Index of Stickied topics + RA Mod Discussion here

[Mau]

Something strange. Played the scenario with the Alfa (Spec Op....). Looks great! However a Krivak III is just passing by (I would say less than a 1000 yards and the lookout is not even reporting it. I can see it when I am on the bridge however when I go back on the map I still can`t see it and cannot see it on the 3D view.

Am I doing something wrong? If I put show Allies I can see it but I do not need to do it to see it and being recognized by the lookout.
As well witht the OHP, when passing just beside another ship, the Link shows high for confidence and still low for Lookout. Very strange....
Thank you

[whiskey111]

Driving Udaloy gives me a lot of enjoyment. But in fight vs OHP it hase no chance. The main reason is a big advantage of speed SM-1 missle. Maybe the chance for Udaloy will be firing salvo of eight missiles capability ?
And one question: I know that Udaloy is just a repainted OHP but it will be possible to make it guns firable ?

[goldorak]

Driving Udaloy gives me a lot of enjoyment. But in fight vs OHP it hase no chance. The main reason is a big advantage of speed SM-1 missle. Maybe the chance for Udaloy will be firing salvo of eight missiles capability ?
And one question: I know that Udaloy is just a repainted OHP but it will be possible to make it guns firable ?

The Udaloy can fire its canon and from further out than the OHP.
You're doing it wrong if the OHP wins over the Udaloy.

[whiskey111]

Yes it's true. Udaloy's canon max range is advantage. But there is only one gun sooting, isn't it ? Any chance to fix it in the future ?

And another question: Lada project 677 sub is diesel electric but in game is nuclear powered sub. Why is it ? The same about U-212 (but this can be a an exception because of it unique engine).

[goldorak]

Yes it's true. Udaloy's canon max range is advantage. But there is only one gun sooting, isn't it ? Any chance to fix it in the future ?


I don't know about this.
On the other hand the in the next version the gun will fire in the correct angle.


And another question: Lada project 677 sub is diesel electric but in game is nuclear powered sub. Why is it ? The same about U-212 (but this can be a an exception because of it unique engine).

Modern diesel electric subs (including the lada) carry towed arrays.
The way DW is implemented is that only nuclear subs carry TA, diesel eletrics no. So a compromise was made, we use the nuclear sub interface for diesel electrics so as to give them the TA sensor, and at the same time limit their maximum speed to 20 knots.
This does not eliminate the problem of "battery going dead", but for all practical purposes either in single or multiplayer you're not going to exhaust the battery of a diesel eletric unless you're going always at top speed, or you play at normal speeds for weeks uninteruptly. So being a non problem the decision was made. I think it was for the better.

[whiskey111]

The way DW is implemented is that only nuclear subs carry TA, diesel eletrics no
I didn't know about this. Now everything is clear. And solution You have chosen was probably the best solution.

What have You in plan for the future to add/change in this mod ?
It will be possible to change polish Kilo and OHP to controlable ?

[Castout]

And another question: Lada project 677 sub is diesel electric but in game is nuclear powered sub. Why is it ? The same about U-212 (but this can be a an exception because of it unique engine).

Besides what Goldorak told you already these subs are equipped with AIP system which would enable them to remain submerged in weeks time compared to conventional electric boat.

[whiskey111]

I'm trying to deploy Special Forces on land object but with no positive result. There is no avialiable clickable option to choose.
Did You change something or just my fault ?

[Mau]

In the DW Spec Op scenario (involving the Alfa) I noticed that the Russian Krivak III passing by at some 1000 yds had no Link entity associated with it.
I found that weird since sometimes you have freighters that has Link which would be very hard to see in the real life.

Which brings me to that point again; With the OHP when a Lookout is reporting a ship it is giving a low confidence but at least this is being done automatically.
On a sub while on the bridge, I found that the only way you can have a contact being reported on the map it is when you are using the periscope (even on the surface) and we have to ``Mark`` it. Then you have a ``visual`` contact being reported on the map.

Is there another way? Can it be done automatically like on an OHP?

Thank you

[whiskey111]

Yes I can confirm this. In LWAMI and pure 1.04 game version it works. We have all contacts automatically updated on map. This is not so painfull now because subs are mostly underwater but in some special scenarios it will be a problem.

And what with my question about special forces deployment ? Still don't know how to use it :)

I have noticed that ASW torpedos tropped by helo are not always detected by Active Sonar Interceptor (and I don't hear their pings). Sometimes torpedos pinging me and somteimes not. I know that torpedos can lock on by passive mode but even through termal layer when I'm at 3 kts ??!! Is this natural or have I problems with my sound card ?
(Subs used: U-212, Akula II improevd).

[Sea Demon]

Any news on the next version?

[goldorak]

I have noticed that ASW torpedos tropped by helo are not always detected by Active Sonar Interceptor (and I don't hear their pings). Sometimes torpedos pinging me and somteimes not. I know that torpedos can lock on by passive mode but even through termal layer when I'm at 3 kts ??!! Is this natural or have I problems with my sound card ?
(Subs used: U-212, Akula II improevd).

Thats because the active intercept has a dead zone. Any active torpedo in that zone will not be detected. So beware and use passive sonar (towed array) for those bearings not covered by the active intercept.

[whiskey111]

Torpedo can be not detected by active intercept but is hearable for everyone in sub. Pings will not disappear when torpedo is in dead zone. This makes it very difficult because You don't know if torpedo is lock on You or not.

And why do You think that active intercept sonar receivers are not covering all directions ?

[goldorak]

And why do You think that active intercept sonar receivers are not covering all directions ?

Do You have proof of the contrary ? That 360 degrees active intercept systems are being used in real life ? :06:
In any case Lwami has no 360 degree active intercept and the mod strives for realism. So I think its no big problem for DWX.
Just beware of the limitations and how you can overcome them.

[whiskey111]

No, I don't have proofs because I haven't found any information about this. So this is why I asked about this. I'm just interested.

And what about disappearing torpedo "ping sound" ? Do You have the same effect or it just my sound card bug ?

[goldorak]

No, I don't have proofs because I haven't found any information about this. So this is why I asked about this. I'm just interested.


I don't know. And even if people knew the answer to your question I seriously doubt they could talk about it.
You'll just have to accept to play with a dead zone in active intercept.


And what about disappearing torpedo "ping sound" ? Do You have the same effect or it just my sound card bug ?

Uhm, some months ago I did a test in multiplayer, and the guy on the sub didn't hear the torpedo pings (it was an active torpedo launched from the mh-60r) in the dead zone.

[whiskey111]

I have this in single player. Not tested yet in multi player mode.

1. And what about special forces inflatable rubber craft ? It doesn't work for me at all. Is this not ended yet or some bug ?
2. There is problem when I was trying to make HF sonar malfunction for Oscar II sub by triger and script. Game crashes to desktop. Not ended or bug ?

[goldorak]

I have this in single player. Not tested yet in multi player mode.

Thats strange.
I remember doing tests with wire guided torpedos, making them go south and then come back up on my six (I was on a 0 course) and never heard them on the active intercept.
I think the dead zone is 60 degrees total, from 150 to 210, maybe a little bit more. The bearings are relative, so if you change course the 60 degree dead zone will of course change with your new course.

[whiskey111]

I'm not talking about active intercept.
The situation is that when torpedo is on my six (dead zone) I should hear pings hitting my subs body - when I'm not in active intercept station. But I don't hear it.

[pjb1]

I'm not talking about active intercept.
The situation is that when torpedo is on my six (dead zone) I should hear pings hitting my subs body - when I'm not in active intercept station. But I don't hear it.

I have a post earlier here about and it was discovered that there is a dead zone to your 180 or behind you there is no active intercept sensor on the screw and the TA doesnt pick up active sonar. I have talked to some people that do this for real and they say its realistic that you wont "hear" the pings hitting your sub body if you do then its real real close and you are about to die, the pinging you do hear is still coming thru the active intercept station. I understand what you mean by hearing pings if this was true then you would hear pings when playing surface ships but when in surface ship you cant hear any pings ever because there is no active intercept. If there was a way to turn off the active intercept station then you would never hear any pings no matter where torp was, does this make sense to you now. Also you should try browsing thru all the posts because this has been addressed earlier also many other things.

[whiskey111]

Thank You for answer pjb1. You set up a light in my mind now :D

[Imamar]

One question before I install this babe, So what is the policy these days? Adding playables to DW -- legal or illegal?

Dont eat your shorts RA-lovers, I just have to know.
:salute:

[caymanlee]

To disconnect physics of game.
It is impossible.
Having removed a mistake with DSRV- all defective physics of game will be broken.
Unfortunately is an irreplaceable loss...


confirm that. the key for the DSRV problem is " oceancurrent" or "ocean flow" simulated by Game physic simulation engine. because of that, sub can't stick steady in fixed position(you could actually see that in game: stope the sub, enlarge the map maximum, press "Enter" make a mark point, wait and see, sub move slowly away from the mark point )----which it is the fact in reality(that's why Virginia Class was designed with a new tech something call like "stay still at the fixed point underwater" for special force)-----------and that cause: the DSRV can go back at accurate launching point, but the sub no long at that point--------that's why no matter how good the doctrine is, the DSRV won't work-----compare with the "Subcommand" which has a properly working DSRV

[whiskey111]

And I discovered next bug: TLAM missles fired from US DDG can't hit the target. The are just flying over the target. Why ?

[goldorak]

And I discovered next bug: TLAM missles fired from US DDG can't hit the target. The are just flying over the target. Why ?

Did you read the documentation on how to set those TLAM's and what is the standard operating procedure ? There are constraints on how a TLAM can hit a target, please read the pdf.

[whiskey111]

I can't find any information in weapon manual how can I set AI units to forced them to targeting TLAM properly.

[pjb1]

I can't find any information in weapon manual how can I set AI units to forced them to targeting TLAM properly.
you might have to use scenario editor and give them a task to eliminate an object not really sure i make mostly multiplayer scenarios

[LoBlo]

Constructive Criticism on the Ohio Trilogy campaign. Seems like 99% damage to the missile targets should be sufficient for a mission kill instead of 100% damage. Its very diffulcult to destroy all 12 targets, as there is a aspect of random error to the Trident flight profile enough to insure that at least one of the targets will not be 100% destroyed. Is this realistic? Well maybe in the most abstract of senses, but in reality, high value targets have multiple warheads designated to ensure destruction. Not to mention that the Trident has 7 re-entry vehicles (not one large warhead).

Perhaps it would be better to designate a 80% damage trigger to the target goal rather than a complete kill.

On a side note, for bug reporting for future installments of the game, does the RA team think its possible to fix the launch announcement bug for verticle launch tubes 13-16 where the game fails to announce the launches (seems like the voice triggers are missnumbered to the launch tube number so its does not trigger the launch announcement).

