[WIP] SJ Radar Mod version 2

[Nisgeis]

First radar mod seems to have worked OK, but there are a few issues with it, which I wanted to fix but thought I would release a workable version, before trying anything more dramatic. I have ideas about how to do all of what is below, but I haven't tested the concept yet, as at the moment I don't have the skills to do this yet. I'll learn as I go. I understand from reading the very long post about the bearing line / range ring mod that was released for patch 1.2 was pretty much killed by patch 1.3. This patch hid the grid texture used somewhere inside the engine so it couldn't be fiddled with and the stock bearing numbers were a permanent feature. This broke peoples custom grids which they had all worked very hard on. They also decided that it was not possible to add in arced contacts, due to the way the radar contact graphics were stored. I hope to make some good progress with this and here's what's planned for version 2 of my radar mod.


Increase resolution of the radar screen. (Complete)
Remove stock bearing numbers. (Complete)
Add high resolution circular bearing numbers round the outside of the scope (needs above completed).
Add a zoom function to the radar screen for easy viewing of the scope). (Complete)
Add high resolution bearing lines in 10 degree increments.
Add high resolution range rings, steps to be determined 10%?
Stop contacts appearing ahead of the sweep.
Remove sweep line?
Change the contacts so that they appear arced, instead of blobs.
Add a digital range readout.
Add a digital bearing readout.
Change max range from 80,000 yards to 40,000 yards.
Leave A-Scope Unaffected. (Failed so far)
I know the range change isn't historically accurate, but from testing it seems you can only pick up targets within the 20 nm (approx 37km) viewing sphere, I used the biggest radar return I could get my hands on, the Yamato, parked them all at set distances and the greatest range I got was just over 37,000 yards, which I could maintain up to just under 39,000 whilst backing off the target. I think it makes more sense to use a maximum range that is workable and useful.

As far as I can tell, the radar beam was 5 degrees wide, so any target should be at least an arc of 5 degrees. targets at the same range and with less than 5 degrees seperation should appear as an arc of greater than 5 degrees. I was pleasantly surprised to see that the game appears to model ships being obscured by other ships between you and the ship in question, so it does not appear on the scope.

I don't currently know if the radar sets had a beam sweeping the scope as currently depicted. All the pictures of WW2 era sets I have seen do not appear to have a sweeping beam visible. If someone could shed light on this, it would be appreciated.

I decided to include a digital bearing readout (if possible) in lieu of a bearing train indictaor easily visible. There is one on the wall above the A-Scope, but it's not easy to get at, as if you move to the A-Scope from the PPI, the radar man starts sweeping and you have to be really quick to get a halg decent bearing reading. Digital range readout to hopefully be accurate to within 0.2% of actual distance. Range and bearing info may be diffult to read at extremely close ranges, due to radar lobes.

I'm hoping to make these changes and leave the A-Scope undisturbed, but it might not be possible. It might not be possible to get all of my hoped for changes active, but one has to have goals right?

[Nisgeis]

Here's what I have so far, stock bearing numbers removed and ready for additional lines to be added. You can't see, but when you zoom in, it's got clean thin precise lines now. I'll add more lines soon.

http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg307/Nisgeis/SubSim/HRRadarWIP.jpg

[Mav87th]

Great idea with the Zoom option nesgais.

Could you write the values to enter into cameras.dat for that. Then ill include the zoom into my next cameras.dat mod.

[LukeFF]

Nice progress there! I'm looking forward to seeing what you come up with. As to your question about a beam sweeping around the scope, check out this picuture:

http://www.usscobia.com/P2050014.jpg?%22

Near the top of the screen you can see the radar contact the scope is picking up. Intersecting that contact is the the beam of the radar.

[Fish40]

Nice going! Keep up the good work!:up:

[gimpy117]

my gramps said that they had a freined or foe do hickey on those things? is he right or is it just the fact that it was 65 years ago??

here's what wikipedia says:
"The IFF of WWII and Soviet military systems (1946 to 1991) used coded radar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar) signals (called Cross-Band Interrogation, or CBI) to automatically trigger the aircraft's transponder in an aircraft "painted" by the radar." -wikipedia.org

[Nisgeis]

Could you write the values to enter into cameras.dat for that. Then ill include the zoom into my next cameras.dat mod.

Using S3D, either add from scratch, or copy using export the Optical node and properties from either of the periscopes and change the zoom levels to 1 and 3, which should be OK for most resolutions.

[Nisgeis]

Nice progress there! I'm looking forward to seeing what you come up with. As to your question about a beam sweeping around the scope, check out this picuture:

http://www.usscobia.com/P2050014.jpg?%22

Near the top of the screen you can see the radar contact the scope is picking up. Intersecting that contact is the the beam of the radar.

i must have looked at that pic dozens of times and never even noticed the contact at the top, or the beam line. It looks like it's not a moving beam though as it looks very narrow - about 1 degree wide, or less. So... from that I'm going to take it that the radar scope will draw 1 degree at a time, but the actual radar beam will detect in a 5 degree arc, so that contact should be arced if the beam were moving. I'd post a pic of the arcs from other pics, but photobucket is down for maintenance at the moment.

[Nisgeis]

my gramps said that they had a freined or foe do hickey on those things? is he right or is it just the fact that it was 65 years ago??

here's what wikipedia says:
"The IFF of WWII and Soviet military systems (1946 to 1991) used coded radar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar) signals (called Cross-Band Interrogation, or CBI) to automatically trigger the aircraft's transponder in an aircraft "painted" by the radar." -wikipedia.org

Was your grandfather in the submarine service and what was his role? Sounds interesting! IFF was developed before WW2 and was in widespread use during the Battle of Britain (1940). The early units were standalone units, later developments were incorporated into the main radar assembly. The IFF interogator would send out a challenge and the unit in the aircraft or surface ship would automatically respond with the correct response, which would then be displayed on the IFF display. As surface ships had the ability to find, track and destroy targets without being able to see them, it became important to have a means of identifying the target with no visibility.

Here's an extract from the war patrol of the USS Baya May 5th 1945:

1236 SD radar contact on B-24 at 20 miles (plane contact no.30). Plane closed to 15 miles and then lost at 20 miles.
1344 SD radar contact at 11 miles (plane contact no.31) No IFF. Plane closed to 9 miles.
1345 Made quicik dive.
1411 Surfaced, all clear.

From what I have read, there was a Mark 3 IFF system in use that would display the IFF signal as a dot and dash contact on the PPI display, instead of the usual solid arc, identifying it as friendly.

The SJ radar was for other things. Because of its highly directional beam, it could be used as a point to point communications tool, without much risk of your transmissions being intercepted. A telegraphy key was attached to the set and the radar pulsed in morse to send a message. The radar operator would also wear headphones so he could hear the pulses and he could also hear the frequency of enemy radars, helping him to identify the type of radar it was.

[Mav87th]

Could you write the values to enter into cameras.dat for that. Then ill include the zoom into my next cameras.dat mod.

Using S3D, either add from scratch, or copy using export the Optical node and properties from either of the periscopes and change the zoom levels to 1 and 3, which should be OK for most resolutions.

OK Zoom levels of 1 and 3 - got it :up:

[M. Sarsfield]

Batfish has her IFF unit in the con near the trim valves. They used to have an explosive charge built into it, in case the boat was going to get captured. The Batfish still has the black contact switch mounted to the forward persicope shear to set off the charge - looks like the alarm contactors with a different knob.

[AlmightyTallest]

Is there any way we could incorporate IFF into our sim? Perhaps if a ship had an IFF system it could be plotted on the map as a friendly unit, or unknown, or additional info about the specific unit detetectd (Destroyer) (Aircraft Radar Friendly) (Aircraft Radar Enemy) etc at beyond visual ranges.

[M. Sarsfield]

I would think that if he finds a way to change the symbol on the radar scope to mark a friendly, then adding text shouldn't be a big deal.

[Nisgeis]

Targets already are plotted on the map as friendly (blue), neutral (green) or enemy (red) and unknown (grey). I can't think of a way to get the information from the game that a unit is friendly or not for display on the radar. That's out of scope (no pun intended) of this mod at least.

[M. Sarsfield]

I don't think he wanted it on the radar display like modern radar screens. He wanted the information transferred to the map. So, if it's a friendly radar contact, it shows up as a blue icon on the charts.

[AVGWarhawk]

Yes, IFF would be nice. Generally there was a zone were our vessels unless advised otherwise were not there so anything floating was pretty much fair game. However, the USS Guardfish and the Extractor are a much different story. The USS Extractor was in enemy waters. Guardfished asked Pearl if ther were any friendly in the vicinity. You guessed it, no IFF used and a negative from Pearl. Down went the USS Extractor. In game and for the most you are sent to hostile waters all the time. So, finding your own vessels milling about is very slim, however, IFF for aircraft would be a nice addition. Although the pilots still went after the subs even when IFF was confirmed.

[M. Sarsfield]

Good old trigger-happy fly boys.

[jdkbph]

Now, if only there was a way to send that bearing and range info to the TDC.....

Perhaps by borrowing some functionality from the sonar station?

JD

[M. Sarsfield]

I think only the MK. IV TDC had the capability of accepting radar inputs and I don't know of many boats that got the upgrade during the war.

[jdkbph]

Ah... sorry. I wasn't clear about what I was asking.

As it stands now, the RADAR is good for situational awareness - building a picture of your surroundings - but in my experience, it's practically useless for generating a firing solution.

What I'm talking about it sending the RADAR generated bearing and range info to the TDC... as in populating game data to a place a place where it is useable by the TDC. Of course, I'd prefer to just dial it in manually as, I imagine, it was done in real life... but for some strange reason the game won't allow manual range inputs.

I'm suggesting that the SONAR "send" function might be a viable work around for that.

Hopefully that makes better sense.

JD

[gimpy117]

my gramps said that they had a freined or foe do hickey on those things? is he right or is it just the fact that it was 65 years ago??

here's what wikipedia says:
"The IFF of WWII and Soviet military systems (1946 to 1991) used coded radar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar) signals (called Cross-Band Interrogation, or CBI) to automatically trigger the aircraft's transponder in an aircraft "painted" by the radar." -wikipedia.org
Was your grandfather in the submarine service and what was his role? Sounds interesting! IFF was developed before WW2 and was in widespread use during the Battle of Britain (1940). The early units were standalone units, later developments were incorporated into the main radar assembly. The IFF interogator would send out a challenge and the unit in the aircraft or surface ship would automatically respond with the correct response, which would then be displayed on the IFF display. As surface ships had the ability to find, track and destroy targets without being able to see them, it became important to have a means of identifying the target with no visibility.

Here's an extract from the war patrol of the USS Baya May 5th 1945:

1236 SD radar contact on B-24 at 20 miles (plane contact no.30). Plane closed to 15 miles and then lost at 20 miles.
1344 SD radar contact at 11 miles (plane contact no.31) No IFF. Plane closed to 9 miles.
1345 Made quicik dive.
1411 Surfaced, all clear.

From what I have read, there was a Mark 3 IFF system in use that would display the IFF signal as a dot and dash contact on the PPI display, instead of the usual solid arc, identifying it as friendly.

The SJ radar was for other things. Because of its highly directional beam, it could be used as a point to point communications tool, without much risk of your transmissions being intercepted. A telegraphy key was attached to the set and the radar pulsed in morse to send a message. The radar operator would also wear headphones so he could hear the pulses and he could also hear the frequency of enemy radars, helping him to identify the type of radar it was.

my grandpa was trained to fix the radio/radar equipment as i am told

[M. Sarsfield]

Ah... sorry. I wasn't clear about what I was asking.

As it stands now, the RADAR is good for situational awareness - building a picture of your surroundings - but in my experience, it's practically useless for generating a firing solution.

What I'm talking about it sending the RADAR generated bearing and range info to the TDC... as in populating game data to a place a place where it is useable by the TDC. Of course, I'd prefer to just dial it in manually as, I imagine, it was done in real life... but for some strange reason the game won't allow manual range inputs.

I'm suggesting that the SONAR "send" function might be a viable work around for that.

Hopefully that makes better sense.

JD

JD,

The newer Mk. IV TDCs had the ability to accept range data from radar, but I think it was the from the ST radar on the observation scope. Most boats were not upgraded with the Mk. IV until after the war, even though it was developed in 1943, I believe.

There is a mod to manually input the range into the TDC, now.

[swdw]

Did the ww2 versions have the range rings?

Because of the difference betwen the way the PPI and A scope interpreted the signal, the PPI was pretty innacurate for range. This was the reason for the A scope. If the PPI was accurate, the A scope would not be needed.

[jmr]

Aye, you can enter range manually using this mod here.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=111371

Unfortunately the max range you can enter is 11,000 yds.

[jdkbph]

Well now... that is good news. And that's really all I was after.

Soooooo... nevermind. :)

JD

[LukeFF]

The newer Mk. IV TDCs had the ability to accept range data from radar, but I think it was the from the ST radar on the observation scope. Most boats were not upgraded with the Mk. IV until after the war, even though it was developed in 1943, I believe.
TDC Mk. IV had repeaters for both range and bearing inputs from SJ radar, not to mention TDC Mk. III could be field-modified into a Mk. IV setup. However, the important thing to note here is that the range and bearing inputs were manually entered with both the TDC Mk. III and Mk. IV. There was nothing "automatic" about sending range and bearing from either sonar or radar to the TDC; the difference in the Mk. IV was the addition of the SJ repeaters.

(And actually, that's a pretty simplistic description of how TDC Mk. IV worked; in reality it was quite a robust piece of equipment, even when compared to the Mk. III).

[M. Sarsfield]

Very true. For our purposes it would be automatic, because the AI TDC operator would do this for us.

swdw, WWII radar did not have range rings. Someone posted a picture of the Cobia's SJ-1 radar earlier that only shows bearing lines. I recommend the bearing line mod, btw.

[Nisgeis]

Did the ww2 versions have the range rings?

Yep. There were several methods to apply them. One was to take some thin paper (can't remember the name, like tracing paper) and draw lines on that. The other was to draw circles directly on the scope. You can read all about the operation of radar at hnsa, be careful though as there are numerous transcription / OCR errors, including numbered components being out of order for diagrams of the SD set, but specifcally the SJ radar is here:

http://www.hnsa.org/doc/radar/part4.htm

Here's an extract dealing with inking of the SJ PPI scope directly:


Bearings and ranges may he read approximately from the PPI scope without stopping the antenna. It is possible to obtain target course within 5 degrees, and target speed within 3 knots from this data. The following suggestions will speed the obtaining of data from the PPI and increase the accuracy:

1. Add inked circles on the face of the PH tube for estimating range (four solid circles, interspaced by four dotted circles). Care must he taken not to scratch the tube in any way.

2. Improvise a more accurate 360 degrees bearing circle over which rides a cursor, or thread stretched across the screen. Targets may then he split by this thread and hearing read on the circle.



Because of the difference betwen the way the PPI and A scope interpreted the signal, the PPI was pretty innacurate for range. This was the reason for the A scope. If the PPI was accurate, the A scope would not be needed.

The radar sets in SH4 are in some respects modelled oddly and in other ways modelled very well (e.g. target obscurance, wave obscurance and pip size depending on target angle are very good). I've also seen vastly varying ideas about what each set should do, some of these ideas are based on research and reading of submarines books and others are based on how the radar was modelled in other games. All the different ideas of what is correct was at the start quite confusing, especially mixed in with what was and wasn't right in SH4.

There's also confusion over how you would operate the radar sets. Reading the range of the SD radar tape is correct and rightly, really badly innacuarte. The SJ radar was much more precise - 25 yards plus or minus 0.1% of the range being measured. There's no way you can get anywhere near that level of accuracy by reading it off a tape.

Depending on what you think each scope is, your perceptions of what they should do will differ.

Is the left hand scope part of the SD or the SJ-1 radar? If you take it that it's the SD scope, then the range being read off the scale at the bottom is correct, but then it shouldn't rotate with the SJ radar head. It also shouldn't have a range selection switch (or sweep / focus). If you take it that the left hand scope is part of the SJ-1 radar, then it shouldn't have a range tape on it.

After extensive reading, the best I can make out is out of the SD and SJ radar sets, only the SD radar had a range marker switch to make the set draw (temporarily) a set of range lines, which could them be marked onto some tape stuck to the SD scope. Ranges of aircraft were then read directly from this tape and that was all the accuracy you had. The scope only had one range and that was from zero to 30 miles, with zero to 12 taking up the first half of the scope line and the remaining 18 miles getting squashed to the right. There are 3 units that make up the SD radar set.

The SJ radar set is comprised of 5 units. The PPI scope and the 'A' scope are not on the same unit. The 'A' scope is part of the 'Range-Indicator Unit' and does not have a range scale. After calibrating the unit to set the correct zero range, you can adjust the range crank on the seperate 'Range Unit', which moves a step on the 'A' scope on the 'Range-Indicator Unit' until the step on the 'A' scope is approximately touching the pip being measured. The 'sweep switch' is then turned to precision, which makes the 'A' scope display an expanded picture of 1,500 yards either side of the range step allowing for greater precision. This allows you to then move the range step towards the target pip until the beginning of the pip sits exactly in the corner of the step. When that has been done, the range can be read (digitally) from the seperate 'Range Unit'.

An approximate bearing can be read using either the 'A' scope and the hand crank's dial, or the PPI scope. A reading accurate to within a quarter of one degree can be obtained by lobe switching. This creates two spikes for the same target at slightly different ranges on the 'A' Scope and you then turn the hand crank until the two spikes are the same height, giving you an accurate bearing. Lobe switching is not modelled in the game.

This is all accurate to the best of my research. However, it's no problem at all to not include a digital range readout on the SJ set.

EDIT: About the 'A' Scope not being needed if the PPI scope were accurate, they would still need both, as although the PPI scope helps with situational awareness, by displaying land masses, that's also what makes it weaker. The land mass on the PPI scope saturates the picture and tracking air targets over land is only possible through the 'A' scope also when being jammed, the PPI scope is saturated / difficult to read, making the 'A' scope invaluable not only for seeing through the jamming, but also seeing what type of jamming it is. there's lots about this at the HNSA site. Very interesting, very well written too!

[LukeFF]

Is the left hand scope part of the SD or the SJ-1 radar? If you take it that it's the SD scope, then the range being read off the scale at the bottom is correct, but then it shouldn't rotate with the SJ radar head. It also shouldn't have a range selection switch (or sweep / focus). If you take it that the left hand scope is part of the SJ-1 radar, then it shouldn't have a range tape on it.

The A-scope we have is part of the SJ radar set. As to why it (incorrectly) has a range tape, my guess is the devs included it since the range display unit isn't modeled.

BTW, very nice description of how SJ and SD radar works! :up:

[swdw]

Radar operators reported the range to the TDC operator prior to the Mk IV. It worked great. This was a glaring omission by the devs. Apparently the send precise range to TDC command uses multiple pings. Looking into to whether that's the case or if it uses the radar.

Thank you for the response Nisgeis. Because I had to go through the Navy's ET A school before going to Nuc school, I actually understand everything you said.

I asked the questions regarding "realism" because this will be a great mod to add to RFB (with your permission) once it's finished.

Very good research- I respect that too. Keep up the excellent work!

[Nisgeis]

Thanks swdw, I'm glad you asked the question, because it made me question it and as a result, I found out much more :up: . I now have a very good idea of how the 'A' scope on the range-indicator unit of the SJ set would have been switched over to the ST radar to find range, the range then appearing on the range unit and I didn't know that before I did that research for your question. If that is how it worked (and I haven't checked the ST specs yet) then if the SJ range and bearing could be sent to the TDC, then it follows that the ST radar could also.

@M. Sarsfield, do you have any pics of the USS Batfish's range unit? I have a sneaking susupicion that the digital read out is of the multiple wire filament readout type, where the filaments are all stacked on top of each other, rather than the wheels with numbers on type. Do you happen to have any pics of it?

@LukeFF - Do you have a copy of U.S. Submarines through 1945 by Norman Friedman, I think you've mentioned it before? I checked my copy and it says that the SJ-a range and bearing data could be fed automatically into the TDC (page 236 of my edition, in Chapter 12 -World War II). Now, by 'fed into' it doesn't explicitly state whether that means fed into the firing solution, or just fed into the unit for display. Where did the info about the range and bearing not being automatically sent come from, as I'd like to check it over. Unfortunately Norman Friedman doesn't give one of his excellent footnotes about the source of the information about the SJ-a set, so I can't look into that.

A while ago, I did read up on the TDC, though I can't remember whether I actually read the full blown manual or not. I do remember however that the TDC has bearing inputs for the sonar bearing and the periscope bearing, due to the parallax error of the spacing between the two. It would then follow that the TDC has to be told which input to take for the tracking (compensating for paralax as well). If the radar set can send the info to the TDC, it must be sent electrically, would it not be just a matter of selecting that repeater as the input to take for bearing?

At this point though it doesn't affect the mod, because I can't think of a way to get a send range/bearing button to work anyway, but as the matter has come up, I want to know now :D .

[Nisgeis]

Oh yes, almost forgot. As far as the range rings goes, I haven't yet found any photos of any WW2 radar sets with field mod range rings inked on. If the manual advised it to be done though, I for one would do it because it would aid my at a glance ranging without having to stop the scope for a precise range on the 'A' scope.

The manual must have taken quite some time to compile and issue, so it's quite odd that they were advising of this field mod rather than attending to it during a refit. Perhaps the lines are on the inside of the CRT and the tubes had already been produced and could not be modified.

The USS Cobia's set doesn't have any range rings on it, but if the scope was restored, then it would have been cleaned and I'm sure india ink would come off with some alcohol, or perhaps it wore off through the years, or maybe it never had any range rings on it.

I'm not certain either way on the range rings and as the US Navy said it was optional, that's why I did my last mod as an option. About 33% of the downloads were for the bearing lines only. As it turns out though, the range rings I did were wrong and the ones the devs had on the PPIScale.dds graphic were closer to historic suggestion. I did find the range rings handy though, as when the target gets to the 25% ring, you know it's time to switch down a range scale. Very useful!

[LukeFF]

@LukeFF - Do you have a copy of U.S. Submarines through 1945 by Norman Friedman, I think you've mentioned it before? I checked my copy and it says that the SJ-a range and bearing data could be fed automatically into the TDC (page 236 of my edition, in Chapter 12 -World War II). Now, by 'fed into' it doesn't explicitly state whether that means fed into the firing solution, or just fed into the unit for display. Where did the info about the range and bearing not being automatically sent come from, as I'd like to check it over. Unfortunately Norman Friedman doesn't give one of his excellent footnotes about the source of the information about the SJ-a set, so I can't look into that.

Maybe I'm reading it incorrectly, but this is what Norman says on page 240-241:

TDC MK 4 carried four sets of repeaters: (1) optical (No. 1 periscope and forward or after TBT), (2) radar (SJ bearing), (3) range (SJ or ST range), and (4) sound (JT or QB-JK sound bearings). Each readout could be compared with the relative range or bearing calculated (generated) by the TDC. Actual input was manual, as in TDC Mk 3. Generated bearing and range could be transmitted automatically to the JT and SJ, with corrections fed back to the TDC.

I see the reference you make on page 236. It makes me wonder whether those statements conflict, or they are talking about two different things.

[Nisgeis]

I looked at the TDC manual, it's more about how it works internally and how to strip it and put it back together again. I'll keep looking for info.

Here's the arced contacts working. It doesn't work fully at the moment, but here's what it looks like now on zoomed in mode.

http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg307/Nisgeis/SubSim/RadarArcsWIP.jpg

It's odd how it changes the perception of what's happening. That's a radar image of a convoy true bearing 30 - 60 degrees (NEish). It's steaming on a course of 305 (NW). It's surrounded by destroyers, with a couple of fleet carriers, a cruiser and the Yamato in the centre. Spacing is at least 1km between ships. I think it's now easier to see the relative strengths of the returns, so the Yamato really stands out now.

To the south, there are three destroyers 500m apart at a range of about 8km. As they are so close, their radar images have merged. The destroyer on the right is head at a heading of 0 degrees (N), so has a smaller radar return than the destroyer heading 270 (W).

Ignore the colours for now, this is just the test colour, as it's easier to see green.

Contacts shown above have a 5 degree arc, to match the figures I found on the radar bearing resolution and beam width.

Next I'll work on the bearing lines, bearing numbers and range rings.

[tedhealy]

Holy frijoles that's looking good :o

[Q3ark]

Wow this looks sweet Nisgeis:ping:. The in game radar is definitely more complex than I realised. I never noticed that land masses obscured the radar (as it should) or that larger ships give a larger return on the screen. Coolies:rock:

[Nisgeis]

It's a shame land mass doesn't give a radar return. That would be great to navigate in heavy fog close to the coast.

[AlmightyTallest]

That's really looking good, thanks for working on this Nisgeis!

[LukeFF]

Good stuff!

[gimpy117]

now bout that Iff

i was also told it had a little pipper thing by the contact on the screen if it was a friend...

[MONOLITH]

http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg307/Nisgeis/SubSim/RadarArcsWIP.jpg




Wow. That is brilliant. :up:

[AlmightyTallest]

gimpy, now that would be very cool to have the icon indicating friend showing on scope. My previous post on this thread was about having the radar operators use IFF information and have it plotted on the map as a friend or foe in different colored ink.

[M. Sarsfield]

@M. Sarsfield, do you have any pics of the USS Batfish's range unit? I have a sneaking susupicion that the digital read out is of the multiple wire filament readout type, where the filaments are all stacked on top of each other, rather than the wheels with numbers on type. Do you happen to have any pics of it?

Batfish has SS radar and I thought I remember seeing wheels with numbers on them for range and maybe even bearing. The unit only has a PPI scope. I will take a picture of it when I get down there on May 10th.

For most of the in-game career, SJ is the proper choice, but SS and SV (air) radar did come out near the end of the war.

I like the scope now portraying the lengths of the contacts. Anyway to make the dashes look a little fuzzy? It wouldn't add anything except aesthetics. Also, is there any reason why you chose a green PPI scope?

[Nisgeis]

I like the scope now portraying the lengths of the contacts. Anyway to make the dashes look a little fuzzy? It wouldn't add anything except aesthetics. Also, is there any reason why you chose a green PPI scope?

I'm having to write a new pixel shader for the radar, so anything is possible. Given that I am having to learn the pixel shader language as I go, some features I may leave for another version.

Basically, the game calls the pixel shader and gives it some textures, and the coordinates of the pixel it wants the colour of, so I have to write something that returns on a pixel by pixel basis, what colour to use. The radar screen is actually drawn in the game code and is drawn with the 30 degree lines, the bearing numbers, the contacts, the scope background and the radar sweep. The standard unaltered radar screen is green, pretty much as it was in the earlier version of the game, before it went red. There is also a blurry version of this that the game also draws and outputs as well as the clean radar screen to the vertex shader and then the pixel shader.

The pixel shader can sample the radar texture to find out what colour of any other pixel at co-ordinates (x,y) are. What I have to do, is come up with sets of mathmatical filters to seperate the information on the radar screen texture, e.g. contact location, sweep line etcetera, fiddle about with them somehow (like, adding arcs to radar contacts) and then reconstruct them all and then come up with ways to draw the extra information I need to show up, depending on where the pixel being drawn is. It's not something I'm used to and it feels kind of backwards doing it this way. That's probably because you're not meant to use pixel shaders in this way. Oh well. :D . The blurry texture can be mixed in with the clean texture to create a blurry glow to it all, but I'm not sure which is the best way to mix them, blend in the blur and then arc the contacts, or arc the blur and the clean contacts and then blend them.

So, that's why it's green, because the basic radar screen is green and I'm trying to keep all the channels separate and keep things as simple as possible. The really nice thing about the pixel shader is that I can tell it that I want all the green to be red and it will do it. So, don't worry about the colour, the final colour will be the correct reddy/orangey colour, with the inked on range rings being slightly translucent black. Of course, this may drive me completely mad before I get that for. :doh: This is a WIP and will look a look different. Screenies are just to give an idea of what's happening. I'm not sure what it may end up looking like though!

[M. Sarsfield]

Okay on all. I'll take pictures of the sides of the SS radar cabinet, too, with a tape measure showing the measurements, in case anyone ever wants to create 3D model of the SS radar - I'll do the same with the SV radar stack in the con.

[Nisgeis]

Thanks! Looking forward to seeing them.

[AVGWarhawk]

It's a shame land mass doesn't give a radar return. That would be great to navigate in heavy fog close to the coast.

First...the radar screen looks great. The pips elongated and arched are very nice and are similar to what I have seen in books. Getting land masses to show would be nice as it was something radar could pick up.

[M. Sarsfield]

Would the arcs really be arcs or would they be dashes? The above picture makes the convoy look like it's traveling in a circle. Also, would an end-on contact appear to look more like a dot, because of the lower profile? Not sure if the radar can be modeled to reflect target AoB. If we can fix the land mass issue, then I would think that it's possible, since the radar would follow the contour of the land.

[kriller2]

Nice work Nisgeis! :yep: Looking forward to use the new radar.

[Nisgeis]

Would the arcs really be arcs or would they be dashes? The above picture makes the convoy look like it's traveling in a circle. Also, would an end-on contact appear to look more like a dot, because of the lower profile? Not sure if the radar can be modeled to reflect target AoB. If we can fix the land mass issue, then I would think that it's possible, since the radar would follow the contour of the land.

The radar is modelled currently to reflect AoB. You get a larger return if the target is beam on. You also get a larger return if the target is bigger as in the yamato picture above, which is the largest return. The arcs you are seeing isn't a function of their length, it's a function of the radar beam's width, which on the SJ radar was 5 degrees.

The radar wave sent out has a spread, and the receiver can receive waves from all angles. If any part of the beam is returned from the target, the sweep will start drawing the pipper where the antenna is pointed, which will be two and a half degrees before the bearing of the target and it will also draw it at the range the target is, so it will appear as an arc. You also at close range get returns from side lobes and back lobes, so in some cases you can get six returns all round the dial from one target, but that isn't modelled in the game (thankfully? :D ).

As well as having a bearing resolution, each radar set has a range resolution, that being the difference in range that the set can't tell the difference between. For an SJ that range is 40 yards, so if two targets are following each other with less than a five degree bearing difference between them, and at the same range, the two targets won't be distinguishable from one another.

Here's a radar pic, first with contacts drawn with 5 degree arcs, two and a half degrees either side and the second which marks the centre of the arc. Yes, it does look odd, but I am fairly sure that's how it should look. There were some pics of PPI sets in use with contacts all round the dial and it looked very odd - espcecially land. Typically though, when I need to find them, I can't.

http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg307/Nisgeis/SubSim/RadarSideBySideComparison.jpg

It does look strange, you're right, it would be clearer if the bearing resolution were higher. If you notice the first two destroyers, they are only 400m apart at a range of 9,181m and 9,159m, so they look like one long target.

Edit: I need to work out exactly how the range switching affects the bearing resolution... but I may not be able to do anything about it, unless I can get a way to determine what the range scale is set to.
Edit2: No I don't, the game scales the contacts according to range scale and the angle remains constant, regardless of range. By the way, the arcing distortion gets more pronounced, depending on how far from the centre the contact is.

[LukeFF]

You are doing some great work there, Nisgeis! :up: I love the new shape of the contacts, which look just like the pictures I've seen (like you, I can't find them right now, either! :rolleyes:). Keep up the good work!

[LukeFF]

Would the arcs really be arcs or would they be dashes? The above picture makes the convoy look like it's traveling in a circle. Also, would an end-on contact appear to look more like a dot, because of the lower profile?
Here's a training pic from the 1945 radar operator's manual. The caption reads: "Two medium, three small targets."

http://www.hnsa.org/doc/radar/img/fig3-7.jpg

[WernerSobe]

regarding digital range display...

historicaly they had them. There is a working one in the u-boat. Maybe you can somehow recycle it.

[Bosn]

Been following this mod with some interest.
From someone who spends a lot of time using shipboard radars, the latest image with the "arced dashes", looks pretty close to the real deal. Actual "clean" radar returns show up a touch fuzzier at the edges (not so crisp).
Hopefully the feedback helps out. The work you've done on this looks great!

[W_clear]

Great!
Looking forward to use the new radar.:up:

[elanaiba]

Looks great :)

BTW, just wanted to add something from a pdf on the MkIV TDC that I have around here:

http://img74.imageshack.us/img74/7881/tdcquotejq3.jpg

[Fish40]

Nisgeis, this is looking great!:up: Can't wait till it's ready:yep: Keep up the great work!

[Nisgeis]

Looks great :)

BTW, just wanted to add something from a pdf on the MkIV TDC that I have around here:



Thanks for the info! From what I can find out, nothing explicitly states anything is directly entered for calculation, apart from the own speed and own course inputs. The reference that said 'fed into' etcetera may have been worded ambiguously. From what I can make out, all input were manual (except for own course and speed) and everything else had repeaters. I'm a bit hazy on method of correction to these values - I've seen reference to handles used to adjust range being different to the input to set range, but that's for future research. I wanted to get a copy of 'Torpedo Data Computer' but it doesn't seem to in print.

