admiralskippy

Silent Hunter UK is exploring various FSC configurations for a role playing game, you two might bounce ideas off of each other. Tony That I am. I'm developing a C1 version with TLAM and a BrahMos style missile I'm calling Sea Mace. Sounds Nice . What ASW capabilites do you intend for C1? My take is that C1 has the bleeding-edge ASW tech and kit, combined with decent land-attack and surface attack capability, while C2 is meant to be cheaper and not ASW orientated. C2 could be on the same hull but minus the ASW capability- with maybe more TLAM or Sea Mace than C1. I know this has certainly been batted around. Is that your take on it? I assume you intend to give both point defence and some defensive AAW- say 16 Aster. ASW will be a Merlin and on-board torpedoes. As for AAW, I'm looking at 16 Aster 30, 48 (quad-packed) CAMM and 2 Goalkeeper. I might swap Goalkeeper for SeaRAM. My current thinking is for a Type 45-based hull. I'm also planning to have two very small UAVs on board. Interesting. Well it's nice we've both got different approaches, it will make it more interesting. When I've got something done I'll let you know.

Silent Hunter UK is exploring various FSC configurations for a role playing game, you two might bounce ideas off of each other. Tony That I am. I'm developing a C1 version with TLAM and a BrahMos style missile I'm calling Sea Mace. Sounds Nice . What ASW capabilites do you intend for C1? My take is that C1 has the bleeding-edge ASW tech and kit, combined with decent land-attack and surface attack capability, while C2 is meant to be cheaper and not ASW orientated. C2 could be on the same hull but minus the ASW capability- with maybe more TLAM or Sea Mace than C1. I know this has certainly been batted around. Is that your take on it? I assume you intend to give both point defence and some defensive AAW- say 16 Aster. I've read stuff about the Type 45 hulls being used but that would mean C1 would be nearly as expensive as the overpriced Type 45 if one assumes pricey new AAW gear is equivalent to pricey new ASW gear. Plus the Type 45 Hull has decent reduced RCS and electronic stealth features- but does it have enough passive sonar stealth features to be really suitable for a frigate that has to live up to the Type 23? I think a new 5000-6000 hull like that proposed by Thales is more likely. Just buying FREMM might be cheaper than home-growing everthing but it would NEVER happen. British shipbuilders are sacrosanct and even if a deal could be done BAE still want their pound of flesh. For C3 I'm thinkin a cross between the River Class, LCS and La Fayette, as bizzare as that sounds ! Sounds great and would like to compare notes as we go. EDIT: sorry about half finished post above but my internet had a bad hair day.

Silent Hunter UK is exploring various FSC configurations for a role playing game, you two might bounce ideas off of each other. Tony That I am. I'm developing a C1 version with TLAM and a BrahMos style missile I'm calling Sea Mace. Nice . What ASW capabilites are you thinking of for C1? For C2, are you going to do a C1 hull with the TLAM and Sea Mace and maybe 16 Aster but no significant ASW? My understadning is that C1 would have the bleeding-edge ASW tech and C2 could have the same hull but be cheaper. I know that's one option being floated around. For C3 I would think a mix of the River Class, La Fayette, and LCS, as bizzare as that sounds .

admiralskippy, if you do find 'redundancies' in the HCDB, I'd appreciate you pointing them out in the 'HCDB requests' thread (look for it in the Database subforum here). I am not aware of any redundant VLS mounts, but I could be wrong. Well what I meant was that the 16 cell Hyuga VLS gives 12 ASROC and 16 Seasparrow- and it was possible to give the same number of missiles through other mounts in the DB. Now the Hyuga has two mounts where there was one but functionally I think it is the same. I'm going to reverse it soon anyway since now I know how to create a VLS from scratch. And thanks to TonyE- I have now sucessfully cloned a Type 45 and now have the refitted and current versions. I'm now going to start work on using bits and pieces and creating others to try and model the FSC (Future Surface Combatant) Frigate replacement programme. This will entail 3 ships as you can see on the wikipedia article for the FSC or at navy matters, though I'm guessing you guys already know about it! Thankyou so much and I'll keep you posted on how it goes

