SUBSIM Radio Room Forums



SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997

Go Back   SUBSIM Radio Room Forums > Silent Hunter 3 - 4 - 5 > SHIII Mods Workshop
Forget password? Reset here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-16-07, 01:41 PM   #1156
Snakeeyes
Captain
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: trailing 1400 yards behind an Oscar-II with my outer doors open
Posts: 488
Downloads: 54
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by danlisa
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snakeeyes
Hey. I was reading "Operation Drumbeat" AGAIN last night and I came across some information stating that the T-III (Ge7 I believe?) had a bigger warhead than the old T-I steamers. Is this modeled in GWX?
I'll have to check to be sure but I think it might be. Not too long ago I was increasing the warhead damage on all the torps for someone who was struggling and I did notice a difference in the values but I didn't think anything more about it.

However, if I'm wrong (cos I can't check at the mo) I need to cover my butt.:rotfl:

If it's not modelled in GWX at the moment it can only be because the damage models of the ships are so finely tuned and balanced that it is required to be this way.

I'll get a final answer to you later.

Sufficiently vague but some hope there I think.:hmm::rotfl:
Ooooooo... we need to change that, unless the author was wrong but he's an unbelievable expert in U-boat history.

I think that the T-I had 2800 lbs of whatever explosive they used... torpex maybe? The T-III had about 5000 lbs. This is QUITE a difference and could really mean certain vessels like C2s go down with one punch if hit in the right spot.
__________________
-- "There's little room in Tupolev's heart for anyone but Tupolev."
Snakeeyes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-07, 02:00 PM   #1157
danlisa
Navy Seal
 
danlisa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cornwall, UK
Posts: 5,499
Downloads: 45
Uploads: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snakeeyes
Ooooooo... we need to change that, unless the author was wrong but he's an unbelievable expert in U-boat history.

I think that the T-I had 2800 lbs of whatever explosive they used... torpex maybe? The T-III had about 5000 lbs. This is QUITE a difference and could really mean certain vessels like C2s go down with one punch if hit in the right spot.
It's up to the Dev team mate, there might be a perfectly good reason that it can't be implemented. However, rest assured they will see this.
__________________
danlisa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-07, 04:47 PM   #1158
Snakeeyes
Captain
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: trailing 1400 yards behind an Oscar-II with my outer doors open
Posts: 488
Downloads: 54
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by danlisa
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snakeeyes
Ooooooo... we need to change that, unless the author was wrong but he's an unbelievable expert in U-boat history.

I think that the T-I had 2800 lbs of whatever explosive they used... torpex maybe? The T-III had about 5000 lbs. This is QUITE a difference and could really mean certain vessels like C2s go down with one punch if hit in the right spot.
It's up to the Dev team mate, there might be a perfectly good reason that it can't be implemented. However, rest assured they will see this.
Oh I know man. It's cool. I know they want as realistic systems as possible. Just asking about it. :p These guys are the best!

Thanks.
__________________
-- "There's little room in Tupolev's heart for anyone but Tupolev."
Snakeeyes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-07, 01:53 AM   #1159
Henri II
Sparky
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 156
Downloads: 47
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snakeeyes
Quote:
Originally Posted by danlisa
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snakeeyes
Hey. I was reading "Operation Drumbeat" AGAIN last night and I came across some information stating that the T-III (Ge7 I believe?) had a bigger warhead than the old T-I steamers. Is this modeled in GWX?
I'll have to check to be sure but I think it might be. Not too long ago I was increasing the warhead damage on all the torps for someone who was struggling and I did notice a difference in the values but I didn't think anything more about it.

However, if I'm wrong (cos I can't check at the mo) I need to cover my butt.:rotfl:

If it's not modelled in GWX at the moment it can only be because the damage models of the ships are so finely tuned and balanced that it is required to be this way.

I'll get a final answer to you later.

Sufficiently vague but some hope there I think.:hmm::rotfl:
Ooooooo... we need to change that, unless the author was wrong but he's an unbelievable expert in U-boat history.

I think that the T-I had 2800 lbs of whatever explosive they used... torpex maybe? The T-III had about 5000 lbs. This is QUITE a difference and could really mean certain vessels like C2s go down with one punch if hit in the right spot.

I'm not sure about those numbers, 5000 lbs. warhead? That's more than the whole torpedo weighted.

These sites (in german, sorry)
http://www.ww2technik.de/dsub_minentorp.htm, http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/.../UTorpedos.htm
give numbers of 280 kg for most warheads. IIRC the explosive was a mix of TNT and something else that was constantly improved during the war, so the later models likely had greater power, but the difference was probably not that great.
Henri II is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-07, 05:12 AM   #1160
Snakeeyes
Captain
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: trailing 1400 yards behind an Oscar-II with my outer doors open
Posts: 488
Downloads: 54
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Henri II
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snakeeyes
Quote:
Originally Posted by danlisa
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snakeeyes
Hey. I was reading "Operation Drumbeat" AGAIN last night and I came across some information stating that the T-III (Ge7 I believe?) had a bigger warhead than the old T-I steamers. Is this modeled in GWX?
I'll have to check to be sure but I think it might be. Not too long ago I was increasing the warhead damage on all the torps for someone who was struggling and I did notice a difference in the values but I didn't think anything more about it.

However, if I'm wrong (cos I can't check at the mo) I need to cover my butt.:rotfl:

If it's not modelled in GWX at the moment it can only be because the damage models of the ships are so finely tuned and balanced that it is required to be this way.

I'll get a final answer to you later.

Sufficiently vague but some hope there I think.:hmm::rotfl:
Ooooooo... we need to change that, unless the author was wrong but he's an unbelievable expert in U-boat history.

I think that the T-I had 2800 lbs of whatever explosive they used... torpex maybe? The T-III had about 5000 lbs. This is QUITE a difference and could really mean certain vessels like C2s go down with one punch if hit in the right spot.
I'm not sure about those numbers, 5000 lbs. warhead? That's more than the whole torpedo weighted.

These sites (in german, sorry)
http://www.ww2technik.de/dsub_minentorp.htm, http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/.../UTorpedos.htm
give numbers of 280 kg for most warheads. IIRC the explosive was a mix of TNT and something else that was constantly improved during the war, so the later models likely had greater power, but the difference was probably not that great.
Yup, looks like I added an extra zero to the warhead size... GEESE! Idiot. Imagine a 5000 lb. warhead! Whoah!

Still, I think that the T-I was 280 warhead and the T-III was 500.
__________________
-- "There's little room in Tupolev's heart for anyone but Tupolev."
Snakeeyes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-07, 07:00 PM   #1161
Paajtor
The Old Man
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The Dutch mountains
Posts: 1,547
Downloads: 64
Uploads: 1
Default



I wonder if this is a bug, and fixed in GWX1.03?
I'm near the end of my current patrol (GWX, U-586 typeVIIC, Dec. '42), and want to RTB, so that I can finally apply the latest GWX-update.

After a successfull convoy-attack - and escaping 4 DD's - I surfaced to send a quick contact-report, and after that I submerged immeadiatly, to 20m at full-speed ahead, to increase distance between me and those radars.
After a little while, a radio-message came in (the "keep up the good work"-one)....weird...we were still travelling submerged!
__________________



Paajtor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-07, 07:58 PM   #1162
Kpt. Lehmann
GWX Project Director
 
Kpt. Lehmann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: The Republic of Texas
Posts: 6,875
Downloads: 115
Uploads: 0


Default

Hi Paajtor,

That is a stock bug. We will look into it for the next update. (Version 1.04)
__________________

www.thegreywolves.com
All you need is good men. - Heinrich Lehmann-Willenbrock
Kpt. Lehmann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-07, 08:10 PM   #1163
Dowly
Lucky Jack
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Finland
Posts: 25,005
Downloads: 32
Uploads: 0


Default

Kpt. you sure that's a bug? I remember there was a mention of radio messages being received when the boat was at PD in Iron Coffins.

Uboat.net says this about it:

Quote:
During the WW2 underwater radio communication was very useful. Submarines were able to receive messages from their commands without surfacing, i.e. the submarines could been submerged. The submarines could not be detected by radar, and the Allies' direction finders could not detect submarines' positions because the submarines were not using their radio transmitters, just receivers. But because of the "one way" communication, it was specific organized traffic, by previously determined scheme.
Messages were marked by serial numbers, each serial number for the each submarine. The messages were transmitted without confirmation of reception, mostly by night, sometimes from the few transmitters simultaneously. Submarine knew time of transmitting, when the time was coming, the submarine was on right depth, and radio operators were monitoring the radio transmitter with best power of radio signal. Efficiency of reception was 90%. It means that 90% of all messages were received successfully. It was very good, indeed.
Quote:
Depth of submerged submarine (i.e. submarine's antenna) for sufficient underwater radio communication depended about distance between land radio station and the submarine, power of radio signal, frequency used in the communication and salinity of the sea water.
http://uboat.net/articles/index.html?article=35

Also, on that same site, you see the table 1 that shows in what depth the uboat had to be for the message to be received. The table is for the 'Goliath' transmitter that became operational in 1943. Before that, the germans were using the 'Nauen' transmitter.
Dowly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-07, 09:49 AM   #1164
mikaelanderlund
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Sweden
Posts: 529
Downloads: 267
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kpt. Lehmann
Hi Paajtor,

That is a stock bug. We will look into it for the next update. (Version 1.04)
Hi Kpt.