They seem to have increased the number of receivers, so not only did the TDC have a calculated range and the radar range feed and associated bearing details, the radar station also had a calculated range and obviously it's own range unit and bearing. This seems to have been to reduce the amount of verbal communication required to improve efficiency and it also allowed the TDC operator and Radar operator to check for bearing rate error. I did find one reference to the deck gun having repeaters for radar range and bearing for fire control.

Anyway, here's a picture posted on the forum before by akdavis in this thread http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=115263&highlight=Radar+range

The last picture posted is dated, so is of the correct era, but it is from the seaplane tender USS Cumberland Sound, so I don't think it would be an SJ set (note no bearing lines).

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/g340000/g344503.jpg

The poster said that this is an image taken just after entering of Tokyo Bay. The circular disturbance in the very centre of the scope is the saturation caused by strong radar returns from the sea. These returns occur between 2,000 yards on a calm sea up to 6,000 yards during heavy seas. As this was taken in Tokyo Bay, I'm going to say the sea returns are from 2,000, which would mean this picture was taken on the 20,000 yard setting.

All these questions are good, because it makes me check and I find out something else that was in the stuff I've read, but didn't go in and stick in my brain.

[Nisgeis]

Been following this mod with some interest.
From someone who spends a lot of time using shipboard radars, the latest image with the "arced dashes", looks pretty close to the real deal. Actual "clean" radar returns show up a touch fuzzier at the edges (not so crisp).
Hopefully the feedback helps out. The work you've done on this looks great!

Good to know it looks authentic. The screen can be fuzzed/blurred a bit I should think after I've finished all the changes.

[LukeFF]

They seem to have increased the number of receivers, so not only did the TDC have a calculated range and the radar range feed and associated bearing details, the radar station also had a calculated range and obviously it's own range unit and bearing. This seems to have been to reduce the amount of verbal communication required to improve efficiency and it also allowed the TDC operator and Radar operator to check for bearing rate error.

Reducing verbal reports to an absolute minumum was one of the benefits of the Mark 4 TDC. I'll pull out the section where Norman Friedman talks about it in his book and post it here, later on today when I'm not so tired. :zzz:

[M. Sarsfield]

Nice research, Nisgeis. You're definitely on the right track and we're all benefitting from it.

A little off topic, here's a nice post-war manual on how to set up a firing solution, different roles of the firing solution party, etc. I think this is a must-read for every WWII sub simmer. Definitely a must-read for n00bs.

http://www.hnsa.org/doc/attack/index.htm

[AVGWarhawk]

Looks great :)

BTW, just wanted to add something from a pdf on the MkIV TDC that I have around here:


Thanks for the info! From what I can find out, nothing explicitly states anything is directly entered for calculation, apart from the own speed and own course inputs. The reference that said 'fed into' etcetera may have been worded ambiguously. From what I can make out, all input were manual (except for own course and speed) and everything else had repeaters. I'm a bit hazy on method of correction to these values - I've seen reference to handles used to adjust range being different to the input to set range, but that's for future research. I wanted to get a copy of 'Torpedo Data Computer' but it doesn't seem to in print.

They seem to have increased the number of receivers, so not only did the TDC have a calculated range and the radar range feed and associated bearing details, the radar station also had a calculated range and obviously it's own range unit and bearing. This seems to have been to reduce the amount of verbal communication required to improve efficiency and it also allowed the TDC operator and Radar operator to check for bearing rate error. I did find one reference to the deck gun having repeaters for radar range and bearing for fire control.

Anyway, here's a picture posted on the forum before by akdavis in this thread http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=115263&highlight=Radar+range

The last picture posted is dated, so is of the correct era, but it is from the seaplane tender USS Cumberland Sound, so I don't think it would be an SJ set (note no bearing lines).

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/g340000/g344503.jpg

The poster said that this is an image taken just after entering of Tokyo Bay. The circular disturbance in the very centre of the scope is the saturation caused by strong radar returns from the sea. These returns occur between 2,000 yards on a calm sea up to 6,000 yards during heavy seas. As this was taken in Tokyo Bay, I'm going to say the sea returns are from 2,000, which would mean this picture was taken on the 20,000 yard setting.

All these questions are good, because it makes me check and I find out something else that was in the stuff I've read, but didn't go in and stick in my brain.

Great pic and from what I recall seeing. As you can see there is a lot of "clutter" on the screen from other things other than ships. Ship are elongated and have a bit of curve as shown above and what you have created thus far is darn good. If we can at least find a way to create "clutter" on the screen from weather, sea state or a seagull sitting on the mast, that would be great. Returns from a distance show as one big mass which the game does already. As you draw closer the mass becomes individual masses or ships. Currently the radar is just too good. So, how to make some fuzzy mess on the screen and force me have to really study the radar to find my targets bearing and speed? These are the questions:hmm: Next thing to study............how to make the darn thing break down? Many times the radar was broken or died during patrols. I'm not asking much:smug: Nice work:rock:


To think Nisgeis(I spelled it right:rotfl:) this all started with a texture on a submarine you worked on. :hmm: Hmmmm....another awesome modder in the making. :D

[M. Sarsfield]

I don't see a sweep line in that photo, either.

[akdavis]

I don't see a sweep line in that photo, either.

Possibly because of low shutter speed. And thank you Nigeis for digging up that old thread.

[LukeFF]

I don't see a sweep line in that photo, either.
Draw an imaginary line from bearing 190 up towards the center, and you'll see it.

[LukeFF]

Reducing verbal reports to an absolute minumum was one of the benefits of the Mark 4 TDC. I'll pull out the section where Norman Friedman talks about it in his book and post it here, later on today when I'm not so tired. :zzz:

Alright, here we go:

Generated bearing and range could be transmitted automatically to the JT and SJ, with corrections fed back to the TDC. The key quantities were the rates at which range and bearing were changing. Now they could be measured almost directly. For example, the JT operator could estimate the rate at which a target's bearing was changing. He could set JT to turn at that rate; if it stayed on the target, the estimate was correct. The measured bearing rate could be fed back to the TDC. Mk 4 could handle more torpedo range and speed settings than its predecessor. Maximum tracking range was up to 30,000 yd, and target speed was to 40 kt. Maximum torpedo gyro angle was 150 degrees. The postwar Mk 106 submarine fire-control system was based on Mk 4.

[Nisgeis]

Ignore the range rings, they are temporary to help with calibration. I'm having trouble with this, for various technical reasons, one being the pixel shader is single pass and I can't store any information at all.

After some early success hooking the radar range readouts up to the engine RPM gauges (which was a bit strange), Here's the state of play at the moment:

http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg307/Nisgeis/SubSim/RadarRangeWIP.jpg

The game engine only sends the info in meters, but then again the radar range is in meters, even if you choose imperial. The range is correct up to 9,999 meters, after which the first digit refuses to move. I haven't been able to find a send range to TDC button - does anyone know if there is one for the U-Boat campaign on the German set?

[Q3ark]

I haven't been able to find a send range to TDC button - does anyone know if there is one for the U-Boat campaign on the German set?

Have had a look on the German set, there dosen't appear to be a send range button. The only switches are on/off, sweep/focus and a range selector just like th ones on the U.S. set.

Have to say your new radar screen is looking good :up:

[Nisgeis]

Have had a look on the German set, there dosen't appear to be a send range button. The only switches are on/off, sweep/focus and a range selector just like th ones on the U.S. set.

Can you set range manually in the U-Boats, or only with the stadimeter and sonar?

[Q3ark]

Can you set range manually in the U-Boats, or only with the stadimeter and sonar?

Let me have a look see :hmm:

You can set range manually using the interface on the attack map from 300 to 10000 meters just like SH3.

You can also alter the bearing to target, angle on the bow and speed. Wish we could do that from the attack map in the fleet boats:damn:

[M. Sarsfield]

Nisgeis,

Are you closer to solving the dial issue not turning over after 9,999? Do you plan on adding a 5th digit, since the radar is supposed to go out to 80,000 yards?

I guess the range read-out is hardcoded, since that wasn't a factor/option that the devs counted on needing both measurement systems for. I have a conversion spreadsheet for yards and meters, anyway. So, that's not a big deal.

[Mav87th]

Here is some warshots in color of the radar in function. Both of the scopes are present in it at 9:16.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3rhxYq2nNI&feature=related

Sorry i forgot the link - doh

[M. Sarsfield]

Pics?

[akdavis]

Here is some warshots in color of the radar in function. Both of the scopes are present in it at 9:16.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3rhxYq2nNI&feature=related

Sorry i forgot the link - doh

Hmm...I have my doubts about the PPI clips shown. It is not from the same, black-and-white film as the A-Scope imagery, which seems in keeping with the quality of low-light film at the time. Furthermore, it is an extremely "clean" image, which suggests Hollywood interpretation to me. I suspect it might be from a movie.

Most of this has probably been posted before. There are these from the USS Cobia:

http://www.usscobia.com/both.jpg
http://www.usscobia.com/ppi.jpg
http://www.usscobia.com/P2050014.jpg


