Navigational stars in Silent Hunter 5

[Alpheratz]

For those looking for opportunities for celestial navigation in Silent Hunter 5. The celestial coordinates of the stars in Silent Hunter 5 are different from those in reality. I was able to determine values ​​for a number of navigational stars. Follow the link to learn how to use it.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCE01NN-hvxUHj_tfxf__Sew/

The video tutorials detail the celestial navigation techniques that work in Silent Hunter 5.

[Aktungbby]

Alpheratz!:Kaleun_Salute: "the fault dear Apheratz is not in our stars, but in ourselves, that we are underlings"... especially when we crash dive!:arrgh!: nice video!:yeah:

[Alpheratz]

:Kaleun_Salute: Thanks! I have been dealing with this issue since 2017. I was able to identify almost all the regularities of the stellar world of Silent Hunter 5, in which the stars are subject to the will of programmers.

[Aktungbby]

:Kaleun_Salute: Thanks! I have been dealing with this issue since 2017. I was able to identify almost all the regularities of the stellar world of Silent Hunter 5, in which the stars are subject to the will of programmers.Feel free to join the 'proud owners of SHV social club' (check my profile site-social groups and click on symbol)' and repost your video site in the group discussion box(below pictures box). Those seeking an immersive experience will appreciate it and then it won't simply disappear into the morass of :subsim: posts, getting lost.:yeah:

[Alpheratz]

From detailed video tutorials, you will learn how, without the help of a navigator, to determine the u-boat position with an accuracy of 1 - 2 km by combining celestial navigation and radiobeacon signal.

[Ashikaga]

Very nice! Well done!!

Have you checked the Almanak for the period 1939-1945 from what I know it can be used in the game with quite good results.

OLtzS Ashikaga

[Alpheratz]

Very nice! Well done!!

Have you checked the Almanak for the period 1939-1945 from what I know it can be used in the game with quite good results.

OLtzS Ashikaga

Thanks! The first thing I did was turn to the historical celestial coordinates of navigational stars. I found that in the game, these values ​​do not quite correspond to the historical ones and need to be clarified. Since 2017, in the game for 21 navigational stars, I have carried out hundreds of measurements and I managed to get celestial coordinates, which take place in the game and provide the best accuracy.

In the game, even the declination of the sun is different from the real one. For example, in fact, on June 21-22 declination of the sun is +23.5 DEG, and on December 21-22 -23.5 DEG. In the game on June 21-22, the sun declination is +22.8 DEG, and on December 21-22 it is -22.8 DEG. It looks as if the wrong tilt of the earth's axis was introduced into the calculation formula.

[Ashikaga]

That might well be the case!!

I believe that the game developers never went as far as to take the curvature of the earth into account when they made the map and the 3d world environment. They basically just took the world map and made it flat.

Great job on what you are doing so far! The time end effort is impressive. I once tried to make workable depth maps by sounding the Deutsche Bucht and the Channel by using real naval charts from te Kriegsmarine to compare these with the in-game depths but that was such a massive undertaking I quit doing it. But you do inspire me with your work.

Best wishes,

OLtzS Ashikaga.

There is a thread on the forum by a map collector who made several original maps available online for download:

https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=213118

This is one of mine:

Will upload a sharper pic soon.

https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/picture.php?albumid=1330&pictureid=11524

https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/picture.php?albumid=1330&pictureid=11525

[Alpheratz]

The fact that the world of Silent Hunter 5 is flat initially seemed to me an obstacle to celestial navigation, but later I became convinced that celestial navigation is possible in Silent Hunter 5, albeit with some reservations. I plan to make this work so that players who don't know celestial navigation but want to use it, can do it.
I believe that Silent Hunter 5 has a lot of potential to raise the level of simulation.

Best wishes,
Alpheratz.

[vdr1981]

The fact that the world of Silent Hunter 5 is flat initially seemed to me an obstacle to celestial navigation, but later I became convinced that celestial navigation is possible in Silent Hunter 5, albeit with some reservations. I plan to make this work so that players who don't know celestial navigation but want to use it, can do it.
I believe that Silent Hunter 5 has a lot of potential to raise the level of simulation.

Best wishes,
Alpheratz.
:up::up::up::salute:

[Sean C]

Nice screen name. :up:

[Alpheratz]

Nice screen name.
:Kaleun_Wink:

[Macgregor the Hammer]

My 'Easter Egg'

Orion

https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/picture.php?albumid=1317&pictureid=11527

[Ashikaga]

I love it when Orion appears.

Also in real life. :)

OLtzS Ashikaga.

[Alpheratz]

https://youtu.be/Z7xvgo_NfaU

[Alpheratz]

https://youtu.be/JaVxh1LzCBw

[vdr1981]

https://youtu.be/JaVxh1LzCBw
Great video Alpheratz, very informative! Thank you very much! :up::up::up::salute:

[Alpheratz]

Great video Alpheratz, very informative! Thank you very much!

Thank you, vdr1981! I am pleased that there are people who show a sincere interest in my work and can appreciate it!:salute:

[Alpheratz]

Only for experienced U-boat commanders who pay attention to "leadership issues". In case the navigator won the singing competition and you took over his watch as a reward. Kaleun salute vom Wolfgang Lüth.

https://youtu.be/HHZfTc8S_c0

[Alpheratz]

If you do not know how to find navigational stars, but want to learn how to do it, from this video you will see how simple it is.

https://youtu.be/AR2NDH9PoFo

[Alpheratz]

For those who want to improve their navigation skills. All necessary tables for celestial navigation (almanacs 1939-1945: Sun and Aries, compact size, adapted for Silent Hunter 5) in the video description.

https://youtu.be/hfQ1dit4ZBY

[vdr1981]

Thank you for the videos Alpheratz! :up::up:
Many people have waiting for something like this for years...:yep:


I have one question for you though since I'm not an expert about these stuff at all.



Few months ago I was experimenting and testing the precision of latitude determination by sun and I noticed that sun's elevation wasn't always correct.
Because of this I crated one "corrections" table charts which can be found in Real navigation charts section.


Can you add any comment regarding this? Did I get things right or maybe I misunderstood something? thanks! :salute:

[Alpheratz]

I greet you, Vecko!:salute:
In determining the latitude by the Sun, two parameters need to be known: sun semidiameter and sun declination. In Silent Hunter 5, both of these parameters are different from the actual values. I took into account the actual for SH5 Sun declination values ​​when compiling Sun almanac 1939-1945. It seems to me that nothing else should interfere with the precise determination of latitude from the Sun.

And I would also like to clarify, were you aware of the sextant techniques I talked about in my video "3 secrets of accurate celestial navigation in Silent Hunter 5" when you did your experiment with the Sun?

[Alpheratz]

Updated table for celestial navigation "Increments & corrections" (with refined values) in the video description from my previous video-post (#21).

[vdr1981]

Sorry for late reply Alpheratz, but after watching some of your videos I have finally realized that you were well aware of the sun declination error I was talking about. It seems to me that your Sun almanac 1939-1945 have completely eliminated any need for my LAN corrections table, which is excellent, and I plan to remove it from the mod in the next update...:yep::up:


Now, I have few questions for you if that's not a big problem for you :) :


Your SH5 specialized tables and documents are completely applicable for our v2.2.22 TWoS even though v2.2.22 uses "smaller" sun semidiamete in the game? The only difference is in added value after the measurement is done (0.5 deg vs 1deg 08' in your Russian WoS version)? Is this correct?


Next, If you agree, I would like to add your PDF tables to TWoS Real nav documentation as well, together with some links to your YT channel.
Now, real nav doc folder from TWoS already contains some documentation and sun almanacs and I'm not really sure which of them could be removed and replaced with your docs? I'll upload them here and if you can please tell me which of them should I remove or move to some subfolder ect...


https://www.mediafire.com/file/x1ctr3o1fni5l02/TWoS_Real_Navigation_documentation_folder.rar/file


And , once again , thank you very much for your work Alpheratz! :up: Even though I'm a layman for most of these stuff It was quite clear to me for some time that we will need some kind of "SH5 only" specialized almanac which will address all the inconsistencies in SH5 world but I was quite skeptical that we'll ever find the person with necessary knowledge and patience to do this task. Luckily, we did. :salute::salute:

[Alpheratz]

Hello Vecko! :salute:

I don't mind if you include my tables in the TWoS documentation:up:. My tables are applicable for TWoS v.2.2.22 as well. At least for the methods that I talked about in my videos earlier. You got it right about the Sun semidiameter, everything else works the same way.

Now in the next step, working on celestial navigation by two stars, I discovered a problem that makes it equally difficult to apply my tables in v.2.0.9 (RUS), in which I work, and v.2.2.22. The celestial sphere should always complete a revolution around the Earth in 23 hours 56 minutes and 4.091 seconds. In SH5, this is not always the case. When playing in 32 and higher time compression mode, the celestial sphere moves without error, and is consistent with my tables and with the chronometer readings. When playing with time compression 1 - 16, the celestial sphere slows down or speeds up at different periods of time. It depends on the [TIME COMPRESSION] settings in Silent Hunter 5 / data / Cfg / main.cfg. I prefer not to use time compression 2-16, and decided to create a table for playing in time compression 1 (TC1, real time) mode, which would correct the chronometer readings, making them consistent with the celestial sphere. In v.2.0.9 (RUS) in TC 1 mode from 0:00:00 "Time" to 4:35:00 "Time" the celestial sphere moves without error. From 4:35:00 to 9:05:00 "Time", the celestial sphere accelerates by about 1.8 seconds every minute. This is equivalent to the chronometer slowing down 1.8 seconds every minute. From 9:05:00 to 24:00:00 "Time", the celestial sphere slows down by about 3.6 seconds every minute (which is equivalent to accelerating the chronometer by the same amount). For information: "Time" = GMT - Time zone port of departure. Due to a bug, if you leave Memel, Kiel, Wilhelmshaven, Narvik, Trondheim, La Spezia, Tripoli, then "Time" is one hour behind GMT. The celestial sphere is 1 hour behind GMT. If port of departure: Brest, Lorient, St. Nazaire, La Pallice, Bordeaux, Bergen, then the celestial sphere moves according to GMT. Until the problem with the acceleration and deceleration of the celestial sphere is solved, my idea is to keep a logbook during the game, taking into account the operating time in TC 1. Before the astronomical observation, enter the data from the logbook into a special excel table that will calculate the correction chronometer. This correction of the chronometer can be entered into another excel table, which will take this correction into account.

I suggest these excel-tables that I compiled for TWoS v.2.0.9 (RUS) for study and use:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oadQrDztPjmyGupyAQAYw4IWdCN5Paip/view?usp=sharing - SH5 Celestial Navigation calculator (excel) - NOW HAVE LOST RELEVANCE

The configuration of the [TIME COMPRESSION] settings in Silent Hunter 5 / data / Cfg / main.cfg differs significantly in v.2.0.9 (RUS) and v.2.2.22 TWoS.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZjGU1JqBG0wlcvxPEHMN1Uorst33f2Zv/view?usp=sharing - main.cfg of TWoS v.2.0.9 (RUS)

I checked v.2.2.22 TWoS: the acceleration and deceleration of the celestial sphere does not coincide both in time periods and in the amount of lag and lead, relative to v.2.0.9 (RUS), so a separate table for v.2.2.22 will be needed. I could investigate v.2.2.22 TWoS to compile such a table if it is technically difficult / impossible to use the [TIME COMPRESSION] v.2.0.9 (RUS) settings for v.2.2.22, or if such a change of settings does not give a result.

As for those documents that are included in the "nav doc from TWoS", I think it is advisable to save them, there is training information on which I did not emphasize in my videos and it can be useful for studying. It may be worth putting it in a separate folder, indicating that these documents have been adapted for SH3 / SH4, but are suitable for mastering celestial navigation in SH5. Only Document "SH3_RNM_TheModInDetail" seems to me not relevant for SH5.

With best wishes:salute:,
Alpheratz

[vdr1981]

Hello Vecko! :salute:

I don't mind if you include my tables in the TWoS documentation:up:. My tables are applicable for TWoS v.2.2.22 as well. At least for the methods that I talked about in my videos earlier. You got it right about the Sun semidiameter, everything else works the same way.
Excellent! :up:

Now in the next step, working on celestial navigation by two stars, I discovered a problem that makes it equally difficult to apply my tables in v.2.0.9 (RUS), in which I work, and v.2.2.22. The celestial sphere should always complete a revolution around the Earth in 23 hours 56 minutes and 4.091 seconds. In SH5, this is not always the case. When playing in 32 and higher time compression mode, the celestial sphere moves without error, and is consistent with my tables and with the chronometer readings. When playing with time compression 1 - 16, the celestial sphere slows down or speeds up at different periods of time. It depends on the [TIME COMPRESSION] settings in Silent Hunter 5 / data / Cfg / main.cfg. I prefer not to use time compression 2-16, and decided to create a table for playing in time compression 1 (TC1, real time) mode, which would correct the chronometer readings, making them consistent with the celestial sphere. In v.2.0.9 (RUS) in TC 1 mode from 0:00:00 "Time" to 4:35:00 "Time" the celestial sphere moves without error. From 4:35:00 to 9:05:00 "Time", the celestial sphere accelerates by about 1.8 seconds every minute. This is equivalent to the chronometer slowing down 1.8 seconds every minute. From 9:05:00 to 24:00:00 "Time", the celestial sphere slows down by about 3.6 seconds every minute (which is equivalent to accelerating the chronometer by the same amount). For information: "Time" = GMT - Time zone port of departure. Due to a bug, if you leave Memel, Kiel, Wilhelmshaven, Narvik, Trondheim, La Spezia, Tripoli, then "Time" is one hour behind GMT. The celestial sphere is 1 hour behind GMT. If port of departure: Brest, Lorient, St. Nazaire, La Pallice, Bordeaux, Bergen, then the celestial sphere moves according to GMT. Until the problem with the acceleration and deceleration of the celestial sphere is solved, my idea is to keep a logbook during the game, taking into account the operating time in TC 1. Before the astronomical observation, enter the data from the logbook into a special excel table that will calculate the correction chronometer. This correction of the chronometer can be entered into another excel table, which will take this correction into account.

