Which SJ radar performance model is preferable?

Ducimus · 04-10-10, 11:41 PM

I'm working inside a box, so im posting this as a sanity check.

Which radar performance model is preferable?

Performance model A:
A fixed max range on both the SJ and SJ-1, max range depending on the radar, with reliable contacts within that range.

Performance model B:
A variable max range depending on the aspect of the targeted ship.

This is the reason i post this, because i've been told that radar performance of this nature isn't quite correct. I attribute this to flaws in the game engine. But in my mind it seems more variable, dynamic, and therego a bit more realistic. But i degress, i could be smoking crack here. So, to understand what i'm talking about, here's the results of 3 or 4 days of number crunching and radar testing:

Approximate SJ radar detection ranges:

Target has 0 deg. AOB.
Battleship: 26.2KM or 28,652 yards
Merchant: 9200 Meters or 10,061 yards
Destroyer: 7300 meters or 7,983 yards

Target has 45 deg. AOB
Battleship: 3.4 KM or 37,620 yards
Merchant: 21.7 KM or 23,731 yards
Destroyer: 17.1 KM or 18,700 yards

Target has 90 deg. AOB
Battleship: 35 KM or 38,276 yards
Merchant: 25.7 KM or 28,105 yards
Destroyer: 19.5 KM or 21,325 yards

Approximate SJ-1 radar detection ranges:

Target has 0 deg. AOB.
Battleship: 34.8 KM or 38,057 yards
Merchant: 12 KM or 13,123 yards
Destroyer: 9000 meters or 9,842 yards

Target has 45 deg. AOB
Battleship: 34.8 KM or 38,057 yards
Merchant: 28.7 KM or 31,386 yards
Destroyer: 21.3 KM or 23,293 yards

Target has 90 deg. AOB
Battleship: 34.8 KM or 38,057 yards
Merchant: 34.2 KM or 37,401 yards
Destroyer: 26 KM or 28,433 yards

Personally i think the numbers are too generous. What the handicap is, is historical figures which cite the maximum reliable range. Which means, that i'm basing everything off the detection range when the target is at 0 AOB, at it's most smallest profile to the radar, and letting everything else falls where it may. If i adjusted it any other way, if the target had a 0 AOB, he'd be invisible to radar, which is obviously not acceptable.

If you'll excuse me now, i need another beer. It makes hashing all this out much more tolerable.

Sledgehammer427 · 04-10-10, 11:50 PM

well, I am going to vote option 2 (after I post this comment of course)

I say this because if you have a target coming straight at you, at precisely 0 AOB (which would be an act of god and I would suppose a helmsman with nerves of steel) I think I would have much more to worry about than the fact that particular ship made like an F-117 and disappeared.

But then where does the ship become detected again?
at .000001 AOB port or starboard? If this is the case, option 2 is best.

Ducimus · 04-11-10, 12:07 AM

All of the figures i posted are approximate.

tater · 04-11-10, 12:18 AM

I'd assume the reliable detection range would be for a BB with the largest possible signature, myself.

Doe the detection ranges drop to 0 with 0 AOB?

Ducimus · 04-11-10, 01:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tater

I'd assume the reliable detection range would be for a BB with the largest possible signature, myself.

Doe the detection ranges drop to 0 with 0 AOB?

If I adjusted the surface factor so a BB detection range drops to 0 with a 0 AOB, i believe that all other smaller craft would become undetectable by the radar.

edit:
For what its worth, how i derived at the above figures, i had a test mission with 3 ships.

A DD, a merchant, and a yamoto. All ships in line from north to south, with 1000 meters spacing in between each ship. I positioned the the starting position 45KM at a 90 degree angle to the middle ship (the merchant).

Always, id detect the BB first. Then the merchent, and then the DD. In that order. The only varience was when i detected them. Detection range would vary based on surface factor of the radar, and the AOB i placed the target ships.

edit 2:

Frankly im tired of working on this. When i post the next update to TMO, it's going to be either model A (what it is now) or model B as written in this post.

edit 3:
Or better yet, just bypass all decision making and make it an alternate mod. I have a feeling no matter what i do, people are going to pick this apart looking for tits on realistic performance that i honestly don't think the game engine will give.

