> Developing an intuition for these situations is hard. They never happen in real life, and we practice them in high-fidelity trainers where time is precious, so young officers don't get many reps. I thought it would be fun to cheaply simulate close range engagements on a laptop, and play against my friends on the web.
I remember reading, decades ago, that the U.S. Navy's flight school in Pensacola had a student who'd done unusually well in the course because he'd bought a copy of an early version of Microsoft's Flight Simulator software (IIRC) with maps of the nearby Navy airfields used for student training. That led to the Navy adopting PC-based flight simulator software generally. (I couldn't find a reference.)
>Some games, like the early-2000s Sonalysts simulations, accurately simulate TMA, but they are so complex that they are hard to learn. As a qualified submarine officer, I still couldn't figure out how to play Dangerous Waters.
ELI5: Passive sonar gives you the opponent's bearing only; Active sonar gives you the opponent's bearing and range; active sonar gives your bearing to your opponent(s); firing a torpedo gives away your bearing to your opponent(s). Why wouldn't you confirm a solution with active sonar before firing?
Can't you get the bearing and range with passive listening from two points, and/or single point but measuring over time?
As for why not to confirm a solution with active sonar before firing; if what you described are rules of the game, then IDK because it doesn't seem to load anymore. In real life, I imagine an active sonar ping being much clearer and more informative to the enemy than the noise generated by launching a torpedo.
Seems like a good strategy is to circle slowly until you pick up a sonar trace and then try to follow it and get in the opponent's baffles. Converting the sonar trace into a map of the opponent's position over time is the essential skill and is something that I'm sure is automated in real submarines.
I love submarines, military history, and all things that this should fit with, but I can't seem to get the hang of this. I kinda wish I could play it solo to just to figure it out.
Playing this for a few turns and you will see why they developed the banjo and then the Torpedo Data Computer. I am currently reading a fiction submarine warfare book (entertaining with warts) and they cover the switch over.
Manual for the banjo here. Imagine a slide rule that could solve the problems in this game (given perfect input data) - https://maritime.org/doc/banjo/index.php
> Imagine a slide rule that could solve the problems in this game (given perfect input data)
I love reading about physical tools made to solve very specific computational problems. Beyond all kinds of weird-shaped, weirdly-scaled, often circular-ish slide rule variants, this includes also all kinds of charts that are effectively currying a complex mathematical function into something with 2-4 parameters and plotting them over useful range, so you can quickly read a specific result for a specific situation.
On the one hand, this is a relic of times before general-purpose computers; today, you'd just code the equations up and even automate their use. On the other hand, those physical artifacts usually have superior UX, especially if the computer equivalent would require you to input any data. No surprise these things keep showing up in the history of high-stakes endeavors, whether it's submarines or battleships or space orbiters.
> Developing an intuition for these situations is hard. They never happen in real life, and we practice them in high-fidelity trainers where time is precious, so young officers don't get many reps. I thought it would be fun to cheaply simulate close range engagements on a laptop, and play against my friends on the web.
I remember reading, decades ago, that the U.S. Navy's flight school in Pensacola had a student who'd done unusually well in the course because he'd bought a copy of an early version of Microsoft's Flight Simulator software (IIRC) with maps of the nearby Navy airfields used for student training. That led to the Navy adopting PC-based flight simulator software generally. (I couldn't find a reference.)
That's exactly the type of thing I was going for here!
BZ.
>Some games, like the early-2000s Sonalysts simulations, accurately simulate TMA, but they are so complex that they are hard to learn. As a qualified submarine officer, I still couldn't figure out how to play Dangerous Waters.
We love our wargamers don't we folks
ELI5: Passive sonar gives you the opponent's bearing only; Active sonar gives you the opponent's bearing and range; active sonar gives your bearing to your opponent(s); firing a torpedo gives away your bearing to your opponent(s). Why wouldn't you confirm a solution with active sonar before firing?
Sonar ignoramus here.
Can't you get the bearing and range with passive listening from two points, and/or single point but measuring over time?
As for why not to confirm a solution with active sonar before firing; if what you described are rules of the game, then IDK because it doesn't seem to load anymore. In real life, I imagine an active sonar ping being much clearer and more informative to the enemy than the noise generated by launching a torpedo.
Maybe you don't want to give yourself away!
Seems like a good strategy is to circle slowly until you pick up a sonar trace and then try to follow it and get in the opponent's baffles. Converting the sonar trace into a map of the opponent's position over time is the essential skill and is something that I'm sure is automated in real submarines.
This is great! I loved playing Sub Command as a kid, and seeing the very familiar waterfall display was a real blast from the past.
I think HN sunk the battleship game?
I love submarines, military history, and all things that this should fit with, but I can't seem to get the hang of this. I kinda wish I could play it solo to just to figure it out.
I didn't make a solo game mode, but you can play against yourself by opening the link in a new tab if that's helpful
One of my first Game Boy (Color?) games was a sub combat game. I think it was the first thing I ever ordered off amazon.
Does not work in Safari?
This is very cool. On the tutorial page, if you confirm the torpedo (and it fits) should you get a 'congratulations' popup?
yeah I love that!
Playing this for a few turns and you will see why they developed the banjo and then the Torpedo Data Computer. I am currently reading a fiction submarine warfare book (entertaining with warts) and they cover the switch over.
The book is Sink the Rising Sun.
The TDC is described well here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torpedo_Data_Computer
Manual for the banjo here. Imagine a slide rule that could solve the problems in this game (given perfect input data) - https://maritime.org/doc/banjo/index.php
> Imagine a slide rule that could solve the problems in this game (given perfect input data)
I love reading about physical tools made to solve very specific computational problems. Beyond all kinds of weird-shaped, weirdly-scaled, often circular-ish slide rule variants, this includes also all kinds of charts that are effectively currying a complex mathematical function into something with 2-4 parameters and plotting them over useful range, so you can quickly read a specific result for a specific situation.
On the one hand, this is a relic of times before general-purpose computers; today, you'd just code the equations up and even automate their use. On the other hand, those physical artifacts usually have superior UX, especially if the computer equivalent would require you to input any data. No surprise these things keep showing up in the history of high-stakes endeavors, whether it's submarines or battleships or space orbiters.
Not sure if it's obvious/implied should say multiplayer