Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Yesman1337

Anti Submarine Weapons Idea (Rockets)

10 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

81
[EQV]
Members
144 posts
1,408 battles

Mounted on the Friesland and Halland (I think the Smalland as well) are the 375mm Bofors Ani-Submarine rockets. With the addition of submarines in the near future will we be seeing these become functional and active. It would be another good anti sub option if say it is sitting to far out of reach and no one DD can close the gap for depth charges without being blown away by his allies. They are already modelled so why not make them functional. I believe they mounted some of them on Visby class ships as well but don't quote me on that.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
81
[EQV]
Members
144 posts
1,408 battles
23 minutes ago, b101uk said:

not a new idea and once that has been discussed before.

Never claimed it was anew as I assumed someone must've brought it up beforehand but I did not see or find it so I figured why not make this just in case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
98
[TWE]
Beta Testers
248 posts
1,600 battles

Never say never? The way submarines have been implemented thus far though, makes even weapons such as Squid and Hedgehog let alone ASWRs gross overkill since all you need to do is have a DD speed to the location of the sub and sit over it dropping DCs with impunity until it dies. But hey, subs are still in testing so lets hope high tier gameplay isn't so one dimensional! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,870
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
8,940 posts
15,761 battles
2 hours ago, Trophy_Wench said:

Never say never? The way submarines have been implemented thus far though, makes even weapons such as Squid and Hedgehog let alone ASWRs gross overkill since all you need to do is have a DD speed to the location of the sub and sit over it dropping DCs with impunity until it dies. But hey, subs are still in testing so lets hope high tier gameplay isn't so one dimensional! 

I think that depends on how they change things.

Historically a lot of these 'thrown' ASW weapons had pretty short range on the order of hundreds of yards (200yd Hedgehog, 275yd Squid, 1,000yd Limbo) the rocket ones like the Halland has have about 3,000 yd range, but still very short.

Given the way depth charges seem to have a huge area of effect around the ship already I'd say keeping to 'historic' ranges will be no different than depth charges as it is for the 'thrown' versions. Ships move so fast that crossing 300yd in-game at 30kt only takes 4s anyway.

The more potent ASW ranged weapons may be pretty necessary up at T10, WG have restricted all sub testing to the radar-free T6. I'm not that enthusiastic to try running direct over a red submarine in a sub when it's division mate with a 12km radar is lurking around in the background!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
646
[P-V-E]
Members
1,649 posts

the thing is Hedgehog, Squid and Limbo were all significantly more successful than depth charges, with Hedgehog and Squid measured in actual wartime (WW2) conditions like depth charges, their advantage being the natural short period of time between launch and water impact ahead of the ship and the sinking time.

 

while rocket propelled ASW in the main had longer minimum ranges with range coming at the expense of of effectiveness, with only later systems being really effective at range due to then being somewhat guided and having depth info updated until the point of water impact, and later still ones with homing capability which could double up as torpedo defence, but guided or homing are outside the realms of WoWs.

 

i.e. depth charge, Hedgehog, Squid and by extension Limbo being based off Squid have some substantive IRL data of actual performance in war, 375mm Bofors ASW rockets and similar there is much less data of which little is in war.

 

for reference 375mm Bofors ASW rockets the time to 200ft depth at 2000m range was 34sec after firing, likewise the range of the 375mm Bofors ASW rocket is dependent on the rocket motor installed, the M/50 rocket motor came in 70m/s or 90m/s varieties with ~490m or ~975m maximum horizontal range, the Erika rocket motor came in 100m/s or 130m/s flavours with 1600m maximum horizontal range, while the Flora rocket motor had 153m/s speed with a maximum horizontal range of 2200m, the greatest chance of success came from firing all 4 tubes with the 70m/s M/50 rocket motor which would allow the rockets to fall into the smallest area, the fuse options were timed fuse or proximity fuse, the timed fuse can be adjusted up to the point of firing by built-in servo, neither fuse will actually arm until the rocket has travelled at least >150m through the air, the timed fuse works as both contact and timed should contact be made before the timer, the proximity fuse will ONLY work as a contact fuse in the first 40m of depth, below 40m depth it will work as both contact and proximity (data from the 1960's Bofors SR-375 anti-submarine rocket system promotional film)

Edited by b101uk
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
98
[TWE]
Beta Testers
248 posts
1,600 battles

Interesting stuff! Thanks for the info @b101uk

13 hours ago, mofton said:

I think that depends on how they change things.

