SUBSIM Radio Room Forums


SUBSIM: The Web's #1 BBS for all submarine and naval simulations since 1997

Go Back   SUBSIM Radio Room Forums > Silent Hunter 3 - 4 - 5 > Silent Hunter 4: Wolves of the Pacific
Forget password? Reset here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-08-2017, 10:58 AM   #1
Jackdaw
Watch
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Thors Zwillinge & Osnabrück
Posts: 20
Downloads: 200
Uploads: 5
bullhorn Adm. Lockwoods submarine doctrine

Hi Mates!
Did someone in regard of SH 3 ever ask himself where from the programmers of SH 4 have, for instance, the different mission tasks? No?

Here the solution is: The US american equivalent to the german U-Boot Kommandanten Handbuch. Interested?

Download:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/down...o=file&id=5294

Pleasant reading!
Jackdaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2017, 07:30 PM   #2
Rockin Robbins
Navy Seal
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: DeLand, FL
Posts: 8,909
Downloads: 135
Uploads: 53


Default

Good show Jackdaw! There's some tasty stuff in there.
Rockin Robbins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2017, 02:13 PM   #3
Rockin Robbins
Navy Seal
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: DeLand, FL
Posts: 8,909
Downloads: 135
Uploads: 53


Default

Here's a very interesting tidbit. I've long maintained that when sighting a target, the commander should assume that the target is either in the recognition manual with the wrong masthead height, or not in the manual at all, or misidentified. In all three cases, which cover a majority of sightings during the war, the TDC and position keeper are useless because your range is wrong.

How to fix that? How about taking a single ping range at about 3,000 yards and then setting the masthead height manually so the stadimeter reads the right range? Then the rest of the action you have him pegged without the need to rely on unreliable information?

Quote:
2303.Echo ranging during the conduct of an approach must be used with discretion and with full consideration of many factors. If it is certain that enemy craft lack the equipment necessary to detect transmission from own equipment on the frequencies used, it can then be used with impunity. Under these conditions, when approaching an unscreened target, echo ranging can no doubt be used effectively for checking course and speed, for solution of the torpedo problem, and for own maneuvers in conducting the final stages of the approach. The importance of obtaining a single ping range at about 2500-3000 yards in order to accurately determine target masthead height with which to correct speed data is obvious. Under these same conditions, periscope observations are usually available, but when the masthead height of the target has to be estimated, echo ranges may be more accurate than periscope ranges.
It seems my logic and assumptions, according to Admiral Lockwood, are locked on target! Unfortunately, our game TDC has no way to input masthead height in order to perform the "obvious" necessessity....another Ubi game fail.
Rockin Robbins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2017, 04:43 PM   #4
BigWalleye
Sea Lord
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Beyond Black River - in Pict country, you betcha!
Posts: 1,987
Downloads: 465
Uploads: 0


Default

Cap'n Scurvy's excellent OTC mod, addas a range dial which allows you to enter the range into the TDC manually, from whatever source, and to update it as estimates improve.
BigWalleye is online   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2017, 09:31 AM   #5
Rockin Robbins
Navy Seal
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: DeLand, FL
Posts: 8,909
Downloads: 135
Uploads: 53


Default

And that is realistic. TDC operator, sonar operator and radar operator could all input a range in yards into the TDC directly. What is not accurate about OTC is that it has a perfect record of all characteristics of every ship on the ocean, where the real TDC had less than half, plus much of the info it had was wrong.

Therefore the necessity, according to Lockwood, of taking a single ping range at somewhere in the neighborhood of 3000 yards so the periscope operator could manually enter the masthead height that yielded the same number as the sonar range. Thus calibrated, the stadimeter would be accurate for that ship only for the rest of the encounter.

Now here's where the logic comes in. If the recognition manual contained accurate information on every ship on the ocean, Lockwood would not say it was a necessity to ping at 3,000 yards to calibrate the masthead height so the stadimeter was worth more than the backgammon table in the crew's mess. Therefore, it was expected that most information on the sub was bad enough to make it necessary to risk the ping.
Rockin Robbins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2019, 02:49 PM   #6
Drakken
Electrician's Mate
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 133
Downloads: 36
Uploads: 0
Default

A bit of necro, but reading this I feel bad using the stadimeter now, like it is cheating.
Drakken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2019, 03:03 PM   #7
propbeanie
CTD - it's not just a job
 
propbeanie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: The Crossroads of Mid-America
Posts: 5,017
Downloads: 274
Uploads: 1


Default

The stadimeter is not accurate though, either - but not because of the machinery on the sub (usually)... are you aiming correctly, pointed exactly on the top of the mast, or are you maybe a yard above, or perhaps below? What does that yard extrapolate to across a 3,000 yard distance? Is that the mast you are actually seeing??... Is the listed mast height measurement accurate? As RR alludes to, all of the nations altered their ships as a natural "aging" process (alterations for new gear etc), but also, during time of war, they would purposefully alter the look of a ship to make targeting more difficult - on purpose, of course. So, besides the "aimer" (your eye) being off, the mast height might be incorrect, even if you do properly ID a ship... Look at it this way, if you hit at a 50% rate, dud or boomer, you're doing pretty good in my book. Look at all of the "professionals" that were running around back when, and their shooting percentage - excluding a select few, of course... - the closer you are, the more assured you are of "accuracy", a fleeting term that...
__________________

"...and bollocks to the naysayer/s" - Jimbuna
propbeanie is online   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2019, 12:42 PM   #8
Drakken
Electrician's Mate
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 133
Downloads: 36
Uploads: 0
Default

Thing is, at 100% Realism (map contacts on, though) I just sunk 7 merchants ships for 60,000 tons in Bungo Suido - with Mk 14 torpedoes. On my first patrol, in December 1941-January 1942 with FOTRSU.

That's insane. I feel I am cheesing something somewhere because while yes, the majority of these were large tankers, still I shouldn't be having such a Happy Time so near Japanese waters in December 1941. That is why I am considering starting a new patrol but with map updates off.
Drakken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2019, 12:58 PM   #9
propbeanie
CTD - it's not just a job
 
propbeanie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: The Crossroads of Mid-America
Posts: 5,017
Downloads: 274
Uploads: 1


Default

In December 1941, the US submarine skippers were unsure of what they would encounter. Their flotilla commanders had told them that the Japanese might have unknown ASW weapons never before encountered. In fact, one of the first suppositions of the dud torpedo rate was that the Japanese had invented a device that rendered the magnetic exploders useless... - Another problem was the US pre-war attack doctrine, where a sub attacked via sonar at approximately a 100 foot depth... misses were rather common.

The IJN also did not have a concerted ASW doctrine, leaving it to local authorities to cover (or not) ships as they left. Convoying was not required. Early in the war, there was basically minimal escort protection for anything other than troop transports and task forces. Also, we might have to look at the dud rate further if you didn't have enough duds that five of the seven you encountered didn't get away with a dud or two sticking in their hulls...
__________________

"...and bollocks to the naysayer/s" - Jimbuna
propbeanie is online   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2019, 01:16 PM   #10
Drakken
Electrician's Mate
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 133
Downloads: 36
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by propbeanie View Post
The IJN also did not have a concerted ASW doctrine, leaving it to local authorities to cover (or not) ships as they left. Convoying was not required. Early in the war, there was basically minimal escort protection for anything other than troop transports and task forces. Also, we might have to look at the dud rate further if you didn't have enough duds that five of the seven you encountered didn't get away with a dud or two sticking in their hulls...
I confirm having no dud. None. Zilch.

That said, I usually aim 10-15 feet above the target's measured draft, contact/influence selected (and yes, I know it's a bit of metagaming - hindsight 20/20 tells me that Mark 14 eels go 10-20 feet lower than progammed). They all WAD upon target contact, though.

Also, most of my shots were taken between between 45-70 degs AOB.
Drakken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2019, 10:53 PM   #11
Drakken
Electrician's Mate
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 133
Downloads: 36
Uploads: 0
Default

Second patrol, surface attack against a Large European Oiler. Weather in windy and high waves, but otherwise clear.

80-90 degrees AOB starboard, attack at 3000 yard. Dive to periscope depth then fire 2 Mk 14 torpedoes at 30 feet deep (draft in the book is 35 feet). High speed, Influence settings.

Got two hits without a problem. No duds.

So I begin to think that something is wrong with Mark XIV dud rates : They are working way too well.

Last edited by Drakken; 07-20-2019 at 11:13 PM.
Drakken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2019, 07:15 PM   #12
Barkerov
Electrician's Mate
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 139
Downloads: 41
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drakken View Post
I confirm having no dud. None. Zilch.

That said, I usually aim 10-15 feet above the target's measured draft, contact/influence selected (and yes, I know it's a bit of metagaming - hindsight 20/20 tells me that Mark 14 eels go 10-20 feet lower than progammed). They all WAD upon target contact, though.

Also, most of my shots were taken between between 45-70 degs AOB.

I've observed something similar to this. When using contact/influence, the dud rate seems to go down, especially on the 90 degree shots. The contact only duds are much more common but still not common enough to send me insane like it would a real skipper.





I'm also starting to believe that my stern tubes dud more often than bow tubes but it could just be random chance (7 of my last 7 stern shots were duds, but only a few of the 15 bow tubes I fired have been duds).
Barkerov is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2019 Subsim