Going a bit MAD

[goldorak]

The only way to be invisibile to mad/sad sensors is :

• either go deep
• or the aircraft is flying at high altitude
• or the aircraft is flying at low altitude but not passing over your head.

You as a sub skipper have control only over the first point.
If the environment doesn't give you deep waters you don't even have this choice so sooner or later the air units will get you.
In this case you have to shoot them down unless you want to be sunk by an air dropped torpedo launched directly over your head.

The tactic for shooting down air units is to stay at periscope depth. Use esm for bearing information and periscope for visual confirmation. Once you have the p-3 or helo in your periscope pop up and launch several sams. Depending on the mod the time to recharge can vary quite a bit. So always try to shoot down the enemy on the first sam.

[NFunky]

About how close does say, a P-3 have to be to see clearly from the SAM launcher station? I believe when you are aiming and firing the SAM, you are looking with no magnification. As I mentioned earlier, I have a bit of a visual impairment so I have a real hard time using all the visually based sensors like periscope, the HF sonar, and especially just standing on the sail where I have no bearing info or magnification. Despite this, I can usually use peri effectively against regular sized merchants and warships at attack ranges, but I haven't ever really tried using it to look for aircraft. What's a reasonable visual range for a P-3 with 8x zoom?

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by goldorak

The only way to be invisibile to mad/sad sensors is :

• either go deep
• or the aircraft is flying at high altitude
• or the aircraft is flying at low altitude but not passing over your head.

Or hang out near a big well known chunk of scrap iron on the sea floor...

[NFunky]

Would that work in DW? I forget if DW itself or LwAmi include any sunken ship entities, but assuming they did would they actually confuse the in game MAD sensors? I would guess yes for player controlled aircraft, but no for AI controlled, but that's just me speculating.

[Dr.Sid]

With stock database it is problem. You can sink ship, but it would be removed from the game in a while and it cannot be controlled (IIRC).
However to make new object with MAD properties would be fairly easy. Would be good suggestion for those new mods.
Anyway if I ever used MAD it was for final confirmation of the target. The first contact was always made using buoys. However I did not play aerial units that much.

[goldorak]

Actually a nice thing in RA, are the helos.
They can be programmed to use mad/sad sensors and once they get a contact you'll get a nice classification (hostile, neutral or friendly) automatically.
And they can even prosecute the contact on their own. ^_^

[NFunky]

I believe that RA includes shipwrecks as sub entities, but I don't remember stock or LwAmi having any. I would be interested in how the AI would handle hostile and neutral MAD contacts practically on top of eachother.

I agree that in most cases, sonar would be the primary method of sub hunting. However, in a place like the Persian Gulf, if I set the bottom type to sand, a Kilo at 2 kts or less is basically undetectable by sonar (buoy or dipping). This is why I was thinking about using several aircraft with MAD to search the Strait of Hormuz. The strait is not very large and a fixed wing aircraft can sweep a good amount of water with MAD in a relatively short time.

I was trying to think tactically from the POV of an Iranian Kilo. The U.S. and other gulf states would have a good number of airborne ASW in the area, P-3s and helos, maybe an old S-2 or something. Iran would most probably use their Kilos for covert minelaying rather than direct action, but either way they would be detected before they could complete their missions. I've run a few test scenarios and it seems that there is no real way for a Kilo driver to remain undetected if there are more than two aircraft doing low altitude sweep searches with MAD.

[Molon Labe]

Two aircraft is a lot of resource to throw into such a small basket as the Strait, at least if it's just the narrowest area. It's just a function of the number of square miles they can sanitize in a given timeframe; make the area small enough and they can get it pretty much airtight. ASW becomes a challenge when the search areas are very large. Mine operations don't have to take place in the high-value real estate; there is a whole rather large Gulf with lots of traffic to mess with. Using self-propelled or drifting mines increases the area a sub can threaten if high-value routes are being patrolled. And there are also territorial airspace issues that create areas where subs can slip through without being monitored by opposing air. The Iranians definitely have a card to play as far as mine operations go.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Molon Labe

Two aircraft is a lot of resource to throw into such a small basket as the Strait, at least if it's just the narrowest area. It's just a function of the number of square miles they can sanitize in a given timeframe; make the area small enough and they can get it pretty much airtight. ASW becomes a challenge when the search areas are very large. Mine operations don't have to take place in the high-value real estate; there is a whole rather large Gulf with lots of traffic to mess with. Using self-propelled or drifting mines increases the area a sub can threaten if high-value routes are being patrolled. And there are also territorial airspace issues that create areas where subs can slip through without being monitored by opposing air. The Iranians definitely have a card to play as far as mine operations go.

That is exactly the reason the Iranians are building a new naval base near Pakistan in the Gulf of Oman, the Kilos will be based there from what I have read while their Midget Subs are going to a based on that largeish island south of Bandar'e Abbas.