Question on Sonar Use at Peri Depth

[Barkhorn1x]

Was fleet boat sonar actually functional at this depth historically??

And where was that link that listed the file mods to make it functional in SHIV?? I did a search but came up empty.

Thanks.

[U-Bones]

I saw this yesterday and can't find it either...

[akdavis]

Yes, historically hydrophones would function at periscope depth and shallower. Interference from surface noise might degrade their functioning depending on conditions.

If you just apply simple logic here, it is obvious they would function: how would a destroyer with hyrdophones be able to detect a sub if hydrophones suddenly stopped working at 55 feet?

[Gildor]

I am not an expert with Naval sensor terminology, but I was under the impression that SONAR and HYDROPHONES were not the same thing.

Isn't sonar the sensor to determine range to a target with a non-passive sound "ping", whereas the hydrophones are a passive listening device? i.e. two different apparatus.

Or am I completely off base here?

[Hitman]

Isn't sonar the sensor to determine range to a target with a non-passive sound "ping", whereas the hydrophones are a passive listening device? i.e. two different apparatus.

Or am I completely off base here?

You are right. However, AFAIK late war sonar (ASDIC) also incorporated a directional microphone, so you could listen and be sure you were going to ping in the correct bearing, as well as hearing the echo yourself.

[Prof]

I am not an expert with Naval sensor terminology, but I was under the impression that SONAR and HYDROPHONES were not the same thing.

Isn't sonar the sensor to determine range to a target with a non-passive sound "ping", whereas the hydrophones are a passive listening device? i.e. two different apparatus.

Or am I completely off base here?Not completely :) SONAR stands for SOund Navigation And Ranging, so any sound-based locating device could be called 'sonar'.

Sonar devices fall into two categories; active and passive. Active sonar sends out a 'ping' to locate an object by echo while passive sonar is just for listening to whatever is out there.

Basically, hydrophones and the 'ping' are both sonar devices.

[Gildor]

Got it. Two different apparatus but technically both are SONAR equipment.

Thanks.

[Barkhorn1x]

Yes, historically hydrophones would function at periscope depth and shallower. Interference from surface noise might degrade their functioning depending on conditions.

If you just apply simple logic here, it is obvious they would function: how would a destroyer with hyrdophones be able to detect a sub if hydrophones suddenly stopped working at 55 feet?

That logic works for me. So, where was that thread anyway??? Perhaps it was in the general SHIV forum.

[Barkhorn1x]

Got it. Two different apparatus but technically both are SONAR equipment.

Thanks.

For the record as I was refering to the hydrophones.

[Fercyful]

hope that with 1.2 you CAN use hydrophones at periscope depth... I don´t like to have to dive a little more for use them and lost periscope view.... (in SH3 no problem with that... but well this hydrophones are Made in U.S.A. :lol:)

[jhelix70]

since this is the mod forum, dare I ask the obvious? Anyone found a way to change the depth at which the hydrophones are functional? Maybe there is a parameter in a cfg file somewhere...

[Ducimus]

:damn:

People, you can only use one sensor at a time. If your using your peiscope, the sonar won't work. Want sonar back? lower the periscope and wait a couple seconds.

[U-Bones]

:damn:

People, you can only use one sensor at a time. If your using your peiscope, the sonar won't work. Want sonar back? lower the periscope and wait a couple seconds.

In the fleet boats, with 60ft PD, this is true. For those of us that drive Pig Boats though, PD is above the depth that the hydrophones will work, even when your periscope is down.

[akdavis]

:damn:

People, you can only use one sensor at a time. If your using your peiscope, the sonar won't work. Want sonar back? lower the periscope and wait a couple seconds.

lol, nope.

54 ft. No contacts, no sound at station.
55 ft. Contacts, sound at station.
55 ft. Periscope up. Sound contacts, visual contacts, sound at station
54 ft. Periscope up. Visual contacts, no sound contacts, no sound at station.

Tested with the Porpoise class sub in the first training mission.

[Ducimus]

:hmm:

Well, im both right, and wrong. :lol: Honestly ive never used any of the pig boats, so i woudlnt have noticed. Tambor/gar is usualy what i start with.

That said, i think its fixable.

[ref]

It's modable adjusting one of the min sensor values, once I get the 1.2 patch I'll make a fix, I have it working at PD with 1.1.

Ref

[MikeJW]

:damn:

People, you can only use one sensor at a time. If your using your peiscope, the sonar won't work. Want sonar back? lower the periscope and wait a couple seconds.



Wrong. Theres nothing about the periscope that would interfere with sonar. From Edward Beaches Submarine! Pocket Books edition, pg. 125

In Harders conning tower the range dials on the TDC have reached 1,500 yards:target's speed is 15 knots, angle on bow zero, relative bearing zero, torpedo gyros zero.
"stand by to shoot! Up periscope!"
The periscope whines softly as it rises out of its well. At this moment another report frpm Sound:"Fast screws! Close aboard starboard beam!"

Thats just one example in the book where a sonar operator detected an unseen destroyer while the captain is on the periscope. There were others but thats the only one I could easily find. You may be thinking of radar, and thats would be true until they tried radar antennas on periscopes.

[U-Bones]

:damn:

People, you can only use one sensor at a time. If your using your peiscope, the sonar won't work. Want sonar back? lower the periscope and wait a couple seconds.


Wrong. Theres nothing about the periscope that would interfere with sonar. From Edward Beaches Submarine! Pocket Books edition, pg. 125

In Harders conning tower the range dials on the TDC have reached 1,500 yards:target's speed is 15 knots, angle on bow zero, relative bearing zero, torpedo gyros zero.
"stand by to shoot! Up periscope!"
The periscope whines softly as it rises out of its well. At this moment another report frpm Sound:"Fast screws! Close aboard starboard beam!"

Thats just one example in the book where a sonar operator detected an unseen destroyer while the captain is on the periscope. There were others but thats the only one I could easily find. You may be thinking of radar, and thats would be true until they tried radar antennas on periscopes.

Actually I am quite sure he is refering to the game feature, or mechanics if you will. :doh:

[MikeJW]

Well, its not a game feature, its a bug. And with the "head hitting the wall" icon I thought he was saying it was historicly correct and shouldnt be fixed when its not correct. If I'm wrong I apologize but the sonar should work at PD for all boats.

[U-Bones]

Well, its not a game feature, its a bug. And with the "head hitting the wall" icon I thought he was saying it was historicly correct and shouldnt be fixed when its not correct. If I'm wrong I apologize but the sonar should work at PD for all boats.
I think we all agree that sonar should work whenever submerged, regardless of the else may be going on ! But - feature or bug, the game does ignore radar and sonar when you have eyeballs on a target.

[Ducimus]

I was referring to how the game works. It worked the same way in SH3, and it works the same way now. Thats a fact. If i was talking historically, i would have said "historically".

[akdavis]

:hmm:

Well, im both right, and wrong. :lol: Honestly ive never used any of the pig boats, so i woudlnt have noticed. Tambor/gar is usualy what i start with.

That said, i think its fixable.

You have phrased it wrong and aren't really speaking to the core problem. It is not the case that sonar "does not work" when you are also using the periscope. Contacts are simply not tracked simultaneously if they are in visual contact. AI will continue to track targets not within sight of the periscope and you can still use the sonar station manually as normal.

If you raise the boat above 55 feet, the AI does not report any contacts, nor can you hear anything using the sonar station yourself, regardless as to whether or not the periscope is raised or lowered.

[NefariousKoel]

The sonar depth needs to be raised quite a ways.

I don't mind not getting reports at surface since you'd spot them visually before hearing them due to the surface noise, however much below that we should be having it.

[Jungman]

Waited for patch 1.2. Just open Sensors_Sub_Us.sim and search for three values set at -6, -6, -9 for MaxSensorHeight. Change them to -5,-5,-8 and the hydrophones will work at about 44 feet instead of 54 feet.

I did this for patch 1.1 and it worked. Since due to changes and other mods using the same file, you should be able to set those values yourself quite easy.

If not, using mini-tweak, I could tell you the values for the adress hex and such.

I did not know if this was realistic or not, but I find it more of a convenience.

EDIT: I meant -9 to -8.

[Meridian]

Waited for patch 1.2. Just open Sensors_Sub_Us.sim and search for three values set at -6, -6, -9 for MaxSensorHeight. Change them to -5,-5,-9 and the hydrophones will work at about 44 feet instead of 54 feet.

I did this for patch 1.1 and it worked. Since due to changes and other mods using the same file, you should be able to set those values yourself quite easy.

If not, using mini-tweak, I could tell you the values for the adress hex and such.

I did not know if this was realistic or not, but I find it more of a convenience.


Mine show values of -9 -6 -9. Should I be lowering each value by "1"?

