Anyone got a good FFG Air-Threat drill?

[JamesT73J]

Getting to grips with the FFG, am having particular problems keeping pesky ASM's and aircraft at bay. CWIS does a nice job (especially on the beam or stern) but I'm getting dinged alot by Subs launching ASM's.

Of course, the trouble is there's no real warning, so when you've got your head buried in the sonar systems working contacts, it's tricky. Anyone got some good techniques they want to pass on?

Cheers


James

[Zerogreat]

If oyu activate countermeasure autocrew it will give you warning of incoming missiles. It cas save you, because sometimes they are even noticed before they appear on radar!

[JamesT73J]

You know..I never knew that. Thanks. Coming from the sub platforms, I'd got used to leaving autocrew off. Of course, with the FFG there's alot more to watch, so some automatic delegation is very handy, I'd already left the ESM to autocrew.

I'll give that a try. Some missiles are so fast though, even if they're locked, handed off, and then engaged, there isn't enough time. Oh well!

[elcid]

How effective is EW in detecting missile threats? In this respect, are there any advantages to leaving EW autocrew on?

All I know is that it clutters up the NAV map. And I don't know if auto TMA will merge other contacts with visual /radar contacts.

[SeaQueen]

Getting to grips with the FFG, am having particular problems keeping pesky ASM's and aircraft at bay. CWIS does a nice job (especially on the beam or stern) but I'm getting dinged alot by Subs launching ASM's.

Of course, the trouble is there's no real warning, so when you've got your head buried in the sonar systems working contacts, it's tricky. Anyone got some good techniques they want to pass on?

Cheers


James

Driving the FFG is different from driving a submarine, where you spend a lot of time staring at grams. Things also happen a lot faster. If you spend too much time in the sonar shack, you'll lack sufficient awareness to respond to threats.

Consider putting the sonar station on autocrew, and running it from mostly the bridge, weapons and weapons coordinator stations. You'll have a more full picture of what's going on around you.

[SeaQueen]

Of course, with the FFG there's alot more to watch, so some automatic delegation is very handy, I'd already left the ESM to autocrew.

I'll give that a try. Some missiles are so fast though, even if they're locked, handed off, and then engaged, there isn't enough time. Oh well!

ESM is good against some ASMs, but like you said it doesn't necessarily give you enough time. The trick is being able to use ESM, air search, surface search, and data links all at once. Unlike with submarines, it's rare to have just one ship in a surface engagement, so think about throwing at least one allied warship into the mix. Surface action is all about working within a team of warships, all doing different jobs. It has a whole different flavor from submarine warfare.

[MaHuJa]

How effective is EW in detecting missile threats? In this respect, are there any advantages to leaving EW autocrew on?

Once radar weapons enable, they'll be detectable by EW - if there's someone (or autocrew) manning it. (Such detection will also trigger the vampire warning if CM autocrew is active.)

All I know is that it clutters up the NAV map. And I don't know if auto TMA will merge other contacts with visual /radar contacts.

The nav map clutter is a thing of air platforms.... Autotma is usually very quick to merge with other sources.

(REMRO, the helo radar, on the other hand...)

[MaHuJa]

Oh, and... the AI platforms datalink information on enemy weapons between them, but you don't get access to that information.

[JamesT73J]

Auto CM is very handy. Map clutter is an issue with every platform, although if you work at it you can resolve merges in under a minute.

[Sea Demon]

I usually like to work from the Weapons Coordinator Station when my ship is in a high missile threat area. I also switch to Weapons Control when I need to release weapons against air, surface, or missile targets. Other things I like to do in the FFG:

1. I utilize helos to the maximum. I always carry two and like to have both in the air when/if possible. I have one with ASW loadout for sub-hunting, and the other in ASuW(or Strike/near land threats) and REMRO to give my FFG better OTH radar coverage. When using the MH-60 with ASuW loadout, I have an additional dedicated anti-ship missile to use. And can fire that one from a different axis. :up: And I can still use the ASuW helo to prosecute sub-surface targets if need be.

2. When I'm in a high threat area (which is 99% of the time in DW), I always load an SM-2. I do this because I can both defend against aircraft and missile threats, or I can attack an enemy surface ship if I need to. It goes without saying, in an ASuW engagement, I will load a Harpoon my next reload if time and conditions permit. This part requires situational awareness of your current battlespace. i.e. What type of surface ships are you engaging? Do you have any mutual support? Are their anti-ship missiles in the air? Are these missiles headed your way? What is the range to target? etc. etc. etc. And in modern naval warfare, you have to be a quick thinking captain.

