PDA

View Full Version : Hunting subs in '68


Shadow
06-28-17, 08:18 PM
So after a good but rather straightforward run on the USS Atlanta (Los Angeles class) in 1984, I went back in time to tackle something far trickier: a Realistic campaign in 1968 aboard the USS Snook (Skipjack class).

My impression after succeeding on my first mission (stop an invasion force headed for Oslo) was that everything's going to take longer, as positioning (and patience) is much more important and your armament's only really effective at point-blank ranges, compared to '84.

My second mission takes me to shut down a Soviet wolfpack operating in the vicinity of the Denmark Strait: confusingly enough, not anywhere near Denmark. For my first attempt at the mission, I noobishly picked the 20 KY starting engagement range option, and it was frankly impossible to find two lone subs at that range, having gotten the impression the Skipjack's sonar isn't very good at all.

For the second attempt I picked 10 KY, which was better but still pretty tough as the Novembers only appeared in my sonar during their occasional cavitating (they seem to like to accelerate to 26 kts and blast away with their active in short-ish bursts). And oh how I swore at the Mk 37. You really need to be within spitting distance or at the very least in the target's baffles to have any chance of landing a hit: not only is it slow (and painfully so before activation, at 20 measly knots), its acquisition range is pitiful. So is its acquisition cone, it seemed, given how the Novembers within the 45-degree front arc of the torpedo still managed to sprint away undetected by its active sonar.

So a first torpedo split the duo and each sub ran way in opposite directions. I directed the Snook after one, and thought I had fired a 37 from a good enough position almost directly behind one of the Novembers. I turned around to look for the second one, trusting my torpedo. But it eventually missed. Before long, I had lost both Soviets from my sonar, and wasted two good torpedoes. Well, "good" being a very generous figure of speech.

At that point, after something like an hour chasing those punks, I was willing to go flank after one, taking advantage of the baffles. The Skipjack's advantage is after all her speed. But the problem is I'd have been entirely blind, and the Novembers wouldn't easily reappear on my sensors even in optimal, ultra quiet conditions. So I gave up.

Any tips?

I felt more frustrated than threatened, at times pondering just making a lot of noise, if only to get my targets' attention. Is there a lower engagement distance than 10 KY? 5? It'd seem that'd be the only viable option in a sub-to-sub engagement being a fairly primitive hunter with even more primitive weapons.

On the other hand, while I get SSBNs/SSGNs or commando-carrying diesels being evasive by default, I'd think attack subs could be more aggressive if presented with a threat. The Novembers should've tried to search around the vector of the torpedoes they evaded, instead of just drifting away. But well, their primary mission was interdicting NATO convoys, so...

jenrick
06-28-17, 08:48 PM
Off to the gym, I'll post more later. The Snook and I have had a very succesfull time. Big thing in the situation you described, go active and stay active. Keep the throttle high as well, only come back to launch torpedoes.

-Jenrick

Shadow
06-28-17, 08:57 PM
But doesn't active sonar suffer the most from high speeds? I got that impression.

The Bandit
06-28-17, 11:11 PM
So after a good but rather straightforward run on the USS Atlanta (Los Angeles class) in 1984, I went back in time to tackle something far trickier: a Realistic campaign in 1968 aboard the USS Snook (Skipjack class).

My impression after succeeding on my first mission (stop an invasion force headed for Oslo) was that everything's going to take longer, as positioning (and patience) is much more important and your armament's only really effective at point-blank ranges, compared to '84.

My second mission takes me to shut down a Soviet wolfpack operating in the vicinity of the Denmark Strait: confusingly enough, not anywhere near Denmark. For my first attempt at the mission, I noobishly picked the 20 KY starting engagement range option, and it was frankly impossible to find two lone subs at that range, having gotten the impression the Skipjack's sonar isn't very good at all.

For the second attempt I picked 10 KY, which was better but still pretty tough as the Novembers only appeared in my sonar during their occasional cavitating (they seem to like to accelerate to 26 kts and blast away with their active in short-ish bursts). And oh how I swore at the Mk 37. You really need to be within spitting distance or at the very least in the target's baffles to have any chance of landing a hit: not only is it slow (and painfully so before activation, at 20 measly knots), its acquisition range is pitiful. So is its acquisition cone, it seemed, given how the Novembers within the 45-degree front arc of the torpedo still managed to sprint away undetected by its active sonar.

