Depth Control Problem

Sub Sailor · 12-26-05, 10:11 AM

I have mentioned this condition is an earlier post, and I have fisnished running a series of tests. The tests are only on the 688i, Seawolf, and Akula.
What I have noted is when you are takeing evasive action and answer a flank bell you boat goes deeper. In fact it is a significat drop and makes it impossible to operate in shallow water and take evasive action if that becomes necessay. I am going to report the average of 10 test per boat. Each boat is at 600 feet(200 meters for the Akula), each boat is answering a flank bell and I inputed the course to insure that it was always the same. I tried using the compass rose but could not get consistence in my course change. All course changes are 180 degrees.
Also because I was in very deep water I allowed each boat to regain odered depth and each did so. I did encounterd a problem with the Akula I have no explanation for, and that was, it would report steady on course but the turn always continued. I would have to stop it from the orederd course meter.

688i Finished the turn 279.4 feet below odered depth.

Seawolf Finshed the turn 208.8 feet below odered depth.

Akula Finished the turn 94 meters(308 feet) below ordered depth.

So if you are in a shallow water operations and a Helo gets on you and drops you are in a heap a trouble. You are probably going to crash.

Also before anyone ask-I tried to control depth by odering a shallower depth on the turn- never could accomplish it, the boats kept dropping until the turn was finished and then each would recover depth. I was never able to effect the drop.

I don't know how to fix it or if it can be fixed, but I never experienced this in SC or in earlier versions of DW.

All I can say in real life submarines maintain depth control in the turn. Oh and I tried some at max depth just for fun, the boat goes below crush depth and they do crush in DW, also in every case starting at 600 feet, each boat would go deep enough to cause significant hull popping.

Respectfully,

Ron Banks MMCM(SS), USN(Ret)

Kapitan · 12-26-05, 12:23 PM

happens some times to me it annoys me but then i think what about a patch

Sub Sailor · 12-26-05, 01:15 PM

Do you think it can be fixed or will we just have to learn to deal with it?
What do you when it happens to you?

Respectfully,

Ron Banks MMCM(SS), USN(Ret)

Molon Labe · 12-26-05, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sub Sailor

Do you think it can be fixed or will we just have to learn to deal with it?

I sure hope so.

Quote:

What do you when it happens to you?

Crash, or stall in the water trying to correct it and die like a helpless b1tch.

Sub Sailor · 12-26-05, 06:12 PM

Well I see we are all on the same page. It sure is frustrating.

Wim Libaers · 12-28-05, 11:02 AM

IIRC this is an intentional effect of the physic engine. In a high speed turn, the resistance of the sail makes the boat roll, so the rudder will not only make the boat turn but also makes it aim downwards. In a real sub that could be compensated with the other control surfaces, but in DW you just turn the rudder without depth control.

Sub Sailor · 12-28-05, 12:13 PM

I don't remember seeing this in SC, or in DW before I patched it to 1.03 Beta.
I know that subs roll, I am just tying to find out what limitations I must compensate for in DW.

Thank You,

Ron Banks MMCM(SS), USN(Ret)

Molon Labe · 12-28-05, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wim Libaers

IIRC this is an intentional effect of the physic engine. In a high speed turn, the resistance of the sail makes the boat roll, so the rudder will not only make the boat turn but also makes it aim downwards. In a real sub that could be compensated with the other control surfaces, but in DW you just turn the rudder without depth control.

The crew should be compensating for this with the dive planes. If the "improvement" to physics did not come with an interface/crew designed to work with it, it's still a bug.

Sub Sailor · 12-29-05, 09:23 AM

I ran test on SC last night on all three boats and they all hold their depth at any speed and degree of turn. So why does that "engine"work and the one in DW doesn't?

Respectfully,

Ron Banks MMCM(SS), USN(Ret)

LuftWolf · 12-29-05, 09:59 AM

Well, Sub Command, despite what the DW detractors say, is hopelessly out of date in terms of its physics and acoustic engines.

So it doesn't really do much good to compare DW to SC, since DW is a much more sophisticated sim, and as such its more difficult to get the balance correct.