[Pumpkin]

Hi,

DWX appears not to work with DWEdit. Is there a version of DWEdit out there that works with DWX? :hmmm:

[whiskey111]

pjb1 - You didn't understand what I'm trying to say. TLAM missles firing from AI US DDG are not hitting the target. Just flying over it and not hit it.
This what I was trying to describe to goldorak. But I think he missed that I was talking about AI DDG not controlable sub.

[goldorak]

pjb1 - You didn't understand what I'm trying to say. TLAM missles firing from AI US DDG are not hitting the target. Just flying over it and not hit it.
This what I was trying to describe to goldorak. But I think he missed that I was talking about AI DDG not controlable sub.

Ah sorry I must have missed it. I think the problem is how the TLAMs work (either launched from a controllable unit or AUI unit). Thats why I recommended to read the weapons manual. It states very clearly (and there was another discussion on this forum about the issue) that TLAM's have great difficulty following terrain and hitting targets inland. You HAVE to position the targets near the coast, or at least in a zone where the depression is not to big so as not to make the TLAM crash in the terrain.

If on the other hand you are targeting targets in the open (oil platforms etc...) and it doesn't work then I guess its a genuine bug.

[Sea Demon]

that TLAM's have great difficulty following terrain and hitting targets inland. You HAVE to position the targets near the coast, or at least in a zone where the depression is not to big so as not to make the TLAM crash in the terrain.


OK, I wasn't going to say anything because of my oversight in not reading the manual more carefully the last time. But that answers another one of my questions. This time, it's not me who's doing things wrong. :oops:

I hope this gets fixed. I sometimes like targeting TLAM's into more mountainous regions for potential scenarios...ala Iran. What happened during the modding which prevented this function from working???

[goldorak]

OK, I wasn't going to say anything because of my oversight in not reading the manual more carefully the last time. But that answers another one of my questions. This time, it's not me who's doing things wrong. :oops:

I hope this gets fixed. I sometimes like targeting TLAM's into more mountainous regions for potential scenarios...ala Iran. What happened during the modding which prevented this function from working???

I don't know. When I came across this "feature" during the beta test I thought it was a bug and reported it. If I recall correctly TLAMs worked more or less in Lwami and AT mods, but there is something in RA that prevents TLAMs from following the terrain and hitting the targets way inland.
I have no idea if it will be fixed. :oops:

[whiskey111]

Thank You Goldorak. I have another two questions:
1. termal layer - how it works in RAmod because I have a feeling that it is not so "strong" as it is in LWAMI mod

2. I'm interesting in particularly subs noise level. Can You make some kind of a diagram of it, which will show us different noise at different speed in comparison to all other subs ?

[Pumpkin]

Hi,

DWX appears not to work with DWEdit. Is there a version of DWEdit out there that works with DWX? :hmmm:

Anyone know? :-?

[goldorak]

Thank You Goldorak. I have another two questions:
1. termal layer - how it works in RAmod because I have a feeling that it is not so "strong" as it is in LWAMI mod


You're mistaken on this point.
The intensity of the layer is obviously not constant because it depends on the specific ssp profile between mission and mission, but you can get pretty dramatic effects sometimes.


2. I'm interesting in particularly subs noise level. Can You make some kind of a diagram of it, which will show us different noise at different speed in comparison to all other subs ?

No no chart. You'll have to tabulate the values yourself.


Anyone know? :-?

The database is locked in this version. A future version will have an open database.

[whiskey111]

I have a question but it is not connectd now with RA mod.
Is this possible to add (in the nearest update/patch) a key combination for "antena up/down" order ? It will be very useful for people who play DW and use some kind of voice communicator (Ventrillo/Team Spek). There will be possibility to use this key combination and connect it to voice communicator order - volume mute/volume down.

This will add a huge upgrade to multi session games :)

[Hawk66]

just a question concerning mast/periscope detection (by radar): is this planned/fixable for RA? Would be cool :|\\

Anyway, thanks for your hard work!

[MR. Wood]

There is a way to simulate Mast dection for time being slightly brouch with say 2 ft of sail to where it makes a wake then just go deeper:arrgh!: to end it

[LoBlo]

Found a bug in the akula II model. Whenever a player passess 15 knots the bow planes wing out and disconnect from the model (instead of moving in).

On a side note. What's planned for DWX 1.1?

[LoBlo]

The database is locked in this version. A future version will have an open database.

Locked? Pooh. What's the fun in that.:down:. I wonder what program the Mod team is using to make their edits?:hmmm:

[fitzcarraldo]

[

On a side note. What's planned for DWX 1.1?[/QUOTE]

I make the same question...:yep:

Regards

Fitz :salute:

[Bob117]

hey i read a wikipedia article on surface ships and i was wondering if ots over the side torpedo decoys could be added to the ohp and the udaloy ddg? that would be so much better than just that towed decoy

[Pumpkin]

Locked? Pooh. What's the fun in that.:down:. I wonder what program the Mod team is using to make their edits?:hmmm:


Here's hoping this will be in DWX 1.2? :yep:

[dyshman]

Good news, everyone! (c)
new 3d-modell of victor 3 wiil be included in DWX 1.1
http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/showpost.php?p=107212&postcount=69
and Victor-s 1 and 2 will be playable!!!!
more news at redrodgers.com )))

[goldorak]

Good news, everyone! (c)
new 3d-modell of victor 3 wiil be included in DWX 1.1
http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/showpost.php?p=107212&postcount=69
and Victor-s 1 and 2 will be playable!!!!
more news at redrodgers.com )))


:yeah:

Any chance of extending playable units to the French Le Triomphant SSBN class ? There is already a very nice 3d model in the database. :06:

[dyshman]

any proposals about new units, missions and etc. please post at redrodgers.com
its main base of DWX-team, respect it)

[goldorak]

Sure thing, I'll ask on the redrodgers forum. :salute:

[Castout]

Good news, everyone! (c)
new 3d-modell of victor 3 wiil be included in DWX 1.1
http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/showpost.php?p=107212&postcount=69
and Victor-s 1 and 2 will be playable!!!!
more news at redrodgers.com )))

They are absolutely gorgeous!:yeah:

[LoBlo]

Here's hoping this will be in DWX 1.2? :yep:

On a side note. Are we sure the database is passworded? I know that's what someone had mentioned on the thread, but looks to me that its just a matter of the database being altered enough that DWEdit is out of date and unable to read the revised database. I may be wrong, can anyone confirm? Where's Ludger or JSteed gone off to....

[sertore]

On a side note. Are we sure the database is passworded? I know that's what someone had mentioned on the thread, but looks to me that its just a matter of the database being altered enough that DWEdit is out of date and unable to read the revised database. I may be wrong, can anyone confirm? Where's Ludger or JSteed gone off to....

Hi LoBlo, I confirm. The RA database is not password protected, just few little updates to personalise few files in the database set, to let DWedit not able to manage the new files format. Obviously there are some methods to get the data overtaking the blocks but it will be not necessary in few weeks, at the releasing of the new RA update due to the declaration by russian modders to remove the protections and open the database at all. :up:

BTW, someone knows any rumor on possible updates on doctrines related to torpedo search and efficiency in the new RA 1.1 (I mainly mean SUBROC, but even other foretaste will be appreciated)?

[LoBlo]

Hi LoBlo, I confirm.

Thanks for the reply. I felt as much. If I knew hex I would probably make the changes myself, but alas, I never got to the course in college. Guess we will just have to wait. Otherwise, if anyone has a corrected version of DWEdit, send me a PM.

BTW, someone knows any rumor on possible updates on doctrines related to torpedo search and efficiency in the new RA 1.1 (I mainly mean SUBROC, but even other foretaste will be appreciated)?

I was hoping the subrocs will be fixed as well. The parachutes are opening way too early. Its probably a doctrine related issue, but its hard to trace the doctrines exactly without the database.

[whiskey111]

New Model looks great !
How about the Special Operates Team deploying form new subs. Any chance to make it working ?

[-GrayOwl-]

Hi LoBlo, I confirm. The RA database is not password protected, just few little updates to personalise few files in the database set, to let DWedit not able to manage the new files format. Obviously there are some methods to get the data overtaking the blocks but it will be not necessary in few weeks, at the releasing of the new RA update due to the declaration by russian modders to remove the protections and open the database at all. :up:

BTW, someone knows any rumor on possible updates on doctrines related to torpedo search and efficiency in the new RA 1.1 (I mainly mean SUBROC, but even other foretaste will be appreciated)?

Victor I and II mine weapons:

PMR-2 & PMT-1 Mine complex
PMT-1 Mine Complex with Torpedo payload.
ASW/ASuW Capability
Length: 7.8 m (25.6 ft)
Diameter: 533 mm. (21 in)
Weight: 1.7 tons
Effective Depths: 200 - 400 m (656 - 1312 ft)
Range: 3 nmi after leaving the tube (For game purpose)
Payload: MGT-1 torpedo. 28 kts/6000 m (6562 yd); depth 400 m (1312ft); 80 kg TNT.
Passive Acoustic channel fuze for both device. 1500 m.Max detectable Capability.

PMR-2 Mine Complex with rocket-mine payload.
ASW Capability
Length: 6 (19.68 ft)
Diameter: 533 mm. (21 in)
Weight: 1.7 tons
Effective Depths: 50 - 600 m (164 - 1968 ft)
Range: 4 nmi after leaving the tube (For game purpose)
Passive Acoustic channel fuze.
Payload:Rocket-mine.
Speed: - 156 kts (288 km/h);
Range: 600 m (656 yd);
Warhead: 350 kg "Sea Mix" Explosive.
Fuze: Contact Detonator

NOTE : In the 1960s, basically new active mine systems, i.e. wide-band rocket-assisted mines and mine-torpedoes were developed. Mines not only retain advantages over other underwater weapons, but have acquired a new capability to attack remote targets within a relatively short time and with all elements of surprise.
The first active mine systems came into service with the Navy in the early 1970s. They were represented by the PMR-2 antisubmarine rocket-assisted mine, which is unrivaled in the world, and the PMK-1 mine system (the export version of the PMR-2 system), which was basically a combination of a moored mine and a fast underwater automatically targeted rocket, as well as the PMT-1 antisubmarine mine-torpedo (the export version of the PMK-2 system) - a combination of a moored mine and a small antisubmarine homing torpedo. The caliber of the PMK-2 weapon is 533 mm and its length is not more than 6 m. The distinguishing feature of these systems is that though they are basically active mines, they attack targets themselves. The equipment of these mine systems detects and classifies an underwater target, determines its course and running depth, optimizes the target intercept trajectory and generates a command to launch either a rocket, which runs at a speed of about 80 m/s, or torpedo.
The warheads (rockets or torpedoes) are accommodated in sealed launchers planted at great depths. There are no effective countermeasures against them today. Operation of the target detection, classification and dynamic parameter determination systems is based on acoustic principles.

[Castout]

I'm reporting possible bug in DWX. I found this when playing online.

1. ASCM sub launched surface missiles tend to veer off course off the target thus missing their prey altogether. Range to target was alittle more than 5nmi.

