Ohio SSGN Missile Submarine With Los Angeles SSN vs Russian Carrier Group | Sea Power

[@BaseRunner318]

As a former submariner for the USN, i can neither confirm nor deny that I enjoyed this video!

[@JimCollett-p4e]

I concur, MM3SS. SSN637 86-89 👍. I see things that could/should be done differently but I also like to keep OPSEC in mind. Some things may not be available in game for a reason 🤫

[@vec306]

Ditto both SSN & SSBN.

[@MuricaRules]

@@vec306 U served on a Ballistic Missile Sub? Did you ever get to see the Tridents?

[@dementionalfed]

@MuricaRules dude, we slept between them.

[@riparianlife97701]

Can you at least confirm you had a toad array? What did you feed the toads?

[@kflanders2826]

Los Angeles (SSN-688) Was my boat. 1990-1992. Weastpac & Rimpac. Took her to shipyard from Hawaii to Mare Island shipyard, Vallejo CA. She was a beast!!

[@patricklopez1799]

Submarine hull compression is amply demonstrated in the historical documentary "Down Periscope"

[@garyK.45ACP]

I like that movie. Historically accurate.

[@morrit33]

@@patricklopez1799 FFS.... I just spent AGES trying to remember this and AGES googling it for YOU to just tell us anyway... You know what? Screw you! 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭 Not fair!!!

[@dementionalfed]

@@patricklopez1799 the most accurate submarine movie ever made.

[@richardmartin8998]

​@dementionalfed Actually yes. Particularly for diesel boat submariners.

[@hardmcshaft7931]

I just watched that 2 hrs ago. Bloody great movie. Forgot how good it was

[@AxlePlaysGames]

Hi Cap, just wanted to mention that the title says DCS but I think you meant Sea Power!!

[@morrit33]

I was so confused!!

[@vaughn1804]

I need to download this DCS update! 😆

[@grimreapers]

Thanks, my brain...

[@33zakb]

@@grimreapers We still love you cap

[@StrugglesWithWords]

​@@grimreapers Cap did it for engagement.

[@StrategicPlanner13]

Hey, Cap. I don't know if Sea Power models it, but thermal layers and acoustic echo play a big role in how far away you can hear something underwater. Basically, sound gets trapped and bounced within layers of water. The result is that, depending on the environment, a sub at a certain depth can not hear a contact from a great distance. However if the sub changes depth and moves into the layer of water the sound is trapped inside, it would be able to hear the sound. TLDR: if you can't hear a sound, change aspect and depth. Both have an influence on the ability to detect.

[@grimreapers]

Yup SP def models it. We just recorded a mission where we use a submarine hunting a convoy and we constantly pop above and below the thermal layer for these reasons.

[@SturmGewehr1944x]

​@@grimreapersHearing a target at 100 miles is possible using Convergence Zones (CZ). CZ 1 is at about 33 nm, CZ 2 is about 66 nm, CZ 3 is about 99 nm, depending on conditions. Direct sonar detection out to 30 nm is very difficult even under the best conditions.

[@MaxIsStrange1]

Cap, iirc the towed array is only good at detecting stuff to the sides of the submarine, and not to its front (things in front of the sub have to be picked up by the bow array). That’s why you had difficulty detecting targets at the beginning-you should’ve put the targets on your 3 or 9 o’clock (like when you’re notching in DCS). You could even see that you were losing tracks each time you turned towards the targets.

[@Tamburello_1994]

Hence the term: CLEAR BAFFLES

[@MaxIsStrange1]

@@Tamburello_1994 Yup 😆

[@grimreapers]

Agree, Pony told me this, I've actually had weird results in Sea Power regards aspect, the best thing I've found is to pretty much rotate randomly until you get a nice sonar hit.

[@daviniusb6798]

Wasn't 30° the sweet spot?

[@kingofbritons]

@@grimreapers The reason you have a hard time detecting in front of you with a towed array is that you're essentially asking the giant ball of microphones to hear through the noise that your own submarine is making.

