Really now? Do you know where that sort of surface area data would be? Maybe all it'd take is just reducing it to a reasonable value.

Looking for it right now. Comparing its data with the periscope data, and other objects in game.

EDIT: Tt is mentioned by name in the Sensors.sim file.

The only other things in there are the Bold decoy data. The surface area for the snorkel is not given out right, it does have maybe a number for heigth at 13.

night AC attacks
 

Gents:

AC attacks are increasing as of Feb of 1943. Thanks to Jungman at least we get a warning.... crash dive and go left or right.... usually works..... tonight first time hit by a B24

anyone figure out how to find the data in the dat file to visual id aircraft to increase reaction time?

Also, how far out does the radar warning array pick up that magic ac radars at ???? as soon as I pick radar up I must dive or get hit on surface!

Finally, how do you mod and what do u mod to get the XXI earlier...

Thanks

THe Radar Warning is not very realistic, The sets ere better than this listed.

Metox 4 km
Borkum 5 km
Naxos 7.5 km
Tunis 10 km

Someone said the Tunis could go 60 km, Naxos 40 km, Borkum 20 km, Metox about 8 to 10 km.

I increased MinHeight values for airplane radar only from zero to 2.5m. I ran into alot of Sunderlands and Catilina in April 1943, so at best Mark VI which was 0.3m modded to 1.5m.

Using a VIIC boat and a snorkel, I could go at periscope depth with the snorkel about barely above water waves (windspeed 5 m/s)
at about 1 meter up out of water.

They never found me on radar cruising at 1/3 snorkeling underwater at 11 meter depth. Now if I went 10 meter normal snorkel depth, the radar will pick me up, as it should (second best radar).

No one should have nay problems except in heavy water waves. The snorkel will shut off and on; the snort to be high enough to work may expose you. Winds above about 10 m/s.

Different boats require different depths. This new modification is not for download yet, I am trying to get some more balance andt test.

It will not protect you from the last war radar in June 1944. I did nerf it from .03m to 0.3m so maybe you could hide in CALM water with snorkel below 3m/s. Really, after that date, you did die from airplanes picking you up?

I could change it to 0.6m so keep you snort below that you might just escape.

Another thing, the Visual Size of the snort is so big, even the Avengers, which have no radar, will spot them in the water. That also is part of the problem.

Hmmm regarding visual snorkel size. They must have created a pretty large wake easliy seen in the dattime, not at night though.

I still don't have a handle as to how far a periscope snrokel could be seen though. I mean I watch planes in real life...can see them at cruise altitude about 20000 feet or so in good weather and like to watch smaller planes..

Hmmm if subsim would rent a u-boat and some aircraft and did some experiments in the North Sea. Maybe an idea for subclub meeting. :rock:

Sounds good Jungman. Can't wait for the results, please tell us the values so I can stick them into my file and run them by Beery before RUb 1.43 is out.

Can you confirm the sources on those receivers? Perhaps that's a theoretical range, and in practice it didn't work out to that much?

MinSurface = does this refer to the minimum surface area reflecting radar back to the transmitter?

If so, the values 0.03, 0.3 1.5 etc (which appear to have been picked because the represent wavelengths of radars)

These numbers are wrong anyway.

0.03 is correct wavelength for late war high res centimetric. 3cm band. above that should be 9.something "called the 10cm band" and above that should be the long wave radar....

I found some good info on these. Anyway my point is, wavelength does not equal surface area detectable or does it. How do you calculate the surface area detectable, from a certain wavelength...?

Is it 3cm x 3cm = 9cm surface area?

Yea, that should be the reflecting surface, NOT the wavelength. I think you'd agree that 3cm by 3cm in water is pretty darn unrealistic for WWII radar... That's a 1/16th of a CD case's surface, if you'd like a visual comparison there... :huh:

So for a start, all radar MinSurface values should be squared?

A standard sensor mod should incorporate.