2. Some ASCM missile and torpedoes seemed to launch at the wrong direction altogether even when they are assigned the correct target track.

That's it
Wishing Merry Christmas to all DWX modders :salute:

[dyshman]

see redrodgers forum. new scrennes added. we present to you attention new 3d-model of french submsrines: Rubis and Amethyste. all driveable.
http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/showthread.php?p=107596#post107596

[whiskey111]

I think TLAMS fired from AI surface units doesn't work at all. It's the big bug. They just avoid any land target like a barrier. Funny think is that TLAMS fired by AI subs works :)
(I'm talking about US units)

Any chance to fix it in the following version of RA mod ?

[Castout]

see redrodgers forum. new scrennes added. we present to you attention new 3d-model of french submsrines: Rubis and Amethyste. all driveable.
http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/showthread.php?p=107596#post107596


Impressive model! :yeah:

When can we get our hands on the new RA?:yep:

[goldorak]

Impressive model! :yeah:

When can we get our hands on the new RA?:yep:

1-2 weeks for further testing of the new drivable units.
But as always take that estimate with a huge grain of salt. ;)

[Bill Nichols]

Any reason why my opening movie has no sound?

[goldorak]

Any reason why my opening movie has no sound?

Maybe they forgot to include the sound. :-?
I've just checked and yes no sound in the opening movie.

[whiskey111]

How to deploy Special Forces from Lada and Uboot Type 212 ?
When I click on the target there is no option to do it.

[Castout]

1-2 weeks for further testing of the new drivable units.
But as always take that estimate with a huge grain of salt. ;)

HUGE is the keyword :D

[whiskey111]

I know that this is not place for this but:
anybody know how to register in Red Rogers Forum ?
Unfortunately I don't know cyrylica.

And one more thing:
When human Heli is not controlled by human than it start to fly north east. Is there any way to fix it ?

[-GrayOwl-]

Any reason why my opening movie has no sound?

We did not attach any sound in a clip. Simply for economy of the size of archive.

[Bill Nichols]

Thanks. I was worried something was wrong with my setup.

:arrgh!:

[Pumpkin]

1-2 weeks for further testing of the new drivable units.
But as always take that estimate with a huge grain of salt. ;)

Any news sir? :arrgh!:

[cj95]

I'm still trying to figure this mod out.

It seems to run oaky which is good, and the new models are fantastic.

The problem I am having 9if it is a problem) is that sub vs sub detection has gone out the window.

Literally I have to be within a mile or so to even start to hear the enemy which quickly turns things intoa knife fight.

Or...as is usually the case, I am crawling around the deep for hours with nary a sound to be heard....kinda dull.

Im not arguing for not being realistic, but whats the use of a weapon that cant even hear an enemy 5 miles away? Its kinda like just randomly bumping into each other as opposed to tactics or manuvering for position.


That said, Im willing to learn, and hoping for advice:salute:

[goldorak]

Any news sir? :arrgh!:

No no news. I'm sure once the modders finish they'll let us know. ;)

[Castout]

Sometimes often enough the launched torpedoes will launch at the wrong direction(completely wrong bearing or slightly off but still off annoying enough) to the ideal trajectory even though they were assigned to the right target and the TMA doesn't change. This is my biggest gripe with DWX. It's a really great mod. I hope they fix this in their upcoming version :yep:

[fitzcarraldo]

I'm still trying to figure this mod out.

It seems to run oaky which is good, and the new models are fantastic.

The problem I am having 9if it is a problem) is that sub vs sub detection has gone out the window.

Literally I have to be within a mile or so to even start to hear the enemy which quickly turns things intoa knife fight.

Or...as is usually the case, I am crawling around the deep for hours with nary a sound to be heard....kinda dull.

Im not arguing for not being realistic, but whats the use of a weapon that cant even hear an enemy 5 miles away? Its kinda like just randomly bumping into each other as opposed to tactics or manuvering for position.


That said, Im willing to learn, and hoping for advice:salute:

I haven´t that problem...Yes, it´s very difficult (and realistic), hear and detect a sub from my sub, but that works fine for me. I use autocrew for all the stations. The sonar autocrew detects the contacts with some delay, and the actualization of TMA is on the slowest side, but that seems realistic for me.

Regards and happy new year to all!

Fitz :salute:

[LoBlo]

Here's a couple of simple request for the modding team.

1. Is it possible to change "Biologics" classification in the NavMap to the specific type. Meaning that instead of assigning the generic "biologics, we would be able to assign shrimp, whale, shark, dolphins, orca all seperately.
1a. Can each of the different biologics have a distinct sound that we would be able to identify from the sonar ourselves? Whales, orcas, dolphins, etc could be distinguished based on what we hear on the sonar screen.

2. One of the dissapointments with littoral combat is the emptiness of the shorelines. Buildings can be inputted on a scenario, but still only make for isolated specks on empty landscapes. How about creating very large and dominating models for bases, cities, skyscrapers, ports that are many times larger (lets say 10 times) than the current bases/buildings. Skylines that were huge compared to the current landbases/buildings/etc will add more life to the shoreline. I would love to look through a periscope and see a bustling New York skyline emptiness. The polygon count should be low of course.

3. Would it be possible to create an Ohio SSGN with 154 tomahawk missiles? I'm not sure how to accomplish this, but perhaps the weaponsloadout could be simulated by making the vertile launch tubes "reloadable" with tomahawks. Very very fast load times, and a large weapons capacity would be one method of simulating the platform.

4. Every submarine information source I see has the Ohio SSBN fielding at least the TB-16 array. Not sure why ingame they are equipping the outdated TB-15. Can they be upgraded?

[falconsix]

Even in the original DW the subs doesnt make any noise in the broadband sonar, unlike ships. Is it possible to add some effects like different screw noises for them? So you can identify a ship or sub with your own ear? This would be great. :yeah:

[Rosencrantz]

It was 14th of January 2010 and we were waiting, waiting once again...
Waiting for the 1-point-1, the RA mod under Russian thumb...
To surface like a rising sun, but not, of course, like the japanese one...
Da-da-da-da... La-la-la-la...



Too bad for the neighbours, but this waiting is making me both poetic and
musical...

Greetings,
-RC-

[Castout]

I've got some too


O Death

O death . . .




[to be continued]

I need further testing on it should be done when DWX 1.1 came out. :O:

On the serious note hope they come out with even better DWX!

[Delareon]

is there a way to get that Mod running on a german version of DW?

[-GrayOwl-]

[
is there a way to get that Mod running on a german version of DW?

Only For English Version - this it is.

Other version - not suppored.

[Delareon]

Yes i know its not supportet but it runs, simply change the naming of the DataBase files according to your language. In my case it was a change from *.eod to *.god for example.

Everything works fine so far with 2 exceptions, the Typhoon and the Type 212 didnt work (the German Version only the 212A from the Italians works). Typhon misses some DB entry in german as the Errormessage said.

[-GrayOwl-]

Yes i know its not supportet but it runs, simply change the naming of the DataBase files according to your language. In my case it was a change from *.eod to *.god for example.

Everything works fine so far with 2 exceptions, the Typhoon and the Type 212 didnt work (the German Version only the 212A from the Italians works). Typhon misses some DB entry in german as the Errormessage said.

Text DLL's were specially edited.
You receive then English text instead of German.

[Delareon]

Thats no problem, i didnt care if the text is in german or english i just dont want to buy that game again in a english version.

Is there a way to edit that Text.dlls myself? Maybe i can fix that Typhoon Problem then.

[LoBlo]

Here's some more request.

1. Seeing that the Red October is a hypothetical platform, can we upgrade it to carry the UGST as well as a towed array?

2. Can the RA team create a drivable Littoral Combat Ship USS Freedom? It could create a model. Replace the OHP gun with a rapid fire 57mm gun. Change the Phalanx to a ESSM Launcher, and change the Missile launcher to a NETFIRES PAM. Alternatively one could use the Missile launcher as the ESSM and exclude the netfires. The ship speed could be set to 47 knots top speed. :cool:

3. Will the teem release an updated DWEdit that we could use to view the platform specifications such as sound levels, sensor sensitivities, etc.

4. Some of the platform descriptions are a little short. How about adding a little more history and dept to the database descriptions.

5. Thanks for the hard work guys. Definately the number one favorite game on my PC again!

[-GrayOwl-]

Here's some more request.

1. Seeing that the Red October is a hypothetical platform, can we upgrade it to carry the UGST as well as a towed array?

2. Can the RA team create a drivable Littoral Combat Ship USS Freedom? It could create a model. Replace the OHP gun with a rapid fire 57mm gun. Change the Phalanx to a ESSM Launcher, and change the Missile launcher to a NETFIRES PAM. Alternatively one could use the Missile launcher as the ESSM and exclude the netfires. The ship speed could be set to 47 knots top speed. :cool:

3. Will the teem release an updated DWEdit that we could use to view the platform specifications such as sound levels, sensor sensitivities, etc.

4. Some of the platform descriptions are a little short. How about adding a little more history and dept to the database descriptions.

5. Thanks for the hard work guys. Definately the number one favorite game on my PC again!

If Red October had TA - what for then to do turn away “Crazy Ivan”?
With UGST - the same moment. 1977-78 year ( On Conn table Janes Book 77-78 year ) :DL.


That that you will see in a Database can surprise you.
However - the installation of real parameters, will not be simple to work!
Put to the helicopter of weight of 4 tons and he will fall in water.
Or ballistic missile - real weight of 80 tons – and missile never fly. It is simple a phenomenon from SCS.

[Castout]

Is there a chance for obsolete diesel electric submarine to be playable say like the Foxtrot or the Ming class.

Love to play some Cuban missile crisis scenario in the foxtrot ...

Just an idea

[LoBlo]

If Red October had TA - what for then to do turn away “Crazy Ivan”?
With UGST - the same moment. 1977-78 year ( On Conn table Janes Book 77-78 year ) :DL.


Is the Red October a 1970's platform? I was assuming it was a modern day hypothetical upgrade of the original Typhoon. A Typhoon II if you will... oh well, so far for a supersub of awesomeness.

That that you will see in a Database can surprise you.
However - the installation of real parameters, will not be simple to work!
Put to the helicopter of weight of 4 tons and he will fall in water.
Or ballistic missile - real weight of 80 tons – and missile never fly. It is simple a phenomenon from SCS.

I was thinking more on the lines of understanding the speed versus sound level profiles as well as the assigned sensor sensitivities more than the physical specifications.

[goldorak]

@ LoBlo : in the film the Red October carries no towed array.
The only thing the RA modders should add is a silent propulsion system.
I don't know how they could do that, maybe limit the top speed to 10-15 knots and set a S/N ratio of 0-1 ? Use the unused towed array switch in the navigation station to switch betwwen normal propulsion and silent propulsion ?
Anyway, the Red October with a towed array would be a heresy.
Its not as if you didn't have the choice with the other 2 typhoons available in RA so don't worry. You can always choose a typhoon with a towed array just not the Red October.

