@GunnersMate
 

Well since it seems you have received your copy of DW and have been playing in the OHP, how does the DW version handle in the sea compared to the real thing?

Seems a bit more - responsive. The turn rate is about 50% quicker in the sim and the APUs are a lot more powerful on the real thing. Acceleration seems about 50% faster as well. And the deacceleraion in the game is totally out the window :o From a flank bell to a stop bell in the game is more like a crash stop. :doh:

BTW I was a helmsman and I wish the helmsman control panel had the real controls.

What about the speed loss when you hit full rudder at any speed especially flank?

Also should the Perry heel over more in a hard/fast turn?

At flank with a 30` rudder speed loss should be about 3-4 kts.
Ship should heel between 30-40` with 30` rudder and flank bell.

BTW- Dont subs have an APU? Called a dolphin d1ck?

Cool things to tell SCS then.

Agree,


I said it way way earlier that the max speed lost during a 30 deg helm should not be more than 5 to 6 knots.

on our Canadian frigate I never noticed more than this.

For torpedo evasion, in this Sim, that is a must to reflect like in RL.

We should be able as well to fire a salvo of two missiles with the same Fire control radar on the same target!

sounds very logical, as a semi active missile just need a radar return to home.
once the radar return is found by the missile (and so, the target is illuminated by one radar), I don't see why more than one SM2 couldn't be guided onto the target with the same radar beam.

This should allow you to launch as many missiles as you want on a target already illuminated, and not just one missile per radar.

Yes. It retracts into one of the aft ballast tanks. Handy little bugger to have around. In addition to its obvious uses, it's also our third backup to the main engines.

I have never heard it called that though...we always just called it the APU.

OKO wrote:

``sounds very logical, as a semi active missile just need a radar return to home.
once the radar return is found by the missile (and so, the target is illuminated by one radar), I don't see why more than one SM2 couldn't be guided onto the target with the same radar beam.

This should allow you to launch as many missiles as you want on a target already illuminated, and not just one missile per radar.``

Absolutely right unless the actual Weapon System or the Command and Control system of the ship is limiting it.

It shouldn't be too hard to fix since we were almost able to do it, but it looked more like cheating since we had to reload very very quickly to do it.

We should go ahead with this for sure!!!!

I forgot also to mention : this is how AIM-7 Sparrows works on fighters.
As soon as target is locked, you could launch as many missiles as you want, all the stock if you wish ...
I can't see why a bigger radar (even a naval one :lol: ) couldn't also do that !

With this (realistic unless proved wrong) feature, ASuW engagment with SM2 should be much more deadly for the surface targets, just limited by the reload time of the MK13.

You must not have been a nuke. Lord knows how many times I have heard over the 2MC (or was it 7MC?? Good.. I forgot something!) on a drill.

"Prepare to lower the outboard"

I have never heard it called anything else. In Nuke school, which at the time was 637 biased, all the instructors would call it that. Seeing as I was on a 688 and that was what we called it, I figured that was the standard nomenclature for the thing.

:D OKO -Flight sim aerial targets rarely require 2 Sparrows and further targets need redisignation.
OK if they are suicidaly, and rarely, in a nice neat formation.

In practise it is difficult enough to maintain the painting and lock on one target without enemy interference.
Hence the Sparrow has largely now given way to active or semi- active missiles.

The AIM-7 did have the Lock on Jamming capablity which has only recently been givien to the AIM-120. So if your Air Force dosn't have the latest (and most expensive) AMRAAM having the cheaper AIM-7 might be a better thing to have in place of the older AMRAAMs.

If you are going up against something like an AWACs or a heavy bomber launching several SARHs might not be such a bad idea. (Talking real life here). A big multi-engine aircraft might be able to survive one or maybe even two hits if its really lucky (they hit a non-critical part of the plane or something.)

umm stupid question but why not use a Shrike or a HARM ? :hmm:

Against a EW Bird? : :hmm: Is an ARM even A/A capable? :o