About the Kilo sonar trackers

[Castout]

Why is the Kilo set to have only 2 sonar trackers? It significantly impairs the sub ability to have a decent situational awareness of its environment. I'm sure this is not the case with the real Kilo. Can we mitigate this by increasing the number of trackers for the Kilo like 2 for each sonar type (2 for bow and 2 for hull). Otherwise the Kilo is somewhat a deaf submarine or the correct word perhaps is very single minded sub hence having an extremely narrow perspective.

Can a mod do this? I got the feelin no though

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Why is the Kilo set to have only 2 sonar trackers? It significantly impairs the sub ability to have a decent situational awareness of its environment. I'm sure this is not the case with the real Kilo. Can we mitigate this by increasing the number of trackers for the Kilo like 2 for each sonar type (2 for bow and 2 for hull). Otherwise the Kilo is somewhat a deaf submarine or the correct word perhaps is very single minded sub hence having an extremely narrow perspective.

Can a mod do this? I got the feelin no though

The Kilo's MGK-400 sonar and its combat system are older types (it was in the USSR's 70s), so its ability to automatically track multiple contacts is weak. If you want to track more contacts, you can do so with paper and pencil. The MGK-400EM is supposed to be better, but from the displays the newer model sonar is not being modeled, so...

Besides, the Kilo is a pretty deaf sub any way you put it.

[Castout]

Are you sayin that the La class and the Seawolf class ability to track up to only 4 :shifty: targets for its each sonar(bow, hull, towed) is also realistic? i thought the devs toned down the no of trackers for each sub platform.

btw i've also noticed that the Kilo's battery endurance is somewhat pretty limited. But maybe this is also realistic. Seems the Kilo class is not a bing bang for the bucks afterall. my Government has decided to buy Kilo.....i hope they don't buy a nightmare. You can have second rate tanks but you just have to have a first rate submarine.

[Dr.Sid]

Most of the time 2 trackers are just fine. I like it. I like all the limits :rotfl:

Kilo is first class submarine. But only in it's class. Which is 'small cheap diesel sub'. It is different sport compared to nukes. As Clancy said in 'Submarine': diesel subs are just moving minefield. Read: once detected they can't run. They are great for stopping invading force surface ships. They can operate in waters so shallow that no nuke can bother them (helos can, especially with those new laser thingies).
They are even greater for 'terrorist' attacks on civilian trafic and with some skill they could even block some harbor.
But they never can go to blue water and hunt subs. They are too slow and deaf to do so. Sure Kilo can go 20 kts too .. but how long ? Nuke can go 20 kts for YEARs.

[Black_Dingo]

Well, maybe hours and possibly days, but doing 20 kts in a nuke is incredibly taxing on the reactor and espescially the cooling system.

I think sonalysts has done a good job in 'balancing' the subs of DW. even though some would say that its a "simulation", I really believe that at its heart, its a game. and a fun one at that! given the amount of classified info regarding these platforms, having a truly 'accurate' simulation would be quite hard. take a look at what sonalysts has done to balance out the subs.

Seawolf: 2nd quietest sub. better sonar, but user has to choose between the 2 towed arrays.

688i: the 'middle' boat of the game. medium in most catergories.

Akula: poor towed array performance, but has shkval and stand-off ASW weapons.

Kilo: at low speed, quietest sub in game. limited sonar capability. 2 trackers and no towed array.

so, all in all theres sort of a balance to be found here. this was probably done with multiplayer in mind.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Are you sayin that the La class and the Seawolf class ability to track up to only 4 :shifty: targets for its each sonar(bow, hull, towed) is also realistic? i thought the devs toned down the no of trackers for each sub platform.

Well, the real amount of trackers for the others is classified. But 4 trackers per array actually means 12 targets total, and that's not bad. Remember that the 688I's base is really early-mid 80s tech for introduction around 1990, and even the Seawolf is early 90s tech.

