[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

[Deathblow]

Another quick question....

ever notice that a torp going 40knots and a depth of 200ft does not cavitate, but a uuv going 5 knots at the same depth does? That just doesn't seem right..... anyone know what determines the cavitation speed vs depth for each of the platforms/torps and how to modify them.... ideally, a uuv going 5 knots would not cavitate unless right at the surface (say for example, under 10ft). Wonder if this can be modified...

... on a related note, uuvs always seemed too sensitive a sensor, with detection capability as good as the subs own primary sensors and sometimes seem even better than the subs own sensors. In addition, uuv's being developed now are now toting 60hr run times with vastly extended ranges....

how about this.... how does reducing the sensitivity but increasing its range? Mabye limiting the sensors to higher detection frequencies in order to reduce its effective ranges (800-2000 seems a good frequency band) and increasing the range to 30km. :hmm: What'd you think?

[LuftWolf]

Ok, thanks, I'll look into it.

[Deathblow]

I may be mistaken, but it seems like the game engine may be determing cavitation speed vs depth as a function of "percentage of maxspeed" of the object rather than the actual speed itself, but I'm not sure. I've not found a "cavitation depth" value box (or its equivalent) in the DWEdit. :hmm: Perhaps the solution is to set the uuv maxspeed to something high, like 30-40 knots and then use the doctrine to assign the uuv speed (which has always been determined by the doctrine, not the user input) to "SetSpd MaxSpd/6" to achieve the desired 5knot speed without the cavitation profile... no clue to whether this will work.

I think tuning down the uuv sensitivity would probably be good for multiplayer as well. From, what I hear (I'm not a MP myself) uuv's are pretty much abused as serrogate sensors to keep contacts updated, while the player is manuevering and evading, probably not a 100% realistic tatic, or something an actually uuv is capable of... tuning down its sensitivity (by increasing the detection frequencies to high frequency noise) may make things a bit more interesting. What do people think about this?

EDIT: Here's a good UUV link from UnderSea Warfare Magazine
http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/cno/n87/usw/issue_15/wave.html

EDIT: Hey I tried the method above, setting the uuv top speed to 30 and then changing the doctrine to setspd = 5 (instead of maxspd) and it worked, the uuv is no longer cavitating at shallow depth. . Guess the engine really is using percent topspeed to determine cavitation

[MaHuJa]

[LuftWolf]

The torpedo issues are separate project... I should try to add those as well for LWAMI 3.03... Amizaur has done quite a bit of work on this.

[Deathblow]

Quick Update: I tried increasing the UUV detect frequency to 800-1200 (similar to a spherical sonar band) and the results are still pretty negligible. Its still detecting everything that moves within 50miles (as good or better than the ships sonars )

Hm..... ever wonder what happens when we set the Nrd to a positive number... its range is -128 to +128, but all the stock values seem to be negative, what happens when be make them positive... come to think of it... what does the Nrd control anyway? :hmm:

Still work in progress. I bet this will be a welcome addition to the multiplayer games... will make them more interesting IMHO

[Molon Labe]

Hmm, in my experience the UUV has had an effictiveness somewhere between the TB-29 and pelimida. 50nm is way beyond any perfomance I've had, at least against subs.

[Deathblow]

[MaHuJa]

I'm quite interested in this topic. However, there are some concerns I have.


First of all, the UUV is indeed powerful. But even with the crippled torpedo passive sensors, do people here remember what happened when the torpedoes got the feedback flag set?

It may be that the immense range is... a bug.

Secondly, keep in mind the purposes of the UUV when making changes.
Do we want to tune down its passive detection capabilities?
Do we want to increase its minefield mapping capabilities?
Etc.

I'd say yes to both, but with moderation; how often do you run into a minefield?

Third, there are some areas of the UUV that are definitely on the weak side. If you want to have a viable tool for minefield navigation, the speed (and with it, the range) needs to move up, and the active sonar which is not much better than a torpedo could do with some improvement. Given that it has much less propulsion and warhead, a better sensor than torpedoes doesn't sound like asking for much.


