Submarine differences

[Floven de Sorezé]

Hello fellows,

I've been playing intensively these last few days and am really getting the feel for this game. I sense that in a not too distant future I'll try manual targeting (but first I want to perfectly understand auto-targeting, I still miss too much - torpedo is too deep, or given too much lead etc...)


In the meantime I've discovered another really newb question.. What's the difference between the American Submarines? (in 1.4 + TM1.76 + RSRD) Off the top of my head the names 'Balao', 'Gato', 'Porpoise', 'SS-18', 'SS-24', 'Salmon' etc. appear. Is there somewhere a place where I can find a comprehensive list of these subs with their differences and comparative specs? To be honest I don't know anything about pacific theatre submarine warfare, so I can only randomly choose one when asked in game.

Probably one is faster, the other goes deeper, one has more torpedoes and another one has a better range? It would be cool if anyone could help me here.

Thank you very much,
good hunting,

Floven de Sorezé Stockeir

[Bubblehead1980]

Hello fellows,

I've been playing intensively these last few days and am really getting the feel for this game. I sense that in a not too distant future I'll try manual targeting (but first I want to perfectly understand auto-targeting, I still miss too much - torpedo is too deep, or given too much lead etc...)


In the meantime I've discovered another really newb question.. What's the difference between the American Submarines? (in 1.4 + TM1.76 + RSRD) Off the top of my head the names 'Balao', 'Gato', 'Porpoise', 'SS-18', 'SS-24', 'Salmon' etc. appear. Is there somewhere a place where I can find a comprehensive list of these subs with their differences and comparative specs? To be honest I don't know anything about pacific theatre submarine warfare, so I can only randomly choose one when asked in game.

Probably one is faster, the other goes deeper, one has more torpedoes and another one has a better range? It would be cool if anyone could help me here.

Thank you very much,
good hunting,

Floven de Sorezé Stockeir


I don't know where a list is but i'll give you a run down....


S-18 and S-42 class are WW I vintage submarines, they are small, slow subs with short range and limited offensive capability.However, they can be fun.You can get them early in the war and I believe into 1943(I have not played the out of the game box in a long time, I run the mods, which once you have mastered stock, should given them a try, the differences are amazing) Had a shallow test depth of 200 feet also in addition to only carrying the WW I era Mark 10 torpedo, which while more reliable than early war Mark 14's have a short max range, low speed and pack less of a punch.

Porpoise Class were the first attempt at a "fleet boat" They have plenty of problems, had a slow surface speed of 18 knots and short range compared to later models like the Gato.They also only have four bow tubes and two stern, also dives slower than later boats and has a 250 foot test depth.Decent boat to have the first year or so and into 1943 but you find its a disadvantage as times goes on.

Salmon and Sargo class are basically same thing, they were improvements on the Porpoise class.They have four stern and four bow torpedo tubes, dive faster but share the same surface speed and 250 foot test depth.Good boats, although as the war drags on, you find things such as slower surface speed to be a liability.

Tambor/Gar Class-Seen as the first real fleet boat but still had limitations.Preceeded the Gato class, had six bow and four stern tubes, top speed of around 20 knots but had a shallow test depth of 250 feet but could go deeper.Good boats all around.Not much difference from Gato class though, esp in the game.

Gato Class-The first real fleetboat in my opinion, refinement of the Tambor/Gar class and standard sub of WW II for the USN.Six bow tubes and four stern, 24 torpedos total.20+ knots surface speed, long range.Test depth of 300 but if needed can safely go deeper as long as no hull damage.Just a great boat that was the workhorse of the submarine force in WW II.

Balao Class-Basically the same as a Gato except it had a welded hull.The Balao has a test depth of 412 feet and can go much, much deeper safely.In stock you can only order up to 450 feet but if damaged and you sink deeper you should have plenty of time to repair before you reach crush depth.In mods like TMO, you can go to 600 feet.

I did not know a lot about sub warfare when I first got SH 4 a couple years ago, always interested but never knew much.The game got me to reading some of the books, which as excellent.Many of the WW II skippers wrote books later in life.I highly suggest "Wahoo!" by Richard O Kane and Clear the Bridge!! also by O Kane.Thunder Below by Eugene Fluckey is also an amazing read.Really gives you a lot of info.

Good luck, hope this helped.

[Armistead]

Here is a list of all the subs that served by class. You can click the specifications tab for complete info. More, look at the technology, it covers all the equipment the subs used.
http://www.fleetsubmarine.com/sublist.html

[Floven de Sorezé]

This community is really unbelievable helpful! Thanks a lot guys, you spared me some tiresome information digging!

Good hunting!

[Ducimus]

@ bubblehead.

You forgot that Tambor and Gar. :O:

At any rate, i wrote out some of the differences in the first part of this post:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=128185

[Bubblehead1980]

@ bubblehead.

You forgot that Tambor and Gar. :O:

At any rate, i wrote out some of the differences in the first part of this post:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=128185


wow I sure did lol, I rarely use them since they are basically like a Gato in the game and I was in a hurry.Will remedy that in a minute.

[ETR3(SS)]

Balao Class-Basically the same as a Gato except it had a welded hull. I believe it was the Cachalots that first employed an all welded hull.

http://www.valoratsea.com/boats2.htm

[Schwieger]

And then, there was the Type 7...

[Bubblehead1980]

I believe it was the Cachalots that first employed an all welded hull.

http://www.valoratsea.com/boats2.htm


Hmm never before read the Cachalots were welded.How do explain the vast difference in the Cachalot and Balaos test depth? Perhaps Balao was all welded construction.Not sure.

[Ducimus]

.How do explain the vast difference in the Cachalot and Balaos test depth? Perhaps Balao was all welded construction.Not sure.

Difference was in material and quanity used.

The material difference was balao's (and tench's) High tensile steel. On top of that, the steel plating used was thicker.

Gato and boats preceeding it used a softer steel. Not high tensile steel, and the quanity used was slightly less in thickness.

Thus the nickname of "thick skinned" and "thin skinned" boats.

edit:
more detailed info here
http://www.submarineresearch.com/bull31.html

edit: And i had the part about the thickness of the steel increasing wrong. It was all in the material used.

[WarlordATF]

The USS Pike was the first all welded construction according to what i have read. I think the others may have been partial welded construction. Check the second paragraph in this link.

http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/history/subsaga6.html

[Bubblehead1980]

The USS Pike was the first all welded construction according to what i have read. I think the others may have been partial welded construction. Check the second paragraph in this link.

http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/history/subsaga6.html

Hmmm I thought all the Porpoise class were riveted.Currently reading the book "Luck of the Draw" by Captain C. Kenneth Ruiz(Ret) again.Ruiz was aboard the Pollack, he mentions the sub was riveted. Although they were once forced to 500 feet during an out of control dive, rivets and things were popping out and shooting everywhere.

[WarlordATF]

Hmmm I thought all the Porpoise class were riveted.Currently reading the book "Luck of the Draw" by Captain C. Kenneth Ruiz(Ret) again.Ruiz was aboard the Pollack, he mentions the sub was riveted. Although they were once forced to 500 feet during an out of control dive, rivets and things were popping out and shooting everywhere.

I'm thinking it was based on which shipyard built the boat. I have also read that the USS Shark SS-174 was of all welded construction and i believe the Tarpon was also, which was one of the reasons these two boats were often considered Shark Class instead of Porpoise. I have looked at a couple dive videos of the USS Tarpon and i can't really say for sure one way or the other.

Its actually kind of confusing since some sources claim the USS Shark was the first all welded construction.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/ss-174.htm

[I'm goin' down]

Early war torpedoes ran deep, so set them for shallow runs.

[subskipper53]

A small tip, Floven. :DL

Under NO circumstances should you go below 700 feet in a Balao. It will only spell your doom. This is because it takes a while to finally level out, and by that time you're probably at 800-something.... Balao boats, in TMO (1.9 anyway, not sure about 1.76...), will go to crap at 8-0-3 feet on the dot! :damn:

Also, for the Gato, 550 should be the max depth you want to consider. At precisely 597 is when you take a permenant trip to Davy Jones' Locker.

As for the older subs, excluding to S-Boat, you can go 200 feet below test depth (i.e, 250 = max 450).

As for the S-Boat, well.... don't go below 300, trust me. :up:

Good Hunting, and good luck in your patrols! :salute:

[Bubblehead1980]

A small tip, Floven. :DL

Under NO circumstances should you go below 700 feet in a Balao. It will only spell your doom. This is because it takes a while to finally level out, and by that time you're probably at 800-something.... Balao boats, in TMO (1.9 anyway, not sure about 1.76...), will go to crap at 8-0-3 feet on the dot! :damn:

Also, for the Gato, 550 should be the max depth you want to consider. At precisely 597 is when you take a permenant trip to Davy Jones' Locker.

As for the older subs, excluding to S-Boat, you can go 200 feet below test depth (i.e, 250 = max 450).

As for the S-Boat, well.... don't go below 300, trust me. :up:

Good Hunting, and good luck in your patrols! :salute:


I've been to 815 feet in a Balao once...didnt implode, think it was TMO 1.6 or 1.7, was a while back.

[subskipper53]

I've been to 815 feet in a Balao once...didnt implode, think it was TMO 1.6 or 1.7, was a while back.

