ASW aircraft - what is needed?
Wire guidance via a buoy system ...
How would that work?
How would that work?
YS
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: ecosse
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sod all to do with the type of ac - you have to use lateral thinking to catch a submarine, ie (options - outside the box - chess moves etc) - it's the sensor that's important - ac alert submerged targets that they are under threat because they are forced to be in the same location at weapon release height to achieve attack criteria (MAD) or to confirm position and attack solution accuracy - even so, they can evade quite successfully
The Seawolf is nearly as quiet as your Fridge/Freezer in the same room from the same distance
Bi-statics is the only answer - that way, you can cover acres of ocean - he is in a trapped environment miles from home, and when he hears that first explosive sonar thud, he knows he's been found - he can run but can't hide - you have all the time in the world to launch an attack from a remote number of platforms which gives you total element of surprise!
Bang! - WTF was that ! - too late
The Seawolf is nearly as quiet as your Fridge/Freezer in the same room from the same distance
Bi-statics is the only answer - that way, you can cover acres of ocean - he is in a trapped environment miles from home, and when he hears that first explosive sonar thud, he knows he's been found - he can run but can't hide - you have all the time in the world to launch an attack from a remote number of platforms which gives you total element of surprise!
Bang! - WTF was that ! - too late
you can cover acres of ocean
ac alert submerged targets that they are under threat because they are forced to be in the same location at weapon release height to achieve attack criteria
Another factor in favour of both this and the long range command guidance torpedo is the remove the launch platform from the engagement zone of mast mounted SAM or future encapsulated systems.
YS
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: St Annes
Age: 68
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it's the sensor that's important - ac alert submerged targets that they are under threat because they are forced to be in the same location at weapon release height to achieve attack criteria (MAD) or to confirm position and attack solution accuracy - even so, they can evade quite successfully
Most of the opinions so far are based on what a current MPA does, and current MPA processing power is pants compared to the average PC...so first off the MPA should have a fully integrated sensor/data suite that ensures all sensor data is processed and presented - ket everyone see what they need to see, instead of having to ask for it.
Using the ESM example, you will often need an operator there to decide which of the 10 possibilities for an ESM ident makes sense - but that op should be assisted by a well thought out and programmed expert system, not a poxy toy processor that has been bastardised from elsewhere and elsewhen..... (I'm being deliberately vague here).
You wouldn't buy a car with a tape drive....
As for an earlier post describing ESM as 'desirable' (TOFO?) No - I gotta disagree, ESM and ECM should be standard fit - self defence old chap, Nimrod surevived by flying where other people don't - but when they are tasked into busier airspace it's a recipe for disaster to simply hope they'll avoid the opposition. Unfortunately the ESM fit has always been pretty crap, due to a variety of reasons, it could easily have been a huge amount better with a bit more help. Having chatted to some of the MRA4 chaps a few years back I can readily understand why the RAF gets crap kit mind, for my own part I suggested they ought to try working controls with gloves on and it was treated like a divine revelation...FFS!
Microwave - no doubt those who flew before me will have their own favourite recipes, but I regretted the passing of honkers...we cooked from scratch a great deal more at the start of my time, by midpoint in my "career" (as in 'he careered downhill') it was all TV dinners - and a guest siggie still managed to set fire to one, shutting the galley down a third of the way into the flight....how anyone could even consider the abortion that is a microwaved meal is beyond me! <g> By the end of my 'career' I think I'd have been happy to land regularly for a calorific top up - Tom Bennington used to be good for that!
Dave
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Tullahoma TN
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
... ac alert submerged targets that they are under threat because they are forced to be in the same location at weapon release height to achieve attack criteria (MAD) or to confirm position and attack solution accuracy - even so, they can evade quite successfully
Meaning the attacking aircraft can evade quite successfully, or what?
How is a submerged submarine supposed to detect an aircraft flying at significant altitude above sea level? Are assuming that your U-boat has a sensor poking up out of the water?
Meaning the attacking aircraft can evade quite successfully, or what?
How is a submerged submarine supposed to detect an aircraft flying at significant altitude above sea level? Are assuming that your U-boat has a sensor poking up out of the water?
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Tullahoma TN
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Weapon system comprises torpedo and bouyant link. Separation occurs on water entry and torpedo commences pre-selected search course or pattern. Connection to buoy is via wire (similar to submarine launched torpedoes) and commands to torpedo relayed via secure link to buoy. The idea was originally floated as a method of utilising larger, more capable, submarine launched weapons from aircraft. Lots of potential problems that would have to be weighed against presumed tactical advantages.
Lots of potential problems, you're right. If the ASW aircraft is near maximum ASW torpedo range from the submerged target, how would the peepul in the airplane decide it's time to launch an ASW torpedo unless there were something already down in the water --e.g., a sonobuoy -- reporting a detection and (at least) approximate track on the submarine?
If there's one or more sonobuoys already reporting on the target, why not just fly closer to launch the torpedo?
Next problem: how would dropping a single passive and/or active sonar buoy of some sort along with the torpedo improve the performance of a sophisticated active acoustic homing torpedo? Please enlighten us.
Lots of potential problems, you're right. If the ASW aircraft is near maximum ASW torpedo range from the submerged target, how would the peepul in the airplane decide it's time to launch an ASW torpedo unless there were something already down in the water --e.g., a sonobuoy -- reporting a detection and (at least) approximate track on the submarine?
If there's one or more sonobuoys already reporting on the target, why not just fly closer to launch the torpedo?
Next problem: how would dropping a single passive and/or active sonar buoy of some sort along with the torpedo improve the performance of a sophisticated active acoustic homing torpedo? Please enlighten us.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Tullahoma TN
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aircraft do not fly at a "significant" height when releasing torpedoes...
Why not, assuming they've got a state of the art air-launched torpedo?
... and the sub will hear the overflight on acoustics.
How? Assuming the sub doesn't have a microphone poking above sea level? Do you have any understanding of the acoustic impedance of the air/water interface?
Why not, assuming they've got a state of the art air-launched torpedo?
... and the sub will hear the overflight on acoustics.
How? Assuming the sub doesn't have a microphone poking above sea level? Do you have any understanding of the acoustic impedance of the air/water interface?
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Tullahoma TN
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You're on a wind-up right? Any sub that isn't bashing along the bottom as fast as he can will hear an aircraft overflying his position - even worse a turbo-prop.
"... The ability of a wave to be transferred from one medium to another is dictated by the impedances of the media. When a wave is transferred from a low-impedance medium (eg, air) to one of high impedance (eg, water), a considerable amount of its energy is reflected and fails to enter the liquid. Water has 3470 times the acoustic impedance of air, meaning that only 0.1% of the sound energy present in an acoustic signal traveling through air actually enters a water-filled medium. ..."
http://www.emedicine.com/ent/topic360.htm
"... The ability of a wave to be transferred from one medium to another is dictated by the impedances of the media. When a wave is transferred from a low-impedance medium (eg, air) to one of high impedance (eg, water), a considerable amount of its energy is reflected and fails to enter the liquid. Water has 3470 times the acoustic impedance of air, meaning that only 0.1% of the sound energy present in an acoustic signal traveling through air actually enters a water-filled medium. ..."
http://www.emedicine.com/ent/topic360.htm
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: St Annes
Age: 68
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Modern Elmo -
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Edited this bit in, having read your follow up as I posted -
With all due respect to your trawling of the internet, you are currently arguing about acoustics with people who do/did it for a living. Part of 'doing it for a living' involves becoming very familiar with sound propogation, and recording and analysing the signals gained from sonobuoys. Having seen a recording, from a submarine, of an aircraft that overflew it, and a number of recordings from sonobuys of aircraft overflights (the sonobuoy microphone being several hundred feet below the surface) I can assure you that despite your internet 'find' aircraft engine noise is far from difficult to detect on subsurface sensors.
By the way, I no longer chase subs - now I'm a physicist - and whether waves reflect or refract depends on angle of incidence.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Air launched torpedoes aren't dropped from 10,000 ft old chap - I have no desire to accidentally drop myself in the poo discussing weapon characteristics, but the Mk46 and Stingray torpedoes are dropped from a lot closer to the surface.
Submarines do not, generally, power around at high speed - they amble very gently along, for the most part, when on patrol so that they can make full use of their passive acoustics suites. I assure you that those acoustic suites are more than capable of detecting an overflight. I can only presume from your comments (this isn't intended as an insult) that you've never actually been involved in airborne ASW, rather than this being some sort of wind up?
Regarding your other ideas - to drop an airborne torpedo you actually have to have a very good idea of where the sub is, how deep it is, and its course and speed. This info will come from acoustics, generally passive sonobuoys. (Active buoys tell him to **** off in fine pitch, which will doubtless screw up your attack solution), much better if the first thing he hears is your overflight followed by a splash, with a homing torpedo sonar to round the morning off.
It is far from uncommon, shall we say, to deliberately overfly the sub at low level to ensure optimum weapon placement. It is also quite common to release a sonobuoy with the weapon drop, this is not for the weapon's benefit - the torp will handle its own tracking and closure with the target.
Dave
Aircraft do not fly at a "significant" height when releasing torpedoes...
Why not, assuming they've got a state of the art air-launched torpedo?
... and the sub will hear the overflight on acoustics.
How? Assuming the sub doesn't have a microphone poking above sea level? Do you have any understanding of the acoustic impedance of the air/water interface?
Why not, assuming they've got a state of the art air-launched torpedo?
... and the sub will hear the overflight on acoustics.
How? Assuming the sub doesn't have a microphone poking above sea level? Do you have any understanding of the acoustic impedance of the air/water interface?
Edited this bit in, having read your follow up as I posted -
With all due respect to your trawling of the internet, you are currently arguing about acoustics with people who do/did it for a living. Part of 'doing it for a living' involves becoming very familiar with sound propogation, and recording and analysing the signals gained from sonobuoys. Having seen a recording, from a submarine, of an aircraft that overflew it, and a number of recordings from sonobuys of aircraft overflights (the sonobuoy microphone being several hundred feet below the surface) I can assure you that despite your internet 'find' aircraft engine noise is far from difficult to detect on subsurface sensors.
By the way, I no longer chase subs - now I'm a physicist - and whether waves reflect or refract depends on angle of incidence.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Air launched torpedoes aren't dropped from 10,000 ft old chap - I have no desire to accidentally drop myself in the poo discussing weapon characteristics, but the Mk46 and Stingray torpedoes are dropped from a lot closer to the surface.
Submarines do not, generally, power around at high speed - they amble very gently along, for the most part, when on patrol so that they can make full use of their passive acoustics suites. I assure you that those acoustic suites are more than capable of detecting an overflight. I can only presume from your comments (this isn't intended as an insult) that you've never actually been involved in airborne ASW, rather than this being some sort of wind up?
Regarding your other ideas - to drop an airborne torpedo you actually have to have a very good idea of where the sub is, how deep it is, and its course and speed. This info will come from acoustics, generally passive sonobuoys. (Active buoys tell him to **** off in fine pitch, which will doubtless screw up your attack solution), much better if the first thing he hears is your overflight followed by a splash, with a homing torpedo sonar to round the morning off.
It is far from uncommon, shall we say, to deliberately overfly the sub at low level to ensure optimum weapon placement. It is also quite common to release a sonobuoy with the weapon drop, this is not for the weapon's benefit - the torp will handle its own tracking and closure with the target.
Dave
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Tullahoma TN
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I assure you that those acoustic suites are more than capable of detecting an overflight.
At what range/altitude from the underwater transducer?
If the attacking aircraft is close and launches an antisubmarine weapon promptly, how much time does your U-boat have to react?
If the aircraft sounds, oh, sort of like a 737 airliner airliner at cruising altitude, how do your submariners know that it's not a civilian airliner passing by overhead? Boeing sells beaucoup 737's, you know.
... I can only presume from your comments (this isn't intended as an insult) that you've never actually been involved in airborne ASW, rather than this being some sort of wind up? ...
Correct, I never was a sailor. Too bad, sure would like to wear one of those Donald Duck hats.
At what range/altitude from the underwater transducer?
If the attacking aircraft is close and launches an antisubmarine weapon promptly, how much time does your U-boat have to react?
