Quote:
Originally Posted by Sailor Steve
I completely agree with you on the merits of the US boats and their purpose. I just wanted to point out that the Type IX had a longer cruising range than the Gato, and just as slow a dive time.
|
Yeah, I'm not sure why I didn't remember that the Type IX had a greater range at 10 knots when compared with the
Gato and
Balao.
Let's assume that one morning in 1944, all the
Gatos and
Balaos in the USN disappeared and were replaced by Type IXCs. Yes, we'd have a boat which could dive slightly faster and had a slightly longer surface range, could dive deeper, and have a smaller surface profile. We'd also end up with boat which was two to three knots slower on the surface, carried 12 fewer torpedoes internally, and didn't have effective surface or air search radar. We'd also end up sending boats without a shower, refrigerated storage, air conditioning, or sufficient bunks for the crew, into humid tropical waters for weeks on end. Sounds like a bum deal to me.
The funny thing is, despite how "huge and yachtlike" the fleet boats were, the Bureau of Ships were designing submarines even bigger than the
Gato and
Balao in 1945. Two of their designs submitted in May 1945 displaced between 330 and 490 tons more than the
Tench class, featured an extra pair of stern torpedo tubes, six athwartship tubes for anti-escort torpedoes, much more powerful diesels, and thicker hulls giving a crush depth around 800 feet. Of course, these designs were put together before the Allies had a chance to examine the Type XXI.
Sorry this is getting off-topic.