Realistic modern sub tactic? - Page 2

Henson · 04-06-06, 04:50 PM

Real submarines use the scope almost exclusively for ASuW, to the point of almost disregarding sonar...we don't need it. We can SEE the guy for crying out loud.

Unfortunately, a lot of the real functionality found in the persicope is not very well emulated in the game. In game, sonar is a MUCH better choice. IRL, not so much. The deal with the scope is that you have to have some knowledge of tactics and effective periscope employment methods to use it well, and you're not going to find that on the internet.

Would you rather fire a gun at a moving target you can only hear, or one you can see?

Kapitan · 04-06-06, 04:52 PM

Nothing wrong with my sonar or perisope sometimes when im going slow i use it to spot other submarines too.

Linton · 04-06-06, 05:13 PM

IT's HMS CONQUEROR!!

Kapitan · 04-06-06, 05:16 PM

We know just because i am a billingual illiterate dislectic doesnt mean i dont know.

sonar732 · 04-06-06, 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cornwallis

IT's HMS CONQUEROR!!

It's Kaptain...no, I meant Kapitan.

Deamon · 05-21-06, 04:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henson

Unfortunately, a lot of the real functionality found in the persicope is not very well emulated in the game.

What for example ?

Deamon

Linton · 05-21-06, 05:37 AM

I found this brochure on periscopes by Thales Optronics.http://www.thalesgroup-optronics.com/pdf/Periscopes.pdf
I also found this one for USN
http://www.eo.kollmorgen.com/product_spec20.html

Deamon · 05-21-06, 06:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Linton

I found this brochure on periscopes by Thales Optronics.http://www.thalesgroup-optronics.com/pdf/Periscopes.pdf
I also found this one for USN
http://www.eo.kollmorgen.com/product_spec20.html

Thanks mate

Alex Nenadic · 05-21-06, 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kapitan

i
Conquorer used sprint drift tactic go deep for a while listen on sonar pop up then back down it was only till the order to fire came.

Can you provide more details?

XanderF · 05-21-06, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Linton

I found this brochure on periscopes by Thales Optronics.http://www.thalesgroup-optronics.com/pdf/Periscopes.pdf
I also found this one for USN
http://www.eo.kollmorgen.com/product_spec20.html

The two bigs ones from that sheet would probably be:
- Magnification to 24x (and, specifically, quality of magnification. DW's 3d world is not as useful as the 'real' 3d world for spotting things.
- 'Workstation with image processing'. While "CSI:Miami/Las Vegas/whatever" levels of image processing are total bunk, you CAN do an awful lot to clean up an image nicely. And the stadimeter built into DW is also...less useful than I imagine the real model would be.

/me continues to wish for DW w/ SH3 level graphics. Would make using the scope (quite important for Kilo drivers) SO much nicer....

Deamon · 05-22-06, 03:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XanderF

The two bigs ones from that sheet would probably be:
- Magnification to 24x (and, specifically, quality of magnification. DW's 3d world is not as useful as the 'real' 3d world for spotting things.

Thanks for the input.

Quote:

- 'Workstation with image processing'. While "CSI:Miami/Las Vegas/whatever" levels of image processing are total bunk, you CAN do an awful lot to clean up an image nicely.

CSI:Miami/Las Vegas/whatever ? Is this levels used in US submarines ?

Quote:

And the stadimeter built into DW is also...less useful than I imagine the real model would be.

/me continues to wish for DW w/ SH3 level graphics. Would make using the scope (quite important for Kilo drivers) SO much nicer....

Yes especialy the flickering of the mastst are horrobly when you try to make a photo of the target for a stadimeter measure.

Wim Libaers · 05-22-06, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deamon

Yes especialy the flickering of the mastst are horrobly when you try to make a photo of the target for a stadimeter measure.

True, but that's not as disastrous as it might seem, as you don't really want the mast height anyway. No matter what the manual may claim, the highest structure usually seems to predict the range better than the highest mast. Still, a full-screen scope image would be nice.

OKO · 05-23-06, 12:27 AM

Yep, that's true, Wim.

Why do you all (well ... not really all ... :hmm: ) have so much criticism against the DW periscope ?
It's a very usefull and efficient tool in this simulation !

Of course ... you need to know you MUST NOT use the highest mast, but only the highest structure, then you will start to live in an accurate periscope world

for the OHP, it's not exaclty the highest structure (but it is for 95% of the ship I tested) : to be really accurate, you need to use the black platform near the top of the radar mast, you could see it fine when you will be at range to work.

Range to work, one very interesting thing.
The range to work depend ... guess what ... on the size of your target !

You could find a very accurate range on a supertanker at 3 time the range you could do for the OHP !
Sounds logical huh ?!

what does it mean : as for TMA, there is time to wait before time to work.
Don't waste your time to try to range an OHP at 12 miles with the periscope => you just won't have anything accurate at less than 33 or 50 % of the real thing
But from 10 miles, you start to be quite accurate, and from 8 miles, you could be surgically accurate (5% of range error)

In fact, this periscope need skill
You need to train to know when it's time to work, and when it's time to wait.
So you need to know to evaluate roughly the range of your target even before ranging them.
it's really not that hard, and in a simple training session (on edited mission), you could learn a lot on this subject.

One other important thing : not only you need to put your upper mark on the higher structure and not the highest mast, but you need to put your down mark to the waterline and not on the sea level : the earth is not flat, and this is simulated in DW.

This mean you must "imagine" where is the waterline on a hull you just see half, or even less (because of earth curve) ! So, you need in fact to put the down mark into the sea, under the sea level you see on the picture !
Except, of course, for quite close targets, say closer than 3 or 4 miles, on which you could see the real waterline of the ship.

So,

1) you have to wait the right time to take your first picture (before, it's useless, too late, it's too dangerous for your stealth)

2) you need to put the upper mark at the highest structure for all ships except for OHP where you better aim at the black platform on the radar mast (easily detectable)
don't ask me why OHP need a special setting, I don't know (maybe because it's a small ship) but you just have to know that, to avoid any problems, and be accurate.

3) you need to put the down mark on the REAL waterline.
If you don't see it, you need to guess where it is on your picture

THEN, you have a fantastique tool, needless to say quite exciting also.

And last thing : as already mentionned by LW and Henson above => the stadimeter give you immediate range with a passive sensor!
You just need to record 3 track, at 1 minute from each others, then, in 2 minutes, you have 3 perfect position of your target.

Now switch to TMA screen, select the visual track, and your TMA is the easiest you could ever made => just have to put the 3 tick marks at the end of the 3 tracks !
you don't even need to know the target speed.
you need 5 seconds to make your TMA here, with only 3 tracks, and in 2 minutes ... who said periscope is not a good tool in DW ?

But it's clear you need to know what I just exposed above, if you want to find accurate ranges, or you could be very disapointed sometimes !

I must admit SCS did a really great job and improvment on the periscope during original beta test.
The one we have now have nothing to compare with the one we had at beta test ... you will tell me that's why there is beta tests ... but when I sometimes read people asking "what did they do during the beta test because they didn't saw this or that" I can tell you these guys don't have ANY idea on the enormous work we made there, SCS and beta testers ... but that's another story ...

Come back to periscope : now, I find this tool very efficient and accurate (when you know issues above), even if it needs a bit of training to handle it at full efficiency.
but that's also why it is great :|\
This is actually a really great tool for all subs, even if it's more crutial for KILOs than for nukes.

What is more exciting than to see a LHD at 20 knts exploding on your 53-65K from a KILO periscope you used to make his TMA ? huh ?

One more thing: I often read "attacking targets at periscope like at WWII"
But there is nothing really comparable beetween WWII periscope use and nowadays :
- with the stadimeter, you don't need to use the bow angle at all (but you can if you are masochist ! :rotfl: )
- At WWII, there had not any TMA station
- WWII periscope targeting very rarely exceeded 1 miles, when modern could be made at near 15 miles on big platforms (say 8 to 15 on warships depending on the size, from the fregate to the carrier)

in fact, the actual use of the periscope, if using the same principles, is, nevertheless, completly different from WWII, when engaging.
This is mainly due to technological factors :
- magnification much better now (until X24 on latest periscopes)
- TMA station, to build quick and accurate solutions compared to bow angle so badly innacurate except at very short range (under 2 miles)
- range of detection, compelling you to keep a much bigger distance beetween you and your target
- torpedoes range, speed and seekers, much more capables and deadly than WWII ones

All of this make the use of periscope very different than the way it was used at WWII.
So you definitly can't say : lets use the scope as they did at WWII, because the only same thing you will do will be to put your eye in the reticle and that's all.
Everything else is different.

