Dick O'Kane lead angle question

[Rockin Robbins]

I received a PM from taukarrie that was so good the I think it needs its own thread:
your first O'Kane method tutrial that is. first off, very well done. a lot of my most recent ciritcal questions were answered by watching it just once. one question though...

when estimating your lead angle you, as a rule of thumb, go for 15 degrees. but you also said that it doesnt really matter what that number is. my question is why would you choose 15 degrees and why does that not matter?

it seems to me that the lead angle estimate is crucial for this method and to regard it so lightly confuses me.

thanks for your time. OK, I'm going to do this without reference to my video, so I may be correcting my own error here. Here is where language becomes very important and I believe that it's important that we be careful to use the same terminology as the military.

Why? Because knowing that lives are at stake, they take great pains in using carefully defined terms that can't be mistaken for each other. They are extremely disciplined in their use of terminology. They don't tolerate sloppiness too well. In this case the sloppiness may be mine, so let me set things straight.

Taukarrie, I think the problem comes with the definition of "lead angle." The lead angle is the difference between the shoot bearing or aiming bearing, along which you sight your periscope at the target, and the bearing the torpedo travels to impact the target you're looking at. Of course, if the TDC just sent the torpedo up the aiming bearing, by the time the torpedo got there the target would be gone! But you've told the TDC that the target is on a course at right angles to your own, traveling at 8 knots. From that the TDC does its analog calculation mumbo-jumbo and says, well, I have to send the torpedo 10º (or whatever lead angle) ahead of the aiming bearing.

You see, Dick O'Kane came about because of my stupid mistake. I was using Gutted's great chart, which he had just adapted for fleet boats. It looks like this:
http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa293/RockinRobbins13/Silent%20Hunter%204/OKane90_FiringAngles.png

OK, so you pick the target speed out of the first column, travel across the row to the column reflecting the torpedo speed and there's your lead angle. We'll take a target traveling left to right at 8 knots. For a fast torpedo your lead angle is 9º. You subtract 9 from 360, where you want the boom to occur, and sight your periscope up the 351 bearing. So your lead angle is 9º and your aiming bearing is 351º. When the target crosses the wire, you push the button, the torpedo zips up the zero bearing and kaboom!

So I did it wrong when I first tried it. I looked across the 8 knot line and picked the wrong column. That gave me the 14½º lead angle for the slow torpedo. I aimed up the 345½º bearing and pushed the button. The torpedo shot up the zero bearing just as it was supposed to but there was no boom. The target got there after the torpedo did. I was a bit miffed.

Then I had an idea. If I could screw that up, so could everyone else. And that chart only had columns for fast and slow Mark 14s. How about Mark 18s and Cuties? Heck, that's two more columns to make twice as many mistakes! The chart is great but we are not. How can we fix that?

It just so happens we have a built-in chart on board that automatically knows what torpedo and what torpedo speed we have selected. It NEVER makes a mistake. It's called the TDC. When we're using the chart, we tell the TDC where we want the torpedo to go and WE pick the lead angle. Let's do it backwards!

Instead, let the stupid people pick the aiming bearing only! The TDC can calculate the lead angle for us and send the torpedo up any bearing it needs to to make a boom. In the Dick O'Kane bearing we pick an arbitrary aiming bearing with a goal of getting somewhere close to a boom at the zero bearing. That's where the rules of thumb come from: under 15 knots, pick 350 or 10 as the aiming bearing, knowing that the lead angle is going to be somewhere around 10º. If you have a faster target than that pick 20º and aim up the 340 or 20 bearings, depending on which direction the target is coming from.

Now this aiming bearing means nothing at all to the solution! Let me explain. Our target is coming left to right at 8 knots. I'm going to choose my 10º offset and aim up the 350º bearing. The TDC is set for 8 knots, AoB 90º-the 10º correction for an aiming bearing of 350º. But that 10º isn't the lead angle! It is the correction for the aiming bearing. We're letting the TDC set the lead angle. And if you check Gutted's chart you can see that the TDC does its magic and calculates the lead angle as 9º. So it adds 9º to the aiming bearing of 350º and sends the torpedo up the 359º bearing. BOOM!

So aiming bearing: where you point your scope. THAT's what we arbitrarily pick by rule of thumb in the Dick O'Kane method!
torpedo track bearing: the path of your torpedo. That is calculated by the TDC much more precisely that we can with a chart!
lead angle: the angle between those two bearings

Clear as mud?:up:

[I'm goin' down]

I downloaded and ran the dick o'kane mission yesterday. I hit the tanker with all six shots. Shots nos. 5 and 6 were slow speed torpedoes. I assume the TDC automatically adjusts the lead angle when you switch from a fast torpedoes to a slow one? Or, when the speed of the torpedo is different do you have resend the range before firing?

Also, O'Kane, being a rule of thumb, becomes less accurate at long ranges. For example, you describe a scenario at 8 kts. where impact occurs at a bearing of 359 degrees. The lead angle is 9 degrees and firing point under O'Kane is when the target crosses the 350 degree bearing. Let's accept that it works at 1,000 yds. (practice verifies it does). It might not hit the target at 2,000 yds., since the firing point(a bearing of 350 degrees) is not when the target crosses a bearing of 351 degrees. The difference of one degree in the firing point (351 degrees [precise firing point] - 350 [Dick O'Kane firing point] = 1 degree.) when the range is 2,000 yds. rather than 1,000 yds. could result in the torpedo arriving at the impact point (359 degrees) before the target does. RR pointed this out in one his posts a long time ago, and, as I recall, the safest ranges for OKane are 800 (?) - 1,500 yds.

And, don't forget:

For the long distance shot, Rock n Shoals constant bearing method or gutted's chart diplayed above or gutted's Solution Solver program are good ways to go. The Solution Solver is pretty amazing.

And, for the angled shots, Cromwell or gutted Solution Solver program or manual targeting using the Easy Aob mod (PK activated) are tried and true techniques.

And my favorite: close your eyes, push all the buttons, and pray.

[Rockin Robbins]

Also, O'Kane, being a rule of thumb, becomes less accurate at long ranges.....

You weren't paying attention. You are confusing a rule of thumb lead angle, which O'Kane does not do as explained above, with rule of thumb aiming bearing, which is the glory of Dick O'Kane. Yes, you pick the aiming bearing by rule of thumb. But the TDC calculates the lead angle with much greater accuracy than you could from a chart and with much more possible variability. It NEVER picks the wrong torpedo speed. It NEVER picks the wrong row unless you enter the wrong target speed.

Also, the lead angle changes depending on the aiming bearing. HUH??? Think about this. With an AoB of zero there is no lead angle at all no matter what the target speed. But lead angle is maximum when impact is at the zero bearing. Your charts can NEVER reflect the constantly changing lead angle with AoB. The TDC calculates it continuously and accurately.

Therefore if you decide not to wait and shoot when the target bears 340º, you can do that with Dick O'Kane and hit every time. With your charts you'll have to wait until he crosses the wire at 350º or just miss. What if you get distracted and don't shoot at 350? Using Dick O'Kane, you just aim up another bearing, like zero, press the send button and you'll still hit because the TDC adjusts for a new lead angle not found in ANY CHART! Dick O'Kane is MORE ACCURATE than a chart, not less because you are not using a chiseled in stone chart, you are using an analog computer which blows that chart all to Hades! It also eliminates a whole horde of human errors that come from using those charts.

So nothing that comes after your quoted statement has any validity whatever. The chart contains dozens of numbers. The TDC generates millions and millions. My money's on the TDC.

