Database Design & Discussion

As I tried to wrap my head around the idea of expanding the database limits, I keep coming back to the idea that we'll need a new database editor. MS Access is getting long in the tooth so a wholesale re-write might be nice. Well, the database storage mechanism will be a whole lot different so how do existing battlesets and scenarios get treated? Maybe their databases could be migrated to the new format. That train of thought led me to digging in old source code (from HC2002 actually) to see what Tools Bret had to dig information out of the legacy battlesets. It turns out he had a tool that exports any legacy battleset to the .csv files we are familiar with when usin…

WARNING !!! Aircraft entries 10469 Yak-38 and 11592 Yak-38M are rated as with "Propulsion: Jet, CVL cpbl", if that is not changed to "Propulsion: VTOL & Helicopter", they can't be loaded building a scenario on the Kiev-class and derivatives CVH (ship entries 2147, 3325, 2148, 2263), rated correctly as with only a VTOL runway. And if I changed it on my DB and make a scenario, the scenario very probably will crash when playing in a not-modified on that sense DB.

That's the new, the standard HCDB 1980-2015 platform database has been downloaded 10.000 times!!!

This discussion branched off from the EW hands on Red flag topic into a full blown DB discussion, so let me copy it over here, the proper place. The bonus is that Enrique's post from 2012 is just few topics away from here, that one is probably the Philosopher's Stone of RCS so far!! (If forum admin could replace this post with posts #17-#31 from the "EW hands on: Red Flag - Russians invited" topic in General that would be even better.) (( Damn, forum doesn't allow me to just quote the other posts, too many quotes ..., attempt to copy them unquoted.)) Here it is: Grumble, on 31 May 2014 - 02:13 AM, said: I just played my first scenarios with the Westpac battle…

In my main computer something has happened with the DB editor, and is destroying the DBs in modification. Each time I try to import a common.res file, the DB is in blank,even importing correct DB files from the other computer, or downloades from the Harpgamer site. It says the error is here in "Modules" and in the section "cFileIO" , but I don't know as to repair it: With rsArray .AddNew ![Annex] = LastAnnex ![iD] = LastID ![subAnnex] = SubAnnex ![Array] = Format$(ArraySize, "0") & ArrayVal .Update End With LastID = -1 Were I should to look to find the LastID = -1 and change it?

Ok. If I understand this correctly - essentially the commondb.res is the database for weapons/sensors/platforms (ships/subs/airplanes) and bases. AS I recall somewhere there is an application that will convert the file (commondb.res) into either Microsoft Excel or Access Database format - a little easier for viewing and analysis. What is the application that I am thinking about? Should it already be on my computer with Install of harpoon - or where is it located within the HARPGAMER site. thanks in advance

The Kfir C.7 is perhaps the most powerful IAF a/c asset of the HDS3 and later MEDC scenarios. In HCE the Kfir is rated at 1516 kts top speed which enables it to choose the fights it wants to fight disengage from the rest and reach any critical spot around Israel quickly. It also easily outruns the Damascus Gammon SAMs (1434kts), which would otherwise be a major headache for blue for the MEDC scenarios. Is this top speed for real or is this a typo? The Wikipedia article actually lists the Kfir C.7 with Maximum speed: 2,440 km/h (2 Mach, 1,317 knots, 1,516 mph) above 11,000 m (36,000 ft) In the original MEDC the Kfir had 1317 kts top speed from HDS3 on it has 1516kts. …

As consequence of some post interchanged with Brad the other day, I've make a chart about the plane carrying capacity of a great number of Aircraft Carriers and other plane-capable ships. First, some comments about it and the numerical values in the attached file. Basically, as commented a few days ago, I've detected some incongruence in HCE/HUCE Databases, I think now the problem comes from the paper rules and from his application to Computer Harpoon and his DBs. In the paper rules it's not the numerical limitation of the Computer Harpoon database, and a player can research in naval books and do changes in plane capacity as result, it's only a pencil and pap…

Greetings, I have been working on a few scenarios in the Caribbean and Sub-Saharan Africa region and have seen there is a lack of any airfields in the HUCE DB for these areas. While I was driving into work this morning and idea hit me - INTL Arfld Lg and INTL - Arfld Sm. Like any other unit in the new group, they can be placed anywhere. Basic numbers could be assigned for their air defense and any additional SAMs can be separately placed around the units. Large airfields could handle all large fixed wind aircraft, while the small version would only be capable of suppporting VSTOL and helicopters. I believe this would be a very beneficial addition in the next H…

Hi, I am trying to track down which Gearings and Sumners were updated while on Turikish service with Harpoon and 35mm dual guns - the DB shows only 2 of them, but I have found photographic evidence 3 were so updated, so I am trying to find out how they looked in the 90s, and it seems all photos on the web were taken from the bow! Any help, please?

