Manual Targeting in TMO different from stock game?

[Mallet]

Hello, I am very new to this mod and more accurately, manual targeting. In the stock game I have for the most part figured out the manual targeting and how to do it. However in TMO, I am having problems where I can reload the same situation several times and follow the same steps to find a solution but miss or barely hit (tip of bow or stern) the enemy ship each separate instance. To cut things short, I just don't know how the targeting changed in this mod. I also no longer really know how to figure out AOB without the ship shapes on the map. Sorry for long first post. I really want to get into this game as much as many of you have and hope to be a regular here.

[jldjs]

There is probably an assist you can follow in the sticky posts. But, briefly, a few suggestions. You don't need the ship's shape to determine AoB, but you do need the target's track, or path of travel. More importantly you need the target's speed. You can determine this in numerous ways, but a simple way is to plot its position twice, at 3 minute interval. This way also gives you its track. Distance travel over 3 minutes yields speed in knots. With the track, use the compass to determine AoB as the angle between drawing the line from your position to the target's position extended thru its track. Now enter the speed first in the TDC, then AoB, and finally distance and bearing to target's position. Turn on the Position Keeper and you have a firing solution. Look for a more complete answer in the stickies.
Enjoy the results, I do! Good luck!

[Gibus]

In the stock game I have for the most part figured out the manual targeting and how to do it.
Bonjour,

If you understand this with the stock game, apply it with TMO.
TMO has no impact on manual targeting.

[THEBERBSTER]

A Warm Welcome Back To The Subsim Community > Mallet
Subsim <> How To Donate <> See The Benefits <> Support The Community (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=2033119%23post2033119)
Post #7 Formula For Imperial Speed Calculating. (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=2297825&postcount=7)
(http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=2033119%23post2033119)

[Mallet]

Thank you for all the responses! I read through the imperial speed calculation intruction but it asks for the ship length. How do i find ship length? My recognition manual doesnt provide this.

[jldjs]

See the sticky SH2<>tutorial<>How to do it on manual targeting. There are methods described that don't use target ship's length.

[razark]

I read through the imperial speed calculation intruction but it asks for the ship length. How do i find ship length? My recognition manual doesnt provide this.
Ship length? Bah!

Plot the target position on the map. Wait three minutes. Plot the target's new position on the map. Measure the distance in yards, divide by 100.
You now have the target speed in knots, without knowing the length.

By plotting it out on the map, you also figure his course, bearing, AoB, range, etc. A good plot is key to the targeting problem.

[Mallet]

Ship length? Bah!

Plot the target position on the map. Wait three minutes. Plot the target's new position on the map. Measure the distance in yards, divide by 100.
You now have the target speed in knots, without knowing the length.

By plotting it out on the map, you also figure his course, bearing, AoB, range, etc. A good plot is key to the targeting problem.

Wow, thats excellent! Thank you so much for the help! I hope I can get to the point where I can do these crazy calculations in my head as well as the sonar methods and such! What a helpful community.

[Gibus]

Plot the target position on the map.
Bonjour,

This only works with the targets on the map.
Otherwise you must use the device superimposed images from the periscope.

[razark]

This only works with the targets on the map.
Otherwise you must use the device superimposed images from the periscope.
I'm not sure I'm following exactly what you're saying, but if I am getting the message correctly:
You don't need the targets displayed on the map. If you get the range and bearing (by periscope, sonar, or radar), you can plot the target yourself.

Of course, it does become much more complicated to do this method with map contacts off. I'm still willing to pay the full price I paid for the game just for the ability to lock a target, get the range, hit the button, and have the position plotted on the map automatically. (Or at least have the PK marker on the map screen.)

[Rockin Robbins]

Never in the war was there a single incidence of obtaining target speed by timing the ship's length by the wire. The majority of the time the target was misidentified and that technique would have resulted in bizarre numbers anyway.

We have had several very fanciful targeting techniques developed which are not historically justifiable. This is one of them. It is simply gaming the system by using god's eye information not available to real submarine crews.

Razark has it absolutely correct: plotting is the beginning and end of a successful attack. And TMO has nothing to do with it, except that it shows ship positions by a position dot, not a silhouette, has no explanitory text and the attack map is lacking some extraneous information also.

I believe that you are not using the TDC properly. It is crucial that you obtain and enter information in a certain order not specified in the game manual or any manual targeting instructions that I've seen outside of my own.

If you're interested, I could tell you about it, but it's a large post on its own! But when I'm done you will understand why you're doing it wrong, I will prove why order of operations is crucial and you'll be able to visualize the process in a way that will ensure your setup is right every time. It's not enough to memorize a list of things to do. You have to know why each step is in that particular order and understand what each step accomplishes. Without in depth understanding of the process you will miss and never know why.

Oh, mallet, quite the opposite of doing calculations in your head, every operation you can unload from your head and make the TDC or plot do will increase your accuracy. You will want all operations to be self-validating so mistakes are OBVIOUS. Numerical calculations are garbage in/garbage out with no obvious error trapping. They're very bad ways to run a war!

Vector analysis, for instance, beats trigonometry every time!

[razark]

If you're interested, I could tell you about it, but it's a large post on its own!
I'm curious. I've seen it asserted that there is a certain order, but I'm not sure I've ever seen it laid out, nor the reasoning behind it.

I do know that whatever I've been doing seems to work. I put in the AoB/target course, then speed, and finally the bearing and range, which I'll update as needed. Only after that do I turn on the PK. (But then, I've got a number of mods that might affect data input.)


Vector analysis, for instance, beats trigonometry every time!
I use vector analysis quite often, and always in S Boats.
One of the first things I do when starting a patrol is go to a quiet area of the map, and draw out a diagram setting up angles and circles I manipulate to solve the problem. I keep meaning to learn the Is-Was.

[Barkerov]

I'm curious. I've seen it asserted that there is a certain order, but I'm not sure I've ever seen it laid out, nor the reasoning behind it.

I am curious to see RR's post about this as well. I have always thought that the hierarchy of input to the TDC was speed first, AOB second and Range third.

My reasoning is based on the fact that the TDC input has to be done in real time and the ship is always moving. Once I obtain the speed, that wont change unless the target changes course so I want to do that first. If I do it last then I am racing around the screen clicking at the end and that is a perfect breeding ground for mistakes.

That leaves the two things that do change in real time. AOB changes the slowest of the two, especially if you are plotting way ahead of firing time. This is because any angular change between me and the target happens slowly until the target is crossing in front of me.

The range I enter last and once I do, I click the PK as soon as possible because the range constantly changes. Remember that the estimate of range is only valid for a single moment in time because we are looking at a moving target. The real drawback of the TDC is that the stadimeter is rubbish, but that's another story.

[Rockin Robbins]

Okay, I was wanting to know I was talking to interested people and not just pushing my ideas on unreceptive mindsets. It doesn't do any good to do that because all listening is voluntary:up:

Okay, let's first look at what the TDC does when the position keeper is on. What it's really doing is setting up an artificial target. When you shoot, you are not shooting at that ship out there, you are shooting at the TDC's artificial target. You WILL hit the artificial target. But, because it really doesn't exist you don't get booms! That is, unless there is a REAL target occupying the same spot where the artificial target is hit.

Our job is to make the artificial target move at the same speed and course as the real target and be superimposed exactly on top of the real target. Kapeech? Ever thought of it that way?

Well, if you do it aids your visualization of the targeting process and makes your targeting much more intelligent. Let's set up a target and do it all wrong. I'll explain every step of the way.

