Barrel wear and bombardments

akdreemer · Post by **akdreemer** » Fri Dec 28, 2007 10:16 pm

My concern is how will WITP:AE address the issue of barrel wear and the need for relining? I posted this on the Naval forum, but I think it got lost in the respawn debate. In larger caliber guns this is a real issue. For instance, the USN 16"/45 Mk 6 was good for about 400 rounds before the barrel was in need of relining. Relining this gun involved pulling the gun from the turret then shipping the gun to a naval ordnance center where the liner would be replaced. Ditto for all of the other guns, big or small. Obviously this takes a considerable amount of time. A possible solution might be to count rounds fired, whether bombardment or ship to ship, and then after the relining total is reached the guns would be disabled?

Or maybe decrease the accuracy after the relining limit is reached?

Limit this just to ships carrying guns larger than 8"?

Ignore this problem?

Finding a way to incorporate this would go a long way towards eliminating the revolving door shore bombardments.

Class Gun ~barrel life ammo per gun
Yamato 46cm/45 Type 94 150-250 100
Nagato 41cm/45 3rd YT 250-300 90
Kongo, Fuso, Ise 36cm/45 41st YT 250-280 90
B-65 31cm/50 "B" 340 150

Richelieu 380mm/45 M1935 200 100

Nelson 16"/45 Mk 1 200-250 95
QE, R Sov.,
Vanguard, Erebous 15"/42 Mk 1 335 100
Renown,
Abercrombie,
Roberts 15"/42 Mk 1 335 110
POW 14"/45 Mk VII 340 100

Iowa, Montana 16"/50 Mk 7 350 130
North Dakota,
Washington 16"/45 Mk 6 395 130
Colorado 16"/45 Mk 1 350 100
New Mexico,
Tennessee 14"/50 M7,11 250 100
New York, Nevada,
Pennsylvania 14"/45Mk 8,9,10,12 250 100
Alaska 12"/50 Mk 8 344 166
Wyoming 12"/50 Mk 7 200 100

source was
http://www.navweaps.com/

Terminus · Post by **Terminus** » Fri Dec 28, 2007 10:20 pm

This is not going to be in the AE. This is a REWRITE, not a brand new game.

akdreemer · Post by **akdreemer** » Fri Dec 28, 2007 10:30 pm

ORIGINAL: Terminus

This is not going to be in the AE. This is a REWRITE, not a brand new game.

Well then I guess we are stuck with the status quo of unrealistic endless cycle shore bombardments. Much like the infinite repeater of Hollywood fame. Looks like the house rules that was implemented in my current pbem game will be the only way to put an end to this.

jwilkerson · Post by **jwilkerson** » Sat Dec 29, 2007 12:39 am

I wonder, if a simple approximation might be possible.

I'm not sure that already, bombardment TFs don't take a bit of extra sys dmg. But regardless, it might not take more than a few lines of code to add a bit more sys dmg to the heavier ships. Not exactly a full blown barrel wear simulator, but perhaps an "Occam's Razor" version!

We'll take this off line and cogitate on it.

pompack · Post by **pompack** » Sat Dec 29, 2007 1:05 am

[quote]ORIGINAL: AlaskanWarrior

"My concern is how will WITP:AE address the issue of barrel wear and the need for relining? I posted this on the Naval forum, but I think it got lost in the respawn debate. In larger caliber guns this is a real issue. For instance, the USN 16"/45 Mk 6 was good for about 400 rounds before the barrel was in need of relining. Relining this gun involved pulling the gun from the turret then shipping the gun to a naval ordnance center where the liner would be replaced. Ditto for all of the other guns, big or small. Obviously this takes a considerable amount of time. A possible solution might be to count rounds fired, whether bombardment or ship to ship, and then after the relining total is reached the guns would be disabled? "

I am afraid that your statment needs a bit of qualification. According to Friedman (Battleship Design and Develpment 1905-1945 page 129), The US 16in/45 Mk VI was rated at 400 Equivilent Service Rounds (ESR). A full power armor-piercing reound was rated at 1.0 ESR. A practice round was rated at 0.14 ESR and the lightweight High Capacity round used for shore bombardment (1900 pounds instead of 2700 pounds) was rated at 0.06 ESR. This was equivilent to a liner life of about 6400 rounds.

treespider · Post by **treespider** » Sat Dec 29, 2007 5:33 am

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

I wonder, if a simple approximation might be possible.

