Expermiting with Scope SH4

[Rockin Robbins]

Originally Posted by gumbeauregard

The only information required for a zero gyro angle firing solution is the target speed and the torpedo speed.

That is absolutely false and because you build your entire attack method on this fiction it too is absolute fiction.

Originally Posted by gumbeauregard

You generate a firing bearing from these two numbers.

No, you don't. The rest is irrelevant. Logic, built upon fallacy, is a bigger fallacy.

Please watch my Dick O'Kane video to find out what pieces of information you are missing for a true target solution. And your tables are ridiculous. What's easier than in the heat of the moment, picking the wrong number from a table? Not much. Tables are tossing predictable human error into the targeting process. If you then start multiplying and dividing, introducing more error-prone steps into the targeting process you get many more misses. Build all that upon the fallacy that all you need is target speed and torpedo speed and you have an invalid method crammed with human error.

Why in the world would you use a trig table when you have an analog trig computer on board? It boggles the mind...

There are two possible ways of improving existing targeting methods: Simplifying and making more accurate. Both may be accomplished by mitigating predictable human error. You have complicated the task and made it less accurate by far, guaranteeing many misses.

[gumbeauregard]

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

That is absolutely false and because you build your entire attack method on this fiction it too is absolute fiction.
No, you don't. The rest is irrelevant. Logic, built upon fallacy, is a bigger fallacy.

Please watch my Dick O'Kane video to find out what pieces of information you are missing for a true target solution. And your tables are ridiculous. What's easier than in the heat of the moment, picking the wrong number from a table? Not much. Tables are tossing predictable human error into the targeting process. If you then start multiplying and dividing, introducing more error-prone steps into the targeting process you get many more misses. Build all that upon the fallacy that all you need is target speed and torpedo speed and you have an invalid method crammed with human error.

Why in the world would you use a trig table when you have an analog trig computer on board? It boggles the mind...

There are two possible ways of improving existing targeting methods: Simplifying and making more accurate. Both may be accomplished by mitigating predictable human error. You have complicated the task and made it less accurate by far, guaranteeing many misses.

I can't help you if you don't understand the math behind the true zero gyro angle shot.

Right triangles and trig functions are immutable. True Zero Gyro shots only require target speed and torpedo speed.

I watched your video. You are mostly guessing. My video removes your guesswork for a better understanding of Dick O'Kane's Zero Gyro method.

[Rockin Robbins]

Originally Posted by gumbeauregard

I can't help you if you don't understand the math behind the true zero gyro angle shot.

Okay, pal, conversation over. You're not worth my time. Everybody on this board understands that I have an intimate knowledge of trigonometry and VALID methods of targeting torpedoes with a submarine. Yours is INVALID. Doesn't work. Can't work because you are ignoring crucial elements of the very definition of a target solution.

Much worse than those who can't be helped is those who are so deluded that they WON'T be helped. You're like talking to a flat earther.

Oh, the Dick O'Kane method IS NOT a zero gyro method. It's a close enough to zero gyro not to matter method. There is no guessing in the Dick O'Kane method at all, not even a LITTLE bit. Hundreds have used the Dick O'Kane method to become great shots with manual targeting who failed previously with other methods. Then the Dick O'Kane method, PROPERLY UNDERSTOOD, helps you to understand other valid methods. Yours is not one of those.


THAT's a valid targeting method.


THAT's a valid targeting method. By the way this is a true zero bearing attack method without all your mumbo-jumbo and invalid assumptions. Trig tables need not apply.

Originally Posted by gumbeauregard

The only information required for a zero gyro angle firing solution is the target speed and the torpedo speed. You generate a firing bearing from these two numbers.

Anything built on that statement is a totally invalid targeting method and I advise any new players seeking to learn to ignore anything you've said in this thread.

[gumbeauregard]

Since there is disagreement about Zero Gyro Angle shots I thought i would provide some background.

The Submarine Fire Control Manual has a hint to the math involved

BLANK 840. DEFLECTION ANGLE FOR STRAIGHT FIRE:

The deflection angle for a straight shot of any torpedo run for target speeds less than one-half the torpedo speed, may be approximated as follows:

Torpedo
Track Angle 46 Knot Torpedo 29 Knot Torpedo
1. 90 degrees 1 1/4 x Target Speed 2 x Target Speed
2. 60 degrees 75% of (1) 75% of (1)
3. 40 degrees 50% or (1) 50% of (1)
4. 18 degrees 25% of (1) 25% of (1)
5. Optimum 1-1/3 x Target Speed

In my example I use a 10 knot target and 46 knot torpedo. The approximation suggested in the STFCM is 1.25 times the target speed for a 90 degree shot or a 12.25 degree deflection angle.

The Arctangent of 10/46 is 12.26477 degrees.

All of this is based on well known trigonometric functions.

A torpedo shot is a simple time and distance problem.

You choose an impact point on the target course line. You position the boat at a firing position within range of the torpedo. You must fire the torpedo so that it arrives at the impact point when the target is occupying the impact point.

That time is determined by the ratio of the torpedo speed to the target speed.

A 46 knot torpedo travels 4.6 times as far as a 10 knot target for ANY given distance.

For any time (T) the sides for this triangle are 10(T) and 46 (T). Thus we can ignore the T.



So far ANY target range the ratio of target speed to torpedo speed is constant, thus the firing angle is constant for any range.

From the STFCM you can see the rule of thumb applies to any shot within 30 degrees of "Normal" (The course 90 degrees off the target course)

So any time you can get into a firing position that allow a nearly 90 degree torpedo impact to target course the trig table I posted is extremely accurate ASSUMING you develop an accurate target speed and use the correct torpedo speed.

No messing with the TDC is required for Bow tubes in SH4.

[gumbeauregard]

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

Okay, pal, conversation over. You're not worth my time. Everybody on this board understands that I have an intimate knowledge of trigonometry and VALID methods of targeting torpedoes with a submarine. Yours is INVALID. Doesn't work. Can't work because you are ignoring crucial elements of the very definition of a target solution.

Much worse than those who can't be helped is those who are so deluded that they WON'T be helped. You're like talking to a flat earther.

Oh, the Dick O'Kane method IS NOT a zero gyro method. It's a close enough to zero gyro not to matter method. There is no guessing in the Dick O'Kane method at all, not even a LITTLE bit. Hundreds have used the Dick O'Kane method to become great shots with manual targeting who failed previously with other methods. Then the Dick O'Kane method, PROPERLY UNDERSTOOD, helps you to understand other valid methods. Yours is not one of those.


THAT's a valid targeting method.


THAT's a valid targeting method. By the way this is a true zero bearing attack method without all your mumbo-jumbo and invalid assumptions.


Anything built on that statement is a totally invalid targeting method and I advise any new players seeking to learn to ignore anything you've said in this thread.

All that messing with the TDC is totally unnecessary for Bow Tubes.

Your 10 degrees for >15 knots and 20 degrees over 15 knots is an error prone simplification of the trig involved.

You can easily create a very accurate table of firing bearings such as the one I posted and know EXACTLY what bearing to fire on for any target ship speed without ever touching the TDC for bow tube shots in SH4.

It accounts for all the required variables (torp spd, target spd ) and isnt a WAG.

I can post videos all day long demonstrating how accurate and easy it is.

[Rockin Robbins]

Anybody can cherry pick irrelevant parts of the Submarine Torpedo Fire Control Manual. Where does it say that the only two pieces of information you need to shoot a torpedo are target speed and torpedo speed?

Knowing how to read is not the same as having comprehension. Rote copying of material you do not understand does not bolster your case.

From time to time people pop into Subsim with crazy ideas that they are the only people in the history of mankind to come up with a completely new method of shooting torpedoes. They make grandiose statements and outlandish claims, then make themselves appear sane by quoting the 1946 Submarine Torpedo Fire Control Manual.

Of course it does NOT support your method. Your method is invalid and cannot be used to accurately aim a torpedo. Those guys seventy odd years ago were way ahead of you.

And you don't understand either the vector analysis method or the Dick O'Kane method. I use the accurate analog trig computer built into the TDC to eliminate inevitable human error and PRECISELY pick the gyro angle, which the selection of lead angle by rule of thumb, not guessing, ensures will be well under 10 degrees. Any gyro angle of under 20 degrees is considered straight shooting where range error is not going to result in missing the target. There's nothing magic about fussing with getting a perfect zero gyro angle shot. Read the freakin' manual you so love to quote! A little understanding would lead you to sheepishly withdraw all you've said. Any fool can retype irrelevant passages. You sure have.

Now either support your foundation statement, "the only two pieces of information you need to shoot a torpedo are target speed and torpedo speed." or go away.

There was another equally deluded guy who claimed that putting the enemy on your 80 degree or 280 degree bearing guaranteed his course was at right angles to your own.... He loved to quote the Submarine Torpedo Fire Control Manual in invalid ways too. Hint: the STFC manual does not depend on Black Magic.

[gumbeauregard]

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

Anybody can cherry pick irrelevant parts of the Submarine Torpedo Fire Control Manual. Where does it say that the only two pieces of information you need to shoot a torpedo are target speed and torpedo speed?

Knowing how to read is not the same as having comprehension. Rote copying of material you do not understand does not bolster your case.

From time to time people pop into Subsim with crazy ideas that they are the only people in the history of mankind to come up with a completely new method of shooting torpedoes. They make grandiose statements and outlandish claims, then make themselves appear sane by quoting the 1946 Submarine Torpedo Fire Control Manual.

Of course it does NOT support your method. Your method is invalid and cannot be used to accurately aim a torpedo. Those guys seventy odd years ago were way ahead of you.

And you don't understand either the vector analysis method or the Dick O'Kane method. I use the accurate analog trig computer built into the TDC to eliminate inevitable human error and PRECISELY pick the gyro angle, which the selection of lead angle by rule of thumb, not guessing, ensures will be well under 10 degrees. Any gyro angle of under 20 degrees is considered straight shooting where range error is not going to result in missing the target. There's nothing magic about fussing with getting a perfect zero gyro angle shot. Read the freakin' manual you so love to quote! A little understanding would lead you to sheepishly withdraw all you've said. Any fool can retype irrelevant passages. You sure have.

Now either support your foundation statement, "the only two pieces of information you need to shoot a torpedo are target speed and torpedo speed." or go away.

There was another equally deluded guy who claimed that putting the enemy on your 80 degree or 280 degree bearing guaranteed his course was at right angles to your own.... He loved to quote the Submarine Torpedo Fire Control Manual in invalid ways too. Hint: the STFC manual does not depend on Black Magic.

Trigonometry is not black magic.

Here you go.

27 knot Yamato
46 knot torpedoes

From my table 30 degree firing bearing.

I never touch the TDC or develop a range, AOB or any of that other unnecessary stuff.

As long as you are in a firing position with the head of the boat 70 to 110 degrees off the target bearing, the table of values works like a charm.

[gumbeauregard]

To come at the issue from a different perspective imagine that your torpedoes can only run straight out the tube and develop a method to fire them accurately under those constraints.

You will arrive where I am if you do that.

If two cars are approaching an intersection, one at 10 mph (Car A) and the other (Car B) at 46 mph there is only ONE triangle of starting points that makes a crash happen at the intersection.

The triangle may have sides that are longer or shorter but the ratio between the two will always be 4.6 to 1.

If Car A is 10 miles from the intersection and Car B is 46 miles and they start towards the intersection at the same time, they will arrive there at the same time. The angle between Car B's line of sight to the intersection and his line of sight to Car B is precisely 12.26477 degrees at start.

That angle does not change as long as neither speed changes.

Car A at 20 miles and B at 92 miles is still a 12.26477 degree angle at the start and they collide 2 hours after start. Change either speed and the angle changes but range does not matter.

[Rockin Robbins]

Originally Posted by gumbeauregard

Trigonometry is not black magic.

Here you go.

27 knot Yamato
46 knot torpedoes

From my table 30 degree firing bearing.

I never touch the TDC or develop a range, AOB or any of that other unnecessary stuff.

As long as you are in a firing position with the head of the boat 70 to 110 degrees off the target bearing, the table of values works like a charm.

You did not support your foundational statement. In fact, you contradicted it.

[Rockin Robbins]

Originally Posted by gumbeauregard

To come at the issue from a different perspective imagine that your torpedoes can only run straight out the tube and develop a method to fire them accurately under those constraints.

You will arrive where I am if you do that.

If two cars are approaching an intersection, one at 10 mph (Car A) and the other (Car B) at 46 mph there is only ONE triangle of starting points that makes a crash happen at the intersection.

The triangle may have sides that are longer or shorter but the ratio between the two will always be 4.6 to 1.

If Car A is 10 miles from the intersection and Car B is 46 miles and they start towards the intersection at the same time, they will arrive there at the same time. The angle between Car B's line of sight to the intersection and his line of sight to Car B is precisely 12.26477 degrees at start.

That angle does not change as long as neither speed changes.

Car A at 20 miles and B at 92 miles is still a 12.26477 degree angle at the start and they collide 2 hours after start. Change either speed and the angle changes but range does not matter.

Again, you did not defend or support your foundational statement. Irrelevant banter does nothing to support your method. Get relevant and support yourself. Why are target speed and torpedo speed the only two inputs you need to determine a firing solution? That's all that counts. Everything else is noise.



If you'll establish your method graphically, like I do here with a third valid targeting system, the John P Cromwell targeting system, you'll see that target speeds and torpedo speeds alone are not sufficient to aim a torpedo and have it hit the target. By making your shot straight shooting, gyro angle between 340 and 20 degrees you can toss out range, but there are other parameters which are absolutely necessary in any valid firing solution. Think man! You can't teach anyone if you don't understand your own method.

I'm not going to hand you the solution on a silver platter. You're going to have to work it out yourself, and the solution does not involve my lack of knowledge about the mathematics and application of trigonometry. Clue: your illustrations above include what you are not considering in your solution. You have the answer but don't know you have it.

Just use geometry and quit thinking about the trigonometry aspect. You want to draw a triangle. There are several ways to describe a specific triangle: ASA, SSS or SAS, that's angle/side/angle, side/side/side or side/angle/side are three of them. You need three pieces of information to define a triangle. You're telling me you can define a triangle only by specifying the lengths (speeds) of two sides. Can't be done. I can construct an infinite number of triangles from torpedo speed and target speed and every one of them will have a different gyro angle. Therefore you can't make a solution knowing only target speed and torpedo speed.

I know you can do it. Think.

You have committed the same mistake as the other great thinker who posited that by putting the target at your 80 or 280 bearing, your course HAD to be 90 degrees from his. But that target has absolute free will, not subject to his bearing from your sub, to be headed any direction he wants and only one of those infinitely possible directions brings him across your bow 90 degrees from your course. That guy never understood he was requiring black magic or voodoo to make his method work. You are in the same position. He had You Tube videos by the dozen. They were all a crock.

[gumbeauregard]

Are you bothering to watch the videos I am posting?

Here is another one.

Target speed is 27 knots
Torpedo speed is 31 knots because the firing range exceeds 4500 yards (we dont care how much it exceeds 4500 yards just that it is past the 46 knot torpedo range)

The Arctangent of 27/31 is 41 degrees.



I dont touch the TDC, fire on the 41 degree firing bearing and put 4 torpedoes in a 27 knot target at 8000 yards.

I think I have the better grasp of the math here and can prove it over and over.

[Rockin Robbins]

No, I'm stuck on your statement that all you have to do is have enemy speed and torpedo speed to hit your target. After you say that, no You Tube videos or other explanation matters.

You still haven't supported your foundational statement and until you do your Videos are really don't matter. Anybody can set up a canned situation fire blindly and hit in a You Tube video. It doesn't prove a thing. That's what the other deranged guy did with his 80-10 farce. Had dozens of videos up there that proved nothing. Claimed he never missed. Didn't have a targeting method at all. He could sink 'em in his videos though, just like you. It's a shame his targeting method was trash and not one single Subsim member profited from the prophet.

