Topic: Anchor Control (Read 29030 times)

chrism · « **on:** May 23, 2007, 22:53:03 »

It would be nice if there want anchor control on the ships and better cockpit features for operating the ship as if it was a 747 on flight sim

mporter · « **Reply #1 on:** May 24, 2007, 01:00:11 »

Quote from: chrism on May 23, 2007, 22:53:03

It would be nice if there want anchor control on the ships and better cockpit features for operating the ship as if it was a 747 on flight sim

Er, well, ships really don't have all that many controls -- throttles, thrusters, and rudder is about it. River towboats also have flanking rudders, but they are not (yet) implemented in SS.

Cheers,
Michael

chrism · « **Reply #2 on:** May 24, 2007, 01:03:04 »

Theres a lot of stuff that can be included in ship sim from Virtual Sailor

Flyboy3771 · « **Reply #3 on:** May 24, 2007, 03:31:03 »

Ya I think an anchor would be neat. Its not always easy to get anchor to stay though.

Stuart2007 · « **Reply #4 on:** May 24, 2007, 15:01:23 »

Quote from: mporter on May 24, 2007, 01:00:11

Er, well, ships really don't have all that many controls -- throttles, thrusters, and rudder is about it. River towboats also have flanking rudders, but they are not (yet) implemented in SS.

Cheers,
Michael

Hmm... Apart from bow thrusters, stern thrusters, rudder, propellor pitch, bouyancy/stability tanks, stabilisers (both fixed and adjustable) ... Even the autopilot has settings to determine its rate of turn, collision avoidance radar.

This isn't a criticism of shipsim or of you Michael, but ships aren't quite as simple as a car.

Stuart

PS (If I WERE being fecetious then I would point out that a 747 has ailerons, rudder, flaps, wheels and thats about it

(I have a PPL and found it easier than the car)

chrism · « **Reply #5 on:** May 24, 2007, 20:07:30 »

Quote from: Stuart2007 on May 24, 2007, 15:01:23

PS (If I WERE being fecetious then I would point out that a 747 has ailerons, rudder, flaps, wheels and thats about it (I have a PPL and found it easier than the car)

along with the state of the art navigation equip, and almost all digital displays and complex flight computers.

Yas said above, yeh, more than a throttle, thrusters, and wheel would be nice

Stuart2007 · « **Reply #6 on:** May 24, 2007, 23:46:43 »

Yes, but please read my post. I said IF I was being fecetious...

The point is that there are only a few main controls to keep a airplane in the sky and there are only a few main controls to manouver a ship.

Do you remember when flightsim first came out? Remember that the function level of FS04 is somewhat different to the version of 2 decades ago! Give ship sim a chance.

PS If you want to talk about heavy jets may I suggest the much more impressive A380- the worlds biggest.

Stuart

LucAtC · « **Reply #7 on:** May 24, 2007, 23:57:20 »

Hello Michael,
Indeed, a one button anchoring system similar to that of a 747 would give a better sense of the complexity of the handling. When pushing the button, the stewards will rush to the bow?

At the same time, you fill the buoyancy tanks to gain some lift (while losing speed

), you reduce the fixed stabilisers

and augment the gain of your stabilizing fins. Thanks to these manoeuvers, you can now check the settings of your autopilot.
I knew some more realism was needed. And dont forget to brief the chief.
Regards,
Luc

mporter · « **Reply #8 on:** May 25, 2007, 00:06:29 »

Quote from: LucAtC on May 24, 2007, 23:57:20

Hello Michael,
Indeed, a one button anchoring system similar to that of a 747 would give a better sense of the complexity of the handling. When pushing the button, the stewards will rush to the bow?
At the same time, you fill the buoyancy tanks to gain some lift (while losing speed ), you reduce the fixed stabilisers and augment the gain of your stabilizing fins. Thanks to these manoeuvers, you can now check the settings of your autopilot.
I knew some more realism was needed. And dont forget to brief the chief.
Regards,
Luc

Ah yes . . and I forgot also that you have to be careful about quick changes in the buoyancy tanks -- an abrupt jump might cause the soufflÃ© to fall.

