View Full Version : S-Boat battery recharge rate
IonicRipper
12-21-12, 12:50 AM
Something has been bugging me about the S-Boats in this game...
It can only recharge about 25% of the batteries in 12 hours?
Is this a historical figure or simply a mistake in the game?
I guess its plausible since this is WWI technology we're talking about.
Either way it makes for very difficult management of daytime underwater navigating, being limited to only 1.5 knots.
Armistead
12-21-12, 01:28 AM
Should be about right. The S class has 2 engines, compared to newer class subs that have 4. Surface, you only have one 600hp motor charging batteries.
I've had similer complaints about the S-boat (with RFB). I don't think this was really intended or historical, but rather just another aspect of Ubi's sloppy game design.
Ducimus confronted this issue in his modding and posted some of what he learned about the battery issue. I can't recall the details, but IIRC, the game works in such a way as it takes a certain amount of time to recharge a battery to a given capacity. So, you can mod the battery to double the capacity, but it will take twice as long to fully recharge. If you change the battery to half the capacity, it will recharge twice as fast (but you only have half the capacity!!!). In other words, the most important elements of this is hard coded making everything a compromise.
When I patrol, I will usually submerge and run at 1 or 1.5 kts and limit my battery use to the greatest degree possible. Either that or remain on the surface.
Honestly, I don't know what the actual battery/engine performance of the S-class was. There doesn't seem to be detailed technical data available.
PS here, I found it:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=179370&highlight=recharging
Sailor Steve
12-21-12, 09:47 AM
I don't think this was really intended or historical, but rather just another aspect of Ubi's sloppy game design.
As I recall, the devs weren't planning on having the S-boat at all. It was added as an afterthought after enough players complained about it. It didn't have near the development time as the other subs.
As I recall.
Webster
12-21-12, 01:41 PM
yep, the s-boat was like a cheat in the stock game and its actually much easier then what reality was for them so things like damage levels, speed, range, and battery life is almost a cheat for them.
this is why i created my s-boat mod to make them accurately represent a 20 year old boat that was rusty and fragile and i think i got it pretty darn close the being a very realistic experience in the full range of things even thou the game doesnt let you be able to mod everything you would like.
if you want to see a realistic version then try my s-boat mod and then you will have a better idea how easy they are in stock game
As I recall, the devs weren't planning on having the S-boat at all. It was added as an afterthought after enough players complained about it. It didn't have near the development time as the other subs.
As I recall.
Hmmm... I'm not surprised. The interiors are all the same, aren't they?
captgeo
12-22-12, 03:37 PM
if you would like more info on S Boat's and other's please go to this link
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=197714
Randomizer
12-22-12, 03:59 PM
Hmmm... I'm not surprised. The interiors are all the same, aren't they?
I think S-Boats have their own unique interior in SH4. There are no crew stations in the conning tower either, unlike in the Fleet Boats.
if you would like more info on S Boat's and other's please go to this link
I poked around the Pigboats.com site. In one of the photo captions they said this:
This view looking aft shows the torpedo storage rack more clearly. The submarine carried a total of fourteen torpedoes. Four of them were in the tubes and ten in the room. Two each on each of the lower wider brackets and one each on the top shorter bracket. Bunks can be seen tilted up in the after end of the room The torpedo loading skid can be seen on the top brace on the right side of the photo. ...
I don't recall reading this before. Can anyone confirm this?
Sailor Steve
12-23-12, 09:33 AM
A link to the picture in question would be nice. After five minutes searching for it I gave up.
Regarding torpedo load-out, there were two major classes of S-Boat. Most had no stern tubes however an aft tube was added on some, which would make the total for those boats 14.
The battery recharge time even according to RFB and Ducimus' TMO would be accurate due to the 2 small WWI era engine reason mentioned above.
Happy Hunting!
Here is the link:
http://pigboats.com/subs/s-boats.html
Scroll down to the tour of the S-4.
Regarding torpedo load-out, there were two major classes of S-Boat. Most had no stern tubes however an aft tube was added on some, which would make the total for those boats 14.
The loadout discussed was for the bow tubes only and the boat had no rear tube.
The battery recharge time even according to RFB and Ducimus' TMO would be accurate due to the 2 small WWI era engine reason mentioned above.
I would agree if you were charging fleetboat batteries with S-class engines. The S-class were smaller, slower boats with less machinery, less performance, and smaller crews. They did not need the same battery capacity (in kilowatt hours) of a fleet boat. The batteries would be appropriate to the type of boat.
