stealth disadvantages for moving submarines

In this thread you can discuss any thoughts you have about balance within the game. Does a particular unit need a specification changed? Is a stealth plane not stealthy enough? Do "Belli Bar" levels need to be changed? Let us know and discuss it all here.

Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators

Should the disadvantages of movement on submarines be reduced

Yes, they should lower these effects to make submarines harder to detect when they move
13
76%
No, I like beeing able to detect submarines at unrealitic long ranges.
4
24%
 
Total votes: 17
User avatar
Sebastiaan
Colonel
Posts: 376
Joined: Aug 29 2005
Location: the Netherlands

Post by Sebastiaan »

found some REALY REALY intresting data about the detectibility of submarines

http://www.armscontrol.ru/subs/snf/snf03222.htm

another nice example when detection can be very hard
Quantitative analysis shows that the shallow water detection range of the fixed sonar of the Baton Rouge against a quiet23 Sierra class submarine would only be a couple hundred meters - even if the acoustic conditions for detection were nearly ideal and the submarine was oriented so that its sensors could achieve maximum sensitivity. Near ideal acoustic conditions could occur only in extremely calm seas. For environmental conditions that are much more typical of the waters off Murmansk, like those associated with a 10 knot surface wind,24 noise levels would be high enough to result in the same short detection range of even if the Baton Rouge were using a long towed array. Making matters worse, it is likely that the Sierra may have encountered the American submarine from behind. In this circumstance, the Baton Rouge would have had no ability to detect the approaching Sierra, as the fixed sonar on the submarine cannot detect the signals within a cone 60 degrees to the rear of the submarine.
and most importantly, the conclusions we have been looking for
It is not difficult to estimate that with detection ranges at several tens of kilometers, the width of the "corridor" may be no less than 5-10 km; and with detection distances of less than 5 km, it decreases to 1-2 km. In this connection we stress the importance of the circumstances which will not depend on the enemy. Firstly, during the tracking process, both the conditions for sound propagation and the level of external noise will change. Shallow water regions are characterized by fluctuations in propagation losses which reach up to 5 dB. In particular, an average detection range of 5 km will result in the upper limit "corridor" fluctuating from 2-3 to 8-9 km (model A). The tracking submarine will hardly be able to respond adequately to such changes during long periods of weeks and months. Secondly, the strategic submarine may also change the mode of its movement. We propose that it will change to another depth. As a result the algorithm for the signal filtration will stop being optimal and the tracking submarine may lose its target. Frequently submarine collisions result from one of them changing their operating mode. At small distances, in which tracking takes place, the integration time (the time needed for accumulating information on the signal in order to decide that a target is detected) is very important. Our calculations assumed an integration time of 100 seconds. Even if the tracked submarine moves at a minimum speed of 5 knots (2.5 m/s), during the time it takes to accumulate the signal, it has moved 250 m before changes in the target's behavior are detected. Obviously, with such a method for signal processing, attempting to tail at short distances is simply dangerous. Decreasing the accumulation time to 10 s results in the "dead distance" being decreased to 25 m, but by doing this the detection threshold is raised by 5 dB (see formula A2.4) and this leads to a reduction in the maximum achieved detection range. If in our computation the detection distance is 10 km, then with a 10 second accumulation, it is lowered to 6 km (model A). If it reached 5 km, then an increase in the detection threshold by 5 dB is equivalent to a decrease in the maximum distance to 2-3 km. One of the biggest problems that occurs during tracking is localizing the target with the necessary accuracy. At short distances (less than 5 km), the precision for determining the distance to the target must be no worse than 0.2-0.5 km. To provide such accuracy the enemy will have to have good knowledge of the conditions for signal propagation in a specific region of military activity within a given period.(32) Horizontal inhomogenities in the environment will lead to fluctuations in the conditions for signal propagation so that the lower limit of the "corridor" will also fluctuate because of changes in the accuracy of localizing the target. The reasons cited permit the claim that an estimate of the detection distance at 10 km is the limit at which it is technically possible to realize continuous tracking, while ensuring covertness and guaranteeing the potential of avoiding collisions. If this is true then it is possible to see (see Figure A2.2a, A2.4a), that even in the most favorable conditions for sound propagation the "Los Angeles" class submarine can not execute this task.
So, the Maximum range an Akula klass submarine can be tracked pasively is 10km , thats more than a magnitute ten times smaller than represented in the game :o. This proves there is something seriously wrong with the sub detection ranges in the game
Last edited by Sebastiaan on Nov 21 2005, edited 2 times in total.
not going forward eqeals to going backward
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 22083
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Post by Balthagor »

At what ranges? Perhaps we have the stealth rating for the Los Angelas wrong. There are so many factors here, we need precise things to go on, we can't just start changing stuff on opinions. Like you said, it's hard to figure out, but you'll need to get more ppl on your side if you want to see this changed. So far this thread has gotten only 10 votes, not something I think I should be devoting much time to investigating...

I will look into it further, no promises on when...
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
User avatar
Sebastiaan
Colonel
Posts: 376
Joined: Aug 29 2005
Location: the Netherlands

Post by Sebastiaan »

Note that on the last document, we can now also understand why there have been so many collision between US and Russion Submarines, " they simply couldn't hear each other well enough to avoid collisions"

To answer you question: Based on the Idea that the Los Angelous is even stealthier than the Akula (read document!), < 10 km maximum when moving.

Of cource I realise that this gameplay wise would be bit of a overkill since that would make submarine really as stealthy as real submarines, which might be frustrating for some players, which a used to detecting submarines at ten times the distance they can realy be detected. Meabee something in between in the range of 30-50 km could be called fair without over powering submarines too much
Last edited by Sebastiaan on Nov 20 2005, edited 1 time in total.
not going forward eqeals to going backward
User avatar
tkobo
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 12397
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Location: In a vast zionist plot ...RIGHT BEHIND YOU ! Oh Noes !

Post by tkobo »

If you decide to increase a subs stealth, please than decrease the subs "hit points"

Personally i think they are too hard to sink now.And that increasing their stealth would increase this even more.

Also, does stealth degrade like supply with damage ?


As for waiting for alot of replys to a poll before changing something, i dont think you should.
None of the polls on the board to my knowledge have ever gotten a large response.

Just examine the evidence put forth,and make changes in small increments, if you decide the evidence supports them.
This post approved by Tkobo:Official Rabble Rouser of the United Yahoos
Chuckle TM
User avatar
Sebastiaan
Colonel
Posts: 376
Joined: Aug 29 2005
Location: the Netherlands

Post by Sebastiaan »

I agree with tkobo on that their defence should be lowered if their stealth is made realisitc. THat's because according to the documenst I read, submarine are very hard to detect, but once spotted, they are relatively easy to destroy.
http://www.armscontrol.ru/subs/collisions/db080693.htm

This paper was published in DACS Breakthroughs magazine (Defense and Arms Control Studies Program at M.I.T., Winter 92/93, v. 2, # 2, pp 19-24) and reprinted in The Submarine Review (April, 1993, pp. 6-14). The paper analyses the plausible reasons, which lead to a Russian (of "Sierra" class) and a U.S. ("Baton Rouge") submarines collision incident in February, 1992. The author comes to the conclusion, that most likely, the reason was very short detection range of submarines, because of that both submarines operated covertly and did not use other means of detection except passive acoustics. There are no reliable means available to submarines that would allow them to operate both covertly and safely in such a complex environment as shallow waters. The collision illustrates that covert operations of foreign submarines close to Russian naval bases can create dangerous situations that may result in undesirable outcomes.
its conclusions:
In spite of the claims in the news reports, it appears likely that neither submarine heard the other before the collision and that the collision was a basically an accident. Playing an extended cat-and-mouse game would have been impossible there because of very short detection ranges that would be possible against quiet submarines. Moreover, there are no reliable means available to submarines that would allow them to operate both covertly and safely in such a complex environment as the shallow waters of the Barents sea. The circumstances of this collision suggests that, at least in some environmental conditions, if carefully operated, modern Russian submarines are almost impossible to detect by passive acoustic methods, even by the highly capable ASW forces of the United States.31 If true, this has important implications for the options available to Russian policy makers as they decide how to implement the nuclear reductions called for by the START agreement as well as possible future deep reductions in strategic nuclear forces.
not going forward eqeals to going backward
User avatar
Sebastiaan
Colonel
Posts: 376
Joined: Aug 29 2005
Location: the Netherlands

Post by Sebastiaan »

Meabee we should ask advise from a militairy expert like Dr. Smith
http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/p ... 32499.html

Dr. Smith was born in Mitchell, South Dakota and raised in Rockford, Illinois. He served for four years in the U.S. Navy before earning bachelors, masters, and doctoral degrees in physics from the University of California at Davis. Dr. Smith joined APL in 1970, initially engaging in theoretical and experimental research on the detectability of submerged submarines.

here is another source taking about submarine beeing hard to detect
http://www.strategypage.com/messageboar ... 2-2357.asp

Navy planners anticipate that adversaries will try to deny U.S. forces access to key strategic coastal areas by deploying quiet diesel-electric submarines. These hard-to-detect boats would make it difficult for U.S. ships to move around freely without exposing themselves to an enemy torpedo shot.

