RAOBF

[Trevally.]

See this first post for key information and links.




Edit: Adding links
************************************************** ***********

What is each ring for? Link (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1563984&postcount=4)

Finding Range and AOB by pictures Link (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1573021&postcount=200)

Finding Speed by pictures Link (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1565233&postcount=37) and tip Link (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1572245&postcount=189)

Target is too big to fit in the RAOBF at x6 zoom Link (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1567833&postcount=97)

Karamazov__KiUB_User_Guide_ Link (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1564031&postcount=8)

How to make RAOBF scales Link (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1567412&postcount=90)

TRUE SH5 Ships' Dimensions (by ToniloCoyote) Link (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=179718)

Recommended Scope Mod (Manos Scopes) Link (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=179068)

Required UI Mod (TDW UI) Link (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=166093) or (TDW MO) Link (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=176123)

In game Tutorial Mod by Trevally Link (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=177725)

Stoianm's Video Tutorial Link (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1640008&postcount=52) and Link (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1640856&postcount=53)


************************************************** *************



I was looking at the RAOBF and I think I need some help.

So far at x6 scope I am seeing the following.

Pic 1

http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/4892/sh5img20101230144707.png

Pic 2

http://img573.imageshack.us/img573/347/sh5img20101230145403.png

So this looks like it works for scope x6.

Does anyone know how to work for scope x1.5?

[Pisces]

I do not know anything about this specific edition of the Range and AOB finder (don't have SH5, so not familiar with this mod), but I do know how it works in general. (I used it from it's inception with SH3) I think you are looking at the wrong place for the optical length of the target (green arrow). It should be found on the inside scale of the middle (moveable) wheel. That will be aligned to the AOB as calculated by the device. In the second image you have the green arrow at 6.5 (650 meters range), instead of 7.5. So that one is certainly wrong. The scale that you have the green arrow pointed to is only to be used for range (number times 100 meters) values.

BTW did you first calculate the range, and then turn the wheel from the target (mast-) height value to the target length value? That is the proper way to set up the wheels for the AOB calculation!

[TheDarkWraith]

see here: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1435215&postcount=3440

[Pisces]

From outside to inside scales:

most outer scale : real (mast)height for range, or real (ship)length for AOB

outer scale of moveable wheel: range only (number times 100 meters)

inside scale of moveable wheel: optical height or (halve?) length as observed in the scope.

most inner scale: AOB scale, 90 degrees is index to which observed height should be aligned for range measurement in 6x zoom.

[Pisces]

see here: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1435215&postcount=3440I'm afraid that is not how the original RAOBF developed by OLC, Hitman and Joegrundman works. The scale pointed to by the yellow and green arrows in Trevally's images is only to be used for range. The inside scale of the moveable wheel is for observed height and observed (halve)length. Darkwraith's solution seems to work. But it can't, as the observed halve length is 10 marks, but (his) 10 is left of 90 degrees. And that is impossible in the formula. There is no angle that makes the sine of it become bigger than 1. (which is what the 12-o'clock position represents) What he does is cheating the numbers. Still, using 10 on the innerscale of the moveable wheel also doesn't work. Since it points to 15 degrees AOB. And that is clearly not the right angle based on the view. Somehow this yellow scale in the scope is wrong! The observed (halve) length should have a value of about 38 marks.

[TheDarkWraith]

I'm afraid that is not how the original RAOBF developed by OLC, Hitman and Joegrundman works.

it's not based off of them that's probably why. It was developed using Karamazov (KiUB User Guide) as the source of information as to how it works.

[Trevally.]

Thanks Pisces:up:

I will try some more tests with the information you have posted.

[TheDarkWraith]

Here is the document I based the RAOBF off of: http://rapidshare.com/files/440129755/Karamazov__KiUB_User_Guide_.doc

[joegrundman]

it's not based off of them that's probably why. It was developed using Karamazov (KiUB User Guide) as the source of information as to how it works.

karamazovnew just took the RAOBF from the U-jagd tools, simple as that.

[TheDarkWraith]

karamazovnew just took the RAOBF from the U-jagd tools, simple as that.

that's good to know :up: So let me ask you this, is the way I implemented it correct or not? If not, how is it supposed to work? I want it to work correctly and accurately.

[Laconic]

that's good to know :up: So let me ask you this, is the way I implemented it correct or not? If not, how is it supposed to work? I want it to work correctly and accurately.

Check out these video tutorials (http://www.filefront.com/15273293/OLCs-Video-Tutorials.rar/).They lay the whole system out. They show two different versions of the interface, but the function is the same. "Fixing" yours should be a "simple" matter of calibrating the graticules to targets of known range/AOB and editing the RABOF discs accordingly. You might could even hunt down OneLifeCrisis (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/member.php?u=234776) and pick his brain on how he calibrated his version.

[Trevally.]

Some good info - thanks all:up:

Watched the vid then checked out and tested the clicks

http://img269.imageshack.us/img269/215/rangeq.png


As you can see I know the range to target is 720m
I know mastheight is 40.4
The 90deg mark shows that the mast should be 2.25 clicks not 6.75

http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/1556/aob.png

Ok in this one I match range to ship lenght (111m)
5.5 clicks on the bow should be 64deg AOB
Actual was 70 deg and should be 5.75 clicks.


Both pics at at 1.5 zoom.

I will read and test the link from TDW next.

[Trevally.]

:hmmm:Some not right. I just tested a diff ship and this time the bow should have been on click number 32:o

Think I've been at this too long today:88)

[joegrundman]

that's good to know :up: So let me ask you this, is the way I implemented it correct or not? If not, how is it supposed to work? I want it to work correctly and accurately.

I don't actually have sh5 so i haven't seen it in action, but i can see that no one has changed the actual ring markings that i put on. People have added better reticules and markers on the edge of the rings.

The middle ring should freely spin; if it does then it works properly!

[joegrundman]

now i look at your reticule, i notice that the vertical markings are half the spacing of the horizontal, why is this? Are vertical meters smaller than horizontal?

There are broadly speaking only two areas of error with this. One is if the reticule markings have become confused, the other is if the wrong scale of RAOBF is being used. There are two RAOBF wheels "out there", one set by default to 6x magnification and one set to 10x to deal with GWX scope magnification. If you took it from karamazovnew then it's i think certain that this is for 6x magnification.

[joegrundman]

Some good info - thanks all:up:


image removed

As you can see I know the range to target is 720m
I know mastheight is 40.4
The 90deg mark shows that the mast should be 2.25 clicks not 6.75

image removed

Ok in this one I match range to ship lenght (111m)
5.5 clicks on the bow should be 64deg AOB
Actual was 70 deg and should be 5.75 clicks.


Both pics at at 1.5 zoom.

I will read and test the link from TDW next.

How do you know the range is 720m?, anyway in the example, I notice you set the range to 7200m, not 720m

and an AOB reading of 64 instead of 70 can be described broadly as successful. Certainly good enough to shoot with.

EDIT: OK I think i understand the problem now. The point is you are using this at 1.5x, rather than 6x while this RAOBF is set naturally to 6x, therefore there needs to be a division by 4.

If you had set the range to 720m rather than 7200m, it would have shown 22 marks, not 2.2.

However you are using 1.5x instead of 6x so the number of marks needs to be divided by 4. 22/4=5.5, which is it least close to what it does show, although not perhaps close enough..

This implies that the vertical scale is half the size of the horizontal precisely for measuring range at 1.5x, while the horizontal is designed for measuring at 6x and from a position of lock onto target so only one side of the target is measured :hmm:

Seems a slightly long winded way of going about things compared to the simpler original approach of all measurements at same magnification, but i guess there's a reason for it

[Trevally.]

Thanks for the help joegrundman:up:

I think I now understand most of how this works.
I am wanting to test the clicks on the RAOBF.

I have measured the info from map.
Range = 850m
Mastheight = 28.4
zoom is x1.5

Testing range.


http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/7844/pic1px.png

Mast should be at 3.5 clicks but shows 4
I use the bottom right marker for zoom x1.5

[Trevally.]

OK next I am testing range with x6 zoom
I use the 12oclock marker for this.
All values are the same as above.

http://img585.imageshack.us/img585/3918/pic2n.png

Ok here we see the mast should be at 13.4 clicks but is 16clicks

[Trevally.]

Ok next testing AOB at zoom x1.5
Ship lenght is 120m
Range is 850m

http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/1889/pic3v.png

So 4.5clicks x 4 = 18clicks
= AOB at 18.5deg

Actual AOB is 112deg starboard
so 112-90=22deg or 21clicks
21clicks /4= 5.25 clicks rather than the 4.5 shown.

Is this close enough for AOB:06:
Do you think that only the vertical clicks need changing:06:

[Pisces]

Yes, your steps are done correctly, despite vertical graticule marks being wrong.

Instead of multiplying by 4 if you use the 1.5x zoom, you can also drag the moveable wheel counterclockwise from the lower-right index to the 12 o'clock index. And then look at the AOB value aligned to the number of horizontal marks that you see on the graticule scale. That works the same.

[Trevally.]

Yes, your steps are done correctly, despite vertical graticule marks being wrong.

Instead of multiplying by 4 if you use the 1.5x zoom, you can also drag the moveable wheel counterclockwise from the lower-right index to the 12 o'clock index. And then look at the AOB value aligned to the number of horizontal marks that you see on the graticule scale. That works the same.

Thanks for the conformation and the tip Pisces:up:

[joegrundman]

AOBs greater than 90 cannot be shown using this tool, as you realised, but stbd 112 is equivalent to 68. 68 is substantially different from AOB 20 that it gave and is not good enough for targeting.

There is something wrong with the reticule here, or else the technique for using the tool with this reticule needs to be explained further, or else remake the reticule from scratch

edit: you're Orkadian? My parents-in-law live on Orkney!!

[Trevally.]

Thanks joegrundman

I have re-made the reticule - I think I have the vertical correct.
Reading about the AOB I think I've now made a mistake based on this:-

112-90=22deg or 21clicks



If I get vertical correct I can re-do the horizontal.

Posting new test soon.........


edit: you're Orkadian? My parents-in-law live on Orkney!!


:DLYes Im Orcadian:up:. Small world eh....

My home town here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stromness

[Trevally.]

Ok I have tested the new reticule

Range to target is 850m and AOB is 117deg - both measured from map
Mastheight is 28.4
Lenght ship is 120m

Pic1

http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/1505/pic1ju.png

That was zoom1.5 and worked ok:up:


Pic2

http://img684.imageshack.us/img684/7194/pic2bo.png

So vertical is also good at x6

[Trevally.]

For the AOB

Pic3

http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/4228/pic3p.png

Actual aob is 117deg starboard

So 180 - 117 = 63deg
63deg is about 50 clicks on scope /4 = 12.5

So the bow/stern should be on the 12.5 click - where its 5 here:06:
I will re-scale so the 5 is 12.5.

[joegrundman]

That looks good - what did you do to the reticule to make it work?

I've been to Stromness before - lovely little town. My in-laws live around Orphia.

[Trevally.]

I just took the dds file and chopped th e top off.
Then select square (to keep everything in check) and stretch the north/south until the correct click reached my thumb that was marking the screen :D

If you keep everything in balance it works:up:

Yes I know Orphir well - nice views:yeah:

[Trevally.]

Ok - range 850m ship lenght120 zoom x1.5

http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/3435/pic1cl.png


If I reduce by 1 click - ship would be 13x4=52
52=65deg:up:

[joegrundman]

Good job so far! Once you have this calibrated properly, make sure to send it to TDW!

[Trevally.]

Good job so far! Once you have this calibrated properly, make sure to send it to TDW!

Thanks - yes I will sent him the files:up:

If anyone is following this thread and wants to help - I could do with someone to test the obs scope for me. (I have a prob obs scope and cant use it - If yours is working at x6, can you let me know what mod you are using.)

Ok the updated file is here http://www.filefront.com/17738447/NewUIs_TDC_6_1_0_6x_6x_7x_RAOBF_obs test.7z test.7z

Dont know if it matters but I am using 1400 x 900 res in options when making this.

Only obs and attack are updated. I need to get those dam ships to stop shooting at me to test the uzo:D

[Pisces]

Are these pictures taken when the scope is locked on the target? The observed halve length isn't allways the same on the bow as on the stern. It could be that the 'lock point' on SH5 models are not completely dead center. Therefore I would rather use the full observed length of the target than just one side of the line, and base the scaling on that.

[Trevally.]

Are these pictures taken when the scope is locked on the target? The observed halve length isn't allways the same on the bow as on the stern. It could be that the 'lock point' on SH5 models are not completely dead center. Therefore I would rather use the full observed length of the target than just one side of the line, and base the scaling on that.

Yes "follow target" is on. I had noticed this and am working on
iiii|iiiii =4.5 clicks. So far it has worked well with my latest tests with no more than 5deg out. I need to test more ships at diff ranges to be sure.

[Trevally.]

The Uzo test was on a ship measured on map and RM as:-

Range = 2600m
Mastheight=27.1
ShipLength=147m
AOB=30deg


Pic1 - Find Range

Look at mast on ship and read clicks - set inside middle ring to 4.1 at the top marker.
Read mastheight from outer ring.
Read range from outside middle ring.

http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/9967/pic1x.png

[Trevally.]

Pic2 Find AOB

Turn middle ring until range lines up with ship lenght on outside ring.
Count clicks that half the ship takes up and read the clicks on the inside middle ring. They line up with AOB in inside ring.

http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/996/pic2f.png

[joegrundman]

This is a very important calibration exercise you are doing, trevally. I'm surprised it went so long with the wrong reticule.

When next I am in orkney, I shall have to look you up and we can have a beer and talk u-boats!:()1:

[Trevally.]

I'm surprised it went so long with the wrong reticule.



Yes I am too. I guess people could not get it to work and could not understand why. just like me in post 1:oops:
I thought I knew how it worked until I tried to explain it to someone:D


When next I am in orkney, I shall have to look you up and we can have a beer and talk u-boats!:()1:

Yes that would be great - the guys at work are fed up with my u-boat talk:arrgh!:

Do you think I should try and nail down that last 2deg error with the horizontal ones - or mabye creat more test missions from more ranges and angles:06:

[Trevally.]

The Red Marker.


Start timing as ship touches the centre scope line.
Do not move scope.
You must be at 0 knots

Pic1
http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/6924/pic1s.png

Stop timing as ship passes

Pic2
http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/2865/pic2l.png

Move the time it took in seconds (36) middle ring outside - to the ship lenght (147m) on the outside ring.
Read speed on middle inside ring at the red marker:salute:

Pic3
http://img813.imageshack.us/img813/6349/pic3l.png

[Laconic]

Good work, gents...painstaking work, I know, but it's greatly appreciated. Do you know what your scope magnification settings are? Standard TDW UI 1x/4x or are you using Arclight's increase to 1.5x/6x?

[Trevally.]

Thanks Laconic:up:

It was using Arclight's 1.5x/6x

[Zedi]

The Red Marker.


Start timing as ship touches the centre scope line.
Do not move scope.
You must be at 0 knots

Pic1
..

Stop timing as ship passes

Pic2
...

Move the time it took in seconds (36) middle ring outside - to the ship lenght (147m) on the outside ring.
Read speed on middle inside ring at the red marker:salute:



Ship scaling is wrong in SH5. If you read the .cfg files, you will see that a Liberty class is longer than a mighty tanker:

[Unit]
ClassName=KL/LL (aka Liberty cargo))
...
Length=147

[Unit]
ClassName=T3Cimmaron
....
Length=139.6

[joegrundman]

Ship scaling is wrong in SH5. If you read the .cfg files, you will see that a Liberty class is longer than a mighty tanker:

[Unit]
ClassName=KL/LL (aka Liberty cargo))
...
Length=147

[Unit]
ClassName=T3Cimmaron
....
Length=139.6

is this pertinent to the problem in hand, though?

[Zedi]

is this pertinent to the problem in hand, though?

Dunno, was just a heads up regarding the wrong ship scaling in SH5, so dont trust in the readings from the recon manual. I'm not using raofb or any UI mod, only stadimeter and chrono.. I love 2 keep things simple and effective.

[joegrundman]

well the raobf is simple and effective, once calibrated correctly, and once u know how to use it.

but importantly, are you saying the recog manual is inaccurate? ifso, have no major mods addressed this?

[Trevally.]

Dunno, was just a heads up regarding the wrong ship scaling in SH5, so dont trust in the readings from the recon manual


I will test this.

[Zedi]

well the raobf is simple and effective, once calibrated correctly, and once u know how to use it.

but importantly, are you saying the recog manual is inaccurate? ifso, have no major mods addressed this?
Yep, I figured this out a long time ago when I was practicing this simple manual tdc tutorial (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=164917), the "ships length divided by how many seconds it took to pass the scope vertical line" method. Looking in the recon manual I realized that the ships lengths are very wrong. So this method will not work in SH5, better results with the 3.15 rule if your game is not lagging. As far as I know, there is no mod/fix for the wrong scaling.

[Trevally.]

:hmmm: There is something wrong here with lenght as Magnum has said.

I will make a mission with the all side by side so I can check further.
looks like the RM may be wrong with some ships.

[Trevally.]

Also, the updated scales I made for RAOBF is for use with "MRP 1.3"

I am having probs with MRP 1.3 and the obs scope so I have switch to
NewUIs_TDC_6_2_0_emtguf_rework_scopes
This scope is very good - it has a larger viewing area:up:

My new scale will not work with it:damn:

I will make new ones for this:doh:

[joegrundman]

Keep up the good work:arrgh!:

[Trevally.]

I have not got my obs scope working and can test calibration for MRP 1.3.

Height is wrong and needs adjustment.
I still need to fine tune horizontals as well.

I will sort MRP 1.3 first then emtguf.

[Trevally.]

http://img810.imageshack.us/img810/6216/pic1fh.png

http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/473/pic2dr.png

http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/3360/pic3d.png

:nope:

6.5= 147m

then 8.75 should = 197.9

Mastheights are correct:woot:

[TheDarkWraith]

6.5= 147m

then 8.75 should = 197.9

IIRC this was something Reaper7 was complaining about some time ago. The ship lengths are incorrect in the ship files (SOAN gets its information from those files). We need to update the ship files with the correct ship lengths.

[Trevally.]

IIRC this was something Reaper7 was complaining about some time ago. The ship lengths are incorrect in the ship files (SOAN gets its information from those files). We need to update the ship files with the correct ship lengths.

Thanks TDW:salute:

This must be the first step - I can't fix the scales if the lenghts are wrong.

Anyone have any suggestions for an easy way to check this:06:

[Pisces]

Nice work! Trevally

Don't you love it when the SH5 Gods (aka Ubisoft Devs) throw you a space-time curveball by changing model scales. ;)

[Zedi]

IIRC this was something Reaper7 was complaining about some time ago. The ship lengths are incorrect in the ship files (SOAN gets its information from those files). We need to update the ship files with the correct ship lengths.

It was me who started to complain about this issue when I was working on ERMe. Reaper and SteelViking tried to fix this problem, you can read about starting here (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=172187&page=3), following post #34. It might be helpfull for those who wanna try fix this..

[Trevally.]

It was me who started to complain about this issue when I was working on ERMe. Reaper and SteelViking tried to fix this problem, you can read about starting here (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=172187&page=3), following post #34. It might be helpfull for those who wanna try fix this..

Thanks for the info Magnum:up:

Reaper and SV got distracted by speed and Im not sure if they finished their tests on length.

Arclight hit on sales for mastheight being correct and thought length was in scale. I am reading his thread for MRP - full of great info. Cant think why I didnt start here:oops:

So far Im hopeful is that the only error is the RM list for lenght.

Remember, its the scale that matters.

[Trevally.]

Good new and hats off to Arclight:salute:

I have been reading his thread a found that I was not patched to my screen size:oops:

The marking in his mod are working with the raobf.
Only tested a few ships but height is correct every time:woot:
horizontal marks seem to be working if each 1 = 3.3 to 3.5

So now I have removed the yellow raticules and just use the scope mod ones

[joegrundman]

:arrgh!:


good news anyway!

[Trevally.]

I have been testing ship lenght and am sure they are in scale.

So far the only error I have found is the Cimarron Tanker Magnum mentioned.

In the CFG it is - Length=139.6

I think this was supposed to be Length=175m to 180m

[dakuth]

So, in summary:

Arclight's scope mod, which uses the more realistic 1.5x / 6x zooms, also has the correct markings for the RAOBF

Also, lengths are correct except for the C. Tanker?

Therefore, a tweak to the cfg of the tanker, and installing Arclight's scope mod over DW's UI and we should be cooking with gas, right? A quick, "easy" (once learnt) and realistic method for speed, aob and range?

[Trevally.]

So, in summary:

Arclight's scope mod, which uses the more realistic 1.5x / 6x zooms, also has the correct markings for the RAOBF

Also, lengths are correct except for the C. Tanker?

Therefore, a tweak to the cfg of the tanker, and installing Arclight's scope mod over DW's UI and we should be cooking with gas, right? A quick, "easy" (once learnt) and realistic method for speed, aob and range?

Yes:woot:

horizontal marks = 3.4

Therefore, a tweak to the cfg of the tanker

Yes but I think any clone needs a sim tweak:06:

[Trevally.]

After my false start - wrong cameras.cam :88) (you must patch your scope to screen size)

Pic1
http://img705.imageshack.us/img705/6103/pic1je.png

C Tanker is 900m at 90deg AOB - from map

Pic2 - x6 zoom
http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/4505/pic2lzj.png


Pic3 - x1.5 zoom

http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/1103/pic3ne.png


:|\\

[Trevally.]

Pic1
http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/9891/pic4a.png

M tanker has range = 1100m and AOB 121 port - from map


Pic2 x6 zoom
http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/1489/pic5y.png


Pic3 x6 zoom
http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/5057/pic6c.png

map 121deg port (180-121=59)

:|\\

[harag]

HI

I've got TDWs 6.2.1 mod installed and with x6 zoom on the scopes, I've been playing around with the RAOBF and realised I needed to install the patch in the TDWs mods folder for x6x6x7 scoped (doh).

Anyway. After installing, been playing around agian but I can't seem to work out How to use the dials. Looked into the documentation folder but no PDF file - only one for the attack disk (which I've no idea how to use)

Would someone please be kind enough to explain how to use it it both 1.5 and 6x views.

I've seen a 40 min long video that someone did explaining, but that was all in SH3 and a different scope graphic.

Thanks for any help. And thanks for an excellent mod TDW (can't wait for the mega mod !)

Cheers
H

[Trevally.]

HI

I've got TDWs 6.2.1 mod installed and with x6 zoom on the scopes, I've been playing around with the RAOBF and realised I needed to install the patch in the TDWs mods folder for x6x6x7 scoped (doh).

Anyway. After installing, been playing around agian but I can't seem to work out How to use the dials. Looked into the documentation folder but no PDF file - only one for the attack disk (which I've no idea how to use)

Would someone please be kind enough to explain how to use it it both 1.5 and 6x views.

I've seen a 40 min long video that someone did explaining, but that was all in SH3 and a different scope graphic.

Thanks for any help. And thanks for an excellent mod TDW (can't wait for the mega mod !)

Cheers
H

Im sorry harag but the scales I made for the RAOB were wrong.
I was using the wrong camera.cam file:oops:

I have fixed it now and have made new ones to use with either scope.
Copy sent to TDW:up:

Until you get the next patch or version - the scales will be wrong.

For the demo - I am going to write a tutorail for this soon.

You could just read this thread from the start - I used pics etc so people could follow as I learnt it. At the start of the tread I am looking to test so give all info required to work it out:03:

[toniloCoyote]

Hello to everybody in my first post.

Trevally, I've been struggling with the same bug at the same time and in the same way you did, and I've been following your steps in this thread.
I've been trying to find the solution to help you and have hoped that you release the fixed graticules soon, to use them with TDW's UIs and emtguf's optics.

I also have read the Reapers's ERM thread that Magnum pointed to you, after some hours of fighting with the Globin editor searching for some line about ship's length in the .sim files.
Then, I downloaded several tools and 3DS max importers to be able of checking the possible discrepancies between ship's 3D models and the cfg files.

Are you sure that all is OK with these lengths? Should I stop fighting with 3DS and these importers and tools? I'm having too much troubles for doing them to work.

regards.

[harag]

Im sorry harag but the scales I made for the RAOB were wrong.
I was using the wrong camera.cam file:oops:

I have fixed it now and have made new ones to use with either scope.
Copy sent to TDW:up:

Until you get the next patch or version - the scales will be wrong.

For the demo - I am going to write a tutorail for this soon.

You could just read this thread from the start - I used pics etc so people could follow as I learnt it. At the start of the tread I am looking to test so give all info required to work it out:03:

Hi Trevally,

thanks for the reply, I've tried looking through the thread and the images, but got confused as on the raobf graphic we have two black lines 12 oc and 4 oc and a red one at about 2 o clock. I'm not sure how to turn the dials.

Looking forward to an updated fix with the right grades and the demo tutorial will be great - cant wait for that!

thanks guys

[Trevally.]

Hello to everybody in my first post.

Trevally, I've been struggling with the same bug at the same time and in the same way you did, and I've been following your steps in this thread.
I've been trying to find the solution to help you and have hoped that you release the fixed graticules soon, to use them with TDW's UIs and emtguf's optics.

I also have read the Reapers's ERM thread that Magnum pointed to you, after some hours of fighting with the Globin editor searching for some line about ship's length in the .sim files.
Then, I downloaded several tools and 3DS max importers to be able of checking the possible discrepancies between ship's 3D models and the cfg files.

Are you sure that all is OK with these lengths? Should I stop fighting with 3DS and these importers and tools? I'm having too much troubles for doing them to work.

regards.

Hi toniloCoyote and welcome to Subsim:salute:

I have finished the graticules for both scope mods.
I think TDW will add them to his next patch or version:up:

I think Reaper may have already gotten this to work with his UI.
Reading his posts - he was trying much the same tests some time ago.

I do think the ships are correct and the biggest problem is people, like me using the wrong camera.cam file - If you use a scope mod, you must get the correct camera.cam.

I have tested the following ships against each other and the AOB and range worked for all apart from the C Tanker (should be 180m ish)

Hog Freighter - 120m - yes
Med Tanker - 111m - yes
Large liner - 173.7m - yes
Large Steamer - 147m -yes
C Tanker - 139.6m - no - 180m

Im not sure why the C Tanker was wrong - typo - could be 179.6m
If there are others it will only be an error from the CFG info -not scale im sure.

I have a good mission saved for testing - I could send it to you if you like.

[toniloCoyote]

Hello Harag

As TheDarkWraith pointed out, you have the Karamazov guide at:
http://rapidshare.com/files/440129755/Karamazov__KiUB_User_Guide_.doc

Also TheDarkWraith gives some idea about how to use it at:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1435215&postcount=3440

And you can see more examples in this post while Trevally is fighting with the graticules bug.

But, as Trevally says you better wait for next release (6.3) of TDW UIs because it will have the graticules fixed by Trevally.

In order to be able of moving the RAOBF dials you must first turn TDC on.

(sorry for my insufficient English)

[TheDarkWraith]

Hi toniloCoyote and welcome to Subsim:salute:

I have finished the graticules for both scope mods.
I think TDW will add them to his next patch or version:up:

I think Reaper may have already gotten this to work with his UI.
Reading his posts - he was trying much the same tests some time ago.

I do think the ships are correct and the biggest problem is people, like me using the wrong camera.cam file - If you use a scope mod, you must get the correct camera.cam.

I have tested the following ships against each other and the AOB and range worked for all apart from the C Tanker (should be 180m ish)

Hog Freighter - 120m - yes
Med Tanker - 111m - yes
Large liner - 173.7m - yes
Large Steamer - 147m -yes
C Tanker - 139.6m - no - 180m

Im not sure why the C Tanker was wrong - typo - could be 179.6m
If there are others it will only be an error from the CFG info -not scale im sure.

I have a good mission saved for testing - I could send it to you if you like.

do we need to update the C Tanker .cfg file then? What is the correct length and what is it's class name (Nxxx)?

[Trevally.]

ClassName=T3Cimmaron
3DModelFileName=data/Sea/NOL_T3Cimmaron/NOL_T03

and lenght is 178.5m:arrgh!: :D(the range of lenghts I got when testing was from 177m to 180m)

Thsnks TDW

[toniloCoyote]

When you see through the periscope you are not seeing a real world's ship, but a 3D model so, to be accurate, I prefer to measure the model I'm seeing.

If you open the Cimmaron GR2 file in the program "Granny Viewer" and activate the Measure Axes, you can see that the length of the ship model is "19.110605m".
In the "File List" tab below, you can see that the original file of developers was "NOL_T03.max" and was modeled with 3D Studio MAX 10 (3Ds 8) with system units of 0.1 units/meter.

So, I understand that the model length in the sim's (SH5) world is 191.106 meters.

My fighting with 3DS max and downloaded plugins is because I have version 2010 of 3DS max, but the plugins only work with v.8, so I will need to build a new plugin or modify and recompile the existing one. In the while, Granny Viewer may be a shortcut.
What do yo think about it?

(again, sorry for my insufficient English)

[Trevally.]

So, I understand that the model length in the sim's (SH5) world is 191.106 meters.


Nice one:up:

can you check on some others too. It would be good to know if they where correct:salute:

[toniloCoyote]

Ok. Work in progress...

[TheDarkWraith]

Ok. Work in progress...

I'll hold off v6.3.0 until we get all the ship's lengths accurate that Trevally has questions about :up:

[toniloCoyote]

Length in meters
---------------------------
NLL - Liberty - 141.496
NKMSS_HogIsland - 122.705


Work still in progress.
Problems to identify folders for:

Med Tanker
Large liner
Large Steamer

[toniloCoyote]

Until now, the list grows as follow:


Length in meters
---------------------------
NOL_T3Cimmaron - 191.106
NLL - Liberty - 141.496
NKMSS_HogIsland - 122.705

NAGC_C2Appalachian - 142.140
NAGP_CarlPeters - 111.574
NAMC_Komet - 116.336
NAMC_Penguin - 156.189
NAMC_Rawalpindi - 165.888
NAO_Dithmarschen - 178.805
NBB_Bismark - 251.657
NBB_King_GeorgeV - 227.946


Still in progress...

Do you think the measures corresponds with the sim world?
The Mast measures could not be done accurately with this viewer. That is why I was fighting with the importers for 3DS max.

[Trevally.]