Captain Dave · 04-11-10, 11:36 AM

I voted for option B. It would seem to me that you can get a contact at a far range, but not determine whether it was Warship or Merchant until it's closer. It's like when you're at the periscope and you want to ID a ship. If the AOB is too small or it's too far away, it won't ID. As the AOB increases or the ship gets closer the game engine IDs it. So, contact first, reliable ID later. You'd probably have to add something like: "Contact, ship, bearing such and such" to the speech file for when it's initially contacted.

Looking forward to TMO 2.0

Hitman · 04-11-10, 12:17 PM

I voted 2, but the thing that should be fixed in the radar and on which we have failed so far is the stupid bug which causes the signature to be SMALLER when the target gets closer instead of the opposite

If you can do something about it, that would be a major breakthrough

BTW Ducimus, even if you retire from modding in that you will be closing the door on TM with 2.0, I asume you will still be around to give advice and fix little things as well as cooperate on smaller scale in projects, right? Once thing is to do the mammouth task of developinga nd keeping TM2 updated, and a very different one is to jump in here and there to help the game push on...

It would be a shame to lose all the knowledge you have gained on the game so far

Munchausen · 04-11-10, 12:43 PM

Zero AOB shouldn't render a ship invisible ... unless it was also two-dimensional.

ETR3(SS) · 04-11-10, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ducimus

...tits on realistic performance that i honestly don't think the game engine will give.

You're dead on there. It is impossible for the game to give a dead on representation of radar theory. And without that you can't have a truly realistic acting radar.

tater · 04-11-10, 02:49 PM

Sorry. No, I would not want it to drop to 0 with 0 AOB, I thought you said it might. What I meant was that whatever the stated reliable detection range is for SJ in manuals, etc, I'd assume it was either 90 degrees, or split the difference and say 45.

Does that make sense? Ie: the reliable range should be under about the best possible conditions so it is less under any other condition. That'd be my guess, anyway.

View Poll Results: Which SJ radar performance model is preferable?
Model A: Fixed maximum radar ranges wth consistant detection	1	5.00%
Model B: Variable radar ranges based on targets aspect to your radar	19	95.00%
Voters: 20. You may not vote on this poll

04-10-10, 11:41 PM	#1
Ducimus Rear Admiral Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 12,987 Downloads: 67 Uploads: 2	Which SJ radar performance model is preferable? I'm working inside a box, so im posting this as a sanity check. Which radar performance model is preferable? Performance model A: A fixed max range on both the SJ and SJ-1, max range depending on the radar, with reliable contacts within that range. Performance model B: A variable max range depending on the aspect of the targeted ship. This is the reason i post this, because i've been told that radar performance of this nature isn't quite correct. I attribute this to flaws in the game engine. But in my mind it seems more variable, dynamic, and therego a bit more realistic. But i degress, i could be smoking crack here. So, to understand what i'm talking about, here's the results of 3 or 4 days of number crunching and radar testing: Approximate SJ radar detection ranges: Target has 0 deg. AOB. Battleship: 26.2KM or 28,652 yards Merchant: 9200 Meters or 10,061 yards Destroyer: 7300 meters or 7,983 yards Target has 45 deg. AOB Battleship: 3.4 KM or 37,620 yards Merchant: 21.7 KM or 23,731 yards Destroyer: 17.1 KM or 18,700 yards Target has 90 deg. AOB Battleship: 35 KM or 38,276 yards Merchant: 25.7 KM or 28,105 yards Destroyer: 19.5 KM or 21,325 yards Approximate SJ-1 radar detection ranges: Target has 0 deg. AOB. Battleship: 34.8 KM or 38,057 yards Merchant: 12 KM or 13,123 yards Destroyer: 9000 meters or 9,842 yards Target has 45 deg. AOB Battleship: 34.8 KM or 38,057 yards Merchant: 28.7 KM or 31,386 yards Destroyer: 21.3 KM or 23,293 yards Target has 90 deg. AOB Battleship: 34.8 KM or 38,057 yards Merchant: 34.2 KM or 37,401 yards Destroyer: 26 KM or 28,433 yards Personally i think the numbers are too generous. What the handicap is, is historical figures which cite the maximum reliable range. Which means, that i'm basing everything off the detection range when the target is at 0 AOB, at it's most smallest profile to the radar, and letting everything else falls where it may. If i adjusted it any other way, if the target had a 0 AOB, he'd be invisible to radar, which is obviously not acceptable. If you'll excuse me now, i need another beer. It makes hashing all this out much more tolerable. Last edited by Ducimus; 04-11-10 at 12:08 AM.

