Submarines do not engage enemy ships

[buceador]

Submarines do not engage enemy ships and enemy ship(s) do not engage submarines?

Subs and ships ignore each other.trk

[Slippa]

I suppose a Minesweeper’s out of the question?

[Northstar98]

To get a submarine to engage a surface ship, you might need to use attack unit/group - I've attached a track below and the Santa Fe does indeed engage with torpedoes (though why they are Yu-6 torpedoes I don't know - the Santa Fe would've had Mk 14 and Mk 37 Mod 3 torpedoes) - see Santa_Fe_attackgroup.trk.

I've only ever seen submarines engage targets of opportunity when at periscope depth. Unfortunately, the Santa Fe isn't configured for this, but the other submarines are (see the Type_93_opportunity.trk below).

As for ships not engaging submerged submarines, there are no ASW sensors and there are no ASW weapons in DCS so that explains that. I've only seen ships only fire anti-surface weaponry against submarines that are either on the surface or have deployed their periscope (see TypeVIIC_attack.trk for an example of the latter). If the latter, the AI appears to be reliant on visual detection.

Santa_Fe_attackgroup.trk TypeVIIC_attack.trk Type_93_opportunity.trk

Edited June 25, 2024 by Northstar98

[Silver_Dragon]

19 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

To get a submarine to engage a surface ship, you might need to use attack unit/group - I've attached a track below and the Santa Fe does indeed engage with torpedoes (though why they are Yu-6 torpedoes I don't know - the Santa Fe would've had Mk 14 and Mk 37 Mod 3 torpedoes) - see Santa_Fe_attackgroup.trk.

I've only ever seen submarines engage targets of opportunity when at periscope depth. Unfortunately, the Santa Fe isn't configured for this, but the other submarines are (see the Type_93_opportunity.trk below).

As for ships not engaging submerged submarines, there are no ASW sensors and there are no ASW weapons in DCS so that explains that. I've only seen ships will only fire anti-surface weaponry against submarines that are either on the surface or have deployed their periscope (see TypeVIIC_attack.trk). If the latter, the AI appears to be reliant on visual detection.

Santa_Fe_attackgroup.trk 70.05 kB · 0 downloads TypeVIIC_attack.trk 49.92 kB · 0 downloads Type_93_opportunity.trk 39.67 kB · 0 downloads

The SA assets pack has none as torpedoes. On fact, missing all western torpedoes.... Ships no have ASW torpedores or other ASW weapons.

[Northstar98]

1 minute ago, Silver_Dragon said:

The SA assets pack has none as torpedoes.

There is the funny looking Mk 46 which is in the SA assets pack, but it cannot be used as intended in DCS.

[Silver_Dragon]

27 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

There is the funny looking Mk 46 which is in the SA assets pack, but it cannot be used as intended in DCS.

The 3D model has present, but missing all funtionality as a ASW Mk-46 Torpedo, sonar engine and fire / flodding on ship DMs :(... I go to put the propper data on the "Ship overview" post.
 

 

[buceador]

55 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

I've only ever seen submarines engage targets of opportunity when at periscope depth. Unfortunately, the Santa Fe isn't configured for this, but the other submarines are

Good to know, thanks for the heads up, it's depth related (and so bears no resemblance to real life) but...  In your example of the Santa Fe firing the torpedo it misses, in my experience, even when I get the  sub to fire it always misses its target, check the trk file please.

Torpedoes miss.trk

It is as if the torpedo is launched but has no guidance system.

[Silver_Dragon]

37 minutes ago, buceador said:

Good to know, thanks for the heads up, it's depth related (and so bears no resemblance to real life) but...  In your example of the Santa Fe firing the torpedo it misses, in my experience, even when I get the  sub to fire it always misses its target, check the trk file please.

Torpedoes miss.trk 55.08 kB · 2 downloads

It is as if the torpedo is launched but has no guidance system.

None torpedoes has guiadance system, only has a straight runner, the error has very large.

[buceador]

1 minute ago, Silver_Dragon said:

None torpedoes has guiadance system, only has a straight runner, the error has very large.

Thank you but...
"Most modern torpedoes have their own sonar capable of tracking a target by bouncing an acoustic echo off it and then measuring the distance to target. That method is known as active sonar."

So DCS torpedoes are simply 'dumb (aquatic) bombs' ?

[rob10]

11 minutes ago, buceador said:

Thank you but...
"Most modern torpedoes have their own sonar capable of tracking a target by bouncing an acoustic echo off it and then measuring the distance to target. That method is known as active sonar."

So DCS torpedoes are simply 'dumb (aquatic) bombs' ?

IRL there is pretty sophisticated tracking available to torpedos.  In DCS any available torpedos are point and shoot like a WW2 unguided version.

[Seaeagle]

10 minutes ago, buceador said:

Thank you but...
"Most modern torpedoes have their own sonar capable of tracking a target by bouncing an acoustic echo off it and then measuring the distance to target. That method is known as active sonar."

So DCS torpedoes are simply 'dumb (aquatic) bombs' ?

I guess the torpedo code that exists in DCS was made for the WWII segment - i.e. it just straight running with no acoustic guidance.

[Silver_Dragon]

3 hours ago, buceador said:

Thank you but...
"Most modern torpedoes have their own sonar capable of tracking a target by bouncing an acoustic echo off it and then measuring the distance to target. That method is known as active sonar."

So DCS torpedoes are simply 'dumb (aquatic) bombs' ?

Has a little problem here about the Argentine Santa Fe Submarine (Ex-US Guppy IA, II SS) 

• Has only two torpedo types on the Santa Fe type:
  • A old Mk14 Mod 3 533mm Torp with a Steam propulsion, second gen Gyro Straight Runner torpedo without guiadance, only capable vs Ships with two speeds (2.3 Nmiles at 46 knots / 4.5 Nmiles a 31 Knots) with a contact fuze.
  • A old Mk37 Mod 0 482mm Torm with a Electric propulsion, first gen Active/Passive guiadance torpedo, only capable vs Subs with a speed of 4 Nmiles at 24 Knots) with a Influenze fuze.

On fact the antiship torpedoe work propperly as a Straight runner. Missing a ASW torpedoe, but as previously talked, DCS not have a propper Sonar engine to simulate active / passive search.

I post that info on the previously linked "Ship Overview" on the Santa Fe SSK entry.

 

Edited June 25, 2024 by Silver_Dragon

[Northstar98]

15 hours ago, buceador said:

Good to know, thanks for the heads up, it's depth related (and so bears no resemblance to real life) but...  In your example of the Santa Fe firing the torpedo it misses, in my experience, even when I get the  sub to fire it always misses its target, check the trk file please.

Torpedoes miss.trk 55.08 kB · 1 download

It is as if the torpedo is launched but has no guidance system.

There's a few things going on here:

Firstly, homing torpedoes aren't actually implemented in DCS. In DCS, all torpedoes are straight-runners that simply remain on the heading they were launched at, maintaining a fixed depth. There isn't really any torpedo guidance implemented beyond one that simply maintains heading and depth. We don't even have WWI/II-era gyroangle guidance modelled (which, upon being launched, the torpedo will turn as necessary to assume the proper bearing, instead of having to turn the firing platform).

For the Type VIIC U-boat and the Schnellboot, they will turn such that when a torpedo is launched, it's on a bearing that will hit the target (at least most of the time). The Santa Fe doesn't appear to do this (and neither does the Type 093), resulting in constant or near constant misses.

What you have to do with the Santa Fe is work out what the torpedo heading should be and have the Santa Fe be on that heading when it fires the torpedo. This is a small amount of fairly simple trigonometry and some trial and error, but I have gotten it to work (see SantaFe_torpattack_corrected.trk), I'd highly recommend checking this website, which explains how to do it. In the uncorrected track, I've changed the heading away from the proper angle, which always results in a miss.

Note that I've switched the target, this is because in testing the Yu-6 ran underneath/through the Pyotr Velikey.

SantaFe_torpattack_corrected.trk SantaFe_torpattack_uncorrected.trk

Edited June 26, 2024 by Northstar98
Deleted duplicate paragraph

[Northstar98]

1 hour ago, Seaeagle said:

I guess the torpedo code that exists in DCS was made for the WWII segment - i.e. it just straight running with no acoustic guidance.

Make that WWII aerial torpedoes, because WWII torpedoes like the G7 series weren't just simple straight-runners, they could be set with a gyro-angle such that they'd turn onto the proper bearing to hit the target (of course ignoring pattern runners and early acoustic homing torpedoes like the Mk 24 Fido and G7es).

In DCS, torpedoes are pure straight-runners - simply traveling on the same heading they were launched at, like a WWII air-dropped torpedo.

The Schnellboot and the Type VIIC U-boat turn to launch the torpedo down the proper bearing, but as far as I can tell the Type 093 (EDIT: The Type 093 doesn't but I have seen the torpedoes it fire be on a different bearing compared to launch) and the Santa Fe do not.

The only thing with the Yu-6 is that after running a certain distance, it performs what looks like a snake search pattern, but without any acoustic homing or wire guidance, this only really serves to complicate the firing solution.

Edited June 25, 2024 by Northstar98
Correction

[buceador]

2 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

There's a few things going on here:

I can see tha!

Ok, so we are saying that the  SSK Kilo-class (Type 636) sub in DCS uses the essentially the same fire and hope unguided torpedo technology despite the spec listed below?

I asking because if this is true then the DCS subs are essentially eye candy and serve a very limited purpose in terms of the mission design.

!The submarine is equipped with six 533mm forward torpedo tubes situated in the nose of the submarine and carries 18 torpedoes with six in the torpedo tubes and 12 stored on the racks. Alternatively, the torpedo tubes can deploy 24 mines.

Two torpedo tubes are designed for firing remote-controlled torpedoes with very high accuracy. The computer-controlled torpedo system is provided with a quick-loading device. The first salvo is fired within two minutes and the second within five minutes.

Sensors on board SSK Kilo-class (Type 636) submarine

Type 636 is fitted with the MGK-400EM digital sonar. This provides detection of submarine and surface ship targets in sonar listening mode, echo-ranging in a ±30° sector of the target relative bearing, telephone and telegraph communication in both long and short-range modes, detection of underwater sound signals and determination of the signal bearing.

The submarine’s radar works in periscope and surface modes and provides information on the underwater and air situation, radar identification, and navigational safety.!

[Northstar98]

55 minutes ago, buceador said:

Ok, so we are saying that the  SSK Kilo-class (Type 636) sub in DCS uses the essentially the same fire and hope unguided torpedo technology despite the spec listed below?

Nope, even worse - the Pr. 636 Kilo (or the 877V for that matter) don't have any torpedoes (or any other weapons) available at all.

There have however been 2 unimplemented (and lacking their launch capsules, assuming they launch encapsulated, which I'm pretty sure they do), submarine-launched, anti-ship cruise missiles present in the files for over half a decade now (I think they first showed up in 2017?).

One of which belongs on Algerian, Chinese and Vietnamese Pr. 636M Improved Kilos (3M54E1) and the other should be renamed 3M54K and go to Russian Pr. 636.3 Improved Kilos (3M54E).

55 minutes ago, buceador said:

I asking because if this is true then the DCS subs are essentially eye candy and serve a very limited purpose in terms of the mission design.

It is true and yes, submarines and submarine/anti-submarine warfare in general is very limited in DCS. Personally, I'd go as far as to say as good as absent, especially as far as anything ASW or anything with guided torpedoes is concerned.

EDIT: And to be honest, naval warfare as a whole doesn't fair much better

Edited June 25, 2024 by Northstar98

[buceador]

1 hour ago, Northstar98 said:

It is true and yes, submarines and submarine/anti-submarine warfare in general is very limited in DCS. Personally, I'd go as far as to say as good as absent, especially as far as anything ASW or anything with guided torpedoes is concerned.

