Captain does and doesn't

[Rosencrantz]

It's quite often stated in the forum what CO does and doesn't, and quite often those statements seems to be a bit, how I would say it, odd maybe. Like "commanding officer doesn't plot target's movement", or "it's not CO's business to take care of dicipline", or "CO is not interested in how does the food taste in the wardroom". Really? In the real life, I think, every CO is very much interested or involved in about everything what comes to the ship. What actions should be simulated in the game is, however, whole different subject.

Just wanted to take this "on board". I think we should try to be more precise and make clear difference when we are talking about real life skippers and when we are talking about sub sims. Just that we wouldn't be spreading out false information.


Greetings,
-RC-

[THE_MASK]

Dont forget though , the devs said we could play as other officers as well .

[Platapus]

I think the CO is aware and does care because ultimately he is responsible. However, despite the responsibility, he delegates authority to handle these issues.

A CO with a good crew does not have to "do" many of these things as he has officers (Commissioned and Non-Commissioned) to "do" these things.

Maybe that can be modeled in the game. If you start out with a green crew they come to you (CO) with every piddling problem. As your crew matures, issues are handled further down the chain.

[ETR3(SS)]

I say the devs make a patrol on a submarine to see the Chain of Command up close. Come to think of it, I'd like to send a lot of people on a patrol so they can see what it's really like. :haha:

[totodog]

Dont forget though , the devs said we could play as other officers as well .


Do you have a source for this?

[THE_MASK]

Do you have a source for this?Its on the forum somewhere .

[JScones]

Being accountable and being responsible are two different things.

For example, I am accountable for staff at work, yet I have subordinates who are responsible for managing their day-to-day activities. My subordinate team leaders are directly responsible for their team's performance, leaving me to develop the forward plan and strategies (for which I am responsible and my superior is accountable). And if I notice something wrong in one of my teams, then I alert the appropriate team leader to fix it (unless it's time critical).

Same in a U-boat; the Kaleun is accountable for his boat and meeting the objective of sinking enemy ships in-line with his boss's (Onkel Karl) directives. How he does that with his available resources is then up to him to manage. He has subordinate ranks to micromanage the day-to-day activities to ensure smooth running. He generally wants "health of the boat" updates, not to be down in the galley counting eggs, tapping pistons and so on. Otherwise, why bother with rank structures or positions (such as LI, navigator, watch officer, discipline WO, storesman, cook etc) at all?

Now having said this, of course there were occasions when the Kaleun got involved in discipline, food rationing, or other nuts and bolts. That's what line management implies. It's just that they're not the first in-line to deal with every trivial issue that arises.

And this is where there's no black and white answer to the OP's question. The further one goes up the line of command, the more their personality affects the execution of their duties. This includes how much control they want over their subordinates and to what level they want to micro or macro manage. Just compare the leadership styles of Wolfgang Lüth to Peter Zschech to see this diversity in action. For every "I want to know everything" leader there's a "don't bore me with the details" leader. Neither approach is necessarily right or wrong, as other factors make up the effectiveness of the leader.

Anyway, there's many books on the subject of U-boat crew responsibilities, and frankly the only information I've seen posted here that I think is wrong comes from those who think that the Kaleun does everything himself. Now if the game allows that, then fine; the misinformed will be blissfully happy. But as long as the game also allows the Kaleun to be the Kaleun, I'll be happy. Then everyone wins.

[JScones]

Its on the forum somewhere .
When you find it, pls post a link as I (and seemingly others) must have missed that post. :up:

The closest I could find was from the Q&A thread over at Ubi:

Will this be the same in SHV as in SHIV that the player can replace the sailor or officer of his job and do it himself? (Or are we restricted to giving them commands only?)

The player can jump in most of the key positions on the ship – firing guns, periscope, hydrophone, navigation map. More so, each of these stations is realistically modeled, and, combined with the FPS view, the immersion should be total. Additionally, we’re aiming to make the player work SIDE BY SIDE with his crew – be it on the periscope, when identifying a ship, or on the map, when looking for enemy convoys.which is no different to SH3 and SH4. In fact, unless I am misunderstanding, the "side by side" concept will reinforce your role as Kaleun by having you with the responsble crewman, not the responsible crewman. But that's how I read it, and from one simple sentence I may be way off.

[JScones]

I think the CO is aware and does care because ultimately he is responsible. However, despite the responsibility, he delegates authority to handle these issues.

A CO with a good crew does not have to "do" many of these things as he has officers (Commissioned and Non-Commissioned) to "do" these things.

Maybe that can be modeled in the game. If you start out with a green crew they come to you (CO) with every piddling problem. As your crew matures, issues are handled further down the chain.
Actually not a bad idea, and one that is reflective of real life. For example, at one point I had 120 staff reporting through 7 team leaders reporting to me. With the more experienced team leaders, a quick daily morning chat was all I needed to know that everything was under control. With the less experienced team leaders, I had to spend time going through their issues, providing advice, assistance, mentoring and so on--exactly as I should I hasten to add--but still taking me away from my main duties. Over time they improved and my "hands on" involvement with their teams decreased.

[karamazovnew]

I say the devs make a patrol on a submarine to see the Chain of Command up close. Come to think of it, I'd like to send a lot of people on a patrol so they can see what it's really like. :haha:

Send me, send me :salute:.

The CO is not born CO. He's born poop cleaner and works his way up. By the time he becomes CO, he know EVERYTHING on his ship, metal and flesh alike. Of course he delegates, but we're not talking about a half drunk beer bellied "ahoy" captain that delegates his dog to bring him another bottle. We're talking about young Kaleuns in the services of the Third Reich here. Maybe someone can provide a list of responsabilities of the Kapitänleutnant. :up:

[Lord Justice]

:woot:It's quite often stated in the forum what CO does and doesn't, and quite often those statements seems to be a bit, how I would say it, odd maybe. Like "commanding officer doesn't plot target's movement", or "it's not CO's business to take care of dicipline", or "CO is not interested in how does the food taste in the wardroom". Really? In the real life, I think, every CO is very much interested or involved in about everything what comes to the ship


Greetings,
-RC-YES, may we all take heed to the fact going back to 1939 living space was very crammed inside u boats, and more so with full compliment of personel, weapons, supplies , etc. so in comparison with todays larger vessels albeit with more crew i dont belive its fair to say or presume the CO didnt interact with crew much as one sometimes thinks. more so during war, brothers in arms. With much less perks also as todays submariner, " shift has finished think i go for shower and watch a movie then perhaps read up for my next exam".:hmmm: Yes great stuff from the quote above,:up: to many belive the capt sat on a white cloud far above snubbing his nose at mundane events. the great divide, back then not a chance!!!

[Rosencrantz]

Yep...

First thing I would like say is that I was only calling after precision and consideration when we are talking about CO's actions in real life. One good reason to be as precise as possible could be example the fact that there's - I think - many youngsters also learning about the military. People who have never been in the military has often odd thoughts about what it is like to be in the ranks. Or at least this is something I have learned myself, you know.

However, I think JScones gave a good writing about the subject. Only thing which I don't fully agree with you, JScones, is that wrong information comes usually only from people thinking CO does everything by himself.

In order to get the topic to move on, I would like to ask, what we actually need to simulate crew interaction or command problems? My suggestion is that morale and health are actually only things we need. So, only thing I miss is actually morale/health which are saved after the patrol. Then, while in port, morale of some individuals should go either up or down, to certain degree. Somehow it's funny both in 3 and 4 that after few days in port you'll get 100 % fit crew again...


Greetings,
-RC-

[JScones]

So, only thing I miss is actually morale/health which are saved after the patrol. Then, while in port, morale of some individuals should go either up or down, to certain degree. Somehow it's funny both in 3 and 4 that after few days in port you'll get 100 % fit crew again...
Agreed. IMHO this is a big failing in SH3. Woundings at sea and battle fatigue are all but forgotten by SH3 (and SH4?) as soon as the boat docks. No convalescence period, not even a wound badge.

http://uboat.net/men/men_lost.htm shows a nice list of mortalities and (more serious) woundings at sea by year. From a quick squiz I'd certainly be surprised if most of those wounded at sea felt 100% when the boat docked. As an aside I noted with interest the proportionately high number of "man overboard" losses (as opposed to watching them stick like glue to your deck in SH3 when large waves break)...

