What factors affect detectability?

[Joe K]

In earlier discussions, we've seen that relative altitudes affect detectability of target groups, as does separation distance and target size.

 

I'm curious whether other factors such as target emissions, target speed, target or detector aspect, relative speed of target and detector, number of units in target (and/or detector) group, and absolute altitude, are figured into all this - and if so, how.

 

We have seen demonstrated that AI targets having their radars on don't necessarily result in detection by player's forces, but we don't know whether the reverse is true.

 

I have tried to set up some tests to see whether most of these other aspects have any effect, but my results are so inconsistent that I can't really tell that way (I'm assuming there are so many probabilities involved in detection that I simply can't set up any valid tests for specific factors)... so, rather than beating my head against a wall, I'm curious how it is all designed to work: Which of these factors (or others) actually come into play as far as affecting detectability?

 

Thanks.

[mavfin]

In earlier discussions, we've seen that relative altitudes affect detectability of target groups, as does separation distance and target size.

 

I'm curious whether other factors such as target emissions, target speed, target or detector aspect, relative speed of target and detector, number of units in target (and/or detector) group, and absolute altitude, are figured into all this - and if so, how.

 

We have seen demonstrated that AI targets having their radars on don't necessarily result in detection by player's forces, but we don't know whether the reverse is true.

 

I have tried to set up some tests to see whether most of these other aspects have any effect, but my results are so inconsistent that I can't really tell that way (I'm assuming there are so many probabilities involved in detection that I simply can't set up any valid tests for specific factors)... so, rather than beating my head against a wall, I'm curious how it is all designed to work: Which of these factors (or others) actually come into play as far as affecting detectability?

 

Thanks.

 

I'm no expert, but I'll try to go over a few things.

 

1) Target emissions: radar emissions, and IR detectability do matter *if* the detecting platform has either the ESM flag or the FLIR flag set. If they don't (like the E-2B has no ESM) then emissions don't matter for detection by that platform. Basically, the ESM flag on the detecting platform determines whether it can 'see' your radar emissions. FLIR flag presence determines if a ship or platform can be seen with IR means. Not sure how IR detectability is done. May just be a <target-size> function. I think there's an RCS entry in the DB, though, as well as a radiated noise value, at least for subs?

 

2) Tony/Brad can correct me if needed, but I don't think aspect, speed, or relative speed matter. Speed will matter for sonar, though, as more speed makes for more noise. Is self-noise built into the sonar model? I expect it is, but I could be wrong.

 

3) number of units will definitely matter, as that raises the RCS or visual size, or if not exactly that, it gives more chances for a detection. Detector group size doesn't matter, as far as I know, other than that multiple ESM-equipped platforms can triangulate for better fixes on emitters, and multiple FLIRs or radars give more detection chances for a given target; i.e. in a 30-sec detection cycle 5 radars in range of the target are more likely to definitely detect a target than 1 radar is. Same for sonars, but the range involved is smaller, and I think sonar is on a 5 or 10-minute detection cycle, if I remember correctly.

[Joe K]

I'm no expert, but I'll try to go over a few things.

 

1) Target emissions: radar emissions, and IR detectability do matter *if* the detecting platform has either the ESM flag or the FLIR flag set. If they don't (like the E-2B has no ESM) then emissions don't matter for detection by that platform. Basically, the ESM flag on the detecting platform determines whether it can 'see' your radar emissions. FLIR flag presence determines if a ship or platform can be seen with IR means. Not sure how IR detectability is done. May just be a <target-size> function. I think there's an RCS entry in the DB, though, as well as a radiated noise value, at least for subs?

 

2) Tony/Brad can correct me if needed, but I don't think aspect, speed, or relative speed matter. Speed will matter for sonar, though, as more speed makes for more noise. Is self-noise built into the sonar model? I expect it is, but I could be wrong.