By the way, Fast-90, usable only by U-Boats, is even more flexible than Dick O'Kane because you don't need to do anything after TDC setup but point the periscope at the target, no matter what the bearing and shoot. You'll hit your mark, With Dick O'Kane in a fleet boat you have to press the send bearing/range button to send the new aiming bearing to the TDC. For maximum accuracy with Dick O'Kane you should also adjust the AoB, but the U-Boat's active periscope/TDC link automatically adjusts the AoB also!

[I'm goin' down]

Very interesting, Herr Doctor. So, why am I screwing around with other methods when the range is 9K or less. (9K seems too far, so let's settle on 4K.) Regardless of the position of the target vis a via my boat, O'Kane yields accurate lead angle that should produce an impact, assuming I have the course and speed of the target and set range to max distance. Admittedly, a broadside impact point yields the largest target profile, but the theory should apply to angled (i.e. smaller) profiles as well.

I may be experiencing a 2001 "dawn of man" moment.

[Rockin Robbins]

Exactly! O'Kane is the closest approximation we can get to the flexibility of the U-Boat attack at 90º to the target track. With it you can accurately shoot at any time before or after the only valid aiming bearing for a chart attack. This flexibility leads to more shots taken, therefore it leads to more hits per patrol. A shot not taken never hits its mark.:D

Remember that the Dick O'Kane instructional video is a BLOWN ATTACK. I was busily running my big mouth as the target blew past the aiming bearing. No matter! Without even updating the AoB (because there just wasn't any time) I just aimed up the zero bearing, pressed send range/bearing and shot anyway. Because the TDC automatically calculated the correct new lead angle, which was no longer 9º, I still sunk my target, salvaging both the attack and the video.

[Dignan]

Good stuff here. Thanks for the explanation/answer to taukarrie's question, RR.

I've got a follow on question of my own. I'm familiar with the Dick O'Kane method and have used it with great success. I recently read the tutorial for the "constant bearing" method. Basically, my question is "how is the constant bearing method different from the Dick O method?"

I will attempt to answer my own question to help myself understand the difference but if any of the experts could weigh in I would also appreciate that.

My perception is that CB differs from DO in the two following ways:

1. In constant bearing you are not limited to a 90 degree angle on the target track. You can attack from any angle.
2. In constant bearing method you must input a fairly accurate range to target track, unlike in DO method.

Are these the only two differences?

[Rockin Robbins]

Well actually "constant bearing" is not a single type of attack but a family of attack methods where you aim the periscope at a chosen aiming bearing and shoot as the target crosses the wire. It differs from other attack methods because they use the position keeper to continuously update target position. Therefore the TDC is continuously changing the bearing the torpedo will follow to the target.

In constant bearing techniques the bearing the torpedo will follow or the aiming bearing is held constant and you wait for the target to cross the aiming point.

Let's say we were shooting a shotgun. You can visualize that better. One way to shoot is to sweep the gun across the sky in front of the innocent cute duckie at the correct lead angle. You can shoot any time during the sweep and hit the target. That is conventional shooting.

But another way is to visualize the right lead angle, point the gun at a spot in a sky the duck must cross. You keep the gun stationary and time the shot for when the duck is at the correct lead angle. That's a constant bearing attack. All ducks are birds but all birds are not ducks. Dick O'Kane is just one kind of constant bearing attack.

Now with a constant bearing attack we have two choices. We can arbitrarily pick an aiming bearing and let our TDC choose the lead angle, as in the Dick O'Kane and John P Cromwell methods. Or we can arbitrarily choose our impact point and calculate backward to find our proper aiming bearing, using a chart, slide rule or computer, as in the vector analysis attack or gutted's 90º attack chart. Those two choices define the differences between varied methods of constant bearing attack.

If someone is taking a specific attack method and trying to name it "constant bearing" they need to change the name of the attack. "Constant bearing" already has a precise definition and has had it for over 70 years.

Dick O'Kane, John P Cromwell, vector analysis and Fast-90 are all constant bearing attacks. The first three can be used in any submarine, the last only with a U-Boat.

[taukarrie]

Making lots more sense now, thanks for the detailed explanation. I thought that with method you needed to pick an already calculated lead angle. I had the whole thing backwards.

Dignan mentioned that O'Kane is limited to 90 degree angles. I haven't seen it used at any other angle but I don't see why it couldn't work at any other angle. Especially since the TDC is doing the work

Rocks and shoals' tutorial for his constant bearing method is not quite the same as O'Kane. But it does seem a little more similar than that.

But, as always, im probably missing something. :)

[Dignan]

Well actually "constant bearing" is not a single type of attack but a family of attack methods where you aim the periscope at a chosen aiming bearing and shoot as the target crosses the wire. It differs from other attack methods because they use the position keeper to continuously update target position. Therefore the TDC is continuously changing the bearing the torpedo will follow to the target.

In constant bearing techniques the bearing the torpedo will follow or the aiming bearing is held constant and you wait for the target to cross the aiming point.

Let's say we were shooting a shotgun. You can visualize that better. One way to shoot is to sweep the gun across the sky in front of the innocent cute duckie at the correct lead angle. You can shoot any time during the sweep and hit the target. That is conventional shooting.

But another way is to visualize the right lead angle, point the gun at a spot in a sky the duck must cross. You keep the gun stationary and shoot when the duck is at the correct lead angle. That's a constant bearing attack. All ducks are birds but all birds are not ducks. Dick O'Kane is just one kind of constant bearing attack.

If someone is taking a specific attack method and trying to name it "constant bearing" they need to change the name of the attack. "Constant bearing" already has a precise definition and has had it for over 70 years.

Dick O'Kane, John P Cromwell, vector analysis and Fast-90 are all constant bearing attacks. The first three can be used in any submarine, the last only with a U-Boat.

Thanks for the detailed explanation. The tutorial I am referring to is here. http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=996547&postcount=1

What makes this different from the Dick O'Kane attack? This tutorial implies that a 90 degree attack angle is not necessary. So my question is what makes this work?....is it the fact that you are entering an accurate range in the TDC where in O'Kane you don't have to???

[Rockin Robbins]

Yes, Rocks 'n Shoals method is different from Dick O'Kane because he is depending on entering the correct range. He is also running the attack with a stopped submarine, a big no-no on my list as a real submarine could not maintain depth control at full stop. I like to be as realistic in my behavior as possible. Yes, you're right that his entering an accurate range makes relative angles of target track and own course irrelevant.

But his is a constant bearing technique of setting the torpedo path and timing the shot for the target to cross the periscope sights. He does a very good job of explaining and illustrating his procedure step by step.

It shares the limitations of using the chart in that if you are forced to shoot at any bearing but the one you have chosen you are out of luck. Since constant bearing attacks are an ambush technique, that won't be a problem very much of the time.

[I'm goin' down]

Assuming, "this" refers to Robbins' explanations, the short answer is that it works because the TDC, being a machine, calculates the lead angle (9 degrees in his examples) even though the PK is not activated (i.e. the red light on the TDC is not turned on.)

Hypo 1:

A 450 foot wood duck, quacking wildly, is traveling from left to right at 8 kts, range 2,000 yds., bearing 270 degrees and closing. (It is lost and not flying very fast.) You put your shotgun away because it does not have enough fire power to bring down waterfowl of such immense size, and forget that it is Thanksgiving. You decide to take it out with a torpedo. You set the scope to 350 degrees, set Aob to to 80 degrees starboard (i.e. the duck is showing you its starboard feathers), and set range to 2,000 yards. Even though the PK is not activated, the TDC, which never sleeps, calculates a lead angle of 9 degrees. If you fire when the duck crosses the wire (i.e. at 350 degrees), the duck and torpedoes should rondeveous at 359 degrees.

