Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Creepershark77

Will HMS Nelson get torpedoes?

25 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
474 posts
598 battles

The reason why I'm asking about this is because the Nelson class battleship Rodney was the only battleship to successfully attack another battleship with torpedoes, so why not have HMS Nelson get torpedoes because of that fact, unless they are hull mounted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
474 posts
598 battles

No, Nelson will not have torpedo tubes. Her torpedo tubes were fixed and submerged. 

 

That's what I thought, because WG will never implement hull mounted torpedoes due to their unreliability. It also raises the question of why didn't the British learn their lesson after WW1 about the unreliability of submerged torpedoes, because the Nelson class of battleships were built in the 1920s, and I would assume that WW1 would show clearly show how fixed torpedoes just don't work, but I guess that wasn't the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,678
Beta Testers
4,735 posts
7,019 battles

 Her torpedo tubes were fixed and submerged. 

for what [edited]purpose?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5,424 posts
3,448 battles

 

That's what I thought, because WG will never implement hull mounted torpedoes due to their unreliability. It also raises the question of why didn't the British learn their lesson after WW1 about the unreliability of submerged torpedoes, because the Nelson class of battleships were built in the 1920s, and I would assume that WW1 would show clearly show how fixed torpedoes just don't work, but I guess that wasn't the case.

 

I don't know how long your forum tenure is, but a long time ago, 15 or so months ago there was a long debate on the forums with the devs weighing in on the viability of submerged torpedoes tubes, and the general consensus was basically that, the uses are so limited that they really have no place in the game, especially since many of the older ships fired the long obsolete Whitehead torpedo, that would be all but useless in this game

 

for what [edited]purpose?

 

Well Nelson was built in the 20s, in the wake of Jutland, back when virtually all navies put multiple submerged torpedo tubes on their ships just as an added measure. Most had had them removed when they received modernization, but Nelson for whatever kept hers, until she was refitted sometime after the sinking of Bismarck, it is not officially documented when she had them removed, but it was either in late 1941 or 1945, because they were frankly just liabilities with extremely limited uses. Plus carrying torpedoes on a ship in real life is a massive risk, because if any stored torpedoes are struck by enemy gunfire, you can kiss your ship goodbye.
Edited by goldeagle1123

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
101 posts
3,998 battles

Forget torpedoes, I'm just hoping they put her at Tier 7 where she belongs......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,678
Beta Testers
4,735 posts
7,019 battles

 

I don't know how long your forum tenure is, but a long time ago, 15 or so months ago there was a long debate on the forums with the devs weighing in on the viability of submerged torpedoes tubes, and the general consensus was basically that, the uses are so limited that they really have no place in the game, especially since many of the older ships fired the long obsolete Whitehead torpedo, that would be all but useless in this game

 

 

Well Nelson was built in the 20s, in the wake of Jutland, back when virtually all navies put multiple submerged torpedo tubes on their ships just as an added measure. Most had had them removed when they received modernization, but Nelson for whatever kept hers, until she was refitted sometime after the sinking of Bismarck, it is not officially documented when she had them removed, but it was either in late 1941 or 1945, because they were frankly just liabilities with extremely limited uses. Plus carrying torpedoes on a ship in real life is a massive risk, because if any stored torpedoes are struck by enemy gunfire, you can kiss your ship goodbye.

 

i swear,jutland is too much overhyped,this battle created one of the most unusual naval designs ever,when you thought the ship of the line style ended with the rotating turret mechanism they give you this.

"let's design a ship where all the firepower face the broadside just like the hms victory days"

"BRILLIANT,so many guns facing the enemy they will not think of hitting our sofit sides"

then the 2 naval engineers proceed to the next pub because the match gentleman liverpool and tea manchester is begining.

 

obviously  this is biasing a lot but...

Edited by Cruxdei

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,889
[HINON]
Members
7,797 posts
2,144 battles

Forget torpedoes, I'm just hoping they put her at Tier 7 where she belongs......

 

They are...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
611
[SYN]
Members
2,861 posts
10,456 battles

 

That's what I thought, because WG will never implement hull mounted torpedoes due to their unreliability. It also raises the question of why didn't the British learn their lesson after WW1 about the unreliability of submerged torpedoes, because the Nelson class of battleships were built in the 1920s, and I would assume that WW1 would show clearly show how fixed torpedoes just don't work, but I guess that wasn't the case.

