Hypothetical sub question...

[joefremont]

You mean these ships.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Narwhal_(SS-167)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Nautilus_(SS-168)

I think they were re-engined and modernized. The article for Nautilus says

In July 1941, she entered the Mare Island Naval Shipyard for modernization — radio equipment, external torpedo tubes,[9] re-engining (with Winton diesels),[11] and air conditioning

The overall range of the ship not that far off, 9,380 nmi @ 10 kn vs 11,000nmi @ 10kn for the Gato class. Yes top surface speed was lower but with the way the submarine campaign was waged I don't think that was that significant.

Both Narwhal and Gato had a 300ft test depth so I don't think they were deficient in that area.

[CptLoonee]

Originally Posted by joefremont

You mean these ships.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Narwhal_(SS-167)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Nautilus_(SS-168)

I think they were re-engined and modernized. The article for Nautilus says


The overall range of the ship not that far off, 9,380 nmi @ 10 kn vs 11,000nmi @ 10kn for the Gato class. Yes top surface speed was lower but with the way the submarine campaign was waged I don't think that was that significant.

Both Narwhal and Gato had a 300ft test depth so I don't think they were deficient in that area.

There may be something off with the stats in game (maybe due to mod soup) then, because my Narwhal-class ships have truly awful range compared to the other boats - even the S-boats.

[Stealhead]

I would say no because the V boats had horrible diving times and they also had horrible submerged handling.On top of that they where huge and had a massive profile to sonar.

The other reason the navy did not bother was because they already had developed the fleet boats and these clearly worked well.No reason to speed a lot of time and money working on the V boats to try and improve them to have better surface speed.

The V class boats just where not ideal designs really the cruiser submarine was never really a very good concept in the first place.The size of the boats is what really hurt them there simply where no engines powerful and reliable enough to power them at fleet boat speeds.

Dont get me wrong the V class boats are very interesting from an engineering stand point.

From a feasibility standpoint there is not one because there where no good power plants available for a V boat(especially at the time point you are talking about) and the navy simply would not have put the effort into developing the V class into a "uber fleet boat" because for the cost on one you could have two or three fleet boats that did work well in their role.

[joefremont]

But those twin 6" guns would be interesting, take on those Japanese DD's on the surface.

[CptLoonee]

Originally Posted by joefremont

But those twin 6" guns would be interesting, take on those Japanese DD's on the surface.

I may not have enough information to make this claim, and it may be a little like being the skinny kid at fat camp even if it's true, but I have to think the Narwhal-class boats were the best of the "submarine cruiser" designs. I don't know how capable ships like the Sarcouf or the X1 actually were, but I would think that the idea of a "submarine cruiser," while interesting, would be hard to execute in practice, given the unstable nature of the boats making them difficult gun platforms.

In game, the Narwhal is an excellent gun platform. While I have to think that was not likely true in real life, the 6 inchers, combined with the sheer size of the boat, make it at least look more stable than ships designed for similar roles.

I wonder if there is any documentation on how often (if at all) these two boats actually used these guns against enemy ships (I know they used them for shore bombardment).

[CptLoonee]

Originally Posted by joefremont

But those twin 6" guns would be interesting, take on those Japanese DD's on the surface.

They sure make short work of destroyers in game, especially if you catch them by surprise, at night, decks awash. You can often take out two escorts before they even find you, then it's easy to make short work out of the convoy itself. Though, as Steal noted, the sonar and radar cross section is huge. It seems pretty difficult to lie in wait of wary escorts, though I have gotten pretty decent at sitting on a parallel track (offering a narrow profile), and bending 6 torps (4 forward and 2 aft) in like Beckham (manual targeting of course).

[Armistead]

Originally Posted by CptLoonee

They sure make short work of destroyers in game, especially if you catch them by surprise, at night, decks awash. You can often take out two escorts before they even find you, then it's easy to make short work out of the convoy itself. Though, as Steal noted, the sonar and radar cross section is huge. It seems pretty difficult to lie in wait of wary escorts, though I have gotten pretty decent at sitting on a parallel track (offering a narrow profile), and bending 6 torps (4 forward and 2 aft) in like Beckham (manual targeting of course).

Depends on your mod setup. I use TMO and Travs mod along with my tweaks for a realistic game, wouldn't think of taking on a DD on the surface. Really depends on the visual values, with stock and some mods the enemy can't see you worth a dern, so you can blast them and they never respond.

[CptLoonee]

Originally Posted by Armistead

Depends on your mod setup. I use TMO and Travs mod along with my tweaks for a realistic game, wouldn't think of taking on a DD on the surface. Really depends on the visual values, with stock and some mods the enemy can't see you worth a dern, so you can blast them and they never respond.

I'm using those as well. They see you as soon as you fire, for sure, but it's just that those fast reloading dual 6 inchers make short work of tin cans. It's like they are getting hit by a light cruiser.

