Sub Interiors

[FritzRommel]

in Sh3 the subs looked different inside compered to other types. is it just me or do all the subs have the same interior?

[Task Force]

some sub interiors look similar, but the Vii IX have similar interiors, but still they differ if you look into them.

But the XXI has a different interior. and the iia /iid have there own interior.

EDIT, woops, this is sh4... he he...:oops: whyd assume it was sh 3 stuff.

Well, as Torplexed said, the upgrades for the us subs mainly effected different thing, like guns, and maby more torp storage, the control rooms stayed pretty much the same. The control room that has the most differences is the one in the S boats.

[Torplexed]

Except for the S-Class boats I believe most US WW2 subs from the Salmon class on were just small evolutionary improvements on the previous class. Odds are the control room layout in each probably didn't look a whole lot different. But then I must admit I'm rarely in the control room as most of the action is elsewhere. :D

[Sledgehammer427]

The Gato and Balao have the same control room because they were basically of the same type of sub.

sometime after the Gatos started building they "locked" the boats into that timeframe, with modifications (like the added gun structures on the tower) added later to keep production numbers up and costs down.

so, since the Balao is merely a slightly improved Gato, thats why you have the same CR.

And, as torplexed said, theres plenty more to look at than just the control room. :D

[Rockin Robbins]

Unlike the Germans, the Americans already had a modern design that worked well. Having that, tweaking was all we accomplished for four years. And that was all that was needed.

The Germans, on the other hand, being stuck with a hatload of obsolete Type VII and Type II World War I technology were compelled to reinvent the U-Boat from whole cloth, resulting in a boat they could never produce in time to see battle.

They had no choice. The Type VII was too obsolete to evolve, the Type IX would have been a good one to try, but the Germans were obsessed with revolutionary weapons, not evolutionary weapons. They were always trying to hit the grand slam home run, the one killer app, the single knock-out blow. Unfortunately, they never listened to "The Honeymooners" and were never educated that the Ralph Kramden strategy almost always results in disaster, especially when you have no choice but to live or die by the result.

The Germans did it with tanks. They did it with aircraft. They did the same mistake with submarines. At least they were consistent!:har:

[Kloef]

There was a certain degree of standarisation,keeping production costs low and producing more boats in less time.Just look at all the different things the U.S build especially the Liberty Ships.

But the adding of Radar,TDC mark I and later the 3,extra crew room etc. could make subs look different,at the same time there was the overhaul,the repairing with non-standard materials on patrol,adding of gauges,valves,painting certain things in different colours,sometimes even the outside.In that retrospect all the boats were probably unique..its a hard thing to study cause most pictures are in black and white and the few boats remaining are all in different colour scemes there is no time standard they use..

Alot of subs were converted into sub-types after the war,some were sold making it more complex to study..nevertheless very interesting.

[Hartmann]

I don´t think that VII and IX boat were obsolete compared with U.S boats
the speed, dive depth, torpedo load in IX boats were similar in both sides.
the main and decisive difference was the Radar and sonar technology , and this could be implemented during the war if Germany had the tech, but allies were always a step forward .

Another important factor was the number of ships build by allies a lot more that u-boats were able to sink, and finally the break of the Enigma code.
Germany don´t developed the XXI boat in the early years thinking that the war was nearly over and when they want to react was too late, the same in reaction planes, tanks, missiles,...

In the other side Japanese don´t had advanced radars, poor sonar devices, and limited build capability, against a modern fleet of submarines with agressive skippers ,with radars,endurance, luxurious life , and a heavy load of torpedoes.

[Kloef]

Maybe you can compare them to the interiour of the U.S.S Pampanito?

Here's the link its got 360 degree pictures in the virtual tour!I guess this boat comes the closest to what a standard boat looked like(apart from the ice cream making machine)and gives you an overall picture of the boat's lay-out..

There is also an online manual..:salute:


http://www.maritime.org/tour/index.php

[oscar19681]

[quote=Hartmann;1128456]I don´t think that VII and IX boat were obsolete compared with U.S boats
the speed, dive depth, torpedo load in IX boats were similar in both sides.

You are kidding me right? Dive depth was the same on both sides? The balao had a test depth of 120 meters. The Gato 90 meters. The german subs where notorious for there diving depth around 200 meters sometimes even 250 meters. I really doubt even a Balao class could go even near 250 meters.

[Sailor Steve]

[quote=Hartmann;1128456]I don´t think that VII and IX boat were obsolete compared with U.S boats
the speed, dive depth, torpedo load in IX boats were similar in both sides.

You are kidding me right? Dive depth was the same on both sides? The balao had a test depth of 120 meters. The Gato 90 meters. The german subs where notorious for there diving depth around 200 meters sometimes even 250 meters. I really doubt even a Balao class could go even near 250 meters.
You doubt wrong. First, the VIIB's "test depth" was only 90 meters. The fact that they could and did routinely go much deeper says a lot for their construction techniques. Yes, the u-boats had thicker pressure hulls, and the British and Americans both got a huge shock when they checked out the captured U-570.

As to the Americans, it's true that the Balao was rated for 450 feet, but it was estimated that the boat would be safe at twice that, and people have posted links in the past to records of them exceeding that depth.

[Kloef]

German U-boats have an almost legendary status,this leads to conclusions about diving so deep,some reports are correct but diving this deep was exceptional and was almost the only option left to escape depth bombs...The Germans also used their U-boats for propaganda,all leading to this somewhat false status of being supersubs..

But you know how it goes,first they have 2 birds,then 3 then 1287..

U.S subs had a diving safety depth of around 90 to 120 meters but there are reports of diving beyond 600 feet..this was the same as for German u-boats,it is part of the myth like in the movie Das Boot,from a engineering point of view how can you survive getting to 280 meters and hitting the bottom with force?The pressure at that depth and water getting into the boat cannot be stopped by human strenght,the forces are enourmous.. but hey its a movie right?

Anyway U.S subs were more confortable,had the latest technology and an incredible machine behind it to support them.

There wasnt any shock when they inspected 570,it just led to all kind of conclusions,basically the Germans used a better quality of steel..

What really suprises me is that everybody allways thinks German subs were the best while in fact Dutch subs were considered to be the most modern and sophisticated,but that fact has been raped for 70 years...yes us modest Dutch you know?