Quote:
Originally Posted by kaleidemiller
1) Regarding the map view (F5)... Would there have been officers or POs in the control center constantly updating the position of enemy ships on the navigation map? Would I, as captain, have been able to visualize a ship's movement imposed upon the map... if not to the same real-time extent as the game portrays?
|
Typically only the navigator, and only at the request of the commander. Plotting was very typical when shadowing a convoy in order to determine zig pattern, speed etc. A plot of each individual ship though wouldn’t happen. In short, the plot was primarily used as a means to determine target data, and not so much for situational awareness.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaleidemiller
2) How accurate was the range estimate from the hydrophone operator? In the game, you can use the hydrophone contact vector to fairly accurately determine the range. Was that possible?
|
Very inaccurate. There are instances in the historical record of experienced sound men being totally confused about the distance of certain sounds, in one memorable case aboard U-47, which picked up explosions that turned out to be miles away, which the operator mistook as right on top of the boat. Passive listening was so dependent on ambient factors (sea state, water depth, salinity, stratification etc) that conditions were often far less than ideal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaleidemiller
3) How does the community feel about using the F5 map for plotting a targeting solution? Do "real kaleuns" solely use periscope target recognition and speed/range determination, aided by clues from the hydrophone operator?
|
It provides far too much information. During a submerged attack, the commander was looking through the attack periscope in the tower making all the decisions for the approach based on what he saw there, assisted by the navigator, who used slide rules and tables to assist him there. Surfaced, the commander would be on the bridge overseeing the situation and supervising the I.WO, who was doing the aiming at the UZO.
Silent Hunter series provides no middle ground. Map contacts on provides way more information at a glance than any real commander could dream of, and map contacts off falls short as well as you are almost entirely dependent on what you yourself can see/gather. In real life, data gathering was normally a team effort - a target would be followed on a parallel course at max range for a time and its speed and course matched (called “Ausdampfen”), or the data was determined by plotting. The officers had a little pow-wow and agreed on the course and speed, and these were documented in the KTB. At the time of the shot, the data was then confirmed by estimation. This is how SH targeting falls short - either you “have it all”, or you are forced to be on your own. That said, I personally play no map contacts, as I find using the historical data gathering methods (matching, plotting, estimating) to be a big part of my enjoyment.