Page 274 of 371
RE: Requests for DB3000 entries
Posted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 6:04 pm
by stilesw
Where is the An-12RR
Ivan,
Logged.
-WS
RE: Requests for DB3000 entries
Posted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 6:23 pm
by stilesw
But article also refers to MiG-29K/KUB of the Indian Navy having PAZ buddy refuelling too.
Logged.
-WS
RE: Requests for DB3000 entries
Posted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 6:41 pm
by stilesw
All variants of the SU-27/J-11 and SU-33/J-15 are missing the "Fly-by-Wire"
Logged for update.
-WS
RE: Requests for DB3000 entries
Posted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 7:13 pm
by Mgellis
It occurs to me that this might also be a way to model "warning shots"--anyone "hit" by this would know someone was shooting at them, but they would not actually be damaged. (I wonder if you could also use this to model things like spraying people with fire hoses.)
ORIGINAL: stilesw
Dear Developers. Some time ago i expressed request for some sort of practice munitions, which would generate HIT event, but without damage to the target. If this request is too complicated and not worth of time it would took to implement, can we get some Generic aerial, surface and underwater targets for the missions simulating exrecises? Thank you in advance.
Logged - not a bad idea and I'll check it out.
-WS
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues?
Posted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 9:18 pm
by stilesw
All Bulgrian MIG-25 RBT (82-91). This is recon variant not fighters. Likely same configuration as #2234
Logged.
-WS
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues?
Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 12:35 am
by jun5896
#4039 J-11D is omitted "KG-600 DECM Pods" from Aircraft Loadouts.
It is specified that is armed DECM Pods.
#4641 J-11B can mount KG-600 DECM Pods. As such, J-11D is able to mount DECM Pods with other weapons.
#4429 SV-22D(Hypothetical)
I mentioned them before, SV-22D have to change Loadout DB ID #23191 - Mk46 NEARTIP Mod 5 -> Mod 5A(SW) or Mk54 LHT Mod 0 [1998, 2003, 2005, 2018 - four variants have same problem about this dipping sonar - Mk54 LHT Mod 0 year 2005, 2018 SV-22D ] AGM-84G -> AGM-84N

RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues?
Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 2:46 am
by jun5896
#4225 - J-16; PLAAF also took delivery of a regiment of J-16 in 2014 (
https://www.popsci.com/blog-network/eas ... e-fighters)
It has integrated PL-10 together with PL-12, In addition can be equipped KG600 DECM Pods(Chinese called other name, that's KL700A.) Above picture J-16 carried two PL-10, two PL-12 and two PL-15 with KG600 ECM Pods.
https://www.twoeggz.com/news/5669752.html (I don't know Chinese, but found picture.)
So Aircraft Loadouts DB ID #21741 21742 PL-8C missile changes with PL-10 missile and can be KG600 DECM Pods.
RE: Requests for DB3000 entries
Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 3:06 am
by jun5896
ORIGINAL: stilesw
All variants of the SU-27/J-11 and SU-33/J-15 are missing the "Fly-by-Wire"
Logged for update.
-WS
Fly-by-Wire
Su-30/J-16/Su-35 are missing the "Fly-by-Wire" too.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/milita ... air-force/
https://www.airforce-technology.com/pro ... aft-india/
https://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraf ... raft_id=88
RE: Requests for DB3000 entries
Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 3:11 am
by jun5896
#3783, 1699 Su-30MKM Flanker G has Supermanouverability (5th Gen Fighters).
I don't understand, That isn't 5th generation fighter.
RE: Requests for DB3000 entries
Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 4:07 am
by Tookatee
I believe that's to simulate the enhanced maneuvering characteristics of both the thrust vectoring engines and canards present on the aircraft. So while it may not be a 5th generation fighter, the actual percentile boost (or plain value boost, I'm not exactly sure how that property affects the agility value) to it's agility is supposed to be representative of such features (of which are typically seen on 5th generation fighters, hence the name.)
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues?
Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 5:11 pm
by stilesw
#4039 J-11D is omitted "KG-600 DECM Pods" from Aircraft Loadouts.
Logged.
-WS
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues?
Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 6:13 pm
by stilesw
So Aircraft Loadouts DB ID #21741 21742 PL-8C missile changes with PL-10 missile and can be KG600 DECM Pods.
Junyoung,
Logged.
-WS
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues?
Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:26 pm
by Tookatee
The #2461 YLC-6M is missing the Mk.1 Eyeball sensor despite the fact that it is a vehicle based mobile radar system, of which requires two non-blind humans to drive and operate.

RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues?
Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2020 8:52 am
by Parel803
Is it possible to add Netherlands Antilles Coast Guard Jaguar class?
Jaguar class, Damen Stan 4100 patrol vessel.
3 Units: Jaguar (P810), Poema (P811) & Panter (P812).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damen_Sta ... rol_vessel
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File ... tguard.jpg
https://www.maritiemdigitaal.nl/index.c ... =101097786
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cate ... _Poema.jpg
If it is possible, what other information/dat do you want me to provide?
with regards
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues?
Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2020 10:29 am
by Parel803
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues?
Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2020 7:08 pm
by Tookatee
The #1918-1919 T-90A's are missing: their forward facing OTShU-1-7 IR dazzlers as apart of the Shtora-1 system (of which are prominently featured to the left and right of the main gun), their four TShU-1-11 laser warning receivers (also incorporated as a part of the Shtora-1 system, but also present on the T-90S export variant [missing on #2827 and #3017].)
In addition, a "T-90" (baseline production variant, IOC in 1993) is missing from Russia in the database and it would be a simple clone of the current T-90A, including the Shtora-1 system, but without the thermal sights. A T-90S variant is also missing from Algeria, its IOC would be in 2016 and the difference between it and the current Algerian T-90S would be the inclusion of the full Shtora-1 system (which Russia provided to Algeria as military aid in 2016.)
T-90A with the Shtora-1 OTShU-1-7 IR dazzlers visible.
Full Shtora-1 system on a T-90 in 1993.
Sources:
https://defense-update.com/products/s/shtora-1.htm ,
https://www.armyrecognition.com/may_201 ... 05161.html ,
http://www.deagel.com/Protection-System ... 49001.aspx ,
https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/docs/3aps98.pdf , and
https://defense-update.com/20051012_shtora-1.html
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues?
Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2020 6:24 am
by Blast33
Thanx for all the updates you all make!
This is not a sentence to close off with, but to start from!
The Royal Netherlands Airforce has two radar post Nieuw Millingen ( 52° 14.030'N 5° 44.542'E) and the Wier ( 53° 15.455'N 5° 37.208'E). Until now operating with the MPR radar for more than 40 years..
The radar at the Wier has this week been replaced by a land variant of the Thales SMART-L radar. And further on this year, the post at Nieuw-Millingen will follow.
Source:
https://www.defensie.nl/actueel/nieuws/ ... htsleiders (you will need google translate to english
Could you add the SMART-L radar to the Nethelands and make a land variant from the naval version?
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues?
Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2020 6:31 am
by Blast33
Sorry I used fast reply and could not place a picture.[&:]
Now there is a picture. Note the placement on the tower if you place it in the lowww Neherlands [;)]

RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues?
Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2020 1:58 pm
by BDukes
ORIGINAL: Tookatee
The #2461 YLC-6M is missing the Mk.1 Eyeball sensor despite the fact that it is a vehicle based mobile radar system, of which requires two non-blind humans to drive and operate.
Not sure if true in CMO but in CMANO if unit not have the Mk.1 eyeball the game was hardcode to give.
Mr. Stilesw does game still do this? Pretty easy to test. Remove radar sensor and see if unit sees something when fly over in visual ranges.
Thank
Bill
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues?
Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2020 2:57 pm
by stilesw
Not sure if true in CMO but in CMANO if unit not have the Mk.1 eyeball the game was hardcode to give.
Mr. Stilesw does game still do this? Pretty easy to test. Remove radar sensor and see if unit sees something when fly over in visual ranges.
Bill,
I found the problem. The YLC-6M had been designated as a building instead of a mobile unit. The former does not have the Mk1 eyeball while vehicles do. re-designated as mobile and the eyeball now appears in the next DB3K release.
Thanks for you and Tookatee for finding this.
-Wayne