The Dreadnought Project Forum Index The Dreadnought Project
Naval History in the years 1890-1920
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   Reg1sterReg1ster 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Presentation in Portsmouth June 10th, 2005

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Dreadnought Project Forum Index -> Simulation
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
tone
Site Admin


Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 479
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Mon Jun 27, 2005 8:26 am    Post subject: Presentation in Portsmouth June 10th, 2005 Reply with quote

I posted a few images from a presentation I did on June 10th for the Saint Barbara Association in HMS Excellent in Portsmouth.

The audience was 40 to 60 graduates of the RN's long gunnery program or the later "surface weapons" programs. I showed a 4 minute video of torpedo firing and then a 45 minute epic on dreadnought gunnery, narrating them live as they were projected in a lecture hall. Looking at a video of the presentation, I am self conscious of a rambling and poorly organized style, but the collateral effect was that the assault of information aroused many questions and comparisons to later systems used by the gunners who attended.

Of particular note to the era I focus on, Captain Jeremy Dreyer, grandson of Frederic (who invented the Dreyer tables) was present at my talk, as was Lord Fisher. After my talk was the annual dinner of the association at which I met Captain RP Dannreuther, who is the son of Commander Hubert Dannreuther who was the gunnery officer in HMS Invincible and one of her 6 survivors at Jutland.

This was the big calendar item for me in 2005, and I am happy to have met these practitioners of the art of naval gunnery and hope that I will continue to draw upon their knowledge and expertise in improving my work.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Guest






PostPosted: Tue Jun 28, 2005 2:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

So I assume my Kaiser stood up to quite a bit of impacts before sinking right in front of the top brass of the Royal Navy?

I am glad you had a good time, Tone. I can tell you that for myself your website has been a lot of fun.
Back to top
Weird Guy



Joined: 26 Apr 2005
Posts: 18

PostPosted: Tue Jun 28, 2005 2:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Signed.

Kyle "Weird Guy" Wiegers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tone
Site Admin


Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 479
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Tue Jun 28, 2005 8:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kyle... your model suffered tremendous punishment, and yet never sank, thanks to the ingenious construction of her German shipwrights (and the total lack of any damage modeling in the prototype).

She was featured in the both videos I showed, and your name appeared in the credits at the end of the first video (I think I forgot to put credits on the second one). There was only one brief moment, however, where the camera was on her decks; I wanted the people to get a sense of what it was like to be on the receiving end of the fire.

The AI of the sailors was in fine form for the gunnery exercise shown in the video. Though they sometimes get "stupid" owning to bugs, some of the mistakes they made were an intentional part of the code. For instance, at one point, a salvo scored a hit, but one or two shells fell short. The AI spotting officer called in an "up" correction because he had not seen the hit -- he had only seen the short shot(s). This was a common sort of error. The result, as you might imagine, was that the next salvo was long.

As I recall, the scenario was this: at a range averaging around 15,000 yards, own ship was zigzagging 2 points either side and target ship was steaming on a steady course. The range rate was set to some ridiculous value (a bug in someone's AI?) at the outset which quickly dragged the salvoes short and as this error was magnifying over time several salvoes were off for deflection. The result of THIS was that the spotting officer could not tell how short the fire was. Once the deflection was brought on, a lenthy series of "up" corrections was used until the salvoes crossed the target, and then the hits occurred but were unseen. A few corrections brought one more salvo on target.

Overall, as poor as the shooting seemed when you were there, the 9% hits realized was not at all bad. Of course, the simulation is not perfect by any stretch.

I hope to be in a position where I can again ask you for help in modeling, but in truth my simulation is likely to be "down" for months and months, as I need to move to a good platform for continued work.

I will keep you in touch with occasional updates!

tone

FYI, here is the textual log of the gunnery run that served as the basis for the video I showed.

Code:

This firing exercise was at approximately 15000 yards against
a target steaming straight ahead at a constant speed while
own ship maneuvered. 

