Sub Skipper's Bag of Tricks

[Rockin Robbins]

Confirmed that getting my voice overlaid with the game sound track is going to be difficult with a USB microphone. That is really unfortunate. They should require a warning sticker on all USB microphones: Warning! Your style is about to be seriously crippled by this piece of dog squeeze.:D

Possible solutions include recording the game session and mixing my voice in later. My son says he likes to make videos that way because he can think about exactly what he wants to say and do retakes if necessary. I'm a spontaneity type guy and although I will do that if forced, would rather have an authentic video where everything happens real time.

I'm looking at some other alternatives and all I can find is paid programs, when I'm spoiled by Linux to think that great software should be available for free. After all, I paid extra to get a Microsoft LifeChat 3000, only to find that in order to use it I have to spend that much again for software? Makes me cranky just thinking about it.

So the search continues for free software that will take the USB microphone feed and repeat it into the stereo mix. Google is gonna earn its money today!

[ColonelSandersLite]

Damn, bad timing huh? If only I had seen your post sooner...


Edit:

You might be able to record both audio track seperately, rip the audio from the vid, use vdm sound to integrate the two, and tell virtualdub to use your new integrated sound file as the soundtrack. I can't say I really recommend going this route, but it (or something really similar) might work.

[Rockin Robbins]

Damn, bad timing huh? If only I had seen your post sooner...


Edit:

You might be able to record both audio track seperately, rip the audio from the vid, use vdm sound to integrate the two, and tell virtualdub to use your new integrated sound file as the soundtrack. I can't say I really recommend going this route, but it (or something really similar) might work.

Yup, that's the plan using Audacity for the mixer. I'll just record the game using Fraps or CamStudio while doing my narration recorded with Audacity. Then I'll mix the two soundtracks with Audacity, then add them to the video with VirtualDub.

That's just too much trouble to do something that can be done real time in one step if you use the old fashioned microphone plugged into the mic jack of the sound card. But it will work.

[Rockin Robbins]

I've discovered a new video for everybody on You Tube by HalfjackHJ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1m_vwkG2Ac). He does a sonar only attack that works out quite nicely.

I hate to put any corrections to his technique here, but there are a couple that absolutely have to be covered.


He does all this from a stopped submarine. In a real submarine this wouldn't be possible. His results would have been just as good from a moving submarine. He was too worried about precision when precision is not on the menu with a sonar attack. I'd be moving at a knot or less while pinging and quite quickly when moving for a great firing position.
He uses a calculator for determining speed when it just isn't necessary. The number of hundred yards the target moves in three minutes is his speed in knots. If, as he did, you choose 15 minutes, that is five times three minutes. 2500 yards divided by five is 500 yards in three minutes: 5 knots. See how fast that is? Look Ma! No calculator!
Looks like he forgets to open torpedo tube doors before firing. In his case with the slow target it meant he hit the aft part of the target. With a faster target that buys you a miss.
He pauses the game. Real sub skippers couldn't pause the game and in his case it did not buy him any advantage. Use the three minute rule, keep sub speed at a knot when pinging and calculating and you're all good!

He did this in weather conditions so bad he couldn't cheat if he wanted to. He did it with naked SH4 1.5 so instructions are extremely clear. He is very well-spoken and complete. If you watch his video you WILL succeed at bagging a nice juicy target without ever laying your eyes on his filthy carcass.:arrgh!:


What's not to like! Thanks HalfjackHJ! Great job! I'm editing post #1 to reflect the addition.

[Ruff EL]

ok....im learning this technique just to expand my toolbox and i have one question.
Im running 1.5 w/tmo 2.5 and RSRDC 502 and im unable to move the haired triangle on the TDC to maximize range. Does that matter if you cant change that from the default setting?

[Rockin Robbins]

There's another way to set range there but since I'm not running that combo I can't tell you what it is. The only truly important thing is that the range is non-zero. Just do a fake stadimeter range and some kind of range will go in there. That will be adequate.:salute:

[Lancezh]

Your Manual Targetting Video is down due to overlength, is it this one ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k5yJI6Z5AU

If yes, update the link will ya, thanks for these!!!

[Rockin Robbins]

That's the one! Thanks.

[maxklinger2001]

Does any one know what the approximate range of the hydrophones?

[Rockin Robbins]

Does any one know what the approximate range of the hydrophones?
Hey Max! I'd say 20 to 30 miles. I've never bothered to find out. Ducimus can tell you to the yard but that's really cheating. You see, the range changed with conditions and the real sonar operators had no idea what their hydrophone range was either.

[Rockin Robbins]

Thought I'd repost something I put in a thread that's just going to fall into the abyss and never be seen again. I had a brain defect and suddenly gained clarity of thought long enough to post my best explanation of how the position keeper works in normal US submarine targeting. I could never remember that in my aged state (just when I had it all together I forgot where I put it....) so here goes:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you're missing astern there's something wrong with your procedure. I propose that it's probably that you are entering the information in the wrong order, since the order of operations is almost never talked about and of course is not in the manual, which seems to be a reprint of the manual for a 1955 Sunbeam Toaster, not a game manual.

When you are entering info to the TDC it is very important that the last piece entered is the range/bearing of the target. And the reason is very apparent if you can visualize how the TDC with position keeper works.

The TDC merely establishes a target position, course and speed. It's a dot with attributes. And that data is good for the instant your button is stabbed. If you were to stab the button, wait ten seconds and then fire a torpedo, guess what?

The target has moved past your aiming point and when the torpedo hits, if it hits, it will be behind the point you aimed at when you stabbed the send range/bearing to TDC button. That's pretty clear, no? So you can miss astern with the PK off. It's easy. Just take too long between your observation and when you fire.

Now lets involve the PK. Instead of a fixed target point, the PK actually takes that target point and moves it along the course you tell it to and at the speed you tell the TDC. Then that target point actually follows the real target over time. In theory you can fire at any time you want and the solution remains good, unlike the old non-PK TDC.

So lets do it wrong. We'll use our periscope and stadimeter to get the bearing and range of the target. As soon as we stab the send to TDC button the TDC plots the position of the target, right on top of the real target. So far, so good.

Now you do your mental gymnastics and get ready to enter the AoB of the target, which tells the TDC the target course. You enter the AoB and stab that send to TDC button. What's happened? Not much. The target position is right where you told it to be and it is moving at zero knots in the direction you just told it. That means it's not moving.

Finally you enter the target speed and press that send to TDC button. NOW the artificial target point begins moving at the course and speed of the real target. But since you just told it to begin moving and it's been fifteen or twenty seconds since you told the TDC where the target is, the artificial target is quite a distance behind the real one! You are going to miss astern aren't you?

How do you prevent this? Just be sure you tell the TDC target AoB and speed first, THEN as a last step pop up the scope and take your range/bearing observation. Since you have already told the PK how to move the target point, you'll hit the send range/bearing to TDC button, the TDC will plot that artificial target right on top of the real one and the PK will immediately begin moving it to follow your input course and speed.

Order of operations is critical. You won't read this anywhere else, no matter how hard you search. I can't tell you why because it is critical information. NOW you will not miss astern.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On another note, I've had a software meltdown on my computer. I held onto my old motherboard long after it started to malfunction. It scrambled my Windows XP installation to the point that even with new hardware my computer was crashing three times a day or so. I put up with it for three months and then it began blue-screening on bootup with no access to Windows at all. It was time for a complete reinstall. That means I also have to reinstall all my programs and that is the delay in the Dick O'Kane Sonar Only video update. It will happen.

[derstosstrupp]

Hi all,

Does anyone happen to have Hitman's "100% manual targetting" tutorial they could send my way? Searched all over for a good link to no avail. I checked with Hitman himself and he doesn't have a copy available. I'd appreciate it!

hamacher@uwm.edu

[Berserker]

If you should come accross a small convoy comprised of 2 destroyers and 1 kiturn maru,leave them alone..Especially if you are in a flat sea and zero wind..I do not know what is so important on that transport,but the destroyer captains take great offence if you sink it..Its been 3 hrs now and they seem to have and unlimited supply of depth charges...:nope:

[Redmane]

Just wanted to shout out a big THANK YOU! :woot:to everyone here at Subsim for this thread. The great info here is going to take me quite awhile to digest completely, but I've mastered the O'Kane solution to begin with and have found it to be very adaptable. My first go-round with it bagged me a pair of unescorted freighters running together. I did get a bit lucky shooting the second one, as she turned toward me rather than away after I hit the leader, but all I had to do was back the boat up and wait until she crossed my bow, then let her have it. Also this solution is by no means limited to a 90' setup on the target's course line. I tested this by purposely setting up a stern tube shot at 110' on the course line, meaning the AOB on the target would be 110' when she crossed my 180 bearing mark. I used a 15' shoot line, so AOB for the setup was 95'. Sure enough, I launched 2 fish on the target when her engineering spaces were under my crosshair and totally gutted her. She sank a short while later. Several hours later I used a similar set-up on a target that had changed course, blowing my first approach. I turned the boat around, got to a 108' angle off her course, which was about the best I could do in that situation, again 15' shoot line, and fired 2 torps. The first one went dud, but I got lucky with the second one. It broke the target in half.:rock:

So again, big thanks for this great thread!

[Ale6]

:up:

[Rockin Robbins]

I'm very happy that it continues to have value and new players are finding that targeting isn't black magic, but something that you can do. So thumbs up to all who use this thread to become submarine aces! You're why the thread is here.

[Clean Sweep]

I'm sure these tactics are commonly practiced, but I've found adequate success with them.

When I'm targeting a convoy that has more than two escorts, I'll usually try to swing behind them, running loud and fast to draw the attention of the escorts away from the transports. Once they've begun tracking me and heading towards me pinging away, I'll dive deep and turn back towards the transports. Once I've closed in I'll go silent and get up to periscope depth. By now the escorts are several thousand yards behind still searching for my sub, this gives me a decent amount of time to strike one or two transports before the escorts flank their way back. When the escorts get in range I'll usually try a stern shot then dive down again and go silent. From there I break off the initial attack but maintain sound contact while my tubes are reloaded and I assess the situation and determine whether or not to attack again or to break contact all together.

If there's two or less escorts I'll pull the stunt I saw in "Run Silent, Run Deep" with Clark Gable. I'll go head on against the escort and at 500-600yds, shoot two fish down the escort's throat and then crash dive and pull hard to port or starboard and get outta dodge. I'll repeat the process until both escorts are destroyed and from there I'll make my attack on the transports.

