JMS

Well, first, I have to ask - did you? (I assume you're running 2011.011 with the iterative saving command line. I ran the scenario using 2009.064). The file was sent to me (yay!) but the iterative saving was not used (boo). Still, haven't had a chance to look at the save but will tonight (yay for Friday!). The WHAT??!

A crash/error as you reported here? nope, it was that red was not playable with the sides.exe - somehow I thought it was solved but it's still on the to do list.

Never mind, found it's still an issue.

"AI submarine stopping noted, please mail to sysop tgp.net"

I think Sukhoi were proposing an updated SU-33 using SU-35 avionics etc.... which I guess might compete with the latest MiG 29K...... however I agree that the production run of MiG 29K for India must be a driving factor..... What next!!! the return of the Su25K Su-25UTG, it was never an attack plane, just a trainer. Even in the 90s the 29K was more multirole than the Su-33 but MiG was out of favor when the USSR fell. Given the limitations of STOBAR it's possibly the better plane too.

the analysis: Initial Response to Atrina Post on Project 1199/11990 The Atrinaflot entry on Anchar, short as it is, has cleared up quite a few things and, as did the entry on Project 1293, presented a couple of surprises and some more confusion. When first we started into this ship we had the line drawing published in Warship International provided by ender and the link from the French language “forum actif”, both of which seemed to show the same ship (I checked: Although the link to that page in that forum is still good the picture is no longer there. I have it as do others). Then Snake65 was kind enough to provide a drawing by A. N. Sokolov. This was of a slightly different version and, as it now turns out, close to the final version. In doing my initial analysis, I had made the assumption that all the above were on the same hull and so in reconciling what I saw in these three graphics I came out with my initial size estimates; I made the assumption that differences were some detail scaling errors on the part of Sokolov as I compared the drawings to the photo of the model and reconciled these with a standard displacement of 12000 tons. It never really occurred to me that this just might be a version with smaller hull (10 150 tons) (That was truly silly of me!!! ). In this, gollevainen got much closer with his size estimate for the Sokolov drawing. Thus the W. I. drawing, the photo from “forum actif” and the photo that later followed (three masts, three centreline SAM launchers) would appear to be longer, larger versions that were prepared using the same basic hull as Project 1293 prior to that project’s termination and the ensuing reduction in size to the final statistics quoted in the Atrinaflot entry. One source of error and confusion disposed of! Another source of confusion cleared up from the first three graphics was the presence of quadruple launchers on the port and starboard side of the ship either side of the Kite Screech gun fire control radar, just aft of the forward SAM launchers. The options I initially presented were launchers for the Medvedka rocket-thrown ASW torpedo system or launchers for either SS-N-25 “Uran” or SS-N-26 Onyx/Yakhont. It now appears they were neither. As with Project 1293, these were launchers for Vodopad-NK. Two quadruple launchers that trained out about 25-30 degrees and could fire either 53-cm heavyweight torpedoes or the Vodopad rocket thrown ASW torpedo system. However, we now encounter several question marks: Why are there only eight rounds? It would seem that according to the data table that there are no reloads carried and there is no apparent provision for handling reloads unless they are embedded within the superstructure block inboard of the forward CADS-N-1 mounts. So, are there eight heavyweight torpedoes, eight missiles or a split between the two? Given what is apparently carried by the Udaloy II and the last three Kirov’s, this doesn’t seem to be enough but there you go. Maybe the larger iterations that came before the move to the final hull size had reloads but the final ones did not. To confuse the issue further, according to the text of the entry it seems that the early versions had no heavyweight torpedoes or rocket-thrown torpedoes at all. Given the start of design in 1974 when such weapons were de rigeur for deep water ASW units I find this difficult to accept. One can only believe that the Soviets expected that the presence of such weapons on other ships in the carrier group plus the helicopters carried onboard this and other ships would have made up for any lack of their (torpedoes and rocket-torpedoes) presence, or later, the small number of weapons on Project 1199/11990 ships. Another source of confusion that was dealt with was the role of the gas turbine propulsion plant. Based on initial information the gas turbines would be used in “quiet” cruise and the nuclear plant would be used for full power and for long distance cruising. This no longer appears to have been the case at all. It seems that all versions that came with additional non-nuclear propulsion systems intended to use these systems in the same way they were used in Project 1144; as an auxiliary system in case of failure of the nuclear reactors or to supplement their power. This makes more sense from an operational standpoint of escorting a nuclear-powered carrier. The only question that remains for each design variant where such an auxiliary system is present then becomes one of how much was each type expected to do? For the final version, if 16-18 knots was all that was expected from the gas turbines alone then the two cruise turbines from Project 1164 (2 x M70 totalling 20000 horsepower, maybe 25000 horsepower if using a later version of this engine) might be all that is needed. Then what about the nuclear plant? Is it expected to power the ship up to its design maximum speed by itself or is it designed to a lower power with the balance being made up by the gas turbines? These are relevant questions because a smaller nuclear plant means lighter propulsion weight which releases space and weight for other things. Difficulties in producing nuclear plants of sufficient power had always been a traditional hindrance to the building of nuclear powered surface ships for the Soviet Navy. The carriage of anti-ship missiles is resolved beyond doubt, at least for those versions near the end of the design development cycle. For those so equipped with missiles other than Moskit the type of missile (SS-N-26, aka P-800 Onxy), method of launch (vertical) and the general placement of the launchers (in two groups either side of the battery of Kinzhal (SA-N-9 Gauntlet) launchers just ahead of the helicopter hangars) is now known. All that is left unknown is the number of missiles. My guess would be a total of between sixteen (16) and twenty-four (24). This makes it a very powerful surface combatant. With cues provided by the drawings from the Atrina entry, all of the variants pictured can be seen to have either a Band Stand radome covering an over-the-horizon fire control radar and associated data links, Punch Bowl radomes covering the antennas for linking up to the Legenda satellite surveillance and targeting system or both. Thus, all the variants have some form of targeting to make full use of the range of their missiles. Neither have the radomes require for the Krystall satcom system so it can be safely assumed that all would carry the Tsunami system for long haul satellite communications. Once again we run into the “More” radar system. My comments from the Project 1293 thread regarding this system are repeated here. Anyone with information on this radar is invited to speak up. The electronic warfare section is no clearer than it was before except that all three of the drawings from the Atrinaflot entry show equipment similar to what was designated as the antennas for the Sozvezdie-BR system in the Atrinaflot entry for Project 1293. This might imply that Project 1199/11990 was to carry the medium ship version of this system, Sozvezdie-SR, as there are fewer equipment clusters shown on the drawings compared to the drawing for Project 1293. I am of the opinion that, at least for the first ship or two of this class it is more likely that Kantata-M would have been fitted and the power generation capacity set to meet its needs. Kantata was the first computer controlled integrated electronic warfare system to go to sea in the Soviet Navy. At the time the Soviet Union collapsed, when such systems were already the rule in NATO navies, only eight such systems had gone to sea on Soviet ships: two on the Kievs, three on the Slava’s and three on the Kirov’s. Given this and the difficulty of bringing even the first of the Sozvezdie systems into service, I think Kantata was the best that Project 1199/11990 could expect to start with. To wrap up, I will make a couple of comments on the drawings presented on the Atrinaflot site. First of all, in general, they clear up a lot of details on the ship fittings and, using them as a cue, more details are discernable in the photographs of the models previously posted. This is, indeed, a great help. The first drawing, that of an “Earlier Variant” (Moskit missiles, three centreline mounted Uragan SAM launchers) helps both to clarify and confuse. It shares enough in common with the photograph of the Moskit equipped version previously discussed in detail to clarify equipment selection and arrangement but at the same time it shows differences in propulsion choice and equipment placement as well as, most importantly, hull size. It is possible that this is a drawing of another variant and, if so, this is welcome information but this drawing appears to conform to the 188 metre overall length of the final version rather than the greater length inherent in the intended commonality of hull with Project 1293. If this is indeed an earlier version then I believe this to be an error, indicated by the arrangement of the helicopter hangar and the aftermost Kortik (CADS-N-1) mount. The full Kortik mount has a below-decks magazine with automatic reload system immediately under the mount for the missile portion of its weapons. The hangar shown doesn’t appear to have an extendable portion similar to that of Project 956 ships (Sovremenny) so, as shown, such a magazine would fill the forward half of the hangar thus preventing the full entry of the helicopter into the hangar. It is possible that the after Kortik mount is intended to be reloaded manually from a magazine placed elsewhere but this seems very inconsistent. In my opinion, this is a drawing of another version but it has been incorrectly compressed into a shorter hull. The third drawing, that of the all-gas-turbine version, is very interesting and it also seems to be an ancestor, along with the Udaloy, to the Project 21956 large missile destroyer now being offered by Severnoye Design and Construction Bureau (aka Northern PKB). That’s it for now. I am putting together a revised assessment for each of the drawings and pictures now available but it will take some time. I’ll keep you posted. Likely more to follow.

Edited to put the translation of a Russian speaker plus comments on Anchar found at warship design forum "As promised, Here is my translation. Before I post that, jere is a list of abbreviations in no particular order. These abbreviations appear all the time so I thought that I would provide them so when they show up one does not have to guess. UVP = Universal Vertical Launcher installation PLRK = Anti Submarine Rocket Complex PKRK = Anti-ship cruise missile complex PU = Launch Installation BIUS = Combat Information Control System REB = Radio Electronic Battle ZAK = anti-aircraft artillery complex ZRAK = Anti aircraft rocket and artillery complex AU = artillery installation AK = Artillery Complex VVR = Pressurized Water Nuclear Reactor PPU = Steam Generator installation GTZA = Geared Turbine unit or aggregate GTU = gas turbine installation EU = power installation GEU = Main Power installation YaEU = Nuclear Power Installation (I think!) TTZ = Tactical Technical Task PKB = Design and Construction Bureau SSZ = Shipbuilding Factory RKR = Rocket Cruiser ZRK = Anti-Aircraft Rocket complex PK = Launch Complex And without further ado, here is my translation of hte Atrinaflot entry: Since 1974 in Northern PKB preliminary studies of the ship of air defence-anti-submarine defence with nuclear power installation were begun, and in 1976 the design office received the official tactical-technical task for the development of Project 1199. On the TTZ this ship of the oceanic zone had to have YaEU (nuclear power installation) and “had to ensure the combat security of nuclear aircraft carrying and rocket cruisers”, standard displacement should not exceed 12.000 tons. In the TTZ nuclear RKR were not casually mentioned as during the same time to Northern PKB was issued the task for developing Project 1293, which was a nuclear strike ship with a displacement of 14 000 tons and armed with the anti-ship rocket "Granit". There was also a concrete object for support and protection in the first Soviet nuclear aircraft carrying cruiser of Project 11437 (but actually– the aircraft carrier which later received the name "Ulyanovsk") which would become the nucleus of a future nuclear carrier-based group. After some time it was been decided to design both the nuclear support ships of Project 1199 and Project 1293 in one hull. Assigned as the chief designer of Project 1199 was I. I. Rubis. In the preliminary design were executed several variants of the ship, differing in the composition of armament, by the volume of protection and type of main power installation, since besides a pure Nuclear installation there was also examined lighter in weight variants with Combined atomic-gas turbine installations and with pure gas turbine installations. The first variant with YaEU turned out not absolutely successful in configuration and represented a nuclear ship of air defence armed with three "Uragan" complexes with single rail launcher, five “Kortik” combat modules (with one command module), 130-mm universal twin artillery installation and eight PKR "Moskit". Anti-submarine functions were carried out by the embarked Ka-27 helicopter. For protection against torpedoes two RBU-6000 rocket depth charge mortars were provided. The ship had to be equipped with the most modern means of radio-electronic armament, including long range phased array air search radar systems (MIKENOTE: I think they mean FRESCAN 3-D systems like Fregat, Forum and the like), powerful sonar and REB (Radio-Electronic Battle) complex. Also provided for was a laser ranging-sighting device for the fire control of the 130-mount (but this they did not develop). In the development cycle (mid 1980’s) to the project was assigned the number 11990 (code name "Anchar"), having stopped on the combined variant of the GEU – with reserve-boost gas turbine part. By then the development of the nuclear RKR of Project 1293 already was recognized as inexpedient (though on it was spent a lot of time and means) which deprived of sense the idea of “unification of the hull and power installation”. As a result the core dimensions of Project 11990 were reduced to 188 x 19 metres, and the displacement was reduced to 10500 tons. The ship was equipped with diversified means of air defence: 4 ZRK "Uragan", 6 launch installations for ZRK "Kinzhal" and 4 "Kortik" combat modules. At first it was intended that the "Kinzhal" and "Uragan" complexes would have the united control system "Orek" as one bureau had developed them. But in the final analysis they stepped back from this, having understood the specific features of these ZRK. The anti-submarine armament also was considerably amplified: Now besides Two helicopters and RBU, the ship was equipped with two Launchers for the long range PLRK "Vodopad". In the stern part of the ship, in the region of the launch installations of the ZRK "Kinzhal", to the sides places were reserved for the developed new complex of anti-ship cruise missiles with vertical launch (subsequently named "Onyx"), although during the entire development of the design there was a dispute on their necessity on this ship. In the future it was planned to replace the RBU-6000 with the complex "Udav". There existed a purely gas turbine variant of Project 11990 which had strengthened means of air defence (ZRK "Fal") due to a reduction in the mass of the main propulsion installation, and equipped with PLRK "Vodopad" and PKRK "Moskit". ZRAK "Kortik" was deleted in favour of ZAK AK-630 and ZRK “Kinzhal” as more effective in short range air-defence-anti-missile defence (a similar solution was applied on Project 1293). But, as has already been told, accepted as the definitive variant was the variant with the combined GEU which, in general, was not entirely reasonable – in essence for most of the time the ship would simply carry on itself the seldom used turbines and fuel for them. Having, moreover, received for armament simultaneously a considerable quantity of anti-ship, anti-aircraft and anti-submarine rocket weapons the project gradually evolved towards a multi-purpose ship and actually began to be converted gradually into the "hotly favourite" rocket cruiser, in concept and size coming nearer to projects 1144, 1165 and 1293. The way to the high-grade multi-purpose ship of the Navy of the USSR was twisting and thorny, which in the final analysis also ruined the project itself. By the end of 1980’s the decision on building the lead ship of Project 11990 at the SSZ in Nikolayev was accepted and even accessories for it, including reserve gas turbine installation, were built. However, the realization of the project was delayed in view of the concentration of the efforts of the shipbuilders on the nuclear aircraft carrying cruiser of Project 11437. But with the dissolution of the USSR all works on Project 11990 in general was stopped and its engine installation according to unconfirmed data went into the installation on the Project 1164 RKR "Varyag". In truth from the factory it later disappeared with a trace and the first domestic nuclear aircraft carrier "Ulyanovsk" of Project 11437 was not completed and it was dismantled on the building stock. The Basic Tactical-Technical Characteristics (variant) Displacement, tons • the standard - 10 500 The core dimensions, m • length overall - 188 • width overall - 19 • draught - unk The main power installation: atomic-gas turbine • 2 VVR, total capacity, mwt - unk • 2 PPU, 2 GTZA, total capacity, h.p. (kw) - unk • 2 reserve-boost GTU, h.p. (kw) atomic-gas turbine - unk 2 shaft; 2 propellers Speed, knots: • maximum - 31 • economic - unk Range under reserve EU, miles (At speed, knots) - unk Autonomy, days - 30 Crew, people 300... 350 ARMAMENT Strike Missiles: • UVP PKRK "Onyx" - Space and Weight reserved Anti-aircraft rocket: • PU SM-196 ZRK M-22 "Uragan" - 4 x 1 • UVP SM-9 ZRK "Kinzhal” - 6 x 8 Anti-submarine rocket: • PU PLRK "Vodopad-NK” - 2 x 4 Anti-aircraft rocket-artillery: • ZRAK 3M87 "Kortik" - 4 Artillery: • 130-mm of AU AK-130 - 1 x 2 Anti-submarine: • RBU-6000 "Smerch-2" - 1 x 12 Aviation: • Helicopter Ka-27 - 2 RADIO-ELECTRONIC ARMAMENT BIUS Unk Air Search Radar - 1 x "More" General Search Radar - 1 x“Forum-2M” Navigation and Surface Search Radar - 1... 2 x "Vaigach-U" Sonar - Unk REB Means - Unk Complexes of Chaff and decoy launchers - 2 x 2 PK-2, 4 x 10 PK-10 Fire Control Radars - 8 x MR-700 for ZRK “Uragan” - 1 x 3R95 for ZRK “Kinzhal” - 1 x "Pozitiv" for ZRAK "Kortik" - 1 x MR-184 "Lev-218M" For 130-mm AU Communication facility - "Taifun-2" IFF - Unk The entry isn't a huge one but, like the entry for Project 1293 provides much useful information and clarification. I will follow this up with some further analysis a little later as the class has been the subject of much discussion. "

