Simple hull array question

[NFunky]

Why exactly is the hull array only available in narrowband for the 688(I)? I mean, what are the technical reasons that narrowband frequencies can't be correlated into broadband contacts?

[SeaQueen]

Originally Posted by NFunky

Why exactly is the hull array only available in narrowband for the 688(I)?

Because SCS said so.

I mean, what are the technical reasons that narrowband frequencies can't be correlated into broadband contacts?

None.

[Janus]

Does it mean real L.A. 688 class subs don't have broadband hull array either or only in Dangerous Waters?

[goldorak]

Originally Posted by Janus

Does it mean real L.A. 688 class subs don't have broadband hull array either or only in Dangerous Waters?

The latter, as SeaQueen said its because SCS said so.
So learn to live with it.

[Dr.Sid]

Originally Posted by Janus

Does it mean real L.A. 688 class subs don't have broadband hull array either or only in Dangerous Waters?

I wonder does LA have hull array at all ? I know it has sphere and towed. What about hull ? What about HF ? Do subs have imaging HF sonars ?

[Ghost Dog]

now youre getting into some possibly classified stuff. Some sources i've seen give the 688i class a hull/flank array of some kind. (I cant quote them im at work) the 688i is known to carry the MIDAS HF under-ice imaging sonar. pretty much every submarine which operates under the ice needs some form of remote-sensing/imaging. this usually comes in the form of an HF sonar. Theres some speculation about Russian boats like Victor and Akula class (and probably delta, typhoon and borei as well) which may have HF sonar or some sort of LLTV (low light television) or both.

[SeaQueen]

Originally Posted by Dr.Sid

I wonder does LA have hull array at all ? I know it has sphere and towed. What about hull ? What about HF ? Do subs have imaging HF sonars ?

Yes, it has a hull array. It's a wide aperture array much like on the Seawolf, and that's not classified. They also have mine and ice detection sonars. That's not classified either.

Actually the treatment of the flank arrays on both the Seawolf and the 688(i) has always bothered me. They should be more similar to one another, including the capability of passive ranging. That's the whole point of being "wide aperture." It allows one to resolve bearings very finely and have lots of beamformers. From that you can triangulate range. I feel like in the absence of being able to reveal any detailed specific technical information, they were searching for ways t differentiate the various US platforms in the game. Just making one quieter, deeper diving, and faster than the other one wouldn't be enough. Bare in mind even the maximum speeds of the platforms is classified. What's published in opened sources are just estimates. As a result, they did things like put external countermeasures on one, but not the other, etc. I think they did it just to make them more different. There's plenty of opened source information about what sorts of equipment these warships have, just not specific engineering information.

Sometimes it actually surprises me how much stuff is unclassified. Like I found some things on the EPA's website once about acoustic countermeasures in an environmental impact statement that really floored me. When I thought about it, nothing there really told you about how the countermeasures really worked, but it did tell you a lot about how they were ejected. I guess nobody cares about whether you can learn how build a countermeasures ejector if you're not sure the countermeasures you're ejecting really work. :-)

[jmr]

Ok I'm no expert on this stuff but I thought WAA technology was first introduced in the Seawolf class . . . so does that mean that for the 688i's that go in for refueling are retrofitted with WAA gear?

[MarkShot]

It might be interesting to if not in absolute sense, but in a relative sense to know what platform differences are realistic and what are just artificially so that it wasn't simply just different GUIs in the game.

For example:

(1) Relative speed
(2) Relative op depth
(3) Relative noise
(4) Relative sensors

Of course, the other issue you have is where things may well be functionally different, but resolve to the same underlying model and just different skins are used to to create a difference. Surely, there must be differences between various sonar sets, but it is likely that the underlying model for all of them are the same. At best you have a few different skins and data presentations.

[Ghost Dog]

Originally Posted by jmr

Ok I'm no expert on this stuff but I thought WAA technology was first introduced in the Seawolf class . . . so does that mean that for the 688i's that go in for refueling are retrofitted with WAA gear?

Well the 688i is fitted with the BQG-5D WAA. this was probably retrofitted when the entire sonar suite was 'digitized' from its old BQQ-5 set into the integrated BQQ-10 system.

in DW, the hull array represents this system you just dont get the "rap loc" feature of the seawolf WAA. but I find that it sure helps to have a tracker in the hull array on a contact for TMA.

[Bubblehead Nuke]

Originally Posted by MarkShot

(1) Relative speed
(2) Relative op depth
(3) Relative noise
(4) Relative sensors

Seawolf is:

Faster - Bigger power plant and improvements in hull hydrodynamics.

Deeper Diving - Better hull materials. hull design better for deep submergence thanks to CAD. One of the design goals was to correct the lack of depth ability over the previous generation of SSN's. They wanted to at least regain the depth ability of the 637 class of SSN's.

Quieter - Lessons learned from all the previous boats are applied to the seawolf. From published reports, it is quieter at 'patrol speed' than a 688I is sitting next to the pier.

Sensors are approx the same sensor suite as a 688I

With that being said, the sensors may be of comparible quality, the computing power that is available to crunch on that data is far better on a seawolf. I have not set foot on a seawolf, but from the publically available data, there is a LOT more computer power in the seawolfs fire control system to make sense of everything.

[Ghost Dog]

Originally Posted by MarkShot

(1) Relative speed
(2) Relative op depth
(3) Relative noise
(4) Relative sensors

I think I know what you're getting at. As far as the sonar model goes, yeah DW probably uses one model for all platforms and just modifies it based on each sensor being used.

but make no mistake, the platforms in DW are different and not just GUIs slapped on to make you think theyre different. Test it out yourself by making a few quick scenarios with the subs.

each sub in DW is different in all respects you mention. The kilo is quieter than the akula for example, and the seawolf is faster and deeper diving than the 688i and so on. they even have different dive and turn rates which DO correlate to thier physical model. they have different washout speeds for sonar and different depths which their sail breaks the surface. they even have slightly different cavitation speeds.

now, as far as realism? well depends if youre using LWAMI or not too I guess. remember that some aspects of the game are for playablilty and multiplayer balance. so, DW is both a sim and a game. and its probably as close to 'real' as youre gonna get without joining the navy.