Slitherine

quote:

Aircraft speeds are in Mph, this was confirmed from Matrix sources.
Thus, the speeds are correct.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

quote:

Aircraft speeds are in Mph, this was confirmed from Matrix sources.
Thus, the speeds are correct.

Oh boy ... can we spell "pandora's box" ??

I guess I'll fast forward to the open question here - which is - does anyone know whether the stock map is in nautical miles or in statute miles ? Unfortunately, it matters.

The game material says the map is in nautical miles. At the very least ship speeds are in knots. The game material says aircraft speeds are in knots.

Now on to the example ( I'll do this example from stock ):

F4f-3

Endurance: 330 minutes
Cruising Speed: 155 MPH

1. Convert endurance to hours: 330/60 = 5.5 hours

2. Calculate maximum range by multiplying endurance times cruising speed: 155*5.5 (miles/hour * hours ) = 852.5 miles

3. Round down to nearest multiple of 60: 852.5 ~ 840 miles

4. Divide by 60 to obtain maximum range in hexes: 840/60 = 14

5. Multiply by 1/3 to obtain Extended range in miles and hexes: 840*.33333 = 280 and 280/60 = 4

6. Multiply by 1/4 to obtain Normal range in miles and hexes: 840*.25 = 210 and 210/60 = 3

So we taken the game data elements, endurance and cruising speed and calculated the player visible values, of maximum, extended and normal range. All is well ?


Nope. We made an ERROR here !!!

Step 4 is invalid - why ?

Because we divided by 60 NAUTICAL miles. And what we divided into was 840 STATUTE miles. Of course saying step 4 is invalid assumes the map is in nautical miles. We don't know that for sure, but continuing with that assumption to show what happens if we correct the ERROR.


"Say it ain't so, Joe".....................

_____________________________

(in reply to jwilkerson)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson
I guess I'll fast forward to the open question here - which is - does anyone know whether the stock map is in nautical miles or in statute miles ?

quote:

Most Japanese fighters had engines that were not optimized for high altitude work. When a Zero flys to 32,000ft it can not even bank at 5 degrees without stalling. How much air to air combat can you do under those restrictions?

quote:

Aircraft speeds are in Mph, this was confirmed from Matrix sources.
Thus, the speeds are correct.

quote:

Climb rates are hard to fing for many aircraft so if you can find good, high quality sourcing for an aircraft we may make changes. I love sources that list 2 versions of an aircraft with the same engine, but the second version weighs 500lbs more...,. yet, the sourced climb rate is the same! Not!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson
I guess I'll fast forward to the open question here - which is - does anyone know whether the stock map is in nautical miles or in statute miles ?

Statute.


Edit - I thought that I better elaborate on this single word answer: The map, being a flat representation of such a large part of the surface of the planet, is necessarily skewed in various parts. Near the top, it tends to be compressed. Near the bottom, it tends to be stretched. This makes single word answers approximate at best. However, when I started to draw my map, the closest fit I got for drawing the land masses, and for many of the stock map distances, was by using statute miles. My map is drawn specifically based on the value of 60 statute miles per hex.

quote:

BTW - (and I realize that this may cause some here to say, "Where has he been?" but....) what is CHS an acronym for?

Init

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

If the map and the aircraft values are all in MPH then what about the ships ? The ship speeds are in knots and the endurances match source data for nautical miles. So by doing the map in statute miles we "move the problem" to the ships.


But Andrew has confirmed that at least his map, is in statute miles.

But first we will look at example in stock.


Example: Kaga ( stock )

Max Speed: 28 knots ( data in game almost matches Jentschura which has 28.5 knots )

Cruising Speed: 15 knots? ( Japansese warships in stock have had cruising speed set to 15 across the board, more on this later )

Endurance: 10,000 nautical miles ( data in game matches Jentschura which has 10,000 nautical miles )

So ship speed and endurance need to be converted to statute miles.

First, we will convert max speed to statute miles.

1. Convert max speed to statute miles: 28 * 1.1508 = 32.2

2. Convert max speed to statute miles per phase: 32.2 * 12 = 386

3. Convert max speed to hexes per phase: 386/60 = 6.4 ... or truncating fractions 6

( note the previously Kaga's max speed was 28 or 28*12/60 = 5.6 ... or truncating fractions 5

So it does matter. And if stock map is in statute miles, then stock ships have incorrect speed data in nautical miles which would need to be corrected. In general, the ships should be moving a little bit faster on a statute mile map.

Same for CHS, if CHS ships have their speed data in knots and their endurance in nautical miles, then these would need to be changed. And I did briefly glance at CHS ship data and in many cases it matches stock data, so CHS ship data is in nautical miles.

So we still have open question about whether STOCK map is in statute or nautical miles. Andrew has answered that his map is statute.

Regardless of map unit, we appear to have data inconsistency now between ship data ( nautical miles ) and aircraft data ( statute miles ). But it does matter what the map units are. That actually needs to determine everything else. So at least for CHS we know. And thus we know how to resolve inconsistency. We aren't sure for stock since we do not know whether the map was designed in nautical miles or statute miles.

quote:

This may not be such a bad thing, as in the real world ships (and especially groups of ships) rarely moved at the speeds most gamers will push them at. When Mikuma pushed into Ironbottom Sound for the Battle of Savo Island at "Flank Speed", he was doing 27-28 knots---as opposed to the 30+ all his ships were rated as capable of. It's not just a matter of fuel consumption, but of maintaining a "manuever reserve"
to enable the outermost ships to keep formation. Having the ships rated in knots, but moving in miles is actually an "error that works" insofar as keeping the game more historical.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

What Mike Scholl said.
Listen to him.

Also, near combat you needed to keep some reserve for electrical turrets and ammo hoists.
Also, the game does not model zig zagging so ships are moving to fast in general.
I am an advocate of lowering every ships endurance and cruise speed to help represent zig zagging.

Mike

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

I am doing a comprehensive review (field by field) of all Japanese aircraft for CHS - and I have found NO CASE where EITHER full speed or cruising speed are not too fast. In the 30 cases (out of 75) so far examined, the record is 70 knots too fast for full speed - and 30 knots too fast for cruising speed.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

But if we were going to pick a zigzag/reserve speed modifier ... would have have scientifically just happened to have selected 0.868 ??? It is a convenient choice because this is the size of the "error" we have to correct. But now that we're talking about it - would .75 be a better choice ?

quote:

This may not be such a bad thing, as in the real world ships (and especially groups of ships) rarely moved at the speeds most gamers will push them at. When Mikuma pushed into Ironbottom Sound for the Battle of Savo Island at "Flank Speed", he was doing 27-28 knots---as opposed to the 30+ all his ships were rated as capable of. It's not just a matter of fuel consumption, but of maintaining a "manuever reserve"
to enable the outermost ships to keep formation. Having the ships rated in knots, but moving in miles is actually an "error that works" insofar as keeping the game more historical.

quote:

Of course "purists" would argue that the game data should be correct to the best of our knowledge - i.e. what is in the books - that is the only way to ensure it is all consistent and there is a point to this. So to borrow one of your earlier arguments...let's get everything correct first .. and then start modifying for effects !!!