|
AmiralLaurent -> Sub vs Sub in WWII, but not in BTR (?) (4/4/2003 10:53:35 PM)
|
[QUOTE]Also, a lot of these sub kills were done on Japanese subs foolishly on the surface -- not a good idea for Japan even in their own home waters! It's assumed your sub commanders are smarter then that. [/QUOTE]
During the whole WWII, about 50 subs were sunk by another sub. Only one (victim) was underwater at the time. And of the hundreds of subs sunk by aircraft, almost all were found and attacked while on the surface, even if they may be sunk after the dive (by a Fido torpedo for example).
WWII subs were very slow underwater and to be able to find targets (either by sighting or radar) need to be on the surface. They also need to surface to recharge batteries (usually during the night) that allowed them to advance underwater.
In Pacific waters, where ASW forces were weak, it was usual for a sub to chase a target on the surface during the night or in bad weather, using faster surface speed to arrive in front of the target and then diving for the final approach.
Before that, the greatest successes of the U-Boat in 1941 were by attacks in groups in surface during the night. British escorts had more often Asdic than radar during this time and a sub has more chance to escape if it didn't dive !
Here is a list of cases of sub vs sub in UV time and aera during WWII:
May 17, 1942
Submarine Tautog (SS-199) torpedoes and sinks Japanese submarine I-28 north of Rabaul, 06°30'N, 152°00'E.
December 20, 1942
Submarine Seadragon (SS-194) sinks Japanese submarine I-4 between New Britain and New Ireland, 05°02'S, 152°33'E, while I-4 is engaged in a resupply mission to Guadalcanal.
3 January, 1943
Submarine Grayback (SS-208) claims to have sunk a Japanese submarine in Solomon waters, wrongly identified as the I-18. In fact she has no success.
27 July, 1943
Submarine Scamp (SS-277) sinks Japanese submarine I-168, 02°50'S, 149°01'E, and damages oiler Kazahaya, 02°38'S, 149°20'E.
16 November, 1943
Submarine Corvina (SS-216) is sunk by Japanese submarine I-176, south of Truk, 05°05'N, 151°10'E.
In our game, I have never seen it. Yesterday I did an head-to-head game to test this. 10 subs from each side were on patrol around the same island (shallow hex) for 25 days and never attacked any other. After ten days, I put about 40 planes on each side on ASW patrol near this aera. They were about 20 sightings each day, with from 25 to 50% attacks. Suppose the 2.3 patch is fully acting here as there were many subs at the same place. The subs were still not seeing each other (at least there should have been some collisions) but I changed the study subject to ASW aerial action.
I see something I have never seen in a game before (maybe because of FOW): a plane bombing a sub (with few sys damage, due to sea before) and the sub sinking at the end of the turn. In this case it was a Mavis against a S-something. There was another success, an I-Boat being bombed twice by B-17 the same day, ending the turn with 70/85 damage and sinking two days and 4 hexs later.
On the whole aircraft seems to be poorer ASW platforms than they were historically. On the Allied side, about 12 B-17 and 30 PBY were on ASW patrol, all at a base 5 hexs away and flying at 1000 feet with 100% ASW. Almost each turn, the B-17 did more attacks than the PBY and they seem to do all the damage. I can't remember if a PBY ever sank an I-Boat in my games, they are far more useful in Naval Search.
In WWII, PBY were efficient during only one month in 42-43. Floatplanes assisted in two killings (I-18 and I-17 in 1943). B-17 were not used for ASW in Pacific (?) but very successful in Atlantic.
October 5, 1942.
PBY (COMAIRSOPAC) sinks Japanese submarine I-22 near Indispensable Strait, Solomons.
October 29, 1942
PBY (VP 11) sinks Japanese submarine I-172 west of San Cristobal Island, Solomons, 13°01'S, 162°45'E.
Sub to sub chasing would be cool. A test I didn't do is to have numerous subs going trough an hex where numerous subs of the other side are patroling.
|
|
|
|
