Targeting Problems

[Feltan]

Originally Posted by aaronblood

No it doesn't...

I've said it almost til I'm blue in the face; a zero gyro angle shot is not influenced by distance. If the Earth we're a 2D flat plane, you could hit the target out to infinity.

Calm down. We are talking about two different things.

The zero bearing attack, and the constant bearing attack (called the O'Kane method on these forums) are not the same.

Regards,
Feltan

[XLjedi]

Originally Posted by Feltan

Calm down. We are talking about two different things.

The zero bearing attack, and the constant bearing attack (called the O'Kane method on these forums) are not the same.

Regards,
Feltan

They're the same... I was the one that explained to em how to do it. One of the main things Rockin Robbins always says is distance doesn't matter. Unless you're talking about a different O'Kane method. Actually, technically, we don't really do O'Kane and Morton justice with what we've come to call the O'Kane method. ...and I've also blasted em for blindly setting AoB to 90° when 75°-80° would introduce far less error. Is he still suggesting 90°? O'Kane's probably rolling in his grave...

Only reason I suggested calling it that was to give O'Kane a nod for his comment about how he learned from Morton to hold the bearing constant as target points of interest passed the aiming wire. Why not call it the Morton Method? ...all Morton was doing was carrying over a practice from WWI technology. O'Kane seemed to use it with the most success. It was really more of a thank you to O'Kane for passing the info along in his writings.

The only thing the TDC is really being used for in the O'Kane method is related to the fact that it already knows the torpedo speeds, so you don't need to look up the lead angle in a table. It's a shame if folks are using 90° for the AoB setting and introducing silly error, in an otherwise straightforward targetting method.

[Rockin Robbins]

The only thing that keeps a constant bearing in the Dick O'Kane attack is the constant bearing from the torpedo to the target. And since you're thankfully not aboard the torpedo to measure that.....there's a point there somewhere. In the Dick O'Kane attack the range absolutely has no bearing on the solution so long as the torpedo has the range to get as far as the target is away. It matters not if the target is 500 or 2500 yards away. The firing solution is the same. And I have hit targets 2500 yards away with it.

Actually ANY torpedo that will hit its target maintains its target on a constant bearing throughout its trip from acquiring course to impact. Therefore, from the point of view of the torpedo ALL attacks are constant bearing attacks.

Define constant bearing attack so I can understand why you're calling a Dick O'Kane attack that. I suggest you check out my tutorial video to ensure that you're right. I'm curious what you are talking about there!

[XLjedi]

I think he's referring to holding the aiming wire constant, ie constant bearing attack

Are you still suggesting people use a 90° AoB as the default for the O'Kane method. That should be like 75°.

[Rockin Robbins]

@aaronblood: My instructions now clearly state that the AoB is equal to 90 minus the lead angle. They've been that way for months, since our conversation after I posted the seminar tutorial and you explained how it was really a blown attack that worked because the solutions overlapped.

[XLjedi]

OK... that's the way it should be done.

I s'pose people just aren't catching on that we're using the TDC to compute a lead angle for a 0°-gyro shot. The only thing we've done is eliminate a lookup table for different torpedo/target speeds.

We should do an advanced O'Kane method that allows folks to approach from different angles other than 90°. Then the torpedo advance would actually produce an ever-so-small error associated with the distance estimate. I'd still just set it to 1000-2000 and not worry about it though. You might get a kick out of watching your torpedo turn into the target from a 45° approach angle.

[Monk29]

RR, great tutoral, first time viewing it. Frankly, I have been using the DO method since I saw (and stayed awake, no card game here) your brief posted on the Video Turtoral: TDC + PK Adv thread. The DO Method has produced the most kills for me thus far. I guess my frustration has be with my failure to produce a solution through the TDC that gets me the same results. I would like to be able to snap a guy in half using the step by step method briefed by WernerSobe (as in make the TDC work for me) in his second TDC video. I usually save at first contact, so I give the by the book targeting a chance and then to switch to the DO Method to get effects on target.

Thanks for the help RR, aaron and felt.

[Feltan]

Originally Posted by aaronblood

I think he's referring to holding the aiming wire constant, ie constant bearing attack...

I was, and also not necessarily at 90 degrees to the target track, but re-reading what I wrote above I didn't make that very clear. Sorry if I caused confusion.

Regards,
Feltan

[McBeck]

Im gonna ask a stupid question....do you remember to open the torpedo doors by pressing "Q" ?

[Rockin Robbins]

Originally Posted by McBeck

Im gonna ask a stupid question....do you remember to open the torpedo doors by pressing "Q" ?

If you don't you miss astern, just like two people have said so far. And you have to allow 15 or 30 seconds for the doors to open before firing, too!

Not opening the torpedo doors can ruin ANY attack unless the target has an AoB of 0 or 180 or unless both you and the target are stationary.

Excellent catch!

[XLjedi]

Originally Posted by Feltan

I was, and also not necessarily at 90 degrees to the target track, but re-reading what I wrote above I didn't make that very clear. Sorry if I caused confusion.

Regards,
Feltan

Actually the real O'Kane method involved using the PK and calling the AoB to determine target true course... confirming the PK track and then just as he was ready to fire... turn the PK off and fire at points of interest as they passed the wire.

We've dumbed it down quite a bit...

O'Kane followed the standard approach course procedure target bearing 90° abeam (that's different than a 90° approach to the target true course) and used 3 second scope peeks to true up the PK track to the target.

If you follow this attack strategy then all inputs to the PK are indeed important, the order of importance is as follows:
1) Speed
2) AoB
3) Distance

You should prioritize your data gathering with the above order in the back of your mind. AoB and distance are very forgiving... speed is a solution killer.

The closer your gyro track is to 0° the less distance will have influence. The error that distance introduces is ONLY related to the torpedo advance. After the torpedo makes it's turn, and providing you're staying inside of a 20-30° gyro angle it's not too bad.

If you you've got speed and distance close AoB allows a lot of room for error... I think you're pretty safe in the +-15° to 20° range provided your within 1000yds.

[Mush Martin]

its been my experience that okanes method makes for a good searching
shot if your not certain of your data. what Dick realized is that a trigonometric
torpedo shot is really a function of interval (time) intersection.

the target will pass through the spot at some point the question is when.

Okanes method also has a tendency when used right on a difficult target.
(eg, Yamato) to walk the damage down the full length of the target ship,
a distribution of damage that is recomended and effective in game.

on the other hand spread shooting can be artistic and in the case of
shooting on formations more effective. as often as not when I target
multiple ships I will target one and shoot on two by estimating the
bearing difference in the offset angle created by the two targets seperation
along the line of advance.

this creates simultaneous first strike on multiple targets Precluding
enemy evasive maneuvers ruining your shot.

Thus !


(btw this is an eight thousand yard shot)

[Feltan]

Originally Posted by aaronblood

Actually the real O'Kane method involved using the PK and calling the AoB to determine target true course... confirming the PK track and then just as he was ready to fire... turn the PK off and fire at points of interest as they passed the wire.

We've dumbed it down quite a bit...

O'Kane followed the standard approach course procedure target bearing 90° abeam (that's different than a 90° approach to the target true course) and used 3 second scope peeks to true up the PK track to the target.

If you follow this attack strategy then all inputs to the PK are indeed important, the order of importance is as follows:
1) Speed
2) AoB
3) Distance

You should prioritize your data gathering with the above order in the back of your mind. AoB and distance are very forgiving... speed is a solution killer.

The closer your gyro track is to 0° the less distance will have influence. The error that distance introduces is ONLY related to the torpedo advance. After the torpedo makes it's turn, and providing you're staying inside of a 20-30° gyro angle it's not too bad.

If you you've got speed and distance close AoB allows a lot of room for error... I think you're pretty safe in the +-15° to 20° range provided your within 1000yds.

Thanks for that summary -- all of it quite familiar to me. Eugene Fluckey was my Godfather, and my father was a classmate of his. Had an opportunity to talk to him at length about this sort of thing before his health failed.

Regards,
Feltan