Calculating AOB with OLC Gold

[Sea Hawk]

Sorted.
Dont know how I did it.
Closed as many applications as pos. that were running in the background.
The next time I lookrd the files I was trying to delete had gone.

[jmr]

Originally Posted by makman94

you didn't do anything wrong Beng.the problem is that mast's values sucks and this have as result your range measurments to be tottaly incorrect.
open data\Sea\NKLS_ and there open the cfg file.set at mast=21.2 and save the file.your hot spot of the ship is the top of the funnel .here:

Markman, where did you get 21.2? Do you have a list of correct mast height values?

[makman94]

Originally Posted by jmr

Markman, where did you get 21.2? Do you have a list of correct mast height values?

hello Jmr,

i calculate it. no, i don't have such a list. i had only fixed 7-8 ships lengths and masts(which are the ships i am using in my missions).in fact , ALL OF THEM need corrections but this is impossible to be done by one person becuase the procedure for fixing one ship is a real pain !
note that i am using ''GWX_ships_Buoyance&draught_mod'' which is 'puting' the ships a little deeper in the water so the 21.2 is correct only if you are using this mod(if you not ,then it is a little bigger-about 0,5-1.2m-but i never tested it without the ''GWX_ships_Buoyance&draught_mod'' )

bye

[tmdgm]

Originally Posted by makman94

hello Jmr,

i calculate it. no, i don't have such a list. i had only fixed 7-8 ships lengths and masts(which are the ships i am using in my missions).in fact , ALL OF THEM need corrections but this is impossible to be done by one person becuase the procedure for fixing one ship is a real pain !
note that i am using ''GWX_ships_Buoyance&draught_mod'' which is 'puting' the ships a little deeper in the water so the 21.2 is correct only if you are using this mod(if you not ,then it is a little bigger-about 0,5-1.2m-but i never tested it without the ''GWX_ships_Buoyance&draught_mod'' )

bye

I guess this was going to be my question. How did you know that ship is 21.2? How did you calculate it? How would you know what the other ships are? You can go in and change that file, but how do you know what to change it to?

Also, how did they get screwed up from the stock version? IF all the ships are screwed up, how does anyone calculate AOB? Usually I just take a rough guess if I get a ship that is off.

[onelifecrisis]

I think all the stock ships are accurate. But GWX changes nearly all the ships; there's hardly a "stock" ship left in it. Still, most of the ships in GWX3 have accurate mast and length values (assuming you've not added extra mods to your GWX installation) so this problem only happens with a few ships.

If you use mods which add new ships or change existing ships then you run the risk of those mods messing up your firing solutions.

[makman94]

Originally Posted by tmdgm

I guess this was going to be my question. How did you know that ship is 21.2? How did you calculate it? How would you know what the other ships are? You can go in and change that file, but how do you know what to change it to?---simple medium maths

Also, how did they get screwed up from the stock version? IF all the ships are screwed up, how does anyone calculate AOB? Usually I just take a rough guess if I get a ship that is off.

its pretty simple but you need patience. put a ship in ME , calculate his EXACT range ,then take a photo with the stadimeter line showing.then open the photo with the graphic programme and get the exact angle(here is the most difficult part becuase angle is very 'sensitive' value) .then tan(θ/2)=mast/(2xrange).
if the values (length and mast) are not far away from the correct ones you can play your game (aob is not very very critical),thats why you can calculate aob but you will never be acurate
and something for last: you still didn't answer if you tried what i told you or not.

Originally Posted by onelifecrisis

I think all the stock ships are accurate. But GWX changes nearly all the ships; there's hardly a "stock" ship left in it. Still, most of the ships in GWX3 have accurate mast and length values (assuming you've not added extra mods to your GWX installation) so this problem only happens with a few ships.

If you use mods which add new ships or change existing ships then you run the risk of those mods messing up your firing solutions.

i will disagree with you here OLC, its not just a few ships that need corrections.
for example ,take the ship that we are discusing here.its a stock ship.
at stock the mast=23.2 and at gwx ...mast=24.5 or 25.6 (still is a riddle for me why the same ship has different mast's values)
well the most correct is stock's value (without being exactly correct).the problem is getting worst at lengths
of course, i haven't take a look at all the ships but as far i had seen till now all need corrections(ok...maybe there will be some exeptions but this doesn't change the main course)
ps: don't start flames here,if you (everybody) want these things to be corrected ,you are not helping if you close your eyes to the problem...

bye

[jmr]

So there's no way of just opening up a ship's file and getting its measurements from there? You actually have to use the ME as you described to get its mast height? Sounds like a real pain :{

[tmdgm]

hmm, so this might be a good reason to install gwx3.0 if most of the mast heights are correct, i'm still using 2.1. For 2.1 with OLCUber, it's been more than just a few ships.