If the aircraft sounds, oh, sort of like a 737 airliner airliner at cruising altitude, how do your submariners know that it's not a civilian airliner passing by overhead? Boeing sells beaucoup 737's, you know.
... I can only presume from your comments (this isn't intended as an insult) that you've never actually been involved in airborne ASW, rather than this being some sort of wind up? ...
Correct, I never was a sailor. Too bad, sure would like to wear one of those Donald Duck hats.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: St Annes
Age: 68
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Elmo - acoustic detections of aircraft at several thousand feet can be made from a submerged submarine or sonobuoy. This isn't theory.
By the way, only the Germans have U boats.
Evasion - you are unlikely to get given a time on this, as there's too much classified info involved, and too many variables. For example, a torpedo, once dropped, has to enter the water, start up, and commence a search pattern...if it's a circular search and your torp goes on one side of the sub rather than the other the sub will gain distance on the torp while it completes its circuit. A torp has an acquisition range, the sub speed will become a factor therefore - if you drop a torp behind a very fast sub your torp may never catch it. In real life the tactical navigator determines the optimum position to deploy the weapon, if the sub is where the crew believe it is then a correctly deployed weapon will prove difficult to evade.
If the MPA ontops the sub, then provided the crew haven't just screwed up then the clock is running.
Regarding your comment about B737s, you might like to learn a little about acoustic sensors before getting funny about them - passive acoustics systems don't only detect other vessels (and aircraft) they provide frequency information that allows the operator to identify the noise source. Acoustics will tell you what class of ship you have detected, it will allow you to identify natural sources (whales, clicking shrimp, etc) and it can also, provided the characteristics of the aircraft are known, ident the aircraft that just overflew from the frequency signature of the engine noise. There's an awful lot of information in the sound. Your insistence on the impossiblity of what we actually do - and have done for decades - is touching in its naivety.
DD sailor hat - in the UK it's the airforce (RAF) who fly MPA aircraft actually, no cute hats in sight.
For unclassified acoustic training I'd recommend the computer game 'Dangerous Waters' to you, it'll give you a very good intro to airborne ASW acoustics.
By the way, only the Germans have U boats.
Evasion - you are unlikely to get given a time on this, as there's too much classified info involved, and too many variables. For example, a torpedo, once dropped, has to enter the water, start up, and commence a search pattern...if it's a circular search and your torp goes on one side of the sub rather than the other the sub will gain distance on the torp while it completes its circuit. A torp has an acquisition range, the sub speed will become a factor therefore - if you drop a torp behind a very fast sub your torp may never catch it. In real life the tactical navigator determines the optimum position to deploy the weapon, if the sub is where the crew believe it is then a correctly deployed weapon will prove difficult to evade.
If the MPA ontops the sub, then provided the crew haven't just screwed up then the clock is running.
Regarding your comment about B737s, you might like to learn a little about acoustic sensors before getting funny about them - passive acoustics systems don't only detect other vessels (and aircraft) they provide frequency information that allows the operator to identify the noise source. Acoustics will tell you what class of ship you have detected, it will allow you to identify natural sources (whales, clicking shrimp, etc) and it can also, provided the characteristics of the aircraft are known, ident the aircraft that just overflew from the frequency signature of the engine noise. There's an awful lot of information in the sound. Your insistence on the impossiblity of what we actually do - and have done for decades - is touching in its naivety.
DD sailor hat - in the UK it's the airforce (RAF) who fly MPA aircraft actually, no cute hats in sight.
For unclassified acoustic training I'd recommend the computer game 'Dangerous Waters' to you, it'll give you a very good intro to airborne ASW acoustics.
Last edited by davejb; 22nd Jun 2008 at 00:24.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Tullahoma TN
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding your comment about B737s, you might like to learn a little about acoustic sensors before getting funny about them - passive acoustics systems don't only detect other vessels (and aircraft) they provide frequency information that allows the operator to identify the noise source. Acoustics will tell you what class of ship you have detected, it will allow you to identify natural sources (whales, clicking shrimp, etc) ...
So how does your Unterseeboot distinguish P-8's at cruising altitude from civilian airliners doing their normal stuff?
Dave, you're telling us another reason why the USN chose the 737 airframe.
