Under Running Torpedoes

AVGWarhawk · 01-04-08, 08:28 AM

All here who hate under running torpedoes all say 'aye'.

1941, S-Class, sticking my neck out in the Luzon. Warships abound. Boat full of deep swimmers

Where is the Admiral? I got a bone to pick

. One lousy sinking. 48 days at sea in my slug of a sugarboat. Nothing worse than hearing you torp go 'glunk' on the side of a vessel. Should have joined the air force.

ReallyDedPoet · 01-04-08, 08:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

All here who hate under running torpedoes all say 'aye'.

1941, S-Class, sticking my neck out in the Luzon. Warships abound. Boat full of deep swimmers

Where is the Admiral? I got a bone to pick

. One lousy sinking. 48 days at sea in my slug of a sugarboat. Should have joined the air force.

Yeah I was reading up on this the other night AVG, early on torps were a nightmare

RDP

DavyJonesFootlocker · 01-04-08, 08:44 AM

Yes, I know the feeling. I'd rather be strapped into a Hurricane Mk IID armed with a pair of 40mm cannon and strafe the living daylights out of the ships. Those early skippers must've cursed everything under the sun at those torps.

SteamWake · 01-04-08, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

All here who hate under running torpedoes all say 'aye'.

1941, S-Class, sticking my neck out in the Luzon. Warships abound. Boat full of deep swimmers

Where is the Admiral? I got a bone to pick

. One lousy sinking. 48 days at sea in my slug of a sugarboat. Nothing worse than hearing you torp go 'glunk' on the side of a vessel. Should have joined the air force.

Ooof tough patrol. Better luck next time

AVGWarhawk · 01-04-08, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Quote:

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

All here who hate under running torpedoes all say 'aye'.

1941, S-Class, sticking my neck out in the Luzon. Warships abound. Boat full of deep swimmers

Where is the Admiral? I got a bone to pick

. One lousy sinking. 48 days at sea in my slug of a sugarboat. Nothing worse than hearing you torp go 'glunk' on the side of a vessel. Should have joined the air force.

Ooof tough patrol. Better luck next time

As a result of questioning the Admiral aggressively, I'm now peeling potatos in the brig

tater · 01-04-08, 12:13 PM

Done right, they should always run ~4ft deep.

AVGWarhawk · 01-04-08, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tater

Done right, they should always run ~4ft deep.

RUN!!! IT'S THE ADMIRAL!!!!!!

NO, THEY ARE NOT BROKEN SKIPPER....YOU ARE BROKEN....NOW GET BACK OUT THERE AND SINK A SHIP!!!!!

I set them to as shallow as it will allow and I get under runners. Oh well, word has it they get better in 43'.

TheSatyr · 01-04-08, 02:33 PM

I had a rather bad experience with under runners. Was patrolling the Luzon Strait in an S-Boat,ran into a 2 DD patrol,had a perfect set up on the DDs and fired 2 torps at each DD. 2 Torps hit the first DD and she blew up and the 2 torps fired at the other DD were under runners.

Unfortunately for me,the second DD picked me up on sonar immediately and his first DC run was a thing of beauty. He had a perfect drop and sunk me. I didn't know whether to applaud or scream at him.

Both DDs were Fubuki class and all the torps were set at the same depth,so I just had some bad luck with the last 2 torps.

AVGWarhawk · 01-04-08, 03:02 PM

This was last nights patrol. 1200 yards off. DD had his port side to me. Perfect shot, 90 degrees off my bow. The DD saw my torp wake but the first torp should have clipped him. It under ran. The DD speed up and cut hard to starboard. Believe it or not, he cut hard and fast enough to present his starboard side to my three other torps coming at him. They all under ran him

Come on....what luck to have the 3 of the four still coming to hit him on the complete opposite side!!! I smiling like a kid in a candy store up to the point they all under ran

TheSatyr · 01-04-08, 03:08 PM

I know what you mean. The first torp that under ran would have hit right between the stacks. He started turning to port,but my second torp went right under his bridge. Then he goes to full speed,turns to starboard,starts pinging me hard and turns my sub into an artificial reef.:rotfl:

TheSatyr · 01-04-08, 03:10 PM

Even with the stock game I still find myself surprised alot with some of the reactions of escorts in the game. Some are dumb as rocks,others are masters at their craft. Rather realistic if you ask me.

AVGWarhawk · 01-04-08, 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSatyr

Even with the stock game I still find myself surprised alot with some of the reactions of escorts in the game. Some are dumb as rocks,others are masters at their craft. Rather realistic if you ask me.

Funny you say that because day one when I played (vanilla) I experience the same thing. All said they all suck. I use RFB now with Petos Longer Evasion mod. Some are great and some are dumb. Then there are others that are hell recarnated.

TheSatyr · 01-04-08, 03:23 PM

I never understood all the complaints about the Stock Escort AI. I always found the Escorts to have fairly realistic behavior. You have the bums and the killers and since 1.04 I'm running into more killers than bums.

My only complaint is that SH4 needs more ship models,especially the later war Japanese escorts. I wouldn't mind seeing the Nautilus and Narwhal either...but then they were only used for normal patrols in the early part of the war. They spent most of their wartime careers running special missions.

Ducimus · 01-04-08, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tater

Done right, they should always run ~4ft deep.

In TM, even if you set the torpedo to the shallowest possible depth, you still have a chance of having the torpedo run right under the keel of most any ship. (aren't i a mean SOB? :p )

TheSatyr · 01-04-08, 03:35 PM

I think MkXIVs should be completely random when it comes to depth keeping. When they did the net tests those things were all over the place. From being off by a few feet to being off by 20ft or more. They just came up with the 10ft difference as an average.

It never pays to do Official BuOrd torpedo depth running tests with dummy warheads that are alot lighter than real warheads,but then that's the Military for you.

01-04-08, 08:28 AM	#1
AVGWarhawk Lucky Jack Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: In a 1954 Buick. Posts: 28,256 Downloads: 90 Uploads: 0	Under Running Torpedoes All here who hate under running torpedoes all say 'aye'. 1941, S-Class, sticking my neck out in the Luzon. Warships abound. Boat full of deep swimmers Where is the Admiral? I got a bone to pick. One lousy sinking. 48 days at sea in my slug of a sugarboat. Nothing worse than hearing you torp go 'glunk' on the side of a vessel. Should have joined the air force. __________________ “You're painfully alive in a drugged and dying culture.” ― Richard Yates, Revolutionary Road

01-04-08, 03:02 PM	#9
AVGWarhawk Lucky Jack Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: In a 1954 Buick. Posts: 28,256 Downloads: 90 Uploads: 0	This was last nights patrol. 1200 yards off. DD had his port side to me. Perfect shot, 90 degrees off my bow. The DD saw my torp wake but the first torp should have clipped him. It under ran. The DD speed up and cut hard to starboard. Believe it or not, he cut hard and fast enough to present his starboard side to my three other torps coming at him. They all under ran him Come on....what luck to have the 3 of the four still coming to hit him on the complete opposite side!!! I smiling like a kid in a candy store up to the point they all under ran __________________ “You're painfully alive in a drugged and dying culture.” ― Richard Yates, Revolutionary Road

01-04-08, 08:44 AM	#3
DavyJonesFootlocker The Old Man Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Stink Drunk in Trinidad Posts: 1,572 Downloads: 138 Uploads: 0	Yes, I know the feeling. I'd rather be strapped into a Hurricane Mk IID armed with a pair of 40mm cannon and strafe the living daylights out of the ships. Those early skippers must've cursed everything under the sun at those torps.

01-04-08, 12:13 PM	#6
tater Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: New Mexico, USA Posts: 9,023 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 2	Done right, they should always run ~4ft deep.

01-04-08, 02:33 PM	#8
TheSatyr Captain Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 545 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	I had a rather bad experience with under runners. Was patrolling the Luzon Strait in an S-Boat,ran into a 2 DD patrol,had a perfect set up on the DDs and fired 2 torps at each DD. 2 Torps hit the first DD and she blew up and the 2 torps fired at the other DD were under runners. Unfortunately for me,the second DD picked me up on sonar immediately and his first DC run was a thing of beauty. He had a perfect drop and sunk me. I didn't know whether to applaud or scream at him. Both DDs were Fubuki class and all the torps were set at the same depth,so I just had some bad luck with the last 2 torps.

01-04-08, 03:08 PM	#10
TheSatyr Captain Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 545 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	I know what you mean. The first torp that under ran would have hit right between the stacks. He started turning to port,but my second torp went right under his bridge. Then he goes to full speed,turns to starboard,starts pinging me hard and turns my sub into an artificial reef.:rotfl:

01-04-08, 03:10 PM	#11
TheSatyr Captain Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 545 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Even with the stock game I still find myself surprised alot with some of the reactions of escorts in the game. Some are dumb as rocks,others are masters at their craft. Rather realistic if you ask me.

01-04-08, 03:23 PM	#13
TheSatyr Captain Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 545 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	I never understood all the complaints about the Stock Escort AI. I always found the Escorts to have fairly realistic behavior. You have the bums and the killers and since 1.04 I'm running into more killers than bums. My only complaint is that SH4 needs more ship models,especially the later war Japanese escorts. I wouldn't mind seeing the Nautilus and Narwhal either...but then they were only used for normal patrols in the early part of the war. They spent most of their wartime careers running special missions.

01-04-08, 03:35 PM	#15
TheSatyr Captain Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 545 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	I think MkXIVs should be completely random when it comes to depth keeping. When they did the net tests those things were all over the place. From being off by a few feet to being off by 20ft or more. They just came up with the 10ft difference as an average. It never pays to do Official BuOrd torpedo depth running tests with dummy warheads that are alot lighter than real warheads,but then that's the Military for you.