Do we actually need SD(P)s?

SharkHunter wrote:I'm wondering if Phantom is still mission killed but the Sag-Bs survive?

Brigade XO wrote:Two points.
I) once you achieve missle saturation against the CM/PPC capasity of your targets, your number of hits should start to go up and spike quickly. That doesn't guarantee destroying or even mission killing the targets but it helps. Before you overwhelm the counter missle defenses you are going to get at least some hits but saturation implies that the defensive systems can't keep up with the number of targets and, along with making mistakes against which are the most dangerous, it isn't going to be able to at least take a shot at everything it needs to. Give that we are talking shooting against parts of a fleet at Hypatia (you can't shoot at them all and expect any good overall results so you pick what you think you can hit hard enough with x number of weapons each and essentialy let luck handle any that end up without a target because it got blown up already. If you don't use "enough" missiles against a target capable of defending itself, you quite likely are not going to gets any hits at all because it interceptions and wedge angles. Any kind of fleet action is now taking so many thousands of missiles to have any results, and that is for RMN vs SLN with the SLN finding itself often in the position of being able to put up a relativly poor defence while not getting into usefull range plus still having to try and penetrate a very successful defensive operation.

2) at Monica we have the RMN essentialy shooting itself almost dry- with very good reason: survival- and calling in the ammo ship from outside the hyperlimit to resupply. The captain of the essentialy defenseless ammo ship was reluctant (with good reason) but followed orders. I would imagine that the path to get to the surviving ships of Terekhov's squadron involved comming in with those ships relativly between the ammunition ship and what was probably left of Monica's ability to take shots at it. Swapping out an ammunition ship that is essentialy an unarmed fast ammo carrying freighter with something like the Charles Wilson is a good idea. the CW has offensive weapos but it also has a solid defensive suite including the tactical electroincs to go with that. On the other hand, most of the time, your ammo ships are doing basic fleet train types of jobs and, whilie they would be escorted places, they are not intended to be in a battle. Which is why Terkhov left his outside the hyperlimit and, having been effectivly lost in overall hyperfootpring, it was making like a hole in space till the the squadron had to call it in. Should ammunition ships- in general- have defensive capasity? Yes. But CMs and point-defense clusters (with the tactical suite to use them) are mostly going to help for providing to "get out of Dodge" if there is a situation somewhere or some pirate that can throw a couple of missles at a freighter, not for going inside a hyperlimit to participate in a battle.

Theemile wrote:If we are discussing a mil-spec missile collier of a first rate navy, I would expect it to carry a defensive suite of a CL or CA, depending on the thinking of the navy fielding it. Somehow, with it's active tempo and forward posture, I would expect more defenses on an RMN ship than other fleets.

kzt wrote:Hey, they have about 80% of the firepower of a Navy Warship. Well, a little crappy ship anyhow, which pretends to be a warship on TV. You know that in order to use the one almost serious weapon they have to send out sailors to go take down the safety lines around the bow? Hope you can carefully schedule your combats to only occur in daylight in nice low seas.

a 185 nmi (343 km; 213 mi) trial (with PTs fully fitted out) was conducted on August 12, 1941. Four boats returned: PT-8, PT-69, PT-70, and MRB, and Elco sent two new boats, PT-21 and PT-29. During this trial, boats faced heavier seas, as high as 16 ft (4.9 m). All except the Huckins (PT-69) completed the run. The Huckins withdrew due to bilge stringer failure. The Higgins 76-footer (PT-70) completed the entire run but also suffered structural failures, attachments between planking and web frames pulling loose, and deck fastenings in the neighborhood of engine hatches showing extensive failures. PT-21 suffered minor cracks in the deck in the same location (but not to the same extent) as previously observed in PT-26, PT-30, and PT-33. PT-29 was assigned as a pace boat with PT-8 in order to generate a pounding comparison.

The average speed results from the 185 nmi (343 km; 213 mi) course were: Elco 77-footer (PT-21), 27.5 kn (50.9 km/h; 31.6 mph); Higgins 76-footer (PT-70), 27.2 kn (50.4 km/h; 31.3 mph); Higgins MRB and Philadelphia Navy Yard boat (PT-8), 24.8 kn (45.9 km/h; 28.5 mph).


The Board arrived at the following recommendations:

That the Packard power plant having been found highly satisfactory be adopted as standard for future construction.
That the ordnance installation of future motor torpedo boats consist of two torpedo tubes, machine guns and depth charges.
That the Huckins 78-foot (PT-69) design be considered acceptable for immediate construction.
That the Higgins 80-foot (PT-6) design suitably reduced in size to carry such ordnance loads as are required by our Navy be considered acceptable for immediate construction.
That the Elco 77-foot design be considered acceptable for future construction provided changes in the lines are made to reduce the tendency to pound in a seaway, and the structure be strengthened in a manner acceptable to the Bureau of Ships.
That the Philadelphia 81-foot boat (PT-8') be stripped of excess weight and be re-engined with three Packard engines.

The Board also had the following opinion on structural sufficiency: "During the first series of tests (July 21–24) the Huckins design (PT-69), the Philadelphia design (PT-8) and the Higgins design (PT-6) completed the open sea endurance run without structural damage. The Higgins 70' (British) boat did not complete this run because of engine trouble. The Higgins 76' (PT-70) and boats of the Elco 77' (PT-20 Class) developed structural failures even under moderate weather conditions prevailing. In the interval between the first and second test periods the PT-70 was repaired and an effort made to eliminate the causes of the structural failures. However, during the second endurance run, which was made in a very rough sea for this size boat, structural failures again occurred in PT-70. PT-69 and PT-21 experienced structural failures during the second run though these were much localized as compared with those found on PT70. The Board is of the opinion that certain changes in design are required to enable PT-69 and boats of the PT-20 Class to carry safely their military loads in rough weather."

Occasionally, some front line PT boats received ad hoc up-fits at forward bases, where they mounted such weapons as 37mm aircraft cannons, rocket launchers, or mortars. When these weapons were found to be successful, they were incorporated onto the PT boats as original armament.
*** snip ***
The larger punch of the 37mm round was desirable, but the crews looked for something that could fire faster than the single-shot army anti-tank weapon. Their answer was found in the 37mm Oldsmobile M4 aircraft automatic cannon cannibalized from crashed P-39 Airacobra fighter planes on Henderson Field, Guadalcanal. After having demonstrated its value on board PT boats, the M4 (and later M9) cannon was installed at the factory. The M4/M9 37mm auto cannon had a relatively high rate of fire (125 rounds per minute) and large magazine (30 rounds). These features made it highly desirable due to the PT boat's ever-increasing requirement for increased firepower to deal effectively with the Japanese Daihatsu-class barges, which were largely immune to torpedoes due to their shallow draft. By the war's end, most PTs had these weapons.

The installation of larger-bore cannons culminated in the fitting of the 40mm Bofors gun on the aft deck. Starting in mid-1943, the installation of this gun had an immediate positive effect on the firepower available from a PT boat. The Bofors cannon had a firing rate of 120 rounds/min (using 4-round clips) and had a range of 5,420 yards (4,960 m). This gun was served by a crew of 4 men, and was used against aircraft targets, as well as shore bombardment or enemy surface craft.