So how does your Unterseeboot distinguish P-8's at cruising altitude from civilian airliners doing their normal stuff?
Dave, you're telling us another reason why the USN chose the 737 airframe.
Nope, I don't know that info. However, I do know that it would be a mistake to trade off the speed and altitude advantages of a turbofan muliti-mission aircraft ( up to date high bypass fans, not Coronation-of -Elizabeth-II vintage Comet airliner engines) merely to support some legacy weapons which need updating anyway.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: St Annes
Age: 68
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep,
I already checked the location - that's why I figured it wasn't a deliberate wind up.
Elmo - for one thing the passenger B737's* will be flying at 35000 ft or more, whilst the P8 etc will be flying (say) 30,000 ft lower...an ASW aircraft that does not wish to risk being detected acoustically will fly most of the time at (say) 10,000 ft to maximise it's ability to pick up the signals from widely dispersed buoy patterns, which will be high enough to avoid acoustic detection (although it wouldn't surprise me to find somebody once managed it). You stand to get detected either when deliberately overflying the sub (for example when trying to make your fix cast iron by acquiring a MAD mark) or when you zoom past on your attack run....both the MAD run and the weapon release run will be a much lower level, and you will be detected by the sub unless he's going too fast for effective passive sensor reception.
* I doubt you'll get 737's crossing the Atlantic, by the way, so I'd have thought that P8's would fail to benefit from any conceivable camouflage effect...they'll be the only version of the 737 out over the oggin.
Please, as a previous poster suggested, credit those of us who have done this for decades with some measure of knowledge of what we're talking about - I chased my first submarine in 1979, honestly, I really do have some idea of what actually happens, regardless of what you've read about the air water interface. For your further edification at the interface some of the sound energy is reflected off, whilst the remainder passes into the water. The lower the aircaft flies the more energy will pass into the water. All you then require is a microphone (submarine sonar array, or sonobuoy) that is sensitive enough to detect the noise. Once detected you analyse the signal to extract a variety of information from the frequencies that the signal is made up from - for a simple example of this consider a ship passing by...the frequency information you pick up will allow you to determine the number of cylinders in the ship's engine, as you hear them 'fire', and you'll know how many blades are fitted to the shaft. If you recognise the signature as belonging to a specific class then the blade count can be simply converted to tell you how fast the ship is going. From knowledge of the ship's speed and the relative bearing change you can begin to solve the problem of it's range from yourself and its course.
Dave
I already checked the location - that's why I figured it wasn't a deliberate wind up.
Elmo - for one thing the passenger B737's* will be flying at 35000 ft or more, whilst the P8 etc will be flying (say) 30,000 ft lower...an ASW aircraft that does not wish to risk being detected acoustically will fly most of the time at (say) 10,000 ft to maximise it's ability to pick up the signals from widely dispersed buoy patterns, which will be high enough to avoid acoustic detection (although it wouldn't surprise me to find somebody once managed it). You stand to get detected either when deliberately overflying the sub (for example when trying to make your fix cast iron by acquiring a MAD mark) or when you zoom past on your attack run....both the MAD run and the weapon release run will be a much lower level, and you will be detected by the sub unless he's going too fast for effective passive sensor reception.
* I doubt you'll get 737's crossing the Atlantic, by the way, so I'd have thought that P8's would fail to benefit from any conceivable camouflage effect...they'll be the only version of the 737 out over the oggin.
Please, as a previous poster suggested, credit those of us who have done this for decades with some measure of knowledge of what we're talking about - I chased my first submarine in 1979, honestly, I really do have some idea of what actually happens, regardless of what you've read about the air water interface. For your further edification at the interface some of the sound energy is reflected off, whilst the remainder passes into the water. The lower the aircaft flies the more energy will pass into the water. All you then require is a microphone (submarine sonar array, or sonobuoy) that is sensitive enough to detect the noise. Once detected you analyse the signal to extract a variety of information from the frequencies that the signal is made up from - for a simple example of this consider a ship passing by...the frequency information you pick up will allow you to determine the number of cylinders in the ship's engine, as you hear them 'fire', and you'll know how many blades are fitted to the shaft. If you recognise the signature as belonging to a specific class then the blade count can be simply converted to tell you how fast the ship is going. From knowledge of the ship's speed and the relative bearing change you can begin to solve the problem of it's range from yourself and its course.
