SST

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

SST

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 >> SST

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

SST - 1/5/2013 3:37:44 PM

Bobthehatchit

Posts: 1478
Joined: 4/27/2003
From: GREAT BRITAIN
Status: offline

I thought SST's where for halling supplies, so I'm wondering why SST I176 has tubes torps and reloads yet I can only user her in sub transport missons. In a Sub transport TF would she attack enemy shipping?

I may have let I-176 six convert to an SST by hence the weapon load compaired to the Yu- class boats.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Bobthehatchit -- 1/5/2013 3:42:09 PM >

_____________________________

"Look at yours before laughing at mine". Garfield 1984.

Wanted: ISDII Low millage in Imperial gray.

Just my 2 pence worth.
I might not be right.
Hell I am probaby wrong.
But thats my opinion for what its worth!

Post #: 1

RE: SST - 1/5/2013 6:25:19 PM

LargeSlowTarget

Posts: 4443
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline

Me think torpedo ammo for SSTs should be reduced to 1 - they usually had torps in the tubes but no reloads.

For the Allied side, I have added some specific units (e.g. the Marine Amphib Recon Coy of Abemama fame, PI Guerillas and Agents) for more SST fun.

_____________________________

AE Mod "Bottlenecks" UPDATED 01/2022

(in reply to Bobthehatchit)

Post #: 2

RE: SST - 1/5/2013 6:35:58 PM

Puhis

Posts: 1737
Joined: 11/30/2008
From: Finland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bobthehatchit

I thought SST's where for halling supplies, so I'm wondering why SST I176 has tubes torps and reloads yet I can only user her in sub transport missons. In a Sub transport TF would she attack enemy shipping?

Probably not...

IMO converting I-boats to SST makes no sense, because cargo capacity is so small that they are nothing but useless. Waste of fuel.

(in reply to Bobthehatchit)

Post #: 3

RE: SST - 1/5/2013 7:55:22 PM

Bobthehatchit

Posts: 1478
Joined: 4/27/2003
From: GREAT BRITAIN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bobthehatchit

I thought SST's where for halling supplies, so I'm wondering why SST I176 has tubes torps and reloads yet I can only user her in sub transport missons. In a Sub transport TF would she attack enemy shipping?

Probably not...

IMO converting I-boats to SST makes no sense, because cargo capacity is so small that they are nothing but useless. Waste of fuel.

I figured as much, thats the only boat thats been converted and by mistake I must add.

Thanks for the reply.

_____________________________

(in reply to Puhis)

Post #: 4

RE: SST - 1/7/2013 12:24:16 PM

LargeSlowTarget

Posts: 4443
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline

Sub transport was ineffective and many IJN subs were sunk on supply runs. But often they were the last practical way to deliver supplies to cut-off bases - not enough of course - or to evacuate personnel.

However, I'm wondering why the capacity in your screenshot reads only "18" - in stock scenario 1 the type KD7 is listed with capacity 30.

I think the cargo capacities for SSTs should be upped. As SST, Narwhal and Nautilus carried about 90 tons of supplies - stock has capacity 60.

Much more difficult to find capacities for IJN combat subs used for transport duty (capacities for dedicated transport sub classes are less a problem).

Only found that I-52 of the type C3 class - which btw in stock AE has no SST option - was used as cargo submarine to Europe and carried 290 metric tons of cargo.

_____________________________

AE Mod "Bottlenecks" UPDATED 01/2022

(in reply to Bobthehatchit)

Post #: 5

RE: SST - 1/7/2013 6:04:04 PM

Alfred

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bobthehatchit

I thought SST's where for halling supplies, so I'm wondering why SST I176 has tubes torps and reloads yet I can only user her in sub transport missons. In a Sub transport TF would she attack enemy shipping?

Probably not...

IMO converting I-boats to SST makes no sense, because cargo capacity is so small that they are nothing but useless. Waste of fuel.

Not necessarily so.

I do recall having seen normal subs in either a sub transport or sub minelaying TF shooting off a torpedo either on route to or from the respective destination. Both mission profiles replace torpedo tubes with cargo/mines as appropriate. Same principle should also apply to a dedicated SST in a sub transport. Just don't expect subs in these types of missions to engage too often the enemy as their priority mission is very much otherwise.

Alfred

(in reply to Puhis)

Post #: 6

RE: SST - 1/7/2013 9:07:15 PM

Puhis

Posts: 1737
Joined: 11/30/2008
From: Finland
Status: offline

IMO there's 3 main problems with SSTs:

1) Cargo capacity is too small to be much use.

