I know it's in, but I'm curious if this is a clue about bottom bounce and how it is programmed in.

But then, can you get echos without targets? How much is it modelled? Bottomed subs near certain bottom features are more, or less likely to give false returns, then?

The goal is to think of ways for subs under active persecution to create some confusion, or for surface ships to avoid it. If you can't mark the other returns, it's not really a big deal.

Btw, it has always seemed that faster subs are more easily detectable on active in these games. Is that true in DW, too? Is there some good reason for the magnitude of the affect (in reality)?

Faster subs are indeed more detectable on active sonar by a signficant degree. No one that I know has a good explanation for this, at least not one they are willing to share. :88)

So I'm not really sure about its presence in DW.

Sound does do some very strange things some times, the paths of sound are rarely straight from one object to another because sound bends in water depending on the SSP.

In that situation, its entirely possible that you were only getting direct line noise from the submarine, and the majority of its sound was hitting the ocean bottom underneth you and bouncing away.

A pity the knuckle isn't modelled when you do a tight high speed turn.

Could it be modelling the effects of Doppler? The sonar processor emphasizing returns that are slightly different from the base frequency because moving targets are more likely to be real targets?

That's a definate possibility, but I am not convinced with my lay knowledge that such a doppler shift given the relatively low speed of submarines verses the speed of sound in water would really matter at the level we are talking about.

Although sonar processors are remarkably sensitive devices. :hmm:

The speed ratio b/w a 5m/s sub versus the about 1500m/s (something like that) speed of sound through water is 1:300. The speed ratio b/w the 300m/s plane versus the 300,000,000m/s radar signal is 1:1,000,000. If anything, the doppler difference should be more pronounced with sonar than radar though of course sonar is trickier due to all those layers in the water...

Well, that's a bit easier to test in DW. Have the sub running perpendicular at a run and at a trot :)

I'm not clear with how interpreting doppler shifts would help. You pick up ANYTHING near 20,000Hz and that's your baby.

While your giving me your hypothesis, also tell me whether two active emitters could confuse each other (as each emitter hears the other at the frequency)?

Thinking more about it, active sonar must be simplified incredibly in DW.

If that's so, reading active sonar returns would be greatly simplified in DW and real life - the screen would be nice and black for most of its scan except for the blips now shown in high contrast, almost as easy to read as radar. In fact, there are some reverbs from the water. There will be reflection off the surface (huge change in Sound Velocity) and the bottom (another Huge Change), some off the layer, some off ice ... all in all a fair amount of noise to deal with.

It is probably simplified, but the best guess I could come up with is that they are trying to simulate Doppler.

As for the possibility of interference, I see no reason why not in real life. However, it could probably be electronically supressed - I understand something similar happens with radar, and modern sets are supposed to squelch this kind of thing.

The WLR-9 Active Sonar Intercept is close to DW's Active Intercept.

EDIT: DW's Active Intercept is close to the WLR-9 Active Sonar Intercept in the fleet. :know: :yep:

I assumed that the background noise in the game's active sonar display was simply generated, as with the noise in broadband. Otherwise, I'd like to be able to mark contacts anywhere I want, even if I'm very wrong.

It is probably generated - who would believe the noise is the same all the way around. But it is supposed to represent something in real life, albeit very crudely, and I think it is all the reverbs through water, layers, various obstacles ... etc.

Not that I mind it being generated - the blips are so hard to see on the Akula sonar that I basicaly click at random in a general area on the screen...

This has been a subject of much debate regarding how the active sonar should actually work in-game.

I guess I missed that debate. I'd say the gameplay changes are quite positive and of course, it must be more realistic.

Maybe it's a programming challenge -- updating the contact to correspond with the finds of subsequent active pings would be impossible without more or less programming the same logic they might use on the real deal.