And of course an autopilot with proper waypoints would complete missions by itself, so we could all relax with a beer.

Cheers,
Michael

tman · « **Reply #9 on:** May 25, 2007, 02:25:55 »

Will there really be an auto pilot? I there is that would be alsome on those long missions

chrism · « **Reply #10 on:** May 25, 2007, 13:33:50 »

AUTOPILOT!!!
nice for ocean voyages to way points
A MUST HAVE

KDS · « **Reply #11 on:** May 25, 2007, 19:01:12 »

Yes good idea aswell.

AriesDW · « **Reply #12 on:** May 26, 2007, 10:57:20 »

There are a lot of small controls for that 747 -however, for the game you really do not need them.

To take the game to the realism and control level requested, there would need to be many, many controls. Ships, well, newer ones at least, are not just rudder, engines, thrusters . . . It is tough stuff.

And I have flown a few hundred hours in 747 simulators and I know there are A LOT of controls and they ALL have uses. Thank gor for MSFS simplicity sometimes. I would sometimes not always want to run the checklist on a weekend, short gaming session like in the bigger simulators. However, I would like to see the control level in SS step up a notch closer to MSFS.

LucAtC · « **Reply #13 on:** May 26, 2007, 12:24:36 »

Totally agreed!! The level of controls could be indeed stepped up, of course taking into account

the graphical burden. But before that, the existing ones could be improved "at low cost"

.

A permanent display of rudder angle and RoT, be it digital or analog? Angle, not %.
Also for the throttle settings (Soll- und Ist- values, dont know how to tell in English, something like desired- and actual values), permanently displayed (2 bargraphs?)
and for thrusters settings.

For the anchor(s) control, like it exists in VS,

I dont support it. In VS its aim is to stop the drift without any semblance of realism

. I think VStep could do far better when letting them down or up, setting the length and allowing the ship to "turn around(?)" its anchor(s), at a minimum, taking into account the time needed to prepare the anchoring.
And if you like MSFS controls, I can

recommend the amazing Tu114, and trying to fly from Moscow to Miami (

) for instance.
Regards,
Luc

AriesDW · « **Reply #14 on:** May 26, 2007, 17:57:00 »

Quote from: LucAtC on May 26, 2007, 12:24:36

And if you like MSFS controls, I can recommend the amazing Tu114, and trying to fly from Moscow to Miami ( ) for instance.
Regards,
Luc

I did the Moscow to NYC run.

AriesDW · « **Reply #15 on:** May 26, 2007, 18:05:22 »

Quote from: LucAtC on May 26, 2007, 12:24:36

But before that, the existing ones could be improved "at low cost" .
A permanent display of rudder angle and RoT, be it digital or analog? Angle, not %.
Also for the throttle settings (Soll- und Ist- values, dont know how to tell in English, something like desired- and actual values), permanently displayed (2 bargraphs?)
and for thrusters settings.

I do like your approach of improving what we have and trying to add things, but improving things first. I have spoken to VStep about this approach in the past. For EX - allowing us to pilot all AI ships - the small tankers, the other containers, the NYC Cattamaram taxi, etc. I am also all for the idea of expanding the current harbors in the game, not just adding new ones. And as you propose here, I am also for the improvement of control as well as the addition of some new ones, although fixing what we have would be a better approach. Just like ship dynamics - why add more ships when the current ones remain in the need of improvement.[/list]

Stuart2007 · « **Reply #16 on:** May 26, 2007, 23:32:59 »

Like others here, I would like to see more facilities added in, but (as said before) don't compare the complexty to MSFS as it has been developed over 20 years. Im sure Ship sim will develop at a pace that suits the developer.