2) SSTs can only do sub transport missions. So even when converted SSTs have torpedo tubes, it's impossible to use them as ordinary subs.

3) Sub transports cannot set to run CS. So player have to micromanage them manually. I could even live with 1) and 2), but I don't want to manually manage ships that have cargo capacity of 30...

Also, playing as Japan, SSTs use huge amount of naval shipyard points (which is questionable, because historically most of the transport subs were not build by navy yards, and YU-1 class was even designed and build by IJA, nothing to do with IJN). So producing one YU-1 class SST cost as much Hi points than 3-5 DDs. Not very cost efficient way to transport tiny amount of supply.

(in reply to Alfred)

Post #: 7

RE: SST - 1/8/2013 11:06:18 AM

Cavalry Corp

Posts: 3107
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Sampford Spiney Devon UK
Status: offline

I think that if they built the they were of good use and therefore the game needs re moddling and must be wrong.
cav

(in reply to Puhis)

Post #: 8

RE: SST - 1/8/2013 11:55:06 AM

spence

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

The Wiki entry on I-52

quote:

On 10 March 1944, on her maiden voyage, I-52 (Commander Uno Kameo) departed Kure via Sasebo for Singapore. Her cargo from Japan included 9.8 tons of molybdenum, 11 tons of tungsten, 2.2 tons of gold in 146 bars packed in 49 metal boxes, 3 tons of opium and 54 kg of caffeine.[4] The gold was payment for German optical technology. She also carried 14 passengers, primarily Japanese technicians, who were to study German technology in anti-aircraft guns, and engines for torpedo boats.

In Singapore she picked up a further 120 tons of tin in ingots, 59.8 tons of caoutchouc (raw rubber) in bales and 3.3 tons of quinine, and headed through the Indian Ocean, to the Atlantic Ocean.

That's a good deal more than 30 tons of cargo.

The link to uboatarchive.net documents relating to the sinking of I-52 in the Atlantic. Interesting to note that a photo of the bridge (I think) of USS Bogue shows 2 "X-ed" IJN submarines along with its collection of "X-ed" Uboats. Anybody know which IJN sub was the other one?

http://www.uboatarchive.net/I-52.htm

(in reply to Bobthehatchit)

Post #: 9

RE: SST - 1/8/2013 1:17:51 PM

Puhis

Posts: 1737
Joined: 11/30/2008
From: Finland
Status: offline

Bogue's anti-sub hunter group sunk also RO-501 (ex-German U-1224).

(in reply to spence)

Post #: 10

RE: SST - 1/8/2013 1:20:21 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

The Wiki entry on I-52

quote:

On 10 March 1944, on her maiden voyage, I-52 (Commander Uno Kameo) departed Kure via Sasebo for Singapore. Her cargo from Japan included 9.8 tons of molybdenum, 11 tons of tungsten, 2.2 tons of gold in 146 bars packed in 49 metal boxes, 3 tons of opium and 54 kg of caffeine.[4] The gold was payment for German optical technology. She also carried 14 passengers, primarily Japanese technicians, who were to study German technology in anti-aircraft guns, and engines for torpedo boats.

In Singapore she picked up a further 120 tons of tin in ingots, 59.8 tons of caoutchouc (raw rubber) in bales and 3.3 tons of quinine, and headed through the Indian Ocean, to the Atlantic Ocean.

That's a good deal more than 30 tons of cargo.

I think the game number is a compromise between weight and cube. The commodities above are very dense. Rice has a lot of air space, as do crates of ammo and medical supplies.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to spence)

Post #: 11

RE: SST - 1/8/2013 2:18:27 PM

Puhis

Posts: 1737
Joined: 11/30/2008
From: Finland
Status: offline

Also we are talking about two completely different supply missions. When Japanese subs went to Europe, it was big port to big port mission. They had time to pack and unload the cargo. While supply runs for troops happened during one night. There was no ports, and it was important to unload fast. I think cargo capacity of SSTs are realistic, usually one I-boat could only deliver 15-30 tons of supply, even when the ships was modified for supply missions (deck gun removed etc.)

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 12

RE: SST - 1/8/2013 2:33:00 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis

Also we are talking about two completely different supply missions. When Japanese subs went to Europe, it was big port to big port mission. They had time to pack and unload the cargo. While supply runs for troops happened during one night. There was no ports, and it was important to unload fast. I think cargo capacity of SSTs are realistic, usually one I-boat could only deliver 15-30 tons of supply, even when the ships was modified for supply missions (deck gun removed etc.)

Good points. I have personally witnessed crew "bucket brigade" evolutions to load out a sub for patrol with food. It is back-breaking, exhausting work. Thirty tons? Our load-outs with a bigger crew and crane support to drop pallets on the missile deck--in daylight--were about 85,000 lbs. 42.5 tons. The crew was wiped for the rest of the day.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Puhis)

Post #: 13

RE: SST - 1/8/2013 8:57:59 PM

Puhis

Posts: 1737
Joined: 11/30/2008
From: Finland
Status: offline

Japanese I-boats modified for supply missions were pretty simple; for example sub might have been fitted with a mounting to carry a (floating) supply container or drums on her deck. It might have been that crew just released the supply (if they were hurry and enemy was near), and army men used Daihatsu barges to pick up floating drums. So they didn't use much time to unload. A seaplane-equipped I-boats could carry cargo in place of its aircraft facilities. Subs were also used to evacuate sick or wounded men and downed pilots.

Japan developed and used special floating supply containers (unkato) that could be towed by submarines. Some unkatos were quite large (over 40 meters long), and could carry about 300 tons. They were not very successful, because subs were vulnerable towing containers...

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 14

RE: SST - 1/8/2013 10:15:35 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis

Japanese I-boats modified for supply missions were pretty simple; for example sub might have been fitted with a mounting to carry a (floating) supply container or drums on her deck. It might have been that crew just released the supply (if they were hurry and enemy was near), and army men used Daihatsu barges to pick up floating drums. So they didn't use much time to unload. A seaplane-equipped I-boats could carry cargo in place of its aircraft facilities. Subs were also used to evacuate sick or wounded men and downed pilots.

Japan developed and used special floating supply containers (unkato) that could be towed by submarines. Some unkatos were quite large (over 40 meters long), and could carry about 300 tons. They were not very successful, because subs were vulnerable towing containers...

Yeah, don't stop too fast . . .

Then there's the stories of them firing torpedoes ashore with rice in the warhead space. Possibly the most expensive rice dish in history.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Puhis)

Post #: 15

RE: SST - 1/9/2013 8:22:04 PM

LargeSlowTarget

Posts: 4443
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline

Puhis is right, the cargo missions to Europe are totally different from the supply runs in the Pacific.

Here is some interesting info from the Nihon Kaigun website about I-1:

Late August to early September 1942:
Yokosuka Navy Yard. I-1 is converted to carry a special 46-ft waterproofed Daihatsu-type landing barge mounted abaft the conning tower. Her 5.5-in aft deck gun is landed. I-1 commences joint exercises with the No. 4 Maizuru SNLF detachment designated as Special Landing Unit (S-Tokuriku) for a planned raid on Espiritu Santo, New Hebrides.

22 September 1942:
Arrives at Rabaul.

1 October 1942:
At 1830, departs Rabaul for a supply run to Goodenough Island, D�Entrecasteaux archipelago. I-1 carrys a Daihatsu landing barge and its three-strong crew along with a cargo of food and ammunition intended for the stranded survivors of Cdr Tsukioka Torashige's No. 5 Sasebo SNLF .

3 October 1942:
At 2240, I-1 surfaces off Kilia Mission on the SW tip of Goodenough Island. After contacting the survivors, the landing barge delivers its cargo, embarking 71 wounded and the ashes of 13 SNLF marines, then departs for Rabaul.

6 October 1942:
At 1330, I-1 arrives at Rabaul, where her passengers are debarked.

11 October 1942:
Departs Rabaul for her second supply run to Goodenough Island, carrying a fresh cargo of food and ammunition.

13 October 1942:
At 1830, I-1 surfaces off Kilia, contacts the Japanese garrison and launches her barge. A Lockheed "Hudson" Mk. IIIA patrol bomber of RAAF No. 32 Sqadron, alerted by Allied intelligence, sweeps over the landing area and drops flares and bombs. Considering his mission compromised, Cdr Ankyu dives I-1 and departs the area, leaving his barge behind.

14 October 1942:
At dawn, a floatplane from I-7 conducts a recce flight over Espiritu Santo and confirms the presence of several warships. The approaches to the harbor are found to be regularly patrolled. The Combined Fleet staff decides to cancel the raid on the base.

[snip]

20 January 1943:
At 0730, arrives at Rabaul. Begins preparations for a supply run to Guadalcanal. Embarks a cargo of food in rubber containers (two-day rations for 3,000 men), most of which is stowed inside the submarine.

_____________________________

AE Mod "Bottlenecks" UPDATED 01/2022

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 16