target speed: the eighty-ten method

[razark]

A quote from Run Silent, Run Deep comes to mind.

Mueller: "I don't know what you're talking about, sir. Do you?"

[Rockin Robbins]

It would never occur to greyrider that when I said I put him on ignore, I did exactly that and didn't look at this thread for a week. I have a life, complete with wife, kids, three cats and a dog. Stuff happens that has nothing to do with greyrider and there's no reason to listen to him anyway.

A wise man consults with others in his search for wisdom
A fool consults only his own empty boasting

I've been consistent throughout the thread, at first giving him the benefit of the doubt and later, when there was no longer any doubt denouncing him as a buffoon and a fraud. This is not for my benefit. It is for the benefit of persons like the poster earlier who said that all this math made his head hurt and he guessed he'd never be better than using auto targeting.

The fact is it doesn't take a genius to do manual targeting. It is easy. If I teach 10 people to do it nine of them will end up shooting better than I do. I boast about the accomplishments of others who have learned that they can shoot manually using several different methods, many of which are not mine. Just about anyone can do it. If I boasted about being able to do it, that would be an empty boast because truly any reasonably average person can be a deadly manual shooter. I could care less if I can do it. I care if YOU can do it. That's the difference between me and greyrider.

The whole head in the noose thing is just bizarre, with the imaginings of some tentative feeling my way back into the thread after being shown a fraud. Whose universe did that happen in? It sure didn't happen here, that is for sure. In this thread greyrider revealed his inner character with great clarity. I don't need to describe something that is clearly revealed.

You'll note that when I delivered the clincher, a REAL technique for passive sonar targeting, which included all steps, initial acquisition to shooting with down periscope, it wasn't my own, but someone else's. I used someone else's work, clearly attributed by the way, to show the difference between instruction and fraud. People who want others to use nothing but their own techniques don't do that.

Sub Skipper's Bag of Tricks is full of other people's techniques, posts and videos. Lots of the techniques I teach, like Nisgeis' vector analysis method, are not mine. I am just the cheerleader, making sure that these methods are paid the attention they deserve. I do this because I know they can make Silent Hunter more fun for other people. Greyrider talks only about his own techniques when he is not claiming that every other one is just a stolen bad copy of his own Trial and Terror method. He reveals himself as a liar and a fraud. This is not character attack. This is an empirical conclusion based on insurmountable evidence supplied by greyrider himself.

Good riddance sir, if you are really leaving. I fear that you will be back to try to mislead other players, some of which will be in danger of listening, trying your stuff unsuccessfully and leaving SH4 in frustration. I'll be here to ensure that they know the truth.

Here's my main message: Manual targeting is easily learned and easy to do. You CAN do it as well as I can. I and a dozen other people are here to fulfill that promise. If you're having a problem shooting it's not because you aren't smart, it's because we didn't make it clear enough and we'll do better! If that's egotistical, so be it but we are dedicated to making SH4 more fun and making you a better sub skipper, because it's not about us. It's about you.

[tater]

Originally Posted by greyrider

does your drawing look like anything i posted from the sh4 mission editor?

doesnt look like it from my house, also does the one heading 90 degrees from your start point look like its closing? not from my house, looks likes its going away, next time, check my radar in the movie, next time read my post, if its not a 10, then you get up, move the sub , close on the target course, not the target, then turn in , to acquire 8010, i have said that more than once,

Do you really not understand the diagram he posted?

The entire point is that your 90-80-10 triangle is ONE triangle of many possible triangles. His diagram (and mine) show contacts on the same 280 bearing, all with different AOBs, speeds, intercept points and intercept angles.

What YOU need to describe is how, exactly, you get yourself into the 90-80-10 situation by more than chance. As I demonstrated, the constant bearing is meaningless, the target AOB is independent of that.

So how do you put your sub on a right-angle intercept of a target whose heading you do not know ahead of time?

Don't answer "hold it at 80" we've proved that wrong.

[Rockin Robbins]

I'm still not sure he understands what an angle on the bow is...

[razark]

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

I'm still not sure he understands what an angle on the bow is...

Sure he does. It's a value equal to 10.

[tater]

Originally Posted by razark

Sure he does. It's a value equal to 10.

LOL

[NorthBeach]

This caused a spit-take...

"...what does a decree mean anyway..."

decree: an official order issued by a legal authority.

While I have been the recipient of such edicts, never has one been issued to me by an educational institution.

"accept that some other moron..."

I can't bring myself to address this one. The irony is self evident.

"the world is full of people with a decree, in positions of leadership, and look at its shape"

Two statements in one sentence that have no relation to each other. Yes, there are people in leadership who have been issued decrees. But, how does observing the Earth as a spheroid relate to the first part of that sentence?

The lack of willingness to read and understand all of the evidence and arguments in rebuttal of said method, and then offer coherent, logical, point by point defense, confounds me if the author truly believes in the scientific validity of the method.

Does anyone else feel like this thread has taken on a Monty Python like feel?

[greyrider]

here is where i am at the moment with your mission, its saved for now, im going to take a break, or maybe get some sleep, however, i will continue at some point.


By null at 2010-09-15


since my last post, the only one worth answering would be taters, and tater, i dont know how many times i have to say this, but ill try again, you know that a target, closing, can and does come at the submarine from any direction of the three sixty, i know you have to at least agree with me on that point.

the first thing i would do, would be to find the direction of its relative movement, once i know where and in what direction its going, i would then turn toward that direction, and with either hydrophone or radar put that target on an 80 bearing offset.

from there i would make an attempt to keep that target constant on an 80 offset, by adjusting submarine speed.

if i cant hold it constant, then ill know i havent got a 10 degree aob, then i make a decision, on how i can keep it constant.

i said once before that theres two kinds of closing targets, ones you can engage, ones you cant, actually you can engage them all, but it takes maneuver to engage the harder ones, those would be the ones that are at long range, with a large aob to begin with.

ships are going to close just like your diagram, but that doesnt mean you cant get them to an 8010, maneuver does, maneuver is part of the approach.

i will turn into a targets anticipated course, after closing on that anticipated course, sometimes, when the target is closing, it wont take much maneuver to get into 8010, like say if a sub has contact at zero degrees, and target doesnt change bearings, its going to run right over you eventually, what i would do then is go into reverse, then turn, if i want to attack its port side, i would reverse the sub, do a hard to starboard, and the sub would turn, the target bearing would eventually get to 80 starboard, this would put the port side of the target facing the bow, for the bow torpedoes, i could do the same thing by putting the sub into a starborad turn, and attack it with stern torpedoes on the targets port side. then the 80 offset and the target would be on 260 degrees. these are discisions made to get into attack position.

the 80 degree offset bearings are 280 80, 100, and 260 degrees.

it would take a small book to say what to do, how to turn, i cant tell you how for every angle targets come at the sub, and how your going to attack it, theres just to many ways, you should know this.
but i have no trouble, an 8010 is an intercept course for a closing target,
what more can i say. you can do it going forward or reverse, either way i have no trouble.

theres been alot of wasted energy here, talking about it, if you dont want to use 8010, dont!

instead of that energy wasted, you and the rest could have tried it, if you failed, you could have tried it again, like what do you have to lose? the answer is nothing!

the tread was poisoned from the begining, because someone got jealous,
and set the tone of it, i told you why, its not my fault.

someone can show you how to shoot a rifle, but until you put it in your hand, and try it yourself, you will never know what its like, and all the explanations in the world wont help you, you have to take it and shoot it to know what its like, 8010 is no different.

[Diopos]

Originally Posted by greyrider

...
the first thing i would do, would be to find the direction of its relative movement, once i know where and in what direction its going, i would then turn toward that direction, and with either hydrophone or radar put that target on an 80 bearing offset.

from there i would make an attempt to keep that target constant on an 80 offset, by adjusting submarine speed.
...

And this is where I stopped reading greyrider. Because it is the first time (I think) that you admit that (1) you must know target course, (2) get into a 90° intercept course and (3) then do a 8010. Are you kidding me??? You presented the method based on the miracle 10° AOB, and people argued that this is doable only in a 90° intercept situation and you just avoided an answer. WHY? WHY DIDN'T YOU STATE FROM THE BEGINING THAT BEING AT 90°/270° RELATIVE TO THE TARGET COURSE IS A PREREQUISITE FOR THE METHOD. Is it poor comunication skills on your part (not a problem just takes a bit longer to "communicate") OR something else? I now really hope you have the gutts to apologize to many people which you insulted explicetely or implicitely, because they were just stating the obvious ...


