Dear visitor, welcome to WesWorld. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains in detail how this page works. To use all features of this page, you should consider registering. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.
Dont think thats going to work.my suggestion. because factories handle production by the 1000 ton. round up all your subs tonnage to the nearest 250t. then try and match performance as best as you can. if it is still off by an unacceptable margin then put them in the dock for 1-2 months with a matching material cost to boost tonnage by and additional 250ton. that is a max tonnage change of 500t and a performance match as best as you can.
Dont think thats going to work.my suggestion. because factories handle production by the 1000 ton. round up all your subs tonnage to the nearest 250t. then try and match performance as best as you can. if it is still off by an unacceptable margin then put them in the dock for 1-2 months with a matching material cost to boost tonnage by and additional 250ton. that is a max tonnage change of 500t and a performance match as best as you can.
Do I infer from what you are saying that it is as if a later-date of construction was used to generate the Subsim but the final version posted to the Italian encyclopedia was backdated to indicate an early date of construction? Or do I misunderstand?Depends on the class. It appears that the laydown date on the classes in question (I only have properly simed versions of the U and Adua classes) has been significantly advanced. This is what is used to improve the capabilities.
Yes. For instance the Adua class has its earlyest examples built in 1932, but that date results in a sim that does not work. Advancing the date to the mid 1940's makes it slightly less illegal, but still broken. Brock told me of a similar issue recreating a Italian-designed sub that is/was in the Chilean Navy.Do I infer from what you are saying that it is as if a later-date of construction was used to generate the Subsim but the final version posted to the Italian encyclopedia was backdated to indicate an early date of construction? Or do I misunderstand?Depends on the class. It appears that the laydown date on the classes in question (I only have properly simed versions of the U and Adua classes) has been significantly advanced. This is what is used to improve the capabilities.
Yes. For instance the Adua class has its earlyest examples built in 1932, but that date results in a sim that does not work. Advancing the date to the mid 1940's makes it slightly less illegal, but still broken. Brock told me of a similar issue recreating a Italian-designed sub that is/was in the Chilean Navy.Do I infer from what you are saying that it is as if a later-date of construction was used to generate the Subsim but the final version posted to the Italian encyclopedia was backdated to indicate an early date of construction? Or do I misunderstand?Depends on the class. It appears that the laydown date on the classes in question (I only have properly simed versions of the U and Adua classes) has been significantly advanced. This is what is used to improve the capabilities.
Quoted
Original U Class (RA's Sim)
Date 1937
Oceanic
Armament 1x 100/35, 1x 25
ElecHP 1600
DieselHP 3600
CREW 51
wt fuel&batts 380
Light weight 1150
kerb wt 1410
disp 1656
res buoyancy 15%
Max Surf Spd 15.5knts
Max Sub Spd 10.4knts (1hr rate)
L 70.0m
Beam 8.6m
D 5.5m
Crush depth 250
#TT 10 x 533mm (6 bow, 4 stern)
Tons Oil 260.0
Tons Battery 120.0
Surface Range 13500@10knts
Underwater range 170@4knts
Quoted
Date 1937
Oceanic
Armament 1x 100/35, 1x 25
ElecHP 1600
DieselHP 3600
Crew 44
wt fuel&batts 380
Light weight 1150
kerb wt 1410
disp 1656
res buoyancy 15%
Max Surf Spd 15.3knts
Max Sub Spd 8.3knts
L 70.0m
Beam 8.6m
D 5.5m
Crush depth 250
#TT 10 x 533mm (6 bow, 4 stern)
Tons Oil 260.0
Tons Battery 120.0
Tons Misc 369.0
Surface Range 12368@10knts
Underwater range 78@4knts
Vodoo?Yeah. I can kinda see where the U class can be worked out, but the Adua class is seriously screwed up. I can't explain how RA got the specs on that one.
Forum Software: Burning Board® Lite 2.1.2 pl 1, developed by WoltLab® GmbH