The total battery capacity for the S-4 was given as 1,240 KWH. I could find any specs for a fleet class, but I would guess it to be at least double that.
Sailor Steve
12-23-12, 07:46 PM
Thanks.
All the published sources I've seen invariably say 12 torpedoes total, except for the four with the stern tube. The author of that article could be mistaken, or all the published sources could cite one original source, and that was wrong. I've never heard anyone say the four boats with the stern tube carried 16 torpedoes, which would be the case if they could carry fourteen forward.
It would make since to have two full complements of reloads, totalling twelve, but it would also make sense to cram in as many as possible. As far as I can see the bottom line at this point is "I don't know".
No matter what the true answer is, those are some cracking good pictures. Thanks again. :sunny:
Interesting..... sorry I missed the topic. My S-Boat records only span SS-123 through SS-159.
- plus, I just now discovered that two of my favorite websites are not up. DANFS & NavSource. I hope that is just temporary.
Frankly it has been a few years since I have been able to get into submarines and SH4. I was exhausted, maybe I still am.
Happy Hunting!
IonicRipper
12-23-12, 10:01 PM
Steve: According to the picture descriptions of the torpedo room, there seems to be room for 10 torpedo reloads along with 4 already in the tubes. If you look at the 3rd photo of the torpedo room (looking aft) it seems like they could have stored 2 torpedoes on each of the wide struts (a pair just above the floor and another pair about waist high) and one on each of the shorter struts above those. I might, also, be horribly mistaken.
Sailor Steve
12-23-12, 11:09 PM
I see what you mean, and I don't know how the storage system actually worked, so I can't say one way or the other.
IonicRipper
12-24-12, 12:56 AM
Found this shot on the same website.
http://pigboats.com/subs/s-14%20torpedos.jpg
10 reloads + 4 in tubes this time.
I guess the torpedo loadout varied throughout the S-Boats' years.
Funny how this thread deviated from the original subject. :haha:
Sailor Steve
12-24-12, 10:08 AM
I only count eight. :-?
IonicRipper
12-24-12, 10:41 AM
Sorry, meant 8. That'll teach me to stay up so late.
I noticed the previous picture also.
It could be that, since they were not loading for an operational patrol, the torpedo loadout was of secondary importance. It could also be that while the room was originally designed store 10, that they found cramming in the extra 2 was impractical. (I'm just guessing, of course.) If the S-class were loaded on the heavy side, would an extra two torps make a big difference?
IIRC, SHCE had the S-class as either:
4 tubes and 12 torpedos or,
4 tubes and 10 topedos with 1 tube and 2 torpedos in the rear
I had always assumed this was correct. :hmmm:
No matter what the true answer is, those are some cracking good pictures.
Yes, they are outstanding. I also liked the description of the overhead track "horseshoe".
Interesting..... sorry I missed the topic. My S-Boat records only span SS-123 through SS-159.
- plus, I just now discovered that two of my favorite websites are not up. DANFS & NavSource. I hope that is just temporary.
I guess the S-class are the red-headed stepchildren of the WWII sub family. We may never know as much about them as the fleetboats.
Sailor Steve
12-24-12, 11:25 PM
IIRC, SHCE had the S-class as either:
4 tubes and 12 torpedos or,
4 tubes and 10 topedos with 1 tube and 2 torpedos in the rear
I had always assumed this was correct. :hmmm:
SH1 and SHCE came only with the 4 tubes forward and the aft tube. I don't recall how many torpedoes they had in the game. Since there were only 4 boats with the aft tube, and none of them ever saw combat. It was one of the wonderful 'Hawk's Silent Hunter Utilities' mods which removed the aft tube from the S-Boats in that sim.
In SHCE the S-Boats had 12 forward and one aft and its reloads before Hawk's Utilities and Kim Ronhof's Torpedo Change Tool, removed the aft tube.
In real life according to DANFS, out of all the S-Boats that saw service in WW II only one, the S-48 (SS-159) had the aft tube. The other three S-48 class, the SS-160, SS-161, and SS-162 did have the aft tube but never made it past the 1930's.
Happy Hunting!
Yes, you are both right.
I mostly played the Hawk's versions.
Sailor Steve
12-27-12, 11:11 AM
Same here. That was my first experience with mods, ever, and I still love them. :rock:
I've been reading WAR IN THE BOATS, by Capt. William J. Ruhe, USN.
I've got to post this before I forget. On pp 21-22, Ruhe describes surfacing in the dark, after submerged patrolling, and recharging the batteries. The battery recharge was finished by 0100. So there is no doubt that the SH4 battery charging of the S-boats is screwy.
