Most torpedoes fired into a single ship

[Hene]

So, after this one badly gone attack I'd like to know what are the highest amounts torpedoes that you have fired at a single ship, of which all have hit. My current record is 10 without sinking the ship. I had set up an attack against a T3 tanker after an earlier badly gone attack against the same convoy. I fired a salvo of three torpedoes at a range of 800-1000 yards, first hit "Torpedo is a dud sir!" second one, also a dud. The third one exploded, and I quickly fired a fourth torpedo at the tanker. After a while I get again "Torpedo is a dud".:nope:. Having emptied all of the front tubes I turn my sub around and fire one of the rear torpedoes (fifth one), also a dud. I fire the sixth torpedo at the ship, dud again.:/\\!!.
I turn the sub around again and wait for the front torpedoes that i have left to load. After the first one has loaded i fire it, with the same results as before, a dud (7). I turn around once again to fire the loaded rear torpedo, which also was a dud(8). I turn around once more to fire my last front torpedo, which also fails to explode (9). with only one rear torpedo left I set the tanker to my rear and fire, waiting, waiting, and finally, "The torpedo is a dud sir!":/\\!!:/\\!!:/\\!!:/\\!!(10). after spending all of my torpedoes i go behind the tanker to avoid the nasty cannon, surface and finish it of with my deck gun. after that I returned immediately to port to write a complaint about the sub-par quality torpedoes that we had received.

[troopie]

Sorry Hene but that makes me feel better; I reckon 1/10 would have to be some kind of record?

[Roger Dodger]

FM: ADM T. WITHERS
COMSOWESPAC, PEARL HARBOR

TO: PILLY LENT
CDR U.S.S.TRITON

JANUARY, 1942

SUBJ: FAULTY TORPEDOES

BT

THE EXTREME SHORTAGE OF TORPEDOES WILL NOT ALLOW THIS HIGH EXPENDITURE FOR THE RESULTS OBTAINED. ONE GOOD HIT USING THE MAGNETIC EXPLODER SHOULD BE SUFFICIENT FOR A 5000 TON MERCHANT SHIP. IF ONE HIT DOES NOT SINK A SHIP OF THIS TYPE, IT SHOULD BE SUFFICIENTLY DAMAGED TO KEEP HER IN ONE SPOT SO THE SUBMARINE CAN TAKE UP FAVORABLE POSITION TO FINISH HER OFF.

BT
END

Typical message sent to commanders complaining about faulty torpedoes early in the war.
Nine failures (duds) out of ten torpedoes must be some kind or record, though.

You might consider re-loading with the MK X torpedo, rather than the MK XIV. Lighter warhead, but more positive results.

Good Hunting!

[Sailor Steve]

You're not alone.

Here is a real-life account - an extract from the report of USS Whale (SS-239), during her second war patrol, January 17, 1943, under the command of Lt. Cmdr. John B. Azer.

Fired three torpedoes. Three hits. One hit aft of his stack, the second blew wreckage up through forward hold and the third hit aft. Target started turning toward us. Swung hard right and set up for a stern shot.

Fired single stern shot at range of 600 yards. Hit aft. This was a good hit, stopping the target cold. The target was sinking by the stern, taking considerable port list. Took pictures, firmly convinced this was the graveyard of another Japanese ship. Many of the crew had an opportunity to view the sinking ship through the periscope.

Having worked up to windward to observe target better, was astonished to find the fire under control and the list corrected. Water was being pumped over the side through portable hoses. Fired another torpedo from the stern tube, but this missed. Target was dead in the water, shooting wildly with deck guns.

Crew and passengers abandoned ship, although gun crew remained at posts. Target settled about ten feet overall and then
maintained its depth. Closed and fired sixth torpedo from bow tubes. This hit aft of superstructure depth.

Target still floating. Fired seventh torpedo from bow tubes. This hit with terrific concussion, but did not change trim or draft appreciably.
Fired eighth torpedo from stern tubes. This was heard to hit, but very little concussion was felt.

Getting dark. Target sinking slowly on an even keel, but still looks salvageable. There was no sign of life aboard, although it was believed gun crews had not yet abandoned ship. Wishing to dispose of it before arrival of planes or rescue ships, fired ninth torpedo. This hit right under stack and the explosion ripped away both sides of vessel about ten feet
below the main deck.

Target now settled more rapidly, the main deck being a few feet from wash condition at last observation. This vessel had absorbed seven and possibly eight torpedo hits. The cargo must have been of such nature as to prevent her from sinking more rapidly. Target was identified as the Heiyou Maru, 9,815 tons.

On retiring we found ourselves in the midst of eight boats full of survivors, approximately fifty men to each boat. These men were dressed in both white and blue uniforms. One boat was passed close aboard, and survivors made ready to hit the periscope with their oars.

[Randomizer]

24-25 July 1943, Lt Cdr Dan Daspit, USN commanding USS Tinosa (SS-283) fired fifteen torpedoes into the tanker SS Tonan Maru No.3 of which two functioned as designed.

