Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

[stilesw]

As far as I can tell, the information for #2117 is for the Factory Trawler, but the image is for the Cyclone.

As far as I can tell, the information for #2117 is for the Factory Trawler, but the image is for the Cyclone.

Hey Mark,

Got me curious on where you see the "information"

Yes, image is correct and located at "[C:...]\DB\Images\DB3000\Ship_2117.jpg"
A text description would be in the file "[C:...]\DB\Descriptions\DB3000\Ship_2117.txt" but there is no such file.

The database viewer describes 2117 as shown below. So I must be missing something.

-Wayne

[stilesw]

The Bahamas actually has a pretty impressive navy for a small country. Please consider adding it.

The Bahamas will show as an included country in the next release. The Royal Bahamas Defence Force units will be possibly added at a later time.

-WS

[stilesw]

Why F-35C Lightning II 2028 (#4874) can't mount JATM missile?

Thanks. Fixed in the next DB3K update.

-WS

[BurntChickenDot]

Alright, so looking at the russianships.info site, it seems like a few Russian warships are either missing outright, or are present in Soviet/Foreign arsenals but not in the Russian one in spite of them being used by the Russians in some limited capacity.

The Pr. 2280.0 Karakurt-class corvette, Pr. 1270.0 Alexandrit-class minesweeper, Pr. 1075.0 Lida-class minesweeper, Pr. 697TB-class minesweeper, Pr. 1259 Olya-class minesweeper and the Pr. 0251.0-class amphibious boat are missing.

The Zhuk-class patrol boat is present in Ukrainian and Soviet arsenals but not Russian. Same thing with the Yevgenia-class minesweeper.

So yeah, mostly minesweepers but the Karakurt in particular stands out. Also, out of curiosity, how real does a design have to be to make it into the DB? Would something like the Pr. 23560 Lider-class proposal be 'real' enough to make it into the database, or will it only be considered for inclusion when/if it starts being built?

I apologize for the lack of links as it is only good etiquette to link to the respective missing ship designs, but unfortunately I'm not permitted to post links until 7 days after my 10th post.

[CV60]

Possible error on DB 3000 Weapon_554, 90, 870, 89, 553, 72, 93, 1721, (Baseline JDAM series, GBU31/32/28). Currently it is listed as 10meters. It should be 5 meters.

The CEP of the JDAM is officially listed as 13 meters. See IHS. "GBU-31, GBU-32 and GBU-38 Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM)." Jane's Air-Launched Weapons, February 2015, FAS reports that the JDAM achieved an accuracy of 10 meters CEP in tests: Federation Of American Scientists. Accessed December 29, 2019. https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/jdam.htm This 10 meter figure is the CEP used in the database.

However, Jane's/IHS reports that based on experience, the JDAM is capable of 14 meters CEP with only INS guidance, and 8 meters with INS and GPS guidance. See IHS. "GBU-31, GBU-32 and GBU-38 Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM)." Jane's Air-Launched Weapons, February 2015. This figure is partially confirmed by the USAF, which in 2003 reported "[JDAM 31/32/38] weapon circular error probable of 5 meters or less during free flight when GPS data is available." [emphasis added]. see https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets ... bu-313238/

One other minor edit: The database gives the range of the JDAM as 1-12 nm. Janes's gives a maximum range of 13 nm. The USAF source cited above (https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets ... bu-313238/) claims 15 miles, but that may be statute miles. If so, that is consistent with Jane's 13nm figure.

UPDATE: The JDAM program office confirms the 5 meter CEP. See https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Docu ... c_2018.pdf at page 8.

[Tookatee]

The #2232 SU-57 Felon is missing the Fly-by-Wire property. The aircraft is capable of supermaneuverability, of which is accomplished through thrust vectoring and a fly-by-wire system. Additionally, the most recent crash of the Felon seemed to be the result of the failure of this system.

Sources: https://www.aviationtoday.com/2018/11/2 ... s-complex/ and https://theaviationist.com/2019/12/29/w ... sh-emerge/

[guanotwozero]

Request:

KC-135Q tanker, used to fuel the SR-71 with its specific requirements.

