Sub contact and sensor weirdness

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Sub contact and sensor weirdness

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Sub contact and sensor weirdness

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Sub contact and sensor weirdness - 8/11/2014 7:49:37 AM

rjosh

Posts: 5
Joined: 1/18/2002
From: Finland
Status: offline

Hi!

Command is getting better by the patch, can't wait for the next one!

I have been playing the first Red Storm -scenario and have some question about subs, as they dont behave like in Dangerous Waters.

1. Thick green rings around US subs. I guess they are sensor ranges, but what ranges, and what do the thick green zones mean?

2. Jumping contacs: Sub contacts jump wildly around screen, instead of being one degrading contact. I really would like an option like "Lock this, ignore others"

3. Sensors cant keep steady track even when target is active torpedo. It also shifts places and disappears from time to time.

4. In DW I can launch a torpedo, wireguide it and activate its sonar only when near target. It seems in C:MANO I can guide torpedos fine, but they always launch active. Enemy subs must be so grateful.

5. Could contact info show the source, like is it from SOSUS or my subs sensors?

Post #: 1

RE: Sub contact and sensor weirdness - 8/12/2014 3:19:35 AM

ExNusquam

Posts: 513
Joined: 3/4/2014
From: Washington, D.C.
Status: offline

Can't help with the others, but the thick green areas around some subs/ships are the convergence zones. They are visible for all ships/subs that have towed arrays.

(in reply to rjosh)

Post #: 2

RE: Sub contact and sensor weirdness - 8/12/2014 1:19:49 PM

scottb613

Posts: 186
Joined: 8/9/2014
Status: offline

Ahh - thanks - answers that question for me as well...

I think the sub jumping around is the ambiguity you get with passive tracking... it takes a substantial amount of time to get good tracking legs to refine the solution to the point you could shoot at something... During this time the solution will jump around in real life... Going active should resolve the range/bearing ambiguity - US subs would almost never use active sonar - though..... As a Cold War US Submarine vet - battle stations "Geo Plot" - it was my job to do the TMA on contacts of interest... As we used to say the solution only needed to be close enough for a 48...

Regards,
Scott

(in reply to ExNusquam)

Post #: 3

RE: Sub contact and sensor weirdness - 8/12/2014 6:27:46 PM

chrisol

Posts: 209
Joined: 1/5/2008
From: Cambridge, UK
Status: offline

I add a reference point if I think an uncertain contact is probably good, and then label it. Helps keep track of things I'm worried about when the display jumps around a bit !

Chris

(in reply to scottb613)

Post #: 4

RE: Sub contact and sensor weirdness - 8/14/2014 2:43:56 PM

BobWBristolRI

Posts: 12
Joined: 5/11/2014
Status: offline

Thx for that - That's a really useful tip and suggestion. To original poster - Passive contact location is loaded with ambiguity (sonar as well as ESM). Estimated location jumps around until a more data (longer detection, cross fix from a second sensor) reduces the ambiguity. To improve it quietly and avoid counterdetection, change your direction of motion while maintaining contact (use yourself to crossfix the target), or put a second platform (or off-platform sensor like a helo, sonobuoy, or drone) in contact.

(in reply to chrisol)

Post #: 5

RE: Sub contact and sensor weirdness - 8/14/2014 6:49:22 PM

scottb613

Posts: 186
Joined: 8/9/2014
Status: offline

Hi Folks,

Yeah - personally - I think Command needs a little work in the Submarine Warefare dept - I think we should lose coms when the boat dives and not know of any results until they come up for message traffic... Any contacts detected by the sub - should then be placed on the map at this time - with ever widening ambiguity reference circles depending on the last solid detection... If the sub submerges again - and - if the sub is the only asset that's detected the contact - the contact shouldn't be updated until the sub comes up again with new information... I think we need more control than Harpooon provided - in that you should probably be able to specify shorter communication intervals when needed so you can get better control... Missions should have just a track option - and - maybe report new contacts at earliest opportunity button... I haven't played enough to know if Command classifies contacts picked up by a submarine well - but - it should provide possible contact matches with any solid contact - this happened fairly quickly with any solid detections... Anyway - just a bubbleheads opinion...

Regards,
Scott

(in reply to BobWBristolRI)

Post #: 6

RE: Sub contact and sensor weirdness - 8/14/2014 9:22:25 PM

ExNusquam

Posts: 513
Joined: 3/4/2014
From: Washington, D.C.
Status: offline

The problem with that is that IRL sub commanders are smart people; the AI, not so much. Jane's Fleet Command modeled the requirement for subs to come to comms depth to give orders, and it was annoying as hell, since the sub AI wouldn't adapt to a changing situation.

As for possible matches, it would be great if this was added to the contact report window for passive sonar tracks.

(in reply to scottb613)

Post #: 7

RE: Sub contact and sensor weirdness - 8/14/2014 11:02:29 PM

GBOATZ

Posts: 126
Joined: 10/22/2013
Status: offline

quote:

I think we should lose coms when the boat dives and not know of any results until they come up for message traffic... Any contacts detected by the sub - should then be placed on the map at this time - with ever widening ambiguity reference circles depending on the last solid detection... If the sub submerges again - and - if the sub is the only asset that's detected the contact - the contact shouldn't be updated until the sub comes up again with new information...

But IMHO in CMANO you are the Admiral, not the Sub Captain and ergo giving instructions to all your assets. If we use your strategy we have NO IDEA what is happening to the sub in the interim or what orders it has or has not received. Realism has its merits, but in my mind that that would involve your completely losing a valuable asset and leaving it to the AI to both attack and defend your subs or even know precisely where it is!

< Message edited by GBOATZ -- 8/15/2014 12:03:42 AM >

(in reply to scottb613)

Post #: 8

RE: Sub contact and sensor weirdness - 8/16/2014 10:32:14 PM

rjosh

Posts: 5
Joined: 1/18/2002
From: Finland
Status: offline

I like to think that ability to command submerged sub is modelling its smart human captain...

BobWBristolRI, is it really realistic when contact jumps from 2 o'clock to 8 o'clock, back to 2 and then to 5 o'clock? It confuses AI pretty well. In REd STorm scenario I think that is because sub sensors say 2 o'clock and SOSUS says 8 o'clock. Maybe an option that limits contact updates to own sensors only?

I am still wondering why passive sensors don't see active torpedos 24/7, and if I can launch torpedoes in passive mode, wireguide them near suspected contact and then activate them?

How about some indication when ship or sub is using active sensor? Like ACT under the ship symbol, similar to CAV used when ship is cavitating?

(in reply to GBOATZ)

Post #: 9

RE: Sub contact and sensor weirdness - 8/17/2014 3:12:17 PM

scottb613

Posts: 186
Joined: 8/9/2014
Status: offline

Yeah - concur - it's been a while since I've tracked submarines but you're right - the bearing wouldn't be jumping all over the place - but - the range would... When you first pick up a contact - your not really sure which side of the towed array is that actual contact - as you get a trace on both sides of the array... Typically - you would run 10 to 15 minute tracking legs before changing the course of your own ship - so the first leg it might be on either side... Once you start getting a good track on your second leg - you know which side is the actual contact by the way the signal tracks on the waterfall display... As long as it's a solid signal - the bearing would be known and consistent... You would probably have at least three legs before you had a decent firing solution... In an emergency - such as an incoming torpedo - you would just snapshot down the bearing of the incoming torpedo and hope for the best - as your evasive maneuvers would cause you to lose your passive track... When the torpedo goes active - you would get alerts in the control room from a piece of equipment to provide bearing to active sound sources...

Regards,
Scott

(in reply to rjosh)

Post #: 10

RE: Sub contact and sensor weirdness - 8/17/2014 4:06:02 PM

mikmykWS

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline

quote:

rjosh
How about some indication when ship or sub is using active sensor? Like ACT under the ship symbol, similar to CAV used when ship is cavitating?

Hi Josh

You will see the pulsing emissions in a datablock of the detected unit. You can also select the contact report button and it will show what's detected.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to scottb613)

Post #: 11

RE: Sub contact and sensor weirdness - 8/17/2014 4:13:43 PM

mikmykWS

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline

quote:

I am still wondering why passive sensors don't see active torpedos 24/7, and if I can launch torpedoes in passive mode, wireguide them near suspected contact and then activate them?

They do see image below.

You can drive torpedoes and turn sensors on/off. Try bol'ing. Control+F1 and then using the plotting tool and sensor button.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to mikmykWS)

Post #: 12

RE: Sub contact and sensor weirdness - 8/17/2014 4:17:50 PM

mikmykWS

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline

quote:

rjosh
I like to think that ability to command submerged sub is modelling its smart human captain...

Yeah being able to drive subs is not an error on our part but a decision driven by the observation that players like too.

_____________________________

(in reply to mikmykWS)

Post #: 13

RE: Sub contact and sensor weirdness - 8/18/2014 10:21:40 PM

rjosh

Posts: 5
Joined: 1/18/2002
From: Finland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mikmyk
Hi Josh

You will see the pulsing emissions in a datablock of the detected unit. You can also select the contact report button and it will show what's detected.

OK, so the functionality is already there! I actually meant my own unit. Just run some sub/torpedo tests, and I really like to have
1) feedback that my sub actually uses active sonar and when it sends a pulse
2) to be sure that my torpedo actually goes active at the desired waypoint. Sensor status was not automatically updated to sensors window.

Would it possible to have an option to show emissions of selected (own) target and its weapons?

(in reply to mikmykWS)

Post #: 14

RE: Sub contact and sensor weirdness - 8/23/2014 4:45:59 AM

Stevechase

Posts: 161
Joined: 10/5/2013
Status: offline

quote:

Yeah - personally - I think Command needs a little work in the Submarine Warefare dept - I think we should lose coms when the boat dives and not know of any results until they come up for message traffic... Any contacts detected by the sub - should then be placed on the map at this time - with ever widening ambiguity reference circles depending on the last solid detection... If the sub submerges again - and - if the sub is the only asset that's detected the contact - the contact shouldn't be updated until the sub comes up again with new information... I think we need more control than Harpooon provided - in that you should probably be able to specify shorter communication intervals when needed so you can get better control... Missions should have just a track option - and - maybe report new contacts at earliest opportunity button... I haven't played enough to know if Command classifies contacts picked up by a submarine well - but - it should provide possible contact matches with any solid contact - this happened fairly quickly with any solid detections... Anyway - just a bubbleheads opinion...

Regards,
Scott

I agree. But understand the other sides argument also.
It would be nice to have both as game options. But maybe too difficult to add it or model both.

< Message edited by Stevechase -- 8/23/2014 5:49:42 AM >

(in reply to scottb613)

Post #: 15