Why dont american subs have german like conning towers?

[CruiseTorpedo]

All the american subs I've seen always had their periscopes up and even when they're down they appear to be up compared to the german uboats. I dont get it? I thought that was a dead give away siloette when your showing scopes up and it was a no no. Can some one fill me in on american uboats, were they even called uboats or submarines?

I guess I'm used to the look of the german stuff, havent seen an american uboat in real life yet, saw the u505 last month, hope to stop by cleveland and see the boat they have docked up there sometime this month! Excited about it cuz they never cut away any of the doors for better access, it's all still in tact just the way they made it back in the 40's.

[don1reed]

US boats were larger and their periscope depth was deeper 65' (19.8m). The scopes were housed in the sheers above the conning tower which also served as lookout platforms, which enabled the lookouts to see farther.

You might want to check out the USS Cobia at Manitowoc, Wis., while you're at it.

75 Maritime Drive, Manitowoc, WI 54220
920-684-0218 or Toll free 1-866-724-2356
FAX 920-684-0219

[CruiseTorpedo]

That's a little too far to drive, the drive to Chicago was a bit much but I figured I love the SH3 game so it would be great to see a real uboat! Was 5 hours from central ohio to see the boat, maybe a 2.5 hour drive to see the one in cleveland from here which is doable. I almost went to see the boat in cleveland rather than go to chicago but I wanted to see the big city too! LOL Was a great trip and the boat was well worth seeing! Here are a few pictures

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c180/PF_Nut/DSC01298b.jpg

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c180/PF_Nut/DSC01288b.jpg

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c180/PF_Nut/DSC01285b.jpg

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c180/PF_Nut/DSC01281.jpg

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c180/PF_Nut/DSC01287.jpg

[CruiseTorpedo]

So see if I have this right, the reason the scopes stick up on the american boats is because they were longer for the boat to operate a little deeper with them up? Why would they do this? What's the benefit?

[don1reed]

Why would they do this? What's the benefit?

You'd have to ask the Naval Architects that question...:)

...but, offhand, I say that the deeper they were at PD made less of a chance to broach during foul wx...and during calm, less visible to aircraft.

The Pacific theater presented an entirely different type of war, but, the US submarine force was no stranger to those waters, having had a pre-war presence there, the USN had the subs designed their way (Fleetsubs)for the purpose of screening for battleships under the Mahon Theory of Naval warfare....that theory came tumbling down when the first BB was sunk at Ford Island, Oaho, H.I. 7DEC41. Until America's industrial might could get the military back up to speed, the subs, US, Brits, and Dutch alone, took the war to Japan.

Nice pics, btw.

Saw her before she was moved indoors and before her ASR was returned. She's lookin' good.

[CruiseTorpedo]

What's the ASR?

[don1reed]

Angriffseerohr (attack periscope_the one aft)

[CruiseTorpedo]

Ah thanks! I'm no expert on these things as you can tell LOL! Thanks for the help!

[Spaxspore]

Ah thanks! I'm no expert on these things as you can tell LOL! Thanks for the help!

Yea great pics, i need to head over to chicago and check it out. I live about 20min out of dayton, ohio.

[DIRTY DEALER]

Nice photos, you could have lifted them from my camera, I was there last year.

I live in Cleveland, so I can visit the Cod anytime. Here's a link : http://www.usscod.org/

Look up the hours and days befor you make your drive !

[don1reed]

Dirty Dealer: You lucky dog! :D

If it was me, I'd be down there weekly.

I've not made it to see the USS Cod yet, so tell us...is she on dynamic display, or static? ...erm, is she in her element (afloat) or thrown up on the beach?

[cmdrk]

Maybe the periscope height/depth has something to do with visibility from the air.
How much water does it take to hide a sub from AC?

[Quagmire]

Great pics! I love the U505. I saw her when I was a kid but at that time she was outdoors on the museum grounds. That new indoor exhibit looks awesome!

Here is a cool idea for a sci fi, time travel type film. Imagine the crew of the U505 is patrolling somewhere in the Atlantic when they decide to submerge in a heavy storm. One of those goofy time warp storms like in the movie "The Final Countdown". In the next scene the Kaluen and his watch crew pop the hatch and climb onto the conning tower to find that they are now no longer in the Atlantic but part of the U505 exhibit! The Kaluen says "Mien Got!" or something and that errie sci fi music plays...

OK, maybe a lame idea for a whole movie but a cool premise none the less!

[Rosencrantz]

cmdr wrote:

Maybe the periscope height/depth has something to do with visibility from the air.
How much water does it take to hide a sub from AC?


No one can answer your question, I afraid. It depends on the situation: How clear is water, sea state and so on. For example Mediterrainian was really clear, so few meters would not make any difference. Also Nord Sea was pretty clear and I think so was actually the pacific too.
But basicly = more depth means more safe you are. Not only for visual sighting, but think also possiblity for collisions for example.

-RC-

[DIRTY DEALER]

Dirty Dealer: You lucky dog! :D

If it was me, I'd be down there weekly.

I've not made it to see the USS Cod yet, so tell us...is she on dynamic display, or static? ...erm, is she in her element (afloat) or thrown up on the beach?


She's in the water. You have to walk a gangway to get aboard, down the for hatch into the for torpedo room to enter. The exit is through the aft hatch in the rear torpedo room.

Last time I went, a couple of years or so ago, the conning tower was "being worked on" and off limits. That may have changed since then.

If you have time be sure to check out the "comforts" of the Cod. She has an ice cream maker, air conditioning and radio to listen to Tokyo Rose ! Not a "pig boat" that's for sure !

[Drebbel]

I live in Cleveland, so I can visit the Cod anytime.

Cool. If you go pls make good pictures of the logos on her sail. There is a whole Dutch story behind some of those and I would love some additional pictures of it.

[CruiseTorpedo]

I think I might head over there next week if the weather's nice. This week it's all thunderstorms every day, soon as it's nice I'm going! I'll take some pics for ya. I'd have inside pics of the u505 but they wouldnt let me shoot em. They're not too hard to find though, that thing has been photographed like crazy from what I've seen in my little searches. There's even a good half dozen photos from inside the u505 in the english translated uboat commander's handbook.

