duds, duds and more duds

[razark]

Originally Posted by CptChacal

All this vocabulary comes from historical sources. I can only suggest reading the fleet submarine handbook online for the official terms, and books like O'Kane's "Clear the bridge!" which show how they were used by sub crews, along with some less-official terms. Such books are all over amazon.com.

Here's a couple to get started on. I know I need to read through them in detail.
http://www.hnsa.org/doc/attack/index.htm
http://www.hnsa.org/doc/subphrase/index.htm

Here's the list of sub documents available there, and there's quite a bit more, if you want it:
http://www.hnsa.org/doc/index.htm#sub

[CSGdesign]

Wow I can't believe that there's still so much to learn!
This game has layer upon layer of realism... it's awesome!

[razark]

Originally Posted by CSGdesign

Wow I can't believe that there's still so much to learn!

I bought this game on preorder. I think there will always be more to learn.

[Dogfish40]

[QUOTE=I'm goin' down;1580960]

Originally Posted by commandosolo2009

dude, the duds are normal and skippers had their share of it after so much time spent tracking and tdc'ing gyros.. If you dont want them turn them off. But you look like the realistic kind, so, bear with them till 1943

Whom are you referring to as "dude?" I hope you are not referring to me, as I, and many others, knew about the history of defective American torpedoes long before I started the thread, which was obvious as my post concluded with a "warning" to others lacking such knowledge or experience. Further, I never implied or stated that "I don't want them," as you term it, presumably meaning that I was unhappy with the high percentage of dud torpedoes.

As I predicted when I started the thread, a skipper not familiar with the issue posted a response. There is nothing better than a factual history of an attack scenario to make a point, which is how I intended to proceed.

The high ratio of duds reveals something else. My crew has learned how to hit their targets.

By the way, in TMO I don't think you can turn off Duds anyway. If you're playing TMO you're stuck with'em. That's one of the realism features that Ducimus felt must stay. I remember reading of one Subs patrol where they had something like 90% of there impacts come back as duds. And we also have to remember that the Skippers were blamed by the Bureau of Ordinance for poor marksmanship. There were some skippers that literally wanted to "throttle" anyone from the "Bureau" they came in contact with. Can you imagine the frustration, not only the frustration of not sinking ships that should have been kills but then to be blamed for it by your own navy.
Rock on "I'm goin down", Keep the posts coming.
D40

[Dogfish40]

Originally Posted by CSGdesign

Wow I can't believe that there's still so much to learn!
This game has layer upon layer of realism... it's awesome!

Welcome Aboard!
Yes, What makes this 'Game' so much fun are the various stages/degrees you'll go through learning. Part of the fun is the learning and I have to remind myself not to get frustated by what I don't know because half the fun is getting there. There are so many ways to play this sim that it should run a good long time before I ever get bored of it. Wait'll you see the graphics that you've got coming when you start modding you're game.
Good Hunting.
D40

[I'm goin' down]

I downloaded a Celestial Navigation program and was running outside to identify stars and constellations for a week. I identified a few stars and constellations. But I never did figure out how to navigate celestially. I gave up.

[Armistead]

Originally Posted by I'm goin' down

I downloaded a Celestial Navigation program and was running outside to identify stars and constellations for a week. I identified a few stars and constellations. But I never did figure out how to navigate celestially. I gave up.

I played with that for months. Heck, really wasn't about subs anymore. After ending up in the south pole when trying to make Brisbane, I gave up.

[TorpX]

I played around with that too. Though I hate to admit defeat, I came to the conclusion that it is too difficult, with the game as it is now. As Armistead says, after awhile, I wasn't really thinking about hunting merchies anymore.

[TorpX]

Originally Posted by Armistead

Wish I could find the stats of the values that cause torp failures. I know their is a value for speed, angle, weather, depth, ect...The game doe's take into account the failure, but also the solves, shooting at slower speed, with some angle, ect..Still have failures, but more success. I'll try and find the chart.


Myself, I carry about 50% M10's early war, mostly because of this.
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/t...848#5031017848

Good story on the link.

Now I'm thinking I should keep my S boat. I mean, after all, it's not that rusty. My crew thinks I'm nuts.



On a more serious note, I read somewhere, that the mechanical elements of the mk 6 exploder were derived from that used with the Mk 10 torpedo. This suggests, but does not prove, that at low speed, the Mk 14 should be as reliable as the Mk 10 (as far as impact detonation is concerned). Unfortunately, no diagrams or photos of the exploders were provided.

An 80% impact failure rate is not very good, by any standard. It still amazes me that the US Bureau of Ordnance, could be so obstanately stupid.

[I'm goin' down]

Originally Posted by CSGdesign

Wow I can't believe that there's still so much to learn!
This game has layer upon layer of realism... it's awesome!

My reaction was a little different.

"Damn. There is too much to learn, and I am so dumb I am not sure I should have signed on." But then I saw the Captain's girls mod and the post where one captain decorated his office desk, walls and floors wth pin-ups, and I decided then and there that wearing a captain's uniform might land me a broad (maybe more than one.) So I headed to the Royal Hawaiin hotel and have been a submariner ever since! Then Ducimus came along.... and has been shoving torpedoes where the did not used to shine ever since.

[Dogfish40]

Originally Posted by TorpX

Good story on the link.

Now I'm thinking I should keep my S boat. I mean, after all, it's not that rusty. My crew thinks I'm nuts.



On a more serious note, I read somewhere, that the mechanical elements of the mk 6 exploder were derived from that used with the Mk 10 torpedo. This suggests, but does not prove, that at low speed, the Mk 14 should be as reliable as the Mk 10 (as far as impact detonation is concerned). Unfortunately, no diagrams or photos of the exploders were provided.

An 80% impact failure rate is not very good, by any standard. It still amazes me that the US Bureau of Ordnance, could be so obstanately stupid.

Yes, you would think that at slower torp speeds, the firing pin would not have bent based on what you just said (about the exploder being based on the MK10), there must have been some other factors contributing. The fact that the Bureau of Ordnance was so afraid to test the torpedo because of fear that the technology would be spied upon, this paranoia kept them from finding the easiest of problems ei; the bent firing pins. The more we read about it the bigger this story is. I can understand failures of the magnetic exploder operation, because even the Germans gave up on it, but the firing pin getting bent and no-one at the bureau finding the problem BEFORE the torpedo was issued is a historical embarrassment. By the way, for the Skippers who don't know, it was the Sub Commanders who were responsible for finding the problem, testing it (via Admrl Lockwood) and putting in the first fixes.
It's too bad 'cause now to be accurate playing SH4 we have to put up with the Bureau's faiures some 70+ yrs later.
Good Hunting/Check yer ammo
D40

[Diopos]

Originally Posted by Dogfish40

...
It's too bad 'cause now to be accurate playing SH4 we have to put up with the Bureau's faiures some 70+ yrs later.
...
D40

Sir, you have a great sense of humor indeed!