BTW, this is an excellent book for anyone interested in what it was like on a S-boat or later fleetboat.
The S-Boat battery recharge rate can be changed - arrgh, It's been a long time. I'll dig through my notes.
Are you using the Propulsion Specialist technique and editing him and the sim?
Webster
02-08-13, 12:38 PM
The S-Boat battery recharge rate can be changed - arrgh, It's been a long time. I'll dig through my notes.
Are you using the Propulsion Specialist technique and editing him and the sim?
while you can change it you get crazy bad side effects like unlimited battery life and range. crazy like batteries only lasting 2 hours or you can go across the globe on batteries without ever recharging kind of crazy.
just about anything you do with the s-boats is like a house of cards and everything else goes fubar when you do it.
when i did my s-boat mod i just found the best i could get thru testing and had to settle for that. getting anything realistic isnt possible so i had to settle for getting things only as close as the game would allow.
while you can change it you get crazy bad side effects like unlimited battery life and range. crazy like batteries only lasting 2 hours or you can go across the globe on batteries without ever recharging kind of crazy.
just about anything you do with the s-boats is like a house of cards and everything else goes fubar when you do it.
when i did my s-boat mod i just found the best i could get thru testing and had to settle for that. getting anything realistic isnt possible so i had to settle for getting things only as close as the game would allow.
Nuts! Too bad. That's probably because the S-Boats were thrown in as an afterthought after much public outcry because there weren't any in the original SH4 game (or was it pre-release publicity).
I have/had all my boats modded with realistic battery & ranges, both surfaced and submerged, except the S-Class which I never did. In SH1 - SHCE and Pacific Aces the Sugar Boats were my favorite class.
Maybe there is a work-around besides the sim + Propulsion Specialist trick - if it doesn't work. Strange........
Are you using the Propulsion Specialist technique and editing him and the sim?
Myself, I just use the RFB version as is.....and suffer. :wah:
I posted the info for general information. Ionic Ripper asked about S-boat batteries, and some thought they were supposed to be like this.
They were my favorites in SHCE, too. I wouldn't mind having a fix for this issue, but my lack of modding skills deters me from goofing around with things.
Myself, I just use the RFB version as is.....and suffer. :wah:
I posted the info for general information. Ionic Ripper asked about S-boat batteries, and some thought they were supposed to be like this.
They were my favorites in SHCE, too. I wouldn't mind having a fix for this issue, but my lack of modding skills deters me from goofing around with things.
Maybe there is hope. Which specific RFB version are you using? I assumed RFB and TMO were accurate.
In my 'meager' reading on the topic of S-Boats, the battery recharge rate when mentioned sounds more like what SHCE had.... and as in the quote above. When SH1 was made WW II submariners were still alive to interview, including the famous 'Bud' - commander of USS Skate. Fortunately all of the patrol reports are online and most of the time one can infer what happened from them.
Before 'making' SH4 I wish the Devs and modding community in general would have spent at least six months doing careers in SHCE just to learn, because it was surprisingly accurate historically in many ways. Other things not so much, but it was a game.
They got the U Boats down pretty good because that's where SH went after SH1, but the US boats are different - as is common knowledge.
'Maybe there is hope' - but according to Webster, not much.
I can only mod enough to get myself in trouble, but we shall see... lol
Happy Hunting!
Sniper297
02-09-13, 12:46 PM
Worst trouble is what info you can find often has the internet factor - it's not all accurate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Porpoise_class_submarine
P class was the first experiment with 4 diesels in two engine rooms, using the diesel-electric instead of direct drive with clutches. This source;
http://www.valoratsea.com/boats.htm
Lists all classes before Gato as having;
Power 2 Diesel engines/2 electric motors
Which is wrong for the Porpoise and Salmon/Sargo. Someone using that as a source and assuming all the data is correct would propagate that, then someone else uses HIS incorrect numbers as a source, Abandon Hope All Ye Who Enter Here.
I actually met a WWII submariner at a VA hospital several years ago, he served on an S class before the war and a Sargo during the war. That was several years ago and he mostly talked about the Saury, but one thing he mentioned about the S class was the depth limit - there was no way to take it down near test depth since they leaked at all the outboard flanges, the periscope flanges leaked even at periscope depth, the propeller glands leaked even on the surface. Down below 100 feet the bailing pumps had to be kept running full time and the water came in like a hydrant thru stuff like the diving planes shafts and sonar connections. A dive to 150 feet was the furthest they ever went, and after surfacing they needed several hours to drain and dry out the engines before they could start them since the main induction and exhaust valves all leaked.