Historically a lot of these 'thrown' ASW weapons had pretty short range on the order of hundreds of yards (200yd Hedgehog, 275yd Squid, 1,000yd Limbo) the rocket ones like the Halland has have about 3,000 yd range, but still very short.

Given the way depth charges seem to have a huge area of effect around the ship already I'd say keeping to 'historic' ranges will be no different than depth charges as it is for the 'thrown' versions. Ships move so fast that crossing 300yd in-game at 30kt only takes 4s anyway.

The more potent ASW ranged weapons may be pretty necessary up at T10, WG have restricted all sub testing to the radar-free T6. I'm not that enthusiastic to try running direct over a red submarine in a sub when it's division mate with a 12km radar is lurking around in the background!

I know we've discussed this in the past, but I'll reiterate it here since my DE post is buried now, Subs will need to be way more dynamic in they're gameplay than they are now for these kind of weapons to make any sense. DCs are just this crazy area effect weapon that'll always do damage provided you're close. And while you're right we haven't seen what they plan to do with high tier SS's yet, I'm hoping they they offer some different and better capabilities that allow them to maintain... something of a level playing field? Also, if you're worried about radar gameplay being a DD, imagine if they implemented radar on the SS's like some of the US and British ones got! :cap_book:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
81
[EQV]
Members
144 posts
1,408 battles
37 minutes ago, Trophy_Wench said:

Interesting stuff! Thanks for the info @b101uk

I know we've discussed this in the past, but I'll reiterate it here since my DE post is buried now, Subs will need to be way more dynamic in they're gameplay than they are now for these kind of weapons to make any sense. DCs are just this crazy area effect weapon that'll always do damage provided you're close. And while you're right we haven't seen what they plan to do with high tier SS's yet, I'm hoping they they offer some different and better capabilities that allow them to maintain... something of a level playing field? Also, if you're worried about radar gameplay being a DD, imagine if they implemented radar on the SS's like some of the US and British ones got! :cap_book:

I am all for that, give subs more things to do. Let them surface and use their deck guns as some of them had quite substantial armor and armament. The HMS X1 had more firepower than some destroyers with it twin dual turrets while the French Surcouf had twin 203mm guns as well as an aircraft. Each of those could be the respective tier 10 ship of their line with the British tier 9 could be an M class with it's 305mm gun. As for Japan the I-300 is the obvious choice for tier 10. It could have a similar mechanic to the hybrid ships in testing now being able to launch a single squadron of 3 aircraft (Torpedo, DB, or Rockets your choice) however it would have to stay surfaced to pick them up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
752
[_I_]
Members
338 posts
1 hour ago, Yesman1337 said:

I am all for that, give subs more things to do. Let them surface and use their deck guns as some of them had quite substantial armor and armament. The HMS X1 had more firepower than some destroyers with it twin dual turrets while the French Surcouf had twin 203mm guns as well as an aircraft. Each of those could be the respective tier 10 ship of their line with the British tier 9 could be an M class with it's 305mm gun. As for Japan the I-300 is the obvious choice for tier 10. It could have a similar mechanic to the hybrid ships in testing now being able to launch a single squadron of 3 aircraft (Torpedo, DB, or Rockets your choice) however it would have to stay surfaced to pick them up.

Wizard! Let's take a silly implementation and make it even more ridiculous!

What the hell, let's have huge consumable blimps for sub spotting while we're at it! :Smile_teethhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
81
[EQV]
Members
144 posts
1,408 battles
51 minutes ago, Hookie_Bell said:

Wizard! Let's take a silly implementation and make it even more ridiculous!

What the hell, let's have huge consumable blimps for sub spotting while we're at it! :Smile_teethhappy:

I'm not sure what you are being so sarcastic and dismissive of these ideas. They were all real ships (Unlike half the ones in game) which really worked. Most of which saw actual use/combat. It is disheartening when someone makes a real suggestion with historical basis for something and then people act ridiculous and overexaggerate what was stated. Blimps would clearly not function as a consumable as they were only coastal based. You make yourself seem a fool who should not be taken seriously by attempting to make such outlandish comparisons. I am trying to improve upon the implementation they are most likely coming whether you like it or not and I would like them to be as well implemented and balanced as possible while having some unique gameplay options and styles that don't only consist of sit back and fire torpedoes. 

  • Haha 1

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.

×