Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

[Tookatee]

Another bug I just found, the warheads for the all variants of the nuclear Agni TELs (#2496-2499) function exactly the same as the conventional version of those facilities. No nuclear detonation occurs when the warhead impacts and it functions exactly the same as its conventional counterpart (no ability to choose a high altitude detonation), even saying that the conventional warheads had impacted the selected target despite the facility stating that the warheads are nuclear.

[WBailey]

ORIGINAL: WBailey

Could we get the AN/FPQ-16 PARCS & EPARCS added to DB3000? PARCS is in the CWDB already, but the radar is operated to this day in upgraded form.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/FPQ-16_PARCS
http://www.radomes.org/museum/showsite. ... S+PARS,+ND

ORIGINAL: WBailey

Please add France's Pluton and Hadès SRBMs, the Pluton was in service until 1993 and the Hadès from 1991-1996.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluton_(missile)
https://fas.org/nuke/guide/france/theater/pluton.htm
Hadès is on wikipedia also, but the forum doesn't like the è in the URL
https://fas.org/nuke/guide/france/theater/hades.htm

Could you check and see if these are on the list? I'm sure they're low priority, just want to know they didn't get lost somewhere.

[stilesw]

Warheads for the all variants of the nuclear Agni TELs (#2496-2499) function exactly the same as the conventional version of those facilities.

Logged.

-Wayne

[stilesw]

Could you check and see if these are on the list? I'm sure they're low priority, just want to know they didn't get lost somewhere.

Warren,

Yes indeed, these requests have been logged and they will be addressed when possible. Thanks for checking.

-Wayne

[SakiNoE]

Could you check and see if these are on the list? I'm sure they're low priority, just want to know they didn't get lost somewhere.

Hades and Pluton were both added to DB3K in Build 1009.31.1.

SakiNoE

[KLAB]

ORIGINAL: Tookatee

Oh and one more that I found, all variants of the KA-50 and KA-52 are missing the ability to load: Igla-1V pods (two [four total Igla missiles], one dual pod per wing, under the countermeasures pod on each wing), R-73's (four, one per pylon), the UPK-23-250 gunpods (four, two per wing), 500 liter external fuel tanks (four, two per wing), Ataka ATGMs (12, with six per wing), and KH-25's (four, one per pylon). Source: Wikipedia for the KA-50/KA-52.

All variants of the Mi-28 also share the same missing loadouts, with the exception of: the Igla pods total to a maximum of four (two dual pods per wing for a total of eight Igla missiles) rather than just two and the Ataka ATGMs as it already has those as its only ATGM loadout right now. Source: Wikipedia for the Mi-28.

It's a personal opinion, but I cannot see much evidence for any of the Igla , R-73 or KH-25 load outs actually being in service operationally,
Photos of the Igla-1V all appear to be with display aircraft at MAKS or other similar defence shows etc
Although it was part of the test program and requested by the RuAF as part of the design specification.

4 x Kh-25 loads and R-73 may have been tested but I cannot find any evidence that there are operational aircraft using them, not to mention the weight implications?

(Kh-35 on the Ka-52K seems optimistic weight wise too, but that's another issue?)

Weapons that are in use are the gun pods and combinations of OFAB-/FAB- M54 250kg and 500kg dumb bombs, as are the long range fuel tanks.
Also the KA-50/52 Mi-28N can use:
KMGU-2 dispenser pods x 2
S8 80mm rockets 4 x 20 round pods.
S13 122mm rockets 4 x 5 round pods.

The retirement of the S5 57mm rocket has been mentioned before but seems to always get overlooked in DB updates so even the latest Russian aircraft are given 57mm RP's.

Regarding ATGM's:
I requested previously that the ATGM loads are amended for the KA-50/52 and Mi-24/35M to reflect the fact that the
9M120-1 laser command guided Ataka AT-9 Spiral II variant is in use in 12 packs on the KA-52 (not the Vikhr-M until post 2015/16) and 16 Ataka's (not 4) on the Mi-24/35M .

There is an extensive back story to the Vikhr/Vikhr M missile and its interrupted development which means it went into very limited service with KA-50's in the Chechen campaign, came out of service
then came back into service again when an order was finally funded in 2015.

Also the bulk of Mi-24/Mi-8 Mi-28 and Ka-52 deployed to Syria have been fitted with Vitebsk self defence suites, and there are photos to prove it, see previous posts for the photos.

