about decoys

Capt. Shark Bait · 08-14-07, 04:43 AM

:hmm: , maybe the decoys in SH4 were meant to be like shooting junk out a torpedo tube?

AkbarGulag · 08-14-07, 05:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Capt. Shark Bait

:hmm: , maybe the decoys in SH4 were meant to be like shooting junk out a torpedo tube?

Haha, I imagine its a leftover from SH3. I guess the developers didn't see the point in leaving something that was already created out.

M. Sarsfield · 08-14-07, 07:40 AM

I think in the original SH you could jettison debris one time per engagement and it was a crap shoot whether they would take the bait or not, depending on how well they had you locked on - especially if three DD's were circling overhead.

tater · 08-14-07, 08:09 AM

The US had such things, but the only refs I see to them at all are late 1944 (November on).

tater

M. Sarsfield · 08-14-07, 08:17 AM

That makes sense, since U-505 was captured in June 1944. U.S. engineers probably liked the idea or at least decided to give it a try.

tater · 08-14-07, 08:29 AM

Lockwood had them working on stuff long before U-505. BuOrd was not fast.

Actually, the USN was PISSED at the capture of U-505. There was simply too much of a chance the sub in town might have been observed by the germans. Had they seen it, they would have known that their codes were compromised. The Navy viewed that possibility as far more harmful than any possible gain from having the boat.

tater

STEED · 08-14-07, 08:46 AM

I used them once and they were a bit of a flop your better off going deep.

08-14-07, 04:43 AM	#1
Capt. Shark Bait Ace of the Deep Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: in a convergance zone Posts: 1,186 Downloads: 3 Uploads: 0	:hmm: , maybe the decoys in SH4 were meant to be like shooting junk out a torpedo tube? __________________ Leiser und tödlicher edler Ritter der Tiefe Corsair Vengeance M70; ASUS Crosshair V Formula-Z; FX 8350; Asus 7870; Samsung SyncMaster 2243SWX; coolmax CUG950B 950w psu; 8GB Kingston HyperX DDR3; Corsair M4 SSD 128GB, WD 1TB; x18 DVR212D; 7SP1

08-14-07, 07:40 AM	#3
M. Sarsfield Ace of the Deep Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Tulsa, OK Posts: 1,016 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	I think in the original SH you could jettison debris one time per engagement and it was a crap shoot whether they would take the bait or not, depending on how well they had you locked on - especially if three DD's were circling overhead. __________________ MJS USS Batfish Volunteer/Reenactor www.ss310.com www.ussbatfish.com Communism killed over 100M people and all that I got was this lousy signature.* *http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.ART.HTM

08-14-07, 08:17 AM	#5
M. Sarsfield Ace of the Deep Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Tulsa, OK Posts: 1,016 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	That makes sense, since U-505 was captured in June 1944. U.S. engineers probably liked the idea or at least decided to give it a try. __________________ MJS USS Batfish Volunteer/Reenactor www.ss310.com www.ussbatfish.com Communism killed over 100M people and all that I got was this lousy signature.* *http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.ART.HTM

08-14-07, 08:46 AM	#7
STEED Lucky Jack Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Down Town UK Posts: 27,695 Downloads: 89 Uploads: 48	I used them once and they were a bit of a flop your better off going deep. __________________ Dr Who rest in peace 1963-2017. To borrow Davros saying...I NAME YOU CHIBNALL THE DESTROYER OF DR WHO YOU KILLED IT!

08-14-07, 08:09 AM	#4
tater Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: New Mexico, USA Posts: 9,023 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 2	The US had such things, but the only refs I see to them at all are late 1944 (November on). tater

08-14-07, 08:29 AM	#6
tater Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: New Mexico, USA Posts: 9,023 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 2	Lockwood had them working on stuff long before U-505. BuOrd was not fast. Actually, the USN was PISSED at the capture of U-505. There was simply too much of a chance the sub in town might have been observed by the germans. Had they seen it, they would have known that their codes were compromised. The Navy viewed that possibility as far more harmful than any possible gain from having the boat. tater