GW Type II has 3 reloads?

[NeonSamurai]

I noticed while diging through the basic.cfg file that both type 2 uboats has 3 tubes and 3 reloads. Is this right? As every website i checked online lists it as only having 2 reloads other then uboat aces which lists 3.

Also found some other mistakes(?) The IXB is missing 1 torpedo (should be 6 bow external), and the IXD2 had 2 extra it shouldnt in the stern (or 2 extra too many in the bow)

[CWorth]

All the books I have say the same for the Type II's..3 tubes and 2 reloads for a total of 5 torpedoes.

[don1reed]

It's no mistake. See below:

THE U-BOAT
The evolution and technical history of German submarines
by Eberhard Rössler
APPENDIX II: U-Boat Specifications, 1935-1945, p.334.

Lists six (6) torpedoes for the typ IIA thru IID

Here is the book:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/104-5435016-0837513?%5Fencoding=UTF8&search-type=ss&index=stripbooks%3Arelevance-above&field-keywords=The%20U-Boat%20the%20evolution%20and%20technical%20history %20of%20German%20submarines

cheers,

[NeonSamurai]

Well unfortunatly there are countless other books, and just about every site online dissagrees and puts the reload count to 2.

Question is which is the right answer. I guess the only way to answer it is to either find a vet, or find the original blueprints (or an official copy) and count the storage brackets available.

There is one surviving type II. But its a prototype and may have been later modified.

[Sailor Steve]

Back in the AOD days someone complained, as Aces gave 3 reloads as well. Looking at diagrams I'm hard-pressed to figure out where they would put three torpedoes.

There is a way to change it back. I hope someone involved reads this as I don't remember what it is and can't look at it. I think it's in the Submarine/IIA.cfg file, and I think it's foreresII, but I really don't remember.

[don1reed]

You needn't take my word for it; however, Rössler is the premier U-Boat chronicler of our time. Perhaps, a jaunt over to Uboat.net to the technical forum may convince you otherwise.

Yes, the Vesikko (CV707) is different from the German types, none of which, unfortunately, exists today to compare with. Still, I believe the gentlemen at GW have earned kudos for authenticity.

Best,

[Sailor Steve]

A link to the specific thread would be nice; I can't find it.

[don1reed]

Steve, are you refering to UBoat.net? If so, heck, just draft a questiion...see what those guys have to say about Rössler or the reloads.

[bigboywooly]

Technical information for type IIA



Displacement:(tons)254 (sf) 303 (sm)381 (total)
Length: (m)40,90 oa27,80 ph
Beam: (m)4,08 oa4,00 ph
Draught: (draft)3,83 m
Height:8,60 m
Power: (hp)700 (sf) 360 (sm)
Speed:(knots)13,0 (sf) 6,9 (sm)
Range:(miles / knots)1600/8 (sf) 35/4 (sm)
Torpedoes:5 3/0 (bow / stern tubes)
Mines:12 TMA
Deck gun:No deck gun
Crew:22-24 men
Max depth:ca. 150 m (492 feet)
sm = submerged, sf = surfaced, ph = pressure hull,
oa = overall, hp = horsepower.


Technical information for type IID



Displacement: (tons)314 (sf) 364 (sm) 460 (total)
Length: (m)43,97 oa 29,80 ph
Beam: (m)4,92 oa 4,00 ph
Draught: (draft)3,93 m
Height:8,40 m
Power: (hp)700 (sf) 410 (sm)
Speed:(knots)12,7 (sf) 7,4 (sm)
Range: (miles / knots)5650/8 (sf) 56/4 (sm)
Torpedoes:5 3/0 (bow / stern tubes)
Mines:12 TMA
Deck gun:No deck gun
Crew:22-24 men
Max depth:ca. 150 m (492 feet)


http://uboat.net/types/index.html

All seem to say 5 that I have seen

[Sailor Steve]

Steve, are you refering to UBoat.net? If so, heck, just draft a questiion...see what those guys have to say about Rössler or the reloads.
Oh, I'm sorry; I thought you meant there was a thread there discussing it already.

