Tutorial #3: warship operations.

[User2]

Hi, folks.

Just finished warship tutorial. That was fun to play.

I have noticed few strange things about it:
((Warning: massive spoilers! [:)]))

1. My Arleigh Burke-class destroyer was able to locate enemy sub 10nm away. Sub's exact location. So it seems it was detected by active sonar. Are modern active sonars so powerful to locate a submerged sub at almost 20km distantce?
2. A 127mm cannon of my super modern destroyer (2015 year according to game's DB) is rather inaccurate. It has a ballistic computer, a laser range-finder and still unable to hit a target! About 90% of rounds missed. Why? I think modern tanks are much more accurate
3. Old (1970?) Nanuchka iii class corvete was able to jam my AA missiles (capable to attack ships). Corvete's DECM has 5% chance to jam my missile, but it seems corvete's OECM has 100% chance. Is 40 year old jammer device able to flood rather modern radar of my destroyer? The question is not about tech level, it is about emission power. I think 40 years ago radars were not as strong as today.
4. That corvete was not even trying to intercept my missiles with its OSA AA missiles or its ak-630 gatling gun. Maybe it was jammed by my jammer device. However, faik, OSA can by guided by operator using TV camera. Anyway i think at close ranges even old radars can burn-through jammer's emission.

Only hellfire missiles were able to hit that corvete (because they used laser guidance). All my other missles were jammed. All P-120 corvete missiles were intercepted by my AA misslies. 127mm gun had finished that corvete. 70 years since WWII I am still forced to use naval guns to destroy enemy ships [:)]

[mikmykWS]

ORIGINAL: User2

Hi, folks.

Just finished warship tutorial. That was fun to play.

I have noticed few strange things about it:
((Warning: massive spoilers! [:)]))

[:)]

1. My Arleigh Burke-class destroyer was able to locate enemy sub 10nm away. Sub's exact location. So it seems it was detected by active sonar. Are modern active sonars so powerful to locate a submerged sub at almost 20km distantce?

Tested and I detected at an active range of 14nm. We'll take a look.

2. A 127mm cannon of my super modern destroyer (2015 year according to game's DB) is rather inaccurate. It has a ballistic computer, a laser range-finder and still unable to hit a target!
About 90% of rounds missed. Why? I think modern tanks are much more accurate

We're are looking to improve the gun model particularly with sea to sea engagements. The logs do actually show the calculations so you can see why.

3. Old (1970?) Nanuchka iii class corvete was able to jam my AA missiles (capable to attack ships). Corvete's DECM has 5% chance to jam my missile, but it seems corvete's OECM has 100% chance. Is 40 year old jammer device able to flood rather modern radar of my destroyer? The question is not about tech level, it is about emission power. I think 40 years ago radars were not as strong as today.

What did the logs tell you? The display just tells you that you're being jammed or that something is jamming.

4. That corvete was not even trying to intercept my missiles with its OSA AA missiles or its ak-630 gatling gun. Maybe it was jammed by my jammer device. However, faik, OSA can by guided by operator using TV camera. Anyway i think at close ranges even old radars can burn-through jammer's emission.

Ok when this happens pause the game and try and manually fire. The manual fire dialog will actually tell you in detail why these weapons won't engage. Please check out the manual as well. It describes what the messages are.

Only hellfire missiles were able to hit that corvete (because they used laser guidance). All my other missles were jammed. All P-120 corvete missiles were intercepted by my AA misslies. 127mm gun had finished that corvete. 70 years since WWII I am still forced to use naval guns to destroy enemy ships [:)]

Point of the scenario is to just walk the player through a surface engagement with all weapons and sensors. Sounds like it did that.

Mike

[Dimitris]

ORIGINAL: User2
1. My Arleigh Burke-class destroyer was able to locate enemy sub 10nm away. Sub's exact location. So it seems it was detected by active sonar. Are modern active sonars so powerful to locate a submerged sub at almost 20km distantce?

In this case yes. Nominal direct-path acoustic range is 9.87nm (20K yards), and the SQS-53C is designed to be effective out to this limit (and beyond it, in fact). In this instance the submarine is shallow so the surface ducting boosts the direct-path range out to 14.8nm, ie. 27.4km.

(See also the section "Understanding depth bands and the thermal layer" on the manual)

Be aware, though, that by using active sonar you are advertising your position to the sub too. In the tutorial this is not a big problem because of the opponent's poor quality, but against a modern threat this can become a hazardous habit.

[Dimitris]

ORIGINAL: User2
2. A 127mm cannon of my super modern destroyer (2015 year according to game's DB) is rather inaccurate. It has a ballistic computer, a laser range-finder and still unable to hit a target! About 90% of rounds missed. Why? I think modern tanks are much more accurate

Gun accuracy depends on range; the closer the better. Against land targets there is a known bug which prevents accuracy from improving with shrinking range, this has been fixed on the upcoming v1.10. If you are referring to ship-to-ship employment, you can see the details on the message log. We are looking for some model tweaks to better represent the gradual improvement in accuracy as shots accumulate against a target but this will take some time.

Comparison with tank guns is a bit apples-to-oranges. Tanks shoot almost always in direct-fire (ie. near-flat trajectory) and at short ranges (rarely over 2km). Ships almost always shoot at greater ranges and with much more parabolic trajectories. Greater time of flight = higher chance the round will deviate due to a number of factors. Ship guns are also shorter-barreled (they are more readily compared with army howitzers rather than tank guns) and usually employ lower muzzle speeds, both of which reduce accuracy.

