recent naval warfare incident & HCE

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

recent naval warfare incident & HCE

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Modern] >> Larry Bond's Harpoon - Commander's Edition >> recent naval warfare incident & HCE

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

recent naval warfare incident & HCE - 5/22/2010 3:52:17 PM

fulcrum28

Posts: 660
Joined: 2/28/2010
Status: offline

I have been shocked by news saying that a submarine might (still unconfirmed) have sunk a south korean warship. Is it possible to simulate this scenario using HCE? I could not find the warship in the DB. I think the ship seems quite advanced and it should have detected the presence of an old-type diesel sub. I would like to test it using HCE.

Post #: 1

RE: recent naval warfare incident & HCE - 5/22/2010 4:13:16 PM

TonyE

Posts: 1551
Joined: 5/23/2006
From: MN, USA
Status: offline

Interestingly enough Brad has been tinkering with the situation and we actually used his results to locate and fix a bug in the game user interface yesterday. The NK subs however didn't stand a chance due to lack of sensors and the ever vigilant crews in HC that were manning the surface forces. Brad is still tinkering though. In any event the tools are present in HCE

_____________________________

Sincerely,
Tony Eischens
Harpoon (HC, HCE, HUCE, Classic) programmer
HarpGamer.com Co-Owner

(in reply to fulcrum28)

Post #: 2

RE: recent naval warfare incident & HCE - 5/22/2010 5:35:28 PM

CV32

Posts: 1046
Joined: 5/15/2006
From: The Rock, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28
I have been shocked by news saying that a submarine might (still unconfirmed) have sunk a south korean warship. Is it possible to simulate this scenario using HCE? I could not find the warship in the DB.

The warship that was lost can indeed be found in the HCDB. It is the Po Hang (Mod) class corvette Cheon An. The midget submarine blamed for the incident currently only appears in a special operations version. A torpedo tube armed version will appear in the next iteration of the database.

quote:

I think the ship seems quite advanced and it should have detected the presence of an old-type diesel sub. I would like to test it using HCE.

Computer simulations like HCE have a difficult time modeling the intricacies of sonar conditions in shallow coastal waters like those where this incident occurred, not to mention the abilities (or mindset) of a suitably motivated midget sub crew. It can be extremely difficult to detect such a target (in real life), even more so when you aren't necessarily looking for it.

< Message edited by CV32 -- 5/22/2010 5:41:24 PM >

_____________________________

Brad Leyte
HC3 development group member for HCE
Author of HCDB official database for HCE
Harpgamer.com Co-Owner

(in reply to fulcrum28)

Post #: 3

RE: recent naval warfare incident & HCE - 6/3/2010 7:20:15 AM

VictorInThePacific

Posts: 169
Joined: 10/30/2008
Status: offline

Regarding the Cheonan incident:

Is it true that, at the time of its sinking, the Cheonan was participating in a major naval exercise?

As to the potential NK unit, I have seen suggestions that it might have been a small submarine. Is that in the DB?

As regards the information about this that I have seen:

I understand that a Pohang class corvette (but PCC stands for patrol combat corvette !) can have 2 main configurations. Primary weapons for the ASW version are 2 x 76 mm mounts and 2 x twin 40 mm mounts (plus torpedos). Primary weapons for the ASuW version are 1 x 76 mm mount, 1 x twin 30 mm mount, and 2 x Exocet SSM.

ref: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/rok/pohang-specs.htm

The Harpoon DB uses this.

But if you look at http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/rok/pohang.htm, you find

"The first four of the Po Hang class are fitted Exocet and the remainder have the improved Harpoon combat data system."

This appears to be incorrect.

If you look in Wikipedia, which is the only source of true knowledge

, you find

Armament:

2 OTO Melara(76mm)/62 compact (1 for early type)
2 Breda 40mm/70
4 RGM-84D Harpoon SSM or 2 MM-38 Exocet, MK-46 mod 2, 12 MK-9 depth charge racks

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pohang_class_corvette)

or

Armament:

4 � Harpoon missiles,
2 � OTO Melara(76mm)/62 compact cannons
2 � Breda 40mm/70 cannons,
6 � Mark 46 torpedoes,
12 � Mark 9 depth charges

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ROKS_Cheonan_(PCC-772))

This appears to be incorrect.

There are videos of the 2 parts of the Cheonan, after recovery. You can clearly see 2 gun mounts on each section. There is clearly no room to mount the SSMs.