[irish1958]

The link to the Dick O'Kane practice mission works, but the file is corrupted (7z) as it won't open. I lost my copy. Does anybody have one? I was working with my grandson on targetting but I can't get the mission.
(http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/downloads.php?do=file&id=1898)
Never mind, I found it. If anyone else needs it, drop me a PM and I'll send it.

[Rockin Robbins]

It's all there and working fine today! It's a mystery......:hmmm:

[grislyatoms]

Kinda like a jigsaw puzzle, Rockin Robbins helped me find the corner pieces with his tutorials and encouragement. Once I had the basics, pieces kept falling in to place, in the manner of "Ohhh! That's why that happens/works like it does". I still have those moments.

Rockin Robbins - :salute:

[Rockin Robbins]

By the way, Shooting Gallery Test Range (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/downloads.php?do=file&id=4159) has been repaired and I even added a guest star, the Yamato. These are an array of targets which will not power up and motor away. I dare you to surface and engage the Yamato in a gun battle.:D

[Rockin Robbins]

Dick O'Kane Sonar Only Tutorial (http://www.gamefront.com/files/23674168/Dick_OKane_Sonar_Only0019_7z)

Having a great time with You Tube and some music in my videos. Let's see, 1971 was 42 years ago. I used a piece of music from Pink Floyd's Meddle album, which nobody ever heard of even in 1972 and they flagged it for copyright violation.

This is going to hurt their sales, how? There is a clear and present danger that someone would hear the music, be intrigued and read the source of the music clearly expressed in the supporting text, along with a strong suggestion that people buy the album. I'm advertising for them for free! They should owe me, not the other way around. I think the legal system is whoever claims foul first is the winner. There's certainly no sense to their idiocy.

But I have a new link in the first thread in the post, plus the link above. I hope to be working on some new videos soon, including one on conventional United States Navy manual targeting, where I'll have some wrinkles not covered in any present tutorial.

[fireftr18]

Thank you RR:up:

[Rammstein0991]

I always try to hit Convoys abeam, I sit silent just off to the side engines dead which usually lets the lead escort pass me unnoticed then I fire off a couple fish and turn away immediately, usually works.

[kurtz]

Werner's Sonar only attack is a dud link?

[Digger Heinz]

I just wanted to take a moment to say thanks for the thread and all who participate... it means a lot that noob like me can come here and get info that makes the game so much more fun than dumb luck and trial and error.

Thanks!!!

Digger

[jscharpf]

I, too, want to thank all of the modders and people who have contributed to this massive list of items!

Reading the real TDC manual really humbles me. IT really makes you appreciate what people have been able to do. It blows my mind that years ago mankind could generate mathematical solutions using mechanics... and today we barely understand how to download apps..
We are spoiled today :)

[ashill2141]

WernerSobe's Sonar Only Manual Targeting doesn't work. The Link has died. The same situation with Dick O'Kane Sonar Only (after waiting few seconds "403-Forbidden" occurs). May anyone correct it or suggest any materials instead of these? I'm new here and the first thing I want to do is learn how to hunt correctly :). Best regards!

[ReallyDedPoet]

Great thread : )

[bybyx]

Hi,
I would like to try my luck with 100% reality settings in the game options. I know my way around the TDC fairly well but i want to know more about tracking and intercepting a target or a convoy without map updates, how it was done using sound and visual observation and later adding radar in the mix.
Any good tutorials out there?

[Rockin Robbins]

Hi, I'm back. I think a UFO crashed in my back yard and has been messing up my computer for the past year. Between video card death, hard drive death and Windows XP death, it's been pretty eventful. Now I'm up and running with a terrabyte hard drive and Windows 7 so looks like I'm good.

Now to get SH4 back up. I'm afraid I've probably lost my save games but I'm probably not good enough to play advanced stuff right now anyway. New beginnings are fun anyway.

I have the WernerSobe video, so I'll work on getting that back up. I have a headset that doesn't plug into USB so I can make videos again. Yikes! Who would think that the computer would have to treat a USB microphone as a new sound card and refuse to mix other sounds in there? My next idea was a mixer board, which I do have access to.

Looks like I have to read the thread on SH4 and Windows 7! At least I could avoid Windows 8. What a travesty that is! I have no idea what Microsoft could have been thinking.:har:

[Sailor Steve]

Good to see you in business again. :sunny:

[merc4ulfate]

[QUOTE=Rockin Robbins;2111072]Dick O'Kane Sonar Only Tutorial (http://www.gamefront.com/files/23674168/Dick_OKane_Sonar_Only0019_7z)


I suppose it is better to check the flag and know your firing at the enemy yes rather than to fire and not worry about it?

[Rockin Robbins]

[QUOTE=Rockin Robbins;2111072]Dick O'Kane Sonar Only Tutorial (http://www.gamefront.com/files/23674168/Dick_OKane_Sonar_Only0019_7z)


I suppose it is better to check the flag and know your firing at the enemy yes rather than to fire and not worry about it?
Naw!!!!! Forgeddaboudit! What's the WORST that could happen?
http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa293/RockinRobbins13/smileys/what.gif

[merc4ulfate]

I have fished a few friendlies a time or two ... A carrier and an large tanker for twosies. I stopped just short of sinking them when I saw the flag but they certainly were not happy with me.

[svt94]

Very informative thread. I have read the whole thing.
One question. What is the deal with Windows 8? been running it for a year without a problem.

[Tony845]

In command.cgf I have changed the 'fire torpedo' key from 'enter' to 'space' (found my note on how to do that) now I want to use the 'enter' key to cancel time compression and return to normal time. How do I do that?

[I'm goin' down]

We all thought RR was on the bridge directing operations when he went down. But Alas! It was another skipper and ol' RR is back in the saddle. Send over my reenlistment papers and let's get the Barbarinna out of mothballs.

Salute to RR! Nice to see you captain!

Geez, I am almost a 3,000 posts!

[granite00]

Does anyone have links that work for the WernerSobe courses?

[Rockin Robbins]

Does anyone have links that work for the WernerSobe courses?

WernerSobe's Sonar Only Targeting Tutorial (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_b1EZl4agxo)

That's the only one I've ever had. It's a good one and lead to all sorts of modifications.

Edit: Correction! I'll find the other two and upload them to You Tube where they will live for awhile.

[Rockin Robbins]

All WernerSobe links (in my opinion the best ever made) have been redirected to valid locations on page 1. Long live WernerSobe wherever he may be!

[granite00]

WernerSobe's Sonar Only Targeting Tutorial (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_b1EZl4agxo)

That's the only one I've ever had. It's a good one and lead to all sorts of modifications.

Edit: Correction! I'll find the other two and upload them to You Tube where they will live for awhile.

The Sonar Only link is labeled "private". Is there another way to access it? Thanks for fixing the other two WernerSobe links.

[DrBeast]

Long live WernerSobe wherever he may be!

I'll second that! I still lament the fact that his improved sinking mod (can't remember its name, sorry...it's been years and I'm not getting any younger) never got a rehaul for 1.5 :wah:

[DrBeast]

DrBeast!:salute:

Cheers! It's good to be back :arrgh!:

[granite00]

The Sonar Only link is labeled "private" in YouTube. Is there another way to access it?

[Rockin Robbins]

I have to redo that video as I used the little known Pink Floyd track "Echoes" and there was a copyright infringement claim against it. Isn't it amazing! I give Pink Floyd full credit. I tell people which album the song came from and urge people to go buy it, as they'll never have another opportunity to hear it but on my video. I'm sending people to buy the thing and they squash the video for infringement. Fine. Screw 'em. They benefit, not me.

But it means I have to redo the video. It's basically a Dick O'Kane attack without ever seeing the target. Simple, accurate, deadly and you can do it first try. If I make a good enough video. Just got the sound problem fixed with USB headphones/microphone and Windows 7. I'll be making a new video with podcast safe music soon.

[Rockin Robbins]

I'll second that! I still lament the fact that his improved sinking mod (can't remember its name, sorry...it's been years and I'm not getting any younger) never got a rehaul for 1.5 :wah:
That's something I may be qualified to look at. I have a copy and have actually used it.

Rumor is it's broken but Pssssst! here's the truth. With 1.5 new ship types were introduced. Those ships that were in 1.4 sink like WernerSobe intended: awesomely. The ships that aren't covered by the mod sink like the stock game. So you can use the mod and most ships will benefit. No babies will die, no kitties remain unfed and sleeping dogs won't be woken up.

[Rockin Robbins]

I began working on a remake of the Dick O'Kane Sonar Only video tutorial today. Pink Floyd must be eliminated!:stare:

[Rockin Robbins]

The new Dick O'Kane Sonar Only Technique video is up! I left the old one up with an annotation and link to the new one as there are a lot of posts under it and I want to spank Pink Floyd's handlers for putting in a copyright dispute on an item which benefited them much more than it did me. As a matter of fact, my video without Pink Floyd is just as good. Without me, they have a significant fraction of worldwide exposure for their product gone.

So the original video has an explanation of why the audio was muted and why it's been replaced, along with a link to the new video.

The new video is also a reply to those who posted in my optical Dick O'Kane video that it wasn't realistic enough. It wasn't supposed to be realistic, it was supposed to teach manual targeting to newbies. Sheesh!

Check it out! It's not perfect by any means but it's probably good enough.

[Crannogman]

That's something I may be qualified to look at. I have a copy and have actually used it.

Rumor is it's broken but Pssssst! here's the truth. With 1.5 new ship types were introduced. Those ships that were in 1.4 sink like WernerSobe intended: awesomely. The ships that aren't covered by the mod sink like the stock game. So you can use the mod and most ships will benefit. No babies will die, no kitties remain unfed and sleeping dogs won't be woken up.

I used the Natural Sinking mod for a while in 1.5; I'll post screenies later, but I had some bizzarro effects. For instance, the Kuma CLs at the Battle of Savo Island. One I hit with torpedoes and it went vertical in the water (the bow over 100 feet in the air) but refused to die or go down. The other Kuma actually sailed between USS Chicago and HMAS Canberra, trading gunfire at point-blank range; when I turned off Natural Sinking, all 4 promptly went down. So if you can make it work that'd be awesome

[Rockin Robbins]

I'm interested in how many people would like to see an in-depth video showing how to do conventional manual targeting in the stock game.

It seems to me that is a large barrier that just doesn't get overcome by many as they go from being pretty dead-eye shots in automatic targeting to a total dufus in manual targeting. They stop having fun and either just quit playing or go back to automatic targeting.

I'm really shocked that I can't find a decent and complete video on this. So anybody want an in-depth, all-encompassing, real time video showing all the steps necessary to sink a ship with conventional manual targeting?

[Rockin Robbins]

Getting ready to shoot the video in a couple days. I'm going to use GFO/RSRDC with TMOPlot so there's no ship silhouettes, velocity vectors or giveaway text information. Have to get acquainted with the controls again and I'll be ready to go.

[captcrane]

I can't wait to see it! Are you going to post a link to it?

[Rockin Robbins]

I can't wait to see it! Are you going to post a link to it?
Is the Pope Catholic?:har:

I have to reacquaint myself with the stock game so I don't fire torpedoes when I'm trying to open the torpedo tube doors. A bit of practice and I'll be good enough to make this work.

[captcrane]

Not to be a pain in the arse. If it is at all possible will your video include using the Stadimeter . I used quite a few videos to "learn" manual targeting. The 90 degree angle more or less works for me. Probably 95% of the time. Trying to use the stadimeter % goes way down to like 5% of the time. Either way definitely looking forward to your video. Thanks in advance.

[Rockin Robbins]

Not to be a pain in the arse. If it is at all possible will your video include using the Stadimeter . I used quite a few videos to "learn" manual targeting. The 90 degree angle more or less works for me. Probably 95% of the time. Trying to use the stadimeter % goes way down to like 5% of the time. Either way definitely looking forward to your video. Thanks in advance.
Actually, that is my exact goal. This entire video will be centered around using the accursed stadimeter. The game doesn't have a proper stadimeter plot, which the real boats used to average out errors in stadimeter readings. We are left crippled as a result and it severely impacts quality of gameplay.

However the stadimeter can be used and I'm rehearsing its use now for several days, as I also tend not to use it. I don't identify ships because my normal targeting procedures don't require it. Conventional targeting with stadimeter is absolutely dependent on identification of your target. My TMOKeys mod includes a control-I command for "Exec, hows about identifying that target for me?" That way if I miss I can blame it on him.:D

[Rockin Robbins]

All right! I was going to do the video in the safe, balmy waters near Catalina Island off the Coast of California, but in the course of getting some experience in a real campaign I've got a great setup on a lone merchie actually in the war zone with evil planes buzzing around and in the final phase of an end-around. It's just a perfect setup in the Marshall Island chain so I'm going to go for it.

I plan on doing a video using GFO/RSRDC and stock plotting with friend or foe colors, with ship silhouettes, with velocity vectors, and you'll see how to set up the attack that way. We'll see the futility of using the accursed stadimeter at 4000 yards and a big surprise, how to use sonar and make that setup pretty deadly at 4000 yards.

Unfortunately you can't depend on your torpedoes not crapping out at that range and our merchie is zig-zagging because I was stupid enough to get spotted earlier in the run where I was making 20 knots to get ahead and stayed on the surface just 10 seconds too long. I got spotted by a plane. No booms but he's a blabbermouth on the radio. Merchie's been zig zagging ever since. No long shots.

But we'll practice with the stadimeter and compare that to sonar fixes, watch our speed setting to see if we've got that accurate and generally not forget to look for planes. I predict we get buzzed by at least three whilst we are very busy concentrating on our target. Don't get tunnel vision! It can get you a severe headache. A short, severe headache....

After we dispatch this guy we'll start all over using my TMOPlot mod, which gives you the plotting scheme of TMO while not changing gameplay one bit. Now friend or foe colors are gone. Ship silhouettes, identification, velocity vectors are gone. All you get, even on radar is a position dot. It's completely up to you to figure out what direction that dot is moving and how fast. It's much more realistic. And we'll go through the entire attack that way, including planes trying to crash the party.

So we'll have two companion videos of the same attack with lots of trial and terror with the stadimeter, pointing out what you can and can't do, a few little tricks that make it more accurate---and remember---we won't be using CapnScurvy's mod to fix all the boo-boos in the game mechanism. I think that although the game boo-boos are different, they have the same effect as the real life boo-boos including misidentification, that the heroes encountered in WWII. Are they the same errors? No. But they ARE errors and that helps the realism a bit. It means you can do everything right and miss.

Should be fun. Just like all my videos, they're real time, no compression, no cuts no matter how long it takes. You will see the pacing and that's more important than a lot of other things even if I do risk boring some people. But if you enjoy the game you should enjoy the videos. Tomorrow we shoot.

Edit: video didn't come out well, I'm still working on it and you'll have to bear with me while I get these sound feeds set up.

[Havan_IronOak]

I would like to have my torpedoes start at a default depth of 5 rather than the 2 meters that they seem to currently default to on an American Sub in SH4. Is there a way to change that in game? If not can someone point me to the file that controls that?

[Rockin Robbins]

New video available, Airplane Avoidance with Radar Tutorial (https://youtu.be/Hidf8p64_CE) video. This shows how to deal with swarms of airplanes without shooting back, without danger and while never leaving the nav map.

I used the Game Fixes Only Supermod, Webster's custom command bar, RSRD, TMOKeys and a bunch of skins and missions that had no effect on the video. Let me know what you think!

[Rockin Robbins]

Just curious why you want torpedoes defaulting to 5 meters instead of two. American torpedoes were such great copies of German ones that they also copied the defects. One outstanding defect was the fact that the torpedoes tended to run much deeper than set and passed under their targets. The solution was to set them to run on the surface and then you got hits.

So I set mine to run on the surface, actually higher than default. Even so they'll sneak under a lot of DDs but I know that whatever else I aim at will go boom!

[Rockin Robbins]

Okay guys, what's the greatest danger while you're setting up a shot? What can happen that will take away that shot, especially in the daytime?

Number one that comes to mind is getting your scope spotted. I just set up an attack like this: spotted a bogey on radar. Plotted the position, set a stopwatch for 3 minutes, marked that position. Gave me a speed of 10 knots and a course of 155º. So I extended the course past my sub. Waited about 10 minutes and observed his position a bit south of my projected track, so I adjusted the track. Ten minutes later he was still on the track, so I considered that I had his course and speed cold.

Then I maneuvered my sub to be 1000 yards off the track at right angles, a Dick O'Kane attack, with TDC set speed:10 knots, AoB 80º starboard. shoot bearing 350 and range at 1300 yards (not critical). What did I do next?

I set speed to half a knot and submerged to 90'. According to stock rules your tubes won't open at 100' of deeper, a gross innacuracy and I believe TMO is 150' still too shallow as fish were fired from as deep as 200' during the war and that was the target depth for shooting a Cutie. But 90' will get the job done. The important thing is that you don't get the message "too deep to fire torpedoes" when you go to open the tubes!

Now you just watch the sonar bearing. Set torpedoes to run fast, on the surface and magnetic exploder just for fun. Now we wait. No scope up. We're on the nav map screen or attack map screen. I prefer the attack map screen so I can see the torpedo controls. I like to shoot with the mouse and use the w key to switch tubes and shoot 2. I use TMOKeys so your keys may be different.

Watch the bearing and when it's at 348, shoot one. And when 352 shoot one. Kablooey! And he never had the chance to see you. You were 90' deep and nowhere to be seen.

[DrBeast]

RR, do we have an ETA on that manual targeting video?

[Rockin Robbins]

My career got corrupted, I had to dial back to my last departure from base and I'm just waiting to encounter a merchie and do the video. Sorry for the delay. RSRD sure can make 'em scarce when you really need to find one!

I also produced the Airplane Avoidance with Radar (https://youtu.be/Hidf8p64_CE) video and Ironclads II Installation (https://youtu.be/_sHXMXxM7PA) video and those kind of got in the way for a bit. Ironclads II vid has twice as many views as my SH4 video. Go figure! Stadimeter Targeting Video is next though no matter what.

[Rockin Robbins]

Spreads. Yeah, we know the principle: distribute torpedoes over the length of the target so no two torpedoes hit in the same place. But if you're stadimeter targeting you can shoot four torpedoes and if your solution is correct all five will hit the exact same spot! That's not so good, especially if you're using a realistic sinking mod.

So some of us tweak the spread dial. But we do it seat of the pants. Sure we hit targets, and miss them. On an upcoming video I'll be extending the still unmade Stadimeter Targeting Video to cover how we, who lack the spread tools the real guys used, might go about calculating a spread in our heads (no calculators, no trig, no outside computer activity--you know (or don't know) how I feel about those things) so that we know our torpedoes will hit.

The real submariners calculated spread with tool built into the TDC (which, of course we don't have). What they call a 100% spread would hit the tip of the bow, points in between, and the tip of the stern. In other words the pattern would cover the length of the target.

If they weren't quite happy with their solution they would cover their bets with a deal with the devil: a spread of more than 100%. In other words, the distance between first and last shot was longer than the target. Yes, that guaranteed at least one miss, but it also would hit if the target were a little further away or moving slower or faster than their settings.

How are we going to do all that? Stay tuned! Then I bet ColonelSandersLite comes out with the precise, mathematically refined, version. Mine will be based on that but in my cheap, dirty, rule of thumb, figure on the fly style.

This is a different kind of spread than the Dick O'Kane or other constant bearing shooting techniques. They use what is called a longitudinal spread, where all torpedoes follow the exact same course to the target. It is the timing of the individual shots that determine where on the target they hit. With your shoot bearing selected properly in a constant bearing attack, your torpedoes will hit exactly where your crosshair aims when you push the fire button.

The stadimeter spread system is more complicated but, as you'll see, has some interesting wrinkles too.

[Tshark]

Really looking forward to your new videos. I have watched and printed out your tutorials on manual targeting and it is one of my go to references as I learn. Thank you so much for all your efforts!

[Rockin Robbins]

Really looking forward to your new videos. I have watched and printed out your tutorials on manual targeting and it is one of my go to references as I learn. Thank you so much for all your efforts!
Thank you Tshark! Guys like you are what keep me going on this stuff eight years after this game hit the market. The special emphasis of my techniques has been to educate the beginner who is just making the step from auto targeting to manual targeting because that is the critical point in any player's history. If he survives the change he'll play for a long time. If not he'll get bored quickly and leave for Borderlands 2 or other FPS game. I'm trying to prevent tragedy here!:rock:

So far I have three videos on deck. First, because it was promised first, will be a Stadimeter Targeting Video showing what most are calling "conventional" targeting, because it is the type described (poorly) in the SH4 manual. There are some important wrinkles in actual practice that are worth covering and bringing together in one place. This video will be accompanied by a written tutorial and flash card just like all my constant bearing attack methods.

Then I'm going to extend the Stadimeter Targeting Video with a separate video and tutorial on Divergent Spreads. This will show how to actually use the spread dial in a scientific way, helped by a nifty keen chart and some in your head mental gymnastics so you can twiddle that spread knob with panache and aplomb, not to mention confidence.

