ESM question, and Harpoon vs. TASM question

[Avatar]

Hello,
In the sim, the Naval Inst. info lists the 688(I) as having an EW: BLQ-10(V) as intercept, however in Tom Clancy's "Submarine" it is listed as a WLR-8(V) ESM. My question: Is the BLQ-10(V) the ESM or is the WLR-8(V) the esm, and if not, what are these two?
Also, does anyone carry Harpoons on their US subs (in DW)? My only AS missiles are the TASM. I made a littoral water scenario between a 688(I) and a Udaloy DDG, and most of my TASM were soaked up by the DDG's defenses. Would the Harpoon have been a better ASM? I remember the ol' Microprose "Red Storm Rising" manual stating that the Harpoon has a lower alt and "pop-up" terminal executing manuver that makes it harder to shoot down than the TASM. Is this correct for DW?
many thanks, and happy new year folks.

[Dr.Sid]

In DW, harpoon is smaller, faster, with smaller payload. I think there is no difference in flight profile. It is usefull for small fast boats. For large slow ships without AA use TASM, they are pretty useless for anything else.
For targets with good defense, use torpedo.

[Pisces]

In DW, harpoon is smaller, faster, with smaller payload. ...

I've heard this often but it's not true. Both stock-1.03 and LWAMI 3.02- database show 510 (knots) for the Harpoon, TASM and TLAM with DWEdit 1.1.22.1. I haven't fired them often, but I never noticed much difference in the distance they covered before they got shot down. If there is a difference it would probably because of different radar reflectivity values. Maybe in RL Harpoon is faster.

[Sea Demon]

I think the RL Harpoon is probably alot more useful than what you will see in any game.

At any rate, I find both Harpoon and TASM very useful. But only launched in salvos of 6 or more at less than 10 Nm from target. Of course you can't be closer than 5 Nm to use these weapons. So therefore my parameters are for Harpoon and TASM......6 or more at any SAG.....Be at least 5 Nm away.....no more than 10 Nm!

I've also found the inverse true for Akula and Kilo (368 Klub). In LWAMI, Ticonderoga and Arleigh Burke are tough AAW ships. You need a similar school of thought for their supersonic SS-N-27 and Klub SSM's. I once loaded all internal and external Akula tubes with SS-N-27 ASM's and fired at a SAG that was positioned 30,000 meters away. All 14 missiles were shot down by Arleigh Burke and Ticonderoga. Of course I'm sure there could be some way to play around with the enable range. I enabled them pretty early in their flight to target.

[Rip]

The WLR8 is the older ESM system and is very similar the the one that was installed on some carriers. Minus jamming and such. The newer more digitally enhanced systems were the WLQ-4 (Sea Nymph) for the 637s relacing the WLR-6 and the WLQ-10 replaced the WLR-8 on the newer classes.

This tells you about as much about it as I could tell you without getting shot.

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/assets/1018.pdf

Rip

[Avatar]

Thanks for the info on the ASM's. I think I'm activating them way too early. But it seems that if the Ships have their Air search (or maybe surface search?) radars on, they'll probably know the missiles are inbound and make efforts to shot them down.
Also, thank you for the link about ESM. I don't want classified info, just to know which is what and what does what. I go to the ships info section of the sim and copy the information down just so I can have bed time reading. I have been comparing the info in the Microprose RSR manual, with that of 688(I)HK, SC, and DW of the Improved LA class. I like to drive the USS Columbia, cuz I went to school at the University of South Carolina. Go gamecocks!
anyway, thanks again for the info. I'm going to try setting the activation points closer to the targets and see what happens.
Also, youre right in saying that the Mk48ADCAP is the way to go in attacking tougher surface vessels. Nothing beats the "wish me dead."

[Avatar]

While I'm here,
If you go to Youtube.com and type in Dangerous Waters you'll see the DW-trailer. My game doesnt have big pieces of ship blowing off the ship and my FFG crew doesnt call "vampire." I have patch 1.03, but that's it, I dont have LWAMI patch. should I get this patch?

[SeaQueen]

Also, does anyone carry Harpoons on their US subs (in DW)? My only AS missiles are the TASM.