Good work toniloCoyote:up:

Although none of these lengths are the same as th RM the do look like they are in scale.:hmmm:

With that it must be possible to use visual measuring get get speed aob etc from the raobf:yeah:

[toniloCoyote]

Ok. I think it make sense that the 3D engine of SH5 doesn't perform an additional scaling.

I hope to finish the list before going to bed.


Length in meters
---------------------------
NOL_T3Cimmaron - 191.106
NLL - Liberty - 141.496
NKMSS_HogIsland - 122.705

NAGC_C2Appalachian - 142.140
NAGP_CarlPeters - 111.574
NAMC_Komet - 116.336
NAMC_Penguin - 156.189
NAMC_Rawalpindi - 165.888
NAO_Dithmarschen - 178.805
NBB_Bismark - 251.657
NBB_King_GeorgeV - 227.946
NBB_Littorio - 239.418
NBB_Nelson - 201.568
NBB_New_York - 178.252
NBB_North_Carolina - 220.453
NBB_QueenElizabeth - 197.116
NBB_RoyalSovereign - 188.310
NBB_Schleswig_Holstein - 127.831
NBC_Deutschland - 185.719
NBC_Hood - 262.668
NBC_Renown - 241.219
NBC_Scharnhorst - 235.089
NCA_Admiral_Hipper - 208.219
NCA_Kent - 183.848
NCA_Northampton - 183.754
NCA_Trento - 196.315
NCL_Bartolomeo - 169.976
NCL_Brooklyn - 185.090
NCL_Dido - 155.257
NCL_Emden - 156.986
NCL_Konigsberg - 173.392
NCL_Montecuccoli - 182.302
NCO_Flower - 62.779
NCV_Ark_Royal - 252.070
NCV_Courageous - 239.144
NCV_Illustrious - 247.486
NCVE_Bogue - 152.404

[dakuth]

I can't wait for these things to be implemented into TDW's UI. I've tried using Arclight's stock marks (x3.4) but I'm not having much luck. I can see from Trevally's latest pictures I was doing one or two things incorrectly (e.g. at 1.5 zoom I need to do a further x4)

I just wanted to say... congrats to the SH5 devs! For allowing scripting and modding. So now we have the incredibly talented likes of Trevally, TheDarkWraith, Reaper7, Arclight, Magnus, etc, et el who have turned this sim into the game it should be.

A whole bunch of my friends(myself included) bought SH5 when Steam put it on special over Xmas, and I feel so sorry for them because they are just playing stock. I last played the SH series with SH3, heavily modded so I knew I certainly did not want to play SH5 stock. A "getting started" thread set me up - but it still took a solid evening of digging and playing (and a week of tweaking) to get it to a stage where I'm looking forward to patrolling. This should really be the way everyone plays this game! It's such a shame the difficulty of getting it rolling it so prohibitive.

[toniloCoyote]

Well, this is the full list:

Length in meters
---------------------------
CMD_small_boat(LifeBoat) - 4.875
NAGC_C2Appalachian - 142.140
NAGP_CarlPeters - 111.574
NAMC_Komet - 116.336
NAMC_Penguin - 156.189
NAMC_Rawalpindi - 165.888
NAO_Dithmarschen - 178.805
NBB_Bismark - 251.657
NBB_King_GeorgeV - 227.946
NBB_Littorio - 239.418
NBB_Nelson - 201.568
NBB_New_York - 178.252
NBB_North_Carolina - 220.453
NBB_QueenElizabeth - 197.116
NBB_RoyalSovereign - 188.310
NBB_Schleswig_Holstein - 127.831
NBC_Deutschland - 185.719
NBC_Hood - 262.668
NBC_Renown - 241.219
NBC_Scharnhorst - 235.089
NCA_Admiral_Hipper - 208.219
NCA_Kent - 183.848
NCA_Northampton - 183.754
NCA_Trento - 196.315
NCL_Bartolomeo - 169.976
NCL_Brooklyn - 185.090
NCL_Dido - 155.257
NCL_Emden - 156.986
NCL_Konigsberg - 173.392
NCL_Montecuccoli - 182.302
NCO_Flower - 62.779
NCV_Ark_Royal - 252.070
NCV_Courageous - 239.144
NCV_Illustrious - 247.486
NCVE_Bogue - 152.404
NCVE_Long_Island - 149.706
NDD_A&B(NDD_Achates) - 95.941
NDD_Clemson - 95.878
NDD_Fletcher - 115.726
NDD_Keith - 96.045
NDD_Rocket - 109.961
NDD_Soldati - 107.948
NDD_Somers - 116.192
NDD_Tribal - 118.350
NDD_Type34 - 121.883
NDD_V&W - 95.279
NDE_Buckley - 93.308
NDE_Evarts - 90.960
NF_Boat_1 - 27.166
NFF_Black_Swan - 91.875
NKLCS_C2SB1 - 140.161
NKMCS_C1B - 128.327
NKMSS_HogIsland - 122.705
NKSCS_N3SA1 - 81.023
NLL(Liberty) - 141.496
NLS_MFP_D(Marinefahrprahm) - 48.164
NLST_Transport - 100.524
NOL_T3Cimmaron - 191.106
NOM_Ranger - 111.910
NPL_C3Middleton - 151.270
NPL_Conte_Verde - 172.994
NPP_QueenMary - 311.420
Nrtw - 62.596
NVV - 139.550

It is a tedious task and a fault-prone one (but I have put too care for don't), but the same work can be done for width and height of the ship (total height, from keel to top of mast, but not for mast height, at least with this software).

I'm going to bed. See you tomorrow. Thanks for your good work. Let me know (in this thread) if I can help in anymore.

[makman94]

hello to all involved,

if you want to make the job right ,you have:

step 1: first to adjust the angular angle and set it at the value that fov=38 degrees at x1,5 zoom. that will be the minimum zoom level and of course next zoom level will be x6 [note:step 1 can be skipped and proceed to step 2 if you don't want a scope with fov=38 degrees]

step 2: next(very important) , you have to see and copy the vertical scale that sh5 is producing at x1,5 zoom (this scale is showing the degrees). now, becuase Reaper and later TDW have used the Karamazovnew's rings that means that scales must calibrated to work with Kara's rings becuase Kara didn't want to use the degrees at aob rings but mils(i know that becuase i was the one who showed and explained to him how to make the proper adjustments for his optics). in order to achieve this you have to create a new vertical scale and place your '10' at exactly where the 5,71 degrees are on sh5's hardcode scale (the why is not at the moment to be explained).
once , you place your '10' at your new vertical scale just built the rest of it accordinally. the horizontal scale must be EXACTLY the same with vertical scale (there is no excuse for not be the same...if it isn't ,,,it is just wrong !) . and don't double the numbers at horizontal scale,...just make it as the vertical scale , and count the whole observed length .the vertical line of scope when locked on target doesn't 'pass' always from the middle of ship as this is turning from its one axis...this is happening only at the situation that aob=90 degrees)

step 3:next(very important) ,you need a ship with correct length and mast values in order to test the rings .most of ships's values are wrong and all the people that say ''do not trust the rec manual'' are absolutely right. you have to measure ,by your own, a ship ! ToniloCoyote's is the most correct method to get the ship's lengths (bravo ToniloCoyote) .once you are sure about ship's length ...proceed to determine its mast.create a single mission(totally calm water) with the ship stationary(very close to our boat ,at 0 degrees bearing, showing all of its hull...yes,aob=90)) and take a photo of it through scope ...open the photo with a graphic programm and count the pixels of its length and the pixels of its mast from waterline .(this is necessery to be done so becuase the .sims files for each ship determines how much deep the ship will 'sit' in water)
then true mast = (true length x mast's pixels)/length's pixels

after all these you will have a ship with correct length and mast values and you will be ready to test your rings .just have in mind that there are some tiny inaccuracies at the rings itselfs .

ps: ps: happy new year to every subsimer with health and smiles !

[Zedi]

Makman, when you will come over and start modding for SH5?! :O:

[toniloCoyote]

Trevally, makman:

Thank you, makman, I was racking my brains about the mean of "Mil".
I suppose you mean an "angular mil" (NATO adopted angular measurement), the same than in sniper's rifle scopes.

I have found an useful article in Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_mil
and an on-line calculator at:
http://www.convertworld.com/en/angle/

Yesterday night, just before going to sleep, I was thinking about some facts:

1- We must not care about the ship's measurements in the real world.
2- We must not care about the measurements in Recognition Manuals.
3- We must not complicate things neither look through the periscope while observing the clock and relying on the accuracy of 3D engine's light projection, in order to calculate anything (in development time).
3- If we want to make calculations in the virtual world of SH5 we need to deal only with this virtual world and its ships, that is, with the 3D models which move along this model of the world.

It makes sense that the modelers guys are not the same people than the developers nor the same people than the documentalists and the history investigators; so, it makes sense that there will be some discrepancies between their works. You cannot ask to a 3D modeler guy to make all the 3D pieces of a ship at the exact measure as it was in the real world and then request him that all these pieces fit in well all together. So, the modeler's final output rules, and we want to sink these final outputs.

I was thinking too that the draft of a ship is not a modeler's decision but a ship's behavior, so this data must be in the .sim file of the ship, and makman has confirmed this fact.
Then, if I can measure with total accuracy the full height of a ship's 3D model (I can), we can have the exact mast height with the formula: mastHeight = fullHeight - draft

Am I wrong?
Will be worth the effort? (For each ship I need to open the ship's model in Granny Viewer and write down its full Height, and then open in Silent 3ditor and write down its draft).

If so, let me know, and I'll begin with that.

Trevally, I think that the fact that makman points out, will complicate things. What do you think? I don't yet understand why the 5.71 factor pointed by makman.

5.71 degrees =
101.51 Mil (NATO)
95.17 Mil (URSS)
99.93 Mil (Sweeden)


(sorry for my insufficient English; I hope I have explained myself correctly)

[Trevally.]

Thanks for the advice Makman

You make some interesting points. Mils are something I am familiar with for navigating on land. So mils v deg, I dont mind - they are all numbers:D

Going back to the reason i started this - I was wanting to confirm I was using the RAOBF the correct way. (I wasnt:88)) So next was to learn.
This turned out to be quite a trial as I learnt I had wrong cam file after changing the scales etc etc :damn:

This has turned out to be a subject that a lot of people have become interested in, new subsimmers and you guys who have a lot of experience in this area.
For me this is great and more people that join in the better.

But all I wanted was to be able to double check differant methods for finding information on a target. So as long as the scales are within a tolerance - thats all I wanted.

For ship information - length mastheight etc, as long as scales of error for each one is constant, then all is ok. I dont intend to go through the whole game correction errors etc. Perhaps others will.

Thanks again for your pointers and a happy new year to you too.:up:

[Trevally.]

@ toniloCoyote

That is a great list of information you have gathered there:up:
For me, i am going to check this v RM as a % scale of error.
This will point out any lengths needing changed in the RM

For the mastheight etc - i have not yet come apon any problems here.
The stadi fix was finished some time ago and I'm sure someone would have noticed problems if they were wrong.
They may not be precise, but remember the ruler can only measure to the nearest 50m so how precise do they need to be:06:

[TheDarkWraith]

@ toniloCoyote

That is a great list of information you have gathered there:up:
For me, i am going to check this v RM as a % scale of error.
This will point out any lengths needing changed in the RM

For the mastheight etc - i have not yet come apon any problems here.
The stadi fix was finished some time ago and I'm sure someone would have noticed problems if they were wrong.
They may not be precise, but remember the ruler can only measure to the nearest 50m so how precise do they need to be:06:

All his measurements (lengths) have been updated in v6.3.0 of UIs mod :up:

[Trevally.]

All his measurements (lengths) have been updated in v6.3.0 of UIs mod :up:

Thanks TDW, I'm downloading now:up:

With my fingers crossed that the gritacules are all correct:D

[toniloCoyote]

You are right Trevally; one wants to sail, but begins to be distracted with technicalities, programming, fixing bugs, etc and, when he realizes, sees that he has been several days without sailing.

I suspect that also the mast height is wrong in RM.
Be as it may, anybody know how to obtain the draft of a ship from its sim file?
S3D doesn't show any information about it, and I don't find this information with Goblin Editor.

[toniloCoyote]

@TheDarkWraith:

Your mod is unique, and Trevally and I would like it to be precise. Don't you worry about the Mils vs Degrees discrepancies pointed out by markman?
Doesn't matter for the accuracy of the RAOBF?

[makman94]

ok guys, forget everything about mils and the reasons ! all you have to do is to create the proper scales for Kara's rings and i just told you EXACTLY what you have to do in order to create the correct scales .just create a scale that its '10' will match with 5,71 degrees (at x1.5 zoom) and you will see the rings to work perfect like a miracle !

look at this pic :
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/5989/scales.png

and for everyone that want to test the rings ...just download this:

http://www.speedyshare.com/files/26081168/testing_AOBF_for_TDW_v6.3.0.rar

and install it directly after TDW gui v6.3.0 (don't install anything else...just the core files of TDW 's gui and then this testing mod).

at cameras i only setted x1,5-x6 zoom (didn't change the angular-fov that TDW's gui is using) and i created the correct scales for the aobf.(note: only at ATTACK SCOPE)

note:the resolution i am using is 1280x960 and you have to use ONLY THIS RESOLUTION ! (i don't know how the scales are streched to other resolutions so if you want to test the aobf use ONLY the resolution 1280x960)

you will find in single missions a mission called ''find the mast'' (don't pay attention to the title) ,run this mission in order to test the rings .this mission containes a ship(dulio) that i measured and has the correct values for its length (239,418m) and its mast (47,82m) so you can test the rings by using this ship

@Trevally : you asked how to calibrate the scales for Kara's rings and i just answered you .now, it is important to have the correct scales in order to see the rings work properly (if at 'your' scales' the '10' is matching with 5,71 degrees at minimum zoom level ...you are ready to go)

@ToniloCoyote : yes, your thought about finding the mast by using the draft values from .sims files is absolutely correct ! the problem is that s3d is not opening the .sims files at sh5 ....thats why i told you the 'trick' with the photo in order to get the true mast value.

bye

[Trevally.]

Thanks again Makman - this looks very helpful.
I will try it shortly:salute:

[Zedi]

Makman, any chance for a MaGui for SH5? :O:

[Trevally.]

This is the emtguf scope attack using the ship from Makmans mission.

Map measured range is 1000m
Mast is 47.82
Length is 239.418m

Pic1 - range/mast height
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/5256/pic1n.png

Pic2 - AOB/Ship Length
http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/5974/pic2rd.png

As you can see from both pics
Range/mastheight is correct.
AOB/Ship Length is out by 10m

So horizontals need a tweek - this will now be easier with this known ship.

[dakuth]

You know... I'm still damn-well lost with this.

Trevally, using your AoB tutorial. The first Ranger Tanker it makes you look at.

I just updated to TDW's 6.0.3

Range: 700m
Length: 112m
Ticks: 13

Try those numbers. What AoB do you get? Because I get a very small AoB, when it should in fact be about 80deg. If I multiply by 4 (only because I saw you do it in one of your screenshots, I don't know why I would multiply) I get 52 ticks... but there are not 52 ticks on the ROABF.......

[Gauthier]

Pic2 - AOB/Ship Length
http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/5974/pic2rd.png

As you can see from both pics
Range/mastheight is correct.
AOB/Ship Length is out by 10m

So horizontals need a tweek - this will now be easier with this known ship.
Hello,

not sure to understand what you do in 2nd pic... why do you show 14 in green? What is it?

I think you have to align length of ship (outer white cross) with distance on middle out=10 (in red); then you read in front of the horizontal width in ticks (22-23 on middle in) the AOB on the inner, here I read 13°... I don't think this is the correct AOB, is it?
I think you should multiply 23*4 (if in 1.5x)=92 and then read around 70° for AOB in this pic if you align red and white cross...

[Trevally.]

Hello,

not sure to understand what you do in 2nd pic... why do you show 14 in green? What is it?

I think you have to align length of ship (outer white cross) with distance on middle out=10 (in red); then you read in front of the horizontal width in ticks (22-23 on middle in) the AOB on the inner, here I read 13°... I don't think this is the correct AOB, is it?
I think you should multiply 23*4 (if in 1.5x)=92 and then read around 70° for AOB in this pic if you align red and white cross...

Yes you are correct - the green mark should be on the middle inside ring showing horizontal clicks @ 23.
I did it this way to compare the length of the ship as per the scope marks v the known length from Makman.

Sorry for the confusion.:03:

[Trevally.]

You know... I'm still damn-well lost with this.

Trevally, using your AoB tutorial. The first Ranger Tanker it makes you look at.

I just updated to TDW's 6.0.3

Range: 700m
Length: 112m
Ticks: 13

Try those numbers. What AoB do you get? Because I get a very small AoB, when it should in fact be about 80deg. If I multiply by 4 (only because I saw you do it in one of your screenshots, I don't know why I would multiply) I get 52 ticks... but there are not 52 ticks on the ROABF.......

If the target is too big to fit in the RAOBF at x6 zoom we use x1.5 zoom.
6 / 1.5 = 4
So if clicks are counted in 1.5 zoom you must X by 4.
Or you can set your clicks to the bottom right black marker (note: if you put 10click at bottom right marker - the top black marker shows this number X 4:up:)

If your click go over 50 (no 50 on wheel) the numgers continue.
so 0.5 becomes 50
next mark up is 55
next mark up is 60 and so on.

Once I get the horizontals sorted - I will post a new step by step guide;)

[Trevally.]

@toniloCoyote

With the info Makman has givrn us and the confirming the that your list of lengths are the correct ones - I am going to re-scale the horizontals to match this new info.

So mastheights:O: looks like this info is going to be required.
Mastheight + draft. If you can find a way to test this you can really fix everyone RM. This would be a big step forward for the game and a huge benefit to eveyone:salute:

If I can help you with this task - please let me know:up:

[Gauthier]

If I can help you with this task - please let me know:up:

+1 :up:

[toniloCoyote]

Sorry, I've been far away from my computer for one full day (family duties). In less of half hour I'll end in attending them and will be on-line again. In the meanwhile, thanks to you all for still in fight.

[toniloCoyote]

Well, I'm running again.
First of all, thanks Markman, your help is still invaluable.
Trevally, I am very glad that you want to end this matter until it was as accurate as possible.

And now, good news:

I found the depth value for each vessel in their sim files. by means of the Goblin Editor. I had already found it yesterday, but did not believe that this was the real thing, because there was too much difference between this value and the one in the .cfg files.

http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/5991/draughtingoblin.png
As you can see the Liberty freighter sim file says that its depth is 8.2 (meters, I suppose) while the .cfg file says it is only 5.8

So what I did just now is to edit this value by Goblin, and change it to 2, and after several SH5 crashes, due to other reasons, here is the Liberty with its propeller in the air.

http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/227/libertydraft2m.png

The question is: Is this value true (in the sim world)? is it really in meters?

As soon as I check it I'll start to write the list of values (of 3D models) for the drafts and the heights of the masts.
Do you know any way to check with accuracy that I am not wrong?

[Trevally.]

Great work toniloCoyote:up:

How about testing the "NBB_Littorio" I think the ship Makman gave us the correct mastheight for (Duilio) ia a clone of this one.

If we know from the sim the total height of this ship - and now can find the draft in the sim, we will know if the draft you are seeing is correct.

Mastheight was 47.82

[toniloCoyote]

OK.

By now, we have:

NLL (Liberty)
---------------------------
Heigth (3D model) 34.397
draft (sim file) 8.2
---------------------------
mast (substract) 26.197

Mast in .cfg file = 27.1 (en el .cfg)

It sounds well. I've just found a way to check with total accuracy if the data gathered is being OK. I'll test it (and the NBB_Littorio).

Work in progress...

[toniloCoyote]

More data:

NBB_Littorio
------------------
Height (3D Model) 58.420
draught (sim file) 10.5
------------------
mast (subtract) = 47.92


NBB_Duilio
---------------
Mast (cfg file) 47
Draft (cfg file) 8.9

Markman's Mastheight = 47.82

It still sounding good.
Now, I'm going to do my test inside SH5.

Work in progress...

[toniloCoyote]

More and more I have the impression that the measurements I am getting are correct, but I wanted to verify them in order to remove all doubts.
My idea was to change the values of draft in the sim file, putting as draft of the ship the full height of it (as obtained from the 3D model).
Thus, if the measures were correct, the ship should appear immersed and the top of the mast would have to be at the level of the water.
If this happened, it would be an irrefutable proof of the accuracy of the measurements.

But a ship is not a submarine, and it seems that SH5 will prevent it at all costs. I've been trying by putting this value in the SIM file, and then in the cfg file and then in the file of the mission, but the most I've achieved is that the ship was immersed up to half, while the boilers exploded in flames.

While the boilers explode...

http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/5682/depth34up.png

...the sailors continue doing their job.

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/8830/depth34down.png

Measures of Liberty's and Littorio's masts that I sent in previous post seem to me to be fairly consistents. Furthermore, the Littorio's matches quite well with the Measures given by Makman.
Makman, could you tell me what procedure did you use to measure it?

Well, I think what comes next is to make the complete list of the 3D models dimensions.
Anyway, I would like if someone comes up with an irrefutable way to verify that the measurements are correct; so, we could terminate a pursuit that has occupied a lot of people for long.

I will start to make the list and I'll publish it here when finished. I'm making it in a spreadsheet of MS Excel, in order to facilitate the work of incorporating it into the mods (by exporting as CVS, etc.).

Good silent hunting, and happy new year.

[toniloCoyote]

Gauthier, Thanks for your offer. I'll let you know if I need help.

[Trevally.]

Thanks toniloCoyote:up:

I have been counting pixels:DL

NOM_Ranger - 111.910m scope x6
Range 2000m
AOB 90

http://img573.imageshack.us/img573/1710/pic2r.png



NBB_Littorio - 239.418m scope x1.5
range 1000m
aob 90

http://img832.imageshack.us/img832/5256/pic1n.png

[toniloCoyote]

Trevally, It seems to be very precise, at least at 90 AOB. What about 45 AOB?

[makman94]

hello,

@ Trevally:

why don't you use all the files that i uploaded ? use the camera and the aobf scales that you will find in there and enter the mission .these files are working just perfect(they are checked)...and containes allready the proper scales for the aobf. did you test them and didn't work on your pc?

note : for installation : ONLY the core files of TDW's gui v6.3.0 and on top of it the mini mod that i upload. resolution...1280x960

although it is good your 'aproach' to try to adjust your scales by setting a ship(that you know its deadly length and mast values) to a given distance and rely only on your tool (aobf tool) ,...i wouldn't suggest you to go that way.becuase,firstly,at sh5, you can't have a deadly measurment of the true distance (you say 1000m but is it exactly 1000m ? you can't say....).secondly,the tool itself is not deadly accurate so the best way is to adjust the scales as i told you.
how ? pay a close look to the pic i posted...you see how i did it ? create a fully transparent image for the ''Periscope_Mask_1024_SH5''.this will allow you to see the sh5's hardcore scales .at minimum zoom level these scales are showing you the degrees . these scales is the most important part becuase they are changing as you are changing the angular angles in cameras(logical).this mean that for each camera setting, you have to create its own specific scales for the tool .in other words ...cameras and scales for the tool goes together !now , create the fully transparent ''Periscope_Mask_1024_SH5'' and once you have decide the camera settings(angular angles,viewports and zoom levels) enter the game in order to be able to see the sh5's hardcore degree scales .the only thing that remains to do is to create your own scale for the tool that way so your '10' to match with 5,71 degrees and you are just finished the job !

@ToniloCoyote:

How exactly did you managed to get acess in .sim files ? yes , as i told you , you are absolutely correct with the procedure (mastheight) = (total height of model ship) - (draft from .sim) . i found the 47,82 with the photo 'trick' i described to an earlier post but as you managed to get the draft value from .sim i would say that your 47.92 is the deadly accurate one ( this 'difference' 47,82 or 47,92 has to do with the fact that i was counting pixels and you can't be deadly accurate with pixels)

@Magnum : there is no chance ! For many many reasons that is off topic to start listing here ( at sh3 forum...i posted these days my stands for sh5)

bye

[Zedi]

...
@Magnum : there is no chance ! For many many reasons that is off topic to start listing here ( at sh3 forum...i posted these days my stands for sh5)


Makes me very sad :( I dont read the sh3 forums, your reason is related to the drm crap, same reason that keep all good old moders away from SH5?

Can you at least make a stand alone mod for raobf?

[Trevally.]

hello,

@ Trevally:

why don't you use all the files that i uploaded ? use the camera and the aobf scales that you will find in there and enter the mission .these files are working just perfect(they are checked)...and containes allready the proper scales for the aobf. did you test them and didn't work on your pc?

note : for installation : ONLY the core files of TDW's gui v6.3.0 and on top of it the mini mod that i upload. resolution...1280x960

although it is good your 'aproach' to try to adjust your scales by setting a ship(that you know its deadly length and mast values) to a given distance and rely only on your tool (aobf tool) ,...i wouldn't suggest you to go that way.becuase,firstly,at sh5, you can't have a deadly measurment of the true distance (you say 1000m but is it exactly 1000m ? you can't say....).secondly,the tool itself is not deadly accurate so the best way is to adjust the scales as i told you.
how ? pay a close look to the pic i posted...you see how i did it ? create a fully transparent image for the ''Periscope_Mask_1024_SH5''.this will allow you to see the sh5's hardcore scales .at minimum zoom level these scales are showing you the degrees . these scales is the most important part becuase they are changing as you are changing the angular angles in cameras(logical).this mean that for each camera setting, you have to create its own specific scales for the tool .in other words ...cameras and scales for the tool goes together !now , create the fully transparent ''Periscope_Mask_1024_SH5'' and once you have decide the camera settings(angular angles,viewports and zoom levels) enter the game in order to be able to see the sh5's hardcore degree scales .the only thing that remains to do is to create your own scale for the tool that way so your '10' to match with 5,71 degrees and you are just finished the job !


Thanks again for you advice Makman:salute:

I have had to go back to work:yawn: - so have less time to spend on this than I would like.

This evening I will set my screen size and run your files to check the 10 v 5.71 then repeat your steps for my size of 8:5 I hope to make good progress this weekend.

@TDW
With this new info we are getting I will continue to try and make the most presice scales that I can. I will send each set to you as they are tested.
With each screen size requiring its own scales - I will work on one scope at a time. (Could take a wee while to get through them all).

@toniloCoyote
I am hopeful that the scales in the last pics I posted will match up with the 5.71 Makman advices. I will post a 45deg once I am sure.

[makman94]

Makes me very sad :( I dont read the sh3 forums, your reason is related to the drm crap, same reason that keep all good old moders away from SH5?

Can you at least make a stand alone mod for raobf?

the mini mod that i uploaded containes the proper scales for the aobf tool (at the angular angle = 62,4814<--standar value of TDW's gui and minimum zoom=x1,5) . it just needs to fining a little bit the image for the scales (was very fast made just for showing it) and to make the same changes for the obs scope at cameras ( minimum zoom=x1,5 and maximum zoom=x6,angular angle = 62,4814) and at its scales (copy the same image scale for attack scope) .

but wait a little bit .... i am sure that these guys (Travelly and ToniloCoyote ) will make a perfect job at the end (and for other angular angles if necessery) so you will get what you want.

about sh5 : DRM is not an issue at all for me ! the problems with sh5 are more serious than this and has to do with behaviours,attidutes and ...intentions.here: http://174.123.69.202/~subsimc/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1566945&postcount=69

[makman94]

......

This evening I will set my screen size and run your files to check the 10 v 5.71 then repeat your steps for my size of 8:5 ......


that is exactly the 'problem' ! i don't know if the images for aobf's scales are streched correct at different resolutions thats why i told you the resolution i was running (Karamazovnew has found something on this about the images streching so he can help on this theme with different resolutions). bottom line is that ,at whatever resolution you may running, must ALWAYS your '10' matches with 5,71 of sh5's hardcore scales . (i am.... afraid that this must be checked for each specific resolution )

good luck :up:

[Zedi]

All these files are working only with TDW UI, not stand alone. Its pretty frustrating that the few of us who dont use his UI are left out from all the goodies developed here :nope:

Regarding the reason why you are not moding for SH5.. I see ur problem is with Ubi and the game engine. Now, there is one thing for sure... is the last subsim we will have for a very loooong time, good or bad. Blaming Ubi or whatever will bring us nowhere and thats a shame.

[makman94]

All these files are working only with TDW UI, not stand alone. Its pretty frustrating that the few of us who dont use his UI are left out from all the goodies developed here :nope:


well , i personally have to 'study' how the files works in sh5 in order to be able to import u-jagd tools to ,for example, stock version . this means a lot of hours (realy ...a lot ) and i am not going to do it ! ( i didn't to it either for sh4 becuase it was just this...a lot of hours).


.... Blaming Ubi or whatever will bring us nowhere and thats a shame.

ok...lets say that i am not blaming them....

but i can't see anyone else preventing the work that modders want to do !

[Zedi]

Ofc its about hours of work, but hey... every moder work for the community, not for ubi. The "I will not fix their failure" thinking is not helping the community, Ubi dont give a frak about us/the customers anyway. Beside that, is a great challenge to try fix stuff that seems 2 be unfixable, is what keeps TDW's engines alive. I'm sure that is SH5 would be a perfect game/sim he would mod now for other games :DL

Anyway, I would be very happy if some1 will make a standalone mod for raobf.. when its done.

[Trevally.]

Ok here is the scales I made last night.

http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/3121/sh5img20110107181121.png


As you can see the verticals are correct:smug:

The horizontals look way off :88)

What to do - what to do.
Is it possible that the horizonal should count for x2 - so mark at 20 - this would show them to be wrong.

If I change the 20 to match the 5.71, will that show the correct ship length. Does not look like it (I will try and test)

If it does not work - does this mean that the range is way off.
I was very careful when marking (the presice mid point from ruler changing from 1050m to 950m)

Suggestions anyone.

[Trevally.]

once , you place your '10' at your new vertical scale just built the rest of it accordinally. the horizontal scale must be EXACTLY the same with vertical scale (there is no excuse for not be the same...if it isn't ,,,it is just wrong !) . and don't double the numbers at horizontal scale,...just make it as the vertical scale , and count the whole observed length .

once you are sure about ship's length ...proceed to determine its mast.create a single mission(totally calm water) with the ship stationary(very close to our boat ,at 0 degrees bearing, showing all of its hull...yes,aob=90)) and take a photo of it through scope ...open the photo with a graphic programm and count the pixels of its length and the pixels of its mast from waterline .(this is necessery to be done so becuase the .sims files for each ship determines how much deep the ship will 'sit' in water)
then true mast = (true length x mast's pixels)/length's pixels

after all these you will have a ship with correct length and mast values and you will be ready to test your rings .just have in mind that there are some tiny inaccuracies at the rings itselfs .


Thought anyone?

[toniloCoyote]

Hello, Trevally.
I also have been today for more than 8 hours struggling with the measures.
I have finished the full list of measures, but there are some boats with value 0 in the draft field. I think that in such cases, the origin of the ship (the point 0,0,0) is used, and I've been firing torpedoes for hours in order to verify this.

I haven't understood what is the problem that you mention in your previous post. Horizontal scale was doubled by TDW to avoid having to count the bars on both sides of the grid, as you know. Can you explain to me a little better what's the problem?

By the way, what program are you using to tweak the grid? Are you using a vector drawing one such as Illustrator or Corel Draw?

[Trevally.]

I haven't understood what is the problem that you mention in your previous post. Horizontal scale was doubled by TDW to avoid having to count the bars on both sides of the grid, as you know.


Yes sorry I had confused myself:oops:
I am setting the horizontals now to the 5.71 mark and will post an image.



By the way, what program are you using to tweak the grid? Are you using a vector drawing one such as Illustrator or Corel Draw?


I am using paint.net


there are some boats with value 0 in the draft field. I think that in such cases, the origin of the ship (the point 0,0,0) is used, and I've been firing torpedoes for hours in order to verify this.



have you had any luck verifying:06:

[toniloCoyote]

Does Paint.net features Vectors or is it only for bitmaps?

(I'll send you the final list in a few minutes).

[Trevally.]

Paint.net is bitmap.

[toniloCoyote]

But, doing it with a bitmap editor can be a nightmare, and it's too difficult to achieve accuracy, isn't?

[toniloCoyote]

@ Trevally:

I have already finished the dimensions list and you can download it from here:

http://www.FileFront.com/17763032/To_SH5_Ships_Dimensions_from_3D_v1-0.zip


Inside the zip there are the listing in Excel (.xls) format and in RTF format (open with Wordpad).

There are 11 ships which have a value of 0 in field "draught" (in their .sim files), so their calculated Draft values (and therefore the Mast Height values) may not be correct.
The procedure I followed is the one I have explained before:


For each boat:

1 - Open its 3D model file (.GR2) in "Granny Viewer" program.
2 - Enable Measurement Axis and note the length and height of the model.
3 - Open its .SIM file in Goblin Editor.
4 - Note the value "Draught" in Hydro-Surfaced category.
5 - For those boats which have this value to 0, open the model in Granny Viewer, enable Origin Grids and count the meters (grid lines) ranging from the bottom of the model to the Origin point.
6 - Calculated "Mast Height" value is obtained from the formula (MastHeight = HeightOf3DModel - ValueOfDraughtField).


Point 5 could be done otherwise, that is, by using the "draft" value from the .CFG file of these vessels.
The reasons to do it as I am doing are:

1- The help for "draught" field states:
"The object's Draught [m]. If 0, Then it is taken from the object's global position."
With 3D models, the Origin Point is like the handle of the model. Whenever you give the position of a 3D model what sits there is the Origin Point. Also, when you open the ship's model in Goblin Editor, you can see that the origin point (where the red and green lines intersect) is always located at the height of what appears to be the ship's waterline. When building a mission, you write 0 for ship's altitude, which is the altitude of water level. Thus, it is not unreasonable to think that SH5 places the origin point of the boat at the water level altitude.

2 - The "draft" values in .CFG files seem to be very wrong, according to tests I've done. (Inside the Excel file there is a sheet called "Estimated Drafts" where I recorded these values and the differences with the origin point.)


The fact is that I am not happy with the results for these vessels which have 0 in their "Draught" fields. For many tests I've done, launching torpedoes, I could not check their level of accuracy.

I have to come up with some better method to check it. Launching torpedoes give changing and inaccurate results.

(I hope don't goof too much due to my bad English, sorry).

[Trevally.]

You have done a fantastic job ToniloCoyote:yeah:

I am having some problems with the 5.71 marker to 10.
In this pic I am 1 pixel short of the 5.71

http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/8246/pic1ti.png

I had to move the 20 marker to thr right by 6 pixels.
The aob does not now look correct.

I thought that my last set were closer. Perhaps I should move the 20 marker back. the finder shows it should be 24 clicks at this range. That is 6 pixels short.

[toniloCoyote]

I would like to help you, Trevally, but I don't know how.

I've been so embedded in my own task that I'm feeling now lost in yours.
I hope you're not doing the work by stretching and narrowing bitmaps, right?

Can I help in any way?

[makman94]

@ ToniloCoyote : yes, for the ships that have 0 at their .sims the

"The object's Draught [m]. If 0, Then it is taken from the object's global position."

is the answer to what must be done. with some method must count the distance between the origin node of ship's hull ( coordinates for this node are always 0,0,0) and its keel . i can tell you how i did it for sh3 but the programm i used is not working with sh5 .the programm is called misfit (thanks to Privateer ). with misfit it is a piece of cake to take these measurments ...i know that this is not so helpful for sh5 but what i am saying is that this distance must be measured.

@ Trevally :

you are going just fine ! just make your '10' at vertical scale to match EXACTLY with 5,71 (not close to it...make it to match exactly) and then MAKE THE HORIZONTAL TO BE EXACTLY THE SAME WITH THE VERTICAL SCALE.

about your last pic: i see that the tool is now working great ! why i am saying this? becuase ,i hope that you understand that if your true range to target was 1030m (and not 1000) the tool will show the correct aob ...right ?

have in mind this: at aob(s) close to 90....the degrees are very close each other (damn...english are not helping me here) so just a slight 'wrong' more or less at inner ring's rotation will be some(or many) degrees off ....and ,also ,add to this some light inaccuracies for the tool itself and you will understand that your tool is going now...just fine !
the aob rings are more usefull for angles not close to 90 degrees (see the space between 25 to 30 degrees and compare it with the space between 80 to 85 degrees).
but ,most of all ,i believe that at your example (last pic you showed) it was your true range to target that causes this,i am saying it again, light 'mistake' on aob rings.

i run the test mission and here is what i got (i have given the correct value to mast at ship's cfg e.g 47,92 and i used the stadimeter to get the range .note: i used the higher zoom when i used the stadimeter in order to get the more precise ,as possible, range reading.then i switched to minimum zoom and the rest is at the following pic) :
http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/5887/81330126.png

[Trevally.]

about your last pic: i see that the tool is now working great ! why i am saying this? becuase ,i hope that you understand that if your true range to target was 1030m (and not 1000) the tool will show the correct aob ...right ?


:88) no I had not thought of that. Of course it now makes sense:arrgh!:
And this is the very reason to set the scales to the 5.71

Thanks again Makman for your continuing help.


I hope you're not doing the work by stretching and narrowing bitmaps, right?



No ToniloCoyote I am drawing a new one each tiime or inserting extra pixels:up: All the lines drawn are 1 pixel size.

I am going to push on today and draw all the scales for emtguf scopes at the different ratios

[Gauthier]

Hello,

is it possible, as mentioned elsewhere, to use the UI change color function to change the crosshair color?

Keep up the good work!

[TheDarkWraith]

Hello,

is it possible, as mentioned elsewhere, to use the UI change color function to change the crosshair color?

Keep up the good work!

If you're talking about the crosshairs of the RAOBF I added that starting in v6.3.0 patch 1 of the UIs mod :up: IF you're not talking about that but rather talking about the scope crosshairs themselves then no, they can't be changed because the game hard code controls them.

[Gauthier]

If you're talking about the crosshairs of the RAOBF I added that starting in v6.3.0 patch 1 of the UIs mod :up: IF you're not talking about that but rather talking about the scope crosshairs themselves then no, they can't be changed because the game hard code controls them.

I was talking about aob crosshair. Tks

[Trevally.]

Screen size 8:5 is finished.

Here is pic 16:9

http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/9189/sh5img20110108152139.png

:up:

[TheDarkWraith]

Screen size 8:5 is finished.

Here is pic 16:9

http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/9189/sh5img20110108152139.png

:up:

Threre's only one problem I see. According to makman once you have the vertical scale set to 5.71 you just copy the vertical scale to the horizontal scale....or am I reading what he wrote as wrong :06:

[toniloCoyote]

@ Trevally:

OK. I just wanted to understand what you were doing. I imagine the task you have in hand must be daunting and, at this point, you must have already filled with grids your head.
What I pointed out is that these tweaks are much easier to do (up to 20:1) with vector programs than with bitmap editors and, as I do not know exactly how you're doing it, I do not know either how I could help you. If I can do, let me know it.

(Congratulation, I just read your last post).

@ Makman:

Thanks for the confirmation. That's how I've done (for boats with Draught = 0) in the list I posted in the thread, but I'm not happy because of 2 reasons:

1- The measurement from the point of origin to the bottom of the keel have been obtained by counting the lines of a grid, but I would like that these measures should be as accurate as with the other boats.

2- Although the inaccuracy of these measures (always for vessels with draught = 0 only) are, possibly, only of decimals, and even though you've confirmed that my assumption about the origin point is correct, I should like to confirm this irrefutably.


The impediments to clear those doubts are:

1 - Ubisoft has adopted the Granny format (.GR2) for SH5 3D Engine. The creators of this format (RAD Game Tools, Inc.) boast of the closed and unwavering that this format is (and they dumped that on its price). Despite this, there are some guys (gr2decode.altervista.org) that have managed to make an importer / exporter, but it is for 3DS max v.8 only, and I work with 3DS max v.2010.
Even so, I have all the libraries needed to develop an importer for 3DS max 2010, but I don't know if I'll embark myself on this task. This would solve many things, including the reason #1 above.

2 - I've been trying to verify the accuracy of these draft measurements by launching torpedoes at different depths, but the results are intermittent, so you can not trust them.
I think the best way would be to build a floating rule (with measures above and below water level), as if it were a boat for SH5 or as part of a scenario.
Thus, you could put a ship next to the floating rule, and measure its actual (as in SH5's world) draft, mast height, etc... Imagine it, you look through the periscope and see a boat and, next to it, floating, a rule.:har: But to do this it firstly would require to develop the importer / exporter for 3ds max.


For all above, I would like that if anyone knows a faster way to assess the validity of these measures (at least for vessels with Draught = 0), they let me know.

(Note: The link to the final list of measures is in post # 124)

[toniloCoyote]

@ TheDarkWraith:

Although for me it's more comfortable that the two scales are equal, I think that, while one is exactly twice the other, is only a matter of adding versus calculating the average.

Am I wrong?

[Trevally.]

So far with emtguf scope all grids for obs scope is the same for attack scope (both x6)


So for each screen ratio I add a RAOBF scale with say 13 pixels between.
I then have to take a pic through scope and uzo.
Mark 5.71 on the pic and count pixels to that mark and read the error in pixels.
The DDS file will have 13 pixels between marks but when I take a screen shot it might have 15 pixels for each.
So if the ss shows im off by 10 pixels to the 5.71 (1 pixel per mark)- I have to adjust the dds by (13/15 or 0.86 pixels per mark or
1 pixel in 8 of the marks)

[toniloCoyote]

It sounds right.
Could be of help to temporarily change the DPIs of your dds (at least while editing it) to match the DPIs of the screenshots (for avoiding these calculations)?

[toniloCoyote]

@ TheDarkWraith:

Do you have any idea on how to use this flag (inside .sim file)?
It seems as if we could run SH5 in debug mode.

http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/9404/debugdraught.png

[TheDarkWraith]

my guess would be enable modding and script debugging in \documents\SH5\data\cfg\main.cfg:

[DEVELOPING]
Modding=Yes
MenuEditor=No
DebugScripts=Yes

If that doesn't work then it's probably outputting that information via Trace or Debug commands in the code which then you would need some software to catch those in real time.

[toniloCoyote]

@ TheDarkWraith:

Thanks, I will try it out.

[TheDarkWraith]

@ TheDarkWraith:

Thanks, I will try it out.

SysInternals DebugView is a great application for catching debug output of programs and from the OS kernel ;)

[toniloCoyote]

Thanks, I have all these tools.

Work in progress ... :arrgh!:

[toniloCoyote]

@ TheDarkWraith:

No luck.

I have modified the main.cfg file as you said. (main.cfg under "My documents" and the one under sh5 root folder).

No extra information about ships with debug flags=Yes is displayed, neither in map, nor in TAI, in the periscope, in the XO dialog box, in the message box, nor in the help box.

SH5 doesn't launches more Debug.Print information than some lines of initialization.
Doesn't create any log file neither under the SH5 folder nor under the My Documents folder.

Perhaps I must activate some debug console inside SH5 by means of some hidden Hot-key, or must register any callback function by script.

[Trevally.]

Finished emtguf and starting MRP:up:

[toniloCoyote]

:woot::rotfl2::rock:

[Gauthier]

:woot::rotfl2::rock:
+1 :yeah:

[Trevally.]

I have finished MRP sclaes for RAOBF.
Both scope fixes can be found here:-

*link removed*

They are not JSGME ready - files only.

Also here is the corrections for making the RM correct for Mastheight, Draft (this will help with mag detonators) and Length-
From toniloCoyote

I have already finished the dimensions list and you can download it from here:

http://www.FileFront.com/17763032/To...om_3D_v1-0.zip (http://www.filefront.com/17763032/To_SH5_Ships_Dimensions_from_3D_v1-0.zip)


@TDW
Can these be added to your UI:06:

[toniloCoyote]

Yesterday I fell asleep without notice, and my computer stayed on. I slept over 12 hours. I needed that.

Congratulations for your work. This must have been colossal.
I'll download it immediately. Now you still have to update your tutorials :know:, or are them valid as they are now?

[Laconic]

Great work. Do the new mast values affect stadimeter readings at all, or is it just a matter of finding the "new" tip-o'-the-masts?

[TheDarkWraith]

Also here is the corrections for making the RM correct for Mastheight, Draft (this will help with mag detonators) and Length-
From toniloCoyote

I don't understand how to interpret the readings for mastheight, draft, and length. What am I supposed to do with each one? Update the ship's .cfg file with each value or :06:

[Trevally.]

Yesterday I fell asleep without notice, and my computer stayed on. I slept over 12 hours. I needed that.

Congratulations for your work. This must have been colossal.
I'll download it immediately. Now you still have to update your tutorials :know:, or are them valid as they are now?

I should do a new pic set to show how to use RAOBF after we get the RM updated:up:

Great work. Do the new mast values affect stadimeter readings at all, or is it just a matter of finding the "new" tip-o'-the-masts?

Yes It will affect it. It should be more accurate. Big thanks to toniloCoyote for this:yeah:

I don't understand how to interpret the readings for mastheight, draft, and length. What am I supposed to do with each one? Update the ship's .cfg file with each value or :06:

Yes I thinks so (same as you did with some of the ships length). Is this something we could do for you TDW and send as JSGME:06:


:damn: I have noticed I have done something wrong with the Uzo for 8:5
Must have saved as wrong one or something:o. This could have a knock on effect and others may be wrong:damn:

Please watch for this anyone using.

[toniloCoyote]

Hello, TDW.

Sorry, I don't know how the fix of measures should fit into your mod, ie I do not know how they affect your modules (neither if you only have to change the files. cfg, or any additional mechanism too), but you can delegate on me any hard work on this issue, if you're too overloaded. (If so, send me instructions).