GATOR ON THE RISE by Alexander Mladenov ISBN 978-1-911096-45-0 PP146-149 specifically cover the Ka-52 armament.

Thanks for consideration,
KL

[Tookatee]

In the official documentation regarding the Weapon loadouts provided by the manufacturer, those weapons are stated as being possible options to equip onto the helicopters. And I don't know where you'd get any weight worries about the weapons, the rated max takeoff weight for the KA-50/52 is around 23,800 lbs (with an empty weight of about 17,000 lbs.) Even with a full loadout of only KH-25's (the heaviest weapon you specified that might be an issue, weighing in at around 600 lbs) that still leaves plenty of weight left over to take off and maneuver easily. In fact, the standard loadout of 12 Ataka missiles (excluding the normally included rocket pods) weighs MORE than a full loadout of KH-25s.

[Tookatee]

And a relatively simple explanation as to why you haven't seen stuff like the Igla equipped is that there isn't a need. All the missions those helicopters would be flying right now are against insurgent forces, but of course they retain the ability to equip said weapons should war with a major power break out.

[KLAB]

Its not my decision on what does get put in the DB updates and your welcome to make your case.


I am not disputing what is in the documentation.


What the brochures say, compared to actual capabilities are different things.


Any photos of an operational KA-52 with 4 x KH-25'S or R-73's?


The DB entries may be taking into account other factors such as are the pilots trained to use it and are these missiles available to the helicopter units?


The general impression from Syrian operations is that the RuAF wasn't exactly awash with PGM's?


If you read the previous posts in general about load outs requests you'll see I am not trying to be dismissive,


By example the vast majority of online or written sources about the RuAF Su-30SM says it can carry R-77/R-77-1 yet the DB3k only has the Russian Navy SU-30SM with the R-77-1.


This is because the Russian Naval Su-30SM has been photographed with R-77-1's.


The RuAF Su-30SM continues to just have R-27's, although in terms of specification they are surely the same aircraft?


Regards


K .

[Tookatee]

A simple Google search reveals many different photos with both the KA-50 and KA-52 being equipped with all the weapons I've described. As for pictures of the aircraft with these ordinance in COMBAT I'm once again going to tell you that it's dependent on the mission. No mission that those aircraft are flying today REQUIRE the use of AA missiles or the KH-25 as those missions are better suited to have either the six Ataka's on one pylon or a rocket pod that contains multiple rockets for multiple targets.

And once again they're all well within the performance specifications of the helicopters capabilities, if you can't trust the manufacture's performance statistics (which seem to be accepted by NATO as being true) then I don't know what to tell you.

And as for training, that's largely irrelevant for this game. The aircraft in game should reflect their full design capabilities so that they can be used accurately in the most simulations possible. If someone wanted to represent any lack of training on the pilot's part then they could use the built in skill system in combination with NOT selecting those loadouts for the aircraft.

As I am only able to upload one picture here is one that shows a possible combination of weapons the helicopter could carry. This one is an older picture that does not include the Igla, but such pictures are once again readily available and a quick google search will show you what you need.

[KLAB]

There is a similar issue with the #4823 A-29A Super Tucano Lebanese APKWS load outs.

#26285
#26286

They are listed as APKWS load outs but have normal Hydra 70's.
Thanks
K

ORIGINAL: KLAB

Thank you for the new additions to the DB:

REF #4825 Nigerian Super Tucano A-29

Ref loadouts:
#26295
#26296


Both these load outs are described as APKWS II but have conventional Hydra rockets not APKWS II.
Thanks
K
Have amended it with screen shot of the issue.

[ARCNA442]

I am running some test scenarios inspired by the current thread on SAM altitudes and discovered that several (all?) helicopters have extremely high min altitudes at cruise / mil throttle.

I tested the AH-64, UH-60, and MH-6:
In hover / loiter, they had min altitudes of 50' over water and 66' over land, which seems fine.
But in cruise / military, they had min altitudes of 100' over water and 500' over land.

Meanwhile, the F-111 had a min of 100' over water and 200' over land even when on afterburner at 800kt.

While I have long thought that min altitudes in the this game are rather conservative (eg in game an Argentinian A-4 has a min altitude of 300' over water when in real life they were attacking from below 50') and likely contribute to the problem of unrealistically effective defenses, such a huge altitude jump (66' to 500') for an airspeed increase of as little as 80kt seems particularly problematic and probably needs to be addressed

[Tookatee]

Another weapons system that's missing are the conventional variants of the AS-16 Kickback, both an anti-ship variant using inertial guidance and an active radar seeker (the KH-15P, entered service in the late 80s) and a ARM variant with a passive radar seeker were produced (the KH-15S, developed into the early 90s). In fact in the description for the nuclear variant that's already in the database explicitly references these by both name and purpose. The warhead for the nuclear variant should be 350 kilotons, not 200.

