Back in the water!

[Nefaro]

SH3 had cool plotting tools. However, the convoys didn't zig-zag or change course at sun down like AOD. Also, I liked how freighters could halt and accelerate faster than my car. Or did I mention the time I raised my scope in the middle of 5 escorts, and they shot each other to sh*t shooting at me.

:)

I know the ones in SH4 zig-zag occasionally.  At least, when I played with the Trigger Maru mod.  Cool stuff.  Can get quite tricky with all the shallow water and islands about, too.

I think any console button-pushing Naval Sim requires the plotting tools of the SH series these days.  Manual targetting is the shiz.   I really wish we had those kinds of tools natively in DW.  :-\

[MarkShot]

Well, I did get to ping in a quick duel today. It's not as useful as I though. I had weak contact on a Kilo at 10NM. When I pinged, I got an audible reflection enough to confirm range, but not enough to MARK a contact.

Does anyone know if SC/DW model reflection cross section ... Meaning if the contact is bow or stern on the reflection is less? The WWII sims often model this.

In this engagement I learned, that sometimes the BB ITA can tell you more about what a contact is doing than TMA. Before I shot, the target was slowly heading to cross in front of me from the side. After shooting the rapid curve on the ITA indicated that besides accelerating, he was turning towards my stern or his right. Somewhere in this thread I said wire guiding was tough, because often 3 maneuvers over 6 minutes can look exactly the same in TMA. But it's clear that BB ITA is unambiguous. Now, of course, what see on the BB ITA only shows "what", but not "where". However, if you take that over to TMA, your chances of getting the right "where" increase greatly.

[Nefaro]

Well, I did get to ping in a quick duel today. It's not as useful as I though. I had weak contact on a Kilo at 10NM. When I pinged, I got an audible reflection enough to confirm range, but not enough to MARK a contact.

Active sonar isn't terribly helpful with just one or two pings.  You still have to TMA the target over time to establish it's heading for a reliable torpedo shot and, of course, you just telegraphed your presence and direction so it won't be continuing straight on.  I've only used Active sonar in cases where I'm already detected by enemy active sonar pings and need to find out their range so as to fine-tune the enable point on the torpedoes.

Does anyone know if SC/DW model reflection cross section ... Meaning if the contact is bow or stern on the reflection is less? The WWII sims often model this.

Yes, it does.   What's really cool is if you're right up close to another vessel, you can turn on your Hi-Freq sonar and look at the forward-facing sonar returns in the window above the periscope - you can see the outline of the vessel!  8)  And yes, you'll get a weaker sonar return from a low aspect angle on active sonar.  One of the things that the Sonalysts games does better than the Silent Hunter series is it's sonar modelling.   Hell, Sonalysts create software for the military for that purpose so I'd expect it to be fairly good at it.   

Also be aware that when using Active sonar, it's effective range can be notably lower than your passive sensors, depending on the target.  That's pretty easy to figure out since the sound of your ping has to travel from your boat to your target and echo that whole distance back to you with enough energy to register, while listening to someone's machinery sounds only has to travel that same distance once.  Sure, the ping is louder so that makes up some of the disparity.  Against some targets like subs with anechoic coatings, or low aspect, or surface noise, that powerful return echo can still be diminished enough to often give your Passive sensors the range advantage between the two.

In this engagement I learned, that sometimes the BB ITA can tell you more about what a contact is doing than TMA. Before I shot, the target was slowly heading to cross in front of me from the side. After shooting the rapid curve on the ITA indicated that besides accelerating, he was turning towards my stern or his right. Somewhere in this thread I said wire guiding was tough, because often 3 maneuvers over 6 minutes can look exactly the same in TMA. But it's clear that BB ITA is unambiguous. Now, of course, what see on the BB ITA only shows "what", but not "where". However, if you take that over to TMA, your chances of getting the right "where" increase greatly.

Yes.. Broadband is the way to figure out what's currently going on if you have a loud enough signal to reliably show on it.   It'll give you a quick look at target bearing changes & such so use that to figure out which way he's going kinda quickly.  Remember "Jonesy" watching the BB waterfall display in HfRO when trying to figure out which way the sub he was tailing was turning?  That's spot on.  In that example, tailing close behind your contact heading in the same direction, you'd only have to look to see if the line turned left or right.  Easy!  ;D  The other longer distance ones take a little visualization to see.

Unfortunately, the Russian sub(s) don't have a waterfall "history" display so it's not as easy - gotta watch it like a hawk for a bit, and that's even if you can make out the contact blip on the screen.  The Russian sonar screens are a pain, especially if you're trying to drag a tracker designation (since they are very limited in number).  Yet, I love to play the Akula in DW - it can be a challenge at times and the arsenal is quite varied.  And they're beautiful boats to boot.

[MarkShot]

The only issue which I have had with the SONAR/layer modeling in SC/DW is that it is not well understood or explained anywhere.  This sort of limits my effective use of it.

[Nefaro]

The only issue which I have had with the SONAR/layer modeling in SC/DW is that it is not well understood or explained anywhere.  This sort of limits my effective use of it.

It hits all the basics, AFAIK.

Such as the Thermal layer, varying water temperatures (Sound Speed Profiler) and layer depths.  Extra surface noise washout the more shallow the specific sonar sensor is.  Convergence zones.  All that good wholesome stuff that makes detection an unsure and varied thing.  8)

[MarkShot]

Yes, but I have yet to see anywhere a solid treatment for utilization in the game.  There is no shortage of books and articles full of math on sound propagation through sea water.  But not something for the SC/DW gamer.

[Nefaro]

Yes, but I have yet to see anywhere a solid treatment for utilization in the game.  There is no shortage of books and articles full of math on sound propagation through sea water.  But not something for the SC/DW gamer.

I don't think there is any salinity variation and the SSPs I've checked show very little change in various places on each individual scenario map.  So those factors don't really change much, if that's any help.

Kinda sad since that would've been great to have.

[MarkShot]

Well, you pretty much set the environmental conditions statically in the scenario editor.

However, there should be some variations as you have maps that depths ranging from 100' to 3000'+.  That would give you temperature, layer, surf, and bottom bounce issues.

I haven't player RSR yet, but I noticed that it models very localized SONAR conditions.

[Nefaro]

There aren't much in the way of variations in DW.

As you said, you set the conditions in the scenario editor.   So, for example, the type of ocean bottom is universal on the whole scenario map, as is most everything regarding sonar.   :-[   

The SSP changes are very minor and I often wonder if it just randomly changes it (for the whole map) after you launch a temp probe or at specified time intervals.  ::)

[MarkShot]

On a totally different note is there any way to break contact once an ASW Helo has found you?

One thing I used to enjoy is trying to break contact in AOD and SHCE. It mainly hinged on getting all the escorts in one quadrant, waiting until a noisy depth charging to turn and sprint into an empty quadrant, and finally, quietly creep away.

[Nefaro]

On a totally different note is there any way to break contact once an ASW Helo has found you?

One thing I used to enjoy is trying to break contact in AOD and SHCE. It mainly hinged on getting all the escorts in one quadrant, waiting until a noisy depth charging to turn and sprint into an empty quadrant, and finally, quietly creep away.

Like that but much more difficult.  :P

Really.. you can only go deep and do your best to creep out (or run out if you get a fish dropped on you).  Part 2 is praying that he doesn't keep dropping buoys near you and gets a good fix.   

I think the best way to extend is to (hopefully) decoy a torpedo well enough that it explodes ( only possible in Vanilla - not LWAMI, IIRC) and then boogie out of the immediate vicinity at high speed while the explosion washes out passive sonar for a short time.   Of course, at high speed you won't be able to tell when the washout clears up by watching your sonar so that takes some timing & I don't recall how long sonar washout generally lasts from the BOOM.  If the helos' sonobuoy loadouts and tactics are historical, then they should only have a very small amount of active buoys that are only used for more exact localization before the attack.  So hopefully you're far enough away from both Passive & Active buoys, and slowed down, before the washout is done -  a tall order.

Aircraft are still the bane of subs - even more so than WW2 sims.

[Toonces]

It is very hard to maintain a track on a fast submarine.  Granted, the sub is making more noise so you can hear it farther away.  But when you consider that the helo/ac has to get in front of the sub, drop a sonobuoy (or dip), wait for it to deploy, then receive the info, decipher it, and make some tactical use of it...that whole process takes a while. 

If you have a sub doing 20kt, it is covering a lot of ground during that time.  How does the 3 minute rule work again?  Something like, for every 3 minutes the sub travels its speed in yards times 100?  So a 20kt sub is covering 2000 yards ever 3 minutes.  If it takes a sub 5 minutes to reposition, drop a buoy, etc, the sub will be almost 3500 yards or so from datum.  That's probably too far to get passive contact... Throw in a few hard turns and the whole tracking solution goes to shit pretty quickly. 

A helo might be harder than a P-3 in this instance because the P-3 has to maintain 150kt or so to stay airborne and so repositioning can be challenging whereas the helo can hover.  Then again, the helo probably isn't doing more than 80kt and then has to slow to hover, and it's carrying a third the buoy loadout of a P-3...

At any rate, if a helo has got you, stealth isn't going to help you much.  Try a good long sprint with radical direction changes and just put a lot of ground between you and the datum.  Let me know how that works for you.

[Herman Hum]

But when you consider that the helo/ac has to get in front of the sub, drop a sonobuoy (or dip), wait for it to deploy, then receive the info, decipher it, and make some tactical use of it...that whole process takes a while. 

This was always the downfall for ASW in Harpoon, the lack of any time delay in actions.  Everything was always instantanneous.  DW's time requirement to accelerate/decelerate, lower/raise dipping sonar, etc. is simply superb.

[Toonces]

Deployment time for a buoy is huge.  I googled it just to make sure the info isn't classified and one of the results that came up said it takes about 4 minutes for a buoy to deploy.  Let's assume that's correct.

Extrapolating out how long it would take to plot where you want the buoy, drop it, deploy it, start getting info and then actually being able to extract a course and speed, easily that's a 6+ minute process.  All that time the sub is cruising at 20kt opening datum.  In 6 minutes he's 4000 yards away from where he was and still moving away...and this is assuming that you actually put the buoy on top of him.  If he did a 90 degree course change you could be 5-6000 yards away from your new buoy and now you're looking at going lost contact.

At this point he's probably going to go active, if he hasn't already, so although you're making more noise going fast that really doesn't matter for DICASS or a dipper. 

[Herman Hum]

Speaking of buoys, can you say anything about the rate of failure in deployment (either mechanical or accidental)?  In both DW and Harpoon, the buoys are 100% reliable.  You drop and know that the buoys will work exactly as designed.  I don't think that happens in real life and there should be problems with the deployment requiring re-deployment of a new one. 

Can you speak to any of this with openly available sources?  The only book ever mentioning this failure was "The War that Never Was", by Michael Palmer.  It had one description of a P-3 needing to go back over a buoy line and replace the faulty buoys.