Thank you for all your input, it has been most valuable - increasingly I find it disheartening that ED focuses on 'look here at this new shiny thing' rather that bringing long term assets 'up to speed' I well understand that they are primarily driven by the need to make money, they are a business after all but at what cost I ask myself... 

Edited June 25, 2024 by buceador

[Silver_Dragon]

4 hours ago, buceador said:

I can see tha!

Ok, so we are saying that the  SSK Kilo-class (Type 636) sub in DCS uses the essentially the same fire and hope unguided torpedo technology despite the spec listed below?

I asking because if this is true then the DCS subs are essentially eye candy and serve a very limited purpose in terms of the mission design.

!The submarine is equipped with six 533mm forward torpedo tubes situated in the nose of the submarine and carries 18 torpedoes with six in the torpedo tubes and 12 stored on the racks. Alternatively, the torpedo tubes can deploy 24 mines.

Two torpedo tubes are designed for firing remote-controlled torpedoes with very high accuracy. The computer-controlled torpedo system is provided with a quick-loading device. The first salvo is fired within two minutes and the second within five minutes.

Sensors on board SSK Kilo-class (Type 636) submarine

Type 636 is fitted with the MGK-400EM digital sonar. This provides detection of submarine and surface ship targets in sonar listening mode, echo-ranging in a ±30° sector of the target relative bearing, telephone and telegraph communication in both long and short-range modes, detection of underwater sound signals and determination of the signal bearing.

The submarine’s radar works in periscope and surface modes and provides information on the underwater and air situation, radar identification, and navigational safety.!

I go to add the sensors / weapons to the Kilos subs on the other post. (added Kilo info).

 

Edited June 25, 2024 by Silver_Dragon

[Seaeagle]

On 6/25/2024 at 6:09 PM, Northstar98 said:

Make that WWII aerial torpedoes, because WWII torpedoes like the G7 series weren't just simple straight-runners, they could be set with a gyro-angle such that they'd turn onto the proper bearing to hit the target (of course ignoring pattern runners and early acoustic homing torpedoes like the Mk 24 Fido and G7es).

In DCS, torpedoes are pure straight-runners - simply traveling on the same heading they were launched at, like a WWII air-dropped torpedo.

The Schnellboot and the Type VIIC U-boat turn to launch the torpedo down the proper bearing, but as far as I can tell the Type 093 (EDIT: The Type 093 doesn't but I have seen the torpedoes it fire be on a different bearing compared to launch) and the Santa Fe do not.

The only thing with the Yu-6 is that after running a certain distance, it performs what looks like a snake search pattern, but without any acoustic homing or wire guidance, this only really serves to complicate the firing solution.

 

Yeah I know that there was a little more to them that just pure straight running, but I still suspect that the simple code implemented for torpedoes in DCS was meant for the WWII boats and not for modern submarines - i.e. you can get away with it for the former, but for the latter it makes no sense. 

 

On 6/25/2024 at 6:26 PM, Northstar98 said:

Nope, even worse - the Pr. 636 Kilo (or the 877V for that matter) don't have any torpedoes (or any other weapons) available at all.

See what I mean?

On 6/25/2024 at 6:26 PM, Northstar98 said:

There have however been 2 unimplemented (and lacking their launch capsules, assuming they launch encapsulated, which I'm pretty sure they do), submarine-launched, anti-ship cruise missiles present in the files for over half a decade now (I think they first showed up in 2017?).

One of which belongs on Algerian, Chinese and Vietnamese Pr. 636M Improved Kilos (3M54E1) and the other should be renamed 3M54K and go to Russian Pr. 636.3 Improved Kilos (3M54E).

IIRC 3M54 actually comes in two versions - one with  subsonic cruise-  and a supersonic terminal stage, and another variant that was subsonic all the way. 

[Northstar98]

21 hours ago, Seaeagle said:

Yeah I know that there was a little more to them that just pure straight running, but I still suspect that the simple code implemented for torpedoes in DCS was meant for the WWII boats and not for modern submarines - i.e. you can get away with it for the former, but for the latter it makes no sense. 