But all this raises another complexity - how many wounded or ill crew were repatriated through milk cows? :hmmm:

Anyway, this discussion seems to be taking your thread away from what you originally intended.

[Sailor Steve]

A good thread, and already some good answers. The reality is that the CO has a lot to worry about, and the command structure is set up to take that burden off his shoulders where possible.

When the captain wants to change course in a combat situation, he gives the order and the helmsman obeys. When he wants to go deeper, he orders the depth, but he doesn't tell the planesmen exactly what dive angle to take. That is the job of his department head, in this case the LI on the uboat. The captain never actually mans the wheel or the planes. He will order the engine settings he wants and the exact speed, including separate engine orders when maneuvering in harbor; but he doesn't actually man the engines, of course.

..."commanding officer doesn't plot target's movement"...
This is one of the tough parts of the game. Some SH3 and SH4 players have complained about the difficulty of manual targetting. I'm not very good at it either. But the answer in SH3 is to use the 'Weapons Officer Assistance', and several people have said that using WOA is more realistic than doing it all yourself. The only problem there is that the captain does indeed focus the periscope, and his assistant reads and records the bearing and range. Either of them could draw the lines on the chart, but that job is usually assigned to a third party, with the senior officers double-checking.

or "it's not CO's business to take care of dicipline"...
Discipline is usually department-specific. The petty officer is the equivalent of a sergeant in the army, and part of his job is to keep his fellows in line. He answers to the Chief Petty Officer, who is charge of the men in his division, or department. The actual department head is a junior officer, and even he doesn't usually concern himself with discipline, but with the running of his department. It is his job to make sure that department runs smoothly, so problems between sailors could be brought to his attention, but he would be more likely to talk them through it than threaten punishment. The XO/1WO was the ultimate department head, and his judgement was final in the day-to-day running of the boat. He was the one who worked with department heads to make sure they got what they needed to do the job, and he was the one who made sure that they provided what the captain needed to do his job. That means that the XO was also in charge of provisioning the boat and scheduling the watch changes, and the captain routinely asked him how things were going.

...or "CO is not interested in how does the food taste in the wardroom". Really? In the real life, I think, every CO is very much interested or involved in about everything what comes to the ship. What actions should be simulated in the game is, however, whole different subject.
I'm sure the captain cares what his food tastes like, and he might actually say something to the cook, or mention it to the XO, if he's not happy. If he is happy he might compliment the cook of course, since it's good for morale and also a guarantee that the cook will try to keep pleasing his captain. On the other hand, it's the XO's job to supervise the loading of supplies. He'll report that the boat is provisioned, and give details if the captain asks for them. He might also let the captain know if he managed to snag any special items, but other than that the CO only cares that the job is done and his boat is ready for sea.

Bottom line: the captain can of course do or say anything he wants. Some did and some didn't get into the nitty-gritty, but the structure is set up so he doesn't have to worry about the details. I can see the desire for the XO to keep his boss informed about the food situation, just as the LI keeps him aprised of the fuel remaining. On the other hand, I don't recall reading any stories of u-boats terminating a patrol because of food shortages.

[FIREWALL]

Read a few of the books that have been posted here.

It will answer many questions.

[JScones]

I've always found Wolfgang Lüth's PROBLEMS OF LEADERSHIP IN A SUBMARINE (http://www.uboatarchive.net/LeuthLecture.htm) lecture from DEC43 insightful. I recommend reading it to get an idea of life onboard his boat...from the man himself (not 20 years later by hearsay).

But pls bear in mind two things when reading:

1. Lüth was an IX Kaleun, thus his techniques are tuned for longer cruises. His approach would unlikely be as practical in II or VII boats, ie the majority of cases.

2. Many of his colleagues, including the Subsim-favourite Buchheim (Das Boot), ridiculed his speech and found his approach to management laughable, suggesting that his ideal was the exception rather than the norm. Indeed, Jordan Vause in his book U-Boat Ace: The Story of Wolfgang Luth states in response "that many officers in the German military establishment at the time, officers young and old, did not think it necessary to "like" their crews or to take care of them, any more than they accepted the idea of a crew as an extended family and the captain a surrogate father. It was not unusual for officers to be successful and disliked, even hated, at the same time."

Just offered to reaffirm the diversity and prove that extreme comments such as "Kaleuns always wiped their crew's butts" are just as wrong (if not moreso) as "Kaleuns never spoke to their crews". ;)

[Ducimus]

One thing that bears mentioning is the Do's and Don't's change based on nationality. I think the line between what is true a US Navy Submarine Captain and a Germain Uboat captain is sometimes blured.

The command structure is entirely different in a fleet boat vs a uboat. A US Navy Captain had a Fire control party, and sometimes had his exec man the periscope, who was taking the range, bearing and AOB for him while he focused on the larger picture. For a Kreigsmarine Captain, this was probably unheard of.

[Alex]

@ JS :

[...] states in response "that many officers in the German military establishment at the time, officers young and old, did not think it necessary to "like" their crews or to take care of them, any more than they accepted the idea of a crew as an extended family and the captain a surrogate father" [...]

Of course that doesn't mean it was the usual way of taking care of a crew, but I do think there was indeed a certain idea of family among the crew members of the same U-Boot.
Erich Topp himself stated that it was called « kamaradschaft » (companionship).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYlk0YUaxPU

[Sailor Steve]

One thing that bears mentioning is the Do's and Don't's change based on nationality. I think the line between what is true a US Navy Submarine Captain and a Germain Uboat captain is sometimes blured.

The command structure is entirely different in a fleet boat vs a uboat. A US Navy Captain had a Fire control party, and sometimes had his exec man the periscope, who was taking the range, bearing and AOB for him while he focused on the larger picture. For a Kreigsmarine Captain, this was probably unheard of.
On the other hand the Kriegsmarine, like the Royal Navy, had a separate Engineering section, whose officers were outside the command structure. The US Navy had junior officers assigned as division heads, and their postings changed between ships until they learned every phase of shipboard operations.

I think the duties of the captain himself were fairly similar in all navies though, regarding what he did and what he didn't do.

[JScones]

Yes, I know many people who are surprised when they learn that the Kaleun was not necessarily the highest rank on the u-boat. I drafted a stock response quite a while ago explaining this for when questioned on it in regards to SH3Cmdr's Realistic Crew option (I know the question/complaint/rant will come up again at some point):

In WWII there were two general streams of U-boat officers - "Line" and "Engineering" (and "Medical" in the later years). In some instances the LI (Engineering stream) would actually outrank the Commander (Line stream) either in seniority or rank (look at U-516 for example, at one stage near the end of the war the Commander was an ObLt whilst the LI was a highly decorated KptLt). And it certainly occurred where a newly promoted ObLt U-boat Commander (such as all of us every time we start a "new" career*) would be "outranked" by the existing ObLt LI.

I should also point out that if something happened to the Commander at sea, it would be the next highest Line officer (ie the IWO/Exec) that would take over command, even if the LI was higher ranked (there are *many* instances where the Commander was an ObLt, the LI was an ObLt and the Exec was an Lt).

[kptn_kaiserhof]

when it comes to the captain hes the most powerful man on the boat

[Rosencrantz]

JScones wrote:


I've always found Wolfgang Lüth's PROBLEMS OF LEADERSHIP IN A SUBMARINE (http://www.uboatarchive.net/LeuthLecture.htm) lecture from DEC43 insightful.



Yep, me too. And what Ducimus said about differencies between a US and a German skipper is, I think, also true. That's why it's interesting to read and learn about how different countries has set up their command organization, or how are different bills manned, for example. It's also interesting how much you actually can read "between the lines", at least after some studies and maybe if you have military background yourself. (Pretty much same thing what intelligence guys are often trying to do.)

Second thing is that my original examples were at least somewhat wrong or missleading, like target plotting example. However, it's nice to see how most of you got the right idea, about what I'm trying to say.

It's just that sometimes it drives me almost crazy when someone is telling that CO is not interested in this or that. From my own past I can recall three very good leaders, two from the army and one from civilian life. What was common to all these three was that they were always interested in everything. Both business and people. I think it was that what made them special. (And I'm not talking about nit-picking, or how it's said in english... ;))


Greetings,
-RC-

[Sailor Steve]

Good points. A good commander does take an interest in his men, and in their jobs. In fact a naval officer learns to perform most of the tasks on his ship, and serves as the head of probably every department at on point or another during his career.

But the question was what does the captain actually do. He commands. he doesn't load the torpedoes, or even fire them. He doesn't steer the boat, or man the dive planes. He doesn't turn the valves. He doesn't cook the food. He doesn't man the guns. He knows how to use the sextant, and almost surely double-checks the work of the navigator, who is usually still learning the craft. Sure, he knows how to do pretty much all those things, but it's not his job to actually do them. That's why we still talk about Aces Of The Deep as such a wonder sim. You were the captain, and your job was to get your boat to where it would do the most good and your crew's job was to make sure you were able to do yours.

[JScones]

But the question was what does the captain actually do. He commands. he doesn't load the torpedoes, or even fire them. He doesn't steer the boat, or man the dive planes. He doesn't turn the valves. He doesn't cook the food. He doesn't man the guns. He knows how to use the sextant, and almost surely double-checks the work of the navigator, who is usually still learning the craft. Sure, he knows how to do pretty much all those things, but it's not his job to actually do them.
:up: Exactly. Being interested in something and doing something are quite different. The two should not be confused or seen as the same.

For example, I'm sure RC that the three very good leaders to which you refer did not actually do your job, but took an interest in what you did and how it contributed to the bigger picture (ie in conjunction with what their other staff did). ;)

[JU_88]

SHV Uboat 'managment' sim

Give orders!
"You there sailor boy, clean my shoes, then make soup, scrub deisels with your tooth brush and then write a patrol report that makes me look good, I expect to see it on my desk in the morning, any questions and you can talk to my P.A (No 1)"

Then you spend the rest of the patrol having lunch, arranging 'meetings' and reading 'Uboats for Dummies' - because only got the job based on your delegetion skills'

Later you get premoted to BDU where you get to sit on your ass all day in front of an enigma machine, pressing the 'keep-up-the-good-work' & Sende buttons.
You try to impress Donitz by pretending you want to be his friend -or pretending to look busy and important, occasionally you try to make him laugh with crap jokes you stole off a comedian somewhere.
:woot:

[looney]

Gamewise we want to do the main task of a Kaptain and his LI... Sink ships.

[Rosencrantz]

To Steve and JScones:


Yep, you are both right. As Steve wrote:

But the question was what does the captain actually do.

and JScones:

the three very good leaders to which you refer did not actually do your job, but took an interest in what you did



Very much Yep. And when I was calling after precision in the first post, maybe it is that I haven't been that much precise myself either. And again we can just learn, how it's often difficult to be precise.

However, one thing I always try to tell youngsters, who haven't been in the military, is that business there is not always as straightforward as it's quite often thought. Probably one of the best examples releated to subs is Mush Morton, who gave the scope to O'Kane and took TDC himself. You know, those men weren't just standing in somewhat pre-ordered position like glued, but after they got the idea they put it into work. And I think that's something what is happening all the time in different ships or units.

And to Ju_88: If you ever read my very first post, you probably would know that I wasn't talking about "SHV Uboat 'managment' sim", like you suggested.

Greetings,
-RC-

[JU_88]

@ RC - Aw lighten up mate, my post was not an attempt a scarcasm directed at you or anyone, It was just a harmless joke damn it. No offence was intended :dead:
Im not even taking sides on this one, but er.. sorry (for what its worth)

[Sailor Steve]

"You there sailor boy, clean my shoes, then make soup, scrub deisels with your tooth brush and then write a patrol report that makes me look good, I expect to see it on my desk in the morning, any questions and you can talk to my P.A (No 1)"

And then get negative renown as you become "the captain no one wants to ship with". Sullen, rebellious crew. Rumors spreading about "the Captain Bligh of the Kriegsmarine."
:rotfl2:

Probably one of the best examples releated to subs is Mush Morton, who gave the scope to O'Kane and took TDC himself. You know, those men weren't just standing in somewhat pre-ordered position like glued, but after they got the idea they put it into work. And I think that's something what is happening all the time in different ships or units.
Good points. That's kind of what "Weapons Officer Assistance" did in SH3, though you had to make the sightings yourself. It would be interesting to see how that could be implemented accurately and realistically.

