Quote:
Originally Posted by Sailor Steve
Did you read my post? I carefully discussed the problems with anecdotal accounts, from both sides, and even linked to the Wiki page in which Fluckey was officially credited with a speed record, giving you the credit in the process. I don't question their integrity or their abilities. TorpX and I sort of reached a consensus on the problems both ways, and now here you are going back over the same ground. If you don't want to investigate with us, fine, but it looks to me like you're the gamers I was describing. You only look at one side because that's what you want to believe. So you completely ignore my last comments about how we'll never know for certain.
But, if you're going to insist on continuing this you need to explain what "150% overload means". Did they suddenly get 9750 horsepower out of an engine rated for 6500? It is a characteristic of all onboard speed measuring equipment to be increasingly inaccurate with increasing speed. Your car's speedometer is a victim of this, as is a mechanical air-speed indicator. Are the sub's measuring devises perfect? I said I don't know. I said I still have doubts, but that's part of my nature - I don't believe anything until I have hard facts, and in this case there don't seem to be any. Maybe they were right. Maybe they were wrong. I don't know, but I've studied enough details about how ships operate over the last two decades that I question how this could be accomplished, and I'll continue to do so. Believe what you want, but I've long held that any change to a game based on anything other than solid proof is a bad idea.
But the developers allow it, and you are free to use it and to justify it however you want. I only stated my opinion and gave my reasons, nothing more.
|
No Steve, I was not ignoring your post.I am no "gamer" and it's not that I believe in it because I want it to be true, I feel that it is based on the evidence.The evidence is that several highly respected skippers stated in writing that they did this, in addition that no crewmember or anyone else has disputed this(as far as I can tell) in the many years that have passed since these incidents occured.Additionally, there was evidence of them moving faster such as Seahorse's encounter with the TF one June 15, 1944.The Seahorse who on paper could only make 20.25 knots yet were able to keep up with a TF or battleships, cruisers, destroyers(carriers I think, can not recall) that were(if I recall correctly) making 25-26 knots.Now running full bore at the paper speed of 20.25, they wouldnt be able to keep them in sight for long, yet when they pushed their engines, they were making 22 or so knots, were able to keep them in sight at a distance for a while until had to take the strain off less they do serious damage.
The Barb would be another example.Barb had a destroyer/PB type that was closing fast and they could not open the distance, the small amount of extra speed enabled them to pull away.
So if the instruments were incorrect and they were not making the speeds they recorded then most likely Seahorse would not have been able to keep up and Barb would not have been able to get away.I almost forgot Tang, who would not have been able to cover such a large area so quickly when rescuing pilots.
I get your point of view and skepticism, I normally share it with just about anything but feel it's unwarranted here because if you count the word of highly respected naval officers and crew, the time that has elapsed without dispute(again that I know of), and again, the results.Seahorse kept up while running flat out, Barb escaped.Tang was able to cover enough ocean to rescue many aviators and aircrew shot down during the Truk raid.I am sure other boats in the war operated at higher speeds, possibe some outside the Gato/Balao/Tench classes than they were supposed to be able to accomplish and odds are some may have had incorrect readings but we know of these three due to their stellar war records and books.The results speak for themselves in the well documented cases.