Is "locking on a target" really realistic?

[breadcatcher101]

I know several helpful threads and links have covered using the TDC. especially getting the target speed has been covered. But I find it hard to accept that the scope would just lock on and hold the centerline of the target while you gathered data. Am I wrong here?

Let's say you've spotted a target. You have a blank plotting table. You need to find it's heading, speed, and range. By taking 2 readings 3 minutes apart--longer is better--this will enable you to plot it's heading, ranges, and it's bearings. From these 2 different readings you can figure speed and heading. Once you have this you are ready to get a firing solution.

Unless I am missing something it is just hard to believe that the scope would have been capable of having the ability to stay on a target when you lock it. Today it is of course workable but in the 1940's??

[Sailor Steve]

The scope doesn't.

But the captain does. He uses both hands to keep the target centered. He calls out "Bearing...Mark!" and his assistant (American XO or German 1WO or British First Mate [or Lieutenant]) reads the bearing off the back of the stadimeter. The captain focuses the spit-image rangefinder and calls out "Range...Mark!" The assistant writes down the range off the back of the rangefinder dial. The captain estimates the AOB. The scope goes down. Together they calculate the parameters and feed the information into the TDC.

You know the rest. Figure out a way to do all that while you keep the scope centered on the target, and you've solved the problem. Until then, having the scope locked on is the most realistic way possible.

[Anachronous]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Figure out a way to do all that while you keep the scope centered on the target, and you've solved the problem. Until then, having the scope locked on is the most realistic way possible.

Co-op mode, where you make the whole family man a station each, and new periscope style game controllers. :P

[Rockin Robbins]

OK, here's the deal. In a submarine, the man on the periscope, usually but not always the captain would put the crosshairs on the target and hold them there (for the check bearing or continuous bearing method). When he called "mark" a designated officer from the firing team would call out the numbers from the dial on the back of the periscope, both bearing and range if a stadimeter reading was taken. Sometimes the captain would do it in two steps "range, mark" and "bearing, mark." The important thing was that it was a two man operation. Three if you count the TDC operator inputting these numbers into the TDC.

In the game we are one person. I suppose you could say "range, mark" and pause the game to go over to the other side of the periscope to read the numbers, then switch positions to the TDC operator and enter the values. But all this would be an immersion killer, forcing you to pause the action to get the job done "realistically." The developers decided that being able to lock the target and automatic input into the TDC resulted in more realistic gameplay (because it took realistic amount of time) and more immersive (because you did not have to stop time to do so. Stopping time is rather unrealistic too!).

Often, in pursuit of one definition of realism you make the fulfillment of another aspect of realism impossible. I think the developers did a really great job of maximizing the reality and minimizing the effects of what is not realistic where periscope procedure is concerned.

If you don't want to lock the scope, You can perform the entire procedure without doing so. As long as you have a target in the crosshairs you can use the stadimeter.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Anachronous

Co-op mode, where you make the whole family man a station each, and new periscope style game controllers. :P

But most of us won't play that way 90% of the time, and in single play you still have the problem.

Your 'PControl (tm)' is a good idea, but you'd need a perfect voice-command system to go with it.

[breadcatcher101]

I thought it was just in gameplay. It does make it easier since you are a one man operation. I have done it the "real" way, it does work but I had the ease of a clear day and a target with a slow speed which gave me time. Even so I had to pause the game once.

[Nisgeis]

JT sonar, the replacement for JP sonar gear in mid 1945 could be driven from the TDC. It had an indicator showing whether the target was to the right or left of the bearing it was trained on, so you could easily see if the target was lagging or leading the generated bearing and so check accuracy. It was very accurate as well, about 2 degrees if I remember right. So the technology was there to have the periscope aligned to the projected bearing from the TDC, it probably wasn't implemented as the sonar would have been used continuously, whilst the periscope only once in a while, so the need to have it track wasn't there.

Skippers didn't like exposing their periscope and minimised the time it was up. It takes a while to operate the stadimeter for example as you have to wind things into place. Using the horizontal stadimeter takes even longer to get an AoB measurement and was hardly ever used. Automatic periscope training was probably a cost that wasn't deemed warranted, or maybe it would have taken time to engage/disengage... not the sort of thing you want when you want to get a bearing and then take a quick sweep for escorts.

[Hylander_1314]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

The scope doesn't.

But the captain does. He uses both hands to keep the target centered. He calls out "Bearing...Mark!" and his assistant (American XO or German 1WO or British First Mate [or Lieutenant]) reads the bearing off the back of the stadimeter. The captain focuses the spit-image rangefinder and calls out "Range...Mark!" The assistant writes down the range off the back of the rangefinder dial. The captain estimates the AOB. The scope goes down. Together they calculate the parameters and feed the information into the TDC.

You know the rest. Figure out a way to do all that while you keep the scope centered on the target, and you've solved the problem. Until then, having the scope locked on is the most realistic way possible.

Ah ya beat me to it! I was too busy fiddlin' with my hooga horn on the boat. Trying to get the rocker switch to work so that it has the proper sound. Almost there, when it started raining. But that's ok, as some of the mud from the bottom that didn't wash off the anchors the other day will get rained off the deck, and save me the scrubbing detail.

[theluckyone17]

Originally Posted by Anachronous

Co-op mode, where you make the whole family man a station each, and new periscope style game controllers. :P

Yeah, right. I can guarantee you no WW2 sub captain ever put up with the verbal abuse I'd receive if I tried to give my wife orders.

