![]() |
Quote:
Well UUV sensor is in fact AI sensor (no display, detections handled by AI) so can't be compared directly to human player sensor specs... I see dramatic difference in performance between 0-2000 and 1200-12000 or 3000-12000 sensor. To be sure, I'll try tomorrow to make a test mission (instead of taking CvC one) and get clear results (det ranges for both) and then send you the mission for you to check if you get the same results as me. My new specs for UUV passive will be 1500-12000Hz (however I think 1500-2000Hz sensor would work exactly the same...) Such sensor would be impossible for human player platform, as there is not many discrete lines above 1500Hz, so in most cases there would be nothing on NB display to identify :-). Only BB would show trace... But for AI seems to be no problem - even 3000Hz up sonar works without problems, detects targets even though there is no discrete lines above 2000Hz in the game, highest are around 1800Hz. |
Really, I never even thought about that! :o
That's great news! :D Thanks Amizaur. Cheers, David |
BTW, you have the 1.03 Analyzer version? :doh: :o :up:
May I have that please? :) Cheers, David |
Quote:
The rock bottom limited environment may transmit signals better than the top level of a surface duct, but the mud and sand bottoms create a very bad acoustic environment, especially in shallow water. Am I understanding your analysis correctly? |
Amizaur, the frequency ranges for the UUV aren't doing anything on my computer. :-?
|
The good news is that it really doesn't have to matter... as long as I can set the NRD the way it needs to be, the actual detection ranges will be the same, since DW isn't using a multichannel model anyway, just using an algorithm to determine signal loss as a function of frequency... SO, if I change the gain of the sensor capable of detecting 50hz signals to detect them at a range equivalent to the sensor with a higher signal gain detecting only the same contact at 1800hz, the end result will be exactly the same, in DW terms.
Gosh this has been any annoying problem. Ok, so the end result is that I'm going to reduce the sensitivity of the UUV even further from where its at, perhaps to about +15. |
I have posted the LWAMI Playtest One WITH ATP correction to the CADC:
http://www.orionwarrior.com/forum/sh...ad.php?t=29521 From the playtest readme: Quote:
Cheers, David |
And, of course, I forgot to mention the "obvious", the ADCAP and UGST will run slower when deep. :)
|
LW, so 1500-3000 UUV sensor works for you ecactly the same like 0-2000 ? On my comp difference is so drastic like between detecting targets 10-20nm out just after launch, and detecting nothing at all initially, only if distance reduced to less than 2-3nm.
And if you mean there is no difference between 0-2000Hz +5 sonar and for example 1500-3000Hz -5 sonar, then I didn't checked this precisely, but for other sensors there was a clear difference (low frequencies propagate far, high freq sonars are semi-capped in range, even very loud contacts are muted at longer ranges), and I think I have seen the difference for UUV sensor too - the proportion between loud target det ranges and quiet target det ranges was quite different. For example, low freq sonar that detects Akula II 5kts from 300yd, detects noisy civilian from 20+ nm high freq sonar tuned to detect Akula II 5kts from 300yds, detects noisy civilian from 5-7 nm only. Thats the difference (of course numbers are pure example) And it could be even greater if there were more frequency absorbtion bands above 1500Hz in sonar model... :-/ But now seems (in DWAnalyzer) that highest frequency that matters is 1500Hz... have to check if it's the same in game, there is no passive sensors set to lower limit above 1500Hz in original DB, but there are active sensors with much higher freqs. P.S. I wonder if we are using same game version to tests and if not maybe that's why we see different things :lol: I have single install of the game only, if it's telling you something ;) |
I tried the version of the game you are using a bit... and nothing.
I am really getting no effect whatsoever from the frequency range. |
Is there any data available (or about to be available after you get some rest?) on the effects of the ATP?
I was thinking something along the lines of a chart with x=speed, y=range with a few representative curves for different depths or something like that. Really, anything just to give us a ballpark idea how it's actually going to work. =) |
Hi,
You may be making things more difficult for yourselves than need be. The sonar sensor model is a very simplified one. It only cares about one frequency. For this discussion, I will create a vessel profile with freq1 = 50, freq2 = 125, freq3 = 320, freq4 = 1050, freq5 = 1500. Now lets create 2 sensors, one is a LF sensor with a freq. range of 10-800. The other is a MF sensor with a freq range of 1000-3000. When using the LF sonar, the only freq. of interest is freq3. (320). If freq3 happens to be 810 instead of 320, the LF sensor will not see the vessel. Freq1 & 2 play no roll except to add individual lines to the narrow band display. The MF sonar only cares about freq5. If the line at freq5 is outside of the MF range, again, the vessel will not be seen. So changing freq5 to 3500, will make the sensor useless. If we create a sensor with a range of 10-3000, the only freq. of interest is freq5, (1500Hz). At least this is how the model worked for SC and DW1.01. I put the game away after that. This simplified sensor model was created in order to save cpu cycles. The game only has to worry about one discreet freq. instead of many. cheers, jsteed |
Quote:
I have made even 8000-20000 and 19000-20000 AI sensors for UUV and they did detect contacts. As there are no discrete lines at all that high, they really should be useless in game but they worked, probably exactly same like a 1500-3000 sensor. I will reply te tests to be absolutely sure, probably will try them on torpedos too. P.S. From what freq up a passive sonar is treated by game as an MF passive ? Or is there a separate flag for it in DB maybe ? |
Instead of making LW or Ami do this for us, I went into the doctrines myself, and after much head scratching and fist pounding, came up with this... I think this is simple enough to do in combat if you have a calculator handy. =)
Range, Variable with Speed ADCAP Range = 27 - 6(SetSpeed - 40)/15 UGST Range = 27 - 6(SetSpeed - 35)/15 (short version, every 5 knot decrease increases the range by 2nm, from a base range of 21nm) Range, Variable with Depth ADCAP Range (and speed) reduction = .29(depth{feet})/3000 UGST Range (and speed) reduction = .2(depth{meters})/735 LW, Ami, if this is wrong, please correct me. |
Not sure if this is a problem with the new mod version or the way I installed it...
I've noticed two problems with the FFG controls for the Helo (when AI helo is controled by the FFG) 1) Whenever I assign a waypoint to the helo I find that the helo takes a while to start dipping. It circles around a bit around the waypoint and then drops down to dip. 2) This is a bigger problem, sometimes if I assign a waypoint to the helo while it's dipping, it ignores the new waypoint. It's the damnest thing. Assign a waypoint, it does nothing, delete it and assign a new one, it rises and moves a bit but then goes back to dip at the same spot. (it doesn't matter what kind of waypoint it is - Fly to, buoy, torpedo) This problem comes and goes. I could play a mission for an hour or so and then this happens. (I checked the usual suspects. The helo is within range of my FFG, It's in Sync) Like I said, I'm not sure if it's just my install or a bug. Thought you should know... |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:16 PM. |
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.