[WIP] The Offical Post of The Surface Warfare Super-Mod

[DarkFish]

Originally Posted by tater

I have data for HMS Hood, and she took about 27 minutes to work up to flank from zero.

Also in emergencies? Normally they wouldn't accelerate at max to avoid damage to the engine. 27 minutes seems more like a 'safe' acceleration, gently building up speed.

[tater]

It's a chart they used in wargames, so it might be the safe speed.

When I read accounts of PTO naval engagements, however, they usually refer (in combat) to ships "working up" to a speed for evasion, etc.

Regardless, the stock values are ridiculous, IMO. There is no way a BB goes from 0 to 20 knots in 35 seconds.

[DarkFish]

They indeed 'worked up' to a speed for evasion, whenever it became clear there would be an engagement they would immediately begin to gain speed. I agree though from 0 to 20 knots in 35 secs is a huge acceleration for a BB. I checked the sim file and its mass is a little lower and its engine hp a little higher than historical. So if this is corrected it'd probably take some 45 secs to get to 20 kts. Still very much, but not too unrealistic I guess, especially in real emergencies like a torpedo heading for the ship.

[tater]

I think that is way too fast. The screw count is wrong, too, big, slow props are more efficient. Iowa tried to keep her turns at no more than 200.

0-20 knots needs to take minutes.

Stopping a ship like Iowa is easier than most ww2 BBs because of electric drive. None the less, throwing her all back from 30 knots took over a mile to slow her. (~7 ship lengths). She could stop faster with a "barn door" stop (they could turn her rudders into each other to make a wall—Wisconsin did this once, and suffered for it thereafter, apparently). I have no timing on this, but starting with ~30 knots, that means ~4 minutes to stop.

Stopping should be faster because you also have drag working for you which goes like v^2.

Less advanced designs would have been slower stopping (and accelerating).

IMO, that means the boundary value would be a ship capable of accelerating as fast as she could stop, and that might be 4 minutes from 30 knots—and with an electric drive, reverse was just flipping a switch, you cannot do this as easily with a direct drive.

[cgjimeneza]

Remember in all our history books or novels:

when you will have an engagement you bring all boilers in line ("Destroyer Command") and yes, the acceleration values are crazy, I hate a ship going at 12 knots slowing to 7 knots in a length or more (no inertia?) and torps passing in front of the target missing by a whisker.

anyone has a copy of Janes Warships of WW2?

Originally Posted by tater

I think that is way too fast. The screw count is wrong, too, big, slow props are more efficient. Iowa tried to keep her turns at no more than 200.

0-20 knots needs to take minutes.

Stopping a ship like Iowa is easier than most ww2 BBs because of electric drive. None the less, throwing her all back from 30 knots took over a mile to slow her. (~7 ship lengths). She could stop faster with a "barn door" stop (they could turn her rudders into each other to make a wall—Wisconsin did this once, and suffered for it thereafter, apparently). I have no timing on this, but starting with ~30 knots, that means ~4 minutes to stop.

Stopping should be faster because you also have drag working for you which goes like v^2.

Less advanced designs would have been slower stopping (and accelerating).

IMO, that means the boundary value would be a ship capable of accelerating as fast as she could stop, and that might be 4 minutes from 30 knots—and with an electric drive, reverse was just flipping a switch, you cannot do this as easily with a direct drive.

[polyfiller]

Folks - if we want to achieve slower acceleration then I think it's going to take something more than just a shipname.sim file change. I tried playing with mass, drag etc. last night on the Yamato and could slow acceleration down ... but at the expense of reducing the top speed significantly (ahieved 6 minutes to accelerate to 11 kts ... and that's as fast as it would go). Also played with reducing number of engines etc. in the UPCGE file. Will have another go at messing with engine power, but susepct that it can't be done with the .SIM file.

Maybe there's a graph file or something somewhere to change. Am going to have a look around. Maybe a more experienced modder knows where to look ?

[Sledgehammer427]

im afraid i have to use the hyphenated deathnote for modding these games

perhaps ship acceleration and deceleration is hard-coded?

its not a big deal to me, like a single flea on a dog

[tater]

It may be that the best that can happen is a compromise with them being a little less speed-responsive.

[ivank]

Originally Posted by Sledgehammer427

im afraid i have to use the hyphenated deathnote for modding these games

perhaps ship acceleration and deceleration is hard-coded?

its not a big deal to me, like a single flea on a dog

I agree, if ship accel and decel is hard-coded and therefore un mod able, it will just be one issue people will have to live with. I understand the plight of the U-boot or US sub commander, but in TSWSM I fail to see the issue(other than historical)

A submariner, who fires slow torpedos(i think the fastest in SH4 is ~44knts?) and the rapid accel and decel of a target can make or break a patrol, I can see getting mad.
But for us surface guys(And I hope if your complaining about this you are a submariner) that fire boardsides of shells that can cover a distance of 10miles in 15secs, I dont see the problem. No matter how fast a target accels or deccels that shell(if on the right trajectory) will hit

[tater]

Long Lance torpedoes.

I wanna try a DD vs a big critter

[Sledgehammer427]

a big critter? I hope you don't mean the Long Lance. That peice of work did like 50 kts and had a 1,217 lb warhead...your DD would be blown to Mars...pollsbly Jupiter...

that, or you can elaborate on "Big Critter"

[tater]

I meant I'd want to have a DD career, maybe in the Solomons and get to attack some CAs, BBs, etc with torpedoes.

[iambecomelife]

Originally Posted by tater

I meant I'd want to have a DD career, maybe in the Solomons and get to attack some CAs, BBs, etc with torpedoes.

The Solomons? Imagine having to go through the "Barroom Brawl"! :rotfl:

[cgjimeneza]

why do you think its called "ironbottom sound"

but it would be nice to tangle with the Tokyo Express

[tater]

I'd like to play both sides ion the Solomons. IJN DDs are sexy, though, you have to admit. IJN CAs are also particularly pretty ships.

Course my fave plane is the F4F, so maybe I'm aestetically broken.