John P. Cromwell attack technique on order

[Lexandro]

Nice post RR. As it transpires this kind of attack is how I have been approaching the game with Monsun/RSRD due to the large size of the convoys. By coming in at a 45 degree attack angle I can work a position to fire my bow and stern tubes in one flurry, using the targets forward speed as an "assist" to the torpedo travel time. That way I can hit 2 targets in one attack run and if I continue on my path I can work another shooting oppertunity from the convoy moving across my path.

While it would be much harder to do with full manual aim (ie work 2 sets of TDC calcs) the 45 degree attack angle method is a staple in my play book.

[Rockin Robbins]

Lexandro, all my attack techniques are manual targeting techniques with the goal of making them so easy and enticing that you, on your next trip to port, will x that manual targeting option and go for it!

Even though it's cool to take out all the escorts and shoot multiple targets with auto-targeting, there is nothing to compare with all the whooping and hollering that takes place when you take out your first target on manual targeting.

My wife thought I was an idiot! Why does she have to be right all the time? It isn't fair....

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by Lexandro

Nice post RR. As it transpires this kind of attack is how I have been approaching the game with Monsun/RSRD due to the large size of the convoys. By coming in at a 45 degree attack angle I can work a position to fire my bow and stern tubes in one flurry, using the targets forward speed as an "assist" to the torpedo travel time. That way I can hit 2 targets in one attack run and if I continue on my path I can work another shooting oppertunity from the convoy moving across my path.

While it would be much harder to do with full manual aim (ie work 2 sets of TDC calcs) the 45 degree attack angle method is a staple in my play book.

I too have been approachin at a similar angle... just made sence to me. As you said if you miss you still have an easy correction to fire again. Plus the closing angles of the torp and the intended target..... well just makes sense its faster.

Ive been doing this out of 'instinct' its pretty cool so see my guesses confirmed.

[Lexandro]

Usually I try the full realism settings in a sim game and can get to grips with the after a bit of practice. In falcon 4.0 I have mastered the full realism settings of air-combat in an F-16 and I know exactly what every button and switch does and when and how to use it.

In SHIV however, its less instinctual than say flight is. Its more calculatory based combat, and to be frank I really cant get to grips with doing lots of math just to play the game. No doubt as some point I will get my head around it in a simple fashion, its just that for the time being manual aim is beyond my grasp.

If there was a proper tutorial mission just for working an easy shot, with lots of guide and tips on how to do so in the mission itself I might be able to learn it easier. Doing it hands on its a much more powerful learning tool for me than learning from study.

[Rockin Robbins]

Nisgeis, why don't you pop in here and tell your story of how you thought up this attack method and what you told me that made me wrestle with all those nasty numbers?

[XLjedi]

So, I see you're coming in on a 45° to the target TC.

Is that it? ...or is there something more to it? :hmm:

So far, I'm not really seeing any need to name it anything...

[Rockin Robbins]

Aaronblood, not to be sarcastic (on the other hand, why not?), but there is one reason to name anything. Human beings have a weird psychological need to label things. Sometimes we even conclude that we know the name of something, so that means we understand it.

You're looking at a strange looking animal you've never seen before. "What in hades is that?" you say. "It's a flobberbitimous compressiceps" I say. You're perfectly happy, although you know nothing more about that strange looking animal than you did a minute ago.:rotfl:But you can tell your girlfriend you saw a flobbergitimous compressiceps and she will get that serious look that tells you she's impressed.

But more than anything names are handles for a collection of behavior directed at a desired goal. How do you find the location of a submarine by listening to it from two radio receivers? Triangulation. The word is shorthand for a complex procedure, usually performed by a team of different people.

In a similar manner, Dick O'Kane attack is a handle for a collection of actions including a course at right angles to the track, AoB being equal to 90º minus the number of degrees from the shoot bearing to zero bearing, turning the position keeper off, yada, yada, yada. I can say, do a Dick O'Kane attack here and you know the steps to take.

John P. Cromwell Attack will be the same kind of handle, encompassing a specific sequence of steps including a course at 45º from the track from ahead of the target, AoB being 45º minus the bearing, position keeper off, yada, yada, yada.

We name things because that is how our brains work. It helps us to remember. In these two cases they also help us to remember great submarine captains of World War II. Every time we pull off one of these tactics we remember them.

What could be bad about that?

[kiwi_2005]

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

Aaronblood, not to be sarcastic (on the other hand, why not?), but there is one reason to name anything. Human beings have a weird psychological need to label things. Sometimes we even conclude that we know the name of something, so that means we understand it.

You're looking at a strange looking animal you've never seen before. "What in hades is that?" you say. "It's a flobberbitimous compressiceps" I say. You're perfectly happy, although you know nothing more about that strange looking animal than you did a minute ago.:rotfl:But you can tell your girlfriend you saw a flobbergitimous compressiceps and she will get that serious look that tells you she's impressed.

:rotfl::rotfl:

[Nisgeis]

Originally Posted by aaronblood

So, I see you're coming in on a 45° to the target TC.

Is that it? ...or is there something more to it? :hmm:

So far, I'm not really seeing any need to name it anything...

I never really understood the Dick O'Kane method. I could never relate the instructions to the maths behind the technique. It just seemed a bit like a rough guess, which worked because you were very close to the target. I had a look on your tutorial thread, but that's a very brief snippet talking about a 7 knot target, with no details. Can you point me to the log behind it?

This new method came out of me trying to create a rule of thumb for a 45 degree attack, without using the TDC at all. I thought the Dick O'Kane method was a non TDC method to attack a target with a zero gyro angle, but it turns out the TDC is used and is more complicated that I thought.

My aim is to present a simple method people can use who want to do manual targetting, but don't want to use the TDC.

As it happens, I could not get an easy rule of thumb for 45 degree attack and after investigating, I found that the old speed plus three rule of thumb is also not satisfactory at all. I came up with a way to get the correct bearing of the target to fire at to hit with any torpedo track angle, with a zero gyro angle, by just using the map drawing tools. Just one protractor drawing and two rule drawings are enough to easily calculate the correct lead angle for a zero gyro angle shot at any intersecting courses for any given target speed or torpedo speed. It's essentially a constant bearing solution for torpedo and target, making the range irrelevant.

[SteamWake]

But the bearing is not constant due to the targets speed and its AOB also any movement by your own boat.