Ship Simulator
English forum => Ship Simulator Extremes => General discussions => Topic started by: Tarsus on May 21, 2012, 16:15:58
-
Being a real life sailor, off sick at the moment, having some free time on my hands, against all negative opinions I decided to finally purchase SSF. So, long story short.
-Game is seriously lacking... texturing. Most models and objects look like quickly lifted out of 3D Studio, without putting a texture on. That's unacceptable for an officially released game.
-Bug after bug, MP/SP. Won't even list them.
-You call it a "simulator". Which part is a simulation actually? There are no navigational instruments whatsoever. How the heck should I plot the course from Dover to Calais? There is no radio which is a number 1 instrument onboard every vessel larger than those in the bathtub. Radar is probably force-pulled out from some console game.
Where are indicators, battery, fuel the basics at least.
-No weather reports whatsoever, weather itself is at arcade level at the most.
-the game doesn't even support it's own features damn it. Tried to assign buttons to 360' circular two way thruster? There are no buttons for it to assign. Only thrusters 1 and 2.
-Game has graphics like from early HL2 epoch and requirements like Crysis.
-Zooming view in onto the dials on the dashboard - textures are so poor, most dials cant be read.
And I'm using high spec machine with all quality options maxed at high resolution.
-Multiplayer free roam mode only? And what, let the people use their own imagination, be good RPers etc? Come on, RP is one thing but we're no longer children who like to play with invisible toys.
-No damage at all in MP, no visible damage in SP, no component damage ... now, that's really low...
-SP missions boring to death, non inventive, passive.
I've seen low budget games in early beta developed better than this. How did you even dare to release it to public, call such a price for it. This is a low punch guys, below the waist. You know, there are people who would kill to have a decent ship sim, so you just released some seriously unfinished product, put the price on it hoping to snatch some money from the market. Even Silent Hunter 5 beats this at every possible point, and people say that game isn't very well attended to by devs.
Sorry. Couldn't resist.
Good points are, the maneuvering of the ship itself. Left right tadadada, it's fun. Short, but fun, and seems to work ok. Apart from the rudder position in reverse and direction to which the ship is gonna go... won't even comment on that, because I'd get banned.
Towing isn't bad idea, and works reasonably well. There is a multiplayer. Buggy as heck, but there is one, so that's a plus too. Water cannons - nice, but where is the fire to be put down? I also like walking on ship feature. Improves immersion.
I seriously believe, the game has great potential, and could be freaking amazing, when released as FINISHED product, with more simulation features added, not only BETA trainer.
Done.
You may kill me now.
:)
-
If I had a penny for every time I've read something similar to what you have just posted I'd be a millionaire...
You share the opinion of most people on the forum, Although you seem to have worded it in a professional manner. You should be credited for this, as most people who have tried to get there point of view across simply screamed it, mentioned something about lawyers and then left.
-
I'm not gonna quit... yet, there is still enjoyment there, just the money I spent kinda itches me there and there.
Will have some multiplayer fun with my wifie, we both risk-purchased SSE, so as God is my witness, I'll squeeze that 40 quid out of that game no matter what :)
-
I'm not gonna quit... yet, there is still enjoyment there, just the money I spent kinda itches me there and there.
Will have some multiplayer fin fun with my wifie, we both risk-purchased SSE, so as God is my witness, I'll squeeze that 40 quid out of that game no matter what :)
I can't squeeze out my 40 quid.... it doesn't work on my PC :C
-
I wonder, why i always feel offended by these topics
I wonder that too, as they are all valid points.
-
I can't squeeze out my 40 quid.... it doesn't work on my PC :C
Have you tried switching it off and on again? :doh:
-
Did you tried switching it off and on again?
as you can see on this chart, your computer is waaaay to under/overpowered (cross out non applicable) to run SSE :doh:
-
You may try the idea of "kids with invisible toys" on my server, maybe some would squeeze few quid back this way :)
http://80.95.161.114/shipsim/forum/index.php/topic,28424.msg377363.html#msg377363
Some peeps played this today, and liked it.
If that wont work, I'm gonna go and play with my rubber duck in the bathtub to get a decent ship-sim experience :)
-
Being a real life sailor, off sick at the moment, having some free time on my hands, against all negative opinions I decided to finally purchase SSF. So, long story short.
-Game is seriously lacking... texturing. Most models and objects look like quickly lifted out of 3D Studio, without putting a texture on. That's unacceptable for an officially released game.
-Bug after bug, MP/SP. Won't even list them.
-You call it a "simulator". Which part is a simulation actually? There are no navigational instruments whatsoever. How the heck should I plot the course from Dover to Calais? There is no radio which is a number 1 instrument onboard every vessel larger than those in the bathtub. Radar is probably force-pulled out from some console game.
Where are indicators, battery, fuel the basics at least.
-No weather reports whatsoever, weather itself is at arcade level at the most.
-the game doesn't even support it's own features damn it. Tried to assign buttons to 360' circular two way thruster? There are no buttons for it to assign. Only thrusters 1 and 2.
-Game has graphics like from early HL2 epoch and requirements like Crysis.
-Zooming view in onto the dials on the dashboard - textures are so poor, most dials cant be read.
And I'm using high spec machine with all quality options maxed at high resolution.
-Multiplayer free roam mode only? And what, let the people use their own imagination, be good RPers etc? Come on, RP is one thing but we're no longer children who like to play with invisible toys.
-No damage at all in MP, no visible damage in SP, no component damage ... now, that's really low...
-SP missions boring to death, non inventive, passive.
I've seen low budget games in early beta developed better than this. How did you even dare to release it to public, call such a price for it. This is a low punch guys, below the waist. You know, there are people who would kill to have a decent ship sim, so you just released some seriously unfinished product, put the price on it hoping to snatch some money from the market. Even Silent Hunter 5 beats this at every possible point, and people say that game isn't very well attended to by devs.
Sorry. Couldn't resist.
Good points are, the maneuvering of the ship itself. Left right tadadada, it's fun. Short, but fun, and seems to work ok. Apart from the rudder position in reverse and direction to which the ship is gonna go... won't even comment on that, because I'd get banned.
Towing isn't bad idea, and works reasonably well. There is a multiplayer. Buggy as heck, but there is one, so that's a plus too. Water cannons - nice, but where is the fire to be put down? I also like walking on ship feature. Improves immersion.
I seriously believe, the game has great potential, and could be freaking amazing, when released as FINISHED product, with more simulation features added, not only BETA trainer.
Done.
You may kill me now.
:)
this Couldent be more true, and where the hell is the TITANIC and why isnent there DAMAGE IN MULTIPLAYER.
-
The reason there's no damage in multiplayer is do idiots can't go on ram rampages.
-
If I had a penny for every time I've read something similar to what you have just posted I'd be a millionaire...
You share the opinion of most people on the forum, Although you seem to have worded it in a professional manner. You should be credited for this, as most people who have tried to get there point of view across simply screamed it, mentioned something about lawyers and then left.
this Couldent be more true, and where the hell is the TITANIC and why isnent there DAMAGE IN MULTIPLAYER.
