06-04-2002 19:33									#91
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

A week or so before you mentioned the large presence of WWII vets in the Col. ski areas I'd heard about them for the first time. Supposedly a bunch from the 10th Mtn. Div. got together and started up the entire industry there with government benefits/loans after they got back home. Must have been during th Olympics.

	06-04-2002 19:33									#92
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Once the torpedo has acquired, zigging will do little. (homing is relatively strong.)

But if the torpedo is in the runout phase, the zig can be effective in taking the target out of the cone.

But the bigger thing is that it is very hard to even get into a decent firing position if the target is zigging. Sub is at PD at 5 kts or less and CV can go "over the hill", become screened by other ships, change firing solution at last minute, etc.

	06-04-2002 19:35									#93
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by KrazyHorse A week or so before you mentioned the large presence of WWII vets in the Col. ski areas I'd heard about them for the first time. Supposedly a bunch from the 10th Mtn. Div. got together and started up the entire industry there with government benefits/loans after they got back home. Must have been during th Olympics.

Founder of Vale, was a 10th Mtn guy. He is still here and skies like a god (at 82).

	06-04-2002 19:35									#94
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Do they still need somebody sitting around crunching trig functions or do you guys have some sort of Killzapper 3000 system to do that for you? Also, weren't you on a missile boat?

	06-04-2002 19:39									#95
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by GP Founder of Vale, was a 10th Mtn guy. He is still here and skies like a god (at 82).

Better than I do, for sure.

I'll never forget the first time I went skiing with my "friends" at the age of 14

"What does that black diamond mean"

"Don't worry about it"

30 seconds later, after reaching speeds in excess of too fast:

	06-04-2002 19:41									#96
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Umm...when I was there we still did trig functions in our head. there is a discipline called "mental gymanstics" which conssists of doing varaious calcs (some but not all trig) in your head. If you are good at it, you get so that you can do it much faster than with a calculator.

I assume there has been some move towards "killzappers" but I don't know all the details. I assume a large amount of guesswork and human intervention is required. Sonar is tricky stuff and not anywhere as clean as radar. (not as amenable to easy firing soultions.)

	06-04-2002 19:45									#97
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by KrazyHorse Better than I do, for sure. I'll never forget the first time I went skiing with my "friends" at the age of 14 "What does that black diamond mean" "Don't worry about it" 30 seconds later, after reaching speeds in excess of too fast:

That happens too much. Skiing is a complex skill. You will learn better with some instruction and with a lot of emphasis on turning...than just barreling down slopes you don't belong on.

	06-04-2002 19:46									#98
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by KrazyHorse Also, weren't you on a missile boat?

Are you trolling me!?

I am not a boomer girl.

	06-04-2002 19:49									#99
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Okay, Mr. Hunter-Killer.

	06-04-2002 19:53									#100
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by KrazyHorse Okay, Mr. Hunter-Killer.

(whew smiley) much better, Mr. Rugby physicist...

	06-04-2002 19:53									#101
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by GP Umm...when I was there we still did trig functions in our head. there is a discipline called "mental gymanstics" which conssists of doing varaious calcs (some but not all trig) in your head. If you are good at it, you get so that you can do it much faster than with a calculator

I'm already there. Something I learned while bored in high school. My limit's 2X3 digit multiplications, though. Beyond that, the calculator's faster.

	06-04-2002 19:56									#102
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

A sub guy would just round to make the math convenient. Mental gymnastics is not more than 5% accurate.

	06-04-2002 19:58									#103
	Got spare money?

So it's theoretical physics, then?

EDIT: Oh, I thought you said 50%.

	06-04-2002 21:19									#104
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by GP (Lucky that we don't have to fight each other.)

That's true

quote: I rode on a carrier and saw the other side of the equation. They have little insight into sub behavior. They don't realize that their best defense reamains running fast and zigging alot at all times.

I find this last statement a little strange and rather insulting to many highly professional officers. In my experience the warfare officers in CVBGs both in the carriers and their escorts are VERY familiar with submarine operations. Countering that threat occupied many of them for every hour of their waking day at times. To suggest that it boils down so simply to understanding about running fast and zigzagging is rather silly. All the surface warfare teams understand the basics about passive target motion analysis and how a submarine achieves it's targetting solutions. They also know how to use it against a submarine using very quiet escorts with towed arrays, which the submarine finds difficult to see and sonobouys from maritime patrol aircraft and helicopters. A complicated business that takes years to understand.

Western forces hone thier skills by pitting the best of their own against the best of their own, I can assure you that in such exercises the winner between the surface BG and the submarine is never a foregone conclusion. As you said at the beginning the best hope is that the enemy will always be inferior to both.