I suggest these excel-tables that I compiled for TWoS v.2.0.9 (RUS) for study and use:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oadQrDztPjmyGupyAQAYw4IWdCN5Paip/view?usp=sharing - SH5 Celestial Navigation calculator (excel)

The configuration of the [TIME COMPRESSION] settings in Silent Hunter 5 / data / Cfg / main.cfg differs significantly in v.2.0.9 (RUS) and v.2.2.22 TWoS.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZjGU1JqBG0wlcvxPEHMN1Uorst33f2Zv/view?usp=sharing - main.cfg of TWoS v.2.0.9 (RUS)

I checked v.2.2.22 TWoS: the acceleration and deceleration of the celestial sphere does not coincide both in time periods and in the amount of lag and lead, relative to v.2.0.9 (RUS), so a separate table for v.2.2.22 will be needed. I could investigate v.2.2.22 TWoS to compile such a table if it is technically difficult / impossible to use the [TIME COMPRESSION] v.2.0.9 (RUS) settings for v.2.2.22, or if such a change of settings does not give a result. Hmm that's not good...:hmmm: I think that "3DRender=xxxx" option is responsible for this discrepancy, please confirm this in your testing if you can. Note that when you are changing TC settings "in fly" you should use main.cfg file from your documents/SH5/data/cfg and not from the main game folder. Main.cfg file from the main game folder is only used once during the game installation and it's automatically copied to your documents for the actual use in game...:yep:


BTW, "3DRender=32" from RUS TWoS means that all 3D animation above TC32 will be suspended, which further means no realistic Uboat speed oscillations while traveling in rough seas, AI won't be able to attack if TC fails to drop to 1 from some reason since their gun barrels movement will be blocked ect...As you can see, these stuff aren't really good for gameplay and that is the reason why I decided allow 3D render animations up to max TC in "international" (so to say :))TWoS...



That been said and if "3DRender" is really responsible for stars movement error, I still can not understand why night sky works OK with TC32 in RUS v2.0.9. (correct?:hmmm:) when "3DRender=32" only effects TC64 and higher... Maybe some other option is responsible, but which one...:hmmm:

I'm not really sure what would be the best course of action to bypass this sky/TC related problem...:hmmm:

And if you create stars corrections table/calculator for TC1, will that table actually be applicable for TC16 as well? If yes, would it then be applicable for, let's say TC512 in v2.2.22 which uses 3DRender=1024? Lot's of questions, I know...:hmmm:


As for those documents that are included in the "nav doc from TWoS", I think it is advisable to save them, there is training information on which I did not emphasize in my videos and it can be useful for studying. It may be worth putting it in a separate folder, indicating that these documents have been adapted for SH3 / SH4, but are suitable for mastering celestial navigation in SH5. Only Document "SH3_RNM_TheModInDetail" seems to me not relevant for SH5.

With best wishes:salute:,
AlpheratzRgr that.:salute:

[Alpheratz]

Thanks for the information about the main.cfg file, I didn't know that the file should be changed in the "my documents/SH5/data/cfg" folder.

I am far from programming, but I have an assumption that the movement of the sky occurs according to two algorithms, depending on the situation: "3d-rendering" - the movement of stars occurs "graphically", starting from some control point at which the position of the stars was loaded from a certain "library" responsible for the position of the stars and occurs until the moment you go beyond 3d-rendering. When playing "outside of 3d-rendering", perhaps another algorithm works, where an error-free "virtual (analytical) movement of stars" occurs. Accumulated errors in 3d-rendering are saved when the game goes "beyond 3d-rendering".

I understand that the [TIME COMPRESSION] configuration in v.2.2.22 is a well thought out decision and should not be changed to the detriment of the gameplay. As far as possible, I will try to get more information about the movement of the sky in v.2.2.22 in various time compression modes.:salute:

[vdr1981]

Thanks for the information about the main.cfg file, I didn't know that the file should be changed in the "my documents/SH5/data/cfg" folder.

I am far from programming, but I have an assumption that the movement of the sky occurs according to two algorithms, depending on the situation: "3d-rendering" - the movement of stars occurs "graphically", starting from some control point at which the position of the stars was loaded from a certain "library" responsible for the position of the stars and occurs until the moment you go beyond 3d-rendering. When playing "outside of 3d-rendering", perhaps another algorithm works, where an error-free "virtual (analytical) movement of stars" occurs. Accumulated errors in 3d-rendering are saved when the game goes "beyond 3d-rendering".

yes , something like that could be the case...:hmmm:





I understand that the [TIME COMPRESSION] configuration in v.2.2.22 is a well thought out decision and should not be changed to the detriment of the gameplay. As far as possible, I will try to get more information about the movement of the sky in v.2.2.22 in various time compression modes.:salute: Great and thank you very much! :salute::salute::salute:

[Alpheratz]

I have also compiled sunrise and sunset tables that can be included in the TWoS real navigation documentation. My tables are more detailed, contain the necessary hints that are relevant for SH5, so they can replace "SunAlmanac39_45", "SunAlmanacAndSpeedTable" from the folder that you showed me.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/10otgcskLq_y8drdPRiKNSWTXGdaRl28v/view?usp=sharing - sunrise/sunset in northern latitudes

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jF34POfL3aPPh-GkdnNLJV2qlgX6Ld93/view?usp=sharing - sunrise/sunset in southern latitudes

[Alpheratz]

Improve your skills in real navigation.
https://youtu.be/12oNG3WIZAo

[vdr1981]

I have also compiled sunrise and sunset tables that can be included in the TWoS real navigation documentation. My tables are more detailed, contain the necessary hints that are relevant for SH5, so they can replace "SunAlmanac39_45", "SunAlmanacAndSpeedTable" from the folder that you showed me.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/10otgcskLq_y8drdPRiKNSWTXGdaRl28v/view?usp=sharing - sunrise/sunset in northern latitudes

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jF34POfL3aPPh-GkdnNLJV2qlgX6Ld93/view?usp=sharing - sunrise/sunset in southern latitudes

Improve your skills in real navigation.
https://youtu.be/12oNG3WIZAo


Great as always! Thank you very much Alpheratz. I am slowly preparing update 2.2.23 and lot of your stuff will be in it. (links to your tutorials, documentation, charts ect...):yep:

[derstosstrupp]

Huge thank you to Alpheratz and the creator of the NewSextant mod! I have always wanted a way to do celnav in a sim, and now all the pieces are there to do it. After seeing the post about the acceleration and deceleration of the celestial sphere, I was trying to figure it out in international TWOS - this last video and this information came at just the right time because my solution was inelegant at best.

I know sometimes when posting things, we are never quite sure how many people we are reaching or if anybody cares. So please know that myself and at least a couple others I know will greatly appreciate this effort. And I certainly hope that other players who might not as yet be familiar with celnav give this a try, it’s a very rich experience, and it’s really not hard (basic arithmetic is all it has to be).

Ritterkreuz verdient! :Kaleun_Salute:

And noted for this year’s best of subsim vote when the time comes…

[Alpheratz]

Huge thank you to Alpheratz and the creator of the NewSextant mod! I have always wanted a way to do celnav in a sim, and now all the pieces are there to do it. After seeing the post about the acceleration and deceleration of the celestial sphere, I was trying to figure it out in international TWOS - this last video and this information came at just the right time because my solution was inelegant at best.

I know sometimes when posting things, we are never quite sure how many people we are reaching or if anybody cares. So please know that myself and at least a couple others I know will greatly appreciate this effort. And I certainly hope that other players who might not as yet be familiar with celnav give this a try, it’s a very rich experience, and it’s really not hard (basic arithmetic is all it has to be).

Ritterkreuz verdient! :Kaleun_Salute:

And noted for this year’s best of subsim vote when the time comes…

Thank you, derstosstrupp, for evaluating my work! I am glad that this attracts the attention of an authoritative and competent audience, which is interested in the fullest possible disclosure of the potential of our favorite simulator.
:Kaleun_Salute:

[Alpheratz]

Great as always! Thank you very much Alpheratz. I am slowly preparing update 2.2.23 and lot of your stuff will be in it. (links to your tutorials, documentation, charts ect...):yep:

Vecko, i'm pleased that this will be my contribution to the overall effort to make the game better :salute:

[Sean C]

Great job, Alpheratz! I was going to suggest that we collaborate on a spreadsheet or something, but I see you have that taken care of! :yeah:

[Alpheratz]

Great job, Alpheratz! I was going to suggest that we collaborate on a spreadsheet or something, but I see you have that taken care of! :yeah:

Thanks! I thought that not everyone would be comfortable using kriegsmarine tables. Let there be a spreadsheet for quick navigation, it can be used both for training and on an ongoing basis. :yep:

[derstosstrupp]

Thanks! I thought that not everyone would be comfortable using kriegsmarine tables. Let there be a spreadsheet for quick navigation, it can be used both for training and on an ongoing basis. :yep:

F-Tafel all the way! In practice though I tend to use either Pub 249 or a scientific calculator. F-Tafel though is very accurate and relatively quick too once you get the hang of it.

[Alpheratz]

F-Tafel all the way! In practice though I tend to use either Pub 249 or a scientific calculator. F-Tafel though is very accurate and relatively quick too once you get the hang of it.

I also prefer the F-Tafel. I'm planning to do another more detailed video on using the F-Tafel. My first video about F-Tafel is not suitable for using "SH5NewSextant".

[vdr1981]

As for those documents that are included in the "nav doc from TWoS", I think it is advisable to save them, there is training information on which I did not emphasize in my videos and it can be useful for studying. It may be worth putting it in a separate folder, indicating that these documents have been adapted for SH3 / SH4, but are suitable for mastering celestial navigation in SH5. Only Document "SH3_RNM_TheModInDetail" seems to me not relevant for SH5.


If you remember our previous conversation I would like to ask this as well...You mean that I can leave files "SunAlmanac39_45.xls" and "SunAlmanacAndSpeedTable.pdf" even though you have created (if I'm not mistaken) specialized Almanacs for SH5 only? Is this correct?

[Alpheratz]

If you remember our previous conversation I would like to ask this as well...You mean that I can leave files "SunAlmanac39_45.xls" and "SunAlmanacAndSpeedTable.pdf" even though you have created (if I'm not mistaken) specialized Almanacs for SH5 only? Is this correct?

I would recommend excluding "SunAlmanac39_45.xls" and "SunAlmanacAndSpeedTable.pdf" from the documentation because they are calculated based on the actual declination of the Sun. I have compiled my tables of sunrise and sunset based on the declination of the Sun, which take place in the world SH5.

[vdr1981]

I would recommend excluding "SunAlmanac39_45.xls" and "SunAlmanacAndSpeedTable.pdf" from the documentation because they are calculated based on the actual declination of the Sun. I have compiled my tables of sunrise and sunset based on the declination of the Sun, which take place in the world SH5.
Thank you! :up:

[vdr1981]

Do you think that it would be useful to have some of your "smaller" charts available in-game as well, like this? :)


https://i.postimg.cc/sv8rkthX/SH5-Img-2021-02-15-00-14-17.jpg (https://postimg.cc/sv8rkthX)

[Alpheratz]

Do you think that it would be useful to have some of your "smaller" charts available in-game as well, like this? :)


https://i.postimg.cc/sv8rkthX/SH5-Img-2021-02-15-00-14-17.jpg (https://postimg.cc/sv8rkthX)

Yes, I think it is worth making such charts available directly in the game. If necessary, they can always be printed on paper.:yep:

[vdr1981]

Yes, I think it is worth making such charts available directly in the game. If necessary, they can always be printed on paper.:yep:


Great! :up:


Also, if you can, please compile one folder with tables and documentation which I should implement into real nav documentation for TWoS. I already created one but I'm concerned that I may mess up something and place outdated tables ect...


Please tell me which tables would be the most useful to be available in the game charts section as well. Right now I have 7 free slots for charts but that can be increased to 11 if necessary...



:salute:

[Alpheratz]

Great! :up:


Also, if you can, please compile one folder with tables and documentation which I should implement into real nav documentation for TWoS. I already created one but I'm concerned that I may mess up something and place outdated tables ect...


Please tell me which tables would be the most useful to be available in the game charts section as well. Right now I have 7 free slots for charts but that can be increased to 11 if necessary...



