Issues with Mines

Issues with Mines (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series

Message

Dan109 -> Issues with Mines (5/28/2017 10:50:42 AM)
Hi All, I've been experimenting with mines, and saw some issues I wanted to report: 1. When laying a minefield in scenario editor, it seems to be able to be done only once. I discovered this trying to lay a 2nd field of different mines over the original minefield, and it would not let me. After deleting the mines, I could not add any more mines anywhere, in any new set of ref points. It appears its a one time shot, so definitely have lost the ability to lay multiple types of mines. I haven't played with minelaying yet, so I'll try that to supplement the single set of mines. 2. I read in the manual that not all mines are sweepable/clearable. Not being familiar with mine technology, I was happy to the see the US having the MH-60S Helicopter with the AN/AQS-20A MCM package which detects with side looking sonar and sweeps with the "Seafox Mine Neutralization Torpedo". Well, a few observations: a) when fit with that loadout, there is no MCM button, but mine detection sonar works great b) the aircraft doesn't try to attack the mine, just goes around detecting c) I did not see any "seafox weapon" under the mount, even though the name is in the mount d) the AN/AQS-20 sonar is listed as a weapon, under the loadout which I believe is fine. So, that lead me to look at the CMANO WIKI. According to the WIKI, the MH-60S doesn't even use the AN/AQS-20 package. Strange mismatch, so I'm not so sure its a 'database' problem per say, and wanted to report it here. 3. Now, I then tried the MH-53E which also has the AN/AQS-20A loadout, but I discovered in this loadout that 1x SeaFox [Killer ROV] is listed, and shows up in the weapons mount. Great! I tried it, but had disappointing results. The SeaFox's weapon stats look fine and great. However, several problems: a) the Heli would not try to attack the mine b) the Heli did not have an MCM button. c) when I flew the Heli over the mine, nothing happened, I tried again and realized I could only fire it BOL (my ROE is tight, tried free, no change) d) when I BOL fired the weapon, it ran out of energy after 29s even though its stats say it should have +2min of endurance at flank speed of 6knts. e) I got really close this time, < 500m, and BOL launched. Once it got 300m from the torpedo, it just bounced back and forth, sitting and spinning, in a way. I can't recall the exact type of mine I laid, but with a Killer ROV there should be no reason it can't destroy it. In a way, it's dancing around the mine just like a traditional sweeper that works....they dance around the mine for a while, and then it blows up eventually. (Going back to issue #2, it might be that the "realistic" loadout for the MH-60S is to have only 1 drop tank, and the other pylon used for the ROV - or not, maybe the procedure is jsut for the crew chief to through it out the hatch, haha) 4. I've seen some missing MCM loadouts for the MQ-8b and MQ-8c, but I'll address that in the DB Update thread Scenario attached as well. That's it for now. REALLY enjoying the mine game, experimenting with it. Giving me ideas for scenarios. Unlike some scenarios that I have seen so far where mine sweeping is just 'a task to do', I want to put the sweepers in harm's way. Force the play to give cover to the sweepers, and even have to follow a fairly narrow swept path that they "hope" is clear. One tactical note - I lost 2 CUSV Remote Controlled surface craft while hunting and sweeping. The first was when it ran straight into a mine because it has no FWD sonar (only sides), and the 2nd loss was when it was dancing around the mine, trying to explode it. It worked many times before, but this time, the mine won. [:D] So, the moral of the story is if you want it done right, get a human in a Helo (but MQ-8b/c will phase that out soon enough).

mikmykWS -> RE: Issues with Mines (5/28/2017 12:59:24 PM)
1. Okay game evaluates where it can drop mines bases on alt/depth parameters. So if there is lots o very deep water it's not going to find many areas and keep dropping in good areas. The function can defitely be called over and over again. 2-3.Known issue.with Seafox. It's in the shop. Wiki may not be updated yet to reflect the newest changes. 4. Thanks! As far as arcs try thin long patrol zones perpendicular to where you think the threat might be. Thanks! Mike