As for charging rate, I can't find any info either, but even with a WWI design you would expect to be able to have at least 12 hours submergence for 6 hours charge. IIRC the fleet boats did a lot better than that, 1 hour of charging for every 6 hours at minimum speed submerged when the batteries are new.
"Valor At Sea" is an excellent website and mostly about the game SH1 & SHCE - with some real history added. SHCE was a great sim considering it was made in the mid 90's when most people were using MS-DOS without Windows but sadly it was already outdated when it was released.
You are absolutely correct about sources.
Lucky you to have had contact with 'real' WW II submariners. I was fortunate to have met some when I was young because almost everyone had a Dad or Uncle etc that served in WW II - but as kids I didn't fully appreciate it like I would now. They were the greatest generation!
Sniper297
02-09-13, 04:38 PM
It was actually one of them serendipity deals, the nearest VA hospital is in Tomah, WI, 90 miles away. When my son is out of town I take the VA van, which is usually loaded up at 0600 and doesn't return until 1800 or so, whatever time your appointment is for you end up spending the entire day in Tomah. He had finished his appointment around 0900 and had to wait til 1600 for his ride back to where he was going, my MRI wasn't until 1430, so we ended up trading sea stories in the cafeteria for 5 hours. :salute: I was an Aviation ASW tech in a heavy helicopter anti-submarine squadron, so he was as interested in my MOS as I was in his.
Maybe there is hope. Which specific RFB version are you using? I assumed RFB and TMO were accurate.
I'm using the latest RFB, 2.0.
Something else I (and others) have noticed, the S-boats don't turn half as well as they did in SHCE. At least when submerged. I don't really know if that is realistic or not. I tend to think the SHCE version is the more accurate.
Ruhe, in the previously mentioned book says quite a bit about the S-37. He made two war patrols on it. Almost everything would break down or leak, but apparently the batteries gave little trouble. It could be that the batteries were of recent manufacture. He did mention that most of the water obtained from the stills went into the batteries, leaving little for the crew.
I can only mod enough to get myself in trouble, but we shall see... lol
On those rare occasions when I give in to the temptation to try modding, I open up a game file in S3D, stare at the digital bits and pieces for awhile, then shut it down in disgust, thinking --well, that's not getting me anywhere. :88) --
We're almost out of luck. Searching the forum the past few days and trying to make a 'nice' RFB install to work from, I became sidetracked... lol
What did you guys do about the NARWHAL? I wanted to include the 'donation' NARWHAL .....
It is almost sacrilegious to touch the/any RFB files because they worked so hard to keep it real. Apparently what I thought of as an agile boat because of its small size, the S-class did not have a fast turning time.
This is typical of what I found - to further discourage me:
-------------
I can't give you accurate data, but I can confirm that the Sclass certainly was phased out already by 1941! Crews hated them, and knew that their surviving chances were a lot slimmer than in more modern boats.
If you want to use the Sclass, you must exploit its strong points and not the weak ones ... try to engage in operations in coastal waters, where its smaller bulk operates to your advantage vs. enemy ASDIC, and make maximum use of the good underwater speed. Your best bet to escape the enemy ASDIC is not by outmaneuvering him, but by sprinting away from where it will search in the next turn after dropping.
-------------
I guess the RFB crew are busy doing other things now.......
I feel the same way. For some reason, there seem to be 10 modders working on SH 3 for every one on SH 4. And God knows, there is plenty in SH 4 that needs to be fixed.
-------------
RFB is a great mod but work on it stopped long ago, and sadly there are not that many fleet boat fans around . And many of those play Trigger Maru, which is also a great mod.
What you report is something related to RSRD, as the campaign should assign you the special missions. But that will depend on boat/date/command you are operating for.
The boats that get most special missions are the Narwhal/Nautilus class, because they were actually so fat, slow and outdated, that they were soon relegated to those tasks. Get one of those in late 1942 or 1943, and you will almost only do special missions.
-------------
The recharge times could be hopeless too. We shall see. What a shame about NARWHAL not patching nicely into RFB though.
Happy Hunting!
Sniper297
02-11-13, 03:30 PM
Okay, after poking around in Silent 3ditor I found this;
\Data\Submarine\NSS_s18\NSS_S18.sim
9:unit_Submarine\unit_Ship
http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/5081/34865320.jpg
That's what the default values look like. Testing in game I ran submerged until the batteries were 50% discharged, then stopped and surfaced, timed how long to full recharge. 36 hours. In another copy of the game I hacked that file;
http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/5332/37700480.jpg
(Tripled the drag on the rudder just because it bugs me that you can't reverse one prop while going ahead on the other, that value increases the rate of turn.) The horsepower of the engines apparently increases the recharge rate, jacking it from 1200 up to 9600 reduces the 50% recharge time from 36 hours to about 17 1/2 hours. Near as I can tell it doesn't affect anything else, altho I haven't done anything other than quick tests for speed, range, fuel consumption and battery discharge rate.