-
I believe if the server is strictly policed by owner, or admin/moderator, ramming griefers wouldn't be a problem. I know that now, been even called names today for kicking people out of well populated server.
Despite that fact, we managed to have almost full server most of the time, and had no griefing at all, two accidental collisions only through whole afternoon session.
Problem is though, to do this, it requires 100% of moderator attention and focus. Just like in real Port Control I imagine. No coffee time. After good six hours I feel so exhausted I wouldn't even expect.
So not really surprised when devs went for no-damage option on MP servers, instead of providing moderating staff.
However, they might have left the option to switch it on/off.
Surely we wouldn't get offended, if there were more server options and in-game server commands.
(...unless there are, and I haven't discovered them yet)
-
I wonder that too, as they are all valid points.
Ballast. where is the post that you were quoting?
-
I'll squeeze that 40 quid out of that game no matter what :)
Hmmm. Then the silver round thingy in the box is good at keeping your table clean from coffee marks, whilst the box it came in provides more entertainment value than the aforementioned round silver thing.... and the box doubles up as a good door wedge.
Apart from that, you're going to be hard pressed to make £40 worth of use out of it.
PS Tarsus, there are several current and retired mariners on this forum (or there WAS- perhaps they've all given up on it) and the general consensus from them was the same as yours.
-
My two pennies worth:
Having seen the amount of computing power it takes to run a professional simulator it was always going to be an ambitious project to make a PC based version. As an example each radar on a full mission bridge simulator has it's own PC.
SS06 / 08 were compromises between playability and simulation, but they were good and they were fun, as a professional seafarer (although not of the coffee drinking / window gazing variety) I found them somewhat lacking in terms of serious ship handling, but I was able to accept that they were good fun ways for people to experience a little of the feel of handling some of the vessel types which were included.
If you look back on the forums from those days you will see millions of gripes about the physics not being accurate and the handling being unrealistic, VSTEP have addressed these issues with SSE, but it has come at a massive cost to resource management with the result that played on anything other than a high end desktop PC the game will be slow and buggy.
The simple fact is that you cannot have a simulator which accurately simulates the incredibly complex physics of manoeuvring a ship in moving water as well as great graphics without a whole lot of computing power, to make Ship Sim able to run well on the average PC it would have to go back to something like the quality of SS08, maybe SSE was a step too far or a step too quickly, but it seems to be a step in the right direction, even if a slightly misguided one.
-
Ballast. where is the post that you were quoting?
I think the poster deleted it :)
-
The simple fact is that you cannot have a simulator which accurately simulates the incredibly complex physics of manoeuvring a ship in moving water as well as great graphics without a whole lot of computing power, to make Ship Sim able to run well on the average PC it would have to go back to something like the quality of SS08, maybe SSE was a step too far or a step too quickly, but it seems to be a step in the right direction, even if a slightly misguided one.
I think you are extensively exaggerating.
As first example, I present you:
Silent Hunter 5.
Great graphics, crew, ability to walk around ship, almost whole world map seamlessly connected with ports of course, instruments of navigation, rulers dividers etc. Component damage, visual ship damage, reparir system, crew morale, skils and management system. Sky that contains real real stars and everything moves in astrological order. One of the user mod even adds sextant if you'd fancy to play with it. There is a radio onboard, for sending/receiving messages about the weather etc. Sonar - that can be manually operated. Radar that can be manually operated. You go to engine room and you see diesels working accordingly to set RPM. Other NPC ships, operating under various algorithms, and maneuver very wisely. ...and I could go like that all day, believe me. Sea waves don't just flap around, they come from certain direction, and when sailing on surface, you can feel props coming out of the water and ship loosing sipeed ( i think RPM was spiking too, but not sure about that).
All this you can also make work in multiplayer.
...only the game is not about civilian ships during time of peace. I'm also tired from shooting things from time to time.
I'd also say few thing about TakeOn helicopters to compare, but what's the point.
Our computers are more than capable of running decently written Ship Simulator. That's an undeniable fact.
Just whoever has created our beloved game ( I admit, I still like it) should be keelhauled for laziness greed, and lack of attention to detail.
Twice.
:D
-
The only things nice for me about SSE is the new ocean system (especially the transit between sheltered waters and open seas), the new dynamic weather system and the new options that the player has such as operating lights, fi-fi monitors, ramps and such.
The reason why people play simulators is to get the feeling of operating the real thing and not for the fancy graphics and neat eye candy. The vibe I get from the community is that they feel the same. SS08 with the aboved mentioned functions would be a very nice game for the hardcore players.
I play ShipSim since the first game came out in 2006 which was by then only available in the German language. Since then I played over 2000 hours. When SS08 came out, everyone was suprised to see the big step forward that VSTEP made compared to SS06 and everyone was expecting the same with SSE. Unfortunately SSE doesn't feel like a step forward, more like a step aside.
Ofcourse the above mentioned is my opinion as a fan of the series and not as a moderator of this forum eh :P
-
The reason why people play simulators is to get the feeling of operating the real thing and not for the fancy graphics and neat eye candy. The vibe I get from the community is that they feel the same. SS08 with the aboved mentioned functions would be a very nice game for the hardcore players.
Of course. I bet if there was a simulator with non-texture filled vector graphics, you'd go for it instead.
Graphics is important, that's the times we live in. We need visual effects to tickle our senses.
Graphics in SSE is fully sufficient, it's just simply not finished, like a house built in a rush, that somebody even didn't bother to paint. I don't really expect to see ever little upholstery stitch on the captains chair.
What is now is good. Good enough. Just put some bloody textures on, because object modeling is done sufficiently enough. This seriously look like unfinished work, can't you see it?
As for simulator - please, point out elements of simulation in SSE. All is pretty much arcade. It would have to be stretched in pretty much every aspect to call it a simulation.
-
lol.............................
-
...as just to point out how much of a simulation this game is... I can't really believe that, there must be some "easy mode" option I missed or something.
Just take simple water taxi boat. Turn your steering wheel fully to the port. Open a throttle very slightly forward. It goes where it should, right? Right. Now same situation, but reverse. Did someone turned the rudder to the opposite side?
I'm no expert guys, but every real boat I was manning the steering wheel, when you turn the wheel left, and put into reverse, the bow moves right, and stern left.
Please don't tell me anything more about simulation, and physics. And i suppose, this was a coding problem hard to solve by devs, so they decided to go "playstation" on basic principle of boat maneuvering.
-
sorry buddy. cant find any message from you...
-
He sent one to me... Your not missing out on much Tarsus :doh:
-
and he send one to me too..
-
Well, you can ignore those.. He's on holiday now for asking other members for their serial key :thumbs:
-
All these holidays must be costing Vstep a fortune! :doh:
Also - we're getting slightly offtopic....
-
Also - we're getting slightly offtopic....