	07-04-2002 08:47									#105
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by IGD That's true I find this last statement a little strange and rather insulting to many highly professional officers. In my experience the warfare officers in CVBGs both in the carriers and their escorts are VERY familiar with submarine operations. Countering that threat occupied many of them for every hour of their waking day at times. To suggest that it boils down so simply to understanding about running fast and zigzagging is rather silly. All the surface warfare teams understand the basics about passive target motion analysis and how a submarine achieves it's targetting solutions. They also know how to use it against a submarine using very quiet escorts with towed arrays, which the submarine finds difficult to see and sonobouys from maritime patrol aircraft and helicopters. A complicated business that takes years to understand. Western forces hone thier skills by pitting the best of their own against the best of their own, I can assure you that in such exercises the winner between the surface BG and the submarine is never a foregone conclusion. As you said at the beginning the best hope is that the enemy will always be inferior to both.

Don't get your panties in a bunch. Going fast and zigging are GREAT defenses against a sub. Especially since ASW is so hard/awfull in performance (by surface/air assets).

My 2 weeks as part of the Flag Battle staff showed me that lots of the officers didn't know to zig enough/got lazy. The result: lots of "green flares" (indicates firing solution) on the carrier. This by a 637 submarine with instructions to simulate a diesel by snorkeling periodically and "simulating battery" by running slow while submerged.

I've spent plenty of time looking at "targets" through the cross-hairs. Even if SWO-daddies have had a few courses that touched on sub TMA, they don't really know how we think/operate. You have to take a ship to PD, dance with the one-eyed lady and do some range/angle on the bow observations through the cross-hairs to understand both the capabilities and limitations of a sub.

MHO but based on pretty savvy direct observation. Which by the way was a small part of a report that I submitted to the Type Commander.

	07-04-2002 08:54									#106
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

IGD, a few more items:

-I am not intimidated by any "hard to hear escort with a towed array". (personal experience). We can "green flare" them way more than they can get us.

-I am not intimidated by sonobouys or dipping sonar. I am concerned about visual detection by air assets when the ship is at PD. If they do see us, they may drop bouys or dip on us. But without a visual detection, it is not a concern.

-sub vs CVBG is pretty much a bloodbath. To make it "fair" the sub is ordered to carry a noise-maker and to run through pre-determined points at specific times so that the ASW assets have a chance.

	07-04-2002 09:42									#107
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

You make it sound pretty bleak for the surface forces GP.

You obviously have your facts straight for modern sub warfare. Can you tell us what the sub vs sub situation is? I would like to know out of general interest, but also for when I get serious about modding.

PS. You're an officer in the sub force? Where do you find time for Poly?

	07-04-2002 11:38									#108
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither You make it sound pretty bleak for the surface forces GP. You obviously have your facts straight for modern sub warfare. Can you tell us what the sub vs sub situation is? I would like to know out of general interest, but also for when I get serious about modding. PS. You're an officer in the sub force? Where do you find time for Poly?

I left active duty in '93. I am still in the reserves. I'm probably being politically incorrect and maybe even "insulting to fine professional naval officers". But I am giving you the straight scoop, IMHO.

Don't know what you mean by sub vs sub. US subs are pretty much way better than Russian ones. Way better training. And some techinical advantages (but that is a mixed bag...)

	07-04-2002 11:41									#109
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Isn't the big problem with the Russkies their reliance on conscripts for the Navy?

	07-04-2002 12:03									#110
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

No, what I mean is how practical is sub on sub warfare?

Assume that in a hypothetical non-nuclear conflict, all the surface units are destroyed or withdrawn into port.

Do subs fight subs effectively? Leave boomers off the table. What about the hunters vs the hunters?

Would there just be a wide ocean blue with nothing much happening, or would the subs be locked in a struggle to the death with each other? And would they be effective?

	07-04-2002 12:15									#111
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by KrazyHorse Isn't the big problem with the Russkies their reliance on conscripts for the Navy?

Also, they didn't have ADM Rickover, we did. And their CO's have nowhere near the freedom US COs do. Our subs operate for months with no comms to shore. We train to operate independandlty. They are much more mehcanical...

	07-04-2002 12:18									#112
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

I do not think the seas would be swept of surface ships unless you had 2 opponents with US quality sub fleets (not in real world...myabe in hypothetical).

In hypothetical-land, would probably still have some surface vessels. sub on sub encounters would occur near ports or would be related to targeting of merchant shipping. blue-ocean huntdowns would not occur. Ocean is vast. Also relatively easy to hide in the arctic.

	07-04-2002 13:55									#113
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

So. the sub on sub war is not practical due to means of detection and interdiction. I thought so. Good to have confirmation.

What about air assets? What threat to subs is posed by aircraft ASW today?

	07-04-2002 14:17									#114
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by GP Don't get your panties in a bunch.

Havent been accused of that before, sorry GP, It didn't come across quite as it was meant. You clearly have a great deal of experience in SUB OPS and it is a pleasure to discuss these things with you. I am also at a disadvantage because I am A Brit and have only the experience of working with the US (Always a pleasure) but not for them. From my perspective as a surface warfare officer, I have spent years in ASW from the other side of the fence (UK not US admittedly) and have to say that in a lot of cases submariners over state their superiority, they usually get a rude shock when they see it from the other side. Not your experience I know, but believe me submarines don't have it all their own way. For example you say :


I am not intimidated by any "hard to hear escort with a towed array". (personal experience). We can "green flare" them way more than they can get us.