Does that mean you have the book? Don't keep us in suspense; tell us what it says! I'm dying for a real answer.:yep:

[don1reed]

Ok, I understand what Uboat.net has up on their board; however, here's what Rössler shows:

http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/6922/2ark2.jpg

This is what was the type II's were designed to carry...what they carried into battle is up for grabs.

[NeonSamurai]

Well thats what he states, it is certainly possible he is incorrect. Typicaly Uboats would pack as many torpedos as they possibly could (limited by space and racks). And its not just uboat, out of my search only one site out of about 20 in total listed the type II (A B D) as having 2 reloads, the one site agreed with your book on 3 reloads.

As for changing it back, yes its real easy, its all found in the basic.cfg file in the data\cfg folder. I noticed it as i was skimming the various files and tweeking what i disagreed with for my own personal use. I only brought it up as everything i had ever read indicated there were only 2 reloads not 3.

[Sailor Steve]

Well, that certainly changes things. Yes, he could be mistaken, but I always trust a book before I trust anything on websites; you never know if they all used the same source, or even copied each other.

I still want to argue, but until I see another prime source that says otherwise, I'm speechless (now there's something new).

[NeonSamurai]

Yes that is true, though several of the sites are quite reputable and normaly accurate to my best knowledge.

[Rosencrantz]

If I remember this right, Silent Otto (Kretschmer) tried to find out if it was possible to have six torp's into the boat - and he failed. Also most of the sources mention 5, not 6 torpedoes.


-RC-

[Pablo]

Hi!

FWIW, Clay Blair in Hitler's U-boat War gives values of 3 tubes and 6 torpedoes for all type II U-boats.

Pablo

[NeonSamurai]

Hehe and so the debate continues :)

[don1reed]

Tnx to Pablo, I found it also:

http://img49.imageshack.us/img49/1218/2bdz0.jpg

Rössler and Blair say 6...maybe someone from GW will step forward and expose their source(s). Hah, this is beginning to read like a blog.:)

[don1reed]

Well...I received my replies from Uboat.net, from two, well respected UBoat authorities.

here is their replies to my inquiry:

http://www.uboat.net/forum/read.php?f=20&i=6421&t=6415

5 it is.

Now, whats to do about correcting it in GW? (edit) nevermind, tnx Neon, I re-read your post above.

...and

my apologies for trying to defend an indefensible position, as it now seems...a tip of the hat, you are correct, sir. :)

[bigboywooly]

No worries:yep:

Well the basic cfg should look like this for the IIA

Year6=1945
ForeTube60=3;T3
ForeTube61=3
ForeTube62=3
ForeResIntern60=0
ForeResIntern61=6
Z01_60=0; IIA/1
A01_60=-1
SuperCharger_60=-1
Batteries_60=1263
Hydrophone_60=1270
Radar_60=-1
RadarWarningReceiver_60=-1
Decoy_Launcher_60=-1
SonarCoatings_60=-1
RadarCoatings_60=-1
Renown6=0

Note only 2 reloads

GW looks like this

Year6=1945
ForeTube60=3
ForeTube61=3
ForeTube62=3
ForeResIntern60=0
ForeResIntern61=0
Z01_60=0; IIA/1
A01_60=10
SuperCharger_60=-1
Batteries_60=1263
Hydrophone_60=1270
Radar_60=-1
RadarWarningReceiver_60=-1
Decoy_Launcher_60=-1
SonarCoatings_60=-1
RadarCoatings_60=-1
Renown6=0
ForeResIntern02=0
ForeResIntern12=0
ForeResIntern22=0
ForeResIntern32=0
ForeResIntern42=0
ForeResIntern52=0
ForeResIntern62=6

Note the lines in yellow are extra in GW

Maybe its just a matter of removing these ?

Or even adding the original basic cfg and see how that goes

[Kpt. Lehmann]

No offense meant to anyone here... as we all aim at a high level of historical accuracy.

Clay Blair I consider to be the authority on such matters. Therefore, GW will be retaining 6 torps for the Type II's. I never argue with either of his "Hitler's U-boat War" books.

I have another text source that I consider to be corroborration... The illustrated directory of Submarines of the World by David Miller.

Websites like U-boat.net and Uboataces.com I always consider to be secondary but otherwise still good sources.

As I see it there is room for either school of thought just based on ambiguous data... so feel free to arm your Type II's as you see fit.

