Until now, the list grows as follow:


Length in meters
---------------------------
NOL_T3Cimmaron - 191.106
NLL - Liberty - 141.496
NKMSS_HogIsland - 122.705

NAGC_C2Appalachian - 142.140
NAGP_CarlPeters - 111.574
NAMC_Komet - 116.336
NAMC_Penguin - 156.189
NAMC_Rawalpindi - 165.888
NAO_Dithmarschen - 178.805
NBB_Bismark - 251.657
NBB_King_GeorgeV - 227.946


Still in progress...

Do you think the measures corresponds with the sim world?
The Mast measures could not be done accurately with this viewer. That is why I was fighting with the importers for 3DS max.

Good work toniloCoyote:up:

Although none of these lengths are the same as th RM the do look like they are in scale.:hmmm:

With that it must be possible to use visual measuring get get speed aob etc from the raobf:yeah:

Ok. I think it make sense that the 3D engine of SH5 doesn't perform an additional scaling.

I hope to finish the list before going to bed.


Length in meters
---------------------------
NOL_T3Cimmaron - 191.106
NLL - Liberty - 141.496
NKMSS_HogIsland - 122.705

NAGC_C2Appalachian - 142.140
NAGP_CarlPeters - 111.574
NAMC_Komet - 116.336
NAMC_Penguin - 156.189
NAMC_Rawalpindi - 165.888
NAO_Dithmarschen - 178.805
NBB_Bismark - 251.657
NBB_King_GeorgeV - 227.946
NBB_Littorio - 239.418
NBB_Nelson - 201.568
NBB_New_York - 178.252
NBB_North_Carolina - 220.453
NBB_QueenElizabeth - 197.116
NBB_RoyalSovereign - 188.310
NBB_Schleswig_Holstein - 127.831
NBC_Deutschland - 185.719
NBC_Hood - 262.668
NBC_Renown - 241.219
NBC_Scharnhorst - 235.089
NCA_Admiral_Hipper - 208.219
NCA_Kent - 183.848
NCA_Northampton - 183.754
NCA_Trento - 196.315
NCL_Bartolomeo - 169.976
NCL_Brooklyn - 185.090
NCL_Dido - 155.257
NCL_Emden - 156.986
NCL_Konigsberg - 173.392
NCL_Montecuccoli - 182.302
NCO_Flower - 62.779
NCV_Ark_Royal - 252.070
NCV_Courageous - 239.144
NCV_Illustrious - 247.486
NCVE_Bogue - 152.404

I can't wait for these things to be implemented into TDW's UI. I've tried using Arclight's stock marks (x3.4) but I'm not having much luck. I can see from Trevally's latest pictures I was doing one or two things incorrectly (e.g. at 1.5 zoom I need to do a further x4)

I just wanted to say... congrats to the SH5 devs! For allowing scripting and modding. So now we have the incredibly talented likes of Trevally, TheDarkWraith, Reaper7, Arclight, Magnus, etc, et el who have turned this sim into the game it should be.

A whole bunch of my friends(myself included) bought SH5 when Steam put it on special over Xmas, and I feel so sorry for them because they are just playing stock. I last played the SH series with SH3, heavily modded so I knew I certainly did not want to play SH5 stock. A "getting started" thread set me up - but it still took a solid evening of digging and playing (and a week of tweaking) to get it to a stage where I'm looking forward to patrolling. This should really be the way everyone plays this game! It's such a shame the difficulty of getting it rolling it so prohibitive.

Well, this is the full list:

Length in meters
---------------------------
CMD_small_boat(LifeBoat) - 4.875
NAGC_C2Appalachian - 142.140
NAGP_CarlPeters - 111.574
NAMC_Komet - 116.336
NAMC_Penguin - 156.189
NAMC_Rawalpindi - 165.888
NAO_Dithmarschen - 178.805
NBB_Bismark - 251.657
NBB_King_GeorgeV - 227.946
NBB_Littorio - 239.418
NBB_Nelson - 201.568
NBB_New_York - 178.252
NBB_North_Carolina - 220.453
NBB_QueenElizabeth - 197.116
NBB_RoyalSovereign - 188.310
NBB_Schleswig_Holstein - 127.831
NBC_Deutschland - 185.719
NBC_Hood - 262.668
NBC_Renown - 241.219
NBC_Scharnhorst - 235.089
NCA_Admiral_Hipper - 208.219
NCA_Kent - 183.848
NCA_Northampton - 183.754
NCA_Trento - 196.315
NCL_Bartolomeo - 169.976
NCL_Brooklyn - 185.090
NCL_Dido - 155.257
NCL_Emden - 156.986
NCL_Konigsberg - 173.392
NCL_Montecuccoli - 182.302
NCO_Flower - 62.779
NCV_Ark_Royal - 252.070
NCV_Courageous - 239.144
NCV_Illustrious - 247.486
NCVE_Bogue - 152.404
NCVE_Long_Island - 149.706
NDD_A&B(NDD_Achates) - 95.941
NDD_Clemson - 95.878
NDD_Fletcher - 115.726
NDD_Keith - 96.045
NDD_Rocket - 109.961
NDD_Soldati - 107.948
NDD_Somers - 116.192
NDD_Tribal - 118.350
NDD_Type34 - 121.883
NDD_V&W - 95.279
NDE_Buckley - 93.308
NDE_Evarts - 90.960
NF_Boat_1 - 27.166
NFF_Black_Swan - 91.875
NKLCS_C2SB1 - 140.161
NKMCS_C1B - 128.327
NKMSS_HogIsland - 122.705
NKSCS_N3SA1 - 81.023
NLL(Liberty) - 141.496
NLS_MFP_D(Marinefahrprahm) - 48.164
NLST_Transport - 100.524
NOL_T3Cimmaron - 191.106
NOM_Ranger - 111.910
NPL_C3Middleton - 151.270
NPL_Conte_Verde - 172.994
NPP_QueenMary - 311.420
Nrtw - 62.596
NVV - 139.550