...maybe it's not such a bad idea :)
-
...as just to point out how much of a simulation this game is... I can't really believe that, there must be some "easy mode" option I missed or something.
Just take simple water taxi boat. Turn your steering wheel fully to the port. Open a throttle very slightly forward. It goes where it should, right? Right. Now same situation, but reverse. Did someone turned the rudder to the opposite side?
I'm no expert guys, but every real boat I was manning the steering wheel, when you turn the wheel left, and put into reverse, the bow moves right, and stern left.
Please don't tell me anything more about simulation, and physics. And i suppose, this was a coding problem hard to solve by devs, so they decided to go "playstation" on basic principle of boat maneuvering.
Just as a point of accuracy, the water taxi which you describe, as well as a few other vessels in the game, is driven by twin Hamilton jet drives. The behaviour of the vessels is, in fact, correct. :doh: As a seafarer yourself you should be aware of this. Oops!!!
Look at this and you can see the system as a simple game explaining how it works. ::)
http://www.hamjet.co.nz/jetboat_game
The vessels and their drive systems in the game are actually modelled by a marine architect, believe it or not. :evil:
Traddles.
-
Message edited. I hadn't read you had already given the answer, Traddles.. :)
-
No problem Salty. Like yourself, I like to point things out when criticism goes too far. :-X
Regards,
Angus.
N.B. the British RNLI has been experimenting with a Hamilton Jet Drive boat, the "EFFSEABEETOO".(Fast Carriage Boat 2) Sadly the hull design was not fully compatible and they have gone back to the drawing board to see if they can improve things. I attach some photos when she was based at Hoylake, Wirral for trials.
http://www.scisys.co.uk/casestudies/RNLI/rnlifcb2.aspx
-
Tarsus, if you would like the boats to behave like a prop/rudder boat, I suggest you get ShipSimulator 2008..
All boats steer in a "normal" way, even the Red Jet4. The Hamilton waterjet characteristics had not yet been implemented.
Lots of nice ships in there too..
-
Well i can say, SSE IS NOW £4.99 haha lol :doh:
http://www.game.co.uk/en/ship-simulator-extremes-45126?pageSize=20&searchTerm=Ship%20Simulator%20Extremes
-
Well i can say, SSE IS NOW £4.99 haha lol :doh:
http://www.game.co.uk/en/ship-simulator-extremes-45126?pageSize=20&searchTerm=Ship%20Simulator%20Extremes
lol - but isn't GAME still in administration? It could be just that they're trying to get rid of old stock as a result of closing down almost 300 GAME shops?
-
If the poster wants a Ship simulator with very realistc features, he should buy Nautis in stead of ShipSim. But Nautis is very unafordable.
Is Silent Hunter programmed more efficiently than ShipSim Extremes?
-
Yes - silent hunter is (atleast in my view) alot better at simulating what it say's its going to simulate....
I've heard people be pretty critical towards nautis aswell ::)
-
The vessels and their drive systems in the game are actually modelled by a marine architect, believe it or not. :evil:
My apologies then. Never had anything to do with this system, in fact haven't even known it.
Feel silly for my brag now. Well, hard to keep up with technologies sometimes.
Again, my apology.
And since you wanted to go salty by "As a seafarer yourself", you can trust me on one thing. Not every person that has something to do with the sea, sails modern Hamilton propelled babies for breakfast. I was just a fisherman on a Baltic, and own a sailing boat, being in love in the sea since I was a kid. That's it really. Sorry again for mistake and brag.
-
No problem Tarsus,
The person who knows everything has yet to be born. :-X (at least I've never come across him/her anyway.) I hope you get as much pleasure out of the game as I do, although, to be honest, I find that SS 2008 has a great deal going for it. However one must always bear in mind that these are really games and the real simulation stuff is in Nautis, which is Vstep's proffessional simulator. A very different kettle of fish. ::)
Angus.
-
The person who knows everything has yet to be born. :-X (at least I've never come across him/her anyway.)
Haven't you heard? Women are always right.. :lol:
But yes, I think VStep may have gone a bit overboard with the Hamilton waterjets. They are in all smaller boats in Extremes..
-
Haven't you heard? Women are always right.. :lol:
But yes, I think VStep may have overdone the Hamilton waterjets. They are in all small boats in Extremes..
My Wife keeps telling me that too. I just won a race in Sail Simulator 5 against my Daughter. She said she was going to beat me, Yippeee!!! There's life in the old Dog yet!!!!!! :2thumbs:
-
Have anyone heard if Nautis really is good or as buggy (sorry to say, but I haven't played SS for a long, time now.. Got tired of all these bugs.... ?
I mean, have anyone even heard if Vstep sold 1 copy of Nautis? And was the costumer happy??
I have a hard time thinking SS series is a good foundation for a professional simulator...
And stop all that nonsense about radars and stuff is too hard for the hardware. It's nonsense!! ;)
Look at FSX!
Yeees, it's been in development for ages, but it IS POSSIBLY!
Everything comes down to optimization! :thumbs:
- Cya around ;D
-
Hi
Do not compare Nautis to the game it is a Professional Maritime Simulator that
has been sold all over the World .
Eric
-
Hi
Do not compare Nautis to the game it is a Professional Maritime Simulator that
has been sold all over the World .
Eric
I just thought it was the same core.
Isn't it?
-
From what I've heard "on the grape vine" Nautis is mainly sold in the Netherlands, with other things like transas being the more favorable choice for those schools and colleges that have a larger budget.
-
Nautis is being sold all over the world. There are several press releases about big orders on the VSTEP website, it goes as far as Taiwan:
http://www.vstep.nl/news/index.php
-
If you look on the transas website you'll find more big orders, its even used by the indian navy! :o
-
Very interesting, I didn't know that :D
-
Hello,
To the contrary of what has been suggested, it is possible to assign keys in order to control the azimuthal thrusters orientation.
Also, of the relatively smaller player boats, 6 have HamiltonJet propulsion, although it could have been from Castoldi or any other manufacturer. As already mentioned, these boats (2 props ie Apollo, Aquila, Arie Visser, VSTP7, and one prop Billy Greene and Greenpeace RIB) can be hopefully turned on the spot while keeping the steering wheel unchanged.
For twin engines implementation, the second advantage is that the boat can be moved laterally more easily than with standard jets, disregarding automated controls, of course.
Doga RIB, both Infernos and "rowboat" have outboard engines, Flambée and Fortissimo Z-drives, Mamba has IPS props, and "Davit" a standard arrangement.
Finally, VStep and Transas or Kongsberg sizes cannot really be compared.
Regards,
Luc
-
Interesting gadget this Hamilton, but...
I may sound old fashioned, but diesel-shaft-prop-rudder simplicity will never be beaten on open sea.
We live in world of gadgets, and well insured wealthy gadget lovers. If you spend some time in marinas, you find that most today's "seafarers" spend 6h on water, and rest of the week in marina. Their boats are so shiny and flashy, you wonder if to salute while walking on the quay. They never go out when sea state is greater than 1-2, as it's very dangerous.