[merc4ulfate]

The test depth of the Narwhal was 300. I t would have been cost prohibitive to upgrade a complete pressure hull when you could just as easily build a new boat. Better hulls, better boats but who would really want to spend money tearing everything apart just for a pressure hull? It would cost less to make a new boat.

[CptLoonee]

Originally Posted by Stealhead

I would say no because the V boats had horrible diving times and they also had horrible submerged handling.On top of that they where huge and had a massive profile to sonar.

The other reason the navy did not bother was because they already had developed the fleet boats and these clearly worked well.No reason to speed a lot of time and money working on the V boats to try and improve them to have better surface speed.

The V class boats just where not ideal designs really the cruiser submarine was never really a very good concept in the first place.The size of the boats is what really hurt them there simply where no engines powerful and reliable enough to power them at fleet boat speeds.

Dont get me wrong the V class boats are very interesting from an engineering stand point.

From a feasibility standpoint there is not one because there where no good power plants available for a V boat(especially at the time point you are talking about) and the navy simply would not have put the effort into developing the V class into a "uber fleet boat" because for the cost on one you could have two or three fleet boats that did work well in their role.

While all of those reasons make sense and were likely the reasons why it was not done, the one issue there that I am most interested in is the claim that there were simply no engines available that could have offered an improvement, as my question is not exactly why didn't they do it but could it have actually been done.

If you are correct, then not only was it not efficient to even attempt, but, given time-specific technology available, it was likely impossible.

Still, despite these boats' obvious shortcomings, it is interesting that both of them racked up enviable wartime records.

[Stealhead]

Originally Posted by CptLoonee

While all of those reasons make sense and were likely the reasons why it was not done, the one issue there that I am most interested in is the claim that there were simply no engines available that could have offered an improvement, as my question is not exactly why didn't they do it but could it have actually been done.

If you are correct, then not only was it not efficient to even attempt, but, given time-specific technology available, it was likely impossible.

Still, despite these boats' obvious shortcomings, it is interesting that both of them racked up enviable wartime records.

I think their records is more a credit to their crews and skippers more so than their design.

As to the specific reasons why they did not attempt to produce a better engine I can not say the exact reason.I know in the book "The Fleet Submarine in the US Navy"(the bible of WWII US Navy submarine technical information) the author explains the reason.

As I recall it basically boiled down to the Navy having already decided to move on in design in the mid 30's.Even before WWII the navy was less than impressed with the V class.

Pre war they simply lacked the resources to focus on multiple submarine development projects and the navy wanted to focus on smaller fleet boat engines.Because of this they focused on the fleet boat concept.

The V class boats did get new engines during the war but these merely improved reliability.They used the same engines used in the Cachalot and Cuttlefish.

The reason that the V class boats did so well early in the war was largely due to the fact that there simply was nothing else available to throw into battle and the better fleet boats available where busy patrolling Empire waters.


Really though your described use of the deck guns is not realistic at all in real life those 6 inch guns where not very fast firing at all they had separate powder bags and thus a slower reloading rate not a single piece shell like the 3"/50,4"/50 and the 5"/54.It was also much harder in real life to have good effect with guns at sea like that and even harder on the decks of a sub.

If you are just having fun it is fine but if your goal is to play with realistic restraints (many of which you must self impose) your tactic is not anything a real word skipper would have done.

[CptLoonee]

Originally Posted by Stealhead

I think their records is more a credit to their crews and skippers more so than their design.

As to the specific reasons why they did not attempt to produce a better engine I can not say the exact reason.I know in the book "The Fleet Submarine in the US Navy"(the bible of WWII US Navy submarine technical information) the author explains the reason.

As I recall it basically boiled down to the Navy having already decided to move on in design in the mid 30's.Even before WWII the navy was less than impressed with the V class.

Pre war they simply lacked the resources to focus on multiple submarine development projects and the navy wanted to focus on smaller fleet boat engines.Because of this they focused on the fleet boat concept.

The V class boats did get new engines during the war but these merely improved reliability.They used the same engines used in the Cachalot and Cuttlefish.

The reason that the V class boats did so well early in the war was largely due to the fact that there simply was nothing else available to throw into battle and the better fleet boats available where busy patrolling Empire waters.


Really though your described use of the deck guns is not realistic at all in real life those 6 inch guns where not very fast firing at all they had separate powder bags and thus a slower reloading rate not a single piece shell like the 3"/50,4"/50 and the 5"/54.It was also much harder in real life to have good effect with guns at sea like that and even harder on the decks of a sub.

If you are just having fun it is fine but if your goal is to play with realistic restraints (many of which you must self impose) your tactic is not anything a real word skipper would have done.

Yeah, I had a feeling that the guns fire too fast and are way too stable, but I would bet that they are on ALL subs and ships in this game. I did not know that the Narwhal's 6 inchers required separate powder bags. Why is this? That would be very unwieldy on the deck of a sub!