Any news for the next update? I'm planing to start a new, from the very beginning, 39 campaigne and it would be nice to start with 1.04 . Thanks for the great GWX .
mikaelanderlund is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-07, 09:59 AM   #1165
danlisa
Navy Seal
 
danlisa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cornwall, UK
Posts: 5,499
Downloads: 45
Uploads: 1
Default

I would go on patrol as you can always start a new career once 1.04 is available.

The development of 1.04 wont be rushed & once complete will require a period beta testing.

Carry on as normal, really I don't where this idea of a 1.04 patch came from.
:rotfl:

Sink 'em all Herr Kaleun.
__________________
danlisa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-07, 10:24 AM   #1166
Kpt. Lehmann
GWX Project Director
 
Kpt. Lehmann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: The Republic of Texas
Posts: 6,875
Downloads: 115
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dowly
Kpt. you sure that's a bug? I remember there was a mention of radio messages being received when the boat was at PD in Iron Coffins.

Uboat.net says this about it:

Quote:
During the WW2 underwater radio communication was very useful. Submarines were able to receive messages from their commands without surfacing, i.e. the submarines could been submerged. The submarines could not be detected by radar, and the Allies' direction finders could not detect submarines' positions because the submarines were not using their radio transmitters, just receivers. But because of the "one way" communication, it was specific organized traffic, by previously determined scheme.
Messages were marked by serial numbers, each serial number for the each submarine. The messages were transmitted without confirmation of reception, mostly by night, sometimes from the few transmitters simultaneously. Submarine knew time of transmitting, when the time was coming, the submarine was on right depth, and radio operators were monitoring the radio transmitter with best power of radio signal. Efficiency of reception was 90%. It means that 90% of all messages were received successfully. It was very good, indeed.
Quote:
Depth of submerged submarine (i.e. submarine's antenna) for sufficient underwater radio communication depended about distance between land radio station and the submarine, power of radio signal, frequency used in the communication and salinity of the sea water.
http://uboat.net/articles/index.html?article=35

Also, on that same site, you see the table 1 that shows in what depth the uboat had to be for the message to be received. The table is for the 'Goliath' transmitter that became operational in 1943. Before that, the germans were using the 'Nauen' transmitter.
Roger Dowly, I was thinking in 'deeper' terms. Couldn't recall offhand if you could still receive messages at inappropriate depths in SH3.

If in SH3 you can only receive messages in the depth bandwidth that is provided by U-boat.net... we have one less thing to check out.
__________________

www.thegreywolves.com
All you need is good men. - Heinrich Lehmann-Willenbrock
Kpt. Lehmann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-07, 11:09 AM   #1167
mikaelanderlund
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Sweden
Posts: 529
Downloads: 267
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by danlisa
I would go on patrol as you can always start a new career once 1.04 is available.

The development of 1.04 wont be rushed & once complete will require a period beta testing.

Carry on as normal, really I don't where this idea of a 1.04 patch came from.
:rotfl:

Sink 'em all Herr Kaleun.
Ok, let me know if you need a beta tester .

Mikael
mikaelanderlund is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-07, 03:56 PM   #1168
Jimbuna
Chief of the Boat
 
Jimbuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: 250 metres below the surface
Posts: 181,375
Downloads: 63
Uploads: 13


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by danlisa
I would go on patrol as you can always start a new career once 1.04 is available.

The development of 1.04 wont be rushed & once complete will require a period beta testing.

Carry on as normal, really I don't where this idea of a 1.04 patch came from.
:rotfl:

Sink 'em all Herr Kaleun.
Well, going on past GWXperiences it coulda been anywhere
__________________
Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something.
Oh my God, not again!!


GWX3.0 Download Page - Donation/instant access to GWX (Help SubSim)
Jimbuna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-07, 05:34 PM   #1169
Paajtor
The Old Man
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The Dutch mountains
Posts: 1,547
Downloads: 64
Uploads: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kpt. Lehmann
I was thinking in 'deeper' terms. Couldn't recall offhand if you could still receive messages at inappropriate depths in SH3.

If in SH3 you can only receive messages in the depth bandwidth that is provided by U-boat.net... we have one less thing to check out.
Maybe I've been overlooking this bug (?) untill now, because I usually use the radio, after surfacing and staying surfaced for an extended time.
This time, I was just popping up for a couple of minutes....well, you have my test-result: it works at 20m, lol.
__________________



Paajtor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-07, 03:22 PM   #1170
Paajtor
The Old Man
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The Dutch mountains
Posts: 1,547
Downloads: 64
Uploads: 1
Default

Another question - GWX1.02 still:

When lying stationary in recharge-mode - decks-awash - on external camera real close to the boat, I can't hear any sound from the recharging diesel...neither at the surface, nor under water.

Is that also a stock-SH3 thing?
I don't think I've seen that mentioned in 1.03's changelog.
__________________



Paajtor is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2024 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.