Blue Water Development Diary

[AzureSkies]

Originally Posted by Wolfpack345

Awesome! The cruise missile looks great!

Originally Posted by Rickster1

All i can say is this game is looking good and looking forward to its development

Thanks!

Originally Posted by Herman

That is generally how Harpoon simulates the missile, too.

However, I remember an NWAC developer saying that the missile in his game had a slower cruise speed in transit and only increased speed when it neared the target area because it would have insufficient fuel for maximum speed throught the flight profile.

I would not profess to know which behaviour is wrong or right. Have you considered different operational parameters?

This got me digging again.

So, to clarify, these are P-500 Bazalts. These were later upgraded to P-1000 Vulkans, which do have a terminal boost to above mach 3, but weren't cleared for service until the late 80's.

Some sources cite the Bazalt's top speed as Mach 2.5, others cite it as Mach 2 or even Mach 1.7. In any case, its drag would be largely dominated by wave drag. Wikipedia had some nice equations for wave drag. Approximating the Bazalt as a double-wedge aerofoil to get its drag at Mach 2.5, then using the specific fuel consumption of the R-15 turbojet (in afterburner) (since it's a turbojet engine from a similar era, so fuel economy should be very similar), I found it'd only take a few hundred kg of fuel for it to travel its entire range at Mach 2.5, using fairly conservative estimates.

The research on the missile is interesting, though. Learned more detail on their guidance AI and found a small tweak I'll probably make to their visual launch effects. This is another funny case where realism will probably look unrealistic - real pictures of Bazalts or Vulkans launching show an impressively large flame plume from the booster rockets.

On the topic of its guidance, I haven't spoken at length about the Bazalt's guidance software, but as some here may know, it was very impressively sophisticated. I haven't gone over it yet because I'm not sure I can implement it on the game's Early Access release, but realism holds some interesting challenges when it comes to balance.

[Herman]

Originally Posted by AzureSkies

Some sources cite the Bazalt's top speed as Mach 2.5, others cite it as Mach 2 or even Mach 1.7. In any case, its drag would be largely dominated by wave drag. Wikipedia had some nice equations for wave drag. Approximating the Bazalt as a double-wedge aerofoil to get its drag at Mach 2.5, then using the specific fuel consumption of the R-15 turbojet (in afterburner) (since it's a turbojet engine from a similar era, so fuel economy should be very similar), I found it'd only take a few hundred kg of fuel for it to travel its entire range at Mach 2.5, using fairly conservative estimates.

Sources often vary, which begs the big question, will players be able to modify operational data if they feel one source is more credible than another? This is how it is done in both Harpoon and NWAC, the games do not profess to be omniscient. Players can enter their own operational data parameters. Of course, there are some self-important developers (of games that cannot be mentioned) who think they know it all and only have one set of 'allowable and acceptable' performance data.

Originally Posted by AzureSkies

On the topic of its guidance, I haven't spoken at length about the Bazalt's guidance software, but as some here may know, it was very impressively sophisticated. I haven't gone over it yet because I'm not sure I can implement it on the game's Early Access release, but realism holds some interesting challenges when it comes to balance.

I read about a hypothetical Soviet missile guidance system whereby one missile acted as the targeting system facilitator for a group of other missiles that actually carried warheads. This was supposedly used to facilitate long-range over-the-horizon engagements. It was only mentioned in a novel, so I do not know if it ever existed or not (probably not.)

Will the game be able to simulate and allow such potential systems?

[AzureSkies]

Originally Posted by Herman

Sources often vary, which begs the big question, will players be able to modify operational data if they feel one source is more credible than another? This is how it is done in both Harpoon and NWAC, the games do not profess to be omniscient. Players can enter their own operational data parameters. Of course, there are some self-important developers (of games that cannot be mentioned) who think they know it all and only have one set of 'allowable and acceptable' performance data.

That goes right in with modability - so it's something I'll definitely be aiming to include.

Originally Posted by Herman

I read about a hypothetical Soviet missile guidance system whereby one missile acted as the targeting system facilitator for a group of other missiles that actually carried warheads. This was supposedly used to facilitate long-range over-the-horizon engagements. It was only mentioned in a novel, so I do not know if it ever existed or not (probably not.)

Will the game be able to simulate and allow such potential systems?

More than hypothetical, that's the actual way the P-500s and their derivatives/modernizations work.

Both of these things are the sorts of things I'd definitely want to include - the latter in particular has been on my mind as I've been working on the cruise missiles, since something like this would so radically alter their behavior.

Hard to say what'll make it into the early access or not, though.

[AzureSkies]

Progress.

[Medley1991]

I only see on real life the GoalKeepper firing, but the russian version have realy this "green" trace ?

The GoalKeepper is more yellow/orange.

[AzureSkies]

Originally Posted by Medley1991

I only see on real life the GoalKeepper firing, but the russian version have realy this "green" trace ?

The GoalKeepper is more yellow/orange.

I've seen Soviet tracers depicted as usually being green as far back as WWII. Here's a video clip of what's ostensibly an AK-630 firing - the colors are hard to read on the old video quality, and the old video quality would suggest using tracers was more of an 80's thing - but they do appear like they're green, just as green shows up on relatively older cameras.

(1:06 seconds)


Also, source 1 on the gun itself mentions it a few times, and another about the ammo, where you'll have to scroll down to "Naval Weapons", list tracers as one of their rounds.

But I've seen plenty of US C-RAM guns (a Phalanx plopped on land) firing red tracers - my guess is the tracer color is related to what resources are more naturally/commonly available in each country.

Addendum: Wikipedia and a Quora seem to back up this supposition - US/Western tracers typically working around Strontium, which seems a bit more complex to get it to work well, with Chinese and Russian tracers using green-burning Barium salts. Could be resource availability or just preference for what may be a simpler construction? Not sure, but it seems they use green tracers, either way.

[Herman]

How about a simple feature that allows a player to set the tracer colour for each side? It might not be perfectly realistic, but it would accommodate those who suffer from colour blindness and other oddities (such as old eyes.)

[longface]

Cold Waters also models tracers as green, and I remember reading somewhere that NATO generally fires red tracers to WP's green.