SUBSIM Radio Room Forums

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)
-   SH4 ATO Mods (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=234)
-   -   [WIP] The Offical Post of The Surface Warfare Super-Mod (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=144946)

tomhugill 01-03-09 12:01 PM

A great piece of thinking IABL could be on to a real winner here:up::rock:

gile 01-03-09 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ivank
Starting new carrer with Prince of Wales.
Will update after 1 patrol.


How is that patrol going on then?

ivank 01-03-09 07:26 PM

Bad, not into the Indian Ocean yet

cgjimeneza 01-03-09 07:40 PM

HMS Prince of Wales sailing again
 
this patrol in Prince of Wales as in "beta"????

or did I MISS something?

happy new year!

Quote:

Originally Posted by ivank
Bad, not into the Indian Ocean yet


ivank 01-03-09 09:11 PM

Edit: Ship Sank.

tater 01-05-09 10:47 PM

What, if anything, have you guys done with ship physics? Meaning acceleration, turning radious, etc?

It should take quite a while to build up speed in a BB, for example. For Hood to work up to flank should take something like 20 minutes.

What values have you found useful in this regard in the propulsion part of the sim file?

tomhugill 01-06-09 03:59 AM

Hey , another thing on the list im afarid as we all know the surface ships move far too quickly , its a pity phil thompson as left us as he did alot of good work on this in sh3

tater 01-06-09 09:52 AM

I only found his thread last night (late) as I only tend to end up at SH3 forum by searches (and to look at IABL's pretty ships). I had been looking into the same thing after testing Ise's acceleration.

Ise goes from 0 to 20 knots in 35-36 seconds.

That should take perhaps 10 minutes or more at the very least. She took an additional minute to get from 20 to her max of 25.6.

I fired a fish at her, and she slowed from flank (25.6) to 11 knots inside a few ship lengths to avoid the fish instead of the X miles it should have taken, lol (fish missed, of course).

I was looking at decreasing engine HP when I found the thread, now I'm certainly going to—today. Nice thing is that his work means I can start testing around his final value.

DarkFish 01-06-09 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tater
What, if anything, have you guys done with ship physics? Meaning acceleration, turning radious, etc?

It should take quite a while to build up speed in a BB, for example. For Hood to work up to flank should take something like 20 minutes.

What values have you found useful in this regard in the propulsion part of the sim file?

I haven't changed anything with the ship physics on the ships I've done. I've just copied the values from the original .sim file (and changed them where historically incorrect).
I've done a test with the New Mexico BB, it takes 2.5 minutes for it to reach its maximum speed. That seems to be ok IMO.
AFAIK even heavy ships like BBs could accelerate to flank speed that fast, but only rarely did, as it can damage the engine.

tater 01-06-09 02:26 PM

I have data for HMS Hood, and she took about 27 minutes to work up to flank from zero. Even a DD can't get to that speed in 2 minutes. The min value on the chart I saw (used for pre-war wargaming purposes) was 4-5 minutes to 20 knots for some DDs.

I checked Ise, for example. She can get to flank in ~1.5 minutes. 35 seconds to 20 knots.

DarkFish 01-06-09 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tater
I have data for HMS Hood, and she took about 27 minutes to work up to flank from zero.

Also in emergencies? Normally they wouldn't accelerate at max to avoid damage to the engine. 27 minutes seems more like a 'safe' acceleration, gently building up speed.

tater 01-06-09 03:05 PM

It's a chart they used in wargames, so it might be the safe speed.

When I read accounts of PTO naval engagements, however, they usually refer (in combat) to ships "working up" to a speed for evasion, etc.

Regardless, the stock values are ridiculous, IMO. There is no way a BB goes from 0 to 20 knots in 35 seconds.

DarkFish 01-06-09 03:56 PM

They indeed 'worked up' to a speed for evasion, whenever it became clear there would be an engagement they would immediately begin to gain speed. I agree though from 0 to 20 knots in 35 secs is a huge acceleration for a BB. I checked the sim file and its mass is a little lower and its engine hp a little higher than historical. So if this is corrected it'd probably take some 45 secs to get to 20 kts. Still very much, but not too unrealistic I guess, especially in real emergencies like a torpedo heading for the ship.

tater 01-06-09 04:25 PM

I think that is way too fast. The screw count is wrong, too, big, slow props are more efficient. Iowa tried to keep her turns at no more than 200.

