Red Rodgers  

Вернуться   Red Rodgers > Запасная полоса > S.C.S. Dangerous Waters

Ответ
 
Опции темы Опции просмотра
Старый 28-03-2010, 00:26   #761
goldorak
Sergeant
 
Регистрация: Dec 2008
Сообщений: 250
Цитата:
Сообщение от CrazyIvan Посмотреть сообщение
Actually I do not see the large difference in features of a torpedo and UUV.

UUV - the same size of a torpedo, why UUV could not have a passive head in same size device body?

Certainly in performance SCS it looks incredibly.

However passive sensor control comparable on the abilities with a sensor control of a torpedo - quite can is on UUV.
CrazyIvan, I can agree with you that UUV's being as big as torpedoes COULD use the same kind of sensors, active or passive. The big problem as I see it, is that a torpedo cannot detect a contact 5-6-7-8-9-10 nm out. UUV's in the game can. This is an enormous difference in capability. If the range of the passive sensor could somehow be reduced without problem, then you would be right in your assessment about UUV's being more or less Torpedoes without explosive heads.

goldorak вне форума   Ответить с цитированием
Старый 28-03-2010, 00:44   #762
dd149
Sergeant
 
Регистрация: Jan 2009
Адрес: North France
Сообщений: 155
Considering that UUV has no warhead, it is plausible that it can carry a sensor suite superior to the one of a torpedo, but still limited by the size. in my understanding passive sensors partly depend on size of the array in order to be able to triangulate distance, which is clearly not going to be accurate with the size of a torpedo. But passive capability should normally still be superior to just torpedo auto director, otherwise, why would one bother to fabricate UUVs?a
dd149 вне форума   Ответить с цитированием
Старый 28-03-2010, 00:55   #763
goldorak
Sergeant
 
Регистрация: Dec 2008
Сообщений: 250
Цитата:
Сообщение от dd149 Посмотреть сообщение
Considering that UUV has no warhead, it is plausible that it can carry a sensor suite superior to the one of a torpedo, but still limited by the size. in my understanding passive sensors partly depend on size of the array in order to be able to triangulate distance, which is clearly not going to be accurate with the size of a torpedo. But passive capability should normally still be superior to just torpedo auto director, otherwise, why would one bother to fabricate UUVs?a

Yes I understand, the point remains though, what kind of performance can we expect from a passive sensor in an uvv (that has the same size of a torpedo) ?
It cannot have the same kind of performance of a towed array, I think you will agree with me on this dd149. I'm not against using a passive sensor in a UUV, I would just like for its performance to be "inferior" to that of the subs towed array and superior to that of a torpedo. It is a realistic expection don't you think ?

Let me give you an example :

Most torpedoes active or passive can't detect contact beyond 2-3 nm at most.
This should represent the inferior threshold for UUV active and passive sonar performance.

As it stands right now, passive uuv sensor in generic conditions (so no convergence zones etc...) has more or less the same capability of a towed array. This is WRONG. Even if we keep the passive sensor, it should have a performance less than that of a fully deployed towed array. And this means (and its my personal opinion) that its maximum range should be somewhere between 5 and 7 nm at most.
goldorak вне форума   Ответить с цитированием
Старый 28-03-2010, 01:49   #764
CrazyIvan
Bugcatcher
 
Аватар для CrazyIvan
 
Регистрация: Nov 2008
Адрес: Russia Kursk City
Сообщений: 1,017
Цитата:
Сообщение от goldorak Посмотреть сообщение
Yes I understand, the point remains though, what kind of performance can we expect from a passive sensor in an uvv (that has the same size of a torpedo) ?
It cannot have the same kind of performance of a towed array, I think you will agree with me on this dd149. I'm not against using a passive sensor in a UUV, I would just like for its performance to be "inferior" to that of the subs towed array and superior to that of a torpedo. It is a realistic expection don't you think ?

Let me give you an example :

Most torpedoes active or passive can't detect contact beyond 2-3 nm at most.
This should represent the inferior threshold for UUV active and passive sonar performance.

As it stands right now, passive uuv sensor in generic conditions (so no convergence zones etc...) has more or less the same capability of a towed array. This is WRONG. Even if we keep the passive sensor, it should have a performance less than that of a fully deployed towed array. And this means (and its my personal opinion) that its maximum range should be somewhere between 5 and 7 nm at most.