Remember that even the Aegis system was limited to tracking 128 targets (though there is supposedly an override) to ensure reliability. The Aegis had MUCH more space to store electronics. And those were air radar targets - acoustic targets are a different story in the amount of sifting required just to hold them. Take all that into account, and 12 really ain't bad.

[Bubblehead Nuke]

Well, maybe hours and possibly days, but doing 20 kts in a nuke is incredibly taxing on the reactor and espescially the cooling system.


Normally I would not interject to correct someone on the real abilities of a nuke sub but I have to disagree here.

FLANK speed for days on end would be taxing, a full bell for a week?? HA! Been there, done that. Yes, I know you have to slow down from time to time to do certain evolutions but those can be done fast and you are back up to speed.

Would be good for the primary systems to be run that like that for a while. Heck, we had more problems when we ran SLOW than fast.

I'll lay odds that we could have run at 20 knts around the WORLD non-stop. It would have been a LOT of SLOT bouys and required us to be loaded a little more that average on food but I bet we could have done it with no problems.

[Black_Dingo]

I dont doubt that US and UK nuke boats could do it, but Russian, French or Chinese SSNs? how long you think a Russian nuke could run at 20 kts before a valve burst? I give it a week at best.

[ASWnut101]

On the FAS place, I looked at the Akula (971):

4,500 Full Power Hours (and you can probably bet that it's a safe limit, not one so close to the reactor limits)

Seeing how the world is ~24,000 miles around, 4,500 hours at 35 Knots would give us a range of 157,500 Miles, or about 6.5 times around the world.


I bet it could go farther though, seeing how FAS is quite old and that info may be less (or more) than what the Russians are really capeable of.

[Bubblehead Nuke]

On the FAS place, I looked at the Akula (971):

4,500 Full Power Hours (and you can probably bet that it's a safe limit, not one so close to the reactor limits)


When talking full power hours they are talking how long with the reactor running at 100% power till the core is depleted. When a plant is critical there is a certain percentage of reactor power required for what are called 'hotel loads'. These are pumps, air conditioning, fire control, everything that is on regardless of how fast (or slow) the screw is turning. Thus, just sitting next to the pier going nowhere but with the plant on-line you will delete the core at a slow but steady pace. Turning the screw just makes this go at faster rate.

What we were discussing was the plant running around at 20 knots till something broke. I made a comment on how my boat could have gone at 20 knots for weeks or more without any problems. What this is largely a factor of it how much reactor power is NEEDED to go 20 knots as steam flow will match reactor output in most plant designs. What most people do not realized is that it is a logrithmic curve, to double your speed requires a cube of the power (guestimating here from memory).

Thus we see that 20 knots may be 60% rated output of the reactor plant or it may only be 18%. This is largely dependant of the propulsion plant design as how much steam flow is required to get to the ordered speed. So as you can see, some plants may be stressing themselves just to get to 20 knots and some may be 'loafing along'.

I dont doubt that US and UK nuke boats could do it, but Russian, French or Chinese SSNs? how long you think a Russian nuke could run at 20 kts before a valve burst? I give it a week at best.

Black Dingo, here is the REAL kicker for you. It is less stressful from a PRESSURE standpoint at a higher bell than at a lower bell. You stand a greater chance to burst something in the steam plant at Ahead 1/3 than you would at Ahead flank. Steam pressure is actually HIGHER at a lower bell. It is due to the design of the propulsion plant.

[goldorak]

I dont doubt that US and UK nuke boats could do it, but Russian, French or Chinese SSNs? how long you think a Russian nuke could run at 20 kts before a valve burst? I give it a week at best.


