Quote:
Originally Posted by pythos
The American fleet boat was several times better than the Type IX and VII...
|
Now THAT's going too far. The American boats were an incremental, not a revolutionary improvement over the U-Boats. We're not comparing atomic submarines to the USS Holland here. They were in no way several times better. They were a little bit better in several dozen categories, just as the U-Boats were a little bit better in several categories.
They both sank targets and were quite good at it. Germans were less successful primarily because of strategy, tactics, planning, operational procedures and the nature of their enemy. It's too easy to overstate the differences between submarines and U-Boats based on the results of the war.
Were the fleet boats better than the U-Boats? Unquestionably yes! Could the US Navy have achieved the same result with a fleet of Type IX boats? Yes, no problem.
Could the Kriegsmarine have achieved the same result with a fleet of US Submarines? YES. The defects of their operational strategy and the difference in the nature of their enemy dictated defeat, even with a fleet of Type XXIs or Guppies. The Germans could never conceive that the very use of submarines in WWII was counterproductive and was enough all by itself to guarantee the loss of the war. Fortunately, that was not the only fatal mistake the Wehrmacht made. They had a talent for serial blunders of fatal catastophe. Many of these blunders, all by themselves, would have guaranteed German defeat. The regime was rotten to the core and incompetent in matters of war. Although tactically superior, they were strategically destitute.