[REL] Depth keeping problem fixed

[ddrgn]

Nice work!

[TheDarkWraith]

Originally Posted by ddrgn

Nice work!

your UHS files were a little trickier to fix the problem of. With the changes you made the sub will keep depth now with the fix but at deep depths it will overshoot the ordered depth. The deeper you dive the more overshoot that happens. I can't seem to fix that part of it. You really only start to see this at depths >120m with UHS.

[ddrgn]

Ya never could get it to balance proper....

[TheDarkWraith]

Originally Posted by ddrgn

Ya never could get it to balance proper....

did you notice what an impact ship length and width do to depth keeping I had to make the stock SH5 VIIA files mimmick the VIIB just to get it to hold depth. For the life of me I couldn't do anything right until I set the length and width to that of the VIIB

[ddrgn]

interesting... i did look into historical lengths and widths, but remember not having to change anything... i certainly didn't focus on that being a cause of the depth keeping issue but makes sense now that i think of it

[dcb]

Just a suggestion. Using the .sim files present in original Magnum Opus (not in the latest fix), I changed the submerged displacement to 770. In my game, it works great, the uboat levels at precisely the ordered depth, from PD down to 100 meters. I never had the chance to test it below this depth, as I am still stalking ships on the Eastern Approaches, but maybe you'll take it as a starting point.

[TheDarkWraith]

Originally Posted by dcb

Just a suggestion. Using the .sim files present in original Magnum Opus (not in the latest fix), I changed the submerged displacement to 770. In my game, it works great, the uboat levels at precisely the ordered depth, from PD down to 100 meters. I never had the chance to test it below this depth, as I am still stalking ships on the Eastern Approaches, but maybe you'll take it as a starting point.

I've already adjusted the submerged displacements for all the subs to make them hold depth. I had to do a little more tweaking on the VIIA to make it hold depth though (length and width adjustments). Most subs were around 740-790 for submerged displacement

[Bilge_Rat]

Originally Posted by TheDarkWraith

your UHS files were a little trickier to fix the problem of. With the changes you made the sub will keep depth now with the fix but at deep depths it will overshoot the ordered depth. The deeper you dive the more overshoot that happens. I can't seem to fix that part of it. You really only start to see this at depths >120m with UHS.

The overshooting is not necessarily an issue. A submarine is not an elevator. Depending on speed, rate of dive, water conditions/temperature/salinity, weight, weight distribution, you can easily overshoot. This is more of a problem the deeper you go since air compresses and the rate of sinking increases with depth. A certain oscillation around the ordered depth until the diving officer gets it nice and stable would not be abnormal.

from wikipedia, but close enough:

When submerged, the water pressure on submarine's hull can reach 4 MPa (580 psi) for steel submarines and up to 10 MPa (1,500 psi) for titanium submarines like Komsomolets, while interior pressure remains relatively unchanged. This difference results in hull compression, which decreases displacement. Water density also increases with depth, as the salinity and pressure are higher, but this incompletely compensates for hull compression, so buoyancy decreases as depth increases. A submerged submarine is in an unstable equilibrium, having a tendency to either fall or float to the surface. Keeping a constant depth requires continual operation of either the depth control tanks or control surfaces

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submari...n_and_trimming

[Zedi]

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

The overshooting is not necessarily an issue. A submarine is not an elevator. Depending on speed, rate of dive, water conditions/temperature/salinity, weight, weight distribution, you can easily overshoot. This is more of a problem the deeper you go since air compresses and the rate of sinking increases with depth. A certain oscillation around the ordered depth until the diving officer gets it nice and stable would not be abnormal.

from wikipedia, but close enough:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submari...n_and_trimming

This. I also think that is very normal that under a certain depth with minimal speed the sub will start to slowly sink, mostly because the bigger water pressure that will overcome the air pressure from the tanks. To have control on depth again, the only way is to increase the speed.

So I think is nothing wrong with the depth control in the game. Stretching the depth limit is only to escape from the sonar, but it has his risk. Problem is that no matter how deep we go, with IRAI enabled, the escort will still ping you down. Just last night I dived down to 258m and they still pinged me and drooped very precise dc's over me. At that depth is no way to survive with a dc near the sub, its insta kill.

[dcb]

Originally Posted by Magnum

This. I also think that is very normal that under a certain depth with minimal speed the sub will start to slowly sink, mostly because the bigger water pressure that will overcome the air pressure from the tanks. To have control on depth again, the only way is to increase the speed.

Back in the early days of SH3, when the buoyancy issue arose for the first time, there was a debate on whether to implement positive or negative buoyancy. IIRC, the general conclusion was that submarines (not just uboats) were built to have a slight positive buoyancy, precisely for the case of engine/battery failures. Eventually, one supermod took the positive buoyancy path, while the other went with the negative one. Though I'm no expert, common sense tells me positive buoyancy should have been norm back then, with less advanced batteries and electric motors, prone to failure.

[Zedi]

Originally Posted by dcb

Back in the early days of SH3, when the buoyancy issue arose for the first time, there was a debate on whether to implement positive or negative buoyancy. IIRC, the general conclusion was that submarines (not just uboats) were built to have a slight positive buoyancy, precisely for the case of engine/battery failures. Eventually, one supermod took the positive buoyancy path, while the other went with the negative one. Though I'm no expert, common sense tells me positive buoyancy should have been norm back then, with less advanced batteries and electric motors, prone to failure.

Using stock settings I can dive and keep depth without using the engines down to 160m. Between 160 and 180m I need at least 1-2kts to keep the sub floating, under 200m I need 4 and at 250 and bellow I need full power to level up. I consider this a very normal situation for a sub in the 38-45 time period. We are not talking about nuclear subs here and the color markers on the depth dial are for a reason.

[stoianm]

Hi tdw

I would like to have a version where i will be able to keep my depth at any speed if is posible

i am working now at a mod who will increase the bank acount - we can make trade


thanks!

[Obelix]

Originally Posted by Magnum

Using stock settings I can dive and keep depth without using the engines down to 160m. Between 160 and 180m I need at least 1-2kts to keep the sub floating, under 200m I need 4 and at 250 and bellow I need full power to level up. I consider this a very normal situation for a sub in the 38-45 time period. We are not talking about nuclear subs here and the color markers on the depth dial are for a reason.

No movement can not keep the boat at a given depth, even on modern boats. The thing that is impossible to perfectly balance the boat for holding at the desired depth without motion. The boat will tend either to surface or the bottom. Therefore, to keep the depth of the boat had to be at least a minimum speed that seaplanes could keep a boat at depth.
Therefore, keeping the depth of no motion, I believe than the fantastic and the game it's always annoyed me. How, indeed, falling through to a depth at low speed.