Best Long range speed?

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by Pilot_76

Can I trust what TMO's navigator says? By clicking on the Maximum range...I mean is it accurate? I saw that in 2/3 Standard Propulsion is the farthest mileage achieved...

And herein lays a problem with SH3, 4 and 5. Fuel usage doesn't scale so well. TMO was designed so you could go to your patrol areas at speeds the subs most accurately traveled in real life. In TMO ahead standard is the fastest economical speed for the fuel used. Yes you can putt putt around at 2/3rds, but you'd be taking advantage of a flaw in the game, and having two to three times the range you should have.

Personally, im starting to wish i didn't adjust speeds to be realistic at ahead standard. Regardless of what I had intended, everyones going to go around at 2/3rds and exploit the flaw in design. So, what the hell, "all ahead harbor speed at 2/3rds for teh win!"

[Barkhorn1x]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

So, what the hell, "all ahead harbor speed at 2/3rds for teh win!"

Japs won't know what hit 'em, and hit 'em again, and again, and...

[TorpX]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

And herein lays a problem with SH3, 4 and 5. Fuel usage doesn't scale so well. TMO was designed so you could go to your patrol areas at speeds the subs most accurately traveled in real life. In TMO ahead standard is the fastest economical speed for the fuel used. Yes you can putt putt around at 2/3rds, but you'd be taking advantage of a flaw in the game, and having two to three times the range you should have.

Personally, im starting to wish i didn't adjust speeds to be realistic at ahead standard. Regardless of what I had intended, everyones going to go around at 2/3rds and exploit the flaw in design. So, what the hell, "all ahead harbor speed at 2/3rds for teh win!"

I know what you mean.

The whole fuel use-range issue bugs me (and not to forget battery capacity either), but what can be done about it really? Since the game uses a flat earth, the distances are off, and the weather never allows the wind speed to go above 15 m/s. These flaws seem to be unfixable.

[jcope]

Programming/design flaws aside, it doesn't take much time to do some speed runs to determine fuel consumption rates at various speeds. And to do the same for battery usage. It's a good way to stay busy during the voyage out to your assignment.

The results are useful, not only for predicting patrol range, but also being able to answer questions like whether I have the charge to try, while submerged at flank speed, to intercept a target. And then how much will I have left if the escorts start hassling me and I have to stay under.

I am currently pursuing the Midway task force, which I ran across while coming back from a patrol. I know how long I can go at flank speed before I have to give up and let them go.

[Lannes]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Regardless of what I had intended, everyones going to go around at 2/3rds and exploit the flaw in design. So, what the hell, "all ahead harbor speed at 2/3rds for teh win!"

LOL...Well, if it makes you feel any better, I use Ahead Standard because that I've figured that is most historically accurate and try to not 'game' the game.

Oh, and thanks for TMO. I appreciate the hard work.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Personally, im starting to wish i didn't adjust speeds to be realistic at ahead standard. Regardless of what I had intended, everyones going to go around at 2/3rds and exploit the flaw in design. So, what the hell, "all ahead harbor speed at 2/3rds for teh win!"

I went in and readjusted mine to match the original values. My thinking is that, at least for fleet boats, that "Ahead Standard" was the speed meant for cruising with the fleet, and the surface fleet standard cruise speed was 15 knots. I may be wrong of course, but I haven't seen any real numbers from people who served on diesel boats as to what speeds actually matched what settings.

Just my thinking, of course.

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

I went in and readjusted mine to match the original values. My thinking is that, at least for fleet boats, that "Ahead Standard" was the speed meant for cruising with the fleet, and the surface fleet standard cruise speed was 15 knots. I may be wrong of course, but I haven't seen any real numbers from people who served on diesel boats as to what speeds actually matched what settings.

Just my thinking, of course.

Well, I had a different rational behind the adjustment. I didn't have all boats cruising at 15 knots, only at what i could conjecture was "3 engine speed". Some patrol logs i have read indicate they cruised two and from their patrol areas at "3 engine speed". So what exactly is "3 engine speed"?


It was awhile ago, but what i think i did was rationalize that 1/3rd was probably 1 engine. 2/3rds two engines, standard 3 engines, ahead full being 4 engines.

At that point I think did a little math by taking the top speed of whatever boat i was looking at, and mulplied it by 0.75 (or 75% which i figured, was about 3 engines). I took that number and entered it into the range figures in the sim file. So instead of say, 11,000 @ 10 knots, i put 11,000 at 13.5 knots.

Of course that "11,000" figure is also subject to conjecture and debate because
a.) fuel ballasts (no hard numbers on that i could find as to capacity and range on this)
b.) The game world is anywhere between 20 %to 30% larger then it is in real life

So while i don't remember the exact figure for fuel i used, i know i took those two things into consideration.

So add that larger fuel allowance, to say @13.5 knots, and that's pretty much what i did. The intent was to have fuel efficiency at speeds greater then the typical 10 knots that everyone uses. I think that figure is often used because that's that everybody uses on uboats. For fleet boats, i dont think the 10 knot figure is correct.

Of course, you take my design there, and throttle it back to 2/3rs for long range cruising going too and from patrol area, and well, you get alot more then you should.

[Sailor Steve]

Good points, and I don't know the answers. I wish I did, and in this case the old saying "your guess is as good as mine" definitely applies. Your guess is probably better, as I don't remember when or why I came to the conclusion I did, and I probably trusted someone else's judgement. Life was so much easier with SH1 - teleport to your patrol zone with appropriate loss of fuel, teleport home when done. Unless you misjudged, in which case you just got a message: "Not enough fuel for return voyage".

Originally Posted by Ducimus

... Personally, im starting to wish i didn't adjust speeds to be realistic at ahead standard. Regardless of what I had intended, everyones going to go around at 2/3rds and exploit the flaw in design. So, what the hell, "all ahead harbor speed at 2/3rds for teh win!"

Not everyone, in a TMO Fleet Boat I transit at Standard but once in the patrol area, cruise at 2/3. The theory is quickest practical time to get on station and then maximum time there since I'm not trying to get anywhere in particular.

Actually I think you nailed it.

[sparrs]

Originally Posted by Randomizer

Not everyone, in a TMO Fleet Boat I transit at Standard but once in the patrol area, cruise at 2/3. The theory is quickest practical time to get on station and then maximum time there since I'm not trying to get anywhere in particular.

Actually I think you nailed it.

I do this too. I was thinking of time factors on the ingress to patrol area; Get there in reasonable time, then use 2/3 for the sweep or until you pick up a contact. Saves fuel, can spend longer in the various areas you need to patrol etc. In my head as I role play, it seems sensible to do.

What I was always unsure of when I first started playing SH4 was how long to patrol - how many weeks at sea is reasonable, as you have the ability to refit and not end your patrol, so in theory you could just continue to stay on the ocean indefinitely (damage not taken into account and I have not tried it), but the fleet boat histories I found over at U-Boat.net are usually just under two months or there abouts at sea, and very interesting too.
An example is this one:- http://uboat.net/allies/commanders/3165.html

I am no expert - I like the challenge the game offers as well as help my maths skills (...) and TMO and RSRD are the best mods I have used for SH4. So thanks for your hard work...

[Ducimus]

In regards to fuel and "allotted time", oh, believe me, I have thought of changing mission objectives to be something along the lines of:

"Reach designated area No later Then Day/Month/Year" or the mission is failed.

It would be realistic, and it would force the fuel usage as I had intended, but seriously, scripting that, and then testing it? It would be a scripting nightmare worse then the sea trials. I'd sooner play Russian roulette with a 45 auto.

[TorpX]

Personally, I've always thought the fuel/range allotments in SH4 were too generous (even with the map distortion issues), mainly, because there is little hinderence due to the weather. Storms and heavy seas created problems in RL, but do not do so in game.

Of course, I have formed this opinion playing RFB. Is there much of a difference between TMO and RFB?

[mobucks]

In heavy chop your range will decrease. If I pour on the coal in nice weather I make 20-21 kts in TMO. Same setting in the worst seas the game has gives an average of 17kts. (17-18-17-16 on and so forth) AFAIK, the engines are still burning the same amount of fuel/hour.

[TorpX]

Originally Posted by mobucks

In heavy chop your range will decrease. If I pour on the coal in nice weather I make 20-21 kts in TMO. Same setting in the worst seas the game has gives an average of 17kts. (17-18-17-16 on and so forth) AFAIK, the engines are still burning the same amount of fuel/hour.

That's not very much. When I was last playing (in a S-boat), the difference was less. I don't think I ever lost more than 2 knots in the worst weather. And I should add, the S-class were notorious for their poor seakeeping qualities. In SHCE, top speed for the S-class boats in heavy seas was about 4 knots!

[Arlo]

Originally Posted by TorpX

Personally, I've always thought the fuel/range allotments in SH4 were too generous (even with the map distortion issues), mainly, because there is little hinderence due to the weather. Storms and heavy seas created problems in RL, but do not do so in game.

Of course, I have formed this opinion playing RFB. Is there much of a difference between TMO and RFB?

Huh. When I play RFB2, I won't have enough fuel to make it back from my first objective, consistantly. In TMO2.2, I always make it back from multiple objectives with reserve.