When you do 360 with your single prop+rudder they say, I can do that too, I also got thrusters...
Hard to find any serious application for Hamilton as a propulsion for open sea crafts really. Even most modern Tamar in UK has fixed props for a reason. And let's not forget, it's an emergency response vessel.
Maybe some port maintenance crafts, pilots, taxis - actually as it is shown in SSE.
One of my yacht club members, dude that circumnavigated the globe in Catalina with very little budget, some years ago said:
"Out there, what you don't have, will not break"
Kinda like that quote :D
-
http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=nl&u=http://www.knrm.nl/&ei=a_-_T_S0BKrV0QW15pm3Cg&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=1&sqi=2&ved=0CFcQ7gEwAA&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dknrm%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1W1ADRA_en%26biw%3D1280%26bih%3D794%26prmd%3Dimvns
If you search this site of KNRM (Royal Dutch Lifeboat Service) You will see that the Terschelling Lifeboat "Arie Visser", which is in the SSE game, has twin Hamilton jets with a maximum speed of 32Knots and a cruising range at full power of 16 hours. Thats a very long way out to sea in anyones language. These boats are also used for towing quite large vessels which have engine failure. I think it can therefore be said that the Hamilton jet system is NOT a toy, but in fact an extremely powerful and reliable tool for such vessels. It should be borne in mind that lifeboats are designed specifically for service in open sea conditions in the worst weather conditions possible.
Sorry to put a damper on your theory Tarsus. ::)
Traddles.
-
Since you're in a mood for a chat about it, why not. It's just a forum jabber anyway :D
We may argue about certain numbers, reliability, which both of us take only from internet articles anyways, because neither me, nor you (I presume If you did you'd have said so) have enough personal experience with this system to provide first hand information. What I know from personal experience, is further you go, less chances for rescue in time you have in case of a life threatening situation. And well known fact is, true reliability comes from simplicity. You may talk about the technology, and fancy gadgets when you're safe ashore, but on the sea there is always something happening. Always. Simpler the gear is, greater your chances are. And believe me, I'm not and and old prick that hates modern technology... Would say exactly opposite. I'm very much much a gadget person. On my boat I got 3 GPS receivers, one in radio, one in handheld waterproof garmin, and one in plotter. I got DSC marine radio with AIS, connected to toughbook, use LSB receiver for weather faxes. Not even mentioning all emergency equipment incl EPIRBs.
...so what. When on the sea, I only have VHF on, that displays lat/long, and gives AIS warnings, and navigate on admiralty paper maps using ruler, divider and compass. When in the mood, I play with toys. But always have hard backup in paper and pencil.
Had an accident on fishing cutter once on Baltic. 18m vessel, single prop, rudder, diesel. Sea state 7-8. Rescuing nets before storm. We've lost clutch, so diesel and pumps were still working, but propulsion was lost. My skipp was somehow working the rudder fin, that our bow was always more or less towards the wave forehead. You know, call me old fashioned, but having lost propulsion in Hamilton's gadget, where there is no rudder, you're dead brick in the water. And propulsion lost, isn't a rare incident. If you live close to sea, buy yourself a VHF, and listen to channel 16. You'll see I'm not just talking out of the hollyhole.
If it was for me to make decisions about choosing the propulsion for close range port maintenance vessels, including a rescue boats, I'd still go for props. And don't get to excited with maneuverability because experienced skip with single prop and rudder, can do pretty much the same. Not mentioning there are thrusters now days which make things much easier, but are not essential for sailing.
-
You may try the idea of "kids with invisible toys" on my server, maybe some would squeeze few quid back this way :)
http://80.95.161.114/shipsim/forum/index.php/topic,28424.msg377363.html#msg377363
Some peeps played this today, and liked it.
If that wont work, I'm gonna go and play with my rubber duck in the bathtub to get a decent ship-sim experience :)
I do believe this SSE is a Ship Wreck so to speak, VSTEP thinks a "real" ship sim which is called Ship Sim 2008 PRO should charge people for a copy about 4000 euro...LOL, well there are "Real" sims out there who are much more affordable and give you the real deal. Anyway.....If you use the horns much? if so give me a PM i have a small tweak special instructions if you'd like to try, for extra realism
Third
-
Another little thingie against Hamilton's.
Ever seen on-shore lifeboat stations in Great Britain? The way the lifeboats are launched and retrieved from sea?
In many cases they run aground, using rudder and props specially installed within the nearly flat bottom of the boat, to maintain position while lying on sand/rocks to wait till retrieving tractor arrives.
Those boats are designed to operate at ANY sea condition, hurricane winds, on very tidal waters.
I can't simply imagine Hamilton's water inlet providing enough water for propulsion when boat is lying flat on the sand, without a rudder, while being continuously hit by incoming tall waves.
Been rescued once, shame to say, by Tyne class lifeboat. about sea state 5-6, waves 2m approx, "wind against tide" effect. Tyne approached us, maneuvered sideways not to hit us, very prcise manouvering on such angry sea.
Tyne is simple twin prop, very old design.
Again, what was that superior advantage of Hamilton's over traditional propulsion, because I think I lost it somewhere :D
-
Hi Everybody.
I have only just bought ship simulator extreme and Joined the forum this week. For the last couple of years I have enjoyed using other simulators that being trainz and railworks. if you go on their forums you will see the same complaints as there is in this thread. Members complaining that it is unrealistic, graphics are not all they should be, locomotives do not perform like they do in real life and that the all game is rubbish.
on first impressions of SSE would seem to more than compare very well with railworks and trainz and the ongoing cost for add-ons and models is definitely far better. With railworks virtually everything you want now is Payware and nothing comes along and much less than £20-£25 routes are often much more than that.
I have a very good spec PC and ship simulator seems to run very smoothly on it especially as I am on the learning curve and often pressing all the wrong keys. I have also started to get to grips with the mission editor and I am looking forward to creating some missions as I did enjoy creating routes in trainz and railworks.
At the moment no similar later will give anybody 100% of what they want. But my first impression of ship simulator (and I am no seaman no more than I was a train driver) is that it is a good product, enjoyable to use and comes at a very good price both initially and for ongoing add-on cost
Also very much enjoying the forum, some very helpful members on here.
with thanks
Bill
-
Hi Everybody.
I have only just bought ship simulator extreme and Joined the forum this week. For the last couple of years I have enjoyed using other simulators that being trainz and railworks. if you go on their forums you will see the same complaints as there is in this thread. Members complaining that it is unrealistic, graphics are not all they should be, locomotives do not perform like they do in real life and that the all game is rubbish.
on first impressions of SSE would seem to more than compare very well with railworks and trainz and the ongoing cost for add-ons and models is definitely far better. With railworks virtually everything you want now is Payware and nothing comes along and much less than £20-£25 routes are often much more than that.
