![]() |
SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997 |
![]() |
#16 | |
A-ganger
![]() Join Date: May 2009
Location: Hooper, UT
Posts: 80
Downloads: 89
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
TMA may be a complex geometry/trigonometry problem, but it's still simple enough that it could be modeled relatively accurately in the game, yet it isn't... not to the degree it should be, anyhow. The ranges jumping all over the place is one example, but another is the way that it gives no idea of relative motion prior to getting the 95% solution (the WHA?!?!). BRGRT is the first and possibly the most important fire control parameter determined (well, second... you know which one I'm talking about, Shipkiller1...), and to not have the vital and valuable information that it presents is just plain silly. We drive off of BRGRT, for heaven's sake... to not have it is almost as much a handcuff as the lack of fine speed control. As an aside, Shipkiller... thanks for using the old school FC terminology - they changed it back around 2000, and I STILL have a hard time using it, even though it SEEMS more intuitive.
__________________
STS1(SS) USN (Ret) : 1997 - 2017 USS MICHIGAN (SSBN-727 BLUE) USS MONTPELIER (SSN-765) IMF PACNORWEST USS ALASKA (SSBN-732 GOLD) USS ALABAMA (SSBN-731 GOLD) NAVAL OCEAN PROCESSING FACILITY, WHIDBEY ISLAND USS TENNESSEE (SSBN-734 GOLD) |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 | |
Electrician's Mate
![]() |
![]() Quote:
BYG-1 TI04 (APB-05) was the big change. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 | |
A-ganger
![]() Join Date: May 2009
Location: Hooper, UT
Posts: 80
Downloads: 89
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
![]()
__________________
STS1(SS) USN (Ret) : 1997 - 2017 USS MICHIGAN (SSBN-727 BLUE) USS MONTPELIER (SSN-765) IMF PACNORWEST USS ALASKA (SSBN-732 GOLD) USS ALABAMA (SSBN-731 GOLD) NAVAL OCEAN PROCESSING FACILITY, WHIDBEY ISLAND USS TENNESSEE (SSBN-734 GOLD) |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 | |
Sailor man
![]() Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 44
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
__________________
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 | ||
Planesman
![]() Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 186
Downloads: 51
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21 |
Sailor man
![]() Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 44
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
Thanks for the out of context wall of text. The quoted part in my previous post is still nonsense. Adding more words before and after it won't change that.
__________________
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#22 |
Sailor man
![]() Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 44
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
Sorry for the spite reply, let me explain my comment further
![]() The quoted part is terribly wrong since it implies that the geographical disposition of the sub allows you to perform triangulation of the target. Since the target is moving, that's bollocks. It can be true only if the target is stationary which is extremely rare. That's how you determine the positions of fixed sites on the shore, and not how you perform TMA for moving targets.
__________________
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#23 |
Engineer
![]() |
![]()
So, what you're saying is, the whole concept of TMA in Fast Attack and Dangerous Waters is BS, or is it just the techniques they encourage?
I'm asking because they seem legit. If you get a constant set of bearings and the target isn't changing course/speed a single course change can give you a pretty good solution. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#24 | ||
Sailor man
![]() Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 44
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
Quote:
TMA is an art of relative movement, it's conducted against a moving element. It's essentially a process by which the target bearing rate is collected on different legs of the sub. The more you get, the better the solution will be. To put it in DW terms - The range in which a single target strip's dots will stack against the lines of bearing will be restrained to a single position - that position is the solution.
__________________
![]() |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#25 | |
Engineer
![]() |
![]() Quote:
![]() BTW, the TMA in Fast Attack is very similar to DW except you have separate stations for plot where you move the "speed ruler" on the map and the fire control station where you manipulate the Range, Course and Speed to stack the "contact dots" (forgive me for using my own names for these things) in a vertical line. This is the plot station: ![]() and this is how fire control looks: ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#26 | |
Sailor man
![]() Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 44
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
![]() It's very much possible that the TMA model in FA is great, but the manual just explains it wrong. In fact, I pretty much believe this is the case.
__________________
![]() Last edited by Destex; 07-14-17 at 08:23 AM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#27 | |
Planesman
![]() Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 186
Downloads: 51
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
![]() Probably its me, but maybe you're missing the point of what the manual suggests. It's obvious that if both emitter and receiver are moving, it wouldn't make sense to change course in order to triangulate the target's position, but as far as I understand it, it's not what it's suggesting either. As I understand, it suggests to change course every 10-12min intervals in order to verify the alignment of the dots with the reference line in Fire Control Console so as to validate the solution. ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#28 |
Seasoned Skipper
![]() Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: The Icy North
Posts: 693
Downloads: 189
Uploads: 0
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#29 |
Electrician's Mate
![]() |
![]()
The second picture, the Fire Control Display is called the "Bearing Difference Plot"
That manual was written by Sierra Games for the game. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#30 | ||
Sailor man
![]() Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 44
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
However, the reason why ownship manuevers are required is explained in the following way: Quote:
__________________
![]() |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|