|
|
Post by rimbecano on May 29, 2019 17:18:46 GMT -6
I'm building a Fletcheresque destroyer of 2500 tons, and with 5 gun and 2 torpedo mounts (which is what the Fletchers had) it's getting the crowded centerline penalty to ROF. Does anyone know if the Fletchers had trouble with deck crowding intefering with the operation of guns?
|
|
|
|
Post by ramjb on May 29, 2019 17:22:13 GMT -6
Don't sweat it too much. At the rate of fire those 5''s spit fire, a 10% RoF Reduction is pretty much negligible.
As far as deck crowding goes, the fletchers (like most american DDs) suffered from a quite serious case of topweight, and so many individual weapon mounts certainly wasn't any good in that regard. But I don't think that had anything to do with the rate of fire aboard those ships.
|
|
|
|
Post by bjornsoniii on May 29, 2019 20:20:05 GMT -6
How about starting them with the 1944 refit? They took out a torpedo mount and replaced it with more AA. The Kidd is a prime example of this.
|
|
|
|
Post by christian on May 30, 2019 6:58:33 GMT -6
Don't sweat it too much. At the rate of fire those 5''s spit fire, a 10% RoF Reduction is pretty much negligible. As far as deck crowding goes, the fletchers (like most american DDs) suffered from a quite serious case of topweight, and so many individual weapon mounts certainly wasn't any good in that regard. But I don't think that had anything to do with the rate of fire aboard those ships. the 5 inch in game in 1950 fire at about 5-6 rounds per minute 10% rof does make quite the diffrence guns in game fire half or 1/3rd of the speed they should in real life |
|
|
|
Post by griffin01 on May 30, 2019 7:12:37 GMT -6
Don't sweat it too much. At the rate of fire those 5''s spit fire, a 10% RoF Reduction is pretty much negligible. As far as deck crowding goes, the fletchers (like most american DDs) suffered from a quite serious case of topweight, and so many individual weapon mounts certainly wasn't any good in that regard. But I don't think that had anything to do with the rate of fire aboard those ships. the 5 inch in game in 1950 fire at about 5-6 rounds per minute 10% rof does make quite the diffrence guns in game fire half or 1/3rd of the speed they should in real life Except the RPM achieved in perfect conditions is vastly different from RPM achieved in battle due to the obvious reason. Just because the guns have 15 RPM stated as the rate of fire does not mean they achieved that in combat. |
|
|
|
Post by ramjb on May 30, 2019 8:17:57 GMT -6
guns in game fire half or 1/3rd of the speed they should in real life A Fletcher firing at full RoF would empty it's anti-surface ammo reserves in 20-25 minutes flat (they carried 350 rounds per gun, but a good number of them were AAA VT fuzes so the actual time depended on how many AAA rounds the ship was packing) In game, as in real life, you rarely get max RoF out of any gun, because in real life practical rate of fire was VERY different from theoretical max rate of fire for many different reasons (spotting fire vs fire for effect, unfavorable geometry, and just to not dump all your rounds too quickly). |
|
|
|
Post by christian on May 30, 2019 9:48:10 GMT -6
the 5 inch in game in 1950 fire at about 5-6 rounds per minute 10% rof does make quite the diffrence guns in game fire half or 1/3rd of the speed they should in real life Except the RPM achieved in perfect conditions is vastly different from RPM achieved in battle due to the obvious reason. Just because the guns have 15 RPM stated as the rate of fire does not mean they achieved that in combat. which is also why i took a low estimate in real life their reported maximum rof in gunnery trails was 25 rounds per minute until the turret magazine ran dry then 15 rounds the hoists could supply 15 rounds per minute but the crew according to the gunnery officer on Delhi the maximum rof the crew could achieve was 25 which dropped to 15 once turret supply was emptied (this is during gunnery trials so they are aiming) 1/3rd of 5 rof is 15 rof and half of 6 is 12 rof and its clear it could very well achieve more than 12 rof the gunnery officer had several commands he could give one was just load (which meant in a double mount each gun would be loaded with one round) but he also had a command called rapid basically the guns are constantly reloaded until check fire or cease fire order is given presuming it works in real life like it does in game rate of fire would be reduced by 1/3rd when not in straddle mode (30%) as it is in game and once straddle mode is enabled (aka you have aquired the correct targeting data and you are achieving straddles) it goes into maximum possible rate of fire www.okieboat.com/Gun%20mount.htmlwww.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_5-38_mk12.phpboth state 15 rounds from main storage (okieboat actually has one of these guns) while the ready round rate of fire is diffrent navyweps states 25 okieboat states 22 considering each shell weights only 37 kg (powder + case and projectile combined) (and its in 2 pieces) its not surprising it has this high a rate of fire www.okieboat.com/Thumbnails/tn_5-38%20mount%20plan%201024.jpgconsidering the amount of people inside the turret i would be very surprised if this gun failed to hit 15 round per minute in standard firing www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGEEmqWE0gwsingle moment where you can see one barrel extracting fumes 0:20 where 3 seconds later the same barrel extracting fumes fires again (right barrel if looking towards the barrels from the mid of the ship) if the time it took to reload is say 4 seconds you would still end up with 15 rof (thats adding a second more than the video seems to indicate) these guns absolutely could hit high rates of fire now what other mounts run into is weather open mounts suffer GREATLY from bad weather which reduces their rof by quite a bit (imagine loading a gun in rain not fun) sea state also changes reload but the MAXIMUM rof you can achieve in game with a 5 inch gun is around 6 rounds per minute in perfect sea state ship sitting still firing at the enemy while the enemy is completely unable to fire back (il do some excercise tests) to show it if you like also in 1945 the americans had an 8 inch gun that could fire 10 rounds per minute which did not care about sea state nor weather because it had an AUTOLOADER which we also have in game but autoloader does not increase rof enough the british also had a 6 inch autoloaded gun which fired at a staggering 15 rounds per minute granted its a 1949s weapon so not quite ww2 but close high rate of fire guns up to and including 8 inch guns were VERY possible higher than this it simply becomes impossible due to the fact you need a welin breech block and sliding breech blocks become impossible added 2 pictures showing the rate of fire of 10 inch guns and the rate of fire of 6 inch guns at peak conditions 1.9 rof can be achieved with 10 inch guns at peak rate of fire (with autoloader) on 6 inch guns 2.5 rof can be achieved needless to say when the brooklyn was able to fire at 8 rounds per minute that is EXTREMELY low www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_6-47_mk16.php 8-10 ROF it is to be mentioned uss savanah fired 138 rounds in one minute she had 15 guns on her (5x3) which means she fired 12 rounds short of 10 rounds per minute american 6 inch gun on worcester (before 1950) www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_6-47DP_mk16.php12 rof these pictures were taken in 1970 when my game ended and i had just enough money for one final excercise i had all technologies at the best and these cruisers had just been build being laid down in 1967 and being completed a few months before the games end www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNRussian_39-70_cm5.php4 inch guns were also shown to achieve 15 + rof examples are the russian 100mm post war design and the japanese 100mm design both getting 15+ under normal circumstances with regards to guns firing slower than they should that is already implemented in game it seems none of you have noticed that the BASE rof on guns is much lower than it should be while the negative effects are all in game this means guns fire WAYYY slower than they should while having all the negative modifiers on them Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by ramjb on May 30, 2019 10:07:02 GMT -6
There's a very real difference between gun trials and real in-battle performance, as many navies of the time found out during wartime, or even through fleet exercises. I'm not questioning your numbers about the american 5in DP mount. That thing was just splendid and BY FAR the best DP gun of the war (and to top if off, it was mounted in the best DP mounts of the war, shooting the best projectiles of their caliber of the war, and fired under the best FCS of the war. Talk about a winning combo.). But one has to begin any ongoing conversation about certain things starting from the same page. If you come with max theoretical rate of fire with the turret full of ready to fire ammunition and list the subsequent rate of fire (until the ready to fire ammunition is spent), while I'm listing the max theoretical sustained rate of fire (meaning, the one that the ship can actually keep up without having the turret full of ready-to-shoot rounds) is inevitable that we'll begin with seemingly different numbers (When in reality we're actually on the same page  ). The fact remains that the american 5'' DP mount high rate of fire was mostly used against AA threats when sheer volume of fire in the smallest time frame was obviously the way to go. But in surface-to-surface combat that high theoretical rate of fire didn't translate to practical rate of fire in most cases. Depending on the situation those guns would fire much, much slower than their capabilities for simple practical reasons as working proper firing solutions (Spotting fire) and somethign as simple as conserving ammo. In game results will of course always show lower-than-theoretical rates of fire for guns as fast firing as the 5''/38 gun, you don't need to go to the lenght of proving that because not only I'm sure you tested it, but also because it's just understandable that most of the time in practice you don't really want to go full "Rambo" not only for the invitable bouts of spotting shooting where rate of fire doesn't help at all, but also when your ammunition reserves are limited and you don't want to spend them all in 20 minutes flat . Also, remember that the game abstracts many things and gun design is one of them. You have 5'' DP guns in your ship. That's all you know. There were other 5'' DP mounts in WW2. The japanese had one ,for instance, and was nowhere close to the american one in capabilities. The americans used at least three different flavors of 5'' guns during the war with different lenghts and even shells (25 calibers, 38 calibers, 54 calibers), so did other navies, which also had different variants of the gun with very different characteristics. But the game only has one 5'' gun. three, if we factor in "quality" (which only seems to affect penetration values, for all I know). And everyone gets to use THAT gun (or those three). So, which one does the game decide is the 5'' gun it uses?. What does it base the gun on?. Does it simulate it to equal the best naval weapon of it's class in the world (by a wide and large margin), or does it average and blend it with others that were far less capable to give a more wide-ranging cover of what were guns and mounts of that size like in that timeframe?. Obviously is the latter. I for one would like to have a much more complex and involved process of designing, from the gun caliber/lenght ratio, to how many shafts does a warship have, just to name two; but we have to accept that this is a very complex game already and that many things have to be abstracted/simplified to the minimum common denominator so we do have a game to play...and not one in infinite development process for a small team (not to mention the more complex you go, the more bugs that come bite your back, making the process even longer ). |
|
|
|
Post by Blothorn on May 30, 2019 11:30:44 GMT -6
The 5"/38 also fired a quite short, light shell for its caliber--good for RoF, bad for ballistics. An "average" 5" gun is also going to include weapons such as the British 5.25" and American 5"/54 whose shells were too heavy for rapid manual handling.
One of my most-desired features, after a better operational level, is more character for weapons--replace generic weapons with ones with their own idiosyncrasies, such as the fast-firing 5"/38 or the flat-shooting 28 cm SK C/34.
|
|
|
|
Post by hoffmads on May 30, 2019 20:57:27 GMT -6
The 5"/38 also fired a quite short, light shell for its caliber--good for RoF, bad for ballistics. An "average" 5" gun is also going to include weapons such as the British 5.25" and American 5"/54 whose shells were too heavy for rapid manual handling. One of my most-desired features, after a better operational level, is more character for weapons--replace generic weapons with ones with their own idiosyncrasies, such as the fast-firing 5"/38 or the flat-shooting 28 cm SK C/34. I would like to second this comment. In fact, I'd like to see a naval guns procurement process similar to the aircraft procurement process. |
|
|
|
Post by Procopius on May 30, 2019 23:08:32 GMT -6
But the game only has one 5'' gun. three, if we factor in "quality" (which only seems to affect penetration values, for all I know). I believe it also affects range. |
|
|
|
Post by secondcomingofzeno on May 30, 2019 23:42:45 GMT -6
But the game only has one 5'' gun. three, if we factor in "quality" (which only seems to affect penetration values, for all I know). I believe it also affects range. Eyup, range and pen are the factors for quality. I kinda want the devs to introduce at least 4-6 quality values, Its weird how a 1902 '10 inch gun' can be compared to a 1950 variant of equal quality. |
|
|
|
Post by Blothorn on May 31, 2019 11:34:28 GMT -6
Internal ballistics/barrel construction didn't advance too much after the early dreadnought period--the 5"/38 was mostly just a barrel extension from a 1920s weapon (with vastly superior mounts), and the BL 15-inch Mark I was regarded as the best heavy gun the British ever made. Most of the improvements were to loading arrangements and shell design (both aerodynamics and armor penetration), two of which (excepting shell aerodynamics) are already represented by other technologies.
|
|
|
|
Post by L0ckAndL0ad on Jun 2, 2019 3:30:21 GMT -6
I was seriously concerned about this initially. Then came the day when I was able to design ships with 5 in DP guns. By this point, I had a previous generation of 1500t destroyers with 4x2 4 inch DP guns (no penalties). I was able to create the same setup of 4x2 5 inch DP (and no penalties!), but feared that it may lead to another arms race with the AI (not sure if it's an actual thing) - I've seen AI make 4x2 4 in DP setups after I did it... So I've made 3x2 5 in DP 2000t DD. More room for ASW assets... But the AI started doing 4x2 5 in (no DP yet).... and even 4x 6 in (no DP yet) DDs. All 1600-1800t. Definitely with penalties..   _ Arms race is happening after all... |
|
|
|
Post by griffin01 on Jun 2, 2019 4:45:52 GMT -6
I was seriously concerned about this initially. Then came the day when I was able to design ships with 5 in DP guns. By this point, I had a previous generation of 1500t destroyers with 4x2 4 inch DP guns (no penalties). I was able to create the same setup of 4x2 5 inch DP (and no penalties!), but feared that it may lead to another arms race with the AI (not sure if it's an actual thing) - I've seen AI make 4x2 4 in DP setups after I did it... So I've made 3x2 5 in DP 2000t DD. More room for ASW assets... But the AI started doing 4x2 5 in (no DP yet).... and even 4x 6 in (no DP yet) DDs. All 1600-1800t. Definitely with penalties.. _ Arms race is happening after all... I have just found out that you can fit 5x2 6" guns on a 2500t destroyer at a modest -20 RoF penalty, which is almost entirely mitigated by autoloaders. 6x2 is achievable if you put torpedo tubes on the sides, otherwise 40 RoF penalty is a bit too much. Hereby I declare CL obsolete. |
|
).
