Naval Warfare (AAW/ASW/ASuW)

[Silver_Dragon]

Evolution of Sonobouis:

http://www.navairdevcen.org/PDF/THE%20EVOLUTION%20OF%20THE%20SONOBUOY.pdf

Edited March 19, 2018 by Silver_Dragon

[Silver_Dragon]

Very interesting document about soviet navy tactics

https://www.usnwc.edu/getattachment/b2ec1735-8652-40b0-ae04-a9e30a5597cd/Kamikazes--The-Soviet-Legacy.aspx

[Silver_Dragon]

By The Naval Trilogy group. Operation Swordfist. The only ASROC nuclear antisubmarine missile launched test live.

http://www.admiraltytrilogy.com/read/292806204-Swordfish-1962-Underwater-ASROC-Nuclear-Weapon-Test-Effects-Report.pdf

[DaveRindner]

This is only my humble opinion. Nothing more. IMHO modern anti-submarine warfare is not a good suit for consumer desktop simulations. Here is why I hold this view.

The tactics for ASW, even though decades old, are classified, and are an arcane dark art.

The tools, systems, and employment of sensors and weapons, are even more classified, and should be. For sake of our submariners.

In reality, and simulation, ASW is time consuming and boring.

So while it is a usefull tool for training of sub qualled and non sub qualled naval ASW personell, it is too boring for a consumer level desktop sim.

[Silver_Dragon]

This is only my humble opinion. Nothing more. IMHO modern anti-submarine warfare is not a good suit for consumer desktop simulations. Here is why I hold this view.

The tactics for ASW, even though decades old, are classified, and are an arcane dark art.

The tools, systems, and employment of sensors and weapons, are even more classified, and should be. For sake of our submariners.

In reality, and simulation, ASW is time consuming and boring.

So while it is a usefull tool for training of sub qualled and non sub qualled naval ASW personell, it is too boring for a consumer level desktop sim.

 

Errrr.... Example: Sonarlist and Dangerous Waters or Ubisoft Silent Hunter series?

[Squid_DK]

Errrr.... Example: Sonarlist and Dangerous Waters or Ubisoft Silent Hunter series?

 

Silent hunter may be an extreme here as it is ASW in a very rudimentary form compared to today.

Sonalysts games are very good and excellent renditions.

 

There is a reason that ASW is often called Awfully Slow Warfare, it is all boiled down to playing a silent game. listenng and observing. in a modern simulation it would be awesome. be it from a surface ASW a SSK/SSN to airborne assets, and all carries a very different set of skills and tactics.

 

(Quick note. I am very biased here)

 

-Staffan

[Silver_Dragon]

Actually ED was added SSK Kilos and submerged launched cruise missiles, a Type VII Kilo and a Ju-88A-4/Torp has planned to WW2, Torpedoes can coming, and on a future, we can see cockpits on ships. Not bad if some type of Silent Hunter / Destroyer command / Dangerous Waters can coming into DCS.

[Northstar98]

The water in the Caucasus is now transparent - I'm hoping this means the facilitation of more water assets such as torpedoes, mines and depth charges.

 

The new Kilo class submarines look stunning (being the most recent naval asset excl. the WIP China assets pack (at least I hope they're WIP)), and the modelviewer confirms fully animated so it is completely FFBNW underwater activity.

 

For actual player piloting submarines however, I think this will be difficult - not impossible but difficult. But in a realistic sense I can't imagine anything more than a RN A-class submarine being done - simply down to complexity and classification. I don't think you could do any more modern without approximating near enough everything.

 

But if this is going to be added it and a playable submarine added, the submarine should be as simple as possible - of course assuming that we have a proper underwater, though by looking alone it seems that we do (though aircraft don't sink yet, I'll test whether ships sink to the bottom - I doubt they do though EDIT: they don't), just because there's less to go wrong than a more complicated submarine. This really applies also to whether or not we receive a full fidelity ground vehicle, or full fidelity ship, the initial modules should represent a more basic craft and not something complex, just because I can see them being less stressful to fully implement and there's less to go wrong.

 

However DCS is going to need a lot of changes, and to it's engine yikes to proper facilitate watercraft even at an AI level.

 

Subject to that and apart from the things that make it problematic I'm all in favour - I'll see if I can dig out that book on naval warfare - since this is a research thread.

