[TEC] Corrected ship dimensions (followup)

[GreyOctober]

Just noticed that someone noticed :hmm: ...anyway. As Krupp pointed out in this thread http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=109721 most of (almost all) ship measurements differ from the ones published in the printed SRM or on the SH4 website (http://silenthunter4.uk.ubi.com/ships.php). As i dont have the SRM, i fiddled with the jappanese freighters and see if it makes any difference to the firing sollution acuracy as some report. I just corrected the cfg files with the figures found on the website thats all. If anyone is working on this indepth..even better. Im not sure about the others ships.
It is possible that these inconsistecies may be due to the fact that the measurements in the cfg files are generated by the 3D modelling program and not copied into the cfg from the ship blueprint. Just my take, but well worth investingating further.

MODIFICATIONS (original values within brackets):

__________________________
NKMCS_Akita

Displacement=4070 (3936)
Mast=29.2 (22.25)

__________________________
NKMSS_Biyo

Length=121.9 (120)
Width=16.1 (15)
Draft=7.9 (7.5)

__________________________
NOM_Buzyun

Width=15.5 (15)
Mast=29.7 (30)
Draft=8.7 (7.5)

__________________________
NPL_Conte_Verde

Mast=42.5 (35)

__________________________
NKLSS_Hakusika

Length=135.6 (120)
Width=17.7 (15)
Mast=29.5 (30)
Draft=8.6 (7.5)

__________________________
NOS_Haruna

*NOTHING MODIFIED*

__________________________
NKMCS_Heito

Mast=26.2 (30)

__________________________
NPL_Horai

Mast=39.7 (33.5)

__________________________
NKSSS_Kasagisan

MaxSpeed=12 (12.5)
Mast=26.9 (22.56)

__________________________
NKMSS_Kinposan

Length=101.2 (107)
Mast=27.5 (23.77)

__________________________
NPL_Kiturin

Length=130.1 (135.94)
Mast=34 (31.7)

__________________________
NKLCS_Nagara

Length=143.2 (120)
Width=18.9 (15)
Mast=36.5 (30)
Draft=8.3 (7.5)
Displacement=7154 (7145)

__________________________
NOL_Nippon

MaxSpeed=20 (12)
Length=159.7 (120)
Width=19.8 (15)
Mast=28.9 (30)
Draft=9 (7.5)
Displacement=9974 (10000)

__________________________
NKSCS_Taihosan

Mast=22.6 (24)

__________________________
NPS_Tyohei

Mast=22.5 (27.4)
Displacement=1713 (1718)

__________________________
NKMCS_Zinbu

Length=121.9 (120)
Width=14.6 (14)
Mast=28.4 (24)
_____________________________________________

Cheers!

GO

[tater]

Is it possible this is intentional? The data in the ONI material that skippers had could easily be innaccurate for any given ships with modifications after it was in Lloyds. Adding a little inaccuracy (at least on the dimensions) would (assuming those numbers were used by the game to get range) would add a little fog of war that perfect ONI data would not.

Or am I off base?

[Krupp]

Nice GreyOctober, I'm so happy to see someone else seeing this too. Thanks for that list. The Japanese man-of-war's have also some strange values (in those CFG-files).

Like an 17850 ton, aircraft carrier that has a mast height of only 16 meters (should be 43.9 meters!). It is less than a 1200 ton destroyer has with 21.3 meters mast.
C'mon, how wrong it should look before it rings any bells here?

[Krupp]

Here's a list of Japanese man-of-war dimensions. Taken from publisher's printed rec book. There are bigger and smaller variations if you compare them to original cfg-values, in brackets ().

