SUBSIM Radio Room Forums



SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997

Go Back   SUBSIM Radio Room Forums > Silent Hunter 3 - 4 - 5 > Silent Hunter 4: Wolves of the Pacific
Forget password? Reset here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-03-08, 04:36 AM   #16
LukeFF
Silent Hunter
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Riverside, California
Posts: 3,610
Downloads: 41
Uploads: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by bookworm_020
Well take comfort in the fact that it happened like that in real life. I think 16 duds in a row was the record!
Ah, yes, that would be the experience of the USS Tinosa. From Hellions of the Deep:

Quote:
From "Report of War Patrol of U.S.S. Tinosa (SS283)..." The date is July 24, 1943. The torpedoes are Mark-14s, with magnetic exploders intact. At mid-morning Tinosa spots an immense Japanese oiler, found later to be the 19,000-ton Tonan Maru III, the largest tanker in the Japanese Navy. It fires six torpedoes with no results. Then this excerpt from the submarine's log:

1009: Having observed target carefully and found no evidence of sinking, approached and fired one torpedo at starboard side. Hit, heard by sound to stop at same time I observed large splash. No apparent effect. Target had corrected list and was firing at periscope and at torpedo wakes with machine gun and four inch [gun].

1011: Fired eighth torpedo. Hit. No apparent effect.

1014: Fired ninth torpedo. Hit. No apparent effect. Target firing at periscope, when exposed, and at wakes when torpedoes were running.

1039: Fired tenth torpedo. Hit. No apparent effect.

1048: Fired eleventh torpedo. Hit. No effect. This torpedo hit well aft on the port side, made splash at the side of the ship, and was then observed to have taken a right turn and to jump clear of the water about one hundred feet from the stern of the tanker. I find it hard to convince myself that I just saw this.

1050: Fired twelth torpedo. Hit. No effect.

1100: Fired thirteenth torpedo. Hit. No effect. Circled again to fire at other side.

1122: Picked up high speed screws.

1125: Sighted DD approaching from the east...

1131: Fired fourteenth torpedo: Hit. No effect.

1132 1/2: Fired fifteenth torpedo. Started DD range 1000 yards. Torpedo heard to hit tanker and stop running by sound.

Had already decided to retain one torpedo for examination by base.
Fun times, ain't it?
__________________


ROW Sound Effects Contributor
RFB Team Leader
LukeFF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-08, 04:51 AM   #17
gmuno
Stowaway
 
Posts: n/a
Downloads:
Uploads:
Default

Fired yesterday a 5-spread against a Shokaku, Dud-Dud-Dud-Torpedo Impact-Dud. The next hour i was busy evading the Escorts and the carrier got away. But that's what mods with added realism are for.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-08, 08:17 AM   #18
Brenjen
Machinist's Mate
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: I live in The U.S. South
Posts: 127
Downloads: 44
Uploads: 0
Default

I've fired ALL my torps at ships in a port & only had one go off out of the entire load out; what's that 23 out of 24 duds? So now I load Mk10's in the tubes in port & have the 14's as reserve. The folks that say it's all about angle & speed are correct, I believe their observation of the issue is spot on.
Brenjen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-08, 09:29 AM   #19
SteamWake
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,224
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LukeFF
Had already decided to retain one torpedo for examination by base.
Fun times, ain't it? [/quote]

If I was him I would have made that a rectal exam :rotfl:
SteamWake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-08, 10:36 AM   #20
Nunya
Seaman
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 39
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0
Default

Most of you probably now this, but:

The history on the MK14 torpedo problems was almost criminal. The torpedoes had 3 problems:

1. They ran too deep, because they were tested without the explosive charge in the warhead. The "gun club" (Bureau of Ordnance) insisted that nothing was wrong with the running depth of the torpedo. It took a covert "testing", authorized by Admiral Lockwood to determine that the torpedoes were in fact running too deep.

2. The magnetic exploder did not function as it should. The "gun club" insisted that the magnetic exploder worked as design. Admiral Christie, in charge of sub operations in Australia, was part of the design team of the magnetic exploder and was adamant that there was nothing wrong. He even accused some of his skippers of incompetency Even after the light started shining at Pearl Harbor, and Nimitz ordered the magnetic exploder be deactivated, Christie still insisted that the exploder work fine and threatened his skipper's with disciplinary actions if they disengaged the exploder.

3. The contact exploder did not work 100% of the time. There were numerous complaints of this early in the war. As with the magnetic exploder, the skippers were accused of poorly executed attacks. After reknown skippers started to adamantly complain, the torpedo was dropped straight down from a crane. The discovery was that with a "perfect" 90-degree firing solution, the firing pin would not activate the explosives. The pin would only activate the explosivies if the torpedo hit the target at an angle. So in other words, the better your solution, the higher chance of a dud.

As I said, most of you probably already know this. To me, it is amazing that the Mk14 torpedo had so many problems and the "higher ups" not only ignored the reports of their skippers, but accused them of not being good at their jobs. If it wasn't for Lockwood, the problems would not have been corrected until even later.
Nunya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-08, 10:51 AM   #21
SteamWake
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,224
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nunya
So in other words, the better your solution, the higher chance of a dud.
The chances of me working out a perfect 90 degree solution, into a moving target, with rounded surfaces, are slim to none.