Sailor Steve
02-11-13, 04:25 PM
(Tripled the drag on the rudder just because it bugs me that you can't reverse one prop while going ahead on the other, that value increases the rate of turn.)
Just a note of reality here. Reversing an engine to increase the turn rate works fine when doing a pre-planned maneuver. In combat it's something that is almost impossible, simply because the order has to be given, the signal telegraph has to signal the engine room, one engine has to be brought to a complete stop and started in reverse. By the time all that happens the point is long past when it would have done any good. Also remember that with one engine reversed the speed loss is almost double. If you go into that maneuver making eight knots you're going to come out of it making two or three.
Yes, it's handy when maneuvering around a harbor. In combat not so much.
Sniper297
02-11-13, 04:49 PM
We're talking submerged here, electric traction motors, not engines. It's a matter of seconds to reverse an electric motor, and it was commonly done when trying to speed up the rate of turn without getting excess speed while trying to line up a shot.
Sailor Steve
02-11-13, 05:03 PM
Yes we are. You're absolutely right, and I apologize. I was doing something else entirely when I realized that, and was just coming back to fix it, but too late. :oops:
Okay, after poking around in Silent 3ditor I found this;
\Data\Submarine\NSS_s18\NSS_S18.sim
9:unit_Submarine\unit_Ship
That's what the default values look like. Testing in game I ran submerged until the batteries were 50% discharged, then stopped and surfaced, timed how long to full recharge. 36 hours...............
(Tripled the drag on the rudder just because it bugs me that you can't reverse one prop while going ahead on the other, that value increases the rate of turn.) The horsepower of the engines apparently increases the recharge rate, jacking it from 1200 up to 9600 reduces the 50% recharge time from 36 hours to about 17 1/2 hours. Near as I can tell it doesn't affect anything else, altho I haven't done anything other than quick tests for speed, range, fuel consumption and battery discharge rate.
Absolutely ridiculous recharge times... that's definitely not right - as you've read. They charged overnight - and not all night either.
I'd like to find the discussion on trying to fix this so I don't duplicate work that's been done. Wonder why the S-class are so different.
Sniper297
02-11-13, 07:07 PM
You're probably thinking of U-Boats. It MIGHT apply to the S boat on the surface - I never did a full study of it, but I recall reading somewhere that the 1918 armistice surrendered a bunch of different U-Boats to various allied forces. The S boat was allegedly based on a 1915 U-Boat design which had a priority that it could be built quickly and cheaply, with all the compromises that go along with that. In other words the design was so bad the Germans didn't really want it, they needed it because they were running out of time and materials.
Best I recall WWII German, British, and all US boats up until the Porpoise class were direct drive, the Porpoise was the first diesel-electric design which used the electric motors at all times, with the diesels coupled to generators so all they ever did was create electricity for running the motors and charging the batteries. The direct drives came in several flavors, most had the motor-generator core wrapped around the propeller shaft so when the field control current was off, it was nothing more than a big copper flywheel. Turn one field circuit on and it became a motor, turn the other one on and it became a generator. The diesels had a clutch which could be disengaged, and most were designed without any kind of transmission, instead they had to be shut down and started in reverse to back up. If there was power in the batteries there was no real need for that since you could just throw out the clutch and back with the motors. Other designs had the motor-generator separate from the shaft with gears and sometimes clutches, but best I recall the U-Boats had to run at 9 knots minimum to charge the batteries. Which made snorkeling a real beast. Once they got the bugs out of it the diesel-electric was a much better design.
Sniper297
02-11-13, 07:12 PM
aanker, missed your post - see my previous, open the \Data\Submarine\NSS_s18\NSS_S18.sim in Silent 3ditor and try fooling with the horsepower numbers. Near as I can tell that's not actually used for anything other than recharging the batteries. Again I have no idea if the S-Boats had to be running at speed or could charge batteries faster while drifting, near as I can find the S-Boat was a direct drive rather than diesel-electric.
Okay Sniper297 - the recharge time bothers me. With ranges - I seem to remember the farther the submerged range, the longer the recharge time.