What's that? She supposed to be the captain? Well then, we've nothing to worry about. We'll never get out of the harbor

[PortsmouthProwler]

OK, here's my two cents on targeting:

* I've read a **lot** about WW2 Pacific Ops. Also, I worked at Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, right on the boats.

* Historical reality: Correct, you want to minimize scope exposure. US doctrine pre-war was submerged sonar attacks - but as soon as the shooting began, they rapidly ashcanned it, 'cuz it didn't work - trying to sink things from 75 feet dowm by sound wasn't a good technique.

* So skippers and officers learned by OJT. Just like the Kriegsmarine found out, the most effective attacks were night surface (see Red Rampage). Also, yes, it's desirable to use the equipment, however, as Dick O'Kane figured out, there's more than one way to skin a cat.

* With experience, a knowledgeable officer can eyeball range and speed. AOB can be within 15 degrees, really; it's the least important element. Remember, they had a good idea of LOA and LWL for most vessels. Hmmm, it just took 5 seconds for a vessel to pass through the hair from stem to stern and she's about 300' LOA - do the arithmetic. In SH 1, I got pretty good at eyeballing range, speed, and AOB. Never bothered with SH2 and got fairly good with SH3, tho' it's harder with water on your scope, etc. Good realism.

* But the single most important consideration is your approach. No quarter, mates, this is all about sneakiness and skullduggery. Find the baseline course for that convoy and 'end-around' it, ambush the bastards every time, if you can. Sneak past those escorts and get to less than 1,000 yards, preferably 750. Errors in your estimates matter little at point-blank range.

* Then get the hell out of there. Destroyers aren't really prizes, what you want is the merchants, and capital ships when you encounter a naval task force.

* And for real historicity, you should be very frustrated and/or dead until the early fall of '43, when the the torpedo problems were finally and truly solved. Until then, you should be gnashing your teeth and cursing BuOrd.

Happy Hunting!

[kiwi_2005]

Originally Posted by PortsmouthProwler

OK, here's my two cents on targeting:

* I've read a **lot** about WW2 Pacific Ops. Also, I worked at Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, right on the boats.

* Historical reality: Correct, you want to minimize scope exposure. US doctrine pre-war was submerged sonar attacks - but as soon as the shooting began, they rapidly ashcanned it, 'cuz it didn't work - trying to sink things from 75 feet dowm by sound wasn't a good technique.

* So skippers and officers learned by OJT. Just like the Kriegsmarine found out, the most effective attacks were night surface (see Red Rampage). Also, yes, it's desirable to use the equipment, however, as Dick O'Kane figured out, there's more than one way to skin a cat.

* With experience, a knowledgeable officer can eyeball range and speed. AOB can be within 15 degrees, really; it's the least important element. Remember, they had a good idea of LOA and LWL for most vessels. Hmmm, it just took 5 seconds for a vessel to pass through the hair from stem to stern and she's about 300' LOA - do the arithmetic. In SH 1, I got pretty good at eyeballing range, speed, and AOB. Never bothered with SH2 and got fairly good with SH3, tho' it's harder with water on your scope, etc. Good realism.

* But the single most important consideration is your approach. No quarter, mates, this is all about sneakiness and skullduggery. Find the baseline course for that convoy and 'end-around' it, ambush the bastards every time, if you can. Sneak past those escorts and get to less than 1,000 yards, preferably 750. Errors in your estimates matter little at point-blank range.

* Then get the hell out of there. Destroyers aren't really prizes, what you want is the merchants, and capital ships when you encounter a naval task force.

* And for real historicity, you should be very frustrated and/or dead until the early fall of '43, when the the torpedo problems were finally and truly solved. Until then, you should be gnashing your teeth and cursing BuOrd.

Happy Hunting!

Wow! And here i am using auto targetting, and i still get frustrated cause of those duds! :rotfl:. Some good advice there

[Sailor Steve]

PortsmouthProwler, that was a great summation! If I didn't get to welcome you before, WELCOME ABOARD!

However, one item leaped off the screen at me. It was probably just a typo, but I felt the need to say something.

Originally Posted by PortsmouthProwler

(see Red Rampage)

Given the context, I'm sure you meant Lawson "Red" Ramage. Though his actions really could be described as a 'Red Rampage'.:rotfl:

And it won him the Medal of Honor.
http://www.ussnautilus.org/undersea/ramage.html

[PortsmouthProwler]

Thanks, guys, appreciate it. Oh, I did mean "Red" Rampage - the very definition of courage under fire.

Ya see, ya gotta be patient - really, reallllly patient to sneak up to 800 yards. All my indiscretions have come from lack of patience.

The easiest way, as I said, is to set up in front of their base course. Of course, time and circumstances may dictate otherwise.

Read War Fish by George Grider - probably the best account of a submariner's experiences in the Pacific.

[Wilcke]

PortsmouthProwler,

Exactly! Well done, good summation.

[breadcatcher101]

How do you guys set up your spread shots? When I have 2 type ships I set my torpedoes to run about 3 feet under kneel. These settings will differ of course depending on the draft of the type ship. I click the torpedoes afterward and they reflect these settings except the spread angle which has gone back to zero. Do I have to set the spread angle as I fire?

I like to use 1 shot if possible to save my torp count unless I am attacking a convoy where I may not get a chance to use my deck gun or to use a followup shot. I just don't want all to hit the same spot. I work around the spread angle dial by adjusting the speed slightly which will work but does take a bit more time. When a escort is pinging me I want to get my shot(s) over with and go deep.

Am I leaving a step out in using the spread dial?