Hypo 2:

Same duck as hypo 1, but you spilled your coffee and did not fire when it crossed the wire at 350 degrees. Swivel your periscope to a bearing of 10 degrees. Reset Aob to 100 degrees starboard, as the duck is flying away from you and still showing its starboard feathers. Click range. The TDC will recalcuate the lead angle to approximately 19 degrees (note, this should read, "approximately 9 degrees" and the term "19 degrees" is the result of a typographical error. See Robbins' comment in post no. 12, infra, where he caught the mistake.) Fire when the duck crosses the wire (i.e. 10 degrees) and the torpedo should hit the duck on its starboard side at a bearing of approximately 19 degrees [wood duck crosses wire and torpedo fired at a bearing of 10 degrees + 9 degree lead angle = torpedo and wood duck rondeveous at a bearing of approximately 19 degrees], as the TDC, even though the PK is not activated, calculated a lead angle of approximately 9 degrees.

The key is that the TDC will calculate the lead angle since it operates even if the PK is not activated.

[Rockin Robbins]

Aside from the 19º typo which you meant 9º lead angle with boom happening at bearing 19º, and the fact that both lead angles will be slightly different from 9º because they are not set for impact exactly at the zero bearing you have it exactly right! That is what make Dick O'Kane and John P Cromwell very resilient and resistant to human error. You can quickly retarget on the fly as coffee singes your gonads and you spend a bit of time cussing at the yeoman.

Perfectly explained!

[I'm goin' down]

I fixed the error noted in post 12, and referred the readers to that post as well.

[Dignan]

Assuming, "this" refers to Robbins' explanations, the short answer is that it works because the TDC, being a machine, calculates the lead angle (9 degrees in his examples) even though the PK is not activated (i.e. the red light on the TDC is not turned on.)

Hypo 1:

A 450 foot wood duck, quacking wildly, is traveling from left to right at 8 kts, range 2,000 yds., bearing 270 degrees and closing. (It is lost and not flying very fast.) You put your shotgun away because it does not have enough fire power to bring down waterfowl of such immense size, and forget that it is Thanksgiving. You decide to take it out with a torpedo. You set the scope to 350 degrees, set Aob to to 80 degrees starboard (i.e. the duck is showing you its starboard feathers), and set range to 2,000 yards. Even though the PK is not activated, the TDC, which never sleeps, calculates a lead angle of 9 degrees. If you fire when the duck crosses the wire (i.e. at 350 degrees), the duck and torpedoes should rondeveous at 359 degrees.

Hypo 2:

Same duck as hypo 1, but you spilled your coffee and did not fire when it crossed the wire at 350 degrees. Swivel your periscope to a bearing of 10 degrees. Reset Aob to 100 degrees starboard, as the duck is flying away from you and still showing its starboard feathers. Click range. The TDC will recalcuate the lead angle to approximately 19 degrees (note, this should read, "approximately 9 degrees" and the term "19 degrees" is the result of a typographical error. See Robbins' comment in post no. 12, infra, where he caught the mistake.) Fire when the duck crosses the wire (i.e. 10 degrees) and the torpedo should hit the duck on its starboard side at a bearing of approximately 19 degrees [wood duck crosses wire and torpedo fired at a bearing of 10 degrees + 9 degree lead angle = torpedo and wood duck rondeveous at a bearing of approximately 19 degrees], as the TDC, even though the PK is not activated, calculated a lead angle of approximately 9 degrees.

The key is that the TDC will calculate the lead angle since it operates even if the PK is not activated.

Thanks for the explanation. Now I want to go play old school Nintendo Duck Hunter. :haha:

[General Tso]

An O'Kane method newbie here, so I'm probably going to make a fool of myself but what the heck I'm used to it. :O:

First would I be correct in assuming that the definition of the O'Kane method is to aim each torpedo at it's own spot on the target rather than aiming at one spot and using offset angles to create a spread of torpedoes?

I looked at the different method's mentioned in this forum and found them to be somewhat complicated and confusing. So I tried doing it exactly as it's explained in O'Kane book and it seems to be a lot simpler and has worked for me every time. I've sunk about a dozen ships with it. Every torpedo hit. Most of the torpedoes hit very close to the aim spot. There where a few exceptions when the AOB wasn't close to 90.

First obtain the target's speed and AOB using your favorite methods and enter them in to the TDC. Then enter the distance and bearing and turn the PK on. The PK should now stay on the rest of the way. Update the range, bearing, etc. to "firm" up the contact as in closes.

When the time comes for firing make sure that the target is unlocked. Aim the periscope at the first aim spot and send the bearing only to the TDC and press fire. Repeat this for each torpedo.

I tried looking for a method like this in the forum but could not find it. If somebody has already posted it I Apologize for the repost.

[I'm goin' down]

O'Kane is discussed in detail in posts 11 -13. You fire torpedoes when the juicy parts of the duck crosses the wire. You should not have to offset torpedoes to hit your mark.

Note: the dials you enter speed, Aob and range are referred to as the Stadimeter aka the Attack Dials (by Capn Scurvy in a tutorial), I believe.

The method you describe in the rest of your post is classic manual targeting. You enter speed, use the Aob to set the target's course (which you can verify by looking at ships dials on the TDC [the dial on the upper left]. You can find the target's true course using the compass tool on the Nav. Map. (Ask in a new thread if you do not know how to find a target's true course vs. relative course.) Next, turn on the PK. The TDC will begin to track the target. Set range with the Range Dial on the Stadimeter. You can check your firing solution on the Attack Map screen. If the whithe "X" is centered on the target, and the white line follows the target's true course (i.e. the course and the silouette of the target match), you are in business. The TDC will accurately track the target unless it changes course or speed. The TDC sets the torpedo angle, and adjusts it continuously while the target proceeds on its course. It will do so even if your boat is moving.

Note: Unless you activate the Easy Aob mod, adjusting the Aob dial will not cause a corresponding adjustment to the target's course. It is a kink in the game. The Easy Aob mod fixes that problem. You can find information on the mod in Neal Steven sticky re mod in the mod forum. The theory of manual target was explained by Hitman in a pdf download called Manual Targeting at 100 Percent Realism, also found in Stevens' sticky.

[General Tso]

Yeah I'm using the Easy AOB mod. I'm also using TMO and RSRD mods so I don't get the little white "X" in the targeting map. I was just happy that I found a way to aim at individual spots on the target by just sending the bearing, but not resending the range. It makes it easier to fire 3 or 4 torpedoes at a fast target since there is less to do during crunch time. I don't understand why the extra work mentioned above for using the O'Kane method is necessary. I can use the O'Kane method without worrying about "Lead angles" etc. and it seems to work fine. I'm not saying that one method is better or more fun than the other. That's the beauty of this game - different people can do some things different and still obtain the same results.

[I'm goin' down]

you may be using the constant bearing method. See Rock n Shoals thread in the Skippers Bag of Tricks thread. Unless the target is going 0 kts. the TDC will compute a lead angle, even if the PK is not activated. In the constant bearing attack, you point the periscope at the bearing you will fire (i.e. 5, 25, or 60 degrees bearing.) Set Aob per the tutorial instructions. Input target speed and range. When the target crosses the wire, fire. The TDC will automatically input the lead angle. It is like O'Kane, but you can use it an any angle. Other than that, I am not sure what you are doing. In the constant bearing attack, Rock n Shoals indicates his boat is stationary. Of course, the target is moving.

[General Tso]

I'll explain in more detail. Assume that the target is a large freighter and it has already been ID'd using the book. First I get the target's speed and AOB using the navigation map (I can explain this part in more detail if needed). I enter the speed into the TDC and click on the red send to TDC button. I then enter the AOB into the TDC and click on the red send to TDC button. Then I use the stadimeter to get the range and click on the red send to TDC button to send range and bearing. I then start the PK. I update the above data as necessary as the target gets closer. I believe the description above is standard manual targeting as I'm goin' down explained in the post above. The part that was new to me is the individual targeting of parts of the ship as follows. I leave the PK on so that the TDC continues to track the target. The TDC is in the set range and bearing mode. I then move the scope's wire to the forward goal post of the freighter and click on the red send to TDC button without using the stadimeter . This sends the bearing of the front goal post to the TDC without changes the distance. I then fire a torpedo. I repeat the above with one torpedo to the stack and another to the rear goal post. The system seems to work perfectly and there isn't any extra complications. Plus I believe it was the actual method used by O'Kane (but I'm not absolutely certain of that). As mentioned above if this is a system that a lot of people are already using then I apologize for wasting everybody's time, but it's new to me and I didn't see it mentioned anywhere.

[I'm goin' down]

I'll explain in more detail. Assume that the target is a large freighter and it has already been ID'd using the book. First I get the target's speed and AOB using the navigation map (I can explain this part in more detail if needed). I enter the speed into the TDC and click on the red send to TDC button. I then enter the AOB into the TDC and click on the red send to TDC button. Then I use the stadimeter to get the range and click on the red send to TDC button to send range and bearing. I then start the PK. I update the above data as necessary as the target gets closer. I believe the description above is standard manual targeting as I'm goin' down explained in the post above. The part that was new to me is the individual targeting of parts of the ship as follows. I leave the PK on so that the TDC continues to track the target. The TDC is in the set range and bearing mode. I then move the scope's wire to the forward goal post of the freighter and click on the red send to TDC button without using the stadimeter . This sends the bearing of the front goal post to the TDC without changes the distance. I then fire a torpedo. I repeat the above with one torpedo to the stack and another to the rear goal post. The system seems to work perfectly and there isn't any extra complications. Plus I believe it was the actual method used by O'Kane (but I'm not absolutely certain of that). As mentioned above if this is a system that a lot of people are already using then I apologize for wasting everybody's time, but it's new to me and I didn't see it mentioned anywhere.

First, let's get the terminology straight so I know what you are trying to say.

The Stadimeter is on the upper right side of the screen and contains the three Attack Dials.

The PK is on the upper left side of the screen. You hit the PK button on the left side of the screen and it turns red, indicating that the PK is activated.

There are two dials on the TDC (upper left side of the screen). One is the ships' dials screen, and the other deals with torpedo speed settings/torpedo depth settings. We are discussing the ships' dials screen and not the torpedo speed settings/torpedo depth settings screen.

You are saying, I think, that you enter speed, aob and range via the appropriate Attack Dials. Next, activate the PK. As the target closes you check your Attack Dial settings for accuracy and refine them as necessary. This classic manual targeting. Here is your twist. Before you fire, you move your scope to the particular part of the target you wish to blow up, reset range on the Attack Dial without turning off the PK, and fire. According to your post, you hit the part of the target that you are aiming for, such as its stack by way of example. I have not done this, but I assume when you point the scope at the stack and click the range button on the Attack Dial (upper right side of screen, it adjusts the torpedo angle appropriately. You can see the adjustment, if there is one, on the ships' dials screen on the TDC (upper left screen) at the moment you click on the range button to send range (Attack Dial on the upper right.) to the TDC. All you are doing, I believe, is refining (adjusting) the lead angle based upon a new firing bearing.

I usually don't do this, but maybe it is a final adjustment to the firing solution that increases the odds of a successful impact. If I have restated your post accurately, let me know the range you are firing at and having success.

[greyrider]

.


You see, Dick O'Kane came about because of my stupid mistake. I was using Gutted's great chart, which he had just adapted for fleet boats. It looks like this:
http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa293/RockinRobbins13/Silent%20Hunter%204/OKane90_FiringAngles.png



rockin robbins + gutted = Plagiarism!

Plagiarism is defined in dictionaries as "the wrongful appropriation, close imitation, or
purloining and publication, of another author's language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions,
and the representation of them as one's own original work."


you are one disturbed individual rock, remember what i said in 8010, the more you try to cover your tracks, the more you expose?

another pathetic attempt at covering your tracks, and with obvious point and shoot material no less!

you seem to forget the people that downloaded the combat information mod, and the individual torpedo data sheets, which i called the bearing/speed charts
back in 2006 and 2007, from sh3 and sh4. you forget that they are witnesses to your lie, and gutted's fraud! you forget the people posting in the treads i made
of point and shoot as well as the sonar overlay and angle solver thread, that they are witnesses, and in which i might add, was the first posted instance of the point and shoot technique,
during the shooting phase of that post, when was that post posted? what year? 2005! where were you and gutted in 2005?

i remember now, you werent here! you didnt come here until 2007, haha! and gutted even later!

there is no civil crime for Plagiarism, but it is a moral crime, but one thing plagiarists do is validiate the work of the authors they steal from,
point and shoot is that good that you and gutted had to steal from it, copy it, and call it your own!


i wouldnt let you come into my house to steal something rock, you wouldnt get 3 feet before i dropped you with that intent , so im not going to let you steal point and shoot either,
i have a little bit of inside and outside work to do today, when i get back, i will spend the better part of the day here gathering evidence from my past posts, for the community to research,
then ill post it here in this tread, anyone still willing to stand for the truth, justice, and morality, will read, and will take a stand.
this really isnt for me as much as it is for future authors, modders, contributors to the game, and its also for the subsim management to make the decision,
will Plagiarism be condoned, or will it be condemned?

[Dignan]

I reckon this thread is about to get a bit unfriendly

[I'm goin' down]

Greyrider, is your beef that Rockin Robbins and gutted failed to attribute some of their work to your ideas? And if so, why does it matter? Are you making a claim that gutted's Solution Solver program is your handiwork? I am not sure I understand the point you are trying to make other than that you believe you were left out of the mix and claim you have not been credited as the originator of the theory applied and expounded upon by RR and/or gutted. Is it possible that they did not know of your ealier work? If you have been left out of the mix in terms of being credited for ideas, techniques, etc., so what? Is it your goal to have Captains stop using the the attack techniques Robbins and gutted refined? Or do you just want Captains to hold them in disdain for taking advantage of your ideas? Or do you want the techniques renamed (presumably to identify your alleged contribution.)?

I am not up to speed on the 8010 method, if that is what your post references, but I understand that there was some controversy regarding its theoretical underpinnings. If this is going to turn into am airing of accusations, may I suggest that it be dealt with in a different thread, as this one is intended to clarify the mechanics of the Dick O'Kane method, or if I understand you correctly, what should be known generally as Greyrider's technique? I wonder whether many will get overly excited about the issue you raise, but if it important to you is important that you aired, go ahead. Please do it in a separate thread as it will not confuse this one. One final note. If you are going to state your case, take time to think it through and present it carefully and dispationately, as the readers will not likely have much patience for a rant filled historical account of past events.

[razark]

I reckon this thread is about to get a bit unfriendly
Ya think?

Edit:
@Fish40: Have you read the 8010 thread? "Innocent mix up" went out the window a long time ago...

[Fish40]

Please guys, let's not get out of hand here. It could be just an innocent mix up.

@ General Tso: As far as I understand it, the DO method dose not use the PK at all. According to the tutorial, the PK is never turned on.

[I'm goin' down]

See post 11.

[Wilcke]

Plus the officers of the Silent Service, and others in or working for the USN are the ultimate developers of all these techniques. They deserve the attribution, the folks here on SS are merely the conduit documenting, delivering the ideas and methods. Nothing new under the sun.

[tomoose]

I'm confused. How is it plagiarism to promote a WWII skipper's attack technique albeit with tweaks to account for game deficiencies/quirks?:hmmm:

[Pisces]

Oh no, not groundhog day. :damn: :damn: Whoever woke them up has to walk the plank. :arrgh!: They were supposed to be in hibernation this time of season.

