PDA

View Full Version : Torpedoes?



Freelancer-1
09-17-2006, 01:27 AM
Flying a co-op the other night.

I was watching helplessly after failing to down a plane before it dropped it's torpedo. I had lots of time, as I watched the inevitable unfold below me, to wonder if it is possible to actually blow one up before it reaches it's target.

So, is it possible to explode a torpedo with your guns or is it a waste of ammo?

zbw_109
09-17-2006, 05:06 AM
Originally posted by Freelancer-1:
So, is it possible to explode a torpedo with your guns or is it a waste of ammo?

Waste of ammo,have tried

VF2_Sarge
09-17-2006, 06:06 AM
That would be cool however.

Is it because the torpedos don't have a damage profile or something like that?

mrsiCkstar
09-17-2006, 06:35 AM
You could have heroically plunged your plane into the sea onto the imminent path of the torpedo and thus saved the ship http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Bobsqueek
09-17-2006, 07:02 AM
That doesnt work, I've spent many an hour trying to torpedo myself in a Betty

VW-IceFire
09-17-2006, 08:08 AM
Originally posted by VF2_Sarge:
That would be cool however.

Is it because the torpedos don't have a damage profile or something like that?
More to do with the fact that even a .50cal or 20mm round looses nearly all of its velocity on impact with the water. So even if it did manage to hit a torpedo that was running the usual amount below the surface...it'd just plink off with no impact. So I suspect they didn't model anything happening to the torpedo because nothing should happen.

Mind you...running a plane into it might...but thats a one in a million chance.

Hanglands
09-17-2006, 10:38 AM
Ive tried destroying torps with 60lb rockets in a Seafire, that didnt work either.

I set up a scenario in the FMB with a 111 H-6 with torps heading for a carrier. I took a 111 H-6 behing the other with SC2000s, even that failed.

Seems our tin-fish are tough little blighters!

Freelancer-1
09-18-2006, 07:14 AM
Well, I guess that's that then.

Thanks for the answers,

Therion_Prime
09-18-2006, 08:09 AM
Torpedos were usually fired in between 1 (impact fuze) to 13 (magnetic fuze, fired below keel) meters below the surface, depending on the keeldepth of the ship. The white trail one can see on the surface is only the bubbles of early war gaspowered torpedos. The torpedo itself was way ahead and below this trail.
Later-war electrical powered torpedos could not be seen from the surface at all.

So, shooting a torpedo would not have worked in RL too.

shahram177
09-18-2006, 01:07 PM
aaah,
well i have shot down betties by hitting the torpedo while in flight.
seemd to work

RamsteinUSA
09-18-2006, 02:09 PM
in reality, a wwii torpedo should be knocked off it's course by the distubance of a bomb exploding in the water at or in front of the Torpedo. Of course not al things in this game work as in reality...

try bombing a submerged sub, and you will see that doesn't work right either... but being as it is.. it is a Great Flight Sim..

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

M2morris
09-18-2006, 02:23 PM
Torps will go off by hitting the shore, or when they go too far out into sea , or by of course hitting their target. I have tried everything to stop them, but I have never been able to. But I have found that a torpedo also works real good as a land attack bomb if you ever get bord enough.

Tater-SW-
09-18-2006, 02:40 PM
Torpedos have countless flaws in this game. One, they all seem the same. Two, they don't seem to have an arming distance. Three, do they dive deep then come up to running depth? Do they run out of fuel and stop? NO.

Add to that that the ships have no AI, so they don't evade (comb the attack, etc) and you can see why they are pretty useless (meaning they rae overly easy to deploy in game).

tater

Lewicide
09-18-2006, 03:43 PM
Why are the German torpedos on the He111 so underpowered compared to other torps?

Vessels that can be easily sunk with one Japanese or American torp, aren't even damaged by a hit with two of the German torps.

WB_Outlaw
09-18-2006, 06:49 PM
An Avenger pilot destroyed an inbound torpedo by dropping a depth charge on (near) it. I forget where but it's probably pretty easily googled. I believe he even got a medal for it.

--Outlaw.

P.S.
I think it was an Avenger.

vocatx
09-18-2006, 06:51 PM
That doesnt work, I've spent many an hour trying to torpedo myself in a Betty


No offense, I've performed some experiments using the sim that some said were off the wall, but THIS takes the prize! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

smokincrater
09-19-2006, 12:32 AM
Originally posted by Therion_Prime:
Torpedos were usually fired in between 1 (impact fuze) to 13 (magnetic fuze, fired below keel) meters below the surface, depending on the keeldepth of the ship. The white trail one can see on the surface is only the bubbles of early war gaspowered torpedos. The torpedo itself was way ahead and below this trail.
Later-war electrical powered torpedos could not be seen from the surface at all.

