Cautious navigation while submerged

[Safe-Keeper]

With the addition of wrecks and rocks on the seabed, will we be forced to hover higher over the bottom to avoid crashing into something? In Silent Hunter III, the sea bed was completely bare, meaning that as long as there wasn't suddenly a hill in your way, you could hover a half metre over the "ground" if you wanted to.

But now that there'll be rocks and the occassional wreck, will this be too hazardous, especially at 100% realism with no external view? Would it be a better idea to not go too close to the sea-bed, to avoid running into a large boulder, the mast of a sunken ship, or some other obstruction?

[hyperion2206]

Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper

With the addition of wrecks and rocks on the seabed, will we be forced to hover higher over the bottom to avoid crashing into something? In Silent Hunter III, the sea bed was completely bare, meaning that as long as there wasn't suddenly a hill in your way, you could hover a half metre over the "ground" if you wanted to.

But now that there'll be rocks and the occassional wreck, will this be too hazardous, especially at 100% realism with no external view? Would it be a better idea to not go too close to the sea-bed, to avoid running into a large boulder, the mast of a sunken ship, or some other obstruction?

The question is if the game "allows" you to collide with rocks or wrecks. If it does I would stay at least 10m or 30ft above the seafloor.

[Aimbot]

That would be pretty damn cool.

[Drebbel]

I wonder how real WWII skippers would do this. I once heard some US subs had 1 outer torpedo door made out of very thick glass. They shoved in a sailor who yelled instructions to the skipper.

Now why hasn't the SH4 team simulated that

BOOOOOOO, I want a mod for that

[Safe-Keeper]

That'd actually be really, really cool.

[Sulikate]

That would be a very nice feature indeed.

[Phil]

Originally Posted by Drebbel

I wonder how real WWII skippers would do this. I once heard some US subs had 1 outer torpedo door made out of very thick glass. They shoved in a sailor who yelled instructions to the skipper.

is that really true about the glass thing?

[Sgian Dubh]

Originally Posted by Phil

is that really true about the glass thing?

I dunno. But I am having warm thoughts about 'Bernard under glass'.

I can just see the mission report:

1 casualty, Seaman Bernard.

While in the observation tube and relaying questionable navigational information, there was a malfunction of the torpedo-tube inner door. In their heroic efforts to free Seaman Bernard, the Torpedo Chief accidentally uttered "Open the d*mn door now" which was unfortunately mis-understood by the torpedo crew as an order to open the OUTER door for the torpedo tube.

This set into motion an further sequence of unfortunate actions that resulted in Seaman Bernard being fired from the torpedo tube. It was extremely unfortunate that directly in front of the boat was the large reef that Seaman Bernard had failed to notice while providing navigational assistance.

An immediate ceremony was given, seeing the Seaman Bernard had become inextricably part of the seascape.

It is worthy of note that these unfortunate events resulted in the fortunate increase in the fortunes of this ship and crew which unfortunately we were not able to share with the unfortunate Seaman Bernard.

[Mylander]

I never heard of the glass thing. But I know this: Even in the clearest water, below about 150', you wouldn't be able to see jack. Not enough light. Even in shallow water, any turbulence or particulate matter in the water and forget it. "Hold it, skipper! There's a - " CRUUUNNNNCCHHHHH!!!!

I'm thinking that's a myth.

Mylander

[GSpector]

Hmm:hmm:, I would think, if they had windows then they would have to have lights to help with navigation and I was not aware there were light fixtures that could take that kind of pressure those subs took back then.

Besides, I think they used the sonar for something back then. I think it was to navigate (or see) under water .

As for the Hydrophones, I can't imagine that being useful for anything other then just to listen to the sounds under water

[Aimbot]

I've dove to 140 feet on a clear day and was able to see pretty well even without light. In clear pacific water you'd have decent vis to 200 feet, I'd guess.

[LC]

I've just been lurking on the SHIV forums so far, like what I see and I love SHIII but the wrecks on the bottom bring up an interesting new sort of game that I can see being around in the forums.

If they do put wrecks in game, I wonder if they will do historical wrecks too. Or just wrecks that you send down to the bottom. Anyone see historical wreck searches!?

Like I said would bring a fun little side game to the main game.

[Safe-Keeper]

If there's a sufficient number of different wrecks in the game, I don't see why it'd be impossible for someone to make a Historical Wrecks mod using the mission editor. You could even have them appear at the historically right time. Good idea, mate.

[Mylander]

Originally Posted by Aimbot

I've dove to 140 feet on a clear day and was able to see pretty well even without light. In clear pacific water you'd have decent vis to 200 feet, I'd guess.

Been there, and deeper. (168' on SCUBA, in the Bahamas, but not by choice) You can see, but how far, and with what color resolution - none. it's all blue and grey and black down there unless you bring your own light - and WW II subs didn't have headlights. And you're talking about the clearest, calmest possible conditions with the most possible ambient light (clear day) - not something I'd want to count on as a sub skipper for U/W navigation. Cloudy day, current stirring up particulate matter, and forget it. Your vis would be very limited. Certainly not enough for Bernard to hang out in a torpedo tube shouting directions :rotfl: Which were then shouted into a voice tube, which were then relayed to the engine room telegraph, which were then, CRUUNNNCHHH!!! "We're taking damage sir!"

I don't claim to have all of the answers - I'm just not buying that scenario. How did they do it? Did they keep a certain minimum depth under keel based on their charts? periodic sonar soundings? I don't know. I'm a sailor, and as such, my depth under keel (5') is always on my mind. But I have GPS charts with spot depths, and a sonar depth sounder which is continually updated, and sounds an alarm if I get too shallow. These guys had none of that. Nor could they see what was around them...

Mylander

[fire-fox]

im not 100% but i think i read (dont remeber where) that thay did have depth sounding gear in the later parts of the war, and there war a "mine finding" forwered looking sonar set on some boats in 44'.