[tomoose]

LMAO. Lllet's get ready to ruuuumBLLLLLLLE!:har:

[timmyg00]

We must all be guilty of plagiarizing the fathers of modern geometry for daring to use their principles in our attack techniques without attribution. Aww, sorry about that Euclid, sorry Pythagoras... every time i shoot a torpedo, I'll pay you royalties. Where do I send the check?

Surely it’s not possible that several people came up with the same ideas independently, unbeknownst to each other, and published them at different times. No! It MUST be plagiarism!!

I can’t wait to see this evidence. This is gonna be good. I’m about due for some good entertainment.

[greyrider]

rockin robbins!
got' cha

i have the evidence right here on my computer desktop, in subsim format, dated 1/2/2006. someone made a tactical folder from the old sh3 days, of all the available tactics up until that date,
in it was a couple pieces of my work. it is in one of those pieces of work that shows the point and shoot technique, publicly on these forums, with reference to the bearing/speed charts, that you call gutted's, date 1/2/2006,
before you where even here as a member.


you have 48 hours to admit to Plagiarism! to be a man, to offer an apology to me, if you do, i will not post it, and i will forgive you, if you do not, i will not forgive you, and then i will post it!
i will come back on saturday morning to either accept your apology, or to expose you and gutted for Plagiarism!
after that, you will be known as a Plagiarist!
your choice now!

[I'm goin' down]

As Admiral Halsey was told by his chief of staff during the Battle of Leyete Gulf, when he lost it after reading Nimitz' terse message about the world wondering about his fleet's whereabouts, "Pull yourself together." Sheesh. I have been reading about the 8010 method to give you benefit of the doubt. Your videos have been deleted from the download site. There is controversy re the validity of the 10 degrees Aob in your formula. I do not understand the math you use due to lack of a good education baclkground in that subject. I would enjoy watching a good video of your method. (Now I am dying to see one.) Seeing is believing. The best way to understand something is to hear about it, read about it, and visualize it.

Robbins critiques of the 8010 method appear made in good faith. Somehow you have turned his critiques into a claim that he lifted your ideas. I note that many other captains took a position similar to his, but haven't found any so far that defend your position.

I suggest you make a video. If it is too long, I am sure another captain can break down your copy so it can be viewed. You might even find one or two captains impressed to the point where they make editing suggestions to enhance is understanding. I know that gutted had an excellent three part video explaining the Solution Solver program, and something similar would be interesting to watch.

Oh, yea. Don't keep us in suspense for two days!! Post the stuff now, so we can begin to digest it, respond if necessary, call you the Albert Einstein of the forum if appropriate, or call the Happy Dale Sanitarium (where the two aunts of Carey Grant were sent in Arsenic and Old Lace. They has been poisoning guests.) and tell them to ready a bed for a new patient.

[razark]

I have evidence right here on my computer that you are not, in fact, a human. It shows that you are indeed a highly trained hamster. I give you until Saturday at noon to apologize for misleading the subsim community.

I will not actually show anyone my evidence, y'all will just have to take my word that I am right and you are a hamster.




Oh, and if there is evidence on subsim to anything, I'm sure you can post a link to it for everyone to verify. Otherwise, you are just making baseless accusations for your own purposes.

What exactly do you get out of it? Even if RR were to admit to directly copying your work, so what? Your attitude in this and the 8010 thread are horrid. RR has been helpful, you call people stupid for not falling in line behind you. RR teaches, you incite. Which one are people going to credit with helping them to learn?

Get over yourself.

[I'm goin' down]

I prefer to hold off taking sides until we see the "evidence" supporting greyrider's claims. He is obviously upset and taking this personally. If he is incorrect, we can deal with it at the appropriate time. If he is correct, he can be chided for his tactics, again, at the appropriate time. I can wait the two days, but prefer he posts sooner rather than later. Who knows, perhaps he has something to show us that is meaningful? He wants his forum. Let's let him have it.

[timmyg00]

I have evidence right here on my computer that you are not, in fact, a human. It shows that you are indeed a highly trained hamster. I give you until Saturday at noon to apologize for misleading the subsim community.

I will not actually show anyone my evidence, y'all will just have to take my word that I am right and you are a hamster.




Oh, and if there is evidence on subsim to anything, I'm sure you can post a link to it for everyone to verify. Otherwise, you are just making baseless accusations for your own purposes.

What exactly do you get out of it? Even if RR were to admit to directly copying your work, so what? Your attitude in this and the 8010 thread are horrid. RR has been helpful, you call people stupid for not falling in line behind you. RR teaches, you incite. Which one are people going to credit with helping them to learn?

Get over yourself. Perfectly said in all respects.

Not only that, but MAN, geometry is geometry... i don't think you can steal that from someone else. Just because someone reinvents the wheel doesn't mean it's stolen. Unless you find your car on blocks the next morning.

TG

[I'm goin' down]

Here is the thread I think greyrider is talking about. You can locate it by searching his posts.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=184396&postcount=1

It is pretty long, and I did go through it in some detail. It looks like he wrote a tutorial for SH3 on sonar only attacks. It did not see anything on point and shoot or 8010. Maybe it is the wrong post?

Post script: I found a reference in greyrider's old posts to a tactical folder, but it is not available on Rapidshare now. He references the tactical folder above, which he has located apparently. He will have to post it, I think, as I cannot locate it.

[Dignan]

Maybe I'm missing greyrider's point here but it is my understanding that all RR has ever done with the Dick O'Kane method and other constant bearing techniques is create easy to follow tutorials for others to learn from. I don't believe he ever took credit for inventing the tactic. Surely we all know that the real sub captain's of WWII developed these strategies.

And after all......it's only a game. No one is making money off this. Just having fun.

[I'm goin' down]

If everyone is having fun, then Greyrider would probalby agree that this is a LOVEFEST. (Something tells me it is not the right description...)

[General Tso]

First, let's get the terminology straight so I know what you are trying to say.

The Stadimeter is on the upper right side of the screen and contains the three Attack Dials.

The PK is on the upper left side of the screen. You hit the PK button on the left side of the screen and it turns red, indicating that the PK is activated.

There are two dials on the TDC (upper left side of the screen). One is the ships' dials screen, and the other deals with torpedo speed settings/torpedo depth settings. We are discussing the ships' dials screen and not the torpedo speed settings/torpedo depth settings screen.

You are saying, I think, that you enter speed, aob and range via the appropriate Attack Dials. Next, activate the PK. As the target closes you check your Attack Dial settings for accuracy and refine them as necessary. This classic manual targeting. Here is your twist. Before you fire, you move your scope to the particular part of the target you wish to blow up, reset range on the Attack Dial without turning off the PK, and fire. According to your post, you hit the part of the target that you are aiming for, such as its stack by way of example. I have not done this, but I assume when you point the scope at the stack and click the range button on the Attack Dial (upper right side of screen, it adjusts the torpedo angle appropriately. You can see the adjustment, if there is one, on the ships' dials screen on the TDC (upper left screen) at the moment you click on the range button to send range (Attack Dial on the upper right.) to the TDC. All you are doing, I believe, is refining (adjusting) the lead angle based upon a new firing bearing.

I usually don't do this, but maybe it is a final adjustment to the firing solution that increases the odds of a successful impact. If I have restated your post accurately, let me know the range you are firing at and having success.

Your description is correct with a couple of exceptions.

First the TDC data entry tool is in the upper right corner of the screen. This tool is used for entering target speed, AOB, range, and bearing. The stadimeter is used to find the range to target. when you click on the proper button a second image of the ship appears and you line it up at the proper spot to find the range. On a real submarine I belive the stadimeter was a prisim located in the periscope housing.

Second when I am ready to fire I DO NOT set the range I just set the bearing. If my target is set up properly in the TDC then the PK is keeping the proper range for the center of the ship which is close enough.

