AAAANNND....it should be modeled that you have to navigate accordingly to the waves...If waves are to strong you can be damaged,injured or tipped over by the waves if you go parallel. I am not a first hand mariner but I would assume this. But maybe this does not apply for u-boats.

@W_clear:
Hey there...I really like your stuff that you have made for SH4. Thanks for that. I just hope that in SH5 they not only allow higher amplitudes but also longer wavelength to the water surface. Like an additional pattern to the "small" wavepattern we already have in SH4 that will be added. And this one must be of an much larger area than the small patch of waves that exists in SH4 or it will never work.

Yes very large waves - big huge rolling waves :rock:

This has been one of my major complaints for a long time. The very word "harbor" means shelter or protection, even when not in a naval context: "They harbored the fugitives". Likewise "haven". They make harbors specifically so there won't be any waves.

This is true. Running parallel to the waves causes the ship to roll - possibly even roll over. In a really bad storm a whole convoy would turn into the wind (and waves) and use just enough power to keep themselves stationary in that direction. This practice is called "heaving to". Into the wind is always safest.

And a surfaced u-boat would also do the same, for the same reasons. Rolling over might not sink a u-boat, but it would certainly cause anything not tied down to come loose, and maybe even some heavy things that are bolted down - like engines. Certainly the bridge crew wouldn't enjoy the experience very much.

Here look at my post,

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=157243

And also it isn't very recommendable to show your stern to the incoming huge waves, at least not in a sailing ship! :o You have a large tendency to lose control of the ship when a big wave is pushing behind your a**s and the bow has an enormous tendency to dive under the water, even if you are not on a submarine!

Bow against the wind/sea is the safest practice :up:

Imagine if that was possible to model, it would add a whole new dimension to convoy attacks. You'd have to tack/beat/run the course you actually want to go to intercept (Can I use these terms like this? I meant zig-zagging in case the mean course you want to go is perpendicular to the wind/parallel to the waves).

This would make you much slower and you had to really spend a lot of time on the bridge navigating - or an autopilot like your Navigator :O:

:yeah: thank you W_Clear for your very good mods in SH4 :yeah:



.

I second that very much!!! It is to me of top priorities as it does very much for the immersion factor

Yes, the dreaded 'following sea'. Part of the control loss is due to the fact that the sea pushing against the stern negates the rudder, which needs water moving over it to function.

I never thought of that! It would also make convoys harder to intercept if they were changing course to keep the wind ahead of them.

Silent Hunter 1 had slower top speeds in bad weather. They omitted this feature in SH3 :nope:
Hope it comes back for SH5.

Oh now I want that even more than wolfpacks!! :yep:

What have I done!! :timeout:

OF COURSE I WANT WOLFPACKS!!!

I don't know what I'm saying... :nope:

What? I thought that big waves actually slow down your boat in SH3/4. Are your sure or did you mean something different? :hmmm:

On a side note, I have readed already several accounts explaining how Uboats were able to escape on surface from escorts -even destroyers- by racing ahead flank against the sea. Apparently the thin frontal section of the uboat (Which in fact is not a hull, but a hull-shaped fairing around the steel cylinder of the pressure hull) allows them to run faster against the sea than normal warships, hence they might actually be faster on those conditions than a ship which would normally be faster than them in fair weather. Also, I suspect that running paralell to the sea would be way more dangerous for a destroyer (higher center of gravity) than for an uboat, whose center of gravity is below the waterline. In those conditions, the DD would probably be chicken first and turn away, leaving the pursuit :O:

i think it just raised your fuel use but i dont recall any noticable reduced speed at all

An SH player will spend more time looking at the sea and weather than anything else, either from the bridge or through the optics. Consequently, it is essential that dynamic weather and decent sea state behaviour is modeled. Quite why this was not done in SH3 and SH4 is beyond me.

And I very much doubt it will be done in SH5 either. The SH series is a 'game' series, not a 'simulation' series....which is unfortunate and, well, amaturish. But I don't blame the devs. We live in the 'greed' world now-a-days and UBI is just another greed monkey.

I wish someone like Oleg Maddox would do a sub sim.....sure it'll take about 6 years but i'd be more than happy to wait for the end result. God I miss the days of writing streams of code in a garage.....the quality was a million times better than the mindless crap that props up the shelves in the local game store. Even my 8 year old has given up buying games, he likens them to scratch cards, they look promising but once you scratch the surface you end up with crap under your nails and nothing underneath.

Oh well....monopoly anyone ?