[Jungman]

That maybe be true for after patch 1.2. Yes, just plug in the correct IEEE single point float number (note it is a negative) one less.

Patch 1.1 was -6, -6, -9. So just use 1 less at -5, -8.

-8 = c1 00
-5 = c0 a0

Remember they get put in backwards. c1 00 00 00 is really in hex 00 00 00 c1

Technically this makes the passive hydrophones work (manual or use the crew) at about 43 feet deep.

Edit: Clarification, 'lowering' the Max value is actually adding a positve '1'. -6 --> -5 aprox depth the sonar will work (all the way to -300 meters).

[TopCat]

@Ducimus

Couldn't you insert this correction into your mod plz?

[U-Bones]

Personally I would use -4 for the two passive sonars. -5 seems to give on and off performance for the S-Class, mostly off.

[Barkhorn1x]

Now we're getting somewhere!!

[Brigs]

I'm trying to get my head wrapped around this tweaking stuff, so need to ask a question here.

Using the minitweaker on sensors.sub.us.sim shows these values:
(MaxSensorHeight field)
Hydrophone 1 -6
Hydrophone 2 -9
Hydrophone 3 20000 (expected to see -6 here)

I changed H1 and H2 to -4 and -7 respectively (-5 and -8 also did not work for me...maybe because I had previously raised my periscope depth up 1 meter ??)

Bingo.....got sonar at periscope depth.

H3 might be a problem later on, though. I replaced 20000 with -4 and nothing evil immediately happened, but I've only been testing on sub school training missions.

Do you think that radical number change in H3 could hose up the works somewhere down the line ?

Thanks

[U-Bones]

I'm trying to get my head wrapped around this tweaking stuff, so need to ask a question here.

Using the minitweaker on sensors.sub.us.sim shows these values:
(MaxSensorHeight field)
Hydrophone 1 -6
Hydrophone 2 -9
Hydrophone 3 20000 (expected to see -6 here)

I changed H1 and H2 to -4 and -7 respectively (-5 and -8 also did not work for me...maybe because I had previously raised my periscope depth up 1 meter ??)

Bingo.....got sonar at periscope depth.

H3 might be a problem later on, though. I replaced 20000 with -4 and nothing evil immediately happened, but I've only been testing on sub school training missions.

Do you think that radical number change in H3 could hose up the works somewhere down the line ?

Thanks
Possibly, but I am using -4 instead of the 20K anyway. Its a sonar and 20K fails the sanity check for maxsensorheight.

[Fercyful]

Bingo.....got sonar at periscope depth.

please Brigs can you send me your file to me? I really want to use sonar at periscope depth... my email is: mospeada21@gmx.net thanks!

:rock:

:arrgh!:

[Brigs]

Thanks U-Bones.....thought maybe I had a problem in that file because of that value being so high.

On the way Fercyful, but be warned.....this was my first time ever using the tweaker files, so I can't guarantee that something else didn't get screwed up along the way. Backup the original first. :)

[Jungman]

20000 is the range in meters. I have not looked at patch 1.2 yet. They made changes to that file. You should not put '-4' in place of that 200000 value. It is wrong adress.:roll:

Patch 1.1 had -6, -6, -9 at 15 km , 5km, and 20km ranges. They were all to -300 meters deep.

If mini tweak is giving you wrong answer, it is because the file has been changed due to patch 1.2 and you need to use an updated adress hex offset file for that program. What I listed worked fine for patch 1.1. Periscope stock setting is 49 feet deep. The passive sonar was set about 43 feet deep using -5, and -8.

I do it by hand. I do not know exactly what those three 'sonar' items are exactly, but they may have been set up that way so the active sonar does not interfere with the crew's AI passive sonar, or maybe even the visual AI reactions of your crew.

I once used the active sonar via crew report for distance and it gave me a rediculus result sometimes. You must be careful with those numbers. There was a reason why they were disabled at periscope depth. Plus, make sure to use an update Tweak File!
-----------------
S-Class. Yeh, they have a shallow draft. They can stand to use an even higher setting at -4. Someone needs to find out what those three entries are affecting what boat classes. Small, Middle, Big submarines :/

Good Luck! :D

[Meridian]

I'm trying to get my head wrapped around this tweaking stuff, so need to ask a question here.

Using the minitweaker on sensors.sub.us.sim shows these values:
(MaxSensorHeight field)
Hydrophone 1 -6
Hydrophone 2 -9
Hydrophone 3 20000 (expected to see -6 here)

I changed H1 and H2 to -4 and -7 respectively (-5 and -8 also did not work for me...maybe because I had previously raised my periscope depth up 1 meter ??)

Bingo.....got sonar at periscope depth.

H3 might be a problem later on, though. I replaced 20000 with -4 and nothing evil immediately happened, but I've only been testing on sub school training missions.

Do you think that radical number change in H3 could hose up the works somewhere down the line ?

Thanks


I mentioned this in another thread. Minitweaker is showing the wrong values. In 1.2 minitweaker has the values for one of the Hydrophones and an SD radar mixed up, that's why you are seeing those wildly different figures.

[bruschi sauro]

I am not an expert with Naval sensor terminology, but I was under the impression that SONAR and HYDROPHONES were not the same thing.

Isn't sonar the sensor to determine range to a target with a non-passive sound "ping", whereas the hydrophones are a passive listening device? i.e. two different apparatus.

Or am I completely off base here?
no you are right:up:

[Krupp]

Like mentioned here many times before, the NSS_Hydrophone 3's max sensorheight=20000 and the other two (1 and 2) hydrophones are -6 and -9 respectively.

The NSS_Early SJ 5 radar's max sensorheight=-5, but the other earlySJ radars have their max sensorheight as 20000. With a quick glance, it looks like there might be a mix up between these two gadgets (max sensorheights)?

Also the min sensorheights seem to be mixed together? 0,1 and -500 values.

[GOZO]

Just a little add-in.....

A very good site presenting the original training manuals online as well.

http://www.fleetsubmarine.com/subtech.html

and here: http://www.maritime.org/fleetsub/index.htm

Sonar has it's own manual here.:)

Cheers

OB

[MadMike]

A mod would be appreciated... :rock:

Yours, Mike

[U-Bones]

20000 is the range in meters. I have not looked at patch 1.2 yet. They made changes to that file. You should not put '-4' in place of that 200000 value. It is wrong adress.:roll:


The value 20000 is in the wrong place, but the address is correct for MaxSensorHeight. The tweakfile does this by search, so it keeps up with minor changes and it confirms the value is supposed to set the MaxSensorHeight variable.

As others have observed, they (UBI) put an SJ value in this sonar, and the sonar value in the SJ... So a small negative number (like -4) does in fact belong here, the 20k belongs in the maxsensorheight of the SJ.

Sanity check on ANY radar fails with maxsensorheight = -6
Sanity check on ANY sonar fails with maxsensorheight = 20000

[Bilge_Rat]

this is the other thread where this question was discussed:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=111277


There is no right or wrong answer to this question within the limit of the very simple sound modeling implemented in SH4. I have left it as is, but its up to the personal preference of each player.

You should also note that even though you cannot hear contacts at PD, your sonar man will still report contacts, so you are not totally deaf.

[U-Bones]

You should also note that even though you cannot hear contacts at PD, your sonar man will still report contacts, so you are not totally deaf.

Boat specific. The whole point of this was that the game modeled an arbitrary level which some boats were above and others were below (while at PD).

In actual practice as soon as the heads are submerged they are able to receive, and at PD, they were well below surface and should be functional for ALL subs.

[Ducimus]

@Ducimus

Couldn't you insert this correction into your mod plz?

Done.

[Bilge_Rat]

In actual practice as soon as the heads are submerged they are able to receive, and at PD, they were well below surface and should be functional for ALL subs.


But as you will note in the other thread, there should be a degredation of sound close to the surface which does not exist in SH4 based on the simple sound model. Therefore the design decision to cut out the sonar at PD makes sense.

If a user wants to mod the game to use the sonar at PD, that is his choice, but no one can argue that one is more realistic than the other.

[U-Bones]

In actual practice as soon as the heads are submerged they are able to receive, and at PD, they were well below surface and should be functional for ALL subs.

But as you will note in the other thread, there should be a degredation of sound close to the surface which does not exist in SH4 based on the simple sound model. Therefore the design decision to cut out the sonar at PD makes sense.

If a user wants to mod the game to use the sonar at PD, that is his choice, but no one can argue that one is more realistic than the other.
I agree totally about the mod choice, but you are absolutely wrong about the ability to argue about which is more realistic. To be factual and specific, at periscope depth the sonar heads are NOT close enough to the surface to be non functional. By design.

If they are below surface captivation level, and are solidly surrounded by fluid they work.

Submerged, but close to the surface, it is not a matter of degradation as much as it is interference from increased surface background noise. It is actually more "degraded" below a thermal and more "noisy" near the surface.

