GWX (Grey Wolves eXpansion Mod)

[Penelope_Grey]

Oh... I see the effect of heavy machine gun fire on U-Boat hulls is still be thrashed out... I don't get, why people think aircraft are unkillable... I'll post a screenshot from my log of the two aircraft I destroyed shortly no. Great trophies they are.

[Kilhmar]

Does anyone here know how thick the gun shields of U-boat flak guns were? I know the army Flakpanzer versions had between 20 and 25 mm thick gun shields, but this sounds perhaps a bit excessive for a U-boat installation.

[Dreamer]

Is anyone else having difficulties loading save games with GWX2? I'm down to resigning myself to never try loading save games as they virtually always crash at the "not so long ago" screen. Tell me I'm not the only one almost willing to roll back to GWX 1.03 because of this frustration.

[donw]

Not had that trouble mate...

[Kilhmar]

A cute anectodal:


"After a fruitless search pursuing two fading sonar contacts in the mid-South Atlantic narrows, Tripoli and her group returned to Recife on 11 September for provisioning and fuelling. Underway again two days later, TG 47.7 headed out to conduct another search—this time along the estimated track of two U-boats slated to rendezvous for refuelling. One of the target U-boats was U-1062, a "Milch Cow" bound from Penang, Malaya, with a cargo of valuable petroleum products for the German war effort. Ordered to fuel U-219, outward-bound for the Far East, U-1062 prepared to rendezvous with her smaller sister boat in the South Atlantic narrows—directly in the path of the Tripoli escort group.

Passing to the westward of the Cape Verdes, TG 47.7 made rendezvous with the Mission Bay (CVE-59) escort group to conduct a joint hunter-killer operation against the two enemy boats. Round-the-clock searches by prowling, radar-equipped Avengers continued with unrelaxed vigilance until 40 minutes after sunset on 28 September, when a TBF piloted by Lt. William R. Gillespie, USNR, reported a definite contact with the surfaced U-219 only 11 miles from the enemy's estimated track.

Gillespie went in to conduct a low-level rocket attack, but heavy flak slapped the intrepid airman's plane and crew into the sea. Another Avenger, drawn to the battle, braved the maelstrom of flak to conduct another rocket run and also dropped depth bombs, while a Wildcat strafed the twisting and turning U-boat which struggled desperately to dodge the harassing attacks by the American planes.

Indeed, U-219 emerged from the fracas unscathed; but U-1062 did not enjoy similar good fortune. Fessenden (DE-242), one of Mission Bay's screen, homed in on sonobuoy indications on 30 September and killed the "Milch Cow" with a four-charge pattern. In the meantime, U-219 was not yet out of the proverbial woods— one of Tripoli's Avengers dropped depth bombs on the fleeing boat on 2 October. Keen-eared American sonar-men felt that they had definitely "killed" the submersible, but postwar accounting showed that U-219 had escaped to Batavia, Java."

[Genferret]

Originally Posted by Kilhmar

I wonder why you would say that? The video showed no cannon fire (.50 cals are not cannon), nor did it show any damage done. A lot of water splashes and a few incendiary flashes yes, but no evident damage done to the U-boat.

Also you should always take these video clips with a grain of salt. I don't know if it was an outtake from Discovery or a WWII propaganda film, but it shows us three distinctly different U-boats. In the first U-boat scene the U-boat is clearly diving, its turm just about to be submerged. The second (very brief) U-boat scene shows a smaller U-boat, probably a VII with a small turm maneuvering on the surface. The third and final U-boat scene shows a mid-late war IX with a large turm configuration being strafed. The fate of these U-boats remain unknown since we don't actually get to see any of them being sunk.

Always remember that wartime footage was filmed for a purpose, and that purpose seldom had anything to do with the truth.

What do you mean by "evident" damage? If you're looking for huge gaping holes, then those you won't see, however, even a .50 would have devastating effects upon the pressure hull of a U-boat, keep in mind it only takes one hole to compromise the pressure hull and make it less effective. Holes such as that wouldn't be evident in that video because they wouldn't be huge, but each hole would have compromised the hull integrety further. Enough of those small holes and you might as well not have a pressure hull since it wouldn't be able to do it's job at all.

I really wish I still had copies or links to all the documentation I had bookmarked back when I played World War II Online. The effectiveness of aircraft guns vs. ground vehicles was always a huge topic of debate.

Here are a couple of pages I managed to find on the WarBird's forums that list the armor penetration values of some of the common aircraft guns.

http://img59.exs.cx/img59/919/ap19az.jpg
http://img59.exs.cx/img59/9960/ap23wz.jpg

Also, keep in mind that no matter what you see in movies regarding the cannons on aircraft, you're not always going to see big explosions or such. Cannons on aircraft usually had several different types of ammo. Some would fire HE (High Explosive) rounds, some fired AP (Armor Piercing) rounds, and some would fire a mixture of the two (3 AP rounds followed by 1 HE or something similiar to that). AP rounds hitting would show no explosion on impact, meanwhile HE rounds would.

Really, in a U-boat, there's no reason outside of the training mission that you should be sitting on the surface exchanging blows with an aircraft.

[Kilhmar]

Originally Posted by Genferret

What do you mean by "evident" damage? If you're looking for huge gaping holes, then those you won't see, however, even a .50 would have devastating effects upon the pressure hull of a U-boat...

I'm sorry but that simply isn't true. The .50 cal isn't even close to have enough power to penetrate the pressure hull of a U-boat.

[Genferret]

Originally Posted by Kilhmar

I'm sorry but that simply isn't true. The .50 cal isn't even close to have enough power to penetrate the pressure hull of a U-boat.

Might want to re-read the thickness of a pressure hull and then look at the document I linked you to again that lists the penetration rate of the .50 cal.

I'll give you a hint, someone listed the pressure hull thickness higher up, and it was less than 20mm.

[Kilhmar]

You might want take those documents with a grain of salt and read my post on modern armour piercing rounds. The IX had 22 mm thick pressure hull, and the VIIc/41 had 28-33 mm thick pressure hull.

I have some very detailed listings and after action reports on sinking of subs by US aircraft. None of the strafing attacks seriously damaged the U-boats, but sometimes cleared the deck allowing other aircraft to attack with bombs or rockets.

Here are a few examples:

U-966, 10 November 1943 (shared)
Type: VIIC Laid Down: 1 May 1942, Blohm &
Voss, Hamburg
Commissioned: 4 March 1943, Oblt. Eckehard Wolf
Commander: Oblt. Eckehard Wolf
Career: Assigned: March 1943–July 1943, 5th
Flotilla (Kiel) training; August 1943 –
November 1943 9th Flotilla (Brest)
Successes: None
Fate: Sunk 10 November 1943 in the Bay Biscay
near Cape Ortegal, Spain, by American and
Czech aircraft bombs in one of the longest
surface battles of aircraft against a U-boat in
WWII. At 0800, a VB-105 PB4Y-1 Liberator piloted
by Lieutenant L. E. Harmon was alerted
by an RAF aircraft of a radar contact near the
coast of Spain. Harmon located the surfaced
U-boat and made two strafing attacks. Heavy
AA fire damaged his aircraft and forced him to
break off the attack. An RAF fighter then dove
to attack the submarine. Harmon made a third
strafing attack, but had to break off afterwards
due to a fuel shortage. Lieutenant K. L. Wright
of VB-103 located U-966 near Ferrol at 1040
and delivered a strafing and depth charge attack.
Intense AA fire drove him off and he,
too, had to depart the target for lack of fuel.
Lieutenant W. W. Parish and crew then arrived
on the scene. A depth charge attack was conducted
in cooperation with a rocket-firing RAF
Liberator at 1230. The submarine was abandoned
by its crew after running aground at
Oritiguiera, Spain. The German crewmen
were quickly picked up by nearby Spanish
fishing vessels and interned in Spain.



Type: IXC Laid Down: 24 September 1940,
Deutsche Werft, Hamburg
Commissioned: 20 October 1941, Oblt. Georg
Staats
Commander: October 1941–November 1943,
Kptlt. Georg Staats (Knights Cross)
Career: Six Patrols; assigned: October 1941–June
1942, 4th Flotilla (Stettin); July 1942–November
1943 10th Flotilla (Lorient)
Successes: 14 ships sunk for a total of 74,087 tons
Fate: Sunk 12 November 1943, north of Cape
Ortegal, Spain, in position 46°00'N, 07°30'W,
by U.S. bombs (VB-103). 57 dead (entire crew
lost). Lieutenant (jg) Brownell made a night
attack on a submarine. His PB4Y-1 Liberator
was apparently heavily damaged by the Uboat’s
AA fire and crashed into the sea with
no survivors. The next day, two oil slicks
were spotted, about five miles apart. Postwar
examination of German records indicates that
he sank U-508.



