A suprisingly easy patrol!

[Nuoz]

[GWX 2.1]
1941, November 23rd, i was patrolling the Atlantic and i received a radio report of a convoy: 7 knots, time: 10:00, direction: EES. I promptly engaged and planned an interception course. Here is where it gets easy (or maybe i just made it easy on myself for careful planning, you be the judge). I sitted still at periscope depth and the head defender, a frigate missed detection dispite traveling in my direction and passing a couple hundred meters port.
Once i heard it was a bit further (over 2km maybe) I had an opening and without ever moving (no positive boyance noted, the submarine kept very stable all the time) i opened fire on the convoy at will. Even so the remaining escorts couldn't figure out my position until i full flanked from my halted position. Diving to 180 meters removed the annoyance in a split second. I sank 3 ship from that convoy and lighted one up severely! Note this was 23rd November, aprox 10:00 hours.

I was returning home that same day and again a radio report reported a convoy that was too hard to resist engaging, time 19:42. I began a interception course. Again i was all too easy to intercept the convoy and this time the head ship didn't even detected me (i was 1500 meters away tough). Once i had visual i was shocked to see that same ship i light up still on fire! It was the same convoy! The fire certainly was burning for 9:45 plus hours! That's one tough ship but 9:45 hours on fire, while keeping up with the convoy seems a little too tough.

My question is: where did i mess up GWX installation? I remember GWX to be very hard! Could this be all luck? About the fire there's nothing GWX can do without the source code :( I think it's hard coded, fires don't cause damage, only flooding can hurt, am i right?

Thanks for reading my cries!

[Sailor Steve]

Sometimes you get the bear, and sometimes the bear gets you.

Not all destroyers are experts.

[Nuoz]

I ran out of luck hehe

[Nuoz]

Aye! And i learned the hardest way. I play with full realism cept for one thing which is btw the most cheating thing of all: Map contact updates. Because i imagine someone else writing on the map while i sight or take decisions. Ultimately i took a bad one when i thought it would be faster to periscope from 180m if i blew the tanks and ordered periscope at 20meters. This has worked before but i was stationary or silent running at 1 knot. Right i was, right all the way up to the surface where the angry destroyer awaited me (my idea was to periscope and take a snap shot at the merchants in the convoy before the destroyer could stop me and then submerge again).

On a historical note i know for a fact U-Boat commanders almost NEVER were stationary, can you confirm that please? Was the trouble they had keeping depth without the water flowing through the diving planes and the increased submerging times the only reason for it?
I don't have this problem in GWX 2.1. I also noted the periscope depth (for my IXB) varies accordingly to the weather ie water conditions. My opinion is while it's natural when a captain orders a depth he shouldn't personally worry about corrections (his crew should do that) i also think a stationary submarine should have trouble maintaining depth if that's what happened in real life, "not so long ago".
I must also say I've never commanded a IXB before dispite all the time I've been on and off the naval sims. Maybe it's just this boat, due to it's added weight?
Educate me please. Thanks in advance!

[UnderseaLcpl]

Aye! And i learned the hardest way. I play with full realism cept for one thing which is btw the most cheating thing of all: Map contact updates. Because i imagine someone else writing on the map while i sight or take decisions. Ultimately i took a bad one when i thought it would be faster to periscope from 180m if i blew the tanks and ordered periscope at 20meters. This has worked before but i was stationary or silent running at 1 knot. Right i was, right all the way up to the surface where the angry destroyer awaited me (my idea was to periscope and take a snap shot at the merchants in the convoy before the destroyer could stop me and then submerge again).

On a historical note i know for a fact U-Boat commanders almost NEVER were stationary, can you confirm that please? Was the trouble they had keeping depth without the water flowing through the diving planes and the increased submerging times the only reason for it?
I don't have this problem in GWX 2.1. I also noted the periscope depth (for my IXB) varies accordingly to the weather ie water conditions. My opinion is while it's natural when a captain orders a depth he shouldn't personally worry about corrections (his crew should do that) i also think a stationary submarine should have trouble maintaining depth if that's what happened in real life, "not so long ago".
I must also say I've never commanded a IXB before dispite all the time I've been on and off the naval sims. Maybe it's just this boat, due to it's added weight?
Educate me please. Thanks in advance!

It is true that U-boats typically did not remain stationary but for the opposite reason that it is unwise to do so in GWX.
In GWX a stationary U-boat has a slightly positive buoyancy and will rise a couple meters over the set depth. Obviously if you are at periscope depth this is bad because it may expose your conning tower to viual observation in moderate swell.

Real U-boats would slowly sink when stationary because they were designed with a slightly negative trim. This, of course, meant having the E-motors damaged or destroyed was very dangerous.