I also saw a report on the internet that stated that there were no SSMs on the recovered aft section of the Choenan. Since the explosion must have knocked those missiles off the ship, this tells us something about the explosion.

Now that is bunk.

I don't have a reference for this last one, because I saw it while I was just starting to look into this matter, and didn't realize that it was wrong, and I didn't save it.

But it just goes to illustrate that there's an awful lot of bad information floating around out there.

(in reply to fulcrum28)

Post #: 4

RE: recent naval warfare incident & HCE - 6/3/2010 1:18:47 PM

CV32

Posts: 1046
Joined: 5/15/2006
From: The Rock, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: VictorInThePacific
Regarding the Cheonan incident: Is it true that, at the time of its sinking, the Cheonan was participating in a major naval exercise?

I think the exercise you are referring to is 'Key Resolve/Foal Eagle'? It does not appear that Cheonan was alone, and in either case, it seems the movements of ROKN warships in the area of Baengnyeong Island had been telegraphed.

quote:

As to the potential NK unit, I have seen suggestions that it might have been a small submarine. Is that in the DB?

Added in the most recent release, HCDB-100528.

quote:

As regards the information about this that I have seen: I understand that a Pohang class corvette (but PCC stands for patrol combat corvette !) can have 2 main configurations. Primary weapons for the ASW version are 2 x 76 mm mounts and 2 x twin 40 mm mounts (plus torpedos). Primary weapons for the ASuW version are 1 x 76 mm mount, 1 x twin 30 mm mount, and 2 x Exocet SSM.

ref: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/rok/pohang-specs.htm

The Harpoon DB uses this.

Actually, the HCDB uses the most recently available Harpoon4 data. It may or may not jive with what you find on the Interwebz.

quote:

But it just goes to illustrate that there's an awful lot of bad information floating around out there.

To be fair, some weapons (such as Exocet and Harpoon) can be readily added, and any description of a warship's specifications can really only be a 'snapshot' of what it was at a certain time. Warships often deploy with less (or more) weaponry aboard than can usually be expected. Also, you often (more often, it seems) see cases of "fitted for, but not with".

_____________________________

Brad Leyte
HC3 development group member for HCE
Author of HCDB official database for HCE
Harpgamer.com Co-Owner

(in reply to VictorInThePacific)

Post #: 5

RE: recent naval warfare incident & HCE - 6/4/2010 2:29:30 AM

VictorInThePacific

Posts: 169
Joined: 10/30/2008
Status: offline

I have some questions about the Cheonan sinking.

I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask these questions, but I think some of you might know at least some of the answers.

1) How did the Cheonan sink?

I have seen one report that a hole was blasted in the stern, and then the ship sank by the stern. But that seems inconsistent with the rest.

Mainly, it seems to be the case that an explosion underneath the ship caused a "bubble jet" effect, which broke the ship in two. We can certainly see in pictures that the ship was broken in two, with essentially zero other visible damage.

(http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/2709/rok-ship-typical-torpedo-damage)

2) What caused the explosion?

The consensus seems to be that it was a (North Korean) torpedo. While it would probably be easy for the platform that fired the torpedo to remain undetected, both before and after, the torpedo itself should have been easily detected by the Cheonan. But I have seen no reports mentioning this.

(ibid, Danieal, Apr. 28)

The alternative would be a mine, which would be essentially indetectible. But how would you get it into the right place?

3) Not to be too macabre, but what killed the 46 members of the Cheonan's crew that died?

Apparently there was no fire, the explosion itself was relatively small, and there was no secondary explosion. One report said that they just drowned. Did the ship go down so fast that they couldn't grab some sort of flotation device and jump overboard?

(in reply to fulcrum28)

Post #: 6

RE: recent naval warfare incident & HCE - 6/4/2010 1:58:04 PM

CV32

Posts: 1046
Joined: 5/15/2006
From: The Rock, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: VictorInThePacific
I have some questions about the Cheonan sinking. I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask these questions, but I think some of you might know at least some of the answers.

1) How did the Cheonan sink?
I have seen one report that a hole was blasted in the stern, and then the ship sank by the stern. But that seems inconsistent with the rest. Mainly, it seems to be the case that an explosion underneath the ship caused a "bubble jet" effect, which broke the ship in two. We can certainly see in pictures that the ship was broken in two, with essentially zero other visible damage.

