The problem is that in alot of cases you encounter the target with a speed and AOB that does not allow you to keep it on a steady bearing with only 2 knots. When you have encountered the target the AOB may have advanced to well over 30 degrees. Assuming you look on his bow with 10 degrees and make speed determinations of that is just silly. And in those situations I still want to know where he is going.

I have not tried the mission as I have no SH4 installed at the moment. But maybe I'll try to recreate it on paper.

You misunderstood. Yes the target's sound may go beyond 270 or below 90 degrees. (or in a backwards direction) But then you should accelerate if the sound crosses towards your bow, and decellerate or stop if it crosses towards your aft. The trick is trying to keep him on 90/270 'on average', and thus your speed wil be an 'average'. You definately should not turn. This messes up the attempt to keep a steady bearing. If you cannot get his sound to come back to the 90/270 degree and you are at maximum speed all the time then you have to give up. He is simply too fast with an AOB near 90. But since US subs can use the hydrophone when surfaced I don't see this happening with most merchants.

Because the astrological symbolism of my starsign sometimes actually makes me feel like that, I won't hold this against you! ;)

im really sorry for mispelling your name pisces, but you made me laugh, that was funny.
listen i have the answers to your questions, i just cant answer them now, ill try to
get them for you late tonight.
i wish i could upload the movie, really, all you need to really see is the first two parts, and the last two parts,
the rest is just a long ride to the target and nothing changes, the first 2 parts shows the sub getting the targets speed, the last 2 parts shows the kill.
its so long because it had to be played in rt, in order to see it work.
i will definitely stick with this post until everybody who wants to learn it has it down pat.
guys when ever we learn something new, it takes awhile to really understand it, but thats what training is all about,but i know
once you have it down, your going to like it alot.
amistead, here i go again mispelling someone name, sorry amistead, said something like its limited, its not really, i just used a medium speed for the test mission, i might make a slow and fast speed mission,
to show its not limited to just a med speed,
the chart i posted, can handle a target going over 20 knots. i know this method can handle any speed, but i stopped there because most targets we encounter
in the game travel less than twenty knots

I for one, see it completely and in excruciating detail. Determining the AoB in any of the situations you have described is impossible. The only facts that can be found by putting the target on a fixed bearing is whether the AoB is under 180º and if that AoB is starboard or port. By cheating and using the sonar operator's speed estimate, knowing the game's precise speed range for each of three possible speeds, you can game the system and narrow down the possible AoB range somewhat. In the real war, your sonar man would be completely unable to give you that information, including whether the target was going away or approaching.

If you look at my tutorials on the Dick O'Kane method, the John P Cromwell method or the vector analysis method you can find the pattern for properly presenting an attack technique. It has to be easy to understand, without ambiguity and possible for the average person to use successfully.

This is nothing but smoke, mirrors and half-constructed thoughts describing a technique based upon an unwarranted assumption of an 8010 relationship that will almost never exist.

I can say with certainty that the AoB will always be under 180 degrees.

Have you guys heard of the wet finger in the wind method?:03:

Well, no, it could BE 180º! hehehehehe!:D

But then your speed to keep it on a constant bearing would be zero or infinitely variable without restriction, depending on your course.

ok, i have uploaded the movie to u-tube, the combined time is about 21 minutes,
in 3 parts. what the movie does is prove that the method works. i have writted a small explanation for
all three individual parts to let the viewer know what going on, for the part thier watching.
but whats happening is the submarine has aligned itself with the target in an 8010
angular arrangment, after about 8 or 9 minutes holding the target at a constant bearing of 280 degrees,
(way longer than i had to, but to show that a target can be held constant for a long period of time),
the approach looks at the combat information chart to fire the torpedoes at the proper firing bearing, for a 0 degree gyro angle,
for the targets course and speed r to submarine, for an mk-14 torpedo set for high speed.
the target is held at 280, and has a starboard aob, so im lisening mostly at bearing 290 and 291, to detect acute bearing change of the target,
which if occurs, either the target has a larger aob than 10 degrees, or submarine speed is not enough to keep target at a constant bearing.
at 290, i can still hear target screws, and hydrophone amplifiers can pick up sound from the target and display it as a green visual indicator
light, because the target sound is diffused 10 degrees on either side of its true bearing, ( not to be confused with its polar bearing), but its real bearing.

eventually the sub closes to short ranges that the sub has to slow to 1 knot, than half knot, and then to all stop in order not to collide with the target and maintain enough arming distance for the torpedoes. firing bearing for target making 11 knots and course 90 degrees r to submarine is 347 degrees for a 0 decgree gyro angle, using mk-14 set for high speed. part 3 shows the kill.


part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzjXvApt1WU
part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_KaezvILg4
part 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5MQiLfdtJY

There is no there there. At no time did you establish the AoB of the target. Therefore at no time did you establish the speed of the target. You set up the scenario in the mission editor, erected your straw man and then knocked him down pretending to accomplish something else entirely. This is evidenced by the fact that you started out the video at 2 knots and course North, never having to adjust either. Why? You already knew the answer.

In a career encountering targets is nowhere near that convenient. Therefore the entire technique is unusable unless used only with your mission.

Useful stuff which is actually contained within the video:

1. Putting yourself on a collision course with an approaching target will definitely put you in a position to shoot. Actually, best approach turns out to be putting the target at your beam, 90º or 270º. You actually should increase speed to arrive ahead of the target so that you have time to set up the shot.

2. Getting close as you can makes any targeting system work, including your by guess and by golly zero bearing shots. In a real life situation you would have had no idea of the target's course or speed, but you were close enough to hit 'em anyway. This is the most important key to success. If you are close enough nothing else matters.