[CruiseTorpedo]

Great pics! I love the U505. I saw her when I was a kid but at that time she was outdoors on the museum grounds. That new indoor exhibit looks awesome!


It is a really cool setup, all the lights and stuff are setup to act as if light's reflecting on the boat off of water. I had an aweful time taking pictures of it though, there's a lot of dust in the air (at least on that day) so half my pics had dots all over them. Very frustrating!

[CruiseTorpedo]

No one can answer your question, I afraid. It depends on the situation: How clear is water, sea state and so on. For example Mediterrainian was really clear, so few meters would not make any difference. Also Nord Sea was pretty clear and I think so was actually the pacific too.
But basicly = more depth means more safe you are. Not only for visual sighting, but think also possiblity for collisions for example.

-RC-

That's interesting, starting to make sense now why the ships would have the longer scopes on them especially for waters that are generally clearer than in the atlantic. I guess the germans could get away with shorter scopes since it was harder to spot them in the dark waters while over in the pacific the boats need to be deeper to maintain surprise.

[cmdrk]

No one can answer your question, I afraid. It depends on the situation: How clear is water, sea state and so on. For example Mediterrainian was really clear, so few meters would not make any difference. Also Nord Sea was pretty clear and I think so was actually the pacific too.
But basicly = more depth means more safe you are. Not only for visual sighting, but think also possiblity for collisions for example.

-RC-
That's interesting, starting to make sense now why the ships would have the longer scopes on them especially for waters that are generally clearer than in the atlantic. I guess the germans could get away with shorter scopes since it was harder to spot them in the dark waters while over in the pacific the boats need to be deeper to maintain surprise.
Rosencrantz - I suspected there was no one depth. Thanks for the confirmation. Being located in the middle of North America, I'm lacking in salty knowledge.
It appears periscope height is based on each navy's tactical doctrine which plays into design specs.

[Ducimus]

In his memrio Hans Gruebeler stated the boat being visible from the air when above 35-40 meters. He emphasiesd being able to reach 35-40 meters depth to be able to make the trip to base when U505 was heavily damaged.

So i guess from there you can come up with a hypothetical "still visible from the air" depth. But not all oceans are the same in visiblity.


Aside from that, id rather have a US subs conning tower over a german Uboats conning tower because:

1.) Look outs are much higher up, therego can see farther.

2.) Boat's periscope depth is deeper, so my chances of broaching arent as high as uboats.

3.) Radar antenna's are much higher up. So i could flood the boat down to where just the top of the conning tower is breaking surface. In practice i think you could have used radar and passive sonar simultainiously by doing this. At least i recall reading bout this being done.


As for profile, im not sure its any larger then a late war uboats. Yes it reach's higher up, but you have to remember that, thats mainly the periscope shears and radar mast. Slim objects in their own right. Its not like a soldid blocky mass.

[Kruger]

Exactly. In addition to that, the South Pacific seas are well known not only for their clearness, but they are...I don't know the word in english. They glow in the dark when something moves on the surface.

I've never been in an american sub, but they sure were a lot more comfortable than their german sisters. They had showers, a nd lots of nice things.


U-Boats were practically steel cylinders packed with equipment...the humans were the last things that designers thought about. IF i know well, the XXI was the first german boat that had showers.

[Rilder]

US boats were larger and their periscope depth was deeper 65' (19.8m). The scopes were housed in the sheers above the conning tower which also served as lookout platforms, which enabled the lookouts to see farther.

You might want to check out the USS Cobia at Manitowoc, Wis., while you're at it.

75 Maritime Drive, Manitowoc, WI 54220
920-684-0218 or Toll free 1-866-724-2356
FAX 920-684-0219

My dad keeps suggesting we go there (I live in wisconsin) :p

[don1reed]

Wisconsin has a lot of WWII history, i.e., old "Camp McCoy" housed a lot of German POWs (U-Boats) also.

When I was a young Army lad at Fort McCoy, I had the honor of seeing their HQ telephone exchange. It was the entire guts from the BB USS Wisconsin. Nothing but oak switch boards and old fashion stepper switches...Brass....truely a thing of beauty...all gone today...new modern PBXs.

If you get the chance, look up Jerry Calenberg. He used to be the Sub Schools Cmdr over at the Pacific Thunder Campaign. He's one of the volunteers that keeps the USS Cobia alive and well.

All the best,

Don

[don1reed]

They glow in the dark when something moves on the surface.

Phosphorescence.

In a fog, running on fumes, Navy aircraft have been known to follow the glowing, phosphorescence trail back to the flight deck of their carriers to get home safe. (James A. Lovell, Jr. Apollo 13 Cdr)

During peacetime, a thing of beauty. Your ship's bow turns over the ocean like a plow revealing a hidden diamond mine at night.
During wartime, the neon sign is pointing at YOU!!@

[Sailor Steve]

Moder sonar uses a spinning antenna, similar to radar but much faster. I remember being on a bridge wing late one night and seeing the phosphorescent plankton light up in the beam. It swept completely around in one second or less, and looked like it went all the way to the horizon.

[NEON DEON]

On The Narwhal's (SS 167) third war patrol in July of 1942 they got a real shock.

"During the night steamed in area of Kamoi Dake. The water was remarkable for its phosphoresence. The phosphorescent wakes of two fish swimming directly at the ship gave the watch a real scare. The OOD thought the ship was about to be torpedoed sure."

:D

[Rose]

By the way, CruiseTorpedo, to answer one of your earlier questions: American "U-boats" are called submarines because... well, u-boat (short for unterseeboot) is the german name for a submarine. Thus it is logical that American boats would go by the English word for an "unterseeboot" -- a submarine. I just noticed no one had answered this question so I decided to step up :D.

[fullmetaledges]

On The Narwhal's (SS 167) third war patrol in July of 1942 they got a real shock.

"During the night steamed in area of Kamoi Dake. The water was remarkable for its phosphoresence. The phosphorescent wakes of two fish swimming directly at the ship gave the watch a real scare. The OOD thought the ship was about to be torpedoed sure."

:D

In "Silent Running" by Jim Calvert, He said that they were often worried about the phosphorescence on the bow of the boat giving away there position just cruising as well as attacks. As far as the lookouts being higher in the US conning tower they often cruised with the periscope up and a sailor manning it to give them a longer range.

[don1reed]

as an aside on the subject of "Phosphorescence". I just finished, Patrick O'Brian's #5 HMS SURPRISE, in it, Dr. Stephen Maturin, wins a bet that he could read a book by the light of the phosphorescent wake created by the SURPRISE.

[WilhelmSchulz.]

Well to anser the origanl question.....
The German Coning towers where no more that Peroscope stations, most of the "conning" was done from the control room.
While in U.S Fleet subs the conning tower has all the equment, Peri's, sonar, radar, helm, TDC. The only thing the contol room was used for was depth control(not realy but).

It all goes back to the Naval phlophies and artects.

[CruiseTorpedo]

Did the american subs make a habit of surface attacks at night against shipping or did they usually go to periscope depth to launch torpedos?

[fullmetaledges]

From what I have read later in the war some skippers prefered night surface attacks

[Threadfin]

It all goes back to the Naval phlophies and artects.
I'll have to take your word for that :)


US boats did indeed favor night surface attacks from mid-war onwards. Early in the war it was rare, as most peacetime skippers stuck to the interwar submerged sonar attack tactic. But as those cautious skippers were replaced by younger more aggressive commanders, they saw the advantage of the example set by the ubootwaffe. In addition, the US boats did not have an effective night scope, such as used by the Germans and British, making the surfaced attack more effective, not only in terms of positioning and evasion, with the higher surfaced speed, but also in visual identification and tracking.

Attacks in daylight were of course done by periscope in most cases.

[WilhelmSchulz.]

Yes the lack of a "Night Scope" Was due to the fact that the U.S Navy/Military Stuck rigidly to the Genevia Convetion, therefore adhering to the "International Cruser Rules". Wich Prohibatited suprise attacks on merchant shipping. Why this wasn't remaidied in later Balao and Trench Boats? Tration I guess. And maby economics.:know:

[WilhelmSchulz.]

No one can answer your question, I afraid. It depends on the situation: How clear is water, sea state and so on. For example Mediterrainian was really clear, so few meters would not make any difference. Also Nord Sea was pretty clear and I think so was actually the pacific too.
But basicly = more depth means more safe you are. Not only for visual sighting, but think also possiblity for collisions for example.

-RC-

That's interesting, starting to make sense now why the ships would have the longer scopes on them especially for waters that are generally clearer than in the atlantic. I guess the germans could get away with shorter scopes since it was harder to spot them in the dark waters while over in the pacific the boats need to be deeper to maintain surprise.

The USS Chicago at Perscope Depth. Being sighted submerged is a submariners worst nightmare.
http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/2011/usschicago1qv9.jpg

[Immacolata]

(Fleetsubs)for the purpose of screening for battleships under the Mahon Theory of Naval warfare....that theory came tumbling down when the first BB was sunk at Ford Island, Oaho, H.I. 7DEC41.

The Mahon what? A google turned up nothing about it.

[Godalmighty83]

http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/2011/usschicago1qv9.jpg
thats the reason why the royal navy has experiemented with paining there subs a bright blue.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/SHIP_SSN_HMS_Torbay_Steely_Blue_lg.jpg

[deacon211]

Hey guys,

Don't forget that RADAR have horizons as well as eyes, that's why they mount them on masts. The higher the RADAR sits above the horizon, the farther the RADAR can see. IIRC, the RADAR was a significant advantage the US Navy had over the Japanese. If the US sub could spot enemy ships on RADAR at distance, then the visual penalty incurred by having extra hardware above the horizon would be more than offset. :ping:

As for submerged visibility, I believe that the author of "My War in Boats" (which I purchased at the USS Pompanito museum in San Fran) stated that the sub would spend all day submerged as it was easily spotted even at periscope depth from the air. That water is very clear. I went diving in Thailand and you must have been able to see easily 50-100ft!

Deacon

[Torplexed]

(Fleetsubs)for the purpose of screening for battleships under the Mahon Theory of Naval warfare....that theory came tumbling down when the first BB was sunk at Ford Island, Oaho, H.I. 7DEC41.
The Mahon what? A google turned up nothing about it.

I think he meant Mahan. Alfred Thayer Mahan.

[don1reed]

...sorry for the typo...:oops:

tnx, Torp:up:

[Torplexed]

No prob. Was always a Mahan Fan. :cool:

[Ducimus]

It all goes back to the Naval phlophies and artects.
I'll have to take your word for that :)



From my understanding, US submarines were infact designed around an entirely different philophy, and sinking merchant shipping wasn't it. They were designed to run with the fleet. Hence the term, "Fleet boat". If you look at some of the nonclamture (number of engines, surface speed and endurance) of the Gato, it almost spells out, "keeping up with the fleet".

Breaking them off from the fleet and using them against merchants was an afterthought.

[fullmetaledges]

The "fleet" submarines were how the "big gun battlehip" navu viewed the submarine while a few officers supported the subs as merchant killers. Since the fleet type boat has a high surface speed with extreamly long range it just happened to be a very good merchant killer.

[WilhelmSchulz.]

It all goes back to the Naval phlophies and artects.
I'll have to take your word for that :)



From my understanding, US submarines were infact designed around an entirely different philophy, and sinking merchant shipping wasn't it. They were designed to run with the fleet. Hence the term, "Fleet boat". If you look at some of the nonclamture (number of engines, surface speed and endurance) of the Gato, it almost spells out, "keeping up with the fleet".

Breaking them off from the fleet and using them against merchants was an afterthought.
Thats because the Geniva Rules. Merchant ships where off limits but subs where greatly efective. However the Fleet was bearly a pipe dream the Battle Fleets at the time moved too fast for the subs to keep up. It wasent till the advent of nuclear and the "Body of Revloution Hull"(AKA Teardrop) (Skipjack Class SSN) was the fleet sub possible, though only in a ASW role.

However during the attacks on the Philpines and other islands subs where stations streiglce to spot and attack incoming enemy fleets. :know:

[Steeltrap]

In their later designs, USA subs featured 'cut down' towers to lower the visibility to enemies.

These were retrofitted to existing boats as part of re-fits/maintenance. For example, the USS Wahoo had hers cut down from the original, pre-war fleet boat config. prior to her 6th patrol (I think it was her 6th). There's a pic of her leaving Midway Island in Dick O'Kane's book "Wahoo".

'Mush' Morton was the first of the USA sub skippers to show what could be achieved with aggressive, realistic use of the fleet boats' capabilities. He replaced the pre-war skipper of the Wahoo following his PCO patrol, sailing as skipper from Brisbane Australia. He used surface, night attacks - the lack of the 'night' scope was largely due to the fact that the designers felt that the larger 'head' of the scope (needed to allow a capture of more light vs. day scope) made the scope too visible.....pre-war USA sub doctrines bred a real phobia about having your scope spotted into the skippers.

Interesting stuff.

[WilhelmSchulz.]

the lack of the 'night' scope was largely due to the fact that the designers felt that the larger 'head' of the scope (needed to allow a capture of more light vs. day scope) made the scope too visible.....pre-war USA sub doctrines bred a real phobia about having your scope spotted into the skippers.

Interesting stuff.

http://http://www.fleetsubmarine.com/periscope.html

In order for a submerged submarine to sink an enemy ship, some means of aiming the torpedoes was required. Different navies evolved different methodologies. During the inter-war period, U.S. doctrine favored the use of Sonar for determining target range, bearing, and angle. It was believed that advances in detection and anti-submarine weapons had made it suicidal to expose a periscope in daylight. To this end, the U.S. Navy installed highly advanced Sonar and hydrophone suites in their fleet submarines, along with Torpedo Data Computers that remained significantly more advanced than anything used in any other navy until well after the war had ended.
In fact, Sonar attacks while submerged turned out to be remarkably ineffective under actual wartime conditions. Falling into one of the more common military fallacies, the U.S. Navy developed a theory, then saw test results through the lens of that theory. Any results that seemed to back up the theory were eagerly embraced, while results that failed to back up the theory were put down to "operator error." This tendency continued well into the war, to the degree that a number of commanders were relieved for "lack of agression" when the actually problem was that the torpedoes they were firing didn't work. (The Bureau of Ordinance said that the torpedoes did work, and since they couldn't possibly be wrong about that, it had to be the commanders.)

:know:

[goose814]

I've been to the USS Cod over a dozen times over the years. I've gotten to see many changes and improvemnets. For instance, when I first went, the crews quarters was empty and used as a display room. Now it's been fully equiped with bunks and other gear. Never get tired of going. I would live on her if given the chance. Anyway, one of the best things I like about her is that she hasn't been altered to allow for easier access. You've got to go through the same hatches that the crew did. Access to the conning tower isn't permitted, unfortunately, but your allowed to climb partway up the ladder and poke your head in to look around at least. I also like the fact that you can roam free at your leisure and spend as much time as you want onboard. On some of the other subs I've been on there was a guide who you had to stay with. I hate that. Never enough time to look things over. Anyway, I highly recommend seeing her. You won't be disappointed.

Gus

[WilhelmSchulz.]

I've been to the USS Cod over a dozen times over the years. I've gotten to see many changes and improvemnets. For instance, when I first went, the crews quarters was empty and used as a display room. Now it's been fully equiped with bunks and other gear. Never get tired of going. I would live on her if given the chance. Anyway, one of the best things I like about her is that she hasn't been altered to allow for easier access. You've got to go through the same hatches that the crew did. Access to the conning tower isn't permitted, unfortunately, but your allowed to climb partway up the ladder and poke your head in to look around at least. I also like the fact that you can roam free at your leisure and spend as much time as you want onboard. On some of the other subs I've been on there was a guide who you had to stay with. I hate that. Never enough time to look things over. Anyway, I highly recommend seeing her. You won't be disappointed.

Gus
Where is the old gal?

[The WosMan]

The boat is located in Cleveland, Ohio off of N. Marginal right next to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. I was actually there yesterday (not my first time) with a family friend that was visiting who likes military history. I took some pictures so enjoy:

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/219/boatwideri6.jpg
Here is the boat as she floats on the water

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/1534/conningtowerne5.jpg
Here is the conning tower.....note all the flags on her including a count for the Japanese Junks she sunk (HA HA!) I wonder what she used on them. The AA guns were probably enough.

http://img321.imageshack.us/img321/2442/bowlu1.jpg
Bow shot looking down the ship

http://img321.imageshack.us/img321/8168/deckgunwa0.jpg My dad and I taking aim at Burke Lakefront Airport.

http://img321.imageshack.us/img321/6233/aagunfb4.jpg
AA Gun.......you can't go up there though :down:

http://img321.imageshack.us/img321/5903/foretorpedoroomec5.jpg
You start off here in the fore torpedo room

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/7881/torpedotubeindicatorow0.jpg
Torpedo 2 and 5 ready.

http://img321.imageshack.us/img321/9320/officerquartersvp9.jpg
Here is one of the officers quarters (I think the skippers)

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/9818/officersmesslb4.jpg
The officer's mess (fine dining at it's best)

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/7039/radioek9.jpg
Radio room

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/1826/crewmessdr1.jpg
Crew's mess......very spacious I think

[The WosMan]

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/9021/trimsr5.jpg
We all know this one! Very important for underwater too.

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/4117/ballastgaugesej0.jpg
Here are the ballast controls

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/4922/tdcbj7.jpg
I think this was the TDC or a firing control of some type...had all kinds of switches for gyro angles and such.

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/3042/dieselhb6.jpg
Here is one of the diesel engines.......huge.......still capable of operation too! The engines were built in Cleveland, Ohio too.

http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/2044/electricengineroomfl3.jpg
Here are the electric engine controls

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/3300/batteryhh2.jpg

Battery motor control and electric gauges

http://img321.imageshack.us/img321/7196/electricroomclutchesre0.jpg
Here are the clutches/controls for operating the electric engines.

All and all very cool place to visit. I hope they pay close attention when they make SHIV and maybe go to this boat for ideas on how to do a Gato right. One glaring thing to me on the boat is that while to some people the boat is cramped and small......the boats were one heck of a lot bigger than the german uboats and it really shows. US fleet subs were the Ritz Carlton while the Germans stayed at the Motel 6.

