Sub physics - experts needed

[TopTorp '92]

When that thread (Dr. Sid) goes tactical let me know as I'd like to provide input.

By far this has been among the most interesting threads I have read in a long time. Only Bubblehead Nuke can provide the level of detail I see here.

However I must make a tactical insertion here because there is after all a tactical problem associated with all the engineering discussion. Earlier BH Nuke claimed that “[w]hen submerged there is NO AIR in the MBT's. You open the MBT vents and close them when you are fully submerged and the tanks are full of water.”

In fact we did cycle MBT vents once submerged to 150’. The idea was to remove trapped air as BH Nuke correctly identifies. Unfortunately there is still some air remaining in the tanks and the effects of this trapped air may not be detected on sonar until the ship makes a depth excursion or turns with enough roll to make the air bubbles shift causing the noise-tactical problem. Not only would we need to cycle vent valves once submerged but also we would need to complete an excursion combined with an additional vent cycle to provide an added measure of certainty in the removal of trapped air in the ballast tanks.

Finally this adjustment requires a tactical trade-off in that any self-induced noise may be detectible on another sonar platform. That’s why we always cycled vents once submerged to 150’ but had to live with the possibility that yet more air bubbles may appear after returning to shallow depth (150’ or above) after a period of operations at deeper depth.

TopTorp

[Dr.Sid]

Interesting ! I read microbubbles can live quite long and quite deep with rough sea or in the ship wakes. Can that be trouble ? Like microbubbles getting into the tanks (through lower openings) from outside ?

[TopTorp '92]

Interesting ! I read microbubbles can live quite long and quite deep with rough sea or in the ship wakes. Can that be trouble ? Like microbubbles getting into the tanks (through lower openings) from outside ?

Your biggest concerns are the bubbles in the ballast tanks after the ship submerges. I don’t know anything about micro bubbles in the wake (cavitation maybe?) or seeping in from the outside (seems a bit farfetched to me.) But the idea was that even if we cycled vents at 150’ there was always an additional concern that some air may return upon returning to shallow depth after operating deep for a period of time. Basically those microbubbles trapped in the ballast tanks are a non-issue until they become bigger bubbles as the ship changes depth from deep to shallow; don’t forget that water pressure at deeper depths keeps the bubbles small while the change in water pressure causes the bubbles to expand, making noise, on the way up.

[Dr.Sid]

Ok .. understood. :arrgh!:

[Bubblehead Nuke]

Hey there Top Torp, Long time no see.

As you have probably been reading, I have been trying to give some insights without breaking the rules.

[Dr.Sid]

I wonder .. how exactly are those 'rules' defined ? You are told what you can tell and what not ? Generally NDAs are more like 'you wont tell anything'. :arrgh!:

[Bubblehead Nuke]

I wonder .. how exactly are those 'rules' defined ? You are told what you can tell and what not ? Generally NDAs are more like 'you wont tell anything'. :arrgh!:

These rules are spelled out on a long form that you sign multiple times when you get out of the military. The length of these forms is dependant on your security clearance, what job you did, what kind of things that you did or may have been exposed to.

What to know the funny thing? You do not get a copy of what you signed off on saying what you can not talk about. You get to read it, sign it acknowledging that you read it and that you can be subject to or cause:

1) recall and face UCMJ at any time for the rest of your life
2) be tried for violation of the espionage act
3) compromise national security
4) create an international incident
5) possibly be subject to capitol punishment
6) create an embarressing situation for the United States

Those are some of the big bold type comments that I remember. As to what they pertained too, well, some I remember clearly still. Some are muddled with time.

Some of the rules are commen sense. We would no want to put our fellow shipmates at risk by describing methods and details. While we might lead you in the correct GENERAL direction, we will not give you the details of how things are exactly done. Even though I have been out for quite some time now, I could give you still give you enough detailed information that could help a potential enemy detect and/or sink our own ships.

Between a few of use that I have had conversations with on this forum, we could concievably give you the detailed operating procedures and characteristcs of every nuke boat that the United States has ever made. We could give some people in the navy right now a heart attack. Then we would have some knocks on our doors as we all got ready to go to prison for the rest of our LIVES.

I would not bet against the possibility that this forum is monitored by someone in the Department of Defense on a daily basis to ensure that one of us do not cross the line. I just wonder if the response would be a e-mail, a phone call, or a knock at the door. I, for one, do not intend to find out.

[Dr.Sid]

Yes .. I know we are walking near borders of 'something'.
As for the sim I sure value any bit of information, on the other hand we don't want you guys in trouble or even away from the forums !
We also don't need totaly perfect simulation. We only want to have it as realistic as we know. And where we don't know, it wont hurt :|\\

[Bubblehead Nuke]

Yes .. I know we are walking near borders of 'something'.
As for the sim I sure value any bit of information, on the other hand we don't want you guys in trouble or even away from the forums !
We also don't need totaly perfect simulation. We only want to have it as realistic as we know. And where we don't know, it wont hurt :|\\

That is how I have been playing it from day one. If you go back and review a lot of my posts I repeat this position quite a bit.

I am looking forward to TopTorp'92's input on tactical considerations. I plan to input some more of the engineering aspects of sub ops into the discussions from time to time. Why you might ask? Because there are things that you can do that improve your tactical position but trade off with operational constraints. Everything is a tradoff and you have to MANAGE your sub as well as fight it. I hope to have some input into making this a SIM and not an arcade game.

If there is ONE thing you do in the sim you are working on, make the crew somewhat scriptable and thus intelligent. Remove some of the micro-management from the captain overhead. I have posted about this on the SDK thread if you want to re-read it.

[Zachstar]

What you guys that were in the Navy ought to do in my view is look for papers the gov realeses to the public describing what you want to talk about. I HIGHLY doubt the .gov will gives reports to News or write papers for the public that will endanger anything.

Like deep within NASA.gov there is all sorts of PDFs of guides and manuals for the physics of the moon flights and shuttle flights that they have decided to make public.

Just make sure it is from a .gov site and is noted for use by the public I guess.

Public Domain is a wonderful thing! The .gov makes use of it all the time!

[Dr.Sid]

Yes .. I know we are walking near borders of 'something'.
As for the sim I sure value any bit of information, on the other hand we don't want you guys in trouble or even away from the forums !
We also don't need totaly perfect simulation. We only want to have it as realistic as we know. And where we don't know, it wont hurt :|\\
That is how I have been playing it from day one. If you go back and review a lot of my posts I repeat this position quite a bit.

I am looking forward to TopTorp'92's input on tactical considerations. I plan to input some more of the engineering aspects of sub ops into the discussions from time to time. Why you might ask? Because there are things that you can do that improve your tactical position but trade off with operational constraints. Everything is a tradoff and you have to MANAGE your sub as well as fight it. I hope to have some input into making this a SIM and not an arcade game.

If there is ONE thing you do in the sim you are working on, make the crew somewhat scriptable and thus intelligent. Remove some of the micro-management from the captain overhead. I have posted about this on the SDK thread if you want to re-read it.

As for the Autocrew, I want to have an option as a captain to sip your cofee and just say 'go there' and 'kill this please'. I don't even have to do something special. Because I want have AI boats same as player boats. Same switches, even if virtual. Same procedures like flooding tubes and opening doors, same sounds, same animations. So there will have to be such autocrew which will have actions defined and will know how to do it.
The micromanagement on the other hand is good when you want to simulate stations more then sub, like more people playing one sub together. Or you could even play sonar operator under virtual captain :|\\
I also want to have XO .. which will be your guide if you allow him to be. It will generally be the virtual captain and he will tell you what he would do at the moment.
The level of micromanagement must be agreed on in multiplayer, but that is no big problem.

[Zachstar]

That sounds great sid!

Could you make a topic on the project forum reposting that for discussion?

[Bubblehead Nuke]

Just make sure it is from a .gov site and is noted for use by the public I guess.



99.8% of the time, the things that I and others can tell you in roundabout ways will NEVER been released in any shape or form in a public domain article from the goverment.

What you COULD find might be some old WWII ops manuals. You might find some archives of ships readiness forms.

Things about ops and capabilities, no matter how washed over, watered down and censored are verboten. They do not exist without big red stamps on them. They sure as heck will not be on a public server.

[Dr.Sid]

One think I really like about SH3 and 4 is whispering in 'silent' mode. It really builds atmosphere.
How much is this used these days ? Is the silencing better ? What 'modes' are use d on sub ?
I plann to have at least 3 modes.
First there would be some 'peace time' set of rules. Safety first, everything allowed. Cavitation, radar, anything loud.
Then there will be some 'war time', with everything tuned to fight and stealth.
And then some 'really silent' mode, in which even diesels sets 0kts. Just for the moments when Red October is passing by.

Is this generaly wrong idea ?

[Bubblehead Nuke]

Is this generaly wrong idea ?
Yes, totally wrong.

First there would be some 'peace time' set of rules. Safety first, everything allowed. Cavitation, radar, anything loud.
Only time this will happen is when you are on the surface. If they can see you who cares if you are cavitating, making noise, etc. You can SEE it is a sub and that it is a hard thing to do anyway when they are underway on the surface.

Then there will be some 'war time', with everything tuned to fight and stealth.
This is S.O.P for a boat. When the hatches clang shut and you dive, this is the NORM. You are locked, cocked, and ready to rock. There are never any 'peacetime' patrols. You operate as if you are going head to head with the varsity at any time.

The change from 'peace' to 'war' mode is more a matter of mindset, not operational procedures. It would take about 30 seconds to change that mindset (General Quarters!!)

And then some 'really silent' mode, in which even diesels sets 0kts. Just for the moments when Red October is passing by.
Rig ship for Ultra Quiet. That is what we called it. You can still operate but due to some of the things you change, you can only do this for so long and maintain peak efficency.

Above in this thread I said I was going to input some engineering into the sim? That is where the above you will see examples of what I am talking about. That is a discussion to have at a later time. I am collecting public domain data to give you general ideas at this time. I will try to give you a good general foundation.

[Zachstar]

Just make sure it is from a .gov site and is noted for use by the public I guess.


99.8% of the time, the things that I and others can tell you in roundabout ways will NEVER been released in any shape or form in a public domain article from the goverment.

What you COULD find might be some old WWII ops manuals. You might find some archives of ships readiness forms.

Things about ops and capabilities, no matter how washed over, watered down and censored are verboten. They do not exist without big red stamps on them. They sure as heck will not be on a public server.
Well the .2 persa of stuff that is public domain will just have to do.

This is one of those times that people have to accept that some parts of this realism stuff are classified so "guessing" has to be made. This is perfectly acceptable because only the people that get into these boats will tell the difference.

Whatever yall can find in News Reports, NAVY public papers, .gov public articles, etc... that is public domain will work fine! Even if they are from WWII

[Bubblehead Nuke]

Dr. Sid,

Read page 160 in 'A Complete Idiots Guides to submarine'

That will give you some basic info. In fact, that whole chapter should be read and analyzed. I found most of that chapter online at google books for preview.

Here is the link:
http://books.google.com/books?id=W0_BL3_ImDIC&dq=the+complete+idiots+guide+to+submarines&pg=PP1&ots=jmVzji1uLQ&sig=0jQDVuLd-7mM3QHPjScYSiyStnQ&hl=en&prev=http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGLJ_enUS238US238&q=The+complete+idiots+guide+to+submarines&sa=X&oi=print&ct=title&cad=one-book-with-thumbnail

and yes, you can read most of the chapter that you might find interesting.

