Blue Water Development Diary

johnbla · 03-06-20, 08:28 PM

Sorry to ask, but will this be released this year? My credit card is waiting.

Raptor_341 · 03-09-20, 12:57 PM

What is your current intentions for the campaign, insofar as the backstory and objectives? If the first area of operations is going to be the Black Sea and the Med, is something along the lines of this to be expected (Operations in the Black Sea and Bosporus)?

http://northernfury.us/blog/post24/

Cheers,

Raptor341

AzureSkies · 03-10-20, 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martes

The ensign regulations are confusing and different for various navies, but as a general rule the ensign on the stern and the jack are flown only on anchored ships in harbor and only in daytime, while underway they either show no ensign at all or fly it from the mast.

BTW, I will duplicate what I have written in Sea Power thread - since it's as relevant here - Will there be any options for non-combat interactions? Like capturing/inspecting/redirecting neutral or suspicious ships, picking up survivors from ships damaged or sunk, downed pilots, etc? When trying to play in heavily modified Cold Waters with a surface ship I encountered a reoccurring problem of damaged subs that blow it and surface, and straightly killing them feels wrong from all perspectives - and unlike a submarine you can't just ignore them.

Thanks for the input - I'm looking over many reference photographs again with this awareness and notice it now. It'd be a shot in the dark, but perhaps they fly the flag from the mast if they're a flagship for the Soviet navy, and if they're a formation/group leader for the USN? It's either that, something close to it, or even more circumstantial it looks like.

And yes. One of the reasons I chose the Sverdlov as one of these first few ships is because it offers a variety of gameplay experience. Pure combat can get a bit repetitive, so operations like that have been a plan from the very start, specifically with ships and aircraft leaving behind survivors to pick up.

Also it's an annoying and old trope in games that enemies never surrender. Zateyev may refuse help from USN warships during peacetime, but WWII U-boat incidents are probably a better reference for wartime encounters.

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnbla

Sorry to ask, but will this be released this year? My credit card is waiting.

I sure hope so!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raptor_341

What is your current intentions for the campaign, insofar as the backstory and objectives? If the first area of operations is going to be the Black Sea and the Med, is something along the lines of this to be expected (Operations in the Black Sea and Bosporus)?

http://northernfury.us/blog/post24/

Cheers,

Raptor341

The premise is a Soviet pre-emptive strike, believing that Able Archer 83 was a cover-up for a NATO first strike. As such, the Soviets would be making a limited counterforce strike around November 7th-10th, 1983.

At that time, there were two carriers operating in the Mediterranean, off Beirut, to support operations in Lebanon: CV-67 USS John F. Kennedy (only ship of her class, a non-nuclear Kitty Hawk variant) and CVN-69 USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (Nimitz-class). Notably, the USS New Jersey was also present at the time, and the only Iowa-class active until the USS Iowa was recommissioned on the 28th of April '84.

November 7th would be barely a week after the end of Operation Urgent Fury. With the distance involved, and the USS Independence arriving off Beirut on November 18-20, The CV-62 USS Independence (Forrestal-class) would've been underway somewhere in the mid-Atlantic en route to the Mediterranean.

It seems at the time the Slava was probably in port in the Black Sea, judging by US National Archive photographs showing it deploying to the "Northern Fleet Area" in August, and more photographs of it taken in the Mediterranean in September.

So that's the setup. Given the presence of USN Carriers in the Mediterranean and their immediate ability to launch nuclear attacks, as well as their strategic importance in a conventional war, they would make tempting targets for the opening salvos.

Campaign is awhile off, but one of my biggest aims with it is to make it highly fluid, with the player's actions having significant consequences beyond mere success and failure, with many possible branching storyline paths based on decisions made during normal gameplay, such as effectiveness/losses, success, and ruthlessness.

AzureSkies · 03-11-20, 12:49 AM

Hello again, everyone!

First off, I'm glad to announce the opening of a Blue Water Discord server: https://discord.gg/NK7D4Zy
Feel free to join, ask questions, discuss, lounge around and post memes, just use the right channel.

And for today's more regular update, a small feature for the RUR-5 ASROC.

The RUR-5 started development not as the ASROC, but as the RAT (Rocket Assisted Torpedo). But before it became operational in 1961, it was renamed the ASROC (Anti-Submarine ROCket).

