| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
IanRG |
SpringSharp 3.0 Beta 3 teaser |
Lead | |
|
Posts: 322 ( 2-Mar-2008 07:23:40) |
We have done a lot of work on SS3.0b3 since my last post here. With the release of of Visual Studio 2008 SS3.0b3 has been updated to use .Net framwork 2.0.
This is good and bad news. First the bad news - You will need to install .Net Framework 2.0 (if it is not already on your computer) to use SS3.0b3. From the
programmers perspective the change to 2.0 is not seamless - especially on Vista using a Pentium 4 HT chip. This leads to the good news - The change has forced
our hands to restructure the program so that it is far more modular, smaller and faster. The 3rd beta was prepared entirely using SharpDevelop, an open source
IDE and no longer relies on DotNetBar. This should allow Linux and Mac OSX versions - albeit using Mono - the open source version of .Net 2.0. As to capability
additions - there are many bug fixes of small errors found in the rebuild process. A new tab page has been added to give a summary page for the guns including
buttons to jump to the specific gun page and a table of weights. The error and warning messages on the gun pages have been reinstated and a description box
previews the full description as it will appear in the report as you assemble the inputs for each battery The weapon page is fully activated now. The mines,
depth charges and AS mortars all work and are included in the report. A description box has also been added as in the Gun pages. The abilty to choose between a
simple fixed mortar like the Hedgehog or a training mortar like the Squid has been added. On the armour page the belt incline responds to input. It increases
the allowable belt height by the incline degrees and is included in the report. The bulkhead choice box will distinguish between bulkheads that are non
structural and those that strengthen the hull and the beam between the bulkheads will allow for different voids and reduction in engine spaces. The engine page
has been redesigned but is largely still a work in progress. The ability to lock the power will be added. This will require manual recalculation of resistance
and speed once the power has been locked. Other additions to come will include the ability to choose a percentage mix between high performance lightweight
engines (where 0% requires short trips or being accompanied by a destroyer tender) to high endurance heavy engines (where 100% has multiple redundancy, high
damage sustainability and the ability to do extended tours/blockades with minimal support. This will need to be balanced and carefully monitored lest we see
15,000 nm range battleships with destroyer weight engines. However its should eliminate the need to allow destroyers with less than 1.00 composite strength.
Finally diesel engine size, room and consumption and the new resistance model is still to come. Structurally the report page has been replaced by the side
panel and the fly out sidebar by an integral one. With luck SS3.0b3 should be downloadable by the end of March Ian
|
||
Carthaginian |
|||
|
Posts: 30 ( 2-Mar-2008 19:53:47) |
*wheeps with joy*
PLEASE, good Sir, withhold this form us no longer! We beg you... RELEASE! |
||
Michael Garrity |
|||
|
Registered Member
Posts: 1 ( 3-Mar-2008 19:42:32) |
Dear Sir:
|
||
P3D |
|||
|
Posts: 758 ( 3-Mar-2008 21:08:01) |
Great.
IanRG, I sent you an email about torpedo tube weights, did you read it (saying that trainable torpedo tubes on destroyers weighed at least as much as the torpedoes themselves)? Could power-to-weight ratio be directly added - or at least displayed as determined by the engine year/performance slider? |
||
emc |
|||
|
Posts: 3519 ( 3-Mar-2008 21:37:54) |
I'm still wishing for the ability to fix horsepower and let speed fall out; it's not unknown for ships to use standard engines or machinery, based on
what's available. Witness, for example, the RN's 9.2in monitors in WW1.
|
||
used to be remf |
|||
|
Posts: 453 ( 4-Mar-2008 20:08:30) |
thank you for the update.
|
||
LordArpad |
|||
|
Posts: 1957 ( 6-Mar-2008 08:06:26) |
I stand ready to beta test again, especially the loonix version
|
||
used to be remf |
|||
|
Posts: 454 ( 7-Mar-2008 16:12:27) |
i will certainly test a linux version
|
||
IanRG |
Torpedo mount weights | ||
|
Posts: 323 ( 9-Mar-2008 05:04:32) |
P3D Firstly, I did not know you were P3D Secondly, as always I value your input as consistently top shelf. I have added mount weights for torpedoes as 0.25
times the torpedo weight for carriages and reloads and 1.0 times the torpedo weight for all other mounts. Also for mines or DC racks 0.25 times the weapon
weight. For mines in tubes equal to 1.0 times mine weight. DCT/Hedgehog 0.5 times, Squid 10 times Appreciate input from anyone with better estimates Thirdly
Why wont this site recognise enter or returns as new lines from a MacBook laptop????????? Ian
|
||
P3D |
|||
|
Posts: 772 ( 9-Mar-2008 08:34:23) |
IanRG,
I am glad that my email got past the spam-filters Your program just allows us to waste soo much time A minor observation. Deck armor weight is independent of citadel length. Could it somehow tied to, say, the total length of the forward and aft deck, as determined on the freeboard page? Same about quarterdeck and forecastle deck armor. About the freeboard drawing. Could we have a button on the page that would generate a scaled image (e.g. 1pixel=1' or 0.5m) in a new window that would be saved (as .bmp) or just copied to the clipboard (the latter might be easier)? |
||