Clear the Bridge! Dick O'kane method - Page 3

XLjedi · 01-14-09, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fish40

I actually got my first kill the other day useing the DO method! RR great tutorial by the way

I got a radar contact at 10nm. I slowed to 1/3 speed and began my first plot. Three minutes later I took another reading and plotted. After determining his course, I got in position 90 degrees to his track and set up the TDC as per the tutorial.

The one thing I have a problem with is getting an acurate speed, which is essential with this method. Since the Radar screen dosn't have range rings, it's hard to determine exact distance between the two plot points, so therefor measuring the distance between the two points will yeild an inaccurate figure. I actually find it a challange to aquire a visual, get an ID, and measure the time it takes for the target to cross the 0 bearing line to determine speed.
.
.
.
It seems to me, once you have an accurate speed, the rest is sinfully easy!

Why are you trying to measure speed on the radar scope anyway?

In your first paragraph you mention that you have acquired the target at 10nm and you plot two points to determine true course (presumably on the navmap). Once you have the TC plotted you should be setting yourself up for a submerged attack on a 90° beam to the target TC.

As you make your submerged approach, the hydrophone operator will call out bearings to the target that you can plot on the TC line. If your TC plot is good, the distance between those points should be plenty accurate enough for a good speed calc.

XLjedi · 01-14-09, 09:38 AM

Oh BTW,

My response to the original OP's question would be... In that instance O'Kane was using a lateral spread.

You can do that easily by locking your scope on the target midship and turning that degree offset dial. You'd wait for the middle of the target to reach the desired bearing and then dial: 2° fire, 0° fire, -2° fire

How do I know 2° is right? I just lock on the target midship and then look on the scope to see how many degrees I needed to offset to hit the various parts.

Now in fairness to O'Kane, this method that bears his name is no longer a good reflection of what you and I read in his book. If you want to see how I originally proposed mimicing Okane you can read my post here:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...&postcount=134

RR chose to simplify it. I choose to bash him over the head

once in awhile for dumbing it down to the point where the TDC isn't even used!

Also, I don't recall that Okane would necessarily line up on a 90° beam to the target. He took a standard 90° approach to the target bearing, but that's something different. There's more evidence in his books that suggests he (and Morton) preferred to fire after the target passed the 90° beam so the torpedos would 1) not impact at a right angle, and 2) the ship would have a harder time evading (never really studied this one, but I trust Morton knew what he was talking about).

Rockin Robbins · 01-14-09, 10:16 AM

Nope, you're right. I can't see any evidence that O'Kane sought a right angle to the track. He might have had a preference for angles that were close, but I don't see any evidence for it.

I think you're right about him using the spread input to hit the bow and stern of the target in that instance. Please note that per the Submarine Torpedo Fire Control Manual, this would have been a computed spread of about 80%. He wouldn't have been just fiddling with the spread dial and hoping the setting was good. That would have earned him a good roasting by his friend, Admiral Lockwood, when he got home.

Hey! That's not fair! I use the TDC. It computes my lead angle and dries my oilskins when I come below in bad weather!

XLjedi · 01-14-09, 10:23 AM

Now I do take a lot of 90° shots... but in those cases I also set the torps for magnetic detonation and try to swim them under the keel. I just got tired listening to the things bouncing off the sides of ships (an all too frequent occurance for right-angle impacts).

XLjedi · 01-14-09, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

Please note that per the Submarine Torpedo Fire Control Manual, this would have been a computed spread of about 80%. He wouldn't have been just fiddling with the spread dial and hoping the setting was good.

At what point did I say that he was, "just fiddling with the spread dial"?

I think he did exactly what he said he did in his book. He targetted midship, then looked at the rear stack, determined it was offset 2-3° and fired his spread accordingly.

tater · 01-14-09, 11:32 AM

O'Kane says in Wahoo that Morton liked 120 degree approaches best.

jbt308 · 01-14-09, 04:05 PM

I see all these Florida boys posting and just had to pipe in!

Have to thank RR for his tutorial on radar-only DO technique shoots. To say that I was dumbstruck when it actually worked(my skill, not the teachings), is an understatement.

A ship came up on radar, so I hopped up to the bridge to take a look around. Pitch black, no moon, 15m/s winds, heavy fog and rain; just one hell of a storm. So I decided to try out the "no eyes on target" method you spoke of.

Tracked the mark down his path, waited till he was a heartbeat past 20' and loosed my last 3 fish. Blew him out of the water at approximately 4000 yds, I couldn't even see the explosions it was so dark!

Thanks again to all that post here and make the game more enjoyable! And maybe for the next Subsim get together in Texas, we can form a Florida caravan!

I'm goin' down · 01-14-09, 07:38 PM

I was running ahead of a tanker to set up for a Dick O'Kane salvo, but was so far ahead of the SOB I brought my boat around for a Cromwell shot. Then the SOB changed course, so I abandoned Cromwell and set up for manual targeting per Hitman's tutorial. I put my last four torpedoes into her, had a beer, followed her for three hours, but she never sank! (It's not dinner until its in the pan!) I concluded the mission by running aground somewhere near Singapore and sinking.

Munchausen · 01-14-09, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aaronblood

I don't recall that Okane would necessarily line up on a 90° beam to the target. He took a standard 90° approach to the target bearing, but that's something different. There's more evidence in his books that suggests he (and Morton) preferred to fire after the target passed the 90° beam so the torpedos would 1) not impact at a right angle, and 2) the ship would have a harder time evading (never really studied this one, but I trust Morton knew what he was talking about).

O'Kane liked the night surface attack. Visually, a 90 AOB is one of the easiest to identify ... especially if the ship has side-by-side masts. A skipper could approach at 120 degrees (as Tater said) and, as long as the TDC was set for 90, send a final bearing when the target looked to have a 90 AOB ... then fire. He could then reposition on another target ... again waiting until seeing 90 degrees before sending a final bearing to the TDC.

XLjedi · 01-14-09, 10:56 PM

Just to clarify, since a couple people now appear to have commented on my statement about the 90° target bearing standard approach; it has nothing to do with a 120° approach to the target true course.

It's just the standard approach an XO would take by putting the target bearing on a 90° beam moving (presumably) in the same relative direction (at this point AoB is an unknown). Then the captain would be informed... and then perhaps after an observation (or several) an AoB determination can be made and then maybe a 120° to TC would be the prefered approach angle for attack.

Okane mentions in Wahoo that as the XO he puts the boat on a standard 90° approach and then informs Morton of the situation. It's a method that's also documented as the standard approach in the torpedo fire control manual. It doesn't mean that you're on any particular approach angle to the target true course.

It looks like this:

The standard 90° approach for target M1 or M2 is 330° and we don't really know what the true course is yet for either one.

This is a first contact (and probably at considerable distance) approach. Granted I've exagerated the M2 contact here because in this case we wouldn't actually be closing (approaching) on the target. I should probably redraw it with an acute angle, but I don't feel like doing it again...

XLjedi · 01-14-09, 11:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Munchausen

Visually, a 90 AOB is one of the easiest to identify ... especially if the ship has side-by-side masts. A skipper could approach at 120 degrees (as Tater said) and, as long as the TDC was set for 90, send a final bearing when the target looked to have a 90 AOB ... then fire. He could then reposition on another target ... again waiting until seeing 90 degrees before sending a final bearing to the TDC.

I have to say though...

I'm not sure why it never dawned on me to try this before!

...seems so obvious.

RR you all might want to consider looking into this one and dubbing it the "Morton" with all appropriate credit to Munchausen of course. ...or dare I say it, a true Fast-90 for fleetboats?

01-15-09, 10:39 AM

jbt308 wrote...

Quote:

Have to thank RR for his tutorial on radar-only DO technique shoots.

Did I miss something? I must have been in the back of the room playing cribbage with the boys(I bet there are some really good cribbage players on this forum, too bad we couldn't have an online cribbage game just for subsimmers). I don't recall reading about a radar only tutorial from RR. There is a Radar approach video tutorial from tale, could this be the reference?

Urge

tale · 01-15-09, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urge

jbt308 wrote...

Quote:

Have to thank RR for his tutorial on radar-only DO technique shoots.

Did I miss something? I must have been in the back of the room playing cribbage with the boys(I bet there are some really good cribbage players on this forum, too bad we couldn't have an online cribbage game just for subsimmers). I don't recall reading about a radar only tutorial from RR. There is a Radar approach video tutorial from tale, could this be the reference?

Urge

No, he is not talking about my video, because it doesn't even touch the attack phase by far. I think he meant The Dick O'Kane Sonar Only (by God!!!) Video third in the list of RR links

Rockin Robbins · 01-15-09, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aaronblood

Quote:

Originally Posted by Munchausen

Visually, a 90 AOB is one of the easiest to identify ... especially if the ship has side-by-side masts. A skipper could approach at 120 degrees (as Tater said) and, as long as the TDC was set for 90, send a final bearing when the target looked to have a 90 AOB ... then fire. He could then reposition on another target ... again waiting until seeing 90 degrees before sending a final bearing to the TDC.

I have to say though...

I'm not sure why it never dawned on me to try this before!

...seems so obvious.

RR you all might want to consider looking into this one and dubbing it the "Morton" with all appropriate credit to Muchausen of course. ...or dare I say it, a true Fast-90 for fleetboats?

I think we have the seed of a new idea here. It could also take advantage of standard convoy behavior. You hit the first target, the convoy goes into St Vitus' dance, then settles back to the original course and speed. You wait for another target to present a 90º AoB, rinse and repeat. Often even with a convoy making 12 knots, the St Vitus dance period results in milling around essentially in place and you can reposition ahead for another shot if necessary.

This has a lot of potential and the "Morton Technique" name is a good idea. Munchausen, your name goes on it and aaronblood, as usual, your vision is 20-20. I don't want to muddy the central concept of the Fast-90 technique, which was the direct connection of the U-Boat periscope with the TDC, automatically recomputing AoB for changing bearing on the same target track. In reality fleet boats could do that too, according to Nisgeis, but it is not modeled in the game.

When my new power supply comes, hopefully Friday, this gets added to my already daunting list!

tater · 01-15-09, 12:26 PM

The scattering of convoys is interesting in that it differs from Task forces where they constant-helm, but tend to hightail it away.

For the game, there is one difference between a TF, and a convoy.

The lead unit.

Have 20 warships lead by a single merchant... it's a Convoy.

Have 20 merchants led by a warship? Task Force.

Might have to do some testing on this.

01-14-09, 09:38 AM	#32
XLjedi Ace of the Deep Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Palm Beach, Florida Posts: 1,243 Downloads: 53 Uploads: 8	Oh BTW, My response to the original OP's question would be... In that instance O'Kane was using a lateral spread. You can do that easily by locking your scope on the target midship and turning that degree offset dial. You'd wait for the middle of the target to reach the desired bearing and then dial: 2° fire, 0° fire, -2° fire How do I know 2° is right? I just lock on the target midship and then look on the scope to see how many degrees I needed to offset to hit the various parts. Now in fairness to O'Kane, this method that bears his name is no longer a good reflection of what you and I read in his book. If you want to see how I originally proposed mimicing Okane you can read my post here: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...&postcount=134 RR chose to simplify it. I choose to bash him over the head once in awhile for dumbing it down to the point where the TDC isn't even used! Also, I don't recall that Okane would necessarily line up on a 90° beam to the target. He took a standard 90° approach to the target bearing, but that's something different. There's more evidence in his books that suggests he (and Morton) preferred to fire after the target passed the 90° beam so the torpedos would 1) not impact at a right angle, and 2) the ship would have a harder time evading (never really studied this one, but I trust Morton knew what he was talking about). __________________ Last edited by XLjedi; 01-14-09 at 10:15 AM.