I carry both. That allows me to make two cruise missile attacks. The first is a salvo of 16 missiles at over 100Nmi away with the TASM. The second is at ~60Nmi, with 4 Harpoons.

I made a littoral water scenario between a 688(I) and a Udaloy DDG, and most of my TASM were soaked up by the DDG's defenses. Would the Harpoon have been a better ASM?

Not necessarily. TASMs in DW are slower and easier to shoot down but you can shoot more of them and compensate. On the other hand, the Harpoons are faster and more difficult to shoot down, but the salvo size is limited by how many torpedo tubes you have. If it was me and I had the opportunity, I'd shoot both, popping off the TASMs first from a longer range, closing, shooting off a salvo of Harpoons next, then closing to finish it off with torpedoes. If you got 'em shoot 'em, I say.

I remember the ol' Microprose "Red Storm Rising" manual stating that the Harpoon has a lower alt and "pop-up" terminal executing manuver that makes it harder to shoot down than the TASM. Is this correct for DW?
many thanks, and happy new year folks.

Wow... to this day I think Red Storm Rising was the most fun subsim ever made. I really miss Microprose. They made the best games.

I don't think DW models things like terminal maneuvers and what not. From what I could tell, the missile's speed is the biggest indicator of it's single shot effectiveness against a given target, because a faster missile means there is less of a window to shoot it down.

[Dr.Sid]

While I'm here,
If you go to Youtube.com and type in Dangerous Waters you'll see the DW-trailer. My game doesnt have big pieces of ship blowing off the ship and my FFG crew doesnt call "vampire." I have patch 1.03, but that's it, I dont have LWAMI patch. should I get this patch?

AFAIK this movie is somehow forged. It is not actual DW engine, although it looks much like it.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

While I'm here,
If you go to Youtube.com and type in Dangerous Waters you'll see the DW-trailer. My game doesnt have big pieces of ship blowing off the ship and my FFG crew doesnt call "vampire." I have patch 1.03, but that's it, I dont have LWAMI patch. should I get this patch?

It should call Vampire. LW's LWAMI is just Doctrine and Database (a bunch of text files really) so it should have nothing to do with it. Make sure you've got radars running and the missiles are in a position where you have even a slight chance of actually detecting them - DW is pretty "generous" in announcing missile and torp launches but at some point even DW won't give you the warning.

Also, does anyone carry Harpoons on their US subs (in DW)? My only AS missiles are the TASM. I made a littoral water scenario between a 688(I) and a Udaloy DDG, and most of my TASM were soaked up by the DDG's defenses. Would the Harpoon have been a better ASM? I remember the ol' Microprose "Red Storm Rising" manual stating that the Harpoon has a lower alt and "pop-up" terminal executing manuver that makes it harder to shoot down than the TASM. Is this correct for DW?
many thanks, and happy new year folks.

There's no such thing as an evasive manuever in Dangerous Water missiles. All are straight runners. When I realized this, I changed the range of the SS-N-27's Stage 2 up to 60km - the real procedure does have the Stage 2 rocket come out 20km distance from the target, but it is supposed to zig before hitting. Since it won't zig, I decided to cram all the "zig" distance into straight run distance.

But I digress - anyway, no such thing as missile maneuvers, and evasive maneuvers cause the missile to spend more time in the WEZ - shootdown.

In stock DW, you should just stick to TASMs - they are the same speed and the same radar SL (50 on scale of 0-100). In LWAMI, Harpoon has a bit smaller RCS (40 vs TASM's 45).

Any way you cut it though, missiles are a pretty inefficient form of attack. Your only real chance is if you detect no signals on your ESM (the enemy is not radiating). If the radars are on, even with a SS-N-27 with its radar SL set on 40, expect to require like 6 just to get good hits on a lone Arleigh Burke.

Here's a better idea - just put 12 TASMs in the VLS seeing they won't hold anything else. Fling them at the enemy without any expectations, and plan to have to kill everyone with torpedoes.

[Bill Nichols]

In reality, all of the Navy's TASMs have been converted to TLAM. As for Harpoon, the U.S. Navy no longer considers it a useful weapon for submarines -- it cannot be carried by the Virginia-class and has been removed from other SSNs.

[Avatar]

I haven't played as the FFG in awhile, I cant remember if the crew announces vampire or not.
I dont think your crew announces a transient, which would really help. Although, I have seen a slight indication of transient when viewing the waterfall display. It's a slightly brighter spike than the actual contact line itself, but I must be looking at the waterfall inorder to know this is happening.
maybe that's for the next fix.
thanks for the info on the tasm and tlam, that's interesting that the virginia class cant use tasm. I guess it's better to attack with torpedoes with just about any ship or sub. Though, sometimes I try to be really quiet and sneak up on them which is probably not as accurate as real life, but kicking up to high speeds usually gets a couple of torps/asw missiles sent my way.
What tactics do most people use? fast attack or stealthy and quiet?
I guess it depends on where you are and how close you are and if things are heating up or not.

[Dr.Sid]

Sub is under water because of stealth. Stealth is it's only advantage. So you must go slow as long as it is possible.

[kage]

I haven't played as the FFG in awhile, I cant remember if the crew announces vampire or not.

If you have the CM autocrew on, they do.

Although, I have seen a slight indication of transient when viewing the waterfall display. It's a slightly brighter spike than the actual contact line itself, but I must be looking at the waterfall inorder to know this is happening.

Try LWAMI, where the missiles themselves create a lot of noise, and a bright spike.

I guess it's better to attack with torpedoes with just about any ship or sub.

Anti ship missiles are still very effective against targets without defenses. Ships like that are usually non-combatant, however.


The nature of my attacks depend on the target (convoy vs lone ship) and environment (long detection ranges or short, amount of neutral traffic in the area...) and of course the capabilities of my own ship. I've parked seawolves in front of convoys and let them meet wave after wave of 8 adcaps. I rarely run out. Though sometimes things become interesting and I have to evade torpedoes.

[Sea Demon]

In reality, all of the Navy's TASMs have been converted to TLAM. As for Harpoon, the U.S. Navy no longer considers it a useful weapon for submarines -- it cannot be carried by the Virginia-class and has been removed from other SSNs.

That may be true, but I still wonder why they consider the Harpoon "not useful" for submarines. Seems to me that they would have some useful purposes like interdicting enemy SAG's at places where they may not want allied surface ships or aircraft operating. Perhaps SSN's lying in deeper waters firing into an area where littoral waters are abundant and enemy SAG's have setup screens. I'm actually quite surprised they even removed the ability for Virginia's to be able to fire them at all. I wish I knew their reasoning. I'm not convinced that removing anti-ship missiles from American SSN's is really such a good idea.

[Rip]

In reality, all of the Navy's TASMs have been converted to TLAM. As for Harpoon, the U.S. Navy no longer considers it a useful weapon for submarines -- it cannot be carried by the Virginia-class and has been removed from other SSNs.
That may be true, but I still wonder why they consider the Harpoon "not useful" for submarines. Seems to me that they would have some useful purposes like interdicting enemy SAG's at places where they may not want allied surface ships or aircraft operating. Perhaps SSN's lying in deeper waters firing into an area where littoral waters are abundant and enemy SAG's have setup screens. I'm actually quite surprised they even removed the ability for Virginia's to be able to fire them at all. I wish I knew their reasoning. I'm not convinced that removing anti-ship missiles from American SSN's is really such a good idea.

There isn't any 1 specific reason. More than half a dozen. Some of which may still be a little sensitive so I will only point out the obvious. You have to realize that it isn't purely a matter of if a weapon is useful but if it is useful enough to justify consumption of a spot onboard. Mines are effective but are almost never carried unless the mission will involve using them.

One thing was the shift to more of a vetical external tube approach to submarine launched missles. The sub harpoon was encapulated version of the same one everyone else used. To have used it in external launchers would have caused some major reengineering. The tomahawk was much more suited for that role.

Another thing was that it's active radar homing could be fooled with newer countermeasures systems. It was also poor at target discrimination. Especially when launched OTH from a sub. Launching it into a dense contact enviroment meant having no idea who it may choose to go after. Even potentially a friendly.

Next target acquisition. If not getting targeting data from another source (which required being at PD and having a radio antenna up then the sub would need to use an RDF system (AN-BRD7 in the day) to figure out firing parameters. This thing had a sizable antenna and you would need multiple intercepts from substantial distances apart (due to long range of target)

They were very restricted as far as speed/depth launch conditions. Meaning at launch anyone seeing it launch not only knew where you were but had a damned good idea what speed and depth.