Yes, there was a shockwave or 'bubble effect' from an explosion that occurred at around 9:22 pm local. The explosion took place underneath the ship, apparently 3 meters left of the gas turbine room. The ship was broken in half as a result. Power was lost immediately, and the captain (Choi Wonil) apparently had to use his mobile phone to call for help.

quote:

2) What caused the explosion?
The consensus seems to be that it was a (North Korean) torpedo. While it would probably be easy for the platform that fired the torpedo to remain undetected, both before and after, the torpedo itself should have been easily detected by the Cheonan. But I have seen no reports mentioning this.

The consensus is that it was a North Korean manufactured torpedo that they have designated CHT-02D. This is most likely an indigenous copy or variant of a Soviet or Chinese design, possibly the SAET-60 or the Yu-3. It is described as a passive acoustic/wake homer.

The Cheonan is reported to have been steaming at just 6 knots at the time, less than one nautical mile from Baengnyeong Island. It would have made for a terrific target for the midget sub believed to have been lurking nearby, on the southern side (toward the open ocean) of the island.

Why didn't the Cheonan detect the incoming torpedo?

There could be any number of reasons, the simplest being inattention. (We recall what happened to the INS Hanit, a heavily defended and very capable combatant that nearly succumbed to a Hezbollah antiship missile at a time when you might have ordinarily expected its crew to be at peak readiness).

Another possible (or related) reason:

The Cheonan has a relatively elderly and short ranged PHS-32 hull sonar. In the Yellow Sea, shallow waters, strong currents and the like make sonar conditions less than ideal, especially close to shore. If this torpedo was a passive homer (as is alleged), there would have been no advance warning and the ship would have to rely on the alertness of its crew to spot incoming torpedoes. At short range, the window of opportunity to detect, identify, and respond to a hostile torpedo is extremely small.

quote:

3) Not to be too macabre, but what killed the 46 members of the Cheonan's crew that died?
Apparently there was no fire, the explosion itself was relatively small, and there was no secondary explosion. One report said that they just drowned. Did the ship go down so fast that they couldn't grab some sort of flotation device and jump overboard?

The stern section reportedly sank in about one minute. For those that survived the shock of the explosion and its immediate effects of tearing the ship in two, there would have been little opportunity for crew in that part of the ship to escape. I understand 38 sailors were still inside the stern section when it was recovered. The survivors clung to the upturned port side of the bow section until it too sank at around 11:20 pm.

_____________________________

Brad Leyte
HC3 development group member for HCE
Author of HCDB official database for HCE
Harpgamer.com Co-Owner

(in reply to VictorInThePacific)

Post #: 7

RE: recent naval warfare incident & HCE - 6/6/2010 8:24:31 AM

VictorInThePacific

Posts: 169
Joined: 10/30/2008
Status: offline

I googled cht-o2d and came up with this:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2517957/posts

Am I supposed to understand that the drawing looks like the thing they pulled out of the water? Because they look rather different. And why does the actual thing look like it's been underwater for a long time? Is that a result of being in an explosion?

Also, how does a wake-homing torpedo find the middle of a ship? How much wake is needed? If the ship stops, is it then safe?

< Message edited by VictorInThePacific -- 6/6/2010 9:29:27 AM >

(in reply to fulcrum28)

Post #: 8

RE: recent naval warfare incident & HCE - 6/6/2010 3:48:02 PM

CV32

Posts: 1046
Joined: 5/15/2006
From: The Rock, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: VictorInThePacific
I googled cht-o2d and came up with this:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2517957/posts
Am I supposed to understand that the drawing looks like the thing they pulled out of the water? Because they look rather different.

I guess whether you believe the allegation is up to you.

Most heavyweight torpedoes (and torpedoes, generally, for that matter) look much the same. The diagram doesn't cause me any real concern. The 5 x 5 contra-rotating propellers look a bit off in the diagram, but I might be more skeptical if it were an exact copy.

quote:

And why does the actual thing look like it's been underwater for a long time? Is that a result of being in an explosion?

We chatted about this a bit at HarpGamer. It doesn't take long for surface corrosion to take effect, especially on exposed, unpainted, gouged metal that has been sitting underwater for the better part of two months. The zinc oxide ('white rust') on the props might be a result of their being made of aluminum-magnesium alloy.

quote:

Also, how does a wake-homing torpedo find the middle of a ship? How much wake is needed? If the ship stops, is it then safe?

