Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

[Mgellis]

One more hypothetical class, the upgunned version of the LCS that Lockheed-Martin is trying to sell to various countries...

Class: Surface Combat Ship (hypothetical)
Type: Frigate
Service: Generic
Displacement: 3600 tons
Length: 118 m.
Beam: 17.5 m.
Draft: 4.2 m.
Speed: 40 knots
Range: 4000 naut. miles at 18 knots
Power: Electrical: 4 Isotta Fraschini V1708 diesel engines, Hitzinger generator units, 800 kW each
Propulsion: 2 Rolls-Royce MT30 36 MW gas turbines, 2 Colt-Pielstick diesel engines, 4 Rolls-Royce waterjets
Sensors: Spy-1F (V) Array, surface search radar, Missile Illuminators, Hull-mounted sonar, Towed array
Weapons: 76 MM Otomelara Super Rapid, 32-cell MK 41 Vertical Launching
System, 2 x 4-Pack Harpoon (8 Cells), OTS Torpedo Launcher, CIWS, 4 x .50 Caliber Guns,
SRBOC
Aircraft: 2 medium (10-ton helicopters), 1 pad, hanger for 2 A/C (or one A/C and two drones)
Boats: 1 11-m. RHIB or USV/UUV

This is, again, meant to be a generic vessel that might be purchased by any number of countries, and quite possibly customized, although Lockheed Martin's brochure offered some pretty specific information about what would be included. It could be used in all kinds of near future scenarios. Thanks for considering this one!

[I1066]

This is not available in the DB
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9K333_Verba

9K333 Verba
Man-portable air-defense systems (MANPADS)

In service
2014–present

Specifications
Warhead 1.5 kg (3.3 lb)
Engine Solid fuel rocket motor
Flight ceiling 4.5 km (15,000 ft)

Guidance system
Three-channel optical seeker (ultraviolet, near-infrared, mid-infrared)

[Dysta]

ORIGINAL: I1066

9K333 Verba
Man-portable air-defense systems (MANPADS)

Then Stinger POST (#735) should also implement UV seeker, and add FN-16 (FN-6 with IR/UV) for Cambodia too.

UV can act as IR's redundancy to shield the signature spikes from flares. There's also an article with diagrams about it:

http://opticalengineering.spiedigitalli ... id=2427710

[orca]

Leonardo to equip MQ-8C with Osprey AESA radar

http://www.naval-technology.com/news/ne ... ar-5034302
http://www.leonardocompany.com/document ... f?download

[mikmykWS]

ORIGINAL: I1066

This is not available in the DB
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9K333_Verba

9K333 Verba
Man-portable air-defense systems (MANPADS)

In service
2014–present

Specifications
Warhead 1.5 kg (3.3 lb)
Engine Solid fuel rocket motor
Flight ceiling 4.5 km (15,000 ft)

Guidance system
Three-channel optical seeker (ultraviolet, near-infrared, mid-infrared)

Anybody find a NATO designation on this one yet? SA-26?

Thanks!

Mike

[Broncepulido]

SA-25, peroused yesterday in Wikipedia.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... issile.htm

[Zaslon]

Sovi...Russian Su-33 received SVP-24.
http://www.janes.com/article/63822/russian-carrier-based-su-33-fighters-receiving-new-bombing-computer

[mikmykWS]

ORIGINAL: Zaslon

Sovi...Russian Su-33 received SVP-24.
http://www.janes.com/article/63822/russian-carrier-based-su-33-fighters-receiving-new-bombing-computer

Added this one to our list the other day. Any pictures of dumb bomb or rocket loadouts?

I'm hoping we'll get some once it arrives off Syria.

Mike

[CV60]

Very minor database addendum: The AS-22 series (DB3000 entries Weapon_3129, 3132, 3130, 3131) currently do not have a minimum platform launch speed in the game. According to Jane's, the launching aircraft must be between 29-875 knts. This number is consistent with the manufacturer's numbers. See http://eng.ktrv.ru/production_eng/323/513/537/

[edsw]

Added this one to our list the other day. Any pictures of dumb bomb or rocket loadouts?

I'm hoping we'll get some once it arrives off Syria.

Mike

That is, you do not want to do make smart bombs and missiles for Su-33 due to lack of pictures with them? Where in this case, photos F-15,16,35 with AIM-120D? !!. Where it is evident that suspended Owned AIM -120D? !!!!

[mikmykWS]

ORIGINAL: edsw

Added this one to our list the other day. Any pictures of dumb bomb or rocket loadouts?

I'm hoping we'll get some once it arrives off Syria.

