Playing at full realism settings

BigWalleye · 04-05-14, 07:34 AM

Cap'n Scurvy and TorpX, I believe you are BOTH correct. Based on my reading over the years, here is how I believe that fire control was executed: The Approach Officer estimated the range, AoB, and speed, and called these out for entry into the TDC. TDC then calculated the target course. The Plotting Party kept updating the attack plot with target range-and-bearing as called out by the Approach Officer. (And AoB, as TorpX points out.) Plotting Party and TDC independently developed a firing solution, based on the two different sets of data. The solutions were checked against each other. Both solutions had to agree, or the boat commander (who usually was, but might not be, the Approach Officer) would not clear to fire. Torpedoes were not supposed to be wasted in snap shots.

IIRC, both O'Kane and Fluckey describe situations were the Plot and TDC solutions disagreed. "Check fire." There was tension and fuming while the discrepancies were resolved. (Beggin' yer pardon, but this early on a Sattidy, I am not up to finding the references.)

Range and bearing do give course, heading, and speed, but AoB immediately identifies target course changes (like zigzags).

Of course, the target range and bearing were determined mechanically, from the bearing ring and stadimeter. The AoB was judged by the Approach Officer, using the Mark I Human Eyeball. It's probably not surprising if former Approach Officers, in their post-war memoirs, sometimes emphasized the parts of their job that called for the most skill on their part.

Another observation from TorpX's excellent illustration: range and AoB data begin at 10000 yds. How hard is it for us to make any kind of range or AoB estimate at 10000? Those first long-range observations were probably easier in the R/L analog periscope view, but not a lot easier. They didn't wait until the target image was clear enough for accurate estimates, because then they would wind up basing their solution on 2 or 3 observations, like we often do. If we want to play "realistically" (in a historically appropriate manner), then we need to train ourselves to make and use good estimates at long range.

Sniper297 · 04-08-14, 01:09 PM

Even if they're zigzagging 30 degrees either side of the base course it's pretty difficult to get closer than "20 to 40 degrees port" from 10000 yards. Coming along without zigzagging can you really tell the difference between AOB port 5 and AOB port 10? Even at close range you can tell if it's not zero when you can see part of one side or the other and not just bow on, but anything more accurate than "less than 30" or "more than 30" or "about 60" would take psychic powers. You can get a GENERAL course from AOB and tweak it later by making a second mark and drawing a line through it, but when it comes to shooting at close range you simply don't have time to do anything other than preset the AOB to 70 or 80 and leave it alone.

Sniper297 · 04-08-14, 01:54 PM

For purpose of illustration the following pics have been edited to slide the TDC and AOB indicators closer to center.

This one I measured his course and maneuvered to be 1000 yards off the track at about 90 degrees to the track for the perfect angle shot. He's only doing 5 knots so nothing is happening too fast to keep up with. This pic is at 3000 yards range, with me 1000 yards off the track the AOB is starboard 25.

At 2000 yards range the AOB has only changed 7 degrees, starboard 32.

1500 yards up to 43, the AOB starts swinging faster, in 500 yards got a 11 degree change.

AOB 50 at 1350 yards, 7 degree change in 150 yards.

For those unaware, on the left side PK the lower ship is your sub showing the compass heading, upper is the target showing his heading. The arrow in the lower one shows the gyro angle for the torpedo, which way and how much it would need to turn if you fired at this moment. Upper dial arrow shows the angle at which the torpedo will hit the target, in this case about a 45 degree angle from the bow.

Here's the shooting setup we're looking for, close to zero gyro angle and close to a 90 degree impact angle. Note the AOB shows 80 degrees but the dial in the TDC shows the torpedo impacting at 90 degrees, the difference is how long it takes a Mark 14 at 46 knots to travel 1000 yards.

Again this is the training wheels study, note the crosshairs for a 5 knot target with a zero gyro angle 46 knot torpedo show 10 degrees off center at the moment of firing. When you move up to manual targeting and no map contact realism, if you want to use the angle off firing method set the bearing for straight ahead, speed zero AOB doesn't matter if the speed is zero, click the "send range and bearing to TDC" button so the gyro angle will be zero and the fish will go straight out of the tube. Range actually doesn't matter with the angle off method, set the crosshairs at 10 degrees right (010) for a target coming from the right, a target crossing your bows left to right set for 350. Whatever the range is when he crosses the 10 degree left (or right) crosshairs you fire, and if he doesn't turn or change speed the torpedo will hit. Get to know different convoys and merchant ships and the speed they usually cruise, that will tell you if your speed guesstimations are close. Make notes on what the angle off is for different speeds and different torpedoes, for a Mark 10 you would need to lead the target by more than 10 degrees, for a task force going 20 knots you would need a lot more lead angle.

BigWalleye · 04-08-14, 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sniper297

Even if they're zigzagging 30 degrees either side of the base course it's pretty difficult to get closer than "20 to 40 degrees port" from 10000 yards. Coming along without zigzagging can you really tell the difference between AOB port 5 and AOB port 10? Even at close range you can tell if it's not zero when you can see part of one side or the other and not just bow on, but anything more accurate than "less than 30" or "more than 30" or "about 60" would take psychic powers. You can get a GENERAL course from AOB and tweak it later by making a second mark and drawing a line through it, but when it comes to shooting at close range you simply don't have time to do anything other than preset the AOB to 70 or 80 and leave it alone.

I must respectfully disagree. There is solid evidence to indicate that historically, the Approach Officer was expected to provide an observed AoB substantially more precise than "less than 30" or "more than 30" or "about 60". First, the Submarine Torpedo Fire Control Manual, SLM-1, cited repeatedly in this thread, emphasizes the importance and use of the observed AoB. SLM-1 lays out the procedures for developing a firing solution in some detail. At no point does SLM-1 imply that AoB should be derived principally from range-and-bearing data. Second, Plate VII of SLM-1, cited above by TorpX, includes a table of Aob observations stated in 5 degree intervals. SLM-1 is a training manual. If the Navigational Plotter could not expect to receive AoB data of that precision in the field, then only a poor training manual would teach him to expect it. Third, Dick O'Kane has a long passage in his book "Wahoo" describing the training regimen he set up for himself when he learned that he, the XO, was to be Approach Officer. He and other officers set up a simulator, using a ship model and an inverted binocular. He trained on this until he was proficient at judging AoB to within 5 degrees. Pete Galantin describes doing the same thing in the Attack Simulator at New London. As I said, a lot of evidence that reasonably accurate and precise AoB observations were expected of and provided by the Approach Officer.

In the game, there are several methods which players commonly use to determine AoB with an accuracy and precision of +/- 2.5 to 5 degrees. One is the Dick O'Kane Mark 1 Human Eyeball method. The SH4 Solution Solver, by gutted (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/down...o=file&id=1358) provides a computer version of O'Kane's AoB training tool to assist in developing the needed skill. Sublynx, in his Charts Add-on v1.4, (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/down...o=file&id=3675) includes a very useful (KM, I believe) chart of a merchant ship photographed at 5 degree intervals. The photos are annotated to show the important features to observe in making an AoB estimate. A second method, the method apparently favored by the KM, was to use the periscope graticle and a simple circular slide rule, the RAOBF. This tool is available in many SH3 mods and in OM, but not in SH4, although it is quite easy to make a hand-held version from the images provided in the mods. (It's metric, but that's just a scale factor.) Using the periscope or TBT graticle, it is possible to quickly determine first the range of the target and then the AoB. I have used a fleet-boat style graticle very successfully for both range and AoB. And, unlike the stadimeter, it is not necessary to know the exact identity of the target first. Merchants were generally of sufficiently similar dimensions that generic numbers are adequate. Once the range to the target is known, the angular length of the ship is used to calculate the AoB. Of course, if an identification can be made, then more accurate numbers can be used for both mast height and LOA.

AoB was historically determined to significantly better than +/- 15 degrees, and the same techniques are available for use in-game. Being able to determine AoB improves your approach planning. It frees you from dependence on the "God's-eye" automatic chart updating. It makes longer range shots more productive, giving you opportunities to attack targets you might not otherwise close. It extends your approach time, making firing more methodical and less hurried. - and less error-prone. And, it allows you to conduct your attacks in a way more like what was actually done historically.

Sniper297 · 04-09-14, 01:38 AM

Hee-hee, it's a lot like math - some people have a talent for it and others don't. My thinking is if it's a large AOB at a long distance you need to quickly figure out the general course and get closer to the track in a hurry, if it's less than 10 degrees you're close to where you need to be so you can daydream until he gets closer. The main thing is if it's less than 10 degrees it's not going to change very much until he gets a LOT closer, then it will change very quickly. Reading SILENT RUNNING recently the author (who was the TDC officer for that sub) commented that he set the AOB to the general course and speed to calculated overall speed of advance into the TDC since the complicated zigzag plan the approaching convoy was using was just too much to handle. When the targets got close enough to get an accurate range and bearing the TDC guess was only 500 yards off the original estimate. Looking at it now page 124;

"Before long Dykers had their tops in sight through the periscope. Alec Nading and Kent Lukingbeal had worked out an overall speed of advance for the convoy based on its zig plan, and I had just set that in the TDC rather than trying to estimate the convoy's many zigs and zags."

