Remove ads

Changing Destiny (Kancolle)

Reader mode
Thorthemighty said:
However the Captain of the Indianapolis actually asked for a Destroyer Escort to accompany the Heavy Cruiser. However this request was denied because a Destroyer Escort was recently sunk along the path that the Indianapolis was due to take by a Japanese Heavy Cruiser.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Without wanting to restart that derail, I think a quirk of language and terminology might be misleading you a little, Thor. McVay asked for a 'destroyer escort' for Indianapolis on her mission, i.e. an escort comprised of one or more destroyers. The Fletcher, Gearing, and Sumner-class destroyers that predominated in the USN's light forces by that stage of the war would have been sufficiently well-armed, fast, and long-ranged to accompany his ship. The vessels the USN designated as 'destroyer escorts' would have been too small, short-ranged, and slow for the job.
 
Trace Coburn said:
Without wanting to restart that derail, I think a quirk of language and terminology might be misleading you a little, Thor. McVay asked for a 'destroyer escort' for Indianapolis on her mission, i.e. an escort comprised of one or more destroyers. The Fletcher, Gearing, and Sumner-class destroyers that predominated in the USN's light forces by that stage of the war would have been sufficiently well-armed, fast, and long-ranged to accompany his ship. The vessels the USN designated as 'destroyer escorts' would have been too small, short-ranged, and slow for the job.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Oh, but still the point stands. He asked for an escort and he didn't get it. Even though by all rights Indy shouldn't have been alone that night
 
Skywalker_T-65 said:
"I would think I know my own family, Sara." James snorted softly, "But yeah, I understand your question there. It's hard to believe it's still my family. I got tossed into the past, and I know for a fact there was no James Thompson in the 1940s, at least not in my family. Apparently I'm Great-Granddad's brother now."
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

That's what I've put.
 
We can but hope. Lord God did he deserve it for that fucking fiasco IRL; he must have burned all his markers to avoid it.
 
Trace Coburn said:
We can but hope. Lord God did he deserve it for that fucking fiasco IRL; he must have burned all his markers to avoid it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Still, look up the USS Tinosa she was a Gato-class Submarine during WWII and she had an interesting incident with her Mark XIV Torpedoes. I bet after that incident the captain of the Tinosa will be screaming for someone's head.
 
A lot of this discussion is citing various pieces of history... that happened during wartime. And a lot of the focus is on the Mark 14 torpedo and its performance... during wartime.

During peacetime (and during and right after the Great Depression, at that), there were very few live-fire exercises, especially for the "top secret, state-of-the-art, limited inventory" submarine launched Mark 14 torpedo. Of the family of Mark 13, 14, and 15, it was the one that had all the bells and whistles, and like all of them, had very limited testing during peacetime.

Adm. Thompson has already done what he could, and being a "carrier man", only the Mark 13 really falls under his purview. Politics are a bitch in any large organization...
 
Deidryt said:
A lot of this discussion is citing various pieces of history... that happened during wartime. And a lot of the focus is on the Mark 14 torpedo and its performance... during wartime.

During peacetime (and during and right after the Great Depression, at that), there were very few live-fire exercises, especially for the "top secret, state-of-the-art, limited inventory" submarine launched Mark 14 torpedo. Of the family of Mark 13, 14, and 15, it was the one that had all the bells and whistles, and like all of them, had very limited testing during peacetime.

Adm. Thompson has already done what he could, and being a "carrier man", only the Mark 13 really falls under his purview. Politics are a bitch in any large organization...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Exactly! However, I really can't wait to see how Pearl Harbor goes down. I mean it will be different, that's for sure, but the question stands is how will it be different?
 
Last edited:
Deidryt said:
A lot of this discussion is citing various pieces of history... that happened during wartime. And a lot of the focus is on the Mark 14 torpedo and its performance... during wartime.

During peacetime (and during and right after the Great Depression, at that), there were very few live-fire exercises, especially for the "top secret, state-of-the-art, limited inventory" submarine launched Mark 14 torpedo. Of the family of Mark 13, 14, and 15, it was the one that had all the bells and whistles, and like all of them, had very limited testing during peacetime.

Adm. Thompson has already done what he could, and being a "carrier man", only the Mark 13 really falls under his purview. Politics are a bitch in any large organization...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
maybe reports from the subs (as in the girls, not their crews) themselves might be able to change things.
 
Spectre said:
maybe reports from the subs (as in the girls, not their crews) themselves might be able to change things.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Would still need livefire before any evidence of the deficiencies come to light -- and these mostly occurred during wartime. All the girls know right now is that there is some newfangled equipment aboard now (see California and radar). Just because the equipment is aboard does not mean they immediately know everything there is to know about said equipment or how to use them optimally.

As for the entire Navy to start accepting and trusting shipgirl spirits implicitly, remember we are now less than a year from Pearl Harbor. Trust takes time to build up, especially something as utterly worldbreaking as ships actually having spirits.
 
Guys, remember, just the fact that we've demonstrated problems with the Mark 13s means that people will pay more credence to field reports of problems with the Mark 14s and 15s, since they're all the same family, basically just different length versions of the same fish. While we can't force BuOrd to fix them, at least we've made it so that higher-ups won't let them ignore the reported problems like they did OTL.
 
rdfox said:
Guys, remember, just the fact that we've demonstrated problems with the Mark 13s means that people will pay more credence to field reports of problems with the Mark 14s and 15s, since they're all the same family, basically just different length versions of the same fish. While we can't force BuOrd to fix them, at least we've made it so that higher-ups won't let them ignore the reported problems like they did OTL.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It really doesn't... just because the torpedoes were from the same family and shared design features does not mean that people automatically considered they would all have the same issues.

For example, with aerial torpedoes (of which the Mark 13 was the USN's first type), the standard thought for the longest time is the entry of the torpedo into water would cause many issues. It wasn't until after the Battle of Midway and intensive studies that the actual issues with the device were discerned.

Another example, the Mark 13 used a different detonator from the Mark 14 and 15, with the first using the Mk 8 detonator and the latter two using the Mk 6. If I remember it correctly, the Mk 8 was a purely contact exploder, whereas the Mk 6 famously had magnetic influence features (which were tested only a couple of times before the war).
 
Last edited:
Deidryt said:
It really doesn't... just because the torpedoes were from the same family and shared design features does not mean that people automatically considered they would all have the same issues.

For example, with aerial torpedoes (of which the Mark 13 was the USN's first type), the standard thought for the longest time is the entry of the torpedo into water would cause many issues. It wasn't until after the Battle of Midway and intensive studies that the actual issues with the device were discerned.

Another example, the Mark 13 used a different detonator from the Mark 14 and 15, with the first using the Mk 8 detonator and the latter two using the Mk 6. If I remember it correctly, the Mk 8 was a purely contact exploder, whereas the Mk 6 famously had magnetic influence features (which were tested only a couple of times before the war).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
When BuOrd tested the Mk 6, they failed to take into account that the Earth's magnetic field is uniform in neither strength nor orientation. There were only two live-fire tests pre-WW2, both in the same location, and a handful of lab tests.

When they tested the Mark 14 torpedo, they used a water-filled exercise warhead, and didn't fit the Mk 6 detonators. This gave the test fish greater buoyancy, and when combined with the poor placement of the Mark 14's depth sensor and the lack of the detonator they were supposed to use in wartime, meant that BuOrd didn't realize that the Mark 14 ran too deep.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top