Sound contacts on the surface?

[brandtryan]

Often enough, I get reports from the SO, of sound contacts while I'm cruising on the surface. I thought you had to be submerged to get sound contacts?

[Powerthighs]

Yes, in the stock game you can detect cotnacts on sonar while surfaced, which isn't realistic.

The Trigger Maru mod modifies this to remove the surface detection. If you don't want to install that perhaps someone can post the specific change and you can make it yourself.

[brandtryan]

Thanks Power

[Rockin Robbins]

It is perfectly realistic to receive sound contacts on the surface. If you'll use your external camera, you can travel under your boat to see the two sonar heads below the forward torpedo room, which always protrude at least 15' below the surface of the water, even when the submarine is on the surface.

Yes, the diesel engines were noisy, making use more difficult on the surface, but they were still useful. The sonar operator had a full set of attenuation filters to filter out frequencies of on-board sounds and amplify sounds coming from outside the boat, where our game sonar is much too simplified to appreciate the sophistication they enjoyed. Using sonar on the surface was done, and contacts were found in that configuration during the war.

However, the cries of the wrong have been so loud that even Ducimus has removed surface contacts from sonar in Trigger Maru, because nothing is louder and more indignant than the voice of the ignorant.

The problem is most of us (including myself) aren't old enough to be able to merely lower the volume on our hearing aids to ignore their prattle.:rotfl:

[LukeFF]

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

It is perfectly realistic to receive sound contacts on the surface. If you'll use your external camera, you can travel under your boat to see the two sonar heads below the forward torpedo room, which always protrude at least 15' below the surface of the water, even when the submarine is on the surface.

Yes, the diesel engines were noisy, making use more difficult on the surface, but they were still useful. The sonar operator had a full set of attenuation filters to filter out frequencies of on-board sounds and amplify sounds coming from outside the boat, where our game sonar is much too simplified to appreciate the sophistication they enjoyed. Using sonar on the surface was done, and contacts were found in that configuration during the war.

However, the cries of the wrong have been so loud that even Ducimus has removed surface contacts from sonar in Trigger Maru, because nothing is louder and more indignant than the voice of the ignorant.

The problem is that the sonar heads mounted on the keel were more for supersonic listening (i.e., picking up pings and such) instead of sonic listening. Sonic listening was the domain of the sonar head mounted on the forward deck:

http://www.hnsa.org/doc/fleetsub/sonar/chap1.htm#1A

Yes, it is true sonic sounds could be picked up on the surface, but that only happened at very slow speeds. Now, given the way it's modeled now, do you want a surface sonar that's too good at picking up sounds (and thus pretty much rendering watch crews irrelevant) or one that's closer to reality? I'll take option B, thank you.

[PapaG39]

sometimes I find myself thinking... I wish that the game would come out with no way to mod it unless you go through the creaters of the game.
The games are usually fine until so many people drama up some scenario that they know just isn't right & bitch until someone dhanges it for them even though a lot of others like things just the way they are/were.

My thinking is: If you don't want to use such and such...then don't!

I think we all gripe to much about things that we really don't know that much about, but think we do...

I was around in 1940, but I really don't know much about how WWII machinery really operated....lol.. hell, I learned to drive on a 1929 Model A truck... & my first car was a 1938 Pymouth, but I still don't know that much about 1940 sonar on a U-boat other then they found ships with it...lol..

it is just a-game...

[Torplexed]

Originally Posted by LukeFF

The problem is that the sonar heads mounted on the keel were more for supersonic listening (i.e., picking up pings and such) instead of sonic listening. Sonic listening was the domain of the sonar head mounted on the forward deck:

http://www.hnsa.org/doc/fleetsub/sonar/chap1.htm#1A

Yes, it is true sonic sounds could be picked up on the surface, but that only happened at very slow speeds. Now, given the way it's modeled now, do you want a surface sonar that's too good at picking up sounds (and thus pretty much rendering watch crews irrelevant) or one that's closer to reality? I'll take option B, thank you.

Cool link! Thanks!

[Rockin Robbins]

Originally Posted by LukeFF

The problem is that the sonar heads mounted on the keel were more for supersonic listening (i.e., picking up pings and such) instead of sonic listening. Sonic listening was the domain of the sonar head mounted on the forward deck:

http://www.hnsa.org/doc/fleetsub/sonar/chap1.htm#1A

Yes, it is true sonic sounds could be picked up on the surface, but that only happened at very slow speeds. Now, given the way it's modeled now, do you want a surface sonar that's too good at picking up sounds (and thus pretty much rendering watch crews irrelevant) or one that's closer to reality? I'll take option B, thank you.

That's fine, but you should read further where they are speaking about use of the WCA sonar.

Securing WCA gear
When your submarine surfaces, you will continue searching. While it is running at a slow speed, you will be able to listen efficiently. But at higher speeds the noise becomes so great that you will have to report to the conning officer: "QB, listening conditions poor." Probably you will then be ordered to secure the gear. Here is the way to secure:

The word "efficiently" means they could expect to find contacts using that method on the surface. Ahead 2/3 at 7 or 8 knots cannot by any means be called "higher speeds." However, in a manual we get no feel whatever for the number of contacts actually developed from the sonar sensors under the hull, only that it was possible and expected. Slightly earlier in the manual it speaks of getting screw counts from these sonar heads. It was a separate operator from the one that you quote in chapter 1 that operated these sonar heads, as the skills were quite different.

