Mk 48 ADCAP...6nm range??

[Richard G]

I just saw a video showing a LA Class loadout. The Mk48 was listed as having 6nm range. Whats up with that?

[Richard G]

Heres the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXX7eLRO7xw

Load out info is at about 2:40 mark.

[Herman]

I just saw a video showing a LA Class loadout. The Mk48 was listed as having 6nm range. Whats up with that?

This shorted-range rationale is also found in Harpoon databases. The reason it was implemented was the expectation that once you fire, the target is probably going to evade at Flank speed (30kts+) and the torpedo would need to catch it. The weapon has fuel for about 20nm (even if it only fires at 6nm). The additional 14nm difference is meant for the weapon to catch a target fleeing in the other direction.

[Bostonmyk]

Hi Guys,

Pretty good discussion on this here that explains it.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3421641

Thanks!

Mike

[biosthetique]

So the torpedoes specifications in that "Realistic" game are not realistic.

Well, I kind of knew that but, here is the discussion at the Matrix website regarding that "Realistic" game and the "Realistic" torpedoes:

"So the "range" of some weapons in Command is dictated not my the weapon itself, but by the limitations of the AI in handling it. I found this revelation surprising."

"This is one of those things that needs to be made clear from the get-go. I am also surprised by it. I never like using the database to manipulate the AI's actions"

"The reason why this is done is you don't want the AI (or the player) to shoot at a target at the very edge of their weapon's range but instead shoot at a range that does not let the target quickly get out of range. If you look at early naval simulations you'll see this issue consistently (so SA-5 is shot at me at max range, I quickly reverse my course moving out of range, wasted SAM shot, rinse repeat).
If you look in our manual go to 8.6 and read our DLZ Why it Matters essay. Sums up many of the issues surrounding this kind of thing."

The player is handled because the game assumes that he does not know what he is doing, and would not learn through a couple of mistakes he would come to make.

Gee when I play a game that I paid $100,00 and change, I want to learn something and grow through my discoveries of the details of the game, instead of having some pre-chewed baby food delivered, not at $108.25.

Now, let's take a look at real hard facts about the Mk 48 ADCAP: in Jane's 2002-2003 (10 years ago) Underwater Water Systems, the specs was that the max speed was 55Kt and the RANGE on a flat run was 38 Km @ 55Kt or 50 Km @ 40Kt.

Meaning the range for a fully fueled MK 48 is 20.5NM at max speed of 55Kt, and the ride is roughly 22 minutes long.
And the range for a fully fueled MK48 is 26.99NM at speed of 40Kt, and the ride is roughly 40 minutes.

As you can see we are so far from the 6nm range, and I am starting to have second thoughts about having purchased that game.

1 International Knot = 1 nautical mile/hour= 1.852 meters/hour =6.076 feet/hour. Distance = Rate x Time

So in the case of Sub A (us) shooting a torp. on the 000 at 55Kt (Hypothetically reach that speed instantly out of the tube), to Sub B (Whatever country), when they are at 10 nm away from each other. Sub A is stationary and Sub B is fleeting away at 30Kt on a flat trajectory (never happens). Every minute, the torp. gains 766 meters on Sub B, it will take roughly 24 minutes to reach Sub B. The Torpedo will run out of fuel before it reaches Sub B. Now, in the case the Torpedo is launched from Sub A at a speed of 40Kt, the torp. will gain on Sub B, 308 meters every minute. At the end of its run the torp. will be 5,892 meters away from Sub B. It would take 60 minutes for the torp. to reach Sub B.

In that case at which distance should Sub A start to consider a launch at Sub B to begin to reach it? For a speed of 55kn, 8.77nm; and for a speed of 40kt, 6.81nm.

I don’t have the acceleration rate of the Mk 48 ADCAP, meaning how long does it take for that torp to reach it's programmed speed, but I would bet it is very fast, considering its engine.

As you can see we are far from the 6nm for a high speed torpedo range including acceleration, deceleration and evasive maneuvers if any. I would personally shoot between 7 and 8nm at 55Kn and between 5 and 6nm at 40kt.

Now if that game would calculate the real torpedo fuel consumption, acceleration, deceleration, re-attack maneuvers instead of cutting corners, the game would BE MORE realistic.

Now, let's take a look at something else. If Sub B is getting away from sub A, this is what we get, but what about if Sub B is closing on Sub A who is traveling at 10Kt toward sub B?....Then you can shoot that torpedo from a longer distance, because the distance gained on Sub B every minute, is greater as the Torp. speed will be added to the Sub B speed. Yet, The realistic game tells you the Torpedo range is still 6nm. At that point I am asking for a refund!

