TDC in Sh5

[Hitman]

Hitman can you confirm thise?

In flank speed on periscope depth and with periscope up can not only be dangerous but also will be hard to aim due to high vibration. Is thise information is correct more or less? Thanks in advance

Yes, that's correct The spiral bounded wire on the periscope tube was a mean of reducing vibrations by changing the frequency of them.

[Kaleun_Endrass]

Originally Posted by Dimitrius07

In flank speed on periscope depth and with periscope up can not only be dangerous but also will be hard to aim due to high vibration.

The peri of type XXI got an additional supporting stand because during testing with the very first boats they found out that there was heavy vibration on the raised periscope at 6 knots and it could not be used as a "sensor" at all.
The older boats didn´t had such problems because noone was aiming at 6kn. As you know this speed was "Große Fahrt" which was very loud and would have alerted the escort vessels.
But the new elektro-boats could run 6kn even with the motors for silent running (Schleichmotoren).

(So stated in the book U-Boottyp XXI)

[Hitman]

The older boats didn´t had such problems because noone was aiming at 6kn

Actually, the problem with the old boats was that the periscope vibrated already at 3 knots! That was solved with the wire I mentioned before, but then when the Type XXI came out, it was able to reach with ease speeds where the vibration appeared again, and hence the additional stand you talked about

[Steeltrap]

I remember Dick O'Kane mentioning several times that at 5kts you could 'see' enough to gain an approximate bearing on the blur, but any meaningful observations weren't possible above 3kts in a fleet boat. Clearly a problem in all navies (not surprising).

[Leif...]

One easy detail for them to implement (but important imho) is to focus on the fact that it’s a mechanical “computer” that is, the dials will not instantly pop into the right fire solution, but slowly turn while the internal gears and cams work out the solution. Add some lowkey well greased electrical motor noise while the tdc is working as well.

[Hitman]

Hey Leif!! Long not seen you you How is all going?


You are completely right in your comment, and the TDC had in fact a lamp that lighted when the calculation was done and the solution was ready

[joegrundman]

yes there was a time delay while the TDC calculated the data, but once set the TDC instantly updated for changes in periscope angle, i think

[Leif...]

Hi Hitman, yes I´m back. I stumbled on the news of SHV and had to drop in for some insight. Looks good so far…

[darby]

I like calculating my own firing solution. I see a lot of you like to just command but I want to try the lesser posts at my whim. I love figuring the best shot and waiting for the explosions based on when they should get there. I also anjoy listening at the sonar. I don't like managing the crew so much.

Too bad we can't maintain multiple stations on one sub. I could have a second computer set up as the sonar station and let my son listen while I captain.

[looney]

Question:

Did the TDC or any other navies counterpart changed / upgraded during the war?

[IanC]

Nice thread guys! A little over my head but very interesting

[Donkey-Shot]

I want an accurate command simulation, I want my crew to be able to do, reliably, what it would have been able to do in RL.

That said, I do want the option to do everything (regarding plotting/targeting) manualy: should I choose.

It seems to me that plotting shouldn't rely heavily on crew skill. It's not some magical skill that requires years and years of training by some sort of magician.
I went to fishery school (we have those in Holland) and was tought how to plot one or multiple radar targets, plot the CPA (closest point of approach), changes in own ship course and speed, changes in target(s) course and speed.

With a good plotting table and, most importantly, with accurate range, bearing and time readings, its pretty simply. I mean, I was 16 years old when taught and we learned how to do this in a couple of afternoons. And we wheren't math geniuses by any stretch of the imagination. With a plotting table it's a matter of being able, litteraly, how to interperate the picture you're drawing on it and know what the logorithimic scales on it mean. (Wich, btw, is explained on the very plotting table!)

No fancy math calculations, just the ability to use a ruler, a compass a pencil and, well, being able to read.

If barely interested, barely attention paying 16 year olds can learn it in a few afternoons, I'd imagine a fully trained and quillified U-boat nav officer, with the right tools and accurate readings should, who ever the hell is on watch, bloody well be able to do this basic task.

If not, he isn't much of a navigator.

One problem with tha above statement is that they didn't have radar in the early years. A second problem is, when they did get radar, it wasn't all that good.

No disrespect, Donkey-Shot. You impress me as a pretty cool guy, with some knowledge behind your words.

[Donkey-Shot]

Originally Posted by Snestorm

One problem with tha above statement is that they didn't have radar in the early years. A second problem is, when they did get radar, it wasn't all that good.

No disrespect, Donkey-Shot. You impress me as a pretty cool guy, with some knowledge behind your words.

no they didn't have radar, they did however have tadimeters.
so a reasonably accurate range reading is definitly possible. The accuracy of that reading depends on the skill of the person taking it. The actual plotting is something a 16 year old could do if taught.

No disrespect taken.

[FIREWALL]

Originally Posted by maerean_m

I do believe you'll be amazed by what Dan has prepared for you in the terms of TDC and manual targeting . I would have never thought of the idea he came up with.
We'll be previewing it at the Subsim meeting.

I have yet to see a detailed post about the TDC and manual targeting that Dan prepared for all of us that was previewed.

Care to share that with us ?