[Driftwood]

Great pics Wosman! Thanks for putting them up! Can't wait for SHIV or that latest Gato model by Revell! The 3-4' one!

[WilhelmSchulz.]

http://img321.imageshack.us/img321/8168/deckgunwa0.jpg

Wich one is you?

[don1reed]

re: TDC

I believe that the USS Pampanito is the only remaining boat that still has an operating TDC (located in the con)

see tour:

http://www.maritime.org/tour/tctvr.htm

[Safe-Keeper]

Here is the conning tower.....note all the flags on her including a count for the Japanese Junks she sunk (HA HA!) I wonder what she used on them. The AA guns were probably enough.Somebody had better get a better idea of what the Jap navy consisted of before taking on Silent Hunter IV (just teasing):p.

[DeepSix]

From my understanding, US submarines were infact designed around an entirely different philophy, and sinking merchant shipping wasn't it. They were designed to run with the fleet. Hence the term, "Fleet boat". If you look at some of the nonclamture (number of engines, surface speed and endurance) of the Gato, it almost spells out, "keeping up with the fleet".

Breaking them off from the fleet and using them against merchants was an afterthought.

Yeah, pretty much. Thus the reference to Mahan above. The predominant theory was that naval supremacy was secured by a "fleet in being." When two of these were brought together for a fight, it was to be a decisive battle. This is what killed Japan - despite their brilliant air power victory at Pearl Harbor. They fought all of the war with the idea of luring the American navy to the "decisive battle."

Anyway, with subs, they really spent their early development being thought of as coastal defense boats - sort of like mobile shore batteries. The early attempts at "fleet boats" were boats intended to keep up with and support the fleet. I think the 'S' boats fall into that category. At any rate, the S-boats didn't work as far as keeping up with the fleet went, so subs acquired a little bit more operational independence. A little later (IIRC in the 30s), some strategists (I think Lockwood was one of them, maybe Ralph Christie also) favored using the sub as a long range scout. It would have to have long range and stay out for about 60 days, but not necessarily the top speed required to follow the fleet "in formation" - it would instead lie off enemy ports and watch and report enemy naval moves. In the event the "decisive battle" seemed to be brewing, it would attempt to intercept and sink the fleet elements coming out of the port it was watching.

[cmdrk]

Oh by the way - they're not conning towers - they are 'Fairwaters' ;)

Where did that term come from? :hmm:

[don1reed]

...my guess is you'd put too fine a point on it to call it a "Conning Tower Fairwater".

Over the years the lexicon of nautical expression has reduced the term to just simply, Conning tower, or Conn. In nautical expression and lingo the captain would not hand over the, "Fairwater" to the watch officer, would he? Of course not, he hands off the, "Conn", and every salty "Richard" knows what the captain's talking about, too, I'll wager.

If one "googles" either term...guess which one wins as being related to submarines the most?

[cmdrk]

...my guess is you'd put too fine a point on it to call it a "Conning Tower Fairwater".

I was just throwing out the term. It is used often in the below book.
'Stern, Robert C. U.S. Subs in Action. Squadron/Signal Publications, 1979.'

So, I thought it might be good to bring up. Today 'conn' is the word to use. Back 60 years ago, the terminology was different.

Also when SH4 comes out, call me Skipper and not Kaleun.:up:

Edit:
Found this info on the net. Clears a few points up for me:
"The fairwater is a structure above the main hull of a submarine (http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=submarine) that serves to streamline and protect the conning tower (http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=conning%20tower). If the submarine does not have a conning tower, the structure is known as the sail (http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=sail) (US) or fin (http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=fin) (UK). On top of the fairwater is the bridge (http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=bridge) which is only used when the submarine is surfaced.

The terms conning tower (http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=conning%20tower), fairwater (http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=fairwater), and sail (http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=sail) are often (incorrectly) used interchangeably."

[don1reed]

The terms conning tower (http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=conning%20tower), fairwater (http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=fairwater), and sail (http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=sail) are often (incorrectly) used interchangeably."

I take it then, you intend to correct a century of misused terms :lol:

...good luck..

seriously, Cmdrk, call it what you like, although more will understand your meaning if you call it conning tower.

[WilhelmSchulz.]

Fairwater it the term used for the conning tower now. Since all it has it the brige.

[Driftwood]

The terms conning tower (http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=conning%20tower), fairwater (http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=fairwater), and sail (http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=sail) are often (incorrectly) used interchangeably."

I take it then, you intend to correct a century of misused terms :lol:

...good luck..

seriously, Cmdrk, call it what you like, although more will understand your meaning if you call it conning tower.

My guess is that anyone who frequents these boards and is either a real or virtual bubblehead knows exactly what any of those terms refers to. Here's a trivia question for the group. Is the term "Con" short for Conning Tower or Control Room?:D

[don1reed]

Whoever has the "Conn" is the one giving commands, as per the American Merchant Seaman's Manual chap.9-12 and Capt. Jack Aubrey, per Patrick O'Brian.

...as far as your question, I believe the answer is, yes. :lol:

[Sailor Steve]

This is the best of many I looked at.


http://www.valoratsea.com/glossary.htm

Conn - The authority directing the steersman, or the act of directing and thus maneuvering the ship.

Conning Tower - The small, heavily armored horizontal hull directly above the control room and below the bridge. Houses the normal steering stand, torpedo data computer (TDC), firing panel, surface search radar, periscopes, sound receivers (except sonic JP), fathometer, navigational plot, and receivers from the target bearing transmitters (TBT); in essence. the heart of both the ship and the torpedo fire control.

[cmdrk]

The terms conning tower (http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=conning%20tower), fairwater (http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=fairwater), and sail (http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=sail) are often (incorrectly) used interchangeably."
I take it then, you intend to correct a century of misused terms :lol:

...good luck..

seriously, Cmdrk, call it what you like, although more will understand your meaning if you call it conning tower.
My guess is that anyone who frequents these boards and is either a real or virtual bubblehead knows exactly what any of those terms refers to. Here's a trivia question for the group. Is the term "Con" short for Conning Tower or Control Room?:D

Honestly folks, I'm not trying to change anything. I just threw out the term 'fairwater' because I haven't seen it on the boards. A lot of people may know it - some may not.
You all did see the wink and grin with my post didn't you. ;)
I prefer conning tower myself. But hmm:hmm:, maybe I'll start calling it a fin.:D

[Threadfin]

A conning tower and a fairwater are not the same thing. The conning tower is wrapped in the fairwater. The fairwater is simply the metal that streamlines the conning tower. Take away the fairwater and you still have the tubular conning tower section.