Already in the CWD, but it remained operational until at least 1989 when the SR-71s were retired, possibly to present day.

Some interesting details from a former crewman in this thread.

[Tookatee]

The KC-135Q is already in the DBK3000 database and has been discussed already.

ORIGINAL: Tookatee

All variants of the SR-71 are able to refuel from aircraft other than the #1320 KC-135Q. This is incorrect because only the KC-135Q carries the fuel that the SR-71 can use (JP-7), all other aircraft carry standard aviation fuel which cannot be run properly in the Pratt and Whitney J58 engines on the aircraft.

Furthermore any aircraft with boom refueling capabilities can refuel from the KC-135Q, which is also incorrect because JP-7 was specifically developed for use in extremely high performance aircraft like the SR-71 and the X-51 Waverider and cannot be run properly in standard engines (hence why the KC-135Q exists as unlike all other KC-135 variants it has two separate fuel tanks separating its own fuel from the payload of JP-7.)

Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratt_%26_Whitney_J58 , https://www.thesr71blackbird.com/Aircraft/JP-7-Fuel , https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJn ... /JP-7.html , and https://www.quora.com/What-makes-JP-7-A ... can-use-it ,

[spec111]

Hey! How about adding 1240 Sarancha (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarancha- ... ssile_boat) and 133 Muravey (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muravey-class_patrol_boat) to DB? [&o]

And yes 206M Turya has 45 kts speed, not 36kts. Cause it is hydrofoil craft. Btw 206M Turya was actively used in Soviet Service. [;)]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turya-class_torpedo_boat



Also i am 100% sure that Turya speed in Wikipedia is wrong. 45kts is confirmed by several russian books. [:-]

[guanotwozero]

ORIGINAL: Tookatee
The KC-135Q is already in the DBK3000 database and has been discussed already.

So it is, thanks!

For some reason it's not showing up in the grouped KC-135 platforms listing though.

Edit: BTW I understand other aircraft can refuel from the KC-135Q IF it's loaded with regular fuel, but then the SR-71 can't do so. It's a binary choice - not sure how that could be implemented in CMO. Maybe loadout?

[stilesw]

The #2232 SU-57 Felon is missing the Fly-by-Wire property. The aircraft is capable of supermaneuverability, of which is accomplished through thrust vectoring and a fly-by-wire system. Additionally, the most recent crash of the Felon seemed to be the result of the failure of this system.

Logged for fix in next DB3K update.

-WS

[BDukes]

Hi All

Indian Mig-27 Retire.(#2702 end date 2019)
https://www.janes.com/article/93394/ind ... l-squadron
https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-ne ... tOhrL.html
https://www.businessinsider.in/defense/ ... 991143.cms
https://www.rt.com/news/472467-india-mig27-last-flight/

Thank!

Bill

[BDukes]

French Reaper now armed with GBU-12. Loadout Already deployed (IOC 2019)

https://www.janes.com/article/93339/fre ... u-12-bombs

Note

Thank!

[stilesw]

Indian Mig-27 Retire.(#2702 end date 2019)

Bill,
Logged and updated.

-WS

[BDukes]

Warsaw Pac Bulgarian Aircraft adds. These probaby importants to Bart sceanrio work etc.

All Bulgrian MIG-25 RBT (82-91). This is recon variant not fighters. Likely same configuration as #2234

https://twitter.com/vesthepes/status/12 ... 0875153413

Bulgarian Mig-23. Need add MLA variant. Note all out of service date seems to be 2002.

https://twitter.com/vesthepes/status/12 ... 0948874240

Thank!

[stilesw]

French Reaper now armed with GBU-12. Loadout Already deployed (IOC 2019)

Logged and updated.

-WS

[Mgellis]

In DB3000, the Cyclone is #2117, but in the CWDB, it isn't. It's the Factory Trawler. But it still has the image (I think the wrong image got attached to entry 2117 in the CWDB, but as I know next to nothing about how databases work, this is just a guess.)