Have you bothered to check out a single thing I've been telling you about? Or are you just focused on being the Apostle of the New Way? Have you found a way to violate the laws of geometry? Without geometry there is no trigonometry, which is only analytical geometry. When the geometric base is fallacy, the trig is misapplied.

Final thought. There is a difference between empty bragging and instruction. Nobody ever learned a thing from empty bragging. The appearance of knowledge is not the same as knowledge. Understand the Dick O'Kane method. Understand the vector analysis method. Understand my paragraph about how to define a triangle and its application to your foundational statement that you can define a triangle by only specifying two sides alone. Fix your method. Quit defending fallacy and ask for help and I'll be glad to get you on solid ground, but you aren't ready for that. You Tube videos of booms won't do the job.

I'll give you until tomorrow morning and then I'll go with exposing the problems of your method. It'll be very simple graphical representation that will be self-validating and everyone will agree with. Except, presumably, you. That doesn't matter. I'm here to warn off the newbies.

[gumbeauregard]

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

No, I'm stuck on your statement that all you have to do is have enemy speed and torpedo speed to hit your target. After you say that, no You Tube videos or other explanation matters.

You still haven't supported your foundational statement and until you do your Videos are really don't matter. Anybody can set up a canned situation fire blindly and hit in a You Tube video. It doesn't prove a thing. That's what the other deranged guy did with his 80-10 farce. Had dozens of videos up there that proved nothing. Claimed he never missed. Didn't have a targeting method at all. He could sink 'em in his videos though, just like you. It's a shame his targeting method was trash and not one single Subsim member profited from the prophet.

Have you bothered to check out a single thing I've been telling you about? Or are you just focused on being the Apostle of the New Way? Have you found a way to violate the laws of geometry? Without geometry there is no trigonometry, which is only analytical geometry. When the geometric base is fallacy, the trig is misapplied.

Final thought. There is a difference between empty bragging and instruction. Nobody ever learned a thing from empty bragging. The appearance of knowledge is not the same as knowledge. Understand the Dick O'Kane method. Understand the vector analysis method. Understand my paragraph about how to define a triangle and its application to your foundational statement that you can define a triangle by only specifying two sides alone. Fix your method. Quit defending fallacy and ask for help and I'll be glad to get you on solid ground, but you aren't ready for that. You Tube videos of booms won't do the job.

I'll give you until tomorrow morning and then I'll go with exposing the problems of your method. It'll be very simple graphical representation that will be self-validating and everyone will agree with. Except, presumably, you. That doesn't matter. I'm here to warn off the newbies.

Its plain to me you don't have a clue what you don't know.

If you do not understand the basic relationship of torpedo speed to target speed and how it determines the firing angle, you don't understand torpedo firing.

Zero Gyro Angle shots are the simplest shots of all. It is a simple matter of having the torpedo arrive at the impact point while the target occupies that point.

Target motion analysis to determine the target speed is critical to the equation but in SH it is much easier than in the real world. And one develops the target course in order to position for the shot.

The method I use is EXACTLY the same as the one in your tutorial video but since I understand the relationship of target speed and torpedo speed, I remove the unnecessary steps of entering AOB, speed and range into the TDC and simply calculate the firing bearing using simple trigonometry. I also remove the inaccuracies you introduce by not precisely determining firing bearing using accurate torpedo speed and target speed.

No WAG of 10 degrees for target speed less than 15 knots and 20 degrees for speeds higher.

It is a precise firing bearing.

Show me your method hitting a 27 knot target at 8000 yards with 4 consecutive torpedoes.

If it is so easy to "can" that scenario, show it to me.

I will give you a hint. Do all of your TDC inputs on that 27 knot target with the periscope on 41 degrees deflection with Mark 14's on low speed and you will hit it with a straight torpedo run.

I look forward to your video of the easily canned 8000 yard quadruple hit on a 27 knot target.

[Barkerov]

gumbeauregard. mate.
Along with target speed and torpedo speed, you also need to know which direction the target is going.

[gumbeauregard]

Originally Posted by Barkerov

gumbeauregard. mate.
Along with target speed and torpedo speed, you also need to know which direction the target is going.

I won't disagree