1. Increased MinSurfaceArea for all radars. Surface ship based and aircraft. ASV I and II Long wave 1.5m squared = 2.25m SQ

ASV III to VI = 9.1 (named 10cm S-band) = 82.81cm SQ

LATE ASV VII = 9cm SQ.

But these could be rounded up. Also radars had a minimum range, not modelled...

And airborne radar and ship mounted radars appear to have similar ranges... but aircraft could search from higher up, dramatically increasing range...

I noticed that in April 1943, the best radar the Catilina and the Sunderland had was the ASVMark I, The default value in game was for MinSurface is 1.5m (the normal start radar, in changed in June 1943 to 0.3m).

I changed that 1.5m to 2.5m plus I even changed the MinHeight of the AIR radars to MinHeight from zero to 2.5m.

SO in the above test, I should have been able to have the snorkel a full 2 meters above the water without radar picking it up.

I think the visual size for the snorkel is what the planes are seeing. It must be barely above the water to get by.

I made a mistake in the above test, the planes have the worst radar ASVMark I at 1.5m default (modded to 2.5m). April 1943.

I do not think the airplanes were attracted byradar from far away. I blew up a liberty ship and they showed up about 1 hour after the deed and were looking for me. I think if they get within visual range the snorkel they will see it as a big house size.

When I am cruising with the snorkel, with this setting in April 1943, using TC of 256x, I am not getting stopped due to radar 'attracting to me', but just plain luck during the day the airplane patrol sees the snorkel from 8 km away visually.

I drove about 100 km with full snorkel in type VIIC at snort depth 10m without detection except via Visual. If I cruise at 11 meters depth, only a close visual will pick me up and that is rare.

I cannot find the 'Surface Size' for the snorkel. It seems to be way too big. If I bump up the radar MinSuface and MinHeight much more, then it will not even see your sub sitting on the water!

Where is this snorkel surface size stored at is the question...if it is in the DLL that is bad....only the Sensors.sim metion the snorkel and that has to due to height and other unkown data there. :hmm:

UPDATE: I ran the U-505 singleplayer mission and blew all the DD escorts out of the water leaving only the Carrier and its Avengers. Avengers have no radar. I never got attacked with my snorkel fully extended 2 meters above water. June 1944 , only the carier will have radar and it is the Type SP radar range 10 km at 0.3m which was modded to 1.5m. I set the MinHeight for that radar also to 2.5m.

I cruised underwater with snorkel 2m above surface with 4000m before they even started to see me on the Noise Meter via Visual. So I know my radar nerf is working.

I think it is the Snorkel SIZE is just too big. I swear it is the size of the sub itself!! :huh:

each sub has a dat and sim file. obj_snorkel is definately mentioned in the sim. Maybe also elsewhere..

Suggestion (for what its worth): find the Periscope object size data, bump it up a bit, and use it for the Snorkel... assuming that both objects might be located in the same .dat or .sim file...

Cordialement, Duke of Earl

I cannot find the Snorkel, nor the Periscope data relating to size. :(

the surface values for German radar in the sensors.dat are all very large numbers..?

20 for late war radars, 40 for early war radars like the GEMA.

??? They work on old 1.5m wavelength band yet they need a large surface...

Maybe the other file is jus plain wrong, maybe a much larger increase is justified, assuming the surface= is equivelent to the MinSurface= for radars in both files.

Why does one set of German radars need 40 sqM and the other only 2sqM.

Good point, maybe try them values out. Bump them up comparable.

But tonight is time to drink some cold beer. :P Here in the MidWest we have a heat wave at 100 to 103F. Now that does not sound that hot, until you figure the HUMIDITY is higher than hell, the dew point is 80 degrees.

Yes, this is more miserable than Arizona. There even at 114 F the humidity is low.

It is so sticky humid here my mouse will not slide correct.

I wil try out the large MinSurface values as Jace11 suggest and see whats up. Talk to you'll tomorrow.