January 7, 20179 yr I have noticed that the range of the various types of F-35 have been reduced dramatically. May we expect the same type of reduction in the F/A 18 family as well? Those changes are mostly due to the overly optimistic estimates of F-35 performance (go figure, eh) back when it was first introduced in the DB. My best advice is not to rely on the data reflected in any DB entry until it has seen attention.
January 8, 20179 yr Thanks, and thanks for everything. I did note that the US Fighter F-35B Lighting II 21 has no radar.
January 8, 20179 yr Thanks, and thanks for everything. I did note that the US Fighter F-35B Lighting II 21 has no radar. Thanks! Fixed.
January 10, 20179 yr Installation #52454 Port Facility should be redesignated as Type: Port, as at present times is designated as Type: Base, with the correspondent "square" icon, and not with the correct (and clearer in the map) "anchor" icon.
January 17, 20179 yr Installation #52454 Port Facility should be redesignated as Type: Port, as at present times is designated as Type: Base, with the correspondent "square" icon, and not with the correct (and clearer in the map) "anchor" icon. Thanks. Fixed. I am addressing the more prominent platforms as fast as my schedule will permit, but if anyone has specific requests - especially if they are using them in an upcoming scenario - by all means let me know.
January 17, 20179 yr Only (painstaking!) verifying the platforms I will probably use on current in development scenarios (or very related). - Entry 10640 F-35B Lighthing II 17 (UK) lacks TCS flag. Is the only F-35 lacking the TCS flag. - Entry 10463 F-35B Lightining II 16 (USMC) has an unique 56135 Precis-LR loadout with 4xDT (and 2xAGM-154C JSOW and 2xAIM-120D and gun) and 1599 nm range, surpassing the 900 nm (based on internal fuel only) ferry range. Is the only F-35 variant with a similar case, a combat loadout exceeding the ferry range and is something incongruent with the "design" in the DB of the other F-35 variants.
January 17, 20179 yr Add H-6K, as stated in: http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?/topic/23387-requests-for-the-hcdb-official-db-of-hce-and-hcdb2/page-57&do=findComment&comment=52234
January 17, 20179 yr Replace the medium range HQ-16B missiles in Entry 3991 Kumming Type 052D provisionally with long range HHQ-9 (probably are equipped with improved HHQ-9B), as stated in: http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?/topic/23387-requests-for-the-hcdb-official-db-of-hce-and-hcdb2/?view=findpost&p=51538
January 18, 20179 yr I will get to those requests in the next iteration. The F-35 issue sounds like an error. Thanks for the reminder.
January 29, 20179 yr I don't know if pretended or not, but weapon 19060 SM-6MR ERAM Blk I has Surface Hit probability, but lacks the requested "ship attack" flag for surface vessels attack.
January 29, 20179 yr I don't know if pretended or not, but weapon 19060 SM-6MR ERAM Blk I has Surface Hit probability, but lacks the requested "ship attack" flag for surface vessels attack. Its intentional, while I still consider how to best implement it. You might have noticed that many Soviet/Russian naval SAMs have also had Surf pH for quite some time now, but lack the flag.
January 30, 20179 yr Just on time to include the new Mirage 2000-5F 07 in The Red Sea Sharks scenario for the HCDB2. But I see apparently Mirage 2000-5F 99 has Sabre DECM with value 15%, and Mirage 2000-5F 07 generic DECM Gen2 with the inferior value of 10%.
January 30, 20179 yr But I see apparently Mirage 2000-5F 99 has Sabre DECM with value 15%, and Mirage 2000-5F 07 generic DECM Gen2 with the inferior value of 10%. Yes, I'm aware. Work on generic ECM generations is in progress.
February 4, 20179 yr A little inconsistence in the DB (probably original ship entry not updated): - #2402 Burke FltIIA (DDG79/02) lacks 3xSPY-1B to be coherent with the rest of Burkes entries (also I think they should be 4xSPY-1D, not SPY-1B). - The smaller SPY-1F radar (only 1856 elements) has a stated range of 185 nm in HCDB2 (As also reflected in the "Smarter Radars for Harpoon" article), when the other SPY-1 (with more elements, some 4352) have a range of only 175 nm. SPY-1 family are PESA radars. - I think it should be updated to at least 250 nm in SPY-1/A/B/D, as in the "Smarter Radars for Harpoon". - Range of SPY-1D against a 1 m2 target is some 316 nm as cited in German Wikipedia, notes . Probably a 50% more against a big target, perhaps some 474 nm total range (if not, SPY-1 could not intercept ballistic missiles on time, also, is a greatest range than SPS-49, and that can explain why Ticonderogas have SPS-49 and Burkes not). As cited in notes 5 and 6 in https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/SPY-1 - SPY-1F has AS and HF(3D) flags, I think it should be SS and HF(3D), as the others SPY-1 -Also, SPY-6 in HCDB2 has a range of 250 nm, when in SITREP 50 has a more coherent range of 522 nm. SPY-6 and SPY-3 (range stated as 113 nm in SITREP 50) are AESA radars.
February 5, 20179 yr A little inconsistence in the DB (probably original ship entry not updated): - #2402 Burke FltIIA (DDG79/02) lacks 3xSPY-1B to be coherent with the rest of Burkes entries (also I think they should be 4xSPY-1D, not SPY-1B). Yep, that's an error. - The smaller SPY-1F radar (only 1856 elements) has a stated range of 185 nm in HCDB2 (As also reflected in the "Smarter Radars for Harpoon" article), when the other SPY-1 (with more elements, some 4352) have a range of only 175 nm. SPY-1 family are PESA radars. - I think it should be updated to at least 250 nm in SPY-1/A/B/D, as in the "Smarter Radars for Harpoon". - Range of SPY-1D against a 1 m2 target is some 316 nm as cited in German Wikipedia, notes . Probably a 50% more against a big target, perhaps some 474 nm total range (if not, SPY-1 could not intercept ballistic missiles on time, also, is a greatest range than SPS-49, and that can explain why Ticonderogas have SPS-49 and Burkes not). As cited in notes 5 and 6 in https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/SPY-1 - SPY-1F has AS and HF(3D) flags, I think it should be SS and HF(3D), as the others SPY-1 ; -Also, SPY-6 in HCDB2 has a range of 250 nm, when in SITREP 50 has a more coherent range of 522 nm. SPY-6 and SPY-3 (range stated as 113 nm in SITREP 50) are AESA radars. Two things going on here: (1) my data is more recent than 'Smarter Radar'; and (2) there is a definite typo. (Btw, peak power and antenna size has much more to do with raw radar range than the number of elements.)
Create an account or sign in to comment