SH4's rendering of Sun and Moon

[Rockin Robbins]

Over at subsowespac a question came up about a typical SH4 screenshot taken from the Alaska area, showing

http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa293/RockinRobbins13/Silent%20Hunter%204/KimRonhoffAlaskaeclipse.jpg

Kim Ronhoff said the time was 1943 to 1944 and asked if the game was showing an eclipse and how accurate was SH4 anyway. I replied "lousy!" and someone else said "pretty darn close." That calls for a Mythbusters-like investigation. Well, here there are several things to check.



Was there a solar eclipse visible from Dutch Harbor in 1943 or 1944?
Was it a partial eclipse like that shown here?
What about the relative sizes of sun and moon?
What about the phase of the moon shown by SH4?
Did any solar eclipse happen at sunset?
If not, what were the relative positions of sun and moon on the sunset of a possible solar eclipse?

To #1, there were two solar eclipses seen from Dutch Harbor in 1943-1944. The first, 2/4/43 was a total eclipse (well, 99%, that's pretty close to total!) beginning at 13:56, at maximum 15:11 and ending 16:25 local time. The second was 1/25/1944 and the moon almost had a clean miss on the sun. No event was visible. SH4 shows a clear overlap, so the event of 2/4/43 is elected. The answer to #1 is yes, there was one and only one suitable solar eclipse in our time frame, on 2/4/43.

#2's answer is no. This eclipse was so nearly total that an observer might not have been able to tell that it wasn't. 99% of total is pretty darned close!

#3 is an easy one. At all times the angular size of the moon and sun are almost exactly the same: ½ degree in the sky. You can just cover them with the fingernail of your little finger at arm's length. The moon does vary a little in size, but that difference is not detectable to the eye, or even in a pair of binoculars. SH4 fails miserably there.

#4. SH4 shows about a one eighth phase moon there. Unfortunately, solar eclipses ALWAYS happen when the phase of the moon is exactly 180º, that is a perfect new moon with zero percent illumination from our point of view. Now the new moon is quite bright because of earthshine, secondary illumination from the full earth, but because of the skyglow from the sun, a new moon is invisible! There is simply nothing to see. The SH4 depiction in that respect is a sorry joke.

#5. Let's watch the solar eclipse of 2/4/43 from Dutch Harbor! As I said, the eclipse actually started at 3:11 pm local time, a long way from sunset. But can you spot the real surprise here? We'll be looking in a constant direction just east of south and the movement of sun and moon will be as it was on that day:

http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa293/RockinRobbins13/Silent%20Hunter%204/DutchHarbor2-4-431113-1429.gif

Can you see the gotcha? Yup, we're darned far north and the sun doesn't go up and down like we expect. In fact, it makes big circles around the sky at a shallow angle to the horizon and only travels a short distance below the horizon! This Dutch Harbor is one freaky place! Who gave the sun permission to act like that? So what the heck? Does the Sun set at all? Since the eclipse happens nothing like what SH4 showed, what really was the position of the Sun and Moon at sunset?

#6. Here is the position at sunset: 5:49 pm local time.

http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa293/RockinRobbins13/Silent%20Hunter%204/screenshot29.jpg

The sun and moon have traveled around half the sky, moving almost horizontally from left to right and dove at a shallow angle of about 10º from the horizon line to barely dip below the horizon for awhile tonight. They will never be more than about 20º below the horizon! You can barely see the moon lit by earthshine, 1º, that's two lunar or solar diameters away from the Sun, above and to the left, a long way from the SH4 plot. Notice that Sun and Moon are the same size and that no portion of the Moon is lit.

Conclusion: SH4 fails in all respects to properly render solar system objects. All speculation and claims of accurate celestial navigation by solar or lunar positions is pure unadulterated bunkum!

In the real sky no stars would be visible in either picture. They are only shown to make clear the relative motion of sky and earth's horizon. Also in the glare of the Sun the moon would not be seen at all, by naked eye or in any kind of optical instrument.

SH4's grade for this exercise? FAIL! FAIL! FAIL!

[totodog]

Well, I'll admit I've never seen someone go so in depth into the rendering of a solar eclipse in a two-year old submarine simulator.

Nice work, though. I learned a lot.

