Submarine Trivia

[mookiemookie]

First question: I'm going with the USS Flasher with just under 44,000 tanker tons sunk.

Second question: The first one to have A/C was the USS Cuttlefish

If I'm right, my question is a softball: What was the first all welded U.S. submarine?

[Stealhead]

Cuttlefish was the 1st with AC in a none prototype fashion they had put experimental ones on some S-boats for testing I have read. I would have to guess that the S-boats where the 1st to be all welded.But it may have been the O or R-boats.


The Gato class had a strutcual improvement over the Tambor and the Gar class does anyone know what that was? What was the secret that allowed the Balao class to make its max deapth a massive improvment even over the Gato class? (I love the double question it makes you dig even deeper)

[Frame57]

The Shark was the first all welded boat. (SS-174). Even thought the letter designator did not follow suit with the names, they were considered "P" class boats.:salute:

[mookiemookie]

The Shark was the first all welded boat. (SS-174). Even thought the letter designator did not follow suit with the names, they were considered "P" class boats.:salute:

The ever-reliable Wikipedia lists the Pike (173) as the first all-welded boat. As does about.com (http://inventors.about.com/od/militaryhistoryinventions/a/Military_Subs.htm ), however the Navy agrees with you and says it was the Shark (http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-usn/usnsh-s/ss174.htm ) but then disagrees with itself and says it was the Pike again here: http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/usw/issue_7/timeline.pdf

[DaveyJ576]

Frame is absolutely correct.

The Electric Boat Company of Groton, CT was an early champion of welding. Portions of the outer hull of the USS Cuttlefish (SS-171) were welded, with the rest of her construction being riveted. EB's experiments with welding on the Cuttlefish were entirely successful and the company adopted the practice from then on.

The Portsmouth Naval Shipyard was the lead design yard for submarines and the engineers there were somewhat conservative. Not convinced to throw away the tried and true riveting method of construction, they specified riveting for the first two boats of the next class, the Porpoise (SS-172) and the Pike (SS-173). Electric Boat was eager to distinguish themselves as a submarine builder and thus chose welding for the two follow on boats, the Shark (SS-174) and Tarpon (SS-175). These two boats were entirely welded and their construction proved to be quite rugged.

The stodgy engineers at Portsmouth still refused to accept welding as a practice and thus when the FY-35 boats were authorized they still specified riveting for the three they were awarded (Plunger and Pollack, with Pompano built by Mare Island). The EB boats of this group (Perch, Pickerel, and Permit) were welded.

I believe that were the confusion comes is the fact that of the 10 boats of the Porpoise/Shark class, half were welded and half were riveted.

BTW, the completely successful use of welding by EB finally convinced the Portsmouth engineers and all government built boats from that point on were welded.

[Stealhead]

You can find alot on contradiction when it comes to classes of ships/subs in this time period. Take look at the Tambor class they had some changes in the last few starting with the Gar and some consider it a new class some do not though in an official manner they considered the Gato a new class and the Gar an improved version of the Tambor. Same can be said for the Porpoise class they used several concepts and they where made at diffrent yards and the yards did have differing views on how to make them. This was a good thing as it is a great way to test diffrent concepts.I wonder also if they did this for polictial means as well got to squeeze that money out of congress. Wikipedia is to be honest a good casual source but not a good source for any other means for that one must dig a bit deeper. anyone can put data in any wiki page and you will see many pages that contradict themselves.Some consider the classes to have been this, Tambor,Gar,Mackrel,Gato,Balao,and Tench.The Mackrel class had a whopping two subs in it.Though the list is shorter if you count when there was a notable improvement over the last class it would be Tambor,Gato,Balao,Tench.The same can be said with the Porpoise,Salmon and Sargos.Man this is getting a bit more in line with the other thread though they are closely tied I suppose. This is why i am eargely waiting on my copy of "US Submarines Through 1945 A Study in Design" from the Naval Institute Press that I ordered from Amazon the other day it was 45 bucks but this book is sweet.(if you are a gearhead like me anyway)I will order the second volume that covers 1945 to modern times at some point.

[LukeFF]

Take look at the Tambor class they had some changes in the last few starting with the Gar and some consider it a new class some do not though in an official manner they considered the Gato a new class and the Gar an improved version of the Tambor.

The "Gars" were an exact repeat of the Tambors and thus not a new class of boats. Hence why most historians (and the Navy?) consider the boats from SS-206 to SS-211 to be Tambor class boats.

[Stealhead]

I agree with you on the Gar not being a new class in respect to the Tambor though I have found in a few places that Gar up could carry more fuel than the the eariler Tambors could I suppose that could explain why some consider them a seprate class though they began using some of the ballast tanks on Gatos as fuel tanks and that was retrograded on all the Gatos but no one considers a higher fuel cap. Gato diffrent from a shorter legged one. (though it could be a downside in Take Her Deep Hailbut lacked the fuel/ballast mod but her pack mates had it meaning she had to leave sooner they even gave her some of thier fuel at one point) Until I can find a well reaseached source varifiing for certain it appears that the Gar and the other G Tambors had a larger fuel load.

[Stealhead]

Man I got a pretty good one. What two submarines where the victor and the victim in the first(and only officialy counted there are some disputed) kill in which both subs where submerged for the enitre engagment? The winning skipper was considered to be amoug the best by his navy before this kill.Wow this one might be hard I know the answer as I just saw it on TV a a while ago but it is hard to find on the web unless you have very good info on it and thefore already know the answer.So i will give slight clue a nation is still dealing with the enviromental effects of the sunken sub.

[Rip]

Man I got a pretty good one. What two submarines where the victor and the victim in the first(and only officialy counted there are some disputed) kill in which both subs where submerged for the enitre engagment? The winning skipper was considered to be amoug the best by his navy before this kill.Wow this one might be hard I know the answer as I just saw it on TV a a while ago but it is hard to find on the web unless you have very good info on it and thefore already know the answer.So i will give slight clue a nation is still dealing with the enviromental effects of the sunken sub.


Would that be U-864 sunk by HMS Venturer off the coast of Norway? Being a bit of an environmental problem because it contains 67 tons of Mercury.

[Rip]

Would that be U-864 sunk by HMS Venturer off the coast of Norway? Being a bit of an environmental problem because it contains 67 tons of Mercury.

They have apparently decided to raise her BTW.

The Norwegian Government has decided that the wreck of the WW2 German submarine U-864 which contains 65 tons of mercury, is to be raised, and that the contaminated seabed be covered with clean sand.http://www.norwaypost.no/content/view/21562/26/

[Warhawk]

I believe you are referring to the USS Stewart (DD-224).

She was scuttled along with the drydock she was inside while in Surabaya, Java in March 1942.

She was raised in 1943 by the Japanese and named Patrol Boat 102.

After the war she was decommissioned into the US Navy once again as DD-224.

She was finally decommissioned on 23 May 46 and was sunk as a target ship.

A most interesting ship history. :salute:

1920 to 1946.

USS Stewart DD-224 is NOT sunk!

Its at the SeaWolf park in Galveson. I took the family there and got tons of pics inside the SSK Cavalla...when I get my darn server working again..I will post pics for all you guys!

Guess which aircraft carrier the Cavalla sunk? 30 years before I was born!

And what is the number of the IXC U-boat about 50 miles off the southeastern Louisiana coast

[DaveyJ576]

USS Stewart DD-224 is NOT sunk!

Its at the SeaWolf park in Galveson. I took the family there and got tons of pics inside the SSK Cavalla...when I get my darn server working again..I will post pics for all you guys!

Warhawk,

Things have gotten a little mixed up here.

The USS Stewart (DD-224), a Clemson class "flush deck 4 pipe" destroyer of WWI vintage was indeed captured by the Japanese in 1942, pressed into service in the IJN, recaptured at the end of the war, and sunk by U.S. forces as a target in 1946.

The vessel at Seawolf Park in Galveston is the USS Stewart (DE-238), an Edsall class destroyer escort commissioned in 1943. It bears absolutely no resemblance to the original Stewart and is a completely different vessel.

The submarine is the USS Cavalla (SSK-244), a Gato class fleet boat that was later converted to a Hunter-Killer configuration.

[Stealhead]

Rip you got it. I did some searching after my post and could find very little really on Royal Navy subs in WWII not with anything more than just casual info anyway. That is why I gave the clue. I had seen this show about the story on military ch. but I was afraid Id forget as I recall things better if I have read them so I was afraid that Id forget the complte answer!:06: I wonder if the German goverment is going to assist in the clean up. I know the US Navy sent thier salvage divers out to an atoll below Guam a few years back when they learned that a USNS tanker which had been hit by the only kaiten attack was found to be leaking oil very badly after a violet typhoon had passed the oil would have killed the fish that where the lively hood of the locals so they came out and pumped out all the oil into a bardge above them. It was a challenge.

The non US and German submarine forces tend to get pretty well over looked by many for some reason though there are many interesting stories from all the nations submarines no all the nations militaries that fought in WWII The militray section in any book store is my bank accounts foe. I have had a fasanation with military history and techonolgy since I watched an episode of "Black Sheep" in the late 70's.

[LukeFF]

Until I can find a well reaseached source varifiing for certain it appears that the Gar and the other G Tambors had a larger fuel load.

U.S. Submarines Through 1945 mentions absolutely nothing about the "late" Tambors carrying more fuel. It was an administrative decision by Navy Secretary Claude Swanson to have the Fiscal Year 1940 fleet boats (staring with Gar) to be repeats of the FY 1939 fleet boats (the Tambors) - nothing more, nothing less.

[Warhawk]

Warhawk,

Things have gotten a little mixed up here.

The USS Stewart (DD-224), a Clemson class "flush deck 4 pipe" destroyer of WWI vintage was indeed captured by the Japanese in 1942, pressed into service in the IJN, recaptured at the end of the war, and sunk by U.S. forces as a target in 1946.

The vessel at Seawolf Park in Galveston is the USS Stewart (DE-238), an Edsall class destroyer escort commissioned in 1943. It bears absolutely no resemblance to the original Stewart and is a completely different vessel.

The submarine is the USS Cavalla (SSK-244), a Gato class fleet boat that was later converted to a Hunter-Killer configuration.

Correct! My mistake..thanks!

Guess which aircraft carrier the Cavalla sunk? 30 years before I was born!

And what is the number of the IXC U-boat about 50 miles off the southeastern Louisiana coast

Pllfft

[Stealhead]

USS Cavalla sank Shokaku on Warhawks brithday.Would have been even more interesting if it was your birth date.
That was the only IJN CV sunk solely by sub I think couple others where combo sinkings.

[breadcatcher101]

Okay, this is one that I do not know the answer. It concerns the Batfish and Wayne Merrill the CO. He was stripped of his dolphins by the same officer that had just pinned a navy cross on his chest.

What did he do on the last trip out that required the exec to relieve him of his duties?

[cgjimeneza]

USS Cavalla sank Shokaku on Warhawks brithday.Would have been even more interesting if it was your birth date.


That was the only IJN CV sunk solely by sub I think couple others where combo sinkings.


and Shinnano??? that was done by a single fleet boat!

[cgjimeneza]

Okay, this is one that I do not know the answer. It concerns the Batfish and Wayne Merrill the CO. He was stripped of his dolphins by the same officer that had just pinned a navy cross on his chest.

What did he do on the last trip out that required the exec to relieve him of his duties?

he was unstable, this was his 3rd time out, he got the medal for making an attack on a jap BB

[breadcatcher101]

On his first patrol he failed to close on the Yamoto fearing the large guns. He made no attack.

His second patrol, in Empire waters, was in bad weather. All they could do to survive.

It was his third time out from Midway that something happened which caused the XO to take command. The XO called in and they were ordered to return to Midway at once where he was relieved from command.

I could be wrong on this but I don't think so.

[Stealhead]

U.S. Submarines Through 1945 mentions absolutely nothing about the "late" Tambors carrying more fuel. It was an administrative decision by Navy Secretary Claude Swanson to have the Fiscal Year 1940 fleet boats (staring with Gar) to be repeats of the FY 1939 fleet boats (the Tambors) - nothing more, nothing less.