Tonan Maru No.3 escaped damaged and Daspit brought his last MkXIV back to Pearl Harbor where at last, COMSUBPAC launched its own investigation into the continuing torpedo failure under Cdr "Swede" Momson.

Clay Blair's account of the attack and subsequent torpedo tests in Silent Victory is pretty thorough.

Never experienced it quite this bad in SH4 but have come pretty close.

[fireftr18]

I was going toward my assigned patrol area in a Porpoise class. On the way, I stumbled upon a lone IJN heavy cruiser. I emptied my bow tubes on her, then turned to empty my stern tubes, which I had to. Between duds, premature detinations, and misses, I eventually sunk her with I think 2 torpedoes left.

[Webster]

so whats the REAL question?

is it the most duds you ever had or the most torpedos that exploded on target but the ship still didnt sink?

as for duds there are times when every torpedo is a dud and sometimes you go almost a whole career without having to experience a dud, thats just a successfull randomization of the game engine that makes things unpredictable and more fun because of it.

with torpedos that hit and explode on target, the time between shots matters a lot.

i have tested extensively to find a ship that sinks with 3 or 4 torpedos in rapid succession will take 5 or 6 or more torps to sink if you fire one at a time then wait for a result so as to have a minute or two between each shot. the reason is the ship seams to self repair a small portion of damage or repeated damage gets multiplied (i never really figured out why) but the result is you dont want to try saving torps by waiting to only use another if needed because doing so will make you need to fire more torps in the long run so just fire enough the first time to be sure you get the kill

[TorpX]

...the ship seams to self repair a small portion of damage or repeated damage gets multiplied (i never really figured out why)...

This is interesting. It stands to reason that a crew could pump out water and make some repairs, if they have time.

[fithah4]

I have had same results with different scenarios , too many duds ; 3 to four torps not sinking ship just coasting or dead stop. If safe to do so also have fired deck gun many times after out of torps and still no result or slow sinking after using most of the deck shells.

I know most here like playing 100% realism but I still use around 65% realism. I still like to go out and watch the effects and sound of the ships breaking up with periscope and external cams!

The real bummer is firing that last fatal shot only to realize ship destroyed before torp fired makes impact!

[Webster]

This is interesting. It stands to reason that a crew could pump out water and make some repairs, if they have time.


well its the only explanation i can think of to explain the things you see happen in the game especially when some ships lose power so im waiting for them to sink when all of a sudden after a while it starts steaming away again. i dont know if its really repairing anything or pumping out water to restore engine power but maybe the game just discounts some of the damage if it doesnt continue to get more damage within a certain time window like maybe a default damage level for a ship that hasnt sunk or something.

none of these explanations fit every situation but its just opinions i formed from playing the game and seeing some of the reactions to damage




I have had same results with different scenarios , too many duds ; 3 to four torps not sinking ship just coasting or dead stop. If safe to do so also have fired deck gun many times after out of torps and still no result or slow sinking after using most of the deck shells.

I know most here like playing 100% realism but I still use around 65% realism. I still like to go out and watch the effects and sound of the ships breaking up with periscope and external cams!

The real bummer is firing that last fatal shot only to realize ship destroyed before torp fired makes impact!

well things to remember are shoot at or just under the waterline so you create flooding, spread your shots around in different spots so dont shoot the same spot twice if you can avoid it, shelling an already flooded compartment does about as much good as a shot above the waterline and shots above the waterline only sink ships by damage level so its a lot harder to sink it that way then to add more flooding to aid in it sinking.

its not always easy to do but if the ship is stationary i have surfaced right beside the ship or the bow or stern to stay out of reach of its guns so i can shell it from safety

[Hene]

so whats the REAL question?

is it the most duds you ever had or the most torpedos that exploded on target but the ship still didnt sink?
Just the most torpedoes spent on a ship, be it ones that exploded or duds. I cannot myself remember precisely the most working torpedoes spent as three torpedoes has usually been enough, I think it was five or six torps on a japanese aircraft carrier but I'm not sure.

[RedMenace]

One boat was passed close aboard, and survivors made ready to hit the periscope with their oars.

They weren't exaggerating when they said the Japanese never give up the fight. :haha:

[Rockin Robbins]

And in real life there was one kind of ship uncannily difficult to sink and that was an empty tanker. They had a double hull with fairly wide separation between. You could fill the outer hull full of torpedoes and they would sail away. More than one WWII American sub captain groused about the number of torpedoes they could take and not sink.

This was made even more maddening by the fact that a FULL tanker, especially if they were full of aviation gas, made for a very easy and spectacular target. They were among the most valuable of targets and could not be ignored. In fact it was just as important to put the empty ones out of business as the full ones, so it was not an option to save your torpedoes, sail away and hope the target could not be repaired. You just about had to shoot until it went down or you were out of torpedoes.

"Captain, we have good news, and we have bad news...."