Above water related points/suggestions/issues

[Mau]

Hi all,

I would like to discuss quickly here about points related to air and surface actions witht DW.

Most of the time we are talking about subs when we have great assets we can use to conduct anti-air and anti-surface operations (of course we have sub that we can use against surface vessels and the very few (and it should be very few) occasions that subs can attack slow and low aircrafts.

CIWS: This wants to be as well a suggestion may be for Luftwolf/Amizaur Mod. What do you think by having possible collateral damage when a missile is being engaged by CIWS (let say a random 0-10% damage).
We all know that if a missile is being engaged at close proximity from a ship, that parts at that speed will still come on the ship and probably hit the ship (but not the warhead). Would it be feasible?

Engaging missiles over the Horizon with AEGIS:
I think a misconceptioon of AEGIS here is that you can and are supposed to attack low seaskimmer missile farther than the horizon (i.e. greater than approx 20-25 Nm).
This is wrong. AEGIS can track and engaged (with up to 16 missiles in the air) many missiles when they are tracking it with their own radar
Now if an helicopter (far ahead) are seeing missiles coming (low skimmer) yes it can and should link it right away so that we know and are prepared to engaged as early as possible when we have a
a contact radar coming (we can actually sow Chaff very early - even better we hear vampire inbound)
Reading what Luftwolf was seeing on what is coming (and I am actually very happy that we work on the air side - thanks Luftwolf - on 2.02 is great but I think that what we are talking here by being able to launch and attack Sea Skimmers far with SM-2 on Link tracks is called more or less the CEC (Cooperative Engagement Capability) We are still very early in that capability.
But again I think that being able to see it earlier by the helicopter would be great because I think right now it is not done properly by the game.

By having proper flight profile would help
In this Convoy scenario that we are attack by AS-4, if we just change it by having a realistic altitude of the aircraft (for the launch - because the AS-4 will and has to be launch from no lower than 18000ft - than we can engage it early. Just place the TU-22 at a range greater tan 80NM so that we cn't engage it with the SM-2
I propose that all high divers missiles would not be being launch at an altitude lower than 10000feet (for all mission designers)

In all real life launch of those big high diver missiles the aircraft will have to be high to see the ship on radar or that the missile (if anti-radiation) will receive emission of the source.

I have so much more stuff to say, add or suggest.
I will stop here and post another message later

Thanks Luftwolf/Amizaur for your great work.

Mau

[LuftWolf]

CIWS: This wants to be as well a suggestion may be for Luftwolf/Amizaur Mod. What do you think by having possible collateral damage when a missile is being engaged by CIWS (let say a random 0-10% damage).
We all know that if a missile is being engaged at close proximity from a ship, that parts at that speed will still come on the ship and probably hit the ship (but not the warhead). Would it be feasible?

This would have to be done at the doctrine level, and take much programming to make work, and probably interfere with missile function. So I'm not sure we can do this, at least not without significant effort. Also, I think the armor plating on warships would do a fair job of protecting against this kind of debris.

In terms of the AEGIS systems, Tgio, who is working with us now, has narrowed down the problem of the AEGIS and other missile systems to their firecontrol radars, which need some definate reworking as previously their detection curves were severely limiting the ability of the platforms to engage all targets. Once those are tuned to realistic parameters, then seaskimming targets should attacked at the horizon, around 15-20nm, assuming they are detected at the maximum range allowed by the curve of the earth, and high altitude targets should be detected and engaged around the max range of the SM-2, which seems to be the correct behavior based on all accounts. So, the limiting factor on engagement for AEGIS vessiles in game will be the ability of their firecontrol radars to illuminate the target for the semi-active seekers on the SM-2, as is the case with the actual platforms IRL.

Thanks Mau! :up: :rock: :arrgh!:

[LuftWolf]

In this Convoy scenario that we are attack by AS-4, if we just change it by having a realistic altitude of the aircraft (for the launch - because the AS-4 will and has to be launch from no lower than 18000ft - than we can engage it early. Just place the TU-22 at a range greater tan 80NM so that we cn't engage it with the SM-2
I propose that all high divers missiles would not be being launch at an altitude lower than 10000feet (for all mission designers)

Yes, I absolutely agree with this.

There is a balance between what we can do as modders to "force" the game to behave realistically and what mission designers can do to "create" realism in their missions, as well as achieve a playable balance. We both have to do our part to give players the best-possible gameplay, and that, most often, involves respecting the real-world parameters of weapons and platforms, on both sides. There are clear limitations in the engine, and the more experience both the modders and mission designers acquire, the line as to what is each camp's responsibility will become clearer, we will all achieve greater proficiency in our craft,and the simulation and the missions designed for it will achieve greater levels of complexity, playability, reality, and FUN! :up: :rock: :arrgh!:

It's just great, from a personal standpoint, to have the opportunity to work with so many talented and dedicated individuals over such a long span of time on such a project with the great potential as DW. :D

Cheers,
David

[Tgio]

To be honest, I don't know when I could give LW the updated radar/range version of th mod. Simply because I have to search "real" detection ranges for ALL radar (nav, air and FC) and ship radar signature.

At this point of the work I have done 100% of FC, 50% of other radars, 10 % of radar signatures. Then I have to balance them.
They are soo many that I'm starting to think that I'm a radar sensor myself ;) .

I have to figure too why some aircraft have (in stock db) a radar signature of 0. :doh:

About FC radars (stock). They were yet :88) ALMOST ALL :88) limited to horizon (22nm) , but due to sensitivity and missiles sgnature they can react only at about 10 nm.

Something similar for other radars, but with greater (...) differentiation.

Looks like SCS done about 15 standard type of radars in total and then changed only the names...