Yes I also have this book but that does not mean that it is going to cover every single detail on every single submarne to the maximum. You once asked Davy in a post about page 145 in the same book in which it states under a line drawing of S-44 that S-42 and S-46 had recived Mk.14 tropedo directors he said that was a typo and you did not argue with him.So with me you say I am completey wrong and with but with Davy you agree with him when he says the author made an error.I would also like to point out to you that in the book that we are discussing please refer to page 205 It does state that the Sec of the Navy the FY 40 was six large submarines(Gar, SS 206-211) and they would duplicate the FY 39 boats(the Tambors). Designed test deapth was still 250ft, but collapse deapth incresed to 500ft. That my good sir makes the Gar boats diffrent from the preceding members of the Tambor class. I will confirm that in the range of Submarines Through 1945 it does not mention that the Gars had a larger fuel load than the Tambors but the book clearly states that the Tambors and the Gars are not 100% identical structualy.You can read the book same as I can dont know how you missed it. By the way I was not aware of this diffrence between the two until I recived the book in the mail the other day.Though you are actualy correct because you are following what the Sec. of the Navy ordered but that was purely for adminastrative purposes it should appear you just did not read the rest of the paragraph I suppose.It is not going to be so easy to say I dont know anything and that you are the guru on this subject if I can challenge what you say aginst my posts using the same source.I am willing to have an open debate on any subject but not one in which one person seems to be set on proving that he is always correct and anyone who has a diffrent view is wrong.At least you did not use the ding ding ding wrong type stuff that you have resorted to before.

[Frame57]

The ever-reliable Wikipedia lists the Pike (173) as the first all-welded boat. As does about.com (http://inventors.about.com/od/militaryhistoryinventions/a/Military_Subs.htm ), however the Navy agrees with you and says it was the Shark (http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-usn/usnsh-s/ss174.htm ) but then disagrees with itself and says it was the Pike again here: http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/usw/issue_7/timeline.pdfI know, it gets a bit maddening at times. Most technical stuff I get from "The Fleet Submarine in the US Navy" by John Alden. He served in the Sub Force so I hope his documentations are accurate. Small world, his first boat was the Pike...:salute:

[Arclight]

On his first patrol he failed to close on the Yamoto fearing the large guns. He made no attack.

His second patrol, in Empire waters, was in bad weather. All they could do to survive.

It was his third time out from Midway that something happened which caused the XO to take command. The XO called in and they were ordered to return to Midway at once where he was relieved from command.

I could be wrong on this but I don't think so.
From what I can find in the patrol logs, Merrill was relieved of command after returning to Midway after his 2nd patrol. Fyfe was the CO from that point on. Nothing indicates the CO being relieved of command during the patrol on either the 2nd or 3rd patrol.

[Torplexed]

I've read something about Wayne Merrill getting tossed out of a hotel window on Midway Island prior to his third patrol and being in terrible physical shape as a result.

[breadcatcher101]

You know Torplexed, you might well be on to something there. maybe he suffered a head injury as well that affected his actions.

Anyway, he was to be CM but he was dismissed from the navy instead.

I'll try to find out more.

[LukeFF]

At least you did not use the ding ding ding wrong type stuff that you have resorted to before.

Ding ding ding! :O:

(But I digress) ;)

Collapse depth is nothing but a theoretical number which, time and again during the war, was proven to be highly variable. Dave may correct me on this, but as I recall he's stated this "increased collapse depth" of SS 206-211 had nothing to do with a design change. It was mostly a matter of the margin of safety that had been built up in the previous classes. And yes, I've read that page in Mr. Friedman's book plenty of times.

And, if I may, I'll bring another source into this debate - Register of Ships of the U.S. Navy, 1775-1990, by K. Jack Bauer, page 270:

Notes: Fiscal years 1939 (SS 198-203) and 1940. This class was designed following a major review of characteristics for an ideal, all-purpose fleet submarine. SS 206-211 are sometimes listed as the Gar class; they were exact repeats of the SS 198-205 group.

Still waiting for you sources stating SS 206 series of boats had more range.

[Frame57]

It would be a great idea to have more sources listed that we all utilize and learn from. I have one book for spec's by John Alden. It is awesome as it covers much detailed info and has a great pic section of each boat as well. But I want to expand my hitorical library. Alden could have made some errors so I have to be open to my fellow skippers here in the info you guys provide even if it is in opposition to something i find. We all learn from each other....:salute:

[Stealhead]

You are completly misundertsanding my whole point Luke. I said that some places on the internet I had seen implied that the Gars had more range. I never said that I belived this to be 100% true.

So to me you are still showing that you have a desire to seek out and find any post by any person whom you think to be wrong and then prove it. Now that I did show you that you did not fully state the truth as to the Gar in Freidmans book you then try to trun it around and say, "but the collpase deapths where only theroy" blah blah blah but in the manner that the chapter in the book this is written in Friedman clearly wants the reader to take that in some way shape or from there was something diffrent about the Gars even it it may have been done in FY39. This clerly shows that your goal is to ALWAYS make your self be correct no matter what anyone else has to say. And I even admittied that in the realm of Freidmans book it does not say anything about if the Gars had increased range or not. I dont have the other book you refer to so I have nothing to say to that.