-----------------------------
Yamato
Displacement: 63200 tons
Lentght: 263.2 meters
Width: 38.9 meters (39)
Height: 43.5 meters (44)
Draft 10.9 meters (10)
------------------------------
Fuso
D: 34300
L: 212.7 (212)
W: 30.8 (30.8)
H: 50.6 (50)
D: 9.4 (9.7)
-------------------------------
Kongo
D: 32000
L: 225
W: 31.7 (30.8)
H: 43 (42)
D: 9.8 (9.4)
------------------------------
Ise
D: 31250 (33800)
L: 205.5 (220)
W: 28.6 31.6)
H: 50.3 (50)
D: 9.9 (9.5)
--------------------------------
Ise (hybrid)
D: 33800
L: 220
W: 31.6
H: 50.1 (50)
D: 9.5
---------------------------------
Taiho
D: 35000
L: 253.7
W: 27.8
H: 45.3 (46)
D: 9.5
----------------------------------
Shokaku
D: 28000 (hm, this should be closer to 20000 tons)
L: 250
W: 25.9 (26)
H: 31.4 (29.7)
D: 8.6 (8.7)
---------------------------------
Taiyo
D: 17830
L: 180.1
W: 22.5
H:43.9 (16) <----------------------------------!!! wtf?
D:7.5
-----------------------------------
Hiryu
D: 16000
L: 223.3
W: 21.3
H: 35.2 (20) <------------------------------!!! also, wtf?
D: 7.5
-------------------------------------
Akitsu Maru-Aircraft carrier
D: 11800
L: 143.7
W: 19.5
H: 35.2 (30)
D: 7.8
-------------------------------------
Takao-Heavy Cruiser
D: 9850 (15870)
L: 204.5 (204)
W: 19 (23)
H: 36.3 (36.5)
D: 5.1 (6.3)
--------------------------------
Maya- Heavy cruiser
D: 9850
L: 204.5
W: 19
H: 36.3
D: 5.1
----------------------------------
Mogami-heavy cruiser
D:9500
L: 200
W:20.5
H: 34.6 (34)
D: 4.4
------------------------------------
Furutaka-heavy cruiser
D: 7100
L: 188
W: 11.9
H: 31.9 (23)
D: 4.5
-----------------------------------------
Agano-Light cruiser
D: 6652
L: 174.5
W: 15.2 (15)
H: 25.2 (30)
D: 5.6
---------------------------------------
Naka-light cruiser
D: 5195 (5113)
L: 163
W: 14.2 (14)
H: 31.8 (35.6)
D: 4.6 (4.5)
----------------------------------------
Kuma-light cruiser
D: 5100
L: 163
W: 14.2 (14)
H: 35.6
D: 4.6 (4.4)
------------------------------------------
Akizuki-destroyer
D: 2701
L: 134
W: 11.6
H: 22.8 (23)
D: 4.1
----------------------------------------
Fubuki-destroyer
D: 2260 (1680)
L: 118.5
W: 10.4 (10.3)
H: 21.1 (21)
D: 3.2
------------------------------------
Asashio-destroyer
D: 1961 (2370)
L: 118.3
W: 10.4 (10.3)
H: 27 (21)
D: 3.6 (3.2)
-------------------------------------------
Shiratsuyu-destroyer
D: 1685
L: 108
W: 9.9
H: 21.9 (22)
D:3.5
----------------------------------------
Mutsuki-destroyer
D: 1313 (1772)
L: 102.4 (103.3)
W: 9.1
H: 23.6 (21)
D: 4.6 (3)
------------------------------------------
Minekaze-destroyer
D: 1215
L: 102.5 (102.6)
W: 8.9 (9.1)
H: 21.3 (21)
D: 2.9
-----------------------------------
No.13 Class - minesweeper
D: 511 (500)
L: 72.1 (70)
W: 7.6 (9.1)
H: 25.5 (21)
D: 1.85 (2.9)
--------------------------------
Okinoshima - minelayer
D: 4400
L: 123.4
W: 15.6
H: 28.1 (21)
D: 5
---------------------------------
Chitose-seaplane tender
D: 11200 (9000)
L: 192.5
W: 20.8
H: 31.8 (16)
D: 7.5
-------------------------------
Atami-gunboat
D:170
L: 45.3
W: 6.3
H: 19.8
D: 1.4
------------------------------------
Hira-gunboat
D:305
L: 56
W: 8.5
H: 28
D: 1.2
---------------------------------

[Redwine]

At first ... many thanks GreyOctober... for job and effort !!

One question...

The new measures you add, are based on real life, on another source... or based on game 3D modellation ?

what is my point...

Disregardong the historical data, or some book data, the important is to have the ingame size modellated as correct data.

In example if a ship has in real life, or into the contact book 300m long, but game modellates it as 280m, i need the 280m data for manual TDC instead the real 300m value.

I thnik so the correct way is to put a test mission, put the sub at a knowed range, and measure the angle, then detrmine the ingame ships sizes.

Sorry my ignorance, but if you can dlarify this i will aprecite it too much.

Mnay thanks in dvance....

[Krupp]

Originally Posted by Redwine

At first ... many thanks GreyOctober... for job and effort !!

Don't mention.

The measures are based on data, that is from the game developers. From their website and from a manual they printed for some editions. The reason for all this fuss. Is that there are so many ships that have almost similar dimension in the cfg-files and the sources mentioned above. And then those that seem to be more or less "wrong".

Reflecting that, it is difficult to believe that, when you compare different ships, you find that there are these oddities (in CFG-files). Like aircraft carriers with way too low heights, some ships drafts are too little and so on.

You don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand that the values need to be those that the game 3D models have. Not ripped from a real life source. But, these values argued here, are from the dev's. And I'm trying to find out which are the correct ones.

I would be happy to test this in game, altho I have no idea how to put up a shooting range for different ships. Say, all merhants 90 degree AOB at 1000 meters. And then test the ranges with the stadimeter + shoot some magnetic torpedoes to test the drafts. But, I'll try if I can arrange this.

[GreyOctober]

Thanks guys. The problem is, i think, correcting these figues wont do much good as i feel they were intentionally put that way in the cfg files. In other words, the cfg may be generated by the 3d modelling program which reads the model and not simply written into the file. As for the printed rec manual, the figures you see there are the correct dimensions of their real life counterparts.
At any rate, we need to make sure that by altering these files we get correct readings from the stadimeter and not just a placebo effect. Needs further investigation.
@Krupp: Can you please post the jappanese warships cfgs and not just the figures? Thank you!
@tater: Youre not off base at all...It might be true. Any historians around with knowledge about this? How precise were the rec manuals? If thats the case, were not doing any good and we should leave them as they are.

Cheers!
GO