Ok, I see the file, good job.

**************************
* Download link restored *
**************************

Hello gap,

When I tested the Mast Height values with TWoS mod (16:9), I was getting erroneous results (ex. 11% error for the C2-S-B1 Merchant).

To get an accurate result, the graticule scale on the periscope must be calibrated with the Cameras.cam AngularAngle.
So I redrew the graticules for a more precise scale, and by try-and-error, found the AngularAngle.
I then manually measured each ship's Mast Height, Length, Width with the new graticule in Test SingleMissions.

I realized that different Classes of ship with the same 3D Model have the same dimention values, but the ID Manual says otherwise.

Ex 1:
DDType34 Class and DDType36N Class both have the same 3D Model: NDD_Type34A.
The Mast Height is listed at 26.6m and 26.8m respectively.
But both were manually measured at 25.8m in a Test SingleMission.

Ex 2:
BBNewYork Class and BBKongo/BBProvence Classes have the same 3D Model: NBB_New_York.
The Mast Height is listed at 48.6m for the first Class, and 39.2m for the other two classes.
They were all measured exactly at 48.6m.

Looks like what I'm measuring is the 3D Model which is identical in those classes,
even if in reality they were different and listed as such in the ID Manual.

Here are some statistics (138 Classes):
--- Mast Height OK = 66 Classes.
--- Mast Height error (average 1.7m) of a class with the same 3D Model as a Class with Mast Height OK = 11 Classes.
--- Mast Height error (average 1.3m) = 61 Classes (2/3 of those classes have an error less than 1m).

I also noticed that the measured Mast Height remains constant, no matter what type of cargo, what temperature or salinity of the water the ship is on.

Nice job :up:

Mast height of the Type 34 Class Destroyer is exactly 26.7713 m, measured in a 3D program :03:

Anyway I doubt that this level of precision would increase in-game hit ratio significantly. For my standards, using 26 or 27 m (without decimals) as recognition manual entry would be okay.

48.72424 m exactly. This time you got closer. Again, for me any integer between 48 and 50 would be fairly acceptable. :)

Yep, you are correct. If you look into each ship unit's unit_Ship controller (in sim file) draft set there is relative to unit's 3D mesh.

I don't think variable water density is simulated in game, but internal cargo might have an effect on draft. External cargo does nothing indedd: it is there just for eye candy. :yep:

This whole treck started when I decided to test wether the draft of ladden ships differs from empty ships or not. I tried all 4 Internal Cargo combinations (None, Freight, Ammunition, Fuel) in Test SingleMissions, using the C2_S-B1 Merchant as the reference ship.

I was expecting a lower mast height and deeper draft for heavy ladden ships.

I didn't see any noticeable differences when measuring the mast height.

After removing all the torpedo limitations (mainly the DepthKeepingDeviation value) in the sim file, I didn't see any noticeable differences when firing torpedoes at ships ladden or not.

I repeated the tests for summer/winter on all oceans, and got the same results. The only thing affecting mast height and draft is the state of the sea.

On the other hand, I noticed some differences with the values listed in the Identification Manual.

I was sure the values in the ID Manual were the result of scientific calculations, but why was I getting some variations when measuring them with accurate periscope graticules?

This is how this mod came about: the production of a manual with precise measured values.

Some may say that the manual or the tools shouldn't be too accurate because such was the reality in those days. That's fine with me, I respect that.

But let's say MataHari managed to survive WWI, and got her hands on secret documents concerning Allied ships. Then she made a Nobel Price winner french engineer her lover, and convinced him to create a more accurate optic device for the KriegsMarine. I'm so romantic ... :oops:


Thanks Neal. I did as you said. What would we do without you ? :salute:

I miss you guys from the WPL. Those were the good old days. SH2/DC were the best sims. :yeah:
I tried SHO, and IMHO it's a way to waist money on a regular basis. :wah:
Bye for now.

During a set of tests with a large oiler imported from SHIV, I noticed that she was sitting lower on the sea level when she had fuel as internal cargo than when she was empty... but it was long ago, so I could as well be wrong on that.

:rotfl2: :up:

I also can not confirm this but, due to "bug", some ships during campaign playout will be occasionally spawned with different heights/draughts so accurate mast height data wont be so much useful in these situations.
This is especially true for ships with Draught=0 in their respective sim file where game has to calculate ships draught from 3D objects height (divided by 2) .

I am afraid I must disconfirm this interpretation of the 0 ship draugth setting. It actually means that ship's draugth is taken from model's absolute coordinate in the global space. In other words, the water line will lie where model's y coordinates are equal to 0. If you open any ship model in a 3D editor you will understand at once what I mean :yep:

As to why ships having this setting are spawned much lower that they should at times, I have no idea why this is happening. Another bugged feature maybe? :hmm2:

Yeah, that...Whatever...:) Anyway, it seems that Draught=0 has an effect on this bug...

If you can take ships sailing sometimes at "deck awash" as feature, than why not...:) It's a bug, but it's somewhat cool IMO...:)

Well, as I see it, it is a feature if it adds an acceptable level of reandomness to ship draft; it is a bug, or a buggy feature if makes ships to sail deck awash. Anyway I will check again the Kawasaki oiler that I had been working on years ago, since as I remember internal cargo made her to sail realistically lower than when she was sailing on ballast. There might be some magical combination of settings in her sim file making it to happen. :)

Is this mod compatible withtwos 2.0?

No. It was left to be compatible from TWoS 1.05, I believe.

In fact, the recognition manual in TWoS 2 is very different to that in MataHari mod.
Regards.

Fitzcarraldo :Kaleun_Salute:

Thanks.

Good job! Thx! :Kaleun_Thumbs_Up::Kaleun_Salute::Kaleun_Applaud:

MataHari`s more accuracy mod
 

Hallo MataHari,
many years I did corrections of the ship lenght in SH 5. I did it for myself. But I know how much work is in it to get the right result, so that a torpedo hits the ship if you made everything right by the TDC procedere.
Good job!