Realism- and gameplay-related hardcode fixes for SH3.EXE

[Leutnant_Werner]

@h.sie

many thanks! Fantastic, i played my first wolfpack attack in sh3.
You made my day :-)

you are the of sh3

Leutnant_Werner

[makman94]

Originally Posted by Olamagato

.....

Nevertheless, the submarine was still able to escape. The best later war sonar (US Type147A and UK QGAA) gave a signal in a cone with an angle that does not exceed 65 degrees vertically from the water surface, so submarine submerged to a depth of 200 m coming out of the cone has 93 meters in front of the escort ship (horizontal). In addition, at that time u-boat had the hull covered with sound-absorbing material, used a fake audio sources, and the Allies still used the poor passive sonar/hydrophone.

SH3 (GWX in particular), poorly modeled this behavior because it seems that the Allied passive sonar (hydrophones) are extremely sensitive, and when combined with active sonar only a little better (or no). It is very likely that the sonar does not help at all in the detection of a submarine or its role is unknown because they occur very frequently detected outside the cone of the sonar signal. In addition, sonar angles modeled in SH3/GWX cover only 10 degrees to the vertical sonars for all except 40 and 65 for types 144A and 147a. But that's not all. Hydrophone/passive sonar scanning angles include up to 80 degrees vertically and 270 degrees horizontally, which means that the submarine can not be lost. That's what is happening in GWX, where a huge increase in detection (paranoid) was obtained by extending the range of primitive hydrophone (default AI) from 600m to 7000m deterioration of the sensitivity of active sonar (sensivity: 0.03->0.01, speed factor: 20->15 kts).

In addition, if weaken of the passive sonar/hydrophone then u-boat silent running (and <2 kts) causes the submarine is almost undetectable, although sometimes it is clearly detected at a distance of 6-7 km when it is switched off engines and silent running.
Therefore, this part of the simulation SH3 is very weak imo.

.......

very interesting post ,Olamagato

so, you think that you can 'heal' somehow all the above 'issues' and give a more realistic behaviour to hydro and sonars ? or you are saying that nothing can be done about this ?
have you look on other supermods settings and see the hydro-sonar's behaviour there ?
have you 'dig' at all on radars settings ?

ps: now ,that H.Sie managed to fix the issues at visual sensors will be superb,if you are right, to have a taken care to the rest sensors too !

[h.sie]

@Olamagato: Sorry, I overlooked your comment.

1) If tried to reproduce the 'bug' - without success: I did set ahead flank while submerged, set TC=128, then surfaced (still flank without touching the machine telegraph again) and after some time I got a damage. As expected. Only issue: In this special situation the message "All we've got" does not occur, because there is no speed change from <FLANK to FLANK. Minor glitch.

2) Maybe it is irritating, but I programmed it exactly this way. The message "If we don't cut power now, we're risking a breakdown!" is sent at the same moment when a little damage is applied to one diesel. Thus, in this mod, this applied little damage must be interpreted as a warning - maybe overheating or similar - and not as normal damage! I admit: This is not elegant (but also not that bad), but it was the ONLY possible way for me to save the state of the diesel (overheated! don't drive too fast!) IN A SAVEGAME. In all other aproaches this information got lost after save/reload.

@Leutnant_Werner: Thanks. Glad you like it.

h.sie

[urfisch]

nice to see, you are still at work thanks for that. did the point "water shaders" slide up on your list?

[joegrundman]

Originally Posted by Olamagato

Deep-water explosions have meaning only if the ship was equipped with only primitive hydrophone monitored directly by human. Later types of passive sonar were not as vulnerable to depth charges explosions.

The escorting ships lost bearing submerged submarine for two reasons:
1. Growth disturbance (volume) generated by the acceleration of their own ship. Hydrophones, and therefore Allies passive sonar were very vile and clearly worse than the oldest German GHG sonar. In addition, the escort ships operated at higher speeds than u-boats.
2. Submarine escape beyond the cone beam broadcast by sonar. Early sonar (first ASDIC type) had a very narrow angle of the cone. Only 10 degrees from vertical (continually expanded with later types of sonars), and about 60-90 degrees horizontally.
It is for this reason, the escort ships sailed a zigzag taper to cover the wider area.

In total, these two reasons, losing a single ship bearing escort when approached at high speed already at a distance of 150 meters - particularly if the submarine was submerged at great depth.

Then there was the factor which temperature inversion layer, which acted like a prism for the light beam and a shallow bottom, which acted like a mirror. Therefore, the escort ships to not lose the bearing of one or more left standing motionless ships, target acquisition suspicious area when the other tried to cover it with depth charges.

As time passes, subsequent models were increasingly sonar cone angles of the transmitted signal - especially in the vertical, the signal was transmitted at ever higher frequencies, which do not interfere with the sound of their own propellers, a layer of water of different temperature and in addition was inaudible to the U-boat crew.
.
.
.
.

.

In addition, if weaken of the passive sonar/hydrophone then u-boat silent running (and <2 kts) causes the submarine is almost undetectable, although sometimes it is clearly detected at a distance of 6-7 km when it is switched off engines and silent running.
Therefore, this part of the simulation SH3 is very weak imo.

