Naval Operations Wish List

[VML_robáG]

My dream F-14B or F-14D, MiG-29K, Su-25BM, A-6 or EA-6, new model MH-53E, SH-60.

[Silver_Dragon]

Please note that this post does not refer to new units. It refers to new functionality, capabilities and changes in CA and DCS: W to improve naval environment.

[VML_robáG]

England, France, Germany, ..., ships added game

[Pelmo]

England, France, Germany, ..., ships added game

 

Italy..:music_whistling:

[Silver_Dragon]

UNREP and VERTEP

[Devious]

Naval Ops Idea

 

I was a big fan of a title called "Dangerous Waters". It incorporated 4 submarines, 2 American and 2 Russian, plus an Oliver Hazard Perry. Each ship had different stations that you could plug into to operate the weapons systems, sonar, helicopter ops (For the Hazard Perry) radio room, ect. The ships, aircraft, helicopters and pretty much everything else looked a lot like what you find in DCS World. The graphics weren't great, but it was all there. I really enjoyed it and I think if the rights could be received, it would give a really good way to control ships and be accurately modeled too. Just a thought. Don't know if anyone else has played that title or mentioned it on this forum yet. Fly safe.

[MBot]

Dual purpose naval guns. Many naval guns are dual purpose (against surface and air targets) with the ability to shoot proximity fused anti-aircraft ammunition.

 

Radar horizon based on sensor elevation and earth curvature.

 

Enhanced AI sensor model to get away from instant target detection and classification. Naval warfare is primary about putting bits and pieces of sensor information together to gain a better overall picture than the enemy. AI should collect data from different sensors (radar, IFF, ESM, active sonar, passive sonar, visual, datalink), compare it with intelligence information (what equipment does each coalition use) and integrate it into a overall picture. Make classification of contacts gradual depending on information available (Unknown -> Aircraft -> Fighter -> MiG-29). Introduce the concept of confidence (low, medium, high) into classification, determination of side and position of a contact.

 

Enhance damage model of ships (damage to individual sensors, weapons, control center, engines, steering, ammo storage, fuel storage). If this is not doable, make damage to ships more random. In previous sims it has been a major immersion breaker to know that ship type X always needs Y amount of ordinance to be destroyed. Damage to ships should be quite unpredictable. For example the 4800 tons destroyer HMS Sheffield was sunk by the kinetic impact and unburned fuel of a single Exocet missile (the warhead didn't even explode), while other ships have taken tremendous damage without being lost. Generally ships should be easy to render combat ineffective but hard to sink.

 

More units of the US Navy and Soviet Navy of the late Cold War era.

[Leatherneck2382]

Would love to see some Amphibious Operations, and all that fun stuff. Which, would mean some fun Naval Bombardment options, CAS, etc.

 

(Yeah, the Marine wants to have Marines, go figure.)

[Supersheep]

Not limited to NavOps:

More flexible AI that makes things fall into place by itself somewhat more.

 

Example:

Carrier+aircraft+tanker+distant thread

=carrier launching aircraft that automatically refuel to engage the threat and to get back.

 

Note:

I'm aware that that's a bad example (doctrine, unintended consequences of the attack etc etc pp), but it should illustrate what I mean.

[Erforce]

Even if a SCS DW mod is appealing, these are 2 different games.

 

apply Dangerous Waters to DCS, and you will sit in the middle of black sea doing nothing.

And if they intend to create command stations in FFG or SSN (i don't dream, creating a full underwater world is not... quite easy), please, make something more... less cheap.

 

I can't see a DCS ships module without reworking the water itself. Right now, sea warfare is more like Battleships, the game : A map, a target, a button "Fire", a chance to win.

 

naval ops should be started by removing all bugs and make something realistic with cruise missiles and CIWS. Right now 2 russian ships can remove a full US battlegroup (Ships, + anti-ships F18s) from earth. 2 vs 20 is not interesting, especially if those 2 win hands down.

[Cedaway]

When talking about Navy Ops, I've always dreamed about a reboot of Harpoon series.

And it's about to come: Command: Air/naval Ops

If ED would add Naval Ops to DCS:CA, it's the kind of functionality I would like to see: immersive, strategic, accurate weapons database and capabilities,...