So SC may work "right", but very simplistically. Dangerous Waters raises the bar by several multiplicative factors in terms of the fidelity of its modelling, so it has also proven to be a greater challenge to get working exactly correct.

Sub Sailor · 12-29-05, 11:11 AM

LW;
Please understand I am not trying to put down DW, quite the contrary, I am try to help with the problem.
I am not in your league when it come to all the stuff in computing, and I know that, I look at your work and stand in amazement how all of you accomplish the stuff you do. I don't even understand some of the things you all discuss with each other. LW, I don't even know what "debug" is.
So, all I can offer to these simulations is my real life knowledge of ships and subs. Don't know much at all about planes and helos, I just know to subs they are a major pain in the a... Planes and helos are without a doubt the best asw paltform, except for a good ssn, and that is because of environment.
So when you talk about "engines" does that mean the problem cannot be corrected? So SC "engine" would not work in DW or vice versus, correct?
Does trying to have so many "playable platforms" add to the difficulty. I think I understand the reasons for multiple platforms and that is marketing. One sim has something for everyone, but doesn't that just add to the problems of building them? I mean there as never been a simulation like DW where you have 4 classes of subs, 1 surface, and 2 aircraft.
The purpose of this post is to insure you and anyone else working on this problem that I am behind you. I am retired and have time and can run test and record my findings that is all I can really offer. I am not a whiner, I just want to contribute.

Thanks,

Ron Banks MMCM(SS), USN(Ret)

LuftWolf · 12-29-05, 11:27 AM

Oh, no, please don't think I was trying to criticize you!!!

That was not my intention at all. I know you are contributing to making DW better!

My comment about the DW detractors was directed at those who repeat over and over again how much better SC was than DW... which is frankly not true, and not even close to being true, from a purely simulation stand point.

I just wanted to clear up the idea that something was working in SC and then broke in DW. The game "engine", which refers to the code under the hood so to speak that does all the calculations and makes the game work, has been completely redone and expanded in DW, so refering back to SC as an example of how things were working at one point is not necessarily a good reference point for DW. That's the only point I wanted to bring up.

Ron, I know you are one of the guys we are lucky to have around these parts!

And thanks for the work you have been doing to try to help SCS and we humble modders.

Cheers,
David

Wim Libaers · 12-29-05, 01:55 PM

And if I remember correctly, SC subs did not have the roll in high speed turns. DW added the roll, which is good, but fails to compensate for the consequences.

Mau · 12-29-05, 03:37 PM

So there is no way to compensate (when in OPS Room station) the lost of depth (manually)?

Just asking since most of my time I am in the FFG

What about the AI Subs when they are trying to avoid torpedoes? Are they going aground?

Mau

Sub Sailor · 12-29-05, 04:59 PM

LW;
Thanks very much, I would not refer to you Modelers has humble by any stretch. I will keep helping anyway I can.

To answer two other post. I posted my results from my latest and in DW at flank the 688i drops an average of 289.8 feet during a 180 degree turn.
Seawolf 208.8, and the Akula 94 meters/308 feet. So yes if you are near the bottom or near crush depth and have to make an evasive manuver you can end up crashing or crushing. But the subs all drop significantly during a high speed turn. In regards to roll, I can not answer that, I don't have knowledge of how these engines work. LW or any of the guys who work on the simulation to make them better would have to answer that. I wish I had the knowledge but I don't. I have not been able to overcome the drop yet. I will say that at low speeds this is not really a problem. I have only encounterd it when taking evasive actions or testing.