A US fleet boat is essentially two tubes, a smaller one (the conning tower) laid upon a larger one (the pressure hull) The fairwater is what gives the conning tower a non-cylindrical appearance.

[goose814]

I believe that the USS Pampanito is the only remaining boat that still has an operating TDC (located in the con)


Actually, according to the USS Cod's website:

Cod's Mark IV Torpedo Data Computer has been restored to full operation.


Also, here's a cool photo:
http://fleetsubmarine.com/graphics/5-inch_Boom.jpg

Firing Cod's 5"/25 deck gun as the submarine answers the salutes, on behalf of the city, of a dozen tall ships during a mass visit to Cleveland in July 2006.



Gus

[Razman23]

Firing Cod's 5"/25 deck gun as the submarine answers the salutes, on behalf of the city, of a dozen tall ships during a mass visit to Cleveland in July 2006.


Resulting in the direct hit and sinking of one tall ship. :rotfl:

[Steeltrap]

Not exactly using 'flashless' powder, are they??

:rotfl: :rotfl:

[ssbn627g]

I live in Cleveland, so I can visit the Cod anytime.

Cool. If you go pls make good pictures of the logos on her sail. There is a whole Dutch story behind some of those and I would love some additional pictures of it.

I started working aboard the Cod when I was in jr. High giving tours, etc... I worked for one of her original Crew members who made 5 of her 7 war patrols. She is the reason I went into submarines after high school.... enough from me.... Am looking for a good picture of the side of the conning tower. There is a Champagne glass with an olive with O-19 Written underneath. On Cod's 7th patrol, she came upon the Dutch submarine O-19 which had run aground on a reef. Cod spent 2 days trying to get O-19 off the reef. When all atempts failed, it was decided to destroy O-19. after the crew was aboard Cod, she fired her deck gun and i think 2 torpedoes into O-19 to try to destroy her. The hulk of the O-19 still sits on the reef. The champagne glass is for the party that was thown for Cod by O-19's crew upon her return from patrol. As my former mentor used to say "It was one hell of a party, because it cause the war to end the next day!"

[ssbn627g]

info and pics.

www.dutchsubmarines.com (http://www.dutchsubmarines.com) On the left side scroll dow to WWII and click. Scroll down to the Fatal patrol of O-19

[Gino]

Being a 'crew-member' of USS Cod, I'm delighted to hear the nice words about the boat.
She really is a beauty, and indeed a very fine example of a Gato class boat as you can find today. Definitely worth a visit, when you're in the neighbourhood.

1) The TDC (Mark IV, Mod I) works. One of the reasons why the conning tower is off-limits.
2) The O19 crew was rescued during the seventh patrol. Last two years we have been commemorating the event with a re-enactment. (With me a skipper of the O19 :) ) By the way, the whole rescue was filmed on colorfilm (ISO6) and is preserved in a reasonably good state, and is quite impressive.
3) Labor day weekend, we have re-enactors during the weekend (Cleveland Airshow) on the Cod. I don't know who is all coming, but last year we had 'British", 'Germans' and 'Americans' together.
4) For firing the gun...we use oxygen and acetylene. The 'BANG' is is very loud (as expected) and reportedly makes car alarms go off :lol:

groetjes,

Gino (the Dutch guy)
USS Cod

[joea]

1) The TDC (Mark IV, Mod I) works. One of the reasons why the conning tower is off-limits.

groetjes,

Gino (the Dutch guy)
USS Cod

Wow, ummm is the TDC still top secret or something?

[tycho102]

cmdr wrote:

Maybe the periscope height/depth has something to do with visibility from the air.
How much water does it take to hide a sub from AC?
It depends on the situation: How clear is water, sea state and so on. For example Mediterrainian was really clear, so few meters would not make any difference. Also Nord Sea was pretty clear and I think so was actually the pacific too.
But basicly = more depth means more safe you are. Not only for visual sighting, but think also possiblity for collisions for example.

-RC-

Quite a bit depends on the ocean depth. Anything over 40m, and you're not going to be visible.

[Gino]

The TDC is not top-secret, but with tourist "ge-finger-poken" it will probably not survive this century. Furthermore, the conning tower is off-limits because of insurance issues (small room, no control on amount of people etc>0

So the solution of going up the ladder halfway, and look around from there is currently the best.

groetjes,

Gino
USS Cod

[Hylander_1314]

Original Question, Why don't American subs have German like conning towers?

Because they were designed by American engineers, and every country at that time had their own ideas about subs, aircraft carriers, tanks and how they are to be used, airplanes, etc, etc, etc.

A lot of the things we take for granted in military equiptment these days were in their infancy then, or the next step up from there. Today we have the advantage of hindsight, and can adjust or promote or delete things that worked, or didn't.

A good comparison, is the aircraft carrier. U.S. built carriers had teak decks, the British carriers in WWII had armoured steel decks. Kamikazes weren't as effective against the British carriers, nor bombs either.

Also, if your military industry is setup to operate a certain way, then you don't want to change too many things that will potentially slow or stop production. Sometimes the need for materials outweighs tecnical advancement.

[Torgen]

IIRC, the US sub skippers loudly and constantly complained about the large silouette (sp) of the subs, saying that it made them an unnecessarily large target on the surface.

You never heard anyone complain about the foresight to add air conditioning, though! :D

[d@rk51d3]

Original Question, Why don't American subs have German like conning towers?

Because they were designed by American engineers, and every country at that time had their own ideas about subs, aircraft carriers, tanks and how they are to be used, airplanes, etc, etc, etc.


My sentiments exactly. German U-Boats were built for a single purpose - seek and destroy with maximum efficiency. Other nations settled more for comfort, or a mixture of both. Maybe having the scope up a bit left a little more elbow room?

[John Pancoast]

Or put another way..........why don't German subs have American sub conning towers ? ;)

[CruiseTorpedo]

Wow thanks for all the great responses! I'm half way through the book called unrestricted warfare which has a lot of stuff about the wahoo in it. I still dont know much about subs, I didnt even think they were called subs for a while (since they have to recharge their batteries and cant stay submerged entire time). It definitely makes sense now that they would want the way longer periscopes on the subs that ran around in the pacific. I can see how that would be overkill in the atlantic and it's why I didnt quite understand. I've also never seen the pacific ocean so I didnt know about the phosphorus stuff or have any clue it was clearer than the atlantic! LOL The book unrestricted warfare is really an eye opener for someone like me that knows a little bit about the uboats and the war they faught but nothing about the american subs. And not to mention all the great info I've learned from the posts on here! Thanks again guys!

Lookin forward to SH4!!!

[John Pancoast]

Wow thanks for all the great responses! I'm half way through the book called unrestricted warfare which has a lot of stuff about the wahoo in it. I still dont know much about subs, I didnt even think they were called subs for a while (since they have to recharge their batteries and cant stay submerged entire time). It definitely makes sense now that they would want the way longer periscopes on the subs that ran around in the pacific. I can see how that would be overkill in the atlantic and it's why I didnt quite understand. I've also never seen the pacific ocean so I didnt know about the phosphorus stuff or have any clue it was clearer than the atlantic! LOL The book unrestricted warfare is really an eye opener for someone like me that knows a little bit about the uboats and the war they faught but nothing about the american subs. And not to mention all the great info I've learned from the posts on here! Thanks again guys!

Lookin forward to SH4!!!

Fwiw, there was/is phospherescence in the Atlantic too. Saw a video clip with some u-boat skipper (Kretschmer maybe ?) where they mentioned it.

[CruiseTorpedo]

That's cool, does phosphorus not show as badly in the Atlantic and that's why it's such a big deal in the pacific and hardly mentioned in the uboat books? I've read two uboat books and I dont recall either one saying anything about that. They were more concerned with leaving trails of oil or fuel.

[John Pancoast]

That's cool, does phosphorus not show as badly in the Atlantic and that's why it's such a big deal in the pacific and hardly mentioned in the uboat books? I've read two uboat books and I dont recall either one saying anything about that. They were more concerned with leaving trails of oil or fuel.

Don't know the answer to that question. Maybe since the water is a different, lighter color in the Pacific generally, it shows up more/more intensely than in the Atlantic, or the cause of it (animal life ?) is more prevelent in the Pacific ?

Maybe it was a Topp interview I'm thinking of.....damn, wish I could remember.

[Ghostieguide]

Can some one fill me in on american uboats, were they even called uboats or submarines?

A famous quote from Winston Churchill

Enemy submarines are to be called "U-boats." The term "submarine" is to be reserved for Allied underwater vessels. U-boats are those dastardly villains who sink our ships, while submarines are those gallant and noble craft which sink theirs. --Winston Churchill :hmm: (http://encyclopedia.kids.net.au/page/wi/Winston_Churchill)

[John Pancoast]

[quote=CruiseTorpedo] Can some one fill me in on american uboats, were they even called uboats or submarines?

Well, since the "U" in "u-boat" stood for a German word, I think it's safe to say that American boats weren't called "u-boats." :)

[Sailor Steve]

'Unterseeboot' is the German word for submarine, or vice-versa if you prefer. Unterseeboot literally means under-sea-boat, which happens to be the exact meaning of sub-marine boat.

I don't know what the Japanese word is, but I'm pretty sure it isn't 'U-boat' or 'submarine'.

[simsurfer]

I was there last weekend for the air show. That is an amazing boat, in fact the best I have ever been on because of the fact that is hasnt been modded in any way.

http://i.pbase.com/o4/04/192704/1/66500207.x208KimA.SubIMA_7370.jpg

http://i.pbase.com/o4/04/192704/1/66500214.fzCD3MZE.SubIMA_7375.jpg

http://i.pbase.com/o4/04/192704/1/66500196.0JPDv8We.SubIMA_7342.jpg

The Rest:

http://www.pbase.com/pixelpusher2/cod&page=all

Be sure to check out the Pano1 image, last image, page 2

[John Pancoast]

I was there last weekend for the air show. That is an amazing boat, in fact the best I have ever been on because of the fact that is hasnt been modded in any way.


The Rest:

http://www.pbase.com/pixelpusher2/cod&page=all

Be sure to check out the Pano1 image, last image, page 2

I hope that wasn't a re-enactor with all the 21st century fashion finger rings :)

Nice photos !

[simsurfer]

I was there last weekend for the air show. That is an amazing boat, in fact the best I have ever been on because of the fact that is hasnt been modded in any way.


The Rest:

http://www.pbase.com/pixelpusher2/cod&page=all

Be sure to check out the Pano1 image, last image, page 2
I hope that wasn't a re-enactor with all the 21st century fashion finger rings :)

Nice photos !

She was also wearing a skirt :-(
Nothing I could do though :)

[monkee]

About visibility from aircraft.
Question to Japanese sub commander:

[Question] At what depth does he think his submarine was visible to aircraft?
(a) In moderate sea?
(b) In China Sea?
(c) In clear, calm water?

[Answer] In the China Sea, 25 meters, keel depth. Around the Marshals in calm sea, 35 meters.

[Question] How far could he be seen by a surface ship
(a) Clear starlight night?
(b) Clear moonlight night?

[Answer] With standard binoculars he could be seen at 10,000 meters by moonlight and at 5,000 meters by starlight.

[Question] How far could be seen CA [cruiser], BB [battleship], DD [destroyer] on a
(a) Clear starlight night?
(b) Clear moonlight night?

[Answer] With standard binoculars --
Moonlight Starlight
CA 12,000 6,000
BB 15,000 7,500
DD 10,000 5,000

[Sawdust]

[quote=CruiseTorpedo] Can some one fill me in on american uboats, were they even called uboats or submarines? Well, since the "U" in "u-boat" stood for a German word, I think it's safe to say that American boats weren't called "u-boats." :)Here is a quote from Winston Churchill on the subject:
Enemy submarines are to be called "U-boats." The term "submarine" is to be reserved for Allied underwater vessels. U-boats are those dastardly villains who sink our ships, while submarines are those gallant and noble craft which sink theirs. --Winston Churchill (http://encyclopedia.kids.net.au/page/wi/Winston_Churchill)

[Sawdust]

(Fleetsubs)for the purpose of screening for battleships under the Mahon Theory of Naval warfare....that theory came tumbling down when the first BB was sunk at Ford Island, Oaho, H.I. 7DEC41. The Mahon what? A google turned up nothing about it.I think he meant Mahan. Alfred Thayer Mahan.You can get some free (public-domain) electronic copies of naval books by Mahan here: http://manybooks.net/authors/mahana.html

[Capt. D]

Touching base to the original question on this thread "Why don't American subs have a German like conning tower?

It may be a size difference to the actual conning tower which of course dictated the size of the fairweather surrounding the tower and the bridge configuration, along with the length of our scopes vs U-Boats - as our periscope depth was at 65 ft.

But take a look at the U-505's conning tower at her web site in the virtual tour:

http://www.msichicago.org/exhibit/U505/index.html

then go to the USS Cod site:

http://www.usscod.org/ (http://www.usscod.org/)

or the USS Pampanito site:

http://www.maritime.org/pamphome.htm

and take their virtual tours of the conning towers. There is a huge difference between the equipment inside the German tower vs the US towers. Along with at least 7-10 men in the tower during the attack the US boats had a larger tower hence more fairweather/bridge/periscope shears areas. Our shears not only housed the scopes but we had lookout stands there for better visability and our radar (SJ and SD) standards were located there also. Different set up totally.

Happy Hunting :ping:

[Kruger]

The interior of USS Cod is astonishing. Really...it's a huge difference...it's alot more comfortable that a U-Boot.


I've seen the pictures, it's a magnificent boat...really. I'm sure that today, it would still make a beautiful sailing vessel, and it would be able to operate (even by today's sub standards) wuth success. After all...diese-electric subs have some advantages over the nuke ones.


I look forward to skippering such beauty in SH4.

[Deamon]

Why would they do this? What's the benefit?
Becose the longer the periscope is the higher is the sea state in that you can still operate savely at PD :)

A logical consiquence for boats that are made for oceanic operations. In the ocean the waves are much higher, you know ?

What a spoiler when you cannot attack a target becose the sea is to heavy.

Deamon

[AVGWarhawk]

If you are in Baltimore. Check out the Torsk.

http://www.hnsa.org/ships/torsk.htm

She did not have the painted teeth during the war but this is how she looks today. She is still afloat and is a blast to explore inside. She sunk the last ship by the Navy during WWII.

[Respenus]

I know this is OT, but lets face it. U-Boats had style :yep:

Submarines are just damn ugly with their conning tower :dead:

[Sailor Steve]

Fwiw, there was/is phospherescence in the Atlantic too. Saw a video clip with some u-boat skipper (Kretschmer maybe ?) where they mentioned it.
I just noticed this. I've read the account of the sinking of U-47, and one of the British destroyermen said that apparently they had damaged one of the boat's propellors, and they could hear odd noises on the hydrophones, and he said that they could see the phosphorescence from the damaged prop deep down in the water.

[Deamon]

I just noticed this. I've read the account of the sinking of U-47, and one of the British destroyermen said that apparently they had damaged one of the boat's propellors, and they could hear odd noises on the hydrophones, and he said that they could see the phosphorescence from the damaged prop deep down in the water.
Didn't he turned that damaged prop off ?

[John Pancoast]

Fwiw, there was/is phospherescence in the Atlantic too. Saw a video clip with some u-boat skipper (Kretschmer maybe ?) where they mentioned it.
I just noticed this. I've read the account of the sinking of U-47, and one of the British destroyermen said that apparently they had damaged one of the boat's propellors, and they could hear odd noises on the hydrophones, and he said that they could see the phosphorescence from the damaged prop deep down in the water.

In reading Blair's first volume, there's several skippers who noted it also to be common off the coast of Florida during Drumbeat, etc. too.

[Sailor Steve]

I just noticed this. I've read the account of the sinking of U-47, and one of the British destroyermen said that apparently they had damaged one of the boat's propellors, and they could hear odd noises on the hydrophones, and he said that they could see the phosphorescence from the damaged prop deep down in the water.
Didn't he turned that damaged prop off ?
Obviously not. Maybe he was desperate to get as deep as possible as quickly as possible. I'll try to get the full quote tomorrow.

[Sailor Steve]

Got it!

From the log of HMS Wolverine, Lt. Commander Jim Rowland (I've done a lot of shortening and paraphrasing for the sake of time and space):

0023: Smoke was seen resembling diesel exhaust and hydrophone effect was reported on the same bearing a moment later. Course altered and speed increased to 18 knots.

0026: Wake sighted and Wolverine increased to 22 knots.

0029: U-boat spotted, "Full Speed Ahead" ordered. Fellow escort fired starshell, U-boat dived.

0044: U-boat detected with ASDIC, depth-charge attack started. Attack lasted more than an hour.

0320: Searchlight revealed oil slick in water.

0400: Hydrophones detected loud propellor noises. Assumed U-boat had surfaced and making high speed. Large oil track spotted, 50 feet wide.

0514: Large rumbling noises heard; assumed depth charge had knocked propellor out of alignment.

0519: U-boat sighted, increased to full speed ordered "Stand by to ram!"

0522: U-boat submerged. Considerable cavitation could be seen from her propellors.

Now phosphorescence seen around submarine, about 50 feet down. "A rush of bubbles was creating a patch of disturbed water and leading out of it was a V-shaped track, about 20 yards in length. Having served some six years in submarines it is my firm conviction that the latter was caused by air escaping from the bow buoyancy vent and that I could see the bubbles underwater near the point of emission. The large patch gave me the impression of air from the main ballast vents with possibly some phosphorescence around the conning tower".

10 depth charges were dropped around the area of the visible bubbles.

0543: Large explosion shattered the surface. An orange light could be seen under the water, lasting 10 seconds.


Thus it seems that Prien was using both engines in a desparate attempt to escape, and did not submerge until the destroyer was very close.