ai radar/visual issue or my install ?

[OKO]

Originally Posted by OneShot

Real:
- Keep the masts up for more then 30 seconds and you are probably toast (I think there is a reason why there is heavy emphasis on quick sweep training for sub skippers), because every platform with a capable Radar has got ya on screen. And given the statements from some former and current TACCOs, the P-3 Radar is perfectly capable of detecting a mast.

I'm sorry but masts are made in composite to AVOID, as long as possible, any detections.
So even IRL, you need to be close to the masts, and need lots of sweep to detect them.
Especially in high sea, where radars should probably be unable to detect anything like a mast from the sea clutter (I use a real radar on my boat and I can tell you on high sea it's a real mess to detect even sail boat with special radar return device -I don't know the english name sorry-)
Masts are also a very faint contacts compared to a ship of course ...

Originally Posted by OneShot

- Getting to the surface takes a bit more time and getting up on the sail definitly more then 2 seconds. Which means the Airborne Platform might have already targeted and fired at you some missile to end your fun.

Are you talking about patch 1.04 ?
With 1.03 and before, you need more than half a minute to come from PD to SAM depth.
This often lead to see an Orion going above you without beeing able to engage him, because it is too late.

Originally Posted by OneShot

- Even if you get a shot off in time, it might be possible to spoof the missile.

as it is in DW, with just releasing some flares ...
A friend of mine is a real expert at this thing : when he know he is in dangerous area, he often release falres and firing SAMs to him become really hard.

But IRL also, aircrafts will not have any detection device against a heat seeker, except on some very recent planes (I know french fighters only -not helos- have this now, I don't know for other countries).


Well I don't see the problem anyway
I learned to use RTE on aircrafts to AVOID to go in the dangerous area, after beeing burned quite a few times by SAM.

On helo, you have a dipping sonar, this allow you to detect the sub at much more than 3 times, the range of the SAM, (talking about LWAMI settings) and engage it in a total safe area for your plane.

So, what do you want exactly ? That subs become only a target without any possibilities to get out of your torps ?

I couldn't be agree with that, sorry !

Aircraft have plenty of means to engage subs without going in the dangerous 3 miles area of them.
I really find the actual situation even for both subs and aircrafts.
On MP matches, there is near 50% of kill beetween them, and I personnally don't want to change that.

Of course, if mast detection could be implemented, this should be nice.
But not what I read, because masts are something VERY difficult to detect.
The first detection device is sonar, not radars, against subs.

[Palindromeria]

hmmm
is there something generally just wrong with ai helo's ?
why do i have to goad them into firing at me ?

ran this tester a couple more times. stayed down . noticed one pass over me and must have got mad contact. the other 5 helos all reacted and they all changed altitude to about 40 ft and spd 130. i went to flank.
they follow and follow and follow circle circle circle repeatedly passing directly overhead....... rarely if ever fire ....

in general im not finding the ffg or helos to be very aggressive at all. (cmon shoot at me ya humps)
when i set helo for sonobouy search instead of dropping in the area designated they just kinda fly off ( ???? !! )
ffg will fire some torps but dont ever really break form to SEARCH and HUNT me down - they just lob a torp my way from 6 miles and keep on truckin'...

i think there is maybe a helo engagement thingy i need to download ?
(among other things)

i am aware the lwami addresses this as well.
it think also addresses lotsa things i havent even encountered yet
not sure how much i will have to learn unlearn relearn on this ...

i tried to go to the script thingy in mission editor to cause damage to the sam launcher but its not an option. spose that woulda been too easy eh ? On the bright side, i noticed that i can destroy torp tubes

maybe a script ?
If ( sub destroys helo and sub depth does NOT = "surface" )
then (all sub torp tubes destroyed)

[Palindromeria]

Originally Posted by OKO

Are you talking about patch 1.04 ?
With 1.03 and before .....

erm - ah - hmmm

patch 1.04 ???? :hmm:

when/where do i get it ?

[Molon Labe]

I think that even with composite materials, masts would be detectable if the receiving radar was close enough and if the mast was painted for long enough to stand out of the clutter. OS's 30 seconds sounds fair, perhaps generous at close range situations.

[OKO]

Originally Posted by Palindromeria

erm - ah - hmmm

patch 1.04 ???? :hmm:

when/where do i get it ?

it's still in beta test
not public

[OKO]

Originally Posted by Molon Labe

I think that even with composite materials, masts would be detectable if the receiving radar was close enough and if the mast was painted for long enough to stand out of the clutter. OS's 30 seconds sounds fair, perhaps generous at close range situations.

30 seconds mean less than 3 radar sweeps.
It's probably more around 6 to 8 sweeps IMHO.

I agree mast should be detected if they are always rised and the detecting platform is quite close to them, in light seas.
But that's far from beeing as crutial as it is mentionned in this thread, and the detecting platform will need some luck to be in range for detection and out of range for sam.

This give you a VERY small area and very short time for an Orion to detect before beeing in the SAM range ... Or he will need a big luck (just in distance to detect with a course avoiding the SAM range)

What I mean is : this is a detail, and certainly not crutial, IRL as in DW.
There is enought means to go without it.

Let me give you a link about this "last ressort" weapon (the embarqued SAM) and the way it's going to be developped

=> http://www.dcn.fr/us/offre/equipements/airdefense.html

not so "last ressort" for the futur isn't it ...
And with these systems, aircrafts will be the real turkeys.

[OKO]

To be complete : I would have appreciated detectable masts
But DW, as it is actually, will not allow it.
That's not a reason to say it's a big problem when it's a small one.

What would you have said if the conning tower couldn't be detected by radar and visual !

If you compare a conning tower to masts, you could see there is a real huge difference of volume
Not even comparing masts to a ship hull ....

[Molon Labe]

Originally Posted by OKO

To be complete : I would have appreciated detectable masts
But DW, as it is actually, will not allow it.
That's not a reason to say it's a big problem when it's a small one.

What would you have said if the conning tower couldn't be detected by radar and visual !

If you compare a conning tower to masts, you could see there is a real huge difference of volume
Not even comparing masts to a ship hull ....

I don't think its a huge issue, since time has to pass before they'd be detected, but it's still a little aggravating. Before I realized that they didn't show up at all, I took an MH-60 out and I was investigating an active contact with MAD run to see if it was a sub or biologic. I had my finger on the trigger for a torp and a penguin and my eyes on the water for a periscope. The ****er surfaced a few feet in front of me and killed me while the Pengin's "fire" light was still flashing. Had masts been visually detectable, there was no way I would have missed the periscope and I could have attacked with a torp before he surfaced...

Next time I'll just listen closer on the dipper from 2.6 miles out, but still, it would be nice...

[OneShot]

A good reading on the whole issue of ASW : The Third Battle by Owen R. Cote, Jr.. Naval War College Newport Papers.

A closer look at this reveals the impact Radar on Air/Surface Platform has/had on submarine detection. While composite material is certainly a lot harder to detect, remember Radars have become quite powerful nowadays. And as I said before, there is a reason why exposing of any of those masts (incl. the periscope) is something the subs are not really fond of.

Either way, the ability to completely avoid detection currently (on behalf of the subs as far as masts go) gives them a clear edge against Air platforms if they have to venture within the range of the SAM.

Its OK to be beaten by good tactics but it sucks to get beaten by an exploit.

[LuftWolf]

Considering most missions designer still like to put a sub in the middle of a 10nm circle and put a big arrow that tells the airdales "SUBMARINE HERE!!!", I'm not losing sleep over the whole mast issue.

If the ASW searches were performed over reasonable areas and the submarine had something to do other than scan the sky for helos and p-3's, I think we'd see a lot fewer cases of bubbleheads starting missions with their balls up against it already and needing to come shallow because they know an airdale is going to be on them within 30 minutes at the most.

I'll start taking the whole issue of masts more seriously when ASW search areas get bigger in missions and bubbleheads are still hanging around the surface even when they ought to be doing something else.

[OKO]

the problem is, on what you say, you need laaarge scenarios during many hours /

One other solution I start to use is to put Orions quite far away from the search area.
this way, subs have time to position themselves during half an hour without beeing threathened from the first 5 minutes of game.

But this mean orion will have nothing to do for 30 mn except cruising.

[goldorak]

Well since the bubbleheads seem so keen on breaching the surface the airdales have a new tactic.
Its not optimal because mad/sad can't be used and the camera is near to useless but at 100% the p-3 will be out of reach of the subs.
Take as a loadout only dicass and cruise at 6000 ft out of sam range, drop buoys all over the area and start pinging.
Sooner or later the sub will show out and a torpedo will be launched at him

[LuftWolf]

Yes, the AI uses buoys very well.

If you are in a P-3 in a mission, and you have a lot of AI platforms in the search area, you can drop a good buoy pattern and the AI will do most of the actual work.

That's why I think that moving to larger search areas isn't such a bad thing.

In any case, if the sub driver is essentially tasked with AA duty in a mission, then of course he will find it necessary to use his SAM launcher.

I guess it would be good for mission designers to strive for around 50% or less detections by airplatforms in missions (that percentage can be a lot less if there are other friendly platforms around), since detection more or less means a sure kill.

[Palindromeria]

Originally Posted by LuftWolf

Yes, the AI uses buoys very well.
.

so how do i force ai to immediately drop buoys upon contact ?

how do i script the helos to randomly place a sonobuoy field ?

using "sonobuoy search" results in helos driving off to nowhere.

am i required to place all sonobuoys myself in the mission script itself ?

helos set as "in station" also rarely break formation despite the fact that one on "random box" or an ffg has picked me up.

i cant seem to program decent ai defenses without going way overboard on the # of vehicles defending.

[LuftWolf]

Ah, that's the rub...

The AI does not DROP sonobuoys on their own very effectively, however, once the pattern is in the water, the AI will read them well.

Some mission designers have found it useful to place sonobuoy fields on their own using place object triggers, sometimes in combination with an planned aircraft fly-by.

You can post over in the mission design forum to see what the mission designers say about this. Personally, I have recommended placing the buoy fields yourself in the mission design phase and then just making sure there are platforms around to read them.