[Radio]

roflol and you told me you don't know how to answer my Vector-Targeting/Mathematics thread? :rotfl2::rotfl2::rotfl2::rotfl2::rotfl2:

The first screenshot reminds me of Kubrick's movie "2001"....:88)

[Akula4745]

Geez... and I had trouble with algebra! LOL
Very interesting post... thanks for doing the detective work!

[Rockin Robbins]

@Radio: yeah, when we jump off the deep end, we take the risk of overwhelming people a bit!;) I hope you know I wasn't attacking you in any way in the other thread, just wondering how to explain it to people and despairing.:up:

It keeps coming up that the sky in SH4 is very accurate and people can use celestial navigation to calculate positions within x hundred yards. Well, in real life that ain't possible, and I hope it's clear by watching the moon and sun fly across the sky at 3 in the afternoon, February 2, 1943, that SH4 didn't exactly take that into account.:har:

And I hope it's clear by seeing the differences between the sizes, phase and positions at sunset, within one minute of the SH4 screenshot, that SH4 is seriously wrong. No celestial navigation involving Sun and Moon will be possible there. Forget it. It would be a waste of time. SH4 is no planetarium simulator. It has a sky with some stars in roughly the right place and two solar system objects in very wrong places.

I thought Kim Ronhoff's question was very interesting and I knew that college graduates today do not know what any uneducated farmer who couldn't spell his own name knew a hundred years ago: that the phase of the moon is tied to its position in the sky and its rise and set time. The new moon always sets at sunset. The full moon cannot rise at 9:00 pm.

And, rather than pull out the nasty equations, I happen to be an amateur astronomer with Patrick Chevalley's incredible Cartes du Ciel, a free astronomy program that can toss the math out the window and just show what I'm talking about. I can put you on the deck of a submarine in Dutch Harbor at 3 pm of February 2, 1943 to let you see for yourself that the sun really did fly across the sky without visibly rising or falling all afternoon! Would you have believed it had you not seen it? Math be damned, it isn't very good at communicating! Your garden variety physicist would argue that point.:O:

As Isaac Assimov said, we live in a universe not only stranger than we imagine, but stranger than we CAN imagine. Who'da thought that a cheap computer game would be so sophisticated that it brought us face to face with one of the strangenesses?

And Dutch Harbor is a pretty cool place!

[Radio]

@Radio:... I hope you know I wasn't attacking you in any way in the other thread, just wondering how to explain it to people and despairing.:up:



Don't worry, I laughed with you about my post :DL

Btw, did you ever try CELESTIA, it's an awesome astronomy freeware program.

[Pisces]

Well luckily for us 6SJ7GT's solution (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=135215&highlight=Stellarium) doesn't rely on SH4 rendering of the sky but does use a realistic planetarium program (Stellarium.org). The downside is that his links are dead for some time now. I'll see if I can find those files on my drives and upload it somewhere. But that might not be today.

[Rockin Robbins]

Yeah, I've looked at Celestia. It's very much a lightweight compared to Cartes du Ciel. Who says the French can't produce anything world class?

Well, actually, that's an unfair generalization. Celestia is made for the casual astronomy dabbler and does things like fictitious "how would our neighborhood look like from Alpha Centauri" and travel through the Solar System whiz bang stuff. People don't realize what astronomers don't know and how that affects such space travel simulation.

Cartes du Ciel is produced for use by astronomers, both amateur and professional and so has very different functions. In a way they kind of compliment each other. But Cartes du Ciel is very much more advanced in function for the amateur and professional astronomer. If you were to travel to the Winter Star Party in the Florida Keys, you'd see lots of people using Cartes du Ciel and nobody using Celestia or Stellarium.

[Radio]

Yep, they have totally different uses. Cartes du Sciel is a professional program to render stars and skies in a scientific manner, whereas Celestia is a mostly educational program.

I once tried Orbiter, but it's so.... difficult (in a lack of a better word), made me feel like this: :doh:

[Munchausen]

I once tried Orbiter, but it's so.... difficult (in a lack of a better word), made me feel like this: :doh:

:03: Successfully docking with the ISS in Orbiter is even more satisfying than sinking your first ship with manual TDC.