LW, what's the status of Lwami 3.0? Done with the Readme yet?

Been working like a dog... I have some time now.

So I HOPE to be able to finish tomorrow.

:o :huh: :|\ Angles and Dangles.

Well I'm almost speechless - yeh right. (That will be the toe turn-up day ;) )
SCS have waved a magic wand with the new physics model.

I'm not saying more - a guy has to make a kill now and then. Sufficient to say that I've been dancing torps
without using a single CM and it really is possible to pull some fancy moves now. I'm talking avoidance in from 3 nm.
Now if we have SCX2 type ping rates within that range that would be neat eh ? :hmm:

Bellman, are you talking about stock 1.03 or 1.03 with Lwami 3.0?

A long time ago I asked why it was important for attack boats to be maneuverable (and not just fast). One answer was that maneuverability was important for evasion. But how could maneuverability actually help against a torpedo, which was faster and maneuverable enough? That's one big piece of metal and torps don't have to explode on contact...

Well, perhaps I have an answer!

Driftwood - all my tests posted in this thread has been with stock 1.03 which only has Amizaurs
New Torp Speed and Depth Beta Mod which I have also been testing.

I have a separate instal with switchable LwAmi 3,0 Beta.

Three14 - give it a roll. My last test was with 3 self-directed Mk 48s activated in a spread within 3 nm
- angles and dangles saved my bacon. Plus speed, depth, timing, turning tightly etc. I am not suggesting the DOD
would allow close modelling of the performance of real avoidance manouvres but I am very impressed with
what SCS has been 'allowed' to simulate. :|\

Generally speaking if a submarine is in the position where the torpedo has acquired it and is actually homing, it is going to be in world of hurt more often than not because as you pointed out the torpedo is faster and more maneoverable than a submarine in most cases.

However, the whole point of submarine torpedo evasion is to never get acquired in the first place by the weapon. The procedure for avoiding a torpedo after it has been fired but before it has acquired because it is still some 3-10nm away is called "clearing datum", with datum refering to the area that your opponent's probably solution places you in (a datum can vary in size based on how strong the solution is). Once you have figured out that you have an inbound TIW (torpedo in the water) you need to do two things generally speaking, clear the datum into a place that the torpedo is not likely to be going and put a counter measure or two between you and the torpedos likely path.

For more information on torpedo evasion, see this thread at the CADC: http://www.orionwarrior.com/forum/showthread.php?t=47 :up: :arrgh!:

Cheers,
David

:D Yes, as ML points out over at CADC - aspect ratio is very important ! ;)

Yep...that's the standard stuff. But for me it doesn't really explain how much SSN's benefit from their vaunted maneuverability as compared to an SSBN.

Standard doctrine also doesn't answer for me how you'd avoid 2 or 3 torpedoes. Sure they cost a lot, but it's a lot better than being dead!

Ok, sorry I couldn't explain it better, but that's pretty much my best shot... :)

In terms of weapons used... my feeling is that standard Cold War doctrine for submarines involves a lot of stalking and repositioning, so after hours of maneoving for a shot, you would fire when you feel that one torpedo stands a significant chance of making the kill, so more than one torpedo is not necessary, then again, Cold War submarine tactics are not something I am strong in, so perhaps someone else with more knowledge could answer the second part of the question.