Other Weapons Mod

[MadMike]

What's the max explosive power for a weapon warhead? Curious, since an ASROC with a W44 nuclear warhead had a 10 kiloton yield which equals 10,000 tons of TNT (or 20,000,000 pounds TNT or 9,090,909 kg TNT).
I wonder if that could be tested on an ASTOR torpedo (Mk 45); not sure it's modeled in game but a Mk 37 or Mk 48 could probably work.
The Mk 45 had an anti-circular run feature, speed of 40 knots, and range of 12,000 yds.
The Swordfish nuclear test of 10 Kt (ASROC proof test) showed that a submerged sub could survive 4500 yds from the burst point (at periscope depth).

[The Bandit]

Originally Posted by MadMike

What's the max explosive power for a weapon warhead? Curious, since an ASROC with a W44 nuclear warhead had a 10 kiloton yield which equals 10,000 tons of TNT (or 20,000,000 pounds TNT or 9,090,909 kg TNT).
I wonder if that could be tested on an ASTOR torpedo (Mk 45); not sure it's modeled in game but a Mk 37 or Mk 48 could probably work.
The Mk 45 had an anti-circular run feature, speed of 40 knots, and range of 12,000 yds.
The Swordfish nuclear test of 10 Kt (ASROC proof test) showed that a submerged sub could survive 4500 yds from the burst point (at periscope depth).

Its been attempted. Torpedoes don't have a blast radius in this game, so you can set the damage as high as you'd like, and it will be dealt, but only to whatever it hits. I've made what amounts to a Mk 45 simulator in my OAS mod. The Mk 45 had no terminal guidance/ homing, it had gyros for the initial run setting and wire-guidance for further steering and detonation settings, but it had to be controlled through its whole run.

As far as nuclear stuff goes, in theory you could probably make a nuclear air-dropped depth charge like a Lulu as the air-dropped weapon does have a configurable blast radius, but doing stuff like that you can see why the dev's thought that was a road best not to go down.

You're playing a mission, you think you're quiet, but all the sudden instead of a torpedo or a sonobuoy they get a russian-lulu followed a few seconds later by a massive pressure wave that completely rupture your boat. Game over, thanks for playing.

[shipkiller1]

Why would you want to introduce Nuclear Weapons, into the game?

No one in their right mind would have launched a MK-45 anyway, and they would have been VERY hesitant to launch a SubRoc. The MK-45 was MAD, Mutually Assured Destruction. You both die. With a SubRoc you only had a 50% chance to die...

[The Bandit]

Originally Posted by shipkiller1

Why would you want to introduce Nuclear Weapons, into the game?

No one in their right mind would have launched a MK-45 anyway, and they would have been VERY hesitant to launch a SubRoc. The MK-45 was MAD, Mutually Assured Destruction. You both die. With a SubRoc you only had a 50% chance to die...

You could say the same thing about any nuclear weapon. The Mk 45 was produced in a hurry once it became apparent how disadvantaged the Mk 37 was, but I'd look at both ASTOR and SUBROC as being intended mostly as anti-boomer weapons.

Its 1966 and you're behind a Yankee which suddenly heads up to launch-depth and starts opening his missile tubes. Are you going to count on one or even a series of Mk 37s (which can just barely catch him, maybe) to do the job? I say he'd be getting nuked, even at the cost of the whole boat and crew, if that puts his 16 SLBMs at the bottom and keeps the eastern seaboard from becoming a radioactive wasteland you're still winning.

For SUBROC, it was developed for long range time critical targets. Back to said Yankee, if you've got him at say 25-30,000 yards off, how many missiles can he get off while you try to get into range for a torpedo shot? None if you drop a SUBROC on him.

As crazy as these weapons seem, the real reasoning behind them was to keep everybody honest, with their fingers well away from the red button. I'd like to see them simulated if only to take up some space in the torpedo room (most attack subs carried 2-4 for most of the Cold War as far as I know).

[shipkiller1]

You are also assuming the CO had nuclear release authority, which in all actuality he would not until the big missiles are already flying...

When I went to Fire Control 'C' school (1980) and learned how to fix the 'Leveling computer' (used for Subroc) all of the older FT's stated that in no uncertain terms that NO one would launch one of these...

Also, based on the sonar technology of the time (your time frame 1966) you most likely would not detect an SSBN at 30K+ and even if you did, you could not resolve the range down to where the CEP was sufficient to destroy the contact. At that range, you definitely would not know if he was in a launch cycle.

When President Bush pulled all the tactical nukes out of the fleet, we were all doing hand stands... thank god they were going away... Not because of what they represented but for all the crazy rules/requirements of just having them on board. They were a nightmare.

[The Bandit]

Originally Posted by shipkiller1

You are also assuming the CO had nuclear release authority, which in all actuality he would not until the big missiles are already flying...

When I went to Fire Control 'C' school (1980) and learned how to fix the 'Leveling computer' (used for Subroc) all of the older FT's stated that in no uncertain terms that NO one would launch one of these...

Also, based on the sonar technology of the time (your time frame 1966) you most likely would not detect an SSBN at 30K+ and even if you did, you could not resolve the range down to where the CEP was sufficient to destroy the contact. At that range, you definitely would not know if he was in a launch cycle.

When President Bush pulled all the tactical nukes out of the fleet, we were all doing hand stands... thank god they were going away... Not because of what they represented but for all the crazy rules/requirements of just having them on board. They were a nightmare.

No doubt they were, but they were still carried very frequently from 1965 until the late 80s. Insanity and impracticality is nothing new for nuclear weapons. Hell, into the 70s they had the BOMARC and Genie anti-air weapons which would have been detonated in the air over North America in hopes of downing Soviet bomber formations!

[shipkiller1]

Originally Posted by The Bandit

No doubt they were, but they were still carried very frequently from 1965 until the late 80s. Insanity and impracticality is nothing new for nuclear weapons. Hell, into the 70s they had the BOMARC and Genie anti-air weapons which would have been detonated in the air over North America in hopes of downing Soviet bomber formations!

The MK-45's were out of the fleet by 1980. Subroc's (UUM-44) were out of the fleet by the middle/late 1980's.
Only 637's and first flight 688's (688-699) could employ the Subroc but lost the capability when converted to MK-117 or CCS MK-1 fire control systems. Second flight and above (SSN-700 +) were built with the newer FCS.
Subrocs were in all actuality a dead weapons system by 1980.