.

[Pisces]

Ahum!!! Typo: decree, should be degree. Decree is rule of law issued by a head of state. Like martial law.

Can't way for your reaction on the testmission.

[EDIT] Oh shoes, now I made my own. "wait"

[Nisgeis]

Originally Posted by Pisces

In all fairness, I think this is the thread that belongs to that image

Yeah, it was a failed attempt at humour - posting something that was obviously wrong. I won't try that again .

Originally Posted by greyrider

they dont look anything like the drawings i put up from the editor, as usual, you add things i never did, putting words in my mouth i never said,

You know you were arguing with yourself there? Who puts words into your mouth, if not yourself?

Originally Posted by Diopos

And this is where I stopped reading greyrider. Because it is the first time (I think) that you admit that (1) you must know target course, (2) get into a 90° intercept course and (3) then do a 8010.

He's said that from earlier on, but all he's saying is that you need to know whether the target is travelling from port to starboard or starboard to port, in order to know whether or not to put the target at 080 or 280. He's not saying you need to know the exact course (at that point). If he were saying that you need to know the target course, then the method would at least make sense, but he isn't saying that, so it doesn't make sense.

Originally Posted by greyrider

if i cant hold it constant, then ill know i havent got a 10 degree aob, then i make a decision, on how i can keep it constant.

How do you know this? This is the question you've never answered. Are you relying on the very narrow speed range given by the sonar operator and by constant you mean near enough to constant (as who cares about a degree or two)? Looking forward to the test mission explanation.

[razark]

Originally Posted by greyrider

if i cant hold it constant, then ill know i havent got a 10 degree aob, then i make a decision, on how i can keep it constant.

And if you can hold it constant, how do you know you have a 10 decree angle on the bow, instead of one of the many other possible combinations of course and speed that would hold the target on a constant bearing?

This method requires a 90 degree intercept course, and you've never demonstrated how you know you've got that right angle.

[Pisces]

Originally Posted by greyrider

here is where i am at the moment with your mission, its saved for now, im going to take a break, or maybe get some sleep, however, i will continue at some point.

Don't forget to mark that position and the next ones at 30 minutes intervals. And draw a line through them and figure the speed between them. Or else we have no way to compare your results with what happens for real. I see you moved to close the distance. To around 10 or 11 nm. Which makes the bearings drift a bit quicker. That's ok. Now comes the fun part, is he too fast?, or to high AOB?, or both? Or neither. Eitherway, I'm curious when you decide to keep him at 80 bearing, or turn into him. Is that a tail I see on the contact mark? (the quality is not that wel.) Remember, that should not influence your steps to take. It's for testing feedback only.

[tater]

He really doesn't get it.

greyrider, you can have a target that is closing that is moving one millionth of a degree off of a parallel heading to your sub on an 80 degree bearing. It IS closing, but it will take nearly forever for the collision to occur.

Your sub can go ~6 knots and hold the contact, say.

That means the contact is going ~6 knots. The AOB is NOT 10, period.

In the diagram I posted above, all the contacts are on the right bearing, and held constant. All are also NOT 10 degrees.

Originally Posted by greyrider

ships are going to close just like your diagram, but that doesnt mean you cant get them to an 8010, maneuver does, maneuver is part of the approach.

The targets in my diagram are all at a 280 bearing (080 port) from the submarine. They are already held constant at that bearing.

The only way you can set up the 90-80-10 setup is to know—in advance—what the target's heading is.

Why do I bother saying the same thing over and over, I could already have taught my 6 YO the required trig.

[tater]

I was listening to an old This American Life podcast in the car the other day. It was about some plumber who started reading up on physics, and decided E=mc^2 was wrong. The show had part of his discussion with a physicist that the reporter had arranged. The physicist looks at it, and tells him immediately that the units are wrong, his equation isn't energy. Poof, done. Right?

No. The guy refuses to believe it. He's sort of in the "I'm not that good at the math part, but let me explain it..." I guess at that point the guy was too invested in his errors to accept them. He leaves and says to the reporter "I know he's got the degrees, and some patents, and stuff like that, but he didn't seem very "bright," you know?"