| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
drEaPer
Joined: 24 Feb 2005
Posts: 158
Location: Germany
|
 Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 12:34 am Post subject: 8kts, 17m, Akula Periscope destroyed |
 |
|
Like the title sais.
The reference sais I can go up to 10kts and 20m deep.
Dont get it. There was no stormy weather, no waves... All was calm.... Bug?
cya |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
drEaPer
Joined: 24 Feb 2005
Posts: 158
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 2:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
I dont feel like opening up another thread so I post it in here even thought it has nothing to do with the topic:
Is there a change to the missile warning system in 1.03? I seem to get a missile warning only about 2 seconds before impact when flying a P3. Are there any factors that influence missile warning effectiveness?
Thx! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sonoboy
Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Posts: 59
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 3:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
What's your GameSpy username? I'm sure I heard those exact two complaints today.
It says in the manual that I can go 10kts with my radio and esm masts up. I didn't know I was at 10kts at the time. I swear, if I knew what speed I was going, I would have slowed down, but my masts still broke! Luckily, I still had the periscope. Stupid mission designer.
As for missiles, I got shot down twice tonight. Once, there was no warning. The other, I got a warning well in advance, but it did me no good anyways, as CMs were ineffective.
Another thing is that it shouldn't give you a warning when locked on with IR seekers, or was that my immagination? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kapitan
Joined: 10 Mar 2005
Posts: 5385
Location: essex england also st petersburg russia
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dear dear dear....................Akula 8 knots periscope up my god man no way would that periscope hold out.
As a seasoned akula skipper i never go above 5 knots with periscope and 18 meters is periscope depth (if using all the mast's) the manual is out of date the game has been updated since its release. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Deathblow
Joined: 11 Sep 2005
Posts: 392
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 5:46 am Post subject: Re: 8kts, 17m, Akula Periscope destroyed |
|
|
| drEaPer wrote: | Like the title sais.
The reference sais I can go up to 10kts and 20m deep.
Dont get it. There was no stormy weather, no waves... All was calm.... Bug?
cya |
If the map has a current associated with it (some mission designs script in a 1-3kt current to the map) the current will add to the "relative" speed of your mast and the mast will break. Same with towed arrays. If you notice your towed array is not exactlly line up straight behind you, but is instead deployed at a odd angle, its a sign that their is a current in play.
Other than that I'm not sure what it could be. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Molon Labe
Joined: 16 Jun 2004
Posts: 1052
Location: Bloomington, IN, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 8:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The missile lock warnings have always been spotty, and yes, SCS had a massive brainfart and put them in for passive homing missiles. :hulk: |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Deathblow
Joined: 11 Sep 2005
Posts: 392
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 1:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Molon Labe wrote: | | The missile lock warnings have always been spotty, and yes, SCS had a massive brainfart and put them in for passive homing missiles. :hulk: |
:dead: :doh: |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wim Libaers
Joined: 21 Sep 2001
Posts: 396
Location: Flanders
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 2:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Molon Labe wrote: | | The missile lock warnings have always been spotty, and yes, SCS had a massive brainfart and put them in for passive homing missiles. :hulk: |
Not sure it was accidental. Lots of flightsims put in those warnings, those where you have the option of not having those warnings are probably less common. It makes it easier for the player.
Not that having such warnings is necessarily unrealistic, as there are systems that can detect incoming missiles (but they aren't fitted to most aircraft), or it could be your crew scanning the surrounding area for smoke trails. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
goldorak
Joined: 21 Apr 2005
Posts: 393
Location: Milano,Italy
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wim Libaers wrote: |
Not sure it was accidental. Lots of flightsims put in those warnings, those where you have the option of not having those warnings are probably less common. It makes it easier for the player.
Not that having such warnings is necessarily unrealistic, as there are systems that can detect incoming missiles (but they aren't fitted to most aircraft), or it could be your crew scanning the surrounding area for smoke trails. |
Well, in Falcon 4 the only way you will get notified of an ir sam coming your way is to look out of the canopy always 
No automatic system whatsoever.
So ir sam detection in dw is unrealistic (albeit somewhat helpful).