:salute:

Here is a link to the folder where I put the actual tables for inclusion in the documentation: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1iUGonLtMpX9b9gWSFO1UqikkayKFRkbD?usp=sharing

First of all, I would make available in the game: "[3] Culminations of stars (SH5)", "SH5 navigational stars (rev.2021)", "SH5 Latitude by Polaris".
:salute:

[vdr1981]

Here is a link to the folder where I put the actual tables for inclusion in the documentation: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1iUGonLtMpX9b9gWSFO1UqikkayKFRkbD?usp=sharing

First of all, I would make available in the game: "[3] Culminations of stars (SH5)", "SH5 navigational stars (rev.2021)", "SH5 Latitude by Polaris".
:salute:


Thank you vary much, working on it right now...:yep::up:


I'll also try to see what is going on with that YS new sextant mod, why CDTs and what's wrong. :hmmm:

[Alpheratz]

I did not include the polaris.txt and stars.txt files in this folder with which it is necessary to replace the corresponding files of the new sextant mod from YS. Maybe later they should be implemented directly into the assembly, after the compatibility problems of TWoS and SH5NewSextant mod are eliminated.:yep:

[vdr1981]

I tested YS New Sextant mod both in v2.2.9 and 2.2.10 versions and those CTDs on initial single mission/campaign gamesave loading are present there as well. Debuger reports that CTDs are caused by some errors in .py scripts., pretty much the same as in the latest TWoS version...:hmmm:


However, once the game is loaded it seems that there are no further gameplay and stability related problems, just as you said in your video...
I'll investigate this further but I'll probably need help from someone with pyton scripts knowledge .


https://i.postimg.cc/pXVvz2YW/Capture.png

The tests are done both with and without your polaris/stars.txt enhancement, it seems there are no difference there...:yep:

[Alpheratz]

I tested YS New Sextant mod both in v2.2.9 and 2.2.10 versions and those CTDs on initial single mission/campaign gamesave loading are present there as well. Debuger reports that CTDs are caused by some errors in .py scripts., pretty much the same as in the latest TWoS version...:hmmm:


However, once the game is loaded it seems that there are no further gameplay and stability related problems, just as you said in your video...
I'll investigate this further but I'll probably need help from someone with pyton scripts knowledge .


https://i.postimg.cc/pXVvz2YW/Capture.png

The tests are done both with and without your polaris/stars.txt enhancement, it seems there are no difference there...:yep:

Yes, stars.txt, polaris.txt are reference files that are accessed by the program, but they themselves do not affect the operation of the code.:yep:

[vdr1981]

Hey Alpheratz,


I exchanged few messages wit YellowSubmarine and he gave me few advises how to solve CTD issues. :yep:


Please try this updated version of New sextant mod and tell me are those CTDs on gamesave/mission loading eliminated. I added your Polaris and stars tweaks to the mod as well... It seems that it works for me...:yep:


https://www.mediafire.com/file/akhube7dp60dy85/TWoS_New_Sextant_v0.1.rar/file

[Alpheratz]

Hey Alpheratz,


I exchanged few messages wit YellowSubmarine and he gave me few advises how to solve CTD issues. :yep:


Please try this updated version of New sextant mod and tell me are those CTDs on gamesave/mission loading eliminated. I added your Polaris and stars tweaks to the mod as well... It seems that it works for me...:yep:


https://www.mediafire.com/file/akhube7dp60dy85/TWoS_New_Sextant_v0.1.rar/file

Vecko, looks like I still have this ejection to desktop problem. And now I'm not sure what exactly the new sextant is causing this. :hmmm:

[vdr1981]

Vecko, looks like I still have this ejection to desktop problem. And now I'm not sure what exactly the new sextant is causing this. :hmmm:
Hm..OK:hmmm:
Tested on which version?

[Alpheratz]

Hm..OK:hmmm:
Tested on which version?

Tested TWoS 2.2.22 with Ubisoft connect

Immediately after activating the mod I had a few ejections on the desktop when loading the saves. I continued testing and at some point the ejections stopped completely, the problem disappeared as if by itself, I don't know how to explain it but it seems to be working.

[vdr1981]

Tested TWoS 2.2.22 with Ubisoft connect

Immediately after activating the mod I had a few ejections on the desktop when loading the saves. I continued testing and at some point the ejections stopped completely, the problem disappeared as if by itself, I don't know how to explain it but it seems to be working.


This is not so unusual when scripts are changed ...Had somewhat simmilar behavior in my game as well...:hmmm:

OK, use it for some time and keep us posted how it goes...:yep:

[Alpheratz]

This is not so unusual when scripts are changed ...Had somewhat simmilar behavior in my game as well...:hmmm:

OK, use it for some time and keep us posted how it goes...:yep:

OK, deal:yep:

[vdr1981]

Hm, yes...I also had several crashes if TWoS New Sextant v0.1 is applied to clear v2.2.22. No idea idea why exactly...:hmmm:


Anyway, in combination with my new v.2.2.23 test update I haven't received any script errors or crashes...Test update is JSGME ready and I'll upload it here later. :yep:

[vdr1981]

OK, here is the new test update, JSGME ready...https://www.mediafire.com/file/vuxwgkuj0lh9zgs/TWoS_v2.2.23_Update_Test.rar/file
Note that thisupdate is only for v2.2.22.

...and here is the example how it should be enabled in JSGME...

https://i.postimg.cc/dVTnQdbX/jsgm.jpg



New Sextant is contained within the update and it will be added automatically to your JSGME. :yep:

Among other things in it, you'll find there updated Real Nav documentation, added your charts, larger sun and moon like they were in v2.2.10 ect...

Fingers crossed...

[Alpheratz]

OK, here is the new test update, JSGME ready...https://www.mediafire.com/file/vuxwgkuj0lh9zgs/TWoS_v2.2.23_Update_Test.rar/file
Note that thisupdate is only for v2.2.22.

...and here is the example how it should be enabled in JSGME...

https://i.postimg.cc/dVTnQdbX/jsgm.jpg



New Sextant is contained within the update and it will be added automatically to your JSGME. :yep:

Among other things in it, you'll find there updated Real Nav documentation, added your charts, larger sun and moon like they were in v2.2.10 ect...

Fingers crossed...

Vecko, i'm testing the assembly in the configuration you suggested. It is a great idea to use a larger diameter of the sun: the contours of the solar disk are sharper and allow for more accurate measurements. No serious problems have been found yet.

The identified problem is not directly related to the New sextant mod, but in the context of celestial navigation it is worth mentioning it here. Usually there is no need to minimize the game and go to the desktop, but if you have to do this, for example, in order to use tables for celestial navigation, then the following problems may be detected:

Case 1: If you go to the desktop while your U-boat is on the surface, then on subsequent dives during the patrol, CO2 will not accumulate in the air until the end of the patrol. In this case, underwater, when trying to activate the air purification system, the mechanic tells you “Sorry, Captain, no need for that right now. We’re on the surface ... ”

Case 2: If you go to the desktop when your U-boat is underwater, there will be no CO2 problem. BUT! If you once went to the desktop while underwater, then activating the air purification system in this patrol will stop the accumulation of CO2 until the end of the patrol (as in Case 1).

[vdr1981]

Case 1: If you go to the desktop while your U-boat is on the surface, then on subsequent dives during the patrol, CO2 will not accumulate in the air until the end of the patrol. In this case, underwater, when trying to activate the air purification system, the mechanic tells you “Sorry, Captain, no need for that right now. We’re on the surface ... ”

Case 2: If you go to the desktop when your U-boat is underwater, there will be no CO2 problem. BUT! If you once went to the desktop while underwater, then activating the air purification system in this patrol will stop the accumulation of CO2 until the end of the patrol (as in Case 1).


Yes , these are all known problems, alt-tabbing to desktop is not recommended in SH5...


Yes, bigger sun is easier for measurements but it looks quite unrealistic to me. I'm experimenting now with 30% smaller Sun and the Moon. It's also nice for measurement but it looks much better. :yep:


Any CTDs with new sextant from v2.2.23?

[Alpheratz]

Any CTDs with new sextant from v2.2.23?

No, I have no desktop crashes.

[vdr1981]

No, I have no desktop crashes.
Great, same here! :up:


Small hint...Not sure are you aware but when you move sextant up to measure altitude, press and hold LCtrl key for smoother movement...:yep:

[Alpheratz]

Small hint...Not sure are you aware but when you move sextant up to measure altitude, press and hold LCtrl key for smoother movement...:yep:

Thanks! :yep:This hint is found at the end of my video "3 secrets of accurate celestial navigation in Silent Hunter 5". By the way, in the international TWoS, according to my observations, the use of the LCtrl key is less effective than in 2.0.9 RUS: when, after the Russian TWoS, I started testing the international TWoS, I thought that my LCtrl key was broken. And when I took measurements in 2.2.22 without the LCtrl key, at first I could not catch the star. :)

[vdr1981]

By the way, in the international TWoS, according to my observations, the use of the LCtrl key is less effective than in 2.0.9 RUS
Hm , I wish I know what have they changed in order to do that...:hmmm:

[Alpheratz]

Hm , I wish I know what have they changed in order to do that...:hmmm:

I wanted to ask about this on the Russian-language forum, where TWoS 2.0.9 RUS was available for download, but www.silent-hunter.ru stopped functioning.

[derstosstrupp]

I have noticed that sometimes the NewSextant mod thinks a body is in a different spot than it appears to be. Typically for a noon latitude sight I don’t see UT show up after putting the object in. If I drop down a degree or so, sure enough, there it is. Now of course I don’t need time for a latitude sight, but it’s just odd. I have run into the same trying to shoot some stars, not very many, but sometimes I run into an issue where UT doesn’t show.

Regarding the sun, when I am doing a running fix for example, if I take, say, and afternoon sun line, for which I get UT displayed, when I use real almanac declination I get very close. However, when I use real declinations for a noon latitude sight (where UT doesn’t show up as mentioned before), I get very close using Alpheratz’s sun declinations. So there is definitely some disconnect perhaps in NewSextant. Not a big deal, because we can use “two sets of books”. But definitely something to investigate.

In short, if I can see UT show up in the display, I get very close using real declinations, but if UT doesn’t show, Alpheratz’s data seems to be closer. I have had a friend test this as well in parallel.

[vdr1981]

I have noticed that sometimes the NewSextant mod thinks a body is in a different spot than it appears to be. Typically for a noon latitude sight I don’t see UT show up after putting the object in. If I drop down a degree or so, sure enough, there it is. Now of course I don’t need time for a latitude sight, but it’s just odd. I have run into the same trying to shoot some stars, not very many, but sometimes I run into an issue where UT doesn’t show.

Are you talking about campaign or single missions?
I noticed the same but only in some single missions. In campaign, it seems that new sextant works normally. Tested in Black Pit campaign, mid Atlantic, and UT is shown up to ~60deg of altitude...

[derstosstrupp]

This is in campaign. And it’s really only at high noon, and maybe with some selected stars, but not very many. I should also point out this is on TWOS version .21. I am waiting for my campaign transition to upgrade to the latest. My friend is on .22 though with the same issue.

[vdr1981]

This is in campaign. And it’s really only at high noon, and maybe with some selected stars, but not very many. I should also point out this is on TWOS version .21. I am waiting for my campaign transition to upgrade to the latest. My friend is on .22 though with the same issue.


Ok, thank you for your report...:up:


Any new strange things in the campaign which you previously didn't notice, without New Sextant?

[derstosstrupp]

Ok, thank you for your report...:up:


Any new strange things in the campaign which you previously didn't notice, without New Sextant?

Not as yet, everything else seems to be very good. I appreciate your hard work on this. I try my best to spread the word about TWOS on Discord and elsewhere, because people still seem to be under the impression that SH5 should be abandoned as a mess.:doh:

[Alpheratz]

I have noticed that sometimes the NewSextant mod thinks a body is in a different spot than it appears to be. Typically for a noon latitude sight I don’t see UT show up after putting the object in. If I drop down a degree or so, sure enough, there it is. Now of course I don’t need time for a latitude sight, but it’s just odd. I have run into the same trying to shoot some stars, not very many, but sometimes I run into an issue where UT doesn’t show.

Regarding the sun, when I am doing a running fix for example, if I take, say, and afternoon sun line, for which I get UT displayed, when I use real almanac declination I get very close. However, when I use real declinations for a noon latitude sight (where UT doesn’t show up as mentioned before), I get very close using Alpheratz’s sun declinations. So there is definitely some disconnect perhaps in NewSextant. Not a big deal, because we can use “two sets of books”. But definitely something to investigate.

In short, if I can see UT show up in the display, I get very close using real declinations, but if UT doesn’t show, Alpheratz’s data seems to be closer. I have had a friend test this as well in parallel.

Thank you, you have raised a very important issue. I know what's the matter here. This problem you are talking about is not a bug in the mod. The reason lies in celestial mechanics. There is only one possible calculation method for time correction, and this method is implemented in the New sextant mod:
There is a formula that describes the change in altitude within 10 seconds of time:

Delta h per 10 sec = 2.5 arc min * cos (Latitude) * sin (Azimuth)

The New sextant mod calculation algorithm calculates the altitude for a celestial body and compares it with the Measured altitude.

Delta h = |Calculated altitude - Measured altitude|

Time correction is performed based on the above two formulas.

Now about celestial mechanics. After the rise of a celestial body, it increases its altitude relatively quickly. The rate of increase in altitude decreases as you approach the upper culmination. Immediately before upper culmination, at the moment of upper culmination, and immediately after upper culmination, there is practically no change in altitude. After upper culmination, altitude decreases very slowly at first, then it happens faster, the rate of altitude decrease is maximum before the celestial body sets over the horizon. The most accurate time correction is possible when the Azimuth of the celestial body = 90 or 270: this corresponds to the largest altitude increment per unit time. The possibilities for time correction are almost exhausted when you observe the upper or lower culmination of a celestial body, when there are practically no changes in altitude (Azimuth = 0 or 180).