It is a tedious task and a fault-prone one (but I have put too care for don't), but the same work can be done for width and height of the ship (total height, from keel to top of mast, but not for mast height, at least with this software).

I'm going to bed. See you tomorrow. Thanks for your good work. Let me know (in this thread) if I can help in anymore.

hello to all involved,

if you want to make the job right ,you have:

step 1: first to adjust the angular angle and set it at the value that fov=38 degrees at x1,5 zoom. that will be the minimum zoom level and of course next zoom level will be x6 [note:step 1 can be skipped and proceed to step 2 if you don't want a scope with fov=38 degrees]

step 2: next(very important) , you have to see and copy the vertical scale that sh5 is producing at x1,5 zoom (this scale is showing the degrees). now, becuase Reaper and later TDW have used the Karamazovnew's rings that means that scales must calibrated to work with Kara's rings becuase Kara didn't want to use the degrees at aob rings but mils(i know that becuase i was the one who showed and explained to him how to make the proper adjustments for his optics). in order to achieve this you have to create a new vertical scale and place your '10' at exactly where the 5,71 degrees are on sh5's hardcode scale (the why is not at the moment to be explained).
once , you place your '10' at your new vertical scale just built the rest of it accordinally. the horizontal scale must be EXACTLY the same with vertical scale (there is no excuse for not be the same...if it isn't ,,,it is just wrong !) . and don't double the numbers at horizontal scale,...just make it as the vertical scale , and count the whole observed length .the vertical line of scope when locked on target doesn't 'pass' always from the middle of ship as this is turning from its one axis...this is happening only at the situation that aob=90 degrees)

step 3:next(very important) ,you need a ship with correct length and mast values in order to test the rings .most of ships's values are wrong and all the people that say ''do not trust the rec manual'' are absolutely right. you have to measure ,by your own, a ship ! ToniloCoyote's is the most correct method to get the ship's lengths (bravo ToniloCoyote) .once you are sure about ship's length ...proceed to determine its mast.create a single mission(totally calm water) with the ship stationary(very close to our boat ,at 0 degrees bearing, showing all of its hull...yes,aob=90)) and take a photo of it through scope ...open the photo with a graphic programm and count the pixels of its length and the pixels of its mast from waterline .(this is necessery to be done so becuase the .sims files for each ship determines how much deep the ship will 'sit' in water)
then true mast = (true length x mast's pixels)/length's pixels

after all these you will have a ship with correct length and mast values and you will be ready to test your rings .just have in mind that there are some tiny inaccuracies at the rings itselfs .

ps: ps: happy new year to every subsimer with health and smiles !

Makman, when you will come over and start modding for SH5?! :O:

Trevally, makman:

Thank you, makman, I was racking my brains about the mean of "Mil".
I suppose you mean an "angular mil" (NATO adopted angular measurement), the same than in sniper's rifle scopes.

I have found an useful article in Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_mil
and an on-line calculator at:
http://www.convertworld.com/en/angle/

Yesterday night, just before going to sleep, I was thinking about some facts:

1- We must not care about the ship's measurements in the real world.
2- We must not care about the measurements in Recognition Manuals.
3- We must not complicate things neither look through the periscope while observing the clock and relying on the accuracy of 3D engine's light projection, in order to calculate anything (in development time).
3- If we want to make calculations in the virtual world of SH5 we need to deal only with this virtual world and its ships, that is, with the 3D models which move along this model of the world.