Makman, I haven't tried it yet as I didn't experience the problem with that ship in particular. My medium cargo seemed ok with 2.1, i kinda agree that all the stock ships in 2.1 seem ok.

The calc method sounds like that would be a pain as you would have to do that for every ship.

[makman94]

Originally Posted by tmdgm

hmm, so this might be a good reason to install gwx3.0 if most of the mast heights are correct, i'm still using 2.1. For 2.1 with OLCUber, it's been more than just a few ships.

Makman, I haven't tried it yet as I didn't experience the problem with that ship in particular. My medium cargo seemed ok with 2.1, i kinda agree that all the stock ships in 2.1 seem ok.

The calc method sounds like that would be a pain as you would have to do that for every ship.

well,for medium cargo the mast is not correct,length is ok.
now,you had mentioned one other ship Tmdgm at sh3 mods workshop.i can't remember which one was now but i 'meet' it once and i posted you there the correct values .for that ship the values was tottaly incorrect.go there,find your thread and test them!
as far i know gwx2.1 and gwx3 are using the same masts values

[makman94]

Originally Posted by jmr

So there's no way of just opening up a ship's file and getting its measurements from there? You actually have to use the ME as you described to get its mast height? Sounds like a real pain :{

i really don't know but i think that with 3d programmes ,as Iambecomelife told me,is not possible .but i don't put my hands in flames for that becuase my english are not so good and maybe i misunderstand him

[harryt8]

Those colored scales around the chronometer are scales to determine speed of a target, as they pass the line of your periscope. The full procedure is a bit more involved than just looking at the target though. (you need to eliminate the effect of your own speed) The colored circles represent a certain length of the target. After the needle has moved X seconds it points to the appropriate speed for the length of that color (100m, 150m or 200m). If the actual ship has a different length you need to chose the color that best fits, or multiply/divide appropriately. But I found a way to (ab)use that range/AOB finder wheel in calculating the speed for any length of ship. See that crooked mark next to the 60 degrees in the inner (AOB) scale?


Pisces,

Can you advise me where I can download a plain chronograph similar to the chrono used by Friedl9te's video on OLC attach solution?

Thank.

Harryt8

[Pisces]

Originally Posted by harryt8

Pisces,

Can you advise me where I can download a plain chronograph similar to the chrono used by Friedl9te's video on OLC attach solution?

Thank.

Harryt8

Sorry, I have no idea what you mean with Friedl9te's video. Or I forgot about it if I ever saw it. I also do not know of a place where you can find such a plain chronograph (I presume you mean without those colored scales). But I do think someone made them before. Maybe there are links in the oldest threads (huge page counts; started around 2007 or so) about the OLC gui or Ujagd tools. You'll have to use the search function of the forum. I just woke up and need coffee first. (@ 11:36 in the morning )

[tmdgm]

Originally Posted by makman94

well,for medium cargo the mast is not correct,length is ok.
now,you had mentioned one other ship Tmdgm at sh3 mods workshop.i can't remember which one was now but i 'meet' it once and i posted you there the correct values .for that ship the values was tottaly incorrect.go there,find your thread and test them!
as far i know gwx2.1 and gwx3 are using the same masts values

oh yeah, the glanville freighter. that was wayy off. this may be a dumb question, but how do you set a mission up with that specific ship? i'm guessing there's a mission editor somewhere?

[onelifecrisis]

Originally Posted by tmdgm

oh yeah, the glanville freighter. that was wayy off. this may be a dumb question, but how do you set a mission up with that specific ship? i'm guessing there's a mission editor somewhere?

I dunno about the mission but yeah, Granville used to be way off, along with the Empire Type Freighter. I assumed that those two, at least, would be fixed in GWX3 because their innacuracies were widely reported... but I've not checked them.

makman, if you say there are very many innacuracies then I believe you. I've never manually checked the ships in a modelling program. But I'd suggest that most of the discrepancies make little actual difference to... well, to anything. I said the ships measurements are mostly accurate because while playing (even in GWX 2.1) my experience was that most ships had data which was accurate enough to get a firing solution. There were exceptions (such as the two ships mentioned above) but generally I managed to hit my targets. Having said that, I would still love to see any inaccuracies corrected! But checking all the ships is a big job.

[Pisces]

Besides that, who said the Lloyds Register didn't have any mistakes in thier records.