finding, intercepting, and engaging targets without automap, radar, or active sonar

[Warren Peace]

Originally Posted by AdamMil

Perhaps I'm dense, but I just don't see it. If they taught it, then I imagine it must have worked, so I'm probably misunderstanding you. But what about these cases?



In both cases, the sub turns to put the target on its beam, and in both cases it can adjust its speed to keep the target there, but in neither case will it ever intercept, no matter how slow the target is going.

Anyway, these examples call into question my own approach as well, since they show that it's possible to keep the target on a constant bearing without being on a lead pursuit course, even if one exists. If you overshoot by too much you might wind up on homing in on one of the constant-bearing courses that isn't an intercept course. (But I think it's less likely to occur with my 'algorithm' since you start out pointing yourself at the target and adjust course rather than speed.)

@Aktungbby: Thanks for the welcome. :-)

In either of those situations, hydrophone checks will give you all the information you need. In the case of your first example, checking for his screw noise will reveal one of two things; a) no change, meaning you are on the same course at the same speed, or b) his contact will begin gaining bearing and becoming quieter, indicating he is pulling away.

In regards to example 2; you'll hear his screws become quieter as you open the range, indicating you are moving away from him and need to readjust your course if you wish to still intercept (which would turn into a tail-chase, not something I typically recommend).

[AdamMil]

Originally Posted by Warren Peace

In either of those situations, hydrophone checks will give you all the information you need.

Of course, but my point regards an easy procedure to establish a good intercept course. I'm trying to understand this Normal Approach Course technique, which given my (mis)understanding of it seems to produce weird results in these cases.