It makes sense that the modelers guys are not the same people than the developers nor the same people than the documentalists and the history investigators; so, it makes sense that there will be some discrepancies between their works. You cannot ask to a 3D modeler guy to make all the 3D pieces of a ship at the exact measure as it was in the real world and then request him that all these pieces fit in well all together. So, the modeler's final output rules, and we want to sink these final outputs.

I was thinking too that the draft of a ship is not a modeler's decision but a ship's behavior, so this data must be in the .sim file of the ship, and makman has confirmed this fact.
Then, if I can measure with total accuracy the full height of a ship's 3D model (I can), we can have the exact mast height with the formula: mastHeight = fullHeight - draft

Am I wrong?
Will be worth the effort? (For each ship I need to open the ship's model in Granny Viewer and write down its full Height, and then open in Silent 3ditor and write down its draft).

If so, let me know, and I'll begin with that.

Trevally, I think that the fact that makman points out, will complicate things. What do you think? I don't yet understand why the 5.71 factor pointed by makman.

5.71 degrees =
101.51 Mil (NATO)
95.17 Mil (URSS)
99.93 Mil (Sweeden)


(sorry for my insufficient English; I hope I have explained myself correctly)

Thanks for the advice Makman

You make some interesting points. Mils are something I am familiar with for navigating on land. So mils v deg, I dont mind - they are all numbers:D

Going back to the reason i started this - I was wanting to confirm I was using the RAOBF the correct way. (I wasnt:88)) So next was to learn.
This turned out to be quite a trial as I learnt I had wrong cam file after changing the scales etc etc :damn:

This has turned out to be a subject that a lot of people have become interested in, new subsimmers and you guys who have a lot of experience in this area.
For me this is great and more people that join in the better.

But all I wanted was to be able to double check differant methods for finding information on a target. So as long as the scales are within a tolerance - thats all I wanted.

For ship information - length mastheight etc, as long as scales of error for each one is constant, then all is ok. I dont intend to go through the whole game correction errors etc. Perhaps others will.

Thanks again for your pointers and a happy new year to you too.:up:

@ toniloCoyote

That is a great list of information you have gathered there:up:
For me, i am going to check this v RM as a % scale of error.
This will point out any lengths needing changed in the RM

For the mastheight etc - i have not yet come apon any problems here.
The stadi fix was finished some time ago and I'm sure someone would have noticed problems if they were wrong.
They may not be precise, but remember the ruler can only measure to the nearest 50m so how precise do they need to be:06:

All his measurements (lengths) have been updated in v6.3.0 of UIs mod :up:

Thanks TDW, I'm downloading now:up:

With my fingers crossed that the gritacules are all correct:D

You are right Trevally; one wants to sail, but begins to be distracted with technicalities, programming, fixing bugs, etc and, when he realizes, sees that he has been several days without sailing.

I suspect that also the mast height is wrong in RM.
Be as it may, anybody know how to obtain the draft of a ship from its sim file?
S3D doesn't show any information about it, and I don't find this information with Goblin Editor.

@TheDarkWraith:

Your mod is unique, and Trevally and I would like it to be precise. Don't you worry about the Mils vs Degrees discrepancies pointed out by markman?
Doesn't matter for the accuracy of the RAOBF?

ok guys, forget everything about mils and the reasons ! all you have to do is to create the proper scales for Kara's rings and i just told you EXACTLY what you have to do in order to create the correct scales .just create a scale that its '10' will match with 5,71 degrees (at x1.5 zoom) and you will see the rings to work perfect like a miracle !

look at this pic :
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/5989/scales.png

and for everyone that want to test the rings ...just download this:

http://www.speedyshare.com/files/260...TDW_v6.3.0.rar

and install it directly after TDW gui v6.3.0 (don't install anything else...just the core files of TDW 's gui and then this testing mod).

at cameras i only setted x1,5-x6 zoom (didn't change the angular-fov that TDW's gui is using) and i created the correct scales for the aobf.(note: only at ATTACK SCOPE)

note:the resolution i am using is 1280x960 and you have to use ONLY THIS RESOLUTION ! (i don't know how the scales are streched to other resolutions so if you want to test the aobf use ONLY the resolution 1280x960)

you will find in single missions a mission called ''find the mast'' (don't pay attention to the title) ,run this mission in order to test the rings .this mission containes a ship(dulio) that i measured and has the correct values for its length (239,418m) and its mast (47,82m) so you can test the rings by using this ship

@Trevally : you asked how to calibrate the scales for Kara's rings and i just answered you .now, it is important to have the correct scales in order to see the rings work properly (if at 'your' scales' the '10' is matching with 5,71 degrees at minimum zoom level ...you are ready to go)

@ToniloCoyote : yes, your thought about finding the mast by using the draft values from .sims files is absolutely correct ! the problem is that s3d is not opening the .sims files at sh5 ....thats why i told you the 'trick' with the photo in order to get the true mast value.

bye