Naval history and civ3 thread for NYE and korn and whoever

[KrazyHorse]

A week or so before you mentioned the large presence of WWII vets in the Col. ski areas I'd heard about them for the first time. Supposedly a bunch from the 10th Mtn. Div. got together and started up the entire industry there with government benefits/loans after they got back home. Must have been during th Olympics.

[TCO]

Once the torpedo has acquired, zigging will do little. (homing is relatively strong.)

But if the torpedo is in the runout phase, the zig can be effective in taking the target out of the cone.

But the bigger thing is that it is very hard to even get into a decent firing position if the target is zigging. Sub is at PD at 5 kts or less and CV can go "over the hill", become screened by other ships, change firing solution at last minute, etc.

[TCO]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
A week or so before you mentioned the large presence of WWII vets in the Col. ski areas I'd heard about them for the first time. Supposedly a bunch from the 10th Mtn. Div. got together and started up the entire industry there with government benefits/loans after they got back home. Must have been during th Olympics.

Founder of Vale, was a 10th Mtn guy. He is still here and skies like a god (at 82).

[KrazyHorse]

Do they still need somebody sitting around crunching trig functions or do you guys have some sort of Killzapper 3000 system to do that for you? Also, weren't you on a missile boat?

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by GP


Founder of Vale, was a 10th Mtn guy. He is still here and skies like a god (at 82).

Better than I do, for sure.

I'll never forget the first time I went skiing with my "friends" at the age of 14

"What does that black diamond mean"

"Don't worry about it"

30 seconds later, after reaching speeds in excess of too fast:

[TCO]

Umm...when I was there we still did trig functions in our head. there is a discipline called "mental gymanstics" which conssists of doing varaious calcs (some but not all trig) in your head. If you are good at it, you get so that you can do it much faster than with a calculator.

I assume there has been some move towards "killzappers" but I don't know all the details. I assume a large amount of guesswork and human intervention is required. Sonar is tricky stuff and not anywhere as clean as radar. (not as amenable to easy firing soultions.)

[TCO]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Better than I do, for sure.

I'll never forget the first time I went skiing with my "friends" at the age of 14

"What does that black diamond mean"

"Don't worry about it"

30 seconds later, after reaching speeds in excess of too fast:

That happens too much. Skiing is a complex skill. You will learn better with some instruction and with a lot of emphasis on turning...than just barreling down slopes you don't belong on.

[TCO]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Also, weren't you on a missile boat?

Are you trolling me!?

I am not a boomer girl.

[KrazyHorse]

Okay, Mr. Hunter-Killer.

[TCO]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Okay, Mr. Hunter-Killer.

(whew smiley) much better, Mr. Rugby physicist...

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by GP
Umm...when I was there we still did trig functions in our head. there is a discipline called "mental gymanstics" which conssists of doing varaious calcs (some but not all trig) in your head. If you are good at it, you get so that you can do it much faster than with a calculator

I'm already there. Something I learned while bored in high school. My limit's 2X3 digit multiplications, though. Beyond that, the calculator's faster.

[TCO]

A sub guy would just round to make the math convenient. Mental gymnastics is not more than 5% accurate.

[KrazyHorse]

So it's theoretical physics, then?

EDIT: Oh, I thought you said 50%.

[IGD]

Originally posted by GP


(Lucky that we don't have to fight each other.)

That's true

I rode on a carrier and saw the other side of the equation. They have little insight into sub behavior. They don't realize that their best defense reamains running fast and zigging alot at all times.

I find this last statement a little strange and rather insulting to many highly professional officers. In my experience the warfare officers in CVBGs both in the carriers and their escorts are VERY familiar with submarine operations. Countering that threat occupied many of them for every hour of their waking day at times. To suggest that it boils down so simply to understanding about running fast and zigzagging is rather silly. All the surface warfare teams understand the basics about passive target motion analysis and how a submarine achieves it's targetting solutions. They also know how to use it against a submarine using very quiet escorts with towed arrays, which the submarine finds difficult to see and sonobouys from maritime patrol aircraft and helicopters. A complicated business that takes years to understand.

Western forces hone thier skills by pitting the best of their own against the best of their own, I can assure you that in such exercises the winner between the surface BG and the submarine is never a foregone conclusion. As you said at the beginning the best hope is that the enemy will always be inferior to both.

[TCO]

Originally posted by IGD


That's true



I find this last statement a little strange and rather insulting to many highly professional officers. In my experience the warfare officers in CVBGs both in the carriers and their escorts are VERY familiar with submarine operations. Countering that threat occupied many of them for every hour of their waking day at times. To suggest that it boils down so simply to understanding about running fast and zigzagging is rather silly. All the surface warfare teams understand the basics about passive target motion analysis and how a submarine achieves it's targetting solutions. They also know how to use it against a submarine using very quiet escorts with towed arrays, which the submarine finds difficult to see and sonobouys from maritime patrol aircraft and helicopters. A complicated business that takes years to understand.

Western forces hone thier skills by pitting the best of their own against the best of their own, I can assure you that in such exercises the winner between the surface BG and the submarine is never a foregone conclusion. As you said at the beginning the best hope is that the enemy will always be inferior to both.

Don't get your panties in a bunch. Going fast and zigging are GREAT defenses against a sub. Especially since ASW is so hard/awfull in performance (by surface/air assets).

My 2 weeks as part of the Flag Battle staff showed me that lots of the officers didn't know to zig enough/got lazy. The result: lots of "green flares" (indicates firing solution) on the carrier. This by a 637 submarine with instructions to simulate a diesel by snorkeling periodically and "simulating battery" by running slow while submerged.

I've spent plenty of time looking at "targets" through the cross-hairs. Even if SWO-daddies have had a few courses that touched on sub TMA, they don't really know how we think/operate. You have to take a ship to PD, dance with the one-eyed lady and do some range/angle on the bow observations through the cross-hairs to understand both the capabilities and limitations of a sub.

MHO but based on pretty savvy direct observation. Which by the way was a small part of a report that I submitted to the Type Commander.