Respectfully,

Ron Banks MMCM(SS), USN(Ret)

12-26-05, 10:11 AM	#1
Sub Sailor Commander Join Date: Sep 1999 Location: Orofino, Idaho Posts: 443 Downloads: 66 Uploads: 0	Depth Control Problem I have mentioned this condition is an earlier post, and I have fisnished running a series of tests. The tests are only on the 688i, Seawolf, and Akula. What I have noted is when you are takeing evasive action and answer a flank bell you boat goes deeper. In fact it is a significat drop and makes it impossible to operate in shallow water and take evasive action if that becomes necessay. I am going to report the average of 10 test per boat. Each boat is at 600 feet(200 meters for the Akula), each boat is answering a flank bell and I inputed the course to insure that it was always the same. I tried using the compass rose but could not get consistence in my course change. All course changes are 180 degrees. Also because I was in very deep water I allowed each boat to regain odered depth and each did so. I did encounterd a problem with the Akula I have no explanation for, and that was, it would report steady on course but the turn always continued. I would have to stop it from the orederd course meter. 688i Finished the turn 279.4 feet below odered depth. Seawolf Finshed the turn 208.8 feet below odered depth. Akula Finished the turn 94 meters(308 feet) below ordered depth. So if you are in a shallow water operations and a Helo gets on you and drops you are in a heap a trouble. You are probably going to crash. Also before anyone ask-I tried to control depth by odering a shallower depth on the turn- never could accomplish it, the boats kept dropping until the turn was finished and then each would recover depth. I was never able to effect the drop. I don't know how to fix it or if it can be fixed, but I never experienced this in SC or in earlier versions of DW. All I can say in real life submarines maintain depth control in the turn. Oh and I tried some at max depth just for fun, the boat goes below crush depth and they do crush in DW, also in every case starting at 600 feet, each boat would go deep enough to cause significant hull popping. Respectfully, Ron Banks MMCM(SS), USN(Ret)

12-26-05, 12:23 PM	#2
Kapitan Sub Test Pilot Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: UK + Canada Posts: 7,130 Downloads: 77 Uploads: 7	happens some times to me it annoys me but then i think what about a patch __________________ DONT FORGET if you like a post to nominate it by using the blue diamond Find out about Museum Ships here: https://www.museumships.us/ Flickr for all my pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131313936@N03/ Navy general board articles: https://www.navygeneralboard.com/author/aegis/

12-26-05, 01:15 PM	#3
Sub Sailor Commander Join Date: Sep 1999 Location: Orofino, Idaho Posts: 443 Downloads: 66 Uploads: 0	Anu ideas Do you think it can be fixed or will we just have to learn to deal with it? What do you when it happens to you? Respectfully, Ron Banks MMCM(SS), USN(Ret)

12-26-05, 06:12 PM	#5
Sub Sailor Commander Join Date: Sep 1999 Location: Orofino, Idaho Posts: 443 Downloads: 66 Uploads: 0	Ah Well I see we are all on the same page. It sure is frustrating.

12-28-05, 12:13 PM	#7
Sub Sailor Commander Join Date: Sep 1999 Location: Orofino, Idaho Posts: 443 Downloads: 66 Uploads: 0	Another question I don't remember seeing this in SC, or in DW before I patched it to 1.03 Beta. I know that subs roll, I am just tying to find out what limitations I must compensate for in DW. Thank You, Ron Banks MMCM(SS), USN(Ret)

12-28-05, 11:02 AM	#6
Wim Libaers Samurai Navy Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Flanders Posts: 569 Downloads: 4 Uploads: 0	IIRC this is an intentional effect of the physic engine. In a high speed turn, the resistance of the sail makes the boat roll, so the rudder will not only make the boat turn but also makes it aim downwards. In a real sub that could be compensated with the other control surfaces, but in DW you just turn the rudder without depth control.

12-29-05, 09:23 AM	#9
Sub Sailor Commander Join Date: Sep 1999 Location: Orofino, Idaho Posts: 443 Downloads: 66 Uploads: 0	Test I ran test on SC last night on all three boats and they all hold their depth at any speed and degree of turn. So why does that "engine"work and the one in DW doesn't? Respectfully, Ron Banks MMCM(SS), USN(Ret)

12-29-05, 09:59 AM	#10
LuftWolf Ocean Warrior Join Date: May 2005 Location: Free New York Posts: 3,167 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	Well, Sub Command, despite what the DW detractors say, is hopelessly out of date in terms of its physics and acoustic engines. So it doesn't really do much good to compare DW to SC, since DW is a much more sophisticated sim, and as such its more difficult to get the balance correct. So SC may work "right", but very simplistically. Dangerous Waters raises the bar by several multiplicative factors in terms of the fidelity of its modelling, so it has also proven to be a greater challenge to get working exactly correct. __________________ LW

12-29-05, 11:11 AM	#11
Sub Sailor Commander Join Date: Sep 1999 Location: Orofino, Idaho Posts: 443 Downloads: 66 Uploads: 0	Explanation LW; Please understand I am not trying to put down DW, quite the contrary, I am try to help with the problem. I am not in your league when it come to all the stuff in computing, and I know that, I look at your work and stand in amazement how all of you accomplish the stuff you do. I don't even understand some of the things you all discuss with each other. LW, I don't even know what "debug" is. So, all I can offer to these simulations is my real life knowledge of ships and subs. Don't know much at all about planes and helos, I just know to subs they are a major pain in the a... Planes and helos are without a doubt the best asw paltform, except for a good ssn, and that is because of environment. So when you talk about "engines" does that mean the problem cannot be corrected? So SC "engine" would not work in DW or vice versus, correct? Does trying to have so many "playable platforms" add to the difficulty. I think I understand the reasons for multiple platforms and that is marketing. One sim has something for everyone, but doesn't that just add to the problems of building them? I mean there as never been a simulation like DW where you have 4 classes of subs, 1 surface, and 2 aircraft. The purpose of this post is to insure you and anyone else working on this problem that I am behind you. I am retired and have time and can run test and record my findings that is all I can really offer. I am not a whiner, I just want to contribute. Thanks, Ron Banks MMCM(SS), USN(Ret)

12-29-05, 11:27 AM	#12
LuftWolf Ocean Warrior Join Date: May 2005 Location: Free New York Posts: 3,167 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	Oh, no, please don't think I was trying to criticize you!!! That was not my intention at all. I know you are contributing to making DW better! My comment about the DW detractors was directed at those who repeat over and over again how much better SC was than DW... which is frankly not true, and not even close to being true, from a purely simulation stand point. I just wanted to clear up the idea that something was working in SC and then broke in DW. The game "engine", which refers to the code under the hood so to speak that does all the calculations and makes the game work, has been completely redone and expanded in DW, so refering back to SC as an example of how things were working at one point is not necessarily a good reference point for DW. That's the only point I wanted to bring up. Ron, I know you are one of the guys we are lucky to have around these parts! And thanks for the work you have been doing to try to help SCS and we humble modders. Cheers, David __________________ LW

12-29-05, 01:55 PM	#13
Wim Libaers Samurai Navy Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Flanders Posts: 569 Downloads: 4 Uploads: 0	And if I remember correctly, SC subs did not have the roll in high speed turns. DW added the roll, which is good, but fails to compensate for the consequences.

12-29-05, 03:37 PM	#14
Mau Sonar Guy Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 382 Downloads: 3 Uploads: 0	So there is no way to compensate (when in OPS Room station) the lost of depth (manually)? Just asking since most of my time I am in the FFG What about the AI Subs when they are trying to avoid torpedoes? Are they going aground? Mau

12-29-05, 04:59 PM	#15
Sub Sailor Commander Join Date: Sep 1999 Location: Orofino, Idaho Posts: 443 Downloads: 66 Uploads: 0	Thanks LW; Thanks very much, I would not refer to you Modelers has humble by any stretch. I will keep helping anyway I can. To answer two other post. I posted my results from my latest and in DW at flank the 688i drops an average of 289.8 feet during a 180 degree turn. Seawolf 208.8, and the Akula 94 meters/308 feet. So yes if you are near the bottom or near crush depth and have to make an evasive manuver you can end up crashing or crushing. But the subs all drop significantly during a high speed turn. In regards to roll, I can not answer that, I don't have knowledge of how these engines work. LW or any of the guys who work on the simulation to make them better would have to answer that. I wish I had the knowledge but I don't. I have not been able to overcome the drop yet. I will say that at low speeds this is not really a problem. I have only encounterd it when taking evasive actions or testing. Respectfully, Ron Banks MMCM(SS), USN(Ret)