Quick question RuB1.43/deck guns

[Kafka]

After moving to RuB, the reload time on deck gun has slowed to a crawl. Each shell takes about 2 minutes to reload. Is this by design? At this rate, it'll take me literally hours (of real time) to just complete the academy artillery exam Maybe the crew is too green?
Is there a cfg I can modify to go back to older reloading settings, fast and efficient? Besides that, so far, everything works just great.
Thanks!!
K.

[Damo1977]

Go here

http://u-boot.realsimulation.com/

sh3downloads
sh3mods (general section)
than scroll down and look for the deckgunreloadtimes(1.4ready).zip

that mod gives u a few choices of reload times.

[MonkeyHero]

I just went in before installing RUb and completed the first 2 training excercises with excellent scores. Just those are enough to get you the max 1500 starting renown in a career. After that install RUb and you're on your merry way.

[Beery]

I've completed the gunnery course easily with the 1 minute reload times in RUb 1.43. If time is an issue, just do it at 8 or 16x time compress and you get about the same rate of fire as the standard game.The reload times are one minute because real average combat reload times were between a minute and a minute and a half.

[Kafka]

Thanks all
It actually took them more than one minute in real life to reload the deck gun?? I guess I'm picturing in my mind those artillerists reloading antitank or big battery guns in just a few seconds, that we all see in movies, or real footage films. But they do it fast on land, maybe on water it's far more difficult. They probably had to haul the shells from below, every time they had to reload. Hence the delay. Just guessing here :hmm:
Thanks again.
K.

[CCIP]

Originally Posted by Kafka

They probably had to haul the shells from below, every time they had to reload. Hence the delay. Just guessing here :hmm:
Thanks again.
K.

That's exactly right!

RUb is not perfect in the sense that the first 20 rounds, which would be on deck, would be fired very quickly - but then after, the time might slip to even as low as 80 seconds, due to having to haul the rounds from below (and the fact that the number of men on deck and in the tower always had to be kept to a minimum to be able to dive quickly in case of emergency).

[Kpt. Lehmann]

CCIP, I'm glad you brought up the "ready rounds" issue.

Deck gun reload times for the 88mm gun are otherwise (IMHO) way way slow even for a tired crew. I actually have several (seven) years experience as an Artilleryman (cannon and later MLRS gunner) in the US Army. I have had the pleasure of examining the 88mm field/flak/ati-tank gun first hand at the Ft. Sill Oklahoma Field Artillery Museum. Its breech is very similar to the 105mm M102 howitzer I was trained on... They were built for speed.
At sea on a U-Boat w/no radar assisted guns, indirect fire is impossible. Accurate indirect fire would require fixed/known points in space. Ergo, U-Boat 88's (and 105's I believe) would be confined to a direct fire role. With a fresh crew on a clear day, more than once I was able to physically see three of our projectiles in space before the first round impacted with target. (1-2 miles distant usually for direct fire.) Direct fire relieves the crew of mathematical solutions etc. Using indirect fire we were still able to fire the 105 at least twice per minute. I'm not sure about the 88, but our 105's were one part shell containing increments of powder (little burlap bags) and one part projectile. The shell and projectile were loaded separately. For direct fire, no measurement of powder was required... you simply used all that the shell was unpacked with from its tube.... no-thinking = very fast rate of fire. You just fire and adjust. Fuse settings for direct fire were "Point Detonation" (impact) and "delay" (penetration) w/ no real difference in rate of fire.
The only things that held us up was a range control order that we could have no more than three rounds "fused-up" during fire missions. Furthermore, there was no need to depress the barrel for reloading as there is with the 155mm and 8 inch guns. (I was trained extensively on all three.) I'm sorry to babble so, but wanted quantify my reason for saying that the 88mm (and the 105 to an extent) was a rapid fire gun. (somewhere on VHS I have film of a u-boat crew firing an 88 and they were WICKED fast... und I don't think zee film was sped up) I found the files to fix the reload times and have set mine for 30 seconds. I think that is a good compromise accounting for weather, and aiming from rolling deck. I may reduce it to 20 if I find that VHS footage again.

I shared this with Beery some time ago and have chosen to go with the 30 second reload as a compromise that includes "ready rounds"

Three other matters that contribute to my reasoning.
1. If the deck gun is in operation, there are most likely crewmen who have little to do inside the sub and would naturally be part of a human conveyor belt removing waterproofing (airtight tubes w/ rubber gaskets containing shells I believe... similar to what we used for our propellant charge) and handing off projectiles to the next man.

2. Any extraneous ready rounds can still be stowed or ditched as necessary during emergency situations. Waterproofing may be re-useable.

3. The Flak 88 and the Naval 88 are quite different weapons even to the point that the ammunition is not cross-compatible. I just don't know enough about the operation of the naval 88.

I do not mean to offend anyone's sense of what may be realistic. It will naturally remain a point of debate. Reload and firing times are highly situational.

I encourage everyone to make their own decisions. The question you must ask yourself is "Am I being reasonable in my quest for the happy medium between simulation and enjoyment?"

Deck gun reload times are an alterable item.

I'm just glad we have a choice thanks to the modders!

[jaxa]

Kpt. Lehmann - very interesting post!
I'm a new user of RUb1.43 and I'm agree with you. I think that 1 minute for reload is too long. I changed it to 10 sec, I think it is more realistic than 4 sec and 1 minute. As you said 88' deck cannon is a rapid fire weapon.
In my opinion power of shell is too reduced. I've just sunk C2 merchant with over 30 shells (very close to ship, target at waterline).

[Beery]

Originally Posted by Kpt. Lehmann

1. If the deck gun is in operation, there are most likely crewmen who have little to do inside the sub and would naturally be part of a human conveyor belt removing waterproofing (airtight tubes w/ rubber gaskets containing shells I believe... similar to what we used for our propellant charge) and handing off projectiles to the next man.

Strict limits were imposed restricting the number of crewmen on deck at any time due to the threat of aircraft attack. It was suicidal to place more than a few men on deck at any time, and even more so when the deck gun was in use, since they were probably firing on a ship that had radioed the position of the attacking U-boat to anyone who would listen. For these reasons you simply could not have a human chain on deck for conveying shells to the gun.

I do not mean to offend anyone's sense of what may be realistic. It will naturally remain a point of debate. Reload and firing times are highly situational.

But the numbers aren't debatable. There are timed examples of 'in combat' gunnery, and all of them that I've seen show definitive average reload times of over 1 minute per shell. In the end, it doesn't matter what the specifics of reloading a gun are, because we have actual details of times and ammo expended: we have the time spent firing and the number of shells expended, and this gives us an unambiguous figure that is not hampered by the vagueries imposed by guessing how long it would take to get a shell to the gun. We know for a fact that if a crew attacked a ship with the deck gun in a protracted engagement, it took over a minute on average to load each shell expended.

I have asked on numerous occasions to see if people can disprove the 60 second reload time I have used (which, by the way is 10 to 20 seconds faster than the real life figures show). All anyone needs to do is show me an example of a U-boat firing 40 rounds or more at a rate of less than 1 shell per minute, and I will consider that seriously. No one has yet done that. Perhaps no one has tried, but in any event, there is nothing that I've seen to suggest that a deck gun could engage in protracted gunnery with a reload rate of less than a minute when averaged out over the length of the shoot. What I have seen are examples that show guns in action that required a minute or more per round expended.

Again, my figures aren't based on 'best guesses' about people running shells up to the deck, or how many men you could put in a human chain, or how fast you could reload based on the breech design of an 88 or 105mm gun. You don't need to guess based on those things. You get a much better estimate when you use actual documented combat reload rates (as I have done) which show start and end times for the shoot, and how many rounds were expended. You don't need to get into greater detail when you have such clear and fundamental info.

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Thank you for all your help so far Beery.

I only have my artillery experience to draw on which is not naval warfare oriented. I have made no secret as to my lack of knowledge regarding U-boat warfare.

Hey! I'm still learning... and still fascinated with everything U-Boat!

I have no doubt that the time you have spent researching and collecting all that is in RUb, is prodigious. I am also sure that your reference collection is enviable. Heck I wish I could spend a few hours (days) getting to see what you see.

I'm sure I chose the wrong word(s) as I sometimes do... for that I apologize. Apart from our own conversation I did not observe other "numerous occasions" where this had been discussed.

My most basic point though is that if there is something you don't like... With a little work you can change it to what suits you. Even with RUb you don't have to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

However, we also have the freedom to choose how we deal with each other.

It is easy to rebuke. It is easy to pour cold water on someone who may otherwise have intentions of becoming a producing contributor to our little community. It is easy to forget that there are varying levels of ability and desire.

[Damo1977]

I am going to give my 2cents.......... to this deck gun debate. I have mine at 4secs, just because I can. But now I hardly ever use it........in this career I have used it once on my mighty warship tonnage of 35t. I like hearing the thunderous sound of a eel exploding better that the thud of the deckgun. Thats all I am going to say.

Take care all

[Pablo]

Originally Posted by Kpt. Lehmann

I'm sure I chose the wrong word(s) as I sometimes do... for that I apologize. Apart from our own conversation I did not observe other "numerous occasions" where this had been discussed.

My most basic point though is that if there is something you don't like... With a little work you can change it to what suits you. Even with RUb you don't have to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

However, we also have the freedom to choose how we deal with each other.

It is easy to rebuke. It is easy to pour cold water on someone who may otherwise have intentions of becoming a producing contributor to our little community. It is easy to forget that there are varying levels of ability and desire.

Ahoy, Kpt.Lehmann,

Beery himself said he changed the default rate of fire on the basis of "meagre historical sources" (see here). Read the entire thread where the development of this mod was discussed (starting here) and judge for yourself how well Beery's own sources back up his claim that

"We know for a fact that if a crew attacked a ship with the deck gun in a protracted engagement, it took over a minute on average to load each shell expended."

There is a download available at http://u-boot.realsimulation.com from which you can choose among several rates of fire should you not find RUb acceptable. See Damo1977's post (above) for good directions to it.

Personally, I go with Sailor Steve's real life experience (see here in the mod development thread) and cut the rate of fire by about half to about one round every 10 seconds.

Pablo

[jasonb885]

And I went with the default values and kept the weakened shell damage values. You can only sink about two ships a patrol with the 88.

[Pablo]

Originally Posted by Kpt. Lehmann

I have had the pleasure of examining the 88mm field/flak/ati-tank gun first hand at the Ft. Sill Oklahoma Field Artillery Museum. Its breech is very similar to the 105mm M102 howitzer I was trained on... They were built for speed.

The 88mm gun on U-boats was the same caliber, but based on a German WWI naval gun instead of the more famous "88" you examined at Ft. Sill (as you pointed out later in your post). That being said, the U-boat gun was also "quick-firing" and capable of a maximum rate of fire of about 15 to 18 rounds per minute.

Ergo, U-Boat 88's (and 105's I believe) would be confined to a direct fire role.

Correct. According to the U-boat Commander's Handbook (you can buy it from Amazon.com), the recommended range for a gunnery engagement was about 600 to 800 yards, at night, in conditions where the target couldn't shoot back.

I'm not sure about the 88, but our 105's were one part shell containing increments of powder (little burlap bags) and one part projectile. The shell and projectile were loaded separately.

In U-boats, the 88mm round was one piece.

If the deck gun is in operation, there are most likely crewmen who have little to do inside the sub and would naturally be part of a human conveyor belt removing waterproofing (airtight tubes w/ rubber gaskets containing shells I believe... similar to what we used for our propellant charge) and handing off projectiles to the next man.

You actually needed about five people to man and service the deck gun at full rate of fire: the gunner, loader, and gun-layer at the gun itself, and two folks carrying ammunition to the gun, either with ready rounds from the small (20 round) ammunition locker on deck near the gun, or from the "human conveyor belt" passing ammunition from within the submarine to the conning tower. On at least some submarines there was a chute that was used to pass ammunition from the conning tower down to the ammunition carriers on deck.

If you're still learning and exploring, I suggest you look up the following references (for a start).

- Williamson, Gordon. Wolf Pack. Oxford, UK: Osprey Publishing. 2005
- Blair, Clay. Hitler's U-boat War. Two volumes: The Hunters, 1939 - 1942 and The Hunted, 1943 - 1945. Naval Institute Press: 2001.
- http://uboat.net/
- http://www.uboatarchive.net/
- If you're anywhere near Chicago, check out the U-505 exhibit at the Chicago Museum of Science and Industry (http://www.msichicago.org/exhibit/U505/

"Dr. Google" can be pretty helpful in finding various web-based resources; Amazon.com has a large selection of u-boat related materials as well.

Pablo

[Beery]

Originally Posted by Kpt. Lehmann

It is easy to rebuke. It is easy to pour cold water on someone who may otherwise have intentions of becoming a producing contributor to our little community. It is easy to forget that there are varying levels of ability and desire.

I'm sorry I offended you. I wasn't trying to rebuke. I was merely explaining how I arrived at the 1 minute reload time and how it's based on actual combat reload times, because many people seem to think it was something I just pulled out of thin air. I was also (once more) putting out there the challenge to the community to prove me wrong - I wasn't, as someone has suggested - being 'bombastic'. Heck, I want someone to show me I'm wrong on this.

If deck guns reloaded faster I want to know about it, because I'm not on an ego trip (as some other folks here seem to think). I'm on a mission to make this game as realistic as possible, and sometimes I'll get stuff wrong, and I need to know about it when I do. The problem is that a lot of people just have a desire (based purely on their idea of what's fun) to have deck guns reload at a faster rate, and that's fine, but in terms of the Real U-boat mod desire and unsubstantiated belief are no substitute for hard research.