NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Relative bearings
From: Bill B
Date: 2015 Apr 16, 13:28 -0400
From: Bill B
Date: 2015 Apr 16, 13:28 -0400
On 4/16/2015 12:36 AM, Paul Hirose wrote: > > Unless terminology has changed since WW2, "angle on the bow" doesn't > mean relative bearing in submarines. Well, actually it does, but it's > the relative bearing from target ship to sub, increasing port and > starboard from the target's bow. For instance, port 90 angle on the bow > means the sub is on the target's port beam, regardless of the relative > bearing *to* the target. Thank you Paul. I did indeed post, "Angle on the bow appears to be from the observer's bow to the target, while target angle is from the target's bow to the observer." I either misread or ran into one of "those" sites, which like me, professed knowledge it did not possess. After spending a goodly amount of time with the Wikipedia article and illustrative photographs trying to reconcile the seemingly contradictory results, it suddenly dawned on me that the "Angle on the bow is a variation of target angle used by United States Navy submarines" statement also referred to the *target* vessel, not the sub. After that things fell into place. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Target_angle > That meaning is also made clear by former fleet boat skipper Edward > Beach in his classic war novel "Run Silent, Run Deep". If you've seen > the movie you'll hardly recognize the book, which puts less focus on > interpersonal drama and more on technical detail. I have not seen the movie or read the book. I did however listen to a radio play on a set the size of a dresser in rural Indiana circa 1957. I recall the ending was distressing to a young boy. There also seems to be a submarine computer simulation by the same name.