I'm not sure that already, bombardment TFs don't take a bit of extra sys dmg. But regardless, it might not take more than a few lines of code to add a bit more sys dmg to the heavier ships. Not exactly a full blown barrel wear simulator, but perhaps an "Occam's Razor" version!

We'll take this off line and cogitate on it.

GMTA... Just add SYS damage when the big guns fire...

akdreemer · Post by **akdreemer** » Sat Dec 29, 2007 9:05 am

ORIGINAL: pompack

ORIGINAL: AlaskanWarrior

"My concern is how will WITP:AE address the issue of barrel wear and the need for relining? I posted this on the Naval forum, but I think it got lost in the respawn debate. In larger caliber guns this is a real issue. For instance, the USN 16"/45 Mk 6 was good for about 400 rounds before the barrel was in need of relining. Relining this gun involved pulling the gun from the turret then shipping the gun to a naval ordnance center where the liner would be replaced. Ditto for all of the other guns, big or small. Obviously this takes a considerable amount of time. A possible solution might be to count rounds fired, whether bombardment or ship to ship, and then after the relining total is reached the guns would be disabled? "

I am afraid that your statment needs a bit of qualification. According to Friedman (Battleship Design and Develpment 1905-1945 page 129), The US 16in/45 Mk VI was rated at 400 Equivilent Service Rounds (ESR). A full power armor-piercing reound was rated at 1.0 ESR. A practice round was rated at 0.14 ESR and the lightweight High Capacity round used for shore bombardment (1900 pounds instead of 2700 pounds) was rated at 0.06 ESR. This was equivilent to a liner life of about 6400 rounds.

"HC rounds at 2,525 fps (770 mps) were 0.74 ESR and at 2,000 fps (610 mps) were 0.09 ESR. The Target rounds at 1,800 fps (549 mps) were 0.08 ESR, but it is noted that this gun could fire 2,860 Target rounds before exceeding liner life."
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_16-45_mk6.htm

Depends upon sources, but more importantly depends upon muzzle velocity. Your argument for 6400 rounds is a bit off as even for practice rounds it would only 2860. It is also off because it is ludicrous to think that all rounds fired are HC rounds at 2000fps. If standard procedures were followed then barrels would be relined when their wear life equaled the ammo capacity for that gun. As barrels wore then accuracy begins to suffer, usually causing short rounds.

I also think that sys damage during bombardments would be a good compromise, maybe variable to reflect ammo type expenditures.

Dili · Post by **Dili** » Sat Dec 29, 2007 5:52 pm

I know, Littorios could do it without taking out the gun from turret but they were also the ship that their liner lasted less. Maybe others could do it too.

Apollo11 · Post by **Apollo11** » Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:45 pm

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: AlaskanWarrior

ORIGINAL: Terminus

This is not going to be in the AE. This is a REWRITE, not a brand new game.

Well then I guess we are stuck with the status quo of unrealistic endless cycle shore bombardments. Much like the infinite repeater of Hollywood fame. Looks like the house rules that was implemented in my current pbem game will be the only way to put an end to this.

There are several things that will change the current WitP to much more realistic thing in "WitP AE"!

I (and many others) asked for that for years and was told that it will be in "WitP AE":

#1
Ammo for all guns can't be loaded in any port (right now you can reload any kind of ammo in any port)

#2
Port sizes will dramatically impact reloading times and berthing capacities

With those two items above it would mean that there will no longer be "endless cycles of shore bombardemets"!

Leo "Apollo11"

tsimmonds · Post by **tsimmonds** » Sat Dec 29, 2007 9:12 pm

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

I wonder, if a simple approximation might be possible.

I'm not sure that already, bombardment TFs don't take a bit of extra sys dmg. But regardless, it might not take more than a few lines of code to add a bit more sys dmg to the heavier ships. Not exactly a full blown barrel wear simulator, but perhaps an "Occam's Razor" version!

We'll take this off line and cogitate on it.

GMTA... Just add SYS damage when the big guns fire...

I disagree with this idea. SysDam lowers speed. This does not compute[;)]

Perhave have a chance for an accident to destroy weapons....

jwilkerson · Post by **jwilkerson** » Sat Dec 29, 2007 9:51 pm

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

I disagree with this idea. SysDam lowers speed. This does not compute[;)]

Perhave have a chance for an accident to destroy weapons....

Are you sure sys dmg lowers speed in AE?
[;)]

We have a new type of dmg called eng (engine)!

So AE Sys dmg, is the generic, everything but engine and floatation damage.

tsimmonds · Post by **tsimmonds** » Sat Dec 29, 2007 9:56 pm

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

I disagree with this idea. SysDam lowers speed. This does not compute[;)]

Perhave have a chance for an accident to destroy weapons....

Are you sure sys dmg lowers speed in AE?
[;)]

We have a new type of dmg called eng (engine)!

So AE Sys dmg, is the generic, everything but engine and floatation damage.

Oh. Well, that's very different. Never mind.[;)]

jwilkerson · Post by **jwilkerson** » Sat Dec 29, 2007 9:59 pm

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

I disagree with this idea. SysDam lowers speed. This does not compute[;)]

Perhave have a chance for an accident to destroy weapons....

Are you sure sys dmg lowers speed in AE?
[;)]

We have a new type of dmg called eng (engine)!

So AE Sys dmg, is the generic, everything but engine and floatation damage.

Oh. Well, that's very different. Never mind.[;)]

I'm not actually 100% sure, but it could be. We will have to wait for Don to give us a "for sure" answer.

treespider · Post by **treespider** » Sat Dec 29, 2007 10:14 pm

The same old same ole ain't anymore...too many assumptions by people until they've seen the big picture.

Don Bowen · Post by **Don Bowen** » Sat Dec 29, 2007 10:17 pm

Ship speed is PRIMARILY reduced for engine damage.   It also suffers reduction for float damage (can't go fast when the bulkheads are giving way) and a slight reduction for systems damage (to account for sub-systems off line).  
 
It is really better to keep your ships in good repair.
 
 

Halsey · Post by **Halsey** » Sun Dec 30, 2007 2:53 am

ORIGINAL: treespider

The same old same ole ain't anymore...too many assumptions by people until they've seen the big picture.

Enlighten us then...

bradfordkay · Post by **bradfordkay** » Sun Dec 30, 2007 3:21 am

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

I disagree with this idea. SysDam lowers speed. This does not compute[;)]

Perhave have a chance for an accident to destroy weapons....

Are you sure sys dmg lowers speed in AE?
[;)]

We have a new type of dmg called eng (engine)!

So AE Sys dmg, is the generic, everything but engine and floatation damage.

Hip, Hip, Hooray!!!!

Barrel wear and bombardments

Barrel wear and bombardments

RE: Barrel wear and bombardments

RE: Barrel wear and bombardments

RE: Barrel wear and bombardments

RE: Barrel wear and bombardments

RE: Barrel wear and bombardments

RE: Barrel wear and bombardments

RE: Barrel wear and bombardments

RE: Barrel wear and bombardments

RE: Barrel wear and bombardments

RE: Barrel wear and bombardments

RE: Barrel wear and bombardments

RE: Barrel wear and bombardments

RE: Barrel wear and bombardments

Ship speed and Damage

RE: Barrel wear and bombardments

RE: Barrel wear and bombardments