Mk 14 vs Mk 23 Torpedo

[MERRICK362]

Hi,
I was just wondering if anybody can explain the difference between the Mk 14 Torpedo and the Mk 23 Torpedo? The Mk 23s just became available to me.

[aanker]

They are the same warhead, steam, 46 knot - 4,500 yard at fast speed - except the MARK 23 doesn't have the 9,000 yard slow 31 knot speed setting. I prefer the MARK 14's.... and they are 'free'.

Happy Hunting!

Art

Edit: may be of interest: http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WTUS_WWII.htm

[Rockin Robbins]

The 23's are slightly more reliable than the Mark 14s and they also become free later in the war. It's not worth the tiny bit of extra reliability until they're free, then have at 'em!

[MERRICK362]

Ok. Thanks alot guys.

[banjo]

When you put your curser over the Mk 23' and Mk 14's it indicates the 23's have a slightly higher explosive charge.

[aanker]

I wonder if that is a mod? I do know the Mark 14's were bumped up to torpex later in the War from TNT like the 23's. I don't know what the game does with them because my definitions are modded...

Art

[banjo]

I don't know. I use TMO.

[LukeFF]

When you put your curser over the Mk 23' and Mk 14's it indicates the 23's have a slightly higher explosive charge.
Eh, no, they don't. If it says that, it's a mistake.

[banjo]

Yes, it does say that. It has always said that in my game. I'm not in the game right now but when you are in port and cursor over the various torps available the mk 14's show something like 635 pds of explosive and the mk 23's about 35 - 40 pds more. Don't remember exactly but it has been that way for some time--using TMO & RSRD. That feature and the fact that you don't have to manually set the speed for each torpedo is why I always spend the renoun to get them.

[Red Devil]

Hi,
I was just wondering if anybody can explain the difference between the Mk 14 Torpedo and the Mk 23 Torpedo? The Mk 23s just became available to me.

The mk 23 is both faster and more reliable. But, when you return from patrol your sub will be auto loaded with Mk 14, you have to remove them all before you can manually load the 23. Mk 14's were prone to premature detonation and dudes. 23 is much more reliable and much better against destroyers at less than 1500 yards.

[aanker]

In TM he probably did play with the explosive values for gameplay or whatever. I don't know. Mid War they were changed to torpex from TNT. Maybe that's what he did in TMO.

I am sticking to my story above however; the 14's & 23's are/should be identical except for the additional slow-speed setting on the 14's.

After mid 43 or so when BuOrd, Admiral Lockwood et al - finally diagnosed and fixed them (and the Mark VI detonator) the Mark 14's are very reliable and should have equal pounds of torpex to the 23's.

I think the Devs tried hard to give us the real life torpedo problems and frustrations experienced prior to mid 43 and I thank them for that realism. This may also be where some of the confusion about the Mark-14's comes from.

Happy Hunting!

Art

[Red Devil]

In TM he probably did play with the explosive values for gameplay or whatever. I don't know. Mid War they were changed to torpex from TNT. Maybe that's what he did in TMO.

I am sticking to my story above however; the 14's & 23's are/should be identical except for the additional slow-speed setting on the 14's.

After mid 43 or so when BuOrd, Admiral Lockwood et al - finally diagnosed and fixed them (and the Mark VI detonator) the Mark 14's are very reliable and should have equal pounds of torpex to the 23's.

I think the Devs tried hard to give us the real life torpedo problems and frustrations experienced prior to mid 43 and I thank them for that realism. This may also be where some of the confusion about the Mark-14's comes from.

Happy Hunting!

ArtGood point. historically it was "all the Captains faults for incorrect settings etc" - many a good skipper got sidelined due to the intransigence of Command HQ. "Silent Victory" by Caly Blair gives an excellent account of the whole thearte of Ops. A Must for every "submariner and developer"

[LukeFF]

The mk 23 is both faster and more reliable.

No, no, no, no, no!!!

To consolidate what everyone is saying in this thread: the Mark 23 was simply a Mark 14 with the low-speed option removed. In all other respects they were completely identical. As it turns out, the low-speed option became more useful as Japanese ASW improved and captains had to take shots from farther away, so most Mark 23s were scrapped and used as parts for Mark 14s.

Now, if TMO deviates from that, then so be it, but the historical fact is as I write above.

[Aramike]

Does anyone know if there's a difference in the stock version of the game?

Why the heck does the Mk 23 cost renoun?

[gmuno]

Because it's not standart issue?

[aanker]

Why do they cost renown? I will guess that they cost renown because after almost 2 years of dealing with faulty Mark 14's the uninitiated playing this game might think, OK here is a new torpedo with a big warhead that might work better. That is my guess. Only the Devs really know.... lol

I use Mark-14's and after they are fixed in mid 43 they are reliable, devastating to those on the receiving end, and I have been lucky enough to occasionally make that 31 kt slow-speed 6,000 yard shot.