Hmm, well i guess you`re just lucky then! :haha:


:sidenote: i`m typing this on my new amazon kindle. :har:

[DaveyJ576]

As to which boats were welded, it goes like this:

Riveting had been the joinery method of choice since the dawn of steel ships in the 1890's. It was well understood as a process and when brand new it provided a strong seam. The problem arose in that over time, bending and flexing moments weakened and tended to separate a riveted joint. This has obvious negative implications for pressure hull strength and was a constant headache when it came to fuel tanks. All submarines up to the V-boats leaked fuel for this reason and the older the boat got the worse the problem got. A slick of leaking fuel trailing behind the boat tended to give away its position to prowling destroyers. Seams had to caulked whenever the opportunity presented itself and it was a constant and ongoing chore.

Stodgy and conservative naval architects and engineers at the Government yards were quite aware of this new process of welding, but were very mistrustful of this technique. They felt that there was not enough operational experience with this technique (and they were right to an extent) to trust it completely. They thought a welded seam would crack, rather than flex as a riveted joint would. Riveting was what they knew and they were going to stick with it.

On the other hand, in the 1930's Electric Boat was very keen on re-establishing itself as a submarine manufacturer and distinguishing itself from the Government owned yards. During the height of the Great Depression, it was also very interested in making itself profitable. Therefore, it embraced welding as a means to these ends. Not only would welding provide a stronger and more durable seam (the EB engineers felt) but it also saved a lot in labor costs.

EB had been shut out of the submarine building business for a almost 11 years while the Government yards (Portsmouth and Mare Island) got the contracts for the V-class. So, when given the chance to build what would become the Cuttlefish, they jumped at it and were eager to once again prove their efficacy as a submarine builder. They desperately wanted to demonstrate welding to the Navy. Distrustful of the technique, the Navy allowed them some leeway and EB used welding to join together seams for the fuel tanks only. The rest of the boat was riveted. Subsequent tests and trials showed that the experiment was quite successful; the Cuttlefish's fuel tanks were tight and remained so. EB was happy with the results and made a wholesale shift to welding.

The designers at Portsmouth were not yet convinced and were not ready to make the shift to welding. For the next series of boats, (the Porpoise/Shark/Perch class) the Government yards continued with riveting and the EB built boats were welded. Operational experience with these boats and shock tests performed on caissons eventually won over the Government designers and all subsequent boats were welded.


So the breakdown goes like this:

All submarines up to Cachalot (SS-170): riveted
Cuttlefish (SS-171): partial riveted and partial welded
Porpoise (SS-172) & Pike (SS-173): riveted
Shark (SS-174) & Tarpon (SS-175): welded
Perch, Pickerel, & Permit (SS-176-178): welded
Plunger, Pollack, & Pompano (SS-179-181): riveted
All subsequent boats from all yards: welded
The riveted boats were mostly pulled from front line duties as quantities of Gatos started to show up in theater. Except for Narwhal, Nautilus, & Pollack they were pulled back to the states for training duties, still useful to the end.

BTW, Porpoise & Pike were the last full double hull fleet boats. EB reintroduced the partial double hull (the outer hull merged with the pressure hull at each end at the torpedo room bulkheads) when they built Shark. All subsequent fleet boats had the partial double hulls.

[Bubblehead1980]

As to which boats were welded, it goes like this:

Riveting had been the joinery method of choice since the dawn of steel ships in the 1890's. It was well understood as a process and when brand new it provided a strong seam. The problem arose in that over time, bending and flexing moments weakened and tended to separate a riveted joint. This has obvious negative implications for pressure hull strength and was a constant headache when it came to fuel tanks. All submarines up to the V-boats leaked fuel for this reason and the older the boat got the worse the problem got. A slick of leaking fuel trailing behind the boat tended to give away its position to prowling destroyers. Seams had to cauked whenever the opportunity presented itself and it was a constant and ongoing chore.

Stodgy and conservative naval architects and engineers at the Government yards were quite aware of this new process of welding, but were very mistrustful of this technique. They felt that there was not enough operational experience with this technique (and they were right to an extent) to trust it completely. They thought a welded seam would crack, rather than flex as a riveted joint would. Riveting was what they knew and they were going to stick with it.

On the other hand, in the 1930's Electric Boat was very keen on re-establishing itself as a submarine manufacturer and distinguishing itself from the Government owned yards. During the height of the Great Depression, it was also very interested in making itself profitable. Therefore, it embraced welding as a means to these ends. Not only would welding provide a stronger and more durable seam (the EB engineers felt) but it also saved a lot in labor costs.

EB had been shut out of the submarine building business for a almost 11 years while the Government yards (Portsmouth and Mare Island) got the contracts for the V-class. So, when given the chance to build what would become the Cuttlefish, they jumped at it and were eager to once again prove their efficacy as a submarine builder. They desperately wanted to demonstrate welding to the Navy. Distrustful of the technique, the Navy allowed them some leeway and EB used welding to join together seams for the fuel tanks only. The rest of the boat was riveted. Subsequent tests and trials showed that the experiment was quite successful; the Cuttlefish's fuel tanks were tight and remained so. EB was happy with the results and made a wholesale shift to welding.

The designers at Portsmouth were not yet convinced and were not ready to make the shift to welding. For the next series of boats, (the Porpoise/Shark/Perch class) the Government yards continued with riveting and the EB built boats were welded. Operational experience with these boats and shock tests performed on caissons eventually won over the Government designers and all subsequent boats were welded.


So the breakdown goes like this:

All submarines up to Cachalot (SS-170): riveted
Cuttlefish (SS-171): partial riveted and partial welded
Porpoise (SS-172) & Pike (SS-173): riveted
Shark (SS-174) & Tarpon (SS-175): welded
Perch, Pickerel, & Permit (SS-176-178): welded
Plunger, Pollack, & Pompano (SS-179-181): riveted
All subsequent boats from all yards: welded
The riveted boats were mostly pulled from front line duties as quantities of Gatos started to show up in theater. Except for Narwhal, Nautilus, & Pollack they were pulled back to the states for training duties, still useful to the end.

BTW, Porpoise & Pike were the last full double hull fleet boats. EB reintroduced the partial double hull (the outer hull merged with the pressure hull at each end at the torpedo room bulkheads) when they built Shark. All subsequent fleet boats had the partial double hulls.


Great info, squashes the confusion, thanks:woot:

[WarlordATF]

As to which boats were welded, it goes like this:

Riveting had been the joinery method of choice since the dawn of steel ships in the 1890's. It was well understood as a process and when brand new it provided a strong seam. The problem arose in that over time, bending and flexing moments weakened and tended to separate a riveted joint. This has obvious negative implications for pressure hull strength and was a constant headache when it came to fuel tanks. All submarines up to the V-boats leaked fuel for this reason and the older the boat got the worse the problem got. A slick of leaking fuel trailing behind the boat tended to give away its position to prowling destroyers. Seams had to cauked whenever the opportunity presented itself and it was a constant and ongoing chore.

Stodgy and conservative naval architects and engineers at the Government yards were quite aware of this new process of welding, but were very mistrustful of this technique. They felt that there was not enough operational experience with this technique (and they were right to an extent) to trust it completely. They thought a welded seam would crack, rather than flex as a riveted joint would. Riveting was what they knew and they were going to stick with it.

On the other hand, in the 1930's Electric Boat was very keen on re-establishing itself as a submarine manufacturer and distinguishing itself from the Government owned yards. During the height of the Great Depression, it was also very interested in making itself profitable. Therefore, it embraced welding as a means to these ends. Not only would welding provide a stronger and more durable seam (the EB engineers felt) but it also saved a lot in labor costs.

EB had been shut out of the submarine building business for a almost 11 years while the Government yards (Portsmouth and Mare Island) got the contracts for the V-class. So, when given the chance to build what would become the Cuttlefish, they jumped at it and were eager to once again prove their efficacy as a submarine builder. They desperately wanted to demonstrate welding to the Navy. Distrustful of the technique, the Navy allowed them some leeway and EB used welding to join together seams for the fuel tanks only. The rest of the boat was riveted. Subsequent tests and trials showed that the experiment was quite successful; the Cuttlefish's fuel tanks were tight and remained so. EB was happy with the results and made a wholesale shift to welding.

The designers at Portsmouth were not yet convinced and were not ready to make the shift to welding. For the next series of boats, (the Porpoise/Shark/Perch class) the Government yards continued with riveting and the EB built boats were welded. Operational experience with these boats and shock tests performed on caissons eventually won over the Government designers and all subsequent boats were welded.

So the breakdown goes like this:

All submarines up to Cachalot (SS-170): riveted
Cuttlefish (SS-171): partial riveted and partial welded
Porpoise (SS-172) & Pike (SS-173): riveted
Shark (SS-174) & Tarpon (SS-175): welded
Perch, Pickerel, & Permit (SS-176-178): welded
Plunger, Pollack, & Pompano (SS-179-181): riveted
All subsequent boats from all yards: welded

The riveted boats were mostly pulled from front line duties as quantities of Gatos started to show up in theater. Except for Narwhal, Nautilus, & Pollack they were pulled back to the states for training duties, still useful to the end.

BTW, Porpoise & Pike were the last full double hull fleet boats. EB reintroduced the partial double hull (the outer hull merged with the pressure hull at each end at the torpedo room bulkheads) when they built Shark. All subsequent fleet boats had the partial double hulls.

Thank You! :salute: