mk27 slightly destroying gameplay experience...

vatek · 06-04-07, 12:23 PM

I would think it would be damn near impossible to successfully engage anything other than a stationary target with a deep-launched torpedo, with WW2 era equipment. The acoustic torpedos improved the odds somewhat, but I would not expect a deep launch with a Mk14, for example, to achieve any reasonable chance of success.

I was under the impression that sub-to-sub combat was virtually impossible in World War 2 because they did not have a means of getting a targeting solution at anything under periscope depth.

Also, wouldn't opening the tube doors at 400 feet be a bad thing? I'm not sure if torpedos have a recorded crush depth, but I would think that the interior of a tube would be much more susceptible to the pressure.

SteamWake · 06-04-07, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vatek

I would think it would be damn near impossible to successfully engage anything other than a stationary target with a deep-launched torpedo, with WW2 era equipment. The acoustic torpedos improved the odds somewhat, but I would not expect a deep launch with a Mk14, for example, to achieve any reasonable chance of success.

I was under the impression that sub-to-sub combat was virtually impossible in World War 2 because they did not have a means of getting a targeting solution at anything under periscope depth.

Also, wouldn't opening the tube doors at 400 feet be a bad thing? I'm not sure if torpedos have a recorded crush depth, but I would think that the interior of a tube would be much more susceptible to the pressure.

From an engineering perspective a tube can take pressure on the inside pressing out a hellua lot better than the outside pressing in... But a breech would be disasterious.

Wait a minute... isint a sub basically a tube ? :rotfl:

tater · 06-04-07, 12:31 PM

I didn' say they hit anything, they didn't. But it was USN doctrine before the war to execute a deep, slow, sonar approach and fire. That was with early fleet boats. They executed such attacks... maybe a few would have worked with better fish, dunno.

tater

vatek · 06-04-07, 12:35 PM

I have apparently been sunk by my lack of engineering knowledge. Well played, sir. :p

SteamWake · 06-04-07, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vatek

I have apparently been sunk by my lack of engineering knowledge. Well played, sir. :p

Like a man that can take a joke

Good for you !

TheSatyr · 06-04-07, 09:42 PM

Also take into consideration that there weren't very many "Cuties" available. Subs generally only had one or two on board. They were only to be used in "emergency" situations.

And I don't think Cuties were very fast so a DD going at full speed might be able to outrun them...if they know it's coming. (A DE might not be fast enough to get away...but a DD doing 35 Knts could possibly do it.).

The Tirante (another Tench) used a Cutie when she was boxed in by escorts. She damaged an escort with one and in the ensuing confusion managed to give the remaining escorts the slip. She may actually have been the first sub to use a Cutie.

SteamWake · 06-04-07, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSatyr

Also take into consideration that there weren't very many "Cuties" available. Subs generally only had one or two on board. They were only to be used in "emergency" situations.

And I don't think Cuties were very fast so a DD going at full speed might be able to outrun them...if they know it's coming. (A DE might not be fast enough to get away...but a DD doing 35 Knts could possibly do it.).

The Tirante (another Tench) used a Cutie when she was boxed in by escorts. She damaged an escort with one and in the ensuing confusion managed to give the remaining escorts the slip. She may actually have been the first sub to use a Cutie.

Most DD's Ive seen were steaming towards me... not running away at 35kts. But yea they could probably out run a torp in the right situation.

pythos · 06-04-07, 10:19 PM

To the skipper upset about the reality being ruined. Don't play a subsim of modern Nuclear subs. Basically once a target is found, most everything is automatic once the torp is out of the tube.

You think the MK27 makes it too easy? The torps on modern subs would make you cry from boredom. Sure they have to still plot solutions, but not to hit, they just need to get into the area of the target, the torp does the rest.

Submarine warfare started drastically changing near the end of the war, the MK27 and type 4es of the kriegsmarine were just the begining.

Nowadays it is findin the target (usually another submarine) that is the hardest part.

nattydread · 06-04-07, 11:14 PM

From what I understand, the torp would home toward the screws, causing the fish to follow a lag pursuit and that shots fired with a small AoB from the target may have had problems acquiring a good contact. I assume hull noise and such was sufficient if the target was moving at high speeds.

I would expect the majority of hits would be stern hits, great for disabling ships if the the damage model has the fidelity for it(If yet to see any stern shots cripple a ship).

If you get too many amidship hits, I'd question the fidelity of the tracking model. Its likly working more like a active ping fish than a passive or just a over-simplified ship-seeking fish instead of a true passive sonar tracking fish(an oversight from previous SH versions).

WernerSobe · 06-05-07, 04:13 AM

how is it ruining the gameplay. its realistic.

its the way how it works. you dont need a firing solution. If you want to add more realism you can perform a realistic firing procedure for acoustic homing torpedoes which means

1. firing only one accoustic torpedoe at once
2. only in deep water
3. diving fast below 150 feet after release and full stop

06-04-07, 12:23 PM	#1
vatek Sailor man Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 44 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	I would think it would be damn near impossible to successfully engage anything other than a stationary target with a deep-launched torpedo, with WW2 era equipment. The acoustic torpedos improved the odds somewhat, but I would not expect a deep launch with a Mk14, for example, to achieve any reasonable chance of success. I was under the impression that sub-to-sub combat was virtually impossible in World War 2 because they did not have a means of getting a targeting solution at anything under periscope depth. Also, wouldn't opening the tube doors at 400 feet be a bad thing? I'm not sure if torpedos have a recorded crush depth, but I would think that the interior of a tube would be much more susceptible to the pressure.

06-04-07, 12:31 PM	#3
tater Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: New Mexico, USA Posts: 9,023 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 2	I didn' say they hit anything, they didn't. But it was USN doctrine before the war to execute a deep, slow, sonar approach and fire. That was with early fleet boats. They executed such attacks... maybe a few would have worked with better fish, dunno. tater

06-04-07, 12:35 PM	#4
vatek Sailor man Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 44 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	I have apparently been sunk by my lack of engineering knowledge. Well played, sir. :p

06-04-07, 09:42 PM	#6
TheSatyr Captain Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 545 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Also take into consideration that there weren't very many "Cuties" available. Subs generally only had one or two on board. They were only to be used in "emergency" situations. And I don't think Cuties were very fast so a DD going at full speed might be able to outrun them...if they know it's coming. (A DE might not be fast enough to get away...but a DD doing 35 Knts could possibly do it.). The Tirante (another Tench) used a Cutie when she was boxed in by escorts. She damaged an escort with one and in the ensuing confusion managed to give the remaining escorts the slip. She may actually have been the first sub to use a Cutie.

06-04-07, 10:19 PM	#8
pythos Grey Wolf Join Date: May 2005 Location: Somewhere over there Posts: 834 Downloads: 46 Uploads: 0	To the skipper upset about the reality being ruined. Don't play a subsim of modern Nuclear subs. Basically once a target is found, most everything is automatic once the torp is out of the tube. You think the MK27 makes it too easy? The torps on modern subs would make you cry from boredom. Sure they have to still plot solutions, but not to hit, they just need to get into the area of the target, the torp does the rest. Submarine warfare started drastically changing near the end of the war, the MK27 and type 4es of the kriegsmarine were just the begining. Nowadays it is findin the target (usually another submarine) that is the hardest part.

06-04-07, 11:14 PM	#9
nattydread Captain Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 498 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	From what I understand, the torp would home toward the screws, causing the fish to follow a lag pursuit and that shots fired with a small AoB from the target may have had problems acquiring a good contact. I assume hull noise and such was sufficient if the target was moving at high speeds. I would expect the majority of hits would be stern hits, great for disabling ships if the the damage model has the fidelity for it(If yet to see any stern shots cripple a ship). If you get too many amidship hits, I'd question the fidelity of the tracking model. Its likly working more like a active ping fish than a passive or just a over-simplified ship-seeking fish instead of a true passive sonar tracking fish(an oversight from previous SH versions).

06-05-07, 04:13 AM	#10
WernerSobe Commodore Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 625 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	how is it ruining the gameplay. its realistic. its the way how it works. you dont need a firing solution. If you want to add more realism you can perform a realistic firing procedure for acoustic homing torpedoes which means 1. firing only one accoustic torpedoe at once 2. only in deep water 3. diving fast below 150 feet after release and full stop