HAWC (Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon Concept)

Take command of air and naval assets from post-WW2 to the near future in tactical and operational scale, complete with historical and hypothetical scenarios and an integrated scenario editor.

Moderator: MOD_Command

Post Reply
Knightpawn
Posts: 349
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2024 12:28 pm

HAWC (Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon Concept)

Post by Knightpawn »

This antiship missile is said to have 1DP, supposedly because it relies on kinetic damage (?). How is damage modeled in this case. How can I know if I need to fire 2 or 4 (for example) weapons against a ship of a certain size?
Screenshot 2025-11-27 181122.png
Screenshot 2025-11-27 181122.png (609.59 KiB) Viewed 246 times
Dimitris
Posts: 15420
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 10:29 am
Contact:

Re: HAWC (Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon Concept)

Post by Dimitris »

The mechanics of applying damage against most typical targets are complex enough (penetration, internal/external detonation, component damage, secondary effects, exposed vs armored areas, underkeel detonation etc. etc.) that a simple "that ship has 100 DPs so I'll throw 10x 10-DP weapons at it" calculator logic won't serve you well anyway.

Just experiment and build up empirical knowledge (a.k.a. "gut feeling").
Nikel
Posts: 2317
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:51 am

Re: HAWC (Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon Concept)

Post by Nikel »

I have run a few test with the HAWK AShM vs 4 different ships located at different distances.

The DPs they cause is always the same, around 2174, only changing the decimal.

The consecuences of it are of course very different, a Visby corvette just sunk (140 DPs) while a Nimitz (7510 DPs) suffered a damage of 29%.

Beside the kinetic energy, the fuel expended is counted?

I mean more distance, less fuel when it impacts, less damage caused.
Knightpawn
Posts: 349
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2024 12:28 pm

Re: HAWC (Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon Concept)

Post by Knightpawn »

Nikel wrote: Fri Nov 28, 2025 9:15 am I have run a few test with the HAWK AShM vs 4 different ships located at different distances.

The DPs they cause is always the same, around 2174, only changing the decimal.

The consecuences of it are of course very different, a Visby corvette just sunk (140 DPs) while a Nimitz (7510 DPs) suffered a damage of 29%.

Beside the kinetic energy, the fuel expended is counted?

I mean more distance, less fuel when it impacts, less damage caused.
Interesting. Btw, how do you see the dp inflicted in general?
Last edited by Knightpawn on Fri Nov 28, 2025 3:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Nikel
Posts: 2317
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:51 am

Re: HAWC (Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon Concept)

Post by Nikel »

DPs are printed in the log files, among many other details.

Examples in the test:

Code: Select all

28-Nov-25 08:50:21 - [Red] K 31 Visby has suffered weapon damage: 2174.8 DPs

28-Nov-25 08:51:59 - [Red] RKR Kirov [Pr.1144 Orlan] has suffered weapon damage: 2174.9 DPs

28-Nov-25 08:52:56 - [Red] CVN 74 John C. Stennis [Nimitz Class] has suffered weapon damage: 2173.9 DPs
Dimitris
Posts: 15420
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 10:29 am
Contact:

Re: HAWC (Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon Concept)

Post by Dimitris »

Nikel wrote: Fri Nov 28, 2025 9:15 am I have run a few test with the HAWK AShM vs 4 different ships located at different distances.

The DPs they cause is always the same, around 2174, only changing the decimal.
That makes sense, because it's a weapon powered throughout its flight (strictly speaking this is not true for hypersonic cruise missiles when fired at the extreme edge of their range, but we let it slide), so its speed at the terminal stage is the same in all case, and hence the kinetic energy imparted is the same.
The consecuences of it are of course very different, a Visby corvette just sunk (140 DPs) while a Nimitz (7510 DPs) suffered a damage of 29%.
You should also observe differences in damage to components as well as secondary effects (fire, flooding).
Beside the kinetic energy, the fuel expended is counted?

I mean more distance, less fuel when it impacts, less damage caused.
Don't remember offhand, would need to check the source or the sim manual to confirm.
Nikel
Posts: 2317
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:51 am

Re: HAWC (Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon Concept)

Post by Nikel »

Thanks for the answers.

I removed the sensors to do the test.

The Visby just sunk.


Burke sinking and extensive destruction.

B.png
B.png (62.57 KiB) Viewed 104 times


Kirov with fire and flooding besides components damage.

K.png
K.png (96.53 KiB) Viewed 104 times


And the Nimitz, no fire/flooding, damage in components. The air facilities are the first damaged in warships.

N.png
N.png (89.29 KiB) Viewed 104 times


Regarding the not expended fuel, I think it is not counted. The warships were at different distances. The Visby near, the Nimitz far.

Searched the manual, nothing found.
Post Reply

Return to “Command: Modern Operations series”