TMO 2.5 manual targeting informal poll

[pdiddy]

Just curious to see how many manual targeters use TMO regularly.

Ducimus himself used auto-targeting I believe.

Personally I find manual targeting with TMO exceedingly frustrating.

[les green01]

I am with OTC

[Longknife]

Originally Posted by les green01

I am with OTC

Ditto

[HertogJan]

Thritto

[SilentPrey]

OTC here as well.

[razark]

Manual targeting, TMO, no OTC.

[Pigboatcook]

TMO, RSRDC, manual targeting with the fleet dunce cap to prove it. It is a good thing my brother-in-law passes out the rearm fish in Midway.

[Captain Dave]

Manual targeting, TMO 2.2. I like this older version of TMO.

[merc4ulfate]

It is hard to miss using O'Kanes method. Under a 1000 yards lead by ten degrees and fire.

[TorpX]

Manual targeting with RFB. And yes, I get frustrated too.

AFAIK, TMO doesn't make it any easier or harder.



As far as frustration is concerned, manual targeting is supposed to be fairly difficult. We naturally want our torpedoes to hit the target, and with manual targeting, there is a good chance that won't happen.

You can think of the problem this way. There are two basic requirements for manual targeting:

1. Understanding the geometry involved for a 'firing solution'.

2. Obtaining accurate data to allow the first to be made a practical reality.

One needs a reasonable degree of ability in both of these, but even after the first is mastered, the second remains problematic. [I'm assuming here that one is not making use of the familiar game exploits that make things much easier.]

That real-life commanders found it difficult is evident, when one reads the statistics associated with the number of torpedoes fired, versus the number of hits obtained, or ships sunk.

[HertogJan]

Just a quick question Pdiddy.
Do you calculate target speed yourself or do you use the option on the TDC after two or more stadimeter readings?

[merc4ulfate]

I guestimate.

If I feel they are traveling more than 10 knots I will lead the target a few degrees more. I do not calculate mathematically anyway. Even when I am using radar or sonar bearings to fire I will only time a target for 60 seconds and estimate its speed then lead the target and fire.

[Pigboatcook]

Originally Posted by TorpX

You can think of the problem this way. There are two basic requirements for manual targeting:

1. Understanding the geometry involved for a 'firing solution'.

2. Obtaining accurate data to allow the first to be made a practical reality.

Yep, that's me! I get the mechanics but the accurate data, especially in seas that aren't flat, is my downfall. More often than not my fish are running aft of the target (O'kanes method). I'm positive it is in my input. Just need more practice I guess but love the challenge of it.

[les green01]

I use 3 different tools one the TDC,Soulution Solver and Tracking Party,for speed I use the watch method or match their speed with my speed and keep fine tuning it as I go if all three telling me the same thing then I fire last campaign I had probly 80 to 85% rates on hits use to had maybe 30% so I can live with 80% or even 70%

[adrians69]

TMO 2.5, no map contact updates & manual targeting. I get speed taking 2 range readings and plot on the map which also gives target course and from there you can work out AOB at your planned shoot bearing. I don't use PK, just set up the shoot bearing/range/speed etc and wait for my unfortunate prey to sail into my cross hair. In bad weather/rough seas etc. when the target cannot be seen I plot target course and range entirely with the hydrophone using the 4 bearings method.