I am a little doubtful that wake homing was employed, but in any event, the seeker technique works by detecting the edges of the wake and then following them to their apex. Exactly how much of a wake is needed would no doubt depend in part on the sensitivity of the seeker, and is probably beyond my pay grade. I suppose a ship that is stopped (and not producing a wake) would be safe, but wake homing is seldom employed alone, and furthermore, a cruising ship cannot stop on a dime (and moreover, you face the rather large problem of actually detecting a torpedo attack and discerning that it is wake homing).

As for where the torpedo exploded, don't forget the action of the fuze.

_____________________________

Brad Leyte
HC3 development group member for HCE
Author of HCDB official database for HCE
Harpgamer.com Co-Owner

(in reply to VictorInThePacific)

Post #: 9

RE: recent naval warfare incident & HCE - 6/7/2010 3:14:19 AM

VictorInThePacific

Posts: 169
Joined: 10/30/2008
Status: offline

Regarding corrosion on the torpedo fragment:

Since yesterday, it has occurred to me that the Cheonan was sunk March 26, and the torpedo fragment was found about 2 months later. I don't know how fast metal immersed in salt water corrodes, but I would not object to being told that that was 2 month's worth of corrosion.

Further, one could perhaps even determine from the amount of corrosion approximately how long the fragment was underwater.

(in reply to fulcrum28)

Post #: 10

RE: recent naval warfare incident & HCE - 6/7/2010 3:22:19 AM

VictorInThePacific

Posts: 169
Joined: 10/30/2008
Status: offline

Amusing anecdote re wake-homing torpedoes:

"At the height of the Cold War in the mid-1980s � as a modern, quieter, and expanded Soviet submarine force seemed ready to challenge the U.S. Navy, anytime, anywhere � concerns spiked when intelligence indicated that the Soviets had developed a new type of long-range torpedo that homed on the wake of surface ships. Existing countermeasures were of no value, and Navy science and technology mavens struggled to find an answer. The �wake-homer� torpedo threat was so severe that then-Deputy Chief of Naval Operations, Surface Warfare (OP-03), Vice Adm. Joseph Metcalf declared the only counter to it was to �...position a frigate astern of every high-value unit.� The response of the frigate community to Metcalf�s �solution� was quick and vocal."

(http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/usw/issue_32/antitorpedo.html)

(in reply to fulcrum28)

Post #: 11

RE: recent naval warfare incident & HCE - 6/10/2010 6:03:17 AM

VictorInThePacific

Posts: 169
Joined: 10/30/2008
Status: offline

Did the Cheonan carry Harpoons?

The Harpoon is about 15 feet long (actually only half the size of a heavy torpedo). A certain amount of space is needed for the launcher.

According to Global Security, the ASW version of a PCC Pohang does not carry AS missiles.

(http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/rok/pohang-pics.htm)

So what are the tubes in this picture?
(http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/fotostrecke-55107-4.html)
And why do they look as if they've just been randomly dropped on the ship?

(in reply to fulcrum28)

Post #: 12

RE: recent naval warfare incident & HCE - 6/10/2010 2:24:51 PM

TonyE

Posts: 1551
Joined: 5/23/2006
From: MN, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: VictorInThePacific
So what are the tubes in this picture?
(http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/fotostrecke-55107-4.html)
And why do they look as if they've just been randomly dropped on the ship?

Those tubes sure look like an Exocet launcher. Also seen at http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?s=&showtopic=8991&view=findpost&p=20988

As for randomness, that seems to be the style with many Harpoon and Exocet launchers, just load them on with a crane when desired for deployment and remove them at will as well.

_____________________________

Sincerely,
Tony Eischens
Harpoon (HC, HCE, HUCE, Classic) programmer
HarpGamer.com Co-Owner

(in reply to VictorInThePacific)

Post #: 13

RE: recent naval warfare incident & HCE - 6/10/2010 11:16:09 PM

CV32

Posts: 1046
Joined: 5/15/2006
From: The Rock, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: VictorInThePacific
Did the Cheonan carry Harpoons? So what are the tubes in this picture?
(http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/fotostrecke-55107-4.html)

Those are indeed Harpoons, in what might be the Mk 140 lightweight launcher.

quote:

And why do they look as if they've just been randomly dropped on the ship?

Because ...

quote:

ORIGINAL: CV32
To be fair, some weapons (such as Exocet and Harpoon) can be readily added, and any description of a warship's specifications can really only be a 'snapshot' of what it was at a certain time. Warships often deploy with less (or more) weaponry aboard than can usually be expected. Also, you often (more often, it seems) see cases of "fitted for, but not with".

_____________________________

Brad Leyte
HC3 development group member for HCE
Author of HCDB official database for HCE
Harpgamer.com Co-Owner

(in reply to VictorInThePacific)

Post #: 14

RE: recent naval warfare incident & HCE - 6/11/2010 12:24:11 AM

TonyE

Posts: 1551
Joined: 5/23/2006
From: MN, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CV32

quote:

ORIGINAL: VictorInThePacific
Did the Cheonan carry Harpoons? So what are the tubes in this picture?
(http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/fotostrecke-55107-4.html)

Those are indeed Harpoons, in what might be the Mk 140 lightweight launcher.

Here I thought I'd gotten one right!

_____________________________

Sincerely,
Tony Eischens
Harpoon (HC, HCE, HUCE, Classic) programmer
HarpGamer.com Co-Owner

(in reply to CV32)

Post #: 15

RE: recent naval warfare incident & HCE - 6/11/2010 4:29:00 AM

VictorInThePacific

Posts: 169
Joined: 10/30/2008
Status: offline

2 comments and a question.

in this picture: (http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/fotostrecke-55107-4.html)

1) OK, you've already said that this is normal, but it looks to me as though those launchers have been strapped to the ship with a staple gun and a bit of Krazy Glue.

2) Anybody walking out that door at the time of launch would probably get a little bit singed.

3) The mount appears to be asymmetric (points left). Would you expect to see a second pair of missiles on the ship?

(in reply to fulcrum28)

Post #: 16

RE: recent naval warfare incident & HCE - 6/11/2010 5:59:50 AM

CV32

Posts: 1046
Joined: 5/15/2006
From: The Rock, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: VictorInThePacific
2 comments and a question.
in this picture: (http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/fotostrecke-55107-4.html)
1) OK, you've already said that this is normal, but it looks to me as though those launchers have been strapped to the ship with a staple gun and a bit of Krazy Glue.

Yeah, there is nothing sophisticated about the launcher frame. Its just there to support the weight of the missiles in their tubes and a fire control connection, and little else.

quote:

2) Anybody walking out that door at the time of launch would probably get a little bit singed.

Yep, that's why they have rules about not being on deck when there is going to be a missile launch.

quote:

3) The mount appears to be asymmetric (points left). Would you expect to see a second pair of missiles on the ship?

Often you do, but in this case, while there is obviously enough room for the base of the launcher, there isn't enough room on the port side for the business ends of two more launcher tubes. Its a compromise. Two SSMs added to a gun armed, ASW oriented corvette gives quite a bit of extra capability, enough to potentially smoke two opposing warships or that submarine(s) you just forced to the surface.

_____________________________

Brad Leyte
HC3 development group member for HCE
Author of HCDB official database for HCE
Harpgamer.com Co-Owner

(in reply to VictorInThePacific)

Post #: 17

RE: recent naval warfare incident & HCE - 6/11/2010 2:43:17 PM

FransKoenz

Posts: 255
Joined: 6/3/2005
Status: offline

Perhaps not relevant to this topic, but here are two pics of a DPRK
over-armed patrol craft

http://www.taitennek.nl/prk-patrolcraft-01.jpg
http://www.taitennek.nl/prk-patrolcraft-02.jpg

I personally think that these boats are for river patrols, in rough seas, these boats would sink with the first big wave

(in reply to CV32)

Post #: 18

RE: recent naval warfare incident & HCE - 6/11/2010 6:23:34 PM

CV32

Posts: 1046
Joined: 5/15/2006
From: The Rock, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Taitennek
I personally think that these boats are for river patrols, in rough seas, these boats would sink with the first big wave

There's not a lot of freeboard, but those things are quite 'beamy', as you can see, and there are a lot of DPRK patrol boats that seem to have readily adapted the 85mm turret. (Sufficient to score hits on a ROK patrol boat in 2002).

_____________________________

Brad Leyte
HC3 development group member for HCE
Author of HCDB official database for HCE
Harpgamer.com Co-Owner

(in reply to FransKoenz)

Post #: 19

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Modern] >> Larry Bond's Harpoon - Commander's Edition >> recent naval warfare incident & HCE

Page: [1]

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

1.375

Slitherine

recent naval warfare incident & HCE