Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

[DESRON420]

ORIGINAL: emsoy

ORIGINAL: DESRON420
#3. Tweak the SAM ranges somewhat:

48N6E3/DM: 130-140 nm range as opposed to current 80 nm range
9M96E2: Add with 9M96E stats and extended 50-65 nm range against aerodynamic targets

Sources please?

Table 2 from the Giles PDF linked in my previous post and the S-400 Technical Data section of http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-S-400-Triumf.html .

Breaking out some more detailed data In support of your policy of skepticism regarding missile performance:

- There is no reported mass increase, warhead reduction, or booster addition between 48N6E2 and 48N6E3. IOC was 10 years apart, 1999 vs 2009. Claimed 48N6E2 range is 108 nm while claimed 48N6E3 range is 135 nm.

- The 9M96E (claimed range ~20 nm) round is 333 kg whereas the 9M96E2 (claimed range ~65 nm) round is 420 kg, with no increase in warhead weight between the two versions.

[Vici Supreme]

Single-Unit Ports, anybody??

[KLAB]

Many thanks for an excellent product and the continual updates to the DB.

After realising that I'm not viewing DB443 yet. In DB442:

Admiral Gorshkovs UKSK twin 8 cell VLS installation is also capable of using ASW versions of the Kalibr system, (50km) 91RT ASW missile.
#3339 SS-N-27 Sizzler [91RT Kalibr, Paket-Nk]

But as I cant provide evidence if the 91RT is actually in service this is for consideration only.

Noticed a minor typo in DB442 referring to the mount for the SA-N-21 as GRIZZLY which should be GROWLER but assume its amended in 443 already.


http://russianships.info/eng/warships/project_22350.htm
http://i41.servimg.com/u/f41/15/11/39/27/355110.jpg ref the UKSK.
http://www.ausairpower.net/Analysis-Regional-ASCM.html
http://tass.ru/en/defense/842799

Regards

K

[alphali]

The Description for GBU-38(V)1/B JDAM[MK 82] (#93 in the database) is for MIM-23 Hawk anti-air missile and not for the GBU

[AdderStrike]

Thanks! The closest I can get to further documentation is the PEO slideshow, but it covers what is in the article. My video search turned up nothing useful, but I will keep an eye out for anything that might help.

[Vici Supreme]

I stumbled across something weird with loadout #7572 of the Venezuelan Su-30MK2. The loadout is the only one that uses the R-73M while all other loadouts use the R-73 or R-73M1. Is this deliberate?

[DESRON420]

ORIGINAL: emsoy

ORIGINAL: DESRON420

#1. Add individual S-400 batteries, each comprising

4x 5P85/5P90 TEL
1x 92N6 GRAVE STONE FC radar
1x 96L6 search radar (optional)

and add an S-400 battalion headquarters unit comprising

1x 55K6 command post
1x 91N6 BIG BIRD search / battle management radar

...

Isn't this exactly how the db is split today? We have 8x and 12x TEL battalions, because that seems to be what they're using atm.

Not quite. The existing 8x and 12x TEL units are fine. What I am asking for is smaller units of 4x TEL that can disperse further, conduct overwatch, and add more 92N6 FC radars, similar to the way that the NATO Patriot SAM batteries are arranged.

Sources:

Photographs / video of the Hmeymim deployment show only 2x TEL. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4dBEpsOHAE

Photographs of S-300/S-400 deployments from http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Rus-SAM- ... igs-B.html show variation in employment, with sites ranging from 4 to 12 TEL shown.

In the context of the sale to China of two "regimental sets" of S-400, the "regimental set" is described as consisting of two "battalions" of four launchers each: https://russiandefpolicy.wordpress.com/ ... -part-iii/ This link also references the ongoing problems with 40N6 development.

[DESRON420]

(1) Update AN/MPQ-64F1 Improved Sentinel DB entry and ensure that correct AN/MPQ-64F1 DB entry is used with other US SHORAD units such as NASAMS / NASAMS II. Radar tech for Improved Sentinel should be Late 2000s or Early 2010s.