So far this method has worked for me out to about 2400 yards with a AOB between 45 and 135 degrees. I haven't had a chance to try any longer shot and most of my shots have been from 1000 - 1200 yards with the AOB closer to 90 degrees.

If this is a new method and people are interested in it maybe I should start a new thread and go over it step by step.

[General Tso]

Please guys, let's not get out of hand here. It could be just an innocent mix up.

@ General Tso: As far as I understand it, the DO method dose not use the PK at all. According to the tutorial, the PK is never turned on.

In real life Dick O'Kane used the PK so that's good enough for me. :DL

[I'm goin' down]

I stand corrected. I meant to say you clicked on bearing. re the new thread, I don't know what you should do.

[General Tso]

I stand corrected. I meant to say you clicked on bearing. re the new thread, I don't know what you should do.

I was concerned that our talk about the O'Kane method was interrupting the LOVEFEST but that seems to have died down, so I guess a new thread isn't needed.

[I'm goin' down]

if greyrider posts here rather than in a new thread, as I suggested, things will get confusing quickly.

[tomoose]

I couldn't agree more. I've never seen RR post the "Rockin' Robin Method" which would give some validity to Greyrider's accusations. RR has always posted the "Dick O'Kane" method and has always referred to the sub skippers themselves as well as indicating other players methods or tweaks. How that can be seen as plagiarism is beyond me.

As you so rightly pointed out, it is only a game and noone's "profits" are being ripped off etc.

I would say RR's only "flaw" would be that he calls 'em as he sees 'em and doesn't pull any punches. I for one appreciate that but some people I guess, do not.:salute:

[I'm goin' down]

I conducted a search of all posts using the term tactical folder. The oldest post located was in Aprill 26, 2006, by greyrider, entitled "tactical folder." He indicates he is building a tactical folder. There is a link in his post to rapidshare, but it is broken. I tried copying the link to his post but it did not copy. To find the post, conduct a word search for "tactical folders" under search posts. His post is on page 6 of the list that contain that term, and he is the author.

[razark]

In real life Dick O'Kane used the PK so that's good enough for me.
The problem is that Dick O'Kane had a real, full-featured, working TDC to use. We don't have a way to run it backwards, the way O'Kane would have, so we have to compromise to find ways to do what real skippers did.

[Rockin Robbins]

Greyrider, at no time during the development of any of the targeting methods I teach was I aware of your existence or "contributions" and there is no need for anyone to be aware of you now. Dismissed.

General Tso: I do not claim that the Dick O'Kane method is a method used by Dick O'Kane. I and the group of people who developed the methods I popularize (I'm a cheerleader and translator, not some mathematical genius) decided that we would name our techniques after prominent US submarine captains. There is some resemblance between the Dick O'Kane method and how the man shot torpedoes, but what you do is actually closer to his technique. After all, the position keeper is more than a predictor of future target positions. It also serves to verify that your TDC inputs are accurate because you can track whether the virtual target is moving at the same speed, in the same direction and maintains the same bearing as the real target. Your technique of unlocking the periscope and sending bearings of juicy parts of the target is a very close analog of O'Kane's manipulation of the PK advance wheel.

By the same token, John P Cromwell never took a shot that resembled the John P Cromwell technique. These attack methods are only memorials for the skippers they are named after.

The vector analysis technique is called that at the wish of Nisgeis, who opted for a descriptive name. I make no claims to have invented anything new in anything I teach. I may present it in a different way, but it is the same technique that U-Boats used in World War I and surface torpedo boats used even before then. Of course, greyrider is older than that and taught them all.

[gutted]

Who cares who did what? As long as the collective knowledge is increased it matters not.


p.s. I still to this day refuse to subscribe to the "Dick O' Kane" bandwagon :)

The name just makes me cringe lol.

[I'm goin' down]

greyrider certainly cares. I'm not anyone else does.

By the way, I still have your Solution Solver program on my desktop, right next to MoBo. I am still not sure how the ship speed portion the program works, so I use the three minute rule.

nice to see you are still around.

[General Tso]

Greyrider, at no time during the development of any of the targeting methods I teach was I aware of your existence or "contributions" and there is no need for anyone to be aware of you now. Dismissed.

General Tso: I do not claim that the Dick O'Kane method is a method used by Dick O'Kane. I and the group of people who developed the methods I popularize (I'm a cheerleader and translator, not some mathematical genius) decided that we would name our techniques after prominent US submarine captains. There is some resemblance between the Dick O'Kane method and how the man shot torpedoes, but what you do is actually closer to his technique. After all, the position keeper is more than a predictor of future target positions. It also serves to verify that your TDC inputs are accurate because you can track whether the virtual target is moving at the same speed, in the same direction and maintains the same bearing as the real target. Your technique of unlocking the periscope and sending bearings of juicy parts of the target is a very close analog of O'Kane's manipulation of the PK advance wheel.

By the same token, John P Cromwell never took a shot that resembled the John P Cromwell technique. These attack methods are only memorials for the skippers they are named after.

The vector analysis technique is called that at the wish of Nisgeis, who opted for a descriptive name. I make no claims to have invented anything new in anything I teach. I may present it in a different way, but it is the same technique that U-Boats used in World War I and surface torpedo boats used even before then. Of course, greyrider is older than that and taught them all.

I assumed that since it was called the Dick O'Kane method that it was supposed to be the same method that he used in real life - my bad for assuming.

What I like about the method that I am currently using is that I found it while reading one of O'Kane's books and I just took what I read there and applied it in the game, and it worked!

[Captainchaos]

Most likely cavemen have been chucking spears ahead of moving prey without the TDC or any sub knowledge.

Helpful tutorials win.

Can`t see where this thread is going except down.

[I'm goin' down]

when you say you set the bearing on the stack, what do you mean? That you point the periscope to the bearing on the stack? I do not fully understand what you mean, or how you set the bearing to the stack.

[General Tso]

when you say you set the bearing on the stack, what do you mean? That you point the periscope to the bearing on the stack? I do not fully understand what you mean, or how you set the bearing to the stack.

The TDC data entry tool (upper right corner of screen) should be in the "set range and bearing mode". This is done by clicking on the left most lower button on that tool. Then point the periscope's vertical wire at the stack and click on the red button at the top of the data entry tool. This sets the TDC bearing to the spot where the scope is pointing to.

Remember the TDC should already be tracking the target with the PK turned on before doing this. If you have entered good data and the TDC/PK is tracking the target properly and you decided to fire three torpedoes without changing the bearing, all three torpedoes would hit the center of the ship. By pointing the scope at a given spot on the ship and sending a new bearing, you are telling the TDC to use all of the previously inputted data that it was using while tracking the target except for the bearing. Instead it will use the new bearing that you just inputted. Since you are doing this just as you are firing the torpedoes any error caused by the tracking bearing being moved from the center of the ship is minimized. You always want to wait until your are just ready to fire each torpedo than set the new bearing for that location on the ship. That's the way O'Kane did it - if I understand his books properly.

For a large merchant ship I usually send three torpedoes: one about a quarter of the way from the bow, one at the center, and one about a quarter of the way from the aft end. I have yet to miss a shot using this method, it's almost to easy. For ships like the large split freighter (I think that's the name) that would be one torpedo at the front goal post, one at the stack, and one and the aft goal post.

Edit: Of course everything depends on getting an accurate track of the target in the first place. As Rockin Robbins mentioned above this can be confirmed by comparing your target track to the target position in the attack map. If you have any questions about how to get an accurate track on the target I can explain the methods that I use.

[I'm goin' down]

that is what I thought you were saying. it makes sense. I use Easy Aob and never thought about it. Tracking the target is easy. I am working on gutted's sonar tracking tool. That is a very interesting program. If you want to see something really interesting, go the MoBo forum and download Mobo. Aaronblood lives in outer space.

[General Tso]

Where is the MoBo forum?

[Pisces]

Where is the MoBo forum?The deepest-but-one level of the Subsim.com Forum basement. ;)

[General Tso]

Thanks I'll check it out.

[Rockin Robbins]

Who cares who did what? As long as the collective knowledge is increased it matters not.


p.s. I still to this day refuse to subscribe to the "Dick O' Kane" bandwagon :)

The name just makes me cringe lol.

I would'a called it the Graucho Marx method but Aaronblood took offense at the mustache!

[General Tso]

I would'a called it the Graucho Marx method but Aaronblood took offense at the mustache!

Because of his "rapid-fire delivery" or his "innuendo-laden patter"? :03:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groucho_Marx

[Rip]

I assumed that since it was called the Dick O'Kane method that it was supposed to be the same method that he used in real life - my bad for assuming.

What I like about the method that I am currently using is that I found it while reading one of O'Kane's books and I just took what I read there and applied it in the game, and it worked!

Must be reading Wahoo? I'm reading it for the third time now. I am amazed by the good fortune of Morton being the one to take her over. I don't think O'Kane would have been half the captain otherwise. It seems apparent that watching Mush lead his men when not under fire taught O'Kane volumes about what separates great wartime leaders from good ones.

[timmyg00]

By the way, I still have your Solution Solver program on my desktop, right next to MoBo. I am still not sure how the ship speed portion the program works, so I use the three minute rule. I love the Solution Solver. And the speed tool is easy... the whole package, combined with Razark's Show Air Contacts mod, has got me sinking ships with no map contacts!

TG

PS the cool thing about the Solver is that I can practice identifying AOBs with Training Mode at work :) My only wish would be to make the ship type changeable...

[General Tso]

Must be reading Wahoo? I'm reading it for the third time now. I am amazed by the good fortune of Morton being the one to take her over. I don't think O'Kane would have been half the captain otherwise. It seems apparent that watching Mush lead his men when not under fire taught O'Kane volumes about what separates great wartime leaders from good ones.

Yeah I read that 2 times myself. I'm currently reading "Clear The Bridge!" for the second time. Since you like Wahoo, I would highly recommend "Clear The Bridge!" - it's also written by O'Kane and is about the war patrols of the U.S.S. Tang (he was captain). In my humble opinion this book is even better than Wahoo. If you are not familiar with the history of the Tang, I recommend that you read this book before checking out any history on that sub.

[Nisgeis]

Remember the TDC should already be tracking the target with the PK turned on before doing this. If you have entered good data and the TDC/PK is tracking the target properly and you decided to fire three torpedoes without changing the bearing, all three torpedoes would hit the center of the ship. By pointing the scope at a given spot on the ship and sending a new bearing, you are telling the TDC to use all of the previously inputted data that it was using while tracking the target except for the bearing. Instead it will use the new bearing that you just inputted. Since you are doing this just as you are firing the torpedoes any error caused by the tracking bearing being moved from the center of the ship is minimized. You always want to wait until your are just ready to fire each torpedo than set the new bearing for that location on the ship. That's the way O'Kane did it - if I understand his books properly.

O'Kane in real life did something that we cannot do in the game, as razark mentioned. O'Kane put all the target info into the TDC, then would 'match bearings' which meant that the TDC operator would turn the target bearing input handle backwards at a rate that meant it did not advance on the TDC and remained static at the point at which the periscope was currently pointing (there was no input connection between the periscope and the TDC, as the US TDC was more advanced than the German one). With this being done, the solution produced was always correct for the part of the ship that was currently on the wire of the periscope. This is different to providing an offset or targetting a stationary spot, as what you are effectively doing is targetting the point of intersection between the periscope's line of sight and the target's track and producing a solution for that problem. When the part of the ship happens to be under the wire, you fire and you hit that part of the ship, as the PK is taking into account your own movement and the diminishing range to track.

If you update the bearing in the game, that will also update the target's AoB, which will change that target's track, which will mean the solution is wrong - the in game TDC is flawed.

[General Tso]

I'm doing exactly that by pointing the scope at a given spot and only changing the bearing and then immediately firing the torpedo. I can turn the AOB dial to any value and it doesn't matter, when I enter the bearing for the spot that I want to hit, the only thing that changes is the bearing. It's totally possible that I'm missing something obvious, but I can't see it.

When I enter the bearing only - I do not enter the range. Could that be causing the difference?

I'm using the "TGT DIALS TO PK FIX - TMO" version of the Easy AOB mod. Could that be causing the difference?

[Bubblehead1980]

yea, I point the scope, send bearing, then point scope at another part of the ship and send the new bearing if want to aim at different parts of ship, then fire, works fine in the game.Keeps me away from the stupid spread knob.

[Rip]

Yeah I read that 2 times myself. I'm currently reading "Clear The Bridge!" for the second time. Since you like Wahoo, I would highly recommend "Clear The Bridge!" - it's also written by O'Kane and is about the war patrols of the U.S.S. Tang (he was captain). In my humble opinion this book is even better than Wahoo. If you are not familiar with the history of the Tang, I recommend that you read this book before checking out any history on that sub.

Read it as well and you are right. Get a little more picture into his way in that one, that and the war got more interesting by then. :yeah:

[greyrider]

rockin robbins!

so 48 hours turns into a week, well priorities first! (work, family, friends), but even with the extra time i knew you wouldnt be man enough, laughter!,
so now we will learn alittle more about your charactor, because its time to pay the toll rockin robbin.
and you can keep in mind that i really didnt want to do this, it sucks to do this, and its very sad, but your attitude in 8010 bought us to this point,
and remember this, i use to like you, in spite of your theft and disrespect, if you didnt act the way you did in 8010, your little sectret was safe with me, as
long as God knew it and i knew it, no one else had to know it, you yourself are to blame now, no one else!

before we go on, lets reexamine the definition of the term plagiarism:

Plagiarism is defined in dictionaries as "the wrongful appropriation, close imitation, or
purloining and publication, of another author's language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions,
and the representation of them as one's own original work."


with this definition in mind:


wrongful appropiation; did you ever ask for permission to use my ideas? no!
is it close imitation? ive never shaved any closer. yes!
purloining? if you didnt ask, and no permission was given, then it was stolen! yes!
publication? yup!
another author's thoughts, ideas, expressions? greyrider is the author of major works listed below, and some works not listed;

point and shoot, 2002
bearing / speed charts, 2002
sound trainer 2005, (with harms way and cpt nautilas)
sonar overlay and angle solver, 2005 ( Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:03 am Post subject: sonar overlay tutorial (finished, edited) ) understand gutted?
AOB trainer, 2008
8010, 2010
and in the near future, point and shoot with 8010 enhanced, and point and shoot 8010 with torpedo offsets.

representation of another authors ideas thoughts, expressions as one's own original work.
named plagiarists that did: rockin robbin, gutted, and richie, ( hydrophono = sound trainer )

among witnesses to point and shoot and bearing / speed charts published in 2002 are all members of 7th flotilla, wpl.
ones i can remember, john speedy( training officer of 7th flot) hill 224, u-422, pete wolf, panther ( co 7th flot), longrange.

and now with the title of this tread in mind: "the dick okane lead angle question"!

the proof that p+s and bearing / speed charts published on subsim formums, 2005, by greyrider!

