Kitakami and Oi: How effective?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Kitakami and Oi: How effective?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Kitakami and Oi: How effective?

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 3:16:04 AM

GaryChildress

Posts: 6830
Joined: 7/17/2005
From: The Divided Nations of Earth
Status: offline

For a short period between 1941 and somewhere in 1942 (I believe) Kitakami and Oi were fitted with 40 torpedo tubes to serve as "torpedo cruisers". Knowing how devastating the Long Lance torpedo was in night battles around the Solomons, etc. I wonder how effectvie Kitakami and Oi would have been had they participated with their 40 torpedo tubes in similar naval surface battles. As far as I know Kitakami and Oi never got a chance to utilize their massive torpedo broadsides before they were again transformed into fast transports.

Anyone care to speculate on how they would have fared in some of the night battles for Guadalcanal?

_____________________________

Post #: 1

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 3:51:03 AM

mike scholl 1

Posts: 1265
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline

No one can know for sure..., but apparently the Japanese were having second thoughts about the whole concept as they never sent them to the area and were soon to start converting them again for other roles. Always fun to speculate.

(in reply to GaryChildress)

Post #: 2

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 4:51:19 AM

gradenko2k

Posts: 935
Joined: 12/27/2010
Status: offline

If NavyField is anything to go by, they would have been absolutely devastating.

And yes, I'm well aware that it's not exactly the most realistic game in the world

(in reply to mike scholl 1)

Post #: 3

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 7:43:28 AM

Sardaukar

Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline

One problem with design was that they were incredibly vulnerable to any kind of hit in area where torpedoes were.

< Message edited by Sardaukar -- 2/20/2012 7:45:44 AM >

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von B�lov, 1870-

(in reply to gradenko2k)

Post #: 4

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 8:41:40 AM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

One problem with design was that they were incredibly vulnerable to any kind of hit in area where torpedoes were.

Which was EVERYWHERE. The Jap admirals who were supposed to take them into battle didn't want them, presumably for that reason.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Sardaukar)

Post #: 5

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 9:00:47 AM

Sardaukar

Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline

One of the less-mentioned downsides of IJN Long Lance torpedoes.

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von B�lov, 1870-

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 6

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 9:02:59 AM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

That, and the fact that the torpedo doctrine that led to them was fundamentally flawed.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Sardaukar)

Post #: 7

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 10:39:14 AM

String

Posts: 2661
Joined: 10/7/2003
From: Estonia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

That, and the fact that the torpedo doctrine that led to them was fundamentally flawed.

You seem to mix up "Fundamentally flawed" and "Not as efficient as advertised"

_____________________________

Surface combat TF fanboy

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 8

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 12:00:35 PM

d0mbo

Posts: 592
Joined: 8/21/2009
From: Holland
Status: offline

Question is: how effective are they in game. Haven't seen any " 3 enemy CA's sunk by one broadside!!111!!!!!1" type of posts, so I guess their in game usefulness is limited as well. Luckely all Japanese light cruisers make fine fast transports.

(in reply to String)

Post #: 9

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 12:16:37 PM

Erkki

Posts: 1461
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline

I think each of the 20-torp weapons can only have 1 target. I've had Oi sink the CL Marblehead(the other half of torps shot, 1 hit).

< Message edited by Erkki -- 2/20/2012 12:17:37 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to d0mbo)

Post #: 10

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 1:54:24 PM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: String

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

That, and the fact that the torpedo doctrine that led to them was fundamentally flawed.

You seem to mix up "Fundamentally flawed" and "Not as efficient as advertised"

No.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to String)

Post #: 11

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 3:13:37 PM

Sredni

Posts: 705
Joined: 9/30/2004
From: Canada
Status: offline

I seem to recall reading somewhere once that the long lances in the war ended up sinking more japanese ships then allied (through deck explosions).

(in reply to GaryChildress)

Post #: 12

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 3:35:49 PM

spence

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline

I never checked the destroyers (since pretty much all DDs carried torpedoes) but IIRC 8 Japanese cruisers suffered catastrophic detonations of their torpedo armament which directly led to the loss of the ship. The Mogami and Mikuma at Midway provide an interesting contrast: both hit amidships by bombs that start fires, the Damage Control Officer on Mogami jettisons his torps, the damage is contained and the ship saved for another day, the DCO on Mikuma does not, the Mikuma's torpedoes "cook off" starting uncontrollable flooding and disabling the ship's engines leading to the loss of the ship. I believe that Suzuya's torpedoes also "cooked off" after a hit from a 5" shell started a fire near the mounts during the Battle Off Samar in 1944.