[@NemoGraynameA8]

You are having trouble picking up sonar contacts because you are facing them. The best way to "listen" is to run slowly at a parallel course to your targets, or failing that, run at 180 degrees off their course. Submarines are basically giant microphones. Im not sure what mic you are using but think of them like a "pill microphone" you don't talk into the top, you talk into the side for the best sound. Also, with towed arrays, the best place is as deep as possible but not below any thermal layers. Although if you want to fire missiles quickly then shallow is better. Edit: you missed one form of communication for submarines. Often a submarine will record a message and then put it on a bouy. The bouy would be released with a timer set and the message would be broadcast after giving the submarine time to move away from the broadcast area

[@grimreapers]

Thanks for info. Yes I did read about the buoy but forgot.

[@AWJFunk]

Cap, as per Tom Clancy books from the 80's and 90's, turning the sub generally produces a degradation in towed array signal fidelity until the wire straightens out again. How true is that? No idea not in the military but it makes sense and looks like it's modelled in sea power

[@grimreapers]

I had no idea! So much to bloody learn lol.

[@Davros-vi4qg]

Yep, it does and Yep it is

[@richardmartin8998]

It depends a lot on your speed, platform hydrodynamic efficiency, crew competency, and the array design.

[@Davros-vi4qg]

@@richardmartin8998 I.e. how many degrees of variance from zero u put the array in both horizontal and vertical planes,be steady and smooth sub drivers 😉

[@GarethFairclough]

Sailor on the back at 20:39 just ate that tomahawk for lunch, it seems! xD

[@MuricaRules]

Actually sailors lol

[@ryabow]

yummy >:D

[@GarethFairclough]

@ I know, but I was referring to the guy furthest back, who had the missile basically fly into him.

[@williamsjm100]

I used to play the strategy game “Harpoon” circa 1991-ish I think. And it was so hard to defend against heavy missile barrages. Graphics are prettier but the game is the same idea.

[@GrahamCStrouse]

I remember that game. Good times. 🙂

[@FleetDefenderRA5]

Hi CAP... first of all, you never have to apologize for things not going as planned. That is why I watch this GrimReapers. One Brotherly suggestion. Were I the Soviet groups I would have had a helo up in the air with its surface search radar on to HOPEFULLY catch the missiles and give the fleet a tad more warning. I am not sure if seapower allows you to do set up helos like that, but I think that be realistic. Thank you, as always...

[@TheRealSteve42]

Fair chance there probably was a few helicopters flying around but they never appeared on screen because all we had spotting the enemies was a couple submarines without their ESM masts up.

[@grimreapers]

They had about 8 helos up but they were busy at 50ft dropping sonar buoys.

[@Sky_Burger88]

** Mr Reaper, Thanks for another awesome see power video. I can tell you why those tomahawks kept going astray. They were getting jammed by the slavas ECM capabilities. The jamming blinding them. They were losing track of their intended targets and then seeking another target. The chaff clouds were also highly effective in spoofing the incoming, hawks.

[@1guitargun1]

There is an interesting SmarterEveryDay video where Destin goes into a sub and also shows this hull compression in action. Kind of cool seeing how much it compresses. Also, there is this "doomsday" plane that will deploy an extremely long "antenna" which will transmit a Very Low Frequency to communicate with the submarine fleet with whatever doomsday orders

[@Capt_Chris1293]

The navy uses ELF, VLF, HF antennas, VHF and SSIX to communicate between subs and ships. ELF is extremely slow. About 1 page of info a minute

[@teresaharmon4405]

Nice video as usual Cap! Keep up the good work.

[@FlordiaMan14]

Every time I see subs In games I always wonder what the first wwI submariners would think of our tech.

[@grimreapers]

Wow, imagine being on one of these death traps!

[@Dimitris_Datseris]

Nice, I mean who doesn’t want some boom boom

[@grimreapers]

Fair comment.

[@A_barrel]

We need a cinematic or youtuber mode. Where you can see everything going on and possibly switch sides or just neutral/god mode where you can play both sides

[@tobysilverstone5297]

f10, tf sensors, then enable. this shows everything on the map and effectively enables a god like view mode but does give the players ships the same data

[@fwfs]

Fun fact about towed arrays is that sharks have been known to chomp on them. There's a lot of juice flowing through the array, and sharks are attracted to them since they navigate via the Earth's magnetic field. Shark teeth have been found embedded in the array and it's cost the Navy tons of money. Well, shark teeth grow back anyway, so they have good dental plans. Haha!

[@zippy_neckbone9930]

So, one thing to mention is the towed array doesnt give a bearing. It gives conical angles. In order to actually verify where a contact is when you only hold them on the towed array, you have to maneuver so that they’re on the other side of the towed array

[@pbr-streetgang]

Thanks for the vid sir.👍🏼👍🏼

[@hphp31416]

at long range sounds can bounce between the sea floor and thermocline or surface, you can pick up bounced sounds at long range but when you get closer you lose it as sounds miss your location

[@Decrepit_biker]

CAP!! I don't know if you're aware of it, but on the 23rd of January an Raf Euro Fighter landed.... without its canopy IRL. Immediately thought of you 😂😂😂😂

[@jovianr9498]

Good effort, Cap.

[@FlyingWithSpurts]

@17:00 "I didn't hear any active pings" really? I was hearing them

[@TheRealSteve42]

Yeah they definitely had distance active sonar going they probably started hearing him when he went ahead std

[@grimreapers]

Wow, your ears are better than mine. I'm getting too old.

[@FlyingWithSpurts]

@@grimreapers I had good headphones on, I could faintly hear them in my left ear.

[@ohiobrian8993]

A good demo cap. A sub taking out 3 escorts would force the russian task force to turn around. Your tactics, using the leading sub to detect and not attack, reflect actual tactics. Another is having subs hide beneath merchant ships.

[@imapopo2924]

It's my understanding that the Tomahawks have a habit of zeroing in on a single target because they are active radar seekers and so will seek their own targets and don't take additional guidance. So, in a fleet formation, they have a habit of seeking out whatever gives them the strongest lock, whether that be the biggest ship or the closest ship. They also aren't hard to spoof and, as you said, are easy to shoot down due to their slower speed. That's why you get over 100 of them. Their biggest advantages in a scenario like this is their long range and the sheer amount that you have with a VLS armed SSGN. That said, I would try to stagger your launches more and use fewer per targeted ship. I've noticed that once they all start going for the same target, they end up coming from different angles so it's harder to defend. Using less means you waste less as you thin out their air defenses and can launch more attack waves. You can also launch the land attack versions ahead to act as decoys by just giving them a nav point instead of a specific target. IRL, the taxpayer would weep at the sheer cost of launching that many missiles just as decoys, but in a game, why not? They're useless otherwise in a sub/surface engagement.

[@Warlord9000]

Is there any kind of jamming/Ewar on those ships that could be messing with the Tomahawks?

[@jovianr9498]

That generally causes the jammed missile to plunge into the water just short of the target though it might have been refined in a recent patch.

[@therealdebater]

I really enjoyed this one. Very interesting. More please!

[@Rapinasimplicis]

If it wasn’t for the second effort I’d guess that it was diving deep that caused the Tomahawks to lose their guidance updates.

[@grimreapers]

I thought that RGM-109B took no further offboard updates once they had been fired? I may be wrong.

[@Wolfe351]

@@grimreapers that is correct I think. They head to the GPS posi and switch on targeting just as they are approaching.

[@XrandomnessX]

I have a lot of time in the game. Since the latest patch to correct some of the issues with air to air missiles and torpedoes I've noticed this is happening with ASM missiles as well. It's still early access and it's a very small dev team so I suspect that this is an issue that came from those fixes above. They will probably work it out in the next week or so I suspect. Amazing game for such a tiny team.

[@Davros-vi4qg]

So a little digging shows the Tomohawks are visual identitified at 15nm and have a chuffing huge RCS in game

[@NeilMillar-g2l]

Have a look at convergence zones regarding sonar detection

[@rumannkoch4864]

One of the 4 SSGNs, USS Florida, is named after my state - The Sunshine State - ironically we had snow fall in northern Florida this morning, a once-in-a-Century thing!

[@GrahamCStrouse]

The US lead naval force that smoked Libya in 2011 was spearheaded by USS Florida. The US launched about 110-115 total Tomahawks at Libyan ground targets during that campaign. Florida was responsible for 91 of the those fires by her lonesome. If the US really wants to be able to help Taiwan deter a Chinese invasion we need more big tactical missile submarines that can stick and move against a Chinese invasion fleet. The Virginias won’t cut it, not even the Block Vs, if they ever get built. America is really sleeping on the tactical Ohios. We’d be wise to convert some of the newer Boomers into tactical platforms if we really want a weapon that can deter China without breaking out the nukes.

[@erickleven1712]

That happened in 2009/10 when I was there.

[@foxy-jj3di]

it could be that when the tomahawks are in terminal manoeuvre the seekers see the escort first instead of the carrier and then just lock onto that as the seeker cones are very narrow

[@nigeldepledge3790]

A little bit on radiocommunications : water is fairly good at absorbing radio waves. It's how a microwave oven works, and it's why the signal from your 5 GHz WiFi router drops off so fast with increased distance. (At such high frequency, the water in the air is enough to absorb thr signal to a noticeable extent.) However, this effect is less with longer wavelengths. In the HF band, for instance, the signal absorption by water in the air is more or less negligible. But HF signals don't propagate well through actual bodies of water. For underwater propagation, you need to get down to the LF, VLF and ELF bands. However, the frequencies down there are so low that you have essentially no bandwidth in which to transmit information. Long wave / Low Frequency occupies 30 to 300 kHz, and can transmit an audio signal with reasonable fidelity. VLF is 3 to 30 kHz, and you'd be pushing the envelope to transmit an audio signal with any quality down there. On/off keying of the carrier is more useful. ELF is 300 Hz to 3 kHz. It passes through the water as if it were in free space, but with the slowest rate of data transfer imaginable.

[@trentvlak]

Even if no ships were hit, the attack would drain their defensive armament.

[@riparianlife97701]

How many toads does it take to make a toad array? What species?

[@grimreapers]

Japanese fighting toad?

[@Davros-vi4qg]

About 1500 wide mouth toads work best

[@riparianlife97701]

@Davros-vi4qg Better'n dolpins.

[@riparianlife97701]

@@grimreapers Keeping them out of the prop looks like it would be the hard part!

[@riparianlife97701]

@Davros-vi4qg If it takes 1500, that would explain why he didn't have his computer render them in 3D in the game. That could crash his machine.

[@TheBloodypete]

In some parts of the world snapping turtles are a massive part of acoustic background noise!

[@michaelinraleigh]

Should have followed up with Torpedoes with the LA class once the confusion started.

[@alexaznavour3033]

Another good book suggestion is Oceans Ventured!

[@robertlewis8295]

Cap, I think you should have been sending the SSN a few degrees East of due North, not almost due East. Too much of your hull was masking the Soviet group from the towed array.

[@grimreapers]

Yes I think that's why I did better in my test before recording, I picked all ships up at about 40 miles.

[@cickeith9579]

If your interested in dry manuals on underwater acoustics, look up the RP33, (Fleet Oceanographic.......), its and old sonar manual that's unclassified, pretty interesting stuff.

[@Mrawelon82]

You should really check out the mighty jingles and his cold waters series 😊

[@Bloodwhiner]

Once the Russians opened up on the Tomahawks, the SSN would move to within 25-30 miles and fire some mk48's. Those are keel busters and the only real defense is to avoid being hit (hard to do with a wire-guided system).

[@lippertwe]

In Cold Waters, so I assume in this game as well, sonar is accurately depicted as inaccurate, as any number of factors can influence where the sonar thinks a target is. It's great realism, and that is probably why the track shifted significantly. The reading was not accurate enough for TASM targeting. you could try another go at this and get the sub within periscope range - and launch some torpedos as well.

[@daviniusb6798]

13:21 there was also a boje you could deploy, it would surface way behind you sub and basically work as a floating starlink dish. But it's not public knowledge when things like that came into use, so psssst don't tell anyone.

[@drood420]

The lost track came back neutral, maybe that’s why those one’s didn’t track.

[@bobbob6898]

Weren't the Ohio class SSBN only converted to SSGN starting in early 2000's. So this is really not a 1991 scenario then?

[@GrahamCStrouse]

You are correct, sir.

