No torpedoes for subs in Darwin?

[Nowi Ribak]

Hello,
me again.
Do I need a HQ with assigned torpedoes to provide them for my subs?

Wanted to establish a sub base in Darwin - if so, which HQ do you guys move over there?

[Platoonist]

If it's sub torpedoes you need getting a fully supplied submarine tender (AS) there would likely be the quickest option.

[DConn]

Apart from an AS, the ability to load torps is based on port size; it's in the rules.

[geofflambert]

And sufficient supply.

[geofflambert]

Those HQs with torpedoes - those are aviation torpedoes not sub or surface ship torpedoes.

[Platoonist]

The one nice thing about Allied submarine tenders is that the nationality of the tender doesn't matter (in the game anyway) British, American or Dutch, they'll have whatever brand of torp onboard that you require. [:D]

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Platoonist

The one nice thing about Allied submarine tenders is that the nationality of the tender doesn't matter (in the game anyway) British, American or Dutch, they'll have whatever brand of torp onboard that you require. [:D]

You need 8 torpedoes? Yes Sir! Will that be working or non-working? [:D]

[GetAssista]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: Platoonist
The one nice thing about Allied submarine tenders is that the nationality of the tender doesn't matter (in the game anyway) British, American or Dutch, they'll have whatever brand of torp onboard that you require. [:D]

You need 8 torpedoes? Yes Sir! Will that be working or non-working? [:D]

Good one!

"Sir, Mk-14 you say? You need to wait a couple hours, we will make some adjustments to our standard issue ones.
What adjustments? Sorry, those are top secret, Sir, please refer to your Bureau of Ordnance for further details"

Or alternatively, for a US AS and Dutch/Brit sub:
"Sir, you need to wait a couple of hours, we need to fix all the wrongs with the torps that BO forbids to fix for our own guys. But for you it's ok."

[Ian R]

You see, sir, the boffins set them to run under the target, and gave them these magnetic field detonators that go off when they are underneath. They reckon that's better than hitting the hull. Yeah right!

Don't worry, we've reset the depth setting so you'll get hull hits, and (don't tell the admirals) we've disconnected the magnetic thingee so the torpedo won't explode until it connects.

Imagine that,some idjit suggesting that if you organised the torpedo to go off directly under the ship it would break it's back and chop it in half. Bloody college kids. It's not like it's the 1980s or something.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: Ian R

You see, sir, the boffins set them to run under the target, and gave them these magnetic field detonators that go off when they are underneath. They reckon that's better than hitting the hull. Yeah right!

Don't worry, we've reset the depth setting so you'll get hull hits, and (don't tell the admirals) we've disconnected the magnetic thingee so the torpedo won't explode until it connects.

Imagine that,some idjit suggesting that if you organised the torpedo to go off directly under the ship it would break it's back and chop it in half. Bloody college kids. It's not like it's the 1980s or something.

The actual theory was and is still sound, the breaking of the keel. If you look at the damage that ships took when the wall of water from a torpedo explosion went up into the hull . . .

That is what happened to the Prince of Wales.

But in practice, the Earth's magnetic waves were more horizontal than vertical in the Western Pacific unlike at the East Coast of the United States so that is why there were the premature detonations.

[Ian R]

And that was indeed the problem ... interestingly, HMS Conqueror in 1982 had a selection of weapons available - and the skipper selected a spread of Mk18s, and took a hull shot. [;)]