.

this is a very interesting post

can you provide some sources that support your description of sonar activity?

[Olamagato]

Originally Posted by h.sie

@Olamagato: Sorry, I overlooked your comment.

No problem. Thanks for reply.

1) If tried to reproduce the 'bug' - without success

Hmmm, I'll try to reproduce it so as to be sure of its repeatability and save sequence of events (such as log messages from crew).

Only issue: In this special situation the message "All we've got" does not occur, because there is no speed change from <FLANK to FLANK. Minor glitch.

That's right. None of this message is not even wrong. Although the combination of problem No. 2 is quite annoying.

2) Maybe it is irritating, but I programmed it exactly this way. The message "If we don't cut power now, we're risking a breakdown!" is sent at the same moment when a little damage is applied to one diesel.

I understand, but for me this "small accident" reveals the often damage repaired 15 hours. Of course, this is due to increased repair time.

Thus, in this mod, this applied little damage must be interpreted as a warning - maybe overheating or similar - and not as normal damage! I admit: This is not elegant (but also not that bad), but it was the ONLY possible way for me to save the state of the diesel (overheated! don't drive too fast!) IN A SAVEGAME. In all other aproaches this information got lost after save/reload.

Thanks for the explanation of the reasons for the implement of the fix.
Personally, I expected more to be able to do it like the very deep draft, when the officer warned the commander of a potential problem, and the commander is able to continuer, alter the decision as to the desired depth, or even stop diving eliminating (probably > 90%) the risk of damage to the hull.

If it is possible to read the state of engine power achieved immediately after loading the game, it may be a good solution would be mandatory to reduce engine power less than 0.97 if it is then higher (with or without crew message). This also could solve this problem, and without having to damage the motor to the power cut.
Conversely, if a player will increase the power, after a generation of warnings by the officer could enter a randomly initialized counter followed by damage (more or less severe - depending on the achieved state power, and engines).
Then you will never be a situation that has been loaded the game, the engines are overloaded, and never will damage the engine.

[Olamagato]

Originally Posted by joegrundman

this is a very interesting post
can you provide some sources that support your description of sonar activity?

Sure. My knowledge of passive and active sonar (and many other things) have a lot of sources, which often can not be found (such as the Soviet).
But recently I came across a good enough site of Federation of American Scientists that may be many people on this forum a help:
Basic sonar system
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/navy/...ys/asw_sys.htm

Introduction to Naval Weapons Engineering
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/navy/...0/syllabus.htm

Underwater Weapons
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/navy/...ns/uw_wpns.htm

This is the state of knowledge from the period 1950-1980 as estimated, but many projects on underwater weapons testing conducted in the Third Reich and in the subsequent research in the allied countries is still a secret. This probably means that some German results and development of weapons are still applicable.

[h.sie]

@Olamagato: Unfortunately, I have to concentrate on my job now for the next months, thus I cannot completely re-write the Fixes.

That means, that the Diesel Damages Fix in it's current state only works well for Repair-Time Factors in the range of [30.....120].

Sorry, sorry!

By the way: Even if one diesel is slightly damaged, you indeed are free to decide to continue running at FLANK speed, but then you risk a severe damage.

[erikdell]

Sorry if i'm asking something offtopic. But under this fix, under the same conditions (torpedo depth, trigger, sea conditions, ect). Which type of torpedo is more likely to fail? TI or TII? I ask this to know if the trail of bubbles left by the TI is compensated by TII problems, so it's better to use TI? Now i use the TI -early war- cause i don't trust the TII.
I apologize for my english, i hope you can understand my post.
Once again i take this opportunity to thank you for this awesome work.

[jaxa]

Originally Posted by Olamagato

Deep-water explosions have meaning only if the ship was equipped with only primitive hydrophone monitored directly by human. Later types of passive sonar were not as vulnerable to depth charges explosions.

The escorting ships lost bearing submerged submarine for two reasons:
1. Growth disturbance (volume) generated by the acceleration of their own ship. Hydrophones, and therefore Allies passive sonar were very vile and clearly worse than the oldest German GHG sonar. In addition, the escort ships operated at higher speeds than u-boats.
2. Submarine escape beyond the cone beam broadcast by sonar. Early sonar (first ASDIC type) had a very narrow angle of the cone. Only 10 degrees from vertical (continually expanded with later types of sonars), and about 60-90 degrees horizontally.
It is for this reason, the escort ships sailed a zigzag taper to cover the wider area.

In total, these two reasons, losing a single ship bearing escort when approached at high speed already at a distance of 150 meters - particularly if the submarine was submerged at great depth.

Then there was the factor which temperature inversion layer, which acted like a prism for the light beam and a shallow bottom, which acted like a mirror. Therefore, the escort ships to not lose the bearing of one or more left standing motionless ships, target acquisition suspicious area when the other tried to cover it with depth charges.

As time passes, subsequent models were increasingly sonar cone angles of the transmitted signal - especially in the vertical, the signal was transmitted at ever higher frequencies, which do not interfere with the sound of their own propellers, a layer of water of different temperature and in addition was inaudible to the U-boat crew.
Nevertheless, the submarine was still able to escape. The best later war sonar (US Type147A and UK QGAA) gave a signal in a cone with an angle that does not exceed 65 degrees vertically from the water surface, so submarine submerged to a depth of 200 m coming out of the cone has 93 meters in front of the escort ship (horizontal). In addition, at that time u-boat had the hull covered with sound-absorbing material, used a fake audio sources, and the Allies still used the poor passive sonar/hydrophone.

SH3 (GWX in particular), poorly modeled this behavior because it seems that the Allied passive sonar (hydrophones) are extremely sensitive, and when combined with active sonar only a little better (or no). It is very likely that the sonar does not help at all in the detection of a submarine or its role is unknown because they occur very frequently detected outside the cone of the sonar signal. In addition, sonar angles modeled in SH3/GWX cover only 10 degrees to the vertical sonars for all except 40 and 65 for types 144A and 147a. But that's not all. Hydrophone/passive sonar scanning angles include up to 80 degrees vertically and 270 degrees horizontally, which means that the submarine can not be lost. That's what is happening in GWX, where a huge increase in detection (paranoid) was obtained by extending the range of primitive hydrophone (default AI) from 600m to 7000m deterioration of the sensitivity of active sonar (sensivity: 0.03->0.01, speed factor: 20->15 kts).

In addition, if weaken of the passive sonar/hydrophone then u-boat silent running (and <2 kts) causes the submarine is almost undetectable, although sometimes it is clearly detected at a distance of 6-7 km when it is switched off engines and silent running.
Therefore, this part of the simulation SH3 is very weak imo.

----------------------------------
@h.sie
Unfortunately Diesels Damage Mod from V16B1 has some minor bugs:
1. If set ahead flank submerged (with electric engines) and surfacing then diesel can run flank until fuel exhaustion.
2. If set ahead flank on surface and increase time compression then diesels always break down because the message from the officer does not reduce the compression time and the player is not able to respond quickly enough. [Update:] This happens even without time compression. Failure occurs immediately after you receive the message from the officer.

Hi Olamagato
I have waited for your info about sonar/hydrophone problems here at this forum, after I've read about your investigation at http://ja.gram.pl/blog_wpis.asp?id=4756&n=19

Maybe it's a good idea to publish your corrected setup files for sonar/hydrophone here at subsim forum for everybody to tests. Let's check and try it. Tell something about your work with widescreen fix, like you informed at ja.gram.pl site, please. It's very interesting

For subsim users - Olamagato is an author of Polish translation for GWX.

[h.sie]

@urfisch: I just consulted google/wikipedia in order to see what exactly a shader is. You see: I'm not competent. Also, I'm not available. Additionally, since I never played a modern pc game, I am not petted by nice/modern graphics and thus very much satisfied with sh3 graphics as it is.

[Olamagato]

Originally Posted by jaxa

Maybe it's a good idea to publish your corrected setup files for sonar/hydrophone here at subsim forum for everybody to tests.

I'm working on a competent response to makman94, so when I finish, it should also satisfy you. This, however, requires the collection of knowledge about the treatment of this problem by various super mods and present it in easy to analyze manner. It must therefore take some time.

[Olamagato]

Originally Posted by h.sie

@Olamagato: Unfortunately, I have to concentrate on my job now for the next months, thus I cannot completely re-write the Fixes.

No problem. Perhaps in the future on the occasion to improve the simulation of some other problem you will find some time to reduce the time compression to 1 if the engine fails due to overloading.

That means, that the Diesel Damages Fix in it's current state only works well for Repair-Time Factors in the range of [30.....120]. Sorry, sorry!

Is probably not as bad as described. I checked it several times and large engine damage most likely resulted from high levels of time compression.

I just consulted google/wikipedia in order to see what exactly a shader is. You see: I'm not competent. Also, I'm not available. Additionally, since I never played a modern pc game, I am not petted by nice/modern graphics and thus very much satisfied with sh3 graphics as it is.

Fortunately SH3 in terms of graphical programming is no different in principle, like the latest games. Shader programs in SH3 consist of only a few instructions while in today's games these might be it more complex.

[Depth Charger]

H.Sie

Short note to say that I am really enjoying V16B1...

The torpedo failure bit is excellent and the weather fix is also a huge improvement.

One small idea for you - I don't think that its really realistic but it would be cool if when you switched to Silent Running, the red lights came on...

Just a thought for you and LGN as I don't know if something like that would be possible.

Once again, thanks to all of you who help to make this possible. Especially H.sie.

Kindest as always

DC

[h.sie]

As the maker of the "Mod of the year 2011",

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...48#post1851148

I am - from now on - no more able to care about profane things like mod support and similar. Please understand that my press relations officer is now responsible for those things.

--

thanks to those who voted. I wasn't even aware that there is such a contest, until I realised that blue-green button below my avatar.

without help of this community, this patch wouldn't have been possible!