Sources:
https://www.militaryperiscope.com/mdb-s ... 6331.shtml


(2) Here is a rough proposal for a Multi Mission Launcher-based US Army SHORADS unit. To date the MML has destroyed targets with AIM-9X, RGM-114L, Tamir [the interceptor component of Iron Dome], and Stinger. I do not know if the Hellfires can target ground units after launch.

Sources:
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /83294392/
http://www.army.mil/article/145021/Army ... r_program/
http://www.scout.com/military/warrior/s ... roys-drone
http://www.scout.com/military/warrior/s ... ll-missile
http://www.janes.com/article/59547/lock ... ile-design
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/d ... ochure.pdf

SAM Plt/2 (Multi Mission Launcher / IFPC Inc 2-I Block 1) -- United States (Army), 2019-0, 2x MML + 1x AN/MPQ-64F1 Improved Sentinel

Mounts:
1x AN/MPQ-64F1 Improved Sentinel

2x Multi Mission Launcher
ROF 2
Capacity 15

Weapons:
AIM-9X-2 Sidewinder Blk II
- Default Load: 15
- Max Load: 15
- ROF 2

Tamir
- Default Load: 0
- Max Load: 15
- ROF 2

FIM-92E Stinger RMP Blk I
- Default Load: 0
- Max Load: 15
- ROF 2

RGM-114L Hellfire II
- Default Load: 0
- Max Load: 15
- ROF 2

MHTK Active Radar
- Default Load: 0
- Max Load: 135 (9 x cell)
- ROF 2
- Range 2.5-3.0 km (estimated from EAPS brochure linked above)

EDITED: Added 4/14 Tamir test update

[Mgellis]

ORIGINAL: Mgellis



PM 01 Teshio
Pennants: PM 01 Natsui (ex-Teshio), PM 02 Kitakami, PM 03 Echizen; PM 04 Tokachi; PM 05 Hitachi; PM 06 Okitsu; PM 07 Isazu; PM 08 Chitose; PM 09 Kuwano; PM 10 Sorachi; PM 11 Yubari; PM 12 Motoura; PM 13 Kano; PM 14 Sendai
Operational dates: 1980-present
Displacement: 630 tons normal; 670 full load
Dimensions: 67.8 m. x 7.9 m. x 2.7 m.
Main machinery: 2 Fusi 6S32F or Arakata 6M31E diesels; 3,650 hp; 2 shafts
Speed: 18 knots
Range: 3,200 naut. miles at 16 knots
Complement: 33
Guns: 1 JN-61B 20mm Gatling gun (mounted fore)
Radars: Navigation: 2 JMA 159B; I-band
Does not appear to have any facilities for aircraft

Thanks for considering these! Like the US, Japan (and also India) has a large coast guard to protect its large EEZ, and its vessels and aircraft see a fair amount of action.

Looking at images of the Teshio, it looks like she carries at least one (and maybe two?) small boats. I cannot tell what size they are, although I suspect they are 7-meter boats.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/f0mfhcQFP5A/maxresdefault.jpg

http://www.armystar.com/uploads/allimg/ ... 5910-0.jpg

I hope this helps.

[Mgellis]

ORIGINAL: Mgellis

I've been playing around with ideas for a scenario involving the Japanese coast guard and North Korean ships engaged in espionage and/or criminal activities like dumping toxic waste. I've tried to dig up some information for a few representative classes in the Japanese coast guard.

The Shiretoko is one of those "backbone" classes; it has been active since the late seventies, chugging along, loyal but not flashy, guarding the coasts and EEZ, with a total of 22 ships in the class, probably one of the most commonly seen vessels in the JCG. So, here is the data (there are actually three sub-classes with slightly different weapons), and I hope they can be included in the DB someday. The class does not appear to have any aircraft facilities. Thanks!