Dan109 -> RE: Issues with Mines (5/28/2017 10:50:10 PM)
The only MCM packages I found, once really deep diving into mine warefare is use of the COBRA system (not to be confused with the COunter Battery RAdar). It sweeps very shallow waters and beaches for mine, basically ones that are designed to go after landing craft. From all of my research into this, I doubt even the Bell 407 based MQ-8C will every do proper mine hunting - the current packages are way too heavy IMO. Wow, there is a LOT to mining :) Here is a great fact file from the Navy discussing the current "layered approach" of the LCS MCM packages for modern mine hunting. It surely blows away legacy minesweeping ship capabilities. http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=2100&tid=425&ct=2 Now I'm off to update the DB Thread, complete arse pain as I have been mistaking the AN/AQS-20 and the new AN/AQS-24A/B/C in some of my observations (issue #1 is still valid though). But HH-53E and MH-60S is definitely missing some loadouts. One question before I jump into testing again - mine hunting, looking at the stats from the WIKI database, it mostly seems the same - I'm hoping to show in testing that using the different packages outlined in the Navy fact file, that certain mines (based on depth) are detectable by certain platforms, hence the Navy's obsession to mix air/surf/sub based assets to detect mines. An example would be would the AN/AES-1 Airborne Laser Mine Detection System detect mines at a deeper depth, or would the AN/AQS-20/24 subsurface detectors detect floating mines(probably, but would the ALMDS have a greater range for float mine detection)? Killing them definitely seems to be the easy part. 5 - Issue with airborne mine detection speed - by all accounts I have found so far, the max speed for the subsurface detection systems like AN/AQS-20 and 24, is 18kts. Early tech models are 12knts. However, when carried by a Helo, minimum speed in Mine Clearing mission for Airborne assets is Loiter, 30knts, which would severely degrade the active sonar range. I know the Loiter speed is coming from the aircraft DB entry, not the weapon platform it is carrying, but something to consider addressing to make things more accurate. I imagine ALMDS can work at much better speeds, maybe even cruise speeds, I'll keep my eyes open for its limits. 1 - definitely a pilot problem - I think my PC had low memory (I sometimes ignore when I've opened up several web pages, and I don't use VM to increase perf). Testing different mine types, I'll def have to use individual zones, as there isn't a way to see the type of mine once laid, even from the owner's side as I'm guessing mines are not considered an official unit according to LUA. Sorry for the conclusion jump.

