If only this were possible, or is it?

[XabbaRus]

Intermittent noise.

I was thinking along the lines of a mooring chain for a mine. Watching several documentaries about WWII subs and there was the mention of how the sonar guys could hear the clanking of the chains. Now this would be an intermittent noise, not constant. How would this work in DW? You could have a sound file that loops where there is a lot of nothing and then a bit of clanking. How would this look on the BB screen? Would it be doable?

Oh and also would depth charges be modelled? I'm not sure if we have vessels equipped with them or if they use them but I think they should be included. They were in SC but if IIRC they didn't work too well.

[Wildcat]

I don't think it would work without some major changes. The graphics on the bb sonars are independent from what you hear. That's why even if you can't hear a whale call, you can see it as a constant, steady sized spike. This is unfortunate. It would be nice if the graphics on the BB were drawn in proportion to the amount of noise coming from a noise source, but also in correlation with what sound is being played.

There might be a workaround where you could set an object to have an engine with 0 thrust that emits noise at random times, but this would still cause narrowband traces to be visible unless you set the frequencies super high or low.

[suBB]

Originally Posted by XabbaRus

there was the mention of how the sonar guys could hear the clanking of the chains.

sheeesh.. after reading that.. that sent shivers up my spine worse than raking fingernails across a chalk board.

Originally Posted by XabbaRus

Now this would be an intermittent noise

Considering the chains as a transmission source, this reminds me of some stuff I worked on long ago along the lines of burst transmitter technology. I agree with the sound file, but I think it should be relative to seastate: higher seastate = more frequent transmissions, lower seastate – less frequent.

Originally Posted by XabbaRus

How would this look on the BB screen?

Good question. On NB I would say that one would experience intermittent contacts due to the transmission type, of course, but on western BB I would imagine it would display random amplitudes(clanking) then nothing or very faint. Eastern BB would be something to monitor for based on NB signature bearing.

On LWAMI 3.02 – A friend of mine on a team dive told me he heard my sub running aground and it showed up on BB then of course went away, so let's imagine what his bb waterfall looked like registering the intermittent noise? Because of that I think it could be tested how it would show up on BB, and if favorable, somehow implement the same mechanism for chains?

Originally Posted by XabbaRus

Would it be doable?

on a custom map.. most definitely as the designer can make a group of clanking.wav with varying amplitudes(soft to very loud) tied to multiple doctrines and scripts to check conditions for range between chains and sub/surface:

Off the top of my head:hmm::

As a platform approaches chains:

IF range <= MAX, start clanking_LOW.wav

IF MED < range < MAX = stop clanking_LOW.wav and run clanking_MED.wav,

IF MIN < range < MED = stop clanking_MED.wav and then run clanking_HIGH.wav.. etc

Depth charges would be a nice addition…

The main question I have still is about the BB signature, other than that, this can be done, I’d say…

[Deadeye313]

There's no point in depth charges anymore. Torpedoes are smart enough and cheap enough (compared to any sub) that there's no point in trying to get directly over a sub and drop depth charges.

[XabbaRus]

But real life units do carry them so in respect to realism it would be good.

[Zerogreat]

Thats strange, i would bet that in some subsim, SC or maybe 688(i) H/K the whale sound on waterfall broadband was not consistent, it was there just for a while, appearing and then slowly fading, making a trace on the waterfall looking like... this

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by Deadeye313

There's no point in depth charges anymore. Torpedoes are smart enough and cheap enough (compared to any sub) that there's no point in trying to get directly over a sub and drop depth charges.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually several times during the Cold War an intruding recon sub had depth charges dropped on it to tell it that it had been caught-submarine "shot across the bow".

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by jason taylor

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually several times during the Cold War an intruding recon sub had depth charges dropped on it to tell it that it had been caught-submarine "shot across the bow".

________________________________________
Rear Admiral J R Hill,RN, author of "antisubmarine warfare" thinks that the depth charge may actually have been underestimated.

His argument is twofold:

1. torpedos have a notorious history of bugs, depth charges are simpler

2. depth charges can keep a submarine hiding. The nature of a submarine is offensive-if it never attacks it might as well be sunk. the nature of a convoy is defensive-if it is not attacked it has succeeded

Obviously it is no longer a primary weapon. But it can still bust light bulbs and spill the captains coffee on his lap. After awhile the enemy will run out of light bulbs and coffee and all his captains will have scalded knees and ruined trousers. More seriously it scrambles his sonar and the sonarmans ears which are perhaps more important and less easy to repair.
Whether Admiral Hill is right or not I don't know-it was speculation on his part in any case. It is not able that that is the opinion of at least one respected officer. However it may turn out that the demands of a long war are to much for the production of modern weapons and more primative methods will have to be used.

[SeaQueen]

Originally Posted by Deadeye313

There's no point in depth charges anymore. Torpedoes are smart enough and cheap enough (compared to any sub) that there's no point in trying to get directly over a sub and drop depth charges.

I dunno... with detection ranges being as short as they can be these days, I wouldn't be surprised if depth charges retained some usefulness. This is a GOOD thing, mind you, but it's definitely not necessarily an unrealistic thing. They're not as good a homing torpedoes, true, but I don't see that they're entirely out of place.

[MuscleBob.Buffpants]

Depth charges are very handy for aircraft prosecuting shallow water contacts. Anyone ever had a torpedo stick itself in the mud when dropping it from an Orion?

[sonar732]

All post that I see show that the current mines are moored cabling, not chain. I understand that Iran used them in the mid-80's and Iraq again in the mid-90's, but they can't afford the newer technology mines. The whole point of the ASW mines are so that the OPFOR won't detect it before it either explodes or launches a MK46 at them.

[LuftWolf]

Sure, we could do intermittent noise on a random basis for some object if necessary.

[GhOsT55]

couple ideas i like it but they only used chain mines in shalo waters and if u did pull it off can u make the chain sound like its moving with the current.