I'm going to play with ranges - different values to reduce the recharge time and try a lot of values to try to find a pattern.
Happy S3D-ing - err Hunting!
Sniper297
02-11-13, 11:01 PM
Yelling down the wrong voicepipe, it's the eng power. Stock game I submerge to periscope depth and run all ahead standard, about 7 knots, goes 10 miles before the battery is down to 50%. Stop and surface, takes 36 hours to recharge.
http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/5332/37700480.jpg
Change the eng power from 1200 to 9600 and it depletes the battery 50% over the same time and distance, but takes half the time to recharge. Another test I changed that value from 1200 to 49600.0 and it recharged from 50% in 10 hours. Again near as I can tell that eng power number doesn't affect anything except the recharge time. If we had an idea what the recharge time SHOULD be we could probably get it pretty close just by changing the eng power number.
Change the eng power from 1200 to 9600 and it depletes the battery 50% over the same time and distance, but takes half the time to recharge. Another test I changed that value from 1200 to 49600.0 and it recharged from 50% in 10 hours. Again near as I can tell that eng power number doesn't affect anything except the recharge time.
This is very interesting. :yep:
I thought the eng power affected acceleration. Did you notice if it got up to speed faster?
I seem to remember the farther the submerged range, the longer the recharge time.
I believe this is correct.
Apparently what I thought of as an agile boat because of its small size, the S-class did not have a fast turning time.
Someone posted a quote from a reliable written source to that effect, but it is hard for me to believe they were this bad. They were designed with underwater performance in mind. We should also keep in mind that turning time and turning radius aren't the same thing. It is possible that they were fast, but had a large turning circle (or vice-versa?). I have never seen anything specific with regard to their turning. You would think there would be some data about this.
When I played the S-class in SHCE, I could dodge ashcans very well (as long as the battery held out). In SH4 w/RFB, I don't even try to use these tactics.
Sniper297
02-12-13, 02:56 AM
Like I say, I haven't done extensive testing on it, but since you mentioned acceleration I tried it just now, and you're correct. Stock game starting from zero on the surface, hit the stopwatch and click ahead flank, 40 seconds to reach 12 knots. Hacked version same experiment, reaches 13 knots in about 5 seconds.
One of the little quirks about batteries, the last few volts take more time and "push" to top them off - the fleet boats had a small auxiliary diesel generator for the topping off part, the Sugar boats only had the two main diesels. So that last bit between 96% and 100% would take a bit longer, but to my way of thinking from 50% to 96% should take no more than 6 to 8 hours. Granted these were little better than submersible torpedo boats, but 3 days for a full charge is nuts.
This was the fix for a GATO to get longer ranges & faster recharge times. Battery and O2 run out about the same time - distance approx 100 nm and recharge time is not that bad.
Combined with a permanent crewman with the Propulsion Expert special ability. Ducimus came up with this thinking outside the 10 knot box in this post - it was was a eureka - voila moment:
http://forum.kickinbak.com/viewtopic.php?f=70&t=2054&hilit=battery
http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p157/ptcbupers/Gato_sim_org_zps72d36333.png
Combined with your S-Boat find. That's what I was doing shouting down that pipe... lol
---------------------------
Here is what he did with the S-18 sim:
http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p157/ptcbupers/S18_sim_zpse1687860.png
I haven't looked at anything else or tried this yet but wanted to get this in the post.
Also didn't look to see what the final TMO 2.5 or RFB 2.0 did.
Trying this 'pipe' first. Should check what Webster did in GFO too.
One of the little quirks about batteries, the last few volts take more time and "push" to top them off - the fleet boats had a small auxiliary diesel generator for the topping off part, the Sugar boats only had the two main diesels. So that last bit between 96% and 100% would take a bit longer, but to my way of thinking from 50% to 96% should take no more than 6 to 8 hours. Granted these were little better than submersible torpedo boats, but 3 days for a full charge is nuts.
Yes, the battery recharge cycle is not linear. When I got really into SHCE, I made a graph of the battery recharge over time for any class of boat I had, so I would know how long it would take. I wish I could remember how long it took. I think the time required to charge (in RL) is more a function of the batteries themselves than the engine arrangements. No matter how much engine power available, the batteries themselves can only absorb the energy so fast. Trying to cram in too much, too fast, leads to problems.
In any case, I highly doubt that any boat would be designed to use batteries that could not be recharged in a single night. The extra capacity would be mostly wasted, since you would have little opportunity to fully recharge them.
Ducimus came up with this thinking outside the 10 knot box in this post
Ahh. Good find.
Whenever I try to use S3D to look at this stuff, I end up getting "lost in the weeds".
Sailor Steve
02-13-13, 03:50 AM
Ducimus came up with this thinking outside the 10 knot box in this post - it was was a eureka - voila moment:
I know this is about batteries, but you brought up the 10-knot thing. I remember thinking he was wrong at the time. I never saw that thread, and now that I have I feel even more strongly about it. The reason is this quote:
i've come to the conclusion the only reason 10 kts is the most fuel efficient setting, is because we've been saying it is.
Had I seen that at the time, I would have said "No, the reason 10 knots is the most efficient fuel setting is because all the sources give the maximum range at 10 knots." Not 15, but 10. Now that could be wrong, but the reason we assign 10 knots is not just because we've been saying it is.
Sniper297
02-13-13, 11:23 AM
All the sources I read said 10 knots for cruising to and from the patrol area, but keep in mind that's compromise - 5 knots would be more fuel efficient than 10 but the idea was to get there before the war was over. :ping: For Silent Hunter tho, it IS a game, not a training device, so for playability I set mine for 15 knots. That way I still have to watch fuel consumption when chasing potential contacts, but don't have to spend an hour of my game playing time watching an icon crawling across a map. For the same reason I also edited AirStrike.cfg to change Maximum Aircraft Range=2000 to Maximum Aircraft Range=200 so I wouldn't have to dive every 10 minutes while crossing the Pacific, I think they set that whole thing up with the North Sea U-Boats in 1944 as a benchmark. :doh: If you have a life outside of computer gaming you have to compromise somewhere unless you're willing to spend all your free time in total tedium.
You can patrol at 10 knots... That wasn't my point and I guess I didn't make it clear. The 10 knots is just a spec. If you try to follow a real patrol report and arrive at a specified destination mentioned in that report, and then another, and another, they had to sail faster than 10 knots.
The real problem that the fix addresses is the recharge times and trying to get approx 100 nm submerged in a fleet boat. SHCE even had it with 'Captain' William P. "Bud" Gruner as a consultant.'Captain' Gruner makes statements like, "on a fleet boat at 6 knots submerged your battery will last about 6 hours (although most submerged operations are performed at 3 kts). (movie 11.SMK)
This fix made the submerged range and recharge times closer to realistic numbers. I have read so many real patrol reports and submarine books that I know recharging the batteries did not take all night....... especially not days.
To complete the fix the Propulsion Specialist has to be edited and also be a leader in the engine compartment or wherever it is specified he should be.
The downside is the player has to be honest too because it would be easy to cheat. Most of us play dead is dead don't we? I figure why not tick the box for unlimited batteries & fuel if the player wants to cheat.
A friend was trying to reconstruct a special mission where USS TUNA departed from Australia (I've forgotten which base) and made an agent drop at a tiny island previously under Dutch control named Sanbergelap Island located in the Java Sea. (if you zoom in far enough the Dev's included this Island in SH4 which impressed me). Nothing is mentioned about the agent drop in the patrol report but the end of the war records now public & published do mention it. After the drop and a patrol in the Java and Fores Sea, USS TUNA headed to Pearl. The point is they cruised faster than 10 knots to do what they did and arrive at specified locations when they did. That is just one example.
SS-203, USS TUNA, Part 2 - takes you to a viewer of scanned documents page:
http://issuu.com/hnsa/docs/ss-203_tuna_part2?mode=a_p
The actual report which may conflict with Roscoe:
(A) PROLOGUE.
... "Commander J. T. Hardin, USN, relieved Lt Cdr A. H. Holtz, USN as Commanding Officer." ...
On page 44 or so in the viewer is the 9th war patrol report of USS TUNA - Nov 43.
The C.O. USS TUNA has a lot of lat & long in his report ... almost can follow his route.
Nov 14
1200 Position 5d-07'S, 117d-12'E
On page 70 of the viewer the 4th remark in the first endorsement mentions a successful special mission...
- - --
Regarding the beautiful donation NARWHAL:
I am thinking RFB left the NARWHAL donation boat - (now not a donation) out because it was a mod unto itself. 2.0 has no NARWHAL just the empty folder - probably because of the 6" guns conflict?? - maybe this was on the 'to do' list?
Before he got burnt out and stopped work on TMO, Ducimus made a patch for TMO that includes the donation NARWHAL which is nice. Maybe something similar could be done for RFB except the two, RFB & TMO are so different. What do you guys do?
Happy Hunting!
Finally got an answer to the travel speed enroute to and from the patrol area and patrol speed on station.