Edited March 16, 2018 by Northstar98

[Silver_Dragon]

CONFIDENTIAL U.S. NAVY AIRCRAFT LAUNCHED, ACOUSTIC TORPEDO TRAINING FILM 81694

[Silver_Dragon]

British carrier operations:

Launch & Recover (1960)

 

HMS Ark Royal 1975 Operation Buccanneer S2 / F-4 Phamtom II

[Top Jockey]

This is only my humble opinion. Nothing more. IMHO modern anti-submarine warfare is not a good suit for consumer desktop simulations. Here is why I hold this view.

The tactics for ASW, even though decades old, are classified, and are an arcane dark art.

The tools, systems, and employment of sensors and weapons, are even more classified, and should be. For sake of our submariners.

In reality, and simulation, ASW is time consuming and boring.

So while it is a usefull tool for training of sub qualled and non sub qualled naval ASW personell, it is too boring for a consumer level desktop sim.

 

Errrr.... Example: Sonarlist and Dangerous Waters or Ubisoft Silent Hunter series?

 

I do confirm that.

 

Bought Dangerous Waters some years ago and... only managed to sink enemy subs or ships with the most simplistic / automated way.

 

Never dedicated the enough time needed to reasonably learn the intrincacies of sonars and such.

[Yoda967]

This is only my humble opinion. Nothing more. IMHO modern anti-submarine warfare is not a good suit for consumer desktop simulations. Here is why I hold this view.

The tactics for ASW, even though decades old, are classified, and are an arcane dark art.

The tools, systems, and employment of sensors and weapons, are even more classified, and should be. For sake of our submariners.

In reality, and simulation, ASW is time consuming and boring.

So while it is a usefull tool for training of sub qualled and non sub qualled naval ASW personell, it is too boring for a consumer level desktop sim.

 

 

When I was on active duty, we called it "Awfully Slow Warfare".

 

 

Over The Horizon ASuW isn't much better -- I hunted an OPFOR cruiser for 33 hours before we met ROE for the shot. For his part, he never saw it coming.

[rogonaut]

Actually ED was added SSK Kilos and submerged launched cruise missiles, a Type VII Kilo and a Ju-88A-4/Torp has planned to WW2, Torpedoes can coming, and on a future, we can see cockpits on ships. Not bad if some type of Silent Hunter / Destroyer command / Dangerous Waters can coming into DCS.

 

every new option is good for dcs, naval warfare needs refinement and subs are very welcome.

[lmp]

I think subs aren't a good fit for DCS at the moment. None of the current modules can interact with subs in any meaningful way. A whole new layer of simulation and a range of new modules (very complex, specialized and niche aircraft) would need to be built before we would see any kind of benefit.

 

On the other hand, expanding current ASuW gameplay is already happening. We're getting new carrier aircraft and all the associated assets (ships, naval focused maps, anti ship missile launchers...).

[jmarso]

ASW is a tough sell for DCS for the reasons listed above. However, some non-flyable versions of MPA aircraft like the P-3 and P-8 would be welcome for scenario building and immersion. Command MNAO is a much better game to play for ASW scenarios, although it's not a sim.

 

Taking it one step further, with the carrier we already have, the carrier module coming, the Hornet, the Tomcat, and so on, there is tremendous potential here for more 'naval warfare' scenarios.

 

What is currently needed are more naval assets such as warships, non-combatants, and such. Without an unofficial mod, the naval assets for a lot of nations in-game are virtually non-existent, and even for the U.S. it's limited to Perry class FFG's and the Ticonderoga class- no destroyers to be seen, Burke, Spruance, or otherwise.

 

Last but not least, we need one good 'navy war' map. The Persian Gulf map is great for all the Iran scenarios, but Iran isn't anything close to a peer competitor to the U.S. in terms of naval power. A good cold-war era scenario is the order of the day, with a map of the North Atlantic (The GIUK gap or Kola Peninsula), or the South China Sea if we're interested in highlighting a more modern hot-spot.

 

Just my .02.

Edited June 29, 2019 by jmarso

[Mr_Burns]

I was thinking about this just earlier, would love the Sonalysts guys to cooperate with DCS but I assume they are competitors, dont both supply software to the military and the public, Bohemia Interactive also.

 

 

With the Caucasus map, I dont think it would be Awfully Slow Warfare, the map isnt huge for ASuW scenarios, you could do an old Sea King Mk 5 or an early P-3 Orion.

 

 

Nevada would be much good though....

[Eihort]

I remember way back in the day they were trying to position DCS as a "multi-platform professional simulation tool" in much the same vein as Steel Beasts and VBS2, which was going to include naval units. Never really did see anything come of it. Not sure if this predated the A-10C or not... My memory is faulty, being an old fart.

[Looney]

Let's start by making sure helicopters and aircrafts don't slide off the deck when a ship is maneuvering. Once that's fixed, work can start on an actual underwater map and not the 3 feet deep trench it is today.

 

After that, start work on sound physics underwater, salt gradients, temperature layers and so on. By this time it will be 2030 so computing power should have increased as well.

 

Awfully Slow Development will be more likely as it takes a ton of work to make a hi-fi ASW/ASuW sim.

[Silver_Dragon]

Use and Tactics on Landing Ships:

 

LCIL Navy Training Film

 

WW2 Training: The LST Description (1944)

 

Landing a LST Training video, interest detail about "warm ups" tanks.

 

LCVP HIGGINS BOAT 1944 U.S. NAVY LANDING CRAFT TRAINING FILM 81614

 

1944 Landing Boat Tactics -- USN training film / Small Boat Operations - LCM/LCVP/APA - 1944 filmed around an APA

 

The LSD Description and Employment - 1944 Landing Ship Dock WWII LCM LCT 80420

Edited February 29, 2020 by Silver_Dragon

[Raisuli]

Are we talking future development? I could see amphibious landings being a thing once CA and AS is a bit more developed. Nothing like trying to establish a beachhead...or break one.

 

 

Anti-submarine warfare is a whole different beast, where time is measured in days, or at least tens of hours, and in the case of (modern) submarines you're doing everything based on sound. DCS would need to make that exciting, because until you get into a position to shoot it's pucker factor 12, hoping the other boat hasn't gotten into position to shoot you first. There's something about "Transient! Torpedo in the water aft!" that really makes your cheeks clench. "Emergency pump start! All ahead flank! Left full Rudder! Make your depth (deeper than 400)!" "Con, sonar, we're cavitating! No, that's just the sound of my butt cheeks sucking up the fire control computer!

 

 

 

Or are you talking anti-submarine, which is depth charges, hedgehogs, and underwater versions of AIM-120s, assuming you can find it in the first place? That can take hours as well, and you still get that clench when sonar announces the transient. Modern heavyweight torpedoes can ruin anyone's day.

[Silver_Dragon]

I added that info as reference, if ED and/or a 3rd party add them to improve naval operations, has welcome.

 

Actually, we have APA, LCT and LCVP and WW2, not bad see that can use propperly. And not bad found actual naval tactics with actual LHA and other modern ships.

[Raisuli]

I added that info as reference, if ED and/or a 3rd party add them to improve naval operations, has welcome.

 

Actually, we have APA, LCT and LCVP and WW2, not bad see that can use propperly. And not bad found actual naval tactics with actual LHA and other modern ships.

 

 

We did an exercise against a 637 boat while I was on a 'cruiser' (really a DLGN) with the big, bad, AN/SQS-26 CX. The ASW guys were waiting for it to start (pinging away, making it impossible to sleep anywhere on the ship). I was working on ESWS hanging out in CIC observing. After about ten hours the 637 surfaced a thousand yards off the starboard beam.

 

 

When asked they just said they were out of torpedoes. For a 637 to run out of torpedoes they must have fired most of them at life rafts, because the first two would have sunk the ship (the first one would have sunk us, but it might take a day for all the parts to disappear).

 

 

 

Hours and hours and hours (and days and days) of setting up, maneuvering, preparing, and sweating. Seconds of excitement, then cleaning up the messes.

 

 

 

I'm totally for all it, but it's a niche market. Now, unrealistic naval warfare that compresses time and shrinks the theater might be doable. This is a tough nut to crack or there would be more naval simulators, I suspect.

 

 

The company that can figure it all out will likely do well.

[Silver_Dragon]

If ED can make a "cold waters" sim into DCS, surelly can get some interesting situations. On other point, Dekka use new torpedo technology to you 093 sub, as sure can use other CA features to improve some naval warfare (yes, missing realistic ASW and sonar).

 

Expected see the improvements of SuperCarrier with "cockpits", and what can build with them the 3rd parties.

[Silver_Dragon]

Torpedoes testing on WW2 era

 

Torpedo effects

[diveplane]

 would love more detail in naval warfare, subs can be controlled by player .. underwater modelled more, more wake effects ocean spray over decks.

Edited December 5, 2020 by diveplane