Dan109 -> RE: Issues with Mines (6/1/2017 4:00:49 PM)
After some extensive mine testing, more issues and observations to report. All of them can be reproduced with 2 new attachments I've added to start of thread, one for CWDB another for DB3000. Just Launch the appropriate vessel from the base, and assigned to a pre-defined mission which goes off to detect and sweep 1 particular mine type. I'm making these two scenarios for eventually publication to be MCM Training Scenarios, to help people understand the capabilities and differences between the different types of MCM Platforms (all of the nice info popups and guidance hasn't been done yet, just the raw mines and units needed). First of all, the CMANO article published here is a very good read, I only happened to stumble upon it as it was from last year on the warfaresims website, not on the matrixgames forums. Please add this link to the manual addendum pages, which I believe is the one stop shop for all post-manual documentation/information. http://www.warfaresims.com/index.php?s=mines 6 - MCM Navigation/Pathing - there were several fixes in 1.12 regarding minesweeper navigation and pathfinding. I can't be sure about this, but I believe this addressed MCMs "dancing" around a mine. Neverthless, I've seen many navigation/pathfinding issues addressed in 1.12 which I have to assume addressing mine trigger, however there are still issues with triggering which might be related to the path in conjunction to the light-blue sweep area of the equipment. a. No CWDB minesweeper can trigger ANY CWDB mine - from loading my attached scenario for CW, try it out yourself - The pathing looks beautiful. The MCM steams beside the mine at 1kt to not trigger acoustic, magnetic, or contact triggering, and its light-blue sweep zone behind it does touch the mine - but the mine never triggers. Now the excellent CMANO Mine article discusses that some MCM sweep technology cannot trigger in certain situations, but I find it odd how the highest tech MCM in the CWDB cannot, which also includes EOD Divers which should be able to destroy the mine regardless of mine type (divers evn do have depth limitations, but these were medium depth mines). This "might" be due to the generic MCM gear all of these vessels carry, but maybe not as the Avenger in DB3000 fails to trigger most mines as well. I first noticed this, but had very little experience with MCM, in the NI Damn The torpedoes scenario with minesweepers near the channel. They simply cannot trigger the mine. b. Using CUSV in DB3000 scenario to sweep a mine looks great, takes a great realistic path, and its high tech sweep gear can trigger the mine. Except every time it triggers a mine, it takes WAY too much damage. Its too close to impact. This of course might be exposing RL limitations of using such a craft for sweeping, or it might mean that the size/shape of the sweep area (light-blue) behind the CUSV needs to change. It just needs to be towed further from the craft. The length of the sweep area shouldn't be associated only with the actual sweep equipment, but also the mothship towing it. The CUSV would have to tow it further away than an Avenger, as the Avenger is much more shock resistant. c. Sweep area in general - the current sweep area looks like it was original designed for mechanical sweepers (cutters), as the area only extends to the back left of the sweeper. But Acoustic and Magnetic sweepers should be symmetric with their area as these sweepers are towed directly behind the craft, and do not use a paravane as in the case of a mechanical sweeper. Only mechanical sweepers should be asymmetric. d. Generic Moored Mine Cable nor Generic Mine Disposal Diver equipment do not have any sweep area when activated. A diver of course would require the vessel to actually stop for a duration, while the diver goes out to set the charge, swims back, and explodes ordinance (VERY slow compared to mechanical/acoustic/magnetic sweeping), but if you want to model it just like other sweepers for simplicity, thats ok, but it needs to work somehow. e. Units need to ALWAYS respect an unexploded mine - when attacking a mine, pathing including speed is beautiful. But if an MCM is by a mine, and it is ordered to RTB (or BINGOs), it will scream past the mine at full speed, and in some cases trigger it within the blast zone (seen with the CUSV). Nevertheless no minesweeper when RTBing will respect the proximity of the mine and stay at a slow speed until further away, they just go to cruise speed immediately. 7. Need for Detection/Triggering granularity. I've noted the problems with certain craft triggering mines and "surviving" such as the CUSV. Even with larger surface vessels such as the Avenger, repetitive triggering can cause damage and lead to excessive damage. Aircraft have always been the best method of triggering mines, as they have the least chance to take damage. Therefore I feel that in Mine Clearing Mission, there should be an "option" of mine triggering/sweeping. This way, we can make a "Mine Detection" mission if triggering/sweeping is not selected. Now if a craft which has both detection and sweep gear, has its sweep gear manually disabled, its works just perfectly. The craft simple only detects, never tries to trigger the mine, and fairly ignores the mine in the future (if its path while detecting does cross the path of a previously detected mine, it will adjust course and slow down to 1kt to prevent triggering). I think it would be a nice improvement to be able to set this up in missions though, rather than have to manually disable sweeping equipment. Of course the default can be on, so it by default behaves like it is today. 8. Mechanic/Magnetic/Acoustic sweep gear is allowed to destroy a floating or moored contact mine. These devices have no means to trigger a contact mine. It would only be through Disposal Divers (which don't seem to work, as they have no blue-light trigger area), modern neutralization methods (SeaFox, but its currently has known issues), or a sniper on the craft in the case of floating mines(which isn't modeled I believe - and a CUSV has no crew to act as a sniper). Hence, a CH-53E or CUSV towing a mag/acoustic sweeper would never be able to trigger a contact mine, without blowing up the sweeper sled itself. 9. Mines not being clickable units on the map - not sure why this is the case, as the CMANO Mine Article describes that mines are indeed units according to the engine, as there can be thousands of them. Without being able to click on them, several limitations exist: a. Unable to classify mines - modern sonar can classify mines, Mk1 eyeball can classify a floating mine, sonar can tell the depth of the mine. When a mine is detected, it just thats that, its detected, not the depth, nor if it has been classified to better help the player understand its characteristics to know by what means its should be trigger/swept. b. Lack of info in detection message stating "by what means a mine has been detected". Was it by sonar, Mk1 eyeball - like other detection messages, the sensor that detected the mine should be displayed in the message. c. By having mines clickable, a craft sent to only detect mines will allow the player to look at the classification of the mine (or lack thereof) and depth of the mine, to determine the proper neutralization platform to later send. In fact, if bottom buried unclassifed contacts are detected by an Avenger, it would imply to the player that deep level sonar is needed like an An/AQS-24 or bottomhunters like the KnifeFish. 10. The CMANO Mine article explained how certain mines can't be swept, due to future target discrimination feature, or it might be too deep to use mechanical sweeping technology, etc. However this exposes two things. First, the need for mine classification (or lackthereof) to be viewable on a clickable mine unit on the map. 2nd, the database needs to explain the depth limitations of these devices, so they can be compared to the mine contact info to explain why they are not being swept. For magnetic and acoustic sweepers, I dont know what extra detail should be explained, as it would get very complex. But in general, I'm asking for information to help a player understand why a mine is not being swept. Use Case examples - mine too deep and your gear can't trigger that deep, mine is within sweeper parameters of trigger but unclassified mine should be classified to determine that it is a mine with counter-measures preventing your sweeper to function, therefore a contact based neutralization method such as killer ROV or diver needs to be deployed. 11. Not being able to sweep, for good reasons - in cases where the sweeper cannot sweep the mine due to proper reasons (mismatch between sweep gear and mine type/depth), the sweeper forever tries to sweep the mine. It tries and tries over and over. This can be seen in CWDB scenarios including my attached CW scenario of any sweep attempt. due to these scenarios where there are proper reasons for failure, the sweeper does need to give up after a certain number of attempts and move on. Those remaining mines should then be avoided as they are marked, and disposed of by different neutralization methods that can be deployed at a later date (send a Heli with ROVs or send a ship with a diver team, etc) 12. The AN/AES-1 ALMDS doesn't seem to work - I tried it with the MHC-101 and by putting it on an MH-60S manually. They actually both detected the float contact mine eventually, but I noticed it was very close range. Odd, lasers can go further than 50m. So, I deleted the Mk1 Eyeball senors on each craft and tried again. No joy, the mine was never detected (yes, I reloaded the scenario, as you can't drop contact with a mine). I even tried the MQ-8c and attached an AN/AES-1 to it (nice to see the unmanned vehicles dont have Mk1 Sensor). Again, no detection. We can have debates in the future as to how deep the ALMDS can detect a mine, and I know IRL its experiencing some false detection issues which require multiple passes, but it just seems like its not working, and this was a float mine. It stated that it is a FLIR, which I really don't think that's how the ALMDS works. I think its scanning with the laser, and a sensor is detecting the laser strike (just like how a laser range finder would work). 13. Not directly related to mine hunting, but a general issues with docked ships - When a boat docks, with a pier, shouldn't it be repaired? Well, I docked a CUSV that was ON FIRE and 58% damage, and nothing happened. After it was ready again(10min I think), I launched it and the damage and FIRE was still there. Now, its unmanned, so no damage control, I get that (heh, Navy does actually have damage control robots on some ships) - but fire continued giving more damage, and ship sank. Shouldn't a docking platform like an ESB or LCS atleast be able to put out the fire!??!? Sure, damage repair rate on board mothership would probably be slower on a ship than on land (maybe that holds true for aircraft as well on CVs, unless an unbiased CV repair crewman disputes this), but a mothership like and ESB or LCS should be able to do modest repairs for sure. Cases of course where it should not be possible - a damaged KnifeFish docks with an unmanned CUSV. The CUSV should not be able to repair the knifefish. In summary from my testing, detection is not a problem. Lack of classification and other pathing/sweepzone mechanics issues lead to numerous problems with seaborne passive sweep neutralization. Airborne sweeping techniques are however always effective (too unrealistically effective in case of the ability to sweep a contact mine). Current issues with ROV based neutralization (the known SeaFox issue, lack of AN/AQS-235 which I have submitted a DB Request for) limit AMNS abilities. However, I'm looking forward to corrections to the issues outlined above and a more realistic MCM experience in CMANO.