According to 'Captain' William P. "Bud" Gruner CO USS Skate (SS-305): Generally after arriving on station they patrolled on the surface at "two-engine speed which would give about 15 knots". They also set out to their patrol area and traveled at two-engine speed or 15 knots. He said the 15 knot speed was also good in case an aircraft was sighted; they could drop the planes and get under in a hurry.
Three times he mentions "two-engine speed" giving "15 knots" and that seems to be what they did.
The 10 knots mentioned in the specs is just a spec, same as a car can drive 60 mph and get a certain gas mileage, however most everyone drives faster.
So, from doing connect the dots with patrol reports and finding speeds in excess of 15 knots to 'Captain' William P. "Bud" Gruner CO USS Skate (SS-305) himself, 15 knots seems to be the historically accurate speed to travel to the patrol area & the patrol speed once on station.
Happy Hunting!
----------------------
Anyone know how to plug the donation NARWHAL into RFB and keep the 6" guns?
Sailor Steve
02-17-13, 10:25 PM
Good to hear, but I have two questions:
1. Where does the information come from? Is there something we can read?
2. Saying that 10 knots is "just as spec" is fine, but did Captain Gruner say that 15 knots actually gave the best effeciency or that they cruised that fast in spite of reduced effeciency?
And an observation: You say that was the speed for both cruising to and from the patrol area and for patrolling, but you quote him as saying they patrolled at that speed "after arriving on station."
BigWalleye
02-18-13, 08:16 AM
aanker, I don't believe anyone is suggesting that 10 kts is the standard cruising speed. It is, as you say, the spec speed for stating cruising range. It may not be the most fuel-efficient speed, although that speed will usually be somewhere nearby. (Most developers "build to spec" just as car manufacturers design their vehicles to be most fuel-efficient in the Government's mileage test speed profile.) It probably won't be the most operationally efficient speed in all circumstances. O'Kane writes of both his boat and Morton's transiting at both higher and lower speeds than 10 kts, or even "two-engine speed." In a couple of instances, IIRC, Morton transited patrol areas at flank speed. Ned Beach describes similar situations. On patrol, sometimes boats would sit idle with no way on. Late in the war some boats would patrol at 5 kts in the hope they would be taken for a fishing boat if picked up on radar. There are many variations, based on the tactial and operational situation. The first-person accounts (Beach, Calvert, Fluckey, Grider, O'Kane, Ruhe, Ruiz, and I've probably left some out) can give you an idea of what worked and what didn't. (Rather like sitting around in the officers' bar at the Gooneyville.) And the HSNA website hnsa.org/doc/subreports.htm has many patrol reports which make interesting reading.
But when I am trying to get home on limited fuel, it's good to know that a setting of 9-12 kts will give me the best chance of making it.
Sorry I didn't specify the specific source. I thought most people were aware of the "Bud" interviews. Everyone who has SHCE has the "Bud" movies. I can't upload them because Ubisoft still owns them. If you have the SH1 SHCE installation disk, drag the "Bud" folder from the CD to your Hard drive. Then watch the movies inside this folder or convert them and watch them.
"Bud" was the consultant to SH1. There are 16 short SMK movies in the "Bud" folder in SH1 - SHCE. These are "Smacker" files. Using a conversion tool the Smacker movies can be converted to AVI or whatever. For example "RAD Video Tools" will do it. Be sure to scan the installation exe before installing and scan the installation after installing. You're looking for spyware or some nasty virus that comes with some software. Using this "RAD Video Tools" program I came up clean.
http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p157/ptcbupers/Rad_zpseea78a0d.png
I converted all of them, 1 - 16. In total about 28 minutes or so of a real WW II submarine 'Captain' talking about his real war experiences and US submarine operations.
7.SMK & 8.SMK both mention "two engine speed" and the "15 knots at two engine speed" specifically is again at the end of 7.SMK. I'm not going to watch all of them again right now however he mentions this a third time.
"Bud" is a wealth of knowledge. When talking about battery life he says that a submarine can travel at 6 knots submerged for 6 hours. He is trying to make the point that it is important to conserve batteries and use a slower speed or they will run down.... but he gives a solid example - "6 knots for 6 hours" that one can work from when adjusting these sim's and the Propulsion Specialist to get a similar result in SH4.
I made the fix to SH4 using numbers that are very close to those that Ducimus came up with through his thinking/research. My Propulsion Specialist adjustment is a little more conservative but I have no problem sailing from Pearl to the Empire, even farther, into the Yellow Sea or down to the Philippines and back to Pearl at 15 kts.
Hope this helps.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.