Good to hear that your work is in progress, padi :up:

Copy that!
Best regards:Kaleun_Salute:

Hello padi,

in case you are looking for 3D models of the two basic types of British throwers, check the lastes version of the guns_UK library.

As for the Isaac Sweers, it was fitted out in the UK and had the standard outfit of fleet destroyers of 1941/42 (4 throwers, 2 rails).

The original French ships had an internal rail systems for heavy depth charges and Thornycroft-type throwers. All that is included in the models done by Texelbo and also in my Le Fantasque model.

The French ships serving with the Royal Navy had their equipment replaced by British material. So, try making educated guesses by comparing with similar British units.

The Italian used their very own type of throwers and also specific rails. A simple model of the Italian throwers was done by JapLance for his SH4 models. Just check the libraries he provided.

Cheers

Wow that are really nice and useful informations!
I'm implementing that information into the files and I hope that I can upload a extended file in the next few days.

But I have two questions regarding your answers:

1. to the Frog: Which guns_UK do you mean? Is the file supplied with your last ship?

2. to gap: I would really like to implement the Models into the files. There is only one Question: Did the Mk7 Mod2 look different from the Mk7?
Sadly the Mk9 Mod2 is useless for the purpose of this mod, because the only advantage (that I have read about) was the deeper detonation depth...
But if the Mod2 had any implementable improvements I'm going to implement them.

Also thanks to all the replys which show me that the work isn't useless and nobody cares about it!

Like we say in Germany "das geht runter wie Öl"!

I don't have any information on the existence of a Mk7 Mod2, but there were a Mk9 Mod1 and a Mod2 if that's what you meant. IIRC, the Mk9 and the Mk9 Mod1 were almost identical, the only difference consisting in construction details. The Mk9 Mod2, on turn, differed in many ways from the two previous mods:

http://i.imgur.com/y9SVLOZ.png

Depth charge Mk9 on the left, MK9 Mod2 on the right

I am going by memory, but I think the Mk9 and the Mk9 Mod2 had slightly different explosive charges/blast radii, and I am pretty sure their sinking rates differed quite a lot. Conversely, the Mk9 and the Mk9 Mod1 shared the same characteristics.

Detonation depths depended on detonators/fuzes fitted, and they can't be associated with any particular depth charge mark/mod, as they were interchangeable and new detonators were often retrofitted to older depth charge models. Information available on the web is often misleading on this point, but the US manuals that I pointed you to are quite clear on this respect.

Sure it isn't, quite the opposite. Depth charge's evolution, together with the improvement of detection technologies, was one of the key factors of WWII ASW. At the beginning of the war, DCs were more a deterrent than an actual threat, but by mid-late war, they had turned into deadly weapons. Unfortunately devs oversimplified these factors. Any mod addressing them, is of high interest :up:

+1 :yep:

No, I mean the second modification of the Mk7, which I refer as Mod2.
Here is the corresponding text from Navweaps:

The part from "A later version..." I think is refering to the Mod2.

I have never heard from that, but I will search about that.

I also haven't knew the information about the fuzes before...

Oh, you are talking about the British MkVII. The usage of the same mark numbers for different depth charges by the Americans and by the English, is a bit misleading. British DC's were designated with roman numbers though, whereas for US DC's arabic numbers were used instead. :03:

Anyway, I think the official designation for the DC mod you are talking about was MKVII-Heavy, and yes, its lead weight protruding from the cylindrical casing, it brong some external differences compared to the 'regular' MkVII:

http://i.imgur.com/VWAvIGD.png

British depth charge MkVII (left) and MkVII-Heavy (right)

I am a bit busy now, but I will point you to the right information ASAP. Somewhere on my HD, I should have an Excel chart created by me, resuming all the characteristics of the main US/British depth charges and all the possible combinations of DC's, fuzes and detonators :salute:

No, I´m talking about the american Mark 7 DC and not the british Mark VII!
As written here http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WAMUS_ASW.php the Mark 7 had at least two modification intervals and because of that I named the second modification interval Mod 2, even if this name is not written, but what should you name it else?

I am sorry: I have checked all the documents I know of, but I couldn't find any useful information on the topic. Data reported by John Campbell in his book that I mentioned in one of my previous posts, is more or less the same as in Navweaps:

That's all. I have also checked this ordnance pamphlet by the Bureau of Ordnance, but nowhere in it these 'lead weight versions' are mentioned. The document is dated December 1943. Either the heavy Mk7 entered service after that date, or it was seldomly used.
Let me know if you find any extra information. In the meanwhile we can only assume that, unlike the British Mk VII-Heavy, the US depth charge with the same number had the lead weight fitted internally, and that the heavy version of it had the same external appearance as its standard-weight mods. The lead weight being internal, seems to be confirmed by the fact that the explosive charge had to be reduced in order to make space for the extra weight, as reported by navweaps. :salute:

For reference, this is how my version of the US Mk DC looks (more specifically a British-made version of it, as you can see from the markings):

http://i.imgur.com/yBb1tNA.png

That models are so nice!

I can't wait to have that models implemented!

After the conversation I think that I will also implement the Mk 9 Mod 1 but for first with estimated ratings, but they are changed later.

The Mk 7 Mod 2 will also stay in the mod, because I think that it is implemented completely...

What happened to the date? 19.19.2017
 

http://s019.radikal.ru/i634/1707/fb/9812b19ad829.jpg
What happened to the date? 19.19.2017

What do you mean?

Another prophecy on when the next end of the world is to be expected? :eek:

Now let's find which calendar has 19.19.2017 as a valid date :hmmm: