After a lot of back and forth discussion with VenaMarissa , it would appear that the correct multiplication number is 1.94 instead of 1.85. If you do the math yourself 1.94 still comes close to 7 knots and since we are rounding up or down anyways , for all intents and purposes , both numbers are valid. In the close range straight shot which I will demonstrate shortly , small speed errors don't have an impact. So ultimately , whether you use 1.85 or 1.94 is a choice you have to make. Just like whether you are going to round the number or not.
It is definitely 1.94. First of all the number 1.852 comes from the fact that 1 nautical mile is equal to 1.852 km. And 1 knot is just short for 1 . So the number comes often into place when you want to convert knots into km/h. But in this case were talking about m/s! So we just want to know how many knots 1m/s is. Well, 1m/s is equal to 1.94 knots. So it's ( / ) * 1.94.
Every simulation is a bit different than the other. Therefore I would not be surprised if wolfpack used entirely different numbers. This is an SH3 tutorial first and foremost. U-boat tutorial second. My method still is valid though. The only way you can be sure about the target's real range is to learn it either through cheats or with a different method such as a stadimeter. Let's suppose that the target's range is 800 meters. Your next step is to apply the formula. So mast height : amount of markings. If we suppose the target has a mast height of 23 and we count 6 markings , 23 : 6 gives us 3.8 . Now because we know that the target's range is 800 meters , we need to find a number that if we multiply it with 3.8 will give us approximately 0.8 . You can either experiment with numbers or you can divide 0.8 by 3.8 . The result of this division is 0.21 . If you multiply 3.8 by 0.21 you get 0.8 kilometers or 800 meters. Thus you are close enough to the real range. 0.22 would still get you close enough to the real range. Keep in mind that rounding numbers will always have an impact on your results. Preferably you don't want to round at all. However , usually easy calculations are preferred over perfect calculations. You are not a mentat after all. Also keep in mind that different scopes with different magnification levels or markings also change your magic number. Once again. Find the real range either with cheats or with a different method and then follow the exact same formula I showcase , to find the number you need for any given scope or magnification.
thanks for the response! I read all of it! It seems in the end the end the end result is minor. I love your uboat school videos keep going! @@tengusimulations Also where you from ?if you dont mid
The conversion constant is wrong though. You must devide (not multiply) the speed by 1.852 if you measure it with kilometer per hour to get the speed in knots. If you measure it with meter per second then you multiply it with 1.944.
@@tengusimulations it's common knowledge pal. Quick google search of "kilometer per hour to knot" and "meter per second to knot" will give you the answer. As for the similarities of your result of fixed-wire method and 3 : 15 method is because 1.852 only have one decimal point difference to 1.944.
@@VenaMarissa Sorry for deleting the comment I was trying to write a different one and youtube decided to shit itself. I did google it and what I found out is that a knot , which is a single mile per hour equals 1(decimal)852 kilometers or one thousand eight hundred fifty eight meters.
@@tengusimulations yes, 1 knot is equal to 1.852 km/h. But you want to convert speed in km/h to knot, not the other way around. Also why would you do that when your data is in meter and second anyway. Converting it to knot directly by multiplying it with 1.944 is much faster.
@@VenaMarissa so to clarify , what you are saying is that the formula should be target ship length divided by seconds = X and then finally multiply X by 1.944?
Links to websites that have proved most useful for me : Subsims Forums : www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php Uboataces : uboataces.com/ Uboatnet : uboat.net/ Torpedo Vorhaltrechner Project : www.tvre.org/en/home-page And under NO circumstances could I forget the man who is responsible for taking me as a useless swabby and with hist tutorials turn me into a proper Leutnant , BStanko 6 : www.youtube.com/@SH3Bstanko6 Even today , his tutorials are INVALUABLE . If you are reading this man , thank you! Timestamps : 0:00 Intro 0:08 Method 1 2:24 Method 2 3:32 Formula 3:52 Example 4:53 Outro As you guys can see , here in Tengu Simulations we are getting rather serious. More complex tutorials are already on the editing stage and once we are done with the targeting tutorials , it will be time to put everything to the test in a real , hardcore career. So please stay tuned for that . Besides SH3 the project is looking to branch out to other simulators too , and that doesn't include just sub sims. I am not going to say anything else :)
![Silent Hunter III [GWX] - Manual Torpedo Solution and Plotting - Using the Hydrophones](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/-fT3s-Qaiig/mqdefault.jpg)
After a lot of back and forth discussion with VenaMarissa , it would appear that the correct multiplication number is 1.94 instead of 1.85.
If you do the math yourself 1.94 still comes close to 7 knots and since we are rounding up or down anyways , for all intents and purposes , both numbers are valid.
In the close range straight shot which I will demonstrate shortly , small speed errors don't have an impact.
So ultimately , whether you use 1.85 or 1.94 is a choice you have to make. Just like whether you are going to round the number or not.
It is definitely 1.94.
First of all the number 1.852 comes from the fact that 1 nautical mile is equal to 1.852 km. And 1 knot is just short for 1 . So the number comes often into place when you want to convert knots into km/h.
But in this case were talking about m/s!
So we just want to know how many knots 1m/s is.
Well, 1m/s is equal to 1.94 knots.
So it's ( / ) * 1.94.
in Wolfpack game on videos they said to multiply with 1.94
Every simulation is a bit different than the other. Therefore I would not be surprised if wolfpack used entirely different numbers. This is an SH3 tutorial first and foremost. U-boat tutorial second.
My method still is valid though. The only way you can be sure about the target's real range is to learn it either through cheats or with a different method such as a stadimeter. Let's suppose that the target's range is 800 meters.
Your next step is to apply the formula. So mast height : amount of markings. If we suppose the target has a mast height of 23 and we count 6 markings , 23 : 6 gives us 3.8 .
Now because we know that the target's range is 800 meters , we need to find a number that if we multiply it with 3.8 will give us approximately 0.8 . You can either experiment with numbers or you can divide 0.8 by 3.8 . The result of this division is 0.21 .
If you multiply 3.8 by 0.21 you get 0.8 kilometers or 800 meters. Thus you are close enough to the real range. 0.22 would still get you close enough to the real range.
Keep in mind that rounding numbers will always have an impact on your results. Preferably you don't want to round at all. However , usually easy calculations are preferred over perfect calculations. You are not a mentat after all.
Also keep in mind that different scopes with different magnification levels or markings also change your magic number. Once again. Find the real range either with cheats or with a different method and then follow the exact same formula I showcase , to find the number you need for any given scope or magnification.
thanks for the response! I read all of it! It seems in the end the end the end result is minor. I love your uboat school videos keep going! @@tengusimulations Also where you from ?if you dont mid
@@ath_greek Thank you ! Με πρόδωσε η προφορά μου ;
χαχαα σε καταλαβα και οταν εδειξες και τον χαρτη της ελλαδας@@tengusimulations
εχεις το wolfpack; ψάχνω άτομα
The conversion constant is wrong though. You must devide (not multiply) the speed by 1.852 if you measure it with kilometer per hour to get the speed in knots. If you measure it with meter per second then you multiply it with 1.944.
@@tengusimulations it's common knowledge pal. Quick google search of "kilometer per hour to knot" and "meter per second to knot" will give you the answer.
As for the similarities of your result of fixed-wire method and 3 : 15 method is because 1.852 only have one decimal point difference to 1.944.
@@VenaMarissa Sorry for deleting the comment I was trying to write a different one and youtube decided to shit itself.
I did google it and what I found out is that a knot , which is a single mile per hour equals 1(decimal)852 kilometers or one thousand eight hundred fifty eight meters.
@@tengusimulations yes, 1 knot is equal to 1.852 km/h. But you want to convert speed in km/h to knot, not the other way around. Also why would you do that when your data is in meter and second anyway. Converting it to knot directly by multiplying it with 1.944 is much faster.
@@VenaMarissa so to clarify , what you are saying is that the formula should be target ship length divided by seconds = X and then finally multiply X by 1.944?
@@tengusimulations yes, cause 1 meter per second is equal to 1.944 knots.
Links to websites that have proved most useful for me :
Subsims Forums : www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php
Uboataces : uboataces.com/
Uboatnet : uboat.net/
Torpedo Vorhaltrechner Project : www.tvre.org/en/home-page
And under NO circumstances could I forget the man who is responsible for taking me as a useless swabby and with hist tutorials turn me into a proper Leutnant ,
BStanko 6 : www.youtube.com/@SH3Bstanko6 Even today , his tutorials are INVALUABLE . If you are reading this man , thank you!
Timestamps :
0:00 Intro
0:08 Method 1
2:24 Method 2
3:32 Formula
3:52 Example
4:53 Outro
As you guys can see , here in Tengu Simulations we are getting rather serious. More complex tutorials are already on the editing stage and once we are done with the targeting tutorials , it will be time to put everything to the test in a real , hardcore career. So please stay tuned for that .
Besides SH3 the project is looking to branch out to other simulators too , and that doesn't include just sub sims. I am not going to say anything else :)