Hm... As to stranger for Kancolle Lore, please explain me what exactly this torpedo aiming for under water?
In real life, torpedoes would sometimes be set to pass under a ship and detonate there rather than with a direct hit. This would (as I understand it) result in the ship's keel first being violently shoved upwards by the shock of the blast, before essentially falling into the cavity in the water briefly left by the explosion, while the water on either side of the cavity continued to support the ship's bow and stern. These attacks (which I've seen called "backbreakers") were generally a greater threat to smaller ships, where their relatively short length would leave a greater portion of their mass unsupported. Detonation of the torpedo in these cases would generally be accomplished by a magnetic detonator.
In real life, torpedoes would sometimes be set to pass under a ship and detonate there rather than with a direct hit. This would (as I understand it) result in the ship's keel first being violently shoved upwards by the shock of the blast, before essentially falling into the cavity in the water briefly left by the explosion, while the water on either side of the cavity continued to support the ship's bow and stern. These attacks (which I've seen called "backbreakers") were generally a greater threat to smaller ships, where their relatively short length would leave a greater portion of their mass unsupported. Detonation of the torpedo in these cases would generally be accomplished by a magnetic detonator.
In Kancolle? No clue brah.
this. this is why I always scroll to the comment. never knew or thought that torp could still cause damage even if it's not directly hitting the hull. flak I still could understand because shrapnel flying really good in air, so no direct hit needed. only now that I understand torp don't need direct hit too.
At least we know Graf is right on the money, thanks to the Admiral's own confession to Atlanta.
Well Graf is partially right: he IS bad at communicating, but he also has some trauma from seeing the first generation of shipgirls treated as disposable weapon thrown into the mix.
this. this is why I always scroll to the comment. never knew or thought that torp could still cause damage even if it's not directly hitting the hull. flak I still could understand because shrapnel flying really good in air, so no direct hit needed. only now that I understand torp don't need direct hit too.
Yep, this is also why depth charges don't have to be in direct contact with a submarine to sink them when they explode. The high density of water carries all the energy/pressure of the explosion, which means the energy not only hits the surface closest to the explosion point, but wraps around the hull of the target, amplifying the damage. Essentially, it is the sound waves that depth charges create that crush submarines. The same principle applies with torpedoes detonating beneath a ship hull.
this. this is why I always scroll to the comment. never knew or thought that torp could still cause damage even if it's not directly hitting the hull. flak I still could understand because shrapnel flying really good in air, so no direct hit needed. only now that I understand torp don't need direct hit too.
It is actually considered an "ideal shot" to detonate under the hull for this purpose. For smaller ships like destroyers, or larger ships without strength decks and reinforced hull support like large civilian ships or auxiliary ships, the ship could actually crumple around the blast area and snap in half. Modern warships also suffer this problem due to the way they are constructed vs WW2 warships. Hence why, as mentioned, its called a "backbreaker".
Even for ships that don't suffer such a catastrophic event, the blast would leave a breach in the ship underneath the hull usually. This usually would flood more compartments and severely complicate damage control than if it was instead on the side of the hull. It would also likely avoid most anti-torpedo measures warships had at the time like bulges or spacers. Even in the modern day, this is the preferred method.
The USS William D Porter infamously sank after a downed kamikaze plane exploded in the water underneath her and broke her keel. Ironically, despite her reputation as an unlucky ship, she holds the rare distinction of being a warship sank in battle with no hands lost as a result.
You'd also sometimes get situations where a ship actually rides over a torpedo without it going off. This happened to Fletcher at Guadalcanal, one of the reasons she's one of the "lucky" ships in Kantai Collection, and Samuel B Roberts at Samar (the ship was already a goner at that point, but a torpedo strike would have resulted in even worse casualties).
Modern mines work on the same principle: They lie on the seafloor and are triggered by the magnetic field of the ship passing over it. The explosion breaks the keel.
I just don't get it!Then why does he hide away from it all and neglect his command of the fleet?GRA...!If he does all that, if he really is worried about us shipgirls, That's still a mystery to me, too.I think I understand now."Scared"... I see...It's much, much more basic than that...It can't just be that he's so scared of talking to girls that he doesn't say anything, right!?Could it just be that...So then...?There really isn't some deep meaning behind his shying away from fleet management...That discomfort that I feel when I see the Admiral's conduct with the shipgirls...He's just scared because he has absolutely no idea how to deal with us shipgirls? That's all it is...?So then...?So then...?Did you mean: Poor Communicator
