[wip] Asw_global

[AkbarGulag]

ASW_GLOBAL will be designed as a COMPLETE air layer replacement.

Changes.

Many fixes, the most glaring being the detection differences between single and twin engine ASW aircraft. To this point, they shared visual files, although single and twin engines have different innate detection qualities. This caused inconsistent detection results in ASW. Therefore, whole new ASW LIbraries have been built to accomodate these changes and to cut down on the number of 'borrowed' files, as these were causing some clutter.

Huge amounts of extra testing to more clearly define aircraft detection behaviour. Aircraft detection behaviour should now become more consistent.

Airbases now have specific labels, for IJNAF and IJAAF. Added RAAF, 2 base types. Historical research will be implemented for all airfields in Australia.

Limited Aircraft scripting will be implemented. Floatplane Aircraft will no longer be 'level bombers'.

Visual sets will now be applied to all allied aircraft and allied air sets are in the mix (This includes non-introduced aircraft). Also, the new Indian Ocean U-Boat campaign will recieve limited work, expanding to extensive reworking. More attention will be aimed at the carrier forces than in previous ASW builds. Japanese Aircraft from the original campaign will now also benefit from the new library sets.

SCAF 1.2 mast heights and draughts will be added to all Carrier Aircraft.

Additions so far: Sunderland Mk-III with historic airspeeds and distances (This ASW clone has extra nodes 8 as opposed to 2 ... my first node job!! even got them to sit in the right places :O)

All GLOBAL versions will be strictly for 1.5 patch and 3rd party MODS designed for 1.5 patch.

[DavyJonesFootlocker]

I.5 only? Damn!:nope:

[DrBeast]

1.5 only? Damn!:nope:

Double damn :nope: :nope:

[AkbarGulag]

I could probably retro-fit an older version, most likely one compatable for RSRD and one for TM, both for 1.4 patch. How about Overhauled and the newest RSRD? But I draw the line there for now, need to spend time building MODS for 1.5 ;)

Anyway, how could I say no to you two :up:

I suggest you guys get the add-on though. More and more MOD makers will drop 1.4 like a ton of bricks. Making multiple versions for various patches is just far to much work.

Most my time is on making radar sets for American and British interests atm. Plus playing with the S3D is getting so much easier, that new ideas keep me busy.

I think you will like the new detection sets also beast :p

[DrBeast]

Well, I might get the add-on if I can find it relatively cheap in this pissant country. Knowing Greek reality, it'll probably cost around 25 Euros (that's about Aus$40) :down:

[M. Sarsfield]

Is this an additional file to be used with the new Air Layer mods?

[Wilcke]

So let me get this straight about the visual detection abilities between single and twin engine aircraft.

Are you talking about the aircrafts ability to spot object on the ocean? If so maybe the DEVS were trying to impart improved abilities on a multi-crewed aircraft. Where as the other members of the crew can devote their time to looking at the surface for ships or subs.....etc.

Let me know just curious, this piece of the puzzle is very interesting to me as push the limits of SH4.

Good work!

[AkbarGulag]

Is this an additional file to be used with the new Air Layer mods?
You could consider this an extension of ASW. Basically ASW but with the Indian ocean getting some love + tidying up all the Japanese layers to the best of my current knowledge. I look at the earlier stuff now and wish I had done it better to start with, but the spin off is, its still improving. Taking the wisdom that was available to start with would have saved me some time. But being told a value and understanding a value are two different things.

And Wilcke, I have done all my testing altering the min-surface of the visual sensor. For some reason my B5N2 has a far greater ability to 'see' my sub. Far more so than a floatplane like the H8K. In fact, my Kate will detect me with half the min surface value. I guess saying 'single' engine or 'twin' engine is a little general, but I don't have a better way to describe it. Also, both the Kate and H8K are flying at the same altitude, so I discounted that possibility.

All testing was done in dead calm seas, with a 'still' sub. Having the sub move around can make them even more sensitive. Also, ducimus mentioned that conditions in the water for example can lessen the sensor. So I decided 'Still' testing was the best way to go, perfect conditions. The thermacline can have an impact, bit is not relevant to my testing. Donut thought 40-50 metres was maybe a little far, so pulling back from that a little makes the thermacline irrelevant for us.

Needless to say, the way Duci has done it (and RSRD, not sure about RFB) is pretty good. It's hard to really refine it further, but refining it we will try nonetheless. At one point I was even trying to fit hydrophones on aircraft :rotfl:

But yea, two aircraft with seemingly different results.

[Wilcke]

Hey thanks for the great explanation, I think we are reaching the last 10% of refinements, but it maybe in that last 10% that we find that "nugget".

Certainly aircraft with one crewman are not going to be as capable as a dedicated ASW platform with many crewman on station with binoculars scanning multiple sectors. PBY Catalina is a good example of a capable platform versus a single engine aircraft where the pilot is more worried about engine problems, fuel and gee what is that strange noise or vibration I am feeling.

Looking forward to it....:up: !

Take care man!