LwAmi 2.02 Test 1 Baffles.

[Bellman]

Is this a concession to playability ? In practise we then only move a small step towards realism with sub baffles ?
I am concentrating on a bubblehead perspective only so my remarks are focused.

NTSC 'Greenville' Report P 11 Note 15:-

''As is typical of all submarines, interference from noises generated by the Greenville itself prevented the sonar system from reliably detecting sonar signals between approximately 120 - 240 deg. relative to the vessel's bow. This arc astern of the vessel is known as the ''baffles'' area, and a submarine has to periodically alter course to uncover this null are, or
''clear the baffles,'' for the sonar system ''

We second guess that there is a difference between SA and Conf stern limits. I suspect there is and SQs responses
to my "Swivel Arrays' topic/thread seems to indicate that the limiting factor on sensor coverage is 'own-noise' and therefore both arrays will share the same boundary interference and performance reduction/s.

If I was to guesstimate I would say that your new limit for SA is about right for Conf and the SAs stern limit
boundaries could be 100 (110) - 220 (230) degs.Figure it this way the sub is cigar shaped with a reduced prow profile
therefore the maximum girth amidships the vessels own construction will block sternwards receptivity at that point.
And that is not to include 'slipstream' turbulence which is much more likely to be heaviest at midships.
The conf can be abaft this point lying in quieter flow and would be expected to have a greater arc of coverage sternwards.

But it remains true that all we have in print is the report. Reality (?) v Gamers who I know in the past have
said to this proposal - 'Dont make it more complicated !'