LWAMI 3.09-3.10 bug advisory and request for help

[Molon Labe]

EDIT: The trigger compatibility issue that follows below has been fixed. There will not be a compatibility issue from 3.10 onwards.


--------------------------------

OK guys, I have some good news and bad news.

The good news is, the release of LWAMI 3.10 is imminent. And it's got a lot of new platforms and doctrines, and DB improvements that will hopefully make this the most complete DW experience we've had yet.

The bad news is the reason it's been delayed. There is a error in the indexing system that began in 3.09. The effect of this error is that triggers which specify particular platforms to complete a trigger have had their platform switched. The effect of this is that some missions written for stock DW and earlier mod versions will have some non-functioning triggers in 3.09 and 3.10. I've held up the release of 3.10 to try to fix this, but after playing with the object numbers, class numbers, and entity numbers, the problem persists. The unfortunate truth is that this issue has TLAM, LW, OneShot and I stumped. If anyone out there has any ideas (other than moving object/classes/entities around to make sure no new o/c/e's appear inside groups of stock o/c/e's and are all added in the back) we would be very happy to hear them.

But, short of getting help, it's time to bite the bullet and move forward. I hope the impact of this indexing error will be minimal, but in any case, the LWAMI project has always prided ourselves on reverse-compatibility, so we will treat this as a serious issue. I will personally take responsibility for mitigating the effects. So, I'm going to do two things: (1) Create and publish a list of any missions effected--PLEASE inform me if you become aware of any such missions. I'll coordinate with Bill and Oneshot to make sure the appropriate notices are displayed whereever these missions are available so users downloading them will know what versions they work with. (2) With the mission designers' permission, I will personally edit and re-release any effected missions to be compatible with LWAMI 3.09 and 3.10.

I don't think this is something most users will even notice, but just the same, it's important to make sure the product works like it's supposed to. Thanks for your support.

[Blacklight]

Thanks for all the work you guys are doing ! I wasn't even expecting a new LWAMI release ! :DL
Take your time. There's no rush. The sim isn't going anywhere and I'm sure that all of us subsimmers would like LWAMI to be the best that it can be ! Editing the missions for compatability is going above and beyond anything I've ever seen a modder do ! Usually it's just. "Here's the mod. Such and such isn't compatable. Good luck with that." Editing things to make them compatable can be quite a task and I'm really greatful that you're willing to go that extra mile. Your work is appreciated ! :salute:

Perhaps you could collect the "fixed" missions into a single zip file that can be downloaded and put into DW with JGME along with the new LWAMI, overwriting what's already in the scenario folder. Then just update that zipped folder as new "fixed" missions become ready. Or maybe set up a "Mega-Missions Pack" or something like that.

[Molon Labe]

Editing the missions for compatability is going above and beyond anything I've ever seen a modder do ! Usually it's just. "Here's the mod. Such and such isn't compatable. Good luck with that." Editing things to make them compatable can be quite a task and I'm really greatful that you're willing to go that extra mile. Your work is appreciated ! :salute:

Thanks. I don't really think it's that big of a deal, it's just a few fields that need to be changed. It's a small bit of effort I can make to try to make this right. One way or another, the error is probably my fault so it's my responsibility to deal with. Luftwolf takes reverse compatibility seriously and I don't want to tarnish his legacy with a noob mistake.

Perhaps you could collect the "fixed" missions into a single zip file that can be downloaded and put into DW with JGME along with the new LWAMI, overwriting what's already in the scenario folder. Then just update that zipped folder as new "fixed" missions become ready. Or maybe set up a "Mega-Missions Pack" or something like that.
That's a pretty good idea, putting all the corrections in a single pack. :) I don't want to overwrite the old ones though--people may still want to play the same missions with stock DW.

[Hitman]

That's a pretty good idea, putting all the corrections in a single pack. :) I don't want to overwrite the old ones though--people may still want to play the same missions with stock DW.

Why not simply include them in 3-10? If the mod is enabled via JGSME, you play LWAMI and you get the correct missions. If you wanna play stock DW, fire up JGSME, disable LWAMI -and the fixed missions- and play again normally with the stock game. :hmmm:

[Molon Labe]

Why not simply include them in 3-10? If the mod is enabled via JGSME, you play LWAMI and you get the correct missions. If you wanna play stock DW, fire up JGSME, disable LWAMI -and the fixed missions- and play again normally with the stock game. :hmmm:

We could do that. But, the "list" will probably grow from week to week or month to month. So we'd have to re-release the mod every so often, I think. I'll ask OneShot about it. In any case, it wouldn't be too much trouble to have a single downloadable zip that is constantly being updated. The first line of the Mission Description will have version notes so people scrolling through missions will know right away which one they're browsing.

[Tarrasque]

So we'd have to re-release the mod every so often, I think.

Perhaps I'm being dumb but couldn't you just release the missions separately and just get the user to stick them in the relevant folder - much as (for example) Operation Monsun for SH4 has done with its hotfix.

[goldorak]

Perhaps I'm being dumb but couldn't you just release the missions separately and just get the user to stick them in the relevant folder - much as (for example) Operation Monsun for SH4 has done with its hotfix.

Yes exactly.
No need to release the missions with the mod, just update them and put a readme file telling to put the missions in the mods/lwami3.10/scenario folder.
:)

[OneShot]

Isn't a problem ... just need to make sure that the folder structure is right. Separate release it will be ...

[dd149]

Any news about possible relase timeline of 3.10, or are you waiting to have a deeper look on DW RA before? Thanks for the efforts in any case. :yeah:

[OneShot]

The last time I talked to ML about this his PC had just gone into electronic nirvana, at that time he was hoping to have access to his data (and thus the Mod) within a few days. Haven't heard from him since (that was about 2 weeks ago).

[caymanlee]

The last time I talked to ML about this his PC had just gone into electronic nirvana, at that time he was hoping to have access to his data (and thus the Mod) within a few days. Haven't heard from him since (that was about 2 weeks ago).

"nirvana"?!:cry: that's real bad news:damn:
hope ML can get his data back. heard TLAMstrike said that a lot of new model in 3.10, can't wait to see that

[dd149]

Thanks for the news OneShot. Another interesting mod to play with soon hopefully. Cheeers to ML for that and hope he can retrieve data.

[dd149]

Hey guys, it seems RA is not going to publish the new installment before some time (based on previous experiences with due dates:yawn:). there is a window of opportunity opening for Lwami 3.10, will you try to seize it? Hope Molon got his files back...

[Sag75]

any news about 3.10 version ?


Thanks!

[TLAM Strike]

any news about 3.10 version ?


Thanks!

ML is back to work after a break. But it looks like we are going to have to abandon the backwards compatablity to prevous versons. So any old missions will need a once over in the editor to make compatable. But on the plus side expect a lot of cool new platforms in the new verson.

[Sag75]

ML is back to work after a break. But it looks like we are going to have to abandon the backwards compatablity to prevous versons. So any old missions will need a once over in the editor to make compatable. But on the plus side expect a lot of cool new platforms in the new verson.


thanks.. playable also?

[goldorak]

thanks.. playable also?


I don't think so. Lwami has always been about modding the database and doctrines. If you want new playable units the only game in town is AT3 or DWX.

[Molon Labe]

No new playable classes, but I've added a pair of new Perrys and Kilo as a small thanks to one particularly active DW community that's helping keep the sim alive.

We don't have a final verdict yet, but we are considering making a PCU-style extra database for the Alrosa. That would sacrifice all of the other Kilos when enabled, though, so it's not clear that it's worth it.

[-GrayOwl-]

No new playable classes, but I've added a pair of new Perrys and Kilo as a small thanks to one particularly active DW community that's helping keep the sim alive.

We don't have a final verdict yet, but we are considering making a PCU-style extra database for the Alrosa. That would sacrifice all of the other Kilos when enabled, though, so it's not clear that it's worth it.


What sense to reproduce mistakes initially incorporated SCS in the original of game?
Even some mathematical formulas are written not correctly.
I think this guy was at school the bad schoolboy:-)
You simply give out these mistakes again and again. It is not serious.

[Molon Labe]

Good news. :woot::woot:


The trigger compatibility issue that is the subject of this thread is DEAD. 100% solved.

There will be no need to edit missions to make them stock or LWAMI 3.10 compatible. LWAMI 3.10 should be ready in about three weeks.:sunny:

[dd149]

Good news, thanks a lot. The French team is eager to look at it. In the meantime, we have launched extensive debug of RA 1.1, so we might have soon two very good mods maybe to combine in order to get the ultimate DW.
We might have interesting and realistic data for some platforms if you are interested.
Cheers to the modders!

[Molon Labe]

Good news, thanks a lot. The French team is eager to look at it. In the meantime, we have launched extensive debug of RA 1.1, so we might have soon two very good mods maybe to combine in order to get the ultimate DW.
We might have interesting and realistic data for some platforms if you are interested.
Cheers to the modders!

You're welcome.

We're always interested in reliable sources. What have you got?

[Castout]

Currently I have LWAMI 3.09 installed looking forward to 3.10

When DWX come out I'll see a double installation:D

[dd149]

You're welcome.

We're always interested in reliable sources. What have you got?

Will send you by MP with some comments, probably this weekend

[nohouan]

Hi, guys,

First of all, my thanks for a great mod. It makes me think "it's alive !" with a large smile when I play DW again.

However, I got an annoying CTD issue, so I was wondering if anyone experienced the same, and if there was a workaround procedure :
CDT occur very often, most of the time when I raise the scope (:dead:on any sub platform, I checked). My LWAMI version is 3.10 using JSGME latest, I have DW US version updated 1.04, and yes, I followed closely every steps of the install. My guess is it could be a graphical issue due to hardware, even if I can't figure out why. The original game alone work fine.
My graphical hardware is an upgraded re-edition of the ATI Radeon HD 2400, running on a Pentium IV with >1.2 Gb of RAM.

So if anyone exerienced similar problem, or have any clue for me, I'll try to figure this out, but right now I'm running out of ideas :06: and patience:damn:.

Thank you !

[Molon Labe]

I can't reproduce that on my end. What other platforms/weapons are present when this happens?

[nohouan]

Well, I tested about ten missions or so, with very different types and numbers of platforms. There do not seem to be a pattern relative to the other platforms.

I made an experiment : Raise scope alone, pan around, drink coffee during five good minutes. Nothing happens. Right. Lower scope... Raise the radio & ESM mast... Nothing happens. Let them both up, and get up periscope... Kaboom Crash. That's really odd. I'll dig out a little more, but thank you for replying. I will test a mission totally platform free, and see what happens.

[nohouan]

Ok, you were right about that plateform related issue:salute:.

I have experienced with certainty the crash when the Kilo Imp./Project 636 was around. There might be other platforms causing this, but it's kind of a wide field, right ? I can't figure out why, as yet. I guess I'll skip the Kilo for a while.

Thanks for the insight !

[-GrayOwl-]

I can't reproduce that on my end. What other platforms/weapons are present when this happens?

Return for Kilo v.2 a sensor control #30 atached to a mast #25.
Unique Numbers of masts are hardcoded in dll files - them it is impossible to change.
Besides - ESM the sensor control will not work on it periscope.

[Molon Labe]

Ok, you were right about that plateform related issue:salute:.

I have experienced with certainty the crash when the Kilo Imp./Project 636 was around. There might be other platforms causing this, but it's kind of a wide field, right ? I can't figure out why, as yet. I guess I'll skip the Kilo for a while.

Thanks for the insight !

Are you using the APAD database? Grey Owl might be onto something, but the Kilo v2 PeriESM should only be present when APAD is enabled.

edit: On second thought, the sensor entity is around but should be dormant. Maybe that's enough to cause a problem. Can you PM me your email address? I'll send you a database without the v2periESM referenced and we'll see if it works.

[nohouan]

Nope, I'm not using the APAD database, haven't taken the time to check it out yet. I've noticed the same issue with the XIA Class SSBN.

[Molon Labe]

Well, the reason I asked about other platforms present is because the periscope accesses the 3d world, so my first guess was that there was a model causing the problem.

But the Xia is an SCX model that's been around since 3.03 or something like that.

[-GrayOwl-]

Nope, I'm not using the APAD database, haven't taken the time to check it out yet. I've noticed the same issue with the XIA Class SSBN.

In what file occurs crush? Windows should write : in what file - in ЕХЕ or NavalSimEngine.

[nohouan]

Well I don't think it's gonna be necessary, because Molon's Database make it work perfectly. It. Works.:up: A thousand thanks Molon & GrayOwl. Now I can properly explore this great mod.

See you around guys,
:salute:
and thanks again !

[Molon Labe]

OK, if that fixed the problem we're going to have to release a new version sooner than expected--because your version is going to trigger database errors if you connect to an MP session.

Keep me posted and let me know if it's still running smoothly for you.

[CapitanPiluso]

Afteer installing when I try to enable USNI data I get
"usnidata.grp" has already been altered by the "LwAmi_Mod" mod.
"usnidata.ndx" has already been altered by the "LwAmi_Mod" mod.

Is this OK ??

thanks

[dd149]

Afteer installing when I try to enable USNI data I get
"usnidata.grp" has already been altered by the "LwAmi_Mod" mod.
"usnidata.ndx" has already been altered by the "LwAmi_Mod" mod.

Is this OK ??
Yes, this how JSGME works, you just click Ok and it will amend the files again. This happens when you enable one mod with another one already enabled.

[Molon Labe]

Afteer installing when I try to enable USNI data I get
"usnidata.grp" has already been altered by the "LwAmi_Mod" mod.
"usnidata.ndx" has already been altered by the "LwAmi_Mod" mod.

Is this OK ??

thanks
There isn't any need to enable the USNI separately. The 3.10 package includes the USNI update released shortly after 3.09. As long as you extracted the files into the graphics folder and ran the zusniinstaller.bat, when you enable 3.10, the USNI archive gets copied over along with the DB, doctrines, and 3d models.

[CapitanPiluso]

Ok, thats right now, thanks again !

[pjb1]

When using the akula when doing the loadout the 65cm and 53cm torps dont show up and as the 65-76 and ugst torps, when launched they show up. Also in the usni they have reverted back to the stock description and no 65-76 or ugst entry. It was correct in 3.09 or did i possibly do something wrong i followed the install instructions to the letter.

[Molon Labe]

The only way to change the name of weapons as seen in the interface is to alter the .dll's, and that is something we've never done. We also haven't edited or replaced the USNI entries for those weapons.

[pjb1]

The only way to change the name of weapons as seen in the interface is to alter the .dll's, and that is something we've never done. We also haven't edited or replaced the USNI entries for those weapons.
i uninstalled 3.10 and put back in 3.09 and the 65cm shows as the 65-76 in usni so somrthing happened between 3.09 and 3.10

[TLAM Strike]

i uninstalled 3.10 and put back in 3.09 and the 65cm shows as the 65-76 in usni so somrthing happened between 3.09 and 3.10

Did you install our mod over another?

3.10 does not alter the torpedo's TOC file in the USNI or the USNI files for the 65-76 torpedo.

I just checked the file I uploaded to SUBSIM.

[pjb1]

Did you install our mod over another?

3.10 does not alter the torpedo's TOC file in the USNI or the USNI files for the 65-76 torpedo.

I just checked the file I uploaded to SUBSIM.

i installed following the install txt to the letter. I have other mods on PC but use the jgsme. Will try on my laptop it has only Lwami.

[nohouan]

To Molon :
Don't worry, I know that my Database is now a mutant, so I won't go MP.
But that didn't solve the problem entirely, other plateforms are messing with the game. Can't tell wich ones, but never mind. It's still playable (sort of), and as Fleet Command did the same kind of CTDs, so I'm used to it.

Bye, guys !

[Molon Labe]

To Molon :
Don't worry, I know that my Database is now a mutant, so I won't go MP.
But that didn't solve the problem entirely, other plateforms are messing with the game. Can't tell wich ones, but never mind. It's still playable (sort of), and as Fleet Command did the same kind of CTDs, so I'm used to it.

Bye, guys !

Alright, but if you have any new information on when the crashes are occuring we're definitely interested. I haven't been able to reproduce those crashes on my end so I can't fix them yet. Also, I think you should look into your system specs and see if the crashes are related to that rather than the mod, since you're still getting them with the "appendix-free" database. Or maybe it's both, as in your graphics card doesn't like the new models. :-?

[nohouan]

No problem, I'll do that and tell you what I find.

[nohouan]

Ok.:o So.
I still haven't found the cause, but I am making some sort of a list, with suppositions & platforms involved, wich is as follow :

-Vishnaya, CTD after multiple commands were issued (Raising, lowering masts, changes in speed & depth, etc). Plateform : Kilo Imp.
-CTD occured after counter-detection by a Victor III, DW original campaign, mission 3. Plateform : 688(i).
-Usually, no CTDing during missions if 3D interface is not accessed.
-Observation of CTD redundancy : Not crashing often when testing plateforms on a clean edited mission, but when a lot of plateforms are present. Guessing : maybe communications between plateforms is the cause (exchanges, behavior modifications, etc). Otherwise, more simply , possible memory buffer allocation for DW insufficient on my comp., but no clue as to how to enhance it.
-Usually, no CTDing during missions if 3D interface is not accessed (it does happen from time to time, but it's very rare).

I know it's not much, but reloading the game sometimes every 2 minutes can be annoying:doh:.

[Gorshkov]

Too many CDTs! I am not going into this mod. :down:

[goldorak]

@ nohouan : so many CTD point to a failure other than the mod.
Graphics drivers can be a culprit, also sound drivers are very finicky moreso if you use integrated sound audio. Try updating graphics and audio drivers.

@ Gorshkov : how about installing the mod before spouting nonsense ?

Many people are enjoying Lwami 3.10 and none have these continuos CTD.
What does that tell you ? That the mod is at fault, or most probably that nohouan has some kind of hardware / software incompatibility ? ;)

[Gorshkov]

@goldorak: What about becoming to know what this forum exists for? :haha:

@LWAMI Team: Your PSL values are ridiculous:

- American: Seawolf, Virginia: 55, 55
- Russian: Graney, Borey: 55, 56

Sorry but I didn't know such amazing PSL levels can be achieved after rusting 15-20 years in Russian shipyard and not having any technological progress in that time due to economic crisis and fall of Soviet R&D base. Strictly speaking I have to use DWEdit to correct these funny values to 57 and 58 respectively for both "brand-news" Russkie nuclear subs founded on 20 years old Soviet technology. I suppose in real life noise level of both these subs is most probably not much better than old Akulas but I won't waste my time to edit all Russian subs PSL values in the LWAMI 3.10 mod. Well, I also tuned PSLs of Astute to 56, Akula II's to 58 and Victor III Imp to 63 so now nuclear subs noise level seems to be rational enough:

- Russia: Victor III 67, Victor III Imp 63, Akula I 63, Akula I Imp 59, Akula II 58, Borey 58, Granay 57

- US: LA 62, LA Imp 58, Seawolf 55, Virginia 55

- UK: Switfsure 63, Trafalgar 59, Astute 56

And please don't give me an explanations like "game-play balance" and similar BS. ;)


PS. Well, it seems that someone have already changed both values to 56 and 57 respectively as I noticed in DWEdit. That was move in right direction but rather too short one, I am afraid. :)

[Molon Labe]

Don't you think you're splitting hairs when your preferences are only a point off from where ours are?

The LWAMI values are based on publicly available charts on noise levels. Subs not on those charts are estimated based on the sub type, country, and year, as well as any information noted about those platforms regarding whether they are unexpectedly noisy or quiet for their generation.

http://toocan.com/lunog/media/blogs/halibut/images/submarine_relative_db.jpg

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/nssn4.jpg

http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/images/349.jpg

[Gorshkov]

I think your pics look well but they are a bit far from reality as for latest Russkie nuclear subs. :haha:

After I spent a lot of time researching area of Russia's weapons development programs since 1991 I am sure my estimates are more precise than those present in LWAMI because they only show faulty constant linear estimation of noise reduction level along with time which was not the case. Moreover above values refers only to theoretical Russian subs noise levels - in real terms they are now louder due to bad maintenance and prolonged build-up periods. I think both lead ships of Borey and Graney classes are more noisy than they should. Conventional subs are another story but Russia lost technological race here too. Lada's AIP propulsion turned out to be a complete disaster and moreover all AIP technology based on electric sources is false path as Germans discovered lately. Now only Stirling engine technology is sole proper AIP solution - "Long live to Sweden!" :)

We shall see how this situation evolves but it is rather certain those days Russia will be able to keep race in the nuclear subs stealth with Chinese only because US Navy is outside their reach. Well, during last 20 years China spent a lot of time and effort copying latest Soviet submarine technology with help of hundreds "imported" Russian naval scientists and now PRC possesses at least Delta IV and latest Victor III technology with rather bright future in sight [095, 096, 097(?) sub types] - Chinese Navy is raising as hell while Russian Navy is declining rapidly.

Anyway test detection radii of Seawolf/Virginia (PSL=55) against Graney/Borey (PSL=57/58) and vice versa.

[Molon Labe]

Until better sources become available, I'll stick with the graphs, thanks. :D If it's any consolation to you, the Russian subs in general have a steeper sound-speed relationship, so the base PSLs make US and Russian subs more even than they are practically in the simulation.

[Gorshkov]

I am afraid "better sources" about latest nuclear subs are top secret. That is why we have to stick on indirect data and make some realistic estimates basing on many factors. Taking all that into account I think Russian shipbuilding industry is now finished once and for all. Read Russian military press if you speak Russian. Often very interesting data can be found there. Expect no Russian Seawolfs, buddy. ;)

Anyway the basic trend is clear: Russkies go down while Chinese go up. In the near future Russia will become weapon importer, not exporter - exactly opposite as China. Can you believe that? Twenty years ago this county was able to produce almost all kinds of known weapons itself... :rotfl2:

[goldorak]

I am afraid "better sources" about latest nuclear subs are top secret. That is why we have to stick on indirect data and make some realistic estimates basing on many factors. Taking all that into account I think Russian shipbuilding industry is now finished once and for all. Read Russian military press if you speak Russian. Often very interesting data can be found there. No Russian Seawolfs, buddy. ;)

Anyway the basic trend is clear: Russkies go down while Chinese go up. In the near future Russia will become weapon importer, not exporter - exactly opposite as China. Can you believe that? Twenty years ago this county was able to produce almost all kinds of known weapons itself... :rotfl2:

:haha: if your indirect sources are nothing more than heresay then the better solution is to stick to published public sources. Wether they are american or russian. Otherwise any dude can come up and say, "the cousin of the cousin of my cousin told me that the virginia could go to 42 knots. I swear it". Ok 42 knots max speed it is.
Sticking to published sources is the right thing to do, because except for officers/sailors that work onboard subs (and know its secret characteristics, and performance) for the rest of us, thats 99% the rest of us such data is simply not available.
What are your realistic estimates ? You realise that your realistic estimates are as good or bad as any other realistic estimate ?
And that the only correct values are known only to a few people ?

[Molon Labe]

I am afraid "better sources" about latest nuclear subs are top secret. That is why we have to stick on indirect data and make some realistic estimates basing on many factors. Taking all that into account I think Russian shipbuilding industry is now finished once and for all. Read Russian military press if you speak Russian. Often very interesting data can be found there. Expect no Russian Seawolfs, buddy. ;)

Anyway the basic trend is clear: Russkies go down while Chinese go up. In the near future Russia will become weapon importer, not exporter - exactly opposite as China. Can you believe that? Twenty years ago this county was able to produce almost all kinds of known weapons itself... :rotfl2:

Of course the best sources are top secret, that's why we have to go by the best data out in public and estimate the rest based on that data!

Regarding the Chinese and Russians, that is an interesting development. The Chinese are still decades behind the Russians in submarine manufacturing, but they'll catch up pretty quickly once they decide to make it a priority. It's amazing to see how quickly they've developed their ASUW capabilities and, more recently, their AAW systems. They do an excellent job reverse engineering Western and Russian designs while adding their own adaptations in the process.

I hadn't really considered whether the Russians would need to start importing, but I think you're right. Shipbuilding at a minimum is in shambles, and any defense industry in general needs consistent spending to keep the factories in shape, which means the whole Russian defense industry is probably equally screwed. That is, unless their export sectors can keep parts of their industry alive, even if the Russian military themselves can't afford the equipment. Flanker exports seem to be doing well, along with several missile designs.

[Gorshkov]

@goldorak: Read again what I wrote and don't be funny again. :rotfl2:

@ML: You are wrong thinking Chinese are decades behind Russkies in the submarine technology. They are now pretty close! Chinese have Delta IV and Victor III technology for sure and what is more important they grabbed Russian know-how thanks to hiring many unemployed Soviet naval specialists. What you also should take into consideration is huge Chinese intelligence activity in the all post-Soviet space which resulted in gaining plethora of interesting stuff there. Well, I am not sure if PRC did not also capture Akula and Borey level of technology that way. In sum next generation of Chinese nuclear subs after 093 and 094 types will be on par with latest Russian models. Moreover Chinese established robust military industry while Russian military industrial complex is in ruins. The best proof is now PRC offers domestic Flanker's copy for export so Russian export incomes will drop considerably! :rotfl2:

[Gorshkov]

I constantly get CTD in Akula's "S.D. Breakout" mission.

[Molon Labe]

@goldorak: Read again what I wrote and don't be funny again. :rotfl2:

@ML: You are wrong thinking Chinese are decades behind Russkies in the submarine technology. They are now pretty close! Chinese have Delta IV and Victor III technology for sure and what is more important they grabbed Russian know-how thanks to hiring many unemployed Soviet naval specialists.

I said the Chinese are several decades behind, but that they'll catch up quickly thanks in part to reverse-engineering of Russian designs. Now you say they have Delta IV and Victor III technology, and that they have access to Soviet expertise. The Delta IV and Victor III are from the 1980s. It is now 2010. So if they have Delta IV and Victor III technology now, they are 3 decades behind the Russians. And you apparently agree with me that they'll catch up.

So how can you say I'm wrong when you are in complete agreement with me?

Edit: I will disagree with how fast they'll catch up; the reports now are estimating that the 095 SSN will remain behind the Akula I in quieting (see graph above, also cited here: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33153.pdf)

[Gorshkov]

First those "new" Russian subs are not much quieter than Akulas as opposed to common belief because Russian R&D base crippled 20 years ago - so Graney and Borey subs are essentially also 1980s to early 1990s vintage technology. Second another reports claim China has also acquired Akula's technology which is now introduced in their brand-new designs after finishing development of Delta and Victor III clones. Moreover Chinese progress is very fast while Russians sit idle in their mess and lack of money. All it means both Russia and China are now almost equal in submarine technology but lag about 15-20 years behind the US (Sewolf, Virginia). Another point is numerical strength of Russian and Chinese nuclear submarine fleets is also far below US/NATO level.

[goldorak]

First those "new" Russian subs are not much quieter than Akulas as opposed to common belief because Russian R&D base crippled 20 years ago - so Graney and Borey subs are essentially also 1980s to early 1990s vintage technology.



How about some sources ? English or Russian, your pick.



Second another reports claim China has also acquired Akula's technology which is now introduced in their brand-new designs after finishing development of Delta and Victor III clones. Moreover Chinese progress is very fast while Russians sit idle in their mess and lack of money. All it means both Russia and China are now almost equal in submarine technology but lag about 15-20 years behind the US (Sewolf, Virginia).


Blah Blah Blah.
You know, you wouldn't be able to publish a single book with all the non facts you're telling us.


Another point is numerical strength of Russian and Chinese nuclear submarine fleets is also far below US/NATO level.

And what does that have to do with technical innovation ?
The 688i are the backbone of the us submarine force, and they are 40 years old. Although they have been upgraded over time, the basic design is almost half a century old. Even the Virginia is a downgrade from the Seawolf class, and only 2 of those were built before the end of the cold war killed the program. Americans are very conservative for instance in weapons design, the russians love to experiment just have a look at their extensive arsenal.

[dd149]

Chinese are having extensive effort ongoing to catch up, but as can be seen in other areas of the manufacturing industry, stupid copy and reverse engineering is one thing, consistent high level engineering is another one. Catching up not only with so called specialists for hire as they have done for space application, but also build up a competent engineering and workforce, as well as crews provided with doctrines, which have taken decades to develop for the western and Russian navies. Silence of a ship has a lot to do with high standards in fabrication and proper maintenance, as it has to do with a good design stolen from others. The US navy is obviously keen to avoid funding cuts and therefor is prone to create the modern day equivalent of the non existing "bomber gap" of the cold war era.

[TLAM Strike]

And what does that have to do with technical innovation ?
The 688i are the backbone of the us submarine force, and they are 40 years old. Although they have been upgraded over time, the basic design is almost half a century old. Even the Virginia is a downgrade from the Seawolf class, and only 2 of those were built before the end of the cold war killed the program. Americans are very conservative for instance in weapons design, the russians love to experiment just have a look at their extensive arsenal.

We built 3 Seawolfs, USS Jimmy Carter SSN-23 was the 3rd. ;)

[-GrayOwl-]

@goldorak: Read again what I wrote and don't be funny again. :rotfl2:

@ML: You are wrong thinking Chinese are decades behind Russkies in the submarine technology. They are now pretty close! Chinese have Delta IV and Victor III technology for sure and what is more important they grabbed Russian know-how thanks to hiring many unemployed Soviet naval specialists. What you also should take into consideration is huge Chinese intelligence activity in the all post-Soviet space which resulted in gaining plethora of interesting stuff there. Well, I am not sure if PRC did not also capture Akula and Borey level of technology that way. In sum next generation of Chinese nuclear subs after 093 and 094 types will be on par with latest Russian models. Moreover Chinese established robust military industry while Russian military industrial complex is in ruins. The best proof is now PRC offers domestic Flanker's copy for export so Russian export incomes will drop considerably! :rotfl2:

Gorshkov: Buy ANY Chinese goods - and you learn what it is technology! :rotfl2:
You can learn it - only from the bad party. :D

Concerning technologies SSN (nuclear!) - Russia never gave these technologies and will not be give them in the future (As well as however and other countries).

You can pay attention - that any country, did not sell the nuclear submarines.
Once, Russia gave in rent for India Charli-1, but flatly has appeared to sell this Sub.

[TLAM Strike]

You can pay attention - that any country, did not sell the nuclear submarines.
Once, Russia gave in rent for India Charli-1, but flatly has appeared to sell this Sub.

Yes Russia leased to India a Charlie class SSGN, it is also leasing a Akula to them soon.

Also the US gave nuclear propulsion designs to the UK for its 1st SSN. HMS Dreadnought was said to have a British front end and an American stern.

[goldorak]

We built 3 Seawolfs, USS Jimmy Carter SSN-23 was the 3rd. ;)


My bad. 3 it is then.

[-GrayOwl-]

@goldorak: What about becoming to know what this forum exists for? :haha:

@LWAMI Team: Your PSL values are ridiculous:

- American: Seawolf, Virginia: 55, 55
- Russian: Graney, Borey: 55, 56

Sorry but I didn't know such amazing PSL levels can be achieved after rusting 15-20 years in Russian shipyard and not having any technological progress in that time due to economic crisis and fall of Soviet R&D base. Strictly speaking I have to use DWEdit to correct these funny values to 57 and 58 respectively for both "brand-news" Russkie nuclear subs founded on 20 years old Soviet technology. I suppose in real life noise level of both these subs is most probably not much better than old Akulas but I won't waste my time to edit all Russian subs PSL values in the LWAMI 3.10 mod. Well, I also tuned PSLs of Astute to 56, Akula II's to 58 and Victor III Imp to 63 so now nuclear subs noise level seems to be rational enough:

- Russia: Victor III 67, Victor III Imp 63, Akula I 63, Akula I Imp 59, Akula II 58, Borey 58, Granay 57

- US: LA 62, LA Imp 58, Seawolf 55, Virginia 55

- UK: Switfsure 63, Trafalgar 59, Astute 56

And please don't give me an explanations like "game-play balance" and similar BS. ;)


PS. Well, it seems that someone have already changed both values to 56 and 57 respectively as I noticed in DWEdit. That was move in right direction but rather too short one, I am afraid. :)

CNO CONGRESSIONAL TESTIMONY: House National Security Committee Testimony, 1996 Defense budget, February 22, 1995:
“... The Russians today have six submarines at sea that are quieter than the 688(I)s, our best submarine.
This is the first time since we put Nautilus to sea that they have had submarines at sea quieter than ours. As you know, quieting is everything in submarine warfare.”
But even as these words were spoken, the Soviet era had given way, and the submarine warriors had a few years to rest on their laurels. :D

Under the statement of the representatives US NAVY, on operative speeds about 5-7 kts, noise submarines such as Improved Akula, fixed means of hydroacoustic investigation, was less noise USS such as Improved Los Angeles. According to the chief of an operative department US NAVY of the admiral Jeremy Boorda, the American subs were not able to accompany Improved Akula on speeds less than 6-9 kts (contact to a new Russian sub was held in the spring of 1995 at east coast of USA.


And statement by Norman Polmar:

As the Soviet submarine force advanced in these areas, U.S. submarine leaders held to the view that the U.S. submarine force was superior because of our lead in acoustics or quieting. There were, however, ominous signs that the Soviets were making progress in submarine quieting. The Soviet Akula class, which went to sea in the mid-1980s, was far quieter than expected. The Akula's appearance led to a House-sponsored study that concluded that because of Soviet submarine acoustic quieting, "We believe that the [U.S.] Navy must, in effect, 'start over' in its approach to ASW."

Addressing specific Soviet submarine developments--called into focus by the unexpected low noise levels of the Akula--the report continued:

... it is true that the Soviets' submarine R&D [research and development] program is extremely ambitious, [it] seems to over-look no promising technologies, and--in that it dates back many years--is no flash in the pan. As a result of their years of intensive research it appears that the Soviets may well be ahead of us in certain technologies, such as titanium structures and control of the hydrodynamic flow around a submarine.

But far more important is the improvement that the Soviets have made in submarine quieting. The problem is not that Soviet submarines are now quieter than ours; they are not. But after decades of building comparatively noisy submarines, the Soviets have now begun to build submarines that are quiet enough to present for us a major technological challenge with profound national security implications.

The Improved Akula SSN, which went to sea in 1990, soon revealed that the Soviets had surpassed the U.S. Navy in some areas of acoustic quieting--the Improved Akula was quieter than our newest attack submarines, the Improved LOS ANGELES class. Admiral J.M. Boorda, the Chief of Naval Operations, told the House:

This is the first time since we put NAUTILUS to sea that [the Russians] have had submarines at sea quieter than ours. As you know, quieting is everything in submarine warfare.

While we are told that the SEAWOLF is the quietest submarine in the world, one wonders if we have "all" the data needed to evaluate the acoustic signature of the Akula II, and the potential noise level of the Russian SEVERODVINSK, now on the building ways. If the past is any guide to the future, it is likely that the SEVERODVINSK will be significantly quieter than the Akula series--and quieter than the SEAWOLF, which was designed several years before the SEVERODVINSK. Discussions that I have had with senior officials of Russia's Rubin and Malachite design bureaus reinforce the view that future Russian submarines will be quieter and have significantly improved performance.

True, the size of the Russian submarine force has been cut in half; relatively few submarines are going to sea; and the construction of new submarines is proceeding at a sluggish rate. But the Russian submarine force remains, in the words of the U.S. Director of Naval Intelligence, the "technological pacing challenge."

[Gorshkov]

Gorshkov: Buy ANY Chinese goods - and you learn what it is technology! :rotfl2:
You can learn it - only from the bad party. :D

And possibly that is why Russkie military industry buys now Chinese machine tools because their own machine industry bellied-up. Go somewhere else propagate your BS about Russian "R&D power", buddy. :rotfl2:

PS. Russia is now finished as modern military and industrial power. It is decades behind the West in new technologies. Again and again refurbished the same old Soviet junk is the best proof of deplorable Kremlin's position. Now Russkies go to the West cadging for new weapons and equipment (warships, UAVs, TIs and so on) because their own stuff is ridiculous or non-existent. So don't tell us about Russian lead in submarines - Chinese not only bought from Russia what they needed but also robbed Russia from "top secret" technologies, too. Now China has five times bigger military budget than Russia and they do not have such overwhelming mess as it is present in Russia so the result of such technological race is rather obvious.
You also apparently confused Russian Navy with US Navy because the latter in fact decreased submarine fleet two times since the Cold War. Yet Russian Navy shrinked about ten times from 362 subs in 1985 to about 35 seaworthy subs now. Well, this is not surprising if you remember on average Russkies introduce now one sub every ten years instead of several ones yearly then. However US military still twaddle to Congress some Sci-Fi stories about "powerful Russian subs" most probably to get more funds to counter fictional threats. Yeah, and many new Mr. Boeings are happy to give them money...do you remember "missile gap" and race to the Moon? That is how this machine works. :)

So go to fool naive public showing them stuff from the Red Square parades with Brezhnev's era junk! My advice to you is to watch much less Putin's TV news about "resurgent Russian power" and similar idiocy. :rotfl2:

[TLAM Strike]

do you remember "missile gap" and race to the Moon? That is how this machine works. :) yea sure, explain why the US Atlas V rockets use Russian Proton Engines? Or why the Russian moonship the Soyuz is still flying as the shuttle is about to bite the dust?

A Ukrainian firm Antonov is about to drop it hat in the the ring for the USAF's new tanker. Politics will dictate that they don't get it but Antonov heavy lift aircraft are just as good if not better than our Lockheed C-5s. In fact the An-124 ships a lot of US and European aircraft and space gear around like the Centaur stage of the aforementioned Atlas V.


<SNIP>

Great post there GrayOwl, we used several Norman Polmar publications as source material. :up:

[dd149]

Lets us not be driven to sterile and sometimes offensive comments here. We are all glad the the game improves due to a joint effort of the community, whether we are from US, Russia, Belarus, various European countries or others, and the forums allow us to debug and exchange on the game, let us not waste them for one-sided arguments. We French people have always been listened to and had the chance to convince RA team to issue a new French playable, We have also exchanged with both RA and Lwami teams for sound levels and so on, but we respect their ultimate decisions, they are the one who do the hard works, it is easy to criticize, but without them and their availability, DW would still be in infancy and abandoned by Sonalysts.:yeah:

[Gorshkov]

yea sure, explain why the US Atlas V rockets use Russian Proton Engines? Or why the Russian moonship the Soyuz is still flying as the shuttle is about to bite the dust?

- First think about lamentable end of such thing like...Buran. :rotfl2:

- Second you should know after USSR's collapse US also robbed Russkies from some interesting pieces of Soviet technology for testing or their own use. Nothing strange here because in few selected areas Soviets possessed good stuff.

- Third think about MIR space station's fate and who was sending in outer space so called "space tourists" and why. :)


A Ukrainian firm Antonov is about to drop it hat in the the ring for the USAF's new tanker. Politics will dictate that they don't get it but Antonov heavy lift aircraft are just as good if not better than our Lockheed C-5s. In fact the An-124 ships a lot of US and European aircraft and space gear around like the Centaur stage of the aforementioned Atlas V.

Yes, An-124 is as good as C-5 but unfortunately it appeared 25 years later. Well, another example of Russian lead in high-tech...by the way Russkies still cannot produce powerful high-bypass turbofans engines because the sole such engine's producer - a "Motor-Sich" factory - remained on Ukraine. Well, US designed such engines during C-5 program about 45 years ago and now third generation of HBR engines is in use in the West. :)

[TLAM Strike]

- First think about lamentable end of such thing like...Buran. :rotfl2:

- Second you should know after USSR's collapse US also robbed Russkies from some interesting pieces of Soviet technology for testing or their own use. Nothing strange here because in few selected areas Soviets possessed good stuff.

- Third think about MIR space station's fate and who was sending in outer space so called "space tourists" and why. :) The Buran was killed due to funding not to any technical or deisgn flaw, in fact it was in many ways a more refined design than the STS.

We didn't steal the Russian engines for the Atlas V, it was good so Rocketdyne partnered with the Russians to build them.

What about Mir? The lessons learn from it will prove useful in any future Mars missions- that was part of its purpose. So they sent some paying customers up for a ride? They beat Branson too it! :yeah:


Yes, An-124 is as good as C-5 but unfortunately it appeared 25 years later. Well, another example of Russian lead in high-tech... :)Something to be said about letting the other guy make all the screw ups for you. ;)