Happy Hunting!

Art

[cleverusername]

I always take the Mk 23's myself. It means I don't have to remember to set my torpedoes to fast speed every time I shoot. One less thing to worry about. :D

[Orion2012]

I would say the cost in renown is to represent the shortage of torpedoes.

[Arsenius]

and the mk 18? what about them? they become available to me in the TMO 1.7 by 300 renown

[Kobal2]

and the mk 18? what about them? they become available to me in the TMO 1.7 by 300 renown

The mk.18 was a knock-off of the German G7e torpedo. It is powered by an electric battery instead of a steam engine, so doesn't produce a visible trail of bubbles on the surface, but it's also slower (31 knots instead of 46 IIRC).

That's not really the reason they're so cool, though. However, they also didn't have faulty detonators, so didn't go "clunk" quite as often as the early war Mk.14s. That alone is priceless :03:

[Red Devil]

The Mk23 also has the advantage of getting job done quicker. I fired a Mk 14 at a stationary destroyer, it suddeny accelerated out of the way. A Mk23 has a 50% higher chance of connecting with target due to the increase speed on approach.

[Rockin Robbins]

Hold it! Why all the bogus information when Luke posted the straight story last year! The Mark 23 and the Mark 14 have the exact same speed because they are the exact same torpedo, except that in the Mark 23 the parts that enable the step-down to 31 knots aren't there. The Mark 23 has no low speed setting. That is the ONLY difference.

In the stock game, for some inexplicable reason, the Mark 23 has a slightly lower dud percentage than the Mark 14. There is no 50% higher chance of connecting with target due to the increase speed on approach. The Mark 23 travels 46 knots. The Mark 14 travels 46 knots. The difference in approach speed is zero.

[Red Devil]

Ok then, rant over I presume? The Mk 23 goes faster for me so maybe when I set the Mk14 speed it does notihng, in that case its a bug! MY mk14 are a lot slower than the Mk 23. On that premise, I am rght.

[Rockin Robbins]

Sounds to me like reasonable advice to give to all the other members of Subsim then. You made no reference to a special mod soup version of SH4 and stated your conclusions as simple fact universal fact in spite of several who attempted to correct your obvious misconceptions.

In the properly functioning game, the increased reliability of the Mark 23 is so slight as not to be detectable at all in gameplay. The two torpedoes are exactly the same speed.

Making a flat statement that other conditions are true is the equivalent of saying that a bowling ball falls faster than a tennis ball, and then when corrected, saying "It does in my dreams." That defense, believe it or not, has been used... It was unconvincing then too.

When you continue to contradict other posters who are attempting to correct your misrepresentations, for the sake of new players who need to know the truth, it is necessary to contradict you strongly enough that those new players will know where the truth lies.

Please visit the How to Reinstall SH4 (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=133290) stickied thread and fix your game, which must have been seriously out of whack for over 10 months. Who knows what else isn't working that you don't know about. I think you'll enjoy it a lot better when you fix it. You can keep all saved game information when you uninstall.

[Harry708]

When you continue to contradict other posters who are attempting to correct your misrepresentations, for the sake of new players who need to know the truth, it is necessary to contradict you strongly enough that those new players will know where the truth lies.

Maybe you should look in the mirror than,and take your own advice. :hmmm:

[Rockin Robbins]

If you can find errors in my posting I'll be glad to! Here are my positions, which correspond with reality:

1. The Mark 23 is exactly the same speed as the Mark 14 on high speed. In fact the Mark 23 WAS a Mark 14 with the low speed capability removed in real life.

2. The difference in dud and premature explosion probability between the two torpedoes is on the order of a couple of a hundredths of a percent. This is not detectable to a player. This does not apply during time periods when the Mark 23 is not available. You must compare percentages for the same time period.

3. These two statements are completely opposed to the repeated false representations above by Red Devil.

4. Allowing Red Devil's false statements to remain unchallenged would confuse new players who might rely on them in playing SH4.

Anyone who can find fault with that can, with my permission, jump all over me strongly enough to correct my misrepresentations. It's actually impossible for me to "take my own advice" since correction of error has to be done by someone else. I nominate you. I thank you in advance for setting the record straight.

The above permission for falsification applies to any of my posts or tutorials. Anyone showing that I am inaccurate is doing me a service by making my tutorials, instructional videos or posts better and more useful, especially to new players. I have no problem with correcting any errors I have made and always give full credit to the corrector, just as I continually do for aaronblood and gutted for the Dick O'Kane technique and to Nisgeis for the John P Cromwell technique.

Correction of errors is a necessary part of the scientific process and those who resist it are doing themselves and others a significant disservice. I wouldn't mete out the correction if I weren't willing to take it in good humor.

[Red Devil]

Come on people, no need to fall out over a mere game, for heaven's sake. Mistakes are made by humans, miracles made by gods, in between we have uncertainty. :doh:

[Rockin Robbins]

Nothing against you at all. We uncovered a problem with your game. You now have the instructions for fixing it and everybody wins!

Sometimes, like when someone reports a Small Old Split Freighter that takes four torpedoes to sink, it's a glitch in the game that other people need to know about. In this case it was a defect in your installation that, again, other people needed to know about because their glitch may be different but the fix will be the same.

Any chance to take the newbie who is about to shelve the game in frustration and make him a happy SH4 addict, slobbering all over his keyboard and lacking sleep, is one we should take. I'll bet your situation has helped a couple of dozen people today.:up:

[Red Devil]

oh no offence taken, I am not always right you know :know: My wife said so.

[Bubblehead1980]

Looks like I stumbled into a cat fight:haha: kidding of course.

Just to add....Mark 23's were the same except they didn't have slow speed setting so they could not go more 4,500 yards.The Mark 14's fast setting has a range of 4000 yards, so 23 can go 500 yards more than a 14(set on high speed).

Someone said TMO made them different, not it does not.23's and 14's have the same hitting power. You can aquire 23's a little too early in TMO but they are more reliable when they first come on seen compared to the Mark 14's before their problems are fixed in mid 43.23's were included because it would have been a large omission if they were not.

Mark 23's were one of those projects that began as a good idea then once into production it was realized they were not needed, so as the torpedo description says in TMO.Most of the inventory were converted to Mark 14's or scrapped for parts for Mark 14's.

Some of the books i've read such as O Kanes about Tang, Fluckey's book and others they mention using Mark 23's, so i use them in late 43 into mid and late 44 then if carrying steam i go back to Mark 14's.

[ETR3(SS)]

Here's a link to hopefully end the argument.

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WTUS_WWII.htm

[Ducimus]

Old thread is old....

In TM he probably did play with the explosive values for gameplay or whatever. I don't know. Mid War they were changed to torpex from TNT. Maybe that's what he did in TMO.


It was awhile ago, but i think that was my logic, as i wanted to make the fish worth spending a little renown on and aquire over a MK 14. Later on i corrected myself. The MK23 is, and is described, how it should be in TMO.

[LukeFF]

In case anyone doubts the Mark 23 was no more than a Mark 14 without the low-speed setting:

http://www.hnsa.org/doc/torpedo/part5.htm#pg275

That's from the March 1945 version of the Mark 14 and 23 service manual.

[Registered55]

all these posts and not one person has hit on what the problem could be, I'm shocked as i have seen so many intelligent people on this forum,

in regards to the name "Mark 14", usually it's Model Number, then serial, however what has not been addressed here is "Revisions" of the independent components that make up the complete torpedo.

http://diodon349.com/Torpedoman/Torpedoes_USN/mark_14_3A_torpedo_Mk_6_exploder.htm

as an example on many occasion i have seen on motherboards in the corner "Rev."

as an example "Rev. 1.0a" and on another motherboard which is identical in everyway, visually & synthetically (full benchmark tests) "Rev. 1.0b"

but here's the problem, no one will carry out full testing and data correlation because of a simple Revision change, further more the powers that be at the time also assumed as many has here; that a "Mark 14" torpedo is always the same as any other "Mark 14" torpedo because of the name, however this is most certainly not the case, also the tests that were carried out was unable to evaluate variables that normal tests will not reveal, which means that such data is correlated either by statistics or other methods like abstract math. in fact there is some cases where some data was taken from earlier models as time and money was not a luxury designers were allowed to afford, and given the situation that the world was at war, test data was the last thing on people's minds.

the "Mark 23" was based entirely on the same components as the
"Mark 14", but what is not well acknowledged by many is the fact that the "Mark 23" like with many equipment utilizes technology that is based on individual components that go through Revisions
(1.0, 1.1, 1.2) or (1A, 1D, 3E)

but I believe this is why many at the time felt that the "Mark 23" was more reliable, because off all those slightly later revisions of the components that made up the "Mark 23" over it's counterpart, it was in fact more stable, and reliable and felt more like a polish product and further more had a more developed and fixed exploder than the earlier "Mark 14", however what is confusing of course between the two types of torpedoes is the specs, because what is written and documented is the data is exactly the same, but stability, and reliability is just a few of many variables that are hard to quantify.

a good example....

