VampireNightVision Bugfix

[Kafka BC]

@makman94

yes it was me who wrote it and i will tell you the why . the 'calculator' at your link is a simple one and is not giving you very accurate results becuase it uses the geometrical formulas for calculating the distances...

Apples and oranges. You missed the whole point. Did you read the paragraph following. I will repeat:

"Even if the mast was higher, without taking into account atmospheric haze caused by distance, and having personally used both hand-held and tripod mounted cameras equipped with telephoto lenses, I can state with confidence that it is impossible to see the barest tip of a mast on the horizon at that distance. A ship would have to be an awful lot closer before the image seen in binoculars on a rocking and vibrating U-Boat can resolve itself enough to be discernible as the mast of a ship. If they are painted white, you probably can't see them until you start to see funnels or superstructure, but I won't declare that as a "fact"."

If you can find a pair of Kriegsmarine binoculars with the kind of resolving power where you can see the top 1 meter of a mast on the horizon at 31 kilometers, and then find a man that can hold it steady enough to see it, then I will retract my statement and say I lied.

that is very interesting finding and sure will help us but i want to ask: i assume that these ranges are for day, and i don't understand why a 8-ship convoy is spotted from 20.4 km (11miles=20,4 km) and why a 64-ship convoy is spotted from 42.6 km (23miles=42,6 km).
what makes the difference ? the tallest ship will be spotted first no matter if convoy has 8 or 64 ships , ....no ?

Boy, you are really fixated on mast height. You are assuming that all convoys were spotted by seeing their masts. They were not. Convoys were usually spotted by seeing their smoke. Bigger convoys produce more smoke that can be seen at longer ranges. Go ask 'Graf Paper', I'm sure he will confirm this.

so according to this article we have vissuality at night at about 9,4/2=4.7miles= 8,7 km ( 9,4miles = 17.4km)

I said the effective range of contact, not visibility. Read the article, although I don't understand the math, I understand what it is saying.

PS. 1 mile = 1.609 kilometers, 9.4 x 1.609 = 15.1246 kilometers, I rounded down.

so , by using your data Kafka i would say that...

I have no idea what you are getting on about, so I can't answer. Except that you seem to be talking about the Mod and I never was.

[Kaleun Cook]

Why is it so difficult for some of you to just exchanges opinions and facts in a calm way? It's not like the future of the world depends on the correct answers to the questions here...

Had to get that off my chest first. What I wanted to post originally was: There seems to have been a small misunderstanding about Makman's GUI. It does not create pitch-black nights per se. On my installation during the last patrols the night became pitch-black only if the sky was very cloudy.

[Jaeger]

i follow this thread for month now and the tone never was this aggressive it is now. please calm down, i think the input given here is very usable. remember, our goal is equal: we want to have the best results concerning realism. the mod is adjustable so this discussion will help the gamers to adjust it the way they think it is realistic (whatever it is). For me, the last posts show that absolut black nights are unrealistic and the range also is shorter at night, compared to daytime. the question we can discuss (and everybody can adjust in the mod for himself) is: what is a good value for this in the mod?

[Hitman]

Ehmm yes, some replies could certainly wellcome a bit less of assertiveness, but the discussion itself is well backed up and at high level, so I hope it can be continued.

Me, I just want to say three things:

a) I have readed several times that WW2 submariners (German and US) clearly stated seeing masts over the horizon. I have never myself figured out, while standing on a beach or at sea, how the hell they managed to see such a thin line in the horizon, as Kafka BC says. There must be a reason for this, though damn me if I can figure out which one.

b) Pitch black nights must be something exceptional, with covered skies precluding even star light. Otherwise, almost none of the WW2 might surface action can be explained. There is a chance for the uboats to see ships silhouetted against the horizon, or they would not be able to attack. And they not only were, they actually seeked that situation and rarely missed their shots!

c) VERY important:

Scaling things down to the 16/20km SH3 world the whole thing is probably NOT a good idea. Why? because we are not scaling down our uboat, its turning circle, the torpedo turning circles and arming distances, the sonar, radar, etc. and as such we are screwing the whole tactical game. We will never be able to employ realistic tactics with capped down sensors in a world that otherwise keeps its proportions. To be honest, we should probably allow the crew to see up to 40 km in daytime, even if we don't see a ship rendered on screen until much closer. It is bad enough not to have other uboats actively scouting the sea, to even let our vision radius decrease so much over the real life figures. Smoke could be seen at 40 kms, so our crew should be able to see that, and you as captain would only start making true tactical decissions when your are 20 kms or less close to the enemy -which is also what you can effectively see in the game.

[Jimbuna]

I agree with Hitman entirely but my spider senses are starting to tingle and I'm getting this uneasy feeling based on posting patterns and rhetoric.

