Matrix Games Forums

[UPDATED DB v439]

Hello friends.
working in scenario I used SA-23 Gladiator/Giant (S-300V4) corresponding to the #1860 database entry and I have noticed that despite being equipped with scope 150MN 9M82M missile, the same may not be employees or assigned targed to it. It is only possible to assign and make use of the 9M83M missile. Reason why the system, which theoretically can use both types of missile, Gladiator/Giant in practice only can make use of the 9M83M type.
Thank you.

For the Archangel, I found these and I hope they are helpful...

http://www.airrecognition.com/index.php ... le&id=1813

http://maxdefense.blogspot.com/2014/06/ ... e-air.html <-- compares the Archangel to the Super Tucano

ORIGINAL: emsoy

Lol its a converted crop sprayer [8D]

Not nearly enough info available for us to add it though...

ORIGINAL: Tarawa565

Kind of a cool new platform coming up:

http://www.iomax.net/archangel/

http://www.janes.com/article/42680/ioma ... -prototype

The UAE is getting some already, as well as Jordan. Could be a fun plane for "what if" scenarios. And cheap, comparatively

Edited out my own shitty comment.....

I'm so sick of the sniping that appears in these db requests. It really needs to stop. It is not what we want this community to be about[:)]

Fact new rule. They'll be one warning and then after that we won't fulfill a db request of yours ever again. Sound fair?

Mike

ORIGINAL: seaman

Hello friends.
working in scenario I used SA-23 Gladiator/Giant (S-300V4) corresponding to the #1860 database entry and I have noticed that despite being equipped with scope 150MN 9M82M missile, the same may not be employees or assigned targed to it. It is only possible to assign and make use of the 9M83M missile. Reason why the system, which theoretically can use both types of missile, Gladiator/Giant in practice only can make use of the 9M83M type.
Thank you.

Yeah its flagged as only to be used against missiles and PGM's. We'll take a look at WRA settings to cover this.

Whatever it was I said that sounded like I was sniping, I'm sorry. I was not trying to upset or offend people, but I clearly put my foot in my mouth somehow, and I apologize.

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

Edited out my own shitty comment.....

I'm so sick of the sniping that appears in these db requests. It really needs to stop. It is not what we want this community to be about[:)]

Fact new rule. They'll be one warning and then after that we won't fulfill a db request of yours ever again. Sound fair?

Mike

ORIGINAL: Mgellis


Whatever it was I said that sounded like I was sniping, I'm sorry. I was not trying to upset or offend people, but I clearly put my foot in my mouth somehow, and I apologize.

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

Edited out my own shitty comment.....

I'm so sick of the sniping that appears in these db requests. It really needs to stop. It is not what we want this community to be about[:)]

Fact new rule. They'll be one warning and then after that we won't fulfill a db request of yours ever again. Sound fair?

Mike

Just ask for stuff like a normal person would. We don't need lectures on how to google things or that we can "just ask". Believe me we know.

We ask for sources because its saves us a ton of time. We could certainly google etc as well as anybody else here could. Our problem is time to do it[:)] The benefit of actually doing this is you get what you want (if the data is good/complete likely quickly) and the whole process speeds up.

Obviously trying to piss us off with passive aggressive stuff doesn't help. Examples of this recently are:

Somebody asking to check our work because we screw things up.
Multiple examples of people asking us to google demonstration systems that aren't even on the deck of a ship yet.
Numerous posts with artist drawings rather than actual photos
News articles that don't have one stat in them or a wrong picture.

Dealing with this stuff actually takes time away and doesn't encourage us to even want to look. We don't owe anybody a platform update at all but choose to do it because we want to support scenario work and grow this community. However...This is not going to be at the expense of us though... I hope you all understand that.

Nuff said. Anybody that doesn't get it will get nothing out of us.

Thanks!

