshield jammer is DECM in the DB while it should be OECM as that's the IAF's escort jammer, it's not for self defense - there is the ELL-8222 pod for self defense that is a lot smaller.
Also it's included only in the SEAD loadout of F-16I with HARMs. First of all there are no HARM missiles in Israel, they didn't buy them so their ARM stocks if they do exist are with Shrikes. But that's minor, they wanted to buy HARMs recently. The jammer however can probably be part of other loadouts as well like the strike one in the video below.

https://youtu.be/0SCgoKQ0ttM

3) SPICE 250 & SPICE 1000 loadouts.
The SPICE 1000 is already in the DB, it's only missing in the loadouts. SPICE-250 is SDB sized bomb (so quad packs), but with EO/IR + GPS/INS allowing it to hit targets even when the GPS signal is jammed (or even the datalink as it can identify the intended target). Also notice the F-16 model above it on the picture (reference for the SDB heavy and SPICE-250 heavy loadouts).

http://airrecognition.com/index.php/foc ... hters.html

F-35I should also get 8 SPICE-250 internal loadout.

4) Lynx MLRS with EXTRA missile.
IDF developed their own MLRS system called Lynx. It's modular.
http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product4244.html






The interesting missile that extends the gameplay possibilities is the EXTRA with 150km range as it's actually in service. Each vehicle can hold up to 8 EXTRA (2 x 4). Battery is probably 3x vehicles, same s M270 MLRS.
https://www.globalsecurity.org/military ... /extra.htm


The Predator Hawk missile passed trials, but is not yet accepted in service. Can still be added for near future scenarios. It's bigger, so only 2x per vehicle (instead of 8 EXTRA). Here is some data for it:
http://www.imisystems.com/wp-content/up ... R-HAWK.pdf

5) Rampage loadout for F-16I
Rampage (the last and official name that was also known as Sky Sniper and MARS in the past) is the air launched versio of the EXTRA missile for LYNX MLRS. 2x or 4x per F-16I. No data on F-15I at this point.

https://youtu.be/LOdNhe8Y-sA
https://www.janes.com/article/81210/iai ... ce-missile
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/21 ... off-weapon

6) DECM pods in the F-15I and F-16I loadouts.
Their main self defense pod is the ELL-8222 - small enough and can be mounted instead of Python 9 missile for WVR combat.


http://www.iai.co.il/Sip_Storage//FILES/4/41414.pdf
http://www.iai.co.il/sip_storage/files/7/27537.pdf


For F-15 it's mounted here (not taking place of any weapon):


7) ELL-8270 towed decoy
To further enchance survivability against SAMs or AAMs there is also towed decoy. In the mentioned scenario that I'm trying to build using towed decoy to furhet enchance the survivability of the planes makes a lot of sense as other aircrafts that use towed decoys perform noticably better.
https://www.janes.com/article/77720/iai ... adar-decoy
http://www.iai.co.il/2013/34486-48830-e ... s-ELL.aspx

It is equivalent of the AN/ALE-50 towed decoy system:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/ALE-50 ... coy_system


8) SAR package for the UAVs.
Those big UAVs don't just have the optical sensors. They also can have radar to detect targets using SAR(synthetic aperture radar) & GMTI on ranges far beyond the optical sensor. Adding that ability is quite important for realistic scenarios.

Eagle can fly for 40 hours at a height of 30,000ft. It can carry 250kg payload and various sensors such as MPR (maritime patrol radar), SAR (synthetic aperture radar) / MTI (moving target indicator), EO (electro-optics) / IR (infra-red) payloads, SIGINT (signal intelligence), COMINT (communication intelligence), laser designator and communications relays.
Heron TP, also called Eitan, can carry multiple payloads and perform multiple missions such as COMINT, SIGINT and IMINT (image intelligence) or SAR and communications relay.
https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/heron-uav/

Here are examples of IAI made SAR radars including for UAVs:
http://www.iai.co.il/2013/36669-en/Busi ... stems.aspx
http://www.iai.co.il/Sip_Storage//FILES/9/41449.pdf

9) Harop UCAV
Harpy and Harop are already in the DB. That's the "suicide" UAVs, one of which even killed a Pantsir in Syria recently. The problem with them in the CMANO logic is that they are useless - they are threated as "weapon" and after the launch they simply fly high and in a straight line making them very easy target for any kind of SAMs.
In reality that's UAV and you can control it in order to pick optimal route and height in order to increase survivability. As such you should add the option to set waypoints (in flight also) and control the height. Making them controlable will enchance the gameplay as they offer some very interesting possibilities.

Also the launchers contain 9 UCAVs which should be fixed in the DB:



10) F-35 OECM.
Not really IAF related, but the AESA radars are supposed to offer some nice jamming capability. Something like the situation shown on the picture below is not possible with the current CMANO logic where the radars can't be used as jammers while that opens a lot more tactical possibilities.

[stilesw]

Sarah,

Thanks for this document re Chinese mines. I've included it in the unofficial CMANO Dropbox reference library.

As always, any forum member can have access to this Dropbox resource. Just PM me with you email address.

-Wayne Stiles

[KC45]

About the Japanese F-2, their loadout for AsuW(naval) mission. They has ASM-2 and the request of the FS-X was 450nm Strike radius with 4 ASMs. So the ASM-2[Type93],Heavy loadout should be 450nm Strike radius.
According to this book,
https://www.amazon.co.jp/exec/obidos/AS ... /ref=nosim

You can Also check Japanese wiki
https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-2_(%E8% ... B%E5%8B%95
There are words
"空対艦誘導弾4発装備した状態で戦闘行動半径450海里を有すること。"

[KC45]

Kawasaki EC-1. electronic warfare training =OECM aircraft variant of C-1.Just like YS-11EA.
Mounts J/ALQ-5(early 1980 technology) till 2011, have J/ALQ-5kai(eaely 2000s technology because improvement plans starts 2002) from 2011 for OECM.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kawasaki_C-1 (Japanese wiki has more info.)
http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/hyouka/ ... bun/05.pdf (Japanese source for J/ALQ-5 kai)