Real Submarine Technology & History Q&A

[Deamon]

Originally Posted by DaveyJ576

I am a Chief Petty Officer in the United States Navy and a qualified submarine sailor. I served aboard the USS Darter SS-576 during the Cold War, a diesel boat very similar to the fleet boats played in SHIV. I am also the co-founder and author of a submarine history website.

Interesting!

Dave, what all were your fields of competence ?

[Deamon]

Originally Posted by reallydedpoet

That is one of the best posts I have read here at SUBSIM Davey

I second that. 5/5 post and 5/5 thread!!!

A sub officer willing to discuss the matter, priceless!!! This thread goes right into my bookmarks!

[Mikeb213]

Hey Dave question for you....so in many books I have read about subs in WWII they said it would get very hot once they would dive. Had they fixed the air conditioning systems so it would stay comfortable by the time you served?

[DaveyJ576]

Originally Posted by Mikeb213

I am really interested in comparing the sub tech between the major players in wwII both before and after the war. I really want to see the specs of German, Jap, and American subs to see where they all were and what they ended up with by the end of the war. Do you guys have any ideas where we could get the specs for the best boats they had at the start of the war, and the best by the end?

The term "best" is extraordinarily subjective. It really depends on which attributes you consider to make a submarine the best. Speed? Range? Torpedo loadout? Diving depth?

Each country's submarines were designed with a specific mission and a specific set of operating parameters in mind. The American fleet boats were designed for long range, long endurance patrols in the warm Pacific. These requirements really drove the design. The Germans, British, and Dutch (among others) all produced excellent boats that were uniquely tailored to the missions that their countries needed them to do.

Submarine design is an evolution in compromise. The state of the art in the 1930's and 40's did not allow anyone to build the perfect all around submarine. It is necessary to sacrifice some performance characteristics in order to get others. To obtain long range, for instance, the boat had to be large in order to be able to carry enough fuel. A large boat is going to dive slower than a smaller boat, and it will have a wider turning circle. To get high speed, you have to have a battery with a very high voltage output. But these types of batteries take longer to charge, they produce high amounts of explosive hydrogen during charging, and they wear out quicker making them much more expensive and maintenance intensive. See the point?

This type of discussion has occurred before in these forums and it ended up being pointless. Every country that had submarines produced some excellent designs. Some of these boats were good in some areas and less than optimal in others. You can argue the various merits of each boat ad nauseum and get no where because it boils down to each person's opinion.

I can recommend several resources that you can go to in order to find the data you are seeking, and then you can make up your own mind. I will be happy to answer any questions you may end up having, but my area of expertise is the American boats. Some of the other participants of these forums are more knowledgeable about the other country's subs. Those resources include:

The Fleet Submarine in the U.S. Navy by John D. Alden (ISBN 0-85368-203-8)

Cold War Submarines by Norman Polmar & K.J. Moore (ISBN 1-57488-594-4)

U.S. Submarines Through 1945 (ISBN 1-55750-263-3) and U.S. Submarines Since 1945 (ISBN 1-55750-260-9) by Norman Friedman. Please see the note of caution about this author's books in a post above.

The Underwater War 1939-1945 by Richard Compton-Hall (ISBN 0-7137-1131-0). I would also caution the reader about this book. Mr. Compton-Hall is an excellent and knowledgeable author, but has a strong anti-American bias that colors what he writes.

Pigboats.com by Ric Hedman and Dave Johnston (www.pigboats.com)

Uboat.net by Gudmundur Helgason (www.uboat.net)

[DaveyJ576]

Originally Posted by Deamon

Interesting!

Dave, what all were your fields of competence ?

To answer that question I will direct you to the following page:

http://pigboats.com/davebio.html

[DaveyJ576]

Originally Posted by Mikeb213

In many books I have read about subs in WWII they said it would get very hot once they would dive. Had they fixed the air conditioning systems so it would stay comfortable by the time you served?

In most submarines, the air conditioning systems weren't broken, they just didn't exist!! Air conditioning was a new technology in the 1930's and 40's and was looked upon as an unnecessary luxury in most navies. Most of the world's submarines did not have any sort of air cooling or dehumidification systems at all until after the war.

The USN had a requirement of conducting long duration patrols in the warm waters of the Pacific Ocean. In the closed environment of a submarine in warm waters, condensation was a huge problem. The condensate dripped into electrical systems and caused constant shorts and fires. It also caused mold, mildew, and heat rash problems for the crew. Seeking a way of mitigating this problem, the USN installed the first air conditioning system in the USS Cuttlefish (SS-171) in 1934. The experiment was entirely successful and A/C systems were installed or retrofitted to all subsequent submarines. These systems were mainly intended for de-humidification, but had the pleasant side effect of cooling the air. This proved to be a key factor in the mechanical reliability of the USN fleet boats.

Those early systems were quite noisy however, and were quickly shut down during evasion to avoid giving away the boat's position to enemy sonars. This is what you were reading about.

A/C systems are of a benefit in any operating theater, but curiously few of the other navies installed them in their boats. This resulted in the sometimes deplorable living conditions that were very accurately portrayed in Das Boot.

[Stealhead]

Nice bio Davey.

Could you go over the histroy of the dreaded circle run that could occur with the mk.14 and mk.18 tropedos?

[DaveyJ576]

Originally Posted by Stealhead

Could you go over the history of the dreaded circle run that could occur with the mk.14 and mk.18 torpedoes?

Circular torpedo runs were a dangerous and frustrating problem for our submarines, but it did not occur with the frequency of the other problems. There was a great deal of debate as to what was the exact cause of the circular runs. Some claimed it was mechanical in nature, others pointed to tactics.

The material that was used in the manufacture of the rudder posts was discovered to corrode rather easily. After the fish left the tube and the gyro swung the rudder to turn the fish it to its preassigned heading, the rudder could jam in that position due to the corrosion on the rudder posts. It was a practice of the time to flood the tubes and open the outer doors well in advance to save time in the firing sequence. This tended to exacerbate the corrosion problem. Once it was realized what was happening, the practice was changed to flooding the tube and opening the outer doors only just before firing, keeping the fish dry as long as possible. There was also a renewed emphasis on proper and careful maintenance of the fish prior to firing.

Later production runs of both types of torpedoes corrected this problem by substituting a corrosion resistant metal in the construction of the rudder posts.

Another possible cause of circular running was forcing the fish to turn too far by putting a large gyro angle setting on it. The gyro would hit its stops and tumble. USN skippers came to favor shots that used little or no gyro angle setting and this helped to mitigate the problem

The Mk. 18 Mod 1 electric torpedo was rushed into production and was very buggy. It suffered terribly from corroded rudder posts among other problems and circular runs were a big issue. For once, feedback from the fleet was listened to and the Mk. 18 Mod 2 corrected most of the problems, but was not available until late in the war.

After the war, with the advent of homing torpedoes, an anti-circular run device was built into the control electronics of all torpedoes. This device would shut down the fish if it detected a turn of more than 180 degrees from the original firing heading.

[Mikeb213]

Hey Dave,
When you would go out for patrol did you guys go through Angles and Dangles? Since there was not a war on at the time did you guys have to go down to or below test depth a lot?
Thanks!

[Stealhead]

Thanks Davey for the torpedo reply.

The Fleet Submarine in the U.S. Navy by John D. Alden (ISBN 0-85368-203-8) is a great book but a heads up it is very rare and out of print so I would go for a used copy which can be had for around $40.00 at Amazon.
Most sites are asking $160.00 for an uncirculated copy.

The aurthor served on fleet boats during and after the war and he wrote the book to answer some of his own questions about fleet boat design.It also covers the post war GUPPY and Fleet Snorkel programs.

[DaveyJ576]

Originally Posted by Mikeb213

Hey Dave,
When you would go out for patrol did you guys go through Angles and Dangles?

Aaahhh, angles and dangles. This is the closest thing to an amusement park ride you can get on a submarine. It was a lot of fun with a strong hint of danger.

Angles and dangles was the process of putting the boat through rather large up and down angles while changing depth. We would at times get as high as 35 degrees. The angle indicator bubble gauge in the Control Room stopped at 45 degrees and we tried to keep it well below that. Anything greater and you risked spilling the battery acid and that would cause a lot of problems.

The planesmen and the Diving Officer had to be pretty careful because you could go out of control pretty quick. If you lost it going up you could broach and risk a collision. If you lost it going down...well, I think you could guess what happens.

One of our skippers liked to pull a large down angle on our first dive after leaving port. It was his method to see if the boat was neat, squared away, and stowed for sea. If it wasn't, anything that wasn't stowed properly would go flying, and if you weren't holding on, so would you.

One day when we were down deep, one of our cooks wanted to bake an angel food cake. He poured the batter in the pan and called up to the Diving Officer to see if we were going to change depth. Assured by the Dive that we were staying right where we were at, he opened the oven and put the cake in. Sure as hell, five minutes later we angled up and headed to periscope depth. You could hear the cursing throughout the whole boat as the cook looked in the oven and found all the batter run to the back end of the pan and sloshed over, creating a huge mess in his oven. Royally pissed, he let it bake and when it was done he took it out. The remainder of the batter had baked in the aft end of the pan and had a nice slope down to the center, where it smoothly tapered to nothing in the front end of the pan. He threw some frosting on it, set it on the table, and called it "Angle Food Cake"!!

Originally Posted by Mikeb213

Since there was not a war on at the time did you guys have to go down to or below test depth a lot?

We could go to test depth anytime operations required it. There were no restrictions. However, one thing you NEVER did was exceed test depth for any reason. After losing the Thresher, the submarine force was a little sensitive about that. If you exceeded test depth all sorts of messages had to be sent explaining why. All systems exposed to sea pressure had to be tested by a shipyard to ensure they weren't damaged. To say that it involved a lot of paperwork is a monumental understatement. As a matter of fact, we usually stayed about 10 feet above test depth just to make sure.

On my old Darter, though, we spent 80% of our submerged time at depths less than 300 feet. By 1986 she was 30 years old and if there was no reason to push the envelope, then we didn't.

[Mikeb213]

Hey Davey,
Another questions for you. I would be willing to bet that you spent some time doing simulated wargames ect. how would you decide when a target had been destroyed? Did you guys have to play against nuke subs very often? I have heard that in a lot of cases a diesel sub can be a lot more silent then a nuke is this true? How would a diesel sub be used to stalk a nuke?

Mike

[DaveyJ576]

Originally Posted by Mikeb213

I would be willing to bet that you spent some time doing simulated wargames ect. how would you decide when a target had been destroyed?

We would make our approach and once we reached firing point, we would launch a flare from our signal launcher (essentially a mini torpedo tube pointed upwards). Once the flair was sighted, the skimmer target was dead. Our weapon was the Mk. 48 Mod 3 torpedo, which at the time was the most capable and deadly torpedo in the world. Once you launched one, your target was dead, no joke.

Originally Posted by Mikeb213

Did you guys have to play against nuke subs very often? I have heard that in a lot of cases a diesel sub can be a lot more silent then a nuke is this true? How would a diesel sub be used to stalk a nuke?

I will refer you back to post #238. A diesel sub, when running on the battery and rigged for ultra-quiet, can be extremely quiet. Virtually no noise is radiated into the water due to the nature of its propulsion system.

On the Darter, we did an exercise once with the USS Bremerton (SSN-698). She did get us, but had one hell of a difficult time doing it. We received several compliments from her CO for being so quiet. This was for a diesel boat that was 30 years old at the time. Think what a modern boat can accomplish.

However, do not make the mistake in thinking that a nuke boat is at a disadvantage. A Virginia class SSN or Ohio Class SSBN is actually quieter than the ambient noise in the surrounding ocean. To detect it (if that is actually possible) you would have to listen for the area of the ocean that is quieter than the rest, not the noisiest!!!

[Arclight]

Looking for the hole in the water.

[Mikeb213]

Back then on Darter, I can't remember for sure but weren't the 688s using the BSY-1 suite at the time? Did they have anything like that retro fitted on to the diesel boats? Did they place a towed sonar array on board also? Sorry for all the questions I have spent years reading about this history of subs from wwII through the cold war and never had a chance to really ask the questions I wanted to ask. So thank you for your patience I really enjoy learning about this.

Mike