Wow. Great insight into the surreality of war from the Jurgen Oesten video. 'Thanks for torpedoing us and giving us a 9-month break in New York'!

As for what could be gleaned about the position of the battleship in the convoy, nothing definite but Oesten did seem to say he was targeting the convoy when he decided to fire at the 'shadow' that looked like it might be the Malaya.

That's another thing I think I came across at precisely the wrong time personally though, in light of my plodding attempts at manual targeting. Er, range; speed, stopwatch for 3.15 oh !*@$ it's a completely different ship than I'd ID'd it earlier what has that done to the range... AOB, ugh, Jawohl Herr Kaleun, solution to target. Compare to: Ja, we saw this shadow that didn't look much like a merchant so we fired at it... at least he didn't sink her!! :damn:

That is exactly what happened to me on my last patrol. I was outbound from Wilhelmshaven in my VIIB to my Atlantic patrol area when I got a message to sail north to protect Narvik. A British task force passed somewhat near to the north of me, but just a bit too far to intercept. I tried anyway and all I got for it was the consumption of precious fuel. I made it to the Narvik area, saw a few German warships but no enemy. I then received the message to return to my patrol, which I did and was rewarded with a convoy battle.

You may want to read:

Edwards, B. (1997) Attack and Sink: the Battle for Convoy SC42. New Guild.

Hague, A. (2000) The Allied Convoy System. Chatham Publishing.

I havent read them but they look interesting.

T'was not the real HMS Rodney, but a reverse Q-Ship! Surprise! That battleship was really an near-empty merchant with cardboard sides!

Okay, I kid. I too, sunk the Rodney just south of Brighton, under very similar circumstances. It was going about 6kts in my encounter as well. Quite odd.

Oh great, I just finished my patrol on April 1st 1940. There goes my R&R. Talk about April Fools'. :damn:

Yep, you're going to be back out pretty sharpish if you using SH3 Commander.
I finished my last patrol 6th April 1940, was back out 12th April and that included a day to repair 1% hull damage and a couple of days to upgrade the batteries.

It was often the case that a BB and close escort would shadow a convoy from a distance during the day but during the night they would on occasion rejoin the convoy because it was felt the BB would be less vulnerable to torpedo attack during the hours of darkness when surrounded by merchantmens hulls......the accompanying escort would then bolster up the convoy escort.

The usually heavy AA weaponry was also useful to help in cases of attack from the air.

I have a video of Jurgen Oesten telling about attacking a convoy from Freetown, accompanied by the old Battleship Malaya, in U-106 with U-105. He states that the Malaya was inside the convoy during the day, using its plane to hunt for u-boats, and left at night for the first 5 days they attacked. Once they had sunk a number of ships, the Malaya didn't leave the convoy one night. Jurgen said he was unaware it hadn't left the convoy when he attacked with the last of his torpedoes, and put one into the Malaya, damaging it, and causing it to travel to New York for repairs.

:salute:

Just hours ago, I was patroling the north atlantic when I came about a convoy with a capitan ship in the middle, HMS Nelson. Luckly for me, this convoy only had that one battleship and 1 destroyer.

Got rid of the destroyer and targeted the BB. I had to use magnetic because I was shooting at an angle, this would also probably explain why it took me 4-6 torps to sink it.

Really lucky if you ask me to have found a convoy with a capitan ship in the middle and only 1 destroyer escort.

Extremely lucky http://www.psionguild.org/forums/ima...ies/pirate.gif

Correct. After the loss of "HMS Edinburgh" and "HMS Trinidad", when heavy units escorted the convoy it was common practice for them to sail at a high speed to avoid the enemy - maybe 16-18 knots - and make "S" turns so that they didn't take themselves too far from the convoy. This reveals a weakness of the SH3 campaign engine - it does not allow for complex escort behaviors, variable speeds, or breakup/merging of individual units in a convoy.

I agree. The AI of the ships is rather primitive. I should never be able to surface in an unarmed convoy and deck-gun ship after ship after ship. They should either scatter or try to ram me.

The other thing that I wish had been better attended to is the modeling of the physical interaction of the u-boat with the water. I would like to see water sluicing around railing stanchions, or even just the conning tower.

Steve

I'll never forget playing "Sub Battle" by EPYX (one of my first two computer games) back in 1992 and having a convoy scatter after I sank both of its escorts. VERY impressive AI for an old, single floppy disk game. There's no reason why this can't be implemented in a modern simulator.

Agreed. It is too bad that the programmers of SH3 couldn't model more complex behaviour. In my opinion, they were pressured by executive types to hurry up and get it out the door and thus could not model everything they would have liked. There's no way the admiralty would place a battleship inside a convoy and only have one ASW escort. One reason why the U-boats had a happy time was that many of the vessels capable of ASW work were dedicated to battleships and carriers or protecting home waters against a Sealion landing operation. Because of game limitations, I will no longer attack capital ships sailing inside the convoy perimeter, notwithstanding Jurgen Osten's account, which was exceptional. I will have no qualms about attacking BB's or CV's sailing in their own task forces at high speeds and have had success at nailing both types in such a manner.

My convoys consisting of approx. 90% TF,
 

and it is OK to hunt like that "also, only one is tightened,
http://imgur.com/TYsew.jpg