about the real fleet boat mod...

[Beery]

Originally Posted by tater

^^^ unless she fired at the low end of the spec ROF, Beery, in which case she put 156 6" rounds downrange at that PC.

tater

Hehe yeah, maybe. After all those heavy waves must have made it easier to load those 6" shells, LOL.

But seriously, I can only go by the ROF that has been shown for Nautilus in combat. But either way, it shows that RFB is well within reasonable limits regarding the effectiveness of the shells (i.e. in no way can it be said that I've made RFB's shells too weak). As for ROF it tells us virtually nothing, but then again we already have a very clear combat ROF value for Nautilus - probably the clearest ROF I've seen for any sub in two years of investigating this stuff.

[NEON DEON]

Originally Posted by Beery

Hehe yeah, maybe. After all those heavy waves must have made it easier to load those 6" shells, LOL.

But seriously, I can only go by the ROF that has been shown for Nautilus in combat. But either way, it shows that RFB is well within reasonable limits regarding the effectiveness of the shells (i.e. in no way can it be said that I've made RFB's shells too weak). As for ROF it tells us virtually nothing, but then again we already have a very clear combat ROF value for Nautilus - probably the clearest ROF I've seen for any sub in two years of investigating this stuff.

Nah she didnt stradle untill the last 3 minutes of the engagement from a distance of 4700 to 5000 yards in heavy seas.

Situation governs rate of fire and subs dont fire at a uniform speed thru the entire engagement.

Take the stock game for a ride in heavy seas and see if you can fire and hit 1,000 ton target at that distance all the time holding your finger on the button.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by NEON DEON

Guess logs can be wrong afterall.

Or right.

I wonder if the order to rapid fire could be wrong too?

Probably not. Once he got close enough he would likely want to throw everything he could at it. I agree, though, in a discussion like this the more that can be found the better.

[NEON DEON]

Absoulute proof that the 4 inch deck gun could only fire at 2 RPM!

[Hitman]

Beery, you have found lots of good info about the US subs, but have you thought about digging a bit in the submarines that used the deck gun most? I mean the WW1 german U-Boots. I think I have readed somewhere interesting info about that subject regarding WW1 german subs, only I can't remember where right now :hmm: Narwhal was heavily based in the german U-Kreuzers, so the idea sparked in my mind

[Palidian]

Can only go by? Why is it that you select the information? Ill chose to go by this fact, and ought right ignore an other.


What about the training manual for the gun? Printed by the ordnance department, after all it is there gun, they should know what it can and cannot do.



Minds are like books they work best when they are open.

Originally Posted by Beery

Hehe yeah, maybe. After all those heavy waves must have made it easier to load those 6" shells, LOL.

But seriously, I can only go by the ROF that has been shown for Nautilus in combat. But either way, it shows that RFB is well within reasonable limits regarding the effectiveness of the shells (i.e. in no way can it be said that I've made RFB's shells too weak). As for ROF it tells us virtually nothing, but then again we already have a very clear combat ROF value for Nautilus - probably the clearest ROF I've seen for any sub in two years of investigating this stuff.

[Torpex752]

Originally Posted by Beery

Blimey! I'm amazed at the ways people choose to rationalize away the facts that don't fit their agenda. What next - will we be discounting evidence because it was written in blue ink and not black? I mean how far beyond ridiculous does this need to get?

I'm just gonna put a couple of these guys on my ignore list. That will save me some time and if they post anything substantial I'm sure one of the RFB users will let me know.

So someone "questions" the accuracy of internet research and they are on an ignore list? LOL (that says allot) Far be it from me to question things on the internet, after all everything on the internet is obviously 100% accurate.

Sorry ol man, I guess I spent more time digging through cardboard boxes and actually reading WWII Submarine patrol reports, so I have a natural tendancy to "question" when something is transcribed. I didnt say I didnt believe it. My adjenda for the record is to pass on what I have collected. I have no other adjenda than historical accuracy. (For the record, the actual final Patrol reports stored in archives are usually the second but sometimes the third draft. So I would never imply anyone lied, but I will imply a human error here or there)

Frank "Torpex" Kulick
Subsim Staff

[Torpex752]

Pal!
How the heck are you! Long time since we posted in the same thread. Do you remember our first conversation and when? LOL

Frank "Torpex" Kulick
Subsim Staff

[Beery]

Originally Posted by Hitman

Beery, you have found lots of good info about the US subs, but have you thought about digging a bit in the submarines that used the deck gun most? I mean the WW1 german U-Boots. I think I have readed somewhere interesting info about that subject regarding WW1 german subs, only I can't remember where right now :hmm: Narwhal was heavily based in the german U-Kreuzers, so the idea sparked in my mind

I haven't considered WW1 subs because the WW1 submarine war was so different. In WW2 air attack was a real threat and subs didn't have time to mess around so they usually sank a ship while the crew was on board, whereas in WW1 sub commanders usually let the merchant crew get off the ship prior to sinking her. This had a huge potential effect on damage control and therefore gunfire effectiveness. As for reload speed I'd be interested in seeing details from WW1 but it wouldn't be useful for RFB as we already have details from WW2 subs, but it would be interesting to see if WW1 subs had a similarly slow ROF. I expect they'd be slower because US subs in WW2 had a lot of attention paid to deck gun placement and ammo supply. Because of this we see a difference in the ROF of US subs compared to German subs (the WW2 German subs reload even slower).

[NEON DEON]

And the beat goes on.

And the beat goes on.

Drums keep pounding rhythm to the brain.

[Palidian]

Do you really eat out of that mouth?

Originally Posted by Beery

I haven't considered WW1 subs because the WW1 submarine war was so different. In WW2 air attack was a real threat and subs didn't have time to mess around so they usually sank a ship while the crew was on board, whereas in WW1 sub commanders usually let the merchant crew get off the ship prior to sinking her. This had a huge potential effect on damage control and therefore gunfire effectiveness. As for reload speed I'd be interested in seeing details from WW1 but it wouldn't be useful for RFB as we already have details from WW2 subs, but it would be interesting to see if WW1 subs had a similarly slow ROF. I expect they'd be slower because US subs in WW2 had a lot of attention paid to deck gun placement and ammo supply. Because of this we see a difference in the ROF of US subs compared to German subs (the WW2 German subs reload even slower).

[joea]

Bloody H, Paladian you're being rude, and I certainly disagree often enough with Beery.

[NEON DEON]

Originally Posted by joea

Bloody H, Paladian you're being rude, and I certainly disagree often enough with Beery.

I would comment but my house is not equipped with safety glass.

[mookiemookie]

Well this discussion has certainly gone downhill...

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Palidian

Can only go by? Why is it that you select the information? Ill chose to go by this fact, and ought right ignore an other.


What about the training manual for the gun? Printed by the ordnance department, after all it is there gun, they should know what it can and cannot do.



Minds are like books they work best when they are open.

What about the training manual? What does it say? Does it talk about sea states, or time and distance calculations?

Peter Padfield, in his excellent book Guns At Sea, which is a history of naval gunnery from the earliest days through the development of the gun Director Control Tower (DCT) makes an interesting observation: "Naval gunnery is the equivalent of attempting to shoot at a tennis ball rolling across a mantlepiece with a pistol from the other end of the living room while sitting in a rocking chair being randomly rocked by somebody else."

You should heed your own quote about open minds, and remember all the posts mentioning that the listed rate of fire is the absolute maximum, disregarding all outside factors.