Give me a break.
You think French subs are second class compared to UK or US subs ?
The americans are the best, the rest of the world is irrelevant :roll:

[ASWnut101]

On the FAS place, I looked at the Akula (971):

4,500 Full Power Hours (and you can probably bet that it's a safe limit, not one so close to the reactor limits)


When talking full power hours they are talking how long with the reactor running at 100% power till the core is depleted. When a plant is critical there is a certain percentage of reactor power required for what are called 'hotel loads'. These are pumps, air conditioning, fire control, everything that is on regardless of how fast (or slow) the screw is turning. Thus, just sitting next to the pier going nowhere but with the plant on-line you will delete the core at a slow but steady pace. Turning the screw just makes this go at faster rate.

What we were discussing was the plant running around at 20 knots till something broke. I made a comment on how my boat could have gone at 20 knots for weeks or more without any problems. What this is largely a factor of it how much reactor power is NEEDED to go 20 knots as steam flow will match reactor output in most plant designs. What most people do not realized is that it is a logrithmic curve, to double your speed requires a cube of the power (guestimating here from memory).

Thus we see that 20 knots may be 60% rated output of the reactor plant or it may only be 18%. This is largely dependant of the propulsion plant design as how much steam flow is required to get to the ordered speed. So as you can see, some plants may be stressing themselves just to get to 20 knots and some may be 'loafing along'.

Ah, I see. Thanks. :)

[Castout]

About Seawolf being the 2nd quietest sub in the game. Some expert pointed that a Seawolf at 20knots is more silent than a La class at pier? So it has a virtual silent speed of 20 knots:dead:.

How's this in game after LWAMI's mod?

[TLAM Strike]

If on the Kilo you find you need to track more than two contacts (or you need both slaved to one contact) you can mark an old contact and get a new bearing LOB transmited to the TMA plot. It has to be a while since you last marked the contact for a new LOB to be transmited but this can be helpful when tracking something thats not a threat like a merchant or biologic.

[LuftWolf]

About Seawolf being the 2nd quietest sub in the game. Some expert pointed that a Seawolf at 20knots is more silent than a La class at pier? So it has a virtual silent speed of 20 knots:dead:.

How's this in game after LWAMI's mod?

After receiving numerous complaints that the SW was too quiet in the earliest versions of LWAMI, the SW PSL was readjusted to a level that everyone appears to be comfortable with.

Cheers,
David

[ASWnut101]

About Seawolf being the 2nd quietest sub in the game. Some expert pointed that a Seawolf at 20knots is more silent than a La class at pier? So it has a virtual silent speed of 20 knots:dead:.

How's this in game after LWAMI's mod?

After receiving numerous complaints that the SW was too quiet in the earliest versions of LWAMI, the SW PSL was readjusted to a level that everyone appears to be comfortable with.

Cheers,
David

Really? That actually kinda sucks for us non-multiplayer people. How hard would it be to make the same LWAMI mod, (3.80 I think), without the PSL decrease?

[Molon Labe]

About Seawolf being the 2nd quietest sub in the game. Some expert pointed that a Seawolf at 20knots is more silent than a La class at pier? So it has a virtual silent speed of 20 knots:dead:.

How's this in game after LWAMI's mod?
After receiving numerous complaints that the SW was too quiet in the earliest versions of LWAMI, the SW PSL was readjusted to a level that everyone appears to be comfortable with.

Cheers,
David

I might elaborate on that and note that it's set so that a SW at 18 knots is equal to a 688 at 0 knots. So if the report is accurate, 2 knots isn't much to gripe about.

[Castout]

I might elaborate on that and note that it's set so that a SW at 18 knots is equal to a 688 at 0 knots. So if the report is accurate, 2 knots isn't much to gripe about.


Good news :up:

Thx again LuftWolf for a mod well done.

[Molon Labe]

I guess it's a good thing that after months of LW bitching at me for being a lazy ****, I finally learned to use DW edit.

[Castout]

What's DW Edit? Btw i did some simple test. I put an Ohio, a 688, a Seawolf and a 688i in parallel course at 3-5nm range from my playable platform. Except the Seawolf which is making a 18knots dash the others are cruising along at 5 knots.

