I just watched the video tutorial, and liked the explanations -and the joking comments-, but you could have done it at night instead of that horrible weather LOL, I wasn't ever able to see the target at all in the video :haha:

Anyway, I agree with some of the previous comments in that I find it completely unnecessary and confusing to feed data into the TDC. After all, you are doing a zero GA shot, so you really don't even need to slide out the TDC and the target data tool. You could simply shoot "a la WW1" once you have calculated your lead angle (Loved the use you made of the game tools for getting it!), which BTW is the technique I use in my careers with S-Boats, as was done in real life :rock:

don't forget old tex
 

old tex made a wonderful chart that contains the torpedo speed, AOB, and lead angle for every possible Cromwell attack at a 135 degree angle. No fiddling with the tools. I have pasted on my ceiling and tatooed on my forearm. Maybe he could make one for 120 degrees (please) ? He posted a link in this thread but I do not know where it is, so you will have to find it without my assistance.

Well, it's really a matter of personal preference. Inputting data into the TDC is unnecessary, but also the vector analysis is unnecessary. Each is unnecessary because the other method of executing the attack is available. Each has advantages.

The TDC method is my personal favorite because with the vector analysis method it is necessary to know the speed of your torpedo. We have 31 knot, 44 knot, 10 knot and modded torpedoes with other speeds. So with the vector analysis method you have plenty of opportunity to misremember the torpedo speed and miss by a mile. The TDC already knows your torpedo speed! And it will never remember wrongly. What's so hard about entering the speed and 45-the lead angle into the TDC? You can ALWAYS do that correctly, and the TDC remembers the hard stuff and figures out the real lead angle. With the TDC, human error is removed to a greater degree than for the vector analysis method. I'm all about mitigating human error.

The vector analysis method always gives you a perfect zero gyro shot, where in the TDC method you are estimating, so you might have a couple of degree gyro angle. This is insignificant but it bothers some people who can't stand the slightest imperfection. The vector analysis method is also not restricted to the John P Cromwell 45º attack, but can be used for an attack from any angle to the track. This makes vector analysis very versitile. Just remember, if you misremember your torpedo speed, or if you draw the triangle for a fast Mark 14 and have slow selected you miss by a mile.

The third variation is suggested by I'm goin' down. Ideally, you would have a three-dimensional chart showing all combinations of angle to the track, target speed and torpedo speed telling you the lead angle for each situation. Since we have charts on two-dimensional sheets of paper, we have to have a booklet of two-dimensional charts. I can draw the vector analysis triangle before you even find the chart. And with multiple pages containing multiple lines and colums, the possibility of error is very high. You pick the wrong page, column or row and all your torpedoes go somewhere you didn't intend.

My inclination is to teach methods that use only in-game tools, don't require you to remember torpedo speeds or information from charts, calculators, help screens, torpedo information screens or anything that is not right in front of you in the nav map, attack map or TDC display. I simplify methods to sometimes sacrifice a little bit of precision for ease of use. This loss WON'T result in any missed targets.

However, in a procedure with more complicated steps, using outside tools, the possibility for human error increases. If history tells us anything, it is that human error has a probability of 100%! If you do it right this time, you're just assuring that the errors are one time closer.

My opinion: Simplicity plus planned error equals success. Complexity plus assumption of perfect execution equals embarrassment.

Here are the 120 and 135 Degree Aiming Data
 

As requested, here are the 120 and 135 degree charts for aiming torpedoes. :up: Old_tex

http://files.filefront.com/13590544
http://files.filefront.com/13590546

Yes, I understand your reasoning, but experience also tells me that the most important thing isn't to have or not external tools, but to practice, practice, practice....when I started manual shooting long ago I used simple and complicated methods and with both of them I only had partial success. Now, after many years of manual shooting, I am able to set up firing solutions or estimate target speed nearly "by naked eye"; practice did it, and now external tools are a pleasure to use because they make the perfect complementary part of the job (And add inmersion in the game). Of course if I was a noob, the external tools would just, as you say, add to the confusion and increase the necessary steps also raising chances of error, but the thing is with enough experience this doesn't happen, but in fact the opposite.

So I applaude your tutorials because the learning curve in this game when going for 100% realism is very hard, and your methods are the best suited for anyone who wants to learn and be confident. That said, I consider that once the confidence is there, and the player has developed his "seaman eye", going for more complicated methods and external tools adds pleasure and why not, some effectiveness. But heck, without great simplified methods and tutorials like yours, nobody would ever learn and develop the seaman eye!!!

Cheers :up:

:hmmm: For the middle one, did you mean 46 knots:06:

Naw, my torpedoes all have defective motors and run slow.:haha: I TOLD you the TDC knows the torpedo speeds better than I do.:har:

[IMG]file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/DIEU-B%7E1/USTAWI%7E1/Temp/moz-screenshot.png[/IMG][IMG]file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/DIEU-B%7E1/USTAWI%7E1/Temp/moz-screenshot-1.png[/IMG]http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/a...stargeting.png

Item 5 and 6:

Can I change yards in meters?
For example:
5 knots=500 m
46 knots = 4600m
Because, I use the metric system in Silent Hunter 4

Can you help me?

I am not an expert on the subject, but common sense says tell me it should work whether the conversion is to from yards to meters, miles to kilometers etc.

Yes, it's fine to use metres. It's just a way of representing the speeds as lines, so the units don't matter.

So lead angle will be the same?
OK, Thank you for help :yeah:

Yes, the angle will be the same regardless of what units you use. I'm testing it with stadia...

Holy Sh**!
 

My God Nisgeis,your a GENIUS!I've never been good with manual targeting,so I hit about 45% of the time.
Was Running around the Luzon Straight dodging air patrols when I did a Hydro sweep and had a tanker moving towards me on a parallel.So I set up for this "Cromwell" technique thinking "Meh,I'll give it a shot can't hurt to try." So it's holding course and moving 10 knots.I turn to get to the 45,set everything up like described and Launch 2 at her with the 3rd and 4th ready for a follow-up.and My god they hit PERFECTLY!I have never shouted so loud over a video game EVER!
One went right Amidships and the other hit just behind the bow.She kept afloat for another 5 minutes before finally giving up the ghost due to a combination of Flooding and a massive explosion in her hold.

As a man who sucks at math big time and usually misses because of it,the simplicity and the ease of this method is a Godsend!
THIS TECHNIQUE GETS MY SEIG ZEON SEAL OF APPROVAL!
http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/m...079/Zeon-2.jpg

I cannot make this technique work from very far out, say farther than 2000 yards. The optics are just too imprecise. A small error (0.5°) from long range can easily result in torps missing ahead of or behind the target.

That is, something seems to be screwy with the in-game optics.

For example, when I press [-] to snap the TBT to "dead ahead" (should be 0° bearing), then click the "send range/bearing" button, the resulting solution is just ever so slightly off from the 0° bearing line on the 3000-yard overlay (default feature of TMO 2.1). I don't know which one's "right." I entered a zero target speed and an arbitrary range. If I understand the TDC correctly, the AOB value shouldn't matter, as it should have no effect on the gyro angle for a stationary target.

I tried using the stern tubes and has a similar problem. Lining up the TBT on the 180° mark gives a solution that is off by a degree or two, not directly aft. I have to point the TBT almost a full degree off (looks like 180.8° or so) to get a perfectly straight aft shot.

Sure wish our fleet boats had a torpedo gyro angle indicator, like the U-boats do. Better yet, one that would indicate in fractions of a degree. 0.1° isn't much up close, but can be hundreds of feet at longer ranges.

MaxOptics IV helps somewhat in that it has a larger bearing scale than the stock game, and has marks every 1°, but it seems to not be lined up quite right.

Anyone else have these problems?

Another thing:
The text walkthrough of this technique would benefit from a clearer explanation of how to set up the TDC. If you are used to using the PK and all the other fancy stuff, it is not immediately obvious how to set up for a "dumb" 0°-gyro shot, leaving the PK out.

Cromwell attack:
 

Try this: download gutted's Solution Solver program, figure out how to use it, and it will compute the lead angle for any speed or Aob. Make sure your speed measurment is accurate. :D

I think what you're noticing is not a result of inaccuracy in measurement or calculation. Check this out next time: use the external camera and get close to the target. I'll bet my bippy that he saw the torpedo and made a simple 45º turn into the path, causing the torpedo to miss to the outside.

That is the major difficulty with John P Cromwell. If the target sees the approaching torpedo it's a simple matter to evade. It's very important to do this in rough water or at night. Even then you'll chock up an occasional miss.

Still, this is a great technique if only for one reason. If you miss, you've got time to set up an attack from 90º off the track. And you've shooting from ahead of escorts and less likely to be detected at this angle.

I play with external camera off because I'm hardcore like that, but I take your point.

Zigzagging can also play merry hell with long-distance shots, but I don't think it will matter too much, as long as I base my calculations on the base course (the overall direction of motion) and compensate for the reduction in forward speed. Measuring the ship's speed on one leg of the zigzag, then knocking off half a knot to compensate for the evasive maneuvers, seems to be a reasonable rule of thumb.

Of course this doesn't help when the convoy does what I call a "strategic zigzag," making a large course change as a unit.

Oh brother tell me about the strategic zig.

A few days ago I had loaded up TMO to give OM a break and stumbled across a nice litte convoy hanging around Luzon. Dead center was a tanker of the 10,000 variety. Obviously she caught my eye and I was ready to give her my full and undivided attention. Had her primed and ready and right when I let loose, the whole convoy zags. That lady broke my heart, lucky it wasn't a total loss as one of the torpedoes hit a stray meandering about behind her and sank. Only 2800 tons though.

Eh sometimes you win sometimes lady luck takes a look and let's out a giggle.

The 45° technique really does work well at night, when no one can see the torps coming.

I still get duds from time to time. Just this morning (middle of the night in game time), I had two Mk. 18 torps bounce harmlessly off a cargo ship, despite the 45° impact angle. I think next patrol I will only carry Mk. 14's. They may still be crap in 1942, but they do work slightly more often at the low-speed setting. At least I haven't had one circle back and sink me (yet).