[Sgtmonkeynads]

I don't know if its been brought up or not, but he should have to sleep once in a while. Being at sea for a month and not taking a nap may have the crew begin thinking that the Kaulen is a crack head.

[Philipp_Thomsen]

I don't know if its been brought up or not, but he should have to sleep once in a while. Being at sea for a month and not taking a nap may have the crew begin thinking that the Kaulen is a crack head.

Did you ever play 18 wheels of steel american long haul?

You are a truck driver, and if you keep driving for over 14 hours, you start to nodoff, the screen goes black and you lose control of your truck... very interesting.

A system like this may be interesting.

Of course the noddingoff wouldnt happen in a very tense situation, only when sailing and nothing happening. To nodoff and being awake by the crew when something happens.

[Platapus]

I wonder how much sleep Kaluens really got on patrol? I would imagine their lives consisted of short naps when ever he could. Of course with all the noise probably the entire crew existed on short naps when ever they could

[Webster]

I don't know if its been brought up or not, but he should have to sleep once in a while. Being at sea for a month and not taking a nap may have the crew begin thinking that the Kaulen is a crack head.

well if they make me sleep then i want to have a choice weather i snore or not :O:

[ETR3(SS)]

I wonder how much sleep Kaluens really got on patrol? I would imagine their lives consisted of short naps when ever he could. Of course with all the noise probably the entire crew existed on short naps when ever they couldCan't speak for back in the day, but neither of my two CO's got a lot of sleep. Usually 6hrs was the most I think they ever got at a stretch. But even then that 6 hours was interrupted by reports from officers, and the on watch section.:dead:

[Sgtmonkeynads]

Heres an idea. As captain you go take a nap because your reasoning and foocus are zapped. You go back lay on your bed and switch to playingg the next officer. Once something happens, that you can not take care of your self you must wake the captain, in which case you are back to playing you. If everyone on board is a sleep, you spend the day making soup.

[CaptainHaplo]

On the issue of how to treat subordinants - many moons ago when I was wearing a funny green uniform, I was able to pass on some very sage advice I was given even earlier....

I had to soldiers who couldn't stand each other, and literally came to blows about 70% of the time. I inherited them, and the former platoon leader pulled me aside and said "just keep those two apart".

I did nothing of the sort. I made them work together every time I could. At the start, they acted like knuckleheads just like I knew they would. I called them both on the carpet, and instead of punishing them, simple asked what the deal was. They both ended up hollering about how the other did this or didn't do that, etc etc till I banged my hand on the desk. I then explained to both of them that I gave nay damned what they thought of each other, but while they wear the uniform, they are professionals. They could hate each other all they wanted, but if I task them with a job, it gets done, or else. They can act on their hate on their own time, NOT on mine. If they couldn't be professional enough to set aside their personal issues and get the job done, I couldn't count on them when I would truly need them, and so I wanted them out.

One of them actually responded with "I am ok with being transferred" and I said no... gone as in out of uniform permanently. If you can't control your personal issues with this guy, you may have the same issue with someone else, and this isn't daycare where we put you just with people you like to play with. So the choice is, deal with your **** on your own time, but work together while your on duty, or I will see you discharged.

They both looked at me like I had three heads. I told em to go think about the point, and they would return the next morning to let me know their decision.

The next morning, they both agreed to act like they had more than a brain cell apiece, and from then on I never had a major problem with them. Sure, the complaining still happened, but things got done. That's all I wanted.

On the other hand, I had guys that we all enjoyed hanging out together. It depends on the people. Some people you can take care of, some you just have to show guidelines and let em stay in between the rails. No one approach fits every situation and person.

*We won't discuss how it is I came by that particular wise advice of "being professional in uniform" though.....