Just how bad were USN torpedoes?

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
sandman2575
Posts: 315
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 1:02 pm

Just how bad were USN torpedoes?

Post by sandman2575 »

...newb that i am, i've been surprised at just *how awful* early-war USN torpedoes are. Although I haven't kept strict numerical track, it definitely feels like 2 out of every 3 (66% at least?) of my torpedoes fail to detonate when they hit their target. IJN fail rate seems much much lower, like maybe 15%-20%

i'm not about to imply "is this historical?" because i feel pretty certain that *everything* in this game has been carefully modelled and exhaustively researched (...incredibly impressive, really) -- but God is it frustrating!!
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: Just how bad were USN torpedoes?

Post by Terminus »

Well, if you've only seen the Mk14 malfunction 2 out of 3 times, then you're lucky...[:D]
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
Shark7
Posts: 7936
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:11 pm
Location: The Big Nowhere

RE: Just how bad were USN torpedoes?

Post by Shark7 »

For the first 1.5 years of the war, the standard US submarine attack goes <Submarine> fires 4 21in Mk 14 Torpedo at <ship>...Torpedoes fail to detonate. As best I can tell, 9 of 10 will miss/fail to detonate.
Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: Just how bad were USN torpedoes?

Post by Terminus »

Aside from the fact that it's 8 out of 10, you're correct.
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
joey
Posts: 1528
Joined: Sat May 08, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Johnstown, PA

RE: Just how bad were USN torpedoes?

Post by joey »

The early torpedoes were so bad that SUBPAC ordered some of the improperly performing functions (depth setting and magnetic exploders ) on torpedoes disabled in order to improve their functioning somewhat. Torpedoes had a few major problems. The depth setting was one of these. The other being the firing pin. Magnetic exploders were another. Washington ordered him to turn them back on; he did not. He refused because to do so would make the torpedoes completely useless.
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Just how bad were USN torpedoes?

Post by witpqs »

IIRC the magnetic exploder was a major problem too and was disabled early on.
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: Just how bad were USN torpedoes?

Post by Terminus »

Correct. The Mk 14 had those three big problems, which conspired for 18 months to make it somewhat less than useful.
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
JohnDillworth
Posts: 3104
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 5:22 pm

RE: Just how bad were USN torpedoes?

Post by JohnDillworth »

The early torpedoes were so bad that SUBPAC ordered some of the improperly performing functions (depth setting and magnetic exploders ) on torpedoes disabled in order to improve their functioning somewhat. Torpedoes had a few major problems. The depth setting was one of these. The other being the firing pin. Magnetic exploders were another. Washington ordered him to turn them back on; he did not. He refused because to do so would make the torpedoes completely useless.

Plus there was complete denial that the problem existed. I believe that the person that finally proved the firing pin didn't work took a sub to some coastline with a cliff and fired a torpedo right into it. I think it failed on the first shot. Then some diver went and retrived the warhead.
Today I come bearing an olive branch in one hand, and the freedom fighter's gun in the other. Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. I repeat, do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. - Yasser Arafat Speech to UN General Assembly
User avatar
Admiral Scott
Posts: 707
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

RE: Just how bad were USN torpedoes?

Post by Admiral Scott »

What is the failure rate of the older more reliable Mark 10 torpedo in the game?
User avatar
Shark7
Posts: 7936
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:11 pm
Location: The Big Nowhere

RE: Just how bad were USN torpedoes?

Post by Shark7 »

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Aside from the fact that it's 8 out of 10, you're correct.

Details, details... [:D]
Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: Just how bad were USN torpedoes?

Post by Terminus »

ORIGINAL: Admiral Scott

What is the failure rate of the older more reliable Mark 10 torpedo in the game?

15%.
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
Chris21wen
Posts: 7700
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Cottesmore, Rutland

RE: Just how bad were USN torpedoes?

Post by Chris21wen »

One of my boats 'hit' the Shokaku with three separate salvos, twice in one turn. Note I use the tern 'hit'.
User avatar
Admiral Scott
Posts: 707
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

RE: Just how bad were USN torpedoes?

Post by Admiral Scott »

Some sub commanders removed the magnetic influence detonators and/or changed the running depth on their torpedoes against orders.
They started to get hits, but the changes they made were kept secret from their superiors.

Is this modeled in the game?
User avatar
sandman2575
Posts: 315
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 1:02 pm

RE: Just how bad were USN torpedoes?

Post by sandman2575 »

thanks for the historical context guys -- interesting stuff!
User avatar
joey
Posts: 1528
Joined: Sat May 08, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Johnstown, PA

RE: Just how bad were USN torpedoes?

Post by joey »

The is an story about these torpedoes. I believe it was the Wahoo. The story goes the torpedo shot was a perfect midships firing position. It does not get much better than that. The torpedo was fired and ran hot straight and normal. The sub commander watched the captain of the freighter (the target) as the torpedo approached the freighter through the periscope. The sub commander watched the freighter captains face go from curiosity (at first) to total fear as the torpedo closed in on the freighter. As the torpedo hit, the sub commander heard a "pinkkk" instead of a "boom!". With that, the freighter captain feinted on the freighter's deck.
User avatar
sandman2575
Posts: 315
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 1:02 pm

RE: Just how bad were USN torpedoes?

Post by sandman2575 »

ORIGINAL: joey

With that, the freighter captain feinted on the freighter's deck.

...well, at least it took out the captain
[:D]
User avatar
Footslogger
Posts: 1250
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 11:46 pm
Location: Washington USA

RE: Just how bad were USN torpedoes?

Post by Footslogger »

Didn't john Wayne make a movie describeing the trouble with firing pin in the torpedo itself?
User avatar
Jonathan Pollard
Posts: 584
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 2:48 am
Location: Federal prison
Contact:

RE: Just how bad were USN torpedoes?

Post by Jonathan Pollard »

I think the problem with the magnetic influence detonators arose from their testing in northern latitudes, where the earth's magnetic field is different from that in the tropics.
User avatar
JWE
Posts: 5039
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 5:02 pm

RE: Just how bad were USN torpedoes?

Post by JWE »

ORIGINAL: Jonathan Pollard
I think the problem with the magnetic influence detonators arose from their testing in northern latitudes, where the earth's magnetic field is different from that in the tropics.
Yes. I heard that as well, and think it's totally likely.

Another problem was the torps tended to porpoise, so maybe they ran high, maybe they ran low, maybe they prematured, but when they ran sweet, the mag exploders were gnarly deadly. Unfortunately, running sweet was a big issue. Took a looong time to get the mag head working right, what with all the other crap going on that skewed the analysis.

There was a temp compensation circuit in the detonator that (hindsight) caused the prematures, and a lag in the analog direction gyros (again hindsight) that caused the porpoising. Feedback from the magnetic system, was rudimentary, and not positive. More like neutral, or even negative feedback, so you are lookin at an increasing sinusoidal track. Woof! Like as: like as not. Math sucks, life's a bitch. But you're on point, Jojo.
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: Just how bad were USN torpedoes?

Post by Terminus »

To sum everything up for the OP:

Yes, the Mk 14 was that bad.
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”