And now the most interesting thing is why UT disappears. Even if you follow all the recommendations for working with the sextant, which I talked about in my videos, you can achieve an accuracy in measuring altitude at the level of + -0.5 ... 1.0 arc minutes. The upper culmination moment corresponds to the maximum altitude that a celestial body can reach at a given latitude. When at the moment of upper culmination you measure Altitude with an error towards overestimation of the result, let it be at least the smallest error + 0.1 arc minutes, then for the New sextant mod calculation algorithm you get an altitude that a celestial body can never reach - based on the measured altitude, the time cannot be corrected, so UT does not appear.

Everything I talked about above concerns both the measurement of stars and the Sun.
Now, for the Sun alone. I have to manually correct over 2500 lines of the Sun.txt file in the New sextant mod in order for this mod to be usable for time-corrected measurements of the Sun. When taking measurements of the sun, you need to make sure that the SEXTANTSUNDIAMETER (String # 53 of "page layout.py") matches the size of the sun in the mod being used. For example, the new test build TWoS 2.2.23 should have SEXTANTSUNDIAMETER = 2.18666666667, but the Sun.txt file has not been redesigned yet, it is premature to talk about it. When measuring the Sun, when in the sextant interface field you enter the value "0" to indicate the celestial body being measured, the sextant "knows" that you are measuring the lower limb of the solar disk and the sextant reading is the altitude of the solar disc center, taking into account the influence of dip + refraction. that is, you don't need to add sun semidiameter to the measured value.

If you want to check the relevance of the declination of a celestial body (remember the maximum accuracy of a single measurement is + -0.5 ... 1.0 arc minutes, and in the case of measuring the Sun due to blurred contours of the solar disk, the error can be 2 - 3 arc minutes), regardless work of New sextant mod and time correction, then you should take measurements without entering the number of the celestial body in the sextant interface field. The sextant reading in this case will represent the actual altitude (without the influence of dip + refraction), which you can use directly to calculate declination when measuring the altitude of upper culmination at a latitude known to you. When checking the declination of the Sun, you should also not enter "0" in the sextant interface field. Add Sun semidiameter to the sextant readings (1 deg 5.6 arc minutes in new test build 2.2.23) and calculate the declination.

[derstosstrupp]

This makes sense. In the meantime, for noon latitude sights (where the problem is most pronounced) your declination numbers for the sun have yielded nearly spot-on results (as you mention, to compensate for the too-high altitude and thus too-low zenith distance). In game I normally get a morning twilight 3-star fix, and then a running fix during the day using a noon latitude sight advanced to another afternoon sun line (normally 3 hours later for a good azimuth change). For the afternoon sun line I always have UT displayed anyway so I can use actual declination (so no issues).

So it’s 2 sets of books for now and that’s OK.

I have also adjusted the diameter of the sun in the mod, mine corresponds to your value of just over a degree.

Thanks for posting that formula also. I will take a closer look at that.

[Alpheratz]

For the afternoon sun line I always have UT displayed anyway so I can use actual declination (so no issues).

So it’s 2 sets of books for now and that’s OK.

You cannot rely on UT and draw conclusions on this basis (including regarding the correctness of declination) if you read UT when measuring the Sun, because there are 2 precisely established facts:
1. The declination of the Sun SH5 does not correspond to the actual declination of the Sun (you can check on your mod with the checkpoints on March 20, June 22, September 23, December 22).
2. The time correction is performed on the basis of the actual declination of the Sun (see file Sun.txt), and therefore gives a deliberately incorrect result.
The only exceptions are measurements taken around March 20 and September 23.

[derstosstrupp]

You cannot rely on UT and draw conclusions on this basis (including regarding the correctness of declination) if you read UT when measuring the Sun, because there are 2 precisely established facts:
1. The declination of the Sun SH5 does not correspond to the actual declination of the Sun (you can check on your mod with the checkpoints on March 20, June 22, September 23, December 22).
2. The time correction is performed on the basis of the actual declination of the Sun (see file Sun.txt), and therefore gives a deliberately incorrect result.
The only exceptions are measurements taken around March 20 and September 23.

Aha I see, ok thanks. I was operating on the assumption that the time correction worked to offset even any declination errors such that using “real” almanac would yield correct results in any case where the corrected UT is displayed. In other words, I had assumed that the mod was trying to force real-world results through the time correction.

That said, my fixes are indeed not totally exact (allowing for possible measurement error), so I can understand what you are saying about the declination being fundamentally different than reality, which is unfortunate. But at least for the moment not wildly off, and still workable.

[derstosstrupp]

Also, if you need any help with fixing the sun data, I would be happy to assist. Any way to make this more like reality is a step in the right direction. Navigating in this game makes it so much deeper.

[Alpheratz]

Aha I see, ok thanks. I was operating on the assumption that the time correction worked to offset even any declination errors such that using “real” almanac would yield correct results in any case where the corrected UT is displayed. In other words, I had assumed that the mod was trying to force real-world results through the time correction.

That said, my fixes are indeed not totally exact (allowing for possible measurement error), so I can understand what you are saying about the declination being fundamentally different than reality, which is unfortunate. But at least for the moment not wildly off, and still workable.

After correcting Sun.txt, everything will work fine together with Sun almanac, which I compiled specifically for SH5.:yep:

[derstosstrupp]

After correcting Sun.txt, everything will work fine together with Sun almanac, which I compiled specifically for SH5.:yep:

Thank you for making an effort with this!

[Alpheratz]

Also, if you need any help with fixing the sun data, I would be happy to assist. Any way to make this more like reality is a step in the right direction. Navigating in this game makes it so much deeper.

Thank you, your help would be greatly appreciated.:up: I tried to send you a link to edit the file, but I'm not sure if my letter reached you.

Column A must be edited. Column A is edited according to columns H (declination in decimal degrees), I (minutes of arc for declination), J (increment in declination in minutes of arc).
What has already been corrected is filled in yellow.

[derstosstrupp]

Thank you, your help would be greatly appreciated.:up: I tried to send you a link to edit the file, but I'm not sure if my letter reached you.

Column A must be edited. Column A is edited according to columns H (declination in decimal degrees), I (minutes of arc for declination), J (increment in declination in minutes of arc).
What has already been corrected is filled in yellow.

Ok great thanks! I did receive, will have a look!

[Alpheratz]

Thank you very much, derstosstrupp, for your prompt assistance in correcting sun declination in New Sextant mod. My preliminary testing revealed no errors. Link to the sun.txt file, which should replace the corresponding New Sextant mod file:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cw6mSicWaw_UfMmkpg_WxtVodb-suMEj/view?usp=sharing
I propose to test this on measurements of the sun. I will continue testing as well.

NOTA BENE! My guess turned out to be wrong.

When measuring the Sun, when in the sextant interface field you enter the value "0" to indicate the celestial body being measured, the sextant "knows" that you are measuring the lower limb of the solar disk and the sextant reading is the altitude of the solar disc center, taking into account the influence of dip + refraction. that is, you don't need to add sun semidiameter to the measured value.

When you measure the lower limb of solar disc altitude, then New Sextant readings represent the sun's altitude reduced by the actual (historical) sun semidiameter. You need to add the historical sun semidiameter to the measured sun lower limb altitude. I will rework my Sun Almanac to include a historical sun semidiameter.

[derstosstrupp]

Thank you very much, derstosstrupp, for your prompt assistance in correcting sun declination in New Sextant mod. My preliminary testing revealed no errors. Link to the sun.txt file, which should replace the corresponding New Sextant mod file:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cw6mSicWaw_UfMmkpg_WxtVodb-suMEj/view?usp=sharing
I propose to test this on measurements of the sun. I will continue testing as well.

NOTA BENE! My guess turned out to be wrong.

When you measure the lower limb of solar disc altitude, then New Sextant readings represent the sun's altitude reduced by the actual (historical) sun semidiameter. You need to add the historical sun semidiameter to the measured sun lower limb altitude. I will rework my Sun Almanac to include a historical sun semidiameter.

You are very welcome! I will test tonight as well.

[Alpheratz]

The updated Sun Almanac 1939 - 1945 is ready with the indication of the Sun semidiameter, for full work with the New Sextant mod.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1x_UZhyl3v5UgHcpj1Cn1T99V3WJfR7fM/view?usp=sharing

[derstosstrupp]

The updated Sun Almanac 1939 - 1945 is ready with the indication of the Sun semidiameter, for full work with the New Sextant mod.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1x_UZhyl3v5UgHcpj1Cn1T99V3WJfR7fM/view?usp=sharing

Thank you sir!

[vdr1981]

The updated Sun Almanac 1939 - 1945 is ready with the indication of the Sun semidiameter, for full work with the New Sextant mod.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1x_UZhyl3v5UgHcpj1Cn1T99V3WJfR7fM/view?usp=sharing


:up::up::up::salute: Replaced old "SH5 Sun 1939-1945 every 4 hours.pdf"...:yep:

[Alpheratz]

In game I normally get a morning twilight 3-star fix, and then a running fix during the day using a noon latitude sight advanced to another afternoon sun line (normally 3 hours later for a good azimuth change).

If you test the New Sextant mod with this method, keep in mind that there are limitations due to the fact that WORLD = MAP in SH5. This imposes restrictions to advance one line of position to another line of position made after a long time (observations with baseline shift, "Sonnenbeobachtungen mit Versegelung"). In fact in SH5 you only have 2 options.

1. Between the measurements of the first and second altitudes your Heading = 0 or 180, then this formula works to transform the first taken altitude and refer it to the zenith of the second observation:

delta h = Speed ​​[knots] * 0.9265 * time [hours] * cos (Azimuth - Heading)

2. Between the measurement of the first and second altitudes your Heading = 90 or 270, then the corrected first formula works:

delta h = Speed ​​[knots] * 0.9265 * time [hours] * cos (Azimuth - Heading) * cos (latitude)

If Heading is different from 0, 180, 90, 270, then it is impossible to calculate "delta h" using a calculator or tables.

[derstosstrupp]

I have thought about this as well. It might be sufficient when the azimuth is further east or west to apply the correction for “spherical transfer” to the resulting line of position before you advance it. My first Sunline is normally a latitude line, so no issue there, but my second one in the afternoon after three hours is of course about 45° shifted, so that would need such a correction.

I should add that I don’t typically use the German running fix method of plotting both lines of position from the second observation. I understand that method, but I find it much easier to simply just DR the first LOP physically on the map.

Of course I might be all wet on the above, and it may likely be invalid, but at least it’s close enough for government work. The litmus test for me is 10nm. If my intercepts are larger than 10 nm using my DR as AP, then I worry.

[Alpheratz]

Yes, I agree that in practice it is more convenient to use graphic solutions.

[Alpheratz]

A prerequisite for the correct operation of NewSextant is the disabling option "No stabilize view" in gameplay settings. In a separate NewSextant mod, GameplaySettings.cfg was adjusted so that when any difficulty level is selected, "No stabilize view" option is always false (disabled). In test build 2.2.23 at any difficulty level from easy to realistic, NoStabilizeView = true, so you must manually disable "No stabilize view". It is certainly not difficult. I just think it makes sense to automate this mandatory default action.

[vdr1981]

A prerequisite for the correct operation of NewSextant is the disabling option "No stabilize view" in gameplay settings. In a separate NewSextant mod, GameplaySettings.cfg was adjusted so that when any difficulty level is selected, "No stabilize view" option is always false (disabled). In test build 2.2.23 at any difficulty level from easy to realistic, NoStabilizeView = true, so you must manually disable "No stabilize view". It is certainly not difficult. I just think it makes sense to automate this mandatory default action.
This will be sorted out in final version of the update...:yep:


BTW, tell me guys what do you think about this new sextant mask file with thinner lines...I guess it should provide more precision during the measurements. :hmm2:



https://www.mediafire.com/file/5mid42vwx684i5q/Z_New_Sextant_Mask.rar/file


https://i.postimg.cc/PqfQY9WR/SH5-Img-2021-02-22-13-52-26.jpg

[Alpheratz]

BTW, tell me guys what do you think about this new sextant mask file with thinner lines...I guess it should provide more precision during the measurements. :hmm2:



https://www.mediafire.com/file/5mid42vwx684i5q/Z_New_Sextant_Mask.rar/file


https://i.postimg.cc/PqfQY9WR/SH5-Img-2021-02-22-13-52-26.jpg

It's a great idea :up:, the thick crosshair lines always got in the way.

[derstosstrupp]

I like it a lot! So far so good on testing by the way, will continue tonight.