[fitzcarraldo]

Some news about the date of the 1.1 mod?:06:

Regards.

Fitzcarraldo

[LoBlo]

@ LoBlo : in the film the Red October carries no towed array.

How do you know that the Red October in THFRO didn't have a towed array? Maybe it was just never deployed as Soviet Naval Doctrine was to conserve extending TA until on a search mission as to cut back on equipment wear/tear/maintence.... hm...... Any platform sophisticated enough to have a waterfall would probably be sophisticated enough to have a TA.

The only thing the RA modders should add is a silent propulsion system. I don't know how they could do that, maybe limit the top speed to 10-15 knots and set a S/N ratio of 0-1 ? Use the unused towed array switch in the navigation station to switch betwwen normal propulsion and silent propulsion ?

I don't think the engine thrust/speed vs sound level artictexture is malleable enough for a two part propulsion system. Perhaps one could manipulate the snorkel function to serve as a 'silent drive off' button (and allowing higher speeds), but that would be tricky... otherwise it would be nice, and perhaps would be useful is modeling "silent speed" in some of the other platforms (speed below which the coolant pumps are off).

Questions for the RA team:
1. Is there a maximum dept for which MAD sensors won't detect a submarine. In the gameplay currently it doesn't appear to be one.

2. I'm curious of why the RA team modeled TLAM the way they did (with on/off radar searches). All the open source info I'm seen bascially has TLAMS working with GPS/inertialnavigation/surface mapping, not active radar searching. Can the group point to the sources of info?

[goldorak]

How do you know that the Red October in THFRO didn't have a towed array? Maybe it was just never deployed as Soviet Naval Doctrine was to conserve extending TA until on a search mission as to cut back on equipment wear/tear/maintence.... hm...... Any platform sophisticated enough to have a waterfall would probably be sophisticated enough to have a TA.


Well since in the film the Red October DOESN'T have a towed array, and the film is based on the book of the same title in which the Red October still DOESN'T have the towed array. I'd say its pretty clear that in the fictional universe in which the Red October lives it DOESN'T have the towed array.
If you're still not convinced ask Tom Clancy directly why the hell he didn't give the Red October a towed array. :haha:

[cj95]

How about we let them focus on REAL WORLD subs and quit worrying about make believe ones?

:hmmm:

[-GrayOwl-]

@ LoBlo : in the film the Red October carries no towed array.
The only thing the RA modders should add is a silent propulsion system.
I don't know how they could do that, maybe limit the top speed to 10-15 knots and set a S/N ratio of 0-1 ? Use the unused towed array switch in the navigation station to switch betwwen normal propulsion and silent propulsion ?
Anyway, the Red October with a towed array would be a heresy.
Its not as if you didn't have the choice with the other 2 typhoons available in RA so don't worry. You can always choose a typhoon with a towed array just not the Red October.

Well. Red October now has two modes - movement on props and on hydrodynamical system.
However - the cinema (Hunt For the Red October) shows that silent run, was on speed 26 Kts.
After failure of system of movement, were switched on props, and Red October was CounterDetected, from the plane.
Which threw a torpedo. (before approach Neptun a mountains massive).

We are going to make a silent mode on the increased depths (for example below than 150-200 meters).
On depths above designated, Red October will run on system props.:yeah:

[-GrayOwl-]

How do you know that the Red October in THFRO didn't have a towed array? Maybe it was just never deployed as Soviet Naval Doctrine was to conserve extending TA until on a search mission as to cut back on equipment wear/tear/maintence.... hm...... Any platform sophisticated enough to have a waterfall would probably be sophisticated enough to have a TA.



I don't think the engine thrust/speed vs sound level artictexture is malleable enough for a two part propulsion system. Perhaps one could manipulate the snorkel function to serve as a 'silent drive off' button (and allowing higher speeds), but that would be tricky... otherwise it would be nice, and perhaps would be useful is modeling "silent speed" in some of the other platforms (speed below which the coolant pumps are off).

Questions for the RA team:
1. Is there a maximum dept for which MAD sensors won't detect a submarine. In the gameplay currently it doesn't appear to be one.

2. I'm curious of why the RA team modeled TLAM the way they did (with on/off radar searches). All the open source info I'm seen bascially has TLAMS working with GPS/inertialnavigation/surface mapping, not active radar searching. Can the group point to the sources of info?


1. The maximal depth MAD detect within the limits of 250 meters (helo mad).
Below MAD does not find out.

2. GPS adheres missile to system to a digital coordinate grid.
Earlier, at absence of system GPG, the TLAM should come on a coast, is strict in the certain points - for attachment to a digital coordinate grid (recollect 688H/K - the coordinate point of an entrance on ground) was always given at strike order.
At presents GPS it not became necessary - missile always receives the data about exact location.

The radar sensor employment for final (precision) aiming at target.

[goldorak]

How about we let them focus on REAL WORLD subs and quit worrying about make believe ones?

:hmmm:

:hmmm: no. The Red October is a status symbol. C'mon nobody seriously plays DW without at least having though of recreating a Red October scenario.
A modern subsim without the RO is like a WWII subsim without Uboats. :arrgh!:

[cj95]

I'd rather have a playable Skipjack, Oberon or a Type 209 instead of yet another variant of the Typhoon.

O dare I ask for....a Nautilus:yeah:



Seriously though I love the mod and have nothing but respect for the makers! Whatever you have is store is goingt o be awesome!:rock:

[Sea Demon]

O dare I ask for....a Nautilus:yeah:



Seriously though I love the mod and have nothing but respect for the makers! Whatever you have is store is goingt o be awesome!:rock:

Oh, Nautilus....Yes. Any of the American nuclear legendary boats of old (The first Seawolf, and USS Halibut).

Agree with you regarding the mod makers. :up:

[Bill Nichols]

I'd rather have a playable Skipjack, Oberon or a Type 209 instead of yet another variant of the Typhoon.

O dare I ask for....a Nautilus:yeah:



Nautilus! My old boat!!!

:ahoy:

[fitzcarraldo]

Nautilus! My old boat!!!

:ahoy:
:yeah::yeah::yeah::yeah::yeah::yeah::yeah:

Excellent election!!!

USS Nautilus!!!!

And for the russians, an Echo or a Charlie Class.

Regards

Fitzcarraldo :salute:

[Captain Sub]

Dear folks,

I have a question regarding the nature of RA mod.

Is it an add-on in a sense that it doesn't modifie but only add content or does it change behaviour of original content?


thanks

[fitzcarraldo]

Dear folks,

I have a question regarding the nature of RA mod.

Is it an add-on in a sense that it doesn't modifie but only add content or does it change behaviour of original content?


thanks

The mod add content (new drivable units in air and sea, new weapons), and it change some aspects of the game, about the weapons and difficulty of the missions (those are more realistics and more difficult to play). The mod have some "bugs", too. Please, read the posts of this forum and the official forum in Red Rogers (http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4912) for a complete discussion of the goodies and the "buggies" of the RA 1.0 mod.

Now, all we are watching the RA 1.1, with more units, more weapons and best playability.

Regards.

Fitzcarraldo :salute:

[LoBlo]

1. The maximal depth MAD detect within the limits of 250 meters (helo mad).
Below MAD does not find out.

Does that apply to P3-Orion and all AI ASW MADs as well?

Also. Can the RA team publish the starting SL of each of the Sub platforms as well as they're maximum SL at max speed?

On an unrelated note. Has the RA team considered improving CM gameplay? One bug I've noticed is that CM don't rise or fall to there assigned depts fast enough. Can they be modded so that they rise or fall fast enough to be useful (ie they could drift past sonar layers). Perhaps even more sophisticated and individualized CM behavior could be introduced as well.

Once again, great mod. The entire community is appreciative.

[Castout]

Is it possible to add the battery capacity for the diesel sub such as the Kilo SSK? At default the battery drains too fast leaving only a few hours of submerged time...which is ridiculous even if it's meant for gameplay . . .screw gameplay give us real battery . . .:nope:

[goldorak]

Is it possible to add the battery capacity for the diesel sub such as the Kilo SSK? At default the battery drains too fast leaving only a few hours of submerged time...which is ridiculous even if it's meant for gameplay . . .screw gameplay give us real battery . . .:nope:

What do you mean at default ? Going at 5 knots gives you a tremendous amount of autonomy. I doubt in real life a sub that uses standard batteries could go on for days at 10-15-20 knots.

[Castout]

What do you mean at default ? Going at 5 knots gives you a tremendous amount of autonomy. I doubt in real life a sub that uses standard batteries could go on for days at 10-15-20 knots.

I didn't mean for high speeds
At 5-7 knots the default Kilo battery would only last hours . . .I believe.
In RL I believe a modern(post WWII) electric boats can stay submerged much longer even the foxtrot could probably stay submerged for a couple days at low speeds.

Isn't it ridiculous that a Gato class submarine battery in SHIV could last longer than a a DW Kilo battery?

For example playing the Kilo for three hours or so at slow speeds(<7 knots) would deplete the battery more than 10%-20% so that gives an endurance of maximum 6-30 hours at slow speeds...the foxtrot could stay submerged much longer than that at slow speeds . . .

[MR. Wood]

could be bad batterys :rotfl2: it is russia after all :har: but I agree with you, I remember seeing somewhere that the kilo averaged about 72 hrs before having to recharge her battery running less than 4 knots :arrgh!:

[Castout]

could be bad batterys :rotfl2: it is russia after all :har: but I agree with you, I remember seeing somewhere that the kilo averaged about 72 hrs before having to recharge her battery running less than 4 knots :arrgh!:

Talk about joke I remember one time playing DW with DWX online...I shot a few number of Anti ship missiles at my adversary and all of them went off course . . . .and not knowing this my online adversary kind of teased me that all of my missiles didn't hit him and that I failed....

and then I said to him "I didn't fail, Russian technology did" :rotfl2:.
Oh how I was pissed when the missiles went off course. The same thing happened to a few of the torpedoes too....some even veered off more than 90 degrees...:nope:..wait a minute that's not veering off that's going into a whole new direction :damn:

[LoBlo]

Is it possible to add the battery capacity for the diesel sub such as the Kilo SSK? At default the battery drains too fast leaving only a few hours of submerged time...which is ridiculous even if it's meant for gameplay . . .screw gameplay give us real battery . . .:nope:

Actually... if the battery life was extended to very long levels it would be a good model for AIP. As it is right now the RA AIP model is really just a nuke reactor with a 20 kt speed limit. Would it be possible to keep the Diseal/battery model, but use a ultra long range batter to simulate hydrogen power. It would take some hacking of the code though I think.

[goldorak]

Actually... if the battery life was extended to very long levels it would be a good model for AIP. As it is right now the RA AIP model is really just a nuke reactor with a 20 kt speed limit. Would it be possible to keep the Diseal/battery model, but use a ultra long range batter to simulate hydrogen power. It would take some hacking of the code though I think.

The reason why modern playable AIP subs in DW are "nuclear powered" is because of a limit in the interface files.
The towed array sensor is only available for nuclear subs, so having a real Type 212 with correct AIP modelling would have meant using the diesel eletric panel and forgo completely the towed array.
Same for Collins, for Harushio etc...
If you ask me, having the towed array is much more important than a half baked AIP modelling.
Modern diesel eletric subs have a towed array, it is a fundamental sensor that simply cannot be forgotten.

Now for old diesel electric subs, such as the old Kilo, yes an increase in battery range should be possibile.

[Castout]

Actually... if the battery life was extended to very long levels it would be a good model for AIP. As it is right now the RA AIP model is really just a nuke reactor with a 20 kt speed limit. Would it be possible to keep the Diseal/battery model, but use a ultra long range batter to simulate hydrogen power. It would take some hacking of the code though I think.


Actually [as we all know] AIP would be able to stay submerged much longer than a couple days at slow speeds. It would be able to stay submerged for weeks!(more than 2 weeks). And

I'm aware of the reason they didn't include the battery just as Goldorak said. I have no objection that there's no battery in AIP subs as long as they are AIP subs. Of course would be even better to have real battery on AIP subs as well one that would last say 3-4 weeks(though I suspect some of these AIP boats may be able to stay submerged for much longer like 8-12 weeks) on 5 knots or so even when the players would never exhaust the battery at all in game hence never needing to recharge.

However in my opinion the conventional electric sub is very handicapped with the very poor battery which I realize was made that way by Sonalysts due to gameplay reasons but with a more realistic battery on the conventional subs then the Kilo and such would be able to maneuver some more in each scenarios even transiting to objective submerged.

Well just my 2 cents anyway.

[LoBlo]

Actually [as we all know] AIP would be able to stay submerged much longer than a couple days at slow speeds. It would be able to stay submerged for weeks!(more than 2 weeks).

I don't think anyone would doubt that a nuclear model for AIP is acceptable for low speed. But some questions arise, like how long should a Type 212 be able to sprint (either to assume an attack position on a convoy, clear datum, or achieve a time sensitive objective)? I'm not sure anyone has the answer.


What if the TA sensor could be linked to another button on another screen? Perhaps the snorkle mast on the diseal interface or in floating wire on the radio interface? It would take deep digging into the engine me thinks. One could also make an perpetually deployed TA by giving the subs flank arrays TA performance.

[goldorak]

I don't think anyone would doubt that a nuclear model for AIP is acceptable for low speed. But some questions arise, like how long should a Type 212 be able to sprint (either to assume an attack position on a convoy, clear datum, or achieve a time sensitive objective)? I'm not sure anyone has the answer.


So what do you gain by replacing the nuclear interface by the diesel one ?
In either case you wont know how long a Type 212 is able to sprint.


What if the TA sensor could be linked to another button on another screen? Perhaps the snorkle mast on the diseal interface or in floating wire on the radio interface? It would take deep digging into the engine me thinks. One could also make an perpetually deployed TA by giving the subs flank arrays TA performance.

If that were possibile it would have been atempted I think.
Maybe so for the flank arrays, but then we would find ourselves with modern subs that use an arcaic ssaz (and that is not at all used in western navies, and has been also phased out in russian boats).
Waterfall display + towed array means we have to use the nuclear interface.

Edit : in the end, this whole battery thing is irrelvant in multiplayer since missions last only a few hours.
And if you're designing a single player mission or single player campaign well you can always rely on the player to act responsabile (for instace not going continuosly at 20 knots and so on) unless he wants to play an arcade style game.
But then you have to wonder what the hell he's playing DW for in the first place.

[Castout]

... But some questions arise, like how long should a Type 212 be able to sprint (either to assume an attack position on a convoy, clear datum, or achieve a time sensitive objective)? I'm not sure anyone has the answer.

......

One could also make an perpetually deployed TA by giving the subs flank arrays TA performance.

But sprinting in long ranges makes the sub vulnerable . . .most players would not sprint in transit . . . but of course a very long battery is better than having infinite ability to stay submerged.


That's a very interesting idea . . . though that would mean the flank array is lost in favor of the perpetual towed array.

We need DWII. Come on Sonalysts but after the previous owner died I doubt Sonalysts would be interested in making another commercial title....:damn:
Paying these Russian DWX modders would even be a good idea....you know outsourcing . . .

[LoBlo]

But sprinting in long ranges makes the sub vulnerable . . .most players would not sprint in transit . . . but of course a very long battery is better than having infinite ability to stay submerged.


True. I don't know if it would effect gameplay that much. Except on long scenarios like Sicillian Wedding. Just a interesting thought.

[-GrayOwl-]

True. I don't know if it would effect gameplay that much. Except on long scenarios like Sicillian Wedding. Just a interesting thought.


On the Sicilian wedding - participates Subs not capable to the given ability (without charges of batteries). Only Sub with Diesel/Capability. And Driveable - Only Nucleer SUB - Los Angeles

[oscar19681]

http://seashadows.org/index.php?seashadows=download

Where is the latest download for RA mod? The link someone gave me is dead.

[fitzcarraldo]

Where is the latest download for RA mod? The link someone gave me is dead.

Go to:

http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4912

RA mod version 1.0. Search in this blog the updates for 1.0 version, too.

All we are watching the update RA 1.1...We haven´t date for it...

Regards.

Fitzcarraldo :salute:

[oscar19681]

thank you

[Deisel Submarine]

Actually [as we all know] AIP would be able to stay submerged much longer than a couple days at slow speeds. It would be able to stay submerged for weeks!(more than 2 weeks). And

I'm aware of the reason they didn't include the battery just as Goldorak said. I have no objection that there's no battery in AIP subs as long as they are AIP subs. Of course would be even better to have real battery on AIP subs as well one that would last say 3-4 weeks(though I suspect some of these AIP boats may be able to stay submerged for much longer like 8-12 weeks) on 5 knots or so even when the players would never exhaust the battery at all in game hence never needing to recharge.

However in my opinion the conventional electric sub is very handicapped with the very poor battery which I realize was made that way by Sonalysts due to gameplay reasons but with a more realistic battery on the conventional subs then the Kilo and such would be able to maneuver some more in each scenarios even transiting to objective submerged.

Well just my 2 cents anyway.



:salute:I think the real AIP powerd SSKs like the U212 cant stay submerged for more than 3weeks do to the fact that there is no Oxygen left in the submarine and SSKs cant make there own oxygen unlike the nuclear subs.
here is how i figure it 13days Aip power 8days Baterys but if i was a captain i would use 1day of aip power and 1day of battery power to extend my Aip power to 26days or have extra Aip for ride home.
Ive made a few missions that you have to stay under for 21days to complete if anyone is intrested message me.:)

But as far as the Kilos battery goes it should be 133hrs to give us a 400NM range and its about 3days and the Aip powerd U212 in RA1.0 will go under 600nm not 1248nm as mentioned in the specs.

[Deisel Submarine]

:salute:I think the RA Team should design a gauge to show us how much power we have left much like the Kilo battery gauge

wheather or not we have the ability to stay submerged for a few weeks or for 600nm we need to know how much power we have i have ran out many times doing a 20kt speed burst the slow to 4kts and im stuck with no more power to complete the mission.

I also think we should be left a deisel engine to save or AIP power and to just to get around or in my case get back to port rather than being stranded out in the middle of the ocean. :)

[Castout]

:salute:I think the real AIP powerd SSKs like the U212 cant stay submerged for more than 3weeks do to the fact that there is no Oxygen left in the submarine and SSKs cant make there own oxygen unlike the nuclear subs.
here is how i figure it 13days Aip power 8days Baterys but if i was a captain i would use 1day of aip power and 1day of battery power to extend my Aip power to 26days or have extra Aip for ride home.
Ive made a few missions that you have to stay under for 21days to complete if anyone is intrested message me.:)

But as far as the Kilos battery goes it should be 133hrs to give us a 400NM range and its about 3days and the Aip powerd U212 in RA1.0 will go under 600nm not 1248nm as mentioned in the specs.

Thanks for the information :salute:. Doh maybe they'll build a 12 weeks endurance AIP sub someday. That will drive the nuclear boats nuts :D.

[Deisel Submarine]

Thanks for the information :salute:. Doh maybe they'll build a 12 weeks endurance AIP sub someday. That will drive the nuclear boats nuts :D.


:salute:Very true I think that if they could add an oxygen Maker they could easily stay under for 12weeks using almost all of there batterys and Aip but @ a top speed of 4kts they could only go about 8000nm which they can already do on there deisel engine But if they ever can Nuclear boats captains will be very angry considering they have a hard enough time trying to find them Aip subs Now.:)

Here is where i get my imformation on the U212 and U214
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_214_submarine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_212_submarine

Enjoy.

[Castout]

:salute:Very true I think that if they could add an oxygen Maker they could easily stay under for 12weeks using almost all of there batterys and Aip but @ a top speed of 4kts they could only go about 8000nm which they can already do on there deisel engine But if they ever can Nuclear boats captains will be very angry considering they have a hard enough time trying to find them Aip subs Now.:)

Here is where i get my imformation on the U212 and U214
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_214_submarine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_212_submarine

Enjoy.

Oh well an AIP sub which could stay submerged for 12 weeks would be a nuclear skipper nightmare as that would mean now the AIP subs could patrol choke points and coastal areas for prolonged period especially in times of raised tensions and even with a completely submerged transit on the way and from assigned area albeit with a slow transit speed..

But let's go back to the thread's topic.
The update to RA that we all have been waiting for must be ready by now:yep:?!

Anyone can give us update on it?

[dyshman]

crazyivan has told me, that the release takes place in the beginning of march. i hope it is 100% true. every points practically completed, he has added. have patience, please)

[goldorak]

crazyivan has told me, that the release takes place in the beginning of march. i hope it is 100% true. every points practically completed, he has added. have patience, please)


Its good to know. :yeah:

[Castout]

crazyivan has told me, that the release takes place in the beginning of march. i hope it is 100% true. every points practically completed, he has added. have patience, please)

Thank you for the update dyshman. Really appreciate it :up:.

[MR. Wood]

Has anyone noticed how bad the upholder/Victoria class ssk model is. It's
very bad. Here is a accurate model of the class anyone want to redo it and maybe make her playable? http://www.48thfleet.com/images/Canada/Duane/100_3019.jpg

[goldorak]

Has anyone noticed how bad the upholder/Victoria class ssk model is. It's
very bad. Here is a accurate model of the class anyone want to redo it and maybe make her playable? http://www.48thfleet.com/images/Canada/Duane/100_3019.jpg

Mr Wood, I'm sure once DWX 1.1 is released we will see a lot more "modding" going on if not for the simple reason that the database will finally be open. So talented 3d modelers can add new 3d models, or replace bad old ones, add new navies etc...
As to adding new playables, once the databse is open I suppose it can't be that difficult to do.

