Thoughts on torpedo failure

[iambecomelife]

While reading one of the game previews I noticed commentary on the problem with American torpedoes' firing pins - the developers confirmed that, just like in real life, torpedos that strike a glancing blow will be more likely to explode than those that hit perpendicular to the target. In my opinion the average player will have something of an ahistorical advantage since unlike the typical commander of the era we already know how to get around this problem (in part). What would you think of a mod that makes all torpedo angles equally likely to fail early in the war? Perhaps by late 1942-early 1943 we could re-implement the default detonation probability, in order to represent word getting around about how to aim your torps. I bet this is not going to be popular with everyone - just a thought...:hmm:

[codmander]

usa torps had some massive problems which probly cost a few sub mariners their skin:cry:

[bookworm_020]

It also saved many japanese ships from being sunk in the first two years of the war. There were reports of mechants being drydock and haveing two or three un exploded torpedos sticking out of there hulls!:o

I'm suprised that the crews didn't mutiny!

[Finback]

I think that mod idea is great! Most likely will regret that I admitted it though :hmm: .

Hopefully, the Mark X torpedos will be less prone to duds than the XIV's. Another good reason to have the old S Class boats in the game.

[THE_MASK]

I want realism damn it . If i choose to start my career early and get my arse kicked for not sinking anything because of torp failure then so be it . If you dont like torp failures then untick the box that will say (tick for realistic torp failures) like SH3 .

realistic

[StandingCow]

How were US torps vs Uboat torps for their time? More or less duds?

[fire-fox]

How were US torps vs Uboat torps for their time? More or less duds?

well for a start the the US trigers in the MK XIV was going to be saw good that it was never tested, and still dever got propper test till about mid-1943!!!! but it had more buges that a bad install of Window 95. with the whourst (in my opinone) being that a impact of @ 10` +/- whould corse the fireing pin to be crushed before it could set of the warhead. saw all the effort that was used by the crew to get that perfect 0` AOB shot never payed off.:damn:

PS sorry for the crap spelling

[Barkhorn1x]

Articles on line giving you all the detail you could want:

http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/1592/ustorp1.htm

http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/1592/ustorp2.htm

Barkhorn.

[fire-fox]

a secound major folt (dont think thay'll put this in SH4) was where there would be a water splash as the torpedo hit the target and may be the detonator worked but did not triger the main charge, resulting in miner hull damage and the belife (from inexpereasd crews) that the torpedo worked but it didnt.

[Sailor Steve]

It also saved many japanese ships from being sunk in the first two years of the war. There were reports of mechants being drydock and haveing two or three un exploded torpedos sticking out of there hulls!:o

I'm suprised that the crews didn't mutiny!
That strikes me as odd, simply because I was reading the Japanese merchant records and came across one instance of a dud torpedo that made a big enough hole that the ship sank anyway.

[NEON DEON]

Articles on line giving you all the detail you could want:

http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/1592/ustorp1.htm

http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/1592/ustorp2.htm

Barkhorn.

Thanks Barkhorn. That was a great read.:up:

[Crosseye76]

A great read. It even mentions that the same series of problems also dogged the Germans early in the war.

[Jimbuna]

I want realism damn it . If i choose to start my career early and get my arse kicked for not sinking anything because of torp failure then so be it . If you dont like torp failures then untick the box that will say (tick for realistic torp failures) like SH3 .

realistic

AMEN!! :yep:

[marky]

I want realism damn it . If i choose to start my career early and get my arse kicked for not sinking anything because of torp failure then so be it . If you dont like torp failures then untick the box that will say (tick for realistic torp failures) like SH3 .

realistic

AGRREEED!!!

live with it!

offset the MK14 failures by-

1. fire spreads of 2 or 3 fish
2. set at 1 foot depth to avoid depth malfunction
3. use contact fuse only
4. use ur gun duhh

[marky]

guys if u dot want torp failures then dont play the game, its war, it appens, get ovedr it

dont freakin cheat

its almost as if ur dishonoring the guys who served in subs just by saying u want a mod to get around it

my god...

[THE_MASK]

OR..........untick the box that says dud torpedoes in the realism options screen .

[Sailor Steve]

More on US vs German torpedoes:

I've been reading Peter Padfield's War Beneath The Sea, and the Germans had it worse than you might think. During the Norway Campaign, the legendary Gunther Prien fired 13 torpedoes for no hits; most likely all were deep-runners, just like the Americans. British experts later determined that no less than four separate attacks were made on HMS Warspite alone, and all of them missed.

The same experts determined that by the end of that campaign, if the Germans had suffered no failures, they would have sunk Warspite, seven heavy and light cruisers and at least twenty troop transports. Prien told BdU "I can't fight with wooden rifles!" It was at that point that the magnetic exploders were removed, not to be replaced until early in 1943.

I'd say yes, the German torpedo problems were every bit as bad as the Americans'.

[Barkhorn1x]

I'd say yes, the German torpedo problems were every bit as bad as the Americans'.

But their response to them was way better.

[Subnuts]

I'd say yes, the German torpedo problems were every bit as bad as the Americans'.
But their response to them was way better.

Well, it's not like they could threaten to have the entire Bureau of Ordanance rounded up by the military police and shot. Or sent to a concentration camp, or shipped out to New Guinea for that matter.