In the end these and other factors weighed together to make the space more valuable when loaded with other ordinance. Not that having a Harpoon on board would be useless. This isn't the first/only weapon this has happened to. Just one of the few publicly known about.

[loynokid]

The Harpoon and TLSMs have differences. The Tomahawks have a much longer range and a much bigger warhead so they would be ideal to shoot when you recieve a radio message telling you to shoot at target coordinates that are out of your Harpoons range. Harpoon's are faster and more agile. This means that they are harder to shoot down. They also skim the waves whereas the Tomahawks fly fairly high in the air. I usually stock up on Mk 48 ADCAPs and Harpoons, but since i am not you, and you might have a different playing style then me, you might choose differently. One strategy that i would recomend is to stock up with 16 TLSMs and the rest Mk 48s on a Seawolf. (this is for the mission where you have to destroy a convoy). You go up to missile launching depth right after you detect the convoy. Launch all 16 of your TLSMs at the center of the convoy and then dive to max operating depth and go all ahead flank for about 15 miles. while you are racing aross the bottom of the ocean, all of your targets will be frantically trying to avoid your missiles. get within 15 miles of the convoy and then launch your Mk 48s in volleys of 8. Try to stay in front of the convoy. When you have launched your last volley, cut all wires and make a 90 degree turn left or right. then go to 20 knots (max silent speed). They wont be able to catch you while they have about 32 ADCAPS chasing them around. you should be a safe distance away by the time that your fish explode. by this time the f-16 falcons should be coming your way and cleaning up the remaining ships.

(this is a scenarion from subguru.com/dwmissions.htm)

[ASWnut101]

What's a "TLSM"?

[Sea Demon]

There isn't any 1 specific reason. More than half a dozen. Some of which may still be a little sensitive so I will only point out the obvious. You have to realize that it isn't purely a matter of if a weapon is useful but if it is useful enough to justify consumption of a spot onboard. Mines are effective but are almost never carried unless the mission will involve using them.

One thing was the shift to more of a vetical external tube approach to submarine launched missles. The sub harpoon was encapulated version of the same one everyone else used. To have used it in external launchers would have caused some major reengineering. The tomahawk was much more suited for that role.

Another thing was that it's active radar homing could be fooled with newer countermeasures systems. It was also poor at target discrimination. Especially when launched OTH from a sub. Launching it into a dense contact enviroment meant having no idea who it may choose to go after. Even potentially a friendly.

Next target acquisition. If not getting targeting data from another source (which required being at PD and having a radio antenna up then the sub would need to use an RDF system (AN-BRD7 in the day) to figure out firing parameters. This thing had a sizable antenna and you would need multiple intercepts from substantial distances apart (due to long range of target)

In the end these and other factors weighed together to make the space more valuable when loaded with other ordinance. Not that having a Harpoon on board would be useless. This isn't the first/only weapon this has happened to. Just one of the few publicly known about.
Thank you Rip for answering. I appreciate your insight. I kind of understand the rationale for the Harpoon's currently that are in service. But if I understand it correctly, Harpoon II's correct the engagement envelopes, countermeasures issues, and a number of other things. I'm sure there are reasons that you can't say, due to security issues. I myself avoid topics on weapons I have actually fired (Mavericks ;)) for the same reasons. But looking at it from someone who has never fired a Harpoon, and only knows about Harpoons from open sources, I do see some usefulness to them.

I'm certain I could justify their existence and reasonably argue for why they should be deployed on US SSN's. I'm certain I could argue for the inception of Block II's on Virginia's. It's a shame they removed the ability to even use them on this platform. I know there might have been people who might have argued this back and forth behind the closed doors of the US Navy (Need to know basis) brass. As a voter and taxpayer, I've got to trust they made the right decision. But if we ever have to face China in the Taiwan straits, I'm hoping we're going to be using all options including the newer Harpoons on our SSN's. I myself see them as just another tool for our submarine sailors to use in a set of tactical situations.

[loynokid]

What's a "TLSM"?

TASM or whatever theyre called, its the tomahawk anti ship missile in DW