Hi Kiddies
I have recently been playing the u-boat simulatar game, Silent Hunter II. In the game, i have been able to sink a couple of battleships, both in the Scapa Flow mission in the Campaign Game, as well as the Dying Battle ship mission, a single mission, where you are assigned to reach the Bismarck and retrieve its log before it sinks. Unlike the historical mission, you have all torpedoes, and so are also supposed to sink either the HMS Rodney, KIng George V, or Ark Royal. The Scapa Flow mission I succeeded in, and for the latter mission I was able to sink the HMS KIng George.
However, in both intsances, it takes five torpedoes--with the dud torpedo function off. (I set it off because I just now the program will overcompensate for the ration of torpedoes, just as it overcompensates for the accuracy of depth charges). In the Bismarck Campaign, I fatally wounded the aircraft carrier Ark Royal, with the crippled DKM Bismarck getting the coveted kill shot--but it took four torpedoes.
My quesion is whether, assuming the torpedos striking the war vessel are live, how many torpedoes does it take to sink a capital war vessel, like a battleship I am pretty sure Prien did not have to use five torpedoes to sink the Battleship in Scap flow. Similarly, the HMS Ark Royal, an aircraft carrier, was sunk by only one torpedo, as recounted in the book Silent Hunters. Yet four torpedoes, all shot at 2000 meter range, were not enough to send the carrier down. So was the u-boat that did sink the carrier lucky, or is this game unrealistic in terms of how many torpedoes a war ship can sustain from between 2000 and 4000 meters?
Warm Regards,
Einsamer Wolf
Post Script--in the Bismarck game, I am especially proud of my service to the Kriegsmarine and the Reich. As mentioned, I sunk the HMS KIng Geroge, and crippled the Ark Royal, setting her up for a death blow by this tragic Bismarck. Beyond this, six destroyers were encircling me, dropping depth charge after depth charge. So, at some 250 meters below, I just headed towards where the crippled German battleship was. The destroyers, intent on killing me, came too close to the dying Bismarck, and the crippled war vessel annihilated them all, saving my skin to be sure. Eventually, the Rodney, being the last Britsh War ship alive, sunk the Bismarck, but not before I fired my two last remaining torpedoes into her. Before she sank the Bismarck, the DKM vessel landed some hits of its own, so that the Rodney limped away with the status of Heavy Damage. Too bad I did not have another torpedo. Even so, after getting out of range, I sent a contact report. Hopefully another u-boat, or possibly the Luftwaffe could finish her off, perfecting vengenace for the Bismarck.
Alas, there is a bug or something, because even though I arrived at port, and quit the mission, the program just saves itself, not allowing me to end the campaign. So I cannot be sure whether I will get the Knight's Cross or not. But could there be any doubt? (I was playing with 74% realism....)
How many torpedoes does it take?
-
Einsamer_Wolf
- Banned
- Posts: 759
- Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 11:45 pm
- Location: New York, NY
How many torpedoes does it take?
Last edited by Einsamer_Wolf on Sun Nov 03, 2002 3:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
Mögen die Flammen unserer Begeisterung niemals zum Erlöschen kommen.
-
Einsamer_Wolf
- Banned
- Posts: 759
- Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 11:45 pm
- Location: New York, NY
Hi Craig
I am posting this reply in both. Of course I was aware that the number of torpedoes would require. I was speaking of averages. Thank you though for suggesting that, on average, the game overcompensates a little. I think the problem is that, when you fatally wound a vessel, as I did with the HMS Ark Royal, the ship does not always slowly deterioate as it would. Sometimes it does, as with merchant and takers; a lot of times, they do not immediately sink when struck, but haggle on for ten minutes or so before an annnouncement comes--"Ziel Zerstoert" or "Target Destroyed. But not so with teh capital war ships. I hit the Ark Royal four times, all fired from close, 2000 meters range. Apparently, it was alive for the some eighty minutes I was submerged, desperately trying to escape those six destroyers, only sinking when hte Bismarck hit her for the final time. I could be wrong, but my experience from the game suggests that, but for teh Bismarck, the carrier would have sustained itself until another blow was dealt.
Incidentally, a response on a mirror posting on uboat.net suggested that it is unwise to attack the side of a ship, because that is where it is most heavily armored. I had thought that the bow was most heavily armored. Anyhow, at least in the game the chance of hitting a ship from across the aft and bow are poor, even from very close range, so there seems to be no choice on the point. Thanks for replying
I am posting this reply in both. Of course I was aware that the number of torpedoes would require. I was speaking of averages. Thank you though for suggesting that, on average, the game overcompensates a little. I think the problem is that, when you fatally wound a vessel, as I did with the HMS Ark Royal, the ship does not always slowly deterioate as it would. Sometimes it does, as with merchant and takers; a lot of times, they do not immediately sink when struck, but haggle on for ten minutes or so before an annnouncement comes--"Ziel Zerstoert" or "Target Destroyed. But not so with teh capital war ships. I hit the Ark Royal four times, all fired from close, 2000 meters range. Apparently, it was alive for the some eighty minutes I was submerged, desperately trying to escape those six destroyers, only sinking when hte Bismarck hit her for the final time. I could be wrong, but my experience from the game suggests that, but for teh Bismarck, the carrier would have sustained itself until another blow was dealt.
Incidentally, a response on a mirror posting on uboat.net suggested that it is unwise to attack the side of a ship, because that is where it is most heavily armored. I had thought that the bow was most heavily armored. Anyhow, at least in the game the chance of hitting a ship from across the aft and bow are poor, even from very close range, so there seems to be no choice on the point. Thanks for replying
Mögen die Flammen unserer Begeisterung niemals zum Erlöschen kommen.
-
Dasbootz
- Supporter
- Posts: 95
- Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2003 6:01 pm
- Location: Zee Island under zee sun situated 1 degree above zee equator
- Contact:
Hi wolf~! I am a bit of a naval sim buff myself so correct me if I'm wrong, I think that most naval sims assumes that when your torpedoe strucks a ship, it hits in the mid section where there's usually a thick belt of armour OR anti-torpedo protection measure such as a water-tight compartment/bulkhead, double hull or double bottom to buffer against such.
In the real world, these torpedo protection systems may or may not be effective but in a naval sim, presuming that the programmer had set a certain "collapsible" value for a certain class of ship, hence requiring a certain amount of torpedoe hits to sink it (damage it beyond that presetted collapsible value).
IMO, the naval sims these days are as realistic as they can be in the visual arena but not in terms of the real thing. Better games (& possibly more realistic ones) will come in time to come presuming companies like Sonalyst & SSI don't go under before that.
Warm Regards,
Das
PS: How many naval sims have you counted playing before SH2? I've counted Harpoon 1&2, SH1&2, Jane's 688i, Jane's Fleet Command & Sub Command... my favourite is still the 688i for its relatively realistic sonar, TMA console.
In the real world, these torpedo protection systems may or may not be effective but in a naval sim, presuming that the programmer had set a certain "collapsible" value for a certain class of ship, hence requiring a certain amount of torpedoe hits to sink it (damage it beyond that presetted collapsible value).
IMO, the naval sims these days are as realistic as they can be in the visual arena but not in terms of the real thing. Better games (& possibly more realistic ones) will come in time to come presuming companies like Sonalyst & SSI don't go under before that.
Warm Regards,
Das
PS: How many naval sims have you counted playing before SH2? I've counted Harpoon 1&2, SH1&2, Jane's 688i, Jane's Fleet Command & Sub Command... my favourite is still the 688i for its relatively realistic sonar, TMA console.
"Say what you mean and mean what you say."
- General George S. Patton Jr
- General George S. Patton Jr
Re: How many torpedoes does it take?
I have not been involved in any war games or simulations, so I can't help from that perspective.
Unfortunately, asking how many torpedoes it takes to destroy a battleship is not all that different from asking how many shells it takes--2 (Hood) or 400 (Bismarck)? Hood was sunk by the first 15in round that hit her because she was an old ship that never received an adequate modernization. There is no modern battleship I know of that would have succumbed to the sort of hit that Hood took.
With torpedoes, the same thing applies. Old ships go pretty quickly when struck by the torpedoes in service during WWII. New ships would generally require more. But if you look at Prince of Wales, she gets criticized for sinking after just six hits from aerial torpedoes. In fact, her torpedo defense system was rather poor, but the real killer in her case was Lady Luck; a torpedo struck the strut to her prop shaft, causing the shaft to flail around. The stern was ripped open, and the distorted prop shaft alley admitted flooding straight into the machinery spaces. Apart from this, she might have taken three more hits and still stayed afloat. Who knows?
No warship at sea has made it back home after a successful attack inflicting more than three torpedo hits (not counting duds). Two Japanese carriers survived three hits at sea, and only because the placement of the hits was not critical. In port, Littorio was repaired after three torpedo hits, and West Virginia was repaired after something like ten torpedo hits. (Yow!) Also, in WWI, the monitor Terror managed to beach herself after three torpedo hits, and she was later repaired.
If all the torpedoes come as a single "pulse" of damage, the consequences are greater. A Japanese cruiser once survived, jeez, I don't remember how many hits; but these were spaced out over the course of some days; experience showed that a single attack with numerous hits could snap a Japanese cruiser into three pieces.