Ohio-5 knots
688i-5 knots
Seawolf-18 knots
688-5 knots

I use the 688i bow sonar to a gather the noise level:

So here's the rank of noise level from the quietest
1. The quietest: Ohio class(only shows up in the intermediate interval display)
2. 688i
3. Seawolf
4. 688

The difference between 688i at 5 knots and Seawolf at 18 knots is not significant(little difference)

However there's quite a significant difference between 688 at 5 knots noise level and that of Seawolf at 18 knots

I'm amazed by the noise performance of the Ohio she's the quietest submarine besides the Seawolf.

Btw Luftwolf, do you have an upadted sonar profile graph for LWAMI 3.08. I only have it for ver 2.00. Like you said in 2.00(Early LWAMI) Seawolf is amazingly soooo very quiet.

[Molon Labe]

What's DW Edit? Btw i did some simple test. I put an Ohio, a 688, a Seawolf and a 688i in parallel course at 3-5nm range from my playable platform. Except the Seawolf which is making a 18knots dash the others are cruising along at 5 knots.

Ohio-5 knots
688i-5 knots
Seawolf-18 knots
688-5 knots

I use the 688i bow sonar to a gather the noise level:

So here's the rank of noise level from the quietest
1. The quietest: Ohio class(only shows up in the intermediate interval display)
2. 688i
3. Seawolf
4. 688

The difference between 688i at 5 knots and Seawolf at 18 knots is not significant(little difference)

However there's quite a significant difference between 688 at 5 knots noise level and that of Seawolf at 18 knots

I'm amazed by the noise performance of the Ohio she's the quietest submarine besides the Seawolf.

Btw Luftwolf, do you have an upadted sonar profile graph for LWAMI 3.08. I only have it for ver 2.00. Like you said in 2.00(Early LWAMI) Seawolf is amazingly soooo very quiet.
DW edit is the database editing software. I'm using it to look up the base PSLs for these platforms.

Base PSLs:
SW: 55
Ohio: 57
688I: 58
688: 62

5 Knots
SW: 57.57
Ohio: 60
688I: 60.42
688: 64.81

18 kts
SW: 63.53

------
LOL, the chart included with the mod is off apparently. I should have said 15, not 18. Sorry.

Time to make a new chart....

Don't say I never gave you anything. http://www.commanders-academy.com/forum/showthread.php?p=82#post82

[Castout]

15 knots silent speed instead of the discounted 18 which is supposed to be 20? Men it's getting harder to swallow:stare:.

Let's petition for a silent speed of 20 knots for Seawolf. Then ban Seawolf in multiplayer game:rotfl:.

[Molon Labe]

I've got a better idea. Petition SCS to let us make sound curves that aren't linear. Then we'll talk to LW about fine tuning specific curves.

That SOB is arleady as quiet as a Kilo at a full stop, and that's a much bigger problem. We're not going to get any net gains with any more tweaks until SCS gives us more to work with.

That 20 knot thing sounds anecdotal rather than solid anyways.

[PeriscopeDepth]

Seems the Kilo class is not a bing bang for the bucks afterall. my Government has decided to buy Kilo.....i hope they don't buy a nightmare. You can have second rate tanks but you just have to have a first rate submarine.

For Indonesia's needs and budget, I think the Kilo class is an excellent choice. I wasn't aware that they decided to go with the Kilo though, thanks for the information.

Give me a break.
You think French subs are second class compared to UK or US subs ?

Hopefully this doesn't start a pissing contest but....Yes, I do think French subs are second class compared to US boats. And it's not because I'm an arrogant American. It's because they weren't built to do what US boats were. Look at the defence budgets and hull size. I'm sorry, but there's no WAY you can come close to an LA in a Rubis size hull and cost restraints. Not to mention Amethyste is an upgrade of the first generation French SSN. You simply can't fit all the gee whiz stuff that makes nukes quiet into a Rubis/Amethyste hull. And as far as I know, they are still without a thinline towed array (I assume they still don't have one because recent stuff promotes Barracuda as having one). I don't think French SSNs are poorly designed or have bad crews, but I just don't think they would do well in a modern ASW environment compared to US boats. And they can't realistically be expected to without spending a ton more money.

http://www.forecastinternational.com/archive/ws/ws5267.htm

PD

[Castout]

Indonesia is planning(not really have decided to) to buy Kilos but it usually stops there at the planning stage:roll:. We have 2 Su-27 and 2 Su-30 all of em without missile inventory. We bought the planes but not the weapons. Maybe the gov were thinkin of kamikaze style attack in air. Who knows. Makes for a good joke.

[LuftWolf]

It's a leap of faith to assume that Navy propaganda is correct.

When constructing a symbolic dynamic system, to over-invest in placement of certain datapoints sacrifices the fidelity of the information system as a whole.

Cheers,
David

[Bubblehead Nuke]

It's a leap of faith to assume that Navy propaganda is correct.


While I do not always believe the propaganda, as a military brat (dad used to talk a lot about things) and then active duty myself, I have found that for the most part the military understates the abilities of its hardware. At least after the first few years it is in use. After a period of time the super-duper-unbeatable line is dropped and then after a while the understated more realistic capabilities are listed.

[Castout]

Abt understating the capabilitites of its hardware, take a look at Mk 48 ADCAP. I got a strong feelin that it can go beyond or at least up to 60 knots(estimate cap 65-70 knots) without problem. The game restrict the torp speed to only 55 knots.

The same with crush depth of all the subs.

And the ships in DW don't drop depth charges. less than 1nm enemy is attacked with torpedo intead which of course failed to lock to its target being launched too close to its intended prey

[SeaQueen]

btw i've also noticed that the Kilo's battery endurance is somewhat pretty limited. But maybe this is also realistic. Seems the Kilo class is not a bing bang for the bucks afterall.

Like all militaria, it depends on how it's used.

My experience in the game is that the battery seems to be fine, provided you go slow (3-6kts). It's when you try to spend a lot of time at 15-20kts that it's tough and you have to snorkel frequently. In real life, that is a major constraint on the operations of all diesel electric submarines. They're forced to make trade offs between submerged endurance and speed. Speed is important if you want to chase surface ships, which tend to move a lot faster than submarines. The dependence on batteries, though, makes it tough for a diesel electric submarine to engage in a long chase. The best way to think of a diesel electric submarine is like a mobile, intelligent minefield. A surface vessel basically has to drive over it for it to be effective, and their best defense against submarines is to hide (which they can do quite well).

[TLAM Strike]

And the ships in DW don't drop depth charges. They do they just royaly suck at it. ONe of the mine sweepers (Russian Natya or PRC T-43) has a DC thrower as does one of the PRC warships. Most of the time they try to use them they end up damaging themselves. :-? :damn:

[Sea Demon]

And the ships in DW don't drop depth charges. They do they just royaly suck at it. ONe of the mine sweepers (Russian Natya or PRC T-43) has a DC thrower as does one of the PRC warships. Most of the time they try to use them they end up damaging themselves. :-? :damn:

I'm thinking that depth charges aren't very useful in modern ASW anyway. If your surface ship is close enough to use these, the sub probably has a good solution on you and can carve you up with a couple of fish. Thinking like a surface ship captain, I'm thinking stand-off weapons are the only real options in todays naval environment. And at the last resort, my own light-weight torpedos from the SVTT. Depth charges, even for short range engagement seems useless for surface ships. They may be useful for aircraft though. Let's put it this way, I'd rather engage a sub using my MK-46 at short range before throwing depth charges off the racks. Any Chinese skipper that tried to do this to me in my 688(I) would be dead in short order. :dead:

[TLAM Strike]

And the ships in DW don't drop depth charges. They do they just royaly suck at it. ONe of the mine sweepers (Russian Natya or PRC T-43) has a DC thrower as does one of the PRC warships. Most of the time they try to use them they end up damaging themselves. :-? :damn:

I'm thinking that depth charges aren't very useful in modern ASW anyway. If your surface ship is close enough to use these, the sub probably has a good solution on you and can carve you up with a couple of fish. Thinking like a surface ship captain, I'm thinking stand-off weapons are the only real options in todays naval environment. And at the last resort, my own light-weight torpedos from the SVTT. Depth charges, even for short range engagement seems useless for surface ships. They may be useful for aircraft though. Let's put it this way, I'd rather engage a sub using my MK-46 at short range before throwing depth charges off the racks. Any Chinese skipper that tried to do this to me in my 688(I) would be dead in short order. :dead: Remember Red Storm Rising? A russian sub sits on the bottom near a shipwreck and all the fancy US torpedoes can't hit it yet a British helo with a depth charge delivers the killing blow. Depth charges have the advantage of being dirt cheap and in shallow waters where a sub can't manuver effective when deployed from small high speed craft. The navies in the Baltic operate around this idea.

[ASWnut101]

Then I guess it just depends on if it's in the "blue ocean," or if it's in shallow waters.


I also belive that Air-dropped DCs are better than ones thrown off a ship simply because you cannot see the airplane coming at you if you are submerged. I'm sure most submarines today can hear a ship at least at ~4nm, giving it some time to react. With air-dropped DCs, you can't hear them until they hit the water, and even then you may not notice them.

[Sea Demon]

Remember Red Storm Rising? A russian sub sits on the bottom near a shipwreck and all the fancy US torpedoes can't hit it yet a British helo with a depth charge delivers the killing blow. Depth charges have the advantage of being dirt cheap and in shallow waters where a sub can't manuver effective when deployed from small high speed craft. The navies in the Baltic operate around this idea.

Yes. that's why I said it might come in handy for aircraft. But I still think it would be a waste of space on surface warships in modern warfare. I think if it came to this situation, just design deeper running torpedos like the MK-50. That would be the better solution. And if depth bombs were needed, send the P-3's.

[TLAM Strike]

Well it also comes down to weather or not the attacking ship is worth a torpedo. I doubt anyone would put DCs on a cruiser but on a small patrol craft why not?

Althogh the Russians still mount RBU series ASW rocket launchers on their ships (even cruisers and carriers) so there has to be something to this primitive weapons. As I recall in Dangrous Ground by Larry Bond a US SSN is almost taken out by them. :rock:

@ Sea Demon: I think you missunderstood that situaton in RSR. The torpedoes couldn't lock on to the sub since it was sitting on the bottom (Ie stationary) and thus wasn't a valid target for the weapons onboard computer).

[Sea Demon]

@ Sea Demon: I think you missunderstood that situaton in RSR. The torpedoes couldn't lock on to the sub since it was sitting on the bottom (Ie stationary) and thus wasn't a valid target for the weapons onboard computer).

Well there's still alot I don't understand about modern naval warfare. It is indeed a complex art/science. But like I said, if this situation arose, putting myself in the Admiral's shoes, I can't see myself tasking a Ticonderoga CG to go out there with depth bombs when I can just as easily send P-3's or even B-52's over to air drop them. If the datum is known, why not? I'm just thinking that the folks at the naval war college aren't going to use Clancy's books as fleet tactics guides.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Remember Red Storm Rising? A russian sub sits on the bottom near a shipwreck and all the fancy US torpedoes can't hit it yet a British helo with a depth charge delivers the killing blow. Depth charges have the advantage of being dirt cheap and in shallow waters where a sub can't manuver effective when deployed from small high speed craft. The navies in the Baltic operate around this idea.

Use antisub mortars then - lets you hit those targets. Conventional depth charges that you have to roll off the back of the ship are simply out. Use them for the element of surprise - you catch a sub at close range, quietly swing your RBU around, and hit him.