| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Posts: 904
|
|
|
Post subject: Japanese Torpedoes and Torpedo Ratings
|
 |
|
So I'm working on some custom cards for a scenario and I ran across something interesting:
Myoko carries 16 Long Lance torpedoes, torpedo rating 3/3/2/1
Tone carries 12 Long Lance torpedoes, torpedo rating 3/2/1/1
Jintsu carries 8 Long Lance torpedoes, torpedo rating 3/3/2/1
Yukikaze carries 8 Long Lance torpedoes, torpedo rating 3/3/2/1
Why do Jintsu and Yukikaze have the same torpedo rating as Myoko when it has twice as many torps? Why do they have higher torpedo rating than Tone when it has half again as many torps? It seems like Jintsu and Yukikaze should have a 2/2/1/1 rating and cost 2-3 points less. |
|
 Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:25 am |
|
|
Has nothing to say.
AHF Silver-Rated Trader
Posts: 3847
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
You know, that is a really good question. And I wish I had the answer.
_________________
I have to make a new sig because my old one is too wide for this new look... |
|
| Sun Feb 17, 2008 4:51 pm |
|
|
Forum Administrator
Posts: 6928
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
I'm just guessing here with no evidence to back up my answer, but...
Perhaps it has to do with the relative effectiveness they had in real battles?
_________________
 |
|
| Sun Feb 17, 2008 5:10 pm |
|
|
AHF Bronze-Rated Trader
Posts: 4166
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
I suspect it is based on the number of torpedo tubes that can be trained in a given attack direction. Japanese heavy cruisers had their 4-tube launchers mounted with two launchers on each side of the ship. So only eight total tubes could launch an attack from either port or starboard.
Light cruisers and destroyers had centerline mounted launchers that could be trained to either side of the ship. So in effect the Myoko-class and the Jintzu and Yukikaze were all able to launch eight torpedoes to port or starboard in one attack.
I have contradictory information on Tone's torpedo launchers. The Nihon Kaigun website lists Tone as having 12 tubes. However, the book "Japanese Heavy Cruisers in WWII" by Wayne Patton indicates she had the standard 16 tubes (two four-tube launchers per side) for heavy cruisers. The diagrams also show two launchers per side. But according to Wikipedia.com the Tone had three-tube launchers. That would explain the twelve. So that would mean Tone could train six torpedoes in either direction.
If Tone does indeed have 12 tubes (six per side) then the stats for all of these ships are consistent.
_________________
The IJN Carrier Liberation Force - "Because We Care"
Join the IJNCVLF. Service Guarantees Citizenship! |
|
| Sun Feb 17, 2008 5:33 pm |
|
|
Posts: 904
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| weedsrock2 wrote: | | I suspect it is based on the number of torpedo tubes that can be trained in a given attack direction. |
That makes sense.
| weedsrock2 wrote: | | Light cruisers and destroyers had centerline mounted launchers that could be trained to either side of the ship. |
Jintsu most other Japanese light cruisers had their torpedoes in four twin mounts, two on each side (the Tenryu, Yubari, and Agano classes had centerline mounts). That would allow only four to bear, rather than six or eight for the other ships. So Jintsu's torpedo rating is still inconsistent.
| weedsrock2 wrote: | | I have contradictory information on Tone's torpedo launchers. |
Cruisers of World War II by M. J. Whitley lists her with four triples. Hmm. What we really need is a nice close up picture showing her with the torpedo mounts trained out. |
|
| Sun Feb 17, 2008 6:16 pm |
|
|
Moderator
Posts: 938
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Tone had four Type 90 Model 1 triple torpedo mounts and twenty-four torpedoes. Apparently she carried Long Lances for her entire career.
Jintsu carried four Type 8 twin mounts, not on the centerline. She received her Long Lances in 1939. |
|
| Sun Feb 17, 2008 6:19 pm |
|
|
AHF Bronze-Rated Trader
Posts: 1145
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
We also have to take into account that torpedo mounts were modified, increased, and, decreased with refits. With the exception of the Kitikami and Oi, all the Destroyer Leader type Light Cruisers of the IJN had double mount torpedo launchers just as Tiornu stated. There is evidence that a few of the Yukikaze's lost tubes as they increased AAA. The Furutaka Class Heavy Cruisers each had different launchers as they were constructed. Furutaka and Kako had six total tubes, and Aoba and Kinugasa had eight tubes. My point is that there really is no standard for torpedo mounts on any particular ship class in the IJN...it changed all the time. I think as Weedsrock2 found out it isnt consistent, but in the big scheme of things the ship stats for the game are accurate.