I hope this helps.

[CV60]

In DB3000, the Cyclone is #2117, but in the CWDB, it isn't. It's the Factory Trawler. But it still has the image (I think the wrong image got attached to entry 2117 in the CWDB, but as I know next to nothing about how databases work, this is just a guess.)

I hope this helps.

Mgellis-I'm the guy who takes care of the images in the database. I'll fix this one. Thanks for brining it to my attention.

UPDATE: Mgellis-I don't see this error in my database, and the one on my computer is the one that is the "Master". Can anyone else confirm that the Ship_2117 image in the CWDB database is the USS Cyclone class PC? If not, I suspect that possibly somehow you have accidenatally moved Ship_2117 image from the DB3000 to the CWDB in your system. You can fix this by simply moving it back to the DB3000 "Images" folder.

[stilesw]

Hey Mark,

Thanks for sorting that. I'd only been looking at DB3K units.

-Wayne

[CV60]

ORIGINAL: CV60

Possible error on DB 3000 Weapon_554, 90, 870, 89, 553, 72, 93, 1721, (Baseline JDAM series, GBU31/32/28). Currently it is listed as 10meters. It should be 5 meters.

The CEP of the JDAM is officially listed as 13 meters. See IHS. "GBU-31, GBU-32 and GBU-38 Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM)." Jane's Air-Launched Weapons, February 2015, FAS reports that the JDAM achieved an accuracy of 10 meters CEP in tests: Federation Of American Scientists. Accessed December 29, 2019. https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/jdam.htm This 10 meter figure is the CEP used in the database.

However, Jane's/IHS reports that based on experience, the JDAM is capable of 14 meters CEP with only INS guidance, and 8 meters with INS and GPS guidance. See IHS. "GBU-31, GBU-32 and GBU-38 Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM)." Jane's Air-Launched Weapons, February 2015. This figure is partially confirmed by the USAF, which in 2003 reported "[JDAM 31/32/38] weapon circular error probable of 5 meters or less during free flight when GPS data is available." [emphasis added]. see https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets ... bu-313238/

One other minor edit: The database gives the range of the JDAM as 1-12 nm. Janes's gives a maximum range of 13 nm. The USAF source cited above (https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets ... bu-313238/) claims 15 miles, but that may be statute miles. If so, that is consistent with Jane's 13nm figure.

UPDATE: The JDAM program office confirms the 5 meter CEP. See https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Docu ... c_2018.pdf at page 8.

< Message edited by CV60 -- 12/31/2019 8:38:14 PM >[/quote]

Additional database corrections for the laser designated versions of the JDAM (LJDAM). These are DB3000 Weapon_2259, 3213, 2260, 3101, 3102, 3394, 3393. Each of these weapons has the following errors: 1) They are listed as having a range of 1-12 nm. This is incorrect. It should be 1-13 nm. See Boeing, "Laser JDAM," https://www.boeing.com/resources/boeing ... t_card.pdf; 2) They are listed as having the properties of "INS w/ GPS Navigation" This is only partially correct. These are laser designated versions of the JDAM, so like the "PAVEWAY II" LGB, they should have the "Supports Buddy Illumination" and "Illuminate at Launch". Note that because the LJDAM also has a GPS/INS, it does not require laser illumination. However, it will suffer a decreased accuracy if the target is not illuminated. 3) the LJDAM's accuracy is increased over the baseline JDAM by the inclusion of the laser seeker. Currently, the database lists all JDAM and LJDAM as having a 10 meter CEP. According to the JDAM program office, the baseline JDAM series has a CEP of 5 meters See https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Docu ... c_2018.pdf at page 8. Therefore, the CEP of LJDAM should be less, especially as it has a capability against moving targets, including vehicles at highway speeds. See https://www.boeing.com/resources/boeing ... t_card.pdf Although I have not found an CEP for the LJDAM, I would estimate that it would be no worse (when using the laser seeker) that the Paveway II LGB, which is listed as 2 meters. See Weapon_955