Do American Subs do Surface Night Atacks?

[Rhodes]

As the title goes do American Subs do Surface Night Atacks, to the convoy's? Sneak past the escorts and unloaded 6 or more torpedos on the targets? Or they only atack submerged?

Other question, don't know if is real. In Torpedo Run, when they rise the attack periscope, the skipper was on his knees almost every time, in other scenes they put the periscope all the way up. So, american subs had 2 positions for the attack scope or a free height control like SH3 (or like u-boats or other subs, correct if wrong).

Final: is historical correct, in march 1942, being ping by japonese destroyers and discovered, when being at silence speed and moving away from the destroyer in a perfect T position, i.e. my sub was bering 270 moving away?

[Egan]

They did do night surface attacks although, in his book 'Silent Running' Jim Calvert writes that his skipper Tommy Dykers on the Jack - who seems to have been a great surface attack expert - was eventually viewed by his superiors as not having the aggression to carry out periscope attacks where he was more liable to be attacked and depth charged. I don't know whether this was a general belief in the sub command considering how devestating a surface attack can be.

[Overkill]

Read Thunder Below by Adm. E. Flucky. He conducted some of the most successfull night surface attacks durring the war.

[WFGood]

Originally Posted by Rhodes

As the title goes do American Subs do Surface Night Atacks, to the convoy's? Sneak past the escorts and unloaded 6 or more torpedos on the targets? Or they only atack submerged?

Other question, don't know if is real. In Torpedo Run, when they rise the attack periscope, the skipper was on his knees almost every time, in other scenes they put the periscope all the way up. So, american subs had 2 positions for the attack scope or a free height control like SH3 (or like u-boats or other subs, correct if wrong).

Final: is historical correct, in march 1942, being ping by japonese destroyers and discovered, when being at silence speed and moving away from the destroyer in a perfect T position, i.e. my sub was bering 270 moving away?

Yes, US submarines did make night surface attacks. For example, CDR Ramage of the USS Parche made some devastating surface attacks against escorted convoys. He was awarded the CMOH for such an attack in July '44. It was a serious departure from pre-war doctrine, and as such was heavily discouraged early in the war. It wasn't until many of the older skippers had been replaced and torpedo issued were largely resolved that the crews began to innovate. Most pre-war training taught submarine skippers that they would easily be detected and sunk which caused an overabundance of caution.

[Steeltrap]

Another factor not covered by the sim is that USA subs suffered periods of blindness through their periscopes. This was due to the attack scope having a narrow head (to minimise chances of it being spotted) which meant they were unable to draw a great deal of light through them. So in periods of low light they were, effectively, blind.

As others have said, it took the abandonment of pre-war doctrines for subs to start demonstrating their potential. One reason Dudley Morton of Wahoo was so famous is he is widely regarded as the first skipper to demonstrate what an aggressively handled fleet boat could do.

The sim has the problem of you inevitably being spotted before reaching firing position on the surface. This is unrealistic as subs were very difficult to see with their low, narrow profiles. Sure, bright moonlight meant surface attacks weren't possible, but with that much light they could use their scope, so it didn't matter.

SHIII required considerable work by modders to enable surface attacks - I suspect this is the same situation in SHIV.

[Chock]

You could try what I managed last night:

I torpedoed three ships in an eight-ship convoy from periscope depth (8200 yards for the furthest one, which is probably my best shot ever I think). They were escorted by three destroyers coming into the channel to approach Hiroshima (which is fortunately quite deep in places). One sank since it got hit by four torpedoes, but the other two kept going at about 2 knots. So I sneaked in under the thermal layer and surfaced between them (took bloody ages, even on accelerated time). The two crippled ships shielded me from the destroyers and I was able to finish one of them off with the deck gun. Then it was back down to 250 feet, silent running on and thank-you very much and goodnight. And yes, that was on manual TDC and all the hard settings.

Good old Gudgeon, she never lets me down

On the subject of which, Gudgeon (the real one) apparently, attacked a ship once on the surface and then sat there whilst it sank, and the crew were allowed up on deck to watch. Not something the backroom boys normally got to see.

[Rhodes]

Thanks , and about the second and third parograph?

Chock, great attack!

[jhelix70]

Another factor not covered by the sim is that USA subs suffered periods of blindness through their periscopes. This was due to the attack scope having a narrow head (to minimise chances of it being spotted) which meant they were unable to draw a great deal of light through them. So in periods of low light they were, effectively, blind.

In other words the scopes werent effective on a dark night--half the reason for undertaking a night surface attack (the other half is the speed at which the sub could operate is of course much faster than when submerged). I think by the game not addressing this we are missing a major part of sub tactics.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by jhelix70

In other words the scopes werent effective on a dark night--half the reason for undertaking a night surface attack (the other half is the speed at which the sub could operate is of course much faster than when submerged). I think by the game not addressing this we are missing a major part of sub tactics.

What part are they not addressing? Scope attack at night or surfaceattack at night? Scope attack at night are difficult with scope, maybe not as difficult as RL but more difficult than a surface attack. Also, the start of the war found Skippers that were not aggressive because there Commanders created overly cautious Skippers. Night surface attack was not taught to a very large extent. Soon the Skippers were replaced with aggressive new breed of Captain. Night surface attack was taught and surface radar introduced.

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Scope attack at night are difficult with scope, maybe not as difficult as RL but more difficult than a surface attack.

What do you mean !!! How can you miss that big green triangle !!! :p :rotfl:

[AntEater]

Problem is that we cant transmit range date to the TDC.
Night attacks were mostly done with radar ranging.
Totally blind radar attacks were rare, but usually bearing was marked by TBT and the range at that bearing was entered into the TDC.
I don't think that is currently possible in SH4, while the totally useless blind sonar approach is possible....
But as stated in the manual, TBTs were only installed in 1943. In 1942, a skipper on a night surface attack simply had to guess the bearings, range, speed and AOB and verbally pass these values down into the conning tower.
Also I'm not sure wether a TBT actually had build in stadimeter as in SH4.

[Seaman_Hornsby]

Ahoy mates,
Night surface attacks are historically accurate, but it is not really possible to make attacks resembling those in the WW2 sub skipper's memoirs in SHIV as it is now. Why? Japanese warships can detect you with their air-search radar from long range.

See discussion here:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=112994

As best I can tell, a radar/visibility mod is needed to make realistic night surface attacks possible.

[Snowman999]

Other question, don't know if is real. In Torpedo Run, when they rise the attack periscope, the skipper was on his knees almost every time, in other scenes they put the periscope all the way up. So, american subs had 2 positions for the attack scope or a free height control like SH3 (or like u-boats or other subs, correct if wrong).

At least for part of the war the attack scope had variable height control as shown in SH3. Perhaps all of it, not sure. Beach speaks of "the pickle" as the switch used by the periscope assistant (usually a quartermaster) to adjust the scope height as ordered by the Approach Officer.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

What do you mean !!! How can you miss that big green triangle !!! :p :rotfl:

Green triangle???? Is it a bug or a feature?

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Seaman_Hornsby

Ahoy mates,
Night surface attacks are historically accurate, but it is not really possible to make attacks resembling those in the WW2 sub skipper's memoirs in SHIV as it is now. Why? Japanese warships can detect you with their air-search radar from long range.

See discussion here:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=112994

As best I can tell, a radar/visibility mod is needed to make realistic night surface attacks possible.

Sure they can detect you. The IJN surface ships and subs had the capability of radar. Not as good as the US version. The Batfish sunk three IJN subs using his radar. The Batfish's radar could detect the IJN radar waves. This was how they found the track of the IJN sub. The Batfish radarman would only turn his radar on for a few seconds and turn it off to get the bearing. It was not left on because they were not sure if the IJN sub radar could detect the Batfish's radar. The radar does need some work.