By that count (8) the Long Lance contributed to pretty near the same number of IJN cruisers sunk as Allied ones.

< Message edited by spence -- 2/20/2012 3:37:23 PM >

(in reply to GaryChildress)

Post #: 13

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 3:45:39 PM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

Fairly useless considering how the AI handles the TTs.

_____________________________

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to spence)

Post #: 14

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 4:56:18 PM

jeffk3510

Posts: 4132
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gradenko_2000

If NavyField is anything to go by, they would have been absolutely devastating.

And yes, I'm well aware that it's not exactly the most realistic game in the world

Aw yes.. the torp whores...

I might need to re install that game.. not bad to waste an hour or two in the evening while waiting on a turn..

_____________________________

Life is tough. The sooner you realize that, the easier it will be.

Currently chasing three kids around the Midwest.

(in reply to gradenko2k)

Post #: 15

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 5:12:56 PM

Shark7

Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline

An interesting 'what if'.

Suppose instead of a torpedo cruiser, they'd gone in the direction of other navies and converted Kitikami and Oi into CLAAs?

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to jeffk3510)

Post #: 16

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 5:30:40 PM

ny59giants

Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline

I just but both in shipyard for 120 days in early '43 to start the conversion process to CLAAs with Scenario 2. They still have some TTs, but not as many.

_____________________________

(in reply to Shark7)

Post #: 17

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 6:30:18 PM

Tiornu

Posts: 1126
Joined: 4/1/2004
Status: offline

If you're in a generous mood, you can interpret the gelding of Oi and Kitakami as a step in the right direction. They were given all those torpedoes to maximize their contribution to the night torpedo attack that was scheduled to precede the Decisive Battle gun duel. The removal of the torpedoes means someone realized the DB concept was kaput. Of course, no one had a viable alternative to the DB concept, which itself was not viable. It's unwise to go into a war you cannot win, even if you're the Duchy of Grand Fenwick.

(in reply to ny59giants)

Post #: 18

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 7:54:05 PM

Commander Stormwolf

Posts: 1623
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline

In the absence of airpower, the Type 93 Long Lance would have been a war-winner

If AC were useless against battleships, as some believed

Type 93 24" torpedo:

historical hit rate was about 1%

total number of torpedoes aboard light IJN warships at Dec 1941:
about 1500

that means in the event of a fleet battle, approximately 10 hits
would be scored against the enemy battleline (assuming 1/3 of the light ships are sunk before they can launch)

basically the USN battleline would have been crippled and finished off by Yamato + the old BBs

_____________________________

"No Enemy Survives Contact with the Plan" - Commander Stormwolf

(in reply to GaryChildress)

Post #: 19

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 8:02:14 PM

Commander Stormwolf

Posts: 1623
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline

Also, the LL was not correctly used
the ships were poorly deployed

however when the long-lance was given the chance to fire,
the results were devastating (see battles around Guadalcanal)

the difficulty was bringing the surface ships into firing position
(practically impossible in daylight)

At midway, not a single long lance was fired
By Santa Cruz, the entire doctrine of naval deployment was revised

The Surface Ships were sent aggressively to the front,
in fact the USN realized they were out of range to strike the IJN carriers so the first wave was ordered to "strike any IJN ships you can find" since they were aware of the Kongos+cruisers coming at them

Hornet was sunk, Enterprise running away pursued by destroyers and cruisers

If this was done at midway, the cruisers and destroyers forming a screen some 100 miles in front of the carriers, the USN may have had to fight a surface action at midway (or at least be spotted by floatplane recon much sooner)

There were 12 other ships capable of being upgraded to the Kitikami/Oi standard (Kiso, Tama, Kuma, Nagara, etc.)

14 torpedo cruisers with destroyers forming a screen in front of the carriers would have been smart

USN would be forced to either fight a surface battle (good for IJN) or maintain a long stand off range preventing them from effective carrier operations (good for IJN)

trading CL for CV ships was the only way for japan to win carrier battles (needed more Coral Sea and Santa Cruz battles and fewer midways)

< Message edited by Commander Stormwolf -- 2/20/2012 8:05:11 PM >

_____________________________

"No Enemy Survives Contact with the Plan" - Commander Stormwolf

(in reply to Commander Stormwolf)

Post #: 20

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 8:57:44 PM

Tiornu

Posts: 1126
Joined: 4/1/2004
Status: offline

I'm not sure Guadalcanal offers any argument in favor of Long Lances. Was there ever a case in which older 24in torpedoes would not have done as well?

(in reply to Commander Stormwolf)

Post #: 21

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 9:25:53 PM

Commander Stormwolf

Posts: 1623
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline

Battle of Savo Island and Battle of Tassafaronga,
the light ships are decisive

Japanese BBs.. not so good

_____________________________

"No Enemy Survives Contact with the Plan" - Commander Stormwolf

(in reply to Tiornu)

Post #: 22

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 9:26:49 PM

Commander Stormwolf

Posts: 1623
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline

quote:

I'm not sure Guadalcanal offers any argument in favor of Long Lances.

said the modern, revisionist historian

quote:

I'm sure Guadalcanal offers an argument that Long Lances were never used operationally

from a book written one hundred years later in the year 2112....

< Message edited by Commander Stormwolf -- 2/20/2012 9:30:29 PM >

_____________________________

"No Enemy Survives Contact with the Plan" - Commander Stormwolf

(in reply to Commander Stormwolf)

Post #: 23

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 10:41:18 PM

bbbf

Posts: 493
Joined: 7/16/2000
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

Like a lot of Japanese planning, I am sure that given the right circumstances they could have had a deadly effect.

The only problem is that those right circumstances were so unlikely to come about, that the ships become white elephants.

_____________________________

Robert Lee

(in reply to Commander Stormwolf)

Post #: 24

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/20/2012 10:56:45 PM

Commander Stormwolf

Posts: 1623
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline

we are taught in science, that if a microstate exists, eventually it is satisfied

even an unlikely event such as "Yamato running into a group of CVs" did materialize (Samar).. unfortunately so did the event of "Japanese commander is demoralized and runs away"

Kurita is probably one of the biggest cowards/idiots of all military history

to the masses it is called murphy's law

to the scientist it is called ΔS= k ln W

either way, better to have Kitikami cruisers with torpedoes,
than Omaha cruisers with nothing

_____________________________

"No Enemy Survives Contact with the Plan" - Commander Stormwolf

(in reply to bbbf)

Post #: 25

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/21/2012 12:19:22 AM

Tiornu

Posts: 1126
Joined: 4/1/2004
Status: offline

The ranges at Savo were short enough to obviate the biggest advantage of the Long Lance over earlier models. How about Tassafaronga--what was the range there? Were there any Guadalcanal torpedo hits from ranges beyond 7000 yards or maybe 11,000 yards?
We don't have complete info on which IJN ships had Long Lances in summer 1942.

(in reply to Commander Stormwolf)

Post #: 26

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/21/2012 12:19:57 AM

Dili

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bbbf

Like a lot of Japanese planning, I am sure that given the right circumstances they could have had a deadly effect.

The only problem is that those right circumstances were so unlikely to come about, that the ships become white elephants.

That sums it up. In right circumstances they could have been devastating.

Also if i am remembering right my search at time they had a limited range that precluded being employed with the main fleet.

(in reply to bbbf)

Post #: 27

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/21/2012 1:12:17 AM

Commander Stormwolf

Posts: 1623
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline

Long Lance's main advantage was not range, it was speed

at the short range setting, it was capable of 50 kts with no torpedo wake

so those cruisers at guadalcanal had no idea what was happening until they were on their way to davey jones' locker

< Message edited by Commander Stormwolf -- 2/21/2012 1:13:31 AM >

_____________________________

"No Enemy Survives Contact with the Plan" - Commander Stormwolf

(in reply to GaryChildress)

Post #: 28

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/21/2012 2:10:10 AM

Dili

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline

Most torpedos were capable of 50kt at short range. The wake is mostly irrelevant at night.

(in reply to Commander Stormwolf)

Post #: 29

RE: Kitakami and Oi: How effective? - 2/21/2012 2:55:04 AM

mike scholl 1

Posts: 1265
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

Most torpedos were capable of 50kt at short range. The wake is mostly irrelevant at night.

No..., they weren't. The initial specs for the Type 94's were based on the faulty premise of the "Decisive Battle" with very long ranged fire. Java Sea proved that wasn't effecient (two Japanese Destroyer Squadrons waisted virtually all their torpedoes at long range for no result)..., but later in the same battle the two heavy cruisers showed what could be done by using them at shorter range and higher speed settings.

That's how the Japs used them around Guadalcanal, and it was quite successfull until the Americans finally caught on and made better use of their radar to counter the threat. Nobody else in the world had a torpedo that could make 49 knots for over 10,000 yards. And if you've ever seen the wake of a ship in phosporescent South Sea waters you wouldn't call it irrelevent. It was a good weapon, and the IJN made good use of it for a while. Unfortunately for them, it was about the only technologically superior weapon they posessed..., and it wasn't enough when faced with Allied superiority in most other tech areas..., and in numbers.

(in reply to Dili)

Post #: 30