Target sighted! AoB is set zero, speed zero and range/bearing 0/0. It won't be set that way in the game but you gotta start somewhere. So right now the TDC plots the target right on top of the submarine, but not moving. It's facing north. As the sub moves the target stays right there and the sub moves away from the artificial target, doesn't it?

Let's get a stadimeter reading on this puppy! We find his range at 2000 yards and bearing 90º. The TDC plots the artificial target at that spot in the ocean. It isn't moving, The real target is so it just runs away from the artificial target. We won't hit if we shoot now, will we?

So let's get a speed. A three minute run is 600 yards so he's running 6 knots. We enter that. What happens to our artificial target. NOTHING! It sits there motionless, farther and farther away from the real target at a rate of 200 yards a minute!

Now we'll work out angle on the bow. We connect the two points, extend the track and use the protractor and get an AoB. We enter that in the TDC. What happens? NOTHING!! The artificial target is still sitting there motionless in the position we fixed several minutes ago.

Turn on the PK. NOW finally, the artificial target begins to move in the same direction and at the same speed as the real target. Unfortunately, the artificial target is several hundred yards behind the real one. You're about to waste some torpedoes.

Let's do things right. The very first thing you should do is turn on the position keeper. Why? Because otherwise you'll forget, that's why. Without the PK on, the artificial target won't move, either rightly or wrongly, at all. So turn on the PK first.

Second and third, and these two can be done in any order you want, speed and course/AoB can be entered. Use your radar to get two positions 3 minutes apart. Now you have speed, and that usually is what I'll get entered first. Make sure you press the send traingle button TWICE.

Then extend the track on the nav map out in front of the target for a distance that you won't have to fiddle with later. Now what's happening right now is you have an artificial target that is moving at the correct speed, but in the wrong direction and at the wrong position. That's what we want.

Enter the AoB determined by your protractor into the TDC and press send twice. Yes, I'm afraid that's necessary. So now we have an artificial target moving at the right speed and course, but not in the right position.

Can you see why we absolutely HAVE TO do the range/bearing last? It's because the artificial target is ALREADY MOVING at the correct speed and course. As soon as we peg the position, it will immediately begin moving at that speed and course JUST LIKE THE REAL TARGET. Therefore your artificial target, which your torpedoes WILL HIT is and will stay exactly on top of the real target.

If you want to be really fussy and verify your solution is good, go to the attack map and read the torpedo run time. Suppose it's one minute. If your artificial target, plotted on the attack map (!), stays on top of the real target for one minute you have sufficient accuracy to shoot. This is exactly analogous to the check that was done every time submarines shot a several thousand dollar torpedo in the war. They didn't just enter the numbers, trust they made no errors and shoot. If they didn't verify, they didn't shoot. That's why the attack map is an essential part of realistic targeting.

Now after your check the artificial target is no longer on top of the real target. Fix that by doing another stadimeter shot, which fixes the position of the artificial target back on top of the real one.

You're ready to shoot and you'll get booms, I guarantee it! And now you can visualize what is happening as you enter those numbers. They aren't meaningless digits any more. Each one of them now means something to you. Something important. Something you can visualize clearly. You're a sub commander now.:salute:

[razark]

I put in the AoB/target course, then speed, and finally the bearing and range, which I'll update as needed.
Wow. I am wrong. I forgot how I do it.

Speed and course are usually known from radar well in advance of visual sighting. Once I am in position ahead of the target and he's in visual range, I start entering the data. First, get bearing. Range doesn't matter at this point (and the stadiameter is crap at long range, anyway), I think I usually just run it up to maximum. Send that to the TDC. Then I get the AoB, which isn't actually AoB. I enter it by watching the target course dial. Once the course matches, AoB is set. Then enter the speed. After that, turn on the PK, and update range and bearing. Then watch the PK to check the actual target against the artificial one. Adjust target speed as needed, and update range and bearing occasionally.

There's a mod (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=164448) that slightly changes the way data input works. Once you set the AoB, it updates whenever you change bearing. If I have a ship dead ahead (bearing of 0/360), and I set his AoB at 90 degrees starboard, then turn the scope to 300 and send a new bearing to the TDC, the AoB automatically updates to 30 degrees starboard. Send a bearing of 315, and the Aob sets to 45s. Convenient for attacking convoys, where everybody's going the same direction.

There's also this one (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=152945) that updates the dials as you move them, so long as the PK is off. This makes entering the course much easier. It's the reason I don't turn on the PK until later.


Let's do things right. The very first thing you should do is turn on the position keeper. Why? Because otherwise you'll forget, that's why. Without the PK on, the artificial target won't move, either rightly or wrongly, at all. So turn on the PK first.
...
Can you see why we absolutely HAVE TO do the range/bearing last? It's because the artificial target is ALREADY MOVING at the correct speed and course. As soon as we peg the position, it will immediately begin moving at that speed and course JUST LIKE THE REAL TARGET. Therefore your artificial target, which your torpedoes WILL HIT is and will stay exactly on top of the real target.

Basically, it boils down to having the AoB and speed set, and the PK turned on, before you enter your critical bearing and range.

In my procedure, since the scope is locked on target, the bearing is spot on and the angles work out for entering the course. Quite often, I don't have the artificial target on top of the real target until quite late in the attack. I just watch it relative to the target to make sure speed and course are good. Once I'm into the final phase of the attack, I make sure I've got the range correct. Soon after, it's time for a shooting observation and a final bearing/range update and fire.


Make sure you press the send traingle button TWICE.
Yes. Every time. It quickly becomes a habit. It's a minor annoyance, but quite important.


And now you can visualize what is happening as you enter those numbers. They aren't meaningless digits any more. Each one of them now means something to you.
Indeed. Understanding what the numbers mean and how they relate to the targeting problem is vital to putting holes in marus on a regular basis.

[Barkerov]

Okay, let's first look at what the TDC does when the position keeper is on. What it's really doing is setting up an artificial target. When you shoot, you are not shooting at that ship out there, you are shooting at the TDC's artificial target. You WILL hit the artificial target. But, because it really doesn't exist you don't get booms! That is, unless there is a REAL target occupying the same spot where the artificial target is hit.

Our job is to make the artificial target move at the same speed and course as the real target and be superimposed exactly on top of the real target. Kapeech? Ever thought of it that way?

This artificial target vs real target way of thinking is exactly how I think of it. It becomes painfully clear that this is the way it should be thought of when you look at the attack map. It's best feature IMO is that it shows you the actual target along with marking the artificial target.

Thanks for that RR. It makes total sense to me to start the PK right off the bat. Also Razark nailed it with how he does the AOB. Just match it up to the target course. We don't actually give a crap about what the AOB is in and of itself, that was just the way target course information happens to be fed into the TDC.

Time to go out there and
SINK EM ALL :arrgh!:

[razark]

We don't actually give a crap about what the AOB is in and of itself, that was just the way target course information happens to be fed into the TDC.
I've always looked at it the other way. AoB is important, because it's one of the three angles of the triangle that we are so interested in:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f8/Intercept.svg/530px-Intercept.svg.pngNote that "Target Course" isn't even on this picture.

It doesn't matter what the target course is, unless you figure in your own heading. AoB remains AoB, regardless of which way you're going. It just happens to be easier to get enemy course directly from the map. Well, you could plot everything relative to your boat, say on a maneuvering board, and get the AoB without knowing anything about your own course, I suppose.
Of course, it's all just different ways of looking at the same problem. You can drag out complex math, draw it out on graph paper, solve it on a slide rule, or hand it to the TDC. (And they definitely knew it during the war. You'll find that subs often had a fire control party working independently of the TDC by another method.) As long as you understand that triangle and what it means, you're on the right track.

[Barkerov]

Yeah that's a good point that I was forgetting. AOB has the distinct advantage of being a relative measure. Course is absolute.

[Rockin Robbins]

That's why you first plot the target track (course) on the nav map and then use the protractor to get the AoB. You can also enter the course directly into the TDC by using the outer set of numbers opposite the bow of the target. That's a multi-step process, but a pretty quick one.

But the AoB has nothing at all to do with your course. I'm away from all my graphics wizardry so I'll have to describe what's going on here. The angle on the bow is your sub's bearing in German nomenclature (starboard/port zero to 180 degrees). Your bearing does NOT CHANGE based on what course you are on, any more than a target's bearing changes when measured from your sub depending on its course.

I don't know where the commonly believed fallacy of AoB being dependent on your course came from, but it's dead wrong. It doesn't matter whether you enter course or A0B into the TDC--they are different ways of measuring the exact same quantity regardless of your sub's course. If your PK is on before you enter AoB, changes in sub position will change that AoB but will not change enemy course in the TDC. If the PK is off it doesn't change and is instantly wrong if you move.

[razark]

...the commonly believed fallacy of AoB being dependent on your course...
Is that commonly believed? I've never heard of that until you mentioned it.

[Rockin Robbins]

I've run into it repeatedly. However referencing your diagram shows clearly that owncourse is entirely irrelevant to AoB.

[Mallet]

All of these answers have been really helpful and that explanation by rockin robbins made it clearer than it has ever been to me. I just want to know few more things. Do you need to send the bearing individually of range or is the bearing automatic? Also when using radar or hydrophone to send information to tdc, does it update the tdc dials or is it just inputing the info without any kind of acknowledgement? When I click send range from hydrophone to TDC, i can never tell that it has actually done it. Of course, if there is already an explanation as clear as the one in this thread about it, please point me in the right direction, the overall theory behind all the variables effects on targeting is interesting and helpful.

[Gray Lensman]

For Mallet (in particular) The following is much simpler to learn as a newbie, then you can explore the PK/AOB/sonar/radar complexity AFTER you are more familiar with the simulation:

With regards to using the TDC in all its complexity, (especially with the PK usage), I find that complexity for the sake of necessity in a game can be fun, however, even Dick O'Kane used a much less complicated modified constant bearing method of torpedo fire control that was much simpler and can be closely emulated in game. In fact Rockin Robbins himself has a video demo showing its simplicity. See here! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k5yJI6Z5AU)

Utilizing this constant bearing method, you don't ever need to turn on the PK, let alone worry about intermittent AOB/range readings. In fact all you need to start is initial course and speed so you can plot an end around if necessary to position yourself right off that course. Of course a few intermittent observations are necessary to verity that the target is indeed continuing along that course with/without a zigzag. Work your way into an approx. 90 degree intercept point at your preferred range. I generally use 600, but sometimes as necessity dictates will increase the distance. I will not set up less than 600 due to torpedo arming distance.

With that in mind, and the approx. intercept point determined, you can preset the TDC with speed first, then preset what the predetermined AOB will be AT that intercept point. I use 10 degrees lead AOB for 8 knots or less, 15 degrees lead AOB for 9 to 12 knots, and 20 degrees lead AOB for any speed over 12 knots.

Then at this same time, I preset the scope/TBT to the same lead angle (10,15, or 20 degrees), basically looking straight down the same heading as the AOB lead angle. Keep in mind, the sub itself will be pointed at close to 90 degrees to the target track. After the normal double clicks on the TDC, you can determine that your setup is almost perpendicular to the target AND you can do a quick check on the attack map screen to see that the torpedo is set up to fire at the approx 90 degree intercept gyro angle you have set into the TDC.

Usually, I have the TDC already pre-setup WAY in advance of reaching the intercept point. This allows me to quickly make a simple one parameter change and re-double click if something necessitates a change. Keep in mind that you have to have the fore/aft torpedo selected that you are plotting to fire along with the scope/TBT lined up along the same lead angle. The latter two items can really mess with your mind when you re-double click and you have moved them since the last time you double clicked. Again this can be confirmed with the left side TDC ship image displays and a quick glance at the attack map screen.

All you have to do now is place yourself at the predetermined intercept point and wait for the target to cross the Periscope/TDC wire. In effect the target has placed itself on the pre-determined artificial target point without you having to make all sorts of bearing/range/AOB observation inputs to the TDC/PK referred to in the earlier post(s) above. I use this technique in almost all my intercepts because I figure if Dick O'Kane used this method it's good enough for me. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you add up all the sunk tonnage he was responsible for (Wahoo AND Tang), he was probably the leading sub ace in WWII.


Some notes:

I try to ensure that the target will indeed be at or slightly outside the predetermined TDC range setting (especially at higher target speeds). The reason for this is at such close range and higher target speeds the TDC lead angle will cause a bow shot to actually cross in front of the target instead of intercepting the bow. This intercept range is adjusted preferably by a small judicious forward/reverse ship movement, but can be done on the TDC, (necessitating double-click rechecking of the solution of course).

Just because you have set up a solution waiting for the target to cross the wire does not mean you have to abandon the shot if you have managed to be a little late raising the scope all the way up. In that case, keep your calm, move the scope a little ahead of the target bow, double click the TDC and fire when he crosses the wire at that new point. This quick snap shot re-setup did not change any TDC settings except the periscope bearing it was fired on, so it usually works and for sure the target is probably slightly further from the pre-determined range referred to in the earlier note above.

This constant bearing technique is much more adaptable to quick snap-shot solutions when you are in the midst of a group of ships than the PK/AOB observations earlier discussed.

You can also use this constant bearing method at sub headings different than a 90 degree tangent, which is helpful in mult-ship convoy intercepts. You just point the sub at your chosen intercept angle and then set the AOB to (10, 15, or 20 degrees) lead from that and align the scope/TBT to that same lead angle. This allows you to shoot at a further target as it crosses the wire using a slower torpedo speed setting, then quickly resetting the TDC range to an inside target and firing torpedoes at a faster speed setting resulting in near simultaneous detonations. (This assumes all the convoy ships are on the same course and speed)

Remember the object of the game/simulation is to sink tonnage in as realistic (but not necessarily as complicated) a manner as possible, depending on your enjoyment factor of course.

[Mallet]

Gary Lensman, I just tried that method and succeeded right away, quite amazing how fast that was. I have had some success in the past using the regular TDC system, range, AOB, Speed, and all that. However I just sometimes fail for a reason that I really cant find. The ocean was pretty wavy but my speed calculation and AOB was correct, but the bearing/ range just wasnt putting the artificial target over the actual target. I couldnt use the stadimeter as the waves obstructed my view so I used sonar instead. Perhaps my range and bearing was off somehow. I think I am getting better but my attempts at normal TDC usage are 40/60 success to failure.

[Gray Lensman]

Gary Lensman, I just tried that method and succeeded right away, quite amazing how fast that was. I have had some success in the past using the regular TDC system, range, AOB, Speed, and all that. However I just sometimes fail for a reason that I really cant find. The ocean was pretty wavy but my speed calculation and AOB was correct, but the bearing/ range just wasnt putting the artificial target over the actual target. I couldnt use the stadimeter as the waves obstructed my view so I used sonar instead. Perhaps my range and bearing was off somehow. I think I am getting better but my attempts at normal TDC usage are 40/60 success to failure.

In my experience any torpedo solution in seas resulting from winds over 12 meters/sec is likely to fail and even 10 meters/sec can be iffy. This is regardless of the solution accuracy. Seems the torpedo(s) don't like to cope with the rough water. I've had shots lined up as described above at 600 yards, the ship just crawling along at 5 knots and still no hit (not even duds). I have made it a note to self not to waste torpedo(s) if the wind is 12 knots or greater and unless I'm just desperate to use my last torpedo so I can head to the barn, I won't bother unless the wind is 9 meters/sec or less.

edit> The random weather model in this game is so screwed that I've seen times when a 15 meter/sec storm lasted for game weeks across most of the pacific, going from east to west north of the equator against the prevailing winds no less, much like the great Red spot on Jupiter LOL. Usually in those cases if I have not made a contact and the wind is stuck on 15 meters/sec (not 14 or less), I will just semi-rage quit and restart from the last save. Even then it might take several restarts until a restart results in a weather taper down. It's just so frustrating the amount of detail devoted to the game/simulation and then have to deal with totally illogical weather patterns that span half the Pacific or more in effect resulting in once in a 1000 year earth storms constantly. Yes I'm running a weather mod patch for TMO but all it seems to do is make the bad weather seas more realistic. It doesn't seem to do a darn thing about maxed out wind duration.

[jldjs]

Don't quit in a rage, try the Ctrl-N cheat to immediately change the weather!!

[Gray Lensman]

Don't quit in a rage, try the Ctrl-N cheat to immediately change the weather!!

Did not know that one... Thanks

Seriously, though, to me, the weather model in this game is the only thing seriously flawed enough to ruin the gameplay. I'm hoping that's one of the things addressed in Webster/Rockin Robbins new mod.

[Rockin Robbins]

Did not know that one... Thanks

Seriously, though, to me, the weather model in this game is the only thing seriously flawed enough to ruin the gameplay. I'm hoping that's one of the things addressed in Webster/Rockin Robbins new mod.
You know, that one wasn't even on the radar. But now it is!

Yes, people have asked "if the US submarine TDC was so all-fired sophisticated compared to the German one, why didn't they sink a lot more ships!"

Complexity results in errors. Sometimes complexity results in unquantifiable errors that can't be mitigated. The real Achilles Heel of the stadimeter measurement of range/bearing (yes, in the game, both are always sent together to the TDC when you press send) is that it absolutely depends on correct identification of the target. Most targets in the real war were identified WRONGLY. That will result in an error that can't be predicted or quanified. The secondary problem of the stadimeter is the difficulty of judging exactly where the tip of the mast is, or exactly where in that thick line is the waterline. A one-click error can be a significant number of yards. When combined, these two error sources are a barrel of laughs.

The Germans, and us if we use a constant bearing technique like the Dick O'Kane method, didn't give a rat's patootie about identifying a target except maybe for bragging purposes in the bar between cruises. Range didn't matter much to them because their targeting method only cared about the angle between target track and submarine course and the speed of the target. Get those two somewhere close, close the range to 600 meters and the target goes down.

Simplicity is the simplest way to eliminate error. Every step you can eliminate. Every calculation, every measurement you do not need to make adds to the accuracy of your shooting.

[Mallet]

Can i ask why range doesn't factor in the Dick o'kane method? Kind of confuses me how you could pick any range and the torpedo wouldn't just turn way left to catch a target 10000 yards away versus 1000.

[Rockin Robbins]

When your gyro angle is near zero (angles less than 20 degrees were called "straight shooting" by American manuals) then the lead angle does not change for a target traveling at the same speed on the same course regardless of range. That really sounds opaque and is hard to understand. Try this:

http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa293/RockinRobbins13/OKane%20method%20animation_zpsxu8lgs8h.gif

Now you can see that all you need to know is the shoot bearing. Sight down that bearing and when juicy parts of the target present themselves you pull the trigger. Each shot is aimed as a specific spot on the target. It doesn't matter what the range to the target is--you will hit your spot if the target speed and your angle to the track are correct. And that, gentlemen, is what made German U-boats and a select few American sub skippers including Dick O'Kane, so deadly. Simplify! Then simplify more.

Target identification? Who needs it! Stadimeter? What in blue blazes is that doing on my boat? Toss 'em out and lets sink some targets!

[Gray Lensman]

Can i ask why range doesn't factor in the Dick o'kane method? Kind of confuses me how you could pick any range and the torpedo wouldn't just turn way left to catch a target 10000 yards away versus 1000.

edit> RR beat me to it, LOL His small video is a great "perfect" situation example and gets the point across quite elegantly, however, in the real world the torpedo wakes of the first couple of torpedo(s) will most likely be seen traversing in front of the closest targets (unless of course you are using wakeless electric torpedos, gotta love those). That's one of the reasons I prefer the angular standoff shot... less chance of the wake being observed by the closer ships.

Just to clarify, in his (RR's) Dick O'Kane video he accomplishes the straight shot (zero gyro angle) by backing the TDC range setting down against the minimum range stop point.

[Rockin Robbins]

Yes, where multiple ships are concerned you must make several deals with the devil to shoot several. The further away from 90 degrees from the track you get, the smaller chance for a hit and the less error tolerant the solution becomes. Furthermore, if you shoot from ahead of the track the ships are more apt to see the oncoming torpedoes and only need to turn a fraction of a right angle to turn into the oncoming torpedoes and make them miss.

Of course you can sit 90 degrees to the track and use Mark 18s--too slow and THAT reduces your chance of hits while keeping them from seeing the wake.

Dick O'Kane, and I agree totally, said that we get darned close, target ONE target at a time and put her on the bottom. Again, simplifying the process gives maximum success. Return and target another. Repeat until the escorts split for home because they have no merchies to herd.

Yes I've seen fancy videos of multiple ship targeting and they look cool. But in practice you'll come up empty more than bag two or three. One premature explosion with six torpedoes in the water targeting three ships and all three ships go crazy and you waste a great portion of Uncle Sam's money.

Dick O'Kane said that when you have to schlepp back 6000 miles for a torpedo refill you aim every shot and keep it simple. Limit the fancy stuff!:D:D:D

[Gray Lensman]

Did not know that one... Thanks

Seriously, though, to me, the weather model in this game is the only thing seriously flawed enough to ruin the gameplay. I'm hoping that's one of the things addressed in Webster/Rockin Robbins new mod.

You know, that one wasn't even on the radar. But now it is!

<snip>



The actual weather graphic effects especially TMO's are quite OK, it's the weather duration timing that's the real problem, both directions, meaning it stays wind flat 0 way to long also, just as bad as pegged out 15 for game weeks.

Don't know if its possible but there needs to be a way of the weather generator algorithm or internal lookup charts to minimize the super long time maxing out. Doesn't matter if a maxed out effect suddenly turns the other way. That's somewhat realistic at the onset/trailing time of storms, but the only time a sub might have the possibility of the long term weather effects in game would be IF it was traveling in the same direction as the prevailing winds to/from it's base. I wouldn't even advocate for that in game either because it is the most boring part of the game traversing to/from the home base, no need to pester the gamer with a storm following him back from Japan to Midway

[Gray Lensman]

Yes, where multiple ships are concerned you must make several deals with the devil to shoot several. The further away from 90 degrees from the track you get, the smaller chance for a hit and the less error tolerant the solution becomes. Furthermore, if you shoot from ahead of the track the ships are more apt to see the oncoming torpedoes and only need to turn a fraction of a right angle to turn into the oncoming torpedoes and make them miss.

Of course you can sit 90 degrees to the track and use Mark 18s--too slow and THAT reduces your chance of hits while keeping them from seeing the wake.

Dick O'Kane, and I agree totally, said that we get darned close, target ONE target at a time and put her on the bottom. Again, simplifying the process gives maximum success. Return and target another. Repeat until the escorts split for home because they have no merchies to herd.

Yes I've seen fancy videos of multiple ship targeting and they look cool. But in practice you'll come up empty more than bag two or three. One premature explosion with six torpedoes in the water targeting three ships and all three ships go crazy and you waste a great portion of Uncle Sam's money.

Dick O'Kane said that when you have to schlepp back 6000 miles for a torpedo refill you aim every shot and keep it simple. Limit the fancy stuff!:D:D:D

Generally, if I setup a multi-target solution, it will only be against 2 targets and of course to keep it simple they will be along the same line of sight using an angular vs perpendicular sub line-up and 10-15 AOB/Periscope lead from there, then almost always go deep and wait for the others to pass and perform an end around for a repeat on remainders.

If they are in line, I'll use slow setting torpedo(s) for the first ship, followed by fast setting torpedo(s) for the trailing second ship

If they are side by side, I'll use the fast setting torpedo for both targets as they cross the wire.

This is the part of the game simulation that I particularly enjoy, shooting, escort avoidance, and scooting, instead of immersing myself in all the stadimeter/AOB complications discussed earlier.

Morton/O'Kane did this for efficiency reasons, I do it for immersion enjoyment. LOL

[Rockin Robbins]

What I enjoy is setting up my TDC by radar information half an hour before I maneuver the boat into position and shoot! The work is already done. All I do is verify and shoot. It really helps to keep the workload down and the situational awareness up.

That being said, I've been working on understanding the wrinkles of the stadimeter/conventional American submarine attack. I don't think it's been taught right yet and I want to make a video as clear and easy to understand as my Dick O'Kane, John P Cromwell and vector analysis videos. I want people not to just be robots, plugging in numbers for unknown reasons, but having a reason and a verification and a backup plan for everything.

I don't do it much, so I'm getting enough experience that I won't be an idiot about it.

[Silavite]

After doing a little bit of mathematical mulling over the 90 degree Dick O'Kane attack, I figured out an equation that can be used to calculate the attack angle required.

Y = lead angle in degrees
X = target speed in knots
Z = torpedo speed in knots

Y = arctan(X/Z) * 57.3

Before you go and run away because this has trigonometry in it, the arctan operation does the same thing that we do when we connect our torp & target speed vectors tip to tail and measure the angle with a protractor. Arctan (or inverse tangent, they're two names for the exact same thing) spits out the angle measure (in radians, hence the multiplication by 57.3) of the angle that is opposite from leg X, and adjacent to leg Z.

Of course, using this equation without a calculator or trig sheet would be quite impractical, but I'd imagine that submariners back in the day had access to trig sheets.

In any case, this equation isn't terribly useful unless you are greater than about 2,500 yards from the target, where getting hits requires closing down on uncertainty as much as possible. For a closer in attack, RR's rules of thumb (10 degrees for slower than 15 kts, 20 degrees for greater than 15 kts) more then well enough do the job.

[Gray Lensman]

Don't quit in a rage, try the Ctrl-N cheat to immediately change the weather!!

Tried this. using TMO/RSRDC. No Joy.

All I got was the "Yes, Sir, Sweeping" audio

Is there a particular MOD where this Ctrl-N has been redefined?

[razark]

Tried this. using TMO/RSRDC. No Joy.
I believe you need to be on an outside view (bridge/deck gun/external camera) for it to work. That's been my experience, anyway.

[jldjs]

Correct, sorry for leaving that out of my first reply. But, be careful, because if your visibility clears up, so does your targets!

[Gray Lensman]

I believe you need to be on an outside view (bridge/deck gun/external camera) for it to work. That's been my experience, anyway.

Correct, sorry for leaving that out of my first reply. But, be careful, because if your visibility clears up, so does your targets!

Cool, I have a save right now a couple of game days back not deleted yet that has 15 meter/sec winds. I had managed to take out a Nippon Maru (10,000 ton) baby, (3 torps fired point blank 600 yards constant bearing approach, all 3 hit, one was a dud...) Took a while to go down, with an escort in the area, which I was deathly afraid was Bungo Pete (TMO/RSRDC) You're saying I gotta risk hell and high water just to use the Ctrl-N combo... Wow: LOL

I've since then advanced on purpose without waiting because 0100 I got an Ultra dispatch re:IJN heavies out of Truk headed to Tokyo and reaching a certain position in 3 days time, and I'm east near Bungo Suido. I would not use it in that situation since I consider that cheating myself out of the challenge of getting back over in position even in high seas and hoping for a little better weather somewhere along the way... it paid off, I'm gonna make it on time and the weather dropped to 9 meters/sec... doable for me if I can manage to be in front of them figuring them to be fast movers.

[Gray Lensman]

Well, tried all the outside views in combination with Ctrl <N>, still no joy... betting that something in the TMO/RSRDC combo MOD changed the key allocation. Will try it again when I reinstall with just vanilla before installing just TMO. Then we'll see what changed what... Might be a while though... Only 1943 game time now.

[Armistead]

aob is simple in the game...get the ships course relative to your sub and set that course in the tdc.

[jldjs]

I believe Ctrl-N is a stock keyboard command and I've used it TMO as well. Perhaps you have a different keyboard key assignment?

[Gray Lensman]

I believe Ctrl-N is a stock keyboard command and I've used it TMO as well. Perhaps you have a different keyboard key assignment?

Well that's helping to pin down the lack of it on my TMO installation

Even though I'm running TMO, it's in combination with RSRDC overlaying it. This probably confirms what Rockin Robbins implied in another thread that RSRDC did not just stick to varying the campaign files when combined with TMO, it also changed Ducimus' underlying keystroke modifications also and now I'm suspecting other things.

This is relatively minor, but now I'm really wondering what else really was deliberately changed in TMO's behavior when RSRDC was overlaid on top of it.
Everything I read in the various RSRDC documentation files implied that

Quote: (from some RSRDC documentation)

"Run Silent, Run Deep, the Campaign" (RSRDC) is a major rewrite of the campaign layers of SH4 and is designed to overcome the following major "stock" campaign problems..."

Notice the wording "campaign layers", I specifically took that to mean that RSRDC was JUST a campaign layer overwrite, and so was specifically designed to overlay the stock or other MODs without changing their other underlying behaviors. Evidence that the key assignments were changed contradicts the implication that RSRDC "is just a campaign layer overwrite".

Rockin Robbins is probably right when he implied that when playing the TMO/RSRDC combo you are no longer playing TMO... In his (Rockin Robbins) words, that combo is like an "alien" taking over the TMO body.

:up: to Rockin Robbins for opening my eyes to pay attention to noticing subtle differences in TMO

[Gray Lensman]

I believe you need to be on an outside view (bridge/deck gun/external camera) for it to work. That's been my experience, anyway.

Okay, decided to do a reinstall of TMO (without the resident evil alien takeover RSRDC mod).

It works as you described, still stating "Yes, Sir, Sweeping" however though...LOL

I guess I can take that literally as the only thing the <Ctrl><N> thing seems to do with the weather is take everything to 0 weather. "Sweeping the weather effects away so to speak, LOL". I was really kind of hoping that it was a random weather gererator change key, so that one could invoke it a few times in succession until you just came off the maxed out maximum and/or minimum weather settings. This wouldn't help at all for those periods that equally annoy me... Weeks on end of 0 weather. That's NOT real either.

[razark]

still stating "Yes, Sir, Sweeping" however though...
I think TMO uses it as the command for "Normal sonar sweep", so it will give you that response.

I'm not sure if clearing the weather was a bug, or intentional, or something else.

[Gray Lensman]

What I enjoy is setting up my TDC by radar information half an hour before I maneuver the boat into position and shoot! The work is already done. All I do is verify and shoot. It really helps to keep the workload down and the situational awareness up.

That being said, I've been working on understanding the wrinkles of the stadimeter/conventional American submarine attack. I don't think it's been taught right yet and I want to make a video as clear and easy to understand as my Dick O'Kane, John P Cromwell and vector analysis videos. I want people not to just be robots, plugging in numbers for unknown reasons, but having a reason and a verification and a backup plan for everything.

I don't do it much, so I'm getting enough experience that I won't be an idiot about it.

After reloading everything, I decided to give manual targeting w/o map updates. Now that's a challenge, mainly for getting into a proper lead position to shoot. Once in position and close enough, however, the Dick O'kane method is still superior, even if you don't have the exact angle info that you can get with map updating.

Like you I'm now experimenting around with the conventional tracking method mainly for use in determining target course/bearing to plot intercepts with/without end arounds.

Your WernerSobe links are a great help, but a tutorial on determining distant target course/bearing w/o map updates would be great. I haven't been able to find any such video example

[Gray Lensman]

Okay, to partially atone for going OT about weather...

Regarding Manual Targeting in game.

Perusing Rockin Robbins bag of tricks thread stickied at the top of this forum. There is a link from ColonelSandersLite regarding Advanced Convoy Simultaneous Hits. Not only is this a great thread from the standpoint of the intended subject, BUT, he, ColonelSandersLite provides some excellent training aids, one of which is extremely useful for target acquisition and approach training. He prepackaged a set of eight single missions to use for such practice. I have found them to be of great value for any sort of practice imaginable. I took the liberty of separating six of them out for posting as an attachment here for anyone wishing to practice manual targeting using whatever techniques they are interested in at the moment. These are much more useful than the canned stock training missions

I just add them to the end of my mod soup whenever I want to practice something and then remove them whenever. I'm pretty sure they won't interfere with any other mods since the only thing they do is add to the Single Missions list without overwriting anything previous.

Note to Moderator(s): I changed the extension to .txt from .zip because your attachment format doesn't cover .zip files. I thought maybe there might be a specific reason for such exclusion but could find nothing in the Rules. Let me know if it is some sort of infraction and I'll find some other way to post the .zip file:salute:



ColonelSandersLite's Training Missions (click/download attachment and change extension from .txt back to .zip)


.

[Rockin Robbins]

After reloading everything, I decided to give manual targeting w/o map updates. Now that's a challenge, mainly for getting into a proper lead position to shoot. Once in position and close enough, however, the Dick O'kane method is still superior, even if you don't have the exact angle info that you can get with map updating.

Like you I'm now experimenting around with the conventional tracking method mainly for use in determining target course/bearing to plot intercepts with/without end arounds.

Your WernerSobe links are a great help, but a tutorial on determining distant target course/bearing w/o map updates would be great. I haven't been able to find any such video example
That's because it just isn't possible. Our radar screens on real subs gave ship positions to within 15 yards, regardless of range, as accurate as our map updates. But our game radars are nowhere near adequate to giving us the same accuracy as the real submarines had. Our nav map suffers from error due to binning, so it is not perfectly accurate either.

Therefore map contacts off becomes like crossing eight lanes of traffic on I-75 in the middle of Atlanta with a blindfold on. It is possible, especially if you are blind and have developed the necessary abilities. But is it in any way realistic? No, like map contacts off, it is difficult and I suppose some points must be offered for the sheer difficulty of it, but it is not historical, accurate or any reflection of the actual situation of a radar equipped submarine in the war.

It is a major travesty that the settings are called "realism" settings. They are difficulty settings and nothing more.

As long as you are using TMO or TMOPlot, map contacts on is much more historically accurate than map contacts off. I've read most of the war reports of American submarines and not one brags about the Commander conning the boat with a paper bag over his head. So far.

[Gray Lensman]

That's because it just isn't possible. Our radar screens on real subs gave ship positions to within 15 yards, regardless of range, as accurate as our map updates. But our game radars are nowhere near adequate to giving us the same accuracy as the real submarines had. Our nav map suffers from error due to binning, so it is not perfectly accurate either.

Therefore map contacts off becomes like crossing eight lanes of traffic on I-75 in the middle of Atlanta with a blindfold on. It is possible, especially if you are blind and have developed the necessary abilities. But is it in any way realistic? No, like map contacts off, it is difficult and I suppose some points must be offered for the sheer difficulty of it, but it is not historical, accurate or any reflection of the actual situation of a radar equipped submarine in the war.

It is a major travesty that the settings are called "realism" settings. They are difficulty settings and nothing more.

As long as you are using TMO or TMOPlot, map contacts on is much more historically accurate than map contacts off. I've read most of the war reports of American submarines and not one brags about the Commander conning the boat with a paper bag over his head. So far.

Well, I actually succeeded in a rough approximation of a distant target's course and speed using the radar screen spokes and very rough approx. radar distance rings. When the target got close enough for the sonar man to call out sound bearings, it helped even more, but even the sonar man is off a couple of degrees usually and at a good distance that can mean a lot of error.

Definitely it was a very rough approximation, but enough to start an end around once close enough to visually feel your way around the outer visibility limit. Two readings were required with several minutes between the readings to get the rough course approximation (forget target speed calculations though). It is doable, but I'm not sure if it's something I'm going to enjoy game play wise.

I did it using the X marker tool, marking the sub position and then the line tool drawing out the same bearing angle 10 miles or so then the compass circle at approx. the same distance, where they intersect, place an X and wait a while, rinse, repeat... It's too sloppy to use for 3 minute speed determination usage however.

I think you might be exaggerating a little bit likening it to conning the boat with a paper bag over his head. Really I don't think they had a map with a little dot moving neatly around on it either. The simulation does suffer from accuracy with the radar screen, but the technique they used had to be something similar to above.

Right now I'm hampered by not being very good with the Position Keeper when they are close enough since I've really just used the Constant Bearing for all my previous gameplay due to its ease of use especially with the moving dot using on-map updates.

[Rockin Robbins]

I think you might be exaggerating a little bit likening it to conning the boat with a paper bag over his head. Really I don't think they had a map with a little dot moving neatly around on it either.
Actually the maneuvering board DID have a lighted dot which moved on the course and speed of the target. The light was under the chart, moved by electric motors! Part of shooting torpedoes was comparing the bearing from the plot with actual bearing. If they matched you shot. If not you started the targeting process over.

The analog of that is our attack map, a much maligned and poorly understood part of SH4. Some mods, RFB being notable, actually took away button bar and keyboard access to the attack map, a very unfortunate decision.

[Gray Lensman]

Actually the maneuvering board DID have a lighted dot which moved on the course and speed of the target. Part of shooting torpedoes was comparing the bearing from the plot with actual bearing. If they matched you shot. If not you started the targeting process over.

The analog of that is our attack map, a much maligned and poorly understood part of SH4. Some mods, RFB being notable, actually took away button bar and keyboard access to the attack map, a very unfortunate decision.

Interesting re: lighted dot in real sub.

But in game, all the attack map does is display the imaginary target. It could be a lot more useful if it superimposed a mobo style dot on it to match that imaginary target to. (Wonder if a mod, could do that? hint, hint, LOL). As it is, all I use the attack map for is confirmation of my torpedo TDC attack solution and sometimes to watch the fired torpedoes tracking on target.

[BarracudaUAK]

... but even the sonar man is off a couple of degrees usually and at a good distance that can mean a lot of error.
...


The one thing I noticed is in SH3, may be the same with SH4, I haven't checked yet, is that the sonar gives the bearing to the screws not the center of the ship.

That may be where your error is coming in.

Barracuda

[Gray Lensman]

Actually the maneuvering board DID have a lighted dot which moved on the course and speed of the target. The light was under the chart, moved by electric motors! Part of shooting torpedoes was comparing the bearing from the plot with actual bearing. If they matched you shot. If not you started the targeting process over.

The analog of that is our attack map, a much maligned and poorly understood part of SH4. Some mods, RFB being notable, actually took away button bar and keyboard access to the attack map, a very unfortunate decision.

Did some thinking re:lighted dot you refer to and one has to wonder how did it get the information for moving on the course and speed of the target...

Could it possibly have been by the methods previously discussed and then placed in this makeshift MoBo?

The one thing I noticed is in SH3, may be the same with SH4, I haven't checked yet, is that the sonar gives the bearing to the screws not the center of the ship.

That may be where your error is coming in.

Barracuda

You could be on to something.

[ColonelSandersLite]

There is a link from ColonelSandersLite regarding Advanced Convoy Simultaneous Hits. Not only is this a great thread from the standpoint of the intended subject, BUT, he, ColonelSandersLite provides some excellent training aids, one of which is extremely useful for target acquisition and approach training. He prepackaged a set of eight single missions to use for such practice. I have found them to be of great value for any sort of practice imaginable.

:up:


A guy commented on one of those videos a couple of days ago so I thought I would stop in, only to find people talking about me :O:.


I don't know where the commonly believed fallacy of AoB being dependent on your course came from, but it's dead wrong

Is that commonly believed? I've never heard of that until you mentioned it.

I've run into it repeatedly. However referencing your diagram shows clearly that owncourse is entirely irrelevant to AoB.

That diagram is wrong. What's labeled as the "Track Angle" is actually the "Torpedo Track Angle". Basically every measure between V Torpedo and V Target needs to have the word Torpedo inserted. See the USN fire control manual at http://archive.hnsa.org/doc/attack/index.htm page 1-12 for a more information. "Track Angle" is actually the relationship between your course and the target course.

That being said, AOB is related to own course. Intercept angle, Bearing, and AOB must add to 180 or it's not a triangle. Intercept angle is based on the difference between your course and target course.

We can say it's a mathematical certainty that if you keep any one point of the triangle constant over time, the other two must change unless you are on a collision course.

The most common constant in a torpedo attack is going to be track angle. Since track angle isn't going to change, bearing and AOB will.

Suppose you want to keep AOB constant though. Why might you do this? Maybe you want your torpedoes to hit the target at a certain angle and you're not happy with the range. In order to keep AOB constant, you must change course and bearing.

Suppose you want to keep bearing constant. Why? Perhaps you're doing an end around to get in front of the target. In this case, you want to keep distance constant so you move around the circumference of a circle centered on the target. AOB and course must change.

In the case of a collision course, all 3 angles remain constant over time, changing the scaling of the triangle, but not the angles.


edit: fixed a small mistake

edit 2: fixed another mistake. I'm on a roll today...

[ColonelSandersLite]

Getting back to the topic of working the TDC, I thought I would state my own data entry procedure when using the position keeper.


Determine target course and speed via any method.

Enter speed into the TDC first.

Enter approximate AOB into the TDC.

Enter bearing and range into the TDC.

Start the position keeper.

Fine tune the AOB.

Get fresh bearing and range entered into the TDC.




If I'm not using the position keeper, my normal procedure is:

Determine target course and speed via any method.

Ensure the position keeper is off.

Set speed to either 0 or target speed depending on method of shooting.

Send range and shoot bearing to the TDC.

Set AOB to either 0 or the AOB of the target at the shoot bearing, depending on method.

Resend range and shoot bearing to the TDC just before firing to ensure that they haven't been messed up by a stadimeter reading or whatever during the approach.

[Gray Lensman]

Getting back to the topic of working the TDC, I thought I would state my own data entry procedure when using the position keeper.


Determine target course and speed via any method.

Enter speed into the TDC first.

Enter approximate AOB into the TDC.

Enter bearing and range into the TDC.

Start the position keeper.

Fine tune the AOB.

Get fresh bearing and range entered into the TDC.




If I'm not using the position keeper, my normal procedure is:

Determine target course and speed via any method.

Ensure the position keeper is off.

Set speed to either 0 or target speed depending on method of shooting.

Send range and shoot bearing to the TDC.

Set AOB to either 0 or the AOB of the target at the shoot bearing, depending on method.

Resend range and shoot bearing to the TDC just before firing to ensure that they haven't been messed up by a stadimeter reading or whatever during the approach.

Very glad to hear directly from you. :rock:

I'm going to use your PK steps for my initial PK training.



re: not using the PK

What method allows for a 0 (zero) speed setting?

What method allows for a 0 AOB or do you mean 90 degrees AOB?

Are those "Down the throat" setup settings?

Thanks for sharing tips!

[ColonelSandersLite]

I usually use 0 speed and AOB for zero gyro shots. I just look up the bearing to aim the scope at on on a reference table. Since you have my reference materials archive, you already have the tables I use. I probably use this method 90% or more of the time when I'm just attacking a lone merchant tracked by radar.

I also have a tendency to finish off ships using just 0 gyro shots and guessing the lead angle. I usually hit. Make enough 0 gyro shots and it's not too hard to do.

Also, yes, I've done that for down the throat shots as well.

[Gray Lensman]

I usually use 0 speed and AOB for zero gyro shots. I just look up the bearing to aim the scope at on on a reference table. Since you have my reference materials archive, you already have the tables I use. I probably use this method 90% or more of the time when I'm just attacking a lone merchant tracked by radar.

I also have a tendency to finish off ships using just 0 gyro shots and guessing the lead angle. I usually hit. Make enough 0 gyro shots and it's not too hard to do.

Also, yes, I've done that for down the throat shots as well.

To make sure I'm understanding this correctly... You're just using 0 speed and 0 AOB as a setting on the TDC to get a "straight as possible" torpedo run and using your reference charts to place the scope on the correct lead angle?

Interesting refinement if that's the case, since my constant bearing shots (no PK) always involve setting the TDC speed to target speed (not 0 unless the target is actually stopped), choosing a lead angle to fire (i.e. usually 10 slow target/15 medium target /20 fast target degrees) and setting that as my target's AOB (at point of firing). Then I scope down the same lead angle allowing the TDC to make slight gyro alterations in the final firing solution.

re: your last (no PK step)


Resend range and shoot bearing to the TDC just before firing to ensure that they haven't been messed up by a stadimeter reading or whatever during the approach.
I usually just quickly flip over to the attack screen momentarily to ensure that the TDC setup has not changed. I used to do it your way, but every so often I would get into some sort of "locked' situation where hitting the triangle would not reset the TDC or worse, mess up an already good setup, so rather than mess with the settings last minute automatically, I check the attack screen solution first to see if it's necessary.

[Rockin Robbins]

There is one thing wrong with ColonelSandersLite's instructions for using the PK, and if you followed my earlier instructions, you already know what it is.

After entering speed and AoB it is absolutely vital that the PK be on before you take your range/bearing sight. ColonelSandersLite turns on the PK after the range/bearing sight. The reason that is wrong is that after taking the sight in ColonelSandersLite's method, your artificial target is not moving. The real target is. Therefore you introduce an error in the amount of distance the target moves between when you hit the send button on the stadimeter to when you start the PK. The artificial target, which is what the sub really shoots at, will be behind the real target by that distance.

If you subsequently take another stadimeter shot, it will correct the error. But why would you use wrong procedure to introduce the error to begin with? Just turn on the PK first and you'll be bang on every time.

