Well, reality in any of this is hard to come by once you come to grips with the fact that no matter what in-game command decisions you make, you can always exit to Windows and reload without worry of dying. I think RFB does a pretty decent job of levelling the playing field despite it all.
That said, I think one point to be made is that if getting a good range on a target is a problem such that increased range will introduce increased error of an unacceptible degree into the firing solution, one obvious solution to the problem is to get closer to the target. If you can't you have a tougher decision to make. I think that is pretty realistic.
Active sonar, when safely available in a tactical situation, even if depending on the operators and not using a DIY approach, can be used in tandem with your stad readings. Get a few readings, set the PK in action, then ping once after a minute or two and check the report against the PK. Once you get radar on your boat, there is a good chance that if you've got it all plotted right and you plan on using the PK, you'll know if your stad reading is right as soon as you take it. There is even a good chance you will be able to manually target without the TDC using your radar-generated /passive sonar-verified plot without even coming up to look if . For further realism, keep a patrol log and document your experiences and findings as you go. That's how real intel is gathered. You'll know from experience when to take extra steps to verify range to target.
Another solution is to use largely range-irrelevant firing solutions, such as vector analysis methods. Get yourself on a converging course, and or two decent though not exact range estimates, along with an anayisis of the rate of bearing change can give you pretty much all the info you need to set up a decent spread.
Which brings me to another point: In game most of us fire spreads so that when it all comes together we get three or four perfectly placed holes in the target. I think most skippers in most situations fired spreads hoping that one or two of the fish might find the target given the uncertain nature of the data used to compute a solution.
Finally, most of us bag more targets in a couple of patrols than many boats fired at for the duration of the war. If we miss a few because of uncertain data (that problem being not unrealistic at all), I can live with that in the name of realism.
Not banging on anyone, as given the first point 'realism' is a pretty hard target to range, and we all try to get that 'enjoyment' out of it which is satisfiying to each of us. Just offering a different perspective on some of these range 'realism' issues.
|