reported earlier Cannot put some ship types in harbours (description.lua depth problem?) Not sure if map or ship lua file is the issue.

[TEMPEST.114]

Below are just a few examples that it's impossible to put ships in ports/docks (shown is the CLOSEST the mission editor will allow them to go to the nearby port) - probably because the description.lua has the wrong depth limit in it, or because the water depth on the map is incorrect.

You have this problem with most maps that have ports. 

The reason I think it's a lua issue is that 3rd party mod ships don't have this problem with the same maps.

 

 

 

[Silver_Dragon]

Harbours never was implemented by ED. The caucasus docks never was "capables" to put a ship on your interior, form some years ago...

[TEMPEST.114]

1 hour ago, Silver_Dragon said:

Harbours never was implemented by ED. The caucasus docks never was "capables" to put a ship on your interior, form some years ago...

If you use the Civilian Assets Pack - Nautical (https://forum.dcs.world/topic/270558-civilian-objects-and-vehicles/) then those will go into the ports no problem; which as I mentioned leads me to think that the description.lua or equivalent that is used for the default civilian ships in the game, is set incorrectly. Should be a trivial fix, but as it's in the CORE files, it needs to come from ED.

 

[BIGNEWY]

Hi, 

it is a long known issue and would require changes to the older terrain, it is limited by the older terrain tech used for the Caucasus terrain. 

thank you 

[TEMPEST.114]

1 hour ago, BIGNEWY said:

Hi, 

it is a long known issue and would require changes to the older terrain, it is limited by the older terrain tech used for the Caucasus terrain. 

thank you 

Odd then that 3rd party mod ships work fine, but okay... kinda breaks my script but I guess it's not going to be fixed anytime soon.

Do you think if I found a fix by changing some lua in the DCS World core game folder, you might consider rolling that into an update?

Edited April 1, 2024 by Elphaba

[Northstar98]

The Caucasus map has very simplistic seabed topography, it's more-or-less just linear down to 100 m. The real thing isn't quite so simple and goes quite a bit deeper.

With these specfic examples however, it's less so that the ports are too shallow and rather that the vessels being used here are simply too large.

The Handy Wind has a draught of about 8.4 m (though I've seen it also listed as nearly 10 m), the Seawise Giant about 24 m and the Santa Fe, 5.2 m. In DCS, the Handy Wind has a draught of 9.5 m, the Seawise Giant 29 m and the Santa Fe 6 m. The only one that's really off (though it could be that ED have defined it for full load) is the Seawise Giant, but correcting it wouldn't change anything in this case.

IRL, according to this, Batumi harbour has a channel depth of 9.4-10 m, the cargo pier 6.4 - 7.6 m and the achorage and oil terminal 7.1 - 9.1 m. The port of Sochi, according to this, has a channel depth of 6.4 - 7.6 m, the cargo pier has a depth of 4.9 - 6.1 m and the achorage has a depth of 11 - 12.2 m.

So in both cases, the Seawise Giant isn't getting in - it's draught is far too large when loaded (as it is in DCS). The Handy Wind isn't getting into Sochi (beyond the anchorage anyway) and is barely getting into Batumi.

The Santa Fe though should mostly be good for both.

Edited April 1, 2024 by Northstar98

[TEMPEST.114]

4 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

The Caucasus map has very simplistic seabed topography, it's more-or-less just linear down to 100 m. The real thing isn't quite so simple and goes quite a bit deeper.

With these specfic examples however, it's less so that the ports are too shallow and rather that the vessels being used here are simply too large.

The Handy Wind has a draught of about 8.4 m (though I've seen it also listed as nearly 10 m), the Seawise Giant about 24 m and the Santa Fe, 5.2 m. In DCS, the Handy Wind has a draught of 9.5 m, the Seawise Giant 29 m and the Santa Fe 6 m. The only one that's really off (though it could be that ED have defined it for full load) is the Seawise Giant, but correcting it wouldn't change anything in this case.

IRL, according to this, Batumi harbour has a channel depth of 9.4-10 m, the cargo pier 6.4 - 7.6 m and the achorage and oil terminal 7.1 - 9.1 m. The port of Sochi, according to this, has a channel depth of 6.4 - 7.6 m, the cargo pier has a depth of 4.9 - 6.1 m and the achorage has a depth of 11 - 12.2 m.

So in both cases, the Seawise Giant isn't getting in - it's draught is far too large when loaded (as it is in DCS). The Handy Wind isn't getting into Sochi (beyond the anchorage anyway) and is barely getting into Batumi.

The Santa Fe though should mostly be good for both.

 

That's really cool info; thanks!