All you said is true Nunya, in my case generally speaking we lost to the RNG :rotfl:

(RNG=Random Number Generator).
SteamWake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-08, 11:08 AM   #22
Urge
Stowaway
 
Posts: n/a
Downloads:
Uploads:
Default

Out on patrol last night I have a contact that turns out to be a tanker. Set up to " 'Kane em" I have to do this 3-4 times because he changes course just before I'm going to fire(TMO is responsible for this I think). Finally I get off 3 fish set for contact minimum depth and they all pass underneath the tanker. So I crank it up and reposition for a second try. 3 more fish, one just misses forward cause he is zigzaging and the rest pass under like the first 4. One last fish and it also passes under. 8 torps 7 shoulda/woulda/coulda hits. So I surface and take him out with the deck gun and the twin 20s. I thought TMO made it harder or next to impossible to take out ships with your guns but maybe cause he was a tanker? All this for a 1500 ton tanker!

Urge
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-08, 11:13 AM   #23
SteamWake
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,224
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Urge
Out on patrol last night I have a contact that turns out to be a tanker. Set up to " 'Kane em" I have to do this 3-4 times because he changes course just before I'm going to fire(TMO is responsible for this I think). Finally I get off 3 fish set for contact minimum depth and they all pass underneath the tanker. So I crank it up and reposition for a second try. 3 more fish, one just misses forward cause he is zigzaging and the rest pass under like the first 4. One last fish and it also passes under. 8 torps 7 shoulda/woulda/coulda hits. So I surface and take him out with the deck gun and the twin 20s. I thought TMO made it harder or next to impossible to take out ships with your guns but maybe cause he was a tanker? All this for a 1500 ton tanker!

Urge
All I can say is make sure you double check your depth settings before punching the fire button
SteamWake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-08, 11:42 AM   #24
Urge
Stowaway
 
Posts: n/a
Downloads:
Uploads:
Default

It was my first action on a new patrol. I left the depth settings at the default 5-6'.

Urge
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-08, 01:43 PM   #25
SteamWake
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,224
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Urge
It was my first action on a new patrol. I left the depth settings at the default 5-6'.

Urge
If your using auto targeting the depth will get jerked around everytime you 'lock' a target. Very nasty buisness.

Again double check the depth before you fire.
SteamWake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-08, 03:19 PM   #26
Urge
Stowaway
 
Posts: n/a
Downloads:
Uploads:
Default

I'm using manual targeting. I know that I need to check depth and (for me) especially, torpedo offset angles. I really hate when I shoot at something and the torpedo goes nowhere near it cause I didn't adjust the offset from the last time I fired.

Urge
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-08, 03:47 PM   #27
Orion2012
Commodore
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 611
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Urge
I'm using manual targeting. I know that I need to check depth and (for me) especially, torpedo offset angles. I really hate when I shoot at something and the torpedo goes nowhere near it cause I didn't adjust the offset from the last time I fired.

Urge
If your engaging your PK, there shouldn't be the need to set the offset.
Orion2012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-09, 11:34 PM   #28
keith_uk
Torpedoman
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 114
Downloads: 101
Uploads: 0
Default

Just had 7 duds in a row, firing side on at a ship in port. All forward torps as well. Thats all six forward torps and the next forward reserve torp!!!

TOO many duds is the one thing i really HATE about TMO.

I bet there were a good few more duds too, but i was so p*$$%d off, i headed back to base and ended the patrol.

Keith.
__________________
i7-3930k CPU
16GB RAM
GeForce GTX 670
Samsung SSD 830 Series
Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
keith_uk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-09, 03:20 AM   #29
Armistead
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: on the Dan
Posts: 10,880
Downloads: 364
Uploads: 0


Default

Yea duds suck. I had a full load, got in perfect position on a big TF with the Yamato. First Salvo 3 hits, 3 prematures...Did two end arounds, 1 hit, 4 prematures. Next round, set contact and 3 duds one hit. Four hours of play the Y is finally dead on the water. I have 5 bow and two aft. I send the first 5 and get two hits, 3 duds. Praying it would sink I line up my two afts, one contact, low speed with some angle....both fail. I go 7000 meters out and give it all my deck gun ammo. Listing bad, time compress for 1 day....never sinks.................

I wonder how many skippers died as a result of dud torps..........
Armistead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-09, 08:52 AM   #30
MonTana_Prussian
Ensign
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Helena,Montana
Posts: 234
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Default

And pre-matures can really make your day exciting. 2 nights ago I found a nice juicy small convoy,2 large and 1 medium tankers,escorted by 1 DD. I decided to take out the DD,then waste the convoy. Fired 2 torps at DD,900 yards....1st torp prematured 200 yards from DD,he went to flank and headed for me,along with a second one I had not seen. They kept me down for 9 hours,luckily,I got away undamaged....
MonTana_Prussian is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.