Quiet submarines, for the most part, cannot be detected with the conventional sonar technologies now employed aboard the Navy’s nuclear-powered submarines and surface ships.

Modern diesel boats have advanced propulsion systems that run quietly underwater, as well as coatings that eliminate echoes, says Navy Capt. Curt Stevens, an antisubmarine warfare expert.
there are also several examples that a modern amerikan Advances ASW ship using powerfull active wasn't able to detect a outdated russian submarine at distance of 500 yards :o
http://www.strategypage.com/messageboar ... 2-2302.asp

Active sonar on a surface vessel also has serious limitations depending on the stratification of the water by temperature (thermals). We had an old Golf class Soviet sub surface 500 yards off our bow in the North Atlantic and we never saw it, and judging by him surfacing in front of a DE doing 15kts he did not know we were there. A thermal at 50 ft could reduce effective sonar output by quite a bit due to reflectivity.
not going forward eqeals to going backward
User avatar
Sebastiaan
Colonel
Posts: 376
Joined: Aug 29 2005
Location: the Netherlands

Post by Sebastiaan »

Well, what do you make of all of this?
not going forward eqeals to going backward
User avatar
tkobo
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 12397
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Location: In a vast zionist plot ...RIGHT BEHIND YOU ! Oh Noes !

Post by tkobo »

I oringinally voted no.

I think id like to see a small reduction now.

The one or two hexs you mention above would be a great start.
This post approved by Tkobo:Official Rabble Rouser of the United Yahoos
Chuckle TM
Slash78
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 583
Joined: May 09 2003
Location: California

Post by Slash78 »

SSNs are noisier in general then modern Diesel-Electric subs. The reason that nuclear reactors make, specifically the pumps and such.
User avatar
haenkie
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 596
Joined: May 27 2005
Location: Netherlands

Post by haenkie »

Yes but USA subs use natural convection in their waterpumps. so they soudn liek the environment. Overall indeed diesels are less nosiy. Even USA is looking to implement them again
User avatar
Sebastiaan
Colonel
Posts: 376
Joined: Aug 29 2005
Location: the Netherlands

Post by Sebastiaan »

Diesels will always be less noicy when submered because Batteries, in contrast to Nuclear Reactors, do not produce any noice when operating.However, This big catch is diesels have limmited endurance and submerged speed. I think this could be reflected in game by making a diesel submarine loose efficency faster when moving compared to a nuclear submarine which have virtualy unlimmited range.
not going forward eqeals to going backward
Jan
Captain
Posts: 122
Joined: May 15 2007
Location: Belgium

Post by Jan »

you really should play a bit at games like Dangerous Waters, and/or harpoon, and read forum like Subsims, you'll learn a lot there, mostly about passive vs active detection and subwarfare.

a realistic sub warfare would require a lot of micro managing or a very good AI (to at least when to rush and when to cat walk).

about detection range, there are a lot of variable (some as weather and water temperature is even not in teh scope of the game), lot enough to give even people that are doing training sim for navies not able to do 100% realitic sims.

on the other side, if you don't want to go too deep ( :D ) in the details, for exmple without detailling active vs passive detection, you can still make subs interisting to play by making them very stealty and powerfull (a lone torpedo can brake an frigate) but fragile and expensive (both in terms of reserach, contsruction and qualified personnel).

cheers,

Jan
User avatar
tkobo
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 12397
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Location: In a vast zionist plot ...RIGHT BEHIND YOU ! Oh Noes !

Post by tkobo »

Jan wrote: you can still make subs interisting to play by making them very stealty and powerfull (a lone torpedo can brake an frigate) but fragile and expensive (both in terms of reserach, contsruction and qualified personnel).

cheers,

Jan
Sounds perfect to me.God I love harpoon.Ill have to warm up my 286 and play some now.
This post approved by Tkobo:Official Rabble Rouser of the United Yahoos
Chuckle TM
Post Reply

Return to “Balance”