2 of the 16 salvoes scored hits.
5 shells out of 58 fired struck the target
(2/4 in one salvo, and 3/3 in another)
The hitting percentage then, was 8.6%

Aboard HMS Queen Mary
Wind is 14.0 knots directed toward 103
Waves = 2.2m


18:30:05.6  Gunnery Officer: "Line up sights"
18:30:10.1  Gunnery Officer: "Line up receivers"
18:30:40.5  Gunnery Officer: "Target Green 45"
18:30:59.7  Gunnery Officer: "Turn 4 points to port"
18:31:01.6  Range cut "T" 14343.102 yards
18:31:05.6  Range cut "." 14617.464 yards
18:31:18.5  Bearing taken rel=59.5 gyro=159.1
18:31:37.9  Bearing taken rel=71.5 gyro=159.2
18:31:42.8  Range cut "T" 13906.852 yards
18:31:44.1  Gunnery Officer: "Open fire"
18:31:47.4  Range cut "." 14167.088 yards
18:31:50.6  Range Officer: "Set rate 850 Closing"

18:31:59.4  Bearing taken rel=79.5 gyro=159.2
18:32:06.3  Range Officer: "Set rate 600 Closing"
18:32:16.7  Spotting Officer: "Over"
18:32:18.6  Bearing taken rel=84.0 gyro=159.667
18:32:18.8  Spotting Officer: "Down 400, Right 2"
18:32:22.7  Gunnery Officer: "Enemy's course 90 to the left at 21 knots"
18:32:29.6  Range cut "T" 14082.337 yards

18:32:34.8  Range cut "." 14192.327 yards
18:32:48.7  Bearing taken rel=88.0 gyro=159.867
18:32:49.3  Range Officer: "Set rate 225 Closing"

18:32:54.6  Spotting Officer: "Too far left"
18:32:58.3  Spotting Officer: "Right 4"
18:33:04.9  Range Officer: "Set rate 150 Opening"

18:33:07.9  Bearing taken rel=89.5 gyro=159.133
18:33:10.2  Range cut "T" 14192.327 yards
18:33:19.8  Range cut "." 14317.007 yards

18:33:33.0  Spotting Officer: "Short"
18:33:33.4  Bearing taken rel=91.0 gyro=159.567
18:33:35.5  Spotting Officer: "Up 400, Right 4"
18:33:50.3  Range Officer: "Set rate 175 Opening"

18:33:51.4  Range cut "T" 14317.007 yards
18:33:52.6  Bearing taken rel=91.5 gyro=159.3
18:34:07.1  Range cut "." 14567.518 yards

18:34:12.9  Spotting Officer: "Short"
18:34:17.4  Spotting Officer: "Up 400, Right 2"
18:34:19.3  Bearing taken rel=92.25 gyro=158.717

18:34:35.0  Range cut "T" 14481.776 yards
18:34:35.3  Range Officer: "Set rate 300 Opening"
18:34:38.6  Bearing taken rel=92.75 gyro=159.683
18:34:52.2  Range cut "." 14892.29 yards

18:34:54.2  Spotting Officer: "Short"
18:34:58.9  Spotting Officer: "Up 800, Right 2"
18:35:01.4  Bearing taken rel=93.25 gyro=159.45

18:35:16.2  Range cut "T" 14857.064 yards
18:35:20.4  Range Officer: "Set rate 450 Opening"
18:35:20.6  Bearing taken rel=93.5 gyro=159.467
18:35:31.9  Range cut "." 14867.357 yards

18:35:35.6  Spotting Officer: "Over"
18:35:38.3  Spotting Officer: "Down 400, Right 2"
18:35:46.9  Bearing taken rel=94.0 gyro=160.2

18:36:00.6  Range cut "T" 15018.17 yards
18:36:06.3  Bearing taken rel=94.25 gyro=160.317
18:36:06.4  Range Officer: "Set rate 325 Opening"

(note:  2 shells of this 4-shell salvo hit, but the virtual
spotting officer did not see the hits.  The human "player"
countermanded the errant spotting correction, but one salvo
had a bad correction applied)

18:36:19.3  Spotting Officer: "Short"
18:36:20.4  Range cut "." 15367.342 yards
18:36:20.6  Range Officer: "Set rate 300 Opening"
18:36:22.2  Gunnery Officer: "Hit"
18:36:23.6  Spotting Officer: "Up 200"
18:36:32.5  Bearing taken rel=94.75 gyro=160.683

18:36:38.9  Gunnery Officer: "Down 200"
18:36:51.7  Bearing taken rel=95.0 gyro=162.067