[TheDarkWraith]

Hello, TDW.

Sorry, I don't know how the fix of measures should fit into your mod, ie I do not know how they affect your modules (neither if you only have to change the files. cfg, or any additional mechanism too), but you can delegate on me any hard work on this issue, if you're too overloaded. (If so, send me instructions).

Just tell me how to interpret the findings in the .xls file and what I need to do with them.

[toniloCoyote]

@ TheDarkWraith:

Inside xls file there are 2 worksheets. The first of them ("Ships Dimensions")is the only needed.
In this sheet there are only 4 needed columns:
Ship Folder, Len, Draft, MastHeight.

There you have all the stock boats with their measures and the exact name of their file folder.
I regret not having more knowledge of what should be done with such data, except for modifying the .cfg files. I can make myself this task, if you want.

[harag]

I have finished MRP sclaes for RAOBF.
Both scope fixes can be found here:-

http://www.filefront.com/17770359/scope RAOBF for both.7z (http://www.filefront.com/17770359/scope%20RAOBF%20for%20both.7z)

They are not JSGME ready - files only.

Also here is the corrections for making the RM correct for Mastheight, Draft (this will help with mag detonators) and Length-
From toniloCoyote


@TDW
Can these be added to your UI:06:

Good news, well done Tev. Now have I got the right files installed to use these? I have the below mods installed:

Generic Mod Enabler - v2.6.0.157
[C:\Games\Silent Hunter 5\MODS]

Gramaphone_One
Gramaphone_Two
Magnum_Opus_v0_0_1
Magnum_Opus_v0_0_1_Patch_1
Trevally TDC Checker
Periscopes by Torpedo
ArcLight_MRP 16x9 patch
NewUIs_TDC_6_3_0_6x_6x_7x_RAOBF_patch_stock_scope


Periscopes by Torpedo - Prefer the big scopes :)
ArcLight_MRP 16x9 patch - this is just a cameras.dat file

NewUIs_TDC_6_3_0_6x_6x_7x_RAOBF_patch_stock_scope

For the above RAOBF mod, I've simply overwritted his 3 files with yours in the link above - is this correct?

Cheers

[Trevally.]

The following need updating in the SOAN and RM

Length - for AOB finding
Draft - for setting mag torp depth
Mastheight - for range finding

These are now the true sizes that you see and can measure in the game.

[Trevally.]

For the above RAOBF mod, I've simply overwritted his 3 files with yours in the link above - is this correct?



Yes the 3 DDS files go here - \data\Menu\Gui\Layout:up:

[makman94]

Just tell me how to interpret the findings in the .xls file and what I need to do with them.

hi TDW,

the game 'reads' AND USING the mast and draft values that are written in ships's cfg files . so,definetely ,you have to import the mast and draft values to cfg files.stadimeter also is 'taking' this value(from .cfg) in account so will show the correct results for range.and the plate for the draft of ship will show the correct draft

about the ships's length there are two possible (afaik) workarounds:
1. either will edit the ships's cfgs (again) and REPLACE the speed values there (this is a totally unusefull info) with the lengths so when user open the rec manual will read the ship's length at the speed's place
or
2. write directly ,with a graphic programm ,the ship's length on the .SIL of each ship

suggestion: create two versions for the rec manual ... a deadly accurate one and an about 5-10% ''messed'' one for giving the feeling of uncertaincy to the player

@Trevally : i hope that you checked at each version of your scales that '10' is always matched with 5,71 (because ,not only about the resolutions, emtguf and arclight are using different angular angles at their mods than the TDW's stock angular angle and zooms)

@ToniloCoyote : about the some ships that had draught=0 : suggestion: you could use (only for these few ships) the photo method 'trick' to get their true mast value and then you can find their draft values .... (real draft) = (total height of 3d model) - (real mast)

[Trevally.]

@Trevally : i hope that you checked at each version of your scales that '10' is always matched with 5,71 (because ,not only about the resolutions, emtguf and arclight are using different angular angles at their mods than the TDW's stock angular angle and zooms)


I was using screen shots with only scales and 5.71 marked (no ships;))

I am sure the are all correct for the obs and attack scopes. I may have made an error with the uzo scopes:damn:
I am looking for anyone wanting to help by testing this with your screen size that you use.

This little pack contains:-

A file for any scope at any size - ready to install (no patching required)
Some test missions
List of ship lengths and mastheights

*link removed*

Thanks everyone:up:

[toniloCoyote]

@ Makman:

Thanks for your help again.
I have managed to open ship files with 3DS Max and now I can measure with total accuracy every part of models, but in anyway, I've ever had in mind your tip since you told it to us.

I don't understand where is the trouble with lengths as .cfg files include a field for it. Must this measure be hardcoded in any other place?

[makman94]

I was using screen shots with only scales and 5.71 marked (no ships;))

I am sure the are all correct for the obs and attack scopes. I may have made an error with the uzo scopes:damn:
I am looking for anyone wanting to help by testing this with your screen size that you use.

This little pack contains:-

A file for any scope at any size - ready to install (no patching required)
Some test missions
List of ship lengths and mastheights

http://www.filefront.com/17771609/Scopes_testing_pack.7z/

Thanks everyone:up:

ok i will test for the 1280 x 960 and i will tell you . forget the uzo ....it is a different story . don't make anything there and i suggest to TDW to remove the aobf from uzo page (there was no aobf at uzo anyway...was only for bearing readings)

[makman94]

@ Makman:

Thanks for your help again.
I have managed to open ship files with 3DS Max and now I can measure with total accuracy every part of models, but in anyway, I've ever had in mind your tip since you told it to us.

I don't understand where is the trouble with lengths as .cfg files include a field for it. Must this measure be hardcoded in any other place?


aa ok then with it ! :up: (draft values)

the 'problem' with lengths is that (I THINK) not showing on rec manual but the player can see the ships's speeds . isn't it like this ? will see it again

[Trevally.]

ok i will test for the 1280 x 960 and i will tell you . forget the uzo ....it is a different story . don't make anything there and i suggest to TDW to remove the aobf from uzo page (there was no aobf at uzo anyway...was only for bearing readings)


:salute: now that would save a lot of trouble:up:

It could only be used with a tick in stable view in options - so it did feel wrong. Without stable view it was impossible.

[Trevally.]

I am making a little mod to help people test.

It will display the correct range and AOB of any ship you are locked onto.

Uploading shortly.

[toniloCoyote]

Warning: small mistakes in the measurements.

Recently I have managed to open the SH5 ships' 3D models in my modeling program (3DS max).
The measures I have taken to date, with which I've made the list, were observed with the "Granny Viewer", from the company that owns the graphical format used by SH5.

Well, now that I have done a much more exhaustive measurements through my modeling program, I have found and confirmed a bug in "Granny Viewer" that distorts the measures displayed by it.

Although the errors discovered so far are no more than 9 cm. for the length of the ship or 30 cm. for the height of the mast, you need to know it.
I would like the final measurements were very accurate and, therefore, will need to modify the list as soon as I end with assisting in the grids testing. I will let TheDarkWraith to know that the list will be modified.

As an example, the NAMC_Penguin ship differences:

Measures in the current list, in meters:

Length = 156.189 (Correct = 156.103)
Height = 43.98 (Correct = 43.66)
Draft = 8.7 (Correct = 8.67)
Mast Heigth = 35.28 (Correct = 34.99)
:damn:

[Trevally.]

Warning: small mistakes in the measurements.

Recently I have managed to open the SH5 ships' 3D models in my modeling program (3DS max).
The measures I have taken to date, with which I've made the list, were observed with the "Granny Viewer", from the company that owns the graphical format used by SH5.

Well, now that I have done a much more exhaustive measurements through my modeling program, I have found and confirmed a bug in "Granny Viewer" that distorts the measures displayed by it.

Although the errors discovered so far are no more than 9 cm. for the length of the ship or 30 cm. for the height of the mast, you need to know it.
I would like the final measurements were very accurate and, therefore, will need to modify the list as soon as I end with assisting in the grids testing. I will let TheDarkWraith to know that the list will be modified.

As an example, the NAMC_Penguin ship differences:

Measures in the current list, in meters:

Length = 156.189 (Correct = 156.103)
Height = 43.98 (Correct = 43.66)
Draft = 8.7 (Correct = 8.67)
Mast Heigth = 35.28 (Correct = 34.99)
:damn:

Great work toniloCoyote - you are a huge asset to sh5 and subsim:rock:

@ Makman and anyone else testing

I have finished the Range and AOB reader. It is very precise with is measuring.
You must lock on to a target and press next in the text display box.

It is JSGME ready.
Run by clicking the automation button.
Select: Tutorials - Sub - AOB_Range_Finder
Then press play in automation screen.
Then play in the text display box.

http://www.filefront.com/17772290/Trevally tell me the range and AOB.7z

:up:

[toniloCoyote]

Thank you.

Installing now your magic robot.

[toniloCoyote]

@ Trevally:

Your cameras.cam are not the same than TDW's 6.3.3.

As I mentioned, he changed it. I've confirmed that yours are not the same than his.

[toniloCoyote]

@ Trevally:

I've confirmed that your cameras.cam for MRP are the old TDW's 6.3.0

He said that he changed the FOV of them.
Waiting for your instructions...

[toniloCoyote]

@ Trevally:

The same for emtguf's cameras.cam of TDW.

[Trevally.]

downloading patch 3 now:88)

Ive been getting very recise readings from the cam files in patch 2.

I will test and see if they need re-doing.

[Trevally.]

Ok it looks like I have made some using patch1 and some using patch2.
None using patch3.

I will re-set with new cam files and start again.:arrgh!:
I was getting good at it by the end:D

Sorry everyone - this may take a while longer.

I will take away the download scope tests - so nobody else uses the wrong cams.

[toniloCoyote]

Good things take long time.

I'll take the opportunity to definitely refine the dimensions list.
Let me know when you need help with new tests.

[TheDarkWraith]

Ok it looks like I have made some using patch1 and some using patch2.
None using patch3.

I will re-set with new cam files and start again.:arrgh!:
I was getting good at it by the end:D

Sorry everyone - this may take a while longer.

I will take away the download scope tests - so nobody else uses the wrong cams.

patch 3 shouldn't be any different from patch 2 .cam file wise

[Trevally.]

patch 3 shouldn't be any different from patch 2 .cam file wise

Good news thanks:up:

I am thinking that I patched to patch2 this morning. All emtguf scales were made yesterday. I need to redo them.

I may hve made a few for MRP before patching - I will test each to the 5.71 and see.

I have updated the scope testing pack with the cams from patch3.
Download here

http://www.filefront.com/17772749/Scopes_testing_pack.7z


This will teach me for not reading release notes:doh:

[Trevally.]

http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/1667/pic1hy.png

[toniloCoyote]

My Christmas gift. I have not had time to even get it out of the box.

http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/7250/169381.jpg

[Trevally.]

I have no idea what that is:oops:


I am now fully upto date with patches and cam files etc - ready to start again.
I am hopeful that most are correct.

What do you think about the uzo scope - should I make scales for them too?


I must go out for a couple of hours - will start when I get back.

[Zedi]

Speaking about scaling, did any1 here played Mafia 2 and visited the dock/port? In SH5 the biggest carrier looks like a toy/fishing boat, put a sub next to Bismarck and you realize that Bismark is not really a mighty bad ass ship as it looks in the movies.

Here (http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/5602/dockrain.jpg) is a screen from Mafia 2 port and how a real cargo should look like. Now compare those with the sorry ass ships we have in SH5 and cry. When you stay next to these ships on the dock, you feel like an ant.

[toniloCoyote]

@ Trevally:

I'm doing tests with your grids and emtguf, at 1280x960 (4:3).
The few tests I've done so far have given me very accurate results for distances, but somewhat offset results in the case of the AOB. I hope to be doing it well; I only have done it once or twice before.

For example, with mission "practice_AOB # 1", I get these results for
the HogIsland:
Trevally script - Dist= 1424m - AOB= 56
RAOBF - Dist= 1420mm - AOB= ~ 60

######### EDITED #############
I have miscalculated the AOB. It's my fault. The new measurements are precise.
################################################## ####

I am still doing tests. Truth that this task is very laborious but, fortunately, I have a program that facilitates a bit this work, and I've been using it before to help me when doing missions, but it is still very useful for these tests. For example, to do the trick Makman said about counting pixels, you do not need to count anything if you are using this program.

This is MB-Ruler. It's the best utility for measuring on the screen. It allows you to measure lengths and angles; to make notes; to vary the scale by reference to any object that appears on the screen; to save the image of all these measures; to work with layers, etc. (Excellent for those building missions with MissionEditor).

In the picture below, for example, I am calculating the HogIsland AOB. All annotations, lines and measures you see are being done as I watch the boat through the periscope, in real time, while the boat is moving.
(Ignore the tooltip, the scale was taken for 90º AOB)

http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/8064/measuringwithmbruler.jpg

This utility is free and can be downloaded from:

http://www.Markus-Bader.de/MB-ruler/index.htm

It's great. Of all I've tried this is the best.

Regarding UZO scales, Makman is right; I think you better don't make them;
You must take a break (at least before TDW change the .cam files again).

[toniloCoyote]

Yes, Magnum, The look of the ships in your picture is impressive, but if you can edit one of the ships of SH5 you will realize the great modeling work behind them.

Note that SH5 ships have to move, to split into different parts when sunk, etc. That is not an animation, but every detail and truly original piece of ship is modeled as a separated 3D object.
I don't know the Mafia-2 program but I suppose that their vessels are largely only about texturing work.

I really love the graphics engine of SH5, but, of course, who has the opportunity to stand next to one of these giants, in a real port, to breathe the smell of fuel and admire closely one of these wonders, should not limit himself to watch a 3D replica of them on his computer screen.

Ships have always seemed work of Titans to me.
(Nevertheless, you're right; These ships impress).

[Walle]

Too bad that MB-ruler doesn't work with multiple screens. At least not my setup with three screens of different size. The base of the ruler ends up way of screen, rendering the ruler impossible to move.

[toniloCoyote]

@ Walle:

Can't help; I have two monitors of same size and resolution, and it works like a charm to me.

[toniloCoyote]

I have been wrong with AOB of HogIsland in my previous post.
I did wrong use of RAOBF rings.

The new measurement of this ship give me very precise results.

[Trevally.]

I have been wrong with AOB of HogIsland in my previous post.
I did wrong use of RAOBF rings.

The new measurement of this ship give me very precise results.

Thanks ToniloCoyote

Makman has informed me of a testing method that is fast to do.
Hope to have some results soon:up:

[toniloCoyote]

I hope so. This one is too time-consuming and fault-prone.

[Zedi]

...
I don't know the Mafia-2 program but I suppose that their vessels are largely only about texturing work.
...

M2 is a game where scaling is incredible perfectly done. Everything, from objects to the smallest living being have a perfect scale. Those guys built a whole town (a virtual replica of NY) with every detail worked out at maximum. The ships are also worked out in max details even they are not accesible. But from outside, they look like a real deal. And those are only cargo ships, imagine how a BB would look like :P

The docks are really impressive, with hundreds of workers who load/unload the ships, shipyards, crates .. is what we can't even dream to have in SH. If these guys could take over SH and add it to their game, we could have the ultimate sim. Just imagine coming home from a long patrol and then take your car and hit the pubs or just simply go home. Im getting wet only thinking about :sunny:

[Walle]

Ohh i remember playing Mafia 2, what a game!

That reminds me of my absolute dream-game/simulator. The "simulate everything"-simulator. I remember when BF1942 was released, how exited I was about the fact that you could actually control the ships, use the guns on the destroyers, fly the planes, drive the tanks, and so on. But the maps were too small, and no one would actually really use the ships the way they were supposed to.

Now, instead imagine taking a submarine simulator, a tank simulator, a driving simulator, a flight simulator, and so on, and put them all together. And there is only one arena to play on (the virtual world), and only two different sides to play on. And the graphics should be something like in Just Cause 2..Thinking about THAT make me wet :D

And if you're the strategic game kind of guy, fine! You'll help lead the battle from
the HQ, using reports from the ppl "out in the fields" and up in the air for enemy locations e.t.c.

Sorry for OT :oops:

[Pisces]

The Red Marker.


Start timing as ship touches the centre scope line.
Do not move scope.
You must be at 0 knots

...I missed this since I did not follow this thread as ofthen as a week ago. If your periscope is pointed along the Sub/U-boat's centerline then you can have any speed. In other words turn towards it (or away) and have periscope at 0 (or 180) degrees. :up: Though uboat rolling due to waves might cause problems with this method.

[toniloCoyote]

In order to confirm to some extent the measures of the masts I've been doing, I followed the Makman's trick (although without taking photos or counting pixels, but watching through the OBS and letting this task to MB-Ruler).

Although the results of measuring through the periscope (in this case, the OBS) are inaccurates, since the process is affected by many factors (inaccuracy and numeric rounding of the 3D projections over a plane, the roll of the ship, deformations due to the proportions of the screen resolution, etc.), is very interesting to be able to confirm, for example, that Makman and I had reason to assume that those vessels with Draught value = 0 were using their origin point as a waterline.

I think the test results confirm our assumption.
How have these tests been done?

1 - I have created a mission with two ships, one with a known draught value (NBB_Duilio) and another with a 0 value in its draught field. I've placed both of them at exactly 1Km from U-Boat and at 90º and 270º AOB, respectively. These values have been confirmed by the measuring tool of MissionEditor and by MB-Ruler (Note how useful this tool is for building missions).

2 - Looking through the OBS, I adjust the scale of MB-Ruler with the visual length of the boat, and I introduce the value of the length of the 3D model (from my list).

3 - Based on that scale, I measure the height from water level to the top of the mast, by means of MB-Ruler.

Be aware that in the case of NBB_Duilio the ship is too big to test it with x4 zoom and so, at x1 zoom the ship appears too small, and it's harder to measure, but the important thing is the measurement of NAMC_Penguin, because this ship has 0 as draught value in its .sim file.

Test Parameters:
- SH5 as in stock, with NO MODs.
- Screen res. 1280 x 960 (4:3)

http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/3268/duilioinmissioneditor.png

NBB_Duilio
----------
Distance: 1Km - AOB: 90º
OBS Zoom: x1
3D Model Length: 239.135
Draught value in .sim file: 10.5
Calculated Mast Height: 47.92
Mast Height resulting from visual Test: 48.57 (diff. about 65cm)
http://img607.imageshack.us/img607/8139/duilioobsx1.png


NAMC_Penguin
------------
Distance: 1Km - AOB: 270º
OBS Zoom: x4
3D Model Length: 156.103
Draught value in .sim file: 0
Calculated Mast Height: 34.99
Mast Height resulting from visual Test: 35.272 (diff. about 28cm)
http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/8479/penguinobsx4.png

[Trevally.]

I think the test results confirm our assumption.

Good work ToniCoyote:up:


For the 400m scale from the mission editor, is it correct at 400m.:06:
I know the ingame map scale is not true.

[toniloCoyote]

@ Trevally:

Yes, I know that ingame map scale is not true (what is true in SH5 measures?), but MissionEditor scale is real.

Your Script (Range_AOB_info) says that Duilio is at:

1003.33 m.

and your script also confirm the AOB (about 89.9, I don't remember).

I'm doing more testing with different aspect ratios to check possible .cam divergences. Also, I'm afraid because you all are basing your work on my measurements and I don't want to fail. I'll send you the results soon.

[toniloCoyote]

@ Walle:

I forgot to say you that MB-Ruler wont work if you have SH5 in full screen mode. You must set it to Windowed mode, and at least one side of this window must be less than your desktop size (this is required by SH5, not by MB-Ruler itself).

[Walle]

Oh, I never got so far, I couldn't move MB-ruler from outside screen. I can see maybe 3-4 cm of the rightmost "corner" on my main screen, and 2-3 cm of the top on one of my secondary screens.

The thing is that i use my HTPC since my gaming 'puter is broken for the time being. Prolly need a new mobo or RAM, not sure which. On the front of the HTPC there is a 7" LCD running at 800*600, my monitor is 19 inch and 1280*1024, and then there's my TV, 42" and 1920*1080 (when I think about it, I don't think the TV was activated). The small screen is (virtually) located to the upper left of my main screen, the TV to the right of the main screen. But when MB-ruler starts, it ends up to the lower right of my main screen, with just parts of it sticking into the main and the small screen. And to move the MB-ruler, it has to be grabbed by the center I guess, since grabbing the corners will only rotate it. But I can't grab it by the center since it's off screen and the mouse pointer can't go there.

I could of course disable the secondary screen, but the problem is that everytime I do that, I get major issues when I wan't to activate both the small screen and the TV. I dunno why, I think it's some compability issues with the ATI-software and Vistas (running Vista Ultimate) display settings. Everytime i change anything in the ATI-software having to do with resolution, display modes, e.t.c, everything gets messed up. The screens change resolution, the native resolutions for the screens vanishes from the list of resolutions, extended desktop get's deactivated, and so on..:damn:

I really should get the other 'puter back up and running though...running SH5 on a Radeon 3400 with 256 MB vid memory isn't really a blast :nope:

Ok, I didn't intend to write a novel on that..oh well :)

[toniloCoyote]

Just imagine coming home from a long patrol and then take your car and hit the pubs or just simply go home. Im getting wet only thinking about :sunny:

Magnum, come to reality.
In case your dream come true, I advice you to go home and take a shower before going to pubs. When one comes from a long patrol, one can recharge a lighter with his breath.

[Trevally.]

Update:

Sorry everyone for the errors that were present in the scales for RAOBF that I had made over the last week.

Making scales for the AOBF tool turned out to be far more difficult than I originally thought. All the different screen sizes, cameras etc.

Makman has been a huge help, teaching me how the scales in the 3d game work and how to set and test them. He has also provide us with a scope mod complete with scales, rings and optics at the historically proper fov, 38 degrees.:yep:

[Zedi]

Magnum, come to reality.
In case your dream come true, I advice you to go home and take a shower before going to pubs. When one comes from a long patrol, one can recharge a lighter with his breath.

True, here is me going home :D

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5164/5348150863_753d6ae0f6_b.jpg

Sorry for the off :oops:

[toniloCoyote]

What a great 3D. It's too close to reality.

[toniloCoyote]

It seems that we soon will have an useful RAOBF for sinking all these Mafia's ships.

[Trevally.]

Finding range from known mastheight.



http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/1907/pic1q.png



Finding AOB from known range and ship length.
Note: New horizontal scale will require you to count whole ship.



http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/8045/pic2mp.png


:rock:

[Gauthier]

Nice work... where is the link?

[Trevally.]

Nice work... where is the link?

Still testing some screen sizes and Makman is going to tweak one cam file. Should be ready soon.

[Gauthier]

Hurry up! :wah::03:

[Trevally.]

Hurry up! :wah::03:

See here http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=179068
:up:

[Gauthier]

Woot!:yeah:

[Trevally.]

Hi everyone.:salute:

I am very close to finishing a tutorial for using the RAOBF wheel.
This tutorial can be run through TDWs UI or MO.

There are four stages covered where I have tried to include all the tips I have learnt from Pisces, joegrundman and Makman. (thanks again guys:up:)
The stages are:-

Bearing to target
Range to target
AOB of target
Speed of target.

I would strongly recommend that you use "Manos Scope" as they have been tested and are correct at all screen sizes.

In the tutorial I am using ships that are correct in the RM. Toni is working very hard to fix all other ship sizes.

[dakuth]

Champion effort. I'd like to take credit for thrusting all this extra work on you boys by asking how it was done :D

[Trevally.]

RAOBF tutorial is now on the tutorial thread see here http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=177725

Comments welcome:salute:

[toniloCoyote]

RAOBF tutorial is now on the tutorial thread see here http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=177725


IMPRESSIVE

http://img832.imageshack.us/img832/6633/trevallytut01.jpghttp://img717.imageshack.us/img717/839/trevallytut02.jpg

A MUST-HAVE

http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/8360/trevallytut03.jpg

[reaper7]

Wow, thats some amazing work done regarding the ship stats and RAOBF scaling. This was one of the biggest Issues I had with SH5 during the development of my UI.
I know the ship stats were incorrect and hence the RAOBF was of no use due to those incorrect stats :).
Well done guys, i've been away for a while due to life Issues and have come back to see this amazing work :yeah:.

I'll have to redo my own optics and Recognition stats to match your findings. Looking forward now to getting back into SH5. Now all I need to complete SH5 for me is to figure out random ship skins :D.

[Trevally.]

Thanks ToniloCoyote:up:

[Trevally.]

Wow, thats some amazing work done regarding the ship stats and RAOBF scaling. This was one of the biggest Issues I had with SH5 during the development of my UI.
I know the ship stats were incorrect and hence the RAOBF was of no use due to those incorrect stats :).
Well done guys, i've been away for a while due to life Issues and have come back to see this amazing work :yeah:.

I'll have to redo my own optics and Recognition stats to match your findings. Looking forward now to getting back into SH5. Now all I need to complete SH5 for me is to figure out random ship skins :D.

Thanks Reaper:up:

For you RM you should get in touch with Toni - He found all the ship sizes and has made a superb ruler for easy measuring of any part of the ship.

[harag]

I also would really like to thank you for your impressive tutorial... Now that the RAOBF for 16:9 seems to work I can start playing around with it.

For others it might be an idea to link through to the scope you mentioned, as I use TDWs Mega Mod, and the scope you mentioned isn't in that, but I downloaded the scope anyway, as it's better :)

Thanks again for an excellent tutorial!

H.

[Trevally.]

Thanks Harag, Im glad you found it helpful.

Yes, good point on the link - I will add that:up:

[makman94]

eh .... Trevally ....you made a great tutorial here !! it was like i was at... school again !! really great ! :up:

tiny tip : for the mast height measurment,it is not needed to put the scope's horizontal line on waterline . it is ok just to count how many marks the ship's mast is 'covering' on vertical scale

congrats Trevally :up:

[joegrundman]

nice work guys:up:

[stoianm]

Hi Trevally,

I practiced yours RAOFB and i learned a lot. Now i play the game with no map contact update and i have a lot of fun.
It is only one thing that i can not understand: after i readed yors Trevally Automated Scripts v0.3 - special this one:
[AS]
Patrol with hydro check at station (looped)
[DESCRIPTION]
You must be below decks before running script.
Looped hydrophone check with
2hr high TC surface run. Sound check
is at station and takes 2mins to sweep.
Midway to loop there is a uzo sweep.
[DESCRIPTION_END]
[CATEGORY]
Search
[SUBCATEGORY]
Search on patrol
[COMMANDS]
Set_Time_Compression,1,0,0,0,0,0,2
Leave_NavMap_Station,0,0,0,0,0,0,0
Ahead_full,0,0,0,0,0,0,2
Set_new_depth,20,0,0,0,0,0,60
All_stop,0,0,0,0,0,0,5
Set_Time_Compression,1,0,0,0,0,0,2
Activate_hydrophone_station,0,0,0,0,0,0,2
Sweep_hydrophone,0,360,120,3073,0,0,1
Report_nearest_sound_contact,0,0,0,0,0,0,2
Leave_hydrophone_station,0,0,0,0,0,0,2
Hydrophone_normal_sweep,0,0,0,0,0,0,1
Ahead_one third,0,0,0,0,0,0,5
Snorkel_depth,0,0,0,0,0,0,0
Snorkel_depth,0,0,0,0,0,0,1
Snorkel_depth,0,0,0,0,0,0,30
Rise_whole_obs_periscope,0,0,0,0,0,0,5
Activate_Scope_Station,1,0,0,0,0,0,5
Sweep_Scope,1,0,360,60.0,192,0,10; abort stop
Leave_Scope_Station,1,0,0,0,0,0,0
Report_nearest_visual_contact,0,0,0,0,0,0,10
Lower_whole_obs_periscope,0,0,0,0,0,0,0
Ahead_full,0,0,0,0,0,0,2
Surface,0,0,0,0,0,0,60
Ahead_one third,0,0,0,0,0,0,5
Activate_NavMap_Station,0,0,0,0,0,0,2
Radar_turn_on,0,0,0,0,0,0,2
Radar_set_continuous_sweep_mode,0,0,0,0,0,0,30
Report_nearest_radio_contact,0,0,0,0,0,0,2
Radar_turn_off,0,0,0,0,0,0,2
Set_Time_Compression,128,0,0,0,0,0,3600
Set_Time_Compression,1,0,0,0,0,0,2
Activate_Scope_Station,2,0,0,0,0,0,1
Sweep_Scope,2,0,360,60,457,0,2
Leave_Scope_Station,2,0,0,0,0,0,0
Radar_turn_on,0,0,0,0,0,0,0
Radar_set_continuous_sweep_mode,0,0,0,0,0,0,10
Report_nearest_radio_contact,0,0,0,0,0,0,0
Radar_turn_off,0,0,0,0,0,0,0
Activate_NavMap_Station,0,0,0,0,0,0,5
Set_Time_Compression,128,0,0,0,0,0,3600
Loop,12,0,0,0,0,0,0
Set_Time_Compression,1,0,0,0,0,0,5
[COMMANDS_END]

I was noticed that you are doing a radar check for contacts. If the radio guy reportin that he has a radio contact (for example) ,,new radio contact: bearing 30, range 300 km,, what i can do to catch this contact.
I have learned the ,,4 bearing metod,, and how to catch a radio contact reported from BDU, but i can not figure how i can catch a contact after the radio guy reported the contact.

Can you explain that for me please?

Thank's!

[Trevally.]

eh .... Trevally ....you made a great tutorial here !! it was like i was at... school again !! really great ! :up:

tiny tip : for the mast height measurment,it is not needed to put the scope's horizontal line on waterline . it is ok just to count how many marks the ship's mast is 'covering' on vertical scale

congrats Trevally :up:

Thanks Makman, I will add the tip about waterline to tutorial thread:up:
I should also tidy this thread up - add some key posts by link to first page.

nice work guys:up:

Thanks Joegrundman :salute: and for the help throughout this thread.

[Trevally.]

Hi Trevally,

I practiced yours RAOFB and i learned a lot. Now i play the game with no map contact update and i have a lot of fun.
It is only one thing that i can not understand: after i readed yors Trevally Automated Scripts v0.3 - special this one:

[AS]
Patrol with hydro check at station (looped)
[DESCRIPTION]
You must be below decks before running script.
Looped hydrophone check with
2hr high TC surface run. Sound check
is at station and takes 2mins to sweep.
Midway to loop there is a uzo sweep.
[DESCRIPTION_END]


I was noticed that you are doing a radar check for contacts. If the radio guy reportin that he has a radio contact (for example) ,,new radio contact: bearing 30, range 300 km,, what i can do to catch this contact.
I have learned the ,,4 bearing metod,, and how to catch a radio contact reported from BDU, but i can not figure how i can catch a contact after the radio guy reported the contact.

