![]() |
Torpedo anti-Torpedo
Now it is official:
http://defensetech.org/2013/10/28/na...gy/#more-21660 And the Torpedo anti-torpedo from Atlas-Elektronik: http://www.atlas-elektronik.com/what...ons/seaspider/ |
Quote:
Not surprised - but I am a little surprised that they haven't worked on a simpler solution - like IR-seeking mortar rounds coupled to the sonar system. This is an existing technology against moving tanks. Without knowing this I should think a torpedo leaves a significant IR track. |
Quote:
|
So now we have a real-world example. That's great!
In accordance with what I said earlier: Quote:
BTW, thanks for confirming my suspicion that it takes brand-new 2010s sonar technology and special mini "interceptor torps" to do this, and you can't do it with old conventional sonars and any traditional torp and certainly not a Mk48. You just confirmed the Clancy-SSN implementation was arcadish :D. Thanks man! |
You don't need 2010-era tech to do it. It's just the USN needs to think about these things now that they no longer have ASW frigates to put in the wake of a carrier if someone launches a torpedo at it.
And it's not like the ability to detonate a weapon on command is some fantasy invention. The old Mk45 ASTOR had this very functionality and I'd be surprised it it weren't retained for later weapons. |
Hi Julhelm, I agree it's a combination of technological maturity and doctrinal needs but even back in the old days the sacrificial frigate was really more of a desperate measure against the Soviet wake-homing monsters rather than a conscious choice. It is reasonable to assume that if the USN had any other viable countermeasure they'd prefer it to losing an escort every time a Sov skipper got within range.
IIRC the command-detonation was a necessity in the Mk45 because it had no terminal homing of its own and relied on the firing sub's sonar picture for guidance (similar to nuclear SAMs in this manner). In Command we do in fact perform remote detonation of such weapons when they reach the estimated target position but it's something done automatically by the virtual sub crew, not manually by the player. Thanks for your input! |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0F8v...RmPoLE&index=5 Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I have to say something for you to re-actualize your "Realistic" game?... That is the perfect example of intelligence break down!....Or "Blow Back" for that matter! Be honest, you don't read between lines and you did not see it coming because you are not a ASW weapon system analyst. You just sell a computer game!... |
To be fair, there seems to be a trend among sim developers today to go with declassified, published data and only declassified, published data. Devs in the 80's and 90's went with published declassified data and a fair bit of guesstimation as to what was classified and ended up closer to real capability as a result.
|
Quote:
Could you possibly de-personalize your posts a little bit going forward. It perfectly fine to voice your opinions, but some of your posts are bordering on personal attacks, and that is something we can't have here at Subsim. Thanks JCC |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:15 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.