So a first torpedo split the duo and each sub ran way in opposite directions. I directed the Snook after one, and thought I had fired a 37 from a good enough position almost directly behind one of the Novembers. I turned around to look for the second one, trusting my torpedo. But it eventually missed. Before long, I had lost both Soviets from my sonar, and wasted two good torpedoes. Well, "good" being a very generous figure of speech.

At that point, after something like an hour chasing those punks, I was willing to go flank after one, taking advantage of the baffles. The Skipjack's advantage is after all her speed. But the problem is I'd have been entirely blind, and the Novembers wouldn't easily reappear on my sensors even in optimal, ultra quiet conditions. So I gave up.

Any tips?

I felt more frustrated than threatened, at times pondering just making a lot of noise, if only to get my targets' attention. Is there a lower engagement distance than 10 KY? 5? It'd seem that'd be the only viable option in a sub-to-sub engagement being a fairly primitive hunter with even more primitive weapons.

On the other hand, while I get SSBNs/SSGNs or commando-carrying diesels being evasive by default, I'd think attack subs could be more aggressive if presented with a threat. The Novembers should've tried to search around the vector of the torpedoes they evaded, instead of just drifting away. But well, their primary mission was interdicting NATO convoys, so...

Yeah the BQR-2B/BQS-4 sonar duo on the Skipjack class is nothing to write home about, the best tip I can give you for acquisitions is when at all possible try to go deep (800-1000 ft) where you may pick something up from the deep thermal layer. Go off of the last, known bearing and run a zig-zag. If that isn't working try fanning out (+/-30 degrees) from either side.

jenrick
06-29-17, 12:06 AM
Okay, so here's my general methodology.

In the Skipjack you don't have some of the major advantages the 688 had over a lot of Russian boats. You are a bit quieter then some subs, and your sonar is a bit more sensitive then some of their models. It is no where near the advantage you can have in the '84 campaign in a 688.

When I first get into the mission I immediately get the bow pointed at the bearing of the contact I'm given in the brief, if I don't already have some contacts on the tac map. Remember you have no towed array, so the bow sphere (the Skipjack as modeled should actually not have a spherical array) is your primary sensor. If I don't have a contact already I will wind my way in the general area, over and under the layer at ultra quiet.

One thing to pay attention to here, are you supposed to be hunting them or was it just a random contact that intercepted you while you were headed somewhere else? If it's the later, then a lack of contact isn't actually a big deal. Just leave the mission area, as you have things to do. If you are supposed to be stopping the target though, we've got to find it regardless of what that takes. It is possible that if you try to simply staying passive and wandering hoping, you may in fact fail your objective as they quietly slip by.

Going active isn't as bad as it could be. You probably have a better active sonar then the target does, and hey if a torpedo comes your way you at least know which way to start looking. Kidding aside, going active is certainly giving up some potential tactical advantage. Please note potential though. In this area, particularly with the Skipjack you aren't a hole in the ocean silently gliding along. There's a decent chance for the enemy to find you while you're looking for them. Also as noted in the paragraph above, sometime the mission is going to demand it to locate the enemy.

Regardless of how you got the contact, you'll need to use a slightly modified set of maneuvers to firm up your TMA. Since you don't have a towed array, you may have to get the bow pointed back at the contact to ensure you have a good track. Beyond that, employee the usual concepts to generate a solution. Now for the interesting part. Your primary ASW torpedo (I have in fact killed a surfaced November with the Mk16, so it is possible), is slow enough the most enemy SSNs can outrun or run from it long enough. It's major advantage is that it runs FOREVER (a hair over 20 minutes), which can allow for a lot of tactical maneuvering on your part.

If you can get a firm solution using just passive sonar, groovy. However you may find yourself in the perfect baffle attack setup, but with a 40% solution. In that situation I'd recommend setting up the MK37, and going active just long enough to confirm range ("One ping!"). You will either be at a good attack range and can fire off your torpedo's, or you're out of range. Due to being in that good attack position you can still tactically maneuver as need to take the shot before the enemy can return the favor. If I'm their baffles and too far for a MK37 shot, I'll go all head full or even flank if it's really far, and charge. I have to cut out enough distance to make a torpedo launch a reasonable threat, to where they can't keep turning and fire a counter shot.

The Skipjack is FAST, use that to your advantage. On occasion I've literally charged the enemy sub at flank speed to get behind the counter fire torpedo, slowing only long enough to drop a MK37 almost on his bow (please note this is not a recommended technique).

Once enemy torpedo's are in the water, the question then becomes what do I gain versus what do I loose for going active. The Skipjack doesn't run quietly, the second you kick up to standard or full, the enemy will know where you are. If you can't get out of the area the initial acquisition cone is going to be in prior to the torpedo enabling, running and maneuvering is going to be a noisy affair. Well, if they're going to know where I am already, then I might as well have as much info as I can get about where they are too.

Now as noted active sonar degrades at speed in the same way passive does. The major difference is that so long as active isn't too degraded it gives you the exact location of the enemy at that moment regardless of if their running ultra quiet or flank. Passive not so much. In a knife fight, you'll be close enough (the Skipjack's BQS-4 outputs as much energy as anything else currently in the game), to get decent returns at standard, and if it's a knife fight in a phone booth even at full speed.

In the situation you described once the Novembers split, get on their tail and sprint and drift. Flank for a minute or two, then drop down to 1/3 and go active for a few. Repeat. While running active shut down the active sonar.
You have a massive speed advantage, if you immediately go in hot pursuit, that November wont have gone far and it will be easy to locate with active sonar. While you're doing that, send of a MK37 or 2 down the bearing of the other November set to active, and enabling almost as soon as the clear the tube. The goal is to keep him occupied and far away from your baffles while you handle the other one. Having a pair of slow and LONG running torpedo's works nicely for area denial basically.

An additional tactical note, you have 6 tubes and no MOS to put in one or them. Use them. Don't worry too much about how many torpedo you have to fire off. A missed kill in an "intercept mission" is a mission fail, regardless of how many torpedoes you come home with. A not taken shot that ends up allowing the enemy to kill you, is the biggest waste of a torpedo you can have IMO. If I can get to attack position via passive sonar, I usually can take out an opposing submarine with 1 torpedo. If it's an active sonar knife fight, all bets are off. I think 6 torpedo's is my record for one enemy sub, and that's just for the ones I actually sunk.

-Jenrick

MadMike
06-29-17, 12:27 AM
Challenging scenario, my favorite class sub in the sim.
The Skipjack class boats were also armed with the 10 kiloton Mk 45 ASTOR torpedo, range 12,000 yds, speed 40 knots. It was wire guided and contrary to popular belief, the firing vessel would not be destroyed along with the target (at least 4200 yds distance from burst zero).

When the USS Scorpion sank in May 1968 (which post mortem analysis in 1970 of some debris shows a likely hydrogen gas explosion from the batteries), she carried-

2 Mk 45 ASTOR's
7 MK 14-5
4 MK 37-0
10 MK 37-1

Many conspiracies surround the loss of the Scorpion, but there is no evidence of Soviet action, no fire in the torpedo room, no torpedoes or remnants in the debris field, no circular run torpedo, no reversing course, and clear evidence of implosion due to exceeding crush depth (Trieste crew member recollections during 1985 survey, and declassified USN Court of Inquiry and subsequent declassified documents). There's much more to the story.

Yours, Mike

Shadow
06-29-17, 07:36 PM
Yes, engagements are definitely far more protracted in the 1968 campaign.

Had an encounter with a couple of ASW surface vessels, a Kashin DDG and a Riga FF. After some extensive maneuvering, I managed to chase off the Riga and go after the meatier Kashin, which took two MK 37s to sink. Quite laborious, overall.

Then I had a handful of sub-to-sub encounters, mostly against diesels. I was reluctant to use my speed advantage so much, due to sonar blindness, but I did go active a number of times. Didn't detect anything, but it was enough to get the attention of the lurking Soviets, whose torpedoes I could use to get a hint about their general location. Bastards were sneaky enough I couldn't detect them until they were under 1,000 yards away. The fish were usually easily evaded, except for the time I lost the Snook to a single torpedo hit due to overconfidence. I knew the warhead was coming but I was obsessed with another sub. I overestimated my last-minute maneuvering capability, the torp was detected too late and my depth commands didn't get my boat out of the way fast enough.

But I was shallow enough, I escaped with my crew and command gave me the USS Scamp. My last engagement pitted me against another pair of diesels, a Whiskey and a Romeo. Similar situation as before: Whiskey went down fairly easily, but the fun part was the Romeo. She managed to fire off two torpedoes at me: the second one was persistent, and as I was sprinting away from it at flank speed, I miraculously missed ramming the submarine, which seconds later got slammed head-on by its own warhead. It was amazing.

Got another sub-hunting mission afterwards, and I only have 3 Mk 37s left. I really need to revise my loadout as I have far too many Mk 16s I seldom ever use: they're worthless against subs, and warships are too erratic to be hit by them 95% of the time.

But at any rate, if I'm careful those three 37s should be enough. And if I'm daring enough, I could even wrangle a Soviet torp or two and politely return them to their owners. :shucks:

Ansgar Burkhard
06-30-17, 03:28 AM
Yes, engagements are definitely far more protracted in the 1968 campaign.

Had an encounter with a couple of ASW surface vessels, a Kashin DDG and a Riga FF. After some extensive maneuvering, I managed to chase off the Riga and go after the meatier Kashin, which took two MK 37s to sink. Quite laborious, overall.

Then I had a handful of sub-to-sub encounters, mostly against diesels. I was reluctant to use my speed advantage so much, due to sonar blindness, but I did go active a number of times. Didn't detect anything, but it was enough to get the attention of the lurking Soviets, whose torpedoes I could use to get a hint about their general location. Bastards were sneaky enough I couldn't detect them until they were under 1,000 yards away. The fish were usually easily evaded, except for the time I lost the Snook to a single torpedo hit due to overconfidence. I knew the warhead was coming but I was obsessed with another sub. I overestimated my last-minute maneuvering capability, the torp was detected too late and my depth commands didn't get my boat out of the way fast enough.

But I was shallow enough, I escaped with my crew and command gave me the USS Scamp. My last engagement pitted me against another pair of diesels, a Whiskey and a Romeo. Similar situation as before: Whiskey went down fairly easily, but the fun part was the Romeo. She managed to fire off two torpedoes at me: the second one was persistent, and as I was sprinting away from it at flank speed, I miraculously missed ramming the submarine, which seconds later got slammed head-on by its own warhead. It was amazing.

Got another sub-hunting mission afterwards, and I only have 3 Mk 37s left. I really need to revise my loadout as I have far too many Mk 16s I seldom ever use: they're worthless against subs, and warships are too erratic to be hit by them 95% of the time.

But at any rate, if I'm careful those three 37s should be enough. And if I'm daring enough, I could even wrangle a Soviet torp or two and politely return them to their owners. :shucks:

Mk16 are not useless. I fire spreads of 3 or 4 to good results. I have a lot more luck with them than with the Mk37 against surface ships since once they go 30+ kts it is nigh impossible for the 37 to hit.

Julhelm
06-30-17, 04:08 AM
The shorter distance scale might actually make the 68 campaign more entertaining. With much of the emphasis being getting into the opponent's baffles, it plays out much like slow air combat underwater.

Bringing everything closer into the camera certainly makes the combat more visually appealing and more cinematic like Hunt For Red October or so.

The interesting thing about compressing the distances is that the tactics don't really change, since sensor performance gets adjusted accordingly - in practice it works out like time compression.

Shadow
06-30-17, 09:43 PM
So on my next mission I did in fact practice my torpedo wrangling.

It was just one November, which I managed to detect fairly early. After some careful initial maneuvering into her baffles, I accelerated to standard speed to close the distance but lost the contact in the process. Not sure if that happened due to my speed or the SSN stopping cold, though that might explain how the Soviet saw me coming and fired a total of three torpedoes at me.

But I was too close by then, and shortly after picking up to flank I zigged, then zagged, and then swooped under the enemy sub as her torpedoes went nuts in the area. It really didn't take long at all for one of them to lock onto its owner and promptly punch her lights out. I was fast and maneuvering aggressively, while the November could barely react to the chaos around her.

The second torpedo soon found the now-sinking Soviet again, as I was already drifting away. The third warhead circled around the vicinity for a good long while, but never found me.

So overall, this is cool, this is great, but with a fast sub and some practice, I fear it might turn exploitable. The AI doesn't seem to react all that well to its own torpedoes locking on to it (though that may be part of the general AI issues), and at least in the '68 campaign, my first impression after these last couple of missions is that it may well be a better idea to perfect torpedo wrangling than bother with Mk 37s in sub-to-sub engagements.

caine007
07-05-17, 04:59 AM
The Skipjack can at least catch just about anything in the water. I found the Sturgeon is a nightmare in '68. Definitely a lesson in patience.

I can see it might be better at surface attacks being so quiet for the era but it's so hard to get close enough for a decent Mk 37 shot on anything but the oldest diesel subs.

Really makes me wish you got partial credit for missions because while you might be able to ambush one target, once you lose the element of surprise you might as well head home.