I voted for ''Advanced Wire Control: the ability to change speed, acoustic mode, search pattern,
and depth for wire guided torpedoes. ' Those of us wanting the changed 'search pattern' element could well
have put the weight of voting in Advanced Wire Control. But all the main feature headings are highly desirable. :|\

I hope polling for a choice doesnt mean that some of the proposed features are not able to coexist ? :hmm:
Must a choice be made from a 'menu' or can we be greedy and say '' Bring it all on.'' Improved physics and advanced
wire control are not mutualy exclusive are they ? Both would be fantastic ! :yep:

A truly exciting prospect !

I'd like to have all of them, but whatever you add, I think the important thing is that it WORKS.

People want improvements, but they'd hate them if the improvement had too many quirks. See v1.03's new hydrodynamic model to see that in action.

Exactly. :yep:

Doesn't seem worth it really, what's the real benifit? Adds a bit more micromanagement to decipher the state of ones own torps without much gained from the changes.

Increased effective range and closing speed, probably realism as well.

Couple of quick points:

1) Has LWAMI ever contained any halfassed garbage? :hmm: No. So of course whatever is in the mod will work, that's my problem. You guys just tell me what would be ideal, and we'll give you the best we can do. :up:

2) Yes, theoretically I can have all the modes on the ADCAP you want, but of course has to be balanced out with playability. Yes, I can have a mode on the ADCAP where it uses its sonar in single beam mode to give the sensor some extra power and a mode where it uses its full frontal aspect homing sonar on a snake pattern for extra area coverage, as well as a circle reattack, both automatic and wire controlled. The only thing I can't see a way to do at this point is under-keel detonations causing extra damage, because of the way the damage model is limited in DW (farther away means less damage, even if that "farther away" is accounted for in depth under keel), but I'll seriously look into it.

Keep in mind, doing advanced features on a single weapon takes a great deal of time. So we'll see what we can accomplish.

Now for the GREAT news!

I have found out a way to reference the launching platform of a wireguided torpedo using some trick sensor and doctrine finagleing.

The long and the short of it is that I have the full status-referencing capabilities of the doctrines now to determine if wires will break or not (I can even introduce small random factors so players can't make exact calculations on when or when their wires will break, only know generally). :rock:

Ok, so now the question is, when should torpedo wires break? :hmm:

Right now I am working with a set range as mentioned above as well as having the doctrine monitor closeing and opening speed... if the opening speed gets too high (around 70 kts), the wire will break.

Ok, everyone who has ever wanted to contribute to a discussion of when wires should break in DW, with the idea that this will actually be implimented sometime in the next 20 years, this is your chance. Let me have it... now! :up:

Cheers,
David

PS Deathblow, no I don't see how I will be able to have the audio warning, since that is coded in the interface .dll's. Also, just for fair warning, you will probably still be able to shutdown the torpedo even after the wire has been cut, but all the other commands will be disabled... I will try hard to get rid of this, but no promises. All in all, I think the advantage of doing this far outweighs those two concerns.

PPS Thank you Henson for explaning how torpedo wires are spooled and out rigged.

:o ... :hmm: ... :|\

You made a sensor that will detect the launching platform and recognize it as such?! Please tell, how did you accomplish this?

I just spent a week teaching ADCAPs to a boat that has been shooting old MK48s up until now. You just happened to catch me at a good time.

I would say that the model you suggested is closest to reality. It doesn't neccessarily matter how far apart the weapon and O/S are. If the distance traveled by the two is longer than the wire it will probably break. Of course there's a little bit of play in that, and wires can (and do) break before that point. Another thing that causes wire loss is that the signal degrades to the point where there is no more good electrical continuity. We actually track the amount of electricity running across an open guidance wire in the fire control system. We used to have a hell of a problem with the wire getting caught in the screw as well, but that has been fixed for years.

Unfortunately I don't think I can tell you how much wire there is. I'll check on it, but better safe then sorry. Lets just say that with current realities and tactics, you should lose the wire becuse of a detonation well before you lose it because you ran the weapon too long.

Thanks for the reply.

About the total distance travelled by both the ship and torp mattering more than the distance between the ship and torp...does that hold true if the boat is travelling in the same direction as the weapon, and what if the torp was turned around to reattack a target and is closing range with the launching boat instead of opening?

Also, since we might be getting other wire breaks modeled, is there a limit to the turn rate, ship speed, or relative course that can't be exceeded without cutting the wire? (probably asking for too much, but I thought I'd try)

I gave the wireguided torpedoes an all-aspect visual sensor that is capable of tracking everything within about 15nm.

When the torpedo is fired, it detects the launching platform immediately and a special doctrine is called which tracks the launching platform. A variable switch and numerous parameter checks are implimented to make sure that special target doctrine gets assigned ONLY to the launching platform (this is done reliably). Also, the rest of the doctrine has been altered to make absolutely sure the input from the visual sensor is ignored completely so it doesn't interfere with other functions of the torpedo.

The special doctrine uses normal doctrine commands to monitor the status of the launching platform relative to the torpedo. When the conditions that allow the wire to break are reached, the monitoring doctrine sends a command to the main torpedo doctrine to change a variable from 0 to 1, and the wire commands are disabled.

This last part of the mechanism is the key... being able to have a target doctrine that monitors the launching platform and can also refer back to the main torpedo doctrine and change a variable. The last part is done with the SetEntVar command, which is not used in any stock SC, SCX, or stock DW doctrines that I can find... its only a minor note in a document relating to the SC doctrine interpreter published by SCS and edited by jsteed, and it took AGES to figure out how it worked in DW.

But it works now, and all this is quite reliable. :up:

So the question remains: when should torpedo wires break in DW? :hmm:

PS Henson... the info that Amizaur has places the length of the ADCAP wires at 10nm... I take it from what you said, that is too short. Perhaps that data he had was for a single spool... meaning the total range might by closer to 20nm? I know you might not be able to answer that directly, but is 10nm *way* too short?

How the heck thin is that wire anyway??? :huh:

Would it be possible to have range dependent variable chances of failure ? Egs. 10 - 12 nm 50 % , 13 - 15 nm 75% , 16 nm - 100%

In addition we are warned that wires brake when ownship turns more than 90 deg from torps bearing.
This rarely, if ever, happens but could this be implemented ?

Based on the idea that I don't think its possible for more than 10nm of wire to fit into a the fuel-tank of a torpedo whose total dimensions are 5.79m by .5334m and in light of the data that there is a spool in the submarine as well, here is the current plan:

The torpedo wire length will be limited in two ways:

1) If the true run of the torpedo is over 10nm, the wire will disable. This is simulating the 10nm spool in the torpedo itself.

2) If the launching platform exceeds a total distance of 15nm from the torpedo, regardless of the distance the torpedo has run or if the opening speed of the torpedo and the launching platform is greater than 60+/-5kts (random), with ownship speed contributing a maximum of 20kts to that total (meaning you could fire a torpedo at 35kts and be reasonably sure you can run around all day without breaking the wire), the wire will also break.

Of course the actual distances and speeds can be varied, but with both truerun and ownship conditions, our options for breaking wires are virtually unlimited.

We can do more or less whatever would be ideal.

Yes. This could simulate conductivity loss, which is probably variable in real life based on the specific conditions of the ocean, but random based on range would be good enough in game, since range is the only thing we really care about in gameplay terms (as opposed to water temp and salinity).

Possibly... I can reference ownship course and bearing to the torpedo, as well as ownships angle off the bow of the torpedo. I should have enough tools to do the math.

The 90 deg + breakage (possibility ?) would lead to some tight calls between cut 'em loose and 'scoot and run'
or finesse a turn and 'stay in touch'. Decisions which could increase reality and gameplay.

Could the angle calculation be referenced the bearing from sub to torps actual position, rather than launch bearing ?
Obvious in reality (but in game ?) The tactical possibilities then are extended - egs the offset launch which is resteered.

Edit. Posts crossed LW - I think you answered my last para !

Just so you guys know what has already been done:

Amizaur has completed the core of the Advanced Torpedo Control (ATC) and Wire Break Mod and the Advanced Torpedo Physics, as well as started the work of creating unique doctrines for each playable torpedo.

The work that still needs to be done is the Advanced Sensor Modelling, the integration of the ATC with the Advanced Torpedo Physics, finishing each unique torpedo doctrine and integrating everything with the database.

And that's just the torpedoes... check out the first post in this thread for everything we are working on, for what is now, LWAMI 4.00! :up: :rock: :arrgh!:

http://www.subsim.com/phpBB/viewtopi...=406982#406982

Cheers,
David

I may be a little late here, but 10nm (20kyd) is about right. We measure the length of the wire in feet, not yards, if that tells you something. We also don't worry too much about running out of wire...the in-game tactics of running a torpedo out for several miles is, IMO, unrealistic in today's tactical environment. Submarine battles are turning into knife fights, and while a torpedo at low speed will run forever, at high speed it eats up gas pretty fast.

A wire-guided torpedo runs a little bit differently at the very beginning (pre-enable) than an AMO (dumb, straight-run) weapon. It does something called a 'wire-clearance maneuver,' one of the effects of which is to allow the guidance wire to achieve that equilibrium I referred to earlier. That maneuver separates the motion of the torpedo from that of ownship, and has the added benefit of separating the wire from the screw. I don't see reason to model this in-game any further than what has already been recommended however.

Are there limits on O/S maneuvers while launching weapons? YES, but they vary by platform, and are so extreme that it's unlikely you would ever reach those tolerances. One of the main concerns, getting the wire wrapped around the screw in a turn, has been fixed by the wire-clearance maneuver. That limits some platforms in speed at time of launch, but not nearly enough to be a problem. If you're launching weapons at that speed you have bigger problems than losing a guidance wire.

The main limitations in course changes come from turning across the wire at high speed and catching it in the screw (note that this doesn't happen if you turn into it instead), and limitations that are placed upon the weapon before it enables designed to keep it from acquiring ownship (look to the experience of Dick O'Kane to find the reasons for that). There is a limitation on how far 'over-the-shoulder' we can launch an ADCAP because of that, but once again, it's a very small area that we're talking about, and not likely to ever be a concern. If it is a concern it's always possible to steer anyway, and is not very tactically limiting.

Pure Gold.

Thank you Henson. :up:

Cheers,
David

That's some pretty ingenious doctrine fixing LW. Wow. :|\

@Henson: Ditto what LW said, its interesting to know whats reality versus Hollywood. I have to admit that my own perceptions of wire breaks were guided mostly by Tom Clancy books :-? :oops:

Sounds like sub speed breaks aren't really the issue they seemed to be...

On a semi-realted note...what if... an ADCAPs snake is removed and the torp is near the limits of its wire. How does one know whether the torp is not responding to course changes because its wire has already broken or rather because its homing into the target... the only way that comes to mind is to temporarily preenable the torp to see if it actually turns off... anyone other way that one can think of?

Brilliant idea ! :up: Little complicated, but I'm afraid all the simple options are already used...

I'll try to answer some questions too tomorrow, about how it works and what do I know about torp wires and depth related slow-down. The 10nm of wire for ADCAP (20k yards) comes from various sources, 10nm in the torp and half of that on the spool like it was said already. I heard that before ADCAP, the Mk-48 had only in-torp wire (and less than 10nm) and launching subs were restricted in movement after torp launch because the wire would be broken if they went too fast or too far from launching point... the hundreds and thousands feets of wire in the water have to make very high drag if something tried to move (pull) it through the water, and would just break. So forget about summing up those two lengths. Wire in torpedo is for torpedo movement, wire on the spool is for sub movement in general, well at least at ranges greater than few hundreds yards. The wire can't be too thick and strong and as I said you just can't pull and drag a few thousands yards of wire through the water without breaking it... you can only move if you are losening free wire from a spool at your end of the wire. It's like walking few hundred meters on a field laying a thin wire or thread on the ground, and then trying to run without unrolling some more thread free - it would just break...

Have no idea what practical limitations are on launching platform to prevent wire breaking. I only heard that wire breaking was a major problem years ago (Mk-37 times for sure, maybe Mk-48 time?), but now it's resolved and chance of wire break is very small, even if launching sub is maneuvering... but... I think (or feel) that 180deg turn and all ahead flank could break a wire even today, with spool in the tube, and, well, exactly 180deg turn and run would cause the wire to get into screw I think...? There must be some forbidden maneuvers.

So I think that torpedo wire should break when torpedo runs more than 10nm from the launch point, or sub moves more than 5nm from the launch point, and personally I think that when sub is making some really extreme maneuvers too (high chance of breaking if turning close to 180deg or going flank or something like that). The last condition (ownship maneuvers) recquires that additional sensor and doctrine Luftwolf has made... I'll write more tomorrow, it's 1.42 AM here :-)

P.S. I liked very much the comment that combat between modern subs is like "knife fight" at close ranges :yep: , it's exactly what I thought and said many times after learning some about modern sub's noise levels, sensor limitations, real life tactics and scenarios. Yes, I know it's unplayable... but this is what happens when very modern subs can detect each other from as close as few hundreds yards, or few thousands at best... Then no wonder that 10nm of wire is more than enaugh, and that small range of many rest-of-the-world torpedos is usually enaugh too... Knife fight... usually doesn't matter than your knife is longer than mine ;-)

...