![]() |
SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997 |
![]() |
#31 |
Electrician's Mate
![]() Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 139
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
i'd be thinkin that dropping shallow fused depth charges would be more effective and historically accurate an anti-submarine weapon than a torpedo, considering the horrendous effects of explosions under a near surfaced hull versus attempting to align a torpedo run on a rapidly diving sub.
to simulate DCs, how about re-jigging bombs to detonate at a certain depth? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#32 | |
Ocean Warrior
![]() Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Norway
Posts: 3,234
Downloads: 11
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
__________________
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#33 |
Lieutenant
![]() Join Date: May 2004
Location: Lethbridge, Alberta
Posts: 260
Downloads: 40
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
Thruster : depth charges are in the game. they have the same model as bombs and the same damage as the 500kg bombs. But they detonate at the surface from my testing. I'll look at this also in the days ahead.
SAFE : sorta .. this would be a huge undertaking and don't even have a save in the latewar so I can't reliably test if it's working. I'd have to change all the campaign files so that at a certain point a different airbase spawned. A very big thing to do. As it stand I'm happier with how it is. you may get attacked by a plane in the early war .. and you may not. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#34 |
Electrician's Mate
![]() Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 139
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
thank you wamphyri
if i had the skills to do it myself i certainly would. im grateful those like you contribute to this. cheers. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#35 | |
Medic
![]() Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 163
Downloads: 123
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
Hurricanes were armed with 8 .30 Browning MGs, and really didn't carry enough ammunition to do more than cause minor damage to a sub without the use of bombs or rockets. Another consideration was their fixed convergence, which mitigated damage even more by spreading it around. They could cause havok on easily damaged external system though, like the periscopes, radar, topside crew etc. Not sure about more than that. They had a hard enough time shooting down Bf-110s or bigger without burning through all their ammo. Big difference between aluminum and steel. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#36 |
Lieutenant
![]() Join Date: May 2004
Location: Lethbridge, Alberta
Posts: 260
Downloads: 40
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
I'll be working on the damage they do next. Won't be hard but I just need to find the time to do it.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#37 |
Watch
![]() Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 24
Downloads: 46
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
Hello,
just for info. all fighters with guns up to 20mm should do absolutely ZERO damage to the sub hull. the cal.303 of planes like the hurrican should only be able to hurt/kill the crew, and damage the UZO or the scope with a lucky shot. the cal.05 of planes like the mustang/p47 (most us stuff) could do the same and maybe damage the guns a bit. but again..NO damage to the subs hull. 20mm..even AP amunition the same..with higher chance to destroy the gun or AA gun of the boat...but the internal hull..never. thsi must and should be adressed..right now hurricans with their beanshooters can rapidly destroy an subs hull. greetings wastel |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#38 |
Lieutenant
![]() Join Date: May 2004
Location: Lethbridge, Alberta
Posts: 260
Downloads: 40
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
New Release.. \o/
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#39 | |
Lieutenant
![]() Join Date: May 2004
Location: Lethbridge, Alberta
Posts: 260
Downloads: 40
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#40 | |
Lieutenant
![]() Join Date: May 2004
Location: Lethbridge, Alberta
Posts: 260
Downloads: 40
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#41 | |
Helmsman
![]() Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 105
Downloads: 27
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
For example look at the bottom of this site: http://www.inetres.com/gp/military/i...g/50_ammo.html As you can see, a cal. 50 round can penetrate a ~25mm thick armor plate. Hell, it could penetrate the top of most german WW2 tanks. Why do you think it should not make a scratch into a sub? |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#42 | |
Electrician's Mate
![]() Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 139
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
Therion_Prime wrote:
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#43 |
Electrician's Mate
![]() Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 139
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
thanks wamphyri i found this and i'll try to quote it. i found it at http://people.brunel.ac.uk/~mastjjb/jeb/or/intro.html it says "The main weapon of attack against a surfaced (when spotted) U-boat was depth charges dropped in a stick (typically six 250lb (110kg) depth charges) in a more or less straight line along the direction of flight of the attacking aircraft. After hitting the water a depth charge sinks whilst at the same time being carried forward by its own momentum. After a pre-set time delay, or upon reaching a certain depth, it explodes and any U-boat within a certain distance (the lethal radius) is fatally damaged. Six variables were considered as influencing the kill probability:
Here we have the issue of historical inertia in decision making - in the dim and distant past someone decided that the standard depth setting should be 30/45 metres and this historical decision has been carried forward - never being questioned/re-examined until ORS came on the scene.
Note here that it could be argued (and was) that since a 250lb depth charge had too small a lethal radius a bigger charge (600lb (270kg) was prescribed by the Air Staff) was needed. ORS suggested 100lb (45kg) on the basis that it would be more effective to have many small explosions rather than one large explosion. (As an analogy would you prefer to throw many small balls at a small target or one large ball?). In fact neither alternative ever really preceded past the trial stage due to increasing success with the 250lb depth charge." i hope this is helpful? i may have another link of interst, i'll post that if its good. cheers. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#44 | |
Helmsman
![]() Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 105
Downloads: 27
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
As I already said above, in therory cal. 50 rounds could easily penetrate the top armor of german tanks up to the Panzer 4. It would require a very steep strafing run, but it would be possible. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#45 |
A-ganger
![]() Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 78
Downloads: 22
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
Will this work with the new planes in http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=164210 ??
Eventually? ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|