Page 1 of 2

ASW Patrol vs Naval Search

Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 4:38 pm
by Captain Cruft
Has anyone ever seen an aircraft on ASW Patrol actually spot a sub? I haven't, not so far anyway. The same airgroup on Naval Search at the same altititude will spot subs, though not very often.

This is playing H2H and applies to both sides. Most submarines of both side are near the coasts so I don't think it's the halved-range affecting things.

RE: ASW Patrol vs Naval Search

Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 4:42 pm
by hithere
I have had aircraft spot subs several times while on ASW. from land based PBY's to carrier aircraft. I put them on ASW and lower the alt to 2000

RE: ASW Patrol vs Naval Search

Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 4:43 pm
by Black Cat
Yes, VS the AI in 3/42 off Rockhampton and Brisbane the ASW Hudsons and PBY`s will spot and even attack subs, but I have 4 groups on ASW at 6000 feet and it only seemed to happen if they have improved exp. levels.

RE: ASW Patrol vs Naval Search

Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 4:46 pm
by Captain Cruft
Ah so I need to lower the altitude from 20,000 feet? [;)]

I've actually been running at 3,000, might try lowering that to 2,000 or even 1,000. Bit gamey but hey if it works ...

Unrelated...

Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 4:50 pm
by Apollo11
Hi all,

"Captain Cruft" what is the picture you have as your logo?


Leo "Apollo11"

RE: ASW Patrol vs Naval Search

Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 4:50 pm
by Black Cat
I have a feeling that 6000 feet is the magic number for both ASW & Naval Search.

RE: ASW Patrol vs Naval Search

Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 4:51 pm
by hithere
the majic number for what? i know that the units get less tired

RE: Unrelated...

Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 4:54 pm
by Captain Cruft
Leo - HMS Barham listing to port just prior to sinking in the Med, 1941.

RE: Unrelated...

Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 4:56 pm
by Apollo11
Hi all,
ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

Leo - HMS Barham listing to port just prior to sinking in the Med, 1941.

Thanks for info!

BTW, is there a film with same scene showing how they even traind the heavy gun barrels to opposite side to prevent listing?


Leo "Apollo11"

RE: Unrelated...

Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 4:58 pm
by tsimmonds
"Captain Cruft" what is the picture you have as your logo?
That's Barham getting ready to explode....awesome film footage.

RE: Unrelated...

Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 4:59 pm
by Captain Cruft
Don't know. The photo is one of a sequence which could have come from a film I suppose.

RE: Unrelated...

Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 5:05 pm
by tsimmonds
BTW, is there a film with same scene showing how they even traind the heavy gun barrels to opposite side to prevent listing?
Barham sank too quickly for such measures. You may be thinking of Szent Istvan, an Austro-Hungarian dreadnaught whose capsizing was also filmed.....she went over to starboard with her main battery trained to port....didn't help[;)]

Image

RE: ASW Patrol vs Naval Search

Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 5:10 pm
by siRkid
ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

Has anyone ever seen an aircraft on ASW Patrol actually spot a sub? I haven't, not so far anyway. The same airgroup on Naval Search at the same altititude will spot subs, though not very often.

This is playing H2H and applies to both sides. Most submarines of both side are near the coasts so I don't think it's the halved-range affecting things.

It’s working for me. I just ran a test using the tutorial. The only TF I had deployed were submarine and all aircraft were either grounded or assigned ASW missions at 100%. There were no aircraft assigned to any other type of mission so there is no possibility of anything but an AWS mission spotting something. All the reports below are sub sightings. Do you have the percentage set up? Also, the reports do not distinguish between normal sighting reports and ASW sighting reports.

OPERATIONAL REPORT FOR 06/14/44

H8K Emily sighting report: 1 Allied ship at 63,67 , Speed 8 , Moving West
H8K Emily sighting report: 1 Allied ship at 62,67 , Speed 6 , Moving West
P1Y Frances sighting report: 1 Allied ship at 62,68 , Speed 8 , Moving West
B-29 Superfortress sighting report: 1 Japanese ship at 63,69 , Speed 12 , Moving Northwest

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPERATIONAL REPORT FOR 06/15/44


G4M2 Betty sighting report: 1 Allied ship at 62,68 , Speed 5 , Moving West
H8K Emily sighting report: 1 Allied ship at 63,67 , Speed 12 , Moving West
H8K Emily sighting report: 1 Allied ship at 65,64 , Speed 8 , Moving Northwest
B-29 Superfortress sighting report: 1 Japanese ship at 71,73 , Speed 12 , Moving East
B-29 Superfortress sighting report: 1 Japanese ship at 71,72 , Speed 11 , Moving East

RE: Unrelated...

Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 5:12 pm
by tsimmonds
This is from the Barham film, about 5 seconds after Captain Cruft's image....

Image

RE: Unrelated...

Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 5:16 pm
by Apollo11
Hi all,
ORIGINAL: irrelevant
BTW, is there a film with same scene showing how they even traind the heavy gun barrels to opposite side to prevent listing?
Barham sank too quickly for such measures. You may be thinking of Szent Istvan, an Austro-Hungarian dreadnaught whose capsizing was also filmed.....she went over to starboard with her main battery trained to port....didn't help[;)]

Image

Yes... I asked him because the small picture seemed so familiar (and I was thinking of Szent Istvan)!

Thanks!!!


BTW, Szent Istvan was "our" Austro-Hungarian ship that Italians sunk in WWI...


Leo "Apollo11"

RE: ASW Patrol vs Naval Search

Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 5:18 pm
by Captain Cruft
Thanks Kid - I believe you, it works! [:)]

I tend to run patrols at 50% so as to keep fatigue well down, maybe 60% or 70% would be better.

Also, I presume the type of pilots don't matter i.e. navy pilots aren't better at searching than army pilots?

P.S. Magazine explosions - a British speciality, on a par with tanks that don't fire HE ammo ...

RE: ASW Patrol vs Naval Search

Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 5:24 pm
by moses
If you set range at 4 for ASW force does it halve this and search only 2? Are only max ranges cut in half?

RE: ASW Patrol vs Naval Search

Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 5:39 pm
by tsimmonds
P.S. Magazine explosions - a British speciality, on a par with tanks that don't fire HE ammo ...
While I agree with the sentiment, in this case I think it was Barham's boilers that went up. While I have never read anything about this, I have seen the film dozens of times. The explosion occurs as she goes over on her beam ends, just at the time that seawater would have been pouring into her boilers thru her uptakes. Large quantities of cold seawater would have flashed instantly into superheated steam with tremendous expansion. The explosion clearly originates from amidships rather than from the area under either set of main battery turrets....

Does anyone know of any definitive word on this? Apologies to Captain Cruft for hijacking the thread.[:o]

RE: ASW Patrol vs Naval Search

Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 5:40 pm
by tsimmonds
If you set range at 4 for ASW force does it halve this and search only 2? Are only max ranges cut in half?
Back on topic, I also have been wondering about this.

RE: ASW Patrol vs Naval Search

Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 5:53 pm
by Captain Cruft
irrelevant - no worries. It suits your nick [:)]