M10, M14 - M6 detonation malfunctions

[Rose]

SHIV needs to include the dismal failure of the M14/M6 torpedo. THere were three major malfunctions: the fish ran about 10 feet deeper than depth setting, the M6 detonator exploded prematurely WAY too much, and there were an obscene amount of duds. Not until Dec. '43 was the M14 perfected. I think if SHIV included these problems, it would greatly add to the realism.

I agree. One of my disappointments in SHIII is that the similar torpedo problems the Germans suffered is much diluted in the game.

[DeepSix]

I'd like it if the Mark XIV problems were corrected in stages - as they were historically. Have the option to disable the magnetic exploder first, then a few months later get improved magnetic exploders only to discover that the contact exploder is still faulty, etc.

The Mark XIV was probably the single worst weapon ever fielded (well, except for that French machine gun we were issued in WWI) by the U.S. until its multiple failures got sorted out. That didn't happen overnight or all at once, so yeah I'd like to see faulty torpedoes, too, as well as a fairly realistic period of time for improving them.

[Torplexed]

Of course I can already hear the chorus of complaints about all the #@*% duds from the first-person shooter types who know diddly about USN submarine operations in WW2....but just wanna sink things.

[don1reed]

fwiw: Some years ago, I picked up a 4 vhs set from the history channel re The Silent Service
The Torpedoes of WWII
The Captains of WWII
The Boats of WWII
& The Attack plans of WWII

narrated by Roger Mudd...great stuff. donno if it's still available; but, the torpedo problems of deep runners, magnetic influence detonators, and impact detonators ran submariners ragged for two years. It was truely a harrowing story.

I've run these things to where almost all the emulsion is rubbed off the tapes we're all getting old.

[Rose]

1. What happened if a ships' draft was shallower than 11 feet? (I guess they'd use the deck gun for that small of a ship?)

2. Why the hell didn't skippers just revert to the old Mark 10s till the 14s were sorted out?

And 3. How in God's name did "Mush" Morton on his epic first patrol manage to acheive such a great torpedo success rate considering the malfunctions of the 14s of that time?

[DeepSix]

Originally Posted by Rose

1. What happened if a ships' draft was shallower than 11 feet? (I guess they'd use the deck gun for that small of a ship?)

2. Why the hell didn't skippers just revert to the old Mark 10s till the 14s were sorted out?

And 3. How in God's name did "Mush" Morton on his epic first patrol manage to acheive such a great torpedo success rate considering the malfunctions of the 14s of that time?

1. Some used the gun, some used torpedoes anyway, some didn't attack. Blair gives a pretty good overall account in Silent Victory, including how different skippers felt about attacking native fishing boats, trawlers, sailing vessels, etc. [Edit: Theoretically, the Mark XIV could hit shallow draft vessels.]

2. Don't know the whole answer, but one reason was that the brass absolutely insisted on using both the Mark XIV and the Mark VI until well into 1942. Part of the problem with the Mk 14 was that the designers and the admirals put a lot of faith in it and thought it was the skippers who were aiming poorly rather than the fish that were malfunctioning.

There were probably also technical reasons for not using the older torpedoes in newer subs - shortages, age, ability to load and fire with newer subs, etc. But I'm not as familiar with the technical part. I think the older boats (like the 'S'-class) still used them, though. Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong about any of this.

3. He was partly lucky in that some of his Mk. 14s worked. Even then, of the first six torpedoes he shot at a single destroyer, only one hit. He was also aggressive - almost recklessly so. Also, part of his success came from what he claimed he sank and what their tonnages were. Morton "wore" his patrol success - sailing into Pearl Harbor with a broom tied to the shears. He also gained notoriety (or infamy) from the shooting incident - he was bound to be the subject of scuttlebutt. Last but not least, after that patrol, the brass credited him with everything he claimed (they didn't always do that) - five ships for 32,000 tons. JANAC reduced that after the war, however, to three for 11,300. But by then he had already become famous. Again, hope somebody will correct any errors in that.

[don1reed]

Originally Posted by Rose

1. What happened if a ships' draft was shallower than 11 feet? (I guess they'd use the deck gun for that small of a ship?)

2. Why the hell didn't skippers just revert to the old Mark 10s till the 14s were sorted out?

And 3. How in God's name did "Mush" Morton on his epic first patrol manage to acheive such a great torpedo success rate considering the malfunctions of the 14s of that time?

One of the major problems as discussed in Blair and the history channel vhs tapes was the politics of the "Good Old Boys" club of the Newport Torpedo Station of the Navy's Bureau of Ordinance. They hand built the weapons and they didn't believe that their ****e could stink.

Before the war, they only tested two torpedoes. The first one didn't work and the second one did....so, that ended their test. In effect the USN then went to war with weapons that had a 50% chance of not working. Another factor was that being handmade the dam things cost $10,000 ea. and were deemed too expensive to train with. So, again, no one in the Navy during the beginning of WWII never even heard what a Mk 14 sounded like (if) it would expode.

In the pre-war years, the sub skippers were trained to be timid and not aggressive. If their scopes were observed by surface ships during a training exorcise, they could loose their commands. Hard cheese all around.

After two years of putting their arses in harms way for nada, of hit 'n miss with the blasted things...the skippers screamed loud and hard. Their Commander, RAdm Chas Lockwood, heard them and made his own tests and proved the skippers were telling the truth that the torps were hosed up...

Bureau of Ord...said you guys are crazy. Your not aiming properly, your not compensating for proper ballast..yada yada. Lockwood did another test into fishing net and also into underwater cliff. The fishing net proved that the Mk14 was running 11' lower than set. The cliff test proved that the impact detonator was bad. Whats funny is years before the war, Bur of Ord, asked Einstein to review their nose cone of the Mk14...He told them back then that it needed more space to impact properly...they deregarded his recommendations.

Also, think about the hardhat Navy diver that dived on the faulty torp at the cliff for a minute. He recovered it unharmed, but, Yep, thats what Memorial Day is all about, gents.

All the best,

[DeepSix]

Originally Posted by don1reed

....Also, think about the hardhat Navy diver that dived on the faulty torp at the cliff for a minute. He recovered it unharmed, but, Yep, thats what Memorial Day is all about, gents.

All the best,

You know, I think subsim.com needs a "salute" emoticon for that. I read about the hardhat dives on the stricken Squalus as well - those Navy divers did some truly amazing and pioneering work. Happy Memorial Day!

[don1reed]

...same atcha!

btw: Navy divers, hardhat, 1 ea.

Think about ... what they had to do at Pearl all after 7 Dec 41.
Think about ... walking guard on the pier at oh dark thirty on that date, listening to the guys trapped inside overturned sunken ships, beating on the hulls to let folks know they're still alive.

[PeriscopeDepth]

SHIII was a disappointment for me too because the way they did (or rather, didn't) model the torp malfunctions. SHI modeled the Mk 14s malfunctions VERY well IMO.

PD

[Subnuts]

Originally Posted by PeriscopeDepth

SHIII was a disappointment for me too because the way they did (or rather, didn't) model the torp malfunctions. SHI modeled the Mk 14s malfunctions VERY well IMO.

PD

I once made a custom mission in SH1 where I had a Nagato-class BB sitting 800 yards in front of me, and I turned off "limted ammo" and "realistic reloads" in the realism settings. I set my Mk 14s to explode under her keel, and I think maybe one in 100 shots the magnetic detonator actually worked. I can't remember what damage percentage I got, though.

[Rose]

I just bought Silent Victory and LtCmdr Fluckey's book off Amazon, so I expect to be very educated on the subject before SH4 comes out . I read in the Time-Life WWII series book called War Under the Pacific that BuOrd DID do multiple tests, but they didn't test with the real detonators. As don1read said, the handmaid fish were 10,000 dollars; BuOrd was not willing to expend that amount of money on destroying perfectly "good" torps. So during their tests, BuOrd used a warhead filled with water instead of the TNT mixture used in war-time. As it turned out, the TNT was significantly heavier than the water, thus the fish sank about 11 feet deeper.

Also, DeepSix, you mention the Mark 11? I have not heard of this... please enlighten me. And I know in '43 (?) they came out with another "super-weopon," the Mark 18. Was this just a the same thing as a Mark 14, but with a more powerful charge, and without the Mk 6 detonator?

[Donner]

To the devs and well as anyone with the slightest interest in the topic, I would recommend "Hellions of the Deep: The Development of American Torpedoes in World War II" by Robert Gannon. ISBN: 027101508X.

You can find used editions for $5 and up.

This is THE book on the subject.

[DeepSix]

Originally Posted by Rose

...I read in the Time-Life WWII series book called War Under the Pacific that BuOrd DID do multiple tests, but they didn't test with the real detonators. ...

Good purchases on your books! Blair gives an excellent layman's history of the development of both subs and torpedoes; I haven't heard of Hellions of the Deep, but I may have to pick that one up myself. I'm sure it goes into more detail, so Donner's recommendation is probably the way to go if you decide you want to get into the technical stuff.

Also, DeepSix, you mention the Mark 11?

I did? I must have written something that misled you - my apologies. Perhaps it was my use of Roman numerals - "XIV" is 14 and "VI" is 6 - I was referring to the magnetic exploder. Sorry for the confusion.

As for the "super weapon:" there were a couple of important torpedo developments made during the war. The Mark 18 (XVIII) was an electric torpedo that was actually in development before the war. Its development progressed slowly and it, too, had its share of problems to begin with, but if I recall correctly these were not as severe as the ones the Mark 14 had. Eventually the Mark 18 came to be used as much as the Mark 14 steam torpedo. Another one that was developed - not sure if you'd call it a super weapon or not - was the "Cutie," an acoustically guided torpedo that began to be used toward the end of 1944 (I think).

Anyway - hope that clears things up a little. Much more in Blair!