Range prediction, fast fire solution.

[NavyUSA]

Originally Posted by Pisces

Can you explain the rational behind those standard deviation numbers? What sort of probability is that? Also how do you get from probability percentages to standard deviations and back in the first place. (I like math, but I suck at statistics, so it's still magic to me)

Speak about the statistical theory in this forum is off-topic. In literature you can find the whole theory.

You know that the bearing rate has a very good correlation with the distance of the contact. It's inversely proportional to the range. These tables are born, from a statistical analysis of Bearing rate variation, by varying the range, route target and relative bearing.

Originally Posted by Pisces

While my Italian is even worse than my 'statistic', it would have been nice if you could have provided a link to that forum. Maybe it is public enough to get a peek inside on that method. And let Google Translator have a go at it. Could be fun.

If Cristian from Betasom, wants personally explain in English this method, would be better. But I think it's very clear. The link below:
http://www.betasom.it/forum/index.php?showtopic=33792
The direct link is this: http://goo.gl/S7iAUy
Page 24.

Originally Posted by Pisces

Still, only with relative target bearing between 75 and 85, and speeds between 6 and 7 , or target needing to be between 5 and 7, seems to be quite limiting in use to me. Such narrow bounds.

For all relative target bearings between 20 and 160 there is a table. I can send you all tables on your e-mail address.
About it, I think that speeds between 5 and 7 knots are not very restrictive, for several reasons.

[Pisces]

Originally Posted by NavyUSA

Speak about the statistical theory in this forum is off-topic. In literature you can find the whole theory.

Well, I didn't mean to ask about what standard deviations are in general. Just in this context, in that table. Standard deviations are the summed squares of differences to a mean value, divided by the population size. But what sort of values and means is that table based on? 'Barnacle size' on the sperical array?

You know that the bearing rate has a very good correlation with the distance of the contact. It's inversely proportional to the range. These tables are born, from a statistical analysis of Bearing rate variation, by varying the range, route target and relative bearing.



If Cristian from Betasom, wants personally explain in English this method, would be better. But I think it's very clear. The link below:
http://www.betasom.it/forum/index.php?showtopic=33792
The direct link is this: http://goo.gl/S7iAUy
Page 24.

Fair enough. I'll see how far I'll get this this document. Looks juicy. Too bad it isn't already in english.

For all relative target bearings between 20 and 160 there is a table. I can send you all tables on your e-mail address.
About it, I think that speeds between 5 and 7 knots are not very restrictive, for several reasons.

Would you care to elaborate on that? Are you expecting all opponents to move at speeds between 5 and 7 knots? Sure, submerged opponents that know that you are there would want to stay silent, and thus slow. But that doesn't account for all,or most situations.

Anyway, I think I'll have pizza tonight and set my teeth in this document. Thanks

[NavyUSA]

Originally Posted by Pisces

Well, I didn't mean to ask about what standard deviations are in general. Just in this context, in that table. Standard deviations are the summed squares of differences to a mean value, divided by the population size. But what sort of values and means is that table based on? 'Barnacle size' on the sperical array?

The population is made by misure of the bearing rate for different target course, range and relative bearing, a large number of measurements.
The standard deviations in that tables shows how much is variation or dispersion of the bearing rate from the average value, for the particular situation fixed by relative bearing, type of los and range.

Originally Posted by Pisces

Would you care to elaborate on that? Are you expecting all opponents to move at speeds between 5 and 7 knots? Sure, submerged opponents that know that you are there would want to stay silent, and thus slow. But that doesn't account for all,or most situations.

Good observation. During a research phase, the submerged opponents probably want to stay silent at speeds between 5 and 7 knots, best search speed is 7.
If a player is moving at speeds less than 5 knots, means that its towed array will be curved in depth, this will not give him a good solution, and the transducers can be below the layer. I think that an experienced player will never move at speeds less to 4 knots in research or attack phase.
Still, if the target has a velocity greater than 8 knots, is very likely that you will hear him with two sensors or you can get information from the demon. In these cases it's easy to proceed with the usual methods, Triangulation, Strip plotting ecc..


I have answered to your doubt?



Thank you for your interest

[NavyUSA]

Pisces, what methods you use to calculate the Br?

I to calculate a history of Br use the method described by Cristian, but if I want to calculate a single value of Br I determine the angle between two lines of bearing directly from the screen of the Tma station (trigonometric).

[Pisces]

I don't in SC or DW really. Back in the beginning I made bearing history charts to plot it. But lost interest in this arduous task. Also, I didn't really know how to use this plot effectively.

Then some years ago I figured out I could used the TMA ruler to estimate the fraction of a bearing to a 10th degree by setting the course of the TMA ruler to the degree before and after the bearing line, and then measuring/eyeballing the ruler-tip distance to the bearing line. This provides much better accuracy than the 1 degree resolution of the bearing readouts. But is still quite arduous, and not very useful in tense combat situations. It takes too much time for me to be comfortable.

So, I still just fumble around trying to get the ruler to lineup with the bearings after enough zig-zags. Just like everyone else, with only a faint idea of what I'm supposed to do with the TMA dotstack. I still let the Auto-TMA do most of the work also. In other words, I suck at it.

But this method on that Italian forum (which I still have not found the time to decypher) does make me curious what you can do with it.

In SH3 and SH4 though, I rely much more on the graphical methods of determining course and speed based on bearing alone. (search subsim for 3 bearing and 4 bearing method) And my self-created 3-bearing AOB finder sliderule disk. Unfortunately the drawing tools in SC and DW leave much to be desired to be able to do this effectively in the game. (no ability to plot lines on the map, only during mission editing)

[NavyUSA]

Originally Posted by Pisces

I don't in SC or DW really. Back in the beginning I made bearing history charts to plot it. But lost interest in this arduous task. Also, I didn't really know how to use this plot effectively.

Then some years ago I figured out I could used the TMA ruler to estimate the fraction of a bearing to a 10th degree by setting the course of the TMA ruler to the degree before and after the bearing line, and then measuring/eyeballing the ruler-tip distance to the bearing line. This provides much better accuracy than the 1 degree resolution of the bearing readouts. But is still quite arduous, and not very useful in tense combat situations. It takes too much time for me to be comfortable.

It is easier to calculate the angle between two bearing (in LAG los)with the pocket calculator :
angle = arctan((So*2/60)/(length segment bearing from ownship and the intersection point))
Br= angle/2 [DEG/min] ''always approximated for defect''

Originally Posted by Pisces

So, I still just fumble around trying to get the ruler to lineup with the bearings after enough zig-zags. Just like everyone else, with only a faint idea of what I'm supposed to do with the TMA dotstack. I still let the Auto-TMA do most of the work also. In other words, I suck at it.

Zig-zags method is useful when target is very far. Allen Schrader in his video show a TMA solution of one target (civil) at range 35 nm. In this situation there is insufficient relative motion between the two platforms and is necessary to move along three/four legs (LAG and LEAD) with 4/5 bearings for leg, exactly Zig-zags.
So, this is a unusual scenery. Method inefficient for target range less then 11 nm (probable scenery).

Originally Posted by Pisces

In SH3 and SH4 though, I rely much more on the graphical methods of determining course and speed based on bearing alone. (search subsim for 3 bearing and 4 bearing method) And my self-created 3-bearing AOB finder sliderule disk. Unfortunately the drawing tools in SC and DW leave much to be desired to be able to do this effectively in the game. (no ability to plot lines on the map, only during mission editing)

Plotting Procedures in Dangerous waters aren't necessary, but certainly in the Second World War

[Pisces]

Originally Posted by NavyUSA

It is easier to calculate the angle between two bearing (in LAG los)with the pocket calculator :
angle = arctan((So*2/60)/(length segment bearing from ownship and the intersection point))
Br= angle/2 [DEG/min] ''always approximated for defect''

Sure, a pocket calculator does make it easier. I didn't find that much math though in that document that you suggested. Or it is hidden in the Italian text. Do you have any other suggestions where I can find how this formula is used and explained? Feel free to make us a tutorial.

Zig-zags method is useful when target is very far. Allen Schrader in his video show a TMA solution of one target (civil) at range 35 nm. In this situation there is insufficient relative motion between the two platforms and is necessary to move along three/four legs (LAG and LEAD) with 4/5 bearings for leg, exactly Zig-zags.
So, this is a unusual scenery. Method inefficient for target range less then 11 nm (probable scenery).

Well, speed changes only also helps to change the bearing rate. But not as much as a lag-los. I can't comprehend this method that you suggest in the first message, so I can't really say anyting about it's preference for short range TMA.

Plotting Procedures in Dangerous waters aren't necessary, but certainly in the Second World War

Until you frequently patrol close to the bottom and near to the shores. Then you'll like to do a bit more depth contour-plotting by yourself. It's a shame it isn't possible during play really, as the code is obviously built into the engine. If I can plot circles and crosses, why not lines? Time comparison between modern and WW2 eras is just no excuse. I'm sure real life operators would have this function.

I know there is MoBo, the electronic manoeuvring-board application. But it is external to the game.