Torpedo Availability and recommendations

[Falkirion]

Playing RFB and I'm really starting to hate the Mark 14s. The last attack I made I had two misses, the misses were probably my fault as I set the gyro angle too far to the right on my first shot. The other pair of torps I fired were duds and the 14s also cost me my last target on my first patrol since the lot of them were duds.

Now being late 43' I figure there's got to be a better torp available to me in RFB for my next war patrol.

[Platapus]

I share you pain with the Mk-14s. Now I know why they are designated Mk-14. That is the rough percentage of torpedoes that won't be a dud [14%]

I hear that is you shoot at slow speed that it helps but frankly I have not found that to be true. I am also in 1943 and I find that I have to shoot 6 fish to get two booms (contact only shallow depth).

I get about 50-60% dud rate.

It is very very frustrating.:wah:

[Fincuan]

No big secret there, early war MK14s are pos. They do improve quite a bit as the war progresses though, but there won't be anything radically more reliable available.

You can however greatly, really almost a night and day difference, improve their reliability by remembering a few things when firing. These are especially important early in the war:
Always use the slow speed setting
Make sure the torpedo track angle is as shallow as possible(early war). No kidding here, early war MK14s have a 100% failure rate at TTA of 90 in RFB.
Use the shallowest depth setting possible

[Stealhead]

Yep those are the best ways to get "booms" with the Mk.14s they had 3 problems
1. ran deep sometimes by 10 feet so you set to 10ft it really goes to 20ft so set them to 5ft or lower (in feet not depth)
2. The magnetic detanaotrs often failed best cure for this is to not use them this is what was done in the real war and in the end they removed that system compeletly
3. at certain strike angles the contact detnators crushed themselves failing to set of the torpex best way to solve this have dont have them hit at a dead 90 or even close to it.

That is why it took so long to fix the Mk.14s they had 3 problems and the running too deep helped hide the failure of the magnetic dets as they ran so deep how could you know that that also was crap?:hmmm:

Another cure is to use Mk.18s they dont have as many issues but they can still run deep sometimes and they have less range and less torpex 575lbs vs. 660lbs in a Mk14/23 and that makes a diffrence in RFB with its awsome ship damage system.:rock:

[LubeNJ]

I am playing stock game w/ RSRD and the dang things keep turning back on me. I'm thinking of switching out my entire load until late '43 to Mark Xs.

[Max2147]

If I remember right the only circular I had was with a Mk 10. It was scary as heck - I was creeping along when I fired it and I had to instantly ring up flank speed to avoid my own torpedo!

[LukeFF]

Now being late 43' I figure there's got to be a better torp available to me in RFB for my next war patrol.

All of the bugs in the Mark 14 are fixed by the end of September 1943 in RFB. So, it's really a choice between it and the Mark 18 from that point onwards.

[Stealhead]

Using Mk.10s in anything besides an S-boat is not very accurate I have not read a book about WWII US Navy subs or by any skippers that ever mentions them being used in anything but S-boats. And in real life S-boats where in very poor shape they had been bulit between 1918-1925 or so and the mk.10s where just about as old of stock. But I am 99% sure that only S-boats used the mk.10s in real life in fact i dont think that there was enough mk.10s to go around they only had enough ofr the S-boats and i dont think any Mk.10s where bulit after the mid 30's there must have been some reason they did not use them as obviously if they where better than early mk.14s they would have so this should tell you something if they did not.:hmmm:

thankfully our navys' weapons today are much better and dont dud like they did in WWII or circle run and kill the vessel that launched it. The circle runner make me think of the Roman Legions' pila which where made so that when they either hit a body or the ground they bent out of shape so that a foe could not use them again.

[Max2147]

thankfully our navys' weapons today are much better and dont dud like they did in WWII or circle run and kill the vessel that launched it.
We can only hope. Before WWII everybody in the US Navy thought that the Mk. 14 was the best thing since sliced bread, which was one of the big reasons the problems took so long to fix. The brass simply couldn't believe that their wonder weapon had so many serious problems. For all we know there might be some unknown flaws in some of the Navy's current weapons.

Just as recently as the current Iraq and Afghanistan wars our troops found out the hard way that a lot of Army and Marine Corps equipment wasn't as good as they thought (Humvee armor springs to mind).

[LukeFF]

Using Mk.10s in anything besides an S-boat is not very accurate I have not read a book about WWII US Navy subs or by any skippers that ever mentions them being used in anything but S-boats. And in real life S-boats where in very poor shape they had been bulit between 1918-1925 or so and the mk.10s where just about as old of stock. But I am 99% sure that only S-boats used the mk.10s in real life in fact i dont think that there was enough mk.10s to go around they only had enough ofr the S-boats and i dont think any Mk.10s where bulit after the mid 30's there must have been some reason they did not use them as obviously if they where better than early mk.14s they would have so this should tell you something if they did not.:hmmm:

Try again. ;) Lots of fleet subs used Mark 10s in the first year of the war, especially those boats based out of Australia. There was a chronic torpedo shortage in the Navy until about mid-1943, so a lot of obsolete torpedoes, including the Mark 10, were pressed into use.

[Stealhead]

Well thats news to me. Not to trying argue but what is your source for this information as I am rather suprised that in the many books by skippers many of whom went into great detail on the enitre torpedo issue during the war none of them have said this.

[Arclight]

There's a clue on wiki:

In 1923, Congress made NTS Newport the sole designer, developer, builder and tester of torpedoes in the United States. No independent or competing group was assigned to verify the results of Mark 14 tests. As torpedo shortages cropped up (despite three shifts of three thousand workers, production at NTS was only 1½ a day in 1937, and only two thousand submarine torpedoes were built by all three Navy factories in 1942), NTS was unable to increase production, for there was no room, and they were already working around the clock, "falling critically behind schedule nevertheless".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_14_torpedo

Even older Mark 7, 8 and 9 torpedoes were still used during WWII;

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

[SteamWake]

Now being late 43' I figure there's got to be a better torp available to me in RFB for my next war patrol.

Sure Mk10's ;)

I always carry a couple on all my patrols.

[Stealhead]

Yep sorry but wikipediea is not trustworthly for me I have found other things on wiki that I knew were not correct. Once I was looking up a japanese flyingboat they had incorrect information and they even refrenced a book that I own and the page they got the information form and they where wrong. The page they have about the m-16 is very incorrect at many points it is total assumption and I read on it that the M-16a2/A4s 3 round burst only works if you press the trigger for the right amout of time they cliam if you dont it only fires one round haha I used this weapon in Iraq and sorry to say the burst mode does not do that it works as long as you press the trigger then to fire 3 more you have to let go and press again you can do this very fast if you want to no problem. For me Wikipedia anyone can put anything on there and there is no way to be sure that they are correct use wiki for a refrence on a college level paper and you are going to fail:rotfl: . I will trust that they used mk.10s as much as you guys are saying when I see that information come out of the US Navy historial records the ones they publish at the pentagon and Annapilos other wise Im not going to agree that that is 100% accurte information:D

[Arclight]

I know what you mean. :)

I'm not saying that source is reliable, it doesn't even specifically say fleet-boats used them. It's just the best I could do. :lol:

I don't know any good source(s) on that bit of info, but I'm pretty sure LukeFF does. And I'm definetly sure he's a more reliable source then Wiki.

Here would be a good place to ask this question:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=147577

If Davey says it's a fact, it's a fact. :yep:

[Stealhead]

Yep just a rule of thumb for me if something comes off the internet anyone could have made it up or make something to thier point of view or even put info that they may not know is wrong. And even military books arent always 100% trust worthy either you can pretty easily find conflicting information for me when it comes to WWII I take something to be reliable info when it can be found in several sources with lillte on no changes to the nomenclature this is a good rule of thumb for popular subjects like US Navy submarines. And dont get me started on some military history related shows like on military and history channel they makes tons of mistakes of those sometimes though one show that seems pretty good and that i have not seen any glaring mistakes is that one show Great Planes on the military channel pretty good but I only wish it would feature aircraft from other nations rather than just US designed planes Id love to see some Soviet planes on there admit it or not they did make some very good fighters the nay sayers just dont like the soviet designs and alot of war is what side has the will to win not always who has the best weapons. My dad who was an intel man in the Air Force and later flew on AC-130s told me how impressed he was with North Vietnamese when he got to look at all this soviet material that Isreal captured in the 1967 war those Fan Song radars where very crappy by our standards but they where very dangerous in hands of North Vietnam.

[Arclight]

Problem with military history is that it's usually written by the winners, presenting a very one-sided view.

“War does not determine who is right - only who is left.”
- Bertrand Russel

[Stealhead]

Not always you just have to know where to look to find unbaised views and Japan lost the war yet youd be suprised what they teach kids over there about WWII but it is not true. There is more than one version of any event you just have to have the wisdom to get the whole picture;). Im not sure if you are being general with your statment or if you are refering to what my oldman saw when he was in Vietnam a good example of something that goes aginst your staement we did not win Vietnam and you can find many books out there that have diffrent views as to why we did not win there are many diffrent opnions history is to be read and the reader is the one that is supposed to take from what they read what they may hopefuly that reader will know that most things written are goi9ng to have some view or another.“War does not determine who is right - only who is left.” and who is left is the one that is right if that is they way they want it be known. Take a look at Rome we still use their terminology to this day "barbarians" though many of the tribes they fought gave their citizens more freedoms than Rome did and often they had equal techonolgy and of course defeated them in the long run anyway.

[Arclight]

I guess the statement doesn't apply to this day and age anymore, where information is abundant in both printed and electronic form. But it holds more water the further back you go in history, like you noted about Roman times. In more ancient times it wasn't too uncommon to see a civilization pretty much wiped out, with historic and religious records that didn't agree with the victors point of view being destroyed (at least to the best of their ability). I agree that a "wise" reader considers all points of view, and their context, before drawing a conclusion.

By the way; I posted the question about the Mark 10 being used by fleet-boats in another thread, and perhaps Luke can shed some light on the matter as well. I'm eager to see some more substantial information about that as well. :hmmm:

[LukeFF]

Well thats news to me. Not to trying argue but what is your source for this information as I am rather suprised that in the many books by skippers many of whom went into great detail on the enitre torpedo issue during the war none of them have said this.

I have the entire set of WWII patrol reports, scanned onto microfilm and converted to PDF. They're now up at the HNSA's website for online viewing, BTW.

[Seminole]

Problem with military history is that it's usually written by the winners, presenting a very one-sided view.

“War does not determine who is right - only who is left.”
- Bertrand Russel


Durn tootin'.....just ask any Confederate.

[Stealhead]

Now that is more reliable information LukeFF. Better than stupid sayings by some old man who was clearly trying to make an anit-war statment. I say right is might and whoever wins the war gets to tell the story the way they see fit. the sad thing is that you cant ask any Confederate solider waht he may think they have all passed on a long time ago or they died in the war like one of relatives did by being hanged for being a Confederate raider why people still get upset about the civil war is beyond me do you really think this nation would have been better of split? Wed have been screwed when WWI and WWII came around get over it.Furhter more wanting to know what weapons where used historicaly has nothing to do with what was right and what was wrong in a given war. And to me in any war both sides are right from thier point of view in the end one side wins and one side loses. Look at the USSR the mass majority of Soviets even though many may not have agreed with the system they lived under and it was brutal to many they still fought the Nazis for a Soviet it was a lesser of 2 evils be a slave to a foregin ******* or not be very free and have a rather crappy life under Stalin they chose to defend thier homeland like any person worth thier should do. Im sorry if some of you like that Bertrand Russel russel quote but I find it rather silly myself and he was a pacifist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacifism). by the way so of course hed say something like that but look at even nature my friends what do you see? Warfare it is not human nature it is animal nature and where are also animals though some will think that we somehow are diffrent than all the others. I hope I am not the only person on this site that has an interst in military history and served in the military as well that does see that some times you have to fight like it or not sometimes the sword is far more powerful than the pen.Id like to see Bertrand Russel have lived in a Ukrainain villege and see his family get killed by the Nazis Id like to the see quote hed come up with then if he followed his ways then hed be next in line.My rule is if you threaten to harm or ensalve my friends my family or my nation my unit I will fight you to my last breath and thats no B.S. either there are a few people no longer on this world in Iraq that know that. I will now step down from my soap box.

[Arclight]

IMHO you're carrying this a little too far, my friend. :03:

Anyway, what sparked this little debat was the question if fleet-boats carried the Mark 10 torpedo on their patrols early war. In addition to Luke's clarification in this thread, you can find some more, very interesting info, right here:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=147577&page=4

(last few posts and next page)

:salute:

[Stealhead]

Yep I read his post and he gave me a better source than the one you list and you guys where the ones that started with the whole history is this and that and all the quotes if you dont want to start up something dont open up the can of worms in the first place:up: I am not afraid to say what I want to say as you have learned If someone asks me if the baby is ugly I will say it is if it is.

[Arclight]

I am not afraid to say what I want to say as you have learned If someone asks me if the baby is ugly I will say it is if it is.:rotfl: Yeah, me too.

And I agree that sometimes you have to fight for something. If it's fight or die, I'll fight untill I die.

I just don't see what you have against that quote. The way I interpret it, it means that the winning of a war does not justify your motivations. Hitler winning WWII would not make the things he did right. Seems to me you're focusing on Russell being a pacifist and are objecting to that. That does not mean the man is wrong. Yep I read his post and he gave me a better source than the one you list ..:-?
Like I said; the bit from wiki was the best I could do on short notice. I pointed you to another thread (twice), and I can assure you that Davey's sources are top notch.

[Seminole]

From my in game experience I must say it doesn't make 2 cents difference which torpedo I use. I set up the shot ,the torpedo hits and the ship goes down. Almost 100% of the time...providing I don't make a careless mistake.

The real difference is when the game senses you are trying to conserve fish and fire only one or two per target. It seems thats when the duds come into play.

The one exception I make is for cuties. They are fun but seldom cabable of sinking anything larger than a Sampan.

I have found that the matter of torpedo selection is so irrelevant I just cast off with what ever is loaded by the dock crew..not even bothering to check what is onboard.

[jazzabilly]

Using RFB w/RSRDC.

The early war torpedoes are insanely frustrating. I once lined up a perfect shot on a big tanker only to get 10 count 'em 10 duds. I went totally berserk, hollering and cussing up a storm, and I am pretty sure that my neigbours in my apt. building think that I am completely off my nut.

I generally use fan shots of 3 on medium merch's, four on troopships and tankers, more on the big capital ships. That's the major difference between SH4 and SH3 that I have found; I'm now quite happy with a patrol total of 25-35 k tonnage, whereas in my old VIIc (GWX) I would have been slightly disappointed. It's not totally realistic, but it's more plausible. After reading some patrol reports and "Silent Victory", I see that using 3, 4 or more on one ship was very common. That satisfies my realism fetish.

The other thing about the early war torp's- don't even bother shooting at anything less than 60 deg. AOB. The contact exploders are craptacular on anything of an angle less than that. The magnetic fuses are actually pretty reliable for me, until later in '42 when they all seem to go off prematurely. Depth-keeping capacity is less than perfect, so I set mine for no deeper than 7.5'.

After Sept. of 43 the torp's are :yeah:. They seem to tear some pretty big holes in those sons of Nihon.

When the electrics come out, I hoard them for daylight/calm weather attacks on warships and DD escorts. With RFB they are expensive at first, and I can't justify using them on merchies. I will even bring them home with me on RTB if I don't see a suitable target. Later, they're cheap enough to use more often.

My only complaint is that I can no longer use the magnetic exploder that, for me at least, makes the "Down The Throat" shot so effective against those damned Jap. tincans.

[Rockin Robbins]

Problem with military history is that it's usually written by the winners, presenting a very one-sided view.

“War does not determine who is right - only who is left.”
- Bertrand Russel

Durn tootin'.....just ask any Confederate.
Confederates were wrong. Utterly, stupidly, morally, economically and militarily wrong.

Also they couldn't shoot a Mark 10 to save their life.

[Max2147]

Using RFB w/RSRDC.

The early war torpedoes are insanely frustrating. I once lined up a perfect shot on a big tanker only to get 10 count 'em 10 duds. I went totally berserk, hollering and cussing up a storm, and I am pretty sure that my neigbours in my apt. building think that I am completely off my nut.
Sounds like you re-created Dan Daspit's infamous attack on the Tonan Maru. 9 shots at a 19,000 ton tanker that was dead in the water, all duds.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Tinosa_(SS-283 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Tinosa_%28SS-283))

[jazzabilly]

>>Confederates were wrong. Utterly, stupidly, morally, economically and militarily wrong.

Yep. And they made the same claims that the NAZIs who were about to swing on the end of a rope at Nuremburg - cries of "victor's justice!"

Bertrand Russell had his head up his ass. The quote should read

“War does not determine who is right - only who is left. But losing a war doesn't put you in the right.”

[Platapus]

[QUOTE=jazzabilly
Yep. And they made the same claims that the NAZIs who were about to swing on the end of a rope at Nuremburg - cries of "victor's justice!"[/QUOTE]

Treason is often a crime invented by the victors as an excuse to hang the losers - Bennie Franklin

[jazzabilly]

Treason's different. Crimes against humanity are as bad, if not worse.

So what you are saying is that the NAZIs should have been excused, then.

[Armistead]

Problem with military history is that it's usually written by the winners, presenting a very one-sided view.

“War does not determine who is right - only who is left.”
- Bertrand Russel

Durn tootin'.....just ask any Confederate.
Confederates were wrong. Utterly, stupidly, morally, economically and militarily wrong.

Also they couldn't shoot a Mark 10 to save their life.


Made the hair crawl on the back of my neck. We lost the war of northern aggression, thus to the victors go the spoils............I'm a confederate re-enactor.

[Torplexed]

Of course, in the American Civil War you didn't have to fire torpedoes. You waited for the enemy to come to them. :cool:

http://www.sonofthesouth.net/leefoundation/civil-war/1865/April/rebel-confederate-torpedo.jpg

[rubenandthejets]

Pre 43?

Use your deck gun! Use your AA guns! RAM THEM!

Just don't expect anything from a Mk 14.

[Falkirion]

Hey the mk 14s on my first patrol were all spot on, only had 2 duds out of the 16 or so I fired. My last contact was the only engagement that my torps dudded on me.

[Red Lord of Chaos]

Gott in Himmel, I've just had more duds on one mission than in the rest of 2 careers.
Oct '43 Type IX, out of Surubaya, prowling South of the Cocos Islands.
TI seemed the most reliable with almost 50% going off.
TII were a waste of time, I don't think any detonated, not taking any of these again.
TIII 2 went off, 1 missed, 2 were duds and 1 disappeared...
My radar isn't worth switching on, it didn't pick up anything for the entire patrol, though my radar detector works, lit up like a christmas tree when I passed an Akizuki...:ping: When did the Japs get Radar?

[Torplexed]

When did the Japs get Radar?
Type 21 anti-air, surface detection radar started to be fitted in Japanese destroyers in March 1943.

[Red Lord of Chaos]

Strange, they don't seem to react to me (playing USN) getting close to them in late '43 - early '44. I (usually) go to radar depth under 12,000 yards range, and periscope at about 4,000, though I've been within 8,000 yards of a destroyer on the surface without reaction...

[rubenandthejets]

Had an absolute shocker in TMO/RSRD last night. Out of Manila in a Salmon class, all Mk 14s. Took precautions like set all to slow, contact and magnetic detonators.

Clear weather, no swell. Contacted a huge task force, got inside and unloaded......
"torpedo was a dud sir" ad infinitum. Every single torp ran deep, failed to detonate and one even turned tail and ran in circles.

Guess which torpedo detonator DIDN'T malfuction.:nope:

"MEDIIIC! We have heavy flooding sir! We have critical flooding sir!" blub blub blub

Okay-I can take a hint. How about I try playing as a Fascist for a change?
This little Type II looks pretty cool. Oh looky, a little freighter tootling along at slow speed right in front of me? 500 meters out, "Los ein!"
"Torpedo was a dud sir"
WTF? "Los zwei! Los drei!"

Can you guess the result?

Gott in Himmel! "Suface the boat, man the flak guns!" Take THAT! Emptied the magazines while waiting for the tubes to load. Okay, take your time, slow speed, set the depth carefully and....Take that! DUD DUD

RAMMING SPEED! Got banged up pretty good and with nothing left to throw at it, headed for home at 512 compression........and was promptly sunk by aircarft.

Hmmm......Time for a little "Med. Total War: For King or Country" And lo, many happy hours were spent butchering Thomas Fairfax and purging London of all rebels. Ransom for Cromwell? BAH! Hand him over to Tillier's Irish Brigade for summary execution! I guess I'm better suited to leading men in Swedish school cavalry charges....