PL 101 Shiretoko
Dates of service: 1978-present
Displacement: 1360t
Dimensions: 78.0 m. x9.6 m. x 3.2 m,
Main machinery: 2 diesels, 7000hp (Janes lists the engines as 2 x Fuji 8S40B providing 8,120 hp, if it matters)
Speed: 20 kts
Range 4400 naut. miles at 17 knots
Complement: 41
Guns:

PL 101-104: 1x1-40mm Bofors; 1x1-20mm Oerlikon

PL 106-117, 119-121, 123: 1x1-40mm Bofors

PL 118, 122, 124-128: 1x1-35mm Oerlikon

Radar: JMA 1576, JMA 1596
Pennants: PL101 Shiretoko; PL102 Esan; PL103 Wakasa; PL104 Kii; PL107 Matsushima; PL109 Shikine; PL110 Suruga; PL111 Rebun; PL114 Tosa; PL115 Noto; PL117 Iwami; PL118 Shimokita; PL119 Suzuka; PL120 Kunisaki; PL121 Amagi; PL122 Goto; PL123 Koshiki; PL124 Hateruma; PL125 Katori; PL126 Kunigami; PL127 Etomo; PL128 Yonakuni

I found an image of this class that shows at least one boat (I think it is a 7-meter boat) carried by this class. The second image shows two boats.

http://api.ning.com/files/fqaVbKZP8*sfD ... /PL118.jpg

http://hush.gooside.com/name/s/Shi/Shir ... retoko.jpg

http://island.geocities.jp/torakyojin88 ... hpp328.jpg

I hope this helps.

[Mgellis]

ORIGINAL: Mgellis

Another of the more common classes in the Japanese coast guard...

PL 02 Ojika <-- sorry, spelling has been corrected
Dates of service: 1991-present
Pennants: PL 02 Erimo (ex-Ojika; the class is sometimes called the Erimo-class rather than the Okija-class); PL 03 Kudaka; PL 04 Yahiko; PL 05 Dejima; PL 06 Kurikoma; PL 07 Satauma; PL 08 Tosa
Displacement: 1883 tons
Dimensions: 91.4 m. x 11 m. x 3.5 m.
Main machinery: 2 Fuji 8S40B diesels; 7000 hp; 2 shafts; 2 bow thrusters
Speed: 18 knots
Range: 4,400 naut. miles at 15 knots
Complement: 38
Guns: 1 Oerlikon 35mm/90; 1 20mm JM-61B Gatling gun (both appear to be mounted fore)
Radar: Navigation: JMA 1596; I-band
Helicopter: Platform (no hanger) for 1 Bell 212 or Super Puma (10-ton helicopter)

According to Janes, "Equipped as SAR command ships. SATCOM fitted. 30 ton bollard pull. Stern dock for RIB." <-- it's hard to tell, but I am guessing there is only room for 1 7-meter RHIB.

Note: there is some disagreement about specifications. http://www.navypedia.org/naval_balance/japan.htm lists some different specifications and suggests that the Ojika-class should be broken up into two separate classes. I decided to use the information in Janes, as that seems more authoritative, but I thought I should provide the link just in case.

PL 02 Ojika

I found a couple of images for this class. I hope this helps...

(By the way, I do not know if the images for the JCG ships I have found are public domain or not; I am only posting the links so database editors can see what is on the vessels; I do not know if they can be used in the DB or not.)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... Kudaka.jpg

http://modelingmadness.com/review/misc/ ... ikomaa.jpg <-- model, not real ship

http://blog-imgs-42-origin.fc2.com/t/h/ ... 1218_1.jpg

[orca]