0-20 knots needs to take minutes.

Stopping a ship like Iowa is easier than most ww2 BBs because of electric drive. None the less, throwing her all back from 30 knots took over a mile to slow her. (~7 ship lengths). She could stop faster with a "barn door" stop (they could turn her rudders into each other to make a wall—Wisconsin did this once, and suffered for it thereafter, apparently). I have no timing on this, but starting with ~30 knots, that means ~4 minutes to stop.

Stopping should be faster because you also have drag working for you which goes like v^2.

Less advanced designs would have been slower stopping (and accelerating).

IMO, that means the boundary value would be a ship capable of accelerating as fast as she could stop, and that might be 4 minutes from 30 knots—and with an electric drive, reverse was just flipping a switch, you cannot do this as easily with a direct drive.

cgjimeneza 01-06-09 05:17 PM

working up speed
 
Remember in all our history books or novels:

when you will have an engagement you bring all boilers in line ("Destroyer Command") and yes, the acceleration values are crazy, I hate a ship going at 12 knots slowing to 7 knots in a length or more (no inertia?) and torps passing in front of the target missing by a whisker.

anyone has a copy of Janes Warships of WW2?

Quote:

Originally Posted by tater
I think that is way too fast. The screw count is wrong, too, big, slow props are more efficient. Iowa tried to keep her turns at no more than 200.

0-20 knots needs to take minutes.

Stopping a ship like Iowa is easier than most ww2 BBs because of electric drive. None the less, throwing her all back from 30 knots took over a mile to slow her. (~7 ship lengths). She could stop faster with a "barn door" stop (they could turn her rudders into each other to make a wall—Wisconsin did this once, and suffered for it thereafter, apparently). I have no timing on this, but starting with ~30 knots, that means ~4 minutes to stop.

Stopping should be faster because you also have drag working for you which goes like v^2.

Less advanced designs would have been slower stopping (and accelerating).

IMO, that means the boundary value would be a ship capable of accelerating as fast as she could stop, and that might be 4 minutes from 30 knots—and with an electric drive, reverse was just flipping a switch, you cannot do this as easily with a direct drive.


polyfiller 01-07-09 04:56 PM

Folks - if we want to achieve slower acceleration then I think it's going to take something more than just a shipname.sim file change. I tried playing with mass, drag etc. last night on the Yamato and could slow acceleration down ... but at the expense of reducing the top speed significantly (ahieved 6 minutes to accelerate to 11 kts ... and that's as fast as it would go). Also played with reducing number of engines etc. in the UPCGE file. Will have another go at messing with engine power, but susepct that it can't be done with the .SIM file.

Maybe there's a graph file or something somewhere to change. Am going to have a look around. Maybe a more experienced modder knows where to look ?

Sledgehammer427 01-07-09 08:10 PM

im afraid i have to use the hyphenated deathnote for modding these games

perhaps ship acceleration and deceleration is hard-coded?

its not a big deal to me, like a single flea on a dog

tater 01-08-09 12:35 AM

It may be that the best that can happen is a compromise with them being a little less speed-responsive.

ivank 01-08-09 12:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sledgehammer427
im afraid i have to use the hyphenated deathnote for modding these games

perhaps ship acceleration and deceleration is hard-coded?

its not a big deal to me, like a single flea on a dog

I agree, if ship accel and decel is hard-coded and therefore un mod able, it will just be one issue people will have to live with. I understand the plight of the U-boot or US sub commander, but in TSWSM I fail to see the issue(other than historical)

A submariner, who fires slow torpedos(i think the fastest in SH4 is ~:-?44knts?) and the rapid accel and decel of a target can make or break a patrol, I can see getting mad.
But for us surface guys(And I hope if your complaining about this you are a submariner) that fire boardsides of shells that can cover a distance of 10miles in 15secs, I dont see the problem. No matter how fast a target accels or deccels that shell(if on the right trajectory) will hit

tater 01-08-09 01:43 AM

Long Lance torpedoes.

I wanna try a DD vs a big critter :)


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:05 AM.

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.