http://www.filefront.com/17617081/Tactics_Manuals.7z

this is the tactical folder in which someone made, i found the sonar overlay and angle solver tutorial here, it has 2 works of mine, plus wazoo's tutorial, some maps,
and another great original authors work, Dantenoc, a friend and a witness, no where will you find rockin robbin or gutted in it. they didnt exist in 2005 here!
there are many other past posts of mine that i can use, but the sonar overlay is the one farthest back i think, before the plagiarists robbins and gutted where here,
and that clearly shows its date, the method, (with pictures), and reference to speed/bearing charts i made, which is the essence of the point and shoot technique,
(point at the firing bearing, shoot with zero degree gyro angle = point and shoot).
this is an excerpt from the sonar overlay and angle solver tutorial i made in 2005 and published 12/29/2005, its near the bottom, and starts near the chapter called
"4th sonar bearing."
http://www.subsim.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=4674

"About one more minute to torpedo launch. The weapons officer sets the tdc.
Looking at the bearing speed chart, for a 44 knot torpedo speed, the weapons officer wants a zero decree gyro
angle on the torpedo launch and
expects the target to be at zero decrees at torpedo impact. The u-boats course is at a ninety decree angle to the
targets course. He knows the target
speed is fifteen knots, He checks to see what bearing he will fire the torpedo at. It is bearing 19, or 19 decrees
starboard. He sets the tdc.
See picture below
The periscope is preset to the firing bearing of 19 decrees. Time is 08:20. See picture below.
end part 8
TORPEDO LAUNCH
The merchants direction has changed from closing to moving away. There is a sight error in the target course
plot. The u-boat is not quite at a 90
decree angle to the targets course, but at this range, its not a problem, the ship will get hit, altho the captain will
change his aiming point from
just under the smokestack, to another forward from the smokestack, to avoid missing the target. Target is
unaware of the u-boats presence.
The commander, manning the periscope, waits for the target to get on bearing 19, at his new aiming point.
When the target has reached bearing
19, the commander orders tube one fired, the weapons officer confirms the launch, " firing tube one, sir !" Time
is 08:20. See picture below.
TORPEDO RUNNING STRAIGHT
The weapon has fired, torpedo wake seen in the periscope, in a few moments the crew should here the explosion
of the torpedo striking the target.
Thirty two seconds after torpedo launch, the torpedo strikes the target aft of midship, target was hit at zero
decrees, time of torpedo impact was
08:21, range to target at torpedo impact was 724 meters."


now rockin robbin, whoes idea for point and shoot and bearing/speed charts is it? who wrote the above excerpt? who owns the rights to point and shoot, and who owns the rights to the bearing/speed charts? you? gutted? i dont think so plagiarists!
show me where you were and where was gutted when this was written? i can answer that you for, no-where, hahahahahahah!
so now everybody can see its really not the dick okane bs lead angle question at all, is it? its point and shoot, Plagiarist! hahahahahahah!
your a Plagiarist rockin robbins! you and gutted! now its known, and as i said i can show alot more past posts from me showing point and shoot, before and after you were here, i think i will add them to this
post over time, just so you dont forget! just to rub it in alittle more each time! when i get the chances to. im the one that creates something from nothing rockin, dont forget that, and when it comes to these formums,
im okane, morton, kretchemer, and anyone else that made thier own tactics, while you are a tactical midget and a thief!
i knew and wondered what the ultimite goal was of your attitude in 8010, to drive me away so that you could inherit point and shoot! and be a big man, not happening bud!
im not finished with point and shoot, its my stlye of shooting, my goal is to improve on it always, where as your okane bs stagnates, like a swamp, still water, going no where, because you cant create!
well well, now we see the your true character bud, every vile vice of humanity, you freaking POS!
and dont talk about the us military, you havent earned the right to, and every right you do have has been given to you as a gift from a us serviceman, past, present, and future!
i spent 16 years in it, i have my honorable! and if you do, at least now you know that right was not gained by yourself, but by someone else again! all you could ever do for us is to bring us shame, got it!, you couldnt carry my canteen, it takes honor
to be a us serviceman, something you dont have!
but as i said, and your drooling over point and shoot reveals, it is that good! and youve been conning the people here for a long time. a poster above nailed you right on the nose, when he wrote that he thought the lead angle was critical,
hes right, it is critical and the longer the range, the more critical it is, your d okane crap, is a hit using a wing and a prayer at long range if its hit at all, and was it blown because you were yapping, or was it because you thought you had point and shoot down, but in reality, didnt have a clue?
but try point and shoot at long range, i got one at night by radar, (hi res ppi mod) at 6700 yards, using point and shoot! hahahaha!
and when ever i show a tactic on the formums, it works the first time, because im the one that created it, so i know it! and 8010 was just another
example, i knew it could work in theory, and it was never tried by me until i posted about it, it was done for the first time right before your eyes, hahahahah! and it worked the first time!
thats the difference between tactical know how, and a tactical pretender!
i feel sorry for you and gutted! you have committed a moral crime,
if it was civil, well.............
without someones elses ideas you people are like an MK-14 torpedo in the early war years, duds!

edit: seems like the link to the sonar overlay is broken, however it doesnt matter, its in the tactical folder link.

[razark]

:yawn:
yay for greyrider. he is so great. i wish i could be just like him. he is so much better than anyone else could ever be and his teaching is the only thing that makes this game worth playing.
:roll:

There ya go. Is that enough validation for you? You can piss off now. Go troll General Topics.

[General Tso]

who owns the rights to point and shoot, and who owns the rights to the bearing/speed charts?

er nobody. :yawn:

[Diopos]

Who owns the rights to "point and shoot"?

Probably, Robert Whitehead (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Whitehead), the inventor of the torpedo? :hmmm:

Greyrider,

On 8010: There were specific questions asked regarding the "general" applicability of the method. If you'd stated that the method is about a sub moving at right angles toward the target's path, the thread would have procceeded differently. The basis of it (collision course) is correct, IMO. BTW have you checked this thread: Link (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=174133&highlight=CCCM)?
On previous work done: I don't think anybody would object in crediting previous similar work (as long as they had knowledge of it).
Rockin Robbins fixation: Aren't you overdoing it? As far as I see it, RR is not at all "cheap" in crediting and "referencing" other people's work. And he has helped many SH4 noobs, either directly or indirectly.

[timmyg00]

completely delusional.

TG

[Rip]

With all the spelling and grammatical errors on would be hard pressed to call any of this a literary work, so what's to plagiarize? I would be willing to bet many of these techniques and tools were used by actual submariners doing the real deal. Should they call you out (if they were alive)? :hmmm:

I find it comical that someone would get all up in arms about someone using that was posted on a forum for a third rate game anyway. :nope:

Suggestion....get a life! :/\\chop

Rip

[Rockin Robbins]

rockin robbins!

so 48 hours turns into a week, well priorities first! (work, family, friends), but even with the extra time i knew you wouldnt be man enough, laughter!

I and a host of others have already shown your assertions to be baseless, proved your method a sham and you have already unconditionally surrendered. The was is over and you lost many weeks ago. Go decompose somewhere. I assure you sir, (I use the term very loosely as you are nothing of the sort) the laughter is all mine.

You have also violated just about every Subsim rule there is, plenty enough to be banned four or five times. However I will not post a protest, as the only person you successfully discredited and made fool of was yourself. Any further posts by you will only accomplish the same. A piece of advice in your best interest: stop while you are only light years behind. Remember, you have your honorable!

I hereby promise that I have never used, understood or taught "point and shoot" and never will. It is a fraud and I don't teach frauds. I teach techniques that normal people can and do use enjoyably and simply to play submarine simulations. It doesn't take a genius to shoot torpedoes. It takes simple, clear and usable instructions such as you have failed to provide. I don't copy failure.

Discussion over greyrider. I'll continue as before, trying to be an asset to the community. I sure wish you would find a way to do the same.

[tomoose]

Should have left well enough alone. :nope:

[Rockin Robbins]

Ah, that's OK. There will always be people like that and we can't let them ruin our lives. Sometimes you just have to let 'em go and go about your business. Think I'll exorcise my hostility on a nice Japanese convoy:D.

[Dignan]

Well played.