It is little wrong treatment - that the device " can not hear far ".
All depends on loudness of a signal - what his part reaches sensor.
Certainly from a silent submarine, the noise travels calming down. It similarly to whisper for the man with weak hearing. When he can not hear whisper on far distance.
However, if the steamroller gives the singing or thunder strike - I think that the man even with weak hearing can hear it on impressive distance.

At the end all is limited what part of a signal arrives to a sensor control - whether the sensor control is capable to take this value signal for a recognition. And the recognition is already dependence on good quality of a sensor control.

Goldorak, I sent you the letter where has specified provisional curves and noises threshold of a new passive sensor control UUV.
( We again collide with incorrect job of the formulas from guy's SCS. )
Check up the your e-mail.
CrazyIvan вне форума   Ответить с цитированием
Старый 28-03-2010, 01:59   #765
dd149
Sergeant
 
Регистрация: Jan 2009
Адрес: North France
Сообщений: 155
For sure UUV cannot have passive capability equal to a towed array, it doesnt have either size or computing power, but my point was that it could still be superior to regular torpedo sensor, anyway it is open to wide speculation as I believe nobody knows real figures even approximately for sure. I'm sure that despite lousy initial job, the RA team will be able to improve the original settings.
dd149 вне форума   Ответить с цитированием
Старый 28-03-2010, 02:28   #766
goldorak
Sergeant
 
Регистрация: Dec 2008
Сообщений: 250
Цитата:
Сообщение от dd149 Посмотреть сообщение
For sure UUV cannot have passive capability equal to a towed array, it doesnt have either size or computing power, but my point was that it could still be superior to regular torpedo sensor, anyway it is open to wide speculation as I believe nobody knows real figures even approximately for sure. I'm sure that despite lousy initial job, the RA team will be able to improve the original settings.
Then we agree.

I'm just trying to get a good understanding of UUV sonars performance.

@CrazyIvan, I will check the email.
goldorak вне форума   Ответить с цитированием
Старый 28-03-2010, 02:48   #767
dd149
Sergeant
 
Регистрация: Jan 2009
Адрес: North France
Сообщений: 155
Just have seen that bug report has been updated in the RA download site, one little question what happen to the bug:The "damage system" not working properly on 212, 212А, Collins and Harushio subs, which seem to have disappeared from the list?
Does the update mean we will have access to download again soon?
dd149 вне форума   Ответить с цитированием
Старый 28-03-2010, 10:37   #768
cayman
Corporal
 
Аватар для cayman
 
Регистрация: Sep 2009
Сообщений: 116
Цитата:
Сообщение от goldorak Посмотреть сообщение
Is this a limitation of the database ?
Nope. no limit

actually, I created several different UUVs in different Navy, FOR example, LMRS for Virginia, fully fuctional UUV + mine sweep ability, only thing can't be done is the HF visual feedback ability to mother Sub

If we change the UUV's attribution in weaponloadout.dll to torpedo's attribution, we can do much more----which RA team already did

In the future, different doctrines and different database setup for UUVs might be a considerable direction
cayman вне форума   Ответить с цитированием
Старый 28-03-2010, 12:15   #769
goldorak
Sergeant
 
Регистрация: Dec 2008
Сообщений: 250
@ CrazyIvan,

I've read the email, and I agree with your proposal to use the UUV exclusively in ASW mode.

As for the detection curves, yeah I'm a little sad that we can't have a continuos (linear or mostly linear) detection range. But if the game is coded is such a way that the modders can't do anything around it we have to keep it as it is discontinuos jump and all.

Anyway your proposed changes make the UUV more "viable" as I see it. It has the right amount of sonar extension without competing with the towed arrays performance.

goldorak вне форума   Ответить с цитированием
Старый 28-03-2010, 13:50   #770
CrazyIvan
Bugcatcher
 
Аватар для CrazyIvan
 
Регистрация: Nov 2008
Адрес: Russia Kursk City
Сообщений: 1,017
Now AI units sensitivity to opening hatches or torpedo muzzle. ( The influence of distance - is taken into account )
Check up attached mission - only on 1.1 versions.
Вложения
Тип файла: rar Hatch Open Detect.rar (946 байт, 482 просмотров)
CrazyIvan вне форума   Ответить с цитированием
Старый 28-03-2010, 14:45   #771
Jaf
БЧ-2
 
Аватар для Jaf
 
Регистрация: Nov 2008
Сообщений: 255
Цитата:
Сообщение от dd149 Посмотреть сообщение
Just have seen that bug report has been updated in the RA download site, one little question what happen to the bug:The "damage system" not working properly on 212, 212А, Collins and Harushio subs, which seem to have disappeared from the list?
Does the update mean we will have access to download again soon?
The bug "damage system not working properly..." was in RA v1.0 and it was corrected in RA v1.1

Current bug report applies to RA v1.1
Jaf вне форума   Ответить с цитированием
Старый 28-03-2010, 17:45   #772
dd149
Sergeant
 
Регистрация: Jan 2009
Адрес: North France
Сообщений: 155
Ok thanks Jaf, I did not understand it. So it is coming soon....
dd149 вне форума   Ответить с цитированием
Старый 29-03-2010, 06:08   #773
Castout
Senior Aircraftsman
 
Регистрация: Nov 2008
Сообщений: 43
We need more new AI only platforms warships and subs but perhaps warships the most.

New Chinese warships, Singapore navy and a lot more warships for smaller navy countries such as Argentine, Brazil even European countries that seems lacking in DW such as Germans, Italian, Spanish, Turkey, Greece.


And we need a great mind to create missions and campaigns for them!

Let's support this cause and nag every day for them!
Believe in the power of nagging!
Castout вне форума   Ответить с цитированием
Старый 29-03-2010, 07:03   #774
dd149
Sergeant
 
Регистрация: Jan 2009
Адрес: North France
Сообщений: 155
Castout, I agree with you, but let us not disturb the modders with changing requests all the time, let 1.1. come as it is with a max of bugs sorted out, then the community will use it as the core version for online play and missions will come. I understand Tlam Strike of LWAMI team in the US is coming with some new models, maybe they can be combined later. RA 1.1 is already is huge step forward especially due the the better multiplayer stability and lots of bugs dating from original DW game sorted out. Models which don't change the core of the game can be added more easily later
dd149 вне форума   Ответить с цитированием
Старый 29-03-2010, 07:14   #775
dd149
Sergeant
 
Регистрация: Jan 2009
Адрес: North France
Сообщений: 155
Another issue is that if the models are only cosmetic candy without realistic data in the DB, they are as good as nothing, and to get proper data will not be easy for exotic navies, it is already an issue for the sound and stealth level of the existing subs, so it will be a problem for sure. This is not what DW is all about, a certain level of realism must be there, otherwise we can as well play an XBOX fps like World of Warcraft .
dd149 вне форума   Ответить с цитированием
Старый 29-03-2010, 08:10   #776
Castout
Senior Aircraftsman
 
Регистрация: Nov 2008
Сообщений: 43
Цитата:
Сообщение от dd149 Посмотреть сообщение
Castout, I agree with you, but let us not disturb the modders with changing requests all the time, let 1.1. come as it is with a max of bugs sorted out, then the community will use it as the core version for online play and missions will come. I understand Tlam Strike of LWAMI team in the US is coming with some new models, maybe they can be combined later. RA 1.1 is already is huge step forward especially due the the better multiplayer stability and lots of bugs dating from original DW game sorted out. Models which don't change the core of the game can be added more easily later
I didn't mean them to be incorporated into DWX 1.1 maybe 1.2

Can't wait to re-release of DWX 1.1
Castout вне форума   Ответить с цитированием
Старый 29-03-2010, 10:19   #777
goldorak
Sergeant
 
Регистрация: Dec 2008
Сообщений: 250
Цитата:
Сообщение от dd149 Посмотреть сообщение
Castout, I agree with you, but let us not disturb the modders with changing requests all the time, let 1.1. come as it is with a max of bugs sorted out, then the community will use it as the core version for online play and missions will come. I understand Tlam Strike of LWAMI team in the US is coming with some new models, maybe they can be combined later. RA 1.1 is already is huge step forward especially due the the better multiplayer stability and lots of bugs dating from original DW game sorted out. Models which don't change the core of the game can be added more easily later
You're right. There has to be a common base upon which to extend and improve non playable AI units. Thats going to be DWX 1.1 (since the database is open). I just hope that people such as Tlam Strike that have really done an outstanding job creating 3d models for Lwami will be willing to include his models also in DWX 1.1.
The only problem I see, is if there is not a centralized structure for improving the 3d models in the database we'll end up with many variants of the database fragmenting further still the multiplayer community.
As there is only ONE Lwami, there should be ONE DWX.
goldorak вне форума   Ответить с цитированием
Старый 29-03-2010, 11:32   #778
CrazyIvan
Bugcatcher
 
Аватар для CrazyIvan
 
Регистрация: Nov 2008
Адрес: Russia Kursk City
Сообщений: 1,017
Цитата:
Сообщение от goldorak Посмотреть сообщение
You're right. There has to be a common base upon which to extend and improve non playable AI units. Thats going to be DWX 1.1 (since the database is open). I just hope that people such as Tlam Strike that have really done an outstanding job creating 3d models for Lwami will be willing to include his models also in DWX 1.1.
The only problem I see, is if there is not a centralized structure for improving the 3d models in the database we'll end up with many variants of the database fragmenting further still the multiplayer community.
As there is only ONE Lwami, there should be ONE DWX.

DW is through impregnated with the bugs...
Different levels of noise why that by the ship of the player and AI.
Screen - Perry_User_CAV.bmp:
The ship of the player on speed of 9 knots run with cavitation - it is visible bubbles behind of the prop.

Screen - Perry_AI_NO_CAV.bmp:
AI the ship on speed of 9 knots run WITHOUT cavitation - bubbles behind of the prop NO.

Between the ships is sonobuoy:
The ship of the player is located on bearing 90 from sonobuoy.
AI the ship is located on bearing 270 from sonobuoy.

Screen BUOY_TRACK_ONLY_USER.bmp demonstrates that really, sonobuoy receives a signal only on bearing 90 - from cavitation of the ship the player.
And AI Perry, run without cavitation at 9 kts - and signal on bearing 270 at sonobuoy - NO.

The controlled Ship ALWAYS begins cavitation between 5-6 knots.
Default bug arriving from SCS - is checked up on 1.04 to patch.
Mission I put. Can check up - on original 1/04 or -RA- addon.
Миниатюры
Нажмите на изображение для увеличения
Название: Perry_AI_NO_CAV.jpg
Просмотров: 737
Размер:	159.6 Кб
ID:	8439   Нажмите на изображение для увеличения
Название: Perry_User_CAV.jpg
Просмотров: 738
Размер:	165.3 Кб
ID:	8440   Нажмите на изображение для увеличения
Название: BUOY_TRACK_ONLY_USER.jpg
Просмотров: 750
Размер:	182.9 Кб
ID:	8441  
Вложения
Тип файла: rar User_Ship_Noise_Bug.rar (1.7 Кб, 463 просмотров)
CrazyIvan вне форума   Ответить с цитированием
Старый 30-03-2010, 04:26   #779
CrazyIvan
Bugcatcher
 
Аватар для CrazyIvan
 
Регистрация: Nov 2008
Адрес: Russia Kursk City
Сообщений: 1,017
Bug with low cavitation speed on User Ship has been fixed.
CrazyIvan вне форума   Ответить с цитированием
Старый 30-03-2010, 04:56   #780
dd149
Sergeant
 
Регистрация: Jan 2009
Адрес: North France
Сообщений: 155
Thanks for fixing, did it also appear for submarines, or only for surface vessels. What else are you still going to fix before re-release?

Последний раз редактировалось dd149; 31-03-2010 в 20:34.
dd149 вне форума   Ответить с цитированием
Ответ


Здесь присутствуют: 10 (пользователей: 0 , гостей: 10)
 
Опции темы
Опции просмотра

Ваши права в разделе
Вы не можете создавать новые темы
Вы не можете отвечать в темах
Вы не можете прикреплять вложения
Вы не можете редактировать свои сообщения

BB коды Вкл.
Смайлы Вкл.
[IMG] код Вкл.
HTML код Выкл.

Быстрый переход


Часовой пояс GMT +4, время: 00:20.


Red Rodgers official site. Powered by TraFFa. ©2000 - 2024, Red Rodgers
vBulletin Version 3.8.12 by vBS. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. Перевод: zCarot