Am I Screwed?

[Stealhead]

What are playing stock or modded? I will assume stock seeing as most mods give a nav mode button to learn of your max range at current speed.If you stay at ahead 1/3rd you should be o.k. to get to Midway if you are in Japan/Northern Pacific if you are based out of Pearl. If your running from Western Australia you should be o.k. as well so long as you go slow.

I'm pretty sure with 25% you should just be able to get back to a port from 1800 nm but it might be rather close.Try to avoid diving you'll want to avoid having to charge your batteries not sure what eers75 is thinking with his advice charging batteries consumes more fuel than staying on the surface even in Stock SH4 though I think that trick will work if you have a short hop to go like a few hours from port if you are trying to realistic that technique would 100% be cheating that would not work in a real life WWII submarine because you'd be consuming easily double the fuel that way vs. surface running so once the batteries where fully drained you'd consume all your fuel trying to recharge them.According to TMOs nav data your max range at given speed goes down drastically while recharging batts which is accurate.


I recall making it from off Okinawa and getting to Midway once with around 30% and that is around 2000 miles or more.This was with TMO though.By the way if your Running RFB or TMO
go to the map room page and one of the buttons will have the nav officer tell you your max range at current speed you'll get your answer for sure then stock its a wild guess but I think you can make it.

Anyway good luck I'd give you a few gallons but currently in the Asiatic Fleet so that is a no go.And it would cost you a lot of Pabst Blue Ribbon.

[BillBam]

Isn't Standard speed the most fuel efficent?

[Stealhead]

Not sure with stock in TMO and RFB your range gets better the slower you go and gets worse while you are charging batts then goes back to normal and ahead standard is the most efficient for regular patrolling from a fuel consumption/time to get to station/area coverage standpoint but if you are dangerously low slower would be better.The speed that each given sub goes at standard is different in each version due to differences in the goals of each mod as is the consumption rate RFB is the the most brutal and accurate TMOs simulates later war fuel ballast modifications that allowed higher speeds and is also accurate if you read the explanation in the PDF and stocks is well its stocks and is the hardest thanks to the guess work.

Because Stock has no nav officer giving this vital data I never took the time to try and figure it out myself so with stock standard might get you the best range I don't recall.In all versions charging batts consumes more fuel than surface running alone aside from the last few mile batteries cheat even with that it wont work at 1800nm and I'd bet that using it that far away he will run out for certain.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by BillBam

Isn't Standard speed the most fuel efficent?

In real life, no. In one of the mods it works that way.

[Dogfish40]

Originally Posted by BillBam

Isn't Standard speed the most fuel efficent?

Standard Speed is indeed the most efficient when it comes to Fuel vrs Time to destination. However, the slower you run the engines, the less fuel burned, or at least going at 1/3. I'm not sure about dead slow, that maybe worse for fuel consumption.
Good Luck Anthony!

[Anthony W.]

If only recoil could push me in the right direction haha

I'd have those 16 inchers blazing up like a flamethrower

[Stealhead]

Basically from a fuel consumption stand point alone Ahead 1/3rd would be the most fuel efficient you'd take a while to move across the map but you'd have tons of fuel to spare but would not be very combat effective.

It is like that Top Gear episode where Jeremy drove the Audi from Scotland to London, he went as slow as he safely could on a highway and turned off every electronic device that he could to conserve more fuel.Pretty sure that barely moving would lower efficiency.

If your goal where to remain combat\normal patrol effective then in this case Ahead Standard is the most effective speed.Being maximally combat effective and being maximally fuel efficient are differing goals.

[Ducimus]

For clarification where TMO is concerned:

- Ahead standard was adjust to be the best speed to fuel consumption telegraph setting. Why? (Aside from technical hashing about 3 engine speed) Because the game defaults to ahead standard whenever you plot a course or order to resume course. I got tired of having to set a new telegraph setting each time i did that. I consider this an ergonomic adjustment to reduce teeth gnashing.

- Ahead standard will not yield 15 knots in all boats. Some of the prewar boats will be moving at a slower rate, but it is still the best speed to fuel consumption ratio for those boats.

- "3 engine speed" or 15 knots (for most boats) was made the new ahead standard speed because thats what various reading would seem to indicate what the boats travelled at. Aside from that, 10 knots is painful, It takes forever, and a fleet boat is not a 2 engined uboat.

- I am WELL aware that travelling at 2/3rds will yield a MUCH larger surface endurance then what is historically correct. I decided to not let a game flaw hamper the good things that would come out of making this adjustment. Or in otherwords, i decided not to hamper enjoyment just because the game left an exploitable bit in its fuel consumption routines. If you want to cruise the worlds oceans at 2/3rds, go for it. The range won't be correct, but that's your decision to make, not mine.

[razark]

Originally Posted by Stealhead

Try to avoid diving you'll want to avoid having to charge your batteries not sure what eers75 is thinking with his advice charging batteries consumes more fuel than staying on the surface even in Stock SH4

I believe it would work because of a game "feature". If you're sitting on the surface, with engines stopped, you aren't burning fuel. Your batteries will still recharge at a slow rate, though. Therefore, you can proceed submerged until you run out, surface, sit and wait, and then dive and proceed again.

None of which matters, as the OP now mentions he's in a battleship.

My advice: It's a learning experience. Learn to watch and manage your fuel.

[eers75]

Originally Posted by razark

I believe it would work because of a game "feature". If you're sitting on the surface, with engines stopped, you aren't burning fuel. Your batteries will still recharge at a slow rate, though. Therefore, you can proceed submerged until you run out, surface, sit and wait, and then dive and proceed again.

None of which matters, as the OP now mentions he's in a battleship.

My advice: It's a learning experience. Learn to watch and manage your fuel.

This is how I remember doing it I would surface and just sit there with time compression at all stop till recharged and hope no planes or vessels spotted me.