I am not going to waste my and the other members time arguing with you. For the record again I never said that the Gar had extra fuel cap. only that I had read this places there is a massive diffrence.And until you have proven to me that you have a PhD and wrote a dissertation on the subject you are in no way shape or form an expert on the subject nor am I nor is any other person on this site.:up: Dont bother posting anything further on this I will not answer.Obviously to you there is no point since you are the Head of Naval History at Annapolis.And have combed through all the naval blueprints and records yourself you know so much I bet you could teach Fluckely,Okane,Morton, and the others a thing or two I am sure of it.Please forgive for having posted something that was not how you say it is.

Sorry to all for my and LukeFFs highjacking of this thread.

[Warhawk]

USS Cavalla sank Shokaku on Warhawks brithday.Would have been even more interesting if it was your birth date.
That was the only IJN CV sunk solely by sub I think couple others where combo sinkings.



Speaking of which!

I have pics of the Cavalla and the Stewart

Check em out

http://awphuch2000.dyndns.org/cavalla/

A few are blurry (I was messing with camera settings) but all in all I got quite a few shots

There are 2 levels of sizes...800x600 and 1024x768...be gentle on my bandwidth please

[Stealhead]

You should visit the USS Drum in Mobile Warhawk if want to see a fleet boat in late war trim you can get there in a day from Texas easy its only $10.00 and you get to see the USS Alabama as well.Drum will fool you though she looks like something shes not. There are 3 mk.27s in the aft torpedo room.

[Warhawk]

You should visit the USS Drum in Mobile Warhawk if want to see a fleet boat in late war trim you can get there in a day from Texas easy its only $10.00 and you get to see the USS Alabama as well.Drum will fool you though she looks like something shes not. There are 3 mk.27s in the aft torpedo room.

Sounds sweet!

I like the old WWII dress, that SSK stuff looks squiffy to me...but it made it quieter and faster...but still the old WWII just has a draw for me!

[Stealhead]

Yeah the Drum has the 5 inch and the 40mm as well. You can sit in the seats of the 5 inch gun they wont let you on the fairwater/bridge so you cant look at the 40mm up close but you see can the ones on the Alabama though they are quad powered mounts. The subs used the single barreled 40mm.One thing you will notice if you dont know much about the sizes of diffrent ammo is that SH4 made the 40mm shell way too big there are some shells on display inside the Alabama.Too bad they dont have one of the old Chicago Pianos on display.

[Frame57]

The USS Archerfish SS-311 was used for torpedo practice by the Snook. Yet her torpdedo tubes can be seen today. Explain how this can be???:salute:

[mookiemookie]

The USS Archerfish SS-311 was used for torpedo practice by the Snook. Yet her torpdedo tubes can be seen today. Explain how this can be???:salute:

Because she was fitted with the tubes intended for the Batfish SS-310. They were both being completed at Portsmouth Naval Yard and the Archerfish was given orders and was not going to be ready in time. In order to make schedule, the yard used parts from the Batfish to finish the Archerfish.

Consequently if you go to the Batfish in Oklahoma you'll see the tubes intended for the Archerfish, stamped "311" :know:

EDIT: Got my boat names mixed up! :88)

[Frame57]

Ok. What Sub crew was saved by a hacksaw. Yep, I said hacksaw. This was pre WW2. Name the boat and briefly describe what happened...:salute:

[mookiemookie]

Ok. What Sub crew was saved by a hacksaw. Yep, I said hacksaw. This was pre WW2. Name the boat and briefly describe what happened...:salute:

The HMS M1 was anchored by it's own gun. Once during firing practice, someone had forgotten to remove the tampion before firing its 12" gun. When the gun was fired, the barrel exploded and sank in front of the M1, taking with it the cabling that was used for the barrel rifling as well as the tampion that was attached to it. The crew had to saw the cable in order to free the ship from this impromptu anchor.

It's well known that the Japanese had submarines that carried aircraft. The U.S. experimented with this concept, pre-WW2 by installing an airplane hangar on to one of its submarines.

Name the submarine, and describe how this particular submarine airplane hanger was used after the idea of sub-carried airplanes was scrapped.

[razark]

It's well known that the Japanese had submarines that carried aircraft. The U.S. experimented with this concept, pre-WW2 by installing an airplane hangar on to one of its submarines.

Name the submarine, and describe how this particular submarine airplane hanger was used after the idea of sub-carried airplanes was scrapped.

The sub was the S-1, but I haven't found out about the hanger usage yet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_S-1_(SS-105) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_S-1_%28SS-105%29)

Razark

Edit:
It was used by former Captain of the S-1, Charles Momsen, to create a prototype diving bell, work which allowed the Squalus survivors to be rescued.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCann_Submarine_Rescue_Chamber

[mookiemookie]

The sub was the S-1, but I haven't found out about the hanger usage yet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_S-1_(SS-105) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_S-1_%28SS-105%29)

Razark

Edit:
It was used by former Captain of the S-1, Charles Momsen, to create a prototype diving bell, work which allowed the Squalus survivors to be rescued.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCann_Submarine_Rescue_Chamber

:salute::yep:

[Frame57]

Very good on the other incidents by the way, but I am looking for an American boat that suffered an unusual casualty circa 1920:salute:

[Sledgehammer427]

:D
http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/usw/issue_23/s5.htm

...on 1 September 1920, USS S-5 (SS-110) suffered partial flooding during a practice dive east of Delaware and settled to the bottom in 180 feet of water with her entire 40-man crew still onboard and alive. Although this was before submarine rescue vessels, Momsen lungs, and McCann rescue bells, what might have been a third major U.S. submarine tragedy was narrowly averted by the extraordinary perseverance of S-5’s officers and men and the heroic assistance of two passing merchant ships. S-5’s story remains one of the great tales of submarine rescue at sea.

[Stealhead]

Simon Lake the submarine designer that opposed John Holland and Electric Boat had some unique design features he added to his designs two of which he stopped using after the Navy said they had no intrest in them what so ever.However Lake did include a device that was found to be very useful that Hollands designs lacked when orginaly made. Can anyone name some of Lakes unique features?

[Platapus]

Simon Lake the submarine designer that opposed John Holland and Electric Boat had some unique design features he added to his designs two of which he stopped using after the Navy said they had no intrest in them what so ever.However Lake did include a device that was found to be very useful that Hollands designs lacked when orginaly made. Can anyone name some of Lakes unique features?

The Hydroplane to allow an level keel dive?

[Stealhead]

That is good but there is still something unique about the diving planes. your answer gives you a good clue if you think about how the subs in SH4 dive.:hmmm: Also Lakes other two unique ideas where very ineresting if you can find what they where.One seemed very useful but if you think about the ocean floors topagraphy not so much.

[razark]

That is good but there is still something unique about the diving planes. your answer gives you a good clue if you think about how the subs in SH4 dive.:hmmm: Also Lakes other two unique ideas where very ineresting if you can find what they where.One seemed very useful but if you think about the ocean floors topagraphy not so much.

The diving planes were mounted forward on the boat, and some of his earlier designs had wheels, to keep from getting stuck on the bottom.

One of his designs also mentioned an airlock, allowing the crew to exit and enter while submerged.

Razark

[Stealhead]

On some of Lakes designs there where planes amidships that was the unique thing I was looking for his idea of diving on an even keel was why they had more planes than anyone else the idea of an even keel dive is that the boat goes under evenly from bow to stern all at the same time rather than bow first then stern which is much faster.Holland boats at first had no fore hyrdoplanes but he started adding them as EB felt that this from of diving was better Lake felt the even keel dive was safer.The Navy agreed with EB as their designs one out everytime until Lake sued claimed bais towards EB and won so then they just took more EB designs and a few Lake designs.The wheels is right but that is not why he put them there Lake tought that you could "roll" along the bottom of the sea with them in shallow areas.

The air lock was supposed to be used for a diver so that the sub could be used for salvage. No one was really crazy for this and the diving lock consumed space inside the sub a few subs with the bell where bought by the russian navy but they did not like the diving bell either so Lake gave up on them.

[Frame57]

OK, Cold war era for this one. Name the most decorated American fast attack submarine?

[Frame57]

Back to the WW2 trivia. Joe Enright questioned his ability to skipper and asked to be relieved of command. Later though, he requested to command another boat. He got his request and commanded the Archerfish. However one peculiar event led to this reinstatement one night at Pearl Harbor. Can you describe it?:salute: