caulfim

Much the same way all pilots learn to navigate today. Yes there are electronic aids but you first learn to use your watch, map and then the ground. Never mess that order up though.

So I plot my route, using waypoints I know I will be able to find like a lake, mountain, town etc. I then take the wind, use my handy manual calculator (bit like a slide ruler) and I work out my heading corrected for the wind and work out what my speed will be over the ground (slower in headwind/faster in tail). On route I will check the time since my last waypoint, knowing my speed I should be x far along my course and I look for a feature on the map. I look up and see if that's the case. If it isn't I work out some features I can find, work out my position and measure how far off course I have gotten. I then calculate a new corse for the windage to get me back on course.

It's not the most accurate, when I was learning I would always check my work with the GPS built into the plane but found I could be reasonably accurate. The best I ever managed was within 30 seconds of planned on a 100 mile leg to find a tiny little dirt field. Was proud of that.

The real problem for WWII aviators was they may not have had the best and most accurate winds, and cloud cover would make it hard to spot the ground. The Germans even tried to put weather stations in Canada, one discovered in the 80s I believe, to check the wind to get a better idea. The Brits also did it at night so there were sextant shots if possible. Ultimately nav aids were made possible and dead reckoning/watch map ground naving was supplemented with more accurate checks.

Now personally having used similar methods I can't believe how accurate some of those navigators were. I was never above 10,000 feet and topped out at 130 knots while those guys were doing 200-300 at 30,000 feet.

Sorry to ramble, hope that clarifies somewhat.

Yeah we Aussies with any military interest get to hear that story quite often, the RAN is pretty damn proud of it. Many years ago I went to the sub base in Perth and yup, they told us. They took a picture of the stern plate didn't they? Then presented it to the captain of the carrier over dinner or some typically Australian thing. Is that true?

Amazing, I thought it was one of those things where the truth got distorted a bit.

Shame those subs keep having problems, pretty major ones so I hear.