So, shooting a torpedo would not have worked in RL too.

SS Robert Walker destroyed a German torpedo with its 20 mm guns off Eden NSW on the 25th of December 1944.

Antoninus
09-19-2006, 12:02 PM
Originally posted by Lewicide:
Why are the German torpedos on the He111 so underpowered compared to other torps?

Vessels that can be easily sunk with one Japanese or American torp, aren't even damaged by a hit with two of the German torps.

At least a HE 111 has two torpedos, try to sink anything with an IL-2T. Especially compared to rockets torpedos are much worse anti ship weapons in IL-2. Four well aimed HVARs can sink a cargo ship but the russian torpedo hiting below the waterline can not.

Tater-SW-
09-19-2006, 12:09 PM
Possibly there is a different torp model for PF vs the old il-2 stuff?

tater

Antoninus
09-19-2006, 01:07 PM
I guess that‚‚ā¨ôs it, and the changes in the ship DM since IL2 that have crippled the old torps. In original IL-2, where ships were never intended to play any greater role, an IL-2T could sink the Romanian destroyer on the Crimea map with one hit. With the new ships in FB and thereafter the DM got better, with visible damage and it the possibility to destroy single turrets, but the old ships are very tough and the old torps very weak since then, compared to newer models of the same size. It seems they have never adjusted the old torps and DMs to the improved system.

Tater-SW-
09-19-2006, 01:09 PM
It might be interesting to try old torps vs PF ships (DDs, for example).

tater

Tater-SW-
09-19-2006, 08:10 PM
^^^I just did this. He111 Beaufighter with torp, and Il-2T vs USS Ward. I only flew once each plane. Il-2T hit, no visible damage. He111 hit with both torps and it sank. Beau hit with 1 and it sank.

It's the torps, not the ships.

tater

Nimits
09-19-2006, 10:50 PM
Out of curiosity, what is the warhead size on a Russian torpedo vs a British or an American Mk. XIII? Could they be moddling differences in torpedo capabilities?

Tater-SW-
09-19-2006, 11:09 PM
Looks like russian 45-36AV-A air dropped torps were 200kg warheads.

Early US mark 13s were 182kg of TNT, later versions were 262kg torpex.

German F5 torps had 200kg hexanite. F5Bs had 180-250kg hexanite.

IJN Type 91 mod2 was 205kg type 97 explosive. Later version went to 240kg, and even 308kg explosives.

The US and UK (Beaufighter) use the mark 13. If they modelled the later Mark 13 (we kept it in service til 1950, and we had far more of them than the early flavor in total numbers), then it would be on the high end of explosive power at 262kg of torpex (I've seen figures claiming twice the power of TNT for torpex, dunno if that is true). Regardless, the US/UK have powerful torps. The IJN torps were also very good, particularly if they made it one of the later vesions (the 240kg warhead was in service in 1942). The german and russian ones are both 200kg. I have no info for the explosive on the russian one.

tater

smokincrater
09-20-2006, 03:22 AM
The Japanese long lance was the best torpedo of WWII. The British Mk 8 was next, then the German GE7 was okay, then daylight to the Yank and russian Torpedos which were for all intents and purposes rubbish.

Tater-SW-
09-20-2006, 04:18 AM
Nonsense. The second generation Mark 13 was probably the best air dropped torpedo of the war.

The Type 93 "Long Lance" is not an air-launched torpedo (at 2700 to 2800 kg), it is a 24 inch diameter torpedo used by surface combatants only. The British Mark VIII was also not an air-launched torpedo. The Mark XVII was the last air launched torp introduced by the UK during the war.

tater

berg417448
09-20-2006, 08:24 AM
Some info regarding the IMPROVED TORPEDO MK 13:

"Parallel with the development of the Mk 25, the Mk 13 was undergoing continuous improvement. Most significant was the development of flight-in-air accessories: stabilizers, drag rings, and shroud rings which permitted launching at altitudes of 2400 feet (vice 50 feet) and air speeds of 410 knots (vice 110 knots). With these improvements, the Mk 13 was successfully employed in the latter stages of World War II; the most noteworthy success being its part in the sinking of the 45,000-ton Japanese battleship YAMATO in April 1945 off Kyushu."

http://www.microworks.net/pacific/armament/mk13_air.htm

Nimits
09-20-2006, 12:23 PM
If they modelled the later Mark 13 (we kept it in service til 1950, and we had far more of them than the early flavor in total numbers), then it would be on the high end of explosive power at 262kg of torpex (I've seen figures claiming twice the power of TNT for torpex, dunno if that is true).