[Silver_Dragon]

The Harpoon community expected a successor or Harpoon 3. If ED can implement the naval envirotment at same level of Air envirotment and get all naval functionality (AAW / ASW / ASuW, countermeasures, etc), surely a big part of Harpoon community can move into DCS: W.

[RagnarDa]

I'd like to see naval ops on the scale of Harpoon. The Black Sea region is too small, one carrier group dominate the whole region and doesn't really need to move.

[diveplane]

some of the naval models need a make over the kilo class subs plz.

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0f/KIlo-class_diesel_submarine_being_towed_through_the_Mediterranean_sea_en_route_to_Iran_(12-23-1995).jpg

[westr]

I know it's not from a combined arms type perspective. But I'd love to see carrier aircraft have proper suspension travel when their wheels hit the deck. At the moment when they touch down they seem to stick to the deck, but that may involve afm for all carrier aircraft? I love the new ship wake effects btw.

[Krunkskimo]

some sort of flight control officer position for carriers who manages landing and launching of player/AI aircraft.

[Jimbolya]

I'm sure this has been mentioned, but if you want to do naval ops and what not check out the following and simply cut and paste what they have:

 

Harpoon

Global Conflict Blue 2

Command Modern Air / Naval Operations

[Netsk]

Found an interesting article. According to this treaty it's not very realistic to have US Ships in the Black Sea :)

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreux_Convention_Regarding_the_Regime_of_the_Turkish_Straits

 

"In the case of non-Black Sea powers, these terms make it impossible for transit any modern ships carrying aircraft through the straits without violating the terms of the convention."

[RIFLE_JTAC_TRAINING]

This is a cool find!

 

However the UN wants to revise it and the U.S. would let people know that.

 

Then if there was such a conflict as we perform in DCS WORLD they would just show up anyways.

 

Perhaps the conflict woudnt being in the black sea but the Aegean sea if that was the case.

 

My two cents.

 

63

[Alfa]

Found an interesting article. According to this treaty it's not very realistic to have US Ships in the Black Sea :)

 

Incorrect. Even quite large US warships(such as Ticonderoga- and Burke class) have regulary entered the Black Sea - making port calls to nations such as Bulgaria, Ukraine and Georgia.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreux_Convention_Regarding_the_Regime_of_the_Turkish_Straits

 

"In the case of non-Black Sea powers, these terms make it impossible for transit any modern ships carrying aircraft through the straits without violating the terms of the convention."

 

If you read through the whole thing, you will find that there is no mention of "aircraft carriers" in the convention. The prohibiting factors(for non-Black Sea powers) would be that:

 

a). a single ship's displacement must not exceed some 15000 tons of displacement(which of course would exclude a modern US aircraft carrier).

 

b). that no more than a total of nine ships with a total displacement of some 30000 tons must pass through the straits.

 

However, although the US has so far observed the rules of the convention, AFAIK they never actually signed it.

[Netsk]

Incorrect. Even quite large US warships(such as Ticonderoga- and Burke class) have regulary entered the Black Sea - making port calls to nations such as Bulgaria, Ukraine and Georgia.

 

Yes you are correct, I ment to write carriers, late night brainfart.

 

 

If you read through the whole thing, you will find that there is no mention of "aircraft carriers" in the convention. The prohibiting factors(for non-Black Sea powers) would be that:

 

a). a single ship's displacement must not exceed some 15000 tons of displacement(which of course would exclude a modern US aircraft carrier).

 

b). that no more than a total of nine ships with a total displacement of some 30000 tons must pass through the straits.

 

However, although the US has so far observed the rules of the convention, AFAIK they never actually signed it.

 

Yes I read the whole thing, what is your point? Did I claim that there is a mention that prohobitis aircraft carriers specificly?

 

What prohibits non-Black Sea Aircraft Carriers is their weight.

[howie87]

haven't read the whole thread but how about being able to disable certain parts of larger ships, like guns and missile stations?

[Darkwolf]

According to this treaty it's not very realistic to have US Ships in the Black Sea

 

let's delete the carrier and cancel DCS : FA18C ;) :P

[Netsk]

let's delete the carrier and cancel DCS : FA18C ;) :P

 

How about let's widen up the map? :thumbup:

[howie87]

Yeah, let's extend it to Nevada :D Plenty of water in between for naval ops!