Another issue concerning the Kickback is it's missing launch platforms; the SU-33, SU-34, and the Tu-95MS-6 (6 missile capacity) could all carry the Kickback.

Source: Wikipedia article for the AS-16.

Here is a picture describing the attack pattern of the ASM variant.

[Tookatee]

The KH-41 Moskit is missing from the database. It is the air launched variant of the P-270 Moskit anti-ship missile and it entered service in 1990. It's weapons platforms are the SU-33, SU-34, SU-30MKI, SU-30MK, and SU-30MKK (all had a maximum capacity of one missile carried in the center-line pylon under the aircraft.) It has a maximum range of 250 km and a minimum range of 10km. It had either a conventional 150kg explosive or a 120 kiloton nuclear warhead.

Source: Wikipedia article for the P-270 Moskit and the Deagle dot com article on the KH-41.

[x2oop]

The KH-41 Moskit is missing from the database. It is the air launched variant of the P-270 Moskit anti-ship missile and it entered service in 1990. It's weapons platforms are the SU-33, SU-34, SU-30MKI, SU-30MK, and SU-30MKK

I remeber several discussions in other forums, which even involved some Russian military experts, and they always ended with conclusion that Kh-41/P-270 on Su-33s were just mock-ups for demonstrations and was never integrated with any Su-27 family aircrafts. The biggest concern was the size of the missile. Though now when we are seeing MiG-31s with big missiles like Khinzals maybe the scnerio of P-270 being airlaunched was not so far from reality.

[Tookatee]

The missile is able to be equipped and launched from these aircraft, the issue as you said is the weight. While still being able to fly (for example the SU-33 has an empty weight of 41,000 pounds and a maximum takeoff weight of about 73,000 lbs [while the weapon itself weighs about 9,900 pounds]) carrier-borne aircraft like the SU-33 had to fly with a reduced fuel/weapons load or else they wouldn't be able to take off of the ski-jump style aircraft carrier they're based at. Aircraft like the ground based SU-34 on the other hand do not have this problem and seem to be able to take off with their additional weapons and/or fuel (albeit with probably a significant decrease in performance and an increase in runway space needed to take off like any other heavily loaded aircraft.)

[Tookatee]

Another weapons system that's missing are the ballistic missile variants of the Chinese B-611. It has a range of 150km to 450km depending on the variant and was first publicly shown in 2004 with a newer variant being first shown in 2006. The variants include the baseline B611 with a 500kg warhead, the B611M with a 480 kg warhead and a range between 80 and 260km, and the B611MR an ARM semi-ballistic missile first shown in 2014 that uses inertial GPS guidance and a wideband passive radar.

Source: Wikipedia article for the B-611, see citation #1 for more detailed information.

[Tookatee]

Both variants of the SU-33 Flanker D are also missing a majority of their other armaments. They're missing the ability to load and use the R-27 ET and T missiles, S-8, S-25, and S-13 rockets, the KH-31A and KH-31P, the KH-25 MP, the RBK and KMGU series of cluster dispensers, the BetAB-500ShP Concrete Piercing Bomb, the FAB-250 and FAB-100 bombs (either one per pylon or six per pylon on the BDZ-USK-B universal bomb rack), and the respective guided variants of these weapons such as the KAB-250 and KAB-500 family of bombs.

Source: Wikipedia article for the SU-33 and reports of SU-33 combat activity in Syria.

[Tookatee]

The KH-27PS is missing the ability to be loaded onto the SU-17 and MiG-27 (currently it's only launch platform is the hypothetical Yak-141 freestyle) and has a range of 60 km rather than 30km. The KH-25MPU ARM (an updated varaint of the KH-25MP) is also missing from the database.

Source: Wikipedia article for the KH-25 and the Global Security dot com artcle for the KH-27PS.

[Tookatee]

Another missing weapon are the nuclear variants of the SS-26 Stone Iskander M ballistic missile for the Russian Armed Forces (with a dial-a-yield capability from five to 50 kilotons). It's launch platforms would of course be the two Russian Iskander facilities #254 and #2556.

Source: Wikipedia article for the SS-26, see citation one.