I used to use a chart to do lead angle. I stopped. Why? What is easier than picking the wrong column off a chart when under time pressure? NOTHING! Humans make stupid errors given the slightest opportunity, and so will you. However the TDC doesn't make that mistake. It always knows which speed of which kind of torpedo is going out the selected tube. It always is picking the correct gyro angle. That's why the Dick O'Kane method uses a rule of thumb for lead angle and lets the TDC pick the gyro angle. It works correctly every time. People don't.

Simplify. Toss out steps that introduce foreseeable error. Then do it some more. What you're left with is repeatable valid procedure.

[ColonelSandersLite]

To make sure I'm understanding this correctly... You're just using 0 speed and 0 AOB as a setting on the TDC to get a "straight as possible" torpedo run and using your reference charts to place the scope on the correct lead angle?

Yep. Not mentioned explicitly, but to be clear, when using that method you'll want to sight the periscope at bearing 0/180 and send a range. The range you send doesn't matter, you're just telling the TDC to shoot straight with this setup.


(i.e. usually 10 slow target/15 medium target /20 fast target degrees) and setting that as my target's AOB (at point of firing). Then I scope down the same lead angle allowing the TDC to make slight gyro alterations in the final firing solution.

Yeah, you got that from one of Rockin Robbins right? Nothing wrong with doing it that way either. That method has a bit more built in error correction in the event you forgot your torpedo speed setting or have the periscope pointed a bit wrong or something.

My favored method above gives a straighter gyro angle, which can yield better accuracy when shooting at long range. It is also a flatly better method in the event you don't actually know target speed and course and want to just guess the lead angle and snap a shot off when target is at some arbitrary bearing because you don't want to be fiddling with dials when you're doing that.

Both are perfectly valid.




There's a third method that combines the best of both but requires you to do more work.

First, plot the target normally and determine target speed and the track angle. For example sake, we will say track angle is 60 degrees port.

Second solve the lead angle with the lookup chart. For example sake, we will say that you need to shoot when target is on bearing 10.

Third, enter the target speed into the TDC.

Fourth, enter the target AOB for where it will be when you shoot at it. In this case, 60 - 10 means 50 degrees AOB.

Fifth, point the periscope at the aiming bearing. Bearing 10 in this example.

Sixth, just before you fire (basically just before the ship starts to cross the line is what you want), use the stadimeter to get target range and bearing.

Seventh, move the periscope back to the aiming bearing and resend range. Do not move the periscope again until you are done shooting. Shoot as you would for the other constant bearing techniques.


The downside is obviously that it's more work.

The upsides? For starters, it has exactly the same level of error forgiveness as Rockin Robbins technique above and since you're not just guessing the lead angle, the gyro angle will be very straight every time if you do it correctly. That combination makes it the most accurate method of shooting that I know. Combining this method, electric torpedoes, and map contacts enabled yields an incredible amount of accuracy even out to maximum range. Not only do I hit the ship nearly every time (baring malfunctions), I hit the exact part of the ship I was aiming at nearly every time.

The other big upside is that it allows you to more quickly change targets in a convoy attack since speed is already entered. I used this method for the 0 gyro shots in the tutorial videos you mentioned specifically because of that.

[ColonelSandersLite]

@RR
You ninjad me. How rude! :P. Of course, it's totally my fault for staying up all night and playing video games instead of sleeping and then trying to put together a detailed and factually accurate post :doh:.

If you subsequently take another stadimeter shot, it will correct the error. But why would you use wrong procedure to introduce the error to begin with?

They both introduce error actually. Your method has the target moving from the wrong position which causes the PK to change the AOB at an incorrect rate, which results in target course error. I honestly don't see that it makes a difference either way. Since the target is closing, a second reading will be more accurate and also allow you to verify your readings so it has an intrinsic value anyways.

What is easier than picking the wrong column off a chart when under time pressure?

Bah, I almost always know my lead angles like half an hour before I actually launch a torpedo :P. More seriously, I can honestly say that I have never missed a target that way. I don't know how many firing solutions I've worked with tables, but it's probably several hundred or even more so I genuinely think it's a total non-issue.


Edit: Of course, now that I've committed those words to the interwebs, I'm sure that ol' Murphy is going to come along and make damned sure I miss my next shot due to exactly that reason...

[Rockin Robbins]

Ah yes, the incredible advantage of constant bearing technique: you set up the shot first, THEN all you have to do is maneuver your boat into position. And that frequently can take a half hour.

It sure takes the time pressure off. You're only concerned with one thing at a time with no hurry. Personally, I still say unload as much workload on the machinery as possible.

What if you print your chart on an inkjet printer and a leaking periscope seal gets the paper wet. All that beautiful color ink runs for the hills and you're looking at a blank sheet of paper. Oh, nooooooooo Mr Bill!
http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa293/RockinRobbins13/smileys/onnistunut_hyppy.gifhttp://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa293/RockinRobbins13/smileys/roflmao2.gif:har:http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa293/RockinRobbins13/smileys/rainbowbanana.gif

Yes, you're right about introducing error. However AoB error is almost always less consequential than having your aiming point behind the target. The most error free technique would be to enter speed first, AoB second, then turning on the PK just before taking the stadimeter shot. Even that will have a tiny AoB error from the delay between hitting the send AoB button and hitting the send range/bearing button. The most important thing is to have the PK on before pegging the position with the stadimeter because position and speed are the most consequential errors. A 10º difference in AoB is most often inconsequential, especially if your gyro angle is less than 20º and your angle to the track is between 70º and 120º. Part of planning an effective attack is getting in the neighborhood of 90º to the track, keeping gyro angles below 20º and shooting for a torpedo track angle of about 110º (120º for a 20 knot target. We have charts for that but they're a bit hard to comprehend). Those three factors being true, you have the most error tolerant solution possible.

Errors are inevitable. Do what you can to make them inconsequential.

[ColonelSandersLite]

Ah yes, the incredible advantage of constant bearing technique: you set up the shot first, THEN all you have to do is maneuver your boat into position. And that frequently can take a half hour.

Daylight attack vs a typical 9 knot target. You get ahead and submerge when he enters visual range, about 5 to 7 miles depending on conditions. 30 mins is right in the ballpark, yeah. Of course, you can even plan your attack well before you submerge and know your lead angle even sooner. Anyone can absolutely use one of the attack plans in those tutorial videos today, and those where worked out *months* ago.


Errors are inevitable. Do what you can to make them inconsequential.

This is the exact reason I just accept that I'm going to be taking a second (and maybe a third, fourth, fifth, and sixth) reading during the course of an attack.


As for AOB error being the less significant error, it depends. AOB error translates to positional error over time. How significant that is depends on time, target speed, target aspect, and reading accuracy.

For a simple case where you're talking about taking a reading on a typical slow merchant target 750 yards away and firing immediately, it absolutely does not matter. If you're talking about taking a reading on a fast target, waiting 5 minutes to fire, and a 3 minute run time, it matters a hell of a lot more.

If attacking from a track angle of about 100 degrees, it matters a lot less than it does when attacking from a track angle of 50 degrees. Especially if it results in the PK adjusting the AOB in a manner that makes the track angle too sharp.


Since I feel pretty strongly that you should be, at a minimum, taking a second reading, if for no other reason than to verify your firing solution, I think the difference is largely academic and doesn't even actually matter in the real world.


Also, this may come as a shock, but I don't tend to keep important printed documents underneath my leaky periscope. I store them properly in a water resistant container. I fully understand that having something absorbent underneath your periscope is conducive to good health, but I would recommend you use a towel or an old T-shirt or something instead.