mikmykWS -> RE: Issues with Mines (6/1/2017 4:47:54 PM)
Thanks Dan. Added a Dan's notes on mine entry to our master list. Mike

msc -> RE: Issues with Mines (6/7/2017 6:45:40 PM)
There is not only the problem with minesweeping as Dan109 describes in his last posting under 6.a. Other units running over the mines do not trigger them (so you do not need to sweep the mines - you can just send your fleet over the minefield, they will not be damaged. I think the problem is one of the updates of CMANO, not with the databases. In August 2016 (don't know which CMANO-version) with CWDB Build 443 minesweeping and triggering worked well. With the latest CMANO version minesweeping and mine triggering neither worked with the latest CWDB nor with CWDB 443.

Dan109 -> RE: Issues with Mines (6/7/2017 8:27:21 PM)
I'm not sure about that. I witnessed several mine explosions on my mine sweepers where the sweeper was at high speed, causing acoustic mines to trigger. If you go slow enough with any craft, acoustic mines don't trigger. Magnetic mine triggering failed to happen with any sweeper, which should be the case. I never bothered sending a CV a full steam near a magnetic mine which should certainly set it off. Nor did I test impacts of contact mines, which obviously need some proximity to trigger, as the vessel dimensions are not properly reflected by a single point in space, represented by lat/long coords. I'm not in front of pc, but feel free to try it out with attached scenarios. I have all individual mine types setup for easy testing.

mikmykWS -> RE: Issues with Mines (6/7/2017 10:05:34 PM)
HI guys Need files showing this stuff. Thanks! Mike

Dan109 -> RE: Issues with Mines (6/8/2017 1:55:10 AM)
I'm still not in front of PC, but the attached files in the first post have every single piece of equipment setup to reproduce the 13 issues I reported. 3 files attached, 1 CWDB MCM scenario, 1 Modern MCM scenario (ignore other scenario). However you do have to pick the appropriate vessel and assign it to one of the predefined missions to make the vessel sweep the relavent mine and mine issue observed. To help facilitate debugging even further, do you want me to create 13 individual scenarios, where I have reproduced the problem and saved the autosave_20s file, so you only have to play it and watch for 20s?? Will be happy to do so if you want. I didn't hear any further feedback about scenario attachments after reporting my 13 issues, so I assumed it was being worked on. As well, I'd be happy try to reproduce msc's possible issues as well.

mikmykWS -> RE: Issues with Mines (6/8/2017 11:26:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dan109 I'm still not in front of PC, but the attached files in the first post have every single piece of equipment setup to reproduce the 13 issues I reported. 3 files attached, 1 CWDB MCM scenario, 1 Modern MCM scenario (ignore other scenario). However you do have to pick the appropriate vessel and assign it to one of the predefined missions to make the vessel sweep the relavent mine and mine issue observed. To help facilitate debugging even further, do you want me to create 13 individual scenarios, where I have reproduced the problem and saved the autosave_20s file, so you only have to play it and watch for 20s?? Will be happy to do so if you want. I didn't hear any further feedback about scenario attachments after reporting my 13 issues, so I assumed it was being worked on. As well, I'd be happy try to reproduce msc's possible issues as well. Great look forward to it Dan. Thanks! Mike

