Hypothetical sub question...

[CptLoonee]

Alright, this might sound awful silly to some of the hardcore realism players (and let me state, I play at 90% realism - only having map contacts and external views on).

But my question is this, given the move away from short-range coastal defense submarines like the S-boats to the idea of a true fleet boat culminating in the successful Gato and Balao subs, would it have been FEASIBLE to upgrade the older, larger Narwhal-class boats into more capable fleet boats - specifically, with upgraded engines giving them a max speed of 19-20 knots (as opposed to their almost never actually reached, 17kt top speed) and extending their range significantly?

I know that we DIDN'T do that because the there were only two ships in the class and they were used often for special ops missions, and they represented a time in US sub development when we were truly confused about what subs should be. The Narwhal was developed to be a "submarine cruiser" that sure looked intimidating but was never really great as a sub or a surface ship. It certainly had potential, but by the outbreak of the war, I believe that ship had literally sailed.

But, I really love the boat and wish to use it in a true fleet boat role, and to do so am seeking some sense of historical feasibility (basically an excuse lol) in somewhat boosting some stats of this boat (most notably increasing its truly awful range) as a not wholly unrealistic representation of a fictional "upgraded Narwhal-class V-boat."

Many of you know these boats inside and out better than I. My question is really, if we had wished to go through the effort to upgrade an obsolete boat, could it have been done in a way that would make it comparable in range and speed to the Gatos and Balaos (I know they could do little about the bad handling, slow dives and shallow test depth)?

I'm not looking to make an uber boat. I just want my stylized fictional captain to command a unique fictional boat that at least COULD have feasibly existed given the technological capabilities of the time (mid 1942 campaign).

[razark]

Considering the boats were designed and built in the '20s, I doubt they would have been worth upgrading. Swapping out engines would probably have been the easy part, but by the 1940s, the hulls were over a decade old, and there would have been no way to bring those up to current specifications. I'm not sure how fitting modern equipment into the boats would have worked. Off the top of my head, I don't know what equipment they were upgraded to during the war, but I would guess that some stuff would be hard to fit into such an old design. (Given what some sub skippers got away with, and the ingenuity of the shipyards, they probably would have found a way to make it work, though.)

[CptLoonee]

Originally Posted by razark

Considering the boats were designed and built in the '20s, I doubt they would have been worth upgrading. Swapping out engines would probably have been the easy part, but by the 1940s, the hulls were over a decade old, and there would have been no way to bring those up to current specifications. I'm not sure how fitting modern equipment into the boats would have worked. Off the top of my head, I don't know what equipment they were upgraded to during the war, but I would guess that some stuff would be hard to fit into such an old design. (Given what some sub skippers got away with, and the ingenuity of the shipyards, they probably would have found a way to make it work, though.)

You're probably right. I mean I know they couldn't "reinforce the hull" in any way to make it dive deeper, or change its handling characteristics much. I just wondered if maybe someone here knew if the engines on these suckers could be upgraded enough to push a few more knots of speed and increase the range.

It is amazing the level of ingenuity some of the sub crews had. I was recently reading Medal of Honor recipient Eugene Fluckey's book Thunder Below and was amazed to learn that he managed to equip the Barb with a rocket launcher that he used to bombard Japan with - making it the first ever "ballistic missile submarine" lol.

[joefremont]

You mean these ships.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Narwhal_(SS-167)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Nautilus_(SS-168)

I think they were re-engined and modernized. The article for Nautilus says

In July 1941, she entered the Mare Island Naval Shipyard for modernization — radio equipment, external torpedo tubes,[9] re-engining (with Winton diesels),[11] and air conditioning

The overall range of the ship not that far off, 9,380 nmi @ 10 kn vs 11,000nmi @ 10kn for the Gato class. Yes top surface speed was lower but with the way the submarine campaign was waged I don't think that was that significant.

Both Narwhal and Gato had a 300ft test depth so I don't think they were deficient in that area.

[CptLoonee]

Originally Posted by joefremont

You mean these ships.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Narwhal_(SS-167)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Nautilus_(SS-168)

I think they were re-engined and modernized. The article for Nautilus says


The overall range of the ship not that far off, 9,380 nmi @ 10 kn vs 11,000nmi @ 10kn for the Gato class. Yes top surface speed was lower but with the way the submarine campaign was waged I don't think that was that significant.

Both Narwhal and Gato had a 300ft test depth so I don't think they were deficient in that area.

There may be something off with the stats in game (maybe due to mod soup) then, because my Narwhal-class ships have truly awful range compared to the other boats - even the S-boats.

[Stealhead]

I would say no because the V boats had horrible diving times and they also had horrible submerged handling.On top of that they where huge and had a massive profile to sonar.

The other reason the navy did not bother was because they already had developed the fleet boats and these clearly worked well.No reason to speed a lot of time and money working on the V boats to try and improve them to have better surface speed.

The V class boats just where not ideal designs really the cruiser submarine was never really a very good concept in the first place.The size of the boats is what really hurt them there simply where no engines powerful and reliable enough to power them at fleet boat speeds.

Dont get me wrong the V class boats are very interesting from an engineering stand point.

From a feasibility standpoint there is not one because there where no good power plants available for a V boat(especially at the time point you are talking about) and the navy simply would not have put the effort into developing the V class into a "uber fleet boat" because for the cost on one you could have two or three fleet boats that did work well in their role.

[joefremont]

But those twin 6" guns would be interesting, take on those Japanese DD's on the surface.

[CptLoonee]

Originally Posted by Stealhead

I would say no because the V boats had horrible diving times and they also had horrible submerged handling.On top of that they where huge and had a massive profile to sonar.

The other reason the navy did not bother was because they already had developed the fleet boats and these clearly worked well.No reason to speed a lot of time and money working on the V boats to try and improve them to have better surface speed.

The V class boats just where not ideal designs really the cruiser submarine was never really a very good concept in the first place.The size of the boats is what really hurt them there simply where no engines powerful and reliable enough to power them at fleet boat speeds.

Dont get me wrong the V class boats are very interesting from an engineering stand point.

From a feasibility standpoint there is not one because there where no good power plants available for a V boat(especially at the time point you are talking about) and the navy simply would not have put the effort into developing the V class into a "uber fleet boat" because for the cost on one you could have two or three fleet boats that did work well in their role.

While all of those reasons make sense and were likely the reasons why it was not done, the one issue there that I am most interested in is the claim that there were simply no engines available that could have offered an improvement, as my question is not exactly why didn't they do it but could it have actually been done.

If you are correct, then not only was it not efficient to even attempt, but, given time-specific technology available, it was likely impossible.

Still, despite these boats' obvious shortcomings, it is interesting that both of them racked up enviable wartime records.

[CptLoonee]

Originally Posted by joefremont

But those twin 6" guns would be interesting, take on those Japanese DD's on the surface.

I may not have enough information to make this claim, and it may be a little like being the skinny kid at fat camp even if it's true, but I have to think the Narwhal-class boats were the best of the "submarine cruiser" designs. I don't know how capable ships like the Sarcouf or the X1 actually were, but I would think that the idea of a "submarine cruiser," while interesting, would be hard to execute in practice, given the unstable nature of the boats making them difficult gun platforms.

In game, the Narwhal is an excellent gun platform. While I have to think that was not likely true in real life, the 6 inchers, combined with the sheer size of the boat, make it at least look more stable than ships designed for similar roles.

I wonder if there is any documentation on how often (if at all) these two boats actually used these guns against enemy ships (I know they used them for shore bombardment).

[CptLoonee]

Originally Posted by joefremont

But those twin 6" guns would be interesting, take on those Japanese DD's on the surface.

They sure make short work of destroyers in game, especially if you catch them by surprise, at night, decks awash. You can often take out two escorts before they even find you, then it's easy to make short work out of the convoy itself. Though, as Steal noted, the sonar and radar cross section is huge. It seems pretty difficult to lie in wait of wary escorts, though I have gotten pretty decent at sitting on a parallel track (offering a narrow profile), and bending 6 torps (4 forward and 2 aft) in like Beckham (manual targeting of course).

[Armistead]

Originally Posted by CptLoonee

They sure make short work of destroyers in game, especially if you catch them by surprise, at night, decks awash. You can often take out two escorts before they even find you, then it's easy to make short work out of the convoy itself. Though, as Steal noted, the sonar and radar cross section is huge. It seems pretty difficult to lie in wait of wary escorts, though I have gotten pretty decent at sitting on a parallel track (offering a narrow profile), and bending 6 torps (4 forward and 2 aft) in like Beckham (manual targeting of course).

Depends on your mod setup. I use TMO and Travs mod along with my tweaks for a realistic game, wouldn't think of taking on a DD on the surface. Really depends on the visual values, with stock and some mods the enemy can't see you worth a dern, so you can blast them and they never respond.

[CptLoonee]

Originally Posted by Armistead

Depends on your mod setup. I use TMO and Travs mod along with my tweaks for a realistic game, wouldn't think of taking on a DD on the surface. Really depends on the visual values, with stock and some mods the enemy can't see you worth a dern, so you can blast them and they never respond.

I'm using those as well. They see you as soon as you fire, for sure, but it's just that those fast reloading dual 6 inchers make short work of tin cans. It's like they are getting hit by a light cruiser.

[merc4ulfate]

The test depth of the Narwhal was 300. I t would have been cost prohibitive to upgrade a complete pressure hull when you could just as easily build a new boat. Better hulls, better boats but who would really want to spend money tearing everything apart just for a pressure hull? It would cost less to make a new boat.

[Stealhead]

Originally Posted by CptLoonee

While all of those reasons make sense and were likely the reasons why it was not done, the one issue there that I am most interested in is the claim that there were simply no engines available that could have offered an improvement, as my question is not exactly why didn't they do it but could it have actually been done.

If you are correct, then not only was it not efficient to even attempt, but, given time-specific technology available, it was likely impossible.

Still, despite these boats' obvious shortcomings, it is interesting that both of them racked up enviable wartime records.

I think their records is more a credit to their crews and skippers more so than their design.

As to the specific reasons why they did not attempt to produce a better engine I can not say the exact reason.I know in the book "The Fleet Submarine in the US Navy"(the bible of WWII US Navy submarine technical information) the author explains the reason.

As I recall it basically boiled down to the Navy having already decided to move on in design in the mid 30's.Even before WWII the navy was less than impressed with the V class.

Pre war they simply lacked the resources to focus on multiple submarine development projects and the navy wanted to focus on smaller fleet boat engines.Because of this they focused on the fleet boat concept.

The V class boats did get new engines during the war but these merely improved reliability.They used the same engines used in the Cachalot and Cuttlefish.

The reason that the V class boats did so well early in the war was largely due to the fact that there simply was nothing else available to throw into battle and the better fleet boats available where busy patrolling Empire waters.


Really though your described use of the deck guns is not realistic at all in real life those 6 inch guns where not very fast firing at all they had separate powder bags and thus a slower reloading rate not a single piece shell like the 3"/50,4"/50 and the 5"/54.It was also much harder in real life to have good effect with guns at sea like that and even harder on the decks of a sub.

If you are just having fun it is fine but if your goal is to play with realistic restraints (many of which you must self impose) your tactic is not anything a real word skipper would have done.

[CptLoonee]

Originally Posted by Stealhead

I think their records is more a credit to their crews and skippers more so than their design.

As to the specific reasons why they did not attempt to produce a better engine I can not say the exact reason.I know in the book "The Fleet Submarine in the US Navy"(the bible of WWII US Navy submarine technical information) the author explains the reason.

As I recall it basically boiled down to the Navy having already decided to move on in design in the mid 30's.Even before WWII the navy was less than impressed with the V class.

Pre war they simply lacked the resources to focus on multiple submarine development projects and the navy wanted to focus on smaller fleet boat engines.Because of this they focused on the fleet boat concept.

The V class boats did get new engines during the war but these merely improved reliability.They used the same engines used in the Cachalot and Cuttlefish.

The reason that the V class boats did so well early in the war was largely due to the fact that there simply was nothing else available to throw into battle and the better fleet boats available where busy patrolling Empire waters.


Really though your described use of the deck guns is not realistic at all in real life those 6 inch guns where not very fast firing at all they had separate powder bags and thus a slower reloading rate not a single piece shell like the 3"/50,4"/50 and the 5"/54.It was also much harder in real life to have good effect with guns at sea like that and even harder on the decks of a sub.

If you are just having fun it is fine but if your goal is to play with realistic restraints (many of which you must self impose) your tactic is not anything a real word skipper would have done.

Yeah, I had a feeling that the guns fire too fast and are way too stable, but I would bet that they are on ALL subs and ships in this game. I did not know that the Narwhal's 6 inchers required separate powder bags. Why is this? That would be very unwieldy on the deck of a sub!

I wonder if I can turn down the rate of fire substantially and/or increase the roll of the boat a bit to at least somewhat better simulate the deck gun experience.

One thing I was thinking that would make gunnery more difficult on a sub is that most surface ships (at least most American destroyers and larger ships) had dedicated gun directors that allowed them to more accurately locate, site and fire multiple weapons. These were usually located up high and had both optical and radar rangefinders as well access to a fire control "computer."

Clearly, no sub would ever have this type of system and would have to rely on the much more rudimentary local manual control.

Do you know if the Narwhal class ever fired their guns in combat against other ships?