IX Real life torpedo loadout vs sh3

abel29a · 10-07-07, 10:55 AM

I'm currently reading Operation Drumbeat, a great book about the second happy time in general and Reinhard Hardegen and U-123 specifically. On his two patrols to America Hardegen, in a IXC uboat, apparently only took his internal load of eels with him. According to the author of the book he had 14 available. For the second patrol it was mentioned he brought along 2 external ones.

My question is - can anyone clarify for me why he didn't take a full load of externals? Was this routinely done? If so, is this something I should do as well on long patrols to play more "realistic"?

bigboywooly · 10-07-07, 11:16 AM

Not sure why he wouldnt take all the eels possible
To be historical ALL ext torps should be steam only as they need a lot less\no maintenance

Perhaps he didnt want to run the risk of Steam fish being kept in outside stowage for that length of time
Perhaps he wanted a lighter load

Could be many reasons

melnibonian · 10-07-07, 11:19 AM

If I remember correctly there were two reasons why some boats were not having a full external torpedo load

1. The allied air cover was devastating so the boats had little chances to actually move the external torpedoes inside the boat.

2. At some point (later than the first attack in US waters though) it was discovered that depth charges cracked open the containers on the deck of the U-Boat. That meant that the boat was vulnerable (lower "Hull Integrity basically") and the torpedoes were damaged.

abel29a · 10-07-07, 12:11 PM

Yeah I was thinking maybe something along the lines of AC cover myself, but seeing as aircover over the Eastern seaboard was an unknown, it would be prudent to bring externals along in case (as it turned out) AC cover was insignificant.

As for the lighter load, 10 externals couldn't have weighed more than 5-10 tons at the most I'd guess - but maybe it would have been to much of an extra load in terms of fuel efficency.

bigboywooly · 10-07-07, 12:18 PM

Wel other boats took a full load AFAIK so maybe just a personal choice

Still he sank 10 ships each trip IIRC

10-07-07, 10:55 AM	#1
abel29a Helmsman Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Trondheim, Norway Posts: 101 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	IX Real life torpedo loadout vs sh3 I'm currently reading Operation Drumbeat, a great book about the second happy time in general and Reinhard Hardegen and U-123 specifically. On his two patrols to America Hardegen, in a IXC uboat, apparently only took his internal load of eels with him. According to the author of the book he had 14 available. For the second patrol it was mentioned he brought along 2 external ones. My question is - can anyone clarify for me why he didn't take a full load of externals? Was this routinely done? If so, is this something I should do as well on long patrols to play more "realistic"? __________________ "Sieben Tankern schlug die letze Stund, die U-Falle sank träger. Zwei Frachter liegen mit auf Grund, Versenkt vom Paukenschläger." - Reinhard Hardegen, U-123 GWX 1.03 and loving it....

10-07-07, 11:16 AM	#2
bigboywooly Rear Admiral Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Swindon, England Posts: 10,151 Downloads: 35 Uploads: 0	Not sure why he wouldnt take all the eels possible To be historical ALL ext torps should be steam only as they need a lot less\no maintenance Perhaps he didnt want to run the risk of Steam fish being kept in outside stowage for that length of time Perhaps he wanted a lighter load Could be many reasons __________________ My mediafire page http://www.mediafire.com/?11eoq19bq9r41

10-07-07, 11:19 AM	#3
melnibonian Ocean Warrior Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Reading UK Posts: 3,473 Downloads: 90 Uploads: 0	If I remember correctly there were two reasons why some boats were not having a full external torpedo load 1. The allied air cover was devastating so the boats had little chances to actually move the external torpedoes inside the boat. 2. At some point (later than the first attack in US waters though) it was discovered that depth charges cracked open the containers on the deck of the U-Boat. That meant that the boat was vulnerable (lower "Hull Integrity basically") and the torpedoes were damaged. __________________ http://www.thegreywolves.com/ http://wolvesatwar.com/ Download GWX and other goodies: http://hosted.filefront.com/melnibonian

10-07-07, 12:11 PM	#4
abel29a Helmsman Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Trondheim, Norway Posts: 101 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	Yeah I was thinking maybe something along the lines of AC cover myself, but seeing as aircover over the Eastern seaboard was an unknown, it would be prudent to bring externals along in case (as it turned out) AC cover was insignificant. As for the lighter load, 10 externals couldn't have weighed more than 5-10 tons at the most I'd guess - but maybe it would have been to much of an extra load in terms of fuel efficency. __________________ "Sieben Tankern schlug die letze Stund, die U-Falle sank träger. Zwei Frachter liegen mit auf Grund, Versenkt vom Paukenschläger." - Reinhard Hardegen, U-123 GWX 1.03 and loving it....

10-07-07, 12:18 PM	#5
bigboywooly Rear Admiral Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Swindon, England Posts: 10,151 Downloads: 35 Uploads: 0	Wel other boats took a full load AFAIK so maybe just a personal choice Still he sank 10 ships each trip IIRC __________________ My mediafire page http://www.mediafire.com/?11eoq19bq9r41