[Alpheratz]

Updated Excel table for CelNav calculations (added a field for entering Sun semidiameter), for the convenience of testing NewSextant by the Sun.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1l1Jn9OfHoY2iwmqTcZ8iUEqXslHW3f_7/view?usp=sharing

[vdr1981]

Updated Excel table for CelNav calculations (added a field for entering Sun semidiameter), for the convenience of testing NewSextant by the Sun.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1l1Jn9OfHoY2iwmqTcZ8iUEqXslHW3f_7/view?usp=sharing
:up:


One question Alpheratz...As I said before, I'd like to add 30% smaller sun/moon then what you have now in the test update. Would that effect in any way your documentation? I mean, I don't want to create any unnecessary extra work for you. As far as I understand these stuff now, only sun/moon diameter had to be precised in the New Sextant scripts and we are good to go? Am I correct? :hmmm:


Here is a small mod to demonstrate smaller Sun and the Moon...https://www.mediafire.com/file/c4zuqrwd5mlhwic/Z__New_Moon_Sun_70%2525.rar/file

[Alpheratz]

:up:


One question Alpheratz...As I said before, I'd like to add 30% smaller sun/moon then what you have now in the test update. Would that effect in any way your documentation? I mean, I don't want to create any unnecessary extra work for you. As far as I understand these stuff now, only sun/moon diameter had to be precised in the New Sextant scripts and we are good to go? Am I correct? :hmmm:


Here is a small mod to demonstrate smaller Sun and the Moon...https://www.mediafire.com/file/c4zuqrwd5mlhwic/Z__New_Moon_Sun_70%2525.rar/file

Absolutely correct, will not affect the documentation, just fix SEXTANTSUNDIAMETER in Page layout.py:yep:

[vdr1981]

Absolutely correct, will not affect the documentation, just fix SEXTANTSUNDIAMETER in Page layout.py:yep:
Excellent! :up: In that case please add new Sun and Moon to your test setup and tell me how it goes. I've calculated sun/moon diameter to be something like 1.74, but you should double check my calculations...:yep:

[Alpheratz]

Excellent! :up: In that case please add new Sun and Moon to your test setup and tell me how it goes. I've calculated sun/moon diameter to be something like 1.74, but you should double check my calculations...:yep:



OK, Vecko, i was investigating the possibility of using the Moon for celesial navigation and came across inconsistencies that are hardly possible to eliminate. I compiled Moon Almanac 1939 - 1945 based on a real Moon and found out that there are differences from SH5 Moon. I find it extremely difficult to perform the same correction for the Moon, similar to the one I did for the Sun, due to the complex pattern of the Moon's motion. For this reason, I did not include Moon Almanac in the documentation and did not raise this issue in my videos.

[vdr1981]

Vecko, please tell me where can I get the new sun and moon?
https://www.mediafire.com/file/c4zuqrwd5mlhwic/Z__New_Moon_Sun_70%2525.rar/file


By the way, I was investigating the possibility of using the Moon for celesial navigation and came across inconsistencies that are hardly possible to eliminate. I compiled Moon Almanac 1939 - 1945 based on a real Moon and found out that there are differences from SH5 Moon. I find it extremely difficult to perform the same correction for the Moon, similar to the one I did for the Sun, due to the complex pattern of the Moon's motion. For this reason, I did not include Moon Almanac in the documentation and did not raise this issue in my videos.
That's really shame , but quite expected at the same time...
Anyway, being able to navigate with Sun and at least few stars is still really awesome and unprecedented. :yep:

[vdr1981]

And here is the new test update No 7 which includes all previously mentioned tweaks, updated documentation, samller sun/moon, set sun/moon diameter in scripts ect...

Note that in this version, New Sextant will become available in your JSGME only after you enable the main Real navigation mod in order to avoid some badly arranged mod lists...

Also , compatibility with other conflicting mods (auto ship recognition and campaign advance verifier) is now fixed so enabling order is not important anymore...:yep: The mods will automatically "make them self compatible" as you enable them one by one in your JSGME...:yep:

https://www.mediafire.com/file/fb6aveep2cv13n9/TWoS_v2.2.23_Update_Test7.rar/file


https://i.postimg.cc/vTL2z9KY/Capture.jpg

[Alpheratz]

The new Sun and Moon have the following dimensions:

SEXTANTSUNDIAMETER=1.61555555555
SEXTANTMOONDIAMETER=1.5125

I was lucky to find NewSextant mod. I found it almost immediately after it was published, but I was not immediately able to appreciate its merits and the reason why it was made that way. Now, after years of researching celestial navigation in Silent Hunter 5, this mod seems to be the most thoughtful and graceful, the "golden key" that finally opens up Celestial Navigation for us in Silent Hunter, we have all been waiting for it.

I was especially pleased with the fact that this mod turned out to be so flexible that it became possible to introduce into it my developments regarding the correction of celestial coordinates.

Thanks to Vecko and derstosstrupp for working on this as a team.

[derstosstrupp]

The new Sun and Moon have the following dimensions:

SEXTANTSUNDIAMETER=1.61555555555
SEXTANTMOONDIAMETER=1.5125

I was lucky to find NewSextant mod. I found it almost immediately after it was published, but I was not immediately able to appreciate its merits and the reason why it was made that way. Now, after years of researching celestial navigation in Silent Hunter 5, this mod seems to be the most thoughtful and graceful, the "golden key" that finally opens up Celestial Navigation for us in Silent Hunter, we have all been waiting for it.

Thanks for those figures. Yes I agree, I couldn’t be happier. For years I waited for a platform to be able to do this in a simulation, and finally it’s possible.

[vdr1981]

The new Sun and Moon have the following dimensions:

SEXTANTSUNDIAMETER=1.61555555555
SEXTANTMOONDIAMETER=1.5125




Maybe I created some mistake in my calculations or it's simply measurement error?

These are two pictures which I used and I got ~ 1.74 value for Sun (zoomed in to check my measurement)...

https://i.postimg.cc/5yZVTDq4/SH5-Img-2021-02-22-14-59-09.png

https://i.postimg.cc/1RTs8Nxk/SH5-Img-2021-02-22-14-59-19.png

Is my calculation OK? Did I measure upper and lower limb incorrectly?:hmmm:

[Alpheratz]

No, the error is not in the calculations, but in the measurement technique. All measurements are recommended to be carried out using the Fine aiming line, which is activated by pressing this button.

https://s8.hostingkartinok.com/uploads/images/2021/02/6e020202b88ea8dff0262f24c01286c7.png (https://hostingkartinok.com/show-image.php?id=6e020202b88ea8dff0262f24c01286c7)

When measuring, it is necessary to capture the extreme row of pixels of the lower and upper extremities of the solar disk.

https://s8.hostingkartinok.com/uploads/images/2021/02/47d09638acab81fb89fb664632d83590.png (https://hostingkartinok.com/show-image.php?id=47d09638acab81fb89fb664632d83590)

In addition, measurements of the diameter of the Sun should be carried out on a pause. Otherwise, between the first and second measurements, the sun can change its altitude by a certain amount, the profile of the solar disk (outlines, set of pixels) also changes by crosshair movement - this is purely "computer reason" introduces an additional error of measurement. You can check your measurement method yourself: take 5 measurements - if the variation is more than 0.3 arc minutes, then the quality of the measurements is poor.

In my series of 10 Sun measurements, the variation (difference between Max and Min result) was 0.2 arc minutes. 1.61666666 and 1.61333333. I took the average of 10 measurements as the result.

[vdr1981]

No, the error is not in the calculations, but in the measurement technique. All measurements are recommended to be carried out using the Fine aiming line, which is activated by pressing this button.

https://s8.hostingkartinok.com/uploads/images/2021/02/6e020202b88ea8dff0262f24c01286c7.png (https://hostingkartinok.com/show-image.php?id=6e020202b88ea8dff0262f24c01286c7)






Thanks for clarification...:up:


But, there is one problem (I think):hmmm:. I've always suspected that measuring by stadimeter button (AKA fine aiming line) is introducing certain degree of error depending on how much stadimeter is moved up. That's why avoided to use it in my measurements...


Later I'll post few screenshots to demonstrate this "error". It could be that imprecision in aspect ratio fixes are effecting sextant function both from normal periscope/UZO and from sextant as well.


In his video, YS is also avoiding to measure altitude by using stadimeter button...I wonder, is it because of this reason...

[Alpheratz]

Thanks for clarification...:up:


But, there is one problem (I think):hmmm:. I've always suspected that measuring by stadimeter button (AKA fine aiming line) is introducing certain degree of error depending on how much stadimeter is moved up. That's why avoided to use it in my measurements...


Later I'll post few screenshots to demonstrate this "error". It could be that imprecision in aspect ratio fixes are effecting sextant function both from normal periscope/UZO and from sextant as well.

I am aware of this problem. Take measurements so that you don't have to raise the fine aiming line above 1.5 - 2 centimeters from the crosshair, then there will be no error.:yep:

At one time, I investigated in great detail all the reasons causing errors in measurements, this is how my video "3 secrets ..." was born, where I summarized my many years of experience in 5 minutes.

[vdr1981]

I am aware of this problem. Take measurements so that you don't have to raise the fine aiming line above 1.5 - 2 centimeters from the crosshair, then there will be no error.:yep:

At one time, I investigated in great detail all the reasons causing errors in measurements, this is how my video "3 secrets ..." was born, where I summarized my many years of experience in 5 minutes.


I experimented a bit with cameras.cam values but I couldn't find any parameter which has any effect on this error... There must be something in the files which effects stadimeter behavior, I just hope it isn't hard codded.:hmmm: We may have problems in situations near the equator when the Sun is high, like 80+ deg, but again, with some resourcefulness and little bit of math, the error can be ruled out during the calculations...

[Alpheratz]

I experimented a bit with cameras.cam values but I couldn't find any parameter which has any effect on this error... There must be something in the files which effects stadimeter behavior, I just hope it isn't hard codded.:hmmm: We may have problems in situations near the equator when the Sun is high, like 80+ deg, but again, with some resourcefulness and little bit of math, the error can be ruled out during the calculations...

Of course, it would be ideal to eliminate this error, which limits our measurements:yep:

[derstosstrupp]

One thing I wish we had is an odometer (pit log). Dead reckoning by using time, speed and distance is all well and good, but the real boats had a form of odometer counter both on the speed gauge box in the control room, and a repeater in the tower by the helm station used during surface travel, even with a reset button for specific legs so helm knew when to turn. Would make dead reckoning in poor weather much easier when your speed fluctuates.

[Sean C]

One thing I wish we had is an odometer (pit log). [...] Would make dead reckoning in poor weather much easier when your speed fluctuates.


I'm afraid a log wouldn't be a whole lot more accurate (IRL, anyway). If there is any current (not unusual in the ocean), it will only display your distance through the water - not over the ground.


But, if you calculate the difference between your DR and your actual position (obtained from from a few sextant shots), you can determine the current's speed and direction - or "set and drift". And if you know that, you can then calculate a DR that will be more accurate than any log. And you don't even need any complicated math ... you just need to draw triangles. An elementary school student could do it.



Here are the relevant pages from Bowditch:


https://i.imgur.com/kFHOEB9h.png
https://i.imgur.com/GmgAMZ6h.png

[derstosstrupp]

Set and drift calculations are relatively pointless in the game, because there are no real currents. There’s only helm error. Now, this helm error does tend toward one side or the other, but the trend over time appears to be meaningless. I wish we had that, because calculating course and speed made good from noon to noon (an “Etmal” in German) would be fun!

I agree though, the triangle is handy to be able to compute (and then anticipate) the effects of it.

Having a pit log I could plot the legs of my maneuvers during an engagement using real nav if I so choose much easier. It also had the additional benefit of making “Ausdampfen” of a target easier - following it and adjusting your own course/speed to match his. With a pit log, that allows you to make several speed changes while refining your maneuvers without needing to keep track. And since you kept him roughly in the same spot relative to you all of that time, the distance you moved in that time was the distance he moved.

[Ypsan]

Ahoy Alpheratz (and all of you guys helping him out)!

I have nothing of value to add. Just here to say that last night I realized how important your work is.

I was so heavly punished by british escorts after sinking their battleship that all my officers ended up wounded. Well, such was the fate that the only one that never recovered was my navigations officer. I always relied on him but this time I had to find my way back to Wilhelmshaven (from Loch Ewe region) on my own. I found Denmark instead.

Looking forward to your mod and to finaly learn this sorcery, celestial navigation.

[vdr1981]

One more question Alpheratz...
You have probably noticed that New Sextant mod also has several docs in it's "Nautical Almanacs and tables" folder.

https://i.postimg.cc/zfCSQqfG/Capture.jpg

Which of those are redundant and/or in conflict with your documents? Which of them should I remove?
Also, would any of them be useful to be shown in the game as well, trough the Charts?

[Alpheratz]

Ahoy Alpheratz (and all of you guys helping him out)!

I have nothing of value to add. Just here to say that last night I realized how important your work is.

I was so heavly punished by british escorts after sinking their battleship that all my officers ended up wounded. Well, such was the fate that the only one that never recovered was my navigations officer. I always relied on him but this time I had to find my way back to Wilhelmshaven (from Loch Ewe region) on my own. I found Denmark instead.

Looking forward to your mod and to finaly learn this sorcery, celestial navigation.

Ypsan, thank you very much for your feedback! I see that there are people who are interested in this! The only thing that bothers me a little is that people hardly ever ask questions about the training videos. From this I conclude that there are many experienced skippers here (and this is actually the case) who are no less versed in navigation than I do. As for those who are just getting acquainted with celestial navigation, I will hope that I explain clearly enough, so there are no questions.:yep:

[Alpheratz]

One more question Alpheratz...
You have probably noticed that New Sextant mod also has several docs in it's "Nautical Almanacs and tables" folder.

https://i.postimg.cc/zfCSQqfG/Capture.jpg

Which of those are redundant and/or in conflict with your documents? Which of them should I remove?
Also, would any of them be useful to be shown in the game as well, trough the Charts?

OK, Vecko, as I see it:

Cosinetable, HeightAndAzimuthTable, Logtable are redundant tables.