 

3) number of units will definitely matter, as that raises the RCS or visual size, or if not exactly that, it gives more chances for a detection. Detector group size doesn't matter, as far as I know, other than that multiple ESM-equipped platforms can triangulate for better fixes on emitters, and multiple FLIRs or radars give more detection chances for a given target; i.e. in a 30-sec detection cycle 5 radars in range of the target are more likely to definitely detect a target than 1 radar is. Same for sonars, but the range involved is smaller, and I think sonar is on a 5 or 10-minute detection cycle, if I remember correctly.

 

Thanks for the info. Is there any way - other than examining the DB (which I can't do) - to tell what platforms in the game have capability for ESM, FLIR, and so forth?

 

Meanwhile, as we're starting down the path of expanding the scope of this thread beyond just detections relating to air groups, there is another pair of related questions that have "bothered" me for a long time:

 

1. Why can't subs (in the game) detect over-flying aircraft acoustically? (At least I see no indication that they do).

 

2. Why can't subs (in the game) detect enemy sonabouys? (At least I see no indication that they do).

[CV32]

Is there any way - other than examining the DB (which I can't do) - to tell what platforms in the game have capability for ESM, FLIR, and so forth?

 

No.

 

1. Why can't subs (in the game) detect over-flying aircraft acoustically? (At least I see no indication that they do).

 

Because its not in the code/model. IIRC, its a wish list item.

 

2. Why can't subs (in the game) detect enemy sonabouys? (At least I see no indication that they do).

 

Again, because its not part of the code/model. Definitely a wish list item (at least for active sonobuoys).

[mavfin]

1. Why can't subs (in the game) detect over-flying aircraft acoustically? (At least I see no indication that they do).

 

2. Why can't subs (in the game) detect enemy sonabouys? (At least I see no indication that they do).

 

I think part of the reason these aren't in the code is that the game was written so long ago originally, and they left several things out because computing power was limited at the time. ~1990 you didn't have multi-core 64-bit processors with power to burn, after all. I believe the original game was written for 2/3/486s at best, and also hard drive space wasn't unlimited. I got a game upgrade mailed to me on a 3.5" floppy in late 1995, I think. The game's had a couple of major upgrades, HC97, and HC2002Gold, but, again, it's a case of increments rather than full-on rewriting. And now, with ANW the 'flagship', this game just gets what volunteers are willing to put into it, so any improvements for known issues take time. It's still one of the most replayable games I've ever played, because you never know what's going to happen in a scenario, even if you won it five minutes ago and are just restarting it. Even when I *know* what assets are there, I still never quite know what combination things will take. And that's why I still play the game, warts, missing pieces, bugs, and all.

 

Edit: deleted derail about why I don't like ANW as much, even though it's the 'flagship' and gets company resources

[VictorInThePacific]

1. Why can't subs (in the game) detect over-flying aircraft acoustically? (At least I see no indication that they do).

 

I don't claim to be an expert in this, but I think there would be physical limitations. The propagation of sound waves in air and water is rather different due to the huge density difference.

 

Getting the signal through the interface in a useful way is the issue.

 

Note that when you use sonobuoys from aircraft, you drop the detector into the medium of interest. Detectors in air can detect objects in the air.

 

As long as the sub is underwater, it probably can't detect sound sources in the air.

[Warhorse64]

1. Why can't subs (in the game) detect over-flying aircraft acoustically? (At least I see no indication that they do).

 

I don't claim to be an expert in this, but I think there would be physical limitations. The propagation of sound waves in air and water is rather different due to the huge density difference.

 

Getting the signal through the interface in a useful way is the issue.

 

Note that when you use sonobuoys from aircraft, you drop the detector into the medium of interest. Detectors in air can detect objects in the air.

 

As long as the sub is underwater, it probably can't detect sound sources in the air.

 

Take a look at the surface of the water under the helo. Do you really think a sub won't be able to hear *something* from that?

 

[CV32]

As long as the sub is underwater, it probably can't detect sound sources in the air.

 

This would be a wrong conclusion. There are a number of variables at play, but submarines most certainly can detect low flying aircraft overhead (in real life, that is).

[VictorInThePacific]

As long as the sub is underwater, it probably can't detect sound sources in the air.

 

Take a look at the surface of the water under the helo. Do you really think a sub won't be able to hear *something* from that?