Finally, a video to accompany the above tutorial on the Dick O'Kane Blindfolded technique (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=2340995&postcount=311), where you complete your setup, position the sub and dive to 90', from which you unleash the fires of hell, shooting blindfolded! This will be extended slightly from the existing tutorial by the application of the principles in the Divergent Spread tutorial and video.

Stay tuned! I hope this will be a very interesting place. But you're the judge. If you sink ships you wouldn't have sunk before then I've accomplished something. My achievement is measured by your results. It's as simple as that.:up:

[ColonelSandersLite]

So some of us tweak the spread dial. But we do it seat of the pants. Sure we hit targets, and miss them. ...Then I bet ColonelSandersLite comes out with the precise, mathematically refined, version. Mine will be based on that but in my cheap, dirty, rule of thumb, figure on the fly style....

I just measure the length of the target in degrees with the periscope when I really care. Is that cheating?

A rundown of a graphical solution would be to draw the torpedo track. At target range centered on the end of the track, draw a circle representing target ship length with a radius of 100y for medium, 150y for large, or 200y for very large ships. Draw a line representing target ship course through the center of the circle. Measure the angle from the center of the circle to one of the edges (radius, not diameter!) where the course line intersects the ship length circle. Divide by the angle by 2 for maximum left/right spread in degrees. It would be a little crude with the game's tool accuracy though.

Actually, a picture is worth 1,000 words so here:
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y91/ColonelSandersLite/spread_zpsbshq9oo4.jpg~original

Divide the result by 2 and be very careful about the way the game rounds.

[DrBeast]

...So far I have three videos on deck...

Really looking forward to those videos! I'm an SH4 old-timer myself, but with all the extended breaks I take from the game, it feels like the first time every time I come back (having the memory span of a goldfish doesn't help, either), so these videos really help getting me back in the saddle again (auto-targeting is SO boring!). Plus your commentary is just as hilarious and entertaining as your posts :D

[Rockin Robbins]

I just measure the length of the target in degrees with the periscope when I really care. Is that cheating?

A rundown of a graphical solution would be to draw the torpedo track. At target range centered on the end of the track, draw a circle representing target ship length with a radius of 100y for medium, 150y for large, or 200y for very large ships. Draw a line representing target ship course through the center of the circle. Measure the angle from the center of the circle to one of the edges (radius, not diameter!) where the course line intersects the ship length circle. Divide by the angle by 2 for maximum left/right spread in degrees. It would be a little crude with the game's tool accuracy though.


Divide the result by 2 and be very careful about the way the game rounds.
The telemeter marks are supposed to be a quarter degree at high magnification, one degree at low magnification. But talk to Captain Scurvy about that one!

You're thinking like I'm thinking. I believe in two things working when the pressure is on: graphical solutions and tables. I'll show both and explain the concept of percentage spread. Actually, you're only drawing the torpedo track if we are straight shooting a zero gyro shot. Taking actual terms from the Submarine Torpedo Fire Control Manual, 1946, (which we really should and you are especially good at that) when we are curved shooting (gyro angle over 20º) that's the pseudo torpedo track.

The real torpedo track extends straight out from the sub to a point called the reach, then curves toward the target. Does in make any difference in twiddling the spread dial? Naw! Forgeddaboudit. (it might make a difference with extreme gyro angles) But it is good conversation around the swill pot on the night watch.

[Tshark]

Using the three minute tracking method to obtain target speed I seem to consistently over estimate speed by 2 knots. This has occurred in quick missions against warships and career against merchants. Any suggestions on what I am doing wrong?

Thanks

[Rockin Robbins]

Using the three minute tracking method to obtain target speed I seem to consistently over estimate speed by 2 knots. This has occurred in quick missions against warships and career against merchants. Any suggestions on what I am doing wrong?

Thanks
Okay, tshark, we'll do the checklist and see if you left anything off.


Are you using Imperial measurements? The 3 minute rule works for yards, not meters. However if you were measuring the distance in meters you would get a smaller number and underestimate the speed, so that isn't happening here.
Are you using radar to plot your positions. It is by far most accurate. Sonar is a good second bet. If you are using the stadimeter outside of 2500 yards all bets are off and your speed has to be considered a beta version--maybe an alpha version of speed. With stadimeter get that last estimate of speed as close to the target as you can.
Using the pencil on the nav map to X the two positions, then using the compass to measure the distance? The number of hundred yards the target ran in the three minutes is the speed in knots. 900 yards would mean 9 knots.

Then there is the all-present monkey wrench. How do you know your speed measurement is 2 knots too fast? The answer to that question could lead us to other parts of your targeting procedure.

[ColonelSandersLite]

The telemeter marks are supposed to be a quarter degree at high magnification, one degree at low magnification. But talk to Captain Scurvy about that one!
Not how I measure actually, since I know those are wrong. What I do is point the periscope at the bow, then point periscope at stern and note the bearing change.


that's the pseudo torpedo track.

The real torpedo track extends straight out from the sub to a point called the reach....
Yep, but for 95% of all purposes the pseudo track is good enough to get the information we need. If it's not, you really probably need a banjo.

[ColonelSandersLite]

The 3 minute rule works for yards, not meters.
To clarify, meters requires 3m 15s

[Tshark]

Doing a little bit of cheating here in that contacts are updated on the chart. As soon as I raise a periscope or am on the surface the visual contacts appear on my chart and I can zoom down to ship outline and watch the movement. I confirmed I was using yards. How do I know I am in error by 2 knots? Well, I replayed the "Midway" quick mission about 10 to 15 times. Each time the Kongo BB plotted out to 16kts. The first half dozen attempts had my fish passing ahead of the ship (if they didn't prematurely explode). I dialed the speed down to 14kts and my torpedo tracks are looking good. I then went out on my first career patrol and got to track a lone merchant. The merchant plotted out to 6kts. Away go the fish and again they passed ahead of target. Lucky for me the merchant was as new to this as I am and continued on course oblivious. I set up another attack and this time dialed the speed down to 4kts. BOOM plus three dud torpedoes! As it stands now I just subtract 2kts from the three minute calculation and it seems to work. Just wondering what I am doing that is throwing the calc off?

[Rockin Robbins]

To clarify, meters requires 3m 15s
39"/36"x3 min = 3.25 min = 3 min 15 sec

Tshark, if you're using 3 minutes by the stopwatch, marking the center of the silhouette with the pencil, measuring the distance with the compass you can't be 2 knots off. Have you been installing and uninstalling lots of mods? And never apologize for setting the difficulty back to learn basic principles of the game. That's why the option exists. And don't make the mistake of confusing difficulty with realism either!

[ColonelSandersLite]

Can you record one of your torpedo attacks? That would probably be the best way for us to to figure out what you're doing wrong.

Edit: Just after posting that, I had a thought. Are you 100% sure you're not accidentally plotting at 4 minute intervals? That would just about match the results your getting.

Past that, yeah, we would probably actually have to see what you're doing to diagnose.

[TorpX]

How do I know I am in error by 2 knots? Well, I replayed the "Midway" quick mission about 10 to 15 times. Each time the Kongo BB plotted out to 16kts. The first half dozen attempts had my fish passing ahead of the ship (if they didn't prematurely explode). I dialed the speed down to 14kts and my torpedo tracks are looking good. I then went out on my first career patrol and got to track a lone merchant. The merchant plotted out to 6kts. Away go the fish and again they passed ahead of target.

With the stock game, or stock game physics, ships often will spot a torpedo, throw the rudder hard over, and slow down dramatically. Torps mostly miss ahead. It sounds like your speed estimates are ok to me.

[Tshark]

I got a chance to make a couple more attacks tonight included using the "Dick O'Kane" method (hard to go back to the stadimeter now) and the speed calc seemed right on. Not quite sure what the problem was earlier as I am doing everything the same. I know this is a long shot, but I wonder if my earlier audio problems were somehow contributing to this issue. All the previous attacks were done while I was still wrestling with having only half the sounds playing correctly. I didn't notice any lag on the chart movement, but now I just don't know. Thanks for taking your time to help me. :salute:

[Rockin Robbins]

Good thing tshark! If you want to see targets juke out of the way, try using the John P Cromwell technique from 45º ahead of the target during the day and with Mark 14s. You'll waste some torpedoes but it's fun to watch.

They'll always turn into the torpedo. Since you know which way they will dodge, it's easy to send a second torpedo up a path to block that maneuver. Then it's only a matter or which torpedo they get to eat.

Of course the disadvantage is that you automatically waste half your torpedoes. If you're going to shoot John P Cromwell attacks in the daytime better to use Mark 18s.

[Rockin Robbins]

Crap! It's always SOMETHING. I'm running GFO/RSRDC, which uses the conventional plotting system. Trying to make a conventional targeting video, but Murphy's Law has reared its ugly head. I found a ship to stalk and.......no position marker, no silhouette! That means that somehow either GFO or more likely RSRDC has a problem.

Now it's not that it isn't possible to do the job without the position marker, it just makes it easer on the newbie to be able to use the basic plotting scheme.

I used up half my fuel just finding this one target. And I guess this needs finding the problem and fixing anyway, so there will be a delay for the first video.:/\\!!

[Barkerov]

I just want to say a big thankyou to everyone who has ever posted a tutorial or created a mod on subsim :subsim:
All of that teaching paid off last night when I attacked a convoy and sank a ship with realism at 100% (RFB & RSRDC version of realism anyway minus the external camera).

Truth be told I only started playing this game a couple of weeks ago even though I have wanted to play it for a long time circumstances did not allow me enough time to do so.

For me this game is all about the realism. I want to feel like a real sub commander even down to the level of disliking BuOrd but only after I have experienced the Mk 14s failures first hand. I even planned my attack on said convoy to be a submerged sonar only attack according to 1930s US Navy submarine tactical doctrine. I even reported the convoy and did not submerge until I had got the radio reply because receiving radio messages underwater spoils the realism for me.

In the end I had to improvise a little bit since the convoy had a projected course less than 100 yards from my position. I was worried about being detected if I moved too fast (convoy was 5-6nm out) and even if I surfaced at the right moment the Mk 14s would not arm in time to explode. As I was working out what to do I was already headed down to get under the escorts when suddenly I had a bright idea. The convoy was arranged in a neat little line and becasue of the angle they were on, I couldn't see any gaps between ships so I set the Mk 14s to slow, picked a depth I thought would still hit the ship with the lowest draft and fired a spread 1 degree apart at 8000 yards. 2 hits out of 4 that I never actually witnessed. Needless to say I was very pleased as I headed to test depth. :)

Then came the depth charging. For 3 hours (game time) I tried to get away actually feeling very nervous when explosions were rocking the boat. I changed speeds several times between 1 and 3 kts as we went East making sure my propeller was always less than 75 RPM. Finally I broke contact and headed to periscope depth. I counted 8 destroyers still circling where I left them.

Last night gentlemen, I felt like a real skipper and I have you to thank. Especially you Rockin Robbins :salute:

[DrBeast]

...I found a ship to stalk and.......no position marker, no silhouette! That means that somehow either GFO or more likely RSRDC has a problem.


If memory serves, RSRDC adds a few ships. It's quite possible that the ship you've found lacks the whatever_shp.dds file. Identify the ship, exit the game, then look inside the ship's folder for that file. If it's not there, just grab any merchant's whathaveyou_shp.dds file, rename it and hey! presto, working marker! I vaguely remember doing that for a few ships (running a TMO+RSRDC combo).

[Tshark]

Welcome Barkerov! Looks like you and I have about the same amount of time with SH4 . I too was always tempted to try SH4 and wanted to learn manual targeting, but just didn't have the time.
I wholeheartedly agree that it is the outstanding support of the group here on Subsim that have made the game for me. I haven't watched so many Youtubes before in my life. I also haven't felt this way about a submarine sim since "Silent Service" (sheesh I am old!). :D

[ColonelSandersLite]

I also haven't felt this way about a submarine sim since "Silent Service" (sheesh I am old!). :D

I still have the c64 version of that in a box somewhere :O:. As well as the PC version of silent service 2.

Though I was a kid when I played them.

[ReallyDedPoet]

Welcome to SUBSIM Barkerov :up:

[Aktungbby]

Barkerov!:Kaleun_Salute:

[Rockin Robbins]

Thank you Barkerov, making killers out of wet behind the ears puppies is what we do and seeing one of our puppies get its first kill is what we live for. Unlike a mother dog, we don't have the luxury of injuring a victim and then handing it over for the coupe de gras. You have to earn the first kill the hard way.:arrgh!:

So congratulations. This kill is 100% you and you deserve the whole credit. The ocean is a harsh mistress and she punishes mistakes without mercy.

I never played any sub games until Silent Service II, which didn't hook me like SH4 has. Are there defects? Sure, but they can be ignored in the incredible quality of the virtual submarine experience Silent Hunter 4 renders.

@Dr Beast, that missing dds file is exactly what I'll be fishing for. Too bad it's not TMO that's messing up because all contacts share the same dds: a dot on the chart! Now I'll have to match up an appropriate similar ship and copy its dds file. I'll also release a patch for whichever mod is at fault.

[DrBeast]

Too bad it's not TMO that's messing up because all contacts share the same dds: a dot on the chart!

Don't tell anyone, but I actually replaced that dot with proper contacts in my mod soup :D

I still have the c64 version of that in a box somewhere :O:. As well as the PC version of silent service 2.

Though I was a kid when I played them.

Silent Service for the Atari 130XE on cassette is the game that made me fall in love with MicroProse. And yes, I was just a kid, as well, but it only made the game that much more impressive in my mind.

[Barkerov]

I remember playing silent service II with my dad. Great fun.

My adventure came to an abrupt end :dead:
I was attacked by a plane and got some flooding 2 days prior to the end though. I had thought everything was repaired but after going underwater during the day on high time compression I found out that the repair job was insufficient.

This is probably the wrong place to ask but is that a feature or a bug? Should I have returned to base even after repairing at sea or was the high time compression what did me in? I hope it's a feature, it makes sense that after damage where flooding is involved might not be as strong as before. But the time compression gave me no chance to react to save the boat.

Also any advice on starting a new career would be great. Would a new commander most likely put in an older boat for his first command or a newer boat?

[TorpX]

I believe that is intended.

Interior spaces and equipment can be repaired (at least to a fair extent), but severe damage, and especially hull damage, cannot be repaired at sea.

Were you using very high TC?

Sometimes people are suddenly attacked/bombed/hit mines at high TC, and don't really know what happened.

[ColonelSandersLite]

Not a bug.

[Barkerov]

I was underwater running at 3 knots, 200 feet deep, no sound contacts in the area which was the between formosa and luzon.

The mods i am using are RFB with the RSRD campaign. It is 1941 (please dont ask me which month) and I was iin a Salmon class boat. I think the TC was 512 at the time. Two days earlier I took a bomb hit to the stern while underwater. It must have been right on
the money since I was 40ft deep when damage was reported. The aft torp room and engine room sustained flooding and i think bulkhead damage. Also on a convoy attack later that day I took some damage to the forward torp room but was able to fix that in a few minutes. After that I was underwater for 2 hours at 240 feet with no problems.

The actual sinking happened two days later

So what is the verdict? Should I have RTB or what?

[TorpX]

So what is the verdict? Should I have RTB or what?

Yes.

About the aircraft: The aircraft in RFB can see you at considerable depth and you can take damage from bombs/DCs even at 200 ft.; 40 ft. isn't safe by a long shot.

Did your crew eliminate all the damage on the board, or only part?

If you have flooding, it is a sure indication you've had significant damage. A submarine is not a heavy cruiser. In RL, most subs that have a significant damage event would likely terminate their patrol. The game is more generous, but the RFB design philosophy was to make things realistic.

[Barkerov]

Yeah I repaired all damage. Im glad its a feature, I will be sure to rtb if that happens again.

I have to say though that 200ft to see a sub from the air seems excessive but I would much more easily believe that than bomb damage at that depth from a surface detonation. 40ft sure but 200ft I would need proof to believe that.

[Rockin Robbins]

Yeah I repaired all damage. Im glad its a feature, I will be sure to rtb if that happens again.

I have to say though that 200ft to see a sub from the air seems excessive but I would much more easily believe that than bomb damage at that depth from a surface detonation. 40ft sure but 200ft I would need proof to believe that.
I've seen photos. Sometimes a sub at 200' is very visible from straight above. Sometimes it isn't.

What you're experiencing is the fruit of the old Submarine Sim Central forum where SH4 modders used to conspire, cooperate and squabble among themselves. These particular products of vile conspiracy are "Duci's Evil Airplanes."

Basically Ducimus woke up in the middle of the night screaming from a nightmare, wrote it down, and when he woke up he built it. These airplanes can see you under water, usually only to a depth of just below periscope depth. If you're at 90' you are virtually safe--we haven't lost any subs cruising at 90' for the past week or so.:D:D

My stragegy in TMO (same planes if you're not using RSRDC and the same goes for RFB. If you use RSRDC you are no longer playing TMO or RFB, you are playing RSRDC) was to use 90' as default depth for moving from position to position if airplanes are above, radar depth otherwise unless within 3000 yards of a target. Tracking planes while attacking becomes as important as tracking your target.

I was crash test dummy for the "Duci's Evil Planes" feature.......ummmm bug......er player torture scheme. I loved it so much he kept it and the RFB team asked if they could incorporate it.

If you're running RSRDC, which nerfed the evil airplanes and want them back, I have a plugin module, RSRD Restore Duci's Evil Airplanes (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/downloads.php?do=file&id=4168), which will torture you and then you can hate me and Duci all over again. It will also add the evil airplanes to stock game, GFO or FOTRS without changing other aspects of the game.

Webster, I read, thought deeply and adopted some of your principles from before you produced GFO! And I believe that although there is a place for supermods, there is also a place for COMPATIBLE modules that plug into all game configurations, changing ONLY the aspect that people want, without redefining all other aspects of the game that people might not want to change. Swappable modules makes it possible to configure the game the way YOU want, not the supermodder. I believe RSRDC is one of the great tragedies of SH4 because most of what it does, it does in secret, without your consent and without the supermodders of GFO, TMO and RFB's consent.

TMO plus RSRDC is NOT TMO. Stock plus RSRDC is NOT stock. GFO plus RSRDC is NOT GFO. RFB plus RSRDC is NOT RFB. That's just wrong.

I keep getting ideas for mods. How about "Nerf Duci's Evil Airplanes" for those who don't want to bother with them?

@DrBeast: VERY interestingly the dds files were not missing. Evidently, lurker produced the stock/GFO version after he produced the RFB version. The RFB version of nav map tracking was to replace all the shp.dds files with blank graphics, making the target visible until you zoomed in far enough that the square/velocity vector was replace by the ship silhouette, whereupon the target vanished entirely from the plot. (Thus the R for "real" in Real Fleet Boat. Didn't real plotters remove targets from the plot when they walked closer to the chart table?) These blank shp.dds files were left in the stock/GFO version of RSRDC for the Momi Patrol Boat and destroyer escort Matsu (at least--I'm still checking for more bugs). I have a mod in the download area, Momi Class Patrol Boat/NDE Matsu fix for RSRDC_SH1 (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/downloads.php?do=file&id=4763) , which restores plotting to those two targets. I think I've talked myself into major RSRDC surgery and release of two mods representing the separate Dr Jekyl and Mr Hyde parts of the mod. That way there wouldn't have to be separate mods for different supermod configurations on just the campaign part, I think.

And on a personal note I'm happy to see you still using the Leovampire memorial banner. He deserves it.

[ColonelSandersLite]

I would much more easily believe that than bomb damage at that depth from a surface detonation. 40ft sure but 200ft I would need proof to believe that.

Something a lot of people don't realize about bombs is that they generally don't explode on contact and there is a lot of good reasons for this. A 0.1-1 second delay is pretty typical depending on a lot of factors. Fuze delays must be set on the ground before takeoff

Taking the example of a american an-m64 (which is pretty typical of 500 lb/250kg bombs of the era)
Minimum Safe Release Altitude: 1,500 feet
Striking Velocity from 1,500 feet release: 450-750 feet/second (depends on dive angle and aircraft speed! Will be higher from a higher release altitude!)

Contact with the water would slow it down some, but we'll simplify here.
Depending on the delay setting and release speed, a miss will explode at a depth of 45-75 feet with a delay of 0.1 seconds. Similarly, explosion depth would be 225-375 feet with a 0.5 second delay setting. Just like a depth charge, if it is close and explodes underneath you, it could seriously mess up your boat.


Long story short, I advise you dive deep the second you make contact with an aircraft. Though they have to get pretty dang close to spot you submerged at all.

[Rockin Robbins]

And don't forget, they dropped depth charges too. How can you tell from the conning tower whether what the plane dropped was a depth charge or a bomb? And if it kills you did it make a sound?:woot:

[ColonelSandersLite]

Now, I remember a fighter pilots account where he spotted a submerged submarine and tried shooting at it a few passes. I don't remember his nationality but he wasn't american so we're probably talking some flavor of .30 cal machinegun. Complete waste of ammo there.