[THE_MASK]

I want realism damn it . If i choose to start my career early and get my arse kicked for not sinking anything because of torp failure then so be it . If you dont like torp failures then untick the box that will say (tick for realistic torp failures) like SH3 .

realistic

Q: Stuntcow: Will it be possible to be relieved of command if the captain does not perform up to par? Think it would be really interresting to have a few bad patrols and then to get relieved of command after returning to base.
A: One of the main ideas behind the career system in SH4 is to have the player's path through the navy change according to his performance. So yes, indeed, it is possible to be relieved from command because of poor performance. Or you may have a long and succesfull career that ends as you accept a job with operations. And guess what, you'll even need renown to stay in combat after you should be rotated to a desk job.

[Sailor Steve]

I'd say yes, the German torpedo problems were every bit as bad as the Americans'.

But their response to them was way better.
Not really, and that was my point. They didn't solve the depth-keeping problems until mid-1941, so it took more than a year; and they didn't have magnetic pistols from 1940 until early 1943. The went through many of the same arguments, including the design people saying it wasn't their fault and the torpedoes simply couldn't have those problems.

I'll have the book with me tomorrow and will give some direct quotes.

[Barkhorn1x]

I'd say yes, the German torpedo problems were every bit as bad as the Americans'.

But their response to them was way better.
Not really, and that was my point. They didn't solve the depth-keeping problems until mid-1941, so it took more than a year; and they didn't have magnetic pistols from 1940 until early 1943. The went through many of the same arguments, including the design people saying it wasn't their fault and the torpedoes simply couldn't have those problems.

I'll have the book with me tomorrow and will give some direct quotes.

The devil is in the details. :p You are right - for the most part*** - and I stand corrected.

From this page:
http://uboat.net/history/torpedo_crisis.htm



A commission was set up in mid-April to investigate the case thoroughly. The commission came out with a comprehensive report in late July, which placed a considerable blame on the Torpedo Department. The TD, it was found, had supplied the boats with the new magnetic firing pistol with four-blade propellers before it had undergone the necessary trials. Consequently, the personnel of the Torpedo Experimental Institute responsible for that SNAFU were court-martialed and sentenced to prison terms. Although the negligence of the Institute had been established, it was not until February 1942 that the U-Bootwaffe got to the heart of the matter.



...and:
In December 1942, well into the war, a new, improved magnetic pistol was introduced which also functioned on contact. It proved very efficient. Until then, writes Dönitz, "the effectiveness of our torpedoes was no greater than it had been during the First World War" (94).

So - the problem was identified and fixed over a period of approx. 28 months - figuring from the start of the war.

And the US torp. problem existed till about August of '43 - or 21 months from the start of the war for the US.

***I do offer one caveat however - and that is fact that the US Navy higherarchy knew that both the Germans and the English had withdrawn their magnetic pistols due to operational issues. This should have been a signal for thorough field testing - especially in light of the dismal results achieved on so many patrols with the Mark XIV. Alas, hubris whispered in senior US Admiral ears that these issues just could not be happening to "our" superior pistols. :nope:

[Sailor Steve]

***I do offer one caveat however - and that is fact that the US Navy higherarchy knew that both the Germans and the English had withdrawn their magnetic pistols due to operational issues. This should have been a signal for thorough field testing - especially in light of the dismal results achieved on so many patrols with the Mark XIV. Alas, hubris whispered in senior US Admiral ears that these issues just could not be happening to "our" superior pistols. :nope:
I can't argue with that one! Even worse, when "Drumbeat" started, our wonderful C-in-C Admiral Ernest King refused to take advice or help from the British, and so for several months east coast cities were lit up, as were merchant ships, no convoys were instituted in the US and it was let out that "several" German U-boats were "made to pay". The actual number sunk during the period was zero.

Also when Admiral Lockwood ordered the magnetic pistols deactivated he met with fierce resistance from ComSubsAsiatic (I'll have his name tomorrow). The two commands were entirely separate, and that particular admiral had also been the man behind the development of the magnetic head!:damn:

[LukeFF]

I'd say yes, the German torpedo problems were every bit as bad as the Americans'.

Otto Kretschmer, in an interview on the Aces of the Deep CD, believed the U-boat force would have sunk twice the amount of actual tonnage sunk, had they had torpedoes that were more reliable. :o

[UBootMann]

Also when Admiral Lockwood ordered the magnetic pistols deactivated he met with fierce resistance from ComSubsAsiatic (I'll have his name tomorrow). The two commands were entirely separate, and that particular admiral had also been the man behind the development of the magnetic head!:damn: Which lead to the curious practice of boats leaving Pearl with the magnetic pistol deactivated and once they arrived under the command of Adm. Christie in Australia the magnetic exploder had to be activated. The opposite procedure was used for boats going the other way!

[Sailor Steve]

It was Christie, thanks. I was thinking earlier of Captain John Wilkes, who commanded the Asiatic fleet subs before being replaced. When Lockwood advised removing the magnetic exploders, Christie refused. He had been in charge of the development of the magnetic pistol, and defended it staunchly.

Here's a note from Doenitz's war diary:
That the BdU has to burden himself with wearying discussions and investigations into the causes of duds - and struggle to correct them - is an absurdity. (So long, however, as these bodies [the Torpedo Directorate and Experimental Department] limp along behind with their measures I am thrown back on my own resources.)