The bad post reports are also something we could do without...so please debate but do so without resorting to terminology you would not welcome being presented toward oneself.

None of us is as clever as all of us.

[makman94]

come on Kafka...relax !
i am not a 'boy' for you (only my girl is calling me like this with a ....meaning) and i bet that if i called you the same way ...you will ,also, don't like it ! no ?
i just tried to discuss with you and ask some things on some points of your post which seemed interesting to me and,as i nowhere insult or 'attack' you , i really don't understand your reaction.
anyway, i will make one more effort but please ,try to be polite this time.(really there is no reason to get upset!)
i see where the misunderstanding is between us: i am talking ONLY for the mod and i am not interested to get a diploma on range vissualities during day or night ! the theme is so complicated and so variable that even a kid can understand that there are no 'fixable' visual distances during day or night.

all these about spotting smaller ships to shorter distances than taller ships (which is absolutely correct) or all these about 'bigger-higher smokes' from a 64-ship convoy than 8-ships convoy (which also is absolutely correct) maybe are very interesting and a good idea to discussed seperately at one other thread but sure is not the object of the mod-thread here.
we are doomed to follow sh3's engine rules and the devs had not modeled the curveness of earth so FORGET the spotting smaller ships to shorter distances than taller ships and the higher smokes from a 64-ships convoys. the sh3's engine will spot at the same range even a fishboat or a battleship...i don't like it ,it is wrong but thats it and that is the 'rule' that we will obey.

it is very easy for me to dig at internet and find links concerning u-boats vissualities during day or night and come back here to make the 'expert' at forums. the point is that i will just make the 'expert' without trully have deep researched the theme. everybody can do that...it is the easy!(so reading only the links that you posted will not really help me or make me 'helpfull on discussions about such themes). what we are looking for(at least me) is someone that have made some deep research on the theme (vissualities during day and night) and give us a good COMPROMISE value for a max detection range during day and one good COPROMISE value for max detection during CLEAR night as concered the REALITY. i thought ,by reading your post, that you have make that deep research thats why i tried to discuss with you these themes.
given the way that engine works ,we have ONLY ONE option :
we need ONE good COMPROMISE value for a max detection range during day and one good COPROMISE value for max detection during CLEAR night as concered the REALITY. all the rest will be scaled down to 16 or 20km enviros

@Hitman : this includes ALL sensors Alberto ! all sensors (hydro-sonars-radars) will be scaled down to 'follow' the propotions of the environment. scaling down the sensors it will take for me less than 1 hour so don't think that it is something enormous to be done ( i allready have made it to my rivate enviro)

@Kafka: i want to reply to some of your comments .

Originally Posted by Kafka BC

@makman94

Apples and oranges.

when you implied that the 31km that i said was wrong and the correct was (after your check) 29.1km it wasn't for you this difference...''apples and oranges''. after that i showed you that the 31km is more correct it 'became'....''apples and oranges''. please...

Originally Posted by Kafka BC

You missed the whole point. Did you read the paragraph following. I will repeat:

"Even if the mast was higher, without taking into account atmospheric haze caused by distance, and having personally used both hand-held and tripod mounted cameras equipped with telephoto lenses, I can state with confidence that it is impossible to see the barest tip of a mast on the horizon at that distance. A ship would have to be an awful lot closer before the image seen in binoculars on a rocking and vibrating U-Boat can resolve itself enough to be discernible as the mast of a ship. If they are painted white, you probably can't see them until you start to see funnels or superstructure, but I won't declare that as a "fact"."

If you can find a pair of Kriegsmarine binoculars with the kind of resolving power where you can see the top 1 meter of a mast on the horizon at 31 kilometers, and then find a man that can hold it steady enough to see it, then I will retract my statement and say I lied.

i read it and i am thinking that the article in wikipedia (which i trust more than you---no offence here) is talking for observer with naked eyes...no binos at all
but even if it is not like that ,how far would you say that it is a good AVERAGE COMPROMISED MAX range for visuality at clear day for using it ingame?

Originally Posted by Kafka BC

PS. 1 mile = 1.609 kilometers, 9.4 x 1.609 = 15.1246 kilometers, I rounded down.

1mile = 1.852 kilometers . at miles in sea ,they mean the nautical miles so you need to check this too one more time

Originally Posted by Kafka BC

..... Except that you seem to be talking about the Mod and I never was.

yes , i am only interested at the mod so please post things about it here .this thread is for getting info for the mod

Originally Posted by Hitman

Ehmm yes, some replies could certainly wellcome a bit less of assertiveness, but the discussion itself is well backed up and at high level, so I hope it can be continued.

.....

Originally Posted by jimbuna

I agree with Hitman entirely but my spider senses are starting to tingle and I'm getting this uneasy feeling based on posting patterns and rhetoric.