Dan109 -> RE: Issues with Mines (6/9/2017 8:22:27 AM)
Be careful what you wish for....28 scenarios added to the zip file in the first post (which had a history of 0 downloads). I also discovered 4 more issues, however after dozens of tests on scenario 6b, I found out the CUSV doesn't get hit by mines 'that' often at all, perhaps 1/10 times. Its pretty bad damage though, but considering its small craft, I can live with that - the mothership isn't repairing the ship though (issue #13). Besides updates to the issues above, I did test msc's claim about non-MCM ships not getting hit by mines. I did not find that to be the case, however I am still nevertheless opening up issue #16, as the vessel cannot safely traverse a KNOWN mine field. Yes, a CV will run into contact mines and take damage - however MCM vessels seem to have a "dotted path" mechanism which gives them course correction when going through mine fields, however there are issues with that as well (issue #6e). Enjoy!! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- #5 Towed Sweeper/Sonar Speed http://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabilities/ANAQS24/Pages/default.aspx - AN/AQS-24B 18knt operation http://navaltoday.com/2016/10/27/northrop-grumman-hails-aqs-24b-demonstration-at-unmanned-warrior-a-success/ AN/AQS-24B speed up to 18 knots I can't find data showing max tow speed of Mk103,4,5,6 or other MCM towed non-sonars. Sonar of course has a limit - you can't be goign full speed and expect your active sonar to work well, or it would have extremely limited range. I cannot find it again, but I remember seeing AN/AQS-20 being limited to 12 knots. Therefore even a CUSV or CH-53E would have a max towing speed of 18knts for the towed based sonar to be effective. ALMDS speed, I'm not sure what the speed or depth limit should be exactly - https://defensesystems.com/articles/2017/03/28/helolaser.aspx describes the speeds to be "great", which I can only assume it means MH-60S cruise speed - depth of detection "can" be up to 200m, but again not sure, and due to "reliability" in detection, I imagine that is due to the depth of the mine, not the necessarily the speed of the craft. Hence, I would say 50m depth is a decent approximation, unless you are going to model the laser detection through water. In summary, sonar and laser based airborne and sub/surface towed mine detection systems all have speed based limitations, which need to be properly address in CMANO, rather than have all work at airborne or sub/surface speeds only definable in the MCM Mine Clearing mission. See attached "MCM Issue #5 - sonar and laser based AMCM detection speed of towing craft not correct.scen" ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- #6a - MCM Navigation/Pathing - No CWDB minesweeper can trigger ANY CWDB mine - 11 scenarios attached, each with 9 MCMs (all US Navy CWDB MCM types to my knowledge) set on mission for that particular mine type - just start scenario, FF x1min, and wait for MCMs to find the single mine, see them all converge and not be able to sweep the mine - should take 1min RT per scenario to show #6b - MCM Navigation/Pathing - CUSV too close to mine when sweeper triggers, causing WAY too much damage to CUSV - 1 scenario attached - Per Scenario, only 1/10 CUSVs are hit by a mine - in 4 runs, only one sunk, but when I noticed the distance, its was 35m!! Going back 20s couldn't reproduce it for some reason, as I had high compression on and I think it was 20min of autosave because compression was at 1xmin - anywasy, due to the 35m proximity of the sunk CUSV, and the outstanding results of the other CUSVs, I stronly believe my original reported issue was due to the lack of no FWD sonar of the AN/AQS-24. The CUSV ran straight into it, not detecting the mine at all. However, I have another open issue concerning the lack of FWD Sonar of the AN/AQS-24 (I found a sneaky classified NOAA report for environmental impacts of MCM, showing the AN/AQS-24 in fact has a FWD looking sonar, just much less range, which would certainly be good enough to detect the mine and avoid 35m proximity detonation). The other damage taken I believe was also due to not detecting the mine first, with the improper side-only sonar (who in there right mind would deploy an MCM system on the surface or submerged without the ability to detect in front of your path??) - Hance, case closed. Scenario Attached for your interest. #6c - MCM Navigation/Pathing - Sweep area in general - no need to have a separate scenario, can be witnessed with any of the attached scenarios which have sweepers #6d - MCM Navigation/Pathing - Generic Moored Mine Cable nor Generic Mine Disposal Diver - after loading, don't start scenario - jsut look at MCM Equipment button for all ships - see Moored Mine Cable and Mine Disposal Diver are ENABLED, but no light blue "detonation" area - if you enable Generic Mechan Cutters or Generic Mag/Acoustic Sweep gear, they do have light blue areas - hence these two reported mine detonation pieces of equipment are useless - CWDB and DB3000 scenarios attached - Note, if you start scenario, all equipment is automatically disabled, becasue of no MCM Mine Clearing Mission - if in MCM Mission, you cannot disable MCM equipment manually (to test a unique piece of gear, for example) - another report on this issue being opened up - MCM Issues #14 #6e - MCM Navigation/Pathing - Not Respecting Known Mine Locations nor MCM Mission Zone when RTBing - CUSV-NoMCMMIssion scenario attached, which shows "most" CUSVs not respecting known mines, you need to load the scenario, and hit RTB on each vessel, so you can see the "full line" pathing when the craft ignores a mine - oddly, some CUSVs have "dotted line" paths, which seem to be paths which do take the mine into account, however they still detonate the mine sometimes - When you run this scenario, if ANY vessel doesn't detonate a mine, use M key and move it again over a mine (give ample room to course correct) - and you will see sometimes it will automatically correct the couse, sometimes not - very strange - also attached, CUSV-MCMENABLED - this time, the CUSVs have their mine sweep gear one (no FWD sonar though), and it doesn't seem to help ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- #7 - Need for Detection/Triggering granularity - more of a feature request/improvement - any MCM scenario from #6a or 6b will show this - need a way to detect mines only, disable mine detonation gear (MCM Equipment), but not sensors used to detect mines - however, if you now know the location of every single mine, most times, vessels have problems safely traversing such a mine field and die - See Issue #6e and #16 for examples of this problem caused by this feature (hence need to fix #6e and #16 prior) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- #8 - Mechanic/Magnetic/Acoustic sweep gear is allowed to destroy a floating or moored contact mine - scenario attached, just play it - I used the CUSV as it only has Mag-Acoustic Sweep Gear - I also added a Mechanical Sweeper to the Float Mine Mission CUSV - Mech Sweeper should not be able to detonate a float mine ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- #9 Mines not being clickable units on the map - pure feature request/improvement - nevertheless, I feel very important to overcome several problems with the realism of the CMANO Mine Game ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ #10 Mine Type and Depth of Mines vs Mine Sweeping Gear - attached scenario - see above for more details - HERE, we have 2 problems in this scenario. #1, a CUSV with mag-acoust-mechanical sweep is allowed to detonate a moored contact mine in 1100ft of water, which should not be possible - maybe similar to issue #8, as I'm trying to find scenarios where MineSweep gear mismatches with the mine type, and sweep is impossible - mechanical sweep gear of course can't work on a moored mine that is in deep water and has a short mooring chain. But, without depth, we have no idea what depth the mine was really at. 2nd issue - CUSV has found an Mk60 Captor mine, and forever tries to sweep it - now, the mine is no detonating, but the pathing is crazy, maybe because the MCM Craft realizes that it cannot trigger the mine because is is indeed too deep and doesn't have the right gear (special deep bottom hunting MCM gear needed like KnifeFish) - But, the MCM Craft never gives up and forever tries to sweep the mine - this sub issue is similar to #6a, where the sweep gear cannot detonate the mine, and will not "ignore it from now on" during detonatio phase, and go back to detection phase for other mines ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ #11 - aha, similar issue to #10 - #10 is really more about the NEED for depth and ID of the mine (hence clicking on it), so MCM gear can be matched by the player for the mine type. For a perfect example of what happens if you cannot sweep a mine, see issue #6a (its a bug, and they should eb able to sweep however) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- #12 - AN/AES-1 ALMDS doesn't seem to work - attached scenario, unlike above, I decided to take a Japanese MCH-101 Helicopter, and manually delete the Mk1 Eyeball sensor and manually disable the AN/AQS-24 towed sonar - it never detects the floating contact mine - Good news is that if you add the Mk1 Eyeball, you can detect it, but that defeats the purpose of the ALMDS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- #13 - Damaged/OnFire/Flooded units which dock to a ship are not repaired - after 30min refueling, and later redploy, they have same damage, fire, and flood - scenario attached - it is with a CUSV which is unmanned, but certainly it should be able to be repaired using the mothership's damage control crew. Flooding is never stopped, although I did see fires go out, but damage % is never reduced. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- #14 Generic or MCM Gear not showing up in Components - hence, they cannot be damaged - see any attached scenario with MCM Equipped vessels - gear doesn't show up in the damage window from hitting the damage button -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- #15 Cannot enable MCM Equipment manually - can only enable it while on Mine Clearing Mission - note, once this is fixed, it may expose MANY more bugs with mine detonation - example, many mine sweepers have multiple types of mine detonation gear, and with this individual option one day, I will check each type of detonation gear vs mine type - generic diver should not be able to detonate a 40mm deep mine, acoustic sweeper should not be able to detonate a mag mine, etc - right now, for the most part, if you have "sweep gear", you can kill any mine, which should not be the case - see any attached scenario - #6a is the best example ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- #16 Vessels cannot traverse a known location minefield safely - see attached scenario - CV with a path set straight over mines (set on the US Navy side BTW, so they definitely know the location), the CV appears to take no corrective course action, in the manner an MCM ship does - an MCM ship gets a special "dotted path" which is an auto course correction to avoid mines - however, that also has problems, see issue #6e -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- #17 Sweep Gear (Generic Mech Sweep, Mk106, etc) Can be added in Sensors manually, however it appears in MCM Equipment Buton - MCM Equipment Button doesn't have a remove option (nor an add) - There is a remove senors button in Sensors of course, but you can't select the sweep gear in order to delete it. Therefore you need to include an "add/remove" MCM Equipment options in MCM Equipment Window - no scenario needed, jsut try this on any craft