Nautical Almanac - not suitable for SH5

DipAndRefractionTable - can be made available among other Charts in the game. I propose to include only this table in the documentation. You can delete the rest of the above tables.

[Sean C]

The only thing that bothers me a little is that people hardly ever ask questions about the training videos. From this I conclude that there are many experienced skippers here (and this is actually the case) who are no less versed in navigation than I do. As for those who are just getting acquainted with celestial navigation, I will hope that I explain clearly enough, so there are no questions.:yep:


I have been telling people for years to ask me about celestial navigation. My website has had hundreds of visits from 37 countries. Almost no one asks me anything. :hmmm:

[Alpheratz]

I have been telling people for years to ask me about celestial navigation. My website has had hundreds of visits from 37 countries. Almost no one asks me anything. :hmmm:

Sean S, if this is the case in your case, then I am quite satisfied with the fact that a small number of people watched my videos from start to finish and found them useful for themselves. :yeah: And of course, I will finish my work to the end.:yep:

[Alpheratz]

Vecko, you can add 3 more documents: F-tafel, Stundenwinkel (F-0), Beobachtungen - I added them to the TWoS RealNav documentation folder. There is no need to show them in the game using Charts, however, they can be useful and I plan to use them in training videos:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1iUGonLtMpX9b9gWSFO1UqikkayKFRkbD?usp=sharing

[vdr1981]

Vecko, you can add 3 more documents: F-tafel, Stundenwinkel (F-0), Beobachtungen - I added them to the TWoS RealNav documentation folder. There is no need to show them in the game using Charts, however, they can be useful and I plan to use them in training videos:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1iUGonLtMpX9b9gWSFO1UqikkayKFRkbD?usp=sharing


:up:

[Alpheratz]

From now on and forever. The sun is accepted for our service. :salute:

https://youtu.be/OkVvPU2c2yo

[vdr1981]

From now on and forever. The sun is accepted for our service. :salute:

https://youtu.be/OkVvPU2c2yo
Excellent Alpheratz! Great work! :up:
v.2.2.23 update is ready, I only need to write down change log...:yep:

[Alpheratz]

Excellent Alpheratz! Great work! :up:
v.2.2.23 update is ready, I only need to write down change log...:yep:

Vecko, I am glad that you are the same enthusiast of real navigation. When I started, I could not imagine that my work would be reflected on the international platform:up:

[Alpheratz]

v.2.2.23 update is ready, I only need to write down change log...:yep:

Vecko, I'm afraid I was late with this, but I just now got the idea to use the separate F-Tafel tables in the TWoS RealNav documentation. "Dip & Ref STARS" and "Dip & Ref SUN" can replace the "DipAndRefractionTable" we talked about. If it is already impossible to include them as Charts in the game, then I hope they can be included in the documentation, if only this does not complicate your work.

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1iUGonLtMpX9b9gWSFO1UqikkayKFRkbD?usp=sharing

[derstosstrupp]

Vecko, I'm afraid I was late with this, but I just now got the idea to use the separate F-Tafel tables in the TWoS RealNav documentation. "Dip & Ref STARS" and "Dip & Ref SUN" can replace the "DipAndRefractionTable" we talked about. If it is already impossible to include them as Charts in the game, then I hope they can be included in the documentation, if only this does not complicate your work.

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1iUGonLtMpX9b9gWSFO1UqikkayKFRkbD?usp=sharing

The Gesamtbeschickung from the F-Tafel is definitely easier as an all-in-one adjustment!

[vdr1981]

Vecko, I'm afraid I was late with this, but I just now got the idea to use the separate F-Tafel tables in the TWoS RealNav documentation. "Dip & Ref STARS" and "Dip & Ref SUN" can replace the "DipAndRefractionTable" we talked about. If it is already impossible to include them as Charts in the game, then I hope they can be included in the documentation, if only this does not complicate your work.

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1iUGonLtMpX9b9gWSFO1UqikkayKFRkbD?usp=sharing


Not a big problem Alpheratz, we'll add new charts and documentation in the next TWoS update. :yep: Until then, people actually interested in celestial navigation are probably already aware of your doc changes...

[Alpheratz]

Not a big problem Alpheratz, we'll add new charts and documentation in the next TWoS update. :yep: Until then, people actually interested in celestial navigation are probably already aware of your doc changes...

Great, Vecko! Thanks for your work!:up:

[Alpheratz]

For commanders from Russia, I started publishing training videos on real navigation in Russian.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNkalMhd-GdTlKjHlXacuKgtQ-1d2cTM2

[Ypsan]

Hi Alpheratz!

Many thanks for your reply few weeks back. Making your self available for questions is really nice of you. I will have some very soon as I'm about to dive in in more advanced stuff now.

It's been a bit slow on my part as I was busy with other things, still I've started watching your videos and getting the hang of basics. After I graduated school of navigation level 2.2 I felt confident and skipped ahead to the one where you use Kriegsmarine tables. Yikes! No more skipping. :o

Also, I see Vecko already implemented it in the new update. Amazing stuff and can't wait to try it out this weekend! :salute:

[Alpheratz]

Hi Alpheratz!

Many thanks for your reply few weeks back. Making your self available for questions is really nice of you. I will have some very soon as I'm about to dive in in more advanced stuff now.

It's been a bit slow on my part as I was busy with other things, still I've started watching your videos and getting the hang of basics. After I graduated school of navigation level 2.2 I felt confident and skipped ahead to the one where you use Kriegsmarine tables. Yikes! No more skipping. :o

Also, I see Vecko already implemented it in the new update. Amazing stuff and can't wait to try it out this weekend! :salute:

Hi Ypsan! :salute: Indeed, it is better to go through the training in the order that corresponds to the playlist on my channel: there the training material is given from simple to complex and you can trace the relationship between the videos, so you definitely won't miss anything. I made a video about Kriegsmarine tables for demonstration purposes, to show that it works in order to interest the public. Taking into account the latest changes in 2.2.23 update, this video needs revision and I will already record a detailed training video on working with Kriegsmarine tables, but this will already be the final level of the navigation school. :yep:

[Alpheratz]

The celestial coordinates of 37 more navigation stars have been clarified.

https://hostingkartinok.com/show-image.php?id=8ddbc1ea143278f374eb15346ed2cc72

https://drive.google.com/file/d/16-WiynY9WnGBXjC8YkR5VlCVubWO2Rwx/view?usp=sharing

Now all 58 tabular stars are available for celestial navigation. The necessary changes have been made to the file stars.txt, which must be updated for the sextant to work correctly: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jm9u-TfgSr-cVCxFkn9Xy-eYQlCEn9he/view?usp=sharing

[derstosstrupp]

The celestial coordinates of 37 more navigation stars have been clarified.

https://hostingkartinok.com/show-image.php?id=8ddbc1ea143278f374eb15346ed2cc72

https://drive.google.com/file/d/16-WiynY9WnGBXjC8YkR5VlCVubWO2Rwx/view?usp=sharing

Now all 58 tabular stars are available for celestial navigation. The necessary changes have been made to the file stars.txt, which must be updated for the sextant to work correctly: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jm9u-TfgSr-cVCxFkn9Xy-eYQlCEn9he/view?usp=sharing

Great work Alpheratz! Thanks!

[vdr1981]

The celestial coordinates of 37 more navigation stars have been clarified.

https://hostingkartinok.com/show-image.php?id=8ddbc1ea143278f374eb15346ed2cc72

https://drive.google.com/file/d/16-WiynY9WnGBXjC8YkR5VlCVubWO2Rwx/view?usp=sharing

Now all 58 tabular stars are available for celestial navigation. The necessary changes have been made to the file stars.txt, which must be updated for the sextant to work correctly: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jm9u-TfgSr-cVCxFkn9Xy-eYQlCEn9he/view?usp=sharing
Thanks Alpheratz! :up: I've already prepared v2.2.24 update with few fixes you've proposed previously...I guess these files should go in it as well? New navigation stars doc can be added to the in game charts in addition to the already existing nav stars chart? Correct?

[Alpheratz]

Thanks Alpheratz! :up: I've already prepared v2.2.24 update with few fixes you've proposed previously...I guess these files should go in it as well? New navigation stars doc can be added to the in game charts in addition to the already existing nav stars chart? Correct?

Hi Vecko!:salute: Yes, it's worth adding Navigational Stars List 1 and List 2, as a Charts in game, as I've updated in the TWoS RealNav Documentation folder.

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1iUGonLtMpX9b9gWSFO1UqikkayKFRkbD?usp=sharing

In the first list of 21 stars, I made some cosmetic fixes by removing the unnecessary info. If it is not difficult for you, replace the previously added file "SH5 navigational stars (rev.2021)" with "SH5 navigational stars. List 1"

[vdr1981]

Hi Vecko!:salute: Yes, it's worth adding Navigational Stars List 1 and List 2, as a Charts in game, as I've updated in the TWoS RealNav Documentation folder.

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1iUGonLtMpX9b9gWSFO1UqikkayKFRkbD?usp=sharing

In the first list of 21 stars, I made some cosmetic fixes by removing the unnecessary info. If it is not difficult for you, replace the previously added file "SH5 navigational stars (rev.2021)" with "SH5 navigational stars. List 1"

:up::up::up: No problem!

No changes to the other charts?

[Alpheratz]

:up::up::up: No problem!

No changes to the other charts?

None, except those that we discussed earlier :yep:

[Alpheratz]

None, except those that we discussed earlier :yep:

The only thing, it seems to me that Star Charts Equatorial, Equatorial II, Northern, Southern seem to me uninformative in the form in which they are presented in the game. But this is just my opinion, so I would like everyone interested to write their opinion, is it worth replacing them with the options I proposed?

NavStarsChart 1 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YJjphNLVF2HLuafm_pEA6IrA9UqQR08T/view?usp=sharing

NavStarsChart 2 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1v1MT5x18wWzY7f-Ai24ZZIDy4r3z0Tox/view?usp=sharing

NavStarsChart 3 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-KXp3O9lWzU6_v9MbNXZbSEca74p97TD/view?usp=sharing

[Alpheratz]

In my division of the three Charts, I was guided by the following considerations Chart 1 - 21 stars, which are easy to find. Chart 2 - stars that are easy to find relative to the stars from Chart 1 and which can be most in demand in celestial navigation along with the stars from the first list. Chart 3 - the rest of the stars, which, IMO, may be less required for practical reasons.

[vdr1981]

The only thing, it seems to me that Star Charts Equatorial, Equatorial II, Northern, Southern seem to me uninformative in the form in which they are presented in the game. But this is just my opinion, so I would like everyone interested to write their opinion, is it worth replacing them with the options I proposed?

NavStarsChart 1 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YJjphNLVF2HLuafm_pEA6IrA9UqQR08T/view?usp=sharing

NavStarsChart 2 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1v1MT5x18wWzY7f-Ai24ZZIDy4r3z0Tox/view?usp=sharing

NavStarsChart 3 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-KXp3O9lWzU6_v9MbNXZbSEca74p97TD/view?usp=sharing
Yes, I was always wondering how much of use are those star charts anyway, especially since they are quite blurry...:hmmm: I could replace them with your charts but I'm not sure would it be any better with such little letters. :hmmm:

[Alpheratz]

Yes, I was always wondering how much of use are those star charts anyway, especially since they are quite blurry...:hmmm: I could replace them with your charts but I'm not sure would it be any better with such little letters. :hmmm:

Yes, this moment confuses me too.:hmmm:

[Aktungbby]

For commanders from Russia, I started publishing training videos on real navigation in Russian.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNkalMhd-GdTlKjHlXacuKgtQ-1d2cTM2 R U sure it helped COMRADE?!!:O:https://i.imgur.com/y2c1bdM.jpeg

[Alpheratz]

:har:
Aktungbby, you are quite good at our naval humor.:yeah: The commander conducts combat training in the navigational warhead of the ship. I will vote for this funniest post by you!:up:

[Aktungbby]

We'll party hearty on the homemade hooch COMRADE!:Kaleun_Cheers: https://i.imgur.com/2iyBEwc.jpg

[Alpheratz]

From the bottom of my heart, COMRADE! :Kaleun_Cheers: Magic liquid for "gentle care" for the "material part", in Russian transcription "SHILO".

[Alpheratz]

On my channel, I found that my videos are watched also by those who find them by the query "Flat Earth". I think Silent Hunter 5 can become a serious argument for flat-earth adherents, explaining why spherical trigonometry works on a flat earth.:O:

[Sean C]

Don't feed the trolls. Ignore them and they will vanish.

[Alpheratz]

Don't feed the trolls. Ignore them and they will vanish.

One of them asked how ANCIENT sailors navigated only with SEXTANT without tables and almanacs. I replied that it was a mystery to me. This is how I got my first "dislike".

https://cs11.pikabu.ru/images/big_size_comm/2020-11_1/1604515067161983730.png

[vdr1981]

On my channel, I found that my videos are watched also by those who find them by the query "Flat Earth". I think Silent Hunter 5 can become a serious argument for flat-earth adherents, explaining why spherical trigonometry works on a flat earth.:O:

Maybe they'll invite you to the flat earth convention as well! :D:D

[Alpheratz]

Maybe they'll invite you to the flat earth convention as well! :D:D

:D Yes, they need supporters in this area of ​​knowledge, because astronomy is a big thorn in their "theory". The unpopularity and impracticality of astronomy in our daily life allows a significant number of people to be fooled. We have that not a frequent case when a computer game is opposed to deep ignorance.