01-14-09, 10:16 AM	#33
Rockin Robbins Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: DeLand, FL Posts: 8,900 Downloads: 135 Uploads: 52	Nope, you're right. I can't see any evidence that O'Kane sought a right angle to the track. He might have had a preference for angles that were close, but I don't see any evidence for it. I think you're right about him using the spread input to hit the bow and stern of the target in that instance. Please note that per the Submarine Torpedo Fire Control Manual, this would have been a computed spread of about 80%. He wouldn't have been just fiddling with the spread dial and hoping the setting was good. That would have earned him a good roasting by his friend, Admiral Lockwood, when he got home. Hey! That's not fair! I use the TDC. It computes my lead angle and dries my oilskins when I come below in bad weather! __________________ Sub Skipper's Bag of Tricks, Slightly Subnuclear Mk 14 & Cutie, Slightly Subnuclear Deck Gun, EZPlot 2.0, TMOPlot, TMOKeys, SH4CMS

01-14-09, 10:23 AM	#34
XLjedi Ace of the Deep Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Palm Beach, Florida Posts: 1,243 Downloads: 53 Uploads: 8	Now I do take a lot of 90° shots... but in those cases I also set the torps for magnetic detonation and try to swim them under the keel. I just got tired listening to the things bouncing off the sides of ships (an all too frequent occurance for right-angle impacts). __________________

01-14-09, 07:38 PM	#38
I'm goin' down Ocean Warrior Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Notify command we have entered the Grass Sea Posts: 2,822 Downloads: 813 Uploads: 0	hearty har har I was running ahead of a tanker to set up for a Dick O'Kane salvo, but was so far ahead of the SOB I brought my boat around for a Cromwell shot. Then the SOB changed course, so I abandoned Cromwell and set up for manual targeting per Hitman's tutorial. I put my last four torpedoes into her, had a beer, followed her for three hours, but she never sank! (It's not dinner until its in the pan!) I concluded the mission by running aground somewhere near Singapore and sinking.

01-14-09, 10:56 PM	#40
XLjedi Ace of the Deep Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Palm Beach, Florida Posts: 1,243 Downloads: 53 Uploads: 8	Just to clarify, since a couple people now appear to have commented on my statement about the 90° target bearing standard approach; it has nothing to do with a 120° approach to the target true course. It's just the standard approach an XO would take by putting the target bearing on a 90° beam moving (presumably) in the same relative direction (at this point AoB is an unknown). Then the captain would be informed... and then perhaps after an observation (or several) an AoB determination can be made and then maybe a 120° to TC would be the prefered approach angle for attack. Okane mentions in Wahoo that as the XO he puts the boat on a standard 90° approach and then informs Morton of the situation. It's a method that's also documented as the standard approach in the torpedo fire control manual. It doesn't mean that you're on any particular approach angle to the target true course. It looks like this: The standard 90° approach for target M1 or M2 is 330° and we don't really know what the true course is yet for either one. This is a first contact (and probably at considerable distance) approach. Granted I've exagerated the M2 contact here because in this case we wouldn't actually be closing (approaching) on the target. I should probably redraw it with an acute angle, but I don't feel like doing it again... __________________ Last edited by XLjedi; 01-14-09 at 11:46 PM.

01-14-09, 11:32 AM	#36
tater Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: New Mexico, USA Posts: 9,023 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 2	O'Kane says in Wahoo that Morton liked 120 degree approaches best.

01-14-09, 04:05 PM	#37
jbt308 Torpedoman Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: S. Florida Posts: 118 Downloads: 23 Uploads: 0	I see all these Florida boys posting and just had to pipe in! Have to thank RR for his tutorial on radar-only DO technique shoots. To say that I was dumbstruck when it actually worked(my skill, not the teachings), is an understatement. A ship came up on radar, so I hopped up to the bridge to take a look around. Pitch black, no moon, 15m/s winds, heavy fog and rain; just one hell of a storm. So I decided to try out the "no eyes on target" method you spoke of. Tracked the mark down his path, waited till he was a heartbeat past 20' and loosed my last 3 fish. Blew him out of the water at approximately 4000 yds, I couldn't even see the explosions it was so dark! Thanks again to all that post here and make the game more enjoyable! And maybe for the next Subsim get together in Texas, we can form a Florida caravan!

01-15-09, 12:26 PM	#45
tater Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: New Mexico, USA Posts: 9,023 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 2	The scattering of convoys is interesting in that it differs from Task forces where they constant-helm, but tend to hightail it away. For the game, there is one difference between a TF, and a convoy. The lead unit. Have 20 warships lead by a single merchant... it's a Convoy. Have 20 merchants led by a warship? Task Force. Might have to do some testing on this.