Do We Really Have What It Takes?

[Fish40]

I'm not poseing this question to the guys out there who have Naval experience, because you have an unfair advantage. Do you think with the knowlege we have from playing SH4 that we would actually be able to track and successfully attack a ship?:hmmm:

[CCIP]

Sure, but the bigger problem is that with the knowledge from playing SH4 we wouldn't be able to crew and operate an actual submarine :D

SH4 might teach a good bit about commanding a sub during the attack stages, but a boat full of wannabe captains ain't gonna go very far...

[Armistead]

I assume you mean if we could go back in time to WW2.

Not even close...

For me, if I could even figure how to get a real scope up, if I saw a DD near, I would probably crap myself,

Destroyeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrrr,,rrrr,rrr,er.. What's the command for getting the hell out of here.

[razark]

I'd say commanding a desktop would be a lot different from commanding actual people.

I don't think any single person simulation, no matter how realistic, is going to make you anywhere close to a real sub skipper. We might have the techniques, much of the knowledge, even many of the tools, they used, but none of us are doing it in the middle of the ocean. We all have the pause button, time compression, and we can save and reload. Very few of us have our computers set up on a rolling and pitching desk. We don't have to worry about the walls crushing in on us, or the house flooding.

Most of all, when we play, there are no lives at stake.

[Rockin Robbins]

I think just as Microsoft Flight Simulator accelerated the training of jet fighter pilots in spite of differences from the real thing, the Silent Hunter games could make you a better sub sailor.

But no, you couldn't go back in time, jump on a Gato in the middle of the Pacific and show those simpletons a thing or three about running a submarine. There is nothing we do here that they didn't do 60 years before us. There is a lot we can do that they couldn't because our game gives us too much information. There is a lot they could do that we can't because Ubi chose not to model important aspects of real submarines. And instead of saying "I'm taking a chance but the worst that could happen is I start a new career" your life would be in danger. There's no way to simulate that!

[sergei]

I'd say commanding a desktop would be a lot different from commanding actual people.

This is the big difference IMO.
Being responsible for the lives of your officers and crew.
If you screw up 60 good men die.
Imagine living with that sort of responsibility every day.
I don't think I could.

[Armistead]

Let's see, we know we couldn't so let's think of the things we SH4 players would say.

"Er, XO, where is the map that shows all the contacts and I need my external cam"

"Here comes a DD, hit the save button"

"That Jap escort is named the Ducimas, kill yourself"

"Where the heck is my Maxoptics, I can't see."

"Where is the stable option, I'm seasick."

"It's winter and all I have is this tee shirt."


or some noobie,

"Five DD's at 1000 yards, surface and man the guns.."

[CCIP]

Hey, those who play 100%, DiD don't do that :D

But seriously, I would have to acknowledge a bit from both perspectives here - yes, reality is nothing like a game. On the other hand, a game can get you a lot closer than one might assume. There's nothing natural about dozens of men stuck in a steel tube performing complicated maneuvers, and if a game can get you into a mindset where you have a good understanding of how the steel tube works and how best to use it and not use it, that is some serious training. Likewise, on the point of staying calm - you'd be surprised how much games can assist with that. Any high-stress situation is made easier when you are in the mindset where a) you know what is happening; b) your mind and body have a good idea of what needs to be done about it. A simulator definitely gets you at least halfway there, and while it certainly does not get you to the level of discipline required, it does get to a sort of starting point for it. The rest would come from drills in an actual sub. I mean let's face it, any real submariner also has their first real encounter in combat. And as an SH4 player, you know what? You already probably have a better understanding of what to expect from combat than they did.

Real submariners aren't made of different stuff than you are. The real difference is that they are drilled better, and that's not something that some training wouldn't fix in the average SH4 player. Most WWII submariners were average Joes too, and when they enlisted, most of them did not have nearly as much submarine knowledge as you might have. Now, noone would let a submarine nerd sail on a real submarine without training of course - so I think the real question should be "Would you enlist in submarines if you lived in WWII?" And I think the real answer is that guys with as much knowledge as you get from playing SH4 would make pretty darn good candidates.

[Deephunter]

Not SH related, but....Back when I was young and reckless, I took up flying, looking to get a PP license. One of the requirements is (was..??) to fly solo to 2 different airports and return to your "home" airport. I flew the first leg without any problems. The second leg required me to fly over an airport somewhat close to the Mexican border (Edinburg, TX). So I'm flying south, and not getting to Edinburg at the time I'd projected, and one thing I don't want to do is cross into Mexican airspace and then return to US airspace. So I'm getting a little "antsy"...
Then I remember I'd been "flying" instruments on my MS Flight Simulator, so I set up the VOR to intercept the Harlingen VOR (HRL bieng my "home" airport), and sure enough I begin to get its signal. Checking for the radial I need to home in on, I notice the Edinburg airport off in the distance. When I intercept the radial, Edinburg is right under my wings. I turn easterly and fly directly to the head of the runway in Harlingen...
I never told the instructor I "cheated", as this was supposed to be a strictly "visual" flight....:D

[Armistead]

Yea, sort of like the guy in a small plane, pilot had a heart attack. He was able to land the plane based on years of playing some plane simulator.

[I'm goin' down]

I suppose if I master a jet fighter sim, I could qualify for Top Gun? (If only they had not shut down the base!) Why would I waste the effort? I already have all the medals I need.

I nominate this for most ridiculous post of the year.

[tater]

Without their training, no, not at all the same.

That said, I think that there is one huge, real life benefit from simulation games. Now, if you read a book about submarines (I'm currently rereading the excellent War in the Boats), you actually understand what they are talking about. You "get" the situations you never would have before.

As a kid, my area of interest was WW2 aircraft, not subs. I read every book I could get my hands on, and loved them—but until I became competent in games like WarBirds, I had never really "gotten" the gist of it. After those games, I actually visualize what is going on in RL descriptions, and even see the pitfalls of some things telegraphed...

Simulations are a huge boon to understanding history intuitively.

[WernherVonTrapp]

I'm certainly no authority on the subject but, somehow, envisioning myself commanding a WWII sub strictly upon the premise of my experience with SHIV? Well, it's an entertaining thought at best. I realize that computerized simulations have permeated the various branches of today's military training but, somewhere in that process, the trainee has to operate the real thing before he is qualified. Usually, that actual operation spans more than just a few hours hands-on.
So, in my opinion, I'd have to offer up a definitive, "No".

[Armistead]

Yea, the amount of skills those sub men had were amazing. Even the cook had to know how to operate the majority of sub systems.

[Sailor Steve]

I spent eight weeks in boot camp just to learn how to be a baby sailor. I spent sixteen weeks in RM 'A' school just to learn how to be an apprentice beginner radioman.

During World War Two the US Navy rushed beginning officers through a three-month training course (hence the nickname "Ninety-Day Wonders"). After that if they went to on-the-job training if they joined the surface fleet, where they had to learn every junior position, serving as comm officers, ops officers, signal officers and engineering officers. After that they might become the XO of a destroyer escort, or of a supply ship, and after a year or more of that they might actually command something.

Potential submariners had to go to a special submarine school, where they not only had to master every system but also had to pass intense rigorous physical training, including spending a lot of time in the water learning to swim properly and to escape from a sunken submarine.

Then they would find themselves in a junior position on an actual sub, and it might take years, if ever, before they became a captain.

In every group there are young men who "have what it takes", and there are certainly some here. But no video game, however realistic they make it, is going to show who they are.

[rein1705]

Ive played SH4 900 so odd hours and i cannot tell you what all the controls do that i can see inside the control room of my boat can you? i know the principles of it all and i understand how and why my sub works and what to do with her but id be LOST completely inside one of these boats if i had to DO something.:D

[CaptainMattJ.]

no. all these are complete understatements. TOTAL understatements.

Theres no "oops i rammed into an island i didnt see, time to reload". theres no "one hole isnt gonna do THAT much damage". that depends. a serious size hole is a death warrant. a kind of small hole isnt. as long as the pressure hull stays intact and it only breached that little space that they have to allow water to pass freely inbetween the hull and outer hull."

theres no TC. its hours upon hours of the same damn noise, rocking, and boredom (mostly). its crap food, cramped spaces, and no F-ing around. you mess up their boat and youll be put out of the job (if you take unnecessary risks). You have to be dominate, and instill respect, hope, and a little fear into your subordinates for them to blindly follow you into the depths of hell. Your equipment OFTEN breaks down, you dont know where the hell you are exactly for about 12 hours everyday.

Theres just about no captain alive who knows what every dam valve or knob does on his ship unless its a sailboat. Ever gone into the queen mary or Midway's engine rooms. at first glance you think its Dr seusse's Worst nightmare. Theres so many valves and pipes that it doesnt even seem real. Its just about endless black if you look down from a catwalk. its gritty dirty and downright scary. On a sub, its a little different. a captain COULD possibly learn every valve and knob. And then theres the Depth Charges.
Oh man. you cant imagine how terrifying those can be. If your running at about 90 meters (if your boat can handle it), and a depth charge blew a hole in your pressure hull. Guess what. Youd be INCINERATED. its unimaginable. Literally one second you could be alive and IN THAT SAME SECOND you could become INCINERATED. Just like that. Or maybe it sparks a fire which in turn burn a main gas line or something flammable and Your entire sub is going bye Bye.

Or maybe a plane comes outta nowhere and drops a 1000 LB bomb just like that. Or maybe your Dive planes fail and/or your ballast tanks fail. youll be plunging into the depths With the knowledge that in a few minutes your going to die.

No matter what you do, unless your unafraid of death youll NEVER be ready to command a sub.

[rein1705]

And yet people like me and you and mostly everyone else that shares this forum did just those things. They weren't superhuman just men. men with duty's and fear and anger and commitment. Men that trained and knew there jobs and the risks. Men that boarded S-boats knowing that every dive could be there last or that at any minute a plane could appear from nowhere and end it all yet they strove on and became the people that we admire so and write these things about. Because there friends were bombed at pearl and there family's over seas were in danger and the world was at war and they did what they could to return the favor.
They were Sailors they were Navy men and they did there duty.

[Sailor Steve]

no. all these are complete understatements. TOTAL understatements.
First, the question was on qualifications, not the life itself.

Second, you sound like you're lecturing everyone as if you had been there. Have you been there? If not, then everything you wrote in this post is nothing but hot air.

[I'm goin' down]

no. all these are complete understatements. TOTAL understatements.

Theres no "oops i rammed into an island i didnt see, time to reload". theres no "one hole isnt gonna do THAT much damage". that depends. a serious size hole is a death warrant. a kind of small hole isnt. as long as the pressure hull stays intact and it only breached that little space that they have to allow water to pass freely inbetween the hull and outer hull."

theres no TC. its hours upon hours of the same damn noise, rocking, and boredom (mostly). its crap food, cramped spaces, and no F-ing around. you mess up their boat and youll be put out of the job (if you take unnecessary risks). You have to be dominate, and instill respect, hope, and a little fear into your subordinates for them to blindly follow you into the depths of hell. Your equipment OFTEN breaks down, you dont know where the hell you are exactly for about 12 hours everyday.

Theres just about no captain alive who knows what every dam valve or knob does on his ship unless its a sailboat. Ever gone into the queen mary or Midway's engine rooms. at first glance you think its Dr seusse's Worst nightmare. Theres so many valves and pipes that it doesnt even seem real. Its just about endless black if you look down from a catwalk. its gritty dirty and downright scary. On a sub, its a little different. a captain COULD possibly learn every valve and knob. And then theres the Depth Charges.
Oh man. you cant imagine how terrifying those can be. If your running at about 90 meters (if your boat can handle it), and a depth charge blew a hole in your pressure hull. Guess what. Youd be INCINERATED. its unimaginable. Literally one second you could be alive and IN THAT SAME SECOND you could become INCINERATED. Just like that. Or maybe it sparks a fire which in turn burn a main gas line or something flammable and Your entire sub is going bye Bye.

Or maybe a plane comes outta nowhere and drops a 1000 LB bomb just like that. Or maybe your Dive planes fail and/or your ballast tanks fail. youll be plunging into the depths With the knowledge that in a few minutes your going to die.

No matter what you do, unless your unafraid of death youll NEVER be ready to command a sub.

Ever thought about teaching a course in English grammar?

[nappy]

I know who you are.. muahaha :arrgh!:

nappy-still-hanging-around-at-off-topics


As a kid, my area of interest was WW2 aircraft, not subs. I read every book I could get my hands on, and loved them—but until I became competent in games like WarBirds, I had never really "gotten" the gist of it..

[Fish40]

@ I'm Going Down: What's so rediculous about this post? Where did I say to jump back in time and command a Fleet boat? I never said do we have what it takes to be Captn. James T. Kirk:nope: Mabey I should have made myself clear. Putting ourselves in the positions of Radar/Sonar operator and WO, could we accurately collect data for a successful attack?

[tater]

The real skippers and crew were just guys like us—only they had training. Does a simulator like SH4 contain anything that is coincident with that RL training? Sure. Assuming you use high realism settings you learn the trig required to make an attack. You also gain something that WW2 training lacked—a visualization of many engagements.

So from a practical standpoint, you gain a fundamental understanding of the torpedo fire control problem, and how to solve it. In addition you gain some insight into tactics for "fighting the boat."

What we lack are all the other aspects of training—which are myriad.

Knowing the limitations of the game simulation, a fair question might be; "assuming an Sh4 player had basic USN sub school training, would his hours of SH4 play make him more effective tactically than he would be otherwise?"

The answer? "Quite possibly."

[Zoomer96]

Personally, with training and experience I believe I could perform any duties and man any station on a submarine and become qualified. However, I question whether I would be able to fit the psychological profile required of staying down in a tight area with contact with the same guys day in day out. I need a little variety and being able to go home after work! The Navy weeds out men that may collapse under the strain. It takes a special Esprit de Corps to be a real submariner and I don't know if I have it or not. At my age it doesn't look like I'll find out! But I do respect the Men that were able to do it.

[Rockin Robbins]

Zoomer you hit the central question squarely on the head. Knowledge alone is not sufficient to make a submariner.

Still, we know more in general and have more interest in submarines than many of the boys plucked from farms in Kansas that were put into submarines, trained thoroughly and served amazingly well. The military knows how to make men ready. Many of us would do just fine.

[Capt. Teach]

I'm not poseing this question to the guys out there who have Naval experience, because you have an unfair advantage. Do you think with the knowlege we have from playing SH4 that we would actually be able to track and successfully attack a ship?:hmmm:


Wellllllll .... no. Being a former "ground pounder" [Ranger, US Army] which I am sure will bring scorn and ridicule upon my head [seeing as this is a naval sim zone] I cannot speak with any naval expertise. However, applying this to what I did do in the military ... my answer would definately have to be "Sorry partner, no way." What someone has learned in the game would probably qualify them just enough to understand the general gist of what was happening around them... not execute it.

Just for example take one important factor ... something we ground pounders know and have a saying for ... "If you can't find the enemy, you can't kill them." Navigation in SH4 is simple ... drop a waypoint and presto ... you go there ... doesn't work that way in RL. Land navigation [without using GPS] has a lot to it that is based more on experience and art form than just drop an azimuth and go. My guess is, that same concept applies to commanding a sub. Knowing how to set up to fire a shot ... and knowing how to press the button to fire .... those are the science or hard fact forms ... but it doesn't include the experience and art form of it which I suspect is a major portion of the success formula. Sub commanders were/are respected as elite and unique ... even amoungst themselves. No simulation would get you to the point where you could find, engage, and destroy the enemy in a real life situation. Consider, there are two types of simulation done in the military today ... first ... computer simulation ... this is the "first step" simulation ... sure ... it has its value and is recognized. However it is also recognized as not enough. Then there is the second simulation the "actual" real life simulation or wargame or exercise or maneuver ... call it what you will but after the computer simulation they go out and do it in "practice" and still get fails ... but the point is no computer sim is ever enough.

[Hitman]

The german and british navies used for their WW2 submarine officers an "attack teacher" machine, that is more or less a WW2 version of a game. Officers looked through a periscope and saw ship models placed on a surface and moving along. They issued orders and the assitants recorded their movements, plotting sub and enemy and the training officer told if they did it right or not. It was used to practice AOB and range estimation, as well as general approach tactics, and it served apparenty well for its purpose.

So I suppose that SH3/4 would indeed be a good trainer for SOME aspects of WW2 submarining, specifically attack tactics, situation awareness, ability to represent in your head the current tactical picture, etc.

But not much more than that. :)

[Sailor Steve]

Wellllllll .... no. Being a former "ground pounder" [Ranger, US Army] which I am sure will bring scorn and ridicule upon my head [seeing as this is a naval sim zone] I cannot speak with any naval expertise.
But we come from all walks of life here, and we all have stories to tell, even those who didn't serve at all. No scorn here, friend.

Also UnderseaLCPL is a friend, so I have to suck up to the dirt guys. :D

[vanjast]

Not a problem.. I can do that, but nobody will follow me , because no-one thinks like I do.

I spend countless hours working out a 'plan' and it's countless alternatives. When I'm in the sub 'I'm wired', and this goes on for the patrol duration.

The same for IL2, where I've spent a gazillion hours pushing the FW190 'beyond' limits.. pushing the boundaries....only to have many say I cannot do that...

But it's the same in either case - I want to live, and I make sure that I do.

edt: And as usual, you won't find me or others like me, making any significant difference in peacetime.
When the Sh1t hits the fan, that's when you'll 'see' us
:)

[Ducimus]

Do We Really Have What It Takes?

No.

[Sailor Steve]

No.
I know I don't. There are some who actually do it, so they do. Some will, some won't.

But does the game show it one way or the other?

I agree, no.

[subskipper53]

or some noobie,

"Five DD's at 1000 yards, surface and man the guns.."


Even when i started playing SH3 early this year (at the time i knew nothing about submarines except that they dive and shoot torpedoes), i knew a heck of a lot better than that! :rotfl2:

[Sailor Steve]

We've had players give "advice" on how to surface behind a Flower-class corvette, because you can sink them with your deck gun before they can turn around to use their single gun.

The reality was that they had a 40mm AA gun back there, and the one time a u-boat is recorded as doing that the AA gun killed the u-boat's deck-gun crew before they could get the gun uncorked.

The u-boat surrendered.

[the_tyrant]

Imagine this:
Somehow, this thread is a time machine
we all go back in time to early 1941, and we are stuck in naval academy
we learn how to use the stuff on the sub(torps, electronics, guns, etc)
Then we get sent to a sub to be ship-mates(assume we know who each other is on Subsim)
we would probably fall apart quite quickly
first of all, we would be screaming for the time compression
than we would be complaining about the bad living conditions. (not to meantion the inconvenience caused by the female members of Subsim-if there is any) After all, i play silent hunter on a comfortable chair, while eating ice cream and rocking along with KISS.
and the biggest problem: leadership
We are used to be an omnipotent power on the sub and that we all think we know what we are doing, so the captain would probably lose control and experience multiple mutinies

Of course, we would all be screaming to head back to port after a week with out showers or air conditioning on a s class boat

[Rockin Robbins]

I have to disagree that we could not do it. When necessity calls a surprising number of people always find that they are ready and able. This would be no exception. I predict that we cannot predict who would qualify, but that a surprising number would be fine. That would include some who think that there is no way they could. It would exclude some that think they would definitely qualify.

[Bubblehead1980]

I have to disagree that we could not do it. When necessity calls a surprising number of people always find that they are ready and able. This would be no exception. I predict that we cannot predict who would qualify, but that a surprising number would be fine. That would include some who think that there is no way they could. It would exclude some that think they would definitely qualify.

I agree with Robbins.Times such as WW II or any war bring out the best in people.Ordinary men(and women at times) show extraordinary courage, ability etc when needed.

[razark]

I have to disagree that we could not do it. When necessity calls a surprising number of people always find that they are ready and able. This would be no exception. I predict that we cannot predict who would qualify, but that a surprising number would be fine. That would include some who think that there is no way they could. It would exclude some that think they would definitely qualify.
While in any group there would be some that could and some that couldn't, and with the proper training, almost any of us here could have a pretty decent idea of what we were doing, simply taking a modern gamer and placing them in command of a WWII Fleet Boat on an actual wartime patrol would be a disaster. Success in the game would not translate to success in real life, and there's a lot more to it than showing some courage.

The captains who started out in command during the war were well trained professionals, with a firm understanding of what their boats could do, and the theory behind how submarines should operate. They trained in tactics and simulated attacks. And then they went on patrol against a real enemy.

And they failed. Many of the early war commanders were awful at the job. They had trained under unrealistic conditions, with unrealistic expectations, using unrealistic tactics. The early captains showed poor results (even taking the poor torpedo situation into account). They missed many opportunities to attack targets because of the way they were used to operating in peacetime and in simulations.

As the early war skippers were taken off the line, they were replaced by their junior officers. These folks had seen over and over again what wasn't working. They knew what had been tried, and they learned from those mistakes. Even with the ongoing torpedo issues, they had higher success against the enemy than the men they replaced.


If we found ourselves on a Fleet Boat in the war, we would be operating on our experiences in the game. We would have false expectations of how things should work, and how to use our boats. We would expect them to behave as in the game. Add in the fact that we are used to commanding the boat by pointing and clicking or poking at a keyboard instead of relying on actual people to carry out our orders and bring us information. We would be like the early failed skippers, and we would quickly be dead or replaced. But whatever junior officers we had might learn from our mistakes.

However, if we were to take sub sim players, and put them through an actual training course like the real officers went through, teach them how to be real naval officers, and how to lead a sub crew, and give them actual hands-on experience operating in one of the boats, would they be able to take command and show better results than if they hadn't spent hours playing SH4? Maybe the ones that didn't wash out first. But without the real training, we'd be almost as lost as any untrained person would be.

[Sailor Steve]

Of course there are some here who could survive the life, and even thrive. People do it all the time.

The original question was whether we could track and sink a ship with the experience we have from playing the game.

[Schwieger]

Of course there are some here who could survive the life, and even thrive. People do it all the time.

The original question was whether we could track and sink a ship with the experience we have from playing the game.

I think I'd feel pretty safe if I was on the ship you're trying to sink... lol Silent Hunter doesn't model modern sub warfare at all, and the WWII combat would still need alot more info than found in game.

[Fish40]

Once again, it seems people think I'm talking about going back in time and running a Fleet Boat during the Second World War. That's not what I meant by "Do we have what it takes":nope: Once again, I'm only referring to the physical accumulation of target data. Could we peer at a radar scope, and know what to do? Would we be able to some degree determine course and speed of a target? I'm willing to bet that we wouldn't be dead on, but we could be in the Ballpark, or at the very least, be playing the same sport! I haven't served in the Armed Forces, but I've been on the water quite a bit due to my love of Saltwater Fishing. My buddy has a boat equipped with radar. Although much more advanced than the units of WW2, reading the scope is nearly the same. You see a blip, and could see it's range by looking at the concentric rings on the scope. There is a range selector, and bearing indicator. What's so different? On an offshore Shark fishing trip once, my buddy and I plotted a course to a wreck useing a chart and paralell rule. Of course we also had GPS and an Auto pilot on the boat, but the course heading was determined by us useing the same tools a navigator during WW2 would use. I'm not a Navigator by any means, so don't start jumping down my throat here!