Perhaps an idea is to tone down the passive side, and up the active side? If the UUV goes active, its presense is known to the enemy (presuming the enemy has subs or AI... but that's a gripe for another time)

I haven't used the UUV in active mode since... well... I sorta just know I have at some time, but by what I can tell that may as well have been with SC...

Current minefield mapping and navigation performance is quite lacking.



As to the "5ft sensor stuck to the end of a torpedo body" I always imagined the UUV as having sensor packages sandwiching the elec/propulsion "core".

In the seawolf, at least, I wish one could see what the uuv sees by it appearing as a last sensor, along with sphere, hull, and towed. Interface-wise it would be a small difference, and game engine-wise it shouldn't be so much different from sonobuoys. But the other platforms might not have that easy a time with it.

[LuftWolf]

I have no problem with messing around with the active/passive sensitivities of the UUV... in fact we have more or less overlooked it to this point.

[LuftWolf]

Fighting a busy schedule and a mild case of burnout (general computer not DW specific)...

So, in short, everything talk about is coming (email, new version of LWAMI, and the expansion of the modding projects...).

To the modellers in particular, sorry about being tardy. How is progress on the sail bridge positioning and the adaptation of the playables? Is it worth waiting to put the non-playables in or should we put those in as soon as we can, including the new platforms?

[Deathblow]

Can't wait LuftWolf. Things keep getting better and better.

With the simulation representing more and more plausible system performances its really gathering the feel of warfare that one would expect. Like with the Aegis systems performing like they do I can now understand why some reports say that RL subs don't bother to carry many ASM missiles anymore, if AAW systems are advanced as they seem in-game those are like impenetrable walls.

[Deathblow]

More random questions (sorry I post then as they come to me). Torpedo hits

Given the reported destructive power of advanced fusing. Are we sure that ships like the OHP and AB could survive even one torpedo hit? I mean look at the devastation to these ship structures...ouch :dead: :doh:

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/21456/torpedo_hit/
http://photos1.blogger.com/img/51/5210/640/adcap%20destruction.jpg

On a related note... can anyone think of a way to "randomize" the percent damage of missiles and torps. Say for example, sometimes it might take 1 and sometimes it might take 2 hits to stink a target, but the attacker can't predict which. Maybe something in the doctrine or a .ini file? :hmm:

[Deathblow]

Some observations regarding Aegis escort behavior.

I've run some small scenarios to observe the escort behavior of an Aegis ship since the improvements. The behavoir is much much better, but is still showing goofy decisions sometimes. Here's the test I ran...

I set us one CVSG with a NImitz as the group leader and one AB DDG as an escort. Opposite of them I put a Russian CVBG with a Kirov as an escort. Each groupl also had a aircraft flying above the group for radar coverage (a Hawkeye and a Flanker-D). The were given a RoE or war and attack behavior... here's what happened.

1.... the Kirov began launching Shipwreck missiles as expected at the DDG, about 7-8 missiles. When the missiles reached about 25-30nm the DDG started throwing SM-2s at the Shipwrecks as expected and was able to intercept them in due space.

2... the Kirov then threw a 10 missile volley at the Nimitz. The DDG again responded with SM-2 when the missiles were around 20nm from the DDG (about 16 nm from the CV). Problem it only launched one SM-2 per shipwreck. :dead: :doh: not near enough to garantee protection to its escortee. At least 2 missiles apiece would be needed to compensate for the inevitable SM-2 miss in time to save the Nimtz, also given that the SPY-2 would not nearly be saturated with only having 4-5 SM-2 airborne.

3. As far as the Russian CGN, whenever the AB DDG started a Harpoon volley against the Kurnevoz (sp?) the Kirov didn't really even lift a finger to help.

There's was also an incident where the DDG alllowed a Russian flanker-D, to practically fly right over the top of it and began circling... it eventually shot it down, but only after it had been allowed to loiter for a while. All seem less than "smart" behavior sometimes.

Seems like the current behavior with good for AAW self defense, but not quite perfect yet for escort defense. What are other people perceptoins of the current behavior? Anyone that can proport similar occurences?