Mike

Could be wrong here but I think that some of the later German Air Force Tornado IDS are missing a load out option. I'd definitely appreciate a Luftwaffe expert to chime in here though...

When the Marineflieger was disbanded, the aircraft and associated naval strike mission was transferred to the Luftwaffe. This includes the AS34 Kormoran ASM. As far as I can tell, this mission/missile has not been retired yet.

However, in the database the latest aircraft to carry the AS34 is the 2004 Tornado IDS (German Navy) while none of the later model Luftwaffe aircraft carry the ASuW load-out. It seems to me that any of the post 2005 Tornado IDS's of the German Air Force should be able to have the ASuW load out of the German Navy aircraft.

Some links:

http://www.touchdown-aviation.com/types ... ornado.php
(Talking about German Navy aircraft being transferred to German Air Force)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panavia_T ... flieger.29
(More info about reorganization)
http://www.luftwaffe.de/portal/a/luftwa ... A_eM7AA!!/
(German Air Force official site, the bottom of the page talks about using the missiles "HARM" and "Kormoran" as well as lists "Seekriegführung aus der Luft" - sea warfare from the air - as a mission)

It appears the Italian Air Force entries have the Kormoran, so perhaps it was just an oversight?

You guys are awesome for taking the time to support all of this. If you need more info I'd be happy to gather it.

Thanks!

Thanks! But we haven't seen it mounted on any AC since Luftwaffe took over. Would it be possible to dig up a recent photo or two? [8D]

Seems there is some updated information on the Luftwaffe Kormorants. Below is what I dug up real quick, feel free to chime in guys. Seems a single Luftwaffe wing took over the maritime strike role. Anyone knows which one?

"All of the maritime combat role was assigned to the Luftwaffe, and one unit of this has had its Tornadoes fighters equipped to carry Kormoran II missiles and American HARM missiles." from Wikipedia:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Air_Force

Photo of Luftwaffe (not Marine) Tornado with Kormorant 2:
http://www.luftwaffe.de/portal/a/luftwa ... rF7WKpKg!/

This article says the Kormorant 2 has been retired already (if my German skills serve me right):
http://augengeradeaus.net/2014/09/deuts ... en-grenze/

Here:
https://translate.googleusercontent.com ... MAP-iTQFJQ

And here:
http://www.bits.de/public/stichwort/tornado-nuklear.htm

The missile was used in live-fire exersises in 2008:
http://www.saairforce.co.za/news-and-ev ... d-hope-iii

So seems the weapon was retired when JLDAM was introduced? HARM seems to be close to retirement as well.

ORIGINAL: emsoy

Seems a single Luftwaffe wing took over the maritime strike role. Anyone knows which one?

This must be the Taktisches Luftwaffengeschwader 51 "Immelmann" (TaktLwG 51) which operates the Tornado ECR from Schleswig Airbase. In the image description of the photo you posted it says that the photo was taken by Aufklärungsgeschwader 51 (In 2013, Aufklärungsgeschwader 51 became Taktisches Luftwaffengeschwader 51). Further, you can see the units emblem on the Tornados tail fin. Until 2012, the Squadron possessed up to 140 Kormorans, which were replaced with GBU-54(V)3 LGBs.

Hope this helps!



http://www.jet-prints.com/verb_ag51/index_e.html (very good summary of the TaktLwG 51's Tornados)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taktische ... chwader_51
Very long link

Thanks emsoy and Supreme! I definitely need to brush up on my German. I'd be curious to know what the ASuW tactics are for TaktLwG 51, especially against some of the long range air defense ships. Also, I wonder if the Italians got 140 new missiles or they're sitting in reserve somewhere...

So, trying to summarize here:

The 2005 Tornado ECR should be able to carry the Kormoran load out? (2 Kormorans or 2 Kormorans + 2 HARMS)

The 2005 Tornado IDS should be able to carry the same? (2 Kormorans or 2 Kormorans + 2 HARMS)

The 2013 and later Tornado IDSs are correct with their LDGP load and no Kormorans.

The 2013 and later Tornado ECR should be able to carry the LDGP load? (x number of weapons)

It seems that the German ECRs are far more weaponized that the current DB indicates.

Thanks guys, we'll update the db and add Kormorant to Luftwaffe Tornadoes 2005-2012 [8D]

The ECRs arrived at the wing in 2013, when their role changed from recon and naval strike to SEAD. So seems the ECR version ever only used HARM.

ORIGINAL: Tarawa565

I'd be curious to know what the ASuW tactics are for TaktLwG 51, especially against some of the long range air defense ships.

In a nutshell, there are close to none currently. When the Air Force retired the Kormorant ASM, it was decided to not get a new ASM for the Tornado. Instead, a new ASuW missile will be acquired ones the Tornado replacement is being determined. For that time, GBUs and HARMs will have to do.

ORIGINAL: Tarawa565

The 2013 and later Tornado IDSs are correct with their LDGP load and no Kormorans.

The 2013 and later Tornado ECR should be able to carry the LDGP load? (x number of weapons)

Well, it seems that the GBU-54 LJDAM was introduced in 2012, this may requiere an new DB entry.

[UPDATED DB v439]

Hi there!

Playing the Kingdom Come BETA lately, I noticed that the Saudi La Fayette-class (#1290 - 812 Al Riyadh [La Fayette]) has the same Model 1968-II/100 TR main gun as the french La Fayette. Altough the Saudis initally ordered and tested their first La Fayette with this gun, it was decided to subsequently fit all ships with an Oto Melara 76/62 Super Rapid naval gun.

Thanks!

http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/al_riyadh

Tornado ECR carries LJDAM? Info?

It appears that the ASSTA 3 upgrade, starting in mid-2015 and ending in 2018, will give all Luftwaffe Tornados (IDS and ECR) the capability to drop LJDAMs. Whether or not they'll ever carry them operationally is another question...

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panavia_Tornado#Avionik

Based on the software upgrades, it seems that ASSTA 1 gave GBU-24 capability to the IDS. It says that all remaining Tornado variants received this upgrade, but I'm not sure if that means the ECR (or, again, if the ECR would ever carry those weapons).

ASSTA 2, started in 2009: http://www.airforce-technology.com/news/news71739.html appears to have integrated the GBU-54 LJDAM and Taurus onto the IDS, with IOC being in 2010 based on the wikipedia link.

This like provides more info on the ASSTA: http://www.tornadosig.com/assta.html

Finally, this link states that the ASSTA 3 modernization will allow both variants to fulfill either mission, while obviously the Mauser cannon and ELS will remain variant specific. http://archive.defensenews.com/article/ ... nado-Fleet

Thanks! The Taurus Wikipedia article says 2005 IOC so dunno.

Will try to push out the database asap.

ORIGINAL: seaman

Hello friends.
working in scenario I used SA-23 Gladiator/Giant (S-300V4) corresponding to the #1860 database entry and I have noticed that despite being equipped with scope 150MN 9M82M missile, the same may not be employees or assigned targed to it. It is only possible to assign and make use of the 9M83M missile. Reason why the system, which theoretically can use both types of missile, Gladiator/Giant in practice only can make use of the 9M83M type.
Thank you.

We've discussed this and made the missile anti-aircraft capable but the WRA tells it to not shoot at anything but ballistic missiles. The player / scenario designer can change the WRA themselves to suit their needs[8D]

ORIGINAL: Mgellis

For the Archangel, I found these and I hope they are helpful...

http://www.airrecognition.com/index.php ... le&id=1813

http://maxdefense.blogspot.com/2014/06/ ... e-air.html <-- compares the Archangel to the Super Tucano

Thanks!

But it says that its the IOMAX's border patrol Block 1 and Block 2 AT-802 that are currently operational? And not the Archangel, which is an upgraded version?