[FIXED] MAD detection of subs

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

[FIXED] MAD detection of subs

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 >> Tech Support >> [FIXED] MAD detection of subs

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

[FIXED] MAD detection of subs - 10/19/2016 4:34:22 AM

dvresic

Posts: 11
Joined: 12/31/2015
Status: offline

I've been using the Scenario Editor to check on MAD detection.
P3 Orion can detect subs down to their deepest depth>700feet.
This must be broken.
MAD detection is inversely reduced by distance squared. There's no way it would be able to pickup a sub at this depth.

< Message edited by Dimitris -- 11/21/2019 7:40:04 AM >

Post #: 1

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/19/2016 4:56:22 AM

Raptorx7_slith

Posts: 380
Joined: 7/27/2013
Status: offline

What altitude is the P-3 at?

(in reply to dvresic)

Post #: 2

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/19/2016 5:36:37 AM

Dimitris

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline

Can you post a link to a save file? Thanks!

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to Raptorx7_slith)

Post #: 3

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/19/2016 7:43:33 AM

dvresic

Posts: 11
Joined: 12/31/2015
Status: offline

I uploaded the scen file.
I've tested this in multiple Northern Inferno scenarios though.
Aircraft are at 1000ft. with MAD

Attachment (1)

(in reply to dvresic)

Post #: 4

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/22/2016 4:16:02 AM

dvresic

Posts: 11
Joined: 12/31/2015
Status: offline

This is the moment of detection where the P3 Orion detects with the MAD the 1100 foot deep sub.
How is this possible?

Attachment (1)

(in reply to dvresic)

Post #: 5

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/22/2016 4:26:11 AM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

I remember reading a study that under good conditions, a MAD system could detect down to 1500 ft. I'll see I can find the pdf in my files.

(in reply to dvresic)

Post #: 6

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/22/2016 4:29:34 AM

michaelm75au

Posts: 13500
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline

The function, then, of airborne MAD equipment is to detect the submarine-caused anomaly in the earth's magnetic field. The depth at which a submarine can be detected is a function both of the size of the submarine and how close the sensor is flown to the surface of the water.

Source: http://defence.pk/threads/so-you-want-to-detect-a-submarine.362636/#ixzz4NmU0yiJk

Another older article which shows some numbers (page 3 shows a table)
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a081329.pdf

< Message edited by michaelm -- 10/22/2016 4:40:25 AM >

_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to thewood1)

Post #: 7

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/22/2016 4:39:28 AM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

That last link is the one I remember.

(in reply to michaelm75au)

Post #: 8

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/22/2016 4:42:40 AM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dvresic

I've been using the Scenario Editor to check on MAD detection.
P3 Orion can detect subs down to their deepest depth>700feet.
This must be broken.
MAD detection is inversely reduced by distance squared. There's no way it would be able to pickup a sub at this depth.

Can I ask where your knowledge comes from? You seem pretty sure in your initial post. Five minutes with google showed me those parameters are at least within the realm of possibility.

I mean, you didn't come in asking how the MAD model works. You actually declared it broken. So I think you can at least show what sources you had to say its broken.

(in reply to dvresic)

Post #: 9

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/22/2016 8:12:54 PM

dvresic

Posts: 11
Joined: 12/31/2015
Status: offline

I'd like to hear some input from the Developers on their MAD model. Short of that are there any submariners that can shed some light on this?
Yes surface conditions, speed of the detecting platform, alignment of the submarine to the magnetic field lines, composition and size of the submarine....but the depth I would assume would be the single most important factor in detection.
Does the game model all this? What factors influence MAD in game and to what extent?

Here's a quote from Wikipedia;

quote:

Operation
To reduce interference from electrical equipment or metal in the fuselage of the aircraft, the MAD sensor is placed at the end of a boom or on a towed aerodynamic device. Even so, the submarine must be very near the aircraft's position and close to the sea surface for detection of the anomaly, according to the Inverse Square Law (or Law of Inverse Squares). The size of the submarine, its hull composition and orientation determine the detection range. MAD devices are usually mounted on aircraft.

quote:

(in reply to thewood1)

Post #: 10

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/22/2016 8:35:04 PM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

My question is you said its broken...what's broken? Can you at least answer that instead of throwing wiki links around?

(in reply to dvresic)

Post #: 11

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/22/2016 10:04:43 PM

Rory Noonan

Posts: 2816
Joined: 12/18/2014
From: Brooklyn, NY
Status: offline

I ran some tests on this a while back. Using a helix to detect a LA class sub altitude and depth had a significant impact.

At a (helo) altitude of 1000ft a sub at -100ft was detected at 564m. At a depth of -500ft the sub was detected at 442m, and at -1000ft the sub was detected at 290m. This was consistent and repeatable.

Not sure if it's correct or not, but the model does seem to take depth into account.

(in reply to thewood1)

Post #: 12

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/23/2016 8:22:05 AM

Dimitris

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline

Tried this now.

The maximum detection range of the CA/ASQ-508(V) MAD sensor is 1nm.

The detection check happens as the CP-140 is at 1000ft and the submarine is at 1312ft. The slant range between them is 0.60nm, well within the MAD sensor's range, so the detection happens.

Which, if any, of the above elements is unreasonable ?

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to Rory Noonan)

Post #: 13

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/24/2016 7:04:19 AM

dvresic

Posts: 11
Joined: 12/31/2015
Status: offline

If this was realistic, that a P3 would get a MAD contact at a sub at any depth, well I don't think the Navies of the world would be spending as much time and money in ASW as they are.

In the game; a 30x30mile patrol box of a P3 with a loiter time of 3hours would detect a sub every single time. No matter what depth or speed. Simply by flying over it with MAD. The sub could be 1400 feet deep.

Therefore I think the model is broken.

Scenario after scenario. Subs sunk due to a MAD hit.

I've posted a scenario...2 US SSN's (LA and Virginia class )are trying to Break out/Break in thru the San Juan Straight. It's not Sonar that picks them up. In every case it's a P3 flying patrol overhead with MAD.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Dimitris)

Post #: 14

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/24/2016 8:32:31 AM

Dimitris

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline

This doesn't answer the question. Which of the above steps that I listed is unreasonable?

Do you have any sources that MAD is unable to detect aircraft at large depth ?

Thanks.

< Message edited by Sunburn -- 10/24/2016 1:09:05 PM >

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to dvresic)

Post #: 15

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/24/2016 10:19:50 AM

Sardaukar

Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline

This was in 1945...so in my opinion, current detection ranges and depths are totally reasonable:

https://books.google.fi/books?id=nyYSERH9wrgC&pg=PA256&lpg=PA256&dq=can+mad+detect+submarine+in+deep&source=bl&ots=PWn8u7oThw&sig=h-bXoY1_7yKTr3KVT7V3Wxu4LD4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj3656fjPPPAhXD_iwKHchUA6o4ChDoAQguMAM#v=onepage&q=can%20mad%20detect%20submarine%20in%20deep&f=false

It says that Japanese MAD could detect submarine 900 feet range. Patrol altitude 200 ft would allow detection to 700 ft.

As Sunburn said, modern MAD has detection range of 1 nm. So detections even deep are totally feasible.

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von B�lov, 1870-

(in reply to Dimitris)

Post #: 16

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/24/2016 10:42:30 AM

Zaslon

Posts: 283
Joined: 6/14/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

Tried this now.

The maximum detection range of the CA/ASQ-508(V) MAD sensor is 1nm.

The detection check happens as the CP-140 is at 1000ft and the submarine is at 1312ft. The slant range between them is 0.60nm, well within the MAD sensor's range, so the detection happens.

Which, if any, of the above elements is unreasonable ?

That's all the input required for a MAD detection? range?

_____________________________

Kids think about Iran and Amateurs think about Russia, but professionals think about China

(in reply to Dimitris)

Post #: 17

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/24/2016 1:08:19 PM

Dimitris

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline

Slant range, plus modifiers for non-metallic construction. If you look at the DB there are no per-platform magnetic signatures.

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to Zaslon)

Post #: 18

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/24/2016 3:40:11 PM

wild_Willie2

Posts: 2934
Joined: 10/8/2004
From: Arnhem (holland) yes a bridge to far...
Status: offline

During normal ASW operations operations there would also be numerous false contacts in any shallow patrol area due to wrecks, debris or magnetic minerals.

Maybe it would be a good idea to introduce false MAD contacts like "wrecks" or "iron garbage" in lieu of false sonar contracts. I don't think these would be hard to program into the game, it would just be a matter of creating a neutral underwater unit with zero speed and a high magnetic field.

W.

< Message edited by wild_Willie2 -- 10/24/2016 3:41:53 PM >

_____________________________

In vinum illic est sapientia , in matera illic est vires , in aqua illic es bacteria.

In wine there is wisdom, in beer there is strength, in water there are bacteria.

(in reply to Dimitris)

Post #: 19

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/24/2016 3:50:12 PM

mikmykWS

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

Hi Guys

There are some planned sonar and sub mechanics improvements planed for the future but for moment the sub model is sufficient for what most people seem to want to do. If you'd like something added please put it in the request strings so we can get a sense of priority.

Thanks!

Mike

_____________________________

(in reply to wild_Willie2)

Post #: 20

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/24/2016 3:51:19 PM

mikmykWS

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zaslon

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

Tried this now.

The maximum detection range of the CA/ASQ-508(V) MAD sensor is 1nm.

The detection check happens as the CP-140 is at 1000ft and the submarine is at 1312ft. The slant range between them is 0.60nm, well within the MAD sensor's range, so the detection happens.

Which, if any, of the above elements is unreasonable ?

That's all the input required for a MAD detection? range?

What are we missing?

Thanks!

Mike

_____________________________

(in reply to Zaslon)

Post #: 21

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/24/2016 3:54:08 PM

mikmykWS

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: dvresic

If this was realistic, that a P3 would get a MAD contact at a sub at any depth, well I don't think the Navies of the world would be spending as much time and money in ASW as they are.

In the game; a 30x30mile patrol box of a P3 with a loiter time of 3hours would detect a sub every single time. No matter what depth or speed. Simply by flying over it with MAD. The sub could be 1400 feet deep.

Therefore I think the model is broken.

Scenario after scenario. Subs sunk due to a MAD hit.

I've posted a scenario...2 US SSN's (LA and Virginia class )are trying to Break out/Break in thru the San Juan Straight. It's not Sonar that picks them up. In every case it's a P3 flying patrol overhead with MAD.

Real navies are looking at our sim and haven't complained about how we're doing this yet.

What is your point of expertise exactly? If its sub command, 688I or Dangerous Waters the scopes of the games are different. We don't model every button push or fish fart but make the assumption that the crew etc. handle these functions leaving the player to worry abut higher level things.

Thanks!

Mike

< Message edited by mikmyk -- 10/24/2016 4:13:10 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to dvresic)

Post #: 22

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/24/2016 4:11:48 PM

stilesw

Posts: 1497
Joined: 6/26/2014
From: Hansville, WA, USA
Status: offline

ROTFL! Sorry, couldn't resist.

-WS

Attachment (1)

(in reply to mikmykWS)

Post #: 23

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/24/2016 5:02:25 PM

Gunner98

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline

quote:

or fish fart

is that really a thing?

(in reply to mikmykWS)

Post #: 24

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/24/2016 5:39:41 PM

Schr75

Posts: 803
Joined: 7/18/2014
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gunner98

quote:

or fish fart

is that really a thing?

It sure is

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcwCYIfm6eA

(in reply to Gunner98)

Post #: 25

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/24/2016 6:04:43 PM

Zaslon

Posts: 283
Joined: 6/14/2015
Status: offline

Thanks Sunburn for the answer.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zaslon

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

Tried this now.

The maximum detection range of the CA/ASQ-508(V) MAD sensor is 1nm.

The detection check happens as the CP-140 is at 1000ft and the submarine is at 1312ft. The slant range between them is 0.60nm, well within the MAD sensor's range, so the detection happens.

Which, if any, of the above elements is unreasonable ?

That's all the input required for a MAD detection? range?

What are we missing?

Thanks!

Mike

You can add Distance to the seabed. MAD doesn't work well in coastal waters because the magnetometer dont measure absolute parameters. THe magnetometer measure differences...contrast...then in coastal waters, MAD detect a lot of natural anomalies of the seabed (and also can detect sunken ships). When the seabed hasn't natural anomalies....It still can mask the magnetic signature of the submarine, his signature can be decreased over his signature in deep waters because we are measuring differences, not an absolute parameter as I said so the magnetic signature of the seabed is greater than the magnetic signature of the sea water.

A friend of mine told me that they do not use MAD in areas with depth less than 1,000 meters (3,330 ft).

P.S. that is very simplistic but can work here. Heading of submarine and Aircraft, speeds...also take account in real life.

< Message edited by Zaslon -- 10/24/2016 6:07:41 PM >

_____________________________

Kids think about Iran and Amateurs think about Russia, but professionals think about China

(in reply to mikmykWS)

Post #: 26

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/24/2016 6:08:45 PM

mikmykWS

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

Seems reasonable. Do you have a source with reliable data handy?

Obviously when asked by a pro why we did this we can't say Zaslon's friend told us to

Mike

_____________________________

(in reply to Zaslon)

Post #: 27

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/24/2016 6:34:36 PM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

Actually, that's a little too generic also. The US Navy used to spend time and money surveying and mapping the behavior of magnetic fields. This is specifically so magnetic-type sensing could be used. Because it is all relative and having a baseline is very important. There are still huge sections of the ocean that haven't been mapped and fields can shift. They tended to map common routes for subs. But it does require constant updating.

I have always suspected that is why MAD fell out of favor. Don't have any data, but my uncle served on a survey ship. It's primary mission in the 1970's was ocean floor mapping, but its secondary mission was field mapping.

(in reply to mikmykWS)

Post #: 28

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/24/2016 7:30:42 PM

Zaslon

Posts: 283
Joined: 6/14/2015
Status: offline

Mike, a MAD its a magnetometer used in Aeromagnetic campaigns. What I wrote can be found in any basic manual about geophysics. But areful because sometimes basic concepts were explained in gravimetry (both methods have similarities).

My buddy only told me the threshold (a rule-of-thumb) betweetn coastal waters and deep waters for MAD detection. If you take the idea, surely Paul or any ASW guy can define a good threshold.

_____________________________

Kids think about Iran and Amateurs think about Russia, but professionals think about China

(in reply to mikmykWS)

Post #: 29

RE: MAD detection of subs - 10/24/2016 7:57:45 PM

mikmykWS

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zaslon

Mike, a MAD its a magnetometer used in Aeromagnetic campaigns. What I wrote can be found in any basic manual about geophysics. But areful because sometimes basic concepts were explained in gravimetry (both methods have similarities).

My buddy only told me the threshold (a rule-of-thumb) betweetn coastal waters and deep waters for MAD detection. If you take the idea, surely Paul or any ASW guy can define a good threshold.

Will do. Thanks

Mike

_____________________________

(in reply to Zaslon)

Post #: 30