Unit Errata

Place bug reports / questions here.

Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators

Post Reply
Nerei
General
Posts: 1126
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

Post by Nerei »

I was looking at the 747 LCF and thinking that is an awfully large payload for a 747 (especially as the LCF was designed to transport oversized not superheavy cargo) so I decided to look at a few 747's.


Boeing 747 LCF (ID 14797)
In-game this aircraft has a cargo capacity of 185 tonne. This is too high. It is around 50 tonnes more than the 747-8F which from what I remember holds the record for the 747 family.

Image

Here is a screenshot from a boeing document about the 747. This part in particular is about the 747-400 Cargo as the dreamlifter/Large Cargo Lifter (LCF) is just a modified 747-400 passenger plane.
The engines are PW4062.

Note the part that says Maximum revenue payload. 112.310kg. That is the maximum cargo weight. You can also go with 123.650kg but note the significantly reduced takeoff weight. That means a much shorter range.

For the record wikipedia lists a total cargo weight of 113.400kg or basically 1 tonne higher.


The screenshot is taken from this boeing fact sheet about the 747
link


Interestingly you already got a 747-400ER meaning you got both a passenger and cargo variant of the 747-400. That is probably overkill. Also this is a specialised version of the 747 used to transport 787 parts.
Perhaps changing this one into a 747-8F. The Freight series of the 747-8 (the latest version of the 747).


747-400ER Boeing (ID 14255)
This is the passenger variant of the 747-400 Extended Range (ER). The Transport Capacity though is set for the cargo variant (ERF). As I do not know exactly what variant of the 400ER this is giving an exact max cargo weight is impossible but looking at a few configurations upper 60's is probably not insane.

You can find the different numbers in this document
link

The relevant numbers is maximum zero fuel weight (MZFW) and operating empty weight (OEW). Basically the difference between MZFW and OEW is the maximum cargo weight.

Naturally this is a wide body passenger plane. Cargo comes in the form of passengers and ULD containers or pallets.

You probably want the ERF variant instead as it can actually load vehicles. The cargo capacity is more or less accurate (I'd personally go with the 112.31). The range however is not. The ER has a much longer range than a fully loaded ERF.
Wikipedia lists the range as either 7585 or 9200km. Boeing notes that it can fly from London to Shanghai which is around 9240km.

Also this aircraft is listed as being available to region groups U and E. From what I understand it is only assembled at the Boeing Everett factory located in the US state of Washington.
Not really sure why it should be available to Western Europe.


To summarise:

Boeing 747 LCF (ID 14797)

Change cargo capacity to 112.3.
Consider changing it to another model of 747 as this is just a 747-400 cargo aircraft for oversized cargo (and you already got a 747-400ER).

747-400ER Boeing (ID 14255)
change cargo capacity to be in the high 60's
Or change it to a 747-400ERF and set the range to just over 9000
Change availability to just U.


Also would it be possible to be more consistent with the naming? This is just a pet peeve of mine but having Boeing first in the name for one aircraft and last in the other just looks wrong.
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20519
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: Unit Errata

Post by Balthagor »

Made a few adjustments, would be good for us to come back to this again when doing more corrections...
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 288
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

Post by milivoje02 »

Correction for unt 4583 Šumadija 262mm MLRS - range is 285km,klaibar of rocket is 400mm. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%A0uma ... _launcher))
User avatar
Uriens
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 516
Joined: Oct 05 2005

Re: Unit Errata

Post by Uriens »

milivoje02 wrote:
Feb 03 2020
Correction for unt 4583 Šumadija 262mm MLRS - range is 285km,klaibar of rocket is 400mm. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%A0uma ... _launcher))
Did i read that right? It has a spread of 150m on its own navigation and 50m with GPS while range of 285km? Thats just crazy accurate. :o

Edit: And considering the weight of the missile i'd say it needs to do significantly more damage.
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 288
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

Post by milivoje02 »

Uriens wrote:
Feb 03 2020
milivoje02 wrote:
Feb 03 2020
Correction for unt 4583 Šumadija 262mm MLRS - range is 285km,klaibar of rocket is 400mm. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%A0uma ... _launcher))
Did i read that right? It has a spread of 150m on its own navigation and 50m with GPS while range of 285km? Thats just crazy accurate. :o

Edit: And considering the weight of the missile i'd say it needs to do significantly more damage.
Yes. 4-rockets(4 rockets 400mm) four 4-missile contener. Tested at the polygons for range of 285 kilometar in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan(https://www.armyrecognition.com/partner ... 06172.html)
Here's a link in English.(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKugl-1dtgw&t=306s) in 5:40 talk about Sumadija. main version. 400mm-range 285 km- 4-8 conteiner,other verison 262 mm 6-16 conteainer.
Perhaps the lethal power of a unit should be increased.
User avatar
Uriens
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 516
Joined: Oct 05 2005

Re: Unit Errata

Post by Uriens »

Bradley's should be amphibious. All variants.
Source
All Bradleys are amphibious. Earlier models are equipped with a water barrier, which is fitted by the crew before entering the water. A3 models have an inflatable pontoon which fits on the front and sides of the vehicle. Water propulsion is provided by tracks and the Bradley can attain a maximum speed of 7.2km/h in water.
GIJoe597
Board Admin
Posts: 2896
Joined: Sep 29 2008
Human: Yes
Contact:

Re: Unit Errata

Post by GIJoe597 »

Interestingly enough, in the original SR2020 they are amphibious.
User avatar
Uriens
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 516
Joined: Oct 05 2005

Re: Unit Errata

Post by Uriens »

AV81 Terrex (ID 634) should also be amphibious.

Source
In its baseline configuration, the AV-81 Terrex is fully amphibious: two water jets mounted on either side at the back of the hull propel the vehicle through water at 10 km/h.
User avatar
Uriens
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 516
Joined: Oct 05 2005

Re: Unit Errata

Post by Uriens »

ADATS vehicles should have 30km range (currently 10km in game).

Source
Length: 2.05 m
Diameter: 152 mm
Launch weight: approx. 51 kg
Speed: Mach 3+
Range: 30 km
Ceiling: 7,000 m
Warhead: 12.5 kg high explosive (HE) fragmentation/shaped charge, impact and proximity fuze
Penetration: 900 mm rolled homogeneous armour (RHA)
Guidance: Digitally coded laser beam-riding
Nerei
General
Posts: 1126
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

Post by Nerei »

Looking at the wikipedia article and checking the stats of the Šumadija 262mm MLRS I would say that it is not really wrong as much as it is BG going with a specific loadout for the unit. In this case most likely 12 262mm rockets instead of 4 400mm.
That is really the problem with way the game handles equipment that support multiple types of ordnance.

A good example of a similar issue is the M270A1 MLRS or M142 HIMARS in that we could argue that they should have a 300km range as both can launch the MGM-140 ATACMS. BG However is assuming they are firing basic M26 rockets.


That said for the attack stats the 12x262mm is probably going to be better. Again going by the wikipedia article the 400mm rockets carry a 200kg warhead.
4x200kg is not really that much.
For comparison a BM-30 Smerch has 12 300mm rockets each with a roughly 250kg warhead. From what I remember each of the 12 M26 rockets of a M270 has around 190kg of submunitions. Even using the M31A1 GMLRS rockets the M270 can fire somewhere around 40-50% more warhead weight.

The range of these rockets are however not even remotely comparable and if I where guess I would say the 400mm rockets are made with range not payload in mind.


As for solution BG have added the above mentioned ATACMS as a missile unit. It might also be an option to have the Jerina I as a missile unit and keeping the launcher at 262mm.
It is not a perfect solution no but it would fit with how BG have added the ATACMS and it would give region group X a SSM missile unit. Currently there are no missile units available from 1967 to 2049.

