Correction of torpedo damage power in SH4

[Gorshkov]

I finally run S3D editor and I have discovered torpedo damage settings in stock game. Here you are:

1. US torpedoes: all have the same AP=100 value and listed below hit points (HP) ranges and damage radii:

- Mk-27: 50-100 HP, 1.5-5 m
- Mk-10 : 80-160HP, 3-6 m
- Mk-14: 100-170 HP, 3-7 m
- Mk-16: 180 - 350 HP, 3.5-8 m
- Mk-18: 120-180 HP, 3-7 m
- Mk-23: 120-180 HP, 3-7 m

For comparison their real warhead's weight are as follows:

- Mk-27: 47 kg torpex
- Mk-10: 225 kg TNT = 150 kg torpex
- Mk-14: 292 kg torpex
- Mk-16: 428 kg torpex
- Mk-18: 261 kg torpex
- Mk-23: 292 kg torpex

As we can see there are several bugs here:

- Mk-18 should have Mk-14's HP value and vice-versa
- Mk-10 is too powerful
- Mk-27 also seems to be overpowered

2. German torpedoes - all have identical AP=100 value and damage radii set at 3-7 m. Their HP values are as follows:

- T-I: 120-180 HP
- T-II: 120-180 HP
- T-III: 120-180 HP
- T-IV: 120-180 HP
- T-V: 120-180 HP
- T-VII LUT: 120-180 HP
- T-XI: 120-180 HP
- T-I FAT I: 80-160 HP
- T-III FAT II: 80-160 HP
- T-I LUT I: 80-160 HP
- T-III LUT II: 120-180 HP

As we can see all German torps are scaled as US stock Mk-18 and Mk-23 equivalents but majority of FAT/LUT torps are Mk-10 equivalents. Of course this is not true. In reality late-war German torps had warheads with weight close to Mk-16 and German acoustic torps had warhead's weight close to stock Mk-18.

Now I'll try to correct all this bugs in my mod similar to Webster's one but being much more detailed. So I am waiting for your suggestions.

PS. Beware my mod will apply only to STOCK sinking model!!!


Here you are link to my most up to date mod version (still BETA!). http://hosted.filefront.com/GorshkovPL/

[skwasjer]

I may be wrong, and I'm no expert on this matter either, but I remember reading torpedoes carried compounds of different materials, torpex being one, but also aluminum oxide or something, and some other ingredients.

Different mixes gave different explosive power, and less weight did not necessarily mean less explosive power. Some compounds also worked better when used with magnetic fuses, below the ship.

Anyway, I just speak from what I remember I read, so don't slap me if I talk out of my ass...

[Gorshkov]

Generally speaking you are right because various explosives have different explosive power for the same mass. Yet for US torps I scaled all their weights to the same explosive i.e. Torpex. Thus we can compare US torps each other.

German torps used Hexanite as filler which has almost similar to Torpex explosive power as I think. Besides on this great technical website I found data about their real weights that were increasing during the war from 260 kg to 420 kg. Yet their filler was always Hexanite.

[Nisgeis]

Originally Posted by skwasjer

I may be wrong, and I'm no expert on this matter either, but I remember reading torpedoes carried compounds of different materials, torpex being one, but also aluminum oxide or something, and some other ingredients.

Different mixes gave different explosive power, and less weight did not necessarily mean less explosive power. Some compounds also worked better when used with magnetic fuses, below the ship.

Anyway, I just speak from what I remember I read, so don't slap me if I talk out of my ass...

You're right about the different explosive potentials. Torpex had aluminium powder mixed in, to take advantage of the oxygen produced in the explosion, to add more heat and expansion. Torpex has been quoted as being 50% more powerful than TNT and I haven't seen anyone disagree with this figure, so 100kg of torpex euqates to 150 kg of TNT.

[vanjast]

I had a look at this and where you'll notice the big difference between RFB and Stock is the 'Blast Radius'. RFB has a lesser value so it reduces the torp damage effect within the compartments of the ship.

I'm not sure how the game engine calculates damage, but logically thinking it's probably a combination of the AP and Blast Radius values.

I would start at AP multiplied by Radius = X and test from there.
Why I say this is because I solved a major Toll Road problem with such a simple multiplication. No one would believe that it was so simple.... I digress :rotfl:

[keltos01]

if you download my IJN torpedo mod and the other one with the mk28 and british mark VIII** torpedo you'll find an Excell spreadsheet in each folder.

I made formulas to give the right explosive power to all my torpedoes, IJN and US/British alike.

You can use that if you want, it computes all parameters including blast radius etc..



Keltos

[Gorshkov]

Thanks, Keltos! Certainly I'll try your calculation formulas. In fact I calculated new values myself and I have been testing them right now. They seem good but this is only a beginning of testing process.

Oh, I forgot to ask Keltos if his torpedo mods are designed for stock or RFB sinking model??? That's crucial for me!

[Rockin Robbins]

Gorshkov, I'm proud of you! Darned good work there. You did confuse the Mark 18 with the Mark 23. It's the 14 and 23 that are equal, but you already knew that. You just misspoke. I'm looking forward to what you come up with and checking it out in the stock game.

Are you going to normalize U-Boat torpedoes too? Looks like the Keltos method works really well. I'm glad to see you making something that looks like it has a lot of potential.

Yer off the ignore list. You earned it. Have a cup o grog.

Now where's my all-female crew?:rotfl:

[peabody]

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

Gorshkov, I'm proud of you! Darned good work there. You did confuse the Mark 18 with the Mark 23. It's the 14 and 23 that are equal, but you already knew that. You just misspoke. I'm looking forward to what you come up with and checking it out in the stock game.