[@WardenWolf]

@Grim Reapers, your targeting priorities need a lot of work. In order to reliably hit a rear-ward high priority target, the defenses closest to the tracks of the missiles need to be crippled first. So your first salvos should have exclusively targeted the two right vessels on their front line. The following salvos would then take advantage of the reduced anti-missile defenses to hit the carrier. You have to "plow the road".

[@Davros-vi4qg]

Tomahawk go whack whack whack, but appear blunted 🤪

[@darkstar7999]

The biggest problem with sending our subs after a Russian carrier group is finding a Russian carrier group. The only carrier they have spends most of its time tied up in port. It's engines are shot, and when it does venture forth, they send a tug with it to tow it back to port if it breaks. How about vs a Chinese carrier group. At least they have one. Although with two of their carriers - not much difference is one is a former Soviet carrier and the other is a copy.

[@StrugglesWithWords]

Cap, don't know if you're getting pushback from YT but if you are moving to Pepperbox might be a solid backup. Its run by American gun tubers who know the pain of demonization. Thought you should know. Also, you're content is high quality. Thank you for making our days brighter.

[@chrisstopher2277]

I wonder if a sub has ever ran into a giant squid?

[@Gregnier]

Cap. Every time you turn the Towed array curves. Towed arrays take a long time to come back online even after you finish the turn as they straighten out. they also aren't designed to see in front of you. You want a crossing bearing in front of the target's rate of advance. that will allow the hull sonar and the tail to see the targets. Also the towed array is designed to drop down below the thermocline layer. it will always have trouble seeing surface ships.

[@noobiesmurf]

How do you stop the cable from being cut by your own propeller?

[@morrit33]

What was that film where the guy hangs a piece of string between stantions in a submarine, and you see the string start drooping as they dive. Was it 'Up Scopeç?

[@BoraHorzaGobuchul]

Not sure I remember correctly but it seems to me it was Das Boot

[@morrit33]

Noo. It was a comedy film, I'm sure. I think... I'm going to look it up!

[@BoraHorzaGobuchul]

@@morrit33 the only sub comedy I know of is down periscope

[@h4l0g3n]

Technically, in the 1990s all four SSGNs were still SSBNs, weren't they? Didn't they complete the conversions in like 2006-2008?

[@jamison884]

Thanks Cap. Though I believe you may be underestimating the effectiveness of the Tomahawk. I'd say the general rule of thumb is that most US military technology, almost regardless of era, is underestimated. The US releases weapon test results to the public for a majority of weapon systems, while countries like Russia and China do not, and then the US generally downplays their specific capabilities (per examples throughout history where weapons/tech have overperformed their public expectations or specifications). Meanwhile, on the opposite end, China and Russia are notorious for keeping their weapon test results secret and also overestimating their specific weapon capabilities as one of their strategic deterrents. They use opposite philosophies when it comes to the treatment of such information. Anyway, I've read one report that stated the Tomahawk design was more stealthy than you'd imagine per your intuition when plainly looking at the design. If I had to guess, that likely means they were applying some early radar-absorbing materials to the surface, especially in the early 1990's with the invasion of Iraq and the amazing efficiency they displayed as hundreds were launched and hit successfully. As you're likely aware, the Tomahawk Block V will return the anti-ship capability to the Tomahawk series, and once again, it was reported that the design has further enhanced its stealth capabilities, despite looking remarkably similar to this classic shape. In addition, there's little doubt it will have more advanced targetting capabilities, such as potentially implementing the high-end features of other modern ASM's like the AI-assisted targetting database and electronic warfare resistance. Ultimately, unless you were directly involved with the military in the 1980's, no one knows for certain, but I just have a feeling they were more capable than Sea Power (and other games/sims) give it credit for. My mind always returns to the Moskva. Two Neptune missiles (an old design with no party tricks), both hitting successfully, and then we watch as the same ship design within this video takes down about 20 missiles by itself without assistance from over-the-horizon radar/sensors. Seems a bit silly. :)

[@SolNacht]

Hey Cap don't apologise for the results you get. If everything always went perfectly we would be wanting more DCS F22 and F35 vs north koreas vids. I love seeing the old stuff BECAUSE things are falliable. (like my spelling)

[@mustang5132]

Seeing as the missiles would take a flight path so that they mostly all arrive roughly at the same time, would it be possible to redo this mission with several submarines firing only a fraction of their missiles so they can all arrive quicker relative to each other and roughly at the same time?

[@jyralnadreth4442]

Cap...1980s UK SSK....could be the Upholder Class that was sold to Canada (Now known as the Victoria Class) 4 were built and were sold shortly (4 years) after commissioning

[@grimreapers]

That's the one!

[@grimreapers]

Why did we sell them?

[@mikeck4609]

Will never really know at this point how good the systems were back then against storms of antiship missiles, particularly Soviet systems because they’re modern Russian equivalent are so poorly maintained. That said you can see the issues with relying on subsonic non-stealthy missiles. I don’t care how smart they are whether they’re upgraded harpoons or new Tomahawk Maritime strike missiles. If you wanna survive, you have to shorten the window of engagement. You could do that by moving through the window quicker or making the window smaller, but you gotta do one or the other…. or you’re just a target.

[@6foot1]

Cap. Tomahawk and harpoon engagements are unplanned. They’re supposed to come in at different points and times.

[@57rcpilot]

A nautical mile is 800 feet longer than a statute mile.

[@taerog]

so, what did you do to "fix" the tomahawks?

[@NemoGraynameA8]

There's a mod on the steam workshop that changes their guidance package

[@grimreapers]

In steam workshop search "tomahawk fix" and comes right up.

[@dtisme53]

Have you tried Dark Waters? It seems like the best Sub Warfare sim I’m not certain about the level of “realism” but I think you might enjoy it.

[@Takarde]

Do you share the mission somewhere?

[@grimreapers]

We can't get them to upload to steam, so instead join the GR discord and do the thing it asks to prove you are human. Then the missions we've share are in the Sea Power Mission room. If you want a mission that's not there then DM me in discord.

[@Takarde]

@@grimreapers Thanks captain ;)

[@ridley68]

What's the book called?

[@mrlodwick]

Read the book Red Storm Rising capt.

[@ryabow]

he has. GR has 3 videos depicting dance of the vampires, naval battles 105a, 105b, & 148.

[@grimreapers]

Yup starting RSR campaign next week.

[@TheEvertw]

Nice demo, which might have been realistic 30 years ago.

[@shonninkuroji7277]

(Edit: There is a TLDR version of this comment at the bottom. I got a little carried away here! What can I say? It's interesting stuff and I loved being a part of it!) Hi Cap! I want you to know I really enjoy your "what if" scenarios! Every now and then I catch one, and they are always interesting. As a prior naval submariner (US) I was very interested in how this particular scenario would play out. That said, there are several small but significant inaccuracies that although minor, combine to ultimately provide for a fairly inaccurate outcome of the battle. For example I can't tell you the actual crush depth of a submarine without violating classification, but I can tell you yours is wrong! Not that it had any effect on the simulation. However, it is a good example the kind of small details that may have an effect on the simulation that taken together result in larger errors. Some of these inaccuracies are inherent to DCS itself and others are the result of your own assumptions about the engagement based upon the information you have. For example: How close can a first flight 688 get to the enemy fleet and safely engage? I can assure you that distance is not 30 miles! The problem is, how can I help you (if you are interested) in making a more accurate scenario without violating the rules regarding classification of submarine systems and operations? What I can say is: 1. that your engagement range is going to be A LOT closer and will NOT necessitate the use of missiles! There is a reason that the Navy stopped using the submarine launched Tomahawk for sea combat and never bothered to replace it. 2. As you know, American forces are highly networked so that individual assets benefit from information from other sources (other units, intelligence, satellites...). Submarines can also access and benefit greatly from this networking. However, without getting specific there are limitations and constraints. Hint: Electromagnetic signals don't propagate through water (this isn't classified, just basic science) and submarines must deal with the issue. Edit: I just realized you did address this, however VLF radio is very limited in its ability to transmit detailed information including track data. Sorry! 3. Submarines can be VERY HARD to detect by surface and air assets even at periscope depth! Under the right conditions, even to this day, with modern technology, surface assets are often reduced to using the MK 1 Mod 0 eyeball to determine the specific position of a periscope depth submarine! Seriously, have you ever tried to spot a slowly moving 3 to 6 foot tall pole in a choppy sea from a helicopter? Good luck! 4. I know that DCS uses some sort of averages when determining the range at which a submarine "sees" an enemy unit, but bear with me here. Detection ranges for a submarine are determined by several factors. The first being limitations of the technology itself, the second on the abilities of the persons who are interpreting the data, ambient conditions (noise pollution, sea bottom etc.) and finally the inclusion of any and all other data available (please refer back to item 2). The older analog sonar systems as mounted in a 688, particularly in the sphere, are very, very sensitive and in some ways better than more modern digital systems. So, any decent American trained sonar or fire control operator is going to make a significant difference in when the submarine finds and engages the enemy asset. A good tracker aboard a 688 is going to pick up, classify, and lock up that fleet well before it does in the simulation, especially if he is already aware the fleet is there to be found. And he will probably have it done BEFORE the towed array gets deployed. I know, I was a damn good tracker! You kind of touched on this a little bit in your video when you mentioned the real world detection range of 100 miles which is not all that uncommon. All in all this issue may be a push, but it may benefit the scenario to lean into this a bit. 5. Also, a submarine is not going to drop a track just because it drops off the sonar. At a minimum, I would DR (dead reckon) the track with a growing area of uncertainty (AOU) until I could regain it on the sensor and update it. Provided the contact does not change its course or speed I will find it exactly where I expect to be. I once used this technique to track a freighter over several days and hundreds of miles (my Officer Of the Deck having lost that particular contact, thought I was using magic when I not only found it again, but could predict its every move! Long story... probably shouldn't tell it on a public forum). Considering that once you get a MK48 torpedo within about 2 or 3 thousand feet of its target (you will likely be using a torpedo!), said target is screwed, losing a contact on sonar for a minute is sort of a non issue. 6. We have (and probably had even back then) some rather interesting abilities to play havoc with the enemy's ability to detect and/or classify our own submarines. Can't say much more there. Only that as hard (or nearly impossible as it is) for a surface or asset to engage a submarine even at "knife fighting" range, we can make it harder. I'll let your imagination run with that! All that said, PLEASE do not take this as some sort of "bla, bla, bla, you are wrong!" kind of post, but rather the thoughts and considerations of someone who has real world experience in submarine warfare aboard an early 688. I love what you do, and even when a given scenario does not match my expectations it still makes for interesting and informative viewing. So keep on doing what you do, and I will keep on watching! If you for any reason you have any questions regarding this or would like to have a more detailed discussion about submarine warfare please don't hesitate to reach out (we could jump on Discord or something). I would love to contribute in any small way. TLDR: I know, I know, wall of text! I really wasn't trying to geek out here, but... So, TLDR Version: I believe, and there is no grantee I am completely right, for this engagement to be an accurate representation, it would have to happen at point blank range using torpedoes, with with enemy surface and air assets severely handicapped (to the point of near blindness). The only way the surface fleet would have a modicum of a chance is if it was protected by submarines of it's own, at which point the undersea battle would be the only thing that matters, and the surface engagement nothing more than an afterthought. Don't ask me how I know this, just trust me, I honestly believe this to be the truth of the matter. Very Respectfully, FT1 (SS/SW) CJMK (USN 2001-2009)

[@grimreapers]

Brilliant feedback thanks very much. We just recorded an interesting battle that I would enjoy your feedback on - we control a single SSK hunting a convoy guarded by soviet escorts. Lots of interesting questions are raised during this battle. I am recording about 1 week ahead at the moment, so that vid should show not this Sunday but next Sunday. I hope you watch it and comment.

[@shonninkuroji7277]

@@grimreapers Definitely! I'll keep a look out for it. It may surprise you to know that modern SSKs are often quieter than SSNs when submerged on battery. And although they are still limited by their ability to run on battery power alone, longer battery endurance and quieter diesel engines when snorkeling have made them a very serious threat indeed. This will be very interesting and I can't wait to see how you manage the stalking of the enemy fleet! Good luck! 🙂

[@cammosoldier]

Does the GOAT reply?

[@fqeagles21]

Are nuclear missiles in this game?

