PermalinkSubmitted by mattm on November 8, 2018 - 04:15
So to summarise what I think you see as included in the MVP:
Choice of multiple ordnance types: with tradeoff between range/speed, countermeasure evasion and damage infliction
Simple trajectory: unguided torpedoes with simple probability calculation(s) of successful prosecution based on distance, speed and effectiveness of detection/countermeasures
Automated countermeasures: Simple calculation of effectiveness based on limited criteria
Simple damage: Recorded as "structural integrity points" rather than attributed to specific location or ship systems
More complexity/realism can be added as the system develops.
PermalinkSubmitted by NeerajA on November 9, 2018 - 13:38
Picking up on your point about a "cool down" time between launches, the railgun launchers will be magnetic which is therefore frictionless, but the torps will be launched explosively to give initial velocity which then gets amplified by the railgun's magnetic field. This will have an impact on launcher condition and will need to be monitored - regular maintenance will be needed to prevent launcher failure.
But the biggest impact to to be turnaround times will be the process of charging the capacitor used to dump the huge amount of power needed at the instant of launch.
PermalinkSubmitted by mattm on November 12, 2018 - 13:31
I'm wondering if we should look at including more around trajectory elements in the MVP, as this is pretty fundamental to tactical management and are vital skills and experience to ground early, not just for the tactical team but for helm and command as well.
This would cover three post-launch phases:
Wire-Guided: The torp is being guided by the vessel's own sensors via a tight-beam data link. This link is easily broken if either vessel or torp maneuver too far out of line-of-sight.
Search: Once the wire is lost, the torp uses uses its own less powerful passive sensors and follows pre-configured search patterns to track the target.
Prosecution: Once close enough, the torp uses active sensors (making it detectable) to close and kill.
To give us the level of realism needed to make it a useful training experience we'd probably need to look at managing the torp track on the TOE grid, rather than just probability calculations.
As this is a whole phase in itself in the service delivery forecast and compared to the size of previous phases, including this seems about right?
Comments
MVP Summary
So to summarise what I think you see as included in the MVP:
More complexity/realism can be added as the system develops.
Launch Timing
Picking up on your point about a "cool down" time between launches, the railgun launchers will be magnetic which is therefore frictionless, but the torps will be launched explosively to give initial velocity which then gets amplified by the railgun's magnetic field. This will have an impact on launcher condition and will need to be monitored - regular maintenance will be needed to prevent launcher failure.
But the biggest impact to to be turnaround times will be the process of charging the capacitor used to dump the huge amount of power needed at the instant of launch.
I went into more detail on this in a separate post here.
Trajectory inclusions for MVP
I'm wondering if we should look at including more around trajectory elements in the MVP, as this is pretty fundamental to tactical management and are vital skills and experience to ground early, not just for the tactical team but for helm and command as well.
This would cover three post-launch phases:
To give us the level of realism needed to make it a useful training experience we'd probably need to look at managing the torp track on the TOE grid, rather than just probability calculations.
As this is a whole phase in itself in the service delivery forecast and compared to the size of previous phases, including this seems about right?