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.

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

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.

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:

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.

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

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. 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.

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/show...=147577&page=4

(last few posts and next page)

:salute:

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.

: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.:-?
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.

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.

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.

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

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

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)

>>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.”