View Full Version : Aircraft kill in TMO!
Pitts2112
02-01-11, 08:31 AM
Got a kill on a two-engined bomber in TMO! :yeah:
Jan 44, patrolling south of Honshu, no surface traffic of any kind seen in weeks. Over 20 aircraft contacts. Got fed up with being a yo-yo and, having nothing to lose on this patrol, decided to fight it out on the surface next time I was bounced and see how it goes.
My gunners are actually pretty good. We've engaged 4 aircraft so far. Set all of them on fire with the first bursts (20mm and 40mm), one exploded and hit the water, crew bailing out on the way down. The rest RTBd. Went to the downed crew and found them floating in the water but couldn't take them onboard - shame really. I was up for a good interrogation as to where all the shipping traffic has gone.
The bombers haven't been that accurate, either. Of the 4 aircraft we wrestled with on the surface, all have made two attacks, one made three. None of them did any damage, which is fine by me.
Not a very satisfying patrol so far, but the aircraft action has been a bit different and fun.
Dogfish40
02-01-11, 10:55 AM
Ahoy Pitts
Yeah, it's always fun when you can break out either the Deck or the Flak gun.
In TMO the planes are supposed to be a bit more accurate (I believe anyway) that's how the whole MOD is set up. It's an open debate; fight the planes or dive.
Historically, U.S subs always dove unless they could not for some reason. Once you start firing at them they will sometimes get less accurate with the bombs because their dodging the bullets.
I got my ship sunk playing stock last year (I forgot to load up my SJ while starting the career) but I was also convinced they would miss... they blew me to hell and back, two bombs, hit the boat. Sigh...I can still hear the guys screamin' as we went under...
Good Hunting
D40:salute:
Armistead
02-01-11, 01:11 PM
Well, they do often miss, but eventually one will score. Enemy planes make no attempt to dodge bullets, they make their passes based on loadout and crew ratings.
Also, if they see you they'll vector other planes to you or ships if nearby.
Just depends on how you want to play. If your goal is to have fun and shoot planes and no concern for your sub or men, have at it. If you don't mind using saves to restart if you take on damage. Nothing is worse to be 3000 miles from base and a plane scores on you and destroys a much needed componant. For reality, if I get hit by a plane, I accept the damage and deal.
Sometimes I do chance it, I may be chasing a fast TF in the day and to dive would mean to lose it, but if the group has carriers and they know your there, they'll often send squadrons at you, giving you no choice but to dive or die.
Pitts2112
02-01-11, 01:20 PM
I'm just doing this for fun at the moment. I usually dive to avoid. I just thought it was kind of cool that my gunners scored a kill. I'm definitely going to make sure I take that back to Pearl at the end of the patrol and see what renown or medals result (provided I get any ships before I run out of orange juice and ice cream!)
Got a kill on a two-engined bomber in TMO! :yeah:
Jan 44, patrolling south of Honshu, no surface traffic of any kind seen in weeks. Over 20 aircraft contacts. Got fed up with being a yo-yo and, having nothing to lose on this patrol, decided to fight it out on the surface next time I was bounced and see how it goes.
My gunners are actually pretty good. We've engaged 4 aircraft so far. Set all of them on fire with the first bursts (20mm and 40mm), one exploded and hit the water, crew bailing out on the way down. The rest RTBd. Went to the downed crew and found them floating in the water but couldn't take them onboard - shame really. I was up for a good interrogation as to where all the shipping traffic has gone.
The bombers haven't been that accurate, either. Of the 4 aircraft we wrestled with on the surface, all have made two attacks, one made three. None of them did any damage, which is fine by me.
Not a very satisfying patrol so far, but the aircraft action has been a bit different and fun.
It was probably a Betty Bomber. It wasn't known on both sides of the Pacific as the "One shot lighter" for nothing. It's one thing when the enemy calls an airplane that, but when your own soldiers call it a "type 1 lighter" or a "flying lighter," you know you did something wrong in the design.
WernherVonTrapp
02-01-11, 01:56 PM
I just thought it was kind of cool that my gunners scored a kill. I'm definitely going to make sure I take that back to Pearl at the end of the patrol and see what renown or medals result The trade off isn't worth the renown. The best you could hope for is a renown gain of 100 for an H8K or 70 for an H6K. The rest are all 50 or less.:salute:
Pitts2112
02-01-11, 02:49 PM
Only 100 renown? Is that it for that kind of shooting? Fahgget that. Diving to avoid from now on!
Planes are really annoying regardless of what version your on.I'm on TMO for 1.4 and I'm happy to see that there a exponentially less than in the stock game.
Even so They're all over the place.You can avoid em but it slows you down.Shooting them down nets you almost nothing.And it only takes one to make your CO write that Sad Sad Letter home.
Ducimus
02-01-11, 05:30 PM
Some aircraft are easier to shoot down then others. Just FYI, the 40 mike mike AA rounds in TMO have a very large splash damage radius.
I play RFB/RSRDC and experience the same problems. The Jap planes seem to be crewed by expert pilots with X-ray vision. I've come to accept the reality that I'm not safe at periscope depth. On another forum I read they can see you at PS depth from 2000yds! I consider this extremely questionable.
I had a good career in S-boats, terminated by bomb attack. After dodging several attacks, they got me. I was at the end of a lousy 2 month patrol, having seen only 1 ship, but at least 50 airplanes. You have no radar and no AA. They wear you down. I made the mistake of diving to PS depth instead of 200'. By the time I realized he was coming straight at us, it was too late. Went straight to the bottom.
More recently, I was at PS depth when the crew spotted aircraft. I took a very brief look, and saw he was going to be approaching close and ordered crash dive. As we were leveling off at 150', there was an explosion that was close enough to shake the boat. As I play DiD, I don't want to take any unneccessary chances, but this seems absurd. Really now, how can an airplane spot you at PS depth, when your crew can barely see them?
I'm on my first patrol with my newly-minted Balao and was nosing around Truk last night, when I had my first aircraft encounter (with that boat). Normally, I dive, but those two, shiny, new twin 20 MMs and that cool looking 40 MM were just too tempting. I had to see what they could do.
The incoming Val is several hundred yards to port when the guns open up. By the time the Jap is a few hundred yards from my boat, there are some impressive flames coming out of the cowling and a large smoke trail. He drops his bomb, but it splashes harmlessly way off to starboard. He then keeps flying off into the sunset.
No entry in the log, so no kill, but it definitely discouraged him from making a second run.
Really now, how can an airplane spot you at PS depth, when your crew can barely see them?
http://www.strangemilitary.com/images/content/113453.jpg
http://lh5.ggpht.com/_kIWY2DV0KnE/Srr4dh8U42I/AAAAAAAAEdA/EFE66BpmqLs/Visual%20Stealth%20-%20USS%20Chicago%20%28SSN-721%29%20showing%20visibility%20when%20submerged.J PG
Razark:
I know very well they can see you under ideal conditions. Looking at your photos, notice they are viewed from directly overhead. I'm talking about them being able to see you from a mile or perhaps more when the angle isn't nearly as favorable. From what I have seen in the game, and what others have posted, it seems they can see you at PS depth almost as if you are on the surface, or they have a amazing clairvoyant ability to fly right over you, when probibilities suggest otherwise.
From what I have seen in the game, and what others have posted, it seems they can see you at PS depth almost as if you are on the surface, or they have a amazing clairvoyant ability to fly right over you, when probibilities suggest otherwise.
I honestly wouldn't know. I never stick around if the airplanes are out flying around. I might just have to test it out sometime.
What's really annoying is when you're in an S-boat, which has no AA armament at all.
Anytime I venture into areas with Japanese air cover, it's yo-yo city.
Yes, quite so.
I'm in a S-boat also. No radar, no AA and best of all, the RFB corp. shipyard decided to use paper-mache for my hull, instead of the "old- fashioned" steel. :haha:
I've been lucky on this patrol though. Only bombed twice in 3 weeks.
Part of the problem may be my crew not spotting the AC soon enough. On more than one occasion, when I checked the perisccpe, the AC seemed pretty close. Now, if in doubt, I go deep. :timeout:
Razark:
I know very well they can see you under ideal conditions. Looking at your photos, notice they are viewed from directly overhead. I'm talking about them being able to see you from a mile or perhaps more when the angle isn't nearly as favorable. From what I have seen in the game, and what others have posted, it seems they can see you at PS depth almost as if you are on the surface, or they have a amazing clairvoyant ability to fly right over you, when probibilities suggest otherwise.
Keep in mind it is a game, and all games have limitations. Unless it's told otherwise, the bit running the plane could see you bottoming out in the Marianas Trench while flying around on the moon. That being said, as I recall TMO was actually modded so the planes could see through the water. I seem to recall the creator saying that he had to actually set the plane's sight to react to thermal layers just so the planes wouldn't see you no matter what. I've experienced this first-hand. I've also experienced a plane flying right over my Air Search Radar mast while I'm at periscope depth in RSRD without them spotting me. So if I had to wager a guess, I'm betting the issue is probably based upon the RFB mod changing the aircraft's sight capabilities without the program having a probability roller in place to check if the airplane actually sees you. So because the plane can "see" through water without the program running, for lack of a better term, a "dice roll" to see if the plane will act on that information, you end up with clairvoyant aircraft. There's probably not a lot you can do about it.
I now have a Salmon-class (USS Seal), but the single 20mm cannon isn't a huge improvement. On my last patrol, I ended up using most of it to sink an H6K flying boat.
Speaking of the H6K, it seemed to take a ridiculously large amount of my 20mm ammo before going up in flames. Is that normal? Seems kind of unrealistic. I would think the first few dozen rounds would have shredded it sufficiently to catch fire and/or sink.
But there are issues with some things sinking in SH4. I caught a Japanese sub unaware back when I still had an S-boat, but it just wouldn't sink. Despite the gaping hole my torpedo tore in its engine room, and my crew having declared, "She's going down!", the sub continued floating there, with crew at the guns and on the bridge.
Also I notice i'm picking up sound contacts while on the surface, in my Salmon-class boat. How is that possible? I thought:
1) the hydrophone is only submerged when the boat is at least at periscope depth
2) I shouldn't be able to hear anything anyway over my diesel engines.
WernherVonTrapp
02-05-11, 10:54 AM
I now have a Salmon-class (USS Seal), but the single 20mm cannon isn't a huge improvement. On my last patrol, I ended up using most of it to sink an H6K flying boat.
Speaking of the H6K, it seemed to take a ridiculously large amount of my 20mm ammo before going up in flames. Is that normal? Seems kind of unrealistic. I would think the first few dozen rounds would have shredded it sufficiently to catch fire and/or sink.
Speculating/Extrapolating::hmmm:
I think by 1943, it was no secret to naval intel that Japanese planes did not have self-sealing fuel tanks and with the use of incendiary rounds, could ignite quite easily. On the other hand, hitting a moving target from a moving target still seems like it might be a bit tricky to pull off. In addition, I don't know how common/uncommon it was for subs to carry incendiary rounds.
Also I notice i'm picking up sound contacts while on the surface, in my Salmon-class boat. How is that possible? I thought:
1) the hydrophone is only submerged when the boat is at least at periscope depth
2) I shouldn't be able to hear anything anyway over my diesel engines.
If you go to external view and look at the chin of your sub, you can see a pair of spheres hanging off the bottom of the boat. Those are the hydrophones. That's why you can pick up sound contacts on the surface.
Got it. I wasn't sure where the hydrophones were on a Salmon-class, and was having no luck looking it up either.
As for the H6N, it was parked at a dock when I shot it up. I was shooting it from only a couple hundred yards, but maybe I was missing a lot.
The Japanese aircraft sure are persistent. As suggested, they're easy to catch on fire, but the other day I had two keep bombing me despite being on fire. Unfortunately, my sub started a one-way dive before they could burn up enough to crash.