Stuart

Britannic · « **Reply #17 on:** May 30, 2007, 15:49:14 »

Quote from: chrism on May 24, 2007, 01:03:04

Theres a lot of stuff that can be included in ship sim from Virtual Sailor

like the rpm meter or the mooring control? Yes, I agree with you there- however, one of the beatys of ship sim, i guess, is its simplicity.

LucAtC · « **Reply #18 on:** May 30, 2007, 17:59:07 »

Up to now, the (elastic) mooring system of Shipsim is "better" than that of VS. Ropes are indeed elastic (but not like chewing-gum), and need bollards or other mooring points. Not in VS, where you can moor your ship in the middle of the sea.
VS has many niceties, but anchoring and mooring are hmmm

less hmmm

realistic.
I am sure VStep will avoid or suppress any grotesque feature in ShipSim! The developers want a certain level of quality, and one must say they have up to now succeeded, let us not ask them to develop a new VS, a game aimed at nice and virtual -hypothetical- visuals, not intended to be a bridge simulator.
Regards,
Luc

Maik · « **Reply #19 on:** May 30, 2007, 19:32:54 »

Quote from: LucAtC on May 30, 2007, 17:59:07

Up to now, the (elastic) mooring system of Shipsim is "better" than that of VS. Ropes are indeed elastic (but not like chewing-gum),

Well that was a shame with ship sim. When you moorde you can shoot out all over the place.

Gustav · « **Reply #20 on:** May 30, 2007, 19:37:07 »

Well a Real anchor should be fun. Then you can anchor up when you go for a meal.

Maik · « **Reply #21 on:** May 30, 2007, 20:42:31 »

That would be very usefull with larger misions. I mostly prefer not to put a game on pause if I go get something to eat. With racegames I mostly park next to the road ore on a parking space. With shipsim it would be great to just drop the anchor. Get something to eat and sail further!

Stuart2007 · « **Reply #22 on:** May 31, 2007, 11:13:56 »

Quote from: chrism on May 25, 2007, 13:33:50

AUTOPILOT!!!
nice for ocean voyages to way points
A MUST HAVE

Then whats the point of playing the game if the computer will do it for you? Might just use a long slide show

Stu

LucAtC · « **Reply #23 on:** May 31, 2007, 15:20:54 »

Anchor control and autopilot are once more derivatives from Virtual Sailor, game that you probably

"miss".
The game playground of VS is huge but not very detailed, unlike that of ShipSim. That is why an autopilot cannot be missed in the game. Indeed, if you intend to simulate a crossing of the Panama Canal with 5 ships together, you will need an autopilot to avoid having to jump

like a fly from one ship to the other.
It would also be an interesting feature within ShipSim for more complex missions with many ships, although I dont

like going from one to the other ship, abandoning the bridge without

MAS anchors. It ruins the sense of the simulation, but enhances the fun!
The need of an autopilot is

belittled by the perfect yaw stability of the ships, (with the exception of the multipurpose vessel Agile Solution). Hopefully, a coursekeeping device will be needed in ShipSim2008.
Regards,
Luc

AriesDW · « **Reply #24 on:** June 01, 2007, 11:14:12 »

I like the idea of utilizing an actual anchoring system. An autopilot would be a feature I am very interested in. I prefer to be on one ship throughout a mission, which makes it more realistic, however, sometimes you need to use other vessels (see some of my missions with the Titanic).

Of course one system that acts both as autopilot and anchor is the new global postioning management system utilized on the QM2 - where if the ship is plotted to stay in one place and anchors, realistically and virtually, the computer mans the thrusters, azipods, and such to make sure the vessel does not drift out of position.

I too am highly annoyed with the extreme elasticity of the ropes on Ship Simulator. I often go to great lengths to doc the vessel properly, however, if there is a wind and the vessel drifts slightly, then the ropes "snaps" the vessel back towards the dock, therefore causing damage. I think this highly, highly annoying.

Author Topic: Anchor Control (Read 29030 times)