Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 03/13/2024 in all areas

  1. 2024.001 posted, be extra cautious and careful, back up your files and tuck them away in case I accidentally introduced new issues.
    2 points
  2. All of the subsurface contacts in the sim were originally submarines, so no surprise that the code assumes they are subject to magnetic detection.
    2 points
  3. This scenario, and other thoughts, have spurred me on to write a small tool for modifying some attributes of in game platforms to better simulate surface (and semisubmerged) drones. Attached is a game save from this scenario where the suicide boats are low RCS and VCS and increased speed (I over did speed, so now max 55 kts). It should open and play with HCDB2 database but retain the platform mods (described above). A slightly different game play results. This scenario has spurred me on to write a tool for making minor modifications within the game to existing game platforms to better simulate this type of USV (and also UUVs) AGIvsUSV1.hpo
    1 point
  4. I'm not sure this should happen, and I can't duplicate it, but I picked up a contact by MAD (so that's got to be a sub I thought) and it turned out to be a school of shrimp! Unfortunately I throw a torpedo at them
    1 point
  5. Ok good we are now, Saving the Whales, and in Donaldseadog also the shrimp.
    1 point
  6. This might be useful? I've stripped out the other air groups other than AEA and reduced its unit number to 3 (still single aircraft units). It is continuing toward landing (on final, wheels down, full flaps?). The two game saves are from TDs test and a second apart xxx.0004 2 sec prior, xxx.0005 1 sec prior, to landing. I think the LandAirEvent triggers during xxx.0005 or next second of play for xx.0004. At that point there are two units remaining in AEA, one unit landed and readying and two zero aircraft PHUnit^.MyPlanes listed for AAC. TESTm(3).0009.zip
    1 point
  7. If the order of magazines is now correct I think bases should be good also. I did check sum type tests comparing the magazine.csv file before and after a import/export/import cycle (with no edits) and it passed while before this new PE the same test would fail. But the test doesn't pickup correct magagazines assigned to the wrong platfroms/bases. To me the biggest problem in correcting DB is that the errors were random, so could be anywhere. I pondered using LazGUI to run thru the DB loaded into the game and look for weapons in magazines not used by mounts of that platform, but kind of hoped people with th eproblem would nut out something else
    1 point
  8. Thanks E, that is a good sign!
    1 point
  9. Tested, both Database remading some magazine entries and tested in some small scenarios. Apparently everything is OK again!
    1 point
  10. The whales now have an option in 2024.001 once somebody adds the non-magnetic hull flag to the whales and the fishies in the DBs.
    1 point
  11. Of interest: https://www.navylookout.com/the-factors-shaping-the-future-royal-navy-surface-fleet/
    1 point
  12. Yeah, almost everything!!! But many thanks!!!
    1 point
  13. Correct, upon first export with the updated PE you may find the magazines assigned to a platform may be sorted differently than before but after that the ordering should be consistent and of course assigned to the correct platform in the game as in the PE.
    1 point
  14. So, within the existing DB structure one could add a Biologic or perhaps 'non-magnetic' flag to the Submarine annex, there is room in the submarine flags. Perhaps a wishlist item? maybe a... #define UF_A2_nonmagnetic 0x0400 // ALE 20240327 added because someone thinks MAD gear shouldn't detect whales, sheesh!
    1 point
  15. Usual bussiness, and for years thinking on it! (at least the Biological SS has titanium hull to halve the detection range of MAD!).
    1 point
  16. View File Russian Sub Hunters, March 2024. Historical Scenario. Russian Sub Hunters, March 2024. Historical Scenario. A Harpoon Commander's Edition scenario for EC2003 Battle for the GIUK Gap and the HCDB2-170308 new standard 1980-2025 Platform Database. This scenario is designed with advanced Scenario Editor and to be run with HCE 2015.008+ or later. This scenario is designed to be played from the Red/Russian side or from the Blue/Russian Aggressor side. You should play a few times first the RED side to avoid spoilers, and only later play the BLUE side. Image: Other more peaceful times, the Russian frigate RFS Neustrashimyy (Temporal hull number 712), lead ship of the Project 11540 Yastreb-class, steams through the Baltic Sea during exercises supporting Baltic Operations BALTOPS 2008. Photo of June 11, 2008, by Mass Communication Specialist Second Class Mike Banzhaf, a serviceperson on duty and in consequence on public domain. Took from Wikipedia Commons. After two long years of Russian invasion of Ukraine, Russia tries to keep an image of normality, including pretended normal military exercises, despite its great surface and subsurface loses in the Black sea by Ukrainian USVs (Uncrewed Surface Vessels), substrategic missiles and other minor forces. This simple scenario tries to depict the pretended "big" ASW exercise publicised by Russia March 13, 2024, and its estimated components. It's of interest the use of a Project 636.3/Kilo II-class submarine in the exercise, as isn't any in the Russian Baltic Fleet strength, and she is very probably B-608 Mozhaisk sailing in test, destined to be in service in the Russian Pacific Fleet. The only Russian submarine in regular service in the Baltic Fleet is an old Project 877/Kilo-class, B-806 Dmitrov, commissioned 1986. Also is of interest the comparison between this very simple Russian exercise and any of the iterations of the NATO yearly Dynamic Manta or Dynamic Mongoose ASW exercises, fulls of surface and subsurface forces and with a great variety of hypothetical situations. Of course this is a training exercise and actual shots, torpedoes and missiles aren't fired and nobody is hurt ... but in the alternate timeline we share now everything is possible, and that previous affirmation can be untrue. Enrique Mas, March 17, 2024. Submitter broncepulido Submitted 03/17/2024 Category GIUK  
    1 point
  17. Ooh, I nearly missed this, distracted I guess. I'll have a spin in the next few days, thanks Enrique
    1 point
  18. Not really an issue, but a bit funny, has anyone else noticed that a sea mine after detonating (and possibly sinking it's target ship) live on but minus armament. Unlike the Baka style weapon equipped suicide boats the sea mine doesn't self destruct once detonated. Don
    1 point
  19. Improving installations in Yap and other places https://www.airandspaceforces.com/air-force-yap-airfield-upgrades-ace/
    1 point
  20. I don't recall an issue but can provide some related information. Effects.c::FireGuns(...) only allows guns to fire against units >= SeaLevel where SeaLevel is the next altitude band above Snorkel. In other words, the code won't fire guns at Snorkeling submarines. That could be changed, I would imagine one would want a lower hit chance for a snorkeling submarine as compared to a surfaced sub. See H3 paper 4.2.3.2 Periscope Depth for a description of this depth. The base H3 paper rules do not accommodate gunfire vs. submarines. I did not check any of the addons nor the H4 nor H5 rules.
    1 point
  21. Testing old scenarios to constate DB editor is going fine, remembers me an old question. In relation to the attached screenshot and the lines "DEBUG Downes FF1070 PointDefense Got'm all" , Downes FF1070 effectively has expended all its ammo firing at the incoming missiles, some have been shot down (or not!) others not and have sunk poor Downes. The questions are: - In the simulation, the Phalanx is shooting down the incoming missiles, or it's only applied its Point Defense Value, a value unknown to me? - The Point Defense Value has any relation with the mount field "Auto", what reads "1" in this concrete case? - If not, the mount field "Auto" is or not implemented on the simulation, and what is its meaning? - The expression "PointDefense Got'm all" what real meaning has, as many missiles have penetrated the Point Defense? - The expression DEBUG, what is related in this case? Perhaps too many question, but many thanks!!!
    0 points
×
×
  • Create New...