04-10-10, 11:50 PM	#2
Sledgehammer427 PacWagon Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Drinking coffee and staring at trees in Massachusetts Posts: 2,908 Downloads: 287 Uploads: 0	well, I am going to vote option 2 (after I post this comment of course) I say this because if you have a target coming straight at you, at precisely 0 AOB (which would be an act of god and I would suppose a helmsman with nerves of steel) I think I would have much more to worry about than the fact that particular ship made like an F-117 and disappeared. But then where does the ship become detected again? at .000001 AOB port or starboard? If this is the case, option 2 is best. __________________ Cold Waters Voice Crew - Fire Control Officer Cmdr O. Myers - C/O USS Nautilus (SS-168) 114,000 tons sunk - 4 Spec Ops completed V-boat Nutcase - Need supplies? Japanese garrison on a small island in the way? Just give us a call! D4C!

04-11-10, 12:17 PM	#7
Hitman Pacific Aces Dev Team Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Spain Posts: 6,109 Downloads: 109 Uploads: 2	I voted 2, but the thing that should be fixed in the radar and on which we have failed so far is the stupid bug which causes the signature to be SMALLER when the target gets closer instead of the opposite If you can do something about it, that would be a major breakthrough BTW Ducimus, even if you retire from modding in that you will be closing the door on TM with 2.0, I asume you will still be around to give advice and fix little things as well as cooperate on smaller scale in projects, right? Once thing is to do the mammouth task of developinga nd keeping TM2 updated, and a very different one is to jump in here and there to help the game push on... It would be a shame to lose all the knowledge you have gained on the game so far __________________ One day I will return to sea ...

04-11-10, 12:07 AM	#3
Ducimus Rear Admiral Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 12,987 Downloads: 67 Uploads: 2	All of the figures i posted are approximate.

04-11-10, 12:18 AM	#4
tater Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: New Mexico, USA Posts: 9,023 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 2	I'd assume the reliable detection range would be for a BB with the largest possible signature, myself. Doe the detection ranges drop to 0 with 0 AOB?

04-11-10, 11:36 AM	#6
Captain Dave Officer Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Herriman, Utah Posts: 247 Downloads: 398 Uploads: 3	I voted for option B. It would seem to me that you can get a contact at a far range, but not determine whether it was Warship or Merchant until it's closer. It's like when you're at the periscope and you want to ID a ship. If the AOB is too small or it's too far away, it won't ID. As the AOB increases or the ship gets closer the game engine IDs it. So, contact first, reliable ID later. You'd probably have to add something like: "Contact, ship, bearing such and such" to the speech file for when it's initially contacted. Looking forward to TMO 2.0

04-11-10, 12:43 PM	#8
Munchausen Commodore Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 608 Downloads: 25 Uploads: 1	Zero AOB shouldn't render a ship invisible ... unless it was also two-dimensional.

04-11-10, 02:49 PM	#10
tater Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: New Mexico, USA Posts: 9,023 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 2	Sorry. No, I would not want it to drop to 0 with 0 AOB, I thought you said it might. What I meant was that whatever the stated reliable detection range is for SJ in manuals, etc, I'd assume it was either 90 degrees, or split the difference and say 45. Does that make sense? Ie: the reliable range should be under about the best possible conditions so it is less under any other condition. That'd be my guess, anyway.