[REL] FOTRS Ultimate Project

[swdw]

From doing RFB it always amazes me how many people are surprised to learn how bad our torpedoes actually were.

Wish I still had all the files when I researched this, but if someone has some historical questions, I'd be glad to answer.

So people know, a target angle of 90 degrees (perpendicular) had a <10% chance of detonating when run at high speed. As the angle changed, the chance of detonation increased. If I remember right (been a while so these may be off) it was 70% at 45 degrees and 90% with an angle of 20 degrees or less. There was little change in the dud rate until an angle of 70-75 degrees was reached. There were other numbers I found, but those are the ones I remember.

Going to slow speed didn't double the chances of detonation, but did increase them.

My understanding is someone came along after I turned over the RFB project and changed the numbers, getting them wrong. Too bad. But man did I catch hell for the torpedo changes and had to post the story of the Tinosa and a couple others for people to back off.

Note: this doesn't even take into account the depth problem or the magnetic exploder issue

[CapnScurvy]

Originally Posted by KaleunMarco

yep...you were bitten by the draft-disparity-bug.
NCA_HAGURO.CFG
ClassName=CAHaguro
3DModelFileName=data/Sea/NCA_Haguro/NCA_Haguro
Draft=6.4

NCA_HAGURO.SIM
draught=10.5


so, the simulated draft of the cruiser you fired on is 6.4 meters but the draft set for your torpedo depth is 10.5 meters.
you would never have hit that ship with the computer-set-draft.


there are a number of ships that have this feature.
please do not get angry at me...i was stung by the bug when i fired on the Aden Maru, the Ada Maru, the Ansyu Maru, and others.

The Hagruo.cfg "Draft=6.4" (in meters) measurement is what's shown in the Recognition Manual. This figure is what you should use when setting up your torpedoes before firing at the specific target. The "Draught=10.5" (again meters) from the same ships .sim file, is what the model uses for the actual draft figure. The fact the "listed" Recognition Manual figure of 6.4 meters is less than the actual figure (10.5 meters) used for the ship model (which is the depth at which a torpedo will either strike a target model, or if greater, will miss the target) seems fine. There should be no reason to think setting your torpedoes for 6.4 meters would not hit a 10.5 meter draft modeled ship. It is NOT as KaleunMarco describes.

This doesn't take in the other "variables" that come into play with torpedoes, but it's correct with understanding the listed RM data and what a modeled ships parameters are.

===============

Originally Posted by SWDW

From doing RFB it always amazes me how many people are surprised to learn how bad our torpedoes actually were.

Wish I still had all the files when I researched this, but if someone has some historical questions, I'd be glad to answer.

So people know, a target angle of 90 degrees (perpendicular) had a <10% chance of detonating when run at high speed. As the angle changed, the chance of detonation increased. If I remember right (been a while so these may be off) it was 70% at 45 degrees and 90% with an angle of 20 degrees or less. There was little change in the dud rate until an angle of 70-75 degrees was reached. There were other numbers I found, but those are the ones I remember.

Going to slow speed didn't double the chances of detonation, but did increase them.

My understanding is someone came along after I turned over the RFB project and changed the numbers, getting them wrong. Too bad. But man did I catch hell for the torpedo changes and had to post the story of the Tinosa and a couple others for people to back off.

Note: this doesn't even take into account the depth problem or the magnetic exploder issue

AND, How the H-E double L are you SWDW??? Man, it's been a long time!! Good to hear from you my friend!?!

[Fifi]

Fleet carrier Hiyo class...impossible to get accurate firing solution as the stadimeter on top of mast gives wrong distance, on top of chimney gives wrong distance too.
This by huge error.
4 torpedoes lost...
Just saying

[merc4ulfate]

Originally Posted by swdw

From doing RFB it always amazes me how many people are surprised to learn how bad our torpedoes actually were.

Wish I still had all the files when I researched this, but if someone has some historical questions, I'd be glad to answer.

So people know, a target angle of 90 degrees (perpendicular) had a <10% chance of detonating when run at high speed. As the angle changed, the chance of detonation increased. If I remember right (been a while so these may be off) it was 70% at 45 degrees and 90% with an angle of 20 degrees or less. There was little change in the dud rate until an angle of 70-75 degrees was reached. There were other numbers I found, but those are the ones I remember.

Going to slow speed didn't double the chances of detonation, but did increase them.

My understanding is someone came along after I turned over the RFB project and changed the numbers, getting them wrong. Too bad. But man did I catch hell for the torpedo changes and had to post the story of the Tinosa and a couple others for people to back off.

Note: this doesn't even take into account the depth problem or the magnetic exploder issue

Yes the dud rate was horrendous during WW2 for the USN. Good thing they had all those IJN propellers to retrofit the firing pin or they would have never sank a thing.

[merc4ulfate]

Originally Posted by Fifi

Fleet carrier Hiyo class...impossible to get accurate firing solution as the stadimeter on top of mast gives wrong distance, on top of chimney gives wrong distance too.
This by huge error.
4 torpedoes lost...
Just saying

How far away from it are you?