I don't recall where I read it, however I seem to remember that a 3rd internal reload torp could have been chained/lashed to the floor of the torpedo room in Type II's as there may have only been "actual" space for two reloads instead of three.

Often data is truly cloudy... and (except for Clay Blair) I can say with certainty that in the past U-boat.net and other websites have been occasionally wrong.

[don1reed]

Tnx Kpt. Lehmann.

We in no way are disparaging your team's great work. I personally enjoy it daily; however, for the sake of the two schools of thought, would it corrupt the rest of your work if some of the players returned the basic.cfg file, re type II uboats, to the original configuration?

Tnx for your response and very much appreciate your fine work,

All the best,

Don

[bigboywooly]

:oops: Same here Kpt Lehmann

I dont use the type 2 so dont bother me but do use GW as it :rock:

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Don1reed, Bigboywooly,

No worries mates, if you'd like to go back to five torps/revert your Basic.Cfg to the stock loadout... no one can really call you "wrong" either. Feel free to do it and don't look back. :up: :up: :up:

It's yet another issue that is "debatable" anyway. Ultimately, the individual player has to decide for themselves what is "realistic" based on their interpretation of the data.

As far as mod packages go... builders have to choose a direction. (Unless you want to try to build a player option for everything under the sun.)

Related though... I found a third text source here in my library:
"Wolf Pack" by Gordon Williamson lists all Type II's as having 6 torps each as well.

[NeonSamurai]

Yep this one is debatable, and it seems there is no real way to conclusivly prove it one way or another other then perhaps finding a mostly intact type II on the bottom of the ocean with all her torpedos.

I was mainly just wondering if this was an oversight or intentional :) Thanks for replying

[CWorth]

I don't think that there ever will be concrete evidence that will ever prove one way or another what is truly correct or historically accurate when it comes to SH3.The passage of time,loss of surviving crews and the German destruction of alot of data during the final days has made sure of that.

I personally enjoy these kinds of debates.And it has been shown here in this thread and in the AP rounds thread that you can have a debate and not have it turn into a flame war.I find it interesting to see the different sources that others are using and then base my decision on those sources.Thats also what is so nice about this game..nothing is concrete and if you know how it can be changed.

Keep up the great work Kpt.Lehmann and the rest of the GW team.

[Sailor Steve]

Well, after seeing Neon Samurai's evidence and Don1Reed's change of position based on it, I will be keeping my two reloads.

I actually only posted this to say that this is (was) what I consider a true debate, so rarely seen anywhere on the web: people reasonably presenting honest arguments and evidence, no one getting hot under the collar, and a final consensus that we may never actually know the real answer, but acknowledging that the other side could still be right.

I'd like to see this thread archived as an example of how it should be done.

[NeonSamurai]

There have been several good debates here over the years, and i always enjoy debating stuff. :) Its one of the nice things about subsim as its one of the very very few places it can happen online, and not spin out of control into a flame war with in a couple of posts.

Anyhow, of course dont take my questioning as a knock against GW, its a great mod :) and i didnt need tweek the heck out of it either (most of the game settings agreed with what i was using previously, so i mainly just was adding in some of my own and other stuff i couldnt live without).

[Pablo]

Hi!

Ya know, I suppose one could always make the 6th torpedo an "external" one to represent the time and effort it would have taken to drag it out from wherever it was stowed and make it available for reloading. On the other hand, I can see lots of questions/comments about an "external" reload when in fact the Type II didn't have one.

Do you think a note in the readme explaining the "internal external" reload would suffice to head off the comments, or should GW let this sleeping dog lie?

Pablo

[CWorth]

Do you think a note in the readme explaining the "internal external" reload would suffice to head off the comments, or should GW let this sleeping dog lie?

Pablo

I would just leave it as it is right now.There is evidence that it was possible that they did carry a 6th torpedo.And it is not that hard to mod it back to 5 if that is what you want to use.

I personally can go either way.I feel that if they did have a 6th torpedo it was not standard practice to do so based on what I see from the data and evidence given..5 may have been the standard with a 6th probably at the capitans discretion.

