Topic: Silent Hunter IV

[AcePylut]

Yes, you can set the depth, speed, and the trigger (contact or contact/magnetic). Personally I use contact exclusively as I trust the magnetic exploders about as far as I can throw them which is pretty historical as the real submariners learned to hate it early on. 

Ok, here's why I asked... I can't remember if it was the Mark 14 or a later model, but what happened is that the torps were originally tested without the warheads on them... so that when the warheads were added, the extra weight caused the torps to run deeper than they were supposed to.... and that accounted for their problems. 

The solution that was implemented was that the skippers were told to set the run depth of the torp some - number I can't remember - feet higher than the depth you wanted them to run at (i.e. if you want to run the torp at 15 feet below sea level, set the torp to run at like 2 feet below sea level).  After this was discovered, the torps worked fine.  I was wondering if that worked like that in game also   I would imagine not, because then you'd have 1941 sup skippers implementing a fix that didn't occur until 1943? or so.

[Commander La'ra]

Ok, here's why I asked... I can't remember if it was the Mark 14 or a later model, but what happened is that the torps were originally tested without the warheads on them... so that when the warheads were added, the extra weight caused the torps to run deeper than they were supposed to.... and that accounted for their problems. 

The solution that was implemented was that the skippers were told to set the run depth of the torp some - number I can't remember - feet higher than the depth you wanted them to run at (i.e. if you want to run the torp at 15 feet below sea level, set the torp to run at like 2 feet below sea level).  After this was discovered, the torps worked fine.  I was wondering if that worked like that in game also   I would imagine not, because then you'd have 1941 sup skippers implementing a fix that didn't occur until 1943? or so.

That was one of the Mk 14's many, many problems, but it wasn't the only problem.  The Magnetic exploder was unreliable and tended to go off prematurely if it went off at all.  The contact exploder was faulty as well, and bizarrely, tended to be most reliable when the torpedo hit at an unfavorable angle.  The torps ran too deep as well.

The problems could've been solved quite early, but the Navy Bureau of Ordnance continued to insist that there was nothing wrong with the weapon and that the submarine captains were employing it improperly.  Eventually, the Sub Admirals did their own testing of the weapon (after a bizarre incident where a US Sub Skipper unloaded most of his torpedos into a Japanese ship he'd disabled) and found out the true extent of the problems.  Until a fix was found, various work-arounds were employed, such as aiming for high-angle impacts, setting the torpedo to run much shallower than you wanted it too, and just not using the magnetic detonator at all.

The contact exploder actually became fairly reliable once the problem with it was discovered:  The firing pin was too heavy and sometimes the impact didn't ram it far enough back.  They found that aluminum was a good replacement and switched to that...early fears that the short supply of the metal would prevent it's use were quashed when it was pointed out that they could recycle it from broken aircraft propellers.

[AcePylut]

This is a good discussion.  I had just read a book not more than 2 months ago about the US war under the pacific.

The book touched ont he contactor problem too, but I can't remember exactly what it was.  I want to say that the force of a "dead on" impact was "too much" and broke the firing pin before it could detonate, but that shooting at an angle decreased the impact, allowed the firing pin to detonate, and tanker ships started going boom.

That case you referred to, again iirc, was where a US Sub skipper snuck into a harbor and unloaded 4 torpedos at a stationary cargo ship from extremely short range.  All four missed the target, however, the sub skipper noted that they exploded when the hit the shore.  After that, iirc, the Bureau of Ordanance fired these torps at a carge net, and noted that the holes in teh cargo net were a lot deeper than the run depth setting.

[Commander La'ra]

That case you referred to, again iirc, was where a US Sub skipper snuck into a harbor and unloaded 4 torpedos at a stationary cargo ship from extremely short range.  All four missed the target, however, the sub skipper noted that they exploded when the hit the shore.  After that, iirc, the Bureau of Ordanance fired these torps at a carge net, and noted that the holes in teh cargo net were a lot deeper than the run depth setting.

Actually, that was a seperate incident, though I recall reading about it, too.  The one I'm talking about was later, I think.  One skipper disabled a Japanese freighter with his first torpedo (which did explode), and then, trying to sink the thing, emptied his magazine, one torp at a time, into it.  Dud after dud after dud.

I'll see if I can find an online description.

[Commander La'ra]

Here we go.  This is from Uboat.net

24 Jul, 1943
USS Tinosa (Lt.Cdr. L.R. Daspit) torpedoes and damages the Japanese oiler Tonan Maru No.3 (19210 GRT) west of Truk in position 06º56'N, 147º52'E.

Tinosa fired no fewer than 15 torpedos, of which 10 hit but only two exploded ! 8 were duds....the ship was heavily damaged but limped into Truk. It illustrated the unreliability of the American torpedoes, and efforts were redoubled to fix the faulty exploder mechanism after the Tinosa captain filed his report on the incident. He could see the Japanese crew running around the decks pointing at the torpeodes before they hit, but a loud thud was the only result time after time. (see map)

Here's the Wiki from the Tinosa

I can only halfway imagine how mad that guy must've been.

[Electric Eye]

The Ubisoft SH 4 forums was enough to make me NOT buy this game. Patches galore and no automatic targeting. Like I really have time for using a stupid stopwatch and crap to get the speed and stuff of an enemy vessel? What does the frigging crew do?

A lot of players are saying that SH 3 was the best, and I definately enjoyed the heck outta that one.  I gave my copy away to another forum member but I'm seriously thinking of purchasing another copy and playing it again.

[Brush Wolf]

The Ubisoft SH 4 forums was enough to make me NOT buy this game. Patches galore and no automatic targeting. Like I really have time for using a stupid stopwatch and crap to get the speed and stuff of an enemy vessel? What does the frigging crew do?

A lot of players are saying that SH 3 was the best, and I definately enjoyed the heck outta that one.  I gave my copy away to another forum member but I'm seriously thinking of purchasing another copy and playing it again.

The targeting system is the same as SH3 on the low to mid realism levels.