Dave
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: St Annes
Age: 68
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah I know,
I'm an optimist - I figured 'one more go' might convince the chap....
As for acoustic footprints...I figured this was good enough considering where the discussion was being held, and yes - overflight of the sub isn't something you'd want to do accidentally.
No doubt he'll be back shortly, allowing for the timezone....think I'll go do something useful....
I'm an optimist - I figured 'one more go' might convince the chap....
As for acoustic footprints...I figured this was good enough considering where the discussion was being held, and yes - overflight of the sub isn't something you'd want to do accidentally.
No doubt he'll be back shortly, allowing for the timezone....think I'll go do something useful....
Davejb
I thought you were very understanding, informative and whole lot more tollerant of some half baked questions, than i would have been. Must have been on 236 at some time?
I like the idea of Global Hawk myself but i guess the galley isnt too big and not a lot of room for the Nortons down the back. 24 Hours without a fag would be pushing my PLE a bit too far !!
I thought you were very understanding, informative and whole lot more tollerant of some half baked questions, than i would have been. Must have been on 236 at some time?
I like the idea of Global Hawk myself but i guess the galley isnt too big and not a lot of room for the Nortons down the back. 24 Hours without a fag would be pushing my PLE a bit too far !!
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
...an ASW aircraft that does not wish to risk being detected acoustically will fly most of the time at (say) 10,000 ft to maximise it's ability to pick up the signals from widely dispersed buoy patterns, which will be high enough to avoid acoustic detection (although it wouldn't surprise me to find somebody once managed it).
* I doubt you'll get 737's crossing the Atlantic, by the way, so I'd have thought that P8's would fail to benefit from any conceivable camouflage effect...they'll be the only version of the 737 out over the oggin.
The lower the aircaft flies the more energy will pass into the water. All you then require is a microphone (submarine sonar array
, or sonobuoy) that is sensitive enough to detect the noise.
There is no resaon why a submarine cannot detect sonobuoy transmissions to the MPA albeit over a very limited range. There was a case of a Canadian O-boat that surfaced, located each sonobouy and switched them off to the puzzlement of the MPA.
how many blades are fitted to the shaft. If you recognise the signature as belonging to a specific class then the blade count can be simply converted to tell you how fast the ship is going.
A sensor operator can reas acoustics like a book.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: St Annes
Age: 68
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi PN,
I think that was more detail than our friend can manage <g> I'm being somewhat vague for two reasons:
1) Acoustics and MPA tactics in general isn't something I tend to blab about in any detail, just in case they take my pension off me and throw me in the slammer.
2) I'm not very good at acoustics, rank amateur although you can't help picking the odd bit up and I used to do okay on 1C. (I learned more about wet stuff during a spell in Int. It's amazing what you learn on a ground tour that you look back on and wonder why you didn't learn about it on the Sqn...)
3) I'm an ex-dry man, so you'd think I could count better, wouldn't you?
1771 - only as a stude a couple of times...120, 206 and (for one sortie) 38 (I think it was)...a taceval sortie in the SWAPPS against Battleaxe, which was then a brand new ship on workup...I had Dougie Wheatland for my Ld Dry that night, but it wasn't all bad
I think that was more detail than our friend can manage <g> I'm being somewhat vague for two reasons:
1) Acoustics and MPA tactics in general isn't something I tend to blab about in any detail, just in case they take my pension off me and throw me in the slammer.
2) I'm not very good at acoustics, rank amateur although you can't help picking the odd bit up and I used to do okay on 1C. (I learned more about wet stuff during a spell in Int. It's amazing what you learn on a ground tour that you look back on and wonder why you didn't learn about it on the Sqn...)
3) I'm an ex-dry man, so you'd think I could count better, wouldn't you?
1771 - only as a stude a couple of times...120, 206 and (for one sortie) 38 (I think it was)...a taceval sortie in the SWAPPS against Battleaxe, which was then a brand new ship on workup...I had Dougie Wheatland for my Ld Dry that night, but it wasn't all bad