Well, that could explain the difference in results between Russian/German and Allied torpedos. And since the most the MK XIII is mostly used in game by mid/late-war bombers (A-20G, Beaufighter Mk.21), it would make sense if they did model that version.

Antoninus
09-20-2006, 01:55 PM
Partily the Mk 13 torpedo seems to most effective with is Ok, but the german torpedos are always launched as a pair from HE 111 and two should in theory surpass the performance of a single Mk 13, while the russian Type 45 torp should at least be capable to sink any weakly build cargo ship with a 200 Kg warhead.

Tater-SW-
09-20-2006, 01:57 PM
I can't say what should and shouldn't sink a ship outright with one hit. Honestly, I'd rather see them all toned down to the german/russian level of damage since ships don't get to have damage control...

tater

Hanglands
09-20-2006, 02:03 PM
IIRC ships are most succeptible to damage in areas where they have already been damaged (makes sense I suppose). So, if you are carrying a single torpedo and come accross a smoking ship, hit her where she's smoking from. I seem to remember that if, for example, you hit a ship with a torp, or skip bomb into the bow, and it starts smoking, the next hit in the bow will sink it, whereas a hit in the stern might not.

Freelancer-1
09-20-2006, 03:29 PM
Originally posted by Tater-SW-:
I can't say what should and shouldn't sink a ship outright with one hit. Honestly, I'd rather see them all toned down to the german/russian level of damage since ships don't get to have damage control...

tater

It would be kinda cool though. I imagine it wouldn't have been too hard to code a regeneration of damage over time to reflect all those busy little sailors shoring up the bulkheads and welding in plates.

Tater-SW-
09-20-2006, 03:46 PM
Or shoring stuff up with timber. A lot would be fire control. I really hop BoB has a decent ship DM, along with some damage control value---it could easily be done the way it is in good miniatures rules like Harpoon. For really complex systems like shipsm, the best way to model damage etc is probably NOT to trace the path of each bullet that hits her. Instead, a good statistical model would be the way to go.

tater

smokincrater
09-21-2006, 01:52 AM
Originally posted by Tater-SW-:
Nonsense. The second generation Mark 13 was probably the best air dropped torpedo of the war.

The Type 93 "Long Lance" is not an air-launched torpedo (at 2700 to 2800 kg), it is a 24 inch diameter torpedo used by surface combatants only. The British Mark VIII was also not an air-launched torpedo. The Mark XVII was the last air launched torp introduced by the UK during the war.

tater

Je Suis Desola! Sorry thought you were talking about destoryer/sub weapons.

Tater-SW-
09-22-2006, 07:40 AM
Ah, sorry for the tone. You are certainly correct regarding surface launched weapons!

tater

Kernow
09-24-2006, 09:34 AM
Originally posted by Tater-SW-:
Possibly there is a different torp model for PF vs the old il-2 stuff?

tater
Exactly right. There is the 'original' torp, which is the same when carried on an He-111 or on an IL-2. Then there is the PF torp, which is the same whether carried by a Beaufighter, A-20 or Betty.

The original torpedo, Type 45-12. The game‚‚ā¨ôs original torpedo runs at 80 kph for 4 m 30 s (6 km range). Ten are needed to sink a capital ship, assuming they all strike the same area.

The PF torpedo, Mk 13. The newer torpedo runs at 62 kph for 5 m 33 s (5.7 km range). Only six are needed to sink a capital ship.

As it carries 2 torps that makes the He-111 the most effective torp-bomber in the game, just.


Posted Wed September 20 2006 12:57
I can't say what should and shouldn't sink a ship outright with one hit. Honestly, I'd rather see them all toned down to the german/russian level of damage since ships don't get to have damage control...

Actually they do. The skill level of a ship determines how much 'bang' is needed to sink it, or so I've been told by someone who probably knew. I've never checked this out myself, but it would explain why I've noticed ships sometimes survive when I thought I'd hit them with enough to sink them.

Tater-SW-
09-24-2006, 02:40 PM
I just tested a Dry Cargo ship, and an IJN DD. I tried rookie vs ace skill levels, and they both seem to blow up at the same damage levels. The cargo ship is gone with a 500lb bomb skipped into it, but starts to smoke after 400lbs (4x100s). The DD is toast at 1000lbs or so.

Too bad, that would have been cool if that worked, particularly with the cargo ships, it'd be nice to see thier sinking less formulaic.

tater