Quote:
Originally Posted by Sniper297
Even if they're zigzagging 30 degrees either side of the base course it's pretty difficult to get closer than "20 to 40 degrees port" from 10000 yards. Coming along without zigzagging can you really tell the difference between AOB port 5 and AOB port 10? Even at close range you can tell if it's not zero when you can see part of one side or the other and not just bow on, but anything more accurate than "less than 30" or "more than 30" or "about 60" would take psychic powers. You can get a GENERAL course from AOB and tweak it later by making a second mark and drawing a line through it, but when it comes to shooting at close range you simply don't have time to do anything other than preset the AOB to 70 or 80 and leave it alone.
|
I must respectfully disagree. There is solid evidence to indicate that historically, the Approach Officer was expected to provide an observed AoB substantially more precise than "less than 30" or "more than 30" or "about 60". First, the
Submarine Torpedo Fire Control Manual, SLM-1, cited repeatedly in this thread, emphasizes the importance and use of the observed AoB. SLM-1 lays out the procedures for developing a firing solution in some detail. At no point does SLM-1 imply that AoB should be derived principally from range-and-bearing data. Second, Plate VII of SLM-1, cited above by TorpX, includes a table of Aob observations stated in 5 degree intervals. SLM-1 is a training manual. If the Navigational Plotter could not expect to receive AoB data of that precision in the field, then only a poor training manual would teach him to expect it. Third, Dick O'Kane has a long passage in his book "Wahoo" describing the training regimen he set up for himself when he learned that he, the XO, was to be Approach Officer. He and other officers set up a simulator, using a ship model and an inverted binocular. He trained on this until he was proficient at judging AoB to within 5 degrees. Pete Galantin describes doing the same thing in the Attack Simulator at New London. As I said, a lot of evidence that reasonably accurate and precise AoB observations were expected of and provided by the Approach Officer.
In the game, there are several methods which players commonly use to determine AoB with an accuracy and precision of +/- 2.5 to 5 degrees. One is the Dick O'Kane Mark 1 Human Eyeball method. The SH4 Solution Solver, by gutted (
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/down...o=file&id=1358) provides a computer version of O'Kane's AoB training tool to assist in developing the needed skill. Sublynx, in his Charts Add-on v1.4, (
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/down...o=file&id=3675) includes a very useful (KM, I believe) chart of a merchant ship photographed at 5 degree intervals. The photos are annotated to show the important features to observe in making an AoB estimate. A second method, the method apparently favored by the KM, was to use the periscope graticle and a simple circular slide rule, the RAOBF. This tool is available in many SH3 mods and in OM, but not in SH4, although it is quite easy to make a hand-held version from the images provided in the mods. (It's metric, but that's just a scale factor.) Using the periscope or TBT graticle, it is possible to quickly determine first the range of the target and then the AoB. I have used a fleet-boat style graticle very successfully for both range and AoB. And, unlike the stadimeter, it is not necessary to know the exact identity of the target first. Merchants were generally of sufficiently similar dimensions that generic numbers are adequate. Once the range to the target is known, the angular length of the ship is used to calculate the AoB. Of course, if an identification can be made, then more accurate numbers can be used for both mast height and LOA.
AoB was historically determined to significantly better than +/- 15 degrees, and the same techniques are available for use in-game. Being able to determine AoB improves your approach planning. It frees you from dependence on the "God's-eye" automatic chart updating. It makes longer range shots more productive, giving you opportunities to attack targets you might not otherwise close. It extends your approach time, making firing more methodical and less hurried. - and less error-prone. And, it allows you to conduct your attacks in a way more like what was actually done historically.