No stupid questions ... [well, almost none ... your's isn't one of them] No, diesel-electric submarines do not snorkel in the game. Its a wish list item. Thanks! this is something that has been in the back of my mind since the first Harpoon iteration, I can assume therefore that their sound signature doesn't include the time they would be snorting?

A very stupid question, does marking "snorkeling sub" have any effect, i.e., do diesel electric subs snorkel?

I suppose the DB can also do with Ulyanovsk http://russian-ships.info/eng/warships/project_11437.htm And it would warm my heart to have the anchar project nuclear cruiser http://www.phpbbplanet.com/forum/viewtopic...warshipprojects

[emphasis mine] !?!? Fear not, must be something in the file because I was using your latest, even if it didn't work it's mighty good reading!

Try deleting the ExportDLLs\SensorVisualH3.dll and firing up the game again. What effect did that have? Please also tell me a scenario where this behavior can be seen. Thanks! Worked like a charm, game is faster now. Thanks! It happened on all scenarios I tried (all stock ones), last one Than Hoa Bridge.

Hi, I am getting some kind of memory leak or something utterly reproductable with this error: AppName: winharp32sides.exe AppVer: 2011.0.1.3 ModName: kernel32.dll ModVer: 5.1.2600.5781 Offset: 00012afb Happens with every scenario after running a few minutes of time compression. Am I doing something wrong? Game log Logging begins. Version = 2011.013, Build Date = Dec 29 2011, Build Time=18:25:08 0 harpoon.c:775 - done processing arguments. Activating logging for: 0 harpoon.c:145 - validateclock test 1 = 1 0 dllexport.c:159 - ExportDLL Loaded: NuclearRelease.dll Interface Ver: 1 DLL Ver: 2 DLL Desc: Nuclear Release Enhancement DLL by Tony Eischens 0 dllexport.c:159 - ExportDLL Loaded: SensorVisualH3.dll Interface Ver: 2 DLL Ver: 1 DLL Desc: H3 Paper Rules Visual Sensor DLL by HarpGamer 0 setup.c:1202 - SetUp(0x0) entered 0 setup.c:1212 - Deleting old memory 0 setup.c:1220 - init_global_variables 100000 setup.c:1243 - BattlesetSelector 100000 setup.c:1270 - load Map 100000 initannx.c:612 - this scenario is from battlesetnumber 26, using annex version 1 100000 initannx.c:657 - reading scenario file version 2 100000 initannx.c:658 - Database Versions: Res: HCDB-070414,1176570039 Rsr: HC Gold Edition Official DB 1176570039 100000 setup.c:1362 - OpenBattlsetResFile 100000 setup.c:1398 - not_saved_game 100000 setup.c:1491 - InitDisplayOp 100309 savegame.c:754 - about to save globals, size=492, file offset=76 100309 savegame.c:760 - after globals save, file offset=568 100729 savegame.c:754 - about to save globals, size=492, file offset=76 100729 savegame.c:760 - after globals save, file offset=568 101649 savegame.c:754 - about to save globals, size=492, file offset=76 101649 savegame.c:760 - after globals save, file offset=568 101660 effects.c:3033 - target group was not found, deleting interception by ZHA 102011 savegame.c:754 - about to save globals, size=492, file offset=76 102011 savegame.c:760 - after globals save, file offset=568

Of interest, although not comparable: http://www.foia.cia.gov/docs/DOC_000031626..._0000316265.pdf Edited to add: they are comparable if applying the old criteria (substracting 100 Db) to the low frequency band

hear, hear, I am trying to dig up some more info on the Sierra III (945AB), looks to me like they planned to have a couple of more built in the 90s but I have seen references to 3. 20+ Akulas promise a lot too... The 675MKVs I quite don't get though... Any info on the P-1000 Vulkan missile by chance?

Just for jigs, I was thinking about how the Soviet Fleet would have looked around the year 2000 if the USSR had not implosioned, let's say they dismiss Gorbachev (on health grounds evidently...) and manage to ride high oil prices to last one more decade. Would the fleet list look like this: carriers 1 CVN: Ulyanovsk (would have been accepted around 1996-7) 2 CVs: Tbilisi & Riga (no name changes there) 4 CVHs: Kiev, Minsk, Novorossiysk, Baku (presumably Kiev would have been refitted around 1990) cruisers 5 BCGNs: Kirov, Frunze, Kalinin, Yuri Andropov & Kuznetsov (commissioned around 1995) 1 CGN of the Anchar project (name?) 8 CGs of the Slava class: Slava, Ustinov, Chervona Ukraina, Lobov, Okt. Revolutsya, Gorshkov. Varyag & Sevastopol 7 CGs of the Kara class (modernised from the late 1980s on) 10 CGs of the Kresta II class (even if modernised they would be close to the end of their useful life, wouldn't they?) Here I have run into a snag, one Kynda was modernised in the late 80s, but the Kresta Is seem to have been disposed of post haste... destroyers 19 Sovremennys 8-9 Improved Sovremenny of project 956U (??) 12 Udaloys 9 Udaloys II (names?) would any Kashin survive? frigates Up to 30 Neutrashimys (there were plans for 70 built in 7 yards?) 11 Krivak IIs 20 Krivak Is 9 Krivak IIIs 3+?? Gepards 34 Grisha III 30 Grisha Vs more later, so what sez the forum?

No, I don't have a source handy, but Desert Storm was the first time carriers deployed in the Gulf, are you sure about the rescue attempt? I seem to recall they were launched from the N. Arabian sea too, to avoid air defences around Bandar Abbas.

Right you are, I picked up a copy 3-4 years back and will surely wear the pages ragged! I really like the Naval Technology section from page 10 to 83 as it explains so many of the mechanisms of warfare at a very Harpoon level, not super deep but yet still more than the surface glance most books offer. Sonar is described very well including the various states and depths of 'layers' across different bodies of water. I highly recommend a copy of the book to anyone who isn't super hard-core. I bought them all in the early 90s and they still form part of my library rather than go into boxes, so good enough for me. There's also a volume on submarines.

Kewl but just think of the state the ships will be in...

And without Harpoon, they also lost the Signaal radar and the air search radar IIRC.

Shattered Sword, but both are good choices. Another recomendation: "On Seas contested" - a short book describing the 7 major navies of World War 2 from the organisational point of view, but touching slightly on the hardware side.

I'll accommodate these, and toss in the RF35 reconnaissance variant of the Draken, but folks need to stay cognizant of the fact that we are scraping the bottom of the barrel when it comes to the Loadouts annex. (I know I sound like a broken record on this, but its true). There had better be a scenario for us coming out of this! I promise... and you also need them for the Cold War Database... just sayin' I think the Italians also used the Kormoran, can anyone confirm?

Amendment to my request, a German F-104G, with the Kormoran missile. and a Danish J35 without medium range air to air missiles and with iron bombs. Pleaaase... Seriously, thank you for your continuing effort.

IIRC there are no F-104Gs on the DB

So submarines just move around in patrol boxes and fire to what comes into range and is detected by them or do they also fire at targets that are detected by other means? Thanks Tony