i'd be thinkin that dropping shallow fused depth charges would be more effective and historically accurate an anti-submarine weapon than a torpedo, considering the horrendous effects of explosions under a near surfaced hull versus attempting to align a torpedo run on a rapidly diving sub.

to simulate DCs, how about re-jigging bombs to detonate at a certain depth?

Would it be possible to clone the airbase(s) so that at a certain time during the war, the early-war airbase vanishes and is replaced by a late-war counterpart with more aggressive planes?

Thruster : depth charges are in the game. they have the same model as bombs and the same damage as the 500kg bombs. But they detonate at the surface from my testing. I'll look at this also in the days ahead.

SAFE : sorta .. this would be a huge undertaking and don't even have a save in the latewar so I can't reliably test if it's working. I'd have to change all the campaign files so that at a certain point a different airbase spawned. A very big thing to do.

As it stand I'm happier with how it is. you may get attacked by a plane in the early war .. and you may not.

thank you wamphyri

if i had the skills to do it myself i certainly would. im grateful those like you contribute to this.

cheers.

That's unfortunate considering the Brownings were notorious for being insufficient against other aircraft, let alone submarines.

Hurricanes were armed with 8 .30 Browning MGs, and really didn't carry enough ammunition to do more than cause minor damage to a sub without the use of bombs or rockets. Another consideration was their fixed convergence, which mitigated damage even more by spreading it around.

They could cause havok on easily damaged external system though, like the periscopes, radar, topside crew etc. Not sure about more than that. They had a hard enough time shooting down Bf-110s or bigger without burning through all their ammo. Big difference between aluminum and steel.

I'll be working on the damage they do next. Won't be hard but I just need to find the time to do it.

Hello,
just for info.

all fighters with guns up to 20mm should do absolutely ZERO damage to the sub hull.
the cal.303 of planes like the hurrican should only be able to hurt/kill the crew, and damage the UZO or the scope with a lucky shot.

the cal.05 of planes like the mustang/p47 (most us stuff) could do the same and maybe damage the guns a bit. but again..NO damage to the subs hull.

20mm..even AP amunition the same..with higher chance to destroy the gun or AA gun of the boat...but the internal hull..never.

thsi must and should be adressed..right now hurricans with their beanshooters can rapidly destroy an subs hull.

greetings

wastel

New Release.. \o/

The issue I found out about is I'm not sure crew damage/death is in sh5 like it was in the others. Plus, damage to the equipment can only happen when a shot gets through the armor, which causes hull damage also. I could adjust it so the damage is virtually nothing but it gets through so there's a chance of stuff breaking. Wouldn't be difficult at all.. stuff like that takes more of my time with testing cause I like to make sure stuff is working like I want it to.

More than do-able. But what depth should I set them at? they detonate at 10m atm. What I change the data to effects all DC's so it's all or nothing. Given some time I could make new DC's.. say one with a 20m fuse.. one with a 40 .. etc. Then add one of each to some planes and you'd never know what he was dropping. Not a bad idea I think.. my next thing after cannon damage.

Sorry, but cal. 50 rounds should rip through a sub like a hot knife through butter.

For example look at the bottom of this site: http://www.inetres.com/gp/military/i...g/50_ammo.html

As you can see, a cal. 50 round can penetrate a ~25mm thick armor plate. Hell, it could penetrate the top of most german WW2 tanks.

Why do you think it should not make a scratch into a sub?

Therion_Prime wrote: i agree, tho i wouldnt be too concerned about the hull casing. i should try and research metal thickness of the conning tower panels and saddle tanks...

thanks wamphyri
i found this and i'll try to quote it. i found it at http://people.brunel.ac.uk/~mastjjb/jeb/or/intro.html
it says

"The main weapon of attack against a surfaced (when spotted) U-boat was depth charges dropped in a stick (typically six 250lb (110kg) depth charges) in a more or less straight line along the direction of flight of the attacking aircraft. After hitting the water a depth charge sinks whilst at the same time being carried forward by its own momentum. After a pre-set time delay, or upon reaching a certain depth, it explodes and any U-boat within a certain distance (the lethal radius) is fatally damaged. Six variables were considered as influencing the kill probability:

• depth (time) setting for depth charge explosion
• lethal radius
• aiming errors in dropping the stick
• orientation of the stick with respect to the U-boat
• spacing between successive depth charges in the stick
• low level bombsights.

We consider each in turn.

• depth (time) setting for depth charge explosion

In the first two years of the war depth charges were mainly set for explosion at a depth of 30/45 metres [this figure having being set years ago and never altered since]. Analysis of pilot reports by ORS showed that in 40% of attacks the U-boat was either still visible or had been submerged less than 15 seconds (these are the U-boats that we would expect to have most chance of killing as we have a good idea of their position). Since the lethal radius of a depth charge was around 5-6 metres it was clear that a shallower setting was necessary. Explosion at a depth of 15 metres was initiated and as new fuses became available at 10 metres and then 8 metres.
Here we have the issue of historical inertia in decision making - in the dim and distant past someone decided that the standard depth setting should be 30/45 metres and this historical decision has been carried forward - never being questioned/re-examined until ORS came on the scene.

• lethal radius

As mentioned above the standard 250lb depth charge was believed to have a lethal radius of only 5-6 metres. Plainly to increase this radius (within the 250lb limit) the chemical explosive inside the depth charge should be more powerful (e.g. increasing the lethal radius by just 20% increases the lethal volume (sphere) around the depth charge by 72.8%). The best chemical explosive currently available was therefore introduced.
Note here that it could be argued (and was) that since a 250lb depth charge had too small a lethal radius a bigger charge (600lb (270kg) was prescribed by the Air Staff) was needed. ORS suggested 100lb (45kg) on the basis that it would be more effective to have many small explosions rather than one large explosion. (As an analogy would you prefer to throw many small balls at a small target or one large ball?). In fact neither alternative ever really preceded past the trial stage due to increasing success with the 250lb depth charge."


i hope this is helpful? i may have another link of interst, i'll post that if its good. cheers.

Well, I would be concerned. I'm talking about the penetration of 25mm ARMOR PLATE (RDA) and not just regular steel plating.

As I already said above, in therory cal. 50 rounds could easily penetrate the top armor of german tanks up to the Panzer 4. It would require a very steep strafing run, but it would be possible.

Will this work with the new planes in http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=164210 ??
Eventually? :) Ill be eagerly awaiting it!