Realtek 8139 Network card,
there has been Realtek 8139A,B,C & D revisions,

and from the material I found publicly available there is no difference to A,B, or D.

but in the realm and limitations of this game, (assuming someone has checked inside the files and looked at the numbers between these two torpedoes) the "Mark 14 & Mark 23" are the same, and there is no difference, as this game only correlates the Model's Data, and not the different revisions that existed for the different types at the time.

I'm not sure if the game checks the release date of a torpedo and creates a modifier based on this variable that actually does effect the torpedo ever so slightly, only experienced modders would know this, I do recall however in silent hunter 3 there was "Prototype year" and "Year of release", not sure if there was any effect to this variable however.

the fact is, without the actual design notes and full engineering drawings of the individual components, no one can really say for sure what changes had occurred in each revision of a torpedo, or what effect did those revision changes made to the torpedo Model, accept maybe log reports from captains from that time period.
and it should be noted that service manuals do not show much information concerning the design differences, and also does not explain why Some "Mark 23's" were made in different material, Bronze, and the later versions switched to Steel, again what effect does this have on the torpedo no one can say because full tests were not carried out for obvious reasons. (money, time and the fact that everyone was in the middle of the war).

[Rockin Robbins]

http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa293/RockinRobbins13/smileys/clueless.gif

[Armistead]

RR is scratching his arse again...:D

[Apocal]

http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa293/RockinRobbins13/smileys/clueless.gif

Seriously.

I read that whole post like three times and I still haven't figured out what his point was besides "changing stuff can lead to unexpected change."

[Torplexed]

Apparently there is some connection between Mk 23 torpedoes and Realtek network cards. ;)

[Armistead]

:haha::haha::haha:

[Rockin Robbins]

Why does my finger smell funny?:88)

[Red Devil]

*man with itchy ass wake up with smelly finger*


The Mk 23 was the answer, apparently, to all those duds the US experiences with the Mk 10 and 14 torps. The magnetic detonator was a major disaster and couple this with an inaccurate depth run - well!!

[Apocal]

The Mk 23 was the answer, apparently, to all those duds the US experiences with the Mk 10 and 14 torps. The magnetic detonator was a major disaster and couple this with an inaccurate depth run - well!!

Dude, the only difference between a Mk23 and a Mk14 was the low-speed setting was removed. Subs still used Mk14s in '44 and '45; their reliability was as good as could have been asked for and a far cry from the first eighteen month.

[Registered55]

"Apparently there is some connection between Mk 23 torpedoes and Realtek network cards"

my attempt was to show using an entiely different example the concept on how Revision changes can take place on a peice of equipment which is known on a global scale by millions of people, and yet know one knows what those changes were, because those changes would only be recorded by the designers, and design specs would be needed to see what those revisions reflected on, by your remark, you clearly have not (by choice i can't say) understood what i was trying to relay.

the 8139 network card A,B,C,D, 4 different revision changes were make on the 8139 network card,

how many revision changes were made on the "Mark 23"?,

i am a PC technician, so it would only be natural for me to attempt to explain a concept on things that i know,

my previous point still stands, even if my language skills has failed me to put that point accross to you fine people, and that is, all equipment is made up of parts, and different parts sometimes have a change made to them, which warrants a revision change to be noted in the design.

i have tried to find out which exploder type was used in the "Mark 14" and the "Mark 23" the mark "14" was clearly known to have a faulty Exploder, and yet if both torpedoes are the same, then after 18 months of time, the powers that be decided to include the faulty Exploder used in the Mk14 in the Mk23 aswell, (which is what you people hare are saying right, they are the same after all except for one particular feature),

let me ask you this,
some Mk14's were made from Bronze, some were made from steel,
by that token, would these torpedoes be the same, further more i ask, would these torpedoes function in exactly the same way as each other, even though 2 different kinds of material were used?

[Sailor Steve]

I got your points fine, and I'm betting most of the others did as well. We just like to have fun around here, and if one person makes a joke the others start to run with it.

What you say is true of most fields of military development. One mark gets developed through sub-types, and when the development of that type reaches its peak it's renamed with an entirely new number. This is true of aircraft development as well. Most casual WW2 aviation fans identify the B-17G from previous models by the chin turret, but many don't know that the chin turret was developed for the YB-40 series escort bombers, and the last sub-variant B-17Fs had them as well.

[Registered55]

wow!, you have managed to relay my point far more etiquette and articulately then I ever could have, and you have achieved what I could not using 90% less text, my hat comes of to you sir. Thank you

[Red Devil]

Dude, the only difference between a Mk23 and a Mk14 was the low-speed setting was removed. Subs still used Mk14s in '44 and '45; their reliability was as good as could have been asked for and a far cry from the first eighteen month. I am not talking about the 'game' but reality. I understand that the Mk 14 had a long fruitful life but not at first.