[Castout]

Has anyone noticed how bad the upholder/Victoria class ssk model is. It's
very bad. Here is a accurate model of the class anyone want to redo it and maybe make her playable? http://www.48thfleet.com/images/Canada/Duane/100_3019.jpg

That's a really good model I must say :DL

Btw if what Dyshman told us is true that means the release of the major update for DWX is near(within a week or so), would you guys be able and willing to play online with the new updated version......sink or be sunk doesn't really matter I just want to go stealth and see if I could surprise someone or be surprised in return.

I think SHV is going to sink....I could only rely on this major update to DW!
I adopt a wait and see stance with regard to SHV but so far I'm not impressed. . .except for the eye candy of course but judging a game by its graphics alone is like judging a meal by its looks

[Castout]

well it's the beginning of March we are still waiting :DL

[goldorak]

well it's the beginning of March we are still waiting :DL


No its not, 28 minutes to go. :D

[Castout]

No its not, 28 minutes to go. :D

:hmmm: umm I see an obsession with timing

:O:

[Deisel Submarine]

:salute:http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4912 (http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4912):) (http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4912)
im downloading it right now my self.
Im not jokeing its realy DWX RA1.1 Awsome
Thanks RA TEAM for All of Your Hard Work.

[Mau]

The date on it (top left) shows like it is a year old (at least...).
So I am not sure about that.....

[goldorak]

The date on it (top left) shows like it is a year old (at least...).
So I am not sure about that.....



Don't worry and download. :DL

[FERdeBOER]

Downloading!!!
:rock:

[Mau]

For those who are installing now, can we put it on top of 1.0 or we need to re install everything from start (i.e Vanilla, 1.04 and then 1.1......)?

Thanks a lot

[goldorak]

You have to install from DW+1.04.

[Mau]

RGR thanks Goldorak,

So we need to de install the present DWX 1.0 (the full DW I mean) and re install everything (DW Vanilla + 1.04 patch and then install the 1.1).

[goldorak]

Yes thats it. Deinstall DWX 1.0 and reinstall DW+1.04+DWX1.1

[Zander]

:salute:http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4912 (http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4912):) (http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4912)
im downloading it right now my self.
Im not jokeing its realy DWX RA1.1 Awsome
Thanks RA TEAM for All of Your Hard Work.

Many thanks to CrazyIvan and the crew for DWX RA1.1:DL
Am upgrading in about a weeks' time. Looking forward to playing
this new version. Again, thanks to the crew.:D

[Castout]

Why nobody from DWX team not bother to announce it here too?:(

Oh well let's see what improvements they got. DWX usually sports major and numerous improvements every time they came out with new version :)

[dd149]

Many thanks to the team, will the files be posted on the download section here? comments on the improvements will be very welcome.

[Castout]

Umm DW menu is totally messed up now. :nope:

Running on Vista x64 with Nvidia 9800GTX+

Edit: Oh well it was an Nvidia setting that caused it. Now I will test the game!. Thanks for the hard work and love involved in making this and sharing it!

[dd149]

I have a problem with the two following files in the compressed files, both in graphics section:
1) ming1c.bmp (seemingly unchanged from RA 1.0
2) seawolf.j3d (seemingly changed from RA 1.0)

Does anybody have same trouble?

[MR. Wood]

I have a problem with the two following files in the compressed files, both in graphics section:
1) ming1c.bmp (seemingly unchanged from RA 1.0
2) seawolf.j3d (seemingly changed from RA 1.0)

Does anybody have same trouble?

I show no problem try reinstalling it over fresh dw 104 I know it's a pain I had to do it twice after I got some sleep redid it workes great good job guys now just need to learn 3d modeling so I can do a new upholder model:rock:

[LoBlo]

Anyone got any release notes to see what changes were made?

[Castout]

:sign_yeah:

Where's the change log? :hmmm:

[dd149]

Apparently file extraction trouble was due to too old version of 7zip, solved. the modders must have used high compression ratio.
French DW enthousiast are starting the testing.
Cheers again to the modding team.
One identified bug, DSRV doesn't dock properly on Virginia, seems to be due to 3D model.

[Castout]

There's a sound bug DWX 1.1 has been taken out from circulation and is now suspended until the modders fix the repetitive sound bug on Russian subs :).

Glad they did quick action hope they got it fixed fast. I really like the new Victor class SSNs.:yeah:

[LoBlo]

Trying out the mod now. Overall looks great. I think the new torpedo-in-water detection finaly grants a big chunk of realism to ASW combat.

Great work. Bravo!

[Hawk66]

There's a sound bug DWX 1.1 has been taken out from circulation and is now suspended until the modders fix the repetitive sound bug on Russian subs :).

Glad they did quick action hope they got it fixed fast. I really like the new Victor class SSNs.:yeah:

I was too slow concerning the download :wah:. Anyway, I also could live with this sound bug :DL

[goldorak]

I was too slow concerning the download :wah:. Anyway, I also could live with this sound bug :DL


Trust me, you wouldn't. :03:

[LoBlo]

A point of interest. I'm curious to how the RA team decided on the SSK sound levels. As it is now a Kilo Improved going 20 knots on electric power is louder than a Akula II going 35 knots. Any reason the RA team decided on these particular noise levels?

[goldorak]

A point of interest. I'm curious to how the RA team decided on the SSK sound levels. As it is now a Kilo Improved going 20 knots on electric power is louder than a Akula II going 35 knots. Any reason the RA team decided on these particular noise levels?


Just my 0.02 € :

Having an electric sub doesn't imply its going to stay "quiet" across the entire speed spectrum. And if I remember correctly sound levels in subs don't increase linearly but by discrete thresholds. So its conceivable that at high speeds and Kilo actually produces more noise than the Akula II. You have to take into also into account that the Kilo is an "old design". How about the sound levels of modern AIP subs, Collins, Type 212 IT/DE with respect to Akula II ? That should give us a better picture of the situation.

Loblo : how much noisier is the Kilo at max speed with respect to the Akula II at max speed ? It would be interesting to compare also to the noise level of the 688 at max speed.

[Castout]

CrazyIvan in Redrogers forum actually mentioned that the sound bug is part of the original DW 1.04 bug and will take some time to fix.:nope:


I don't believe it will take too long so let's hope CrazyIvan manage to quicken a fix or find a shortcut to fix the sound bug.

[Yskonyn]

Download links are down. Any idea where to get v1.1 please?

[Castout]

Download links are down. Any idea where to get v1.1 please?

DWX 1.1 suffers froma sound bug it's been suspended until a fix is done.
Meanwhile you could try asking those who have downloaded it. My upload speed is waaay to slow it would take me more than a working day to have them uploaded but then again witht he sound bug it's not really worth playing it. So my suggestion is to be patient. I myself have uninstalled DWX with DW altogether.

[Deisel Submarine]

DWX 1.1 suffers froma sound bug it's been suspended until a fix is done.
Meanwhile you could try asking those who have downloaded it. My upload speed is waaay to slow it would take me more than a working day to have them uploaded but then again witht he sound bug it's not really worth playing it. So my suggestion is to be patient. I myself have uninstalled DWX with DW altogether.


:down:I dont understand why every one is so up set about a sound bug its been there ever since ive been playing DW and installed the 1.04patch i enjoy playing DWX 1.1 all games and patches have something wrong with them and our RA Team seems to fix them almost as soon as they or discoverd i use the doctrine fix.:salute:

[Castout]

Doctrine fix was meant for version 1.0 not 1.1

We're not upset. We are waiting for the re-release :DL.

If you thought there were negative vibes in my post it was probably coming from elsewhere outside the forum and certainly not from my post . . .

There has been no doctrine fix for DWX 1.1...not that I know of at least

[Deisel Submarine]

Doctrine fix was meant for version 1.0 not 1.1

We're not upset. We are waiting for the re-release :DL.

If you thought there were negative vibes in my post it was probably coming from elsewhere outside the forum and certainly not from my post . . .

There has been no doctrine fix for DWX 1.1...not that I know of at least

:salute:I wasnt refering only to you other people on the Fourums were kinda up set or so it seemed that the RA 1.1 had a sound bug and im sure your right that the Doctrine fix isnt for RA1.1 i enjoy DWX as it is but i too will be glad when they re-release the Fixed RA1.1.:)

[LoBlo]

Loblo : how much noisier is the Kilo at max speed with respect to the Akula II at max speed ? It would be interesting to compare also to the noise level of the 688 at max speed.
Here's the noise level with Russias newest SSK
LAimproved at 32 knots = SL 73
Lada at 21 knots = SL 76.
Akula II at 35 knots = SL 76


Here's the reference I refer to most of the time from FAS.org http://www.fas.org/spp/eprint/snf03221.htm
At higher speeds flow noise predominates. And flow noise is a function of speed, displacement, and hydrodynamic form. Given that the SSK are around 24%-33% the displacement, traveling 60% the speed, and have equivocal shapes, why would they have louder sound levels? The machinery noise of a that nuclear boat deal with in the form of reduction gears, turbines, and coolant pumps aren't present as well.

Of course given that the RA team is making the mod as they see fit, its no big deal and its modder's prerogative . I'm just interested in how the sound levels were decided.

DWX 1.1 suffers froma sound bug it's been suspended until a fix is done.

*whew* Glad I got a chance to grab it and play it before it was taken down. Fantastic mod sound bug or not.

[Castout]

:salute:I wasnt refering only to you other people on the Fourums were kinda up set or so it seemed that the RA 1.1 had a sound bug and im sure your right that the Doctrine fix isnt for RA1.1 i enjoy DWX as it is but i too will be glad when they re-release the Fixed RA1.1.:)

Well I hope they got it fixed within a week or two...days even better I'm not sure I can wait for another few months [pull hair]:DL

[Deisel Submarine]

Well I hope they got it fixed within a week or two...days even better I'm not sure I can wait for another few months [pull hair]:DL

:salute:Yup lets hope they hurry with the fixes they said they fixed the DSRV bug already But I Wonder how they will fix the Sound bug thats in the 1.04 patch but ill leave that to the Pros.:know:

[goldorak]

:salute:Yup lets hope they hurry with the fixes they said they fixed the DSRV bug already But I Wonder how they will fix the Sound bug thats in the 1.04 patch but ill leave that to the Pros.:know:

Well many people said the DSRV couldn't be fixed, or that the Udaloy being a copy of the Frigate could not fire its cannon in the correct position.
And yet the modders did it. So I have confidence that the sound bug will be squashed seeing as it was not present in DWX 1.0. All it takes is time and energy. :shucks:

[Yskonyn]

I see, thanks for the headsup.
Eventhough some find DXW 1.1 is perfectly playable it isn't available for download anymore. ;)

I have LWAMI 3.09 installed over DW 1.04 at the moment and that suits me fine as well as I am returning to DW and need to get the hang of things first again. More playable platforms is not really necessary at the moment for me and I think LWAMI did a great job of improving realism of the 1.04 game.

[Deisel Submarine]

Well many people said the DSRV couldn't be fixed, or that the Udaloy being a copy of the Frigate could not fire its cannon in the correct position.
And yet the modders did it. So I have confidence that the sound bug will be squashed seeing as it was not present in DWX 1.0. All it takes is time and energy. :shucks:

:salute:The Modders or the ones that made all of these mods possible so Yes i agree that they will squash this bug given a little time.
No Matter what file its in.:)

[fitzcarraldo]

Where is the bug sound in RA 1.1? In the russian subs? I´ve installed the mod and works fine for me. Yes, I don´t use the new units, or russian subs: only 688i (improved) and Seawolf.

With this subs, the mod is Ok for me. I test DSRV and works fine (with the "bug" of the return to my sub, original of DW 1.04, this bug is present). The weapons works correctly.

Regards.

Fitzcarraldo :salute:

[goldorak]

Where is the bug sound in RA 1.1? In the russian subs? I´ve installed the mod and works fine for me. Yes, I don´t use the new units, or russian subs: only 688i (improved) and Seawolf.

With this subs, the mod is Ok for me. I test DSRV and works fine (with the "bug" of the return to my sub, original of DW 1.04, this bug is present). The weapons works correctly.

Regards.

Fitzcarraldo :salute:


Yes in the russian subs, so saying the mod works correctly is a bit of a strech. ;)

[fitzcarraldo]

Yes in the russian subs, so saying the mod works correctly is a bit of a strech. ;)

Many thanks.

With the default units of DW, the 1.1 "beta" mod works fine for me. The new problem of TIW alarm isn´t present with incomings torpedoes to default subs, I use Windows Vista Home Premium. English voice pack not installed. Offline tests.

I´ll make new tests with the others units in RA 1.1 "beta".

Regards.

Fitzcarraldo :salute:

[Hawk66]

I've just tried out RA 1.1 beta and have a question about the mast detection:
In a quick mission (helo), I'Ve got several 'mast search fixes' of a Nacken SSK at 68 feet.

How is that mast search implemented in detail?

[Mau]

What is the main difference between RA Mod (DWX..) 1.0 and 1.1?

As well, with DWX 1.0, scenarios to be used are only the ones coming with it (unless there is a site with updated ``DWX`` scenarios?

Thank you

Mau

[goldorak]

May I say "Who cares ?".
Really, nobody is going to play DWX1.0, 1.1 is the latest version.
This is going to be the official mod. And the modders are not going to release a change log, they say there are too many changes to keep track of.
So use DWX1.1, and read the documentation included (weapons manual, sonar profiles, and shipwreck missile employment).


Any mission can be made DWX1.1 compatible. Nothing difficult right there.

[Mau]

Why going with ''Who cares''.......

I just ask a simple question. If you do not know the answer it is just as easy to say that there are no change log that was done.

Understand that we usually use the latest MOD (when it works fairly well).

Right now I do not have acces to 1.1, so I would like to know what I can expect in comparison with 1.0.

Again I was just asking a simple question.


And for the other question, I guess the answer was no.
We have to modify them. You said it is easy. I will try fo find myself where to look to modify them.

Thank you anyway

[goldorak]

Ok Mau, if you want to know the relevant changes you may read the official thread on redrodgers forum. In the last 10 pages you'll get a fairly good idea of what the major improvements are.

Porting missions from DWx1.0 to 1.1 should be mostly automatic. The biggest differences are going to come from Lwami and At3 that both use a fairly different database from that of DWX. In this case you will need to verify that the playable units haven't changed etc... Of course make sure all triggers reference the correct units.
Sensor enhancements may make a mission designed for lwami or at3 to be "re-jauged" for DWX. Otherwise the mission may prove too difficult or too easy.

[Mau]

Thanks a lot Goldorak!

Yes i meant from the LWAMI or Vanilla scenario to DWX (let say the scenarios we can find on Subguru).

So it can be fairly difficult.

So, do you personnaly wait for the fixed 1.1 and still play with 1.0 until then? Or you are still playing 1.1 (sound bug) anyway?

Thanks again

Mau

[goldorak]

I'm playing with 1.1 for the moment (I cancelled 1.0 the moment 1.1 was out ^_^ ).
I just don't use the 3 russian units that activate the bug.

[Mau]

Is there a way I can find the 1.1?

[goldorak]

I don't know.
Nobody is hosting the mod as far as I can see.

[dd149]

It is osted in Poland as one big file, have fun.
http://dangerouswaters.pl/download/RaDWX_v1.1.rar

[Hawk66]

possible bug in beta 1.1 (?):

Quick Mission, MH-60...Torpedo with circle pattern acquires hostile submarine:
[5180] NSE: Sierra-I SSN detected by Mk 50 Torp [User] with Active Sonar at rng 1005

but it does not prosecute the target but continue its circle pattern.

Or have I missed sth...could it be the shallow water of 280 depth(sonar conditions?)

[Mau]

Thank you dd149!

[dd149]

My pleasure, it helps while waiting for the final version!

[MR. Wood]

They will get the bugs worked out just take some time they do one heck of a job. RA Mod Developers you rock

[Woodylepic]

I have instaled RA V1.1 yesterday and suprise there no voive sound in heach interface vessel ?

i have decompresse SFX.agg and all RA V1.1 SFX.agg was emty and have only 15.6k weight ? Only the Bear plane seem to be ok whit a 6 mg sfz file ?

What going on ?

[MR. Wood]

Try reinstalling over a fresh clean copy of dw and patch to 104 then do the RA mod

[LoBlo]

If the RA Mod team is looking for its next big challenge, I have a few ideas.

#1. Improved aircraft and carrier behaviors: Currently aircraft carriers (Kuneztov, Nimitz, Invicible, Charle de Gaulle, etc) don't sortie as they should, don't utilize AEW efficiently, and don't land aircraft correctly. Launching/landing seems a bit random and sporadic. It would be nice to have a improved behavior for those combined arms scenarios.

#2. Make the Sovremenny Class playable: The power of the Sunburn missile would be nice.

#3. Voice trigger to annouce when the sub reaches its assigned depth, similar to the annoucement when it reaches its assigned course. For example "Steady on depth XXX meters (feet)? I think it would add a bit of realism.

#4. Realistic turn radius for SSKs: I see alot of the smaller SSK have equal turn radius as the larger. Can they be modified to turn more realistically?

#5. Convert UUVs for countermine warfare only: As they are used in real-life.

[goldorak]

#5. Convert UUVs for countermine warfare only: As they are used in real-life.

Edit : I think you could be right.
But on the other hand limiting uuv in DW to countermine warfare makes them useless for 90% of the games people play most of the time. And its a really big asset in terms of sonar detection right now.

[ashepherd316]

is there any way you can change the russian navy to the soviet navy and have the soviet flag aswell also would be good if there was a cold war campaign.

[LoBlo]

Edit : I think you could be right.
But on the other hand limiting uuv in DW to countermine warfare makes them useless for 90% of the games people play most of the time. And its a really big asset in terms of sonar detection right now.

My issue isn't whether or not UUVs with ASW or ASuW capability are plausible. They obviously are. Its whether or not they actually exist in RL currently. Even the US Navy UUV Master Plan from 2008 (http://www.navy.mil/navydata/technology/uuvmp.pdf )states that it may be possible in the future for UUVs to have these capabilities, but currently they do not. Having UUVs in the game is the equivalent of having Rattlrs (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/rattlrs.htm) or hypersonic jets or laser point defense systems. They are all purely hypothetical currently. So IMHO its a deviation from RL tatics for players to be using them in the sim and represents a point of fantasty instead of simulation.

also would be good if there was a cold war campaign.

There is a DW conversion of the old SubCommand 688/SW and Akula campaigns floating around somewhere. Its quite good, but may require some fine tuning as it does not convert 100% with some minor bugs. Not sure where its hosted at the moment though.

[dd149]

The campaigns are included in the RA DWX mod, and are converted, don't know if there are some bugs.

[goldorak]

My issue isn't whether or not UUVs with ASW or ASuW capability are plausible. They obviously are. Its whether or not they actually exist in RL currently. Even the US Navy UUV Master Plan from 2008 (http://www.navy.mil/navydata/technology/uuvmp.pdf )states that it may be possible in the future for UUVs to have these capabilities, but currently they do not. Having UUVs in the game is the equivalent of having Rattlrs (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/rattlrs.htm) or hypersonic jets or laser point defense systems. They are all purely hypothetical currently. So IMHO its a deviation from RL tatics for players to be using them in the sim and represents a point of fantasty instead of simulation.



Trying to keep the game assets in some way synchronized with "reality" is like chasing a moving target. There is always going to be a new capability that is not simulated in the game, or vice versa some aspects of game that are "forward looking" with respect to reality. These forward looking choices are arbitrary but still they may exist purely for gameplay purposes.
Insofar as UUVs are concerned, the real problem as I see it is the ability they have to use a passive sensor which up to now had more or less the same capability as a towed array. Which all other considerations aside is pretty much preposterous even in the game world. The choices we had were twofold : either eliminate completely the passive sensor capability, or leave it in but reasses the maximum range of the sensor so that it doesn't compete with the towed arrays performance. The choice was to go with the second option. So from now on, players won't be able to use uuvs as secondary towed arrays. With the new performance profile they are much nearer to real world uuvs than ever before. Even if we still retain a passive sensor capability (which has been pretty much gimped although not completely neutralized).
If you're thinking of using 2 uuvs to intercept incoming torpedoes from far away, that won't be possibile anymore. Or use a towed array and an uuv to triangulate a contact at 10 nm. These are great improvements as far as "realism" is concerned. And the game as a result is a little bit less arcade. :03:

[LoBlo]

Trying to keep the game assets in some way synchronized with "reality" is like chasing a moving target. There is always going to be a new capability that is not simulated in the game, or vice versa some aspects of game that are "forward looking" with respect to reality. These forward looking choices are arbitrary but still they may exist purely for gameplay purposes.

I disagree. Every other aspect of the game is modeled according to historical or existing platforms and systems. Nothing else in the game is futuristic, so in so much UUV with ASW/ASuW are out of place.

Cutting the sonar performance is a step in the right direction. However, if I recal correctly when this was tried in the past, a glaring bug was uncoveraged in that the UUVs sensor range would not respond to capping or reductions and would retain maximum detection capability. (on a side note, I think torpedo feedback had a similar bug).

[goldorak]

Cutting the sonar performance is a step in the right direction. However, if I recal correctly when this was tried in the past, a glaring bug was uncoveraged in that the UUVs sensor range would not respond to capping or reductions and would retain maximum detection capability. (on a side note, I think torpedo feedback had a similar bug).


I think the modders are well aware of the bug that afflicted the uuvs in Lwami, and it seems they somehow managed to overcome it. When the 1.1 version is re-released we will have to test it of course but it all seems pretty good.

[ashepherd316]

thanks ill look for them but is there anyway i can change the ukraine and russia into the soviet union and have the soviet flag

[Lane]

Has R A V 1.1 been fixed?
and were can you download it?

Thanks for any info.

Lane :)

[Castout]

Hi Lane they are fixing some reported bugs besides fixing the sound bug that made the release retracted.

I don't know when they will re-release DWX 1.1. I'm hoping soon enough :)

[fitzcarraldo]

The RA 1.1 "beta" version is perfectly playable, except for the sound bug in Russian units and some other problems. That problems don´t make greats mistakes to the playability in the default units of DW and playable american units. (if you aren´t very exquisite with the sim...).

I´m testing and playing regurarly with RA 1.1 (only with american subs), and it is great! :DL

Regards.

Fitzcarraldo :salute:

[goldorak]

The RA 1.1 "beta" version is perfectly playable, except for the sound bug in Russian units and some other problems. That problems don´t make greats mistakes to the playability in the default units of DW and playable american units. (if you aren´t very exquisite with the sim...).

I´m testing and playing regurarly with RA 1.1 (only with american subs), and it is great! :DL

Regards.

Fitzcarraldo :salute:

Uhm no, there are BIG problems beyond the sound bug (that has already been fixed). BIG problems that affect playability in multiplayer for instance.
The units are pretty unbalanced in terms of radiated noise. The uuv have the same capability of a towed array and then some more. So no, DWX 1.1 is pretty much beta. It should tell you something that the modders are investing their time trying to fix these and other problems.

[ashepherd316]

what are the 3 russian units that cause the bug thanks

[dd149]

* Alfa
* Victor I
* Victor II
But some other bugs are still being sorted out as pointed out by Goldorak, its a work under progress.

[ashepherd316]

thanks does anyone know what happened to that seashadows website im sure you were able to download everything from there

[dd149]

Yes, they had extensive mirror for gamepatches and mods, but links are broken and no recent news.

[TheSoviet7520]

Hi
euh... i have a problem everytime when i stat dangerous waters i get after the intro trailer a error and the game crashes. pleas help

[MadDog09]

Try to edit your dangerouswaters.ini! At line 8 you schould find this: "SkipOpening No", change it to "SkipOpening Yes". This will disable the Intro.

[TheSoviet7520]

Thanks It works :ping:

[ashepherd316]

hopefully they will add the vanguard ssbn aswell for us british lol

[LoBlo]

Observation on the RA 1.1 passive torpedos.

Me things that torpedo passive sensors work a bit too well. During the harbor attack mission of the SubCommand campaign, a 50 knot Mk48 was able to lock on a passively home in on a Akula I submarine going only 5 knots. Seems a little extreme that a sub at 5 knots can be detected by a torpedo going 50 knots with passive sensors. Perhaps making the passive sensors a bit less sensitive and reducing their washout speed (as well as the pre-set passive homing speed) of the torpedos would make them more balanced.

[ashepherd316]

noticed that most of the subs don have any visible torpedo tubes and the typhoon only has 4 tubes when in real life it has 6 think this mod has alot of room for improvement.

[ashepherd316]

you can see the torpedo tubes on the akula and typhoon but the torpedos do not fire out of the them also the dive planes dont go in when you go faster.

[dd149]

The dev team is aware of these, but they consider that removing known and community reported bugs from the core game engine is more important and therefore gets top priority. It is true that for real gameplay this graphic issues, which can be annoying are of secondary importance. Probably those glitches can be addressed by the development of new graphic models, like the ones which will come in Lwami 3.10. Let the Russian team do what thy do best, i.e. giving us a better core code, and the community will improve the graphic models afterwards.

[ashepherd316]

does the lwami 3.09 improve the ra mod in anyway

[tonibamestre]

Two questions guys:

Concerning RA mod, can you confirm if it installs and runs well under W7?

Could we suggest RedRodgers development team to continue their work and develop more Platforms and surface vessels once RA bugs are cleared?

[dd149]

We have several people in France who run it under W7 we even had multiplayer sessions with XP SP3, Vista and W7 simultaneously with no special instability found.(RA 1.1 plus one minor correction only concerning French subs)
Regarding further developments, they are open to suggestions but at the moment more focused on bug solving. Lwami will bring new models and a lot of existing things too so lets see if they could combine. It is announced in approx. two weeks.

[SELaunch]

I have used all of the mods that I could find for DW but I am tired of the same playables - downloaded the RA mod yesterday:damn: - can someone give clear concise directions on how to install. I have twelve files on my desktop and I don't know what to do with them. In the past I have successfully installed patches, LWAMI and Alpha Tau. I read on the forum that I need a clean install and 104 - now what:hmmm: - simple directions for a computer dummy - help

[dd149]

In France, we have a file, which allows you to install with JSGME. But you need to register in order to access the download.
www.mille-sabords.com/forum/ but its all in French Im afraid.

[hotrod1525]

Sould be a text document in the download that will give you instructions on how to install.

[Castout]

There seems to be no news update. Does anybody know how's the progress with fixing the sound bug?

[dd149]

They just said yesterday that release is imminent, but no news on the updates and/or corrections. Btw Lwami 3.10 is also announced in the coming days.

[Castout]

They just said yesterday that release is imminent, but no news on the updates and/or corrections. Btw Lwami 3.10 is also announced in the coming days.

Oh really?! Jolly good then! :DL

[Theta Sigma]

In France, we have a file, which allows you to install with JSGME. But you need to register in order to access the download.
www.mille-sabords.com/forum/ (http://www.mille-sabords.com/forum/) but its all in French Im afraid.

A link is also here:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=160966

[dd149]

Theta Sigma, it is not the Millsab mod im referring to, one of our members has compiled a JSGME compatible RA 1.1. file, anyway, the revised RA is due soon, so let us wait a little bit more. During that time we test RA in multiplayer , quite successful.

[Castout]

How soon is soon dd?:DL

[dd149]

Only the team knows, and they won't tell! But they seem confident that it will be before 2011.:har:
But besides joking the effort they put in that mod makes it worth waiting.
When do we have a drink in Jakarta?(Whether it is Bintang or lemon squash I will leave to you...)

[Castout]

Only the team knows, and they won't tell! But they seem confident that it will be before 2011.:har:
But besides joking the effort they put in that mod makes it worth waiting.
When do we have a drink in Jakarta?(Whether it is Bintang or lemon squash I will leave to you...)

Well the world is going to end in 2012 so 2011 would still give us a year to play it. As for Bintang....I'm afraid I only drink coffee at most(I know that would mean I'm a a dull person) but Javanese coffee is one of the best out there guess I'll treat you to a coffee instead. :D

[dd149]

Deal!:yeah:Will let you know, I should come soon.

[Theta Sigma]

Theta Sigma, it is not the Millsab mod im referring to, one of our members has compiled a JSGME compatible RA 1.1. file, anyway, the revised RA is due soon, so let us wait a little bit more. During that time we test RA in multiplayer , quite successful.

:damn:

Ah well, I wish that JSGME-fixed RA 1.1 were also linked like millsab is in that thread. ;)

[dd149]

Lets wait for the revised RA and we will try to give a linked download, but first we will validate it internally.

[Castout]

Deal!:yeah:Will let you know, I should come soon.

:DL No promises though

[-GrayOwl-]

DWX 1.1 has been released.

http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/showthread.php?p=111703#post111703

[MadDog09]

Thank you!:yeah:

[Castout]

DWX 1.1 has been released.

http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/showthread.php?p=111703#post111703

As the Commanding officer of Victor I class attack submarine, K-306, I'm reporting that enemy Oliver Hazard Perry class frigate has been successfully sunk in the GIUK sea area.
:yeah:

[dd149]

:DL No promises though
Might be in Jak next week from Wedneday night to friday eve..

[Castout]

Might be in Jak next week from Wedneday night to friday eve..

Oh really where are you staying?(PM would be more prudent)

If the timing and distance is right who knows :DL

[Mast]

When installing to the Dangerous Waters main folder, I get a crc error on the nonnukesub file. I tried downloading the part04.rar again and the error still comes up. Anybody else having the same trouble? Is there another location to download dwx1.1?

[-GrayOwl-]

When installing to the Dangerous Waters main folder, I get a crc error on the nonnukesub file. I tried downloading the part04.rar again and the error still comes up. Anybody else having the same trouble? Is there another location to download dwx1.1?

Use for download Opera or FireFox browser.
Don't use MS Explorer - sometimes it does not receive "the complete size of an archival file".

The exact size of a file of 4-th part: 41.186.858
Check up the size the 4 parts.

[Castout]

Umm the provided Iranian Kilo fix dodn't fix the CTD when selecting Iranian Kilo in quick mission and entering its weapon loadout.


Should I redownload the mod again?

Edit: Okay got it working CrazyIvan gave me help in redroger.

[Mast]

Thanks -GrayOwl-,

I used Firefox and that worked. :up:

[Mau]

Hello everyone,

I have installed RA 1.0. Do I have to re install everything from scratch to put 1.1?

Thank you

[clive bradbury]

Yes, according to the installation notes. Install on clean DW patched to 1.04.

[Mau]

Thanks, and where is the installation note?
Also, do we install the fix for the Iranian Kilo interface after the installation?

Thank you

[clive bradbury]

err...in the documentation in the zip. The latest version includes the Kilo fix, so no need to apply the patch.

[Mau]

Sorry, got it! Thanks again (I am getting old I think...)

Now to install it, understand that before there was only one big file of some 110MB, now there are 4. Do we put the 4 in the Dangerous Water root and just double click on the Opfor EXE of the first RAR file of 41MB and everything will go automatically (not clear in the instruction). But again I am getting old so just want to play on the safe side!!

Thank you

[NFunky]

Does anyone here know if the AI flaws from 1.0 have been fixed in this new version? Those were really the only bugs that stopped me from switching to RA/DWX.

[-GrayOwl-]

Does anyone here know if the AI flaws from 1.0 have been fixed in this new version? Those were really the only bugs that stopped me from switching to RA/DWX.

Simply download 1.1 archives from a point, and installation as the instruction speaks.

If you find faults - inform us.

[Castout]

UK's Type 21 FF doesn't have any texture on it.

Or is it just me?

[convoy hunter]

Is there a fix for the crew on russian subs to speak russian?

[convoy hunter]

on version 1.1

[NFunky]

There's a voices patch available on RedRogers I think.

[convoy hunter]

Its ok I found an agg file with russian sounds in my old hard disk

[-GrayOwl-]

Its ok I found an agg file with russian sounds in my old hard disk


Russian the voice pack - is not compatible with the version 1.1
This voices is made only for the version 1.0

[MadDog09]

http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4912

Its for 1.0 but the RU-Voices works fine with 1.1 too!

[convoy hunter]

Russian the voice pack - is not compatible with the version 1.1
This voices is made only for the version 1.0
I opened the file and took the speech files only and replaced them with the russian ones