Description:A 10 cm surface-search and torpedo- control for installation on submarine.
Number of operators:One.
Power supply:SJ-1; 1.4 kva, 115 v, 60 cps. SJ SJ-1Maximum reliable range (miles): Bombers, 500 ft. 5. 5. Battleships 8. 12. Cruiser 8. 12. Destroyers 6. 8. Submarines (sur- faced) 3. 6. Beacons S Band Horizon. same.Resolution: Range (yd.) 50. 50. Bearing (deg.) 5. 5.Accuracy: Range (yd.). 25+-.l%. 15+-.1% (precision sweep). Bearing (deg.) +-0.3. 0.3 degree (with lobe switch).Minimum range (yd.) 250. 250.Indication and data output:
Range: 5-inch A-scope with range step and dial. Main Sweep: 60,000 yd. Expanded Sweep 20,000 yds. Precision sweep on 40,000 yds. 1,500 yds. either side of mark.
Bearing: Relative bearing read from train indicator. Pip match is optional.
PPI: A 5-inch PPI is provided with SJ-a and SJ-1
Ranges: 8,000, 20,000, 80,000 yd. 160,000 yd. delayed sweep.
Other: Provisions for IFF indication are present.
Transmitter specifications: Frequency (Mc) 3000. R-f source Magnetron,706AY. R-f lines Wave guide. Pulser type Thyraton-SJ; Peterson Co: 1 SJ2. R-f peak power (kw) SJ-20; SJ-1-50. R-f average power (kw) 0.018-SJ. Pulse rate (pps.) SJ-600 & 1800; SJ-1- 1500+-150. Pulse length (micro second) 0.25.Receiver specifications: Type Superheterodyne. Stages. 6 i-f; 3 video. Local oscillator 707A; SJ-1-726B. Intermediate frequency (Mc) 60. Band pass (Mc). 5 i-f; 5 video. Mixer Crystal SJ-1; grounded. grid triode-SJ. Noise, db above theoretical. 10.Antenna specifications: Total weight (lbs.) SJ-300; SJ-1-330. Feed Wave guide. Reflector: Old type Solid unhoused reflector. New type Slotted. Shape Truncated paraboloid. Size SJ-10" high x 30" wide.H.P. beam width: Horizontal 9 degrees. Vertical 29 degrees.Polarization Horizontal.Gain (db) 19 (SJ-1).Scan Continuous rotation through 360 degrees at 1 to 8 r.p.m. by motor or it may be trained manually. Left-right lobe switching. Divergence is 5 degrees. Elevation fixed.Tube complement.-1 type 705A, 1 type 706A or 706AY, 1 type 707A, 1 type 708A, 1 type 709A, 1 type 713A, 1 type 722A, 1 type 2X2/879, 1 type 5HP1, 4 type 5U4G, 1 type 6AB7, 14 type 6AC7, 1 type 6H6, 10 type 6L6, 10 type 6SN7GT, 4 type 6SQ7, 2 type VR-105/30, 3 type VR-150-30, 1 type 813, 2 type 836, 4 type 991.
Dimensions and weights (SJ-1) Unit Navy Type Length Width Depth Weight Pampanito No. Inches Inches Inches Pounds Serial #Antenna assembly CW-66AFC 31 1/2 30 15 350Transmitter re- CW-43AAF-1 20 5/8 18 7/8 13 190 #12,C.T. ceiver.Range indicator CW-55AAL-1 16 3/4 11 3/8 20 3/4 110Plan position in- CW-55ADE 14 3/8 13 1/8 19 7/8 120 #6,C.T. dicator.Range unit CW-23ACC 6 9/16 9 1/2 18 3/4 67 #67,C.T.High voltage rec- CFZ-2OAAR-1 10 5/16 12 18 7/16 100 #6,P.R. tifier.Regulated recti- CFC-2OAAQ 18 1/4 10 21/32 17 5/8 115 #6A,6B P.R. fier (2).Main control unit. CFC-23ADH 14 1/4 15 1/4 13 125 C.T.Bearing indicator CW-55ADD 8 12 8 20 C.T.,C.R.Motor generator CW 12 37 3/4 12 110 control unit.Adapter control CW-23ABX 5 3/4 5 3/4 4 5/8 6 1/2 C.T.,P.R. unit.Junction box (2) CW-62AAB 14 17 9/16 4 5/8 32Motor generator CG-21AAS 15 1/8 13 7/16 44 3/8 450 set.Range transmitter 6 1/2 9 1/32 9 1/2 26Test Equipment.-ABM wave meter and OBU echo box included. OBU,C.T.Literature.-SJ instruction book (Eng. 188). SJ-1 instruction book (Ships 258).


SV

Description.-An 8 cm. aircraft warning radar for use on submarines to supersede the SD.
SV-1 has instantaneous automatic volume control, fast time constant. Also uses SS indicating unit.
Number of operators.-One
Weight installed.-3,400 lb.
Power suppIy. 6 kva, 115 volts, 60 cps, 1 phase. Maximum reliable range. (miles): Bombers, at 30,000 ft 7.5 Bombers, at 10,000 ft 10 Fighters, at 10,000 ft 12 Battleships 12.5 Cruisers 15 Destroyers 10 Submarines, surfaced 7.5Resolution: Range (yd.) 5.7 Bearing (deg.) 5Accuracy: SV SV-1 Range (yd.) +-(50+0.1%). 15+-1%. Bearing (deg.) +-2. 1/2.Minimum range (yd.) 400. 400.Indication and data output:
Range: SV uses SJ-1 indicator (5 inch A scope with 10, 30 mi. ranges). SV-1 uses SS range indicator (3 inch A scope 10, 30 mi. ranges).
Bearing: SV-1 uses SS bearing indicator (3 inch B scope with 4,000 yd. range).
P.P.I.: 5-inch scope. Provision for four radar repeaters.
Ranges: 4, 10, 40 miles on SV; 4, 10, 20, 80 miles on SV-1
Other: Provisions for IFF trigger and display.
Antenna specifications: Total weight (lb.) 500 including pedestal but not torque tube. Feed Wave guide. Reflector: Type Slotted csc2 parabola. Size 2 ft. high x 4 ft. wide. H.P. beam width: Horizontal 5.5 degrees. Vertical 60 degrees. Polarization Horizontal. Gain (db) 30. Scan 360 degrees at 0 to 6 r.p.m. by motor. D-c motor control.Transmitter specifications: Frequency (Mc.) 3400-3700. R-f Source Magnetron. R-f Lines Wave guide. Pulser type Nonlinear coil. R-f peak power (kw) 500. R-f average power SV-0.2; SV-1-0.15.(kw). Pulse rates (pps) SV-300 +-5%; Pulse length (micro sec) 1.

http://www.maritime.org/img/radio-svppi.gif
SV Radar PPI.
http://www.maritime.org/img/radio-svrange.gif

SV Range Indicator
Receiver specifications: Type Superheterodyne. Stages 7 i.f. 2 video. Local oscillator 2K29. Intermediate freq. 60.(Mc.). Band pass (Mc.) 2 i.f.; 3 video. Mixer Crystal IN21B. Noise, db above 13. theoretical.Tube complement.-2 type 1B27; 1 type 2AP1; 1 type 2K29; 2 type 3B24; 4 type 5D21; 2 type 371B; 10 type 6AG7; 6 type 6AK5; 7 type 6AL5; 1 type 6S5GT; 18 type 6SN7GT; 1 type 6V6GT; 3 type 705A; 1 type 807; 1 type 4J36; 1 type 2X2; 5 type 5HP1; 17 type 6AC7; 4 type 991; 7 type OD3/VR150; I type 6Y6-G; 1 type 3B24; 1 type SFP7; 1 type 6H6GT; 2 type 6L6-GA; 2 type 991; 6 type SR4GY; 2 type 393A; 2 type C6J.

Literature.-Instruction book, Ships 340. Dimensions and weights Unit Navy Type Length Width Depth Weight Pampanito Inches Inches Inches Pounds Serial #Antenna projector 66AJV 27 48 36 400Transmitter-receiver 43ACW 22 21 70 800 C.R.Echo box 13ABG 16 8 7 10Torque tube drive 10AFB 16 22 30 500 unit.Motor drive gear unit 10AFD 11 18 13 125Motor drive shaft (#1) (#1) (#1) 14Spline shaft drive unit. 1OAFC 11 17 9 50Spline shaft (#2) (#2) (#2) 100Spline shaft upper 10AFE 8 6 8 25 bearing unit.Synchro unit 21ADE 12 17 11 90Main control unit 23AGD 18 21 18 100 #28,C.R.Range unit 23ACC 19 10 7 60 #28,C.R.PPI 55ADE 20 12 15 120 #28,C.R.,#6,C.T.Range indicator 55AGE 21 17 13 110 #28,C.R.Regulated rectifier 2OADN 27 20 18 250 #28,C.R.Auxiliary rectifier 20ADO 27 20 18 200 #28,C.R.Wave guide switching 24AAK 20 13 9 75 C.R. unit.Dummy antenna 66AJW 20 11 C.R.Motor controller unit. 23AGE 12 12 14 50 #28,C.R.Motor control rectifier. 2OADP 27 20 18 300 #28,C.R.Antenna drive motor. 21ADC 21 11 11 260Adaptor control unit 23ABX 5 6 10 7 C.T., C.R.Frequency power meter TS-295/UP 10 9 9(#1) 1.5 diameter. Length cut on job.
(#2) 2.25 diameter. 14' in length.
REFERENCES:

The information enclosed here is excerpted from:
Catalogue of Naval Electronic Equipment-April 1946- NavShips 900,116.

[Nisgeis]

Nisgeis,

Are you closer to solving the dial issue not turning over after 9,999? Do you plan on adding a 5th digit, since the radar is supposed to go out to 80,000 yards?

I guess the range read-out is hardcoded, since that wasn't a factor/option that the devs counted on needing both measurement systems for. I have a conversion spreadsheet for yards and meters, anyway. So, that's not a big deal.

Sorry for the late response, I've been testing away and got some worrying results.

The variables that you can attach to dials are hardcoded and I don't think there's a way to add in a fifth dial, but that's what people said about arced contacts right? 10km is about 11,000 yards, so should be enough range to start a track with. There may be a method to add it in another way, but it might be a prohibitively heavy load for the graphics card.

[Nisgeis]

[quote=akdavisHmm...I have my doubts about the PPI clips shown. It is not from the same, black-and-white film as the A-Scope imagery, which seems in keeping with the quality of low-light film at the time. Furthermore, it is an extremely "clean" image, which suggests Hollywood interpretation to me. I suspect it might be from a movie.[/quote]

Here's some stills for you M. Sarsfield:

Radar Antenna shown before the radar screen clips:

http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg307/Nisgeis/SubSim/YouTubeAntenna.jpg

'A' Scope or possibly 'R' Scope :

http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg307/Nisgeis/SubSim/YouTubeA-Scope.jpg

PPI Scope:

http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg307/Nisgeis/SubSim/YouTubePPI2.jpg

I agree the PPI scope isn't from an SJ and doesn't look of WWII era. The clip of a radar antenna they show immediately before the two radar sequences looks like a polystyrene rod antenna, which is a fire control radar. I'm not sure these types of radar have PPI scopes.

My reasoning is this: The PPI image shows that the radar it is connected to has a very narrow beam, as the blob is circular, not arced, indicating that radar has a high bearing resolution, whereas the SJ set had a bearing resolution of 5 degrees. If you note on the PPI screen shown, it is also drwing its own range rings, which is not something the SJ set did. I'm not sure if other search radars did this during WW II though. Also, if the speed of the film is accurate, which given the fade rate of the scope seems like it is, then the PPI scope is connected to a radar head that is rotating once every 3 seconds, or 24 RPM. The SJ radar rotated at a max of 10 or 12 RPM, which would suggest that the radar was of a later era. Finally, the SS sets that replaced SJ on submarines were connected to the existing scopes, so no upgrades there either. Lastly, that PPI image does not appear to be receiving any sea returns, which normally would swamp the scope up to at least 2,000 yards and there would be a clump of light in the centre of the scope if that PPI scope were connected to a surface search radar, so I am guessing that it's attached to an air search radar.

[M. Sarsfield]

Finally, the SS sets that replaced SJ on submarines were connected to the existing scopes, so no upgrades there either.

Hmmmm... now you really peaked my interest. Batfish has electrical boxes labeled as SS RADAR, but the unit in the Batfish CT looks a lot more modern than the SJ-1 scopes. Might be a 50's or 60's era scope.

[Nisgeis]

This will teach me to post without checking my references! I can't be sure that the SS sets were installed to use the existing scopes, or if they were replaced. There's no mention of it. The SS radars got a new 'B' Scope, and had a PPI and 'A' Scope, though the SS was produced too late in the war for service. ST used the 'A' Scope of the SJ and SV, first installed in August 1945 used the SJ scopes as well.

Would love to see some pics of the USS Batfish's scopes and range units.

Edit: Even if the scopes weren't replaced initially, they probably would have been over time with newer models.

[CaptainNemo]

Awesome! Can we ask how the state of the development is?

Regarding the question if green or red radar:

You have to consider that after the war the submarines had been updated with new technology. So it is unsure if the actual pictures are historically correct.

[akdavis]

Awesome! Can we ask how the state of the development is?

Regarding the question if green or red radar:

You have to consider that after the war the submarines had been updated with new technology. So it is unsure if the actual pictures are historically correct.

The pictures of the red scope are of the only remaining working SJ-1 radar, if I understand correctly.

[CaptainNemo]

In the movie "Below" where I think they had a fairly historically correct setting the radar screen was green.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41VK3F4FCTL._SS500_.jpg

http://www.aotd-flottille.de/Bilder/greenradar.jpg

[Nisgeis]

In the movie "Below" where I think they had a fairly historically correct setting the radar screen was green.



They also said 'Blow Negative' when they wanted to dive quickly, bless them. I'll take a look at my copy this evening. Those range rings don't look right, as far as I have found, built in range rings were not a feature of the SJ radar.

[CaptainNemo]

@Nisgeis

:rotfl:

You are right, the movie Below was okay but in detail...oh well. But I had the impression that the setting was historically correct.

The question is: If the radar on the cobia hasn´t been updated after the war.

[Nisgeis]

Awesome! Can we ask how the state of the development is?

Regarding the question if green or red radar:

You have to consider that after the war the submarines had been updated with new technology. So it is unsure if the actual pictures are historically correct.

You're right about the updates, though I think for claims of authentic WWII sets, they would check the serial numbers before making such a claim. State of development is me trying to work out if the radar bearings are all screwy, or if I just can't read them of the bearing indicator accurately enough. The bearings given by the radar are between 10 and 1 degrees to the left of the target, as if the radar has been lobed off to the left hand side by 5 degrees. This appears to be why the radar blips jump onto the screen well ahead of the sweep reaching them.

Does anyone actually use the radar to track targets? U.S. or German radar sets? Can you get an accurate bearing with the german sets, ie one that matches the periscope bearing.

As for red versus blue, sorry, I mean green. It's not a problem to change the colours. I think I've seen two sets of pic with the 'A' scope being green and the PPI scope being Orangey/Red. The one pic of a 'B' scope I saw, it was purple.

@M. Sarsfield, SJ 'A' Scope was apparently 5 inches and the SS 'A' Scope was 3 inches, so they are different scopes. The SS set also had a 'B' Scope, which was 3 inches, with a 4,000 yard range and was a bearing indicator. How big is the one on the Batfish and does it have a 'B' Scope?

[M. Sarsfield]

The question is: If the radar on the cobia hasn´t been updated after the war.

I correspond with the Cobia museum frequently and thy swear up and down that they own the original radar scopes from the war years. So, I'll take their word for it.


@M. Sarsfield, SJ 'A' Scope was apparently 5 inches and the SS 'A' Scope was 3 inches, so they are different scopes. The SS set also had a 'B' Scope, which was 3 inches, with a 4,000 yard range and was a bearing indicator. How big is the one on the Batfish and does it have a 'B' Scope?

The Batfish has about a 2 1/2 ft high cabinet that's about 2 feet wide and a foot deep. I think the scope diameter is 5 inches - only PPI. The knobs and dials are smaller on it than the old SJ sets. There are two doors on the front to access the electronics. Currently the rotating motor for the antenna is removed for repairs, but they wan't to at least get it rotating and then some day we'll get the cabinet/scope working.

[CaptainNemo]

Hmm, then why is there always a green radar? Be it in movies or games...Very strange...

[M. Sarsfield]

Most game researchers probably go off of black and white historic photos and compare them to modern radar/ATC equipment. They make the incorrect assumption that all radar [PPI] screens have always been green. It won't be the first time that something in a game, movie, TV show, etc. has been wrong.

Another thing that I have discovered being around sub vets is that 20 vets in a room will sometimes give you 20 different memories. Small details escape a lot of peopel over time - especially 60+ years.

[CaptainNemo]

Assumedly you are right..So the big question has been answered. The radar screens were red.

[akdavis]

Wartime SG Radar imagery:

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/i00000/i00391.jpg
USS Denver (CL-58) SG radarscope image, showing the situation at time 0138, shortly before the U.S. force ceased its bombardment of Vila.

Denver is the bright spot in the scope center, with other the U.S. ships steaming north, ahead of her. The large white patch at left is Kolombangara, with Vila at its southern end. Very faint patches offshore, to the west of the U.S. ships, are the wreckage of Japanese destroyers Murasame and Minegumo, sunk earlier in the action. At the lower left is Arundel Island. New Georgia is in the lower right.

[M. Sarsfield]

I took pictures of the Batfish SS-2 radar, BUT most software developers have not developed a way for my LG Trax camera phone to talk to Winblows XP :nope: . So, I will have to use my Fuji digital camera when I go back in two weeks.

The unit does have two scopes. The PPI is about 5 inches in diameter and the screen looks like it is orange. There is also a small 2 or 3 inch A-scope to the right of it that is probably green. There are two range dials that use the odometer wheels. One is in yards and the other one is in miles. They had red lenses and the wheels were white with black numbers.

[Hitman]

In SH1 -and I think that was a very well documented game- the PPI was orange and the A-scope green. :hmm:

[Nisgeis]

In SH1 -and I think that was a very well documented game- the PPI was orange and the A-scope green. :hmm:

Yep, that seems to be the way the evidence is pointing.

Thanks M.Sarsfield for the info, can't wait to see the pics.

[Nisgeis]

The range dials, though still in meters only are ready for testing. Would anyone like to be involved in the testing? I just got four hits at 6,500 yards whilst just testing this.

This will just be a test of the digital range readouts in all subs. It shouldn't matter whether you are running version version 1.4 or version 1.5, or any of the big mods. But we'll see about that when we test it.

The pixel shader work isn't ready yet, as it doesn't work with 1.5 the same way as with 1.4, so the PPI scope isn't ready yet, but in the mean time if you are interested in testing the digital readouts with range rings and bearing lines, you can use the previous version here:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=134566&highlight=radar+bearing

If you are interested in testing, please post here. Thanks.

[akdavis]

Glad to help test Nisgeis. Also, I was pondering last night whether there might be a way to cause at least large-caliber shell splashes (i.e. "Particles.P01_&Big_Shell_water_explosion") to return a radar contact, if not all calibers.

[Nisgeis]

Glad to help test Nisgeis. Also, I was pondering last night whether there might be a way to cause at least large-caliber shell splashes (i.e. "Particles.P01_&Big_Shell_water_explosion") to return a radar contact, if not all calibers.

I haven't looked at what causes an object to give a radar echo, it may be a property of the object. It was removed from sampans in one of the patches, so may be possible. Either it's hard coded into the radar routine, or there's a sim controller in the .dat file for the ship - it's on my to do list, to try to see if I can get ship contacts longer.

[akdavis]

Well, I have tested with stock 1.5 so far. Took me a few tries to understand the dial readings above 10,000m, but quite effective once I figured it out! Deck gun hits on a large target at 10,000m and over the horizon at 13,000m using radar for range (visual bearing on superstructure). Hits on a moving target at 7,000m (bearing obtained by visual). Interestingly enough, hits are not consistent, which seems to indicate the guns are not entirely gyro-stabilized as they might seem (but the variation is not apparent until you fire at these extreme ranges). Seems that there actually is a tiny bit of pitching up and down with the guns. Gun bearing seems to stay constant. Obviously shooting truly BVR (with true bearing unknown) will be much more challenging.

Noticed two things so far:

1. Correct bearing seems to be on the counter-clockwise side of the contact (i.e. rotate clockwise through the target until you lose the return, then rotate back until you first pick up the return, that is the accurate bearing (AI seems to return bearing on the edge of the return first reached rotating clockwise).

2. In the Gato, the range dial on the A-scope is reversed from the range dial on the PPI display (which has the correct range).

http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/3787/gato1ls6.jpg

Here, PPI dial shows correct range of 9659m, but A-scope has this number reversed (9569m).

More obvious here:
http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/3559/gato2wq5.jpg
A-scope reads 5109, PPI reads 9015 (once again, PPI is correct).

Porpoise in training school missions does not have this, but I have not tested any other subs yet.

[akdavis]

Okay, tested the other classes. A-scope range dial has reversed value on:

Gato
Gar
Tambor
Balao

Okay on:

S-18
S-42
Porpoise
Salmon
Sargo

[Nisgeis]

Well, I have tested with stock 1.5 so far. Took me a few tries to understand the dial readings above 10,000m, but quite effective once I figured it out!

What method are you using? Guestimating with the range rings how many thousand meters away they are and then fine tuning with the readout, or using the A-Scope to get the thousands? Inetersting, as I only thought it would be useful below 10 km.

Deck gun hits on a large target at 10,000m and over the horizon at 13,000m using radar for range (visual bearing on superstructure). Hits on a moving target at 7,000m (bearing obtained by visual).

Blimey, that's extreme shooting :o - are you using one of the playable BB mods?


Noticed two things so far:

1. Correct bearing seems to be on the counter-clockwise side of the contact (i.e. rotate clockwise through the target until you lose the return, then rotate back until you first pick up the return, that is the accurate bearing (AI seems to return bearing on the edge of the return first reached rotating clockwise).


Very observant! This is an issue I have been struggling with and I don't think there is a way round it. It makes no practical sense, but may be fine operationally. The hydrophone also has an arc of detection, but the hydrophone has the arc either side of the contact, with the correct bearing being the middle of the two bearings where the contact is lost. The radar has an arc that abruptly ends right on the leading edge. It's as if the radar beam is lobed out to the side, but that doesn't make any sense, as if that were the case, you wouldn't pick up the contact before the sweep got to it and lose it right on it. I can only ssume this is a bit of stock game weirdness.

Out of interest, how are you measuring bearing? The stock camera doesn't allow you to look at the radar antenna bearing indicator properly and it's also not accurate in itself - the bearings are only marked in 5 degree increments and even these aren't accurate - sometimes off by 2 degrees. I am working on a high res accurate bearing indicator, but with this I have noticed that targets directly infront and directly behind are accurate, but ones to the sides are off consistently by half a degree.

The bearing indicator problem may be a game measuring error, as the antenna apparently goes between 0 and 360 degrees, which is 361 degrees in a cirlce, or due to the measurement errors, it's possible it's a 3d model placement problem in the interior, the indicator being position a touch too high/low, and therefore being accurate at 0 and 180, but innacurate at the sides.


2. In the Gato, the range dial on the A-scope is reversed from the range dial on the PPI display (which has the correct range).



That's a bonehead mistake by me. I tested it all before packing it up, but must have packed one of the wrong files in. Thanks for spotting and I PMed you a new link to the (hopefully) corrected file.

Would anyone else like to test this?

[akdavis]

Well, I have tested with stock 1.5 so far. Took me a few tries to understand the dial readings above 10,000m, but quite effective once I figured it out!

What method are you using? Guestimating with the range rings how many thousand meters away they are and then fine tuning with the readout, or using the A-Scope to get the thousands? Inetersting, as I only thought it would be useful below 10 km.