TLAM Strike · 05-23-06, 12:41 AM

All I got to say about the Periscope is why does the speed on a contact have to get set to zero when I enter the solution at the standimeter.

Stupidist thing ever. Maybe thats why I only use the 'scope for bearing mesurements.

OKO · 05-23-06, 02:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

All I got to say about the Periscope is why does the speed on a contact have to get set to zero when I enter the solution at the standimeter.

huh ?
I don't get it TLAM
you mean when you go from stadimeter to TMA, speed is set at 0 ?
anyway, you don't care about, do you ?
I mean, once you have your 3 visual tracks, you just have to put the 1st tick mark on the first track and the last tick mark on the last track, and then you have the speed.
The second track is only here to help you to have a more accurate picture, using average beetween the 3 tracks and not only a starting track and ending track.
in fact it's not really needed, but give a more accurate solution.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

Stupidist thing ever. Maybe thats why I only use the 'scope for bearing mesurements.

huh ?
I'm not sure I get your point above ...
but I really don't see what you are talking about ?!
One of the best thing with stadimeter is rightly it will give you the speed without using DEMON !

Well ... i'm not sure if I miss something or if you miss something

but I'm sure what i told above works perfect, periscoep is 80% of time my tool of choice for ASuW attack with the KILO.
because I love to see my target burning and sinking

04-06-06, 04:52 PM	#17
Kapitan Sub Test Pilot Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: UK + Canada Posts: 7,132 Downloads: 77 Uploads: 7	Nothing wrong with my sonar or perisope sometimes when im going slow i use it to spot other submarines too. __________________ DONT FORGET if you like a post to nominate it by using the blue diamond Find out about Museum Ships here: https://www.museumships.us/ Flickr for all my pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131313936@N03/ Navy general board articles: https://www.navygeneralboard.com/author/aegis/

04-06-06, 05:13 PM	#18
Linton Sea Lord Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 1,898 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	IT's HMS CONQUEROR!! __________________ http://lintonsview.blogspot.com/

04-06-06, 05:16 PM	#19
Kapitan Sub Test Pilot Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: UK + Canada Posts: 7,132 Downloads: 77 Uploads: 7	We know just because i am a billingual illiterate dislectic doesnt mean i dont know. __________________ DONT FORGET if you like a post to nominate it by using the blue diamond Find out about Museum Ships here: https://www.museumships.us/ Flickr for all my pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131313936@N03/ Navy general board articles: https://www.navygeneralboard.com/author/aegis/

05-21-06, 05:37 AM	#22
Linton Sea Lord Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 1,898 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	I found this brochure on periscopes by Thales Optronics.http://www.thalesgroup-optronics.com/pdf/Periscopes.pdf I also found this one for USN http://www.eo.kollmorgen.com/product_spec20.html __________________ http://lintonsview.blogspot.com/

05-23-06, 12:41 AM	#29
TLAM Strike Navy Seal Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Rochester, New York Posts: 8,633 Downloads: 29 Uploads: 6	All I got to say about the Periscope is why does the speed on a contact have to get set to zero when I enter the solution at the standimeter. Stupidist thing ever. Maybe thats why I only use the 'scope for bearing mesurements. __________________

04-06-06, 04:50 PM	#16
Henson Planesman Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 185 Downloads: 13 Uploads: 0	Real submarines use the scope almost exclusively for ASuW, to the point of almost disregarding sonar...we don't need it. We can SEE the guy for crying out loud. Unfortunately, a lot of the real functionality found in the persicope is not very well emulated in the game. In game, sonar is a MUCH better choice. IRL, not so much. The deal with the scope is that you have to have some knowledge of tactics and effective periscope employment methods to use it well, and you're not going to find that on the internet. Would you rather fire a gun at a moving target you can only hear, or one you can see?

05-23-06, 12:27 AM	#28
OKO Commander Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Solar system, mainly on earth Posts: 476 Downloads: 62 Uploads: 0	Yep, that's true, Wim. Why do you all (well ... not really all ... :hmm: ) have so much criticism against the DW periscope ? It's a very usefull and efficient tool in this simulation ! Of course ... you need to know you MUST NOT use the highest mast, but only the highest structure, then you will start to live in an accurate periscope world for the OHP, it's not exaclty the highest structure (but it is for 95% of the ship I tested) : to be really accurate, you need to use the black platform near the top of the radar mast, you could see it fine when you will be at range to work. Range to work, one very interesting thing. The range to work depend ... guess what ... on the size of your target ! You could find a very accurate range on a supertanker at 3 time the range you could do for the OHP ! Sounds logical huh ?! what does it mean : as for TMA, there is time to wait before time to work. Don't waste your time to try to range an OHP at 12 miles with the periscope => you just won't have anything accurate at less than 33 or 50 % of the real thing But from 10 miles, you start to be quite accurate, and from 8 miles, you could be surgically accurate (5% of range error) In fact, this periscope need skill You need to train to know when it's time to work, and when it's time to wait. So you need to know to evaluate roughly the range of your target even before ranging them. it's really not that hard, and in a simple training session (on edited mission), you could learn a lot on this subject. One other important thing : not only you need to put your upper mark on the higher structure and not the highest mast, but you need to put your down mark to the waterline and not on the sea level : the earth is not flat, and this is simulated in DW. This mean you must "imagine" where is the waterline on a hull you just see half, or even less (because of earth curve) ! So, you need in fact to put the down mark into the sea, under the sea level you see on the picture ! Except, of course, for quite close targets, say closer than 3 or 4 miles, on which you could see the real waterline of the ship. So, 1) you have to wait the right time to take your first picture (before, it's useless, too late, it's too dangerous for your stealth) 2) you need to put the upper mark at the highest structure for all ships except for OHP where you better aim at the black platform on the radar mast (easily detectable) don't ask me why OHP need a special setting, I don't know (maybe because it's a small ship) but you just have to know that, to avoid any problems, and be accurate. 3) you need to put the down mark on the REAL waterline. If you don't see it, you need to guess where it is on your picture THEN, you have a fantastique tool, needless to say quite exciting also. And last thing : as already mentionned by LW and Henson above => the stadimeter give you immediate range with a passive sensor! You just need to record 3 track, at 1 minute from each others, then, in 2 minutes, you have 3 perfect position of your target. Now switch to TMA screen, select the visual track, and your TMA is the easiest you could ever made => just have to put the 3 tick marks at the end of the 3 tracks ! you don't even need to know the target speed. you need 5 seconds to make your TMA here, with only 3 tracks, and in 2 minutes ... who said periscope is not a good tool in DW ? But it's clear you need to know what I just exposed above, if you want to find accurate ranges, or you could be very disapointed sometimes ! I must admit SCS did a really great job and improvment on the periscope during original beta test. The one we have now have nothing to compare with the one we had at beta test ... you will tell me that's why there is beta tests ... but when I sometimes read people asking "what did they do during the beta test because they didn't saw this or that" I can tell you these guys don't have ANY idea on the enormous work we made there, SCS and beta testers ... but that's another story ... Come back to periscope : now, I find this tool very efficient and accurate (when you know issues above), even if it needs a bit of training to handle it at full efficiency. but that's also why it is great :\|\ This is actually a really great tool for all subs, even if it's more crutial for KILOs than for nukes. What is more exciting than to see a LHD at 20 knts exploding on your 53-65K from a KILO periscope you used to make his TMA ? huh ? One more thing: I often read "attacking targets at periscope like at WWII" But there is nothing really comparable beetween WWII periscope use and nowadays : - with the stadimeter, you don't need to use the bow angle at all (but you can if you are masochist ! :rotfl: ) - At WWII, there had not any TMA station - WWII periscope targeting very rarely exceeded 1 miles, when modern could be made at near 15 miles on big platforms (say 8 to 15 on warships depending on the size, from the fregate to the carrier) in fact, the actual use of the periscope, if using the same principles, is, nevertheless, completly different from WWII, when engaging. This is mainly due to technological factors : - magnification much better now (until X24 on latest periscopes) - TMA station, to build quick and accurate solutions compared to bow angle so badly innacurate except at very short range (under 2 miles) - range of detection, compelling you to keep a much bigger distance beetween you and your target - torpedoes range, speed and seekers, much more capables and deadly than WWII ones All of this make the use of periscope very different than the way it was used at WWII. So you definitly can't say : lets use the scope as they did at WWII, because the only same thing you will do will be to put your eye in the reticle and that's all. Everything else is different.