I have a very good spec PC and ship simulator seems to run very smoothly on it especially as I am on the learning curve and often pressing all the wrong keys. I have also started to get to grips with the mission editor and I am looking forward to creating some missions as I did enjoy creating routes in trainz and railworks.
At the moment no similar later will give anybody 100% of what they want. But my first impression of ship simulator (and I am no seaman no more than I was a train driver) is that it is a good product, enjoyable to use and comes at a very good price both initially and for ongoing add-on cost
Also very much enjoying the forum, some very helpful members on here.
with thanks
Bill
Best reply so far.
I think there are enough navigational aids to set out a course. On a good widescreen you can even shoot the sun or stars ;D
(http://www.imaginaryviews.nl/freework/nav1.jpg)
It is obvious there is navigational aid :angel:
(http://www.imaginaryviews.nl/freework/nav2.jpg)
My only real problem is my own pc, it is just to slow. I do have a ducky, but no bathtub.
I only complaint round authum.
And you say you think its crap?
http://80.95.161.114/shipsim/forum/index.php/topic,28493.msg378888.html#msg378888 (http://80.95.161.114/shipsim/forum/index.php/topic,28493.msg378888.html#msg378888)
I think to improve reality, buy British Admiralty nr 1406 (Dover and Calais to Orford Ness and Scheveningen) and 1408 (Harwich and Rotterdam to Cromer and Terschelling)
And a ventilator!
-
I don't really understand all this complaining.
I waited a long time to buy shipsim extremes, because I allready had SS08 and didn't want to spend €40.
First time I installed it, I allso was a bit dissappointed. But after installing some updates, I was pleasantly surprised.
Ship handling is MUCH more realistic. Finally rudders and engines have a realistic reaction time.
You can even see a wake created by the ship. In SS08 you could easily enter a port with a speed of 15 knots, put the engines in full astern and moore the ship in a record time. This is not possible in extremes, just because the game dynamics have improved a lot. It is not there yet, but I am convinced that this is the best value for money simulator that you can buy.
Why the hell would you like to use a sextant? This game is, to me, about maneuvering. When using a sextant it is all about the feeling you have for it, and experience. Seeing some angle on your computerscreen compared to holding the real thing in your hands?? A radio is the no1 instrument on the bridge? I thought your eyes where?
Not that I am a experienced seaman. I only have 7 months of sailing time on some general cargo ships (15 000 - 20 000 DWT), and am still finishing my studies. But what most captains and mates thought me, is to use your eyes. A radar is fancy and modern, but nothing is more reliable than using your eyes.
In the past people have been asking for a lot of features like the ones you mentioned, that are available in Silent Hunter. But those are all just bells and whistles.
Features like the buttons to start or stop the engines, realistic sinking, radio sounds, ...
All nice but they don't really improve the simulation.
(People who think you start any massive two or three floors high diesel engine by just pushing a button on the bridge, clearly have no idea about the real thing)
-
(People who think you start any massive two or three floors high diesel engine by just pushing a button on the bridge, clearly have no idea about the real thing)
:doh: :2thumbs: :thumbs:
Hope everybody understand I was not complaining, xcept about my puter.
Have been engineer, you are so right!
Some land folks even think ships drop anchor about 17:30 for dinner at six, a drink a good sleep and 07 in the morning ready to go again.
-
I hear you Tarsus... Waterborne...
Ex Mariner from the US Army sailed the ocean blues....
SS 08 is a lot better...
-
A propos lifeboat stations and Hamiltonjet, there is a short and interesting topic (http://blog.swanagelifeboat.org.uk/2012/06/new-all-weather-lifeboat-in-2015.html)about the new Shannon class lifeboat in the Swanage RNLI Lifeboat Station blog.
Regards,
Luc
-
It is really interesting to follow this tread. I'm a master mariner myself and have spent approx 10 years at sea on different types of ships and after that 7 years at a VTS which I'm still doing.
I just bought the SSE and I like it for what it is: a game. It is a game, not a simulation, however the most realistic part would be the waterjet vessels.
When it comes to the two engines/two rudder vessels there is still a way to go. In real life, when turning/going sideways with a ship like the albatros or the pride of rotterdam, the trick would be to put the port rudder hard to stb and the stb rudder hard port. then use the engines fwd or astern depending what you want to do with the ship. In SSE I soon found out this was not the case, but knowing that fact I still enjoy manouvering the POR or the Albatros in Dover or Calais :)
Another thing is the VHF issue. As a VTS operator we try to keep the traffic on the radio as possible because we are not air traffic controllers. When the ship officers constantly have to deal with the background noise from the radio it is very tiring. Only place I can think of where this is the case is in the Persian Gulf. Even in the Dover Strait or Rotterdam I have never experienced the VHF so busy as it is being presented in SSE.
But of course this is all small details, but still something to keep in mind when developing later versions of this game :)
-
I do believe this SSE is a Ship Wreck so to speak
yes, this game is definitly going to die. vstep realized ist , stopped spending resources on it .
we will not see any improvements anymore or the next generation. it happened to many games.
i quess they smelled the money and tried to maximize profit with minimazing effords. it worked for some time but of course will not work on long terms.
i am nevertheless thankful to vstep for the time some years ago where it was something new and a very promising project. vstep made in my opinion some severe mistakes and we will see the result that this game - never being a simulator- will stop existing.
the idea of a shipsimulation is great and maybe somebody will do it the right way in future, but surely not vstep.
best regards !
-
@ACR:
yes, this game is definitly going to die. vstep realized ist , stopped spending resources on it .
we will not see any improvements anymore or the next generation. it happened to many games.
i quess they smelled the money and tried to maximize profit with minimazing effords. it worked for some time but of course will not work on long terms.
i am nevertheless thankful to vstep for the time some years ago where it was something new and a very promising project. vstep made in my opinion some severe mistakes and we will see the result that this game - never being a simulator- will stop existing.
the idea of a shipsimulation is great and maybe somebody will do it the right way in future, but surely not vstep.
I am also afraid that Ship Simulator will be a thing of the past in the near future. While SS06 and SS08 were very successfull. But SSE 2010 suffers from a lot of bugs and performance problems. Since the release of the 1.5 patch in last february, I haven't seen any new developments or any new patches. I think that Vstep has abandoned further developing SSE 2010. How stupid Vstep could be!
-
I've seen alot of posts in this thread, but I think maybe I shall chime in...
If you guys didn't already know, I think VSTEP is trying their hardest to make Ship Simulator realistic. Also VSTEP is the developer for Nautis Maritime Simulator, which is a bridge simulator used to train future mariners. Basically what Ship Simulator is is a denomination of Nautis, or vice versa depending on what was made first. Of course there not going to make it completely realistic, because that would keep the younger generation from buying it, which in retrospect would diminish sales. Every company needs to make a profit, and by whatever means possible. But some of those companies will do what they need to, not what they have to.
If you ask me I think VSTEP has been doing a fantastic job, and I think they're trying their best in order to fix these bugs and make Ship Simulator a better platform for everyone, not just the easily impressed. I still enjoy Ship Simulator, and I have been a fan since SS06, and there is nothing that's going to stop me from enjoying it. Not even if VSTEP threatens to sue because I enjoy it too much. And for all of those who are complaining, just drop it. You paid for the game, and enjoy it or not, it's a simulator designed not to please everyone, but to give us ship lovers and mariners the chance to be a captain, in the virtual world of course. So please don't complain, it may not be the best simulator, but it's one that's aimed at simulating ships and boats, so if you have been looking for a ship sim, but are unhappy with this game, well suck it up, beggers can't be choosers. I think that given a few years VSTEP will redeem itself and make Ship Simulator into it's prime, one that hopefully everyone can be happy with, or for some, atleast satisfied.
Best regards,
Carter
-
I've seen alot of posts in this thread, but I think maybe I shall chime in...
If you guys didn't already know, I think VSTEP is trying their hardest to make Ship Simulator realistic. Also VSTEP is the developer for Nautis Maritime Simulator, which is a bridge simulator used to train future mariners. Basically what Ship Simulator is is a denomination of Nautis, or vice versa depending on what was made first. Of course there not going to make it completely realistic, because that would keep the younger generation from buying it, which in retrospect would diminish sales. Every company needs to make a profit, and by whatever means possible. But some of those companies will do what they need to, not what they have to.
If you ask me I think VSTEP has been doing a fantastic job, and I think they're trying their best in order to fix these bugs and make Ship Simulator a better platform for everyone, not just the easily impressed. I still enjoy Ship Simulator, and I have been a fan since SS06, and there is nothing that's going to stop me from enjoying it. Not even if VSTEP threatens to sue because I enjoy it too much. And for all of those who are complaining, just drop it. You paid for the game, and enjoy it or not, it's a simulator designed not to please everyone, but to give us ship lovers and mariners the chance to be a captain, in the virtual world of course. So please don't complain, it may not be the best simulator, but it's one that's aimed at simulating ships and boats, so if you have been looking for a ship sim, but are unhappy with this game, well suck it up, beggers can't be choosers. I think that given a few years VSTEP will redeem itself and make Ship Simulator into it's prime, one that hopefully everyone can be happy with, or for some, atleast satisfied.
Best regards,
Carter
Yes, thats the true man....SSE is the best of his kind....His graphics....Ships..Well i can´t play right now ´cause this computer doesn´t support the game...But i will install the game in another(I have play the demo and it is really really good job)
-
Not even if VSTEP threatens to sue because I enjoy it too much.
:D :2thumbs: greatest line in a comment ;)
-
Ship handling is MUCH more realistic. Finally rudders and engines have a realistic reaction time.
(People who think you start any massive two or three floors high diesel engine by just pushing a button on the bridge, clearly have no idea about the real thing)
do you really believe the throttle reaction time of lets say the vermaas has anything in common with a real massive three floor high diesel in a +300 meter containership ????
and with all respect for vstep - you call the bridge of our ships and the control inputs we can do at the end of 2012 a simulator in any kind ???
-
Hi ACR,
You are very scathing about the controls of the ships in the game, and, in fact SSE as a whole. Have you experience of the engine reaction times of a large containership? The game, & this IS a game, as you are well aware, actually reflects remarkably accurately the acceleration times of most of the ships represented. :thumbs:
If you check my signature below you can see I have some experience of ships in the real world. :captain: Are you aware that the dynamics of the ships in the game are modelled by a fully qualified naval architect with many years of experience? Guesswork does not come into it. ::)
Regards,
Traddles.
-
As we're on the topic of controls - The sherpa's controls ARE unrealistic. The pitch on Most large AHT and AHT(s) doesn't 35 seconds to change from Full ahead to Full astern
The Sherpa can make 18.6 knots ingame, whereas SSE states it should only be able to make 16.60...
She also has prop walk when moving astern - which she shouldn't have, because she has two "contra rotating" shafts (or at least, she's supposed to have two shafts ::) ).
Please see attached image, you'll see my sherpa has one(1) propellor, not two(2)!
And before I get slammed by "its your computer, reinstall this reinstall that" This has happened on both steam AND non steam versions.
-
hi traddles !
my real life experience is mostly on recreational cabin boats , so no large ships ::).
nevertheless - google search or wartsila documents teach us that highly charged 4-stroke medium speed marine diesels have a runup time of about 60-90 seconds from zero to full load due to emmissions control and the delay in turbocharger runup time.
very large two strokes with a fixed pitch direct drive prop several minutes from full forward to full astern, even in emergency, and in normal operation due to minimizing sudden heat stress on the heads and pistons as well surging of the minivan seize turbochargers up to 30 minutes.
as a real :captain: you surely know this.
so they all need tugs for berthing in ports... well, i do not need a tug in the vermaas, ... ok, no kind of modelling the winddrift helps a lot here.
as a real merchantman- do you want to tell us here the accleration times of especially the big containers, gas or crude tankers are at least rougly real here ?
don,t get me wrong - i would strongly wish to see further improvements in shipsim and a long future of vstep with this, but i believe that this ship is sinking due to obvious reasons.
cheers
-
@Danny - 7 seconds from full ahead to full astern, would mean approximately 3.5 seconds for full ahead to zero pitch. I have never seen a governor which could cope with taking an engine from full load to zero load in 3.5 seconds without the engine overspeeding.
@ACR You are correct in that going from zero to Full ahead on a large 2 stroke diesel normally takes something in the region of 30 minutes (with more modern engines this can be as low as 20 minutes), however, zero to full ahead manouvering is measured in seconds rather than minutes so in theory it would be possible in good conditions to berth one of these ships without tugs, the reason that it isn't done is that the consequences of it going wrong in real life just isn't worth the risk.
-
@Danny - 7 seconds from full ahead to full astern, would mean approximately 3.5 seconds for full ahead to zero pitch. I have never seen a governor which could cope with taking an engine from full load to zero load in 3.5 seconds without the engine overspeeding.
Thats the figure I was told for a recent Farstad newbuild (PSV, Twin shafts, clean design)... I can't remember the name though :(. I Think a member approached Vstep with permission from Farstad to put the vessel in question into SSE, along with a 3D model provided by Farstad. Vstep turned it down.
-
danny, it may be true that the pitch of the propeller itself is able to change in 7 seconds the full range of its pitch , but as clancy said the engine itself would never be able to cope with the resulting load change in this small time.
no way you will go from full forward to full astern power with the whole drivetrain in 7 seconds, even when due to variable pitch the engine by itself does not need to be reversed in rotation .
@clancy :
here is a video of yard trials for a crash stop of the hansa papenburg. its only a 1700 teu ship, so no comparinsion of the real big diesels
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KaE9pQ3MuIk
look carefully for the massive surge and finally blow off of the turbo charger. and listen how long it takes until the engine and turbo finally spinns down. after the engine and the turbo came to a stop you have to reverse and rev ip the engine again. due to the massive inertia of such big engines i do not think its a question of seconds.
here i found a video of the real condor express acclerating for open sea. interesting video .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4lcNRVMd3w&feature=relmfu
look how long it takes to spin up the engines and acclerate the ship. the huge amount of black smoke during acc. tells us that the guys are not easy on the throttle but the turbochargers start to delay in boost pressure build up and so the engine smokes due to lack of air .
cheers
-
Danny,
I have absolutely no idea how your "Sherpa" looks like you show above. Naturally I am not doubting your picture, but this is how she should, and does, look in fact. ???
Traddles.
-
Danny,
I have absolutely no idea how your "Sherpa" looks like you show above. Naturally I am not doubting your picture, but this is how she should, and does, look in fact. ???
Traddles.
Well, my sherpa has always had 1 prop, with both my steam and non steam versions ???
-
That will have been done from full ahead with the engine on 100% load, ships never use 100% load during manoeuvring, manoeuvring full ahead will be something like 40 or 50% load and from manoeuvring full ahead to stop is a matter of seconds, even on bigger engines than the one shown in the video.
If you are on a ship like Vermas and you are stopped and put the engine control lever to the full ahead (100%) position then the pitch / rpm should increase to about 40% over a period of around 30 seconds then to 60%over the next 30 seconds and then slowly increase to 100% over the following 20 minutes or so.
-
To put in my 2 cents, the picture that Traddles posted seems to indicate that she does not have contra-rotating props (judging by the angles of the blades)..
-
If you are on a ship like Vermas and you are stopped and put the engine control lever to the full ahead (100%) position then the pitch / rpm should increase to about 40% over a period of around 30 seconds then to 60%over the next 30 seconds and then slowly increase to 100% over the following 20 minutes or so.
clanky, ships like the vermaas have no variable pitch propellers . further no gearing, no clutch, so prop rpm is equal to engine rpm and usually very low about 100-120 rpm.
so having the engine control lever at full stop means the engine is also stopped. pushing it forward means to initially start the engine at all- going from forward to astern means initially fully stop it, then reverse it and then start it again. i think this will take more than 30 seconds.
the load curve you described seems right to me.
and compare it to the "simulator" here...
-
To put in my 2 cents, the picture that Traddles posted seems to indicate that she does not have contra-rotating props (judging by the angles of the blades)..
You are right. Ingame they both move the same direction.
-
The real world version of the "fairmount class" does have counter-rotating screws, along with almost every other twin screw ship in operation. (I got contra and counter rotating props mixed up :( )
Also - The single screw sherpa bug appears to be rather odd... When I load the sherpa in "ship preview" I have 2 propellers, when I load into free roam and apply power I still have 2 screws. If I change views from the orbital cam however my 2 screws merge into 1.
-
Hello Saltydog and gentlemen,
Sherpa propellers? You probably meant outward turning, and so you are right, the Sherpa model of the game is designed indeed with inward turning propellers. Contra-rotating is something else. Nevertheless, I think it is indeed a pity that the screw models don't represent pitch really, and also they don't rotate as we would have liked it.
To come back to the issue about the pitch settings of Sherpa, danny is indeed right: the times are not realistic, but then very far from his friend's 3.5 seconds. The time from full pitch, while at full load (not far from maximum torque), to full pitch in the other direction is 65 seconds (ahead to astern) and 78 seconds (astern to ahead). But from astern at full load to 0 degree blade angle, the delay is only 22 seconds. I am sure that an expert engineer like Clanky can explain why to us, but it is not possible to take into account the propeller load in a game, and that is why it was assumed that the no load time of 15 seconds from max to 0 pitch was a reasonable guess for Sherpa. There is no doubt that clanky knows better than anyone else here that big container ships have fixed pitch propellers, evt contra-rotating, and has seen and heard more than enough of them.
Reason for this choice is that the game is about handling ships in or around harbours, and so I am not ashamed of the thrust buildup of most ships, although errare humanum est. Well, I think also many if not most interested players are aware of the time it takes to accelerate the engines.
Vermaas startup was set at around 10 seconds from bridge order to deadslow (set at 34 RPM), another 20 to get to 104 RPM, too fast certainly, but also not at full load, as the propeller is not at its best efficiency at full RPM and harbour speed.
If somebody wants to play more realistically, he can replace the PLCs at the bridge or the engineers dowwn there, by pushing the controls slooower? Eventually, asking to change some settings will certainly be answered, and done if it is sensible and can be done.
Regards,
Luc
-
As far as I could discover, the Fairmount Sherpa does not have contra-rotating props.
She does however have controllable pitch props, but that option is not in the game.. ;)
-
Doubleprop ships with variable pitch control usually do turn counterwise.
-
I think I was confused with counter-rotation propellers, such as on the Titanic.. ;)
-
I think I was confused with counter-rotation propellers, such as on the Titanic.. ;)
The picture you show is either the Olympic or Brittanic, Titanic had a 3 blade centrepropeller with a little larger diameter than the 4 blade centreprop of the Olympic. At least this is the case as far as I studied Titanic.
If the Titanic is made for simulation with a 4 blade centreprop, I can tell people did not do their homework.
:D
-
Whether or not Titanic's central propeller was 3 or 4 bladed is a matter of debate..
It is not the question here.. :)
-
She has controllable pitch propellers so the angle can be set to whatever you want, but yes, if those are both set to the ahead direction then they are not contra-rotating. They also look nothing like real propellers.
-
Sorry - I got contra-rotating and counter-rotating mixed up :doh:
-
Whether or not Titanic's central propeller was 3 or 4 bladed is a matter of debate..
It is not the question here.. :)
:D How dare you write that! In terms of how accurate SSE is (see 2 clockwise turning props on the Fairmount) on ships, it is actually a good question here!
http://www.encyclopedia-titanica.org/mystery-titanic-central-propeller.html (http://www.encyclopedia-titanica.org/mystery-titanic-central-propeller.html)
Why? It is kind of obvious that the found papers at Harland and Wolff may tell the truth.
Danny could try to look in his game how many blades and props the Titanic has :D
She has controllable pitch propellers so the angle can be set to whatever you want, but yes, if those are both set to the ahead direction then they are not contra-rotating. They also look nothing like real propellers.
Who is "she" in your comments? if Titannic its a NO, if it is Fairmount Sherpa also no, and they do look like a solid prop from a little distance
(http://www.imaginaryviews.nl/SipsimForumSupport/solidprop.jpg) (http://www.imaginaryviews.nl/SipsimForumSupport/pitchprop.jpg)
I rest my case.
Sorry - I got contra-rotating and counter-rotating mixed up :doh:
Nevermind, we understand what you mean ;)
-
She has controllable pitch propellers so the angle can be set to whatever you want, but yes, if those are both set to the ahead direction then they are not contra-rotating. They also look nothing like real propellers.
Forgot to add this to previous post, but 2 prop ships with pitchcontrol are supposed to contra rotate, or it would stationary drift left or right depending on the rotation.
-
Further to clankys' point about the screws not looking "correct" - The leading edge should have a much shallower curve, with a sharp tip.
(http://www.shipspotting.com/photos/big/6/0/6/1600606.jpg)
-
Controlable or not, it is obvious these props will (have to) turn counterwise. These props are mirrored, as the wingprops of Titanic, Olympic and Brittanic are also.
Even with azipods if there are 2, they are mirrored, and work counterwise.
-
clanky, ships like the vermaas have no variable pitch propellers . further no gearing, no clutch, so prop rpm is equal to engine rpm and usually very low about 100-120 rpm.
so having the engine control lever at full stop means the engine is also stopped. pushing it forward means to initially start the engine at all- going from forward to astern means initially fully stop it, then reverse it and then start it again. i think this will take more than 30 seconds.
the load curve you described seems right to me.
and compare it to the "simulator" here...
There are ships in service with large 2 stroke diesels and controllable pitch propellers, granted it is unlikely in the case of something like Vermass, but it is not that unusual for other ships.
-
The real world version of the "fairmount class" does have counter-rotating screws, along with almost every other twin screw ship in operation. (I got contra and counter rotating props mixed up :( )
I think contra rotating propellers are 2 screws on the same shaft turning in opposite directions. most Torpedoes use this set-up to stop the weapon from spinning in the water.
-
Syd, you are correct, contra rotating describes 2 propellers on the same shaft, counter roatating is what Sherpa is supposed to be, although I have to admit that I had to google it!
-
Counter and contra rotating means the same. It are props on the same shaft or in some occasions in one line.
In ships with double propellors it is said as the prop turn clockwise or anticlockwise or counterwise. I think there is no special expression for twinscrews, it is however from before the Titanic a fact that a starboard and port propellor have opposite work direction.
-
Hello,
It is only semantics, of course, and I am not English speaking, but I'll try to explain what I think to know about the terminology used for propellers, with the caveat of the language.
Counter-rotating propellers are just that, propellers turning in opposite directions on parallel shafts, vertical like CH47 Chinook or KA-31, horizontal like twin engine aircraft, or for ships with pairs of propellers turning in opposite directions, like most but not all twin screw ships. Indeed, some modern ASD tugs, or towboats, have the same propulsion units at both sides, an interesting feature to steer on large bends on rivers.
Such counter-rotating propellers can be outward turning, like Sherpa, or inward turning like RPA12 or many other but not all CPP propulsions.
Outward turning propellers mean that the starboard propeller is right-handed, the port prop is left-handed.
Inward turning sees a left-handed one at starboard and a right-handed one at port side.
A right handed propeller turns ahead clockwise when seen from astern, the screw is right-hand. Left-handed etc.
Screw propellers like Volvo Penta Aquamatic Duoprop, or Wartsila Lips for large marine propellers have pairs of coaxial propellers, in view of increasing the efficiency of the propulsion. The turboprops of Tu-114 or the rotors of some helicopters are flying examples of the same. They have since a long time been named contra-rotating propellers.
The main goal of such an arrangement is more the increase in efficiency of the propellers, not so much canceling opposing torques. The propeller shafts are coaxial.
There are also propellers in tandem on the same shaft, with the same pitch direction, for instance at both ends of the main shaft in a pod. These propellers are of course not contra-rotating nor counter-rotating propellers.
Perhaps could an English speaking check and correct this.
Regards,
Luc
-
:thumbs: Think it does not need much correction.
The marinewiki only shows contra-rotating propellers
http://www.marinewiki.org/index.php/Contra-rotating_Propellers (http://www.marinewiki.org/index.php/Contra-rotating_Propellers)
Counterwise just means the opposite. So it is not completely wrong to name them counterwise propeller.
Counterwise is often the opposite of clockwise, so if clockwise is right, counterwise is the general name for left turning things.
It seem contra-rotating propellers is the right expression.
As you are French, I am Dutch, we may have the same language gap.
Indeed, some modern ASD tugs, or towboats, have the same propulsion units at both sides, an interesting feature to steer on large bends on rivers.
I am not that sure if some tugs have this setting, rivers have many bends, and on the "countertrip" it would not help at all.
-
Who is "she" in your comments? if Titannic its a NO, if it is Fairmount Sherpa also no, and they do look like a solid prop from a little distance
If you look at this (http://www.fairmount.nl/index.php/fleet/ship/14) description of the Fairmount Sherpa, you will see she has 2 cp propellers. I think that means controllable pitch..
ps; the opposite of clockwise is counterclockwise.. ;)
-
Luc, I think you have nailed it. No need for correction.
-
Indeed it is counterclockwise or anticlockwise. Counterwise has in fact nothing to do with rotational movement, but it is as far as I recall commonly used to express a left rotation.
If you look at this (http://www.fairmount.nl/index.php/fleet/ship/14) description of the Fairmount Sherpa, you will see she has 2 cp propellers. I think that means controllable pitch..
ps; the opposite of clockwise is counterclockwise.. ;)
Sherpa has controlable pitch and clockwise and anticlockwise propeller.
-
duplicate comment. deleted
-
Luc,
Your English is fine -- no need to worry -- and your explanation of the cunfusion in terms is exemplary.
People need to understand that there is a lag between engine orders (also helm orders) and execution, and then a further lag before the ship reacts, even in relatively small ships. Momwentum/Inertia, two sides of the same coin.
Best,
Michael
Hello,
It is only semantics, of course, and I am not English speaking, but I'll try to explain what I think to know about the terminology used for propellers, with the caveat of the language.
Counter-rotating propellers are just that, propellers turning in opposite directions on parallel shafts, vertical like CH47 Chinook or KA-31, horizontal like twin engine aircraft, or for ships with pairs of propellers turning in opposite directions, like most but not all twin screw ships. Indeed, some modern ASD tugs, or towboats, have the same propulsion units at both sides, an interesting feature to steer on large bends on rivers.
Such counter-rotating propellers can be outward turning, like Sherpa, or inward turning like RPA12 or many other but not all CPP propulsions.
Outward turning propellers mean that the starboard propeller is right-handed, the port prop is left-handed.
Inward turning sees a left-handed one at starboard and a right-handed one at port side.
A right handed propeller turns ahead clockwise when seen from astern, the screw is right-hand. Left-handed etc.
Screw propellers like Volvo Penta Aquamatic Duoprop, or Wartsila Lips for large marine propellers have pairs of coaxial propellers, in view of increasing the efficiency of the propulsion. The turboprops of Tu-114 or the rotors of some helicopters are flying examples of the same. They have since a long time been named contra-rotating propellers.
The main goal of such an arrangement is more the increase in efficiency of the propellers, not so much canceling opposing torques. The propeller shafts are coaxial.
There are also propellers in tandem on the same shaft, with the same pitch direction, for instance at both ends of the main shaft in a pod. These propellers are of course not contra-rotating nor counter-rotating propellers.
Perhaps could an English speaking check and correct this.
Regards,
Luc