SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - View Single Post - Hit power of torpedoes : US to IJN calculation

keltos01 · 03-22-09, 04:47 AM

then early mk14 till the end of 1942 are less powerful, then switch to 1.5 times what they did before, any way to mod that ?

so I should use this formula to figure out how powerful they really were ?

weight of Type 97 / 1.5 (being less powerful than torpex) x 1.07

type 95 mod 1
(405 / 1.5 )* 1.07 = 288.9

288.9 / 292 (mk14) = 0.9893 times the power of the mk14 before : 1.38 times

Type 95 mod 2 and Type 96
(550 / 1.5)* 1.07 = 392.333
392.333 / 292 (mk14) = 1.343 times the power of the mk14 before : 1.88 times

and do the others accordingly ? Peabody what do you think ?
I need to be sure what the mk14 were modded from : early or late war explosive power.

any intel on the german explosive?

we could go from there as they didn't improve theirs.

Keltos

below : a very good read, don't have time to read it all now :

quote Tiornu :

The British developed Torpex in 1942, getting it into service right around the end of the year and sharing it also with the Americans who adopted it in 1943. Torpex is considered 50-100% more powerful than TNT. Japanese Type 97 explosive is considered 7% more powerful than TNT. The various explosives used by the Germans were more powerful than TNT, but I don't have any figures for them

tomas:
The German torpedo warhead was slightly more powerful than an equivalent TNT only warhead, but had a much greater brisance than TNT. Torpex, on the other hand would have yielded approximately 20% more power making a 500 lbs warhead the equivalent yield of a 600-lb TNT warhead. The inclusion of aluminium powder to increase brisance would have given a greater destructive power against standard ship hull structures, though not necessarily having an effect on heavy armour.

Bill Jurens :
Too much is generally made regarding the exact relative strength of explosives used in torpedoes. The amount of damage, though of course not entirely unrelated to explosive strength, can be surprisingly disconnected from this variable. Relative strength in and of itself can be a very difficult thing to pin down in any sort of objective way, or -- more properly -- the relative strength of explosives can vary somewhat depending upon exactly what you are measuring. Both overpressure and total impulse are important, and in some cases, if the charge bubble period is in resonance or near-resonance with the structure, a smaller charge of 'weaker' explosive can actually do more physical damage.

http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewt...644fda231667aa

03-22-09, 04:47 AM	#18
keltos01 Silent Hunter Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Milan Italy Posts: 4,999 Downloads: 114 Uploads: 18	then early mk14 till the end of 1942 are less powerful, then switch to 1.5 times what they did before, any way to mod that ? so I should use this formula to figure out how powerful they really were ? weight of Type 97 / 1.5 (being less powerful than torpex) x 1.07 type 95 mod 1 (405 / 1.5 )* 1.07 = 288.9 288.9 / 292 (mk14) = 0.9893 times the power of the mk14 before : 1.38 times Type 95 mod 2 and Type 96 (550 / 1.5)* 1.07 = 392.333 392.333 / 292 (mk14) = 1.343 times the power of the mk14 before : 1.88 times and do the others accordingly ? Peabody what do you think ? I need to be sure what the mk14 were modded from : early or late war explosive power. any intel on the german explosive? we could go from there as they didn't improve theirs. Keltos below : a very good read, don't have time to read it all now : quote Tiornu : The British developed Torpex in 1942, getting it into service right around the end of the year and sharing it also with the Americans who adopted it in 1943. Torpex is considered 50-100% more powerful than TNT. Japanese Type 97 explosive is considered 7% more powerful than TNT. The various explosives used by the Germans were more powerful than TNT, but I don't have any figures for them tomas: The German torpedo warhead was slightly more powerful than an equivalent TNT only warhead, but had a much greater brisance than TNT. Torpex, on the other hand would have yielded approximately 20% more power making a 500 lbs warhead the equivalent yield of a 600-lb TNT warhead. The inclusion of aluminium powder to increase brisance would have given a greater destructive power against standard ship hull structures, though not necessarily having an effect on heavy armour. Bill Jurens : Too much is generally made regarding the exact relative strength of explosives used in torpedoes. The amount of damage, though of course not entirely unrelated to explosive strength, can be surprisingly disconnected from this variable. Relative strength in and of itself can be a very difficult thing to pin down in any sort of objective way, or -- more properly -- the relative strength of explosives can vary somewhat depending upon exactly what you are measuring. Both overpressure and total impulse are important, and in some cases, if the charge bubble period is in resonance or near-resonance with the structure, a smaller charge of 'weaker' explosive can actually do more physical damage. http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewt...644fda231667aa __________________ "Honorable Builder of Sinking Ships" Last edited by keltos01; 03-22-09 at 05:08 AM.