Let's talk tactics

[Jimbuna]

The potential rewards ar huge though....there is at least one Illustrious carrier out there

[Steeltrap]

The whole issue of sensor performance is a thorny one.

I believe passive detection by escorts is massively overplayed. To be effective, an escort needed to be travelling slowly in good sea conditions. They did do the 'sprint and drift' as part of doctrine, but even that relies on the sub making enough noise to be heard and then your operator hearing it.

Radar is a different issue. Early sets weren't that great, and a u-boat is a small target for a radar return. Late war radars could, in ideal conditions, detect a periscope out to about 2,000-2,500 yards.

As for sonar/asdic, the more advanced sets were effective to a maximum of 2,500 yards. From about Sept '43 it was common to encounter the sets that gave distance, bearing AND depth. They were linked to the depth-setting of dc without manual intervention. Ultimately, they could train and fire 'squid' and 'hedgehog' from the asdic 'hut'. At that point, a well-trained crew had around a 50% likelihood of inflicting damage/sinking the u-boat.

In summary:

- an escort travelling at convoy speed should have next to no chance of detecting you through passive means, in which case it really shouldn't matter how quickly you travel (the fact is the gear was overwhelmed by sea-state and speed of the escort such that it wouldn't hear any emissions from a sub). The presence of so many ships also provided massive interference, one reason why the most successful commanders got 'inside' the convoys. In short, I believe escorts should have no real chance of detecting you through passive means until such time as they are conducting a deliberate hunt without the body of the convoy being within several miles at least.

- early radars might detect you on the surface, but not outside around 6,000 - 8,000 yards. Even within that range, it would epend on sea-state and the aspect of the sub (i.e. bow on presents a very small potential return surface).

- later war radars should be effective out to a significant distance (as far as 15,000 yards?).

- asdic/sonar should never detect you outside 2,500 yards, and the earlier sets less than that. They should only provide accurate depth info from around Sept '43 onwards.

- depth charges should render passive/active detection unreliable, if not totally ineffective, for as much as 2 minutes after an attack.

- being spotted on the surface by lookouts should be notoriously difficult. There are countless examples of subs being on the surface at as little as 500-1,000 yards and never being seen, not even by escorts (from my experience, NYGM does a better job in this regard than GWX).

The real issue is working out how the sensors in SHIII work compared with this. In some respects it's better not to have in-depth knowledge of real WWII sensor performances as one is less likely to get frustrated by the simulation not mirroring known, real-world scenarios (one reason I was such a critic of SHIV was due to their failing so blatantly, and badly, in this respect)!!

Oh well - the ultimate test is what works in the sim, not what 'ought' to work!!

[kiwikapitan]

Interesting thread.

I use similar tactics to herr kaleun Schöneboom and most of the time it works although I always find the targeting period nerve-wracking. I played a late war single mission recently (the rendezvous with a small trawler) where you are up against a HUGE convoy with many escorts and I did manage to sink a medium tanker and a large freighter and thought I had escaped the destroyers and corvettes but I hadn't counted on the trailing HK group.

I left my bedroom briefly and when I returned I heard the terrifying sound of being pinged. I raised my periscope and was horrified to see a destroyer bearing down on me. I froze initially, contemplated a dodgy stern shot but then realized I was in mortal danger and tried to crash dive but got caught in a series of close explosions which tore the sub apart.

Stupid kaleun!