If it's any consolation, there are several torpedo schemes present in the files (under Scripts\Database\Weapons\Torpedoes, with things like preset-unguided (which I assume to be gyroangle), guided, guided-stab(?) and unguided-stab(?). So maybe in the future we'll see bugs like the above fixed.

I'm not sure what guidance scheme(s) they're planning for (if they're planned for - I believe those schemes have been around since 2.7), acoustic homing is obviously the big one, but itself is split up into active and passive. There's also wake homing (which technically uses a high-frequency active sonar to detect wakes), which is a pretty big one for Soviet/Russian submarines.

21 hours ago, Seaeagle said:

See what I mean?

Yep.

Though if anybody is interested, for the domestic Pr. 877V Kilo and Pr. 636.3 Improved Kilo, the torpedoes it should fire include the UGST (presumably), USET-80, TEST-71/-71M/MK, 53-65 (and its versions) as well as the MDM-1 mine (which is a bottom, influence mine).

21 hours ago, Seaeagle said:

IIRC 3M54 actually comes in two versions - one with  subsonic cruise-  and a supersonic terminal stage, and another variant that was subsonic all the way.

Yes, in DCS the 3M54E is the one with the supersonic terminal stage and the 3M54E1 is subsonic throughout.

Personally, what I'd do is the following:

• Copy and paste current Pr. 636 Improved Kilo, rename one to Pr. 636.3 Improved Kilo and give it to Russia, call the other one Pr. 636M and give it to Algeria, China and Vietnam.
• Rename (or copy and paste) 3M54E to 3M54K, implement and give it to the 636.3 (unsure if this is used by export customers, but if it is, then copy and paste, give the 3M54K to the 636.3 and 3M54E to 636M).
• Implement the 3M54E1 and give it to the 636M.

I wonder if the 3M54E1 model could be reused to make a 3M14T and 3M14E, which would provide land-strike capability. Though I maintain that until ASW is developed (if it's ever developed) submarines should take 2nd place to surface ships and even then, it would be better if we had say SSGs or SSGNs that need to surface in order to use their primary armament (such as the Juliet or Echo/Echo II series - at least for the latter we already have a P-500 albeit with low-quality artwork and very low-fidelity modelling), at least that way they'd be vulnerable to existing sensors and weapons.

[Seaeagle]

On 6/27/2024 at 5:52 PM, Northstar98 said:

Yes, in DCS the 3M54E is the one with the supersonic terminal stage and the 3M54E1 is subsonic throughout.

Ah ok - its been a long while since checked these things out in DCS, so I didn't realise that both versions were there.  Those are the correct export designations for the missiles as part of the "Club" missile system.

On 6/27/2024 at 5:52 PM, Northstar98 said:

Personally, what I'd do is the following:

• Copy and paste current Pr. 636 Improved Kilo, rename one to Pr. 636.3 Improved Kilo and give it to Russia, call the other one Pr. 636M and give it to Algeria, China and Vietnam.
• Rename (or copy and paste) 3M54E to 3M54K, implement and give it to the 636.3 (unsure if this is used by export customers, but if it is, then copy and paste, give the 3M54K to the 636.3 and 3M54E to 636M).
• Implement the 3M54E1 and give it to the 636M.

Yeah that would be fine. But I seem to remember Chizh being against implementing both domestic and export versions/designations for the same missile in connection with the R-27(e.g. R-27R for Russia and R-27R1 for other nations), so I doubt a similar suggestion for naval missiles would fare much better  .

On 6/27/2024 at 5:52 PM, Northstar98 said:

I wonder if the 3M54E1 model could be reused to make a 3M14T and 3M14E, which would provide land-strike capability.

Good question. To be honest I am not sure about the exact relationship between them - overall it does look like the same missile with different guidance systems. But from what I can remember looking at photos of them, there were little differences - then again both missiles come in a version for submarines and another for surface ships, so I guess that could be the reason.

On 6/27/2024 at 5:52 PM, Northstar98 said:

Though I maintain that until ASW is developed (if it's ever developed) submarines should take 2nd place to surface ships and even then, it would be better if we had say SSGs or SSGNs that need to surface in order to use their primary armament (such as the Juliet or Echo/Echo II series - at least for the latter we already have a P-500 albeit with low-quality artwork and very low-fidelity modelling), at least that way they'd be vulnerable to existing sensors and weapons.

Agree.

[Silver_Dragon]

Only a remarks....

• Kilo 877 has none connectors on the torpedo tubes to fire anything weapong, as Type VII of Dekka sub. The same situation has to launch Iglas from the conning tower, not has a launcher with connectors. Only the 636 has some connectors on the TT (no capable to fire 3M54E).
• The "3M54E/3M54E1" has no the same system....
  • 3M54E has the antiship version, modeled as the complete missile with your booster and wings, but ED dont have modeling the detachable Spint rocket, on fact, has none arguments to that section disapear them from the carrier section and missing the sprint rocket 3D model appart as a missile on the DCS World directories.
  • The 3M54E1 has the long range cruise missile version, with your booster and wings. Has none to do with the previously version.

3M54E Use (show a YJ-18A Chinese copy):

3M54E

3M54E1

 

Edited June 28, 2024 by Silver_Dragon

[Northstar98]

2 hours ago, Seaeagle said:

Ah ok - its been a long while since checked these things out in DCS, so I didn't realise that both versions were there.  Those are the correct export designations for the missiles as part of the "Club" missile system.

Yeah, they're both there. They don't have animated control surfaces (like more recent missiles) but they're still very high-quality addons. They are missing their launch capsules (I presume they launch encapsulated) and I'm not sure if the 3M54E has a seperate terminal supersonic stage or whether the whole missile accelerates (I seem to recall quite a high terminal supersonic speed for that missile).

2 hours ago, Seaeagle said:

But I seem to remember Chizh being against implementing both domestic and export versions/designations for the same missile in connection with the R-27(e.g. R-27R for Russia and R-27R1 for other nations), so I doubt a similar suggestion for naval missiles would fare much better  .

Okay

Seems odd, it's a very trivial small change to make and they don't seem to have any qualms with having duplicate entries of what should be the exact same unit in other areas seems odd he'd be against having proper export designations (mind you, getting proper designations at all seems to be a challenge unique to DCS.

42 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

 

That clears that up - cheers Silver_Dragon

[Silver_Dragon]

On 6/27/2024 at 4:52 PM, Northstar98 said:

Though if anybody is interested, for the domestic Pr. 877V Kilo and Pr. 636.3 Improved Kilo, the torpedoes it should fire include the UGST (presumably), USET-80, TEST-71/-71M/MK, 53-65 (and its versions) as well as the MDM-1 mine (which is a bottom, influence mine).

All data and sensors, Weapons and systems has been updates on the previously post.

I Missing the MG-74 3rd Gen mobile decoys:
Country / Name / Simulator Generation / Endurance (hours) / MAD Capability / Max Speed / Active Capability.
Russia / MG-74 / 3 / 2 / Yes / 12 kts / Yes

Quote

Mobile decoys: are the most sophisticated type of ACM and can affect both search sonars as well as torpedo sensors. If launched as a torpedo decoy along with other ACMs or alone, it is included in the ACM part of the Homing Torpedo Attack Table. However, if the torpedo misses and reattacks, there is a chance that
the torpedo will acquire the decoy instead of the submarine, because by that time there is enough separation between the decoy and the target for the decoy to be truly effective.

Mobile decoys are also designed to pull an ASW force off a submarine while she makes her escape. The endurance and effectiveness of the mobile decoy depends on its generation.

The endurance is the number of hours that the simulator can run at maximum speed. MAD capability means that the simulator tows a magnetic field generator which will look like a submarine to a MAD equipped aircraft. Third and fourth generation submarine simulators can make up to two course changes and two speed changes. The earlier simulators are single-speed devices that follow a preset course.

 

Edited June 28, 2024 by Silver_Dragon