Cold War Naval assets

[Kang]

Am I the only one who thinks that 'more submarines' is the least interesting naval asset wishlist item?

Don't get me wrong, I like submarines, but... in what is mostly a flight simulator with literally no ASW modeled I don't find the subtle difference between an Improved Kilo and an early model Kilo submarine matter at all. The nuclear powered ones even less, considering they exist in two states in regard to DCS: docked targets, for which all those internal capabilities don't matter very much, or submerged, for which they are literally invisible to me.

[Northstar98]

17 minutes ago, Kang said:

Don't get me wrong, I like submarines, but... in what is mostly a flight simulator with literally no ASW modeled I don't find the subtle difference between an Improved Kilo and an early model Kilo submarine matter at all.

Well, one has modern anti-ship cruise missiles (which are in the files, and yes they are specifically submarine launched versions) - the other doesn't, hardly a subtle difference.

But surface ships should have way more priority than submarines IMO.

Edited August 6, 2022 by Northstar98

[Tippis]

The Type 093 shows that there's at least something in the code that lets submarine submarine to some extent. It seems intuitively likely that if we can have a sub that fires ASMs, it should be possible to fit others with cruise missiles. The targeting logic (and more relevantly the mission tasking) is admittedly a bit different, but it is at least possible to make them defeat other units in the game, so that's a promising start…

[upyr1]

10 hours ago, Kang said:

Am I the only one who thinks that 'more submarines' is the least interesting naval asset wishlist item?

Don't get me wrong, I like submarines, but... in what is mostly a flight simulator with literally no ASW modeled I don't find the subtle difference between an Improved Kilo and an early model Kilo submarine matter at all. The nuclear powered ones even less, considering they exist in two states in regard to DCS: docked targets, for which all those internal capabilities don't matter very much, or submerged, for which they are literally invisible to me.

I fully get the feeling. I while I would like some improvements to subs, I would have no problems if Eagle decided to focus on surface vessels. I have said it multiple time Eagle needs to start on some naval modules. The base line might be DCS: fleet ops which covers a verity of modern ships and the first step would be to work on changes to dcs core. The subs might be a bit more interesting if you are commanding a destroyer hunting them or a sub hunting the carrier 

[Northstar98]

On 8/7/2022 at 12:13 AM, Tippis said:

The Type 093 shows that there's at least something in the code that lets submarine submarine to some extent. It seems intuitively likely that if we can have a sub that fires ASMs, it should be possible to fit others with cruise missiles. The targeting logic (and more relevantly the mission tasking) is admittedly a bit different, but it is at least possible to make them defeat other units in the game, so that's a promising start…

Plus the Type VIIC and ARA Santa Fe - torpedoes are in DCS (though the only guidance systems implemented are WWI style, straight-running torpedoes) and there are several torpedo schemes in Scripts\Database\Weapons\schemes\torpedoes.

But yes the Type 093 proves we can have submarines launch anti-ship cruise missiles (all they're missing is the fact they should be encapsulated, but this is more of a trvivial detail, easily solved with an animation argument). The 2 anti-ship cruise missiles for the B-871 Alrosa and the Pr. 636 Improved Kilo are the 3M-54E and 3M-54E1, the former is missing its terminal stage and both don't have their launch capsules. However, the 3M-54E and E1 are specifically submarine launched variants. The Improved Kilo is also fully animated (and I mean fully - even the torpedo tube reloading adapter cover is animated, as are the outer doors for its tubes, all masts and antennas, you name it).

As for the targeting logic and mission tasking - it's no different to what we have for surface ships right now ((i.e the attack unit/group tasks, which AFAIK grant the AI omniscience about their target. Last I checked ships and submarines don't get the search then engage tasks which requires they find the target themselves), just submarines in DCS are limited to generic optical sensors only (at least, that's all that's defined in their .luas).

 

With all that said I'd still really like to stress that I'd almost infinitely prefer to have more surface ships (particularly Cold War BLUFOR ships like the Knox, Spruance and Belknap), than more submarines (for which there is little-to-no groundwork for player interaction).

Edited August 8, 2022 by Northstar98

[-SkyRaider-]

When the new engine comes out, can we expect to see this feature has this naval simulator have? or it is possible right now with the actual engine, or in a near future upgrade?

Sea Power : Naval Combat in the Missile Age

[Kang]

5 hours ago, SkorpioN1606689188 said:

When the new engine comes out, can we expect to see this feature has this naval simulator have? or it is possible right now with the actual engine, or in a near future upgrade?

 

I'll go out on a daring limb and just predict: no

[Northstar98]

18 hours ago, SkorpioN1606689188 said:

When the new engine comes out, can we expect to see this feature has this naval simulator have? or it is possible right now with the actual engine, or in a near future upgrade?

ED have said in a newsletter that they plan to improve ship motions, though there were little details. It could be anything from tuning of the current system (where the motion is more or less randomised, with a magnitude dependent on wind speed), to an actual buoyancy model of some description, as seen in your example.

Quote

We are pleased to inform you that the smoke emitted from exhausts and from impact damage is being improved. Roll and sway effects in windy conditions are also work in progress.

Next, we will be working on the collision model of certain ships to improve the impact zone accuracy of anti-radiation missiles such as the AGM-88C HARM. This work is part of broader enhancements to ship Damage Model. 

[Mike Force Team]

Rest assured, ED reads your forum posts and respones. They might not comment on all of every response but know they read them.

[Seaeagle]

6 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

ED have said in a newsletter that they plan to improve ship motions, though there were little details. It could be anything from tuning of the current system (where the motion is more or less randomised, with a magnitude dependent on wind speed), to an actual buoyancy model of some description, as seen in your example.

Hmm between the announcement of the Kola Peninsula map and that quote, I have to say that - for the first time in decades - I am becoming moderately optimistic about the prospect for  naval warfare in DCS  World.

But we will see - I just hope that the bit about a wider improvement to ships' damage model also addresses ships' defence capabilities  - i.e. countermeassures and ECM and isn't merely in response to DCS Hornet owners complaints about the effect of their Harpoons and HARMs in anti-shipping missions.

[stuart666]

Im surprised nobody has mentioned missile ships. Both Norway and the USSR had small fast attack antiship missile boats. They were very fast, could attack other ships from a great range, and, to the great satisfaction of pilots, had limited air defences meaning you can beat up on them and probably survive.

Also, dont forget antiship missiles batteries. The whole area was a military fortress, and any Carrier approaching Kola, if it comes too close to the coast, risks these things being fired off. And of course, they are another useful target to beat up on.

Much as I love submarines, I cant see any utility in them except as targets tied up to the quay. You need an asw model, functional ASW torpedo's, RBU's, a workable asw model, and functional asw helo's and aircraft. Whilst I would like all that, considering how long it takes to get the engine updated, not to mention the dynamic campaign, I think that probably ought to be considered the next decades update. Id pay for a crewable Nimrod of course....

[Northstar98]

2 hours ago, Seaeagle said:

Hmm between the announcement of the Kola Peninsula map and that quote, I have to say that - for the first time in decades - I am becoming moderately optimistic about the prospect for  naval warfare in DCS  World.

But we will see - I just hope that the bit about a wider improvement to ships' damage model also addresses ships' defence capabilities  - i.e. countermeassures and ECM and isn't merely in response to DCS Hornet owners complaints about the effect of their Harpoons and HARMs in anti-shipping missions.

Yeah, I've got hopes. But the list of stuff to do (and this is without ASW mind) is gigantic.

20 minutes ago, stuart666 said:

Im surprised nobody has mentioned missile ships. Both Norway and the USSR had small fast attack antiship missile boats. They were very fast, could attack other ships from a great range, and, to the great satisfaction of pilots, had limited air defences meaning you can beat up on them and probably survive.

Mmm, agreed.

I'd love a Soviet Nanuchka I. Right now we only have the Tarantul III and the Type 148 Tiger-class (La Combattante IIa), though the latter still fires the wrong missiles.

20 minutes ago, stuart666 said:

Also, dont forget antiship missiles batteries. The whole area was a military fortress, and any Carrier approaching Kola, if it comes too close to the coast, risks these things being fired off. And of course, they are another useful target to beat up on.

Yeah and IRL there are coastal defence missile batteries on the coast of the Kola Peninsula. Something like the 4K51 'Rubezh' [SSC-3 Styx] and (seeing as we have an appropriate missile in the files) the 3K60 'Bal' [SSC-6 Sennight].

AFAIK, there's at least a former P-35 battery (formerly a KS-1 battery) at Kildin island. There's even a coastal RBU-6000 installation at Cape Vyevnavolok, there's almost certainly some more coastal defence missile installations around.

20 minutes ago, stuart666 said:

Much as I love submarines, I cant see any utility in them except as targets tied up to the quay. You need an asw model, functional ASW torpedo's, RBU's, a workable asw model, and functional asw helo's and aircraft. Whilst I would like all that, considering how long it takes to get the engine updated, not to mention the dynamic campaign, I think that probably ought to be considered the next decades update. Id pay for a crewable Nimrod of course....

At the moment, I unfortunately have to agree.

The naval aspect is the least well modelled and developed and the above list is huge even without ASW, which would have just about all the items of said list while adding a few of its own.

[Seaeagle]

On 8/16/2022 at 8:19 PM, stuart666 said:

Im surprised nobody has mentioned missile ships. Both Norway and the USSR had small fast attack antiship missile boats. They were very fast, could attack other ships from a great range, and, to the great satisfaction of pilots, had limited air defences meaning you can beat up on them and probably survive.

Well as Northstar said, we do have such a unit in DCS - namely the Tarantul III class, which is equipped with Moskit missiles. 

On 8/16/2022 at 8:19 PM, stuart666 said:

Also, dont forget antiship missiles batteries. The whole area was a military fortress, and any Carrier approaching Kola, if it comes too close to the coast, risks these things being fired off. And of course, they are another useful target to beat up on.

True - but both this and the above mentioned small missile ships are sort of "generic" coastal defence assets, that exist in many places and not really specific to the map in question. The Kola Peninsula is very much about larger ocean going submarines and surface combatants, because its the only place from which the USSR had direct access to the Atlantic ocean and ice free ports to operate from. 

On 8/16/2022 at 8:19 PM, stuart666 said:

Much as I love submarines, I cant see any utility in them except as targets tied up to the quay. You need an asw model, functional ASW torpedo's, RBU's, a workable asw model, and functional asw helo's and aircraft. Whilst I would like all that, considering how long it takes to get the engine updated, not to mention the dynamic campaign, I think that probably ought to be considered the next decades update. Id pay for a crewable Nimrod of course....

You are of course right and I would have said the exact same thing a week ago. But I think that anyone who has had some fun studying the Kola peninsula with Google maps, would have noticed just how many submarine bases there are, so I don't know.

[Seaeagle]

22 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

Yeah, I've got hopes. But the list of stuff to do (and this is without ASW mind) is gigantic.

Indeed. But I meant more in terms of there now seemingy being a desire to do something about it, which hasn't been the case for many years. A proper map for the purpose and better damage models for ships, is a good start especially if the latter also comes with introduction of countermeassures. 

22 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

Mmm, agreed.

I'd love a Soviet Nanuchka I. Right now we only have the Tarantul III and the Type 148 Tiger-class (La Combattante IIa), though the latter still fires the wrong missiles.

The Nanuchka class was in Flanker 2 and I wouldn't be surprised if the P-120 "Malakhite" missile for it still remains in the code to this day.