I wonder if I can turn down the rate of fire substantially and/or increase the roll of the boat a bit to at least somewhat better simulate the deck gun experience.

One thing I was thinking that would make gunnery more difficult on a sub is that most surface ships (at least most American destroyers and larger ships) had dedicated gun directors that allowed them to more accurately locate, site and fire multiple weapons. These were usually located up high and had both optical and radar rangefinders as well access to a fire control "computer."

Clearly, no sub would ever have this type of system and would have to rely on the much more rudimentary local manual control.

Do you know if the Narwhal class ever fired their guns in combat against other ships?

[joefremont]

Originally Posted by CptLoonee

Yeah, I had a feeling that the guns fire too fast and are way too stable, but I would bet that they are on ALL subs and ships in this game. I did not know that the Narwhal's 6 inchers required separate powder bags. Why is this? That would be very unwieldy on the deck of a sub!

It was quite common for naval guns of 6" and greater for then to have separate shells and power charges. This was basically the same gun used on the Omaha class CL. With a 105lb shell and a 44lb propellent charge it w be pretty hard to man-handle as a single piece.

Originally Posted by CptLoonee

Do you know if the Narwhal class ever fired their guns in combat against other ships?

Not sure, the wikipedia artical for Nautilus said that on her second war patrol she

she provided gunfire support against enemy positions at Ukiangong Point on Butaritari and shelled enemy ships in the lagoon, sinking two, a troop barge and a patrol boat.

I don't know if a patrol boat counts as a warship.

[merc4ulfate]

USS Narwhal (SS-167)

The twelfth war patrol – from 10 June – 7 July – gave Narwhal a chance for some action. On 13 June, she submerged for reconnaissance of Bula, Ceram Island, a source of enemy oil. That night, the submarine closed the shore and fired 56 rounds of 6 in (150 mm) projectiles to destroy several gasoline storage tanks and set fires around a power house and pumping station area before she had to retreat from the salvos directed at her.



She spent her second war patrol – from 28 May – 13 June – in defense of Midway Atoll. As TF 16 – with the aircraft carriers Enterprise, Hornet, and Yorktown — prepared to meet the Japanese attack, Narwhal joined Plunger and Trigger in scouting east of Midway; during the Battle of Midway on 3–6 June, these submarines – along with 15[13] others – accomplished nothing.

==================================

My mistake on this post. I misread a description of Nautilus and was instead reading Narwhal. I'll get that brain scan and my glasses checked soon LOL.

[Stealhead]

Originally Posted by CptLoonee

Yeah, I had a feeling that the guns fire too fast and are way too stable, but I would bet that they are on ALL subs and ships in this game. I did not know that the Narwhal's 6 inchers required separate powder bags. Why is this? That would be very unwieldy on the deck of a sub!

I wonder if I can turn down the rate of fire substantially and/or increase the roll of the boat a bit to at least somewhat better simulate the deck gun experience.

Clearly, no sub would ever have this type of system and would have to rely on the much more rudimentary local manual control.

Do you know if the Narwhal class ever fired their guns in combat against other ships?

The separate powder bags was common at the time that the subs where designed and constructed which was the mid to late 20's.At one time all shells even smaller size ones where not fully in cased.And guns past a certain size where usually powder bag.The 6 inch guns used on the V class boats was simply a modification of a surface gun.I am fairly sure during WWII in any navy any gun over 6" had powder bags.

A site that I really like to look at and I am guessing you will as well is http://www.navweaps.com/
here is the page for all US Navy guns http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_Main.htm

Remember that the V class where designed when it was expected that submarines would stop and search a merchant remove the crew and any passengers then sink it. No seriously they really agreed to this in treaties the UK actually tried on more than one occasion to completely ban subs.The V class where never designed to attack a warship on the surface.

Early in the war before the SJ radar was available they had to use only optics and estimate range and such.The SJ radar could actually see water splashes created by shells hitting the water it could also see land small island and such.They would use the SJ to get a good range and use the splashes to tell how short or long they where.

The small size of a sub even the larger V class made them very unstable gun platforms as a result they usually only used the guns a close ranges 2,000yds or less.

Later in the war tey actually did have "gun boats" which had two of the 5"/25 guns one bow and one stern and a gunnery computer I do not think any of these entered service in time to see much action.A few boats did patrol that had the two 5"/25 but no plotting computer for them.

Are playing any of of the Mega mods? Trigger Maru Overhauled makes the deck gun a bit less stable than stock but Real Fleet Boat wins out for having the most realistic deck gun aiming movement greatly effects accuracy you can see the boat movement in the sight and you have to wait for just the right point to fire other wise the short will be short or long.
You can probably edit some files to make the TMO deck gun be more sensitive to movement although what you would need to tweak I have no idea.