So the real question is, are the capabilities of these heads grossly overmodeled in the game? The answer to that question would have to come directly from the sub logs themselves stating "QB contact" or "JK/QC contact" for under hull or "JP contact" for the sonar head on deck. Then a statistical study would have to be made to determine real wartime capabilities based on the evidence. I don't have access to that information.

TATER!!!!!!! HELP!!!!!!!

In the meantime I'm using Trigger Maru unaltered and not feeling too crippled. I can't imagine too many instances where sonar could outdistance radar, except when I'm submerged. The only important thing we are missing is the ability to ping a target during a surface attack. That is a regrettable loss.

By the way, Luke's link to the sonar manual for WWII submarines is good for killing several hours of fascinating reading. Wonder when PC simulators will be good enough to reproduce even half of that? Anybody think those men of the 1940's were a bunch of simpletons? Read and marvel!

[Laffertytig]

im using RFB and have always wondered about this as well. i just assume the sonar set was underwater and along with the fact that the pacific is a lot more calm than the atlantic thats why i can detect ships on the surface.

i thought RFB was designed to be realistic?

[Rockin Robbins]

RTFM!!!!!!!:rotflI always wanted to say that) Luke posted a link to the real World War II sonar manual. Read it and learn the error of your ways, grasshopper. Those two sonar heads under water did indeed give contact info on the surface. The unknown factor to us is exactly how much.

If they give us grossly too much information Luke is right. Better for us to turn them off.

My position is the radar gives you the information too, so it's not as if the sonar gives you an advantage, because you already know whatever the sonar is telling you in much more detail. I contend that losing the ability to ping targets from the surface is a much more serious problem than getting too much info from an instrument that only tells you the bearing to a target you already know both bearing and range to from the radar! Therefore, if I am right, keep the sonar functional as the more realistic option. Beery seems to agree with me. Ducimus has yielded to the dark side.:rotfl:

[swdw]

Originally Posted by Laffertytig

im using RFB and have always wondered about this as well. i just assume the sonar set was underwater and along with the fact that the pacific is a lot more calm than the atlantic thats why i can detect ships on the surface.

i thought RFB was designed to be realistic?

LukeFF has made changes to the senors for an upcoming RFB release that takes care of this issue and a few others

[Rockin Robbins]

Originally Posted by swdw

LukeFF has made changes to the senors for an upcoming RFB release that takes care of this issue and a few others

Is Luke familiar with the epic deck gun fights?

Is it going to be possible to ping targets from the surface? That is definitely historical and the lack of that capability would be demonstrably unhistorical, while using sonar to locate targets on the surface gives no advantage to the player which could be considered unfair unless they do not have radar.

So what say you? Which unhistorical error is most egregious? I say taking the sonar away is a greater crime than leaving it there so long as the sub has radar. If the sub has no radar then I think it's defensible to remove the surface sonar capability.

Second thought: is it possible to remove detection ability while leaving the ability to ping targets? That might be the best solution of all.

I originally came from RFB, but left it when Beery abandoned it and its characteristics became dated. I only switched to TM out of desperation to find some way to integrate what turned out to be the very mods that were the basis of TM. At first I wasn't happy about the unhistorical Japanese ASW AI, but after playing it for awhile, I came to the opinion that it made for a much more enjoyable game not to have a Japanese side that was such a pushover for a GWX graduate.

So I look forward to a hale and healthy RFB and will make an alternate installation including it when you get your feet on the ground.

[LukeFF]

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

Is it going to be possible to ping targets from the surface? That is definitely historical and the lack of that capability would be demonstrably unhistorical, while using sonar to locate targets on the surface gives no advantage to the player which could be considered unfair unless they do not have radar.

So what say you? Which unhistorical error is most egregious? I say taking the sonar away is a greater crime than leaving it there so long as the sub has radar. If the sub has no radar then I think it's defensible to remove the surface sonar capability.

Second thought: is it possible to remove detection ability while leaving the ability to ping targets? That might be the best solution of all.

Hmm, I just thought of something. It might be possible to keep the surfaced sonar contacts, but indeed have it affected by the boat's speed. From Sensors.cfg:

;Hydrophone
Hydrophone range factor=1 ;[>=0]
Hydrophone fog factor=0 ;[>=0]
Hydrophone light factor=0 ;[>=0]
Hydrophone waves factor=0.5 ;[>=0]
Hydrophone speed factor=0.5 ;[>=0]
Hydrophone enemy speed=0 ;[>=0]
Hydrophone aspect=0 ;[>=0]
Hydrophone noise factor=0.5 ;[>=0]
Hydrophone sensor height factor=0 ;[>=0]
Hydrophone already tracking modifier=20 ;[detection probability modifier]
Hydrophone decay time=150 ;[>0] already tracking bonus decay, in seconds
Hydrophone uses crew efficiency=true ;[true or false]

Set that to an even higher number, and it's likely we can still simulate contacts on the surface without them becoming too ueber.

@swdw, we need to look into this more.

[nattydread]

Now you guys are gonna make me check my memoirs to see if they could detect screws while surfaced.

Also keep this in mine, the "supposed" super sonar heads while surfaced seem to provide detection ranges that should be possible visually but arent visually possible due to in game model limits.

Even the 12km visual mods dont make up for the crew being able to visually detect from 15-20km or more under favorable conditions including the placement of look outs on the shears. So in my mind, the super ears are to make up for the gimped eyes...it seems the sound detection is out to about 20km

[Laffertytig]

yeah the surface sonar detection makes up for the limited visual detection range although once the patch increases visual range to 20km i dunno where that leaves the surface sonar question.

does anyone know if crew will spot smoke stacks at 20km after the patch or will it still the actual ship?