A very interesting document, with APS-127, APS-134(V), APN-133(V), APN-215(V) tested by the USCG: http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=AD...oc=GetTRDoc.pdf

For database purposes, is there any differences in using a Block10/20 Global Hawk versus a separate BAMS entry? From what I can tell, it's a navalized G-Hawk, but no distinct differences jump out at me. I have an HoA scenario almost 90% done, but just wanted to eke out as much authenticity as possible. Thanks

Greetings, Is the SKRUNDA (AR SWATH) PB for Latvia, part of the HUCE DB? Two of four units have been delivered as of 2012 and I was wanting to utilize it, in a planned scenario in my BRICS campaign. If you need details on the class, let me know and I can provide them.

Japanese site (in simulated/automatic translator English!) with details of the Kawasaki P-1 (radar, sonobuoy processor, illustrated with 8xASM-1E, etc ... Is the only site where I've finded the approximative wing area), and some notes of humour with the P-1 speculative variants painted in RAF or Japanese 1942 styles: http://www.heinkel.jp/yspack/ysf_p1_eng.html The text says the HPS-106 is very similar to the modelled APY-10. Other Japanese projects: http://www.heinkel.jp/yspack/yspack_eng.html Including details about rare Japanese weapons, as modern deep charges: http://www.heinkel.jp/yspack/ysf_weapons_eng.html

Greetings, Is there any chance the naval inventories of smaller forces can be added to the HUCE database? These forces would help to fleshout the South America, Sub-Saharan Africa and the smaller forces in the GUIK and WestPac battlesets. Adding these smaller units would make generating a broader range of scenarios possible. If numbers and names need to be plugged into an Excel spreadsheet to be incorporated into the DB, send me a template of the Excel workbook and I'b be more than happy to plug int the numbers and text to help the community in developing a better gaming experience. Best regards!

Hi guys, Just read some interesting tidbits about Chile's modernization of its Type 23 frigates. A NIPmail piece (August 2011) shows that in mid-2011 they contracted with BAE Systems for an update to the Tracker Type 911 surveillance radar and Thales Underwater Systems for the addition of their 2087 towed-array sonar. The radar tweak is nothing really significant, but from an ASW standpoint, the frigates didn't previously have a towed array. This would give them quite a capability update and expand their capability. This might be benefitial, from a scenario design perspective.

After some testing I'dont see effects in the use of TCS on planes. Neither in the use of IR and Low-level light TV on ships (and submarines). They are actually any effects by his use in the game!

I'm back after a long hiatus (real life work takes up too much time but I gotta eat) - anyways - I managed to get HCE working in a VM sandbox. I'm trying to build some test scenarios to get back into the groove - looking for suggestions on how I can create/substitute some China Marine Surveillance Vessels. (link below) My practice builds will eventually continue my South China Sea/Sulawesi Sea Triangle series that I had small success with a few years back. http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/marine-surveillance/ship.asp Thoughts? Recommendations? If it's in the latest HCDB build/other database I do apologize, I haven't swapped out the Commonres.db yet, but I am on b…

I have a few questions about the DB and please excuse my ignorance on the subject, Ive been away from harpoon for several years now. I'm currently putting together some scenarios in the westpac battleset and I'm running into a few problems. I am trying to construct the scenarios reasonably realistically, Some of it is hypothetical but I'm not doing things like giving Singapore an aircraft carrier but I am using platforms that won't be in service until the 2015-2020 time frame. The problem is the huge buildup in forces in the area. When I look up some ships, I find several variations of the same hull being used and the DB doesn't include all of them. Some of the variations…

Not is clear what types of AIM-9 were employed in the mainly exported F-104 Starfighters. The follow considerations are basically informed guesses with puntual evidences. Also, we must remember a missile is designed to keep his integrity when loaded in a plane because the vibrations only a few flight hours (most between 40 or 400), and late it will be discarded or remanufactured. One of the most confusing elements is the double designation of the AIM-9F as AIM-9B FGW Mod.2, shortened to AIM-9B in the texts, the confussion provoked to think late Starfighters were equipped with the low performance, old and original AIM-9B. As consequence, most of the literature says A…