This is not my experience. With an integrated ASW force, decent quiet escorts (i.e. Type 23 in ultra quiet, which incidentaly is also forced to carry a noisemaker outside strict waterspace managed exercises since submarines can't hear them) organic ASW air assets (dippers and weapon carriers, with plenty of off axis I Band flood) MPA and organic JEZ for seeding roads with on board processing and Link. Add to that good people (The most important aset of all) who understand TMA, the SSN targeting problem and his weapon suite your advantage disappears. That doesn't mean that the submarine doesn't get through now and then and I have seen my share of "Green Flares" but there are plenty of accurate weapon drops too, don't tell me you have never had crackers dropped on your head before. I am just saying that it is a complicated business and I believe the equation is much more equal than you are painting it to be .. but then I would say that !

As a final note, just so we don't all get too depressed about the survivability of Uncle Sams CVBGs - A CVBG has SSNs in support too. After all despite what they may tell us our ones are still the good guys.

	07-04-2002 14:26									#115
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither So. the sub on sub war is not practical due to means of detection and interdiction. I thought so. Good to have confirmation. What about air assets? What threat to subs is posed by aircraft ASW today?

Be interesting to hear GP on this, but I believe a sub is still the best weapon against a sub (although it hurts me to say it) and therefore it is a highly likely scenario in any future conflict between players with decent navies. The point about vast oceans is very true but the fact is that the target of one enemies submarines is likely to be protected by the submarines of the other. Rather forces them both into the same area of sea.

I would like to think that if we (ie the west) were one of the protaganists, we would have a rough idea of the whereabouts of the enemies submarines anyway, which always helps.

	07-04-2002 14:40									#116
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

IGD. So you don't see the sub as being as effective against surface forces as GP paints them to be. Good. Glad to know the RN hasn't neglected the lessons of 2 world wars.

You must be aware of the stats of sub vs surface from 1939 to 1945. Do you think subs would do better or worse today vs surface fleets than then? Try to divorce Boris from the equation. Imagine that Germany were building and crewing the modern subs you would have to go up against (in other words, as good as or maybe better than the American and British Hunters).

	07-04-2002 19:15									#117
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither You must be aware of the stats of sub vs surface from 1939 to 1945. Do you think subs would do better or worse today vs surface fleets than then? Try to divorce Boris from the equation. Imagine that Germany were building and crewing the modern subs you would have to go up against (in other words, as good as or maybe better than the American and British Hunters).

Based upon the ability to stay submerged and the vastly improved underwater speed, I would think that the subs would have an advantage over the surface vessels (relative to WWII). Something that hasnt been mentioned yet, that is counter to this though, is better intelligence about sub locations. If you know where they are, you have a chance to kill them. SOSUS didnt exist in WWII. Based on my knowledge of that world (20 years ago) the german subs would never reach the atlantic. Those based in France would have a small chance to evade detection, but not much.

	08-04-2002 04:59									#118
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither So. the sub on sub war is not practical due to means of detection and interdiction. I thought so. Good to have confirmation. What about air assets? What threat to subs is posed by aircraft ASW today?

visual detection threat is highest both for surface and air assets. Once a helo detects a sub, it is hard for the sub to get away. The helo can move its dipper very quickly. But unless there is a previous detect, helo not too much too worry about. IMHO, sonobouy fields are not that effective.

	08-04-2002 05:13									#119
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

IGD, I'm honored to discuss this with you. Glad you didn't get prissy about my panty-flaming. You know us naval officers have foul mouths, despite being gentlemen (ala JPJ).

I can understand having a noise emitter on the TA if it is not waterspace managed. To be honest, probably makes more sense to keep it out of the sub stratum. (It is a collision hazard. We don't hear arrays.) But we do hear the ship. That's what I meant when I said I wasn't worried about it.

Part of my mindset is based on having to do exercises where we ran through points or just "gave ping time" to the surface/air forces. We are capable of much more free play ourselves. But the exercise/training is a waste for the ASW operators if they never see the sub other than via flares. In discussions with ASW officers they were "overly" proud of any detects (because they were rare unless part of a set exercise), whereas we watched/heard our own surface forces all the day long.

	08-04-2002 07:13									#120
	Increase the size of your Attachments

GP - I assume since you left in '93 you were still on assigned to an SSN during 1989. About then I believe we had what, 90 LA class? And the Soviets had 60+ SSBN's.

You may or may not know, however I have an inkling there were general operating orders that if general warfare occurred between WP and NATO that the first orders from CINC of both Atlantic and Pacific was to immediately bottom every Delta and Typhoon they tailed as well as any Yankee's they'd sortied into theatre nuke roles. I don't know where you were in the chain of command, but the command staff always talks - so any sort of inkling on this? Or was it considered too provocative to bottom the Soviets boomer fleet?

Venger