[Alpheratz]

You can download print-ready tables and almanacs for celestial navigation in Silent Hunter 5 TWoS in manual mode without the use of electronic computing tools.

Nautical Almanac 1939 - 1945 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1k79QrXREM9vlx6BTbBR_vycU0IC9qQ0i/view?usp=sharing

F-Tafel https://drive.google.com/file/d/13rah_6ApG8VIY2rjgWr0tnyLO2d4NZ1X/view?usp=sharing

Astronomical observations logbook https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JIaL2i5CRJ5Ud0nYHhTRAlB1Rldlnr7Z/view?usp=sharing

[Alpheratz]

Excel spreadsheet for fast celestial navigation with the Sun and 58 navigational stars in Silent Hunter 5 TWoS:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PaEifD17n_Fi0CG3hRsGlQXDodm027Aj/view?usp=sharing

[Alpheratz]

The graduation course of the school of navigation has started
https://youtu.be/I6u6ZYBDCcg

[Alpheratz]

Tame celestial navigation. Kriegsmarine "F-Tafel" tutorial.

https://youtu.be/cre5X6c8mL4

[Alpheratz]

There is good news about the moon. I made a small change to the Page layout.py file that should allow the moon to be used for celestial navigation. Preliminary testing gave good results. I will continue to research. You can update Page layout.py through JSGME by downloading Moon fix for NewSextant from this link:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YsPCfewoYouT1KAxkYAzoea5dWX4V613/view?usp=sharing

To navigate with moon, use a special moon almanac for SH5. Link to the SH5 moon almanac:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zBgQW3XGyREFaI7vZisY1m65I5QvE-K2/view?usp=sharing

Moon phases:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kNg4xSusYytWw7j5yAnVTo5wMIEy3b_a/view?usp=sharing

[Alpheratz]

I have taken a series of measurements on the moon. All the results indicate that the "graphic" center of the moon (the center of the moon image in the SH5 sky) does not coincide with its "astronomical" center. The image of the moon SH5 in the sky is about 10.3 arc minutes ahead (in the direction of movement of the celestial sphere) and 2.5 arc minutes lower relative to the real moon (regardless of which hemisphere you are in, the readings of the "old" sextant (without refraction without parallax and without dip), when measuring the altitude of the moon, are underestimated by an average of 2.5 arc minutes.In order for the new sextant to give correct readings of time and altitude for the Moon, I made changes to Page layout.py (link to the updated file in the previous post). It worked well for me, so I am starting work on the Lunar Almanac, which will compensate for the discrepancy of 10.3 arc minutes.

[propbeanie]

Is the moon in SH5 "drawn" from a series of moon pictures in one file, and the proper 'phase' of the moon is chosen by "cropping" the image with a menu_1024_768.ini line? That would use one of the corners of the image to place it, instead of the center... maybe??

https://i.imgur.com/V13ghel.jpg

[Alpheratz]

Is the moon in SH5 "drawn" from a series of moon pictures in one file, and the proper 'phase' of the moon is chosen by "cropping" the image with a menu_1024_768.ini line? That would use one of the corners of the image to place it, instead of the center... maybe??

To be honest, I don’t know how to correct the graphic image of the moon. IMO, If my solution to the Moon problem works correctly, it might be better not to change the graphical settings of the Moon, just so as not to spoil what works - I'm afraid this could make it a distant prospect of using the Moon for celestial navigation.

[propbeanie]

Your methodology is probably the only way to attempt to correct it, since if you change the crop settings, you'll end up with possibly portions of 3 or 4 different "moons" displaying... might be shades of Jupiter or something... :har: - From what I remember, SH3 uses the upper left corner of an image, while SH4 uses the lower left. I would imagine that SH5 does similar when it comes to grabbing images like that.

[Alpheratz]

I hope, after the holiday season, there is someone with sufficient knowledge to check and confirm that this works or does not work before I recommend this method for use. :Kaleun_Salute:

[CaptBongTrillion]

Started playing SH5 again when I saw this thread. The research that has been done to make these methods work in SH5 is incredible, and I'm excited to learn more.

I will ask a couple questions since there have been a few folks who offered to take questions.

In the table in Alpheratz's almanac of arc minute and second corrections to GHA, is my time input to the table also GMT - 1 hour like it is above to determine GHA to the nearest 4 hour increment (since my port of departure is Kiel)?

Also, I think I understand how to do the GHA corrections for minutes and seconds, but say if my time input is 2 hours ahead of the nearest 4 hour GHA increment, does that mean in the table of min/sec corrections, I also need to add the corrections for 60min x 2 in order to account for the extra two hours?

I tried figuring out latitude from a Polaris shot and got within ~5 arc minutes but I was using a time input with an hour that matched one of the 4 hour GHA intervals, so I don't think correcting for the hour was necessary. Of course, this could also have been a happy accident because at this point I'm all enthusiasm and zero skill :)

Thanks again for the amazing work, navigators.

[Alpheratz]

Started playing SH5 again when I saw this thread. The research that has been done to make these methods work in SH5 is incredible, and I'm excited to learn more.

I will ask a couple questions since there have been a few folks who offered to take questions.

In the table in Alpheratz's almanac of arc minute and second corrections to GHA, is my time input to the table also GMT - 1 hour like it is above to determine GHA to the nearest 4 hour increment (since my port of departure is Kiel)?

Also, I think I understand how to do the GHA corrections for minutes and seconds, but say if my time input is 2 hours ahead of the nearest 4 hour GHA increment, does that mean in the table of min/sec corrections, I also need to add the corrections for 60min x 2 in order to account for the extra two hours?

I tried figuring out latitude from a Polaris shot and got within ~5 arc minutes but I was using a time input with an hour that matched one of the 4 hour GHA intervals, so I don't think correcting for the hour was necessary. Of course, this could also have been a happy accident because at this point I'm all enthusiasm and zero skill :)

Thanks again for the amazing work, navigators.

I'll be happy to help you, but I'm not sure yet that I understood correctly what you are asking about. I suggest that you write here all the initial data and your specific example of calculations (for example, as I did in video 3.1), then I will tell you if you are doing something wrong.

I created the table for determining the latitude according to Polaris in a simplified form for educational purposes and the accuracy (max error) of determining the latitude from it is 2-3 arc minutes. If your error was 5 arc minutes, you may have been mistaken at some stage. I am currently working on Nautisches Jahrbuch, which will replace Nautical Almanac. Nautisches Jahrbuch will contain a more accurate Polaris latitude table used by Kriegsmarine.
:Kaleun_Salute:

[CaptBongTrillion]

Ok, here are the calculations. I'm horrible at math, so this might be a bad idea :) I did leave the boat going 10 knots while I did the calculations before I asked the navigator to get a fix to confirm, which also took some time, but I thought I accounted for that leg of the journey. I don't have the exact position of the boat displayed, and I'm not sure how accurate the navigator is. Perhaps the actual error was 2-3 arc minutes.

So is this correct? If it is, then my question is about what happens if I had say 4 hr 3 min GMT instead of 5 hr 3 min GMT. I think I would instead start with the GHA table value at 0 GMT, but then how do I account for the extra 3 hours?

1939 Oct. 2; PoD = Kiel; Longitude = 0°
Altitude of Polaris: 56°7.3' at 5 hr 3 min 0 sec GMT

LHA = GHA + SHA + Longitude
= GHA + 322°10.7' + 0°
= GHA - 37°49.3
Time = GMT - 1 = 4 hr 3 min
GHA = 69°58.7' (4 GMT table) + 45.1' (3 min table)
= 70°43.8'
LHA = 70°43.8' - 37°49.3'
= 32°54.5'

Arc minutes altitude correction:
37.3 - (0.4x(54.5/60)) = 36.9

LAT = 56°7.3' - 36.9' = 55°30.4'

Thanks!

[Aktungbby]

CaptBongTrillion!:Kaleun_Salute: nice 5-year silent run:up:

[Alpheratz]

@CaptBongTrillion, your calculations are absolutely correct. If GMT = 4-03-00, then really "Time" = 3-03-00. Then GHA Aries at 3-00-00 = GHA at 0-00-00 + 45 ° 7.4 '(3 hour GHA increment from the "Increments & corrections" table in the upper left corner.There are also GHA increments for 1 hour (15 ° 2.5 ') and for 2 hours (30 ° 4.9')).

[CaptBongTrillion]

Wow, I don't know how I missed the box in the top left with the hour increments for GHA. I think I started ignoring that box because I thought I didn't need it. Anyways, I did another calculation somewhere near Aberdeen and got a 3 arc minute error in latitude compared to what the navigator said, as expected.

Now if I could get sophisticated enough to determine the ever elusive longitude.

And yes, it has been years since I've played SH5. Computers in the year 2021 might be powerful enough to run SH5 :)

[Alpheratz]

By the way, the maximum navigator error for celestial navigation is automatically set to 8000 m when installing TWoS.

https://i.postimg.cc/yds2VW1s/fix.png (https://postimg.cc/CZrc7hnQ)

[Alpheratz]

This is me to the fact that it may very well be that you can be more accurate than your default navigator :)

2-3 arc minutes is the marginal error, which in most cases is smaller.

[les green01]

i try it couple of times couldn't figure it out but it be nice to take a shot and see how snafu my navigator is maybe too much math for me kinda like me trying to figure a intercept path to a convoy or task force

[Alpheratz]

kinda like me trying to figure a intercept path to a convoy or task force

I think that for such cases it is worth hone your skills in mathematics in order to take navigation into your own hands at especially crucial moments, in other cases you can completely rely on your navigator. Ask questions here, or in the comments to the video if you need help.

[les green01]

i try watching your video and it just way over my head you lose me basic right at the start my math level is second grade level

[Alpheratz]

i try watching your video and it just way over my head you lose me basic right at the start my math level is second grade level

In my videos, I proceed from the fact that listeners know what latitude and longitude are, they know that 1 degree consists of 60 arc minutes, they can add and subtract angles, they know what sine and cosine are, they can solve a right triangle. This is not to say that the mathematical component of navigation is "very simple", but it is quite "simple" that allowed the NCO to be used as a U-Boat navigator.

[CaptBongTrillion]

Believe it or not, my new years resolution was to get better at math, and since it's now June and I got bored with math problems a few months ago, I think I will count this :) It definitely helps with mental math.

As is probably evident, for me personally, the calculation of GHA was the hardest part with all the hour, min and sec adjustments. And GHA seems to be a common denominator in the different methods.

I might try the 2 stars graphical map method to get both lat/lon. My understanding is that it can be done at any time regardless of whether the stars are at their upper culmination (this is good b/c I don't think I understand upper culmination yet). However, I think I might cheat and use the same GHA for both star observations and try to take the two observations as quickly as possible. This way I only have to determine one GHA instead of properly determining both GHA values. I assume error will still be quite minimal.

[Alpheratz]

What is good about the graphical method with Messkarte, you actually measure two stars almost simultaneously, then read from the Messkarte LHA of the second star, subtract the SHA of this star from it and add to the obtained SHA Polaris value to get the LHA Polaris and determine your latitude using the correction table to the altitude Polaris. Longitude can be determined to the nearest degree by subtracting SHA from LHA (read from Messkarte), and then subtracting GHA Aries at the time the stars were measured from the obtained value.:yep:

[les green01]

so can you take a shot off of the little dripper or is just like a star or a planet

[Alpheratz]

Ultimately, any object can be used for celestial navigation. If it is such a distant object as a star, then it is enough to know its celestial coordinates (declination is a celestial coordinate similar to latitude, right ascension is a celestial coordinate similar to longitude). If the object is close enough to the earth (Sun, Moon), then in addition to the celestial coordinates, it is necessary to take into account the distance to these objects and their geometric dimensions.

[CaptBongTrillion]

Just want to point out that the graphical method for lat/long requires very little special math if that's a problem for people. However, I want to make sure I'm doing it right.

My fix was 5.7 km from where the navigator said (granted, the navigator has random error, only reports to arc minute precision and my map work is probably sloppy). But something happened that seemed different from the demonstration video during my map work. My 90 degree LOP line from the Betelgeuse azimuth transfer line actually crossed the azimuth transfer line from Polaris, which doesn't happen in the demonstration video. In the video, only the LOP lines cross. Is this normal, or did I mess something up? Sorry, if I'm messing up the terminology here too.

[Alpheratz]

@CaptBongTrillion, Please provide the date, dead reckoning position, UT + Altitude for Betelgeuse and Polaris, so that I know the details of your task.

As for the intersection of non-LOP lines, this happens quite often and should not distract you. You should clearly see the intersection of LOP 1 and LOP 2 and you need to draw a "spherical transfer" to properly postpone the "map transfer".

[CaptBongTrillion]

Sure, thanks for having a look.

1939 Dec 14; 58 N 0 E; PoD=Wilhelmshaven; GHA for 8pm (22° 35.3')

Betelgeuse: 22:26:23 UT; 34° 39.7' h; azimuth transfer 144.5°, -21.3 km
Polaris: 22:25:25 UT; 59° 1.8' h; azimuth transfer 359.5°, 32.8 km

I did end up with two LOP lines crossing, but it just looked different from the video.

EDIT: I think the navigator said 58°18'N 0°7'E, so the fix was pretty close to that point.