The bad post reports are also something we could do without...so please debate but do so without resorting to terminology you would not welcome being presented toward oneself.

None of us is as clever as all of us.

i will disagree with you two here , guys !
the only reason that this thread is still at 'high level' is thanks to me,H.Sie and Rubini and by no meaning thanks to the 'attackers' !

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by makman94

i will disagree with you two here , guys !
the only reason that this thread is still at 'high level' is thanks to me,H.Sie and Rubini and by no meaning thanks to the 'attackers' !

That is your right and one I accept and respect but when I see bad post reports it is my right/position to appeal to ALL contributors to act in a respectful manner toward one another and conform with the requirements as set out in the rules of this forum.

Now back to what is really an interesting debate please.

[Kafka BC]

@makman94

i am not a 'boy' for you (only my girl is calling me like this with a ....meaning) and i bet that if i called you the same way ...you will ,also, don't like it ! no ?...

Sorry, I did not see that you were from Crete.

I was not calling you a 'boy', in the English language using 'boy' at the start of a sentence is commonly used as a way of adding emphasis to the whole sentence. It is like saying Gosh, Wow, My God, or Damn, or a host of others. I guess I should have used one of them...it was not intended to be an insult.

it is very easy for me to dig at internet and find links concerning u-boats vissualities during day or night and come back here to make the 'expert' at forums. the point is that i will just make the 'expert' without trully have deep researched the theme. everybody can do that...it is the easy!(so reading only the links that you posted will not really help me or make me 'helpfull on discussions about such themes). what we are looking for(at least me) is someone that have made some deep research on the theme (vissualities during day and night) and give us a good COMPROMISE value for a max detection range during day and one good COPROMISE value for max detection during CLEAR night as concered the REALITY. i thought ,by reading your post, that you have make that deep research thats why i tried to discuss with you these themes.

Those articles that you seem to be dismissing as not 'expert' are documents from the Operations Evaluation Group Report No. 51 of the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations of the United States Navy. Are you telling me that you are more 'expert' than them?

....''apples and oranges''

"Apples and Oranges" is a shortened version of the English phrase "It is like comparing apples and oranges", both are fruit but which one tastes better, and where the answer is "it does not matter". I guess you are not familiar with the phrase. My apologies again.

i read it and i am thinking that the article in wikipedia (which i trust more than you---no offence here) is talking for observer with naked eyes...no binos at all

So, by your reasoning, I should be able to see the Empire State Building from 50 miles away (you can) and with the naked eye be able to count the windows as well (you can't). There are things like atmospheric turbulence and human eye resolution that you have ignored, and the wikipedia article does too.

but even if it is not like that ,how far would you say that it is a good AVERAGE COMPROMISED MAX range for visuality at clear day for using it ingame?

I am not going to talk about the mod. Nor do I wish to make any suggestions.

1mile = 1.852 kilometers . at miles in sea ,they mean the nautical miles so you need to check this too one more time

If they were using nautical miles they would have said 'nautical miles' and their diagrams would be using the abbreviation NM instead of MI, so I think you should check one more time.

yes , i am only interested at the mod so please post things about it here .this thread is for getting info for the mod

I see, others can post assumptions regarding the mod, but I can't post facts that you can use in the mod.

the only reason that this thread is still at 'high level' is thanks to me,H.Sie and Rubini and by no meaning thanks to the 'attackers' !

Are you implying that my initial post here is not 'high level' and that I am an 'attacker'?

I'm through discussing this.

[Kafka BC]

@Hitman

I guess I touched a nerve here, sorry to bring you into this.

I don't believe my first post was offensive and was intended to give some supporting "facts" for 'Noisy_Buoy', and as I said at the start of it, it was for other people to ponder, especially about the Night Vision Binoculars.

Nor was the second one to h.sie, in which I apologized for possibly unintentionally offending him.

My third one to 'Graf Paper' I will wholeheartedly admit was agressive. His highhanded use of assumptions over facts in his response to my first post, which he so obviously did not read, really offended me. I can not tell you how much of an insult I consider that to be.

I have readed several times that WW2 submariners (German and US) clearly stated seeing masts over the horizon. I have never myself figured out, while standing on a beach or at sea, how the hell they managed to see such a thin line in the horizon, as Kafka BC says. There must be a reason for this, though damn me if I can figure out which one.

On a day with good visibility I am sure they could see masts over the horizon when using binoculars. If you note in my first post in this thread, the horizon for a U-Boat watchman is about 8 kilometers (5 miles). That is not very far, how far over the horizon, I can't say, it would depend on how much of the mast can be seen and other factors, but it is certainly not 31 kilometers from the bridge of a U-Boat.