The power of the warhead is a factor, though less than explosive weights might imply. Torpedo destructive is not exactly proportional to warhead weight anyway. The torpedo that crippled Bismarck was only about a third as powerful as those that sank Scharnhorst. In Surigao Strait, four big torpedoes struck Yamashiro, yet she continued to fight for some time. Her sistership, subjected to the same torpedoes in the same battle, blew apart after only one or two hits.
I'll give a specific mention to Ark Royal. She sank quite some time after taking a single torpedo hit. This was not simply a fluke but the result of a flaw in her design that facilitated progressive flooding and a loss of power. British carriers in general did not fair well with torpedoes. By contrast, the American carrier Hornet absorbed sixteen torpedo hits before sinking.
So when estimating the number of torpedoes you'd actually need to sink a ship, you have to look at the placement of the hits, the power of the warhead, the rapidity of the hits, the age of the target, and the track record of ships that came from the same "stable" as the target.
With regard to the comment from uboat.net, armor has nothing to do with resistance to torpedoes. Torpedoes strike beneath the armor of a battleship, which is why they are so deadly. The most vulnerable portion of a battleship is aft where damage to the screws and rudder can cripple. The shaft alleys also facilitate flooding. The bow is not an area of great volume, so even though they have little in the line of torpedo defenses, they are not as vulnerable. The torpedo defense system is broadest directly amidships, which makes sense since that is the sector of greatest volume--it needs protection. As the hull thins near the gun turrets, the TDS tends to be thinner. This is the sort of thing that drives ship designers crazy; unless they want to build a rectangular hull, the TDS is going to be thinner right alongside the magazines. Ouch!
Unfortunately, asking how many torpedoes it takes to destroy a battleship is not all that different from asking how many shells it takes--2 (Hood) or 400 (Bismarck)? Hood was sunk by the first 15in round that hit her because she was an old ship that never received an adequate modernization. There is no modern battleship I know of that would have succumbed to the sort of hit that Hood took.
With torpedoes, the same thing applies. Old ships go pretty quickly when struck by the torpedoes in service during WWII. New ships would generally require more. But if you look at Prince of Wales, she gets criticized for sinking after just six hits from aerial torpedoes. In fact, her torpedo defense system was rather poor, but the real killer in her case was Lady Luck; a torpedo struck the strut to her prop shaft, causing the shaft to flail around. The stern was ripped open, and the distorted prop shaft alley admitted flooding straight into the machinery spaces. Apart from this, she might have taken three more hits and still stayed afloat. Who knows?
No warship at sea has made it back home after a successful attack inflicting more than three torpedo hits (not counting duds). Two Japanese carriers survived three hits at sea, and only because the placement of the hits was not critical. In port, Littorio was repaired after three torpedo hits, and West Virginia was repaired after something like ten torpedo hits. (Yow!) Also, in WWI, the monitor Terror managed to beach herself after three torpedo hits, and she was later repaired.
If all the torpedoes come as a single "pulse" of damage, the consequences are greater. A Japanese cruiser once survived, jeez, I don't remember how many hits; but these were spaced out over the course of some days; experience showed that a single attack with numerous hits could snap a Japanese cruiser into three pieces.
The power of the warhead is a factor, though less than explosive weights might imply. Torpedo destructive is not exactly proportional to warhead weight anyway. The torpedo that crippled Bismarck was only about a third as powerful as those that sank Scharnhorst. In Surigao Strait, four big torpedoes struck Yamashiro, yet she continued to fight for some time. Her sistership, subjected to the same torpedoes in the same battle, blew apart after only one or two hits.
I'll give a specific mention to Ark Royal. She sank quite some time after taking a single torpedo hit. This was not simply a fluke but the result of a flaw in her design that facilitated progressive flooding and a loss of power. British carriers in general did not fair well with torpedoes. By contrast, the American carrier Hornet absorbed sixteen torpedo hits before sinking.
So when estimating the number of torpedoes you'd actually need to sink a ship, you have to look at the placement of the hits, the power of the warhead, the rapidity of the hits, the age of the target, and the track record of ships that came from the same "stable" as the target.
With regard to the comment from uboat.net, armor has nothing to do with resistance to torpedoes. Torpedoes strike beneath the armor of a battleship, which is why they are so deadly. The most vulnerable portion of a battleship is aft where damage to the screws and rudder can cripple. The shaft alleys also facilitate flooding. The bow is not an area of great volume, so even though they have little in the line of torpedo defenses, they are not as vulnerable. The torpedo defense system is broadest directly amidships, which makes sense since that is the sector of greatest volume--it needs protection. As the hull thins near the gun turrets, the TDS tends to be thinner. This is the sort of thing that drives ship designers crazy; unless they want to build a rectangular hull, the TDS is going to be thinner right alongside the magazines. Ouch!