78 Gearing-class destroyers were modernized with it, and many ships featured the ASROC's characteristic Mk. 16 8-celled "box" launcher with 4 independently-elevating dual tubes.

It could also be fired from Mk.10 and Mk.26 dual rails.

Sources vary somewhat with range, but a close average seems to be around 820 meters minimum and 16 km maximum (900 yards to 10 miles).

The system was solid-fueled and fired at a fixed launch elevation.

By 1983, units were the Mod 4 or Mod 5 variants, carrying either a Mk.46 torpedo or a nuclear depth bomb with a W44 warhead with a yield of about 10 kT, respectively.

Pictured here is the Mod 5 variant. Understandably, it seems incredibly difficult to find any sources on what the W44-armed depth bomb looked like. Only one source even listed its name as a "Mark 17 Depth Bomb (W44 Warhead)", but I've found no other references to a Mark 17 Depth bomb.

Knowing US practice, though, I wonder if it wasn't visually almost identical to the Mk. 46...

Now showing the Mod 4, Mk.46-loaded variant.

The list of ships that carried this weapon system includes the Bleknap, Leahy, Bainbridge, Truxtun, and California-class cruisers, the Farragut, Charles F. Adams and Spruance-class destroyers, and the Bronstein, Garcia, Brooke and Knox-class frigates, making it almost even as - and perhaps even more - prevalent in its era than the 5" gun.

Also, since all the RUR-5A variants could fire from the same launch systems, this made all of those ships nuclear-capable.

After booster burnout, it would separate and fall away.

At a predetermined point in the flight path, the remaining aerial structure would separate. At this point, if it were the Mod 5 nuclear depth charge variant, it would free-fall, hit the water, shattering the protective nosecone, sink to a predetermined depth and detonate.

But with the Mod 4 Mk.46 Torpedo warhead, it was a bit more complicated - a parachute was released to slow the descent and water entry to a lower speed. On entry, the protective and aerodynamic nosecone would shatter, absorbing some of the impact energy.

Once in the water, the torpedo would power-on and begin a search pattern looking for sonar signatures to engage.

Thanks for joining us today. Feel free to comment and discuss, leave feedback and questions, and join the Discord. This is its public opening, so don't be surprised if not much has happened there yet.

Until next time, clear sailing.

AzureSkies · 03-24-20, 07:10 PM

Hello again everyone,

It looks like a lot of the discussion moved to the Discord server. That's not too surprising, but as a result, we didn't have anything to reply to last week here in this thread.

This week, though, is another update week. And wow how crazy things have gotten in a relatively short period of time. Fortunately I was somewhat prepared already, but I like to try to stay one step ahead of things. The last two weeks have seen a lot of my time and energy taken to making sure friends and family are set to ride out the storm, whether it gets better or worse. That, and completion of the models highlighted recently means there's nothing much new to update on.

However, in addition to being prepared for the worst, it's also a very good idea to be prepared for the more likely case that life goes on as (relatively) normal. As such, work will resume, probably at an accelerated pace, late this week if not sooner.

What an interesting year, eh? Lots of fun memes wondering what April has in store since every month so far just seems to escalate. Fighting Skynet next month sounds fun.

At any rate, it's good to prepare for the worst that you reasonably can, but not at the cost of becoming too unprepared for life to carry on as usual.

Don't spread misinformation - check your sources, think critically from a position of trying to disprove rather than confirm hypothesis, since we as humans have a strong confirmation bias. Trust established science rather than uninformed intuition. Look at data, not anecdote. When it comes to exponential curves/growth, the current value means very little since exponential curves explode very quickly, so rely on the proven science for that sort of thing, not intuition. Exponential models have been extremely accurate thus far.

If I were to skipper a boat, I'd trust the nuclear techs to run and assess the reactor, not my intuition.

If you're cruising in a warship and hear an explosion - Observe, Assess, Decide and Act. You'd gather reports and try to assess while preparing damage control for the worst. Panic sinks ships but rationality designs and builds them, and allows them to complete their missions safely. This isn't all that different. Ask not what others can do for you but how you can best help others stay afloat - that's a great mindset for overcoming fear.

But if you're here and reading this, I trust you're a smart bunch because not everyone likes learning about realistic, technical systems and playing involved strategy sims based around their complex mechanics, so you got this. Go forth and research. Most of you will be fine but you probably know someone who'd be playing a game of Russian Roulette to catch it - mostly the elderly, immunocompromised/unhealthy, and especially smokers, as that makes the lungs much more vulnerable. But even healthy young people are at a small risk - it happens, so stay safe.