_________________
Mutants For Nukes! |
|
| Sun Feb 17, 2008 11:47 pm |
|
|
Posts: 904
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| seisen wrote: | | I think as Weedsrock2 found out it isnt consistent, but in the big scheme of things the ship stats for the game are accurate. |
It's definitely true that ships configurations got modified all the time, but other than possibly Yukikaze, the other long lance ships we've got stats for remained the same throughout the war. |
|
| Mon Feb 18, 2008 12:39 am |
|
|
AHF Bronze-Rated Trader
Posts: 4166
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Now that I know where to look on the photographs it appears the Jintzu had two 2-tube launchers on each side of the ship. So she should indeed have a lower torpedo rating and lower cost. It should probably be a 2/2/1/1. A lower cost would be very handy in IJN builds.
Most of the IJN heavy and light cruisers were fitted with long-lance torpedoes by 1940 according to my references.
It appears the 'weight of the evidence' so far is Tone and Chikuma had triple-tube torpedo mounts. So it is probably just Jintzu that is over-rated. And seriously so.
_________________
The IJN Carrier Liberation Force - "Because We Care"
Join the IJNCVLF. Service Guarantees Citizenship! |
|
| Mon Feb 18, 2008 3:53 am |
|
|
Posts: 162
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| jfkziegler wrote: | I'm just guessing here with no evidence to back up my answer, but...
Perhaps it has to do with the relative effectiveness they had in real battles? |
I would say the same, torpedos were generally more affective from smaller ships then larger ships right ?
Or might even just be to keep "balance" and the japanese something the others don't have
_________________
 |
|
| Tue Feb 19, 2008 2:20 pm |
|
|
Posts: 9282
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| LoneWolf wrote: |
I would say the same, torpedos were generally more effective from smaller ships then larger ships right ?
|
Bingo!
_________________
 
My new blog, specialised in the military equipment of Greece (1821-today). |
|
| Tue Feb 19, 2008 2:33 pm |
|
|
Posts: 162
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| NeuralDream wrote: | | LoneWolf wrote: |
I would say the same, torpedos were generally more effective from smaller ships then larger ships right ?
|
Bingo! |
Everyone looks at "numbers of" a little to much to often, they forget there is always a reason for everything if it is continued to be built and used.
Destroyers weren't just there for sub hunting.
Just have to look at PT Boats to get that.
_________________
|
|
| Tue Feb 19, 2008 2:50 pm |
|
|
Posts: 162
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
I hope i can use this to make my example, But is the Lancaster bomber in AAM game ?
T-34 might actually be a better example then lancaster.
_________________
|
|
| Tue Feb 19, 2008 2:54 pm |
|
|
Posts: 904
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| LoneWolf wrote: | | [I would say the same, torpedos were generally more affective from smaller ships then larger ships right ? |
For most navies, yes, but the Japanese were somewhat of an exception. Their cruisers did quite a bit of damage with torpedoes. A lot of this had to do with differing doctrine. Most countries maneuvered their cruisers primarily for maximum advantage in gun power, while Japanese doctrine emphasized the torpedo for cruisers as well as destroyers.
Of course, we were talking about differences within a single navy, so differing national doctrine doesn't have much to do with it. This is, in fact, a completely useless tangent.  |
|
| Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:18 pm |
|
|
AHF Bronze-Rated Trader
Posts: 944
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| Blackeagle wrote: | | Of course, we were talking about differences within a single navy, so differing national doctrine doesn't have much to do with it. This is, in fact, a completely useless tangent. |
I find most of the tangents on the forum interesting - they may be off-topic but not useless at all  |
|
| Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:33 pm |
|
|
Tora Tora Tora
Posts: 5706
|
|
|
| Wed Feb 20, 2008 1:47 am |
|
|
Moderator
Posts: 938
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| This was always a frightening thought for me, to serve aboard Kitakami--standing there with the forty warheads and forty oxygen flasks, shells exploding all around.... |
|
| Wed Feb 20, 2008 3:43 am |
|
|
Posts: 904
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| Tiornu wrote: | | This was always a frightening thought for me, to serve aboard Kitakami--standing there with the forty warheads and forty oxygen flasks, shells exploding all around.... |
Hmm. Maybe a 8/7/5/2 torpedo attack and some sort of "One hit and we're done for" SA?  |
|
| Wed Feb 20, 2008 3:55 am |
|
|
Tora Tora Tora
Posts: 5706
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| Tiornu wrote: | | This was always a frightening thought for me, to serve aboard Kitakami--standing there with the forty warheads and forty oxygen flasks, shells exploding all around.... |
Yeah, but what a ride! 
_________________
Member of the Helldivers WAS league |
|
| Wed Feb 20, 2008 6:20 pm |
|
|
positive-negative-zzzzzt Whoa!!
AHF Gold-Rated Trader
Posts: 132
|
|
|
Post subject: Re: Japanese Torpedoes and Torpedo Ratings
|
|
|
| Blackeagle wrote: |
Why do Jintsu and Yukikaze have the same torpedo rating as Myoko when it has twice as many torps? Why do they have higher torpedo rating than Tone when it has half again as many torps? |
It's probably that good old 'pro-American bias' taking over again. 
 |
|
| Thu Feb 21, 2008 4:48 pm |
|
|
|
