Observations on Realistic Realism and gameplay

[Rockin Robbins]

Originally Posted by Orion2012

You wrote a book about submarines...this I would love to read!

Oops I just caught this. No I never wrote a book on submarines. I wrote about something I read in a book. I think the book was my book on Manitowoc submarines, Freshwater Submarines-the Manitowoc story, by Admiral William T Nelson.

[Orion2012]

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

Oops I just caught this. No I never wrote a book on submarines. I wrote about something I read in a book. I think the book was my book on Manitowoc submarines, Freshwater Submarines-the Manitowoc story, by Admiral William T Nelson.

:rotfl:/Either way I'm always looking for something to read, especially involving submarines.

[DaveyJ576]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Here is a laymans question...

Why wold they do this? Sure it would decrease the 'dive time' but by how much? How long did it take to open those valves? How much time was actually gained?

What if a top valve should accidently open or fail?

Seems to me like the risks would out weigh the reward.

The only scenario I can see is if the boat 'knew' it have to dive quickly as in a convoy approach or in an area thick with air patrols.

I simulate this "realistically" by approaching a convoy with decks awash on occassion.

I was asked by Bosje to make some comments on this subject. All hands involved in this thread have made some very cogent observations and comments. Most of the historical aspects of this discussion are dead on with just minor quibbles.

I personally play at 58% realism and that suits my game play style just fine. I have tried to walk a line between moving things along and realism, and I think this is the devil that any sim developer must face. I see the beauty of SHIV is the ability of individuals to mod it as they see fit. Two major things that have been missed: 1. A random equipment malfunction feature (always the bane of a sub CO). 2. The above mentioned process of refining your solution to a high degree in assisted mode. (as in SHI)

Now to answer Steamwake's questions above:

The flood valves on the bottom of the MBT's were known in the USN as "Kingston" valves. Their only function was to close off the flood port and act as a backup to the vents at the top of the MBT. In operation the Kingstons were always opened first. They opened inward, against the air pressure in the tank and thus were difficult to operate quickly and in the days before hydraulics the complex linkages required a healthy amount of Armstrong Engineering (get it? ) to move. If you opened the vents first, you could unintentionally flood the tank through the vents (especially in heavy seas). The operating mechanisms and linkages for the Kingstons were inside the tank and therefore virtually impossible to maintain short of an drydock overhaul. The linkages for the vents were in the superstructure and thus readily accessible. There were a set of Kingstons for each MBT (port and starboard) and that equated to a lot of valves that had to be opened for the boat to dive.

As a higher level of mechanical confidence was gained in the ability of the vents to hold air in the MBT's, the Kingstons came to be viewed as a unnecessary redundancy, and indeed a liability due to their difficult and time consuming operation. During the 1930's the Kingstons were usually left open all the time and by the late 30's they had been deleted from the boats altogether.

The vents also operated inward against air pressure, so having one open accidentally was a very rare occurance. Even if one did open unintentionally, enough buoyancy would be retained by the other tanks to hold the boat on the surface. On the Darter, we did this once alongside the pier. We opened one vent to do maintenance on the mechanism. The boat listed to one side a little, but it didn't sink.

Running with decks awash provided both advantages and disadvantages. It did reduce the boat's silhouette in calm seas or if the moon was behind the boat. You could still use radar and have the lookouts stationed. But there was a huge disadvantage to this tactic. With the decks awash, the mufflers and overboards for the main engine exhausts were submerged. The engines were not designed to continuously push water out of the exhaust pipes, it produced too much back pressure. It would blow out the exhaust manifolds on the engines or even worse flood them. So if you are going to run decks awash you would secure the mains and run on the battery, and if you are going to do this you might as well run submerged. Your speed would be the same. I haven't tried this in the game yet, so I don't know if the speed issue is modeled correctly.

If anyone has any more questions, please surf over to the Real Submarine Technology and History Q&A thread:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=147577

There have been some great questions asked there. I try to check it as often as I can.

Dave

www.pigboats.com

[Bosje]

cheers!

[Wilcke]

DaveyJ,

Excellent information, I need to drop by more often to read your stuff.

Thanks!

