SUBSIM Radio Room Forums
Page 4 of 4 123 4
Show 20 post(s) from this thread on one page

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)
-   SH4 Mods Workshop (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=219)
-   -   Question on Sonar Use at Peri Depth (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=112341)

Bilge_Rat 04-20-07 02:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U-Bones
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat
Quote:
Originally Posted by U-Bones
In actual practice as soon as the heads are submerged they are able to receive, and at PD, they were well below surface and should be functional for ALL subs.
But as you will note in the other thread, there should be a degredation of sound close to the surface which does not exist in SH4 based on the simple sound model. Therefore the design decision to cut out the sonar at PD makes sense.

If a user wants to mod the game to use the sonar at PD, that is his choice, but no one can argue that one is more realistic than the other.
I agree totally about the mod choice, but you are absolutely wrong about the ability to argue about which is more realistic. To be factual and specific, at periscope depth the sonar heads are NOT close enough to the surface to be non functional. By design.

If they are below surface captivation level, and are solidly surrounded by fluid they work.

Submerged, but close to the surface, it is not a matter of degradation as much as it is interference from increased surface background noise. It is actually more "degraded" below a thermal and more "noisy" near the surface.
It dont think you understand the argument, Yes, the hydropnone worked near the surface, but based on a variety of factors, i.e. temperature difference, sound reflection, water disturbance, sound could not be heard as well or as far as in deeper water, all other factors being equal. This is better modeled in DW although still not as well as in RL.

In SH4, the sound model is very simple, you hear or you dont hear, so if you can hear at PD, you can hear as well at 300 feet, discounting the thermal layer. The design decision to cut out sonar at PD is justifiable in the circumstances although you could just as well argue the other way.

But given the simplified sound model which is extremely simple compared to real life and which already allows users to hear ships much farther out than you could in real life in all circumstances, arguing that making it even easier to pick up a sound contact is realistic does not make sense to me.

U-Bones 04-20-07 03:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat
Quote:
Originally Posted by U-Bones
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat
Quote:
Originally Posted by U-Bones
In actual practice as soon as the heads are submerged they are able to receive, and at PD, they were well below surface and should be functional for ALL subs.
But as you will note in the other thread, there should be a degredation of sound close to the surface which does not exist in SH4 based on the simple sound model. Therefore the design decision to cut out the sonar at PD makes sense.

If a user wants to mod the game to use the sonar at PD, that is his choice, but no one can argue that one is more realistic than the other.
I agree totally about the mod choice, but you are absolutely wrong about the ability to argue about which is more realistic. To be factual and specific, at periscope depth the sonar heads are NOT close enough to the surface to be non functional. By design.

If they are below surface captivation level, and are solidly surrounded by fluid they work.

Submerged, but close to the surface, it is not a matter of degradation as much as it is interference from increased surface background noise. It is actually more "degraded" below a thermal and more "noisy" near the surface.
It dont think you understand the argument, Yes, the hydropnone worked near the surface, but based on a variety of factors, i.e. temperature difference, sound reflection, water disturbance, sound could not be heard as well or as far as in deeper water, all other factors being equal. This is better modeled in DW although still not as well as in RL.

In SH4, the sound model is very simple, you hear or you dont hear, so if you can hear at PD, you can hear as well at 300 feet, discounting the thermal layer. The design decision to cut out sonar at PD is justifiable in the circumstances although you could just as well argue the other way.

But given the simplified sound model which is extremely simple compared to real life and which already allows users to hear ships much farther out than you could in real life in all circumstances, arguing that making it even easier to pick up a sound contact is realistic does not make sense to me.
"arguing that making it even easier to pick up a sound contact is realistic does not make sense to me."

This is your relative reasoning misplaced into a binary argument. I am not reverse engineering realistic behavior. I am simply stating that sound gear worked at PD. and should in game as well.

"...could not be heard as well..." relative (implied binary true)
"...making it even easier to pick up..." relative (implied binary true)
"...you hear or you don't hear..." binary

"The design decision to cut out sonar at PD is justifiable in the circumstances although you could just as well argue the other way."

Justify the arbitrary imposition of an (admittedly) unrealistic totally deaf condition ? "Could just as well argue the other way" is simply funny.

And which dev told you it was a design decision ? My money is on a simple oversight - ie, it was set on a fleet boat and not checked on the sugar...

Sound gear -worked- at PD but don't let common sense get in the way.

If you -want- your soundman to be stone deaf at PD, that is an entirely different argument. AND I support your ability to choose to have it that way.

Bilge_Rat 04-20-07 03:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U-Bones
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat
Quote:
Originally Posted by U-Bones
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat
Quote:
Originally Posted by U-Bones
In actual practice as soon as the heads are submerged they are able to receive, and at PD, they were well below surface and should be functional for ALL subs.
But as you will note in the other thread, there should be a degredation of sound close to the surface which does not exist in SH4 based on the simple sound model. Therefore the design decision to cut out the sonar at PD makes sense.