More info on ACTUV Sea Hunter

Weight- 140 tons
Max speed- 27kts
Range- 10,000 at 12kts

Sensors:
Short and long range radar
EO/IR
Long-range mid-frequency active-passive sonar
Also short range HF sonar

http://www.naval-technology.com/project ... ssel-actuv

http://www.naval-technology.com/news/ne ... er-4860036

[Triode]

about project 971 submarines variants in database :

project 971M have two entry in database
#34 - PLA-971M Akula II for 1995
#625 - PLA-971M Akula II for 2005

problem is , project 971M is name for modern upgrade for all pr.971 subs and first 971M submarine will be K-328 "Leopard" in 2017 (well, december 2017 ,so it can be 2018 )
in this upgrade:
new sonar system MGK-540M "Kizhuch" (deep upgrade of MGK-540"Skat-3")
http://www.e-disclosure.ru/portal/FileL ... id=1092043 ("Okeanpribor" annual report,in russian)
new periscope systems "Parus-98"
http://elektropribor.spb.ru/en/newprod/ ... /parus.pdf
Kalibr complex and new torpedoes(UGST, maybee UET-1)

So, I think pr.971M should go to 2018 and recive all this things above



In database passive signatures of pr.971 Akula and pr.971 Imroved Akula are the same
Improved Akula should be less noisy than Akula, like Improved Los Angeles > baseline Los Angeles



also about project 885, #405 - PLA-885 Severodvinsk [Yasen, Granay] in database and project 955, #136 - PLARB-955 [Borey]in database,
I think accoustic signatures for this submarines is wrong, they shoul be less noisy

from Russian Akademy of Science journal "Fundamental and practical hydrophysics" 2012-5-2
"Parkhomenko V. Parkhomenko VV Reducing the noise of domestic nuclear submarines in the period from 1965 to 1995"
http://hydrophysics.info/wp-content/upl ... 0%BE_2.pdf in russian
Parkhomenko is Captain 1 Rank from Protection Service of ships physical fields of Russian Navy

I - first generation , projects 627(A), 645, 659T, 659, 675
II - second generation, projects 671(RT),705(K), 661, 667AT, 670, 667(A,AU,B,BD,BDR)
III- third gen , projects 671RTMK,685,945(A),971, 949(A),941
IV - fourth generation projects 885, 955

as you can see project 885, 955 should have 15-18 dB advantage over 971 and 945 in VLF

[Zaslon]

It's strange but I never saw in DB3K a russian AA loadout with IR versions of R-23/24 and R-27. IR versions exist in the database but they aren't used in loadouts.

[KLAB]

Have just checked and these have been Added for the MiG-23ML etc in DB443. Thank you, much appreciated!

ORIGINAL: Zaslon

It's strange but I never saw in DB3K a russian AA loadout with IR versions of R-23/24 and R-27. IR versions exist in the database but they aren't used in loadouts.

DB442 SU-27 does have R-27T/ET Alamo B and D.

MiG-29 doesn't but I think there is another thread about that, R-27T & in later versions also the R-27ET may not have been operational at first. Will do more checks.

MiG-23 various versions,
Following images in books;
OKB Mikoyan ISBN 978-1-85780-307-5 Page 259. MiG-23 prototype with R-23T.
and on Page 537. Airshow demo photo of MiG-29 SE with R-27ET as it appears later MiG-29's
could use R-27ET. Can't find in service aircraft photo for this configuration though.

Soviet Russian Aircraft weapons ISBN 1-85780-188-1 Page 44. Photo of MiG-23 with R-23T.

JANES ALL THE WORLD'S AIRCRAFT 1995. ISBN 0-7106-1160-9 Page 325. Polish AF MiG-23 MF Flogger B. R-23/24T. This is probably the best evidence as if even the WP client states have R-23/24T it's a pretty sure bet the Russians did.

So perhaps the USSR/RUAF & WP MiG-23 loads could be amended to include :
1 x R-23/24T & 1 X R-23/24R Apex and 2-4 x R-60 Aphid /R-13 Atoll, depending on operational dates?

I do more research when time permits.

Thanks,

K

[Pancor]

Hello everyone

i was just looking in the database for the predeccesor of the D 550 Audace
the impavido but it doesnt exist



could you add the ship:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impavido-class_destroyer
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classe_Impavido
http://www.marinai.it/navi/mm60/impavido.pdf

thanks

[PN79]

ORIGINAL: KLAB

...

