SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - View Single Post

NEON DEON · 07-01-07, 01:54 AM

I do not disagree with your AA capability assessment of the 5 inch gun. Never did. Never once wanted it to fire it as an AA weapon. The speed is what I refer to on the 5 inch 25.

Earlier in the same patrol. The Nautilus engaged a 1,000 ton Patrol craft in high seas at 5,000 yards and sank her with gunfire in 13 minutes. Yet ----------
I hear it should take much longer to do that and no way can you fire from a sub and sink a ship from that distance in high seas.

The Nautilus attacks a 9,000 ton ship with gunfire and one torpedo and sinks her in 18 minutes. Yet ----------------------

I hear from the anti gun patrol that a sub would not attack a ship that big on the surface with gunfire.

Tater in almost every post I have made I have said the situation dictates the ROF.

A sub did not fire as fast it could all the time in a gun engagement, if that was the case otherwise, then there would be no reason for a RAPID FIRE order. I have shown you just a few posts ago the rapid fire order does indeed exsist.

You cant put aside a point blank engagement. That goes to combat situation.

Yes Tater people have argued the average issue. DId you not see the earlier posts?

The outcome of a gun engagement and its correspondance to RL is not clear for all situations. The guns are different the situations are different and the ship conditions are different.

I point once again to the Nautilus sinking the PC in 13 minutes in high seas from 5,000 yards.

I was very clear that it was a combined attack and yes the 9000 ton ship was credited to the Nautilus and so was the PC. In fact, the letter from sub Squadron leader to the Pacific sub commander he points out how pleased he was in reference to the use of the guns to sink enemy shipping.

Guess its time to give my opinion on changes in the deck gun.

Yes I believe a stability mod would make a much better choice Than a overinflated rate of fire because it gives you back choice to at least try.

Combine that with a smaller increase in ROF and subtract some damage from the projectiles in accordance with their size plus increase merchant and escort AI in gun battles and arm almost every thing with deck guns faster.

That should put a crimp on the number of close in engagements and make it real hard to beat a destroyer if not impossible. And, since the close in engagemnents would be much harder you have to fire at a longer distance which means you would need to get a little lucky to hit the ship at the waterline.

And with a lot more armed merchants running around with better AI ratting it would make people who play dead is dead think twice about engaging in a gun battle.

07-01-07, 01:54 AM	#172
NEON DEON Ace of the Deep Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 1,207 Downloads: 39 Uploads: 5	I do not disagree with your AA capability assessment of the 5 inch gun. Never did. Never once wanted it to fire it as an AA weapon. The speed is what I refer to on the 5 inch 25. Earlier in the same patrol. The Nautilus engaged a 1,000 ton Patrol craft in high seas at 5,000 yards and sank her with gunfire in 13 minutes. Yet ---------- I hear it should take much longer to do that and no way can you fire from a sub and sink a ship from that distance in high seas. The Nautilus attacks a 9,000 ton ship with gunfire and one torpedo and sinks her in 18 minutes. Yet ---------------------- I hear from the anti gun patrol that a sub would not attack a ship that big on the surface with gunfire. Tater in almost every post I have made I have said the situation dictates the ROF. A sub did not fire as fast it could all the time in a gun engagement, if that was the case otherwise, then there would be no reason for a RAPID FIRE order. I have shown you just a few posts ago the rapid fire order does indeed exsist. You cant put aside a point blank engagement. That goes to combat situation. Yes Tater people have argued the average issue. DId you not see the earlier posts? The outcome of a gun engagement and its correspondance to RL is not clear for all situations. The guns are different the situations are different and the ship conditions are different. I point once again to the Nautilus sinking the PC in 13 minutes in high seas from 5,000 yards. I was very clear that it was a combined attack and yes the 9000 ton ship was credited to the Nautilus and so was the PC. In fact, the letter from sub Squadron leader to the Pacific sub commander he points out how pleased he was in reference to the use of the guns to sink enemy shipping. Guess its time to give my opinion on changes in the deck gun. Yes I believe a stability mod would make a much better choice Than a overinflated rate of fire because it gives you back choice to at least try. Combine that with a smaller increase in ROF and subtract some damage from the projectiles in accordance with their size plus increase merchant and escort AI in gun battles and arm almost every thing with deck guns faster. That should put a crimp on the number of close in engagements and make it real hard to beat a destroyer if not impossible. And, since the close in engagemnents would be much harder you have to fire at a longer distance which means you would need to get a little lucky to hit the ship at the waterline. And with a lot more armed merchants running around with better AI ratting it would make people who play dead is dead think twice about engaging in a gun battle. __________________ Diesel Boats Forever! Last edited by NEON DEON; 07-01-07 at 02:06 AM.