[Dimitris]

ORIGINAL: User2
3. Old (1970?) Nanuchka iii class corvete was able to jam my AA missiles (capable to attack ships). Corvete's DECM has 5% chance to jam my missile, but it seems corvete's OECM has 100% chance. Is 40 year old jammer device able to flood rather modern radar of my destroyer? The question is not about tech level, it is about emission power. I think 40 years ago radars were not as strong as today.

Soviet/Russian jammers have traditionally relied more on sheer power rather than finesse to defeat radars. "Side Globe", a late-50s/early-60s system IIRC, would flat-out kill you if you walked within 50ft of it while it was emitting. Krasukha, a modern ground mobile jammer, is rumored to be powerful enough to literally fry the target's receiver components if it gets close enough. (Taken with a pinch of salt but it does give an indication).

[User2]

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

What did the logs tell you? The display just tells you that you're being jammed or that something is jamming.

It would be great to see a list of jammed sensors. Just a wish [:)]

Ok when this happens pause the game and try and manually fire. The manual fire dialog will actually tell you in detail why these weapons won't engage. Please check out the manual as well. It describes what the messages are.

I'll make a scenario to play as that corvette to see what's wrong with OSA system. IIRC it is stated in DB that it is capable to intercept missiles. IRL OSA (at least its early version) was not very good at intercepting targets. There was a tradegy in 1987 during naval training. Nanuchka I class corvette failed to destroy an air target PM-15M (training missile - it seems it was a training verion of the soviet SS-N-2 Styx missile). That missile stuck the corvette. Fire quickly destroyed the ship. 39 crew members dead.

Point of the scenario is to just walk the player through a surface engagement with all weapons and sensors. Sounds like it did that.

I agree, the scenario has fulfilled its mission. [:)]

[User2]

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

In this case yes. Nominal direct-path acoustic range is 9.87nm (20K yards), and the SQS-53C is designed to be effective out to this limit (and beyond it, in fact). In this instance the submarine is shallow so the surface ducting boosts the direct-path range out to 14.8nm, ie. 27.4km.

Modern sonar technology is very impressive. Bad news for submarines with their 8nm torpedo ranges [:)]

Gun accuracy depends on range; the closer the better. Against land targets there is a known bug which prevents accuracy from improving with shrinking range, this has been fixed on the upcoming v1.10.

Great news! I have read about other awesome improvements in v1.10. Waiting for release!

Tanks shoot almost always in direct-fire (ie. near-flat trajectory) and at short ranges (rarely over 2km). Ships almost always shoot at greater ranges and with much more parabolic trajectories.

That make sense. I did not think about indirect fire. Thank you. It seems laser range-finders can not be used in this case. Only radar based methods.

Soviet/Russian jammers have traditionally relied more on sheer power rather than finesse to defeat radars. "Side Globe", a late-50s/early-60s system IIRC, would flat-out kill you if you walked within 50ft of it while it was emitting. Krasukha, a modern ground mobile jammer, is rumored to be powerful enough to literally fry the target's receiver components if it gets close enough. (Taken with a pinch of salt but it does give an indication).

Thanks for clearing it out. Very interesting info! Such a powerful emission can harm a pilot's most valuable organ [:)]. It seems it is bad idea to fly over these mobile jammers.

[mikmykWS]

ORIGINAL: User2

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

In this case yes. Nominal direct-path acoustic range is 9.87nm (20K yards), and the SQS-53C is designed to be effective out to this limit (and beyond it, in fact). In this instance the submarine is shallow so the surface ducting boosts the direct-path range out to 14.8nm, ie. 27.4km.

Modern sonar technology is very impressive. Bad news for submarines with their 8nm torpedo ranges [:)]

Gun accuracy depends on range; the closer the better. Against land targets there is a known bug which prevents accuracy from improving with shrinking range, this has been fixed on the upcoming v1.10.

Great news! I have read about other awesome improvements in v1.10. Waiting for release!

Tanks shoot almost always in direct-fire (ie. near-flat trajectory) and at short ranges (rarely over 2km). Ships almost always shoot at greater ranges and with much more parabolic trajectories.

That make sense. I did not think about indirect fire. Thank you. It seems laser range-finders can not be used in this case. Only radar based methods.

Soviet/Russian jammers have traditionally relied more on sheer power rather than finesse to defeat radars. "Side Globe", a late-50s/early-60s system IIRC, would flat-out kill you if you walked within 50ft of it while it was emitting. Krasukha, a modern ground mobile jammer, is rumored to be powerful enough to literally fry the target's receiver components if it gets close enough. (Taken with a pinch of salt but it does give an indication).

Thanks for clearing it out. Very interesting info! Such a powerful emission can harm a pilot's most valuable organ [:)]. It seems it is bad idea to fly over these mobile jammers.

Torpedo range answer here:

http://qa.commandmodernairnavaloperatio ... atic-range

Mike

[User2]

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

Torpedo range answer here:

Thanks, Mike. Are the targets at kinematic range can be targeted by BOL mode only? IIRC manual attack did not allow me to launch torpedo at a target >8mn away.

[mikmykWS]

WRA.

Here you go

http://www.warfaresims.com/index.php?s=wra

Automatic Firing Range
In addition to control whether or not a weapon can be automatically fired by the Artificial Intelligence (AI), and preventing a weapon to automatically fire depending on target type, the WRA also allows the player and scenario designers to limit automatic fire by target range. For instance, a 80nm range weapon may be limited to automatic fire at 30nm. The player will of course be able to allocate weapons manually out to full weapons range.

[Dimitris]

There is also a dedicated doctrine option specifically for enabling torpedo shots at maximum kinematic range.

[mikmykWS]

and guess where you could read about it?