[Rockin Robbins]

Some actual shots of submarine at periscope depth:
http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa293/RockinRobbins13/SSN721_at_PD_2.jpg (http://s196.photobucket.com/user/RockinRobbins13/media/SSN721_at_PD_2.jpg.html)

http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa293/RockinRobbins13/seaview_strangemilitary.jpg (http://s196.photobucket.com/user/RockinRobbins13/media/seaview_strangemilitary.jpg.html)

http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa293/RockinRobbins13/571727_med.jpg (http://s196.photobucket.com/user/RockinRobbins13/media/571727_med.jpg.html)

There are times where the sub is much clearer than these photos show. I have seen a photo of a nuclear sub from straight up that was really scary in the extreme visibility of the sub, but that was back in 2007 and I can't find the photo now.

[Barkerov]

Something a lot of people don't realize about bombs is that they generally don't explode on contact and there is a lot of good reasons for this. A 0.1-1 second delay is pretty typical depending on a lot of factors. Fuze delays must be set on the ground before takeoff

Taking the example of a american an-m64 (which is pretty typical of 500 lb/250kg bombs of the era)
Minimum Safe Release Altitude: 2,500 feet
Striking Velocity from 2,500 feet release: 450-750 feet/second (depends on dive angle and aircraft speed! Will be higher from a higher release altitude!)

Contact with the water would slow it down some, but we'll simplify here.
Depending on the delay setting and release speed, a miss will explode at a depth of 45-75 feet with a delay of 0.1 seconds. Similarly, explosion depth would be 225-375 feet with a 0.5 second delay setting. Just like a depth charge, if it is close and explodes underneath you, it could seriously mess up your boat.


Long story short, I advise you dive deep the second you make contact with an aircraft. Though they have to get pretty dang close to spot you submerged at all.

A 2500ft release is going to have serious accuracy issues and i think the slowing it down some is a bit of an understatement. I recall an episode of mythbusters where they tested if water was bulletproof. Indeed this was plausible but I was especially surprised to learn that the faster the projectile hit the water, the less it penetrated. Furthermore the larger the projectile the less it penetrated the surface tension of the water. So what this means for a 500 pounder doing 0.46 to 0.67 mach is unclear. In any case whatever the AI slants are dropping on me is from well under that height.

[ColonelSandersLite]

A 2500ft release is going to have serious accuracy issues
That was supposed to be 1500, sorry edited above. Still, I don't know how close you think bombers actually got to their targets. Fuses typically wouldn't let the bomb even arm if released under a thousand feet to prevent destruction of the aircraft. Dive bombers of all nations typically released between 1000 and 3000 feet depending on payload and the aircrafts specific characteristics (i.e. it's ability to pull out of the dive). 1,000 is really point blank range, 1,500 and even 2,500 are not uncommon release altitudes at all.



I recall an episode of mythbusters where they tested if water was bulletproof. Indeed this was plausible but I was especially surprised to learn that the faster the projectile hit the water, the less it penetrated. Furthermore the larger the projectile the less it penetrated the surface tension of the water. So what this means for a 500 pounder doing 0.46 to 0.67 mach is unclear.

Doesn't mean anything. If you recall, the impact had a tendency to shatter the bullets. If memory serves the correlation between size and effect on the bullet didn't really exist either. Basically every time they went up in size, they where using bigger guns with better muzzle velocities. I'm sure the effect is there to some degree, but their "study" didn't really show it out. General purpose aircraft bombs routinely survived falls of 25,000 feet, smashing through and into concrete and steel, successfully detonating after impact as designed. There where bombing missions with release altitudes of over 30,000 feet as well and again, the bombs functioned fine. At those release altitudes, the bombs where actually going at supersonic speeds on impact. Water is comparatively not that tough. Not even close.


In any case whatever the AI slants are dropping on me is from well under that height.
That's purely because the game designers knew something about submarines, but not aircraft. Alternatively, they decided to do it the way they did in the name of game balance to give you good odds of shooting down aircraft with the AA guns. The way the aircraft operate in the game is completely and totally unrealistic.

[Barkerov]

I think I am not writing enough words and therefore coming across as an idiot who knows nothing about bombing, fuses etc. Let me start by saying that I know a lot more about aircraft than submarines and that flight sims were my first love of war simulation games. I agree totally that the way the game implements aircraft is unrealistic, the reason you supplied of giving the player a chance is probably spot on, since developers have to cater for the realists and the arcade players equally in order to maximise profit.

I don't think for one second they got closer than the fragmentation envelope of the bomb they were employing. I also am under no illusion that the bomb will fail to detonate after impact with the water becasue of damage to the bomb. After all they are designed to hit the ground at supersonic speeds. Furthermore I am not stupid enough to believe that Mythbusters provide anything more than proof of concept experiments. Your point about increasing projectile surface area / weight being confounded by muzzle velocity is correct. However the key concept, that high velocity impact with the water dramatically changes the projectiles behavior, is valid.

My query revolves around how deep is deep enough both IRL and in the game. I have not seen aircraft bombs with delay fuses yet so the first question is how damaging would a surface detonation be to a submarine at various depths. I suspect not much at periscope depth

The second question, which you got me thinking about, was how deep will a bomb penetrate underwater before detonation. Lets for a second assume that skipping of the bomb is a non issue. My feeling (please note how I distinguish between what I think by using emotive terms and what I can prove as fact) is that the bomb will lose almost all of its airborne energy upon impact with the water greatly reducing the speed at which it travels underwater particularly in the direction of depth. To get to 40ft with a 0.1 second fuse it is easy to see that it has to travel downward at 400ft per second, a value which I find very hard to believe. A half second fuse which you suggested would detonate at 225-375 feet deep would require downward motion equal to the impact velocity. This would defy the laws of physics.

I found a book today entitled "Britain's Anit-submarine Capability 1919-1939" which stated that one report concluded that "for entry velocities of more than 250fps the trajectory curvature may be so great that accurate bombing of submarines at depths greater than 50ft would be impossible". I have probably taken this quote too far out of context but there must be a reason why planes carried depth charges instead of bombs.

[Sailor Steve]

Airborne anti-submarine bombs used by the Japanese generally used a 3-second-delay fuse. The effective underwater range was given as 10 meters, which makes it about as powerful as an extra-large depth charge, and no good at much more than periscope depth.

Naval Weapons of World War II, by John Campbell

[TorpX]

The second question, which you got me thinking about, was how deep will a bomb penetrate underwater before detonation.

I have no idea how deep a bomb in the game can go, or how that is determined, but I think as far as our safety is concerned, it is more a problem of how large the blast bubble is, than exactly where the bomb goes off. And of course, how deep can they see us.

I did some tests after having some experiences like yours (with RFB + RSRDC), and found that it was possible for a low flying a/c to see and kill me at 200 ft. Granted, he was flying right over me, and low, but I thought it a bit much, and decided to edit the files to prevent that.

If you want to do this CapnScurvy explains how to do it HERE (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=183764). You would need to change all the airborne sensors for this.

[Barkerov]

Airborne anti-submarine bombs used by the Japanese generally used a 3-second-delay fuse. The effective underwater range was given as 10 meters, which makes it about as powerful as an extra-large depth charge, and no good at much more than periscope depth.

Naval Weapons of World War II, by John Campbell

Thankyou sir :salute:
That answers my second question completely.

[Aktungbby]

To get to 40ft with a 0.1 second fuse it is easy to see that it has to travel downward at 400ft per second, a value which I find very hard to believe. A half second fuse which you suggested would detonate at 225-375 feet deep would require downward motion equal to the impact velocity. This would defy the laws of physics.

:up: The teardrop-shaped United States Mark 9 depth charge entered service in the spring of 1943. The charge was 200 lb (91 kg) of Torpex with a sinking speed of 14.4 ft/s (4.4 m/s) and depth settings of up to 600 ft (180 m). Later versions increased depth to 1,000 ft (300 m) and sinking speed to 22.7 ft/s (6.9 m/s) with increased weight and improved streamlining. Roughly 5 seconds per 100 feet. Note the sink times: http://www.ussslater.org/tour/weapons/dpthchrg/dpthchrg.html (http://www.ussslater.org/tour/weapons/dpthchrg/dpthchrg.html) http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/rep/ASW-51/img/Fig13-10.jpgAnd then watch out for serious hunting from the air in 'follow-on' attacks:dead: http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/rep/ASW-51/ASW-13.html (http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/rep/ASW-51/ASW-13.html) I have probably taken this quote too far out of context but there must be a reason why planes carried depth charges instead of bombs. Footnote to history!::know: The first to deploy depth charges from airplanes in actual combat were the Finns (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finland). Experiencing the same problems as the RAF with insufficient charges on anti-submarine bombs, Captain Birger Ek (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birger_Ek) of Finnish Air Force (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_Air_Force) squadron LeLv 6 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LeLv_6) contacted one of his navy friends and suggested testing the aerial use of standard Finnish Navy depth charges. The tests proved successful, and the Tupolev SB (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_SB) bombers of LeLv 6 were modified in early 1942 to carry depth charges. The success of the anti-submarine missions reached RAF Coastal Command (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Coastal_Command), which promptly began modifying depth charges for aerial use. [wiki] Thank heavens there were so few Squids: note the sink rate: Squid consisted of a pair of three-barrel mortars whose pattern of six depth charges was normally fired dead ahead, but could be trained 30 degrees to the sides if warranted. Each charge weighed 390 lbs (177 kg) of which 207 lbs (94 kg) was minol. These had a sinking rate of 43.5 feet per second (13.3 m/s) and the fuses operated by clockwork. The pattern was overlapping triangles 40 yards (37m) on a side with the depth of the triangles set 60' (18m) apart. Squid was equipped with a fire control system (http://pwencycl.kgbudge.com/F/i/Fire_Control.htm) that was tied directly into Type 147 sonar (http://pwencycl.kgbudge.com/T/y/Type_144_sonar.htm) (no 'blind spot') and automatically set the detonation depth and fired the charges from the mortars at the right moment. It was estimated that Squid was nine times as effective as a conventional depth charge attack, or over twice as effective as Hedgehog, with about a 40.3% probability.

[TorpX]

Very interesting about the Squids there, Aktungbby.

:hmmm:

[Aktungbby]

Very interesting about the Squids there, Aktungbby.

:hmmm:

JA! VERRR....:dead:

[Rockin Robbins]

Awesome information, Aktungbby (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/member.php?u=313053). Over 40% accurate and the 1 knot silent running speed of the U-boats meant the Atlantic was safe. Except for the U-boats!:haha:

Well, the stuff on the surface was safe, anyway. The only thing a sub could do about that attack was run out from under it and I don't even think a fleet boat could have done that. A Guppy II might have, but wow! Talk about a game changer...

[Aktungbby]

I just can't believe the math in the OEG link http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/rep/ASW-51/ASW-13.html (http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/rep/ASW-51/ASW-13.html) of hunting techniques percentages from the air. Now I gotta worry about a 'reconnect' on my 'gambit course'. Reading Black May and seeing the Movie: A Beautiful Mind are required for:subsim:ers. Really, once the science jocks discovered transit time across the Biscay Bay and U-Boat battery-endurance limits, the jig was up. the Triton version enigma of the Kreigsmarine and Dönitz's adding fourth rotor-wheel didn't give the Allies all that much edge in real time. I'm taking some aspirin and getting out my old trig tables: http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/rep/ASW-51/img/Fig13-1_sm.jpg (http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/rep/ASW-51/img/Fig13-1.jpg)

The "entrapment triangle" is drawn tangent to the sonar detection circle with limiting escape lines drawn at angle = sin-1 sub speed/ship speed. In this way it is analogous to the submerged approach zone except that the submarine is trying to get out rather than in. As can be seen from Figure 1 searching in line abreast makes such evasion impossible except from positions near the ends of the line. Some theoretical considerations concerning search in line abreast arc given in Chapter 6, Volume 2B.
There are also many practical reasons for searching in line abreast. The ships are close enough for convenient communications and know the positions of their fellow ships at all times. Similarly the ships' are readily recognizable by aircraft or other forces in the area, even at night. In addition ships are in a position to coordinate during attack once a contact is made.
MEIN GOTT!!:wah: I thought Einstein was working on the bomb! They're hunting me with math; never mind what they'll actually kill me with!:arrgh!:

[Barkerov]

A lot of fantastic maths and statistics were invented and put to good use in WW2. I remember hearing once that the allies had a way of estimating how many tanks Germany possessed that was based only on the largest serial number of the tank they just destroyed. This relied on the fact that Germany had no idea this could be done so they kept stamping new tanks with the next number in the serial sequence.

I am not sure how true this is or how accurate it was but it wouldn't surprise me that this could be done.

As for the squid, 40% is terrifyingly effective. Particularly if you inhabit a steel tube under tremendous pressure.

[Tshark]

Hey Rockin Robbins,

I am finishing up my career with the stock/GFO SH4 and am eager to ratchet-up the realism/difficulty. I thought your post in 2008 comparing TMO and RFB to be very informative. I know several reiterations of both mods have occurred since then. You mentioned you would revisit RFB. Would you say your initial evaluation to still be accurate?

I hope I am not stirring up the pot. If I am feel free to slap me in the face with a cod! :doh:

[Rockin Robbins]

Hey Rockin Robbins,

I am finishing up my career with the stock/GFO SH4 and am eager to ratchet-up the realism/difficulty. I thought your post in 2008 comparing TMO and RFB to be very informative. I know several reiterations of both mods have occurred since then. You mentioned you would revisit RFB. Would you say your initial evaluation to still be accurate?

I hope I am not stirring up the pot. If I am feel free to slap me in the face with a cod! :doh:
Sorry, I'm fresh out of cod!

The operative word in RFB is "Real." But it is nothing of the sort, and SH4 can't ever get to the "real" threshold. So basically you play both and figure out which you like best.

RFB Team decided that having accurate position information for targets on your nav maps was not real. Never mind that the real radar was accurate in range to plus or minus 35 yards, not too many pixels on your map. It was much better than that in bearing accuracy. So the stock game shows a box with velocity vector until you zoom in close enough then the target is replaced by a silhouette with text saying what the ship is, its course and speed. Granted, that's too much information. But TMO and RFB handled the situation very differently.

TMO nerfed the velocity vector, the descriptive text and replaced the ship silhouette with a position dot. Based on the above accuracy of radar, I'd say that's VERY realistic information.

RFB took the easy way out. When you exceed the magnification that the nav map shows a box and velocity vector the target simply vanishes without a trace. Yes, if you stand too close to the chart table all targets disappear. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to conclude that this "remedy" is much, much worse than the problem. You are no piloting your sub with a paper bag over your head and crowing how realistic the experience is. Makesanosensa. It's a near fatal flaw in my book.

However, TMOKeys, a mod of mine, will replace the RFB comedy of plotting with the TMO system and make no other changes to your game. There might be a ship or two that will plot in the RFB way, but I'm gong through and updating the mod to fix that. I've never had that problem.

Now RFB is a great mod to play. You'll find that difficulty is as low as the stock game. You'll find that S boats are especially fragile, a very realistic thing that makes them challenging and fun to play. I say if S-boats are your game RFB is your mod. Your chances of being sunk in the line of duty are low because the RFB team decided that odds of results should be close to actuality. There are plenty of arguments for and against that decision.

TMO has lots of unrealistic things. The enemy has Superman on board every warship and they have x-ray vision to keep you pinned down for hours. Their guns can plug you for 10,000 yards on the second shot. Their airplanes can see you below the surface and sometimes even at 90' or below. Don't think of TMO as a realism mod, it's a difficulty mod and you get a real sense of accomplishment playing it. It's my favorite supermod, even though I'm playing a GFO career right now and having a blast.

For years I used multi-SH4 and had separate installations for stock, TMO, GFO, RFB and FOTRS. It was too much. My brain overloaded and shut down. So right now it's GFO and TMO. When I pick up another mod I'll delete one of those. Too much is too much!:timeout:

[Tshark]

Thanks RR. I will probably try both mods, but will start with TMO.

[CaptainRamius]

Some very helpful links, thanks a lot! :salute:

[ColonelSandersLite]

Don't think of TMO as a realism mod, it's a difficulty mod and you get a real sense of accomplishment playing it. It's my favorite supermod, even though I'm playing a GFO career right now and having a blast.

I don't agree with everything you said in perfect detail, but the above?
QFT

IMHO, once you manage to not only survive but thrive in the very lethal TMO environment, the other mods just don't cut the mustard anymore.

[Rockin Robbins]

I don't agree with everything you said in perfect detail, but the above?
QFT
I've been accused of some really slimey things lately but being accused of TRUTH! Outrageous!
http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa293/RockinRobbins13/smileys/1292186522_triple_facepalm_zpsd9c364dc.jpg

[Majestik 909]

:D Hmmmmmm

[Rockin Robbins]

However, this thread is oriented toward the newbie, who can't quite get a handle on the process of getting a torpedo out of their submarine and into the side of an unsuspecting merchant ship, preferrably one belonging to the enemy.

For that, I recommend a stock or Game Fixes Only installation, first with automatic targeting. This is because unless you lean boat handling to achieve a good firing position you can't hit the target, no matter how great you are at manual targeting.

So learn to walk first. Learn to position yourself so that the target will pass at right angles to your course, or close to that, and will pass under a thousand yards from you. That means you have to develop the skill of determining target course and speed. You have to learn at what range you will be spotted on the surface, where you have much greater speed, and when you must submerge in order to avoid an alarmed merchie changing course to get away.

You don't have to in automatic targeting, but get in the habit of determining enemy course and speed as early as possible. That will help when you take the training wheels off and go manual.

Once you are comfortable with boat handling and it's natural to you, THEN it's time to proceed to manual targeting. Boat handling is pretty automatic and you don't have to think too much about it. Believe me, it's plenty to think about when you're beginning manual targeting. It's an exacting process and you don't want to be distracted by other aspects like boat handling.

I recommend that you don't learn manual targeting with TMO. You need all the help you can get to be able to visualize the process so it is something that makes sense, not just a list you must check off for who knows what reason. When you know why you remember much better. The stock tracking system tells you why and you can check your work quickly.

[Rockin Robbins]

Why in the world would I get involved in producing a shooting technique for Silent Hunter 4, name it after a famous submarine commander, Dick O'Kane, and never read his book? Well, for some reason I hadn't read Dick O'Kane's Clear the Bridge until now. Stupid!

In answer to the enquiries about whether Dick O'Kane ever used such a technique or whether ANYONE had used something like the Dick O'Kane Technique during the war, my stock answer is that we developed the Dick O'Kane Technique entirely in the game and with MoBo. Although the technique is historically plausible, it COULD have been executed by a real submarine, we have no evidence it was ever used. It was merely named in honor of a great submarine commander and we do not imply that he did anything like the Dick O'Kane Manual Targeting Technique.

Then I read chapter 7 of Clear the Bridge yesterday:
“We’ve got her on course two seven zero, speed eight, Captain.” It was Fraz's voice. "Range twenty-eight hundred, we're twelve hundred yards from her track. It looks good from here." It looked good from the bridge, too, but a bit scarier perhaps, for at this stage her angle on the bow looked very sharp, and a slight change of enemy course would put us underfoot. That was always the case if you were really right in there, and there were invariably anxious moments until the rate of change of her angle became pronounced with the decreasing range. Perhaps it was well that I was busy twisting our boat for a minimal silhouette, marking bearings, and then settling her on the heading for near zero gyro shots. A black squall in back of us gave us further security from detection, but I more than welcomed Fraz's call, "Ten degrees to go, Captain."
"She's turned back, but she'll never make it." It was Jones, just in back of me, keeping track of the bow escort. I knew exactly what he saw: The escort ahead was coming toward us. It was like having another pair of eyes and the judgment to go with them.
"Constant bearing-mark!"
"Set" from the conning tower.
"Fire"
The next three torpedoes, each fired to hit a specific point, zinged out at eight-second intervals. From the instant of firing it was impossible for the enemy to maneuver his 600-foot ship to clear the divergent torpedo tracks. The whacks of the first two detonationsWe can now say that the Dick O'Kane technique has left the realm of merely being historically plausible to being able to say that Dick O'Kane himself executed such an attack on the very first target recorded for the Tang.

[Gray Lensman]

In a sense, Clear the Bridge is like the 2nd half of the book Wahoo started. Reading them back to back is the best way to enjoy them.

Anyone who has not read them should get both of them together and enjoy the read.

[Rockin Robbins]

I'll bet you've notice that all my Photobucket links are broken. I've decided that this thread is important enough to restore the links. I believe I have everything from Photobucket transferred over to Google Photos, from which I will replace the links.

This will be a long-term, slow project. Every company comes to a crisis, during which they decide whether they will live or they will die. Photobucket has made an executive decision to anger the entire Internet, which will kill them. I would love to have a video of that meeting!

To paraphrase the sage and all-seeing InspiroBot.me (http://inspirobot.me/)*:

Freedom is sometimes like a maze
Very entertaining for the survivors

Among Photobucket's bucket of freedom was the decision to die. They made that decision and now we get to be entertained.

*Warning. Do not click this link. It will suck up whole days of your life. It will take the place of sleep, food, sex and any other activities you cherish. You have been warned.

[Rockin Robbins]

All essential graphics formerly kept at Photobucket, which has decided to die, are not relinked from another source and the thread pretty much restored to its former self.

[Platapus]

The three printable crib cards on the first page have broken links. Are these images stored somewhere else?

They are far too handy to lose.

[propbeanie]

ditto RR...

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1007637&postcount=204

[Rockin Robbins]

I'll have it fixed in a couple minutes. It's the demise of Photobucket that did the trick. They want you to pay big bucks for linking to a graphic. Sucks to be them but I have to make occasional changes.

I'll be linking to my Imgbb page. That's been a great service, but I'd link here at Subsim if I were to do it again.

[Rockin Robbins]

Okay, more victims of Photobucket's demise spotted. Thanks!

https://image.ibb.co/eN1WU5/OKanemethodanimation.gifhttps://image.ibb.co/eN1WU5/OKanemethodanimation.gif
https://image.ibb.co/fsu8ua/Vector_Analysistargeting.pnghttps://image.ibb.co/fsu8ua/Vector_Analysistargeting.png
https://image.ibb.co/f2Y1Ea/Size_of_1_deg_at_100_yd_zps326lw7y5.pnghttps://image.ibb.co/f2Y1Ea/Size_of_1_deg_at_100_yd_zps326lw7y5.png
https://image.ibb.co/eTRGfF/Lineardistanceof1degree.jpghttps://image.ibb.co/eTRGfF/Lineardistanceof1degree.jpg
https://image.ibb.co/fNb4Za/John_PCromwelltargeting.pnghttps://image.ibb.co/fNb4Za/John_PCromwelltargeting.png
https://image.ibb.co/i8G4Za/Dick_OKanetargeting.pnghttps://image.ibb.co/i8G4Za/Dick_OKanetargeting.png
https://image.ibb.co/krSVPa/Okane_Approach.pnghttps://image.ibb.co/krSVPa/Okane_Approach.png

Here are not only those diagrams, but others you might be interested in. I'll correct the links on page 1. Done!

[l02turner]

Why in the world would I get involved in producing a shooting technique for Silent Hunter 4, name it after a famous submarine commander, Dick O'Kane, and never read his book? Well, for some reason I hadn't read Dick O'Kane's Clear the Bridge until now. Stupid!



When I first started playing SH4 many years ago I read all I could find from US Sub Commanders from WW2 and "Clear the Bridge" is my favorite! Glad to hear you enjoyed it too - O'Kane had a great career!
:arrgh!:

[Rockin Robbins]

When I first started playing SH4 many years ago I read all I could find from US Sub Commanders from WW2 and "Clear the Bridge" is my favorite! Glad to hear you enjoyed it too - O'Kane had a great career!
:arrgh!:

Absolutely! I'd argue the Eugene Fluckey's career was more outstanding, but Fluckey didn't have to suffer the kind hospitality of a Japanese POW camp for a significant part of the war. But tactics-wise, those two skippers taught me just about all I know.

[Aoogahman]

Many thanks RR for the Airplane Avoidance with Radar Tutorial. It really helped me with that nagging problem right off the bat. Now I find myself jagging (is that a word?) around on the surface without worrying too much about losing the boat and crew to those pesky flying machines. Perfect!:Kaleun_Applaud:

I was thinking (which hurts) it might be nice if there were some way to drag the five-mile circle around with the boat, like Peanuts' Linus van Pelt's security blanket, without having to move it around manually. But then again isn't there an old saw about being careful of what you wish for? It might be better to have a dedicated key on the keyboard to toggle it on and off as needed...or not. Probably not.

At any rate, even though I know you can't have everything, and I don't want everything anyway, I've learned just enough to know that you can have your cake and eat it too, as long as you don't eat the last bite.:hmmm:

[Rockin Robbins]

Sometimes you eat the bear, sometimes the bear eats you. Leave the last piece of cake for the bear.

The five mile circle could be done but it would gobble up every bit of memory you have on your computer for most people. The reason the 3,000 yard (1.5 mile) bearing compass isn't used by everyone is that it's a memory hog and ruins a lot of people's playing quality. A circle of 10,000 yards would be a killer. I also find with FOTRSU that a six mile circle is safer. Detection ranges vary with the mods you use and weather/sea conditions.

[Aoogahman]

Yeah, I'll just have to grin and bear it!

I follow you with the memory usage, but you lost me on "3,000 yard bearing compass". I don't have a clue as to what that is. Hmmm. Correction: Yes I do! I was watching one of your other tutorials and suddenly there you were explaining all about it. Thanks again, got it now.

But otherwise, I've been attempting to keep the weather and sea state in mind when we have aircraft approaching the 5-mile limit. If they're at the edge of the circle, where we'd normally just remain at radar depth, and the the weather's clear and the sea's nearly flat, we go ahead and dip down to periscope depth just to be sure. It's working fine so far, thanks to your tutorial:salute:

yesterday, trying to vacate Jap waters, we had so many a/c harassing us that it was easier to just pull the plug and stay submerged until nightfall. Then we made a night run out of that particular area while charging up the batteries. No problems after that.

[Rockin Robbins]

Well, folks, after three years of living without a computer running Windows, I've partially gone to the dark side and dedicated a carefully quarantined and defanged hard drive to again boot Windows when I want. This means I'll be able to reload SH4 and resume producing tactics tutorials and videos.

My intent for this thread was to be unique in all of Subsim by teaching boat handling, attack tactics and how to think about the World War II submarine war. This thread should be useful for any game based on World War II submarines and not constrained by the mechanics, quirks and old man-itis of Silent Hunter 4.

I enthusiastically and unapologetically champion the philosophies of Eugene Fluckey, Admiral Lockwood and Dick O'Kane in believing that the job of a submarine is to be dangerous, not hiding when no one is looking. I believe that the number of contacts developed is proportional to the number of square miles of ocean surface searched each day, and you can't do that submerged all day. I'm a royal pain and I hope you enjoy it.:D

[Captain Dave]

I agree with you, only dive when necessary. Heck, I even take pot shots at aircraft from time to time.

[Rockin Robbins]

I agree with you, only dive when necessary. Heck, I even take pot shots at aircraft from time to time.

OOOOOOO, that's against my religion. I look at it this way. To shoot at the plane, you must be on the surface, so you and the plane have about even odds of survival. So your hugely expensive submarine with 70 highly trained and difficult to replace crew aboard are duking it out with 50-50 chance with a cheap and quick to produce plane with maybe two people in it.

The cost-benefit ratio is just wacko. If you win, you don't win very much at all. They'll have a new plane and crew in the air in a week. But if you lose it will take months to produce a replacement submarine and probably years to develop a new crew with the proficiency of the one you lost.

Odds are even. Would you bet a million dollars against an opponent's 1 dollar, so you're playing for a dollar and he stands to win a million? Of course not, but that's the game when you take pot shots at aircraft.

[Barkhorn1x]

\I'm a royal pain and I hope you enjoy it.:D

Hey Rockin. Good to see you again. :Kaleun_Cheers:

Here is a link to a PDF file of 3 different attack methods that we worked on about 10 years ago.

https://mega.nz/#F!rvZ3EYhL

[Rockin Robbins]

Hey Rockin. Good to see you again. :Kaleun_Cheers:

Here is a link to a PDF file of 3 different attack methods that we worked on about 10 years ago.

https://mega.nz/#F!rvZ3EYhL

Super! It's all locked up with a super secret encryption key though.

[Barkhorn1x]

Super! It's all locked up with a super secret encryption key though.

Crap! I'll work on a new link.

[Barkhorn1x]

Try this one.

https://mega.nz/#!ivYy2Kwa!GpCxZUpdfB3zBqGBX9iSQfbnarpLboxRe9OCCRN h0WQ

[Rockin Robbins]

Try this one.

https://mega.nz/#!ivYy2Kwa!GpCxZUpdfB3zBqGBX9iSQfbnarpLboxRe9OCCRN h0WQ

Works perfectly and is a great addition to the thread!:salute:

[Drakken]

Well, having the submariner itch once again, I am now back into the hunt myself. Just finished installing FOTRSU and back to active duty! Always at 100% realism, of course, but I admit I have to refresh my target interception skills.

This time, while on patrol to send all those Jappo merchant ships down to Davey Jones' locker I'm also on the hunt for that elusive live carrier or battleship kill during the campaign. Even the Yamato, if I am lucky! I'm like that tanker hunting the White Tiger in that 2012 Russian movie of the same name - it's a personal mission.

Setting up and interception courses for warships has always been my Achilles' heel due to the usual distance of contact reports, their sheer speed, and their zig-zagging course. Any tip you might have for these situations are most welcome. That being said, such situations are great to learn how to perform vector attack solutions and the John P. Cromwell method. :Kaleun_Salute:

[Majestik 909]

@RockinRobbins - You are still here!!!!

[les green01]

RockinRobbins hadn't log in on subsim in a year

[Majestik 909]

LOL...Ok, I didn't notice that....

[Majestik 909]

Sank about 7 merchant ships this morning. First time back in game in a year to the day...

[propbeanie]

Rumor has it that RR has been seen on the Facebook side of thangs, and might even do the Discord, though I haven't been there when he has, if he does...

[Majestik 909]

Awesome...thanks...

[ComradeCupcake]

Well, having the submariner itch once again, I am now back into the hunt myself. Just finished installing FOTRSU and back to active duty! Always at 100% realism, of course, but I admit I have to refresh my target interception skills.

This time, while on patrol to send all those Jappo merchant ships down to Davey Jones' locker I'm also on the hunt for that elusive live carrier or battleship kill during the campaign. Even the Yamato, if I am lucky! I'm like that tanker hunting the White Tiger in that 2012 Russian movie of the same name - it's a personal mission.

Setting up and interception courses for warships has always been my Achilles' heel due to the usual distance of contact reports, their sheer speed, and their zig-zagging course. Any tip you might have for these situations are most welcome. That being said, such situations are great to learn how to perform vector attack solutions and the John P. Cromwell method. :Kaleun_Salute:

Personal missions and emotional involvement usually get people killed in the process. Keep a cool head and focus on your job (sinking merchant shipping). Submarines were not designed to fight warships. My tip is to avoid task forces and dedicated anti-submarine vessels altogether.