Are you going to normalize U-Boat torpedoes too? Looks like the Keltos method works really well. I'm glad to see you making something that looks like it has a lot of potential.

Yer off the ignore list. You earned it. Have a cup o grog.

Now where's my all-female crew?:rotfl:

Now that's what I like to see on subsim, He earned it, you gave it to him, bravo.

On the other remark on 14-18-23. I see what you are saying RR the kg are the same and he is saying the HP should be switched but it depends on which number is right.

If you switch HP 14 and 18 then the 14 and 23 become the same hp and kg. If you switch KG 14 and 18 then the 18 and 23 are the same on hp and kg. It all depends on which number is wrong. Should the 14 and 23 be equal or the 18 and 23 be equal??

mk14 100-170 292 kg
mk18 120-180 261 kg
mk23 120-180 292 kg

Peabody

[keltos01]

[quote=peabody]

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

Are you going to normalize U-Boat torpedoes too? Looks like the Keltos method works really well.
Yer off the ignore list. You earned it. Have a cup o grog.

Now where's my all-female crew?:rotfl:

Now that's what I like to see on subsim, He earned it, you gave it to him, bravo.

aggreed there !

Keltos

btw with my method the Kaiten is between 1500 and 2500 explosive power

[LukeFF]

Originally Posted by peabody

If you switch HP 14 and 18 then the 14 and 23 become the same hp and kg. If you switch KG 14 and 18 then the 18 and 23 are the same on hp and kg. It all depends on which number is wrong. Should the 14 and 23 be equal or the 18 and 23 be equal??

mk14 100-170 292 kg
mk18 120-180 261 kg
mk23 120-180 292 kg

All three (Mark 14, 18, and 23) are equal in RFB, since the wartime service manuals all list their warhead size as 600 pounds of torpex.

[Gorshkov]

Yes! First I'd like to correct HP values for each torp on both sides to historical levels i.e. equal to their real warhead weights in kilograms of Torpex. This should be quite easy with Keltose's spreadsheet and my technical data. So Mk-14 will have the same value as Mk-23 but Mk-18 slightly lower. Also Mk-10 and Mk-27 will be lowered in their HP values. German acoustic torps will possess much less HP than unguided torps. That is all for now with respect to HP settings.

Anyway I still wait on your opinions about AP and RMin-RMax values. AP is armor in cm which torpedo can penetrate. Yet I am not sure stock value (AP=100 cm each!) is historic because no warship had such armor! As for damage radii I have a question to Keltos: Your mod introduces very decreased RMax values (about 3.5 m for majority of torps) as compared to stock's 7 m. Could you tell me how deep this change stock sinking mechanics?

[AVGWarhawk]

Gorshkov, now your winning friends

[keltos01]

Originally Posted by Gorshkov

As for damage radii I have a question to Keltos: Your mod introduces very decreased RMax values (about 3.5 m for majority of torps) as compared to stock's 7 m. Could you tell me how deep this change stock sinking mechanics?

not much as I shoot most of my torpedoes to detonate under the keel.. otherwise sometimes you don't see the damage at all, or a small hole.. makes it more interresting to aim torpedoes where they'll hurt the most !

Keltos

[Gorshkov]

OK, below I list my proposition of new HP values for all torps based on Keltros formulas and my historic and technical data with short comments:

1. US torps:

- Mk-27 = 20-31 HP - I am not sure this torp is useful with such small damage power...any comments?

- Mk-10 = 67-107 HP - this torp had 225 kg TNT warhead but note I scaled it to Torpex value of 150 kg and that is why HP are much lower now. Thus S-class skippers won't be so successful now!

- Mk-14 and Mk-23 = 130-210 HP - basically identical toprs and thus the same HP settings. I think their Keltrose's HP estimate is right.

- Mk-16 = 191-307 HP - because of 50% more powerful warhead

- Mk-18 = 115-188 HP - as technical data suggest this torp had slightly lower warhead's weight than contemporary US wet-heaters what I introduced here. Now there is less HPs in exchange for wake-less capability.

2. German torps - I divided them into two categories: acoustic and unguided torps because background data are very different referring to both classes. Moreover I do not find any info that FAT/LUT models had noticeably lower warhead weights. Also I assume that both Torpex and Hexanite have identical explosive power which may be slighty unrealistic. So there are my estimates:

- T-I/II/III/VII (also all FAT/LUT versions) 178-287 HP - data I possess state that during the war these torps warhead's weight increased from 280 to 430 kg. Unfortunately I do not have data about their specific weight annually. So I had to do a sort of linear estimation here and assumed this mass was increasing by 25 kg a year. Later I decided to choose 1943 values as most appropriate for SH-4/UBM game. That is why I this in this year warhead's weight was 380 kg which reflects above HP value.

- T-IV/V/XI - 106-171 HP - all data I saw suggest warhead's weight was in 200-278 kg range. So I can assume situation similar to unguided torps which means constant increasing of warhead's mass yet limited by space needed for passive homing device. Therefore I set 239 kg kg for 1943-1945 time period based on identical linear estimation as before. This way we get less power for homing capability. Of course we can adjust these value separately for each acoustic torp basing on their IOC, say: T-IV (early 1943 - 200 kg), T-V (late 1943 - 239 kg), T-XI (never deployed but suppose for game purposes 1945 - 278 kg).

Note I still retained stock AP and RMin-RMax values! No I must test this settings a bit.