When I have had an issue of bad firing solutions I have sometimes set the scope at zero and just turned the boat to fire where I think they should meet and launch a spread as I turn. I do how ever get in fairly close doing this.

I sank the Yamato in a storm once off Truk like this. I was less than 1000 yards but couldn't see a thing but radar showed location so I blind fired until I sank it.

[Fifi]

Originally Posted by merc4ulfate

How far away from it are you?

When I have had an issue of bad firing solutions I have sometimes set the scope at zero and just turned the boat to fire where I think they should meet and launch a spread as I turn. I do how ever get in fairly close doing this.

I sank the Yamato in a storm once off Truk like this. I was less than 1000 yards but couldn't see a thing but radar showed location so I blind fired until I sank it.

Around 1500m...

I can check the distance error using attack map when target is locked.
Putting the stadi either on top masts or chimney is off by far.
I was completely unable to get the right distance, and the solution was wrong even with right target speed.

[KaleunMarco]

Originally Posted by CapnScurvy

The Hagruo.cfg "Draft=6.4" (in meters) measurement is what's shown in the Recognition Manual. This figure is what you should use when setting up your torpedoes before firing at the specific target. The "Draught=10.5" (again meters) from the same ships .sim file, is what the model uses for the actual draft figure. The fact the "listed" Recognition Manual figure of 6.4 meters is less than the actual figure (10.5 meters) used for the ship model (which is the depth at which a torpedo will either strike a target model, or if greater, will miss the target) seems fine. There should be no reason to think setting your torpedoes for 6.4 meters would not hit a 10.5 meter draft modeled ship. It is NOT as KaleunMarco describes.

This doesn't take in the other "variables" that come into play with torpedoes, but it's correct with understanding the listed RM data and what a modeled ships parameters are.

I must disagree, with respect, based on experience and testing.

I fired a whole-boat-load of torpedoes at a small convoy of Ada and Aden marus. Using the event camera I was able to see that every single shot ran too deep. I use auto-targeting, so the draft values are generated for each shot automatically.
In an effort to find the root cause, I returned to my in-port save file and then proceeded to negate all of the torpedo side effects: circle run, deep run, dud, etc. set them all to zero for the torpedoes I had on board. This will eliminate torpedo performance variations. Then restarted the mission from port and sailed back into the west-Pac looking for more Adas and Adens. When I found them and attacked, the same damn thing happened: every shot ran deep. It cannot be bad torpedoes because I eliminated those in the SIM settings...the problem has to be the system generated draft. So, I attacked again only this time I changed my depth setting manually to a value less than the automatic setting and ....bingo... got hits.
Next test, I changed the SIM-draft setting for the Ada and Aden to the same value that is stored in CFG and sailed back into the west-Pac looking for more Adas and Adens. When I found them and attacked, using auto-targeting, every torpedo fired hit the ship.
So, now, based on testing, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that the auto-targeting draft is too deep because it uses the draught (sic) value in the SIM file for the respective ship.

[torpedobait]

Originally Posted by italianmarine

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/down...o=file&id=5432

this should bring you directly to his mod for SH4.

It is not exactly the full version like the one for The Wolves of Steel but at least nice radio channel for departure, Washington and Tokio.

Thank you, Captain!

[propbeanie]

Originally Posted by KaleunMarco

I must disagree, with respect, based on experience and testing.

I fired a whole-boat-load of torpedoes at a small convoy of Ada and Aden marus. Using the event camera I was able to see that every single shot ran too deep. I use auto-targeting, so the draft values are generated for each shot automatically.
In an effort to find the root cause, I returned to my in-port save file and then proceeded to negate all of the torpedo side effects: circle run, deep run, dud, etc. set them all to zero for the torpedoes I had on board. This will eliminate torpedo performance variations. Then restarted the mission from port and sailed back into the west-Pac looking for more Adas and Adens. When I found them and attacked, the same damn thing happened: every shot ran deep. It cannot be bad torpedoes because I eliminated those in the SIM settings...the problem has to be the system generated draft. So, I attacked again only this time I changed my depth setting manually to a value less than the automatic setting and ....bingo... got hits.
Next test, I changed the SIM-draft setting for the Ada and Aden to the same value that is stored in CFG and sailed back into the west-Pac looking for more Adas and Adens. When I found them and attacked, using auto-targeting, every torpedo fired hit the ship.
So, now, based on testing, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that the auto-targeting draft is too deep because it uses the draught (sic) value in the SIM file for the respective ship.

There were issues with the Ada & Aden Maru ships, which have been "repaired". Fifi had posted a shot somewhere in this thread about one of them, which was found when looking at a similar issue found on the Tone class in the Stories and Patrol Logs... Post #4941 picture he has there. The Ada and Aden should now be correctly configured, as is the Tone. The Hagruo had also been worked on. I don't know about the Hiyo. One thing I do know with it though, is that the stadimeter itself can produce some strange results for me, and I'm better off not using it. I just make all kinds of confusing marks (where are the "notes" Ubi promised??) on my NavMap and attack from it... (and missing just as often).

[Fifi]

Originally Posted by propbeanie

I don't know about the Hiyo. One thing I do know with it though, is that the stadimeter itself can produce some strange results for me, and I'm better off not using it. I just make all kinds of confusing marks (where are the "notes" Ubi promised??) on my NavMap and attack from it... (and missing just as often).

Isn’t FOTRSU an evolution of FOTRS?
I’m asking because in FOTRS V1.3 i don’t have ANY stadimeter problem...all measurements are very accurate (for all ships).
In fact after few V1.3 patrols, i didn’t encountered any problems at all. Of any kind (no radar mast animation issue, no locking target at sea level problems etc)

[propbeanie]

Yes, it is an "evolution" of FotRS - versions 1.2 & 1.3 combined... However, "evolution" isn't always an improvement in all aspects... - as most have witnessed, we've had a few things go "backwards", and more than once. There are more ships and planes in FotRSU than there were in both the 1.2 & 1.3 FOTRS mods. Even in those two versions, the ships were configured differently amongst themselves (authorship differences), which is something that s7rikeback and CapnScurvy have strived to eliminate, by having all of the ships configured similarly. Not all are, and a few of the new ones "sneak" new problems in. We'll have to look closer at the CV Hiyo, and see if anything is different about it. According to the Names.cfg file, it came in with v0.26 of FotRSU, so it should have been checked already, and fully functional - but it is easy to overlook a "comma" or a "semi-colon" in all these test files. Maybe CapnScurvy can comment on the Stadimeter and what is used to "measure" with on some of the targets...

[KaleunMarco]

that broken pipe/hiss is real PITA.
you pick it up whenever you take any damage...it is not activated on control room damage.
then it hangs around even after your crew repairs all damage.
you can be on high TC (2048) and still hear it.
you can save and exit then re-enter and reload and still hear it.
you come out of high TC for a radar contact or radio message and you hear it and then you accelerate to high TC and it is suddenly quiet.
then six days later for no reason at all, the hiss returns. WTF.
no consistency whatsoever.
exasperating.

i suspect the sound is Interior.SteamBurst and it is set to loop. it would be interesting to find out what event activates it.

[merc4ulfate]

REPORT:

March 18 1943 0730 South of Kii Suido Task force position reported by radio.

Balao moved to intercept and spotted TF on radar and positioned the boat in the path of their course.

Approximate TF position:
134° 55.8 E
33° 29 N

First go around I dropped to periscope depth to inhibit radar detection. Visually spotted CV Shōkaku. Game crashed about 20 seconds later.

Second Go around same actions but I camed out to see what was coming. I spotted at least:

Tanker 2
DD 4
CL 2
CV 2

There were more but the game CTD once more. I did get a look at the second CV before the CTD and it certainly looks like a IJN Taiho:



I think the problem CTD wise is the Taiho was not commissioned until 1944 so there is no way it should be showing up March of 1943.

Visual range can never be closer than the sighting of the Shōkaku. As soon as the Taiho enters visual range CTD.

[merc4ulfate]

Originally Posted by KaleunMarco

that broken pipe/hiss is real PITA.
you pick it up whenever you take any damage...it is not activated on control room damage.
then it hangs around even after your crew repairs all damage.
you can be on high TC (2048) and still hear it.
you can save and exit then re-enter and reload and still hear it.
you come out of high TC for a radar contact or radio message and you hear it and then you accelerate to high TC and it is suddenly quiet.
then six days later for no reason at all, the hiss returns. WTF.
no consistency whatsoever.
exasperating.

i suspect the sound is Interior.SteamBurst and it is set to loop. it would be interesting to find out what event activates it.

I have often wanted to remove the sound altogether.

[propbeanie]

Originally Posted by merc4ulfate

REPORT:

March 18 1943 0730 South of Kii Suido Task force position reported by radio.

Balao moved to intercept and spotted TF on radar and positioned the boat in the path of their course.

Approximate TF position:
134° 55.8 E
33° 29 N

First go around I dropped to periscope depth to inhibit radar detection. Visually spotted CV Shōkaku. Game crashed about 20 seconds later.

Second Go around same actions but I camed out to see what was coming. I spotted at least:

Tanker 2
DD 4
CL 2
CV 2

There were more but the game CTD once more. I did get a look at the second CV before the CTD and it certainly looks like a IJN Taiho:



I think the problem CTD wise is the Taiho was not commissioned until 1944 so there is no way it should be showing up March of 1943.

Visual range can never be closer than the sighting of the Shōkaku. As soon as the Taiho enters visual range CTD.

I'll look into that. The Task Force files were worked over to eliminate such occurrences. This is probably something edited after that was done. We still can't figure out why the game uses dates, if it's just going to run over them anyway, such as spawning a Taiho before its time... Similarly, you shouldn't have a Balao off the coast of Japan in March of '43 either... - but the game runs over those dates also...

As for that sound, we found nodes that it was tied to earlier, but have not found why it "hangs" and repeats over and over. I cannot get my computer to do the sound like that, which makes it difficult to diagnose. Didn't we have a picture of a "leak" somewhere that's an animation, and it wouldn't quit either? Can you look around your boat when you get that, and see if you can find an animation also stuck? Thanks.