SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997 |
|
03-25-20, 12:38 AM | #1 |
A-ganger
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 75
Downloads: 51
Uploads: 0
|
False ship data?
Hi,
I had a problem in play. During an attack, I took my measurements for the RAOBF disc, and I got this: If I look at the result correctly, in X6, with a height of 7.5 (1200m) and a length of 23, I get an AOB of 52.5 . Since the ship has a leaking heading, the true AOB would be 180-52.5=127.5°. This is totally false. To the eye we can see that the AOB does not exceed 105/110°. Only erroneous data can give such results. The mast height and/or length of the vessel must be wrong. Am I getting the wrong idea, or am I correct? |
03-27-20, 09:27 AM | #2 |
A-ganger
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 75
Downloads: 51
Uploads: 0
|
Nobody?
|
03-27-20, 11:11 AM | #3 |
Navy Seal
|
There is indeed a possibility that not all the values from the recognition manual are 100% correct. Unfortunately there is no 100% valid way in the game to measure ships length, height and other values...
__________________
Best regards... Vecko The Wolves of Steel v2.2.25_SH5 Expansion Pack_Full The Wolves of Steel v2.2.xx to v2.2.25 - Update PDF Install Instructions How to report an issue If You wish to support my work... |
03-27-20, 12:12 PM | #4 |
A-ganger
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 75
Downloads: 51
Uploads: 0
|
May be a conversion error between units of measurement (feet/metres)...
Could someone with the feet version be able to give us the values he has? |
03-27-20, 12:42 PM | #5 | |
Grey Wolf
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Verona, Italy
Posts: 913
Downloads: 1333
Uploads: 0
|
Quote:
__________________
Parked under the balcony with my U-27 waiting Juliet finish makeup Last edited by hauangua; 03-27-20 at 01:11 PM. |
|
03-27-20, 01:49 PM | #6 |
A-ganger
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 75
Downloads: 51
Uploads: 0
|
I've decided to take a different approach to checking this ship's values.
I created a mission with the ship AOB 90° at 2000m. I was able to determine the values at once: Height: 5.5 ticks for 2000m corresponds to a height of 27.6m length: 17.4 ticks for an AOB from 90° to 2000m gives us a length of 86.9m So there are a lot of wrong values in this identification book. I hope there aren't too many, it would be really stupid to miss out on it. Thank you for your help. |
03-27-20, 01:52 PM | #7 |
A-ganger
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 75
Downloads: 51
Uploads: 0
|
For info, with the values of 7.5 ticks of height and 23 ticks of length, I find an AOB of 104-105°.
|
03-27-20, 02:33 PM | #8 |
Grey Wolf
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Verona, Italy
Posts: 913
Downloads: 1333
Uploads: 0
|
delete
__________________
Parked under the balcony with my U-27 waiting Juliet finish makeup |
03-27-20, 02:52 PM | #9 |
A-ganger
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 75
Downloads: 51
Uploads: 0
|
Why did you delete my message?
You miscalculated. Did you take the values from my screenshot? On the ship's identification book, we have a height of 22.6m and a length of 86.9m That gives us this theoretical aspect ratio: 86.9/22.6=3,485 Now, the observed aspect ratio in ticks: 23/7.5=3.067 ratio observed aspect / theoretical aspect ratio X 100= 3.067/3.485 X 100 = 88% X 100 = 88 If we go back to the Gegnerlage Berechnungstabelle: We're getting an AOB of 63° And since the ship is fleeing: 180-63=117° Last edited by nazaka; 03-27-20 at 03:14 PM. |
03-27-20, 01:55 PM | #10 |
A-ganger
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 75
Downloads: 51
Uploads: 0
|
|
03-27-20, 02:04 PM | #11 | |
Grey Wolf
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Verona, Italy
Posts: 913
Downloads: 1333
Uploads: 0
|
Quote:
__________________
Parked under the balcony with my U-27 waiting Juliet finish makeup |
|
|
|