I remember someone joking once on these forums that if you wanted a realistic subsim experience of operating a Typhoon or Ohio-class sub, then you should sit in front of your laptop for days, patrolling and doing nothing. Well, if you're in those risk groups, it might be a good time to get a truly realistic boomer patrol experience.

Next update I hope to have some new shinies to show off as game development continues. Or pictures of the destroyed scraps of a robot army I fought off, if April sees fit to gift us with such an experience. Keep Calm and Carry On - be prepared for the worst, but also prepared for the best.

Until next time, clear sailing after this red sky at morning.

w33m4n · 04-03-20, 04:52 PM

Hey Subsim folks
and

thx for the words AzureSkies,

someone should reply them to Captain Brett Crozier

back to topic: this game looks awesome, sounds like you know alot about all this stuff and maybe served by yourself

, discovered this highlite and now i had to register here

so time to wait until we can preorder or put it on our steam wishlist.

AzureSkies · 04-14-20, 09:59 PM

Hello again everyone,

Sorry to say there's nothing to show off for weekly updates this week, but thanks for dropping by if you're reading this. Development continues.

Quote:

Originally Posted by w33m4n

Hey Subsim folks
and

thx for the words AzureSkies,

someone should reply them to Captain Brett Crozier

back to topic: this game looks awesome, sounds like you know alot about all this stuff and maybe served by yourself

, discovered this highlite and now i had to register here

so time to wait until we can preorder or put it on our steam wishlist.

Thanks, I'm glad to hear. Can't say I served, only that 20th century maritime engineering, the Cold War and its associated strategy, tactics and engineering; and physics have all been long-time interests of mine, which makes developing this game a real treat.

03-09-20, 12:57 PM	#2
Raptor_341 Loader Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Canada Posts: 89 Downloads: 35 Uploads: 0	What is your current intentions for the campaign, insofar as the backstory and objectives? If the first area of operations is going to be the Black Sea and the Med, is something along the lines of this to be expected (Operations in the Black Sea and Bosporus)? http://northernfury.us/blog/post24/ Cheers, Raptor341 __________________ MAD MARK, FULL SCALE!

03-11-20, 12:49 AM	#4
AzureSkies Blue Water Dev Join Date: Feb 2019 Posts: 95 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	WEEKLY UPDATE Hello again, everyone! First off, I'm glad to announce the opening of a Blue Water Discord server: https://discord.gg/NK7D4Zy Feel free to join, ask questions, discuss, lounge around and post memes, just use the right channel. And for today's more regular update, a small feature for the RUR-5 ASROC. The RUR-5 started development not as the ASROC, but as the RAT (Rocket Assisted Torpedo). But before it became operational in 1961, it was renamed the ASROC (Anti-Submarine ROCket). 78 Gearing-class destroyers were modernized with it, and many ships featured the ASROC's characteristic Mk. 16 8-celled "box" launcher with 4 independently-elevating dual tubes. It could also be fired from Mk.10 and Mk.26 dual rails. Sources vary somewhat with range, but a close average seems to be around 820 meters minimum and 16 km maximum (900 yards to 10 miles). The system was solid-fueled and fired at a fixed launch elevation. By 1983, units were the Mod 4 or Mod 5 variants, carrying either a Mk.46 torpedo or a nuclear depth bomb with a W44 warhead with a yield of about 10 kT, respectively. Pictured here is the Mod 5 variant. Understandably, it seems incredibly difficult to find any sources on what the W44-armed depth bomb looked like. Only one source even listed its name as a "Mark 17 Depth Bomb (W44 Warhead)", but I've found no other references to a Mark 17 Depth bomb. Knowing US practice, though, I wonder if it wasn't visually almost identical to the Mk. 46... Now showing the Mod 4, Mk.46-loaded variant. The list of ships that carried this weapon system includes the Bleknap, Leahy, Bainbridge, Truxtun, and California-class cruisers, the Farragut, Charles F. Adams and Spruance-class destroyers, and the Bronstein, Garcia, Brooke and Knox-class frigates, making it almost even as - and perhaps even more - prevalent in its era than the 5" gun. Also, since all the RUR-5A variants could fire from the same launch systems, this made all of those ships nuclear-capable. After booster burnout, it would separate and fall away. At a predetermined point in the flight path, the remaining aerial structure would separate. At this point, if it were the Mod 5 nuclear depth charge variant, it would free-fall, hit the water, shattering the protective nosecone, sink to a predetermined depth and detonate. But with the Mod 4 Mk.46 Torpedo warhead, it was a bit more complicated - a parachute was released to slow the descent and water entry to a lower speed. On entry, the protective and aerodynamic nosecone would shatter, absorbing some of the impact energy. Once in the water, the torpedo would power-on and begin a search pattern looking for sonar signatures to engage. Thanks for joining us today. Feel free to comment and discuss, leave feedback and questions, and join the Discord. This is its public opening, so don't be surprised if not much has happened there yet. Until next time, clear sailing.