U-598, 23 July 1943
Type: VIIC Laid Down 11 January 1941, Blohm &
Voss, Hamburg
Commissioned: 27 November 1941, Oblt.
Gottfried Holtorf
Commander: November 1941–July 1943, Kptlt.
Gottfried Holtorf
Career: Assigned: November 1941–July 1942, 8th
Flotilla (Danzig); July 1942–July 1943, 6th
Flotilla (St. Nazaire)
Successes: Two ships sunk for a total of 9,295
tons; one ship of 6,197 tons damaged
Fate: Sunk 23 July 1943, in the South Atlantic near
Natal, in position 04°05'S, 33°23'W, by U.S.
bombs (VB-107). 44 dead, one survivor.
Lieutenant (jg) Waugh, flying PB4Y-1 Liberator
aircraft 107-B-6, attacked the surfaced U-boat
in conjunction with a second squadron aircraft
flown by Lieutenant William R. Ford, sinking
the submarine. Waugh’s aircraft apparently
sustained damage during the attack, plunging
into the sea after his bombing pass with the
loss of all hands. The submarine’s identity was
confirmed by the sole survivor as U-598.



U-174, 27 April 1943
Type: IXC Laid Down: 2 January 1941, AG Weser,
Bremen
Commissioned: 26 November 1941, Fregkpt.
Ulrich Thilo
Commander: November 1941–March 1943,
Fregkpt. Ulrich Thilo; March 1943–April 1943,
Oblt. Wolfgang Grandefeld
Career: Assigned: November 1941–July 1942, 4th
Flotilla (Stettin); July 1942–April 1943, 10th
Flotilla (Lorient)
Successes: Five ships sunk for a total of 30,813
tons
Fate: Sunk 27 April 1943, south of Newfoundland,
in position 43°35'N, 56°18'W, by U.S. bombs.
53 dead (entire crew lost). A VP-125 aircraft attacked
U-174 on the surface near Cape Race.
The U-boat heavily damaged the PV-1 Ventura
with its 20-mm AA guns before sinking.



U-604, 30 July 1943
Type: VIIC Laid Down: 27 February 1941, Blohm
& Voss, Hamburg
Commissioned: 8 January 1942, Kptlt. Horst
Höltring
Commander: January 1942–August 1943, Kptlt.
Horst Höltring
Career: Six patrols; assigned: January 1942–July
1942, 5th Flotilla (Kiel); August 1942–August
1943, 9th Flotilla (Brest)
Successes: 6 ships sunk for a total of 39,891 tons
Fate: Lieutenant Commander Thomas D. Davies
and crew spotted a fully surfaced submarine
during a coastal barrier sweep northeast of
Bahia. The U-boat crew attempted to fight it
out with 20-mm AA fire, but the bow guns of
the Ventura quickly cleared the decks of the
submarine, allowing Davies to make a perfect
drop with four Mark 47 depth charges athwart
the still surfaced U-boat. The submarine, U-
601, submerged after the attack then surfaced
again at a 60-degree angle with the screws out
of the water. The U-boat then submerged
again. Later, German prisoners of war indicated
that the damage to the U-boat was so
severe that it had to be scuttled on 11 August
1943. The U-604 crew was taken aboard U-
185 and U-172 (during the sinking



U-615, 7 August 1943 (shared with VB-130)
Type: VIIC Laid Down: 20 May 1941, Blohm &
Voss, Hamburg
Commissioned: 26 March 1942, Oblt. Ralph
Kapitzky
Commander: March 1942–August 1943, Kptlt.
Ralph Kapitzky
Career: Assigned: March 1942–August 1942, 8th
Flotilla (Danzig); September 1942–August
1943, 3rd Flotilla (La Pallice)
Successes: Four ships sunk for a total of 27,231
tons
Fate: Sunk 7 August 1943, in the Caribbean southeast
of Curacao, in position 12°38'N, 64°15'W.
Lieutenant (jg) John M. Erskine, pilot of a
PBM-3S Mariner of VP-204, attacked the surfaced
U-615 on 6 August, causing moderate
damage. The squadron aircraft maintained
contact with the submerged submarine and
kept it down over night. On the morning of
the 7th, Lieutenant Anthony R. Matuski spotted
the U-boat when it surfaced and made an attack
run. His aircraft was damaged by return
fire and crashed with the loss of all hands.
Lieutenant Lewis D. Crockett, flying a VP-204
Mariner, located the U-boat and conducted a
bomb run that further damaged the vessel, but
resulted in severe damage to his aircraft from
AA fire. He remained on the scene until
Lieutenant Holmes, pilot of a PV-1 Ventura of
VB-130, arrived to assist him. The two aircraft
conducted a coordinated bombing and
strafing attack. Lieutenant (jg) John W.
Dresbach, in a VP-204 Mariner, arrived and
made a bombing and strafing attack on the Uboat.
This attack resulted in mortal wounds to
the pilot, Lieutenant Dresbach, and the final
blow for the submarine. A U.S. Navy destroyer
from Trinidad reached the area the next morning
and rescued forty-five of the U-boat’s crew
of 49.



U-572, 3 August 1943
Type: VIIC Laid Down: 15 June 1940, Blohm &
Voss, Hamburg
Commissioned: 29 May 1941, Kptlt. Heinz
Hirsacker
Commander: May 1941–December 1942, Kptlt.
Heinz Hirsacker; December 1942–August
1943, Oblt. Heinz Kummentat
Career: Assigned: May 1941–August 1941, 3rd
Flotilla (Kiel); August 1941–August 1943, 3rd
Flotilla (La Pallice)
Successes: Six ships sunk for a total of 19,323
tons, one ship of 6,207 tons damaged
Fate: Sunk 3 August 1943, northeast of Trinidad,
in position 11°35'N, 54°05'W, by bombs from
a PBM-3S Mariner of VP-205. 47 dead (entire
crew lost). Lieutenant (jg) C. C. Cox attacked
U-572 on the surface and was shot down during
the bomb run with the loss of all hands.



I have never read or heard of a U-boat being sunk or seriously damaged by strafing alone.

More documentation can be found at www.history.navy.mil


Unfortunately the power of the .50 cal has been greatly exaggerated in popular media.

[Storabrun]

What is up with the unkillable planes in... Never mind, this will actually be about something else if that is allowed in this thread

I have been waiting for the 23/29 flottilla to become available. Sure enough, in september 1941 it's there and I request transfer and it was approved. Strange thing is that when I click the map it says "base moved to brest" or something like that and I end up at 0 0 which is a bit south east of Freeport.

I have GWX 2.0 with light harbour traffic and some other mods but they are graphical in nature.

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Originally Posted by Storabrun

...I have been waiting for the 23/29 flottilla to become available. Sure enough, in september 1941 it's there and I request transfer and it was approved. Strange thing is that when I click the map it says "base moved to brest" or something like that and I end up at 0 0 which is a bit south east of Freeport.

I have GWX 2.0 with light harbour traffic and some other mods but they are graphical in nature.

Hi Storabrun,

The situation to which you refer is conclusive evidence that you have a file conflict. This occurs when the base coordinates in the Flotilla.cfg are different in comparison to the base coordinates in the LND file.

The most likely causes are:

a) Loading a save file from a previous version of GWX
b) Failing to completely remove residual files from previous installations of SH3
c) Incompatible or incomplete mod installation (However inadvertant it may be.)

Secondarily, given the above situation, you should also assume that other files in your installation are also suspect/corrupt/incorrect.

As unfortunate and as aggravating as it may be, the only way to cure the situation is to reinstall SH3+GWX 2.0 from scratch after paying special attention to the removal process.

First, completely uninstall SH3 USING THE GAME DISK... then visit your Program Files/Ubisoft/SilentHunterIII directory and delete all remaining GWX material. (There should be a fair bit of it as the GWX mod is over 1 gigabyte expanded.)

Then REBOOT your system before initializing the installation process again. You must follow the directions in the "Getting Started" section of the GWX manual to the letter.

I wish the answer was a more pleasant one for you, Storabrun. However a moment's pain now, will save you loads of frustration later.

Originally Posted by Dreamer

Is anyone else having difficulties loading save games with GWX2? I'm down to resigning myself to never try loading save games as they virtually always crash at the "not so long ago" screen. Tell me I'm not the only one almost willing to roll back to GWX 1.03 because of this frustration.

Dreamer, what you've described is also evidence that you now have a "mixed" installation. This would be especially true if you attempted to apply GWX 2.0 directly over the top of GWX 1.03 instead of placing GWX 2.0 one a brand new clean installation of SH3 patch to version 1.4b. As a result, rolling back to verision 1.03 would be equally difficult as completing an accurate installation of GWX 2.0.
Unfortunately, my advice to you is the same as to Storabrun.

What Kpt. said above is probably 90% of most problems in all threads.

You MUST have a VIRGIN install!!!
No roll backs,
No "I uninstalled 1.03 but"
No excuses!!!

If she ain't pretty and proper?
You got all kinds of VD problems!
(Very Disappointing!)

Originally Posted by Kilhmar

You might want take those documents with a grain of salt and read my post on modern armour piercing rounds. The IX had 22 mm thick pressure hull, and the VIIc/41 had 28-33 mm thick pressure hull.

I have some very detailed listings and after action reports on sinking of subs by US aircraft. None of the strafing attacks seriously damaged the U-boats, but sometimes cleared the deck allowing other aircraft to attack with bombs or rockets.

. . . . . . .


I have never read or heard of a U-boat being sunk or seriously damaged by strafing alone.

More documentation can be found at www.history.navy.mil


Unfortunately the power of the .50 cal has been greatly exaggerated in popular media.

Although the .50 caliber is quite powerful, yes, it probably couldn't penetrate the pressure hulls. Thing is, the light hull, ballast tanks, and fuel tanks weren't so thick. They never saw the pressure differential that the pressure hull would and did, and so weren't thick-walled at all. .50 caliber would most certainly penetrate that and, once your tanks were perforated, well . . . that might not sink you (and probably didn't) but it sure would prevent you from submerging, as you wouldn't be able to effectively blow the tanks once you'd gone down to any depth. And once you were stuck running surfaced . . .

The problem is, as Kpt. Lehmann and the others have mentioned before, is that they're stuck both with the game engine (which is hardcoded) and that so many individual things are interconnected. Mess with one and that can have disturbing (and unrealistc) effects elsewhere. In a perfect world the .50 caliber would, at best, sweep your deck of personnel (ick!) and damage the light hull and prevent you from submerging. However, I don't think there is any way they can mod the damage effects to duplicate that without making some horrendous effects elsewhere.

If you want to see just how devestating a .50 caliber aircraft attack can look like, watch this: I warn you now: it's really hideous.

In a perfect world, yes, the .50 caliber most likely wouldn't do the internal damage that it does now. Unfortunately, the SHIII game engine and hard codes seem to be less than perfect.

(By the way, excellent job of research there!)

[Dreamer]

Originally Posted by Kpt. Lehmann

Dreamer, what you've described is also evidence that you now have a "mixed" installation. This would be especially true if you attempted to apply GWX 2.0 directly over the top of GWX 1.03 instead of placing GWX 2.0 one a brand new clean installation of SH3 patch to version 1.4b. As a result, rolling back to verision 1.03 would be equally difficult as completing an accurate installation of GWX 2.0.
Unfortunately, my advice to you is the same as to Storabrun.

The previous attempt was indeed over a clean, new installation and I'm currently trying it again after following the install directions (yet again) from your site. I'll let you know how it goes as I've just hit "load" on another new save game.

Thanks for the help.

Right.
It is historically proven the .50 call would punture dive tanks and ballist
tanks at the very lest.
With out those being in near perfect working order?
Your in a world of hurt.
The game engine does not allow us to make a call as to if hull
means dive tanks or ballist tanks.
So we do the best we can within the limits we have to work with.
If you can do better?
Please do so and teach me!!
I'd love that!!
If you just want to complain?
Push this button.