How many of us since we started playing SH have been on the water for whatever reason, and saw a ship heading towards us. You mean to tell me you never tried to figure it's AOB and bearing? I know I have:o So yes, we don't have the training of a submariner. Most of us don't know what it's like to be in a combat situation. I know I couldn't give orders to run a Fleetboat, but I bet we could get a basic setup of data on an approaching ship, although not as accurate as a trained sailer, but fairly in the park. That's my opinion.

[fastfed]

I think just as Microsoft Flight Simulator accelerated the training of jet fighter pilots in spite of differences from the real thing, the Silent Hunter games could make you a better sub sailor.

But no, you couldn't go back in time, jump on a Gato in the middle of the Pacific and show those simpletons a thing or three about running a submarine. There is nothing we do here that they didn't do 60 years before us. There is a lot we can do that they couldn't because our game gives us too much information. There is a lot they could do that we can't because Ubi chose not to model important aspects of real submarines. And instead of saying "I'm taking a chance but the worst that could happen is I start a new career" your life would be in danger. There's no way to simulate that!


I only read this thread up to this part, because from experience I know, playing MFS, actually helps you in getting your Pilots License.. They can take the hours flown from the simulator and apply it towards real simulator hours..

Simulators are one of the best tools in learning about certain machines. Be it planes, tanks, helicopters..

Flying a radio controlled plane is harder than flying a REAL plane, just because of the scaled down model and the 180 degree difference (when the plane is flying toward you)
And even flying radio controlled planes have a nice simulator for the computer.. To learn first.

They didn't have simulators like they do today, back then.. But almost all modern equipment have some sort of virtual simulator and its a marvel of an invention.

That said, I think a simulator for a plane, tank and even helicopter would allow most of us to do the real thing (Under certain conditions)

But a submarine? I highly doubt that. Unless are minds are happy and we are not understress at all, we might have a chance to actually do something good with tracking down some merchants.. But we are not under stress in this game, we are in a stable room, with no pressure at all.


I think adding the real elements of life would have most of us forget what the hell to do.



I always think of things like the OP said. But if I was in WW2, I don't think I would want to be on a submarine, even though its one of my favorite pieces of history, I think I rather choose a battleship, or destroyer.. Probably wouldn't even be on the waters.. Put me into a nice B-25 and call it a day..

I'd be able to jump in one right now and fly and land her.. :)

[Marka Ragnos]

There was a study recently, where they tested gamers for military purposes.

And they all tested higher then non gamers.
This was tested with first person tactical shooters.

Maybe the same go's for submarines.:|\\

[fastfed]

There was a study recently, where they tested gamers for military purposes.

And they all tested higher then non gamers.
This was tested with first person tactical shooters.

Maybe the same go's for submarines.:|\\


I read that, and if I am not mistaken its why the game "americas army" was invented, by the Army.. And was used to train soldiers.

[Capt. Teach]

I'm not poseing this question to the guys out there who have Naval experience, because you have an unfair advantage. Do you think with the knowlege we have from playing SH4 that we would actually be able to track and successfully attack a ship?:hmmm:


Well,

As I said before, I believe we would know enough from the game to have a general understanding as to what the real crew was doing around us and why it was happening. I don't believe we could actually perform it.

Why? Here is one example .... the game doesn't take into consideration the difference between grid azimuth and magnetic azimuth. You plot your intercept solution on the map ... and then use those exact figures to set up ... in real life ... epic FAIL. You will miss every time because you didn't convert from grid to magnetic azimuth or ... you didn't account for magnetic declination [All military maps have the magnetic declination difference located in the legend of that map, many times it is a difference of up to and sometimes exceeding 14 degrees. If you are trying to put one under the smoke stack an aiming error of 14 degrees would be rather significant! Just imagine all the fun you would have if you made several measurements from real observation and plotting on a grid map and then back again. That would spell F-U-N in a big way! :yeah:]. That is just one example. But do you understand what the real crew is doing? Sure you do. :up: Could you do it yourself and hit? Not without real life experience and further training. :down: