Ships sinking time

[AVGWarhawk]

This weekend I watch a Discovery Channel program of the dismantling and sinking the the 'BIG O' off the coast of Florida. The crews cut holes for the water to come into the aircraft carrier. The bilges that run the outside of the hull were filled with water. They used explosive from stern to bow to blow the covered holes to the sea. Everything was set up to make this ship sink.....my point is, it took 37 minutes for the carrier to sink.....................so you SH3 players who complain that GW makes the sink time of ships unrealistic I say they are realistic. Here we have an aircraft carrier that is cut up, blown up and set in every way to sink like a rock and it took 37 minutes to sink.

What say you?

[Finnbat]

Hit the boilers !
noproblemo...

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Finnbat

Hit the boilers !
noproblemo...

Boilers smoilers.....they had explosives blowing holes along the entire keel. Six by six holes cut along the sides. Large valves that let the sea in for ballast were blown open. Still 37 minutes to go down

[Warmonger]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Boilers smoilers.....they had explosives blowing holes along the entire keel. Six by six holes cut along the sides. Large valves that let the sea in for ballast were blown open. Still 37 minutes to go down

Was there any mod installed?

Originally Posted by Warmonger

Was there any mod installed?

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

[Respenus]

DO you even realise what cold sea water does to how steam inside the boilers.

"BOOOOOMMMMMM!!!!"

Plus I used for fish, hit the stern of the carrier (my gooddamn weapons officer miscalculated again) and she sank in under 30 min. And I didn't hit the boilers.

Hit the boilers, you can see her sink before the even start DC-ing you.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Warmonger

Was there any mod installed?

Yes, modded TNT so the sea water would not put out the fuse:rotfl:

[HunterICX]

Are we talking about some firecrackers. I say lets test it with an Nuke see, just to see how fast sinks

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by HunterICX

Are we talking about some firecrackers. I say lets test it with an Nuke see, just to see how fast sinks

Not to many nukes coming out of my torpedo tubes SH3

[SteamWake]

I saw this piece.

It was a "controlled" explosion or rather a series of explosions carefully crafted so tha the ship would settle on the bottom sitting upright. This was important because if the ship layed on its side it would only clear the surface by 20 or so feet.

One of the things mentioned was that certain chambers had to be filled at a controlled rate to avoid the ship rolling on its side.

Im pretty sure that if they wanted to sink her faster they certainly could have.

One of the interesting side notes they did explain how the ship was protected against torpedo damage by a triple layer of ballast tanks like this. Generally speaking the torpedo would breach only the first or second blukhead. The bulkheads were also segmented fore to aft.

View in section

Torpedo Hull Water or air
>>---> | | ~~


>>---> |~~|~~|~~| (people and equipment) |~~|~~|~~|

[AVGWarhawk]

Yes, I recall that they flooded these bulkheads before detonation so she would sink on an even keel. She was the unsinkable ship for sure! No matter as they blown holes throughout the entire keel. I believe with that many holes at the exact same time blown she would have gone down quickly. My point here is the people who believe that GW sinking model is off. I think it is darn close to the real thing. People always say I read this ship or that ship went down with one torpedo. Sure, the writer wants excitment so the one torpedo fireworks is a great read. I'm sure most do not want to read about 5 hours of chasing a half sunken ship around. I believe GW is dead on with the sinking model(with exception of that darn tramp steamer with the Klingon cloaking device or something to keep it floating).

[Respenus]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Yes, I recall that they flooded these bulkheads before detonation so she would sink on an even keel. She was the unsinkable ship for sure! No matter as they blown holes throughout the entire keel. I believe with that many holes at the exact same time blown she would have gone down quickly. My point here is the people who believe that GW sinking model is off. I think it is darn close to the real thing. People always say I read this ship or that ship went down with one torpedo. Sure, the writer wants excitment so the one torpedo fireworks is a great read. I'm sure most do not want to read about 5 hours of chasing a half sunken ship around. I believe GW is dead on with the sinking model(with exception of that darn tramp steamer with the Klingon cloaking device or something to keep it floating).

Klingon Cloaking Device?! I'm sure I'm not mistaken that you're not a Trekkie?

But sure, those steamers are made from something that doesn't exist anymore.

There once was a company a Tramp Steamer makers and they decided that to make influence on the world market, their ships needed to be made out of something special. While they were thinking about it, a spacial rift opened into another dimension and out came a peace of Trinium and a Replicator. With the Replicator, they created tons of Trinium and this is how their ships are so hard to sink.

The second image of my siggy is the USS Barr. Under action her entire stern was blasted apart and off by an acoustical torpedo, yet she remained not only afloat but on QC for hours.(http://www.de220.com/Armament/Decoys/Decoys.htm)

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Albrecht Von Hesse

The second image of my siggy is the USS Barr. Under action her entire stern was blasted apart and off by an acoustical torpedo, yet she remained not only afloat but on QC for hours.(http://www.de220.com/Armament/Decoys/Decoys.htm)

No more questions you Honor.....you have solved the case of the slow sinking merchants in SH3 GW modded. I believe the sinking mod is darn good and darn close to the actual reality of it.

[Hueywolf123]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

No more questions you Honor.....you have solved the case of the slow sinking merchants in SH3 GW modded. I believe the sinking mod is darn good and darn close to the actual reality of it.

All those who consider sinking times unrealistic, have never heard of damage control. Ships are not a completely hollow vessel. They have watertight bulkheads at regular distances throughout the hull. Blew off part of the stern? Shut the door! I was a 'Chippy' in the RAN and damage control was a big part of my duties. Just so long as the remaining part of the ship remains watertight and can maintain a positive bouyancy, bad luck for Herr Kaleun.
I have read WWII reports of tankers taking seven torpedoes and still only being classed as a write-off, not an actual sinking. If your AI units are set at expert, good luck sinking them, this is random in the game but the higher difficulty level you play at, the more common it is to find expert AI units.