[JScones]

A few other (what I consider reputable) sources:

First U-Boat Flotilla by Lawrence Patterson states 5.
U-Boats - History, Development & Equipment by David Miller states 6.Basically, I know that with what I've read in this thread, I'll be happy with 5 or I'll be just as happy with 6 (or is that, I'll be happy with 6 or I'll be just as happy with 5???). :up:

Now, if I may ponder an *intuitive* thought, I would guess that like most things, the boat was "specced" to (theoretically) hold 6 torpedoes, but in reality only comfortably held 5. Doesn't mean it couldn't or didn't hold 6, it just prolly wasn't generally practical to do so in reality. Just a not-based-on-anything feeling I have.

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Hi!

Ya know, I suppose one could always make the 6th torpedo an "external" one to represent the time and effort it would have taken to drag it out from wherever it was stowed and make it available for reloading. On the other hand, I can see lots of questions/comments about an "external" reload when in fact the Type II didn't have one.

Do you think a note in the readme explaining the "internal external" reload would suffice to head off the comments, or should GW let this sleeping dog lie?

Pablo

For a number of reasons, most discussed on this thread we are going to leave it as-is in the GW files. :ping:

[Sailor Steve]

I think that's the best decision, with one caveat: A very brief explanation in the readme might head off future problems; "Sources differ on Type II torpedoes-some say 6 torpedoes total, equally reliable sources say 5 total. The Grey Wolves mod uses 6, but here is what you change if you believe 5 is correct".

Then again, how many days go by without someone asking a question and then saying "Read the readme? Why should I do that when I can just come here and ask?".:damn: :rotfl:

[Kpt. Lehmann]

I think that's the best decision, with one caveat: A very brief explanation in the readme might head off future problems; "Sources differ on Type II torpedoes-some say 6 torpedoes total, equally reliable sources say 5 total. The Grey Wolves mod uses 6, but here is what you change if you believe 5 is correct".

Then again, how many days go by without someone asking a question and then saying "Read the readme? Why should I do that when I can just come here and ask?".:damn: :rotfl:

Roger your entire transmission Sailor Steve!!! :up: :up: :up:

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

[don1reed]

Hehehehehe

...well, I've just about been thrown out on my arse over at Uboat.net...I asked and asked and they finally gave me an answer....

“U 57 was a Type II single-hull boat, a "dug-out," as we called it in naval circles. Officially it displaced 250 tons, could run up to 12 knots on the surface, 7 knots under water. We had three torpedo tubes mounted in the bow and two torpedoes in reserve.

Lieutenant Commander Claus Korth turned the boat over to me with a seasoned crew of twenty-two. My executive officer was Lieutenant Kurt Reichenbach-Klinke, the chief engineering officer was Lieutenant Christ. The boat had been successful. I would have to prove myself as its new commanding officer.

As executive officer aboard U 46 I had served on a vessel more than twice the size of U 57. On the former we officers enjoyed at least some privacy in quarters halfway separated from the others. On U 57, however, the entire crew lived, ate, and slept pressed together in a single narrow space behind the torpedo tubes on a floor of wooden planks that covered the two reserve torpedoes.”

Source: Topp, Erich. The Odyssey of a U-boat Commander – Recollections of Erich Topp. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 1992. ISBN: 0-275-93898-0. Copyright: Verlag E. S. Mittler & Sohn GmbH, 1992

the emphasis above is mine.

[Rosencrantz]

5 or 6, now I really miss the extra one. Scored two hits on C-2 and that bloody tommy refuse to sink! :damn:


-RC-

[NeonSamurai]

I think the issue that is causing the uncertainty (as was posted in the thread don1reed started at uboat.net) was that it was originaly planned for it to have 3 torpedoes, but they found the setup didnt work in reality and thus went to 2 torpedos.

Personaly im more enclined to belive Erich Topp, who was there over "experts" who wernt :) But thats just my opinion.

[Sailor Steve]

When I was playing Aces Of the Deep I loved having six torpedoes, mainly because on every patrol at least three of them were duds!

[NeonSamurai]

Hehe, ya ive never had any major issues with real duds (where they were shot well within the peramiters and bounced anyways) in SH3. Infact i cant remember a single torpedo that failed to detonate that i couldnt figure out why (but i tend to like following my torpedoes in external view so its usualy apparent why it went clunk)