[Bilge_Rat]

In actual practice as soon as the heads are submerged they are able to receive, and at PD, they were well below surface and should be functional for ALL subs.

But as you will note in the other thread, there should be a degredation of sound close to the surface which does not exist in SH4 based on the simple sound model. Therefore the design decision to cut out the sonar at PD makes sense.

If a user wants to mod the game to use the sonar at PD, that is his choice, but no one can argue that one is more realistic than the other.
I agree totally about the mod choice, but you are absolutely wrong about the ability to argue about which is more realistic. To be factual and specific, at periscope depth the sonar heads are NOT close enough to the surface to be non functional. By design.

If they are below surface captivation level, and are solidly surrounded by fluid they work.

Submerged, but close to the surface, it is not a matter of degradation as much as it is interference from increased surface background noise. It is actually more "degraded" below a thermal and more "noisy" near the surface.

It dont think you understand the argument, Yes, the hydropnone worked near the surface, but based on a variety of factors, i.e. temperature difference, sound reflection, water disturbance, sound could not be heard as well or as far as in deeper water, all other factors being equal. This is better modeled in DW although still not as well as in RL.

In SH4, the sound model is very simple, you hear or you dont hear, so if you can hear at PD, you can hear as well at 300 feet, discounting the thermal layer. The design decision to cut out sonar at PD is justifiable in the circumstances although you could just as well argue the other way.

But given the simplified sound model which is extremely simple compared to real life and which already allows users to hear ships much farther out than you could in real life in all circumstances, arguing that making it even easier to pick up a sound contact is realistic does not make sense to me.

[U-Bones]

In actual practice as soon as the heads are submerged they are able to receive, and at PD, they were well below surface and should be functional for ALL subs.

But as you will note in the other thread, there should be a degredation of sound close to the surface which does not exist in SH4 based on the simple sound model. Therefore the design decision to cut out the sonar at PD makes sense.

If a user wants to mod the game to use the sonar at PD, that is his choice, but no one can argue that one is more realistic than the other.
I agree totally about the mod choice, but you are absolutely wrong about the ability to argue about which is more realistic. To be factual and specific, at periscope depth the sonar heads are NOT close enough to the surface to be non functional. By design.

If they are below surface captivation level, and are solidly surrounded by fluid they work.

Submerged, but close to the surface, it is not a matter of degradation as much as it is interference from increased surface background noise. It is actually more "degraded" below a thermal and more "noisy" near the surface.
It dont think you understand the argument, Yes, the hydropnone worked near the surface, but based on a variety of factors, i.e. temperature difference, sound reflection, water disturbance, sound could not be heard as well or as far as in deeper water, all other factors being equal. This is better modeled in DW although still not as well as in RL.

In SH4, the sound model is very simple, you hear or you dont hear, so if you can hear at PD, you can hear as well at 300 feet, discounting the thermal layer. The design decision to cut out sonar at PD is justifiable in the circumstances although you could just as well argue the other way.

But given the simplified sound model which is extremely simple compared to real life and which already allows users to hear ships much farther out than you could in real life in all circumstances, arguing that making it even easier to pick up a sound contact is realistic does not make sense to me.

"arguing that making it even easier to pick up a sound contact is realistic does not make sense to me."

This is your relative reasoning misplaced into a binary argument. I am not reverse engineering realistic behavior. I am simply stating that sound gear worked at PD. and should in game as well.

"...could not be heard as well..." relative (implied binary true)
"...making it even easier to pick up..." relative (implied binary true)
"...you hear or you don't hear..." binary

"The design decision to cut out sonar at PD is justifiable in the circumstances although you could just as well argue the other way."

Justify the arbitrary imposition of an (admittedly) unrealistic totally deaf condition ? "Could just as well argue the other way" is simply funny.

And which dev told you it was a design decision ? My money is on a simple oversight - ie, it was set on a fleet boat and not checked on the sugar...

Sound gear -worked- at PD but don't let common sense get in the way.

If you -want- your soundman to be stone deaf at PD, that is an entirely different argument. AND I support your ability to choose to have it that way.

[Bilge_Rat]

In actual practice as soon as the heads are submerged they are able to receive, and at PD, they were well below surface and should be functional for ALL subs.

But as you will note in the other thread, there should be a degredation of sound close to the surface which does not exist in SH4 based on the simple sound model. Therefore the design decision to cut out the sonar at PD makes sense.

If a user wants to mod the game to use the sonar at PD, that is his choice, but no one can argue that one is more realistic than the other.
I agree totally about the mod choice, but you are absolutely wrong about the ability to argue about which is more realistic. To be factual and specific, at periscope depth the sonar heads are NOT close enough to the surface to be non functional. By design.

If they are below surface captivation level, and are solidly surrounded by fluid they work.

Submerged, but close to the surface, it is not a matter of degradation as much as it is interference from increased surface background noise. It is actually more "degraded" below a thermal and more "noisy" near the surface.
It dont think you understand the argument, Yes, the hydropnone worked near the surface, but based on a variety of factors, i.e. temperature difference, sound reflection, water disturbance, sound could not be heard as well or as far as in deeper water, all other factors being equal. This is better modeled in DW although still not as well as in RL.

In SH4, the sound model is very simple, you hear or you dont hear, so if you can hear at PD, you can hear as well at 300 feet, discounting the thermal layer. The design decision to cut out sonar at PD is justifiable in the circumstances although you could just as well argue the other way.

But given the simplified sound model which is extremely simple compared to real life and which already allows users to hear ships much farther out than you could in real life in all circumstances, arguing that making it even easier to pick up a sound contact is realistic does not make sense to me.

"arguing that making it even easier to pick up a sound contact is realistic does not make sense to me."

This is your relative reasoning misplaced into a binary argument. I am not reverse engineering realistic behavior. I am simply stating that sound gear worked at PD. and should in game as well.

"...could not be heard as well..." relative (implied binary true)
"...making it even easier to pick up..." relative (implied binary true)
"...you hear or you don't hear..." binary

"The design decision to cut out sonar at PD is justifiable in the circumstances although you could just as well argue the other way."

Justify the arbitrary imposition of an (admittedly) unrealistic totally deaf condition ? "Could just as well argue the other way" is simply funny.

And which dev told you it was a design decision ? My money is on a simple oversight - ie, it was set on a fleet boat and not checked on the sugar...

Sound gear -worked- at PD but don't let common sense get in the way.

If you -want- your soundman to be stone deaf at PD, that is an entirely different argument. AND I support your ability to choose to have it that way.

whatever, man...have a nice weekend. :|\\

[U-Bones]

You too, thanks.

[Sailor Steve]

I think sound should work at shallow depths as well, if for no other reason than as a game factor. I don't know how well sonar worked at periscope depth, but I'll bet my last dollar that not one captain ever said "We'll stay at periscope depth; they can't hear us here!":dead:

[Farinhir]

ok I am looking for some help trying to find the correct values to edit in the sim file. I am new to using minitweaker (this is my 1st time) and so I am a little lost.I decided to search for all the maxsensorheight values and have found many more than I was hoping for. my tweak file is rather rudamentry and is as follows:

Version=1.2
Path=Data\Library\USSubParts\Sensors_sub_US.sim

[1]
DropDownName=Sonar Settings
search,MaxSensorHeight,1,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,2,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,3,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,4,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,5,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,6,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,7,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,8,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,9,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,10,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,11,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,12,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,13,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,14,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,15,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,16,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,17,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,18,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,19,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,20,single,>2,Sonar Max Height

My results are as follows:


Max Sensor Height = 5.916837E+22
Max Sensor Height = 0
Max Sensor Height = 2.463314E-30
Max Sensor Height = 1.821688E-44
Max Sensor Height = 2.463709E+11
Max Sensor Height = 0
Max Sensor Height = 7.533832E+28
Max Sensor Height = 7.139008E+31
Max Sensor Height = -9.629651E-35
Max Sensor Height = 0
Max Sensor Height = -7.402504E-12
Max Sensor Height = 0
Max Sensor Height = 2.26488E+20
Max Sensor Height = -2.510878E+36
Max Sensor Height = 3.60288E+16
Max Sensor Height = 3.681211E-42
Max Sensor Height = 7.145191E+31
Max Sensor Height = -2.000026
Max Sensor Height = 1.163312E+33
Max Sensor Height = 1.85236E+28

If anyone can help me figure this out it would be much apreciated as I know that the hydrophones should work (albiet not as well) as long as they are at least 10ft under the surface of the water. The reason they should work less efficciently has to do with the signal to noise ratio. As long as the SNR > 1, a contact can be tracked. The closer you are to the surface, the more ambient noise you will have.


I suppose that I should mention that I used CaptainCox' post on how to use minitweaker and have the v1 build-104.

Thanks
~F~

Edit: corrected some typos