Quote:
Originally Posted by Armistead
Has no bearing on the thread or your method, but it states..
"Launders spotted another periscope. Lowering Venturer's, Launders correctly guessed that the other periscope belonged to his quarry. Slowly following U-864, Launders planned to attack the German u-boat when it surfaced."
Seems he made visual contact and followed it by scope enough to get into position to attack by sonar. That statement in fact is the problem with your method, he had to put himself on course to attack to start with and did so with a visual.
His attack why well planned, was more luck and theory....I've sunk many ships by sonar alone with no visuals at all, but it was estimate info at best.
Here he had visuals to start with...
I use to have some respect for you, but this constant silliness trying to just jest at people is silly.
Thread needs to be lock and deleted, it has no merit at all.
|
what did i say at the begining, this was not an 8010, what bearing it has is that tater and a few other try again as usual, saying you cant track by hydrophones, it has an arc, or whatever else he imagines, so that documentary has bearing, it also has bearing in showing what a submarine can do, with a capable skipper, with audacious tactics, and a very capable hydrophone operator, thats what bearing it has.
it has bearing also, in that a submarine could track, and kill another unseen target, why ami not surprised you would deny the truth of that?