So just to clarify, at some point off the coastline is the 100m seabed, and from the coastline to that seabed it's a linear gradient down, and there's no way to know that info from the mission editor?

And if the Santa Fe should get into both, but you can clear see it's not getting into Batumi, then what's the problem with that? Is it that the gradient is too shallow there? 

And how, using 3rd party mods for giant oil tankers etc, are they able to get right up to the quayside but none of the default ships can get anywhere near?

I'm not contradicting your information, I'm just still confused. 

[Minsky]

2 hours ago, Elphaba said:

And how, using 3rd party mods for giant oil tankers etc, are they able to get right up to the quayside but none of the default ships can get anywhere near?

3rd parties could've set the ship's dimensions smaller than the actual model. Just to avoid this particular problem.

[Northstar98]

16 hours ago, Elphaba said:

That's really cool info; thanks!

So just to clarify, at some point off the coastline is the 100m seabed, and from the coastline to that seabed it's a linear gradient down

There are some exceptions where the gradient does change (though you will eventually end up with a linear gradient), but more or less.

Spoiler

Just as an example:

Chart Depth /ft	Actual Depth in DCS /ft
10	32
20	68
50	78
100	92
200	100
500	176
1000	245

In this case the gradient doesn't reflect reality at all, it's only at the 100 ft mark where it's close. I'd have to take more measurements though at equal spacing to really compare the gradient properly however.

Just note that in different areas of maps different charts are used, which may have soundings in different units. Here it's in feet but further to the north it uses fathoms (fms).

 

16 hours ago, Elphaba said:

and there's no way to know that info from the mission editor?

All the mission editor and F10 map will tell you is the altitude or depth under your cursor (in the above spoiler you can see ALT -176 in bottom-left of the screenshot).

One thing I've done though is that I've gone into Server.lua (found in your main DCS installation, under Config\View) and changed "CameraTerrainRestriction" from true to false, which lets me take the camera underwater, allowing you to inspect the seabed visually.

Perhaps (though this is something for the wishlist) it would be nice if the ALT layer showed bathymetry and not just topographical relief.

16 hours ago, Elphaba said:

And if the Santa Fe should get into both, but you can clear see it's not getting into Batumi, then what's the problem with that? Is it that the gradient is too shallow there?

Sorry, I completely forgot to mention how the IRL depths compare with DCS.

The problem there is that the ports are a couple of metres too shallow for the Santa Fe. Batumi harbour has a depth of 5 m practically all throughout, which is just below the draught setting for the Santa Fe. Sochi is 6 metres throughout, though immediatelly next to the docks is 5 metres. Both get deeper around their mouths though.

16 hours ago, Elphaba said:

And how, using 3rd party mods for giant oil tankers etc, are they able to get right up to the quayside but none of the default ships can get anywhere near?

As Minsky said, they likely are using a shallower draught setting, or maybe don't have one even defined. I wouldn't be able to tell you which without seeing the .lua definition for it (for ED ships, they can be found here, simply click on the one of interest and Ctrl+F "draft" (I use the British spelling).

Edited April 2, 2024 by Northstar98
slight addendum

[TEMPEST.114]

1 hour ago, Northstar98 said:

There are some exceptions where the gradient does change (though you will eventually end up with a linear gradient), but more or less.

  Reveal hidden contents

Just as an example:

Chart Depth /ft	Actual Depth in DCS /ft
10	32
20	68
50	78
100	92
200	100
500	176
1000	245

In this case the gradient doesn't reflect reality at all, it's only at the 100 ft mark where it's close. I'd have to take more measurements though at equal spacing to really compare the gradient properly however.

 

All the mission editor and F10 map will tell you is the altitude or depth under your cursor.

One thing I've done though is that I've gone into Server.lua (found in your main DCS installation, under Config\View) and changed "CameraTerrainRestriction" from true to false, which lets me take the camera underwater, allowing you to inspect the seabed visually.

Perhaps (though this is something for the wishlist) it would be nice if the ALT layer showed bathymetry and not just topographical relief.

Sorry, I completely forgot to mention how the IRL depths compare with DCS.

The problem there is that the ports are a couple of metres too shallow for the Santa Fe. Batumi harbour has a depth of 5 m practically all throughout, which is just below the draught setting for the Santa Fe. Sochi is 6 metres throughout, though immediatelly next to the docks is 5 metres. Both get deeper around their mouths though.

As Minsky said, they likely are using a shallower draught setting, or maybe don't have one even defined. I wouldn't be able to tell you which without seeing the .lua definition for it (for ED ships, they can be found here, simply click on the one of interest and Ctrl+F "draft" (I use the British spelling).

This is spectacular info and a learning moment. Thank you so much!