I haven't played a version with range rings yet. Above 10k, I use the A-scope to determine thousands (i.e. 13k etc.) and the range dial for hundreds (i.e. 13150m). At 10k or greater, the left number on the dial remains at 9 while the other three continue to rotate through the numbers, i.e. dial reading as such:

500m = 0500
1000m = 1000
5000m = 5000
9000m = 9000
10000m = 9000
10500m = 9500
11000m = 9000
11750m = 9750

Deck gun hits on a large target at 10,000m and over the horizon at 13,000m using radar for range (visual bearing on superstructure). Hits on a moving target at 7,000m (bearing obtained by visual).

Blimey, that's extreme shooting :o - are you using one of the playable BB mods?
No, but with the stock 3" gun, you can get 5 shells in the air at once at 13,000m. Had about a 20% hit rate on a very large target (CV).

However this was with known and observable bearings. I tried a practice shoot against large tankers at various unknown bearings and ranges from 4-13k at night with rain and heavy fog. This was much more difficult because even if you have the correct bearing, you won't know until you achieve a hit, and the slight pitching/rolling in the gun means you could fire many times on the correct bearing with the correct range and still miss. Add a slow reload time like RFB, and it is a real bitch.


Noticed two things so far:

1. Correct bearing seems to be on the counter-clockwise side of the contact (i.e. rotate clockwise through the target until you lose the return, then rotate back until you first pick up the return, that is the accurate bearing (AI seems to return bearing on the edge of the return first reached rotating clockwise).


Very observant! This is an issue I have been struggling with and I don't think there is a way round it. It makes no practical sense, but may be fine operationally. The hydrophone also has an arc of detection, but the hydrophone has the arc either side of the contact, with the correct bearing being the middle of the two bearings where the contact is lost. The radar has an arc that abruptly ends right on the leading edge. It's as if the radar beam is lobed out to the side, but that doesn't make any sense, as if that were the case, you wouldn't pick up the contact before the sweep got to it and lose it right on it. I can only ssume this is a bit of stock game weirdness.

Out of interest, how are you measuring bearing? The stock camera doesn't allow you to look at the radar antenna bearing indicator properly and it's also not accurate in itself - the bearings are only marked in 5 degree increments and even these aren't accurate - sometimes off by 2 degrees. I am working on a high res accurate bearing indicator, but with this I have noticed that targets directly infront and directly behind are accurate, but ones to the sides are off consistently by half a degree.

The bearing indicator problem may be a game measuring error, as the antenna apparently goes between 0 and 360 degrees, which is 361 degrees in a cirlce, or due to the measurement errors, it's possible it's a 3d model placement problem in the interior, the indicator being position a touch too high/low, and therefore being accurate at 0 and 180, but innacurate at the sides.

With stock, it is very difficult. You are too far away from th display, the contacts are too large and the degree markings to sparse. I found getting a rough bearing (within 1-2 degrees) using RFB much easier. The camera allows you to get close, there are more bearing markings and the contacts are much smaller. Although you still have the contacts giving range returns over a large arc, if you place the update line over the RFB size "blips," you will have a close to correct bearing.

RFB+radar mod:
http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/5240/rfbradarik7.jpg
Here you can see there are actually two long range contacts fairly close together. The sweep line is merged with the closer, more southerly contact, giving both range and a fairly accurate bearing. However, it should be noted that return "arc" of the closer contact is wide enough to mask the second contact, so you can get an accurate bearing off the second contact by moving the sweep line on top of it, but the range returned is still for the closer contact until you move the sweep line significantly closer to 90 degrees, at which point you will get a range return on the second contact, but the bearing of the sweep line will be off the contact.

I have also now tested it with PE3 alone, RFB alone and PE3 + RFB. PE3 works okay, but the cameras make it a bit more difficult to use the range dials. RFB or PE3 + RFB works like a charm, as noted above.

I'll download the new file and test shortly.

[Nisgeis]

akdavis, you seem to be an advanced radar user.:D . I need to make up a little mini manual of how to use the scopes, like how to differentiate targets on the same bearing with different ranges and all the stuff like that in the proper radar manual.

Stock game's bearing resolution on the SJ radar sets is 9 degrees, which is ahistorical. Actual bearing resolution was 5 degrees and makes it easier to distinguish targets on the A-Scope. The PPI stock scope is too good, with the contacts being dots rather than arcs.

Using the antenna bearing indicator, which is loacted above the A-Scope and a high res texture marked accurately, you can get bearing to within half a degree of the leading edge. As part of my testing, I set up a mission in heavy fog, rain and at night with no moon - it's what Radar Training Part 3 used to be like before I moved the submarine closer and have made 3 hits out of 4 with a three degree from 6,000 yards. If I take the time to plot a track and get the correct course and speed, I'm fairly confident I'll get some hits.

I've also used the antenna bearing indicator above the A-Scope to plot tracks from radar depth and that works very well too.

[akdavis]

Well, I must admit I didn't know about the antenna bearing indicator above the A-scope, but unfortunately it looks like RFB makes it pretty much unusable:

http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/7136/rfbantennabearingindicads2.jpg

But without RFB, the indicator appears too low res and inaccurate to be much more useful than the PPI.

[Q3ark]

If memory serves, this was a problem with the re-texturing work done by Oakgroove. Trigger Maru uses the same work, and Ducimus fixed it with the latest version of TMO

[Hitman]

A bit of feedback here:

In the version I have tested, the numbers for range didn't show up when using the 1.4 version of the game. In SH5 they worked well, though.

I therefore did some testing in 1.5 (No other mods installed except your radar mod) and first impression is that the contact dots are a bit too large. :hmm: It becomes difficult differentiating contacts on close bearings.

Also -this happens already in the stock game- many times the A-Scope doesn't show a clear return while the PPI shows a clear contact, making it difficult to use the scale for determining distance when over 10.000 metres.

I will play a mission with a single ship and try to plot it before actually trying to plot a convoy -which is right now much more complicated- and will report.

FYI I'm using a plot in paper, not the game map, and do it with Kim Ronhoff's ruler for radar plotting. Will try to put a photo of the resulting plot when I have it :up:

[akdavis]

Nisgeis, I can't remember if you are on the RFB team or not. Should I report the Antenna Bearing Indicator problem in the RFB thread?

[Nisgeis]

I'm not a part of the RFB team and yes probably best to report it there. Thanks!

[Nisgeis]

A bit of feedback here:

In the version I have tested, the numbers for range didn't show up when using the 1.4 version of the game. In SH5 they worked well, though.


Strange, works for me! I'll recheck.


I therefore did some testing in 1.5 (No other mods installed except your radar mod) and first impression is that the contact dots are a bit too large. :hmm: It becomes difficult differentiating contacts on close bearings.


The PPI and A-Scope screens aren't affected by this part of the MOD, so they will look massive. It's correct that you shouldn't be able to easily distinguish between two targets at the same range on a close bearing, due to arced contacts. Different ranges should be easily distinguishable though.


Also -this happens already in the stock game- many times the A-Scope doesn't show a clear return while the PPI shows a clear contact, making it difficult to use the scale for determining distance when over 10.000 metres.


Yeah, it's annoying to be sure, I'll see if I can reduce the noise level, or change some settings to give better returns.


I will play a mission with a single ship and try to plot it before actually trying to plot a convoy -which is right now much more complicated- and will report.

FYI I'm using a plot in paper, not the game map, and do it with Kim Ronhoff's ruler for radar plotting. Will try to put a photo of the resulting plot when I have it :up:

Looking forward to it. Have you tried mobo? That can be used as a standalone manouevering board.

[Hitman]

Tried again with version 1.4 -clean install with no other mods enabled except yours- and still no numbers showing up :hmm:

I have tried to track a single ship but it becomes too difficult due to the lack of precise bearings :damn: I would accept that a contact covers 2 degrees and even so I could get a good solution. But right now, when it is between the bearing lines currently present, it is impossible to get accurate bearings :shifty: Fixing the antenna bearing indicator above the A-scope and also modifying the cameras.dat is therefore very necessary if the radar display is to remain as it is now. I could of course use the hydrophone as bearing indicator, but I think the real fleet subs were able to get exact bearings. It would be nonesense to install such a precision device and then let the bearings be so vague.

We need better bearings indication :yep:

[Nisgeis]

I have tried to track a single ship but it becomes too difficult due to the lack of precise bearings :damn: I would accept that a contact covers 2 degrees and even so I could get a good solution. But right now, when it is between the bearing lines currently present, it is impossible to get accurate bearings :shifty: Fixing the antenna bearing indicator above the A-scope and also modifying the cameras.dat is therefore very necessary if the radar display is to remain as it is now. I could of course use the hydrophone as bearing indicator, but I think the real fleet subs were able to get exact bearings. It would be nonesense to install such a precision device and then let the bearings be so vague.

We need better bearings indication :yep:

Fleet boats could get exact bearings and ranges on most targets, problems arose with contacts at very similar range on similar bearings (within five degrees). The stock game's radar is too wide at nine degrees, which is a bit of a nightmare if you are trying to track any ships vaguely close.

Actual SJ Radar performance was bearing accuracy to within one quarter of one degree. The in game radar, once I have gotten over the problem of the radar train bearing indicator problem, should be approximately one fifth of one degree. That's how much one turn of the mouse wheel moves the antenna. The in game SJ set is more limited than the actual set. Not being able to obtain bearing by lobing off is a handicap (though only to the small number that would have learnt it). Also the digital readout will only show the closest contact to you. This will improve a bit when I change the resolution to five degrees.

The way the game works out the radar contact bearings is a little odd. It will pick up the contact of the ship for nine degrees clockwise before the ship and continue showing a spike right up until the antenna point at the leading edge of the ship (the first part to be swept over). The very first part of the ship touched is the end of the contact and then the rest of the ship doesn't show up on radar, no matter how big it is. You can see this effect if you hold the radar beam slightly clockwise of the centre of the target. The range will flip to 0000 and the target will slowly fade.

I've got changes for the stock camera, stock bearing train indicator texture, PPI scope resolution increase, bearing contact arcs (making them thinner too) in the works, but things get muddled with all the various mods about, with the spider like nature of the changes. I'm trying to keep it as compatible as possible, but it's not easy :D .

Thanks for everyone's feedback so far.

[Hitman]

The in game radar, once I have gotten over the problem of the radar train bearing indicator problem, should be approximately one fifth of one degree
What have you thought for telling the player those exact bearings?

Would it be possible to add a digital readout for the bearing? :hmm: i.e. like the one for distance you have already, but for bearings (And decimals for that 1/5th of grade?).

[Nisgeis]

What have you thought for telling the player those exact bearings?

Would it be possible to add a digital readout for the bearing? :hmm: i.e. like the one for distance you have already, but for bearings (And decimals for that 1/5th of grade?).

Real life readings would be taken from the venier scale on the big handle used to manually train the antenna. I think a digital readout would be possible, but probably wouldn't look so good.

[Hitman]

Real life readings would be taken from the venier scale on the big handle used to manually train the antenna. I think a digital readout would be possible, but probably wouldn't look so good.

Aaahhhh that explains it :D

I had not noticed that one :damn:

So you are going to implement a rotating graded scale? :hmm:

P.S. What about version 1.4 of the game? Did you check if the mod works for you?