mikmykWS -> RE: Issues with Mines (6/9/2017 11:10:40 AM)
Thanks Dan. Mike

msc -> RE: Issues with Mines (6/13/2017 7:14:10 PM)
Sorry Mike, I was offline for some days. Here is the file which shows the problem. Minesweepers do not sweep the mines. Other surface vessels and submarines do not trigger the mines. The scenario worked well a year ago when I created it. But now after updating to the latest CMANO version it does not work any longer. I also tried Dan's #6a scenario. I had the same problems with that one. Even tried with a destroyer running full speed over the mines - nothing happend.

Dan109 -> RE: Issues with Mines (6/13/2017 8:43:54 PM)
MSC, issue 6a is specific to CWDB, and when I tested your specific reported issue, I tested DB3K only. So, I would speculate that there may be a problem with all CWDB mines.

msc -> RE: Issues with Mines (6/17/2017 10:12:48 AM)
Dan, yes I think it is a problem with all CWDB mines. I tried some other mine types in CWDB, but no joy. I think its not the database itself, because even in the old CWDB 443, where I created the scenario last year, does not work any longer. Hope the devs will take a look at this problem.

mikmykWS -> RE: Issues with Mines (6/17/2017 12:59:13 PM)
Thanks MSC Added a separate report for your issue and created a separate file in more open waters so the guys can see its not a land avoidance thing. Thanks for your work on this! Mike

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

8.375