[@ryabow]

not in the base game. there's at least one mod, but it doesn't seem to work very well against vessels.

[@grimreapers]

Yes but the ones I have used don't really do nuclear damage. Just like normal missile damage.

[@fqeagles21]

@@grimreapers ok thanks

[@bestofjetz]

Hey there

[@melangellatc1718]

SSK... Kerosene?

[@grimreapers]

Diesel Electric so yes pretty much kerosene.

[@TheAvidracerf1]

I am a disabled gamer, and I am very limited in the games I can play. Is there a feature to pause the game, execute a maneuver and then press play?.

[@user-gv4zb9rc6u]

Am I the only one curious as yo the accuracy of how efficient the CWIS behaves on things like Slava/Moskava where they delete a line of missiles in one go? I feel like that's more of a balancing choice unless someone wiser knows the credibility of the system to thay degree

[@syedayanather713]

u and wolfpack should collab!!

[@36thulsterdiv72]

The British SSK's mentioned were the Upholder Class and regarded as the best non-nuclear powered subs in the world at the time. Commissioned in 1990, the end of the Cold War rendered them no longer needed, laid up in 1994 and they were sold to the Canadians as the Victoria class in 1998, who had a terrible accident sailing one over to Canada in 2004. They were refitted to Canadian standard electronics/weaponry which cost a fortune and their service career in the RCN has basically been a disaster.

[@grimreapers]

Thanks!

[@KristyMurray-s9n]

100 miles away? Thats a bad submarine lol

[@draigygoch]

Your info about the weaknesses of the towed array simply isnt true

[@normanmadden]

Towed array; a grid of amphibians. /s

[@BobK58]

Will NATO defend Greenland?

[@Thewayofgrass35]

Submarine

[@Thewayofgrass35]

Submarine

[@Thewayofgrass35]

Submarine

[@Thewayofgrass35]

Submarine

[@Thewayofgrass35]

Submarine

[@Thewayofgrass35]

Submarine

[@AmvC]

Cap should run tfa, stands still and tells us about some ship and armament models 😂

[@invictus2578]

Is this venom geek media?

[@andyf4292]

tomahawks are notoriousy easy to shoot down.. they launched shedloads of them at that Syrian airbase, had hardly any hits

[@RobertLason-n6y]

Please add the kirov to this war game

[@cg9952]

I still prefer DCS vids

[@MrCrystalcranium]

It's unfortunate everyone gets disappointed/upset when America loses these battle simulations but surface warfare isn't what the US Navy concentrates on. Fighting a gun war at sea-level is almost always going to be won by Russia due to the number of defensive missiles or the number and explosive power of their anti-ship ordinance. For the Chinese, it's primarily overwhelming numbers of missiles offensive and defensive. The USN is essentially an air dominance offensive battle group with a high level of identification, tracking and offensive technology so it's not built to win a surface slugfest. Cap's dilemma is a long range destruction of a Soviet battle group with the Russians never seeing the American fleet makes for a very boring and uninteresting video! Maybe if SP permits, a guns battle during WWII between the US Iowa class and other navies would be something the viewers would want to see. The USN was a slugging navy at that time with a growing airwing but, correct me if I'm wrong, the surface ships in SP aren't modeled to fight with guns only? There's always going to be the issue of the vessel thinking it's a missile platform first and even if you shoot off all the missiles at once at a nonsense target to eliminate them, the ship is still going to strategize and maneuver as if it has missiles. Not 100% certain of that but I have seen modeled conflict in SP where trying to make a 1990s ship simulate a 1940s vessel makes for lots of glitches and inexplicable strategy decisions. Anyway, sorry for the dissertation but I can feel Cap's disappointment when these fights turn out this way. He's trying to give you guys what you want but it's difficult for the US Navy to win a "Rock Em' Sock Em'" engagement in this era. We simply weren't built for it.

[@TheRealSteve42]

Sea Power isn’t a WWII game. An appropriate game would be War On The Sea with many more WWII suface vessel models with a similar mission editor and game style

[@beemy.6923]

No views 13 seconds grim reaper fell off 😞

[@chriscallan2735]

First

[@randomaccount-dq1jq]

HMS Swiftsure - "Wtf is happening up there?"