MiG-23 various versions,
Following images in books;
OKB Mikoyan ISBN 978-1-85780-307-5 Page 259. MiG-23 prototype with R-23T.
and on Page 537. Airshow demo photo of MiG-29 SE with R-27ET as it appears later MiG-29's
could use R-27ET. Can't find in service aircraft photo for this configuration though.

Soviet Russian Aircraft weapons ISBN 1-85780-188-1 Page 44. Photo of MiG-23 with R-23T.

JANES ALL THE WORLD'S AIRCRAFT 1995. ISBN 0-7106-1160-9 Page 325. Polish AF MiG-23 MF Flogger B. R-23/24T. This is probably the best evidence as if even the WP client states have R-23/24T it's a pretty sure bet the Russians did.

So perhaps the USSR/RUAF & WP MiG-23 loads could be amended to include :
1 x R-23/24T & 1 X R-23/24R Apex and 2-4 x R-60 Aphid /R-13 Atoll, depending on operational dates?

I do more research when time permits.

Thanks,

K

R-23T was available in significant numbers to Warsaw Pact MiG-23. However MiG-23MF could carry either 2x R-23R or 2x R-23T but not combination 1x R23R and 1x R-23T due to system limitation. Later version MiG-23ML could carry this combination.

Regarding availability this was situation of interceptor variants of MiG-23 in Czechoslovakia:

MiG-23MF - 13 delivered from August 1978
-- combat load: 2x R-23R or 2x R-23T or later 2x R-13M under wings and 2x R-3S under fuselage or later R-60 as with MiG-23ML

MiG-23ML - 17 delivered from November 1981
-- new combat load: 1x R-23R and 1x R-23T or later 2x R-13M under wings plus 2x or 4x R-60 under fuselage

R-24 missiles were not bought by Czechoslovakia.

EDIT - image of czechoslovak MiG-23MF with R-23T and R-3S:
http://forum.valka.cz/files/3920_297.jpg


EDIT 2 - correction regarding R-13M: it can be carried only under wings and not under fuselage due to system limitations.

[peterc100248]

Same issue as in the post above by alphali with a weapon having a description for different a weapon. Weapon 802 (DB 443) BLU-97/B cluster bomb has the description for the MIM23 Hawk missle. Other data is correct.



Somebody likes the Hawk.

[Vici Supreme]

Awesome DB update yesterday! Found this while looking through the new stuff. It looks like the specifications of #3017 - RKR Petr Velikiy [Pr.1144.2 Orlan] and #417 - RKR Petr Velikiy [Pr.1144.2M Orlan] have been mixed up because of the version from 1999-2019 having the Zircon missile and the version from 2023-onwards having shipwrecks. [;)]

Fixed. Sorry!

[Mgellis]

According to...

http://jsw.newpacificinstitute.org/?p=10821

...and...

https://rhk111smilitaryandarmspage.word ... pine-navy/

...there is a plan to convert four retired Japanese destroyers into uber-cutters for the Japanese Coast Guard. Unfortunately, as the second article points out, there does not appear to be an English-language confirmation of this. (At least I could not find one. Anyone have the newest edition of Jane's? Maybe it is in there?)

The biggest issue here is the lack of information. The Hatsuyuki-class destroyer is already in the database, and the articles say her missiles and torpedoes will be removed...but...there is not much else to go on. I'm assuming her sensors will remain intact, but will she keep her ECM equipment, or her CIWS? And there is no information on the service dates...these ships may have already been transferred and converted--how long would this process take...a few months?--, but there is no confirmation either way.

Maybe just put in a basic version of the platform--yank all weapons but the 76mm gun and assume service dates of 2016-present?

Again, I'm thinking of working up some scenarios involving the Japanese coast guard (and eventually some others involving the Indian coast guard, but that won't be for a while), so I hope this will be considered, but I understand the information on it is still pretty sketchy.

(P.S. I agree with Supreme. New new database is awesome! [:)])