TDC Issues

[Rockin Robbins]

That is why leaving the map updates on and using TM is MUCH more realistic than turning map updates off, because it simulates the testing of your attack crew to ensure that the solution of the TDC remains good. This testing was a continuous procedure during real attacks and to be deprived of that is MOST UNREALISTIC!

Get TM to get rid of the unrealistic ship silhouettes and velocity vectors and start using your plotting crew like Uncle Sam and Admiral Lockwood intended.

[joegrundman]

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

That is why leaving the map updates on and using TM is MUCH more realistic than turning map updates off, because it simulates the testing of your attack crew to ensure that the solution of the TDC remains good. This testing was a continuous procedure during real attacks and to be deprived of that is MOST UNREALISTIC!

Get TM to get rid of the unrealistic ship silhouettes and velocity vectors and start using your plotting crew like Uncle Sam and Admiral Lockwood intended.

I'm not sure I agree here. Even without the tails and silhouettes those map contacts are utterly comprehensive and accurate to within a yard for every unit out there all because you up scope for 5 secs.

Do it twice and you have every course, speed and position with perfect knowledge. This is not even possible today, not unless you are radiating your targets somehow, and that sort of poor Emcon is not normal for modern submarines.

While i accept that the game forces you to choose between two situations, my opinion is that you have no real excuse for missing with map contacts on. Except for duds. Such is the level of accuracy it provides.

Let's assume you are underwater. There is only you looking, or perhaps one other looking through the obs scope if at long range (who ought not to be much more skilled than the skipper), and all the information that goes into being plotted comes from what you say to the 18year old able seaman with the chinagraph pencil. He does not have some some kind of divine knowledge of the outside world.

And this is what a stadimeter plot looked like - Note the large number of observations required to get a good reading and the poor level of accuracy for any given observation:



Now this is a similar plot derived from a periscope fitted with radar. As you can see the accuracy is much greater



These are from the Submarine Torpedo Fire Control Manual 1950

http://www.hnsa.org/doc/attack/index.htm

Now I don't know about you, but when i take stadimeter observations of the target it looks very similar to the first image. When you use the map contact updates on, it looks more like the second image.

The inaccuracies of the stadimeter method are such that the manual states that

"Since the errors in stadimeter ranges may be great and variable the plot is much harder to make and analyze than the periscope radar plot.
A system of fairing in the target's course through the observed points must be used. The plotter must lean heavily on the Approach Officer's angle on the bow in arriving at the proper course line. In general the smaller angles on the bow and the shorter ranges will be the most accurate."

So my point is that the map contact updates on is a far cry from the reality of the situation, and that you need to temper your plots with your own AOB observations.

BTW - to all concerned - I have no problem with people using map contact updates on, or any of the other options available. If that's how you like to play it, then that's great. This is purely a contribution to the discussion as to which options best approximate realism.


joe

[joegrundman]

May i add that I would love it if you could have it such that your own measurement yielded an automatic plot mark on the nav map where you established it to be, but i guess we'll have to wait for the next generation of sub sim for that to happen.

From the same source, the plotting happened on a Dead Reckoning Tracer (DRT) and used apart from chinagraph pencils, rulers and a Parallel Motion Projector (PMP)

From what i read it seems that the PMP served the purpose of the protractor bearing overlay incorporated into TM, but it could also move around holding the same relative bearings, so you could use it in other situations

The DRT was a cool device. It was a glass top table with a pinpoint light "bug" under it. This bug represented your submarine. Magnets could control where on the surface this bug appeared and you could set it so that it would drift along the glass top to match the submarine's course and speed. This of course helps with plotting to target.

The DRT is very much analogous to the way your own ship moves on the attack map screen, but i don't think it could automatically take into account changes in your own course and speed. So it was probably best to stay on the same velocity until your plotting was complete and you were ready to begin the attack phase.

If, as said above, you could make your own marks on the attack map, it would be a great thing as a simulation of the DRT.

joe

[Powerthighs]

I agree, if when you clicked the send range/bearing button, it plotted an X on the attack map, that would give you a plot with all the inherent inaccuracies of actual range measurement.

But of course that doesn't happen.

[Rockin Robbins]

Originally Posted by joegrundman

And this is what a stadimeter plot looked like - Note the large number of observations required to get a good reading and the poor level of accuracy for any given observation:



joe

Awesome! If such a plot resulted as a result of our stadimeter observations, I'd be in favor of turning the map updates completely off. That plot is a veritable Bible for future sub simulations and there's no reason why it could not be done, leaving you to draw the average course implied by your multiple observations. They could continue to autoplot radar returns without velocity vectors, as they do now and only plot your specific visual observations with velocity vectors and AoB determinations on the table.

However, that is not our choice. As you say, all our available choices leave something to be desired. And the game is great, even with the compromises we have to make. If they were fixed, those would only be replaced with other quibbles.

Mostly this stuff has to be written off to wait for the next generation of sub sims. The amount of collected knowledge necessary to pull Silent Hunter 4 off as well as it is just amazes me. You have to keep in mind that this is a game, and many decisions related to it are commercial, not related to realism. The learning curve has to be climbable for enough people to make the game profitable.

We're strange birds looking for an authentic experience. And there's not enough of them for the game to be profitable if it caters only to us. They only put up with us because we're the most hardcore and loyal simmers out there. We're also the most *****ly and contentious.

[Munchausen]

Personally, I can't see why not. We already have one map that has all the plotting tools available. And another map that gives you a plot according to what's in the TDC (with PK activated). I don't know why the two can't be combined.

There's an old forum thread that explains how to move the navigation tools and modifiy their size. After I finish my current patrol, I might take those two weeks of R&R to see what happens if I "paste" the pencil to the attack map.

Of course, if you have four arms, two brains, and twenty fingers you can take a range fix using the stadimeter, note the bearing, quickly switch to the nav map, mark your current postion, then plot the stadimeter data. Wait 3 minutes from the time of your first observation (which should, after all you've just done, be about 20 seconds ago), repeat what you just did, then measure the target's speed and heading.

Unfortunately, even if we could move all the plotting tools to the attack map, we can't use radar to plot a target's position. With radar, "automatic map updates" is about as close as we can get to a more realistic scenario.

[Nisgeis]

If you could plot a point and use the nav map tools on the attack map, that would certainly improve my enjoyment of the game and would make the approach phase much more enjoyable, even if it was just the ability to put a pencil mark on the white x of the PK plot. It's still a shame that the radar doesn't give range readouts.