18:36:52.0  Range cut "T" 15032.283 yards

18:37:00.9  Spotting Officer: "Over"
18:37:06.0  Range cut "." 15367.41 yards
18:37:15.5  Range Officer: "Set rate 175 Opening"

18:37:17.1  Spotting Officer: "Can't see"
18:37:17.5  Bearing taken rel=95.25 gyro=161.883

18:37:35.7  Gunnery Officer: "Turn 4 points to starboard"
18:37:36.8  Bearing taken rel=95.5 gyro=163.6
18:37:41.0  Range cut "T" 15057.324 yards
(note: all 3 shells of a 3 shot salvo at this time hit the target)

18:37:51.0  Spotting Officer: "Hit"
18:37:51.5  Range Officer: "Set rate 175 Closing"
18:37:52.8  Range cut "." 15642.46 yards

18:38:04.5  Bearing taken rel=74.75 gyro=164.417
18:38:22.5  Range Officer: "Set rate 325 Opening"
18:38:23.2  Range cut "T" 15382.214 yards
18:38:23.8  Bearing taken rel=66.0 gyro=164.967

18:38:28.1  Spotting Officer: "Too far right"
18:38:32.2  Spotting Officer: "Left 8"
18:38:35.0  Range cut "." 15382.214 yards
18:38:37.5  Range Officer: "Set rate 200 Opening"

18:38:50.9  Bearing taken rel=59.0 gyro=165.0
18:39:07.5  Spotting Officer: "Can't see"
18:39:07.7  Range cut "T" 16167.132 yards
18:39:10.2  Bearing taken rel=56.25 gyro=166.183

18:39:23.2  Range Officer: "Set rate 550 Opening"
18:39:24.7  Range cut "." 15657.308 yards
18:39:36.3  Range Officer: "Set rate 225 Opening"
18:39:36.7  Bearing taken rel=54.25 gyro=166.45

18:39:38.5  Spotting Officer: "Can't see"

18:39:47.4  Range cut "T" 14851.277 yards
18:39:51.7  Range Officer: "Set rate 500 Opening"
18:39:56.0  Bearing taken rel=53.5 gyro=165.767

18:40:09.9  Spotting Officer: "Short"
18:40:11.4  Range cut "." 14892.471 yards
18:40:14.5  Spotting Officer: "Up 400"
18:40:25.9  Bearing taken rel=52.75 gyro=166.017

18:40:36.1  Range cut "T" 15567.989 yards
18:40:45.2  Bearing taken rel=52.5 gyro=165.2
18:40:50.8  Gunnery Officer: "Turn 4 points to port"

18:40:56.1  Spotting Officer: "Over"
18:40:58.2  Range cut "." 15407.321 yards
18:40:58.3  Spotting Officer: "Down 200"
18:40:59.3  Gunnery Officer: "Check"
18:41:11.9  Bearing taken rel=68.75 gyro=164.55

18:41:21.4  Range cut "T" 14706.927 yards
18:41:31.2  Bearing taken rel=80.0 gyro=165.133

18:41:43.2  Spotting Officer: "Too far left"
18:41:45.6  Range cut "." 14607.274 yards
18:41:46.6  Spotting Officer: "Right 4"
18:41:59.5  Bearing taken rel=89.25 gyro=164.85
18:42:01.5  Range cut "T" 14607.274 yards
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Weird Guy



Joined: 26 Apr 2005
Posts: 18

PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2005 5:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Those lectures you gave, they were some sort of door prize to guests of the conference to attend as a reward, or what was their purpose if that is wrong?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tone
Site Admin


Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 479
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2005 8:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

My presentation was a preliminary "dog watch instruction" to an annual dinner of the organization. About 110 (of approx 800) members of the association attended the dinner, and about half of those attended my talk. I got the invitation to present last September, when the head of the organization saw me do a brief talk at the Fisher Conference.

tone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Weird Guy



Joined: 26 Apr 2005
Posts: 18

PostPosted: Thu Jul 07, 2005 3:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Can I ask what the crowd thought of your computer demostrations?

Did anybody mention anything that surprised them?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tone
Site Admin


Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 479
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Thu Jul 07, 2005 9:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think there was a significant distance, technologically, between the systems I showed and what they had ever used. Some of the criticisms were of superficial bits easy for them to detect, but hard for me to research in advance (given all that I must juggle):

1. My new sailor models had small white stars inset in the corners of the flap of cloth that hangs between their shoulder blades. Several noted that those did not belong.

2. My ships all had a naval ensign or flag mounted on a jackstay on the prow. Several pointed out that such flags were never flown there, but were on the aft jackstay or at the head of a mast.

3. They wanted to correct my use of the term "step by step" transmitters by (if I recall correctly) M-type devices. This was merely a shift in terminology, I think, as "M-type devices" has never appeared in the contemporary literature I study, and "step by step" abounds. Just a new word was taken up to describe these devices at some post-war juncture.

Aside from that, they either failed to notice the occasional bits I knew were glaringly wrong (such as my turrets have a single sightsetting station that magically works to adjust all 4 sighting scopes, whereas a real turret would have had 4 such stations), or they lacked particular knowledge of the equipment and ships in the era I modeled, or assumed that omissions were bits I hoped to get to later (and of COURSE I want to get everything eventually!) Additionally, much of the ugly bits flew past very quickly --- I have editorial control, after all.

I have stopped work on the sim in its old form in order to concentrate on a new instantiation of the effort. It will be several to many months before ships and waves are seen again, but I can hope it will be shinier and in a form that I can eventually share it with others who'd like to tinker with it!

tone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Beatty



Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 21

PostPosted: Wed Jul 27, 2005 10:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tone,

I'll say it once I'll say it again, I'm sooooo envious! That "psuedo-gunnery report" is pretty cool and I think you could turn that into a standar format say based on actual gunnery reports or action reports.

The more and more I read about this sim the more and more I know you on the right track. One area I really like is the communcation loops between the various FC stations. You can't really call it a simulation, particuarly the era your modeling, without those.

I can't wait.

Brad

BTW-got the automated announcement, works fine.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tone
Site Admin


Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 479
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Thu Jul 28, 2005 9:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks, Brad. The report as printed above reflects a split-purpose and some errors. I was torn between having the format be one that might have been logged on the ship and one that reflected the truth. The differences, of course, would be that errors in range and bearing should be manifest in the former but could be segregated in the latter (that is, observations with errors seen alongside actual data for comparison).

I may post my "analysis" video later, which comprises an orthographic overhead replay of a gunnery engagement, as it shows the actual course of firing and target ship over time, along with markers for range cuts, salvo aim points, shotfall splash markers, and a scrolling log of chatter with the spotting and rate corrections overlaid directly on the battle. Though it gets confusing, given how much is depicted, the best part of this is that an animated "ghost ship" is also drawn on the battle which represents the hypothesis on the firing ship of where the target ship is presumed to be. This really helps you see the divergence between the actual firing scenario and the one being modeled in the TS.

I'll post at least a few screenshots later, perhaps (though I've not run the old sim in 2 months).

tone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
tone
Site Admin


Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 479
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 1:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

10 short months later, I got around to digitizing a video of the presentation.

It's a full hour, and 160 MB, but it should stream. I doubt many will want to see it, but it does show a slightly higher level of attainment in simulation than that seen in the videos already posted. Before downloading it, however, be aware that this is a video OF the presentation stage, and so the simulation may not be nearly as clear as the simulation videos already posted. I could post the videos being projected in this one, but they'd have no sound (I edited them for live narration).

I have to say -- I think my presentation skills were lacking, and that I drove into excessive depth of detail.

If you want to download to desktop before viewing, do the right-click+save as... thing.

The presentation is 46 minutes long, followed by 16 minutes of discussion before the tape ran out.

160 MB Quicktime Video


tone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
tone
Site Admin


Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 479
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2006 9:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

For the sake of completeness, I scanned the photo taken by the professional photographer at the event of Captain Raymond P Dannreuther and me right after dinner and posted it on the web page for the event.



Captain Dannreuther had just had his recent book on World War II naval operations in the Mediterranean, Somerville's Force H: The Royal Navy's Gibraltar-Based Fleet, June 1940 To March 1942 published when we met.

His father was HMS Invincible's gunnery officer and a survivor of her destruction.

tone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Dreadnought Project Forum Index -> Simulation All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group