Can you explain that for me please?

Thank's!

Hi stoianm - glad you liked the tutorial:up:

The radar sweep will only work if you have a radar, otherwise it will skip.

For the radio contact - at 300km it is going to be difficult to find this contact. If I was going to chase it I would think about the following.


Where is its destination? If I am in the atlantic it will either be heading to the US or to UK so check shipping chart for routes
Estimate target speed - 5 to 6 knots?
How far can it travel in the time it take me to get there?
should I waste the fuel at fast speed?
As the game loads ships when they are within a 30km (or is it 15km:hmmm:) radius, that is the target area to aim for. If you can get inside that circle, you can find the ship with hydro.

Hope this helps:up:

[stoianm]

I understood. Thanks for explanations Trevally!

[Trevally.]

Updated the links in post 1 to include ToniloCoyote's great work:up:

TRUE SH5 Ships' Dimensions (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=179718)

[Trevally.]

Updated the links in post 1 to include Stoianm's great video tutirials:up:

Let's learn to use RAOFB wheel in SH5 (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1640008&postcount=52)

How to use only the RAOFB whell with Real nav and Realism 100% in SH5 (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1640856&postcount=53)

[stoianm]

your post is very easy to find things on it... i can see that you have good management skills:)

[Trevally.]

your post is very easy to find things on it... i can see that you have good management skills:)

:haha:

Sid Meier's games taught me everything I know:D

[Wolfstriked]

LMAO,thanks for this find.I have been having the hardest time understanding shooting a torpedo and in past I would only attack unescorted merchant convoys with a 100% accuracy of driving up to them with 0 bearing and firing away!!

Stoianm is explaing how to use the RAOBF in the video I am watching and I am just laughing like crazy when he keeps saying "it's very simple...ok...next" and I am still trying to understand the bearing.:rotfl2:

This is why I love simulations though and its just fuel for me.:know:

[Wolfstriked]

Stoianm,can you tell me what mod you are using that gives you the graded center cross in your video about the ROABF?

[stoianm]

Stoianm,can you tell me what mod you are using that gives you the graded center cross in your video about the ROABF?
you need TDW UIs and Manos Scope

[Wolfstriked]

you need TDW UIs and Manos Scope

Thanks bud,and thanks for your hardwork making Silent Hunter better and better.:salute:

[Zs4zet]

Hi!

Yesterday I try to shoot with the aft tubes and the RAOBF. (After a direct hit, Rawalpini was by survivor mode... and nothing fore torpedoes...)
Screenshoot for it:
https://picasaweb.google.com/Zs4zet/Temp#5673753411877505666

I beleive, the standard RAOBF calculating method not good for the aft tubes, but I don't know that I how get the correct AOB value.

Ship-book-length = 147 m
Optical length = 28 click
Ship range = 540 m (this is correct).
I get AOB = 15 deg, but I see on the TAI it is 69 deg.
(Currently was Manos scope)

How I get the good value from RAOBF?

Thanks!

[Trevally.]

Hi!

Yesterday I try to shoot with the aft tubes and the RAOBF. (After a direct hit, Rawalpini was by survivor mode... and nothing fore torpedoes...)
Screenshoot for it:
https://picasaweb.google.com/Zs4zet/Temp#5673753411877505666

I beleive, the standard RAOBF calculating method not good for the aft tubes, but I don't know that I how get the correct AOB value.

Ship-book-length = 147 m
Optical length = 28 click
Ship range = 540 m (this is correct).
I get AOB = 15 deg, but I see on the TAI it is 69 deg.
(Currently was Manos scope)

How I get the good value from RAOBF?

Thanks!

Hi Zs4zet:salute:

Well done you are very close to mastering the RAOBF:yeah:

In your pic - you are using scope zoom x1.5 (normal AOB is at x6 zoom, so x6 divided by x1.5 zoom is 4)
So you need to x your 28 clicks by 4
28 x 4 = 112

Now look at 112 and you will see it is AOB=70deg:up:

[Zs4zet]

Ohhh.... very thanks! :salute:

The another more difficult situation - shoot after the ship (AOB > 90 deg) - read in your tutorial, I must do: 180 deg - AOB. This is enough? This was 2x, in different situations, but not got good value. Sure, I forget something, too....

The most difficult situation, shoot after ship and with aft tube, never arose till yet.

[Trevally.]

Ohhh.... very thanks! :salute:

The another more difficult situation - shoot after the ship (AOB > 90 deg) - read in your tutorial, I must do: 180 deg - AOB. This is enough? This was 2x, in different situations, but not got good value. Sure, I forget something, too....

The most difficult situation, shoot after ship and with aft tube, never arose till yet.

Yes - If ship is moving away from you it will have an AOB higher than 90deg.
The RAOBF only goes up to 90 deg.
So this is when you would take away your result from 180 to give AOB

[Zs4zet]

Thank you! The I will use it with an occasion nearest.
:salute:

[Zs4zet]

I try shoot after the ship...

Set ship length, range is ok, set the optical value, but I don't see the AOB value.
I read this from TAI. That is 102 deg. I set it too.
I rotating to periscope to Gyro 0-0, and a crosshair is wrong direction.

I try to 180 - 102 deg the error is only smaller.

(The scope multiplier is x6, the AOB is positive - right side of ship)

https://picasaweb.google.com/Zs4zet/Temp#5674099089414649058
https://picasaweb.google.com/Zs4zet/Temp#5674099086030489522

I always found this...(only once was good, but I don't know, how I do that; but I remember the AOB was a good place, and I did 180 - AOB, and set that to TDC, and the Gyro was good.)
I have some big mistake here, but I don't see what is that. Sorry I know, I do something badly...

[Trevally.]

Not sure what you are trying to do here.

For the RAOBF in image 1 - it looks like the range is wrong.
When a ship is at 90deg AOB - it will appear in the scope at its largest possible size.
If the ship is rotated so that AOB passes 90deg to 100deg - the ship will appear smaller in size - so the AOB readout in the RAOBF can not be greater that 90deg

So this is why I think either the range or ship length is set wrong:hmmm:

[Zs4zet]

Thanks!

I try 10-20x this situation, but I received the same one, after I was angry next, and kill them by the simple, numbers in circles method.

This was not a ideal test environment (but I not prepared for testing...)
- the place was in the crossroads of ship-routes 6 ship arrived from 3 direction (in pair), and they modified their direction and their velocity.
- the see wasn't very rough, but was big waves.
- under the aiming I always disconnected from the ship.

Tomorrow, I will be testing in your tutorials, with standing ships and without big waves.

[Zs4zet]

Hi Trevally!

You're right.
I get wrong range value, if measuring badly. Does the weather have an effect on the visibility of the ship? The same ship at two days, I measured it for two kinds.

The RAOBF rings working correctly, I get good AOB (if the range is correct).

But, 2 days I looking the good targeting method for the away ship.
I get the values from RAOBF and clock, and I type then the XO's dialog, working for the coming ship, but not working the away ship.

I try the another (AOB=90 deg) tutorial method.
- After the get the values, disable follow target, after unlock.
- Set the scope to 0 bearing.
- Press red button.
- Set range, AOB, and speed rings. (I set correct AOB +/- side.)
- Press green button.
- Set Gyro to 0.
And if the ship come to me, this is good. If the ship away from me, not.
If the AOB values between 90 and 180, the gyro go (aiming) after, and not before the target.
What do I badly? Please, if have you time, write that, what is the good targeting order step by step.

(I saw the gyro working only, if I set the any speed value. I don't try to shoot not moving ship.)

Thanks!

[Trevally.]

Hi Zs4zet:salute:

It sounds like you are setting the AOB to the wrong side.:hmmm:
If it is set to the starboard side, but it should be the port side - the TDC will think the target is travelling the opposite direction.
This will cause the torp line to be behind the target.

[Zs4zet]

Hi!

I know this... this was my first thought.

I did screenshots for this:
https://picasaweb.google.com/Zs4zet/Temp#5675163367302574802
I got the datas from TAI, not for the RAOBF. They are correct values.

After I move to gyro 0:
https://picasaweb.google.com/Zs4zet/Temp#5675163366598355282
The red line shows the direction showed by TAI, and the green line would be the correct.

If I set the gyro not to 0 but I set gyro to 90 deg, I get the good line, I shoot before the ship.

What I do badly?
My aiming working correctly, if the ship come to me.

Hi Zs4zet:salute:

It sounds like you are setting the AOB to the wrong side.:hmmm:
If it is set to the starboard side, but it should be the port side - the TDC will think the target is travelling the opposite direction.
This will cause the torp line to be behind the target.

[Trevally.]

For image 1 - your setting are correct. If you move your scope to the target and fire - your torp will hit:yep:

In image 2 - your setting are also correct. But by setting your gyro to zero - you must wait until the ship passes you scope and then fire. To get this to work - you need to place your boat in front of the target - then wait for it to pass through your scope:up:

[Zs4zet]

Hi!

Oh no, sorry...
The ship move from left to right (to the other direction). I draw to TAI a black arrow (at the 1st picture) to point this, and wrote with black color "direction". That mean "ship moving direction", sorry my sort and simple title.

I see the gyro not working for me, if the AOB > 180 deg. Wrong direction and wrong angle. Everybody working, and not for me?

I don't know what to do with it.
I drew 2 pictures with the all case of AOB, everything looks good, I do this, but the gyro does not aim at good place.

(
https://picasaweb.google.com/Zs4zet/Temp#5675584155592528178
https://picasaweb.google.com/Zs4zet/Temp#5675584151837597346
)

Very thanks!

[Trevally.]

Hi!

Oh no, sorry...
The ship move from left to right (to the other direction). I draw to TAI a black arrow (at the 1st picture) to point this, and wrote with black color "direction". That mean "ship moving direction", sorry my sort and simple title.

I see the gyro not working for me, if the AOB > 180 deg. Wrong direction and wrong angle. Everybody working, and not for me?

I don't know what to do with it.
I drew 2 pictures with the all case of AOB, everything looks good, I do this, but the gyro does not aim at good place.

(
https://picasaweb.google.com/Zs4zet/Temp#5675584155592528178
https://picasaweb.google.com/Zs4zet/Temp#5675584151837597346
)

Very thanks!

Remember that when you are setting AOB into the TDC that this will adjust as you move you scope.

So when aiming at the ship - input: range, speed and AOB.
Now when you move your scope - your AOB will adjust to match your scope moving (gyro will also move). It is most important that your input data(AOB) is while pointing at the target.

[Zs4zet]

Hi Trevally!

I found my origin of mistake.... the tubes of my submarine not the cannon of Monitor. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monitor_%28warship%29) :03:
I don't know the concrete value, but if my bearing is 0 deg, my tubes turning only about +/- 20 deg. If my ship only stand a position and not turn after the enemy ship, my tubes never able access the ship.
If the ship come toward for me this is not a problem (I'm waiting, and it's come), but if the ship away from me, I necessary turn the ship and I will access him.

It is very simple... (if I remembered it already...) :03:

Very-very thanks, the much help for me!
:salute:

[Trevally.]

Gald you got it working Zs4zet:up:

[nodlew]

I haven't played SH5 in about a year. Last I played it, TDW's UI was still on version 2.0 and there had been no word from him in so long it seemed like he'd quit.

I had a custom scope graticule that worked for the RAOBF with TDW's mod, it was ugly, but it functioned. But there seemed to be no cure for the problems with the recognition manual, etc.

My hard drive died and when I replaced it I didn't reinstall SH5 and that was that.

Anyway, last night I decided to check in and see what's been going on and--wow! TDW has released several improved versions of his UI, there is a new Campaign mod that looks like tremendous fun, the recognition manual has been corrected and calibrated graticules are available for use with the scope mods and the RAOBF--just fantastic. I can't wait to check out all of the new stuff. :salute:

[Charteris]

A morning well spent! Again, I thought my calculations were screwed trying to to Trevally's RAOBF tutorial but, after installing Manos's godly scopes and reading through all the posts here I am getting faster and faster at the RAOBF range and AOB finding procedure.

Brilliant work to all concerned.

Have Tonilo Coyote's 'Real Dimensions' been incorporated in TDW UI or should I install that separately?


Cheers,
Charteris

[Trevally.]

A morning well spent! Again, I thought my calculations were screwed trying to to Trevally's RAOBF tutorial but, after installing Manos's godly scopes and reading through all the posts here I am getting faster and faster at the RAOBF range and AOB finding procedure.

Brilliant work to all concerned.

Have Tonilo Coyote's 'Real Dimensions' been incorporated in TDW UI or should I install that separately?


Cheers,
Charteris

:DL I'm glad you got it working - The RAOBF is a great tool when you get used to it and yes, it is very fast when used with confidence.

Making tutorials was great fun for me - I am surprised that more people have not made any.
Its very rewarding starting off with a blank notepad page and then just start typing. Bofore you know it - you have made a mod from nothing (not quite nothing as you need to use TDWs commands in his UI:D)

Making the tutorials felt more creative than making OHII as the tools (ME2) make campaign work easy

TDW has used the finding from Tonilo's work in his UI mod. It is also used for the new ships in OHII.

I think Reaper and Dr Jones would have used these as well - so no need to install:up:

[keith_uk]

I have a few questions. Why do some tutorials tell you to count all the clicks along the ships length and other tell you to count half of them (the front half)?

When finding the ships speed by timing it while it passes in the scope, should the scope be at 1.5 x zoom or 6x?

Before I fire the torps, do I have to set the scope at 0?

Thanks,

Keith.

[Pisces]

I have a few questions. Why do some tutorials tell you to count all the clicks along the ships length and other tell you to count half of them (the front half)?This is probably because some tutorials are based on the original mod they were based on, the OLC Gui for SH3. The creator OLC decided that it was easiest with his mod to read of halve of the marks, instead of all the marks. Iirc in the earlier versions of his mod he doubled the mastheight values in the recognition values to make the RAOBF wheel scales align better. In later versions he avoided that with requiring only halve of the marks to be counted.

But with so many different derivatives it's risky to rely on the precise procedures shown in these tutorials. Always go with the instructions that this mod comes with.

As the lock-on point for the periscope could potentially be offset from the model center (if some modder messed up his model offset) I would count all the horizontal marks, and divide by 2 if needed. Only considering the marks on the left or right side of the horizontal scale is risking false measurements leading to false AOB.


When finding the ships speed by timing it while it passes in the scope, should the scope be at 1.5 x zoom or 6x?Doesn't matter, the line is dead-center of the view in both cases. And to null out your own speed effects, the periscope should be pointed 0 or 180 degrees, and the bow/stern turned just in front of the targets passage. Choose the zoomlevel that gives the best view on when the target bow and stern cross the line. So for distant targets this would usually be the high zoom level.

[keith_uk]

Thanks.

Another thing... after entering the AOB, i seem to have to flip it to the opposite side for some reason for the torps to be on target otherwise the torps go behind the ship
So the ship could be on my right, but i have to flip it so the arrow for the AOB is on my left.

I'm following the RAOBF instructions to the letter, but, to me, the whole system seems to be really inaccurate so far.

Keith.