[Nisgeis]

So you are going to implement a rotating graded scale? :hmm:

P.S. What about version 1.4 of the game? Did you check if the mod works for you?

The scale is already in the game, it's directly above the A-Scope. I don't think anyone has noticed it as functional, as the stock (and most mods derived from it) camera doesn't allow you to look at it from the A-Scope view and it's behind something else in the PPI view. It shows relative bearing to target and true bearing to target, with the centre bug rotating. It needs some retexturing, as it's a bit low res, not aligned properly and it's only graduated in 5 degree increments and should having graduations to at least the nearest degree. It's also not aligned properly - I need to work on it some more before it's ready.

Not had time to try in 1.4 again yet. Though I can get round it if it doesn't work, it'll just have to be a stock 1.4 version only.

[Hitman]

The scale is already in the game, it's directly above the A-Scope. It shows relative bearing to target and true bearing to target, with the centre bug rotating. It needs some retexturing, as it's a bit low res, not aligned properly and it's only graduated in 5 degree increments and should having graduations to at least the nearest degree. It's also not aligned properly - I need to work on it some more before it's ready.


Aye, your using that one :yep:

Only problem is that with stock cameras I can't see it, so I need to rework the cameras.dat file.

Thanks

[M. Sarsfield]

Nisgeis,

I worked on the Batfish this weekend, but time did not permit me to photograph the SS-2 radar, nor the Batfish con. Our main priority was starting to replace the rotting deck wood and the little time that I had left I spent hooking up and tweaking our temporary "1MC" system, which we need running for our VJ-Day event in August. I'll get those pictures, yet. :ping:

Needless to say, I became very familiar with the bow dive planes rigging machinery, since I was inside the forward superstructure a lot.

[dannygjk]

First radar mod seems to have worked OK, but there are a few issues with it, which I wanted to fix but thought I would release a workable version, before trying anything more dramatic. I have ideas about how to do all of what is below, but I haven't tested the concept yet, as at the moment I don't have the skills to do this yet. I'll learn as I go. I understand from reading the very long post about the bearing line / range ring mod that was released for patch 1.2 was pretty much killed by patch 1.3. This patch hid the grid texture used somewhere inside the engine so it couldn't be fiddled with and the stock bearing numbers were a permanent feature. This broke peoples custom grids which they had all worked very hard on. They also decided that it was not possible to add in arced contacts, due to the way the radar contact graphics were stored. I hope to make some good progress with this and here's what's planned for version 2 of my radar mod.


Increase resolution of the radar screen. (Complete)
Remove stock bearing numbers. (Complete)
Add high resolution circular bearing numbers round the outside of the scope (needs above completed).
Add a zoom function to the radar screen for easy viewing of the scope). (Complete)
Add high resolution bearing lines in 10 degree increments.
Add high resolution range rings, steps to be determined 10%?
Stop contacts appearing ahead of the sweep.
Remove sweep line?
Change the contacts so that they appear arced, instead of blobs.
Add a digital range readout.
Add a digital bearing readout.
Change max range from 80,000 yards to 40,000 yards.
Leave A-Scope Unaffected. (Failed so far)I know the range change isn't historically accurate, but from testing it seems you can only pick up targets within the 20 nm (approx 37km) viewing sphere, I used the biggest radar return I could get my hands on, the Yamato, parked them all at set distances and the greatest range I got was just over 37,000 yards, which I could maintain up to just under 39,000 whilst backing off the target. I think it makes more sense to use a maximum range that is workable and useful.

As far as I can tell, the radar beam was 5 degrees wide, so any target should be at least an arc of 5 degrees. targets at the same range and with less than 5 degrees seperation should appear as an arc of greater than 5 degrees. I was pleasantly surprised to see that the game appears to model ships being obscured by other ships between you and the ship in question, so it does not appear on the scope.

I don't currently know if the radar sets had a beam sweeping the scope as currently depicted. All the pictures of WW2 era sets I have seen do not appear to have a sweeping beam visible. If someone could shed light on this, it would be appreciated.

I decided to include a digital bearing readout (if possible) in lieu of a bearing train indictaor easily visible. There is one on the wall above the A-Scope, but it's not easy to get at, as if you move to the A-Scope from the PPI, the radar man starts sweeping and you have to be really quick to get a halg decent bearing reading. Digital range readout to hopefully be accurate to within 0.2% of actual distance. Range and bearing info may be diffult to read at extremely close ranges, due to radar lobes.

I'm hoping to make these changes and leave the A-Scope undisturbed, but it might not be possible. It might not be possible to get all of my hoped for changes active, but one has to have goals right?

Remember, radar range is limited by the fact that the earth is round, and radar does not bend over the horizon... ;)

[Mav87th]

Remember, radar range is limited by the fact that the earth is round, and radar does not bend over the horizon... ;)

Actualy yes it does - to some extent :know:

[Bulleye]

Well, it's a good thing the world in SHIV is flat.
With enuogh power we'd have unlimited range! :ping: :rotfl:

[LukeFF]

Actualy yes it does - to some extent :know:

Not to mention the radar sets of WWII also were greatly affected by the vacuum tubes installed in them. Swapping those out could have a noticeable effect on how far a given radar set could pick up a contact. The battleship Kongo, for instance, was detected at a range (about 44,000 yards) far beyond what was considered "normal" for SJ-1. Kongo, additionally, was the only Japanese BB ever sunk by a submarine and the last BB ever to fall to a submarine's torpedoes.

[Bulleye]

So, how's it going?
Any news on the radar front?

[Mav87th]

If you are interested in testing, please post here. Thanks.

I am.

[Wilcke]

Just got caught up on this thread and your work!


Be glad to test it out.

[Bulleye]

Things have been awfully quiet lately in this post.
How are things comming along Nisgeis?

[Demonizer]

Yeah whats going down i just spent about 5 hours making a 2048 PPI Radar Texture only to find out it dont work... Im not a happy chap. :shifty:


Check this out:
http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/8995/ppiradarsv3.jpg

[kriller2]

Yes, hows the radar-mod going Nisgeis - allso you contacted me about some ideas for PE4, please pm when you see this :up:

[Nisgeis]

Well, I've been going through a redundancy process at work and as anyone that has been through it will tell you, it's not fun and it's very stressful, so I haven't had the time or the inclination to do anything with SH4.

It's been going on for about 3 months now and I'm a bit worn out by it, but I am thinking about SH4 again.

It's been a bit of a shock returning, what with the forum split and all - see what happens when my calming influence isn't here :D.

Demonizer, that looks like a very nice texture. What program did you use to create it? Perhaps you'd like to collaborate on this project. There are a number of tricks to getting the textures to work. They involve re-programming the pixel shaders and a number of other artistic things to get SH4 to do what you want.

[Nisgeis]

I've had it confirmed by those that very kindly tested this for me many weeks ago that the range readout works in version 1.5, but not in version 1.4, in the current incarnation. That's probably because I relied on a trick that SH 1.5 uses, that 1.4 apparently doesn't, namely there being a radio room file that was loaded.

The digital range readout is in meters only and I was having great fun with my stopwatch plotting courses of ships I was tracking with range and bearings from the radar set. The radar bearings are a bit screwy and I don't think I can make that any better, but I can write a doc saying how to interpret the bearings you get. Just like RL, there's a learning curve to this new technology :D.

Unfortunately for whatever reason the radar arc changes don't work with SH 1.5, due to whatever changes that have been made. This results in SH 1.5 installations having only a blue radar screen, with nothing displayed on it. I've yet to look into what caused that, as I have to get myself sorted with a dual install. That is a temporary porblem, but it does mean that there will need to be two versions for 1.4 and 1.5.

Thanks to everyone that took the time to test this and I will get on with fixing this up. Sorry for the delay, but, you know... life!

[Demonizer]

Well i managed to get part of my texture in... I coundnt add the outer markers. I managed to get this by using the radar.dds which looks like its meant for the background.. However it displays 4 images starting from the top left hand of the PPI screen and then rotates and flips so adding outter markers such as bearings numbers is impossible unless i can find out to tell the game to display 1 big image and not 4.. Had to mess about with the radar shader file is well to make the hardcoded orginal go away. But one thing i think is clear in what i think was that the shader file has no effect on the background images ie lines and bearings, reason why is because i deleted the shader files and loaded up the game it sperted a load of errors about the missing files but managed to load anyway, but i checked the PPI screen and the orginal background was still there so there must be an embedded image somewhere in the file system which is the daddy.

The files for the PPI-Screen and Ascope seem to be located in for example NSS_GATO_CT.sim near the bottom under radarscreen it says TGA_file data/misc/radar.tga But there is no radar.tga file only radar.dds so i changed the path to include my own version radar1024.tga and changed the tex_dim to 1024 and sorted.

About the shader file i just found the bit where it said RGB (Red,Green,Blue) and 0, 5, 0,

But yeh bit of a heavy nights work i must say.

Im gonna have alook at the Ascope. Il have to do this to other subamarines and hopfully see if i can somehow put in the outer bearing numbers is well once ive done that il pack it up and upload it for public use.

Im gonna make the contacts bigger in the screenshot im using the smaller contacts mod (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=112055&highlight=%5BREL%5D+Small+Radar+Contacts) but as you can see with the 1024 screen it makes the contacts look tiny so il proberly have to make them a bit more larger and faded. Its annoying that i cant add the bearing numbers tho i dunno what else i can use to cut this restriction the orignal PPICircles.dds & Radarsweep.dds seems to have no use anymore... Oh well

http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/5741/ppiradarrn1.jpg

Edited:

Ive managed to get the bearing numbers for the outer marking

http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/8391/ppiradar1bu6.jpg

It seems the PPI-Circles.dds has some kind of use still but only as the outer markings and using one of anvarts old PPIRadarPS.fx file.

Il pack this up asap and get it uploaded it looks pretty nice i think :) And it works for 1.5

[castorp345]

nice work, Demonizer!

[Mav87th]

New question for an old mod...

How was it possible to get the Arced radar returns?

Does anyone remember how that was accomplished ?

[Nisgeis]

I remember! Modification of the shader for the PPI scope.

[Chubster]

Will this mod work with TMO 1.9 and the others and has it addressed the camera view when at radar station...ie far to close to it ??

Looks great

[Nisgeis]

This is an ancient thread that was raised from the dead. The mod was released over a year ago and has been replaced by a newer version and yet another version is being worked on.

[Chubster]

I did wonder...:hmmm:

you wouldnt happen to know the location of the "newer" one would you. The radar and sonar screen in tmo etc do my head in. Im a midget :DL

[Nisgeis]

Hitman, where did you put your version of the radar?

[Mav87th]

I remember! Modification of the shader for the PPI scope.

Did that shader get lost, or do you have it somewhere ?

[Nisgeis]

I still have it, probably somewhere, but 1.5 came out half way through this WIP and it all changed, so I shelved it as all it did was make things more difficult and not a lot of people were interested in things that did that.

[arnahud2]

(...) not a lot of people were interested in things that did that.

Really ?

No ones but a few ones, as me and others.

Even if your project is currently dead, i've to tell you that you did a nice work.