A majority of the noise from a sub is propulsion related. Extrapolate from what you read and it may give you a better insight into some things.

This is a publicily available book that talks about sub construction and operations. It will give you a good starting point on some principles of operation and how to control noise levels vs operational constraints.

And that folks, is ALL I could find in about 2 days of exhaustive searching of the internet and a public library. One book that had some decent starting points to consider. Everything else I could find was either JUNK, fiction, or fantasy.

They do keep a tight lid on things eh?

[Zachstar]

If they did not make it public domain... There was a good reason for it and we just have to accept that.

Let me ask you this. HOW deep must the realism go before people that serve on these vessels don't think it is stupidly unrealistic?

I mean common 2 days man? Is that aspect THAT important? Only yall would notice the unrealistic part anyway right?

I think if it can beat DW on realism even SLIGHTLY it will be enough in my view.

[sonar732]

One thing I would like to see is on the sonar side. The level of experience of the operator is of importance. I'm not for sure on how much I can tell you of my experience on the boat and how we staffed the stacks...so I'll leave it at that.

[Bubblehead Nuke]

If they did not make it public domain... There was a good reason for it and we just have to accept that.

Let me ask you this. HOW deep must the realism go before people that serve on these vessels don't think it is stupidly unrealistic?

I mean common 2 days man? Is that aspect THAT important? Only yall would notice the unrealistic part anyway right?

I think if it can beat DW on realism even SLIGHTLY it will be enough in my view.

Is it that important? That would be hard to explain at this point. Later, if Dr. Sid can pull this sim off, I think you will be shocked at how important it might be.

Some of the biggest things are some of the most mundane sounding.

[Zachstar]

Maybe contact the US NAVY then and ask them if they will see if they can make public domain info to make it more realistic?

Otherwise I can only say use the WWII docs?

[TopTorp '92]

Hey there Top Torp, Long time no see.

As you have probably been reading, I have been trying to give some insights without breaking the rules.

I tend to keep it simple . . .stupid (KISS.)

Keep up the good work. Maybe the sim guys will strike a better trade-off between a game that sells and a sim that educates.

I monitor the threads and add perspective when I think it appropriate. Unfortunately modelling tactical considerations is much more difficult than modelling engineering factors. However, I must add that Bill comes up with some really good scenarios. Very good.

To be honest I have trouble organizing knowledge that was/is unclassified separate from the other knowledge (the Top Secret stuff) that could potentially endanger lives or worse become self-incriminating.

You know I think I read somewhere that either DW or Sub Command has been used to train Naval Academy students as some kind of introduction to submarine operations and general warfare. If any of you guys can confirm, I'd like to know.

Top Torp

[Dr.Sid]

Thanks for another info. I'm currently fightinh terrain rendering again, just so you know. I already implement final design (at least of distribution of heightmaps).

[Bubblehead Nuke]

I tend to keep it simple . . .stupid (KISS.)

Keep up the good work. Maybe the sim guys will strike a better trade-off between a game that sells and a sim that educates.



I try to keep is simple, but you know as well as I do that some people do not have an 'I believe' button and it takes a little more to make it understandable.

As for the classified vs unclassified stuff?? I just try and be broad in scope and paint large pictures that give a general idea of the scene. You know, keep the topic out of focus somewhat.

[Zachstar]

I tend to keep it simple . . .stupid (KISS.)

Keep up the good work. Maybe the sim guys will strike a better trade-off between a game that sells and a sim that educates.


I try to keep is simple, but you know as well as I do that some people do not have an 'I believe' button and it takes a little more to make it understandable.

As for the classified vs unclassified stuff?? I just try and be broad in scope and paint large pictures that give a general idea of the scene. You know, keep the topic out of focus somewhat.

To be honest that may not be the best idea either.

It may gain a bit of realism but also may be getting dangerously close to the line here. It is a subsim and not worth getting a phone call from the Navy about.