Database Design & Discussion

Beauvechain Type: Airfield VicCond: Primary RCS: 199 DP: 7500 North 50-7,58611 East 4-7,68333 two VLarge runways Bertrix Jehonville Type: Airfield VicCond: Secondary RCS: 199 DP: 2500 North 49-8,91667 East 5-2,23889 one VLarge runways Brussels National Type: Airfield VicCond: Primary RCS: 199 DP: 7500 North 50-9,01389 East 4-4,84444 three VLarge runways Brussels South Type: Airfield VicCond: Primary RCS: 199 DP: 5000 North 50-4,59197 East 4-4,53817 one VLarge runways Chievres AB Type: Base VicCond: Primary RCS: 199 DP: 9000 North 50-5,75842 East 3-8,31075 one VLarge runways NOTE: USAF Base Deurne Antwerpen Type: Air…

Chinese Type 055 destroyer and Type 075 LHD Royal New Zealand Navy ANZAC class frigates with the 2017 Frigate Service Upgrade Thanks!

Eric, thank you for attempting to organize the database requests. I'm an interested to see where it goes and appreciate the effort it take to maintain the list of enhancement requests!

Brains found an inconsistency in the Aircraft short names battleset string. The data fix is applied by you database authors. Not fixing it doesn't really hurt anything, it could just be confusing to later editors. Instructions: 1. With your database loaded in the PE, go to the lPlatformSubTypes table. 2. Scroll down the list until you are at Annex 5 3. Unless you've already fixed it, where Annex = 5 and ID = 15 you'll see double quotes that were caused by a missing comma. 4. Delete those double-quotes, close the table, then export. 5. Data inconsistency solved, thank you for participating.

China’s Carrier-Capable Naval Stealth Fighter Has Flown https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/42920/chinas-carrier-capable-stealth-fighter-has-flown https://harpgamer.com/harpforum/hc_platform_requests/aircraft/?do=form&d=2 View full record

About the County class destroyers and the Sea Slug missile, my results about the ships missile-carrying capacity, after a long afternoon of research motivated by the contradictory data about the topic: Originally envisaged to carry 18 or 20 missiles, but magazine enlarged before the ship building. The ships were equipped with: Sea Slug load=24 on the first THREE ships, of them 8 ready to fire (unknown missile-readying time). Sea Slug load=39 on the later FIVE ships, of them 6 ready to fire (unknown missile-readying time). 30 seconds time cycle for two missile salvoes obtained of the 8/6 missiles in the ready to use compartment, beyond the magazine and …

Recently commissioned INS Vikrant has 4xAK-630 but not 4x76mm guns, casual find looking on her photos, and confirmed here, minute 1:28: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CXLp926P20

Hope it helps, Jan

With a lot of new drone and autonomous weapons it seems to me (once we get back to modernising DBs in some way) that the line between platform and weapon is becoming difficult to decide. Also there is the decision on whether to create single generic items or create a pletherer of individual. Here's what hot my thinking about it (I know infact it's not a new delema) seen in current events https://defence-blog.com/xdown-develops-stud-drone-for-squad-level-strikes/

I posted lastnight with some general db questions and asking how to create battlesets for HCCE. I was trying to find out how to place a unit in a battleset if it wasnt in that battleset originally. I notice this morning that my posting lastnight has been deleted. Any help appreciated

I have posted a 'blank' database to HarpGamer DB Share area. The database has a bare minimum of sample platforms, weapons, and such to make the platform editor, scenario editor, and game engine happy to use the file. As it is a blank database, the battleset scenarios that come with HC will not operate when using this database, only scenarios crafted with whatever database you create from this blank slate will operate correctly. Have fun, design away http://www.harpgamer.com/HARP_dbpage.htm

799 THAAD interceptors delivered to 7(US)+2 (UAE) batteries, or some 88 interceptors by battery, without discount of those fired on test or angry (transcendent in view of the great SAM expenditure in Ukraine and the low yearly production level): https://news.usni.org/2024/10/17/report-to-congress-on-the-terminal-high-altitude-area-defense-thaad-system

Actually just one today. I am trying to figure out the fuel category. This one eludes me, as I can't seem to come up with how that number is figured or what units of measure are used on it. It seems that when I check sourses against the existing DB, none of the figures I am using is matching the number in the slot for that AC. Now this could mean my sources are not entirely correct, or that I am making a calculation error or its even possible that I am totally clueless (actually a high percentage chance on the latter) . Is there an easy explanation and I have just completely missed it?

Legacy standoff ASW weapons, like ASROC, relied purely on inertial guidance to put them on the target's last known position prior to launch. If the target was maneuvering, or moving rapidly, there could potentially be a largish discrepancy between its current position and the splashdown point of the torpedo. That said, some modern standoff ASW weapons, like the French/Italian MILAS, for example, are capable of receiving target updates from the parent ship, so that their terminal accuracy is considerably improved. How do we accommodate both possibilities?

I noticed the following submarines listed as being capable of "very deep" (below 600 meters) operations: Class: Depth per Combat Fleets of the World 15th Edition 1. SSBN Le Triomphant: 500 meters 2. SSN Barracuda: 400 meters 3. SSGN Oscar II/I: 500 meters 4. Akula 1: 520 meters (also probably Akula II); normal operating 400-450 meters Compares to "deep": 5. Virginia: 488 meters test depth 6. Seawolf: 594 meters test depth 7. Los Angeles: 450 meters May need to change the above subs in the database. Steven

In HCDB 081124, the noted entry for the Chinese sub tender has text referring to the Belgian FF Weilingen class.

Getting a "Run-time error 3022" when I try to import HCDB 061014 into the Platform editor.

I notice that both the RQ-4A Global Hawk Block 10 and the RQ-4B Global Hawk Block 20 seem to have exactly the same range listed in the "weapons" display, even though the Block 20 is supposed to have rather greater range, and claims to have 14,000 nm range (vs 12,500 for the Block 10) on the "Unit Display" popup. Is this proper?

1. Do you have any plans to make the three US version of the F-35 Lightning 2? 2. Do you plan to put the small diameter bomb on any other aircraft? thanks -Tanthier

I have a question about the dfferent databases. Are they all compatible with HCBB that comes with the game? I installed the latest HC65to95 and it removed most of the more modern platforms. Is there a way around this? Thanks -Tanthier