3. SeaQueen mentioned it above, and I can't reiterate it enough. Take along an AEGIS ship and become part of a SAG. When I've done this, the AEGIS ship has done most of the AAW and ASuW work, leaving me to focus solely on ASW and supporting the AEGIS ship where necessary in the ASuW/AAW role. AFAIK, this type of teamwork is the most realistic in terms of real-world Ops anyway. And with this in mind, you can fully utilize your Perry Class ship in the ASW role. Me and an Arleigh Burke once destroyed an enemy Russian SAG escorting cargo ships in the North Atlantic. Their supporting Akula fired a few SS-N-27's. The Arleigh Burke destroyed these incoming missiles, and my helo(Me in ASTAC) destroyed the Akula. SAG teamwork is your strength.

4. Turn your CIWS to Auto in a high threat area. Full auto will most likely destroy any SM-2 or Harpoon missiles you fire. Only go full auto when you're not around any friendlies and you're out of missiles. Any thoughts from other Perry Class Captains?

These are just a few things off the top of my head.

Sea Demon

[OneShot]

This thread brings up the old question ... Anybody up for writing a FFG manual? I know some people said they are working on it, tho I'm curious if there will be a release somewhen.

Cheers

[SeaQueen]

1. I utilize helos to the maximum. I always carry two and like to have both in the air when/if possible.


I usually carry one because IRL they usually use the other hanger to stowing extra junk and gym equipment. :-)

It's a classic case of what's on paper v. real life.


I have one with ASW loadout for sub-hunting, and the other in ASuW(or Strike/near land threats) and REMRO to give my FFG better OTH radar coverage. When using the MH-60 with ASuW loadout, I have an additional dedicated anti-ship missile to use. And can fire that one from a different axis. :up: And I can still use the ASuW helo to prosecute sub-surface targets if need be.


The thing about the ASuW configuration they have in DW is that it carries 2 Mk.50 torpedos. I just use them for ASW. I don't think it's wise to put a helo close enough to drop a torpedo on a surface ship. There than that, the OTH coverage the radar gives you is definitely the way to think about it. You can't use the Harpoon's maximum range without it.

I wish I also had the option of adding external fuel tanks to my helo. It'd make convergence zones a sub commander's worst nightmare.



4. Turn your CIWS to Auto in a high threat area. Full auto will most likely destroy any SM-2 or Harpoon missiles you fire. Only go full auto when you're not around any friendlies and you're out of missiles. Any thoughts from other Perry Class Captains?


Not to mention your own helo as it's taking off if you turn it on and forget about it. Let me tell ya, if that doesn't make you feel like a real ding dong, nothing will.

I haven't figured out a reason to go full auto yet.

[Kapitan]

get two ships on perry u command one spruence along side you

then about 50 miles away put an aircraft carrier pref a american one then set the option for war time 80 planes to be shot down a good start :D

[Sea Demon]

I usually carry one because IRL they usually use the other hanger to stowing extra junk and gym equipment. :-)

It's a classic case of what's on paper v. real life.

In general warfare, I'm pretty sure the Perry Class Captain will leave behind the Rowing machine and free-weights to accomodate another helo. At any rate, I like two because they have the capability to use two. And I like to fully utilize my Perry's capabilities.



The thing about the ASuW configuration they have in DW is that it carries 2 Mk.50 torpedos. I just use them for ASW. I don't think it's wise to put a helo close enough to drop a torpedo on a surface ship. There than that, the OTH coverage the radar gives you is definitely the way to think about it. You can't use the Harpoon's maximum range without it.

I have to correct you here. The MH-60 in the ASuW configuration carries 1 Penguin anti-ship missile and 2 MK-50 torpedos. You can't direct the helo to fire that missile from ASTAC, but you can from the NAV map. And I use the NAV map as the FFG's CIC plot anyway when looking at the full tactical picture. And I like that additional anti-ship missile flying around out there, plus it's radar giving me better eyes over the ocean. There have been times I have used all 4 Harpoons with various waypoints and have directed the helo to launch it's penguin on a 180 degree axis from the threat platform. The results were pretty devastating....to the enemy ship that is.


I wish I also had the option of adding external fuel tanks to my helo. It'd make convergence zones a sub commander's worst nightmare.

Count me in. What a great thought.


Not to mention your own helo as it's taking off if you turn it on and forget about it. Let me tell ya, if that doesn't make you feel like a real ding dong, nothing will.

I've done this a couple of times, so I know what you mean. :D


I haven't figured out a reason to go full auto yet.

As I've said before, I only use full auto when there are no friendlies around, I'm out of missiles, and I'm not launching or recovering helos. These 3 conditions must be met for me to switch to full-auto. Otherwise I'm in auto for a high threat area, and in hold when there are no threats present.

Sea Demon

[TLAM Strike]

Otherwise I'm in auto for a high threat area, and in hold when there are no threats present. You never know when a SLCM might get shot at you. I leave it on at least 'AUTO' at all times unless a friendly is doing a flyby. The ten seconds it takes to turn on the CIWS when you get a Vampire could be the death of you.

[Sea Demon]

Otherwise I'm in auto for a high threat area, and in hold when there are no threats present. You never know when a SLCM might get shot at you. I leave it on at least 'AUTO' at all times unless a friendly is doing a flyby. The ten seconds it takes to turn on the CIWS when you get a Vampire could be the death of you.

Very true.

[SquidB]

This thread brings up the old question ... Anybody up for writing a FFG manual? I know some people said they are working on it, tho I'm curious if there will be a release somewhen.

Yes I second this, ive hardly played in the ffg, it seems so alien to me. A manual would be ace, and tempt me to the surface, any takers?

[SquidB]

This thread brings up the old question ... Anybody up for writing a FFG manual? I know some people said they are working on it, tho I'm curious if there will be a release somewhen.

Yes I second this, ive hardly played in the ffg, it seems so alien to me. A manual would be ace, and tempt me to the surface, any takers?

[SeaQueen]

This thread brings up the old question ... Anybody up for writing a FFG manual? I know some people said they are working on it, tho I'm curious if there will be a release somewhen.

Yes I second this, ive hardly played in the ffg, it seems so alien to me. A manual would be ace, and tempt me to the surface, any takers?

I'm slowly working something out. I agree, though, the FFG is the most different of all the platforms in the game. It's easily the most complicated. It's one of the most potentially powerful too, except that it's also very difficult partly because of complications, but also because how to do things like stay stealthy while finding the enemy are not as straight forward as in submarines. Sometimes you just can't expect to remain undetected. What do you do then? There's a lot more thinking to be done, and typically a lot less time to do it. :-)

I think it's actually one of the most interesting platforms though, because you can do so much with it. It's where the graphics in DW really pay off too.

[compressioncut]

I wish I also had the option of adding external fuel tanks to my helo. It'd make convergence zones a sub commander's worst nightmare.




Um, the CZs are 25-30 miles in the game, unless you mean multiple CZs, which I haven't seen (but haven't tested, either). Beyond one CZ detection is rare to begin with, and completely unlikely in real life using a TACTAS these days.

But you're right, CZ prosecutions with the helo are ideal. I made a couple of simple CZ scenarios and have no problem carrying the prosecution to destruction. Textbook standoff ASW.

[SeaQueen]

But you're right, CZ prosecutions with the helo are ideal. I made a couple of simple CZ scenarios and have no problem carrying the prosecution to destruction. Textbook standoff ASW.

Yeah... I made some like that too, then took the same scenario, moved things around and made the environment bottom limited, or surface duct, just to see the difference in performance.

Something I'm still trying to figure out is the DW sonar model. I think it'd be nice to have a little TDA that would allow me to predict sonar performance given a few inputs (target type, SSP, bottom type...).

[compressioncut]

Yeah... I made some like that too, then took the same scenario, moved things around and made the environment bottom limited, or surface duct, just to see the difference in performance.

Something I'm still trying to figure out is the DW sonar model. I think it'd be nice to have a little TDA that would allow me to predict sonar performance given a few inputs (target type, SSP, bottom type...).

There's a sort of prediction model in the mission builder, although I don't know how accurate it is or how dependent it is on conditions. I think it may even be called "show predicted sensor range," although I've kinda set DW aside till the AAW/ASuW with the frigate gets sorted (which is why I checked this thread), and can't say for sure.

No full field displays showing TLs and PODs, but a useful circle around the selected unit in the building screen is there.

And as for the original question, the AAW side of the game is really not very good, or at least a lot more difficult than it should be. It would be much more playable with only a few things added (like the autocrew classifying radar/EW contacts).

"Popup bearing 136!"

"TWEEEEEEEEEEEET. Zippo one based on Exocet!!"

rather than the fairly unuseful "Vampire inbound!"

If I'm the combat officer, I don't busy myself with classifying EW/radar/sonar contacts. I make decisions based on what the combat team has classified them as that allow me to effectively fight the ship.

By the same token, if I'm the ASW director, I don't really worry about what's going on with the AAW guys. It would be great if they took care of their own stuff in the game, too.

I haven't been able to come to grips with it satisfactorily, especially in multi-threat environments.

I don't think that would require major changes to the game, but I obviously just don't know.

[SeaQueen]

There's a sort of prediction model in the mission builder, although I don't know how accurate it is or how dependent it is on conditions.


We talked about that in the Mission Designer's forum, actually, about the potential of using it as a TDA. The thing is I'm not really clear what the circle really means. I suspect it's maximum range, but only rarely do I ever get a signal out that far. I wish it was mean detection range or sweep width instead. It'd be more useful.


No full field displays showing TLs and PODs, but a useful circle around the selected unit in the building screen is there.


When I get some free time I'm thinking about making a little ray tracer spreadsheet so that you could put the SSP in and estimate the range of CZs. It wouldn't be too hard to do. Predicting signal excess would be more complicated. I'm not sure I could do that accurately without knowing exactly how their sonar model works.

There was an article in the Harpoon HQ about how the Harpoon sonar model worked. I used that to create a little spreadsheet that was pretty useful. I want to create a similar thing for DW, but so far nobody has given me the info.


If I'm the combat officer, I don't busy myself with classifying EW/radar/sonar contacts. I make decisions based on what the combat team has classified them as that allow me to effectively fight the ship.

By the same token, if I'm the ASW director, I don't really worry about what's going on with the AAW guys. It would be great if they took care of their own stuff in the game, too.

I haven't been able to come to grips with it satisfactorily, especially in multi-threat environments.

I don't think that would require major changes to the game, but I obviously just don't know.

I think this might be one area where Harpoon is probably the superior simulator. There, you take the role of an over-all decision maker while the computer takes responsibility for classifying targets, etc. etc. DW tries to strike a balance between different positions on the ship, and does a better job on some of them than others.

Honestly, I think naval warfare is really hard to make a super-accurate simulator for, if you're going to have just one person playing it. So much of it is about the crew working together ya know? So... I think DW is good for what it captures, but it's not by any means a complete sim, in the sense that it faithfully duplicates how everything works.

[OKO]

How effective is EW in detecting missile threats? In this respect, are there any advantages to leaving EW autocrew on?

All I know is that it clutters up the NAV map. And I don't know if auto TMA will merge other contacts with visual /radar contacts.


there is no vampire report on EW
but it could be effective on ASM detection
As it is a passive sensor, EW must always be on
On a real ship, an operator always manage this hardware, and is able to report as soon as a new contact appear.
so, you can use the AC here, with EW always on
You will need anyway to classify it manually on EW.

where is it usefull against ASM ?
if it is always on, and you made the good job merging previous contact to declutter your NAV screen, a new contact will pop clearly here, you just have to jump to EW to see if its a XXXmissile
then you will saw every seeskimmer opening their seeker too early.

but your best protection agaisnt missile is the radar/SM2 ...
your radars, or the helo's one in REMRO, the best way to remain steath (for the FFG) with a clear picture of the theatre.

[MaHuJa]

but your best protection agaisnt missile is the radar/SM2 ...
your radars, or the helo's one in REMRO, the best way to remain steath (for the FFG) with a clear picture of the theatre.

I've never gotten a vampire on the remro. Have you, or are you speaking from theory? (I've seen it -vs- It should appear)

[Apocal]

I've never gotten a vampire on the remro. Have you, or are you speaking from theory? (I've seen it -vs- It should appear)

I've seen it. Both my SPS-55 surface search and SPS-49(V)5 were not radiating at the time. Only radiating radar around the helo's. Got a vampire call, two C801s inbound. The mission was East Timor NEO. I'm going to go back to try again and see if it wasn't just some fluke.

[Sea Demon]

I've never gotten a vampire on the remro. Have you, or are you speaking from theory? (I've seen it -vs- It should appear)

I've seen it. Both my SPS-55 surface search and SPS-49(V)5 were not radiating at the time. Only radiating radar around the helo's. Got a vampire call, two C801s inbound. The mission was East Timor NEO. I'm going to go back to try again and see if it wasn't just some fluke.

Good Question. I'll have to test this out myself later. :up:

Sea Demon

[Apocal]

I've never gotten a vampire on the remro. Have you, or are you speaking from theory? (I've seen it -vs- It should appear)

I've seen it. Both my SPS-55 surface search and SPS-49(V)5 were not radiating at the time. Only radiating radar around the helo's. Got a vampire call, two C801s inbound. The mission was East Timor NEO. I'm going to go back to try again and see if it wasn't just some fluke.

I'm afraid I may have been mistaken.

I was using the Alert 5 helo as a standoff sensor, as such it was radiating. Vampire detection was made as previously noted, but I realized it was at short range, very, very close to visual.