we need the 1980s Iowa-class battleships in DCS core

[upyr1]

8 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

We've got a Krivak II, it's just named in a way that doesn't make it obvious to people unfamiliar with Soviet/Russian designations/classfications and names.

It's called "Frigate 1135M Resky". Though personally, it should be called SKR Pr. 1135M 'Burevestnik-M' [Krivak II FF], which makes it obvious to people familiar with either the NATO reporting name/classification or the native name/designation/classification, while allowing you to learn the other.

Plus its model is probably getting on for being 2 decades old, the SS-N-14 system also isn't implemented (while this was more intended as an ASW weapon system, in the mid 80s it was upgraded to fire the 85RU missile, which both carries a lightweight aerial torpedo (the UMGT-1) and has its own 185 kg unitary warhead with an IR seeker for use against surface ships).

 

That is one chriticism I have with the way DCS handles the Soviet/Russian ships is they don't list the NATO class designation. In this case 1135M (Kirvak II) would work

[Northstar98]

2 hours ago, upyr1 said:

That is one chriticism I have with the way DCS handles the Soviet/Russian ships is they don't list the NATO class designation.

Yeah, they're named in an annoying way, just about everything else does a better job of it.

2 hours ago, upyr1 said:

In this case 1135M (Kirvak II) would work

Only thing I don't like there is that it doesn't mention the classification. SKR for Soviet/Russian (meaning Storozhevyye Korabli - patrol ship), FF for US DoD/NATO, meaning frigate.

Edited August 9, 2022 by Northstar98

[upyr1]

58 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

Yeah, they're named in an annoying way, just about everything else does a better job of it.

Only thing I don't like there is that it doesn't mention the classification. SKR for Soviet/Russian (meaning Storozhevyye Korabli - patrol ship), FF for US DoD/NATO, meaning frigate.

 

a menu where you have

<frigate>

1135M (Kirvak II)

would work when you have all selected for ship type

then when you have frigate selected then we only see the different classes of frigates 

[Seaeagle]

11 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

We've got a Krivak II, it's just named in a way that doesn't make it obvious to people unfamiliar with Soviet/Russian designations/classfications and names.

It's called "Frigate 1135M Resky". Though personally, it should be called SKR Pr. 1135M 'Burevestnik-M' [Krivak II FF], which makes it obvious to people familiar with either the NATO reporting name/classification or the native name/designation/classification, while allowing you to learn the other.

Yes agree - though for the sake of simplicity, I think I would ditch the Russian codename and just make it something like; "SKR Pr. 1135M (FFG Krivak II)".

I.e. Russian classification and designation first(since its a Russian ship) and NATO classification/codename after, so everyone knows what it is. 

BTW I believe it should be "FFG" rather "FF", since the extra "G" is for "Guided[missiles]", which applies the the Krivak.

11 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

Plus its model is probably getting on for being 2 decades old, the SS-N-14 system also isn't implemented (while this was more intended as an ASW weapon system, in the mid 80s it was upgraded to fire the 85RU missile, which both carries a lightweight aerial torpedo (the UMGT-1) and has its own 185 kg unitary warhead with an IR seeker for use against surface ships).

Yup thats right - in its upgraded form, the Russian designation is URK-5 "Rastrub".

[upyr1]

3 hours ago, Seaeagle said:

Yes agree - though for the sake of simplicity, I think I would ditch the Russian codename and just make it something like; "SKR Pr. 1135M (FFG Krivak II)".

I.e. Russian classification and designation first(since its a Russian ship) and NATO classification/codename after, so everyone knows what it is. 

BTW I believe it should be "FFG" rather "FF", since the extra "G" is for "Guided[missiles]", which applies the the Krivak.

Yup thats right - in its upgraded form, the Russian designation is URK-5 "Rastrub".

Rezkiy is the name of a specific vessel, which is another thing I don't like with the way ED handles ships. I think ships need different levels of classification. So a collapsible menu with type, class, subclass(when available), configuration, and ship and also a way to just select a random ship in a given class. 

 

 

[Seaeagle]

19 hours ago, upyr1 said:

Rezkiy is the name of a specific vessel...

Yeah it is.

The name is a leftover from the days of Flanker 2.0. I am not sure if there was even a Krivak II by that name in the Black Sea at the time, but for the past couple of decades there has only been a single one in the Russian Black Sea fleet, and that is called "Pytliviy"(#808). There was also a single Ukrainian unit; U132 "Sevastopol", but that was scrapped long time ago.

I personally don't mind stating the name of a unit along with designation/classification if its a "singleton" - i.e. where there is only a single vessel of the type(like the "Kuznetsov") or if the configuration of the modelled unit makes is uniquie in its class(like "Pyotr Velikiy"), but neither is the case with the Krivak II in DCS. 

19 hours ago, upyr1 said:

..which is another thing I don't like with the way ED handles ships. I think ships need different levels of classification. So a collapsible menu with type, class, subclass(when available), configuration, and ship and also a way to just select a random ship in a given class. 

Yes that could work. 

[Northstar98]

22 hours ago, Seaeagle said:

I personally don't mind stating the name of a unit along with designation/classification if its a "singleton" - i.e. where there is only a single vessel of the type(like the "Kuznetsov") or if the configuration of the modelled unit makes is uniquie in its class(like "Pyotr Velikiy"), but neither is the case with the Krivak II in DCS.

Agreed. Though the issue there is we have some ships in DCS that are named individually but don't exactly stay true to the configuration (aside from the name/number).

An example is HMS Ariadne (wrong HF/DF antenna). The post 1980 Andromeda should be drastically different also.

22 hours ago, Seaeagle said:

Yes that could work. 

It would be my preferred solution, it's a bit more work from ED, but IMO it would be worth the improvement.

I did make a thread about here.

Edited August 11, 2022 by Northstar98

[upyr1]

On 8/11/2022 at 7:36 AM, Northstar98 said:

Agreed. Though the issue there is we have some ships in DCS that are named individually but don't exactly stay true to the configuration (aside from the name/number).

An example is HMS Ariadne (wrong HF/DF antenna). The post 1980 Andromeda should be drastically different also.

It would be my preferred solution, it's a bit more work from ED, but IMO it would be worth the improvement.

I did make a thread about here.

 

Something like that would be awesome, though I have advocated breaking the sections up. For example if the historical mode is off and we're selecting the Iowas we might see the following each <section></section> should be read as a different drop down

<type>battleship</type>

<class>Iowa</class>- we'd see all the battleship classes available then in this case select Iowa

<subclass></sublcass> not used

 

---fitting I am listing all possible fittings I can think of--

<fitting>WWII</fitting>

<fitting>Korea</fitting>

<fitting>Vietnam</fitting>

<fitting>1980s</fitting>

---The ship and fitting could be swapped even if the differnce between ship A and B is a livery I think they should be listed here though that would require altering the code for liveries a bit and adding a ship tag--

<ship>Iowa(bb-61)</ship>

<ship>New Jersey(bb-62)</ship>

<ship>Missouri (BB-62)</ship>

<ship>Wisconsin (BB-63)</ship>

 

---optional, if Eagle changes the code so mod builders could add what if ships we might have the following added---

<ship>Mod- Illinois(BB-64)<ship>

<ship>Mod- Kentucky (BB-65)<ship>

<sublcass>Mod- Kentuky guided missile battleship(mod)<subclass>

<ship>Mod-Kentucky (BBg-1)<ship>

<ship>Mod-Illinois(BBg-2)<ship>

 

 

Something combining both styles of drop downs could work better 

Edited August 13, 2022 by upyr1

[Fangs Out]

I'd love a Potential BBG-1 as that was really cool to see in CMO's desert storm.  example used below is from Deviant art as BBG-1 was never built .

+1

[upyr1]

1 hour ago, Fangs Out said:

I'd love a Potential BBG-1 as that was really cool to see in CMO's desert storm.  example used below is from Deviant art as BBG-1 was never built .

+1

The Kentucky would be an awesome mod. I know if we got an Iowas class module I would hope someone did a Kentucky mod. I figure if the Navy had built a new class of battleships to replace the Iowas something like that except  vls tubes to replace turret 3.