Unuseful, misleading stuff in the video:

Deax ex machina! You pull out an unannounced and unexplained tool which is nothing but a vector analysis substitute bearing lookup tool. After all the hocus pocus, you do a standard vector analysis attack having nothing to do with 8010! However, a target approaching at AoB 10º starboard, unless you change your course, which you never did, will never cross at 90º. You only hit because you were so close. You blew the 90º attack totally unless you did some maneuvering that did not take place in the video.

For a Bearing-Only estimation of target course and speed (assuming target at constant speed and course) check:
http://www.archive.org/details/maneuveringboard00unit (you' ve got to download it) and go to "Case XI".



.

I've really tried to follow the methodology here and find myself;
a.) Scratching my head
b.) Wondering why I would bother learning it when a combination of the 3 minute rule coupled with the Dick O'Kane targeting method give you all you need to hunt/position/hit/sink targets successfully.

They have the added advantage of being intuitive - this method is not - at least IMO.

greyrider
Ok, if I succeed (say via sonar) to keep a distant target at a relative bearing of 80° while my speed is 2.5 Kts, why am I to suppose a AOB of 10 and a target speed of 14.1 kts and not other solutions (sample on following table)? Even if the sonar man or a contact report states a "slow" target the solutions are more than one. (Not to mention the possibility of the target running parallel and at equal speed with the sub)
OwnShip Speed (kts) ____"Lead Angle" (°) _____AoB (°) _____Target Speed (kts)
__________2.5_________________ 80 __________10 _______________14.2
__________2.5_________________ 80 __________15 ________________9.5
__________2.5 _________________80 __________20 ________________7.2
__________2.5 _________________80 __________25 ________________5.8
__________2.5 _________________80 __________30 ________________4.9


What you're proposing (trying to keep target at a fixed bearing) has its merits in conjuction with other available information, but not limited to the 80-10 case though.

And that's the thing that has me scratching my head.

How can one assume an AOB of 10 on a target we neither plot nor eyeball?

What if when we first make contact with the target the AOB happens to be say 45?
Do we run ahead at speed until we get a 10 AOB, then start the approach?


It looks to me like this attack method will only work in a very limited set of circumstances.

hey rr, this is a picture from the TFCM, says we can,

http://a.imageshack.us/img834/8706/platexvi.jpg
By null at 2010-08-17

i put up a mission, that says we can,
i made a movie, that shows we can.
now show me yours, that says we cant.
and why would i read the cromwell method, or anything else you wrote, which i consider inferior, when its just a step child of point and shoot, which is highly flexible, and where your things
come out "AFTER", and the key word is after, someone elses. check the dates of when posts by rr came out, verses dates for point and shoot by me,
or the sound trainer or hydrophone tutorial from sh3. i have only posted alittle over 200 times, and most of my posts have dealt with tactics, so im easy to trace.
you say you got inspired by a microflash diagram gutted made, where do you think he got that from?
from point and shoot, he either understood very well what i was talking about, or he read and saw pictures i posted of patrol reports, when i was part of the atlantic campaign
at wpl, and i demonstrated point and shoot by hitting four targets as they crossed the firing bearing at 0 gyro, check the dates i posted the torpedo data sheets
for the point and shoot technique in sh3, you discover the gutted's diagram post came out "after".
now i dont care if you believe it or not rr, im not here to impress you, got that? you dont impress me, as i said, your a derivable, not original.
no ones twisting your arm.


funny how point and shoot keeps on getting better and better, while cromwell and company are not
improving over time as point and shoot does, that proves to me that you dont have any originality,
and that whatever you write about is derivable, from somebody else!
you know, if i was to do a cromwell type shot, i do any angle i feel like, if im not developing a deliberate attack, then im making a hasty attack, ill go
in with no solution, because i have a real good eye for speed over the water, and a even better eye for torpedo speed in the water,( kentucky windage ) thats another skill you dont have!
thats a skill i havent written about yet, but when i do, im sure youll come out with something that youll derive from it.
you said earlier in this tread that you had a brainstrom, and it all of a sudden was inspired by pices post, well where is it? im hoping
you do use 90/270, im inviting you to try and show us what you come up with, im really looking forward to that!
this is excately what im trying to say about you, and your own words prove it.


barkhorn, do you know the reason why you would want to learn, because in rl, not all methods will work at all times, not even this one, so it behooves you to learn as much as you can,
just my opinion, and you can use elementary tactics all you want like dick okane method, and 3 minute rule, as i said, im not twisting anyones arm.
it isnt hard, i do it automatically, its part of my standand attack method, it comes natural for me to turn a closing target to an eighty offset, whether port or starboard,
because i know hes coming down the line on a 90 or near 90 r to sub, you can sit there if you want, and take the time to plot its course using the methods
you described, and then all i do is turn, and dont plot, which is easier? you decide.

That's still what doesn't make sense to me. Watched the youtubes and basically it's set up.

Say I'm going north and I get a sonar contact at bearing 170. Say it's a group of merchants, but running in a row at 12kts. I can't see it, so do you hit the gas until you have it in the correct position coming towards you. If contacts are off and if this works it would only be a tool for contacts off, you would have to track it by other methods until it's on a perfect path, but by then I would already have my setup.

It just doesn't make sense unless it's one ship and all factors are perfect.


The bigger problem is I'm not going through all this when they're much easier ways for a single ship. I still see no way it could work with a large convoy or TF with ships in a zig pattern with escorts constantly making zigs. Your sonarman will tune into different ships, giving different commands.

The real tool is radar, not the blind use of sonar. This appears to be using your elbow to scratch your arsehole.

I've quoted this again Greyrider, because this is the question I really want you to answer.

Until I am given a convincing answer to this question, I remain extremely sceptical of the viability of this method except in very specific circumstances.