[Alpheratz]

My drawings. "Map transfer" = 16,9 km
Observed position N 58 deg 16,3' E 0 deg 8,5' :salute:

https://i.postimg.cc/7P2JJLCv/4-1-Map-Transfer.png (https://postimg.cc/Sjmxwk7V)

https://i.postimg.cc/gkbXVPRx/4-2-Map-Transfer.png (https://postimg.cc/w3FjzZwz)

https://i.postimg.cc/FH9Y6gTm/4-3-Map-transfer.png (https://postimg.cc/dLxQkdMS)

https://i.postimg.cc/Z5VWzBQN/6-Observed-position.png (https://postimg.cc/tsnqhTpR)

https://i.postimg.cc/zXwLpPS0/7-Observed-position.png (https://postimg.cc/mtD2gjnH)

[CaptBongTrillion]

Wow cool! That's what I saw on my screen haha. I think that's close enough for me. No more GPS.

[Alpheratz]

By the way, with the new sextant, when you use UT, PoD is now irrelevant (except when you are calculating local noon or nautical twilight.

[CaptBongTrillion]

Just wanted to share a fun fact I read related to this. The U.S. Navy did not train officers in celestial navigation for a period of about 10 years because it was assumed that GPS would always work. About 5 years ago, they realized this probably wasn't a good assumption and started training in celestial navigation again :)

[Alpheratz]

Yes, I've heard about it. :) Indeed, satellite navigation devices can be vulnerable to external influences: for example, electronic suppression technology, an electromagnetic pulse from a nuclear explosion, or well-known hackers who can take over your home Wi-Fi ironing device. :arrgh!:

[Sean C]

AFAIK, they are only training officer cadets at Annapolis.

[CaptBongTrillion]

I'm not sure I understand how to apply the graphical method if I am west of the prime meridian. So far, I've been applying the method in places east of the prime meridian, and the starting point for the drawing is the bottom left corner of the 1 deg X 1 deg box. Do I still start in the bottom left corner if I am west of the prime merdian? Or do I start in the bottom right? Thanks.

[Alpheratz]

If you mean the LOP transfer, then there is no fundamental difference which side of the prime meridian you are on - you can choose any point as the Dead Reckoning Position. You can give your example of drawing on the map so that I can check if you are wrong.

[CaptBongTrillion]

I don't have a specific example yet, but my assigned patrol area is pretty far out in the Atlantic so we'll see if I can actually find it :) I was also wondering about what happens if I don't know exactly which 1x1 box I'm in, but you answered that, and it sounds like it doesn't matter. You will just get LOP lines that place you in the correct box.

But to better explain my thought process, say I have a DR position of 56 N 4 W for example, and I am in fact inside this 1x1 box. Because longitude increases in absolute value going west, I think my assumed position is the bottom right corner of the 1x1 box. So is the bottom right corner supposed to be the origin of the LOP transfer lines? Or do I say that my DR position is 56N 5 W which is the bottom left corner of the box?

I guess another way to ask it might be: does it matter which corner I start in?

I don't know if I'm making any sense here :hmmm:

[CaptBongTrillion]

Ok I think I'm starting to see the flexibility of this method. I had a situation where I guessed the wrong DR position and still got a fix. Here's the map work below. I showed the island I found for proof :) My navigator gave me a position almost 50 km away (the random mark to the north) but I know this couldn't have been correct, otherwise I wouldn't have run into the island.

https://imgur.com/a/q8AYP7D

https://imgur.com/a/xCvSuKu

[Alpheratz]

There are three things to keep in mind here:
1. It really doesn't matter which point is used as the Dead Reckoning Position. You can try to use for this each of the 4 vertices of the square, inside which your actual position is located, and performing the LOP transfer in all four cases you will get practically the same observed position.
2. It is not necessary to use coordinates rounded to the nearest degree as Dead Reckoning Position. It makes sense to take DRP into account to within minutes of arc.
3. The closer the Dead Reckoning Position is to your actual position, the more accurately you will determine your actual position using celestial navigation. In this case, the actual curvature of the LOP (which we depict as a straight line, even though it is a large arc) will not have a noticeable effect on the result.

[Alpheratz]

I have compiled Nautisches Jahrbuch for 1939. I will continue to post Nautisches Jahrbuch as they become available.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RBC2xb1Y2gG-VLnRbAmoYGk9baDGJ44W/view?usp=sharing

https://i.ibb.co/BjR7qmQ/NJ1939.png (https://ibb.co/xGQcJyB)

[Ashikaga]

I know this is slightly off topic and has little to do with celestial navigation but I managed, when my navigator was severely wounded, to dead reckon my way back to base guestimating the time period traveled and course setting from the last DR fix. I then started setting new course lines from rhe guessed fix mark on the map and measured them and used the distance/time equation and started heading down my course lines at such and so speed for such and so time duration and at the end of that line changed course to the new heading I thought was good. When I figured I should almost be at my base and hit land which I then could follow, the Navigator recovered. I did a celestial fix and it turned out that I was 80-100 Nm from where Celestial said I was.

I did feel a little proud. Even with that much of a difference.

Ashi.

[Alpheratz]

Indeed, it was not uncommon for the sky to be tightly covered for 5 or more days in a row and you had to rely only on DR.

Perhaps someday you will update TWoS to 2.2.24 and find yourself in a similar situation as Paul Pfaffinger with U-441, you can make a celestial fix yourself and feel just as proud about it.

[Ashikaga]

That might be sooner than later Alpheratz! I was just told that upgrading from version 2.2.7 does not endanger my savegames. Even though Vecko states at the upgrade that from 2.2.9 onwards it is no longer savegame compatible.

Yay! ;-)

Best,

Ashi.

[Alpheratz]

https://drive.google.com/file/d/19o5jLi4DeKsES2nybvkuXoiovKrRiu7v/view?usp=sharing

https://i.postimg.cc/YCB9fLc1/1940.png (https://postimages.org/)

[Alpheratz]

https://youtu.be/bpqL8dqAmNM

[Alpheratz]

Updated Excel table for celestial navigation by the Sun, Moon and 58 navigational stars. Now U-boat position fix will be a couple of hundred meters more accurate:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PaEifD17n_Fi0CG3hRsGlQXDodm027Aj/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=108962480718904900747&rtpof=true&sd=true

[Alpheratz]

In the lines of the sun.txt file: 78-80, 267-269, 633, 634, 809-811, 998-1000, 1174-1176, 1363-1365, 1539-1541, 1728-1730, 1905, 1906, 2094, 2095 , 2270, 2271, 2459, 2460, there was no minus sign before the minutes of declination of the sun, which led to erroneous UT readings of the sextant. This error was quite difficult to spot in testing as it only affects a few days in each year: late September and late March. Link to updated sun.txt file, which fixes the above errors:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cw6mSicWaw_UfMmkpg_WxtVodb-suMEj/view?usp=sharing

Replace with this file the corresponding file in the root folder with the game.

[derstosstrupp]

Thanks Alpheratz! Great work as always!

[Alpheratz]

Thanks Alpheratz! Great work as always!

:salute:

[derstosstrupp]

Not sure how many others are doing full celnav out there, but for those who are, please share your routine (your “day’s work in navigation”). Here’s mine below. For sight reduction I use various tabular methods (S-table, F-Tafel, or Fulst’s Nautical Tables) or a calculator if not feeling up to crunching logarithms.

1. Morning twilight 2-star fix.

2. Calculate LAN for the approximate longitude I will be around LAN.

3. Take a sun sight about 3 hours before LAN for a sun line.

4. Take a latitude sight at LAN and advance the morning sun line for a running fix.

5. Take a sun sight about 3 hours after LAN. I won’t typically reduce this unless I can’t get evening stars or am otherwise diverted (by a target sighting etc). In that case I’ll advance the LAN latitude line for another running fix.

6. Calculate time of sundown and plan on being on the bridge shortly thereafter.

7. Evening twilight 2-star fix.

8. Calculate time of sunup and plan to be on the bridge about 30 minutes prior.

9. Hit the sack - I’ve earned it.

For my dead reckoning, I keep a log in a notebook, making an entry each time I change course, speed, save and exit, or get a fix.

The one concession I make is I pretend every target I sink radios its position and that it’s accurate. It’s my reward for sinking things.

Please share your approach!

[Alpheratz]

I showed my CelNav routine in the video "Silent Hunter 5 Wolves of Steel: what is Real navigation in 2021" and in general it is similar to what derstosstrupp does:

https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=162521&page=240

Of the two stars, one is usually Polaris to save time.

For calculations I use either F-Tafel or my excel spreadsheet "SH5 celestial navigation Sun, Moon, 58 stars" (this is an updated version of my excel spreadsheet "SH5 celestial navigation" included in C: \ Ubisoft \ Silent Hunter 5 \ The Wolves of Steel - Documentation \ Real Navigation \ RealNav - almanacs and tables by Alpheratz), which can be downloaded from the link in my signature.

I recently got acquainted with Fulst's Nautical Tables, which seemed to me quite easy to use (many thanks to derstosstrupp for explaining and showing me how to use them).

[SnipersHunter]

I am currently starting to lern celnav thanks to Alpheratz excellent series. Can not wait to do a full patrol without needing my navigator.

[Alpheratz]

I am currently starting to lern celnav thanks to Alpheratz excellent series. Can not wait to do a full patrol without needing my navigator.

I am delighted to hear that and you can count on my help if you need it.

[SnipersHunter]

Just leaving this here for the people that claim celestial navigation should not be the job of a commander. :03:

https://uboat.net/media/men/crew/commander_3.jpg

[Alpheratz]

Eloquent evidence to the contrary :yeah:

[Alpheratz]

The most up-to-date information and documents on celestial navigation in Silent Hunter 5 that are not yet included in TWoS are now in DISCORD. If you want to join, just send me a PM.

[Alpheratz]

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Zs4TGJ_-nfEBvfh8-pD9-q7Arb6RRW8G/view?usp=sharing

https://i.postimg.cc/xCJcDXr6/image.png (https://postimg.cc/gXpY3k2h)

[derstosstrupp]

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Zs4TGJ_-nfEBvfh8-pD9-q7Arb6RRW8G/view?usp=sharing

https://i.postimg.cc/xCJcDXr6/image.png (https://postimg.cc/gXpY3k2h)

Great work! I much prefer these old German almanacs that work in times instead of angles. To me, the calculation of LHA is quicker with them, and they make the calculation of the time of local apparent noon, nautical twilight etc easy without any additional tables.

[Alpheratz]

Great work! I much prefer these old German almanacs that work in times instead of angles. To me, the calculation of LHA is quicker with them, and they make the calculation of the time of local apparent noon, nautical twilight etc easy without any additional tables.

Thank you, Matt! I was also surprised how easy and convenient Nautisches Jahrbuch is after Nautical Almanac - no increments & corrections tables: constant mittlere Sonne increments by 1 second of the R.A. every 6 minutes of time and 4 minutes (seconds) for each degree (arc minute) of longitude.

Of course, I was guided by pure enthusiasm when I started my work, and did not consider it possible to keep my "discoveries" a secret from the gaming community (for me personally, these discoveries are real, without any quotes) in the world of silent hunter 5. Nevertheless, I must admit that I overestimated the importance of astronomical navigation for the vast majority of players. Now I understand that my work cannot attract a wide audience, but I am glad when I see even single responses from truly enthusiastic and competent people who are able to appreciate my efforts. And for this I want to thank you again. :Kaleun_Salute:

[derstosstrupp]

Hopefully with the new Discord server more people’s interest gets piqued.

[ybar]

https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/<a href=&quot;https://public.joomeo.com/files/626ba4ca6a2ea&quot;>Calculator_HR2.jpg</a>Recently while reading a book on the Second World War, I was surprised to discover a celestial navigation tool that was on board the Uboote!
Do you have more information about this device?

Calculator_HR2.jpg (https://public.joomeo.com/files/626ba4ca6a2ea)

[les green01]

Just leaving this here for the people that claim celestial navigation should not be the job of a commander. :03:

https://uboat.net/media/men/crew/commander_3.jpg

Some did but wasn't all the time just like one had a itchy trigger finger and after u-505 sunk the merchant planes was floating so commander jumped on the aa gun and sunk the planes

[Sean C]

https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/<a href=&quot;https://public.joomeo.com/files/626ba4ca6a2ea&quot;>Calculator_HR2.jpg</a>Recently while reading a book on the Second World War, I was surprised to discover a celestial navigation tool that was on board the Uboote!
Do you have more information about this device?

Calculator_HR2.jpg (https://public.joomeo.com/files/626ba4ca6a2ea)


It looks very similar to the Bygrave (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bygrave_slide_rule) or Fuller (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuller_calculator) cylindrical slide rules. I'm sure someone at NavList (http://fer3.com/arc/) would know more about it.

[ybar]

It looks very similar to the Bygrave (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bygrave_slide_rule) or Fuller (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuller_calculator) cylindrical slide rules. I'm sure someone at NavList (http://fer3.com/arc/) would know more about it.
Thank you, with your answer, I was able to find this site which explains to me how this device works.

https://manualzz.com/doc/10987759/navigation-calculation--1

With the advantage that it is written in my language!

[Kal_Maximus_U669]

Good evening Yves and good evening Mille-Sabords...
really remarkable.. I had already seen it but did not interest me...
I already see the purists in the angels ... a rare herd no doubt. It's in the moments that the simulation takes a big direction... a real difficulty for the gameplay...
thanks to you I will sleep less stupid tonight..
thanks for the doc
Greeting Kal Maximus U669 :up: :subsim: :salute:

[les green01]

I might have to try it again go the course for dummies make sure I wear the dunce cap