Then again, I wonder if in "Tom Clancy SSN" the Torp. fuel consumption is realistically modeled. After all Tom Clancy is not a Geeky Week End Warrior!:hmm2:

To be continued!

[mapuc]

As I wrote in an another thread in this sub-forum.

Such a game like this one(Command) can never be 100 % Realistic

Markus

[biosthetique]

As I wrote in an another thread in this sub-forum.

Such a game like this one(Command) can never be 100 % Realistic

Markus
As I said in other forum, don't claim realism if you are not!...

[mapuc]

As I said in other forum, don't claim realism if you are not!...

I do not claim that, because it is impossible. most of the weapons and the gear we use in those games are made from what the dev have got from Jane's and other informations sources. Forget that USA would reveal the exact data about some given weapons

Some weapons are known by the public, but this is elderly weapons. Today's modern weapons, well I have hard to believe the US military would give away info. about these weapons og their military gear they have.


But I want as far it is possible as realistic it gets.
Markus

[biosthetique]

I have my info from Jane's, and what they show is NOT from Jane's.

Then the decision to reduce the range, does not come from Jane's but from a lack of experience of shooting torpedoes at moving target from a submarine, in games like DW or SSN .

As I gathered, Harpoon is doing the same thing and they duplicated a Harpoon inaccuracy.

Realism is impossible I agree, but accurate data is possible, and decreasing a torpedo range under the excuse of one evading submarine, and the player unable to understand what is going on, to rationalize one size fits all, ignoring willingly any other case of submarine contact and following maneuvers is unacceptable in my book at that game price.

Which raise, another question, how accurate are their missiles behaviors, is it one size fits all with castrated data?...

Unfortunately, I can not talk about missiles and guided rocketry, otherwise, I would have showed my nose up the game data bank.

There no smoke without fire, you cut corners for Torps, you cut corners for other calculations, and wish that no one will pull the old slide ruler to check on them.

[mapuc]

^ I agree on that :up:

Markus

[emsoy]

Now, let's take a look at something else. If Sub B is getting away from sub A, this is what we get, but what about if Sub B is closing on Sub A who is traveling at 10Kt toward sub B?....Then you can shoot that torpedo from a longer distance, because the distance gained on Sub B every minute, is greater as the Torp. speed will be added to the Sub B speed. Yet, The realistic game tells you the Torpedo range is still 6nm. At that point I am asking for a refund!

Thank you for your feedback Biosthetique,

As has been pointed out repeatedly, this simulator will continue to evolve as we get more feedback from our users.

Simulating technical limitations is one thing, taking into account practical 'field limitations' is another. In order to have a realistic sim we need to take into account both.

For instance, Soviet doctrine stated that torps should not be fired at targets beyond 13k yards. The chanse of actually hitting the target drops dramatically beyond that range while at the same time you notify the target about your presence and possibly even give away your (approximate) position. This goes for the super-heavy 650mm torps too, which would use their speed and range to catch up with a fleeing US CVN.

As such, the practical firing range in Command is limited to ca 6nm, even for high-end torpedoes. It makes sure that both the player and the AI adhere to the same real life technical/tactical/doctrine/field limitations. The ADCAP still has enough fuel to make it out to 20nm at 55kt, or 27nm at 40kt.

You mention 8nm and we could probably update the practical firing range from 6 to 8nm for the most capable torps such as ADCAP, Spearfish, DM2A4, etc.

It would also be great if you could back up your posts with more hard facts, along with links to the sources. Something as 'simple' as the max practical firing range for these high-end torps would help tons.

Thanks!

[biosthetique]

Thank you for addressing that problem.

Ha Ha Ha!....My sources are not on the web!...Your good friend Sunburn and staff member said that you have access to Jane's publication. My sources are from Jane's. There is nothing better than a good old hardcover source, in my opinion.

The rest of it, is experience and something that more people should do: mathematics. It is as good for the brains, as PT @ 05:00 is for the heart.

If one can't create an equation to calculate the duration of a torpedo run, which is not a directly supplied data, one should try gardening as a new field of endeavour. Because one might encounter situations where 2 equations with 2 unknown variables might be necessary to create, in order to find answers.

Doctrine is a guideline. Some would say a refuge for the unimaginatives. I say it is a base on which you get creative. If you don't know what to do, then follow the doctrine, if you know what to do, then do it! In reality, you can push weapons further than the doctrine allows you to, and that means something!

So 13Km? I tell you what I have been told very often "If you have a shot, take it!" Don't wait for the enemy to dictate you next move, you have the initiative, use it and abuse it. It all depends of what the situation dictates, and what your mission is. A missing torpedo can also create havoc through a submarine crew, especially a stealth one coming out of nowhere through a thermocline.

There are no limitations in combat, to win to survive, one does what is necessary to prevail. Because there is no second chances, one needs to be ready to be surprised and surprise. The only limitation, are the tools available from the toll box.

In my opinion, this is not the firing range that you need to increase. A torp is like a mini-sub with a mind of its own, once the wire is broken. Torpedoes, acquire, lose, search and re-acquire target. They also do a lot of other things.

It is not about extending the practical firing range of the torp as a simple number to be changed, then hit enter. Create a program that allows a torp to search, acquire, lose and re-acquire target, go passive and active, and go from stealth mode to search mode, to attack mode on its own. All of the above based on acceleration deceleration and fuel consumption. Then you will have something realistic that you will be able to claim. Otherwise, your torpedoes are linear creatures.

When you look at the evolution of Torpedoes since their creation, it is a weapon that grew in flexibility, not in rigidity.

There are no weblinks to my brains. But I will tell you this, and that should be Sunburn 's job as he criticized other people's finished work. Ask him to acquire Tom Clancy SSN to play it. As it will teach the understanding of the tactical usage of and dynamics of modern torps, calculating, shooting at and being shot at, acquiring and evading. It could not be any clearer in that game. It is a Modern torpedoes boot camp for civies.

For the rest, you have all the data available in the open, all you need to do, is to make the equations sing your song!

[FERdeBOER]

I'm still deciding if buying or not the game, but I like what I see.

Maybe I can put some light on this "problem". We "subsimers" (sorry, at least me and some people I play with), use torpedoes in huge variety of different ways. Could be used only for provoking havoc in a convoy (as stated by others), could be used to follow it and approach the enemy while he tries to avoid it. Could be used as a distraction...
The point is, I don't want to be limited by a "false" range based on doctrines. If I miss a shot because I launched too far away, that's my problem. Maybe the game could alert me on that.
If I'm micromanaging a sub, I would prefer to be fully free on its use and not limited by doctrines.

[emsoy]

Thank you guys, we really appreciate your input :D

I should probably start by mentioning that it is possible to BOL-launch torpedoes if you want to be creative. You can then manually stear them to their target at max range - granted the weapons have wire guidance and you don't fire more torps than you have wire guidance channels. The 6nm range limitation is for "ordinary" torpedo shots.

We actually tried a more advanced method for determining max firing range based on torpedo speed and target speed & heading. This resulted in a lot of stupid shots while the AI was building a firing resolution. Like, if you have contact at 20nm but no speed info, do you shoot? No? But if the same contact is at 4nm? Etc etc.

The end result was that the targets fled and helicopters scrambled for no torp hits. A diesel sub in this situation is in pretty deep poo-poo since it doesn't have the speed to catch up with the SAG or fast convoy, and also lacks the speed and diving depth to get outa there before the helos start dipping their sonars.

This situation got even worse when the opening long-range shot was against one of the outer screen ASW escorts. The SAG/convoy would turn around and run, and there was no way an AI-controlled submarine would get into position for a shot on the HVUs.

As such, limiting the firing range from 'max theoretical' to 'max practical' the AI was much more successful. It would wait for the targets to get real close before shooting off torps and sinking ships in quick succession.

The AI still does the target/speed evaluation, but practical firing range is limited to 6nm/8nm (depending on what we do next) for the above reasons.

[biosthetique]

In other words, you are saying that the AI you created does not allow anything to be done, but a 6/8nm max distance mark28 ADCAP mod 7.

Then we can shoot manually torps at a longer distance as long as we don't have a solution on the target?

So you want me to shoot at a tango only when I can see the white of his eyes?...I might as well ram him for all intent and purposes!...Does brushing incident count in the mission total points?

That is awesome!...OUSTANDING!...Coughing VERY loudly:oops:...not!....Come on!...Plimus is not gonna be very happy!

I am going back playing GCB2, because for it's value, it is the perfect game!

[emsoy]

Hm... not exactly... :hmmm:

We can easily lift the practical firing range limitations and let the AI shoot at any target within kinematic range. In fact that's how it the sim handled it for a while. So the functionality is already there - we also do on-the-fly DLZ calcs for SAM/AAMs to allow weapons to be fired 'early' to hit a fast closing target like an ASBM. But for relatively slow tops and fast ships this leads to a lot of stupid shots as the weapons are usually detected early and the defender has lots of time to move out of the way.

You can BOL-fire torps at any time, and guide them to any target.

As for fighting other submarines, sub-vs-sub is like a knife fight in a phone booth. If you get a good firing resolution on a sub beyond 6-ish nautical miles it suggests there might be something seriously wrong with the sensor model. So the firing range limit is pretty much a non-issue there, at least as far as I know.

[biosthetique]

EMSOY, I am worried about you eyes.

All I have been talking about, was SubvsSub.

And NO, it does not have to be a brawl!.....

But it is OK now, I already canceled the charges on my CC!....The fish is already in the water, the wire just snapped!...Can you hear it acquiring the target, it is going active....

[Herman]

Then the decision to reduce the range, does not come from Jane's but from a lack of experience of shooting torpedoes at moving target from a submarine, in games like DW or SSN .

As I gathered, Harpoon is doing the same thing and they duplicated a Harpoon inaccuracy.

Realism is impossible I agree, but accurate data is possible, and decreasing a torpedo range under the excuse of one evading submarine, and the player unable to understand what is going on, to rationalize one size fits all, ignoring willingly any other case of submarine contact and following maneuvers is unacceptable in my book at that game price.

I think that your mathematics, calculations, and logic are correct. You understand that the reduced firing range was a Harpoon work-around solution to help the AI so that the targets could not run away. Although the firing range might be only 6nm, the fuel range was usually 20nm or so. The 14nm difference between firing and fuel range was to allow the torpedo to catch the target.

The PlayersDB also used this work-around solution, but not all H3 databases do. Some databases used the ideas you postulated (firing range = fuel range). I have tried them and I have never been hit by a torpedo fired against me. Against AI targets, the fuel=firing range databases seem okay since the AI might continue sailing right into the torpedo. Against a human, the AI-fired torpedoes are easy to escape.

Harpoon is hampered by the fact that the ships can turn and accelerate instantly. MNO uses a physics package to restrict units from instantaneous turns or acceleration. This helps, but only serves to reduce the chase range. Instead of needing 14nm to catch a target, it might only need 8-10nm. It is an improvement, but still not a perfect solution.

I think your ideas are good. The blanket firing range of #nm is easy for players and DB editors to use because it is fixed. Unfortunately, DB editors must make assumptions on the behaviour of the target. For example, PlayersDB assumes that the targets will run at 35kts to escape. Therefore, targets that are slower or faster than this basic assumption are still governed by the same firing range.

Your idea to have the firing range calculated according to the data from the target is very sophisticated and complex. By incorporating target data, you would know the max speed and manoeuvrability of the target and thus the torpedo would be allowed to fire at longer ranges when engaging a lumbering merchant vessel capable of only 20kts as opposed a shorter engagement range for an agile frigate capable of 30 knots. The firing solution would allow for X seconds for the ship to turn and X seconds to accelerate in the opposite direction. Your suggested firing solution would be very advanced.

I think it would be great. Unfortunately, both Harpoon and MNO games seem to rely upon pre-calculated solutions. I think you have a great concept, though. :)

[biosthetique]

Thank you Herman, it is appreciated.

It always feel good when someone reads thoroughly what you write, and understands it.:up:

After those good words, I am going to read your review now!

[FERdeBOER]

I'm perfectly ok with the AI using the 6nm limit. I just would like to be able to use the fuel range for me (and multiplayer in the future). And, if I miss, it's my problem. :D

[Herman]

I'm perfectly ok with the AI using the 6nm limit. I just would like to be able to use the fuel range for me (and multiplayer in the future). And, if I miss, it's my problem. :D

Some of us have thought about your idea for Harpoon. Because we are able to modify Harpoon databases, there were some people who thought about creating scenarios and databases with the longer engagement ranges for MP sessions. That way, a player could fire at longer range, but had to accept the possibility that his weapon would run out of fuel before reaching the target.

This remains a possibility if you wish to spend the time and effort to modify databases. However, most Harpoon database editors did not make the change since a human player could always fire the torpedoes on Bearing-Only-Launch and then take control of them via the guidance wire.

[emsoy]

I'm perfectly ok with the AI using the 6nm limit. I just would like to be able to use the fuel range for me (and multiplayer in the future). And, if I miss, it's my problem. :D

I've added your request to the bug/feature tracking database, requesting an option for the human player to manually fire torps at targets out to the torp's max kinematic range. Have given it priority Major.

Thanks! :D

[FERdeBOER]

I've added your request to the bug/feature tracking database, requesting an option for the human player to manually fire torps at targets out to the torp's max kinematic range. Have given it priority Major.

Thanks! :D

Thanks to you!