03-24-20, 07:10 PM	#5
AzureSkies Blue Water Dev Join Date: Feb 2019 Posts: 95 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	WEEKLY UPDATE Hello again everyone, It looks like a lot of the discussion moved to the Discord server. That's not too surprising, but as a result, we didn't have anything to reply to last week here in this thread. This week, though, is another update week. And wow how crazy things have gotten in a relatively short period of time. Fortunately I was somewhat prepared already, but I like to try to stay one step ahead of things. The last two weeks have seen a lot of my time and energy taken to making sure friends and family are set to ride out the storm, whether it gets better or worse. That, and completion of the models highlighted recently means there's nothing much new to update on. However, in addition to being prepared for the worst, it's also a very good idea to be prepared for the more likely case that life goes on as (relatively) normal. As such, work will resume, probably at an accelerated pace, late this week if not sooner. What an interesting year, eh? Lots of fun memes wondering what April has in store since every month so far just seems to escalate. Fighting Skynet next month sounds fun. At any rate, it's good to prepare for the worst that you reasonably can, but not at the cost of becoming too unprepared for life to carry on as usual. Don't spread misinformation - check your sources, think critically from a position of trying to disprove rather than confirm hypothesis, since we as humans have a strong confirmation bias. Trust established science rather than uninformed intuition. Look at data, not anecdote. When it comes to exponential curves/growth, the current value means very little since exponential curves explode very quickly, so rely on the proven science for that sort of thing, not intuition. Exponential models have been extremely accurate thus far. If I were to skipper a boat, I'd trust the nuclear techs to run and assess the reactor, not my intuition. If you're cruising in a warship and hear an explosion - Observe, Assess, Decide and Act. You'd gather reports and try to assess while preparing damage control for the worst. Panic sinks ships but rationality designs and builds them, and allows them to complete their missions safely. This isn't all that different. Ask not what others can do for you but how you can best help others stay afloat - that's a great mindset for overcoming fear. But if you're here and reading this, I trust you're a smart bunch because not everyone likes learning about realistic, technical systems and playing involved strategy sims based around their complex mechanics, so you got this. Go forth and research. Most of you will be fine but you probably know someone who'd be playing a game of Russian Roulette to catch it - mostly the elderly, immunocompromised/unhealthy, and especially smokers, as that makes the lungs much more vulnerable. But even healthy young people are at a small risk - it happens, so stay safe. I remember someone joking once on these forums that if you wanted a realistic subsim experience of operating a Typhoon or Ohio-class sub, then you should sit in front of your laptop for days, patrolling and doing nothing. Well, if you're in those risk groups, it might be a good time to get a truly realistic boomer patrol experience. Next update I hope to have some new shinies to show off as game development continues. Or pictures of the destroyed scraps of a robot army I fought off, if April sees fit to gift us with such an experience. Keep Calm and Carry On - be prepared for the worst, but also prepared for the best. Until next time, clear sailing after this red sky at morning.

04-03-20, 04:52 PM	#6
w33m4n Join Date: Apr 2020 Posts: 0 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Hey Subsim folks and thx for the words AzureSkies, someone should reply them to Captain Brett Crozier back to topic: this game looks awesome, sounds like you know alot about all this stuff and maybe served by yourself, discovered this highlite and now i had to register here so time to wait until we can preorder or put it on our steam wishlist.

03-06-20, 08:28 PM	#1
johnbla Swabbie Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 9 Downloads: 17 Uploads: 0	Sorry to ask, but will this be released this year? My credit card is waiting.