That's the worst trouble with trying to play this game on full realism, note he mentions himself on the TDC along with two other guys on the plot. He only mentions the Captain on the periscope, but there were always two - the assistant approach officer waltzed around the back side of the periscope reading off the ranges and bearings when the Captain said "mark". All the captain (or whoever was doing the periscope work) had to do was center crosshairs, adjust stadimeter, and estimate AOB, he had a whole team to do everything else. For me trying to be Captain and the entire approach team along with the crew setting torpedo speeds and depths is just too much in too little time to screw around with unrealistic realism.

BigWalleye · 04-09-14, 06:23 AM

Hey, it's your game. You can play it any way you want, as long as you have fun. THAT is the most important thing.

But your choice is not the only one. And, for anyone who wants to learn how to make accurate observations, it is not impossible, it is done by many players, and there are tools to help do it.

As for realism, after a point the question is not "What is realistic?" but "What you do want to simulate?" Is it more realistic to have a God-like omniscient plotting party or to have the Approach Officer do all the plotting? The correct answer is "No." That's why I did not use the word "realism" in my post. But it is possible to play it either way, and many players enjoy each alternative.

There are posters on this site who like to play at 50% difficulty, and have a ball doing it. It would be wrong to suggest that they are not playing the game the way it is supposed to be played. But it would be equally wrong to suggest that playing a 100% difficulty is either impossibly challenging or less historically accurate than playing at 50%.

I wouldn't want a new player, who has read accounts of careful, cold-blooded stalking approaches, to become turned off because he read on SubSim that the game only allows hip-shots and that the way he wants to play is impossible.

04-05-14, 07:34 AM	#1
BigWalleye Sea Lord Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: On the Eye-lond, mon! Posts: 1,987 Downloads: 465 Uploads: 0	Cap'n Scurvy and TorpX, I believe you are BOTH correct. Based on my reading over the years, here is how I believe that fire control was executed: The Approach Officer estimated the range, AoB, and speed, and called these out for entry into the TDC. TDC then calculated the target course. The Plotting Party kept updating the attack plot with target range-and-bearing as called out by the Approach Officer. (And AoB, as TorpX points out.) Plotting Party and TDC independently developed a firing solution, based on the two different sets of data. The solutions were checked against each other. Both solutions had to agree, or the boat commander (who usually was, but might not be, the Approach Officer) would not clear to fire. Torpedoes were not supposed to be wasted in snap shots. IIRC, both O'Kane and Fluckey describe situations were the Plot and TDC solutions disagreed. "Check fire." There was tension and fuming while the discrepancies were resolved. (Beggin' yer pardon, but this early on a Sattidy, I am not up to finding the references.) Range and bearing do give course, heading, and speed, but AoB immediately identifies target course changes (like zigzags). Of course, the target range and bearing were determined mechanically, from the bearing ring and stadimeter. The AoB was judged by the Approach Officer, using the Mark I Human Eyeball. It's probably not surprising if former Approach Officers, in their post-war memoirs, sometimes emphasized the parts of their job that called for the most skill on their part. Another observation from TorpX's excellent illustration: range and AoB data begin at 10000 yds. How hard is it for us to make any kind of range or AoB estimate at 10000? Those first long-range observations were probably easier in the R/L analog periscope view, but not a lot easier. They didn't wait until the target image was clear enough for accurate estimates, because then they would wind up basing their solution on 2 or 3 observations, like we often do. If we want to play "realistically" (in a historically appropriate manner), then we need to train ourselves to make and use good estimates at long range. Last edited by BigWalleye; 04-05-14 at 07:55 AM.

04-09-14, 06:23 AM	#6
BigWalleye Sea Lord Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: On the Eye-lond, mon! Posts: 1,987 Downloads: 465 Uploads: 0	Hey, it's your game. You can play it any way you want, as long as you have fun. THAT is the most important thing. But your choice is not the only one. And, for anyone who wants to learn how to make accurate observations, it is not impossible, it is done by many players, and there are tools to help do it. As for realism, after a point the question is not "What is realistic?" but "What you do want to simulate?" Is it more realistic to have a God-like omniscient plotting party or to have the Approach Officer do all the plotting? The correct answer is "No." That's why I did not use the word "realism" in my post. But it is possible to play it either way, and many players enjoy each alternative. There are posters on this site who like to play at 50% difficulty, and have a ball doing it. It would be wrong to suggest that they are not playing the game the way it is supposed to be played. But it would be equally wrong to suggest that playing a 100% difficulty is either impossibly challenging or less historically accurate than playing at 50%. I wouldn't want a new player, who has read accounts of careful, cold-blooded stalking approaches, to become turned off because he read on SubSim that the game only allows hip-shots and that the way he wants to play is impossible. Last edited by BigWalleye; 04-09-14 at 06:55 AM.

04-08-14, 01:09 PM	#2
Sniper297 The Old Man Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Philadelphia Shipyard Brig Posts: 1,386 Downloads: 160 Uploads: 19	Even if they're zigzagging 30 degrees either side of the base course it's pretty difficult to get closer than "20 to 40 degrees port" from 10000 yards. Coming along without zigzagging can you really tell the difference between AOB port 5 and AOB port 10? Even at close range you can tell if it's not zero when you can see part of one side or the other and not just bow on, but anything more accurate than "less than 30" or "more than 30" or "about 60" would take psychic powers. You can get a GENERAL course from AOB and tweak it later by making a second mark and drawing a line through it, but when it comes to shooting at close range you simply don't have time to do anything other than preset the AOB to 70 or 80 and leave it alone.

04-08-14, 01:54 PM	#3
Sniper297 The Old Man Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Philadelphia Shipyard Brig Posts: 1,386 Downloads: 160 Uploads: 19	For purpose of illustration the following pics have been edited to slide the TDC and AOB indicators closer to center. This one I measured his course and maneuvered to be 1000 yards off the track at about 90 degrees to the track for the perfect angle shot. He's only doing 5 knots so nothing is happening too fast to keep up with. This pic is at 3000 yards range, with me 1000 yards off the track the AOB is starboard 25. At 2000 yards range the AOB has only changed 7 degrees, starboard 32. 1500 yards up to 43, the AOB starts swinging faster, in 500 yards got a 11 degree change. AOB 50 at 1350 yards, 7 degree change in 150 yards. For those unaware, on the left side PK the lower ship is your sub showing the compass heading, upper is the target showing his heading. The arrow in the lower one shows the gyro angle for the torpedo, which way and how much it would need to turn if you fired at this moment. Upper dial arrow shows the angle at which the torpedo will hit the target, in this case about a 45 degree angle from the bow. Here's the shooting setup we're looking for, close to zero gyro angle and close to a 90 degree impact angle. Note the AOB shows 80 degrees but the dial in the TDC shows the torpedo impacting at 90 degrees, the difference is how long it takes a Mark 14 at 46 knots to travel 1000 yards. Again this is the training wheels study, note the crosshairs for a 5 knot target with a zero gyro angle 46 knot torpedo show 10 degrees off center at the moment of firing. When you move up to manual targeting and no map contact realism, if you want to use the angle off firing method set the bearing for straight ahead, speed zero AOB doesn't matter if the speed is zero, click the "send range and bearing to TDC" button so the gyro angle will be zero and the fish will go straight out of the tube. Range actually doesn't matter with the angle off method, set the crosshairs at 10 degrees right (010) for a target coming from the right, a target crossing your bows left to right set for 350. Whatever the range is when he crosses the 10 degree left (or right) crosshairs you fire, and if he doesn't turn or change speed the torpedo will hit. Get to know different convoys and merchant ships and the speed they usually cruise, that will tell you if your speed guesstimations are close. Make notes on what the angle off is for different speeds and different torpedoes, for a Mark 10 you would need to lead the target by more than 10 degrees, for a task force going 20 knots you would need a lot more lead angle.

04-09-14, 01:38 AM	#5
Sniper297 The Old Man Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Philadelphia Shipyard Brig Posts: 1,386 Downloads: 160 Uploads: 19	Hee-hee, it's a lot like math - some people have a talent for it and others don't. My thinking is if it's a large AOB at a long distance you need to quickly figure out the general course and get closer to the track in a hurry, if it's less than 10 degrees you're close to where you need to be so you can daydream until he gets closer. The main thing is if it's less than 10 degrees it's not going to change very much until he gets a LOT closer, then it will change very quickly. Reading SILENT RUNNING recently the author (who was the TDC officer for that sub) commented that he set the AOB to the general course and speed to calculated overall speed of advance into the TDC since the complicated zigzag plan the approaching convoy was using was just too much to handle. When the targets got close enough to get an accurate range and bearing the TDC guess was only 500 yards off the original estimate. Looking at it now page 124; "Before long Dykers had their tops in sight through the periscope. Alec Nading and Kent Lukingbeal had worked out an overall speed of advance for the convoy based on its zig plan, and I had just set that in the TDC rather than trying to estimate the convoy's many zigs and zags." That's the worst trouble with trying to play this game on full realism, note he mentions himself on the TDC along with two other guys on the plot. He only mentions the Captain on the periscope, but there were always two - the assistant approach officer waltzed around the back side of the periscope reading off the ranges and bearings when the Captain said "mark". All the captain (or whoever was doing the periscope work) had to do was center crosshairs, adjust stadimeter, and estimate AOB, he had a whole team to do everything else. For me trying to be Captain and the entire approach team along with the crew setting torpedo speeds and depths is just too much in too little time to screw around with unrealistic realism.