 

Fair enough, but I was thinking about a sound source in the air, at some significant vertical and horizontal separation from the sub. This example is a large physical disturbance on the surface of the water, not an acoustic response to the flying object.

[Joe K]

As long as the sub is underwater, it probably can't detect sound sources in the air.

 

Take a look at the surface of the water under the helo. Do you really think a sub won't be able to hear *something* from that?

 

Fair enough, but I was thinking about a sound source in the air, at some significant vertical and horizontal separation from the sub. This example is a large physical disturbance on the surface of the water, not an acoustic response to the flying object.

 

I certainly don't know the particulars of how it's done nor the nuances of its use or capabilities, but my understanding was that, in RL, subs are able to "hear" aircraft - at least under some conditions... and it seems plausible that they could.

 

Of course, it may fall into the same category - and I sometimes wonder if I was just dreaming it - but I could have sworn that I once heard that self-guided AA missiles were being tested for sub use - to take out those pesky ASW helos if they got too close, I suppose.

[CV32]

I certainly don't know the particulars of how it's done nor the nuances of its use or capabilities, but my understanding was that, in RL, subs are able to "hear" aircraft - at least under some conditions... and it seems plausible that they could.

 

We all know that sound travels through both air and water, and you can, of course, be within one medium and still transfer an acoustic signal to the other.

 

Of course, it may fall into the same category - and I sometimes wonder if I was just dreaming it - but I could have sworn that I once heard that self-guided AA missiles were being tested for sub use - to take out those pesky ASW helos if they got too close, I suppose.

 

There have been several efforts over the years, and they continue, the German IDAS program probably being the most notable of late.

[TonyE]

3) number of units will definitely matter, as that raises the RCS or visual size, or if not exactly that, it gives more chances for a detection. Detector group size doesn't matter, as far as I know, other than that multiple ESM-equipped platforms can triangulate for better fixes on emitters, and multiple FLIRs or radars give more detection chances for a given target; i.e. in a 30-sec detection cycle 5 radars in range of the target are more likely to definitely detect a target than 1 radar is. Same for sonars, but the range involved is smaller, and I think sonar is on a 5 or 10-minute detection cycle, if I remember correctly.

 

Nice job Mavfin . 3) is the only place I think there is confusion and rightly so since the game doesn't act like it should in some of these cases. The cases that don't work right are multiple aircraft or weapons in the same unit (we remember that if we launch 4 x F-14B with the same loadout it is one unit with four aircraft but if we launch 2 with Phoenix and 2 with Sparrow only then we have two units each with two planes). Detection is only run once per unit and having multiple aircraft or weapons in a unit does not increase the detectability of the platforms even though it should. Mavfin is otherwise correct that more units means more sensor attempts both on the emitting and detected sides of the fence.

[mavfin]

3) number of units will definitely matter, as that raises the RCS or visual size, or if not exactly that, it gives more chances for a detection. Detector group size doesn't matter, as far as I know, other than that multiple ESM-equipped platforms can triangulate for better fixes on emitters, and multiple FLIRs or radars give more detection chances for a given target; i.e. in a 30-sec detection cycle 5 radars in range of the target are more likely to definitely detect a target than 1 radar is. Same for sonars, but the range involved is smaller, and I think sonar is on a 5 or 10-minute detection cycle, if I remember correctly.

 

Nice job Mavfin . 3) is the only place I think there is confusion and rightly so since the game doesn't act like it should in some of these cases. The cases that don't work right are multiple aircraft or weapons in the same unit (we remember that if we launch 4 x F-14B with the same loadout it is one unit with four aircraft but if we launch 2 with Phoenix and 2 with Sparrow only then we have two units each with two planes). Detection is only run once per unit and having multiple aircraft or weapons in a unit does not increase the detectability of the platforms even though it should. Mavfin is otherwise correct that more units means more sensor attempts both on the emitting and detected sides of the fence.

 

So 4 F-14s, same loadout, one unit, also do one outgoing and one incoming detection, not four, right? Just to make sure I understand.

[TonyE]

Correct you are.