Scapa flow

sasquatch · 12-11-07, 08:46 PM

Just did some research. Type II's do indeed have 6 torps. Then why does "vanilla" only give them 5? 6 is low enough already... I guess I should move on with the times and get GWX already.

I am Back · 12-11-07, 09:14 PM

Nice dude, my first time in Scapa Flow I sunk but I learned from my lessons and with a Type IIA I sunk a Revenge-class Ship (After I learned of the Royal Oak History, nice to read some). That was 2 days before U 49 sunk the Royal Oak. Dont remember the Tonnage

Sailor Steve · 12-12-07, 12:03 PM

The Type II torpedo loadout is an argument that goes back several years. Aces Of The Deep gave them 6, but people complained that research showed them only having 5. SHII gave them 5, and some people complained. SHIII gave them 5, and people complained. GWX gave them 6, and people complained.

The reality? Some sources say 5, some say 6. The problem is that they are all secondary sources, and no one seems to be able to find a primary source that says either way.

A careful examination of interior drawings indicates that there was only room under the deck for two spares, so 5 seems to be right. However, some people have said they've heard anecdotal evidence that since the patrols in a Type II were so short kaleuns were willing to discomfit the torpedo crew by carrying a sixth eel on the torpedo room deck.

Bottom line: the argument has been going on for years, and no one has yet come up with a definitive answer; so use what you think best and claim you're right.

sasquatch · 12-12-07, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

The Type II torpedo loadout is an argument that goes back several years. Aces Of The Deep gave them 6, but people complained that research showed them only having 5. SHII gave them 5, and some people complained. SHIII gave them 5, and people complained. GWX gave them 6, and people complained.

The reality? Some sources say 5, some say 6. The problem is that they are all secondary sources, and no one seems to be able to find a primary source that says either way.

A careful examination of interior drawings indicates that there was only room under the deck for two spares, so 5 seems to be right. However, some people have said they've heard anecdotal evidence that since the patrols in a Type II were so short kaleuns were willing to discomfit the torpedo crew by carrying a sixth eel on the torpedo room deck.

Bottom line: the argument has been going on for years, and no one has yet come up with a definitive answer; so use what you think best and claim you're right.

Thanks for the intruiging information...

U49 · 12-12-07, 02:51 PM

The 6th torpedo would have a "terrible" effect for the already unpleasent crew spaces and the trim situation of the boat.

Although it could be loaded, it would be almost impossible to perform the required maintenance or to keep up the planned reload times for the other 2 spare torpedos.... And not to mention that the crew would now have almost no place at all to live during a 2-week patrol.

2 reloads is so to speak the realistic thing.... 3 reloads is for a 2-day torp-ex training mission in the baltic.

12-11-07, 09:14 PM	#2
I am Back Watch Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 27 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Nice dude, my first time in Scapa Flow I sunk but I learned from my lessons and with a Type IIA I sunk a Revenge-class Ship (After I learned of the Royal Oak History, nice to read some). That was 2 days before U 49 sunk the Royal Oak. Dont remember the Tonnage __________________ I need a XXI boat soon....

12-12-07, 12:03 PM	#3
Sailor Steve Eternal Patrol Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: High in the mountains of Utah Posts: 50,369 Downloads: 745 Uploads: 249	The Type II torpedo loadout is an argument that goes back several years. Aces Of The Deep gave them 6, but people complained that research showed them only having 5. SHII gave them 5, and some people complained. SHIII gave them 5, and people complained. GWX gave them 6, and people complained. The reality? Some sources say 5, some say 6. The problem is that they are all secondary sources, and no one seems to be able to find a primary source that says either way. A careful examination of interior drawings indicates that there was only room under the deck for two spares, so 5 seems to be right. However, some people have said they've heard anecdotal evidence that since the patrols in a Type II were so short kaleuns were willing to discomfit the torpedo crew by carrying a sixth eel on the torpedo room deck. Bottom line: the argument has been going on for years, and no one has yet come up with a definitive answer; so use what you think best and claim you're right. __________________ “Never do anything you can't take back.” —Rocky Russo

12-12-07, 02:51 PM	#5
U49 Grey Wolf Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: D/Niedersachsen Posts: 777 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	the 6th torpedo The 6th torpedo would have a "terrible" effect for the already unpleasent crew spaces and the trim situation of the boat. Although it could be loaded, it would be almost impossible to perform the required maintenance or to keep up the planned reload times for the other 2 spare torpedos.... And not to mention that the crew would now have almost no place at all to live during a 2-week patrol. 2 reloads is so to speak the realistic thing.... 3 reloads is for a 2-day torp-ex training mission in the baltic. __________________ SH3 battle capability upgrades: GWX2.0, JSGME2.0, SH3Commander 2.7, SH3Gen 0.8.2, TorpDamageMod 2.0, OLC GUI 1.1.5 Awaiting combat readiness for GWX2.0: SH4 effetcs for SH3, SH3Weather 1.5 Following development of: www.subwolves.com Realism: 90%

12-11-07, 08:46 PM	#1
sasquatch Medic Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Kentucky, USA Posts: 160 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Just did some research. Type II's do indeed have 6 torps. Then why does "vanilla" only give them 5? 6 is low enough already... I guess I should move on with the times and get GWX already.