Personally I would also say that as a 21st century rocket artillery the Šumadija with most likely 12x262mm rockets it really does not hit hard enough.
Balthagor wrote:
Jan 29 2020
Made a few adjustments, would be good for us to come back to this again when doing more corrections...
Here is a question with regards to more thorough corrections. Sometime ago you renamed your J-99 light to represent the Type 10 MBT. Now the stats are not exactly accurate for that given that you are repurposing a roughly 20 tonne light tank to represent a more modern 40-48 tonne MBT.
How thorough suggestions do you want?
Also given that you now have both have a real world and a fictive J-10 are you interested in suggestions to make the names more in line with real world naming conventions?
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20519
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: Unit Errata

Post by Balthagor »

Nerei wrote:
Feb 05 2020
How thorough suggestions do you want?
A good question to which I don't have a great answer. I have no clear sense currently how much more time we an invest in some of these tasks. I would suggest that if it's really detailed information, it might be worth using a dedicated thread. This thread is best for small, quick corrections that we can quickly accept/reject and change where accepted.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 288
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

Post by milivoje02 »

I understand where you see the problem,why would not be a display unit in its primary power? It seem here two variants of weapons were mixeds,because range is appropriate to 262mm and combat time to 400mm.
BM-30 Smerch with 12 rockets have 3 combat time. if Šumadija 262mm MLRS have 12 rokets she should have too 3 combat time(currently has 1 combat time). Šumadija 400mm with 4 rokets should have 1 combat time like Ws 2c from Cina.
Generally technology for Šumadija 400mm is simular similar to Chinese Ws 2c. At armaments fairs it was shown Šumadija 400mm with 4 rokets because it have a range of 285 km and with that it plans to stand out in the market. For ranges of 70 kilometers this is a variant of 262mm,but there is rocket launcher Tamnava - 267/122 mm MULTIPLE LAUNCH ROCKET SYSTEM (MLRS)(https://www.yugoimport.com/en/proizvodi ... ystem-mlrs) with
6 (267 mm), 25 (122 mm) roket containers which has primacy in the range of 70 km in Sebian army . So if not insertable 400mm variant,Šumadija should have only changde of calibar to 400mm and extension of range to 285 km(https://www.yugoimport.com/en/proizvodi ... nch-weapon) because it was planned that it covers a much larger area than Tamnava.
SGTscuba
General
Posts: 1985
Joined: Dec 08 2007
Location: Tipton, UK

Re: Unit Errata

Post by SGTscuba »

Nerei wrote:
Feb 05 2020
Looking at the wikipedia article and checking the stats of the Šumadija 262mm MLRS I would say that it is not really wrong as much as it is BG going with a specific loadout for the unit. In this case most likely 12 262mm rockets instead of 4 400mm.
That is really the problem with way the game handles equipment that support multiple types of ordnance.

A good example of a similar issue is the M270A1 MLRS or M142 HIMARS in that we could argue that they should have a 300km range as both can launch the MGM-140 ATACMS. BG However is assuming they are firing basic M26 rockets.
The ATACMS missile is a missile design of its own in game though, and they do give the M270 a missile capacity to use these in lieu of its normal attack capability, I think this is a reasonable way around the problem without having 2 different units with different stats.
My SR:U Model Project, get the latest and post suggestions here:

http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 79&t=28040
User avatar
Uriens
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 516
Joined: Oct 05 2005

Re: Unit Errata

Post by Uriens »

SGTscuba wrote:
Feb 05 2020
Nerei wrote:
Feb 05 2020
Looking at the wikipedia article and checking the stats of the Šumadija 262mm MLRS I would say that it is not really wrong as much as it is BG going with a specific loadout for the unit. In this case most likely 12 262mm rockets instead of 4 400mm.
That is really the problem with way the game handles equipment that support multiple types of ordnance.

A good example of a similar issue is the M270A1 MLRS or M142 HIMARS in that we could argue that they should have a 300km range as both can launch the MGM-140 ATACMS. BG However is assuming they are firing basic M26 rockets.
The ATACMS missile is a missile design of its own in game though, and they do give the M270 a missile capacity to use these in lieu of its normal attack capability, I think this is a reasonable way around the problem without having 2 different units with different stats.
If i'm following this correctly you are suggesting to use missile design to complement to 'mimick' Jerina 1 missile while using normal attacks to as Jerina 2? I can see what you mean there but making a missile Jerina 1 would allow all missile launchers to be able to use them. I don't see how you can make them launchable from specific launcher only.
Nerei
General
Posts: 1126
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

Post by Nerei »

SGTscuba wrote:
Feb 05 2020
The ATACMS missile is a missile design of its own in game though, and they do give the M270 a missile capacity to use these in lieu of its normal attack capability, I think this is a reasonable way around the problem without having 2 different units with different stats.
I know. That was the solution I suggested :p
The ATACMS is not even just 1 unit. There are 11 versions total.

From what I can tell that is in general the solution BG tends to go with as except for a few Chinese rocket artillery units none have a range beyond 100km and ignoring those there is only a handful with a range over 75km.
milivoje02 wrote:
Feb 05 2020
I understand where you see the problem,why would not be a display unit in its primary power? It seem here two variants of weapons were mixeds,because range is appropriate to 262mm and combat time to 400mm.
BM-30 Smerch with 12 rockets have 3 combat time. if Šumadija 262mm MLRS have 12 rokets she should have too 3 combat time(currently has 1 combat time). Šumadija 400mm with 4 rokets should have 1 combat time like Ws 2c from Cina.
Generally technology for Šumadija 400mm is simular similar to Chinese Ws 2c. At armaments fairs it was shown Šumadija 400mm with 4 rokets because it have a range of 285 km and with that it plans to stand out in the market. For ranges of 70 kilometers this is a variant of 262mm,but there is rocket launcher Tamnava - 267/122 mm MULTIPLE LAUNCH ROCKET SYSTEM (MLRS)(https://www.yugoimport.com/en/proizvodi ... ystem-mlrs) with
6 (267 mm), 25 (122 mm) roket containers which has primacy in the range of 70 km in Sebian army . So if not insertable 400mm variant,Šumadija should have only changde of calibar to 400mm and extension of range to 285 km(https://www.yugoimport.com/en/proizvodi ... nch-weapon) because it was planned that it covers a much larger area than Tamnava.
I would not judge much on combat time for rocket artillery. Beyond "usually it is 2" there is not much logic to it and there is plenty of inconsistencies.

Take the Chinese PHZ 81, 83, 90 and Russian BM-21 Grad. The PHZ 81 and 90 have a combat time of 1 while the BM-21 and PHZ 83 have 4.
All carry 122mm rockets the main thing of note being that while the PHZ 81, 90 and BM-21 carry 40 the PHZ 83 carry only 24. Also the PHZ 90 carry a full 40 rocket reload.

You could just as well compare the Šumadija to the M270 that has 12 227mm rocket and a combat time of 2 or the PHZ-90 that 40+40 rockets and a combat time of 1. This is a central problem with how the unit database is. You get different results depending on what you compare to.

Personally I would say the Smerch should not be above 2. I see no reason why it should be that high when most other rocket artillery is not and a if we go by number of tubes there is a lot of rocket artillery with better capabilities below it. The Šumadija should probably also have combat time 2 as that seems fairly typical.
The WS-2 should probably not even be a traditional rocket artillery. The rocket it fires is basically the size of cruise missiles and their range varies quite a bit and representing that is probably easier to do with missile units. Also as interception of the rockets would likely be a valid strategy having them as missile units would allow that.
Last edited by Nerei on Feb 05 2020, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply

Return to “Issues and Support”