[ReFaN]

Very good read. Some interesting facts

[THE_MASK]

I found the two best things to enhance realism was not to use any external cameras . And the other thing was to play on a max of 128x time compression . That way i could play a patrol over a few weeks rather than a few days and it added to the excitement when you found something . It really annoyed me that the game wouldnt go to 1x when non enemy contacts were spotted and i think that this is the spoiler .

[ReallyDedPoet]

Nice post Davey, thanks


RDP

[Red Devil]

For the first time since I installed SH4 (RSRD) I was in a position to respond to a PAC message. I had just past Midway on my way to drop an agent "near Tokyo" when a message came in that IJN were about to attack Midway. Knowing the actual history of the Battle, I turned and went to where I knew, historically, there was a Task Force and lo and behold - there it was!!

I got a Kongo and a carrier before they knew I was there and another carrier which ran past behind me and a Cruiser which also passed nearby. Finally I got 2 destroyers before running out of torps!! Then I went deep in my USS Drum and got the hell out of there!!

[AVGWarhawk]

Running with decks awash provided both advantages and disadvantages. It did reduce the boat's silhouette in calm seas or if the moon was behind the boat. You could still use radar and have the lookouts stationed. But there was a huge disadvantage to this tactic. With the decks awash, the mufflers and overboards for the main engine exhausts were submerged. The engines were not designed to continuously push water out of the exhaust pipes, it produced too much back pressure. It would blow out the exhaust manifolds on the engines or even worse flood them. So if you are going to run decks awash you would secure the mains and run on the battery, and if you are going to do this you might as well run submerged. Your speed would be the same. I haven't tried this in the game yet, so I don't know if the speed issue is modeled correctly.

You can run decks awash in the game but the diesels will still be working. You can get the submarine to a point were the electric motors will kick in. At this point, you are pretty much submerged. So, yes, one might as well just submerge fully as you suggested. As far as speed while in game, your speed drops to about 10 knots when at decks awash and full ahead. It is a very fine line in the game when running decks awash on diesels or electric. Unfortunate we can not switch in game. No maneuvering room

[tater]

My biggest gripe with the basic gameplay paradigm of SH4 (and presumably 3 as well, dunno, never played it), is that the game only allows a completely unrealistic "auto targeting" and an almost equally unrealistic "100% realism." I'd prefer to play the role of the skipper, and have my firing party do some of the "100% realism" tasks, but using my observations, not 100% accurate, magical, real time plotting, etc.

I shoot a bearing, and the plotter should mark it on the map. I take a range, same thing. They can automatically work up AOB, speed, etc, based on MY observations, and when I see the map view, I get straight lines plotted between my observations, with notes "written" on the map with AOB/speed, etc. This is a middle road between "auto targeting on" and "100%" in game, and is in fact more realistic than "100%" while at the same time being easier for the player.

[Red Devil]

I agree about the targetting, it is something that the "skipper" simply would not do. There should be a "lock" on the periscope that sends bearing and speed to the TDC at least, so that the "skipper" is not running a one man boat. Take a bearing, (then press "L") give it time for a speed fix, watch for a "green light" and click lock - then fire, on a second green, after a realistically suitable delay.

[Rockin Robbins]

I will give up my external camera when they pry my cold, dead fingers from around my mouse!

If the replay feature worked better I might have a different opinion.

[Armistead]

I play at 100%, cams off. Before when I played with contacts on it was easy to get speed using the 3 minute marking rule from far away. I could get a perfect set and would seldom raise the periscope, just shoot when they were in range.

Figuring track and speed without contacts, cams has become a job, moreso for fast TF.

Using Radar, it's fairly easy to get a track. Still I'm having a problem using sonar to figure track and speed. Is there a method here I'm missing. With merchants, I will ping them, mark bearing and distance on the map. Then I repeat until I figure a track. Obvious, you see nothing on the map, but the marks get you close, then I'll draw a line between the marks and get a base track.

Is there away to get speed using sonar. Can you ping, get distance, wait three minutes, ping again..distance...and with those two ranges somehow figure speed with some formula.

[Munchausen]

Originally Posted by Armistead

Is there away to get speed using sonar. Can you ping, get distance, wait three minutes, ping again..distance...and with those two ranges somehow figure speed with some formula.

If you plot those two points on the map, yeah. Ping, note range and bearing, plot it. Wait three minutes. Ping, note range and bearing, plot it. Measure the distance between the two points, same as if you were doing it with map contancts "on," and then calculate the speed.