Lenght of ship
 

I am unable to find the lenght of japanese warships in the manual .. i see height, draft and tonage but no length .. am i doing something wrong?

I'm a first time player of SH4 and trying to play the game @ Realism = 100
I want to use the lenght to determine speed ..

Forgive me if this is a stupid or weird question.




PS. Is there a tutorial to determine course of ships?

Nope. In stock there is no data on length.

Getting target's course or speed is influenced on what level of difficulty of level you are playing, mod etc. There are numerous posts and tools on this subject. Starting point: Sub Skipper's Bag of Tricks--Techniques, tactics, tutorials, videos

And welcome aboard! :salute:

.

There is chart someone that you can print giving lengths and shooting methods, try searching "ships lengths" here

Welcome Aboard .Memento.Mori!
 

:salute:

Mark ship's position on map. Wait a few minutes. Mark ship's position on map. Draw line between two points. Measure angle of line.

It's the simplest method of doing it. You other choice is to look at the ship and estimate the AoB. With practice, you can become very good at it.

And Welcome to Subsim.

here:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/4itn7g...4%20Manual.pdf

pretty much the whole shebang....

The boxed version comes with a poster giving ship characteristics, maybe that's why it's not in the manual.

It is also in the manual that came with the original offering of the game.

I have the original SH4-Wolves Of The Pacific version in cd box (downloaded en bought U-Boat Missions from Ubisoft). But the PDF manual had nothing about ship length's .. I downloaded the manual sugested by "commandosolo2009" in this post and it had more info on US and Japanese ships.

I was reading "Simplified Manual Targeting 100% realism.pdf" and it said about length:
".. You can get it from the recognition manual .."
That's why i wondered why i did not see it in the recognition manual.

But still the AOB is rather a mystery to me at this moment as is the entire concept of nautical navigation and managing a submarine. I could use one or two hits on a good and clear tutorial or maybe even better some literature on WWII submarine management/warfare and nautical navigation.

I'm still practicing on the Torpedo Training Mission.

Where's all that rain I can drop on your parade? Oh, here it is, lurking above me!

First of all, determining target speed by timing target length by the wire is a technique that nobody used during the war. Why? Because we didn't know what the length of the target was. In SH4 our recognition manual has precise information about every single ship on the ocean. The real thing? Don't make me laugh. When it did have information it was often wrong. When it was right, the captain chose the wrong target anyway.

The majority of targets sunk during the war were misidentified. There was never any attempt to measure target speed by calculating from target length. It's a bogus technique that has for some reason, taken on a life of its own in Silent Hunter.

So using that is gaming the system, taking advantage of unrealistic information, just as those who know that by sonar you can hear screw sounds exactly two degrees to either side of the real bearing and then there is a sudden cutoff. They game the system to get an exact bearing to target by passive sonar when in real life the width would not only be wider, but the width would vary with conditions! Passive sonar bearings were about half as precise in real life as they are in SH4.

OK now that your parade is wetted down I'll let you get back to obtaining advice.:D

Some interesting statistics regarding that issue:

Unrestricted Warfare, Appendix 3, Page 1:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/pict...pictureid=3520
Unrestricted Warfare, Appendix 3, Page 2:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/pict...pictureid=3521

Who needs wily coyote? We have Rockin Robbins!:woot:

It's not bogus, it's scientifically sound. It's just historically unrealistic. Well, for US atleast. Since the intelligence about those ships could not be trusted, or the Officer using it. BTW, the Germans did have special functionality in some of their periscopes ('Feste Linie im Raum', tr.: 'fixed line in space') to keep a gyrocompass-synchronised vertical line in their view. (Link)

Ahum, ;)

In another post (I think it was the recently resurrected 'Clear the Bridge! Dick O'kane method' thread, ... yup it's post 7) you said:


It works, 'fairly' quick, at least usually quicker than 3 minutes :O:, it's (can be) precisely defined how to, and it's simple. What more do you want?

Could somebody translate that please? This is the first time I've ever heard of a gyro-stabilized anything on a WW2 submarine, and I'd like to know exactly how this thing worked.

How about the torpedoes you shoot. They are gyrostabilised as well ;)

Sorry, my German is barely enough to understand it myself. Maybe Google ist in ein sprechen mood. ;)

I looked up "bogus" in the Rockin Robbins unabridged dictionary and it said "historically unjustified procedure." My post wasn't to tell the OP not to use the technique, but that actual use of that technique was impossible during the war.

The Germans had the capability to use this technique. They were fighting open societies which did not restrict or falsify information about their merchant ships. A Liberty Ship, for instance, was a cookie cutter thing where each ship shared waterline length, overall length, masthead heights and cabin configurations. It wouldn't be difficult at all to determine the numbers by trial and terror and then apply those numbers to hundreds of available targets with devastating results. But I haven't seen evidence of much or any use of this technique, even by them.

Japan, however, was a closed society. Very little was known about their merchant fleet. We knew some things about their war fleet but much of that information was purposely misrepresented. The state of global communications just didn't allow us to use "timing by the wire" or to calculate target speed by prop turn count as we can today.

But don't confuse putting something in historical perspective with telling a new player not to learn the technique. I did not do that. In fact, I joked that now that I had rained on his parade he could continue collecting information.

I had worked out the technique years ago when I was still playing SHCE. I thought, at the time, it was a brilliant idea and that it would be a great help to me. I soon stopped using it. Why? Not because it was ahistorical, but because I didn't see any advantage to it.

If the target is abeam, one must 'add' the sub's speed to the target's. If the target is ahead this is not neccessary, but then your already lost your window of opportunity. If the target is far away, it will be hull down and you can't use it. If the Aob is small, you can't really tell when the stern passes the wire. When you put your boat on a normal approach course, frequently, the target will be moving very little, relative to the wire, making the technique unusable. In any case, I would still have to make a plot to obtain the course and range, so I would use it for the speed also. The timing target length, or whatever you want to call it, will not give you any information that you can't get form a good plot.

That said, I don't see anything wrong with using it. It may be ahistorical, but it is not implausible. Certainly, at least some of the IJN warships were distinctive and would permit its use. :-?

The ship lengths that were in the printed manual were off. I created a tool that will fetch all the data you'd possibly need about each ship from the actual game files:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/down...o=file&id=1602

It was made for SH5, but will work for SH4 as well.

enjoy.

Good idea! :up:

Wasn't JANAC controversial? I think O'Kane mentions at the end of his book that JANAC was discredited after checking with IJN records. Then new tonnage was credited.