![]() |
SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997 |
![]() |
#1 |
Navy Seal
![]() Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 9,023
Downloads: 8
Uploads: 2
|
![]()
Japanese DF capability was supposed to be decent, but I'm unsure of their capabilites at sea. Certainly this capability was an assumption of prewar USN doctrine, and why our subs kept quiet.
Radar detection is more vague, though I seem to recall reading about attempted setups (using radar) that the US skipper thought was detected. I ask because all the sns files have blank spots for DF and radar detection gear... tater |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
Seaman
![]() Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Kitchener, Ontario
Posts: 35
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Navy Seal
![]() Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 9,023
Downloads: 8
Uploads: 2
|
![]()
Cool. I looked in the sensors dat file, and I cant see DF or RWR stuff in there though, so it might be moot.
I was thinking more of just "detection" rather than location, really. Probably very late war. tater |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Sonar Guy
![]() Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Newfoundland,Canada
Posts: 398
Downloads: 6
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
Ahh a Fellow Canaidian
![]() How are ya? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
The Old Man
![]() Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,434
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
I have read accounts of IJN using radar detection for US subs near the end of the war. The story of the Shinano sinking mentions detecting the US sub radar (they KNEW it was a US military radar and suspected it was a sub) which instigated an attempt by one of the escorts to find the sub which nearly succeded until the carrier captain got nervous and called the escort back in fear of a possible wolfpack.
-Pv- |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Seaman
![]() Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 40
Downloads: 8
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
Japanese land based RDF was excellent. It's possible that that capability was instrumental in the loss of Amberjack, Grampus, and Triton during Adm Fife's early 43 "playing checkers with submarines" campaign, in which he required the boats to maintain more frequent radio contact than was the norm.
However Japanese shipborne RDF capability was not as good, certainly nowhere near the level of sophistication achieved by the Allies. My impression is that crews on IJN ships could fairly regularly intercept radio transmissions from nearby Allied subs, and make decently accurate assumptions about their proximity, but not bearing. The Japanese had shipborne radar warning receivers; both metric- and centimetric-wavelength RWR's were operational by April 1944, and they slowly found their way into the fleet. Late 44 might be considered the date at which they were in fairly widespread use. Capabilities as follows: E-27 (Kai-3) detected radar signals of 0.75-4.0 meters at ranges up to 300km using non-directional antennae mounted on each side of the bridge plus a "Racket" style antenna mounted on a rotatable pedestal to determine bearing of signal. 2500 units were delivered. Model 3 (3 Gata) detected radar signals of 3-75 centimeters through a small directional bridge-mounted parabolic antenna. 200 units were delivered. I don't have much operational data on the use of these devices within the IJN, and in particular, how many centimetric-wavelength RWR sets were installed, and by when. A fleet full of meter-wavelength RWRs in 1944 would have done them very little good. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Navy Seal
![]() Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 9,023
Downloads: 8
Uploads: 2
|
![]()
I figured out how to add sensors just now.
Now I need to see if the RWR and DF nodes were just stuff they planned to add but never did. tater |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Silent Hunter
![]() Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Riverside, California
Posts: 3,610
Downloads: 41
Uploads: 5
|
![]() Quote:
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|