akd
Full Member
Posts: 126
|
Post by akd on Jul 21, 2020 9:06:17 GMT -6
There were not significant technological developments during this era when it comes to visually acquiring targets. The lookout (http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/ref/Lookouts/index.html) with a pair of binoculars remained the primary means of finding enemy ships visually. Also, the highest visual spotting position is not likely to be the very tip-top of the mast height. I'm just eyeballing it, but looking at scale drawings, it seems the top spotting position on the Iowa (BB-43) in 1943 is not any higher than that on the Maine (BB-10) in 1911 with lattice masts. Might even be a bit lower. I don't see a good reason to significantly increase the visual spotting radius as the timeline progresses. Another issue is that a ship would need to be above the horizon to target effectively, and since main gun range often exceeds the horizon, showing ships that are the very limit of possible visual acquisition (mast top to mast top) and that are within gun range, but aren't really within a range at which they can be targeted with those guns could be confusing. Same issue with funnel smoke, which in clear conditions should be visible even further (but again gives warning of a possible enemy, not a target which can be engaged). These types of visual acquisitions might better be handled with some sort of spotting report giving a bearing from a ship. Well given funnel smoke or radar acquisition, they might actually be using optical range-finding at those long ranges Sorry, I don’t understand. That doesn’t change the problem described above. Even with early radar, the limits of engagement remained less than the current maximum of 26,000 yards, as radar could not observe shell splashes at that range or even closer. I would agree, however, that advanced radar should push the possible maximum engagement range out further, even if as noted above it might be somewhat futile to engage at those ranges. Would definitely need some way to influence the behavior. Becomes essential with the advent of ship-to-ship missiles.
|
|
|
Post by seawolf on Jul 21, 2020 12:48:29 GMT -6
Well given funnel smoke or radar acquisition, they might actually be using optical range-finding at those long ranges Sorry, I don’t understand. That doesn’t change the problem described above. Even with early radar, the limits of engagement remained less than the current maximum of 26,000 yards, as radar could not observe shell splashes at that range or even closer. I would agree, however, that advanced radar should push the possible maximum engagement range out further, even if as noted above it might be somewhat futile to engage at those ranges. Would definitely need some way to influence the behavior. Becomes essential with the advent of ship-to-ship missiles. Wouldn't they be using a telescopic rangefinder mounted high in the ship, versus a pair of binoculars? Edit: Yeah, from what I'm reading the Mark 38 GFCS used the optical telescopic sights, which are slightly below the mainmast. Edit 2: This height gives us the reduced distance of 31.5 km or 34,500 yards
|
|
|
Post by seawolf on Jul 21, 2020 13:28:11 GMT -6
Some optical spotting distances from WWII actions (The point at which ships were identified or fired upon) Sinking of Glorious-28,600 yards Cape Spartivento-30,000 yards Denmark Strait-29,500 yards End of Bismarck("atrocious weather conditions")-25,000 yards Battle off Samar-33,900 yards(Yamato actually scored a hit on her third salvo from this range) Engagement between Kido Butai and USS Edsall-30,000 yards
And here is radar max ranges Suriago Strait-42,000 yards North Cape-45,500 yards
And some other fun tidbits Using aerial spotting, the standard battleships could hit targets with 14" guns at around 33,000 yards! Iowa scored a near miss using radar gunnery at 39,000 yards
|
|
|
Post by seawolf on Jul 21, 2020 13:31:08 GMT -6
Point is, historically, WWII battleships could spot, identify, and fire upon ships at ranges between 30,000 yards(For older and smaller battleships) and 34,000 yards(For big battleships) in clear weather.
Therefore, they shouldn't be capped at 26,000 to 27,000 yards in game
In fact, in game spotting ranges more closely correspond to bad weather conditions
|
|
akd
Full Member
Posts: 126
|
Post by akd on Jul 21, 2020 13:50:10 GMT -6
Sorry, I don’t understand. That doesn’t change the problem described above. Even with early radar, the limits of engagement remained less than the current maximum of 26,000 yards, as radar could not observe shell splashes at that range or even closer. I would agree, however, that advanced radar should push the possible maximum engagement range out further, even if as noted above it might be somewhat futile to engage at those ranges. Would definitely need some way to influence the behavior. Becomes essential with the advent of ship-to-ship missiles. Wouldn't they be using a telescopic rangefinder mounted high in the ship, versus a pair of binoculars? Edit: Yeah, from what I'm reading the Mark 38 GFCS used the optical telescopic sights, which are slightly below the mainmast. Edit 2: This height gives us the reduced distance of 31.5 km or 34,500 yards Yes, but I’ve never seen anything indicating the optical rangefinder was any more efficient or effective at searching than lookouts with binoculars that would be stationed at similar heights. But that’s just on the point of later battleships seeing further than early battleships. As to what the absolute limit for visibility should be from large surface ships in game, I’m not sure. I would guess that 26,000yds was selected as a more typical limit of atmospheric visibility in average conditions, although there should certainly should be circumstances where this is extended further based on time of year, location and weather.
|
|
|
Post by seawolf on Jul 21, 2020 14:31:33 GMT -6
Wouldn't they be using a telescopic rangefinder mounted high in the ship, versus a pair of binoculars? Edit: Yeah, from what I'm reading the Mark 38 GFCS used the optical telescopic sights, which are slightly below the mainmast. Edit 2: This height gives us the reduced distance of 31.5 km or 34,500 yards Yes, but I’ve never seen anything indicating the optical rangefinder was any more efficient or effective at searching than lookouts with binoculars that would be stationed at similar heights. But that’s just on the point of later battleships seeing further than early battleships. As to what the absolute limit for visibility should be from large surface ships in game, I’m not sure. I would guess that 26,000yds was selected as a more typical limit of atmospheric visibility in average conditions, although there should certainly should be circumstances where this is extended further based on time of year, location and weather. That's the thing, 26,000 isn't average, 30,000 is. 25,000 is horrible weather conditions, and 34,000 is perfectly clear weather
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Jul 21, 2020 14:41:24 GMT -6
Yes, but I’ve never seen anything indicating the optical rangefinder was any more efficient or effective at searching than lookouts with binoculars that would be stationed at similar heights. But that’s just on the point of later battleships seeing further than early battleships. As to what the absolute limit for visibility should be from large surface ships in game, I’m not sure. I would guess that 26,000yds was selected as a more typical limit of atmospheric visibility in average conditions, although there should certainly should be circumstances where this is extended further based on time of year, location and weather. That's the thing, 26,000 isn't average, 30,000 is. 25,000 is horrible weather conditions, and 34,000 is perfectly clear weather I assume that you are referring to the game; correct? As an aside, here is a good article on Japanese binoculars which were probably the best in the war. www.warrelics.eu/forum/japanese-militaria/japanese-wwii-binoculars-700929/
|
|
|
Post by seawolf on Jul 21, 2020 14:50:33 GMT -6
In the game, 27,000 yards is perfectly clear conditions, and the average is even lower In real life, 30,000 is the average, with 34,000 being clear conditions and 25,000 being horrible conditions
|
|
akd
Full Member
Posts: 126
|
Post by akd on Jul 21, 2020 15:04:50 GMT -6
No, 25,000 is not “horrible” visibility conditions. Average visibility in North Sea was something like 10,000-15,000 yards, which initially drove some poor assumptions about gunnery ranges in the British fleet. Of course, even in bad weather visibility can be highly variable moment to moment (see Jutland).
|
|
|
Post by seawolf on Jul 21, 2020 15:11:30 GMT -6
No, 25,000 is not “horrible” visibility conditions. Average visibility in North Sea was something like 12,000-15,000 yards, which initially drove some poor assumptions about gunnery ranges in the British fleet. Of course, even in bad weather visibility can be highly variable moment to moment. The quote was "Atrocious weather conditions", but I presume it could still get worse than that. I would assume very cloudy, windy weather would make the spotting range close to 25,000 yards, while a storm could drive it all the way down to a few thousand Are you talking about WWI or WWII, because those ranges are very different. At Jutland, the ranges were around 15,000 yards, which wasn't great conditions. In WWII, even in bad weather, the ranges increased. As I stated above the Scharnhorsts engaged Glorious at over 28,000 yards, in the North Sea
|
|
akd
Full Member
Posts: 126
|
Post by akd on Jul 21, 2020 15:24:23 GMT -6
No, 25,000 is not “horrible” visibility conditions. Average visibility in North Sea was something like 12,000-15,000 yards, which initially drove some poor assumptions about gunnery ranges in the British fleet. Of course, even in bad weather visibility can be highly variable moment to moment. The quote was "Atrocious weather conditions", but I presume it could still get worse than that. I would assume very cloudy, windy weather would make the spotting range close to 25,000 yards, while a storm could drive it all the way down to a few thousand Are you talking about WWI or WWII, because those ranges are very different. At Jutland, the ranges were around 15,000 yards, which wasn't great conditions. In WWII, even in bad weather, the ranges increased. As I stated above the Scharnhorsts engaged Glorious at over 28,000 yards, in the North Sea That was the change in understanding in effective gun ranges, increase in absolute gun ranges and fire control, not ships seeing further in WWII (excluding the effects of radar on aiding tracking targets beyond visibility or in intermittent visibility). From Friedman’s Great War at Sea: But I agree entirely that 26,000yds doesn’t make sense as a hard, all-conditions limit.
|
|
|
Post by rimbecano on Jul 21, 2020 15:30:39 GMT -6
No, 25,000 is not “horrible” visibility conditions. Average visibility in North Sea was something like 12,000-15,000 yards, which initially drove some poor assumptions about gunnery ranges in the British fleet. Of course, even in bad weather visibility can be highly variable moment to moment. The quote was "Atrocious weather conditions", but I presume it could still get worse than that. North cape is "atrocious weather conditions". The conditions at the last stand of the Bismarck were somewhat poor for aviation, but for surface combat would qualify as "decent" (not good or great), at least as far as visibility goes. There was probably some tendency, historically, for pre-radar surface actions to be biased towards occurring in good visibility (more likely that the opposing forces will make contact in the first place), though this should also probably be reflected in-game. The wind would probably be the biggest factor, in terms of knocking spray into the air.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Jul 21, 2020 15:32:40 GMT -6
In the game, 27,000 yards is perfectly clear conditions, and the average is even lower In real life, 30,000 is the average, with 34,000 being clear conditions and 25,000 being horrible conditions Real life? Did you calculate that or do you have a source which explains that. I would love to see it.
|
|
|
Post by seawolf on Jul 21, 2020 15:35:14 GMT -6
The quote was "Atrocious weather conditions", but I presume it could still get worse than that. I would assume very cloudy, windy weather would make the spotting range close to 25,000 yards, while a storm could drive it all the way down to a few thousand Are you talking about WWI or WWII, because those ranges are very different. At Jutland, the ranges were around 15,000 yards, which wasn't great conditions. In WWII, even in bad weather, the ranges increased. As I stated above the Scharnhorsts engaged Glorious at over 28,000 yards, in the North Sea That was the change in understanding in effective gun ranges, increase in absolute gun ranges and fire control, not ships seeing further in WWII (excluding the effects of radar on aiding tracking targets beyond visibility or in intermittent visibility). From Friedman’s Great War at Sea: Well then you're talking about precipitation, which is a whole different issue. The point is, the max range for clear weather in game is too short. That's simple, historical fact. Now, from what I've been reading compared to pictures, it seems that visibility from a wwII system ranged about 25,000 yards in conditions that were cloudy, windy, and dark, but without rain, fog, or mist. You're saying that ships couldn't see further in WWII. I follow your logic, but historically, that's wrong. Ships optically identified and fired upon ships and much greater ranges in WWII. There are a few possible reasons for this 1. Improved telescopic sights allowing greater visual clarity 2. Larger rangefinders, placed higher in the ship, allowing for a simple increase in mathematical line of sight 3. Doctrinal changes related to longer gun range, causing additional effort to be placed on identifying ships at those long ranges
|
|
|
Post by seawolf on Jul 21, 2020 15:36:50 GMT -6
In the game, 27,000 yards is perfectly clear conditions, and the average is even lower In real life, 30,000 is the average, with 34,000 being clear conditions and 25,000 being horrible conditions Real life? Did you calculate that or do you have a source which explains that. I would love to see it. I'm just comparing battle accounts with the reported weather conditions. Most engagements seem to start around 30,000 yards, with up to 34,000 given a large ship or extremely clear conditions, and 25,000 with cloudy conditions
|
|