If a user wants to mod the game to use the sonar at PD, that is his choice, but no one can argue that one is more realistic than the other.
I agree totally about the mod choice, but you are absolutely wrong about the ability to argue about which is more realistic. To be factual and specific, at periscope depth the sonar heads are NOT close enough to the surface to be non functional. By design.

If they are below surface captivation level, and are solidly surrounded by fluid they work.

Submerged, but close to the surface, it is not a matter of degradation as much as it is interference from increased surface background noise. It is actually more "degraded" below a thermal and more "noisy" near the surface.
It dont think you understand the argument, Yes, the hydropnone worked near the surface, but based on a variety of factors, i.e. temperature difference, sound reflection, water disturbance, sound could not be heard as well or as far as in deeper water, all other factors being equal. This is better modeled in DW although still not as well as in RL.

In SH4, the sound model is very simple, you hear or you dont hear, so if you can hear at PD, you can hear as well at 300 feet, discounting the thermal layer. The design decision to cut out sonar at PD is justifiable in the circumstances although you could just as well argue the other way.

But given the simplified sound model which is extremely simple compared to real life and which already allows users to hear ships much farther out than you could in real life in all circumstances, arguing that making it even easier to pick up a sound contact is realistic does not make sense to me.
"arguing that making it even easier to pick up a sound contact is realistic does not make sense to me."

This is your relative reasoning misplaced into a binary argument. I am not reverse engineering realistic behavior. I am simply stating that sound gear worked at PD. and should in game as well.

"...could not be heard as well..." relative (implied binary true)
"...making it even easier to pick up..." relative (implied binary true)
"...you hear or you don't hear..." binary

"The design decision to cut out sonar at PD is justifiable in the circumstances although you could just as well argue the other way."

Justify the arbitrary imposition of an (admittedly) unrealistic totally deaf condition ? "Could just as well argue the other way" is simply funny.

And which dev told you it was a design decision ? My money is on a simple oversight - ie, it was set on a fleet boat and not checked on the sugar...

Sound gear -worked- at PD but don't let common sense get in the way.

If you -want- your soundman to be stone deaf at PD, that is an entirely different argument. AND I support your ability to choose to have it that way.
whatever, man...have a nice weekend. :|\\

U-Bones 04-20-07 04:10 PM
You too, thanks.

Sailor Steve 04-20-07 04:51 PM
I think sound should work at shallow depths as well, if for no other reason than as a game factor. I don't know how well sonar worked at periscope depth, but I'll bet my last dollar that not one captain ever said "We'll stay at periscope depth; they can't hear us here!":dead:

Farinhir 07-10-07 06:32 AM
ok I am looking for some help trying to find the correct values to edit in the sim file. I am new to using minitweaker (this is my 1st time) and so I am a little lost.I decided to search for all the maxsensorheight values and have found many more than I was hoping for. my tweak file is rather rudamentry and is as follows:

Code:
Version=1.2
Path=Data\Library\USSubParts\Sensors_sub_US.sim

[1]
DropDownName=Sonar Settings
search,MaxSensorHeight,1,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,2,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,3,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,4,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,5,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,6,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,7,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,8,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,9,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,10,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,11,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,12,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,13,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,14,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,15,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,16,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,17,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,18,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,19,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
search,MaxSensorHeight,20,single,>2,Sonar Max Height
My results are as follows:

Code:
Max Sensor Height = 5.916837E+22
Max Sensor Height = 0
Max Sensor Height = 2.463314E-30
Max Sensor Height = 1.821688E-44
Max Sensor Height = 2.463709E+11
Max Sensor Height = 0
Max Sensor Height = 7.533832E+28
Max Sensor Height = 7.139008E+31
Max Sensor Height = -9.629651E-35
Max Sensor Height = 0
Max Sensor Height = -7.402504E-12
Max Sensor Height = 0
Max Sensor Height = 2.26488E+20
Max Sensor Height = -2.510878E+36
Max Sensor Height = 3.60288E+16
Max Sensor Height = 3.681211E-42
Max Sensor Height = 7.145191E+31
Max Sensor Height = -2.000026
Max Sensor Height = 1.163312E+33
Max Sensor Height = 1.85236E+28
If anyone can help me figure this out it would be much apreciated as I know that the hydrophones should work (albiet not as well) as long as they are at least 10ft under the surface of the water. The reason they should work less efficciently has to do with the signal to noise ratio. As long as the SNR > 1, a contact can be tracked. The closer you are to the surface, the more ambient noise you will have.


I suppose that I should mention that I used CaptainCox' post on how to use minitweaker and have the v1 build-104.

Thanks
~F~

Edit: corrected some typos


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:56 AM.
Page 4 of 4 123 4
Show 20 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.