Mike

That is, you do not want to do make smart bombs and missiles for Su-33 due to lack of pictures with them? Where in this case, photos F-15,16,35 with AIM-120D? !!. Where it is evident that suspended Owned AIM -120D? !!!!

You're being ridiculous. Once I see a picture will add. Look forward to it!

Mike

[edsw]

Вы смешны. После того, как я вижу картину дополнит. Посмотрите вперед к нему!

Майк

I ask again, on what basis for the F-15,16,35 added AIM-120D ?!

[thewood1]

My reading of the appropriations is that IOC on SIP 1 is complete on F-22 and other aircraft that already have the 120C. SIP 2 and 3 go through 17 to 19.

[thewood1]

And this is why there is so much skepticism around Chinese and Russian claims on new weapons. The US and NATO country armed forces are forced to be fairly transparent when it comes to weapon acquisition. Both budgeting and shareholder information for GRC at defense contractors drives a certain amount of openness. I will point out that anyone thinking they know when weapons go online in the US and aren't looking at appropriations, are just guessing. This level of transparency is driven by legal and constitutional mandates and are governed by legal checks and balances, as well as the press and dozens of watchdog organizations. Pick a weapon system and the google it with the word budget or appropriation and you will get all the detail you need.

What we get in this thread is blurry pictures, press releases, and models at tradeshows. We get a picture of a prototype on a runway. Where is the planning for IOC and the steps that go with it? The history, especially with Russia, is usually significantly less than what is announced. So I expect the devs to push back a little on nationalistic jingoism, US, Russia, whatever. The difference with the US, its fairly easy to debunk a PR with a budget report. That lets the devs decide if its worth putting in a hypothetical unit or not.

[thewood1]

Here is a pessimistic, but most likely realistic, assessment of Russian Navy ship building expectations. Delays, productivity, quality, and missing integration seem to be issues. This would be a massive scandal in most countries, so I have to assume there is little oversight.

https://csis-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs ... ov_Web.pdf

[Hongjian]

ORIGINAL: thewood1

And this is why there is so much skepticism around Chinese and Russian claims on new weapons. The US and NATO country armed forces are forced to be fairly transparent when it comes to weapon acquisition. Both budgeting and shareholder information for GRC at defense contractors drives a certain amount of openness. I will point out that anyone thinking they know when weapons go online in the US and aren't looking at appropriations, are just guessing. This level of transparency is driven by legal and constitutional mandates and are governed by legal checks and balances, as well as the press and dozens of watchdog organizations. Pick a weapon system and the google it with the word budget or appropriation and you will get all the detail you need.

What we get in this thread is blurry pictures, press releases, and models at tradeshows. We get a picture of a prototype on a runway. Where is the planning for IOC and the steps that go with it? The history, especially with Russia, is usually significantly less than what is announced. So I expect the devs to push back a little on nationalistic jingoism, US, Russia, whatever. The difference with the US, its fairly easy to debunk a PR with a budget report. That lets the devs decide if its worth putting in a hypothetical unit or not.

You have to remember that this sort of strategy is, while bad for us gamers, good for Russia and China.

They are being consistently underestimated and not taken seriously - until it is too late and Red Lines have been overstepped, an unloved dictator rescued and moderate islamists successfully driven to the brink of destruction, leaving everyone dumbstruck since they never believed that the suppossedly "inferior and obsolete" military of that power could have pulled it off.

Sure, it's hyperbole now, but you know what I mean...

/off topic

[thewood1]

OK, like they've shown before...oh wait. They haven't. Russia especially, how many systems have people claimed are operating or going to operate, yet never do. Just look at tanks....good grief, I shouldn't have to look beyond that to make my point.

And I do know what you mean...another person sucked in by press releases. I have seen little from China except press releases and some staged demonstrations.

[mikmykWS]

Ok locking this string for awhile. I've asked a couple times that this one be kept strickly for requests but I guess no comprende!

This is why we can't have nice things[:D]

Anybody needs anything just pm with sources etc.

Thanks!

Mike

[mikmykWS]

Ok reopened.

Requests only.

Thanks!

Mike

[Zaslon]

I notice that Aero L-39C hasn't any loadouts.

L-39C Has a gunsight and two hardpoints, so it can load:

100kg of bombs in each pylon (so FAB-100)
A pair of UB-16-57U with S-5 Rockets.
A pair of IR missiles (R-3S, R-60)

Manual (page 140-141)

Missing users:
Slovakia
Russia
Soviet Union
Ukraine x39?
Algeria x7
Azerbaijan x23
Iraq x22
Ethiopia x17
Afghanistan x26
Czech Republic
Kazakhstan
Kyrgyzstan
North Korea
Vietnam
Yemen