It can be quite a bit of work if you're trying to create a whole database (or armada), but creating a new Mount (such as your proposed 12 cell VLS for Tomahawks) should be relatively simple. Have you yet tried building or creating the Mount (containing the appropriate weapons) and then adding the Mounts to your newly created Ship? (As opposed to 'cloning'). I tried making the mount, and it has an entry on the tplatform list and it's ont the platformmount list with the Id for the tomahwak missle where it should go. The annex is correct, but it crashes scenario editor when I try to open a battleset where I could use it on the platform. I'll fiddle with it some more later. It works fine with the Burke VLS, Phalanx and RGM-84 on it so I suppose I that's a start. Had it and the CVF in a battlegroup really mess up the Charles De Gaulle, which was fun. Thankyou so much and BTW are there any scenarios fan-made or official that have the Queen Elizabeth Class Carriers? EDIT: I fixed it! By taking the 16 cell VLS from a Japanese Hyuga DDH and making it a tomahawk VLS, and then making the Hyuga platform the same by giving it the 12 ASROC and 16 Sea Sparrow via other mount entries. (There are multiple redundancies.) I also think that what I learned doing this should mean I can create a designed-for-purpose VLS for the type 45, but I will do that later when I'm bored. Thanks again!

What version of MS Access are you using? That'll help answer this. You are also asking a second question with adding ship names, that isn't too tough, navigate to the ship in question, hit the Names button and start adding names to the bottom of the list . I'm using the latest version of MS Acess- 2007 I think- and it seems to work okay. I've added the weapons to the Type 45 platform sucessfully, and they work in-game, but I so far have not been able to clone a type 45. I also could not create a 12 cell VLS launcher for the tomahawks which means I had to add an Arleigh burke 29 cell launcher- now I have some SM3's that shouldn't be there. The ship names thing I can do already. I will play around again with getting the scenarios I have to work when I have time. Thankyou all again

How do I add scenarios from the download section to the game? There's a few WestPac scenarios I'd love to try. Also, does anyone know of any scenarios involving the Queen Elizabeth Class future carriers (CVF)? Thanks again

Just downloaded the new DB and I now have 3 new platforms to play with! Outstanding! Now I can concentrate on editing my own abominations against nature! Thankyou all

You can swap out databases easily, but you cannot mix and match, so switching to another DB will overwrite your existing additions and mods. You need to save your existing DB (with your additions and mods) before overwriting it (swapping) with another. Absolutely. You can create as many different versions of the same basic platform as space in the annexes will allow. Thankyou. So this is how I understand it now: 1. There is the standard database for the updated version of HCE which I have on my machine now. 2. The great people on this fine site have taken the time to add things to it. 3. Some modded databses have totally different platforms to reflect the 50s or WW1 and some are essentially the standard DB but with extra fan-made platforms. 4.Many of the modded databases aren't compatbile with the standard WestPac or EC2003, only fan-made scenarios for those areas. 5. If I download a fan made database I lose any units I've added to mine. (Fine for me as I haven't added anything yet, just begun to learn how to create platforms.) I've read the description of each database and I think I understand it. So if I downloaded HCDB-090620 then I would suffer no penalties in terms of not being able to play certain scenarios or losing platforms in my current database, and gain some new platforms? Becuase if so I'll download right away. But I'm trying to be cautious. Also, would someone be kind enough to give a description of how to clone a ship entry and then save it please? I can open the DB in Acess and I know how to import the current DB and theoretically how to export the DB once I've finished playing with it, and I can play around with ship entries, but cloning I have no idea how to do. If I work it out I will add another ship name to the class along with Daring, Diamond, Dragon etc.- Dolly! Thanyou all so much

I bought HCE a few weeks ago and have been transfixed. I since discovered your incredible site. I like playing with the units in the database of the current latest version, my question (and I'm sure it's really obvious) is this: if I were to download and overwrite with one of the fictional DB's available here, would I keep all the platform I already have and gain some new fan-created ones, or would I lose some of the platforms I have currently? Much obliged Also, I've begun learning how to mod and add ships to my current database (am being cautious and have not exported any frakenstein type platforms yet), is it simple to create a "clone" of a platform (ship), and then add a few new systems creating a new ship in the ship database? (I would imagine so but then again I know nothing.) In this case it is for the Type 45 "Daring" class of Destroyers, fitted "for but not with" phalanx, cruise, and of course Harpoon. I would like to create and upgrded version to reflect what the ministry of defense will do when they can scrape the money together. Much obliged again