[TEC] Corrected ship dimensions (followup)

[Krupp]

uhm...sry. wrong buttons...

[Krupp]

Update:

Since DD Asashio is one of those ships with signifigant variation in mast heights, I tested her.

1. First, I used the mast height (printed manual, that, again, I've been fussing about) of 27 meters. Result was very accurate: 993 meters.

2. With the original cfg value of 21 meters, the result was 772 meters.


So, if you are using those file originally in the game, you WILL get wrong firing data for you TDC. You can imagine how much you will miss your target if it's going like 15 knots, at 1500 meter distance, and your range is almost 25% wrong because of the faulty mast height in your game cfg files.


And what comes to the draft of those ships, mags seem to fine with the printed manual values. I will absolutely positively change all ship dimensions like they are in the printed manual.

Looks like the horse ain't dead yet.

[tater]

I'd be curious to know how accurate the USN ONI manuals were compared to the real ships. They have a photo taken by a moving aircraft in combat of a jap DD. Analysts then calculate the mast hight and enter it into the next addition. How accurate is it?

I think it's really interesting that the data is screwed up, but I'm not sure a variation with reality isn't a good thing, it's not like it's hard to sink stuff now compared to RL. Again, this goes to outcome simulation, not technical simulation.

[Krupp]

Originally Posted by tater

I'd be curious to know how accurate the USN ONI manuals were compared to the real ships. They have a photo taken by a moving aircraft in combat of a jap DD. Analysts then calculate the mast hight and enter it into the next addition. How accurate is it?

I think it's really interesting that the data is screwed up, but I'm not sure a variation with reality isn't a good thing, it's not like it's hard to sink stuff now compared to RL. Again, this goes to outcome simulation, not technical simulation.

well, the data you have from the collecors edition recognition book, is accurate. The data in the game ain't. Some ships are correct and others are wrong. I could understand your point and agree with it, if the variation in data would be with small tolerances. But, take a look at Taiyo carrier, it will give you like 65% error in 1000 meter distance, and DD Asashio would give error of nearly 25 %. That is just too much I think.

And besides, gathering firing data is difficult enough when you plot courses and speed estimates and AOB's etc.

[akdavis]

I get consistently better ranges when I measure using the first crosstree instead of the tip of the tallest mast. Easy to check your stadimeter range versus actual range by using the attack map with map contact updates on.

[Jungman]

Hello all! Good work Krupp.

I was just requote information to the other Canadian guy (Yllekm) who made a nice manual for those who want /did not get one. He wondered about the values if they are accurate. I said no, there are not. They are being worked on. Plus add in the ship length (and this one is in Imperial units and not Meters).

My statement that the in game config values are correct and the printed one are wrong, is rather backwards statement of what you all were stating. Sorry, I correct myself.

A better statement would be we need to make sure the ingame 3D models data agree with Config data so the TDC and Stadiameter will give you correct results.

Now wether the ingame 3D model data actually matches real life print material is another story. I believe for playing the game, the Recon manual being made should match the true ingame 3D models -not so much the real life dimensions.

[Jungman]

Mogami Heavy Cruiser in the training mission. The draft says 4.4 meter or 14.4 feet.

I shoot torpedos just under it to miss. 28 feet depth hits, 29 feet misses. So I assume the draft the 3D model is sitting into the water deeper than the manual would indicate. Which would mean your apparent mast heigth may look to be lower than normal because the 3D model is sitting lower in the water.

The .sim file for that ship has it at draught = 28 41 hex = 10.5 sitting into the water. So maybe on some ships this may cause the Mast heigth in game to be too low, or too high depending upon that setting.

Edit: wrong value for .sim draft depth. Set it zero and the ship floats above the water. Good for testing.

[Jace11]

Originally Posted by Jungman

Mogami Heave Cruiser in the training mission. The draft says 4.4m or 14.4 feet.

I shoot torpedos just under it to miss. 28 feet dpeth hits, 29 feet misses. So I assume the draft the 3D model is sitting into the water deeper than the manual would indicate. Which would mean your apprent mast heigth may look to be lower than normal because the 3D model is sitting lower in the water.

The .sim file for that ship has it at draught = 1b hex = 27 feet sitting into the water. So maybe on some ships this may cause the Mast heigth in game to be to low or to high depending upon that setting.

Could this be related to the TDC aft shooting bug???? A bad mast height would affect range... but it in manual I can hit her dead center so I guess not..

[Jungman]

Jace11

The Aft hitting torp is a bug in the torpedo speed. The high speed torp setting M14 and M23 suffer from this, the devs made a statement on this bug today.

The wrong apparent mast height would though, cause error in the range using manual TDC and the stadiometer.

I think the modders here krupp and GreyOctober are testing the values in the .cfg files, printed recon manual values, and (as for me) trying to ascertain the true in game 3D numbers.

I wish I had a ruler and fly around inside the game to measure things.

[Krupp]

Originally Posted by Jungman

Mogami Heavy Cruiser in the training mission. The draft says 4.4 meter or 14.4 feet.

I shoot torpedos just under it to miss. 28 feet depth hits, 29 feet misses. So I assume the draft the 3D model is sitting into the water deeper than the manual would indicate. Which would mean your apparent mast heigth may look to be lower than normal because the 3D model is sitting lower in the water.

The .sim file for that ship has it at draught = 28 41 hex = 10.5 sitting into the water. So maybe on some ships this may cause the Mast heigth in game to be too low, or too high depending upon that setting.

Edit: wrong value for .sim draft depth. Set it zero and the ship floats above the water. Good for testing.

Good point. I tested mogami mission too, and found the same thing. It looks like the Mogami is actually swimming around 8 meters deep, instead of 4.4 meters. Strange. Strange because I measured the distance to Mogami in the mission editor, and it was 1000 meters. Which seem really odd cos the stadimeter gave same distance.

[Krupp]

I looked all the sim files and the ship draughtsubmerged values. For example, for mechants the value seems to be roughly the double that the actual draft we have in our rec manuals.

Then there is Kasagisan Maru, her draughtsubmerged sim-value is only 1 (she looked ok, not swimming too high at all) and when I put her under the 1000 meters test, it showed exact range to her and the magnetic torpedo was right on spot (about 20 feet) and destroyed her totally.

When I changed the value for heavy cruiser Mogami (from 10.5 to 4.4, which is the announced draft) she looked really hilarious swimming almost top of the water. With the depth of about 5 meters the magnetic torpedo went too deep. The right value is between 10.5 and 4.4, but it's different thing how does she look like (too high?) and problem remains, the draft is still too much. So what's the point to do any changes?

In my opinion, if I get the correct ranges by editing the cfg values, the draft is still wrong. Draft would be wrong even with the original values.

I'm very confuced

But it is quite serious, that this problem makes pretty much all magnetic torpedo shooting pointless.

[Immacolata]

According to Wikipedia here the mogami cruiser Suzuya had 5.5 meter draft.

Try that for test?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_cruiser_Suzuya

[Krupp]

Originally Posted by Immacolata

According to Wikipedia here the mogami cruiser Suzuya had 5.5 meter draft.

Try that for test?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_cruiser_Suzuya

Roger, I'll test it right away. "The Illustrated Directory of Warships" gives 5.5 draft too. "Jane's" gives the same as dev's ,4.4 meters.


edit: Nah, with 5.5 meters, she is floating way too high.

[Hitman]

I'm preparing a tutorial for targeting with 100% realism, based on the aspect ratio of the target to get the AOB, and it would really be essential for me to have the real length and mast height values the game is using. I'll try to keep an eye on this topic, but please if someone is really making an updated list, notify me as I would be very grateful and include it in my manual

Cheers

[Krupp]

Originally Posted by Hitman

I'm preparing a tutorial for targeting with 100% realism, based on the aspect ratio of the target to get the AOB, and it would really be essential for me to have the real length and mast height values the game is using. I'll try to keep an eye on this topic, but please if someone is really making an updated list, notify me as I would be very grateful and include it in my manual

Cheers

Try these:
http://www.speedyshare.com/485726177.html

In this mod, I have corrected the ship dimensions. There still is a problem with the draft issue, but it has nothing to do with this mod. The original sim files are somewhat biased.

If you find something that's wrong let me know.