[REL] RFB/Real Fleet Boat for 1.5

[Quagmire]

Hey Tater (or anyone on the RFB team), do you guys have a "feature list" that you can share with us yet? I've been reading about so many exciting RFB 2.0 tidbits (new enviro mod, new torpedo models, a range readout for the A scope, etc.) in other threads. A list of what to expect would sure give an excitement rush!

If this has been done already could you point me in the right direction. RFB 2.0 is going to be mega. I cant wait!

Thanks guys!
.

[Soundman]

Originally Posted by LukeFF

The patch for 1.52 is complete and has been uploaded to the server. See the first link in this thread for details.

Fixes:

• Fixes a problem with the ship damage model where ships would continue to steam on with hits to the machinery spaces.
• Fixes some minor issues with the submarine damage model.
• Fixes a problem where the Hog Island freighter would catch fire in heavy seas.
• Fixes the problem with flashing/flickering textures in the periscope and deck gun views.
• Adds in a couple of missing textures from the PE4 mod.
• Corrects the starting date for the acquisition of SJ-1 radar.
• Corrected max gyro angle on the Mark 10 torpedo to 90 degrees.

Changes:

• Adjusted the ammo count on the 5"/25 deck gun to 75 rounds.
• Removed the hull integrity indicator from the damage report page.
• Adjusted the default deck guns for all American subs.
• Some adjustments made to the visual spotting behavior for the player's submarine.
• "Return to Plotted Course" and "Recognition Manual" commands can now be accessed from any view.
• New sound for the wind in heavy seas.

Luke, I'm in my first RFB patrol and have something to report. I came accross a "Hog Island Freighter" in fairly rough seas. She was on fire. At the time, I figured maybe another sub had already done damage, but after reading your post of fixes, thought you may want to review it again.

I'm using RFB 1.52 with the 1.52 patch and the proper version of RSRDC.

[Rockin Robbins]

Originally Posted by Soundman

I suppose that's reasonable, thanks Tater!

Soundman, if you find that unreasonable (I emphatically do) check out TMOplot, which substitutes the much superior TMO plotting system. At least then if you stand too close to the table the contacts don't vanish!

The only defect in the TMO plotting system is that visual targets are plotted at exact position. You are on your honor not to take measurements from those visual positions. If you have a boat with radar your positions would be that accurate anyway.

This lets you use the attack screen to check the validity of your solution as the real boats did. Comparing TDC output to plot was central to the firing procedure of fleet boats. The RFB plotting system does not allow you do perform this procedure at all. It's just set and by golly shoot. Not realistic. Such a shot would buy you a hotseat in Admiral Lockwood's office.

[Soundman]

The only defect in the TMO plotting system is that visual targets are plotted at exact position. You are on your honor not to take measurements from those visual positions. If you have a boat with radar your positions would be that accurate anyway.

On my honor... ..I can pretty much agree with that honor system, but on the other hand, if the contact is in visual range, they would certainly have the ability to give a very accurate reading on bearing, AND would they not be able to give pretty good (maybe not exact) range as well, at least for nearby contacts ? Of course the perfect solution to this problem would be the ability to allow better range accuracy for closer contacts, not so much for farther away. Yes I know this is harder to model than it may sound, but we can wish anyway!

[I'm goin' down]

While I await UBSoft to go back to work so I can get the proper codes to reinstall the UBoat add on, I am in port updating my radio and music files. I would like to know, what, if any, in game mods are compatible with RFB v1.52 and comparable RSRDC mods, beside the ones I have activated, which are jamminadrid's mini chrometer and tools mod installed via JTex, and Killflag's custom boats mod.

[Rockin Robbins]

Originally Posted by Soundman

On my honor... ..I can pretty much agree with that honor system, but on the other hand, if the contact is in visual range, they would certainly have the ability to give a very accurate reading on bearing, AND would they not be able to give pretty good (maybe not exact) range as well, at least for nearby contacts ? Of course the perfect solution to this problem would be the ability to allow better range accuracy for closer contacts, not so much for farther away. Yes I know this is harder to model than it may sound, but we can wish anyway!

Actually the best way to do visual errors in range would be a random error between an upper and lower error limit which varies with distance. That is hard coded into the game and can't be touched without actually breaking our contract with Ubi not to modify any of the executables. I bet they have a whole school of those lawyer guys.

[vanjast]

A few questions with RFB
- How bad is the Mark14 dud rate with RFB.
- Are the depth keeping failure problems mainly related to the faster speed setting only, as it was discovered back then.

If all is ok, I can understand the crew's 'red level' frustration with the torps as I've sent 8 torps at 5 feet, on slow speed, at about 1500 yards at 'Large Barn doors'.
Firing a spread of 2 or 3 along the length of the ship.

Only to hear the torps 'pass through' the ship on the sonar. This sounds like a depth keeping problem - had set the torps to contact only.

[tater]

RL mk14 depth keeping was not a function of torpedo speed as I understand it, it was poor calibration using test-warheads that were lighter than real ones.

[Fish40]

Originally Posted by tater

RL mk14 depth keeping was not a function of torpedo speed as I understand it, it was poor calibration using test-warheads that were lighter than real ones.

Tater, I believe speed indeed added to the problem. I'll try to locate an article dealing with the problems of the Mk14. In a nutshell, the increased speed caused an increase in hydrodynamic pressure (pressure along the skin of the torpedo, as opposed to hydrostatic pressure which is proportional to water depth). Anyways, the senseing ports along the torpedo were misplaced giving false pressure readings. The ports were being influenced by the hydrodynamic, not the hydrostatic pressures. It fooled the depth keeping mechanism into thinking the torpedo was too shallow, thereby causeing it to run deep.

[Fish40]

Here's the link to the article: http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/1592/ustorp2.htm What you said about the difference between the weights of the practice vs warshot was also a factor. Great techie article

[tater]

Interesting.

I think that unfortunately, the depth errors, unlike pistol problems are NOT related to speed at all in the SH4 engine. FWIW, I think that they almost never fired fish set to slow in RL. Only for long-ranged shots. The online PRs many times have the torpedo forms which show the warhead, speed setting,, even the serial number of the specific torpedo fired. Might be interesting to check.

[LukeFF]

Originally Posted by tater

I think that unfortunately, the depth errors, unlike pistol problems are NOT related to speed at all in the SH4 engine. FWIW, I think that they almost never fired fish set to slow in RL. Only for long-ranged shots. The online PRs many times have the torpedo forms which show the warhead, speed setting,, even the serial number of the specific torpedo fired. Might be interesting to check.

You are correct. Basically, the Mark 14's failures are set up like this:

• Depth-keeping errors: will occur 100% of the time up to ~mid-August 1942. Variance is between 10 and 11 feet IIRC.
• Premature detonations: dependent on the state of the sea and the magnetic exploder being active. If the magnetic exploder isn't activated, then there will be no chance of a premature.
• Duds: dependent on the angle of the shot and the speed setting, with the worst characteristics present to about the end of September 1943. Shots at or near 90 degrees will always result in a dud; when the low-speed setting is used, the chance of a dud is reduced by 50%.
• Circle-runners and gyro angle errors: set to fixed chance rates. Not affected by torpedo speed, detonator, sea state, etc.

SH4's torpedo failure characteristics are actually very well-modeled, IMO. The only feature they don't have that I wish they did is a failure chance for the magnetic detonator. Because of this, I have set the magnetic detonation range to a very small value.

[Franklin Van Valkenburg]

104 pages is a lot to look through so if this has been addressed previously I apologize.

I am running SH4 1.4 with the following mods:

Real Fleet Boat v1-4 031408
RFB zones file - dont use with NSM or ROW
RFB_V1-4_TorpedoFix_081108
SS275 USS Runner_Fooskin_Black_Franklin Van Valkenburg

For some reason the con tower on my Gato is missing... not there at all... just a hull in the water. Digital_Trucker and I have looked into this issue, trying various ways to fix it (namely going into the UPC files and changing the texture files from T01 to T02). DT has suggested that it is an internal problem within the RFB mod and not a confliction between the mod and my skin.
I am using a Gato Class boat and am currently at June of 1942.

I understand that RFB for SH4 1.4 is no longer being worked on, but if anyone has suggestions so I can fix the files myself I would be quite thankful!

[vanjast]

Originally Posted by Franklin Van Valkenburg

I am running SH4 1.4 with the following mods:

Update to V1.5... quickly

[Franklin Van Valkenburg]

And if updating to 1.5 isn't an option?
Sorry to be stubborn... but to spend $10 and register on Ubi (who will spam my e-mail) just to fix something that I know can be solved by changing some code? Just point me in the right direction... what file or line, what to change?