VampireNightVision Bugfix

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Noisy_Buoy

As for the sailor steve I wonder who has bitten this no lifer anyway ?

Sailor does it realy bothers you that I registered only few days ago or what ?

No, it doesn't bother me at all. I was just trying to draw you out, because we knew you were PapaKilo, and it worked. You couldn't help being the same old troll as always.

[Victor Schutze]

So after a much heated debate, what is your conclusion concerning visibility?

[Sailor Steve]

My conclusion? H.sie had a problem with the way things worked, and he fixed it. Never a bad thing.

[Rubini]

Originally Posted by Victor Schutze

So after a much heated debate, what is your conclusion concerning visibility?

IMO, by what i have read here my conclusion is that 50% is the best compromisse for sh3 (with its limited environment). But this is only for ping, as the mod will allow any value.

[h.sie]

http://www.u575.de/6Feindfahrt.html

Weather getting better. Moon visible from time to time. convoy sighted. Distance: Approx. 5sm. (9km).

[Graf Paper]

A 50% reduction seems fine. It would fit fairly well in the 8 km and 16 km environments. I am unsure if it's as good for the 20 km environment, but 10 km isn't too much of a stretch for visual contact, given the range of distances quoted by everyone.

I know the SH3 developers settled on 8 km as the environment size after several WWII historical sources cited 5 miles as the maximum visual range one has while standing on the bridge of a u-boat. Given the surviving diaries, log books, and statements of actual sailors of the U-bootwaffe, it does make me wonder how this absolute number of 5 miles was ascertained. Was it done with mathematics or some other source? From what I have read of the books that often quote this number, there seems to be little clarification. The authors make no mention if this 5 mile limit is with or without optical aids. There is no specificity to define exactly when a ship is considered to be "spotted", either. Is it when the masthead, all or part of the superstructure, or the hull is in plain view?

When weighing this matter, I must lean strongly in favor of the testimony of men who were actually there. No scholar working amid stacks of books, rather than the stacked rollers of an Atlantic storm, can ever claim to have definitive knowledge. This leads me to conclude that the SH3 developers and historians got it wrong while the fans and modders of this community have always been right.

[SquareSteelBar]

Originally Posted by One_timer

...I'm gonna haunt this place till I die =] ...

some kind of pathological personality...

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by One_timer

Add to the list Kentas and Infamous CONTACT. (can't even remember all my temporary nicks already) Your efforts to stop me from being here is nothing compared to my wish to stay here no matter what nickname I own =]

This fight you will never win, I'm gonna haunt this place till I die =]

You tracked me, just because I wanted so, do not expect it will happen

again in the close future =]

P.S. I always hold my word!

Every time you show your hand you can rely on myself or fellow moderators to ban you.

P.S. I always keep my word too.

[h.sie]

http://www.u575.de/8Feindfahrt.html

May 5th, 1943, North-Atlantic

21:30: Visibility getting worse, fog, rain.
22:20h: convoy sighted in 12000m distance, suddenly coming out of haze.

Örps!

[Rubini]

Originally Posted by h.sie

http://www.u575.de/8Feindfahrt.html

May 5th, 1943, North-Atlantic

21:30: Visibility getting worse, fog, rain.
22:20h: convoy sighted in 12000m distance, suddenly coming out of haze.

Örps!

North Atlantic at spring-summer have long days...

[Kafka BC]

@Graf Paper

Originally Posted by Graf Paper

My own remarks and observations pertained to the general conversation and were not necessarily directed specifically at everything you had to say, Kafka.

Really, then you should have said so.

Context is at least as important as grammar.

From my perspective, you fail at understanding context, at least mine anyway.

Also, you say sky and land. I believe the discussion here concerns sky and sea.

And I believe my discussion involved the night sky, the light gathering properties of large objective lenses, the fact that you could see ships on or near the horizon at night with the Kriegsmarine Binoculars in use at the time, and that the horizon for a U-Boat was 8 kilometers.

As I said, it was a way to simplify. If you could not get the gist that it was part of a lead-in to discussing Night Vision Binoculars...then that is not my problem. I was providing facts for consideration, some of which were not considered in previous discussions where assumptions were being made.

Right from the get go in your first two paragraphs you went off on a tangent totally unrelated to the points I was making. You assumed I knew nothing about, had not seen an ocean, nor been to sea, and questioned my 'visual acuity' and then proceeded to 'teach' me on something irrelevant. Your whole tone sounded demeaning and that you knew better than me. I found it offensive.

Actually, it was you who failed to comprehend. I used the collective pronoun "them" in reference to the testimonies of crew serving aboard u-boats, which is plainly obvious by the active pronoun "they", as in "the persons who perfomed this action" in regards to the actual spotting of the mastheads in question.

If you were agreeing with me, I could not tell, perhaps if you had clearly said so. From the first sentence and the way you structured the paragraph it appeared that you were contending something I did not say. Maybe I did misunderstand, but you contributed to that misunderstanding.

Actually, one source for this figure comes from the direct statements of Lt. Robert Atkinson, DSC, RNR of K-137, H.M.S. Pink. I'd dare say that a commanding officer of a WWII Royal Navy corvette, serving as convoy escort, knows a few more things about ship's smoke and u-boat tactics. He ought to be ashamed of himself for misleading us all!

That is what it is - a statement, which it prone to misinterpretation and exaggeration. Did he say a single ship or a convoy of many ships? Did he have a long base range-finder that can accurately tell the distance out to 50 miles? A corvette didn't have them.

Actually the misleading misconception I was referring to is the belief that all coal-fired ships belch dense black smoke. My mistake there, I should have pointed that out, but I didn't want to start an argument about it.

You prove nothing by this statement. Being a such a mechanic does not qualify you for anything other than to work on marine power trains. Additionally, in studying to be a marine engineer, it in no way follows that you actually became one or served aboard any ocean-going vessels.

That statement was to refute your assumption that I was a total landlubber.

So you think my Diploma and Certificates from The Nautical Institute of Nova Scotia are meaningless, and everything they taught me about marine diesels, steam turbines, triple-expansion engines, ship buoyancy and loading, and coal and oil fuel are as well. I must go tell them to stop wasting taxpayer's money.

And to show how little you know on the matter, part of the training to become a Marine Engineer involves actually going to sea, and I did for a bit, as a 4th class engineer cadet (meaning unpaid) to get my required sea-time, on board an oil tanker that went between the ports of Halifax, Montreal and St. John's. I did not pursue the career, turned out I didn't like being in the "bowels of the ship", and I needed a job that paid more than the meager stipend I was getting from the Government.

You may belittle my reasoning by labeling it as "pseudoscience" yet you use your photography hobby as the basis for your "expertise" on visual properties as applied to u-boat tactics. Taking pictures of sunsets does not give your arguments any additional weight over what others here have said.

No. I was using it as the basis of my "expertise" in regarding the resolving power of the human eye, the size and distance of an object, and the fact that optical devices such as binoculars with long focal lengths are subject to something called "camera shake", which becomes more acute when viewing objects at longer ranges, especially if they are hand held or if there is the slightest vibration of any kind. Tell me that doesn't happen on a moving U-Boat. Tactics has nothing to do with it.

It wasn't just a hobby, I actually made a few bucks doing it, not enough to live on though.

And then you attempt to humiliate me further by calling my use of language "High-handed"?

I said your "high handed use of assumptions". Read what I said about your first two paragraphs and your assumptions.

If you feel intimidated by complete sentences and florid words, like "diffraction", that should not be my problem.

Childish. I believe my big words can match your big words any day.

I have been polite and even supported some of the points you made.

Again, you did not make that clear. The first sentence of your forth paragraph:

Also, this mod primarily deals with night vision using the unaided eye, a fact I think some have missed while attempting to prove some points.

That sounded to me like you were discounting the information I provided on the Kriegsmarine Binoculars, sticking with using "the unaided eye" as a basis, and a jab at the points I was making. The rest of the paragraph sounded patronizing...like I didn't know these things and that I was a newbie. This again I found offensive.

Now, your last paragraph you did agree with me...on a conclusion I never made.

EDIT: I take that back, I now realize you were talking about the 'fog being the big bugaboo for U-Boats'. I didn't interpret it that way.

As for the rest of your speech I say "No Comment". I will let you and others make of it as their will.

[Victor Schutze]

[Kafka BC]

@makman94

Originally Posted by makman94

--- i said exactly the opposite but thats ok too

I messed that up. I now believe that part of our difficulties is the language barrier and I am not understanding your wording because of it. I will try to look closer to see what you are saying from now on.

Concerning my first post about our different calculations of 29.1 and 31. I looked at it again and I should have said they were close enough. I was thinking it but I did not do it. I thought that people would understand that they were, that is why I said the "Apples and Oranges" phrase. In the following paragraph I should have said "at those distances" instead of "at that distance".

I am sorry for that confusion, I was too focused on trying to say that the tip of a mast is too small to see that far away. In actual fact, I was surprised that they were that close together because elsewhere in other threads I had seen people saying you should see further based on the height of the extended periscope.

The reason I don't want to talk about the mod and make any suggestions is because I do not know exactly what is being done on the mod and my speculating on ranges would not be helpful. From what I see from the log entries being posted, I believe that a good average may be arrived at, and they certainly don't need me.

---thats really very 'strange' for me. they talk for miles on sea and they are using the international mile ? i can't say anything more...it is just 'strange',thats it what i was thinking as i was glancing to the link

Yes, documents like those are prepared for more than just the Navy, there are others like politicians, bureaucrats, and scientists who may have no understanding of a nautical mile when they are familiar with other measurements. Even though my country has been using the Metric system for a long time, I still find it hard to judge measurements since I grew up using using the Imperial system.

Regards

[Kafka BC]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

No, it doesn't bother me at all. I was just trying to draw you out, because we knew you were PapaKilo, and it worked. You couldn't help being the same old troll as always.

Noisy_Buoy was PapaKilo!!!!

Now, I am so truly and unimaginably embarrassed.

[Hitman]

He was Papakilo, Kentas, Contact ... when your paranoid these things happen. He will return, and we will ban him again, that's life ... simply ignore him and do not reply to posts from "new" members that appear as veterans when talking about the game. We will take care of the rest