The pilot or co-polit should continuosly scan the surface of the sea for the missile trails. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Molon Labe
Joined: 16 Jun 2004
Posts: 1052
Location: Bloomington, IN, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 6:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wim Libaers wrote: | | Molon Labe wrote: | | The missile lock warnings have always been spotty, and yes, SCS had a massive brainfart and put them in for passive homing missiles. :hulk: |
Not sure it was accidental. Lots of flightsims put in those warnings, those where you have the option of not having those warnings are probably less common. It makes it easier for the player.
Not that having such warnings is necessarily unrealistic, as there are systems that can detect incoming missiles (but they aren't fitted to most aircraft), or it could be your crew scanning the surrounding area for smoke trails. |
Flight sims only did this when they were pretty new. I know USNF had the "feature" but by FA-18 this appears to have stopped. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LuftWolf
Joined: 09 May 2005
Posts: 1872
Location: Free New York
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 11:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
I dunno guys... P-3 and MH60 have a *crew* as opposed to single seat fighter aircraft.
I have no problem with passive warnings, considering I spend essential 0% of my time in aircraft staring out the window smearing boogers on the wall. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wim Libaers
Joined: 21 Sep 2001
Posts: 396
Location: Flanders
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 1:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| goldorak wrote: |
Well, in Falcon 4 the only way you will get notified of an ir sam coming your way is to look out of the canopy always
No automatic system whatsoever.
So ir sam detection in dw is unrealistic (albeit somewhat helpful).
The pilot or co-polit should continuosly scan the surface of the sea for the missile trails. |
| Molon Labe wrote: |
Flight sims only did this when they were pretty new. I know USNF had the "feature" but by FA-18 this appears to have stopped. |
Both Jane's F/A-18 and Falcon 4 have something like this, but it's not integrated in the RWR, but with voice warnings. It can also be disabled with the game options or depends on version for Falcon, the famous "Archer inbound" message). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BigBadVuk
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 120
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 29, 2006 6:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
In both old falcon f4 and new Allied Force(remake) if there is wingman near u and u r low enough to be shooted at u will in most cases hear RADIO warrning(no rwr or any other miracle device capable of detecting passive sensors in IR sam)like SAM 4`o clock or just SAM launch north,etc...Eventualy if u r in dog fight u will hear archer inbound etc....But again there is no way to detect(beside visual) passive IR,like there is no way to detect passive sonnar!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wim Libaers
Joined: 21 Sep 2001
Posts: 396
Location: Flanders
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not sure about the details in F4, but in F/A-18 I'm pretty sure there was an option to get voice warnings about incoming missiles, even IR, and without any friendlies nearby. It wouldn't be done at high realism settings though.
And indeed, passive IR homers cannot be detected by their seekers, but the missile itself is still detectable. The systems just aren't put on most aircraft. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
OKO
Joined: 10 Jan 2002
Posts: 468
Location: Solar system, mainly on earth
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 30, 2006 3:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BigBadVuk wrote: | | ....But again there is no way to detect(beside visual) passive IR,like there is no way to detect passive sonnar! |
As stated above some aircraft are equiped with active and passive defense system against IR missile
I only know the french systems enought to talk about it (don't know ROW systems here) =>
active system is named DAM (detecteur d'arrivée missile)
It consist on several very small radars around the plane, creating a radar bubble, scanning in some kilometers around the plane to find if there is any objects with an interception course on your plane.
passive system is named DDM (detecteur de départ missile) and watch for any big flash that could be a missile ignition.
Both system work together (DDM find a suspect flash and alert the crew while radar bubble give informations on the trajectory of the missiles)
Both are installed on the Rafale, and will be installed on all french military air transports (already installed on some)
Civilian company, especially Israelians, are very interested in these systems, and you could be sure some civilians, especially in dangerous area, will be equipped soon.
But I doubt a lot these systems could be already installed on the MH-60.
certainly on attack choppers, especially latest ones (radar bubble shouldn't be easy to create if you didn't built it on the original chopper plans), but not on the ""quite old"" MH-60.
I quite believe this is implemented on the Comanche and on the Tiger.
So crutial for them, perfect slow target for missiles, even if they already have a very very small IR signature ...
Because maybe old IR SAM are quite easy to deceive, but new generation use shape recognition and are much more difficult to deceive once locked. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