Keep in mind it is a game, and all games have limitations. Unless it's told otherwise, the bit running the plane could see you bottoming out in the Marianas Trench while flying around on the moon. That being said, as I recall TMO was actually modded so the planes could see through the water. I seem to recall the creator saying that he had to actually set the plane's sight to react to thermal layers just so the planes wouldn't see you no matter what. I've experienced this first-hand. I've also experienced a plane flying right over my Air Search Radar mast while I'm at periscope depth in RSRD without them spotting me. So if I had to wager a guess, I'm betting the issue is probably based upon the RFB mod changing the aircraft's sight capabilities without the program having a probability roller in place to check if the airplane actually sees you. So because the plane can "see" through water without the program running, for lack of a better term, a "dice roll" to see if the plane will act on that information, you end up with clairvoyant aircraft. There's probably not a lot you can do about it.
You may be right. It bothers me though, because it seemed this is another example of something that was well modeled in SHCE. It couldn't have been that difficult. If you are saying that RFB messed up something in the game, perhaps someone could figure out a way to straighten it out. I don't expect the game to be perfect, but there are a lot of examples of things that defy the laws of physics.
As for the H6N, it was parked at a dock when I shot it up. I was shooting it from only a couple hundred yards, but maybe I was missing a lot.
The Japanese aircraft sure are persistent. As suggested, they're easy to catch on fire, but the other day I had two keep bombing me despite being on fire. Unfortunately, my sub started a one-way dive before they could burn up enough to crash.
I think part of the problem you had is due to the simplistic models used. By that I mean, there is a difference between damadging/disabling X and destroying X. A few 20mm hits could KO an engine or perforate a fuel tank, but wouldn't neccessarily disrupt an attack or cause the loss of the plane (though it might). To sink/destroy the same plane, at anchor, might well require hundreds of rounds (unless set on fire). Generally, it takes much more firepower to destroy something, than to damadge it.
You may be right. It bothers me though, because it seemed this is another example of something that was well modeled in SHCE. It couldn't have been that difficult. If you are saying that RFB messed up something in the game, perhaps someone could figure out a way to straighten it out. I don't expect the game to be perfect, but there are a lot of examples of things that defy the laws of physics.
I'm not sure it is fixable. As far as I can tell stock Silent Hunter 4 does not model aircraft being able to see down to periscope depth. As far as the program is concerned, the water is a brick wall that sight cannot pass. What RFB and the others do is move that wall, allowing the computer to "see" your sub at periscope depth. The problem is that although you and I can barely see the sub at periscope depth unless the camera is directly above, the computer has no such limitations. Because the sight "Wall" was moved down to 100 or so feet below the water, the computer can see all the way down to that "wall" without any problem. Now, if the game was built with planes being able to see periscope level targets, the developers would have put in a random number generator to govern, via chance, whether the plane could actually see the submarine while it was underwater. Without that generator, the plane will always see you as long as you're above the sight wall.
About the only thing I can think of that would fix this problem is if somehow you were able to convince the game that everything below the ocean's surface is treated as a fog bank. By doing this, it would bring in the game's probability calculations with regards to whether or not a ship can see you if you're on the surface in a fog bank.
Because the sight "Wall" was moved down to 100 or so feet below the water, the computer can see all the way down to that "wall" without any problem. Now, if the game was built with planes being able to see periscope level targets, the developers would have put in a random number generator to govern, via chance, whether the plane could actually see the submarine while it was underwater. Without that generator, the plane will always see you as long as you're above the sight wall.
Yikes! I'm living on borrowed time. :timeout:
Shot down a pesky H6N yesterday.
I was very surprised. I really didn't think I was hitting him, but he was doing one of those steep climbs they do after a bombing run, and I kept shooting at his backside.
Next thing I know, he bursts into flames and starts coming apart!
20mm twin cannon for the win!
Shot down a pesky H6N yesterday.
They are annoying, aren't they.
Congrats. :DL
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.