 

Eh,  lot of navies kept their submerged torpedo tubes until the 20's. Even the Colorado's and Nagato's had them when they where first built, and those ships where only a few years older than the Nelson's, though they quickly lost those torpedo tubes in the inter war years. The nelsons probably only continued to carry them until WW2 simply due to the fact that the RN didnt have as much opportunity to refit their ships in the inter war years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
474 posts
598 battles

I don't know how long your forum tenure is, but a long time ago, 15 or so months ago there was a long debate on the forums with the devs weighing in on the viability of submerged torpedoes tubes, and the general consensus was basically that, the uses are so limited that they really have no place in the game, especially since many of the older ships fired the long obsolete Whitehead torpedo, that would be all but useless in this game

 

Well, I know about that, but I'm talking about IRL with the British and the use of submerged torpedo launchers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,067 posts
2,554 battles

 because they were frankly just liabilities with extremely limited uses. Plus carrying torpedoes on a ship in real life is a massive risk, because if any stored torpedoes are struck by enemy gunfire, you can kiss your ship goodbye.

 

And flooding danger. having submerged tubes compromised the ship's integrity against flood and underwater damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
474 posts
598 battles

I would imagine that these torpedo tubes would have shown how useless they were after World War I, and since HMS Nelson was laid down in 1922, it shows how the British didn't learn their lesson about how those torpedoes were a bad idea and didn't come up with the idea of either just excluding them from the final design, or mount deck launchers instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5,424 posts
3,448 battles

I would imagine that these torpedo tubes would have shown how useless they were after World War I, and since HMS Nelson was laid down in 1922, it shows how the British didn't learn their lesson about how those torpedoes were a bad idea and didn't come up with the idea of either just excluding them from the final design, or mount deck launchers instead.

 

This problem wasn't exclusive to the British, as I said virtually all battleships laid down in the twenties were equipped with submerged torpedo tubes. The only difference between Nelson and most other BBs laid down as that time was that most other BBs had them removed when they were modernized.
Edited by goldeagle1123

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
474 posts
598 battles

 

This problem wasn't exclusive to the British, as I said virtually all battleships laid down in the twenties were equipped with submerged torpedo tubes. The only difference between Nelson and most other BBs laid down as that time was that most other BBs had them removed when they were modernized.

 

At least the Germans were smart enough to start using deck mounted torpedoes on their light cruisers right before the war, starting with the Pillau-class light cruisers laid down in 1913.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5,424 posts
3,448 battles

 

At least the Germans were smart enough to start using deck mounted torpedoes on their light cruisers right before the war, starting with the Pillau-class light cruisers laid down in 1913.

 

 

 

 

Well at the time it wasn't exactly seen as "smarter". Because deck mounted torpedoes, while they get firing arcs, are completely unshielded from enemy gunfire, and if one of those torpedoes gets hit by a shell, goodbye ship. Battleships having submerged torpedo tubes was partially seen as a way to keep them somewhat protected.
Edited by goldeagle1123

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
611
[SYN]
Members
2,861 posts
10,456 battles

 

At least the Germans were smart enough to start using deck mounted torpedoes on their light cruisers right before the war, starting with the Pillau-class light cruisers laid down in 1913.

 

 

 

 

The only advantage deck mounted torpedoes had really was firing arcs, but up on the deck they where also dangerously unprotected. In fact it was surface mounted torpedo tubes that doomed a number of Japanese cruisers and why the USN stopped putting torpedoes on cruisers. Plus in general surface ship mounted torpedoes where never as effective as air dropped or sub launched ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
474 posts
598 battles

Well if the Nelson isn't getting torpedoes, let's just hope she doesn't end up like the Izumo, since both ships have the exact same turret placement: 3x3 turrets that are all placed in the front of the ship and none in the rear.

Edited by Creepershark77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,113
[CHASE]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,973 posts
13,112 battles

With the bow in meta for bb on bb fights, forward mounted underwater torpedoes would be an incredible advantage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5,424 posts
3,448 battles

With the bow in meta for bb on bb fights, forward mounted underwater torpedoes would be an incredible advantage.

 

A. "Bow on" really isn't the meta at tier 7.

B. Nelson's torpedoes were mounted to port and starboard.

C. She isn't going to get them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,168
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
9,312 posts
18,902 battles

Well if the Nelson isn't getting torpedoes, let's just hope she doesn't end up like the Izumo, since both ships have the exact same turret placement: 3x3 turrets that are all placed in the front of the ship and none in the rear.

 

Nelson's third turret points forward, so it only has to traverse 45' instead of 325' to go from side to side at targets near ahead. It should be better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,067 posts
2,554 battles

 

 In fact it was surface mounted torpedo tubes that doomed a number of Japanese cruisers

 

Liquid oxygen tends to make things a bit more flammable. As for USN, leaving torpedoes to the destroyer mean they can put the space usually utilized for torpedo mounts for other things on the cruiser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,678
Beta Testers
4,735 posts
7,019 battles

 

Liquid oxygen tends to make things a bit more flammable. As for USN, leaving torpedoes to the destroyer mean they can put the space usually utilized for torpedo mounts for other things on the cruiser.

 

imagine if destorying the enemy torpedo mount  could destroy the ship.:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×