v1.09 SS-N-19 does not have Salvo simultaneous weapon arrival

[BobTank63]

Hello,

I'm experiencing a bug where the Shipwreck antiship missile does not use the new simultaneous salvo feature introduced in v1.09. I've attached a test scenario with a Kirov and an Oscar attacking a target ship, along with a Kresta 1, Slava, and Sovremenny as control cases.

To reproduce, simply order the Kirov or Oscar to fire all its missiles at the target in one salvo using the Manual Attack menu.

Results from my tests:

1. Oscar: fires one missile at a time, missiles form a single file line extending for 15+ nm.

2. Kirov: same as Oscar.

3. Kresta 1: 2 groups of 2 missiles each.

4. Slava: 2 groups of 8 missiles.

5. Sovremenny: 1 group of 8 missiles.

Expected behavior: Oscar and Kirov should launch missiles in 1-2 groups of many missiles as outlined in the v1.09 patch notes and as shown by the Kresta/Slava/ Sovremenny.

Missile Salvo test.zip

(26.7 KiB) Downloaded 11 times

[Raptorx7_slith]

Thanks, logged as 0017287

[Dimitris]

Had a look at this now.

The root cause of the problem is that the SS-N-19 is described in the DB as not having a waypoint capability (which is consistent with our research so far), and our internal check that determines whether a missile can perform simultaneous TOT includes the waypoint capability as a must-have (ie. if the missile does not have a waypoint capability, it absolutely cannot do TOT).

As a comparison, if you place e.g. a late-service Iowa within firing range of the target, and launch a 16-Harpoon salvo at it, the missiles quickly bunch up nice and tight.

So, several ways to look at this:

* Our research is incomplete, and the missile has a waypoint capability (ie. DB error).

* OR our "must have waypoint capability" criterion is flawed, and there exist missiles which are able to achieve simultaneous TOT without having the autopilot smarts sufficient for a waypoint capability.

* OR both our model and data are correct, and the SS-N-19 (as well as its previous entire family, e.g. SS-N-3/12) is designed to break through defences through numbers, speed and DECM, rather than through elaborate simultaneous arrival.

Open to suggestions.

[BobTank63]

I was wondering if the internal check required waypoint capability. That would explain what I've seen. It appears the Slava/Kresta missiles only bunched up because they have multiple missile launchers on the deck instead of the one VLS battery like Oscar/Kirov.

In this case, the "must have waypoint capability" criterion is flawed. The SS-N-19, as well as the SS-N-12, had the capability to send data to each other in flight. The lead missiles would slow down, allowing the following missiles to catch up before accelerating to max speed. This allows all the missiles in a salvo to arrive at the same time.

This capability also allowed one missile to act as the "spotter" for the others when approaching the target. One missile would pop up while the others stayed close to the water, use its radar to detect a target, then send that data to all the others in the salvo. The CMO DB actually describes this capability in the text description of the SS-N-19.

Now I don't think this spotter capability needs to be modeled (in terminal the spotter pops back down and all the missiles turn on their radars), but the SS-N-19, as well as the SS-N-12, were capable of TOT.

[Dimitris]

I see your point, but simply removing the "must have waypoint smarts" criterion (without any other change) would then open the door to any old ASHM (from Styx all the way to even Fritz-X!) having a TOT capability. "Fix 1, break 10" territory.

Any alternate suggestion? Any other existing DB property or flag that can be used as a reliable proxy for this capability?

[BobTank63]

Apologies for the late reply.

After reviewing the DB, I don't think there is another existing flag that could be used here. Maybe a separate "can do ToT" flag is required for this edge case?