RUb Depth Charges - a strange incident.

[jason210]

I've been playing RUb all day. I think I can live with the gun - it just takes some getting used to after being spoiled with the default gun for 6 months.

Something that I find hard to accept are the depth charges. I was 108 m underwater, and on the surface was destroyer. In the default SHIII, I would expect to hear a report that depth charges were in the water, but this was not reported in RUb. Ok, I can live with that.

Suddenly and unxepctedly, I heard some depth charges going off. They weren't close, but the sub was badly damaged. I had hull integrity turned on (via SHIII commander) and this remained at 100%, but the rear batteries were destroyed, the main pump destroyed, and most of the rest of the equipment was damaged.Oh, I forgot to say, my radio operator was killed, and I had flooding in several compartments.

I was sinking so I blew the ballast tanks twice. This slowed the sinking down. I managed to get all the water out, and started to come up. I didn't want to break the surface of course, so when I got to 40m I ordered periscope depth. By this time I had repaired everything that could be repaired. As the sub leveled out periscope depth, it began to sink again! I re-ordered periscope depth and we were making 2 kts, so there should have been enough speed for the hydroplanes to keep the depth - but not so. It continued to sink. There were no leaks and there was no water in any compartments. At 47 metres I blew the ballast again and started coming up again. Again, as I neared the surface I ordered periscope depth. The destroyer was still up there, and I did not want to break the surface.

It levelled out at periscope depth, and I raised the periscope and caught a brief glimpse of the Destroyer before the periscope went under...I was sinking again! This time I didn't stop sinking....

I was in a type VIIB and it crushed at 320m.

Three things here. First, the sounds of the explosions did not seem loud enough to have caused all that damage. They were quiet. The damage seemed to happen without any drama. This can't be explained away as unimportant ear candy - the sound and damage have to go together to form the immersive experience.

Second, why was I unable to maintain depth?

Third, why did my radio operator die?

[Beery]

Originally Posted by jason210

I've been playing RUb all day. I think I can live with the gun - it just takes some getting used to after being spoiled with the default gun for 6 months.

Something that I find hard to accept are the depth charges. I was 108 m underwater, and on the surface was destroyer. In the default SHIII, I would expect to hear a report that depth charges were in the water, but this was not reported in RUb. Ok, I can live with that.

Nothing has been changed in terms of depth charge reporting. The crew won't report depth charges if they don't hear them. If the DCs drop behind the sub the engine noise will cover them up. Also, if the hydrophone guy is tired or unqualified he'll do a worse job.

Suddenly and unxepctedly, I heard some depth charges going off. They weren't close, but the sub was badly damaged. I had hull integrity turned on (via SHIII commander) and this remained at 100%, but the rear batteries were destroyed, the main pump destroyed, and most of the rest of the equipment was damaged.Oh, I forgot to say, my radio operator was killed, and I had flooding in several compartments.

I was sinking so I blew the ballast tanks twice. This slowed the sinking down. I managed to get all the water out, and started to come up. I didn't want to break the surface of course, so when I got to 40m I ordered periscope depth. By this time I had repaired everything that could be repaired. As the sub leveled out periscope depth, it began to sink again! I re-ordered periscope depth and we were making 2 kts, so there should have been enough speed for the hydroplanes to keep the depth - but not so. It continued to sink. There were no leaks and there was no water in any compartments. At 47 metres I blew the ballast again and started coming up again. Again, as I neared the surface I ordered periscope depth. The destroyer was still up there, and I did not want to break the surface.

It levelled out at periscope depth, and I raised the periscope and caught a brief glimpse of the Destroyer before the periscope went under...I was sinking again! This time I didn't stop sinking....

I was in a type VIIB and it crushed at 320m.

Sounds like an exciting and nail-biting patrol. Pity it ended in death. The next version of SH3 Commander includes a 'Surrender' option. You will have the ability to surrender your boat if you're willing to let discretion be the better part of valour.

Three things here. First, the sounds of the explosions did not seem loud enough to have caused all that damage. They were quiet. The damage seemed to happen without any drama. This can't be explained away as unimportant ear candy - the sound and damage have to go together to form the immersive experience.

The depth charge explosion sounds are unchanged from the standard SH3 sounds. This may be a bug in the standard game, or it may be that the DCs exploded at the rear of your boat (which goes along with the fact that you didn't hear them in the water, although it doesn't explain the amount of damage throughout the boat). RUb does indeed make depth charges have more impact on the interior equipment. It makes damage less immediately deadly. One thing to note is that DCs in RUb are substantially LESS damaging than in standard SH3.

Second, why was I unable to maintain depth?

The flooding in RUb has a much greater impact on your ability to stay buoyant than in the standard game. What happened was that you blew ballast, twice, but the boat was still flooding. Maybe you had the flooding somewhat under control, but when it came time to blow ballast a third time there was probably not enough pressure in the ballast tanks to surface the boat. When you tried to surface by using your dive planes, either they were damaged, or your batteries were flooded, or your engines were damaged, or perhaps your boat had simply taken on too much water. Any one of these would have caused your attempt to fail.

Third, why did my radio operator die?

I've no idea. When SH3 calculates damage I think it assigns it based on the proximity of the compartment to the blast. If the damage is too much for a man in that compartment he will die. Maybe he was thrown off balance by the blast, or maybe he had some other accident.

[jason210]

Thanks. It was a good patrol but the first time I came to periscope depth I had 25% compressed air left, so I hadn't run out when I sank the first time.

I guess, like the gun, I'll get used to this new interior damage, but it seems a bit strong when major equipment is actually destroyed. As you said, it's a pity it ended in depth - but there was nothing I could do. If I'd surfaced that would have been the end too.

[Kissaki]

But didn't you say there was no water in any compartments? The u-boat commanders on shore are worried...

[Beery]

Originally Posted by Kissaki

But didn't you say there was no water in any compartments? The u-boat commanders on shore are worried...

True, he did say there was no water in the compartments. I missed that one. However, if he was already down to 25% compressed air when he sank the first time, then he must have had very little after he blew ballast the second time. If he had no compressed air (or too little) and perhaps no propulsion (or a damaged system that killed the propulsion), he would sink.

[BipBip]

I have another question about this accident :

Were your depth planes (bow or aft) damaged ?
Did you put power to help your sub in its rising ?

[Kissaki]

Originally Posted by Beery

True, he did say there was no water in the compartments. I missed that one. However, if he was already down to 25% compressed air when he sank the first time, then he must have had very little after he blew ballast the second time. If he had no compressed air (or too little) and perhaps no propulsion (or a damaged system that killed the propulsion), he would sink.

Well, he had 2 kts. which I would think insufficient - but would a sub sink for lack of compressed air? I'm no technical expert, but if that is indeed the case it looks like I'm going to have to go through some new safety routines and regulations with my crew!

[Beery]

Originally Posted by Kissaki

Well, he had 2 kts. which I would think insufficient - but would a sub sink for lack of compressed air? I'm no technical expert, but if that is indeed the case it looks like I'm going to have to go through some new safety routines and regulations with my crew!

I found that (when I was using SH3 version 1.3) if I was running silent at 3 knots, the boat had a tendency to sink. This was with no mods affecting the damage or the buoyancy). I'm not sure what SH3 1.4b does - I haven't noticed that same sinking tendency recently. I think if a U-boat had no propulsion (or too little) and no compressed air it would almost definitely sink. U-boats retain buoyancy by a mixture of ballast and propulsion. If neither is sufficient to maintain neutral buoyancy it will sink. I think the air contained in the boat's crew compartments is not enough, on its own, to surface the boat even if it is at a shallow depth.

[Mr.Fleck]

The tendency to sink is still there in SH3 1.4b (with RUb 144), but it seems to occur very seldom. I experienced it last night. Below 3 knots my sub was sinking. At 4 knots and above I could get higher. My boat was not damaged and the zentrale was at 100% efficiency. I think SH3 does not model the fact that the pumps are not working below 150 meters (at least I think this is the depth). Else the added water weight could explain the sinking.
Does someone know how the "sinking effect" is triggered? The next three times I submerged I experienced no sinking at all (even at 0 knots over 1-2 hours which definitely is not very realistic)

I'm not sure where I read it but as I recall "Schleichfahrt" at 90 rmp (corresponds to aprox. 1 knot) and proper dive plane settings should be sufficient to keep the depth of a Type VII (with neutral buoyancy).

[Jungman]

I notice that below about 200+ meters, the Uboat will sink slowly if not moving forward a small amount of speed. In shallower water, I do not sink at all at zero speed.

In my testing of a new mod, I notice the changes made to floatability and critical floatability could cause bouyance problems not so noticeable. It was changed to get more flooding time.

I stay away from it, what happens is your Uboat is too 'floaty', and then if you happen to get enough physical damage to be below critical floatation (which is reduced almost to zero) you will experience something like that, sink like a rock.

Normally your chance of compartment damage landing in that small spot is very unlucky. Was one of your comparments almost completely destroyed in the red? The color sometimes is not correct with the text due to increase HP made to it.

[Beery]

I just had the exact same experience as Jason210. I kept blowing ballast and stopping at periscope depth. I had some bad damage but the main thing I noticed was that the electric motors weren't working. I was still going along at 2kts, but the motors weren't working. Because of the damage I kept see-sawing up and down, alternately sinking and blowing ballast. Eventually I surfaced and got attacked and sunk. But it felt right. With a badly damaged boat things go wrong very quickly and the boat's trim is what tends to go wrong first.

[Kissaki]

Originally Posted by Beery

I think if a U-boat had no propulsion (or too little) and no compressed air it would almost definitely sink.

I don't see why the amount of compressed air would affect buoyancy. When one spends compressed air to blow the ballast tanks, it is not replaced by anything heavier. Even air has positive weight, and is certainly heavier than vacuum. Having no compressed air left would therefore make the sub lighter, though not significantly.

[Beery]

Originally Posted by Kissaki

I don't see why the amount of compressed air would affect buoyancy. When one spends compressed air to blow the ballast tanks, it is not replaced by anything heavier. Even air has positive weight, and is certainly heavier than vacuum. Having no compressed air left would therefore make the sub lighter, though not significantly.

My point was simply that without any means of giving the sub positive buoyancy it would sink. submerged U-boats, if they are without ballast, are heavier than the water around them.

[Kissaki]

Originally Posted by Beery

My point was simply that without any means of giving the sub positive buoyancy it would sink. submerged U-boats, if they are without ballast, are heavier than the water around them.

If they are without ballast? Without compressed air, you mean? Because you can't get a sub lighter than having no ballast - and I've been able to surface without blowing ballast tanks and with no propulsion.

[Beery]

Originally Posted by Kissaki

If they are without ballast? Without compressed air, you mean? Because you can't get a sub lighter than having no ballast - and I've been able to surface without blowing ballast tanks and with no propulsion.

Yeah, without compressed air is what I mean. You can surface without blowing ballast and without propulsion. As I understand it, it's a very annoying flaw in the simulation.