I am in awe!
 

Wow! The Holy Grail of submarine books: the one I'd most like to find and read. It seems to me that Admiral Gallery also talks about the incident. Time for me to do some reading to see what his take on it was.

One point about the stealth of the Type XXI. It occurs to me that a torpedoing is simply an extreme detection of a submarine's position. Assuming he is undiscovered before that point, his location is known pretty precisely now. Time to draw the maximum range circle and the hunt begins. Did they have any primitive sonarbuoys in WWII? More reason to submerge into Gallery's book. Take her deep!

>>Did they have any primitive sonarbuoys in WWII?

I *think* so, im not sure. I know they had airdropped homing torpedo's though.

Yes, in the later part of the war planes did drop sonar bouy. FIDO did the rest. No matter how you cut it, it was a losing situation in the last year of the war.

Japan, as an island nation, shares similar vulnerabilities with the United Kingdom. The US Submarine campaign in the Pacific and the German in the Atlantic both had the same overall aim: The isolation of the enemy nation by the destruction of it's merchant shipping.

Very good point and observation!

Allied ships production> high
japanese merchant production >low

Allied Asw/sonar development/radar> high
Axis asw /radar>low

And sume to the balance the breaking of the enigma code, and the intensive use of planes equiped with radar .

the result is the difference in submarines losses and finally the war

Yes, but with one great difference: The USN campaign was far more centered on the cutting of supply lines to the offensive Japanese ground and air forces spread throughout the Pacific, where as the British were clearly on the defensive in the Atlantic. Starving out the Japanese at home was not really critical until later in the war. In this case, the oft used ladder metaphor is much more applicable to the Pacific, as the geographic reality was that Donitz did not have to contend with a sprawling defensive front. The European war, in that regard, was far more compact than the Pacific, making comparisons difficult at best.

Monkey wrench goes here!
 

But Japan and Britain were utterly different in one regard: Japan stood on its own. Stopping supplies to Japan shut down their industrial capacity and won the war.

Britain, however, received its supplies from the United States on American ships. Blockading Britain did not reduce American industrial capacity at all! And limiting British industial capacity depended on sinking American merchies, resulting in a lost war for Germany. That is why submarines were the weapon that lost WWII for the Germans. As such, they were largely just wasted resources which could have been used to actually win the war. (Am I a heretic or what???:up: U-96's gotta jump on that one!)

American subs in the Pacific were the instruments of Allied victory. German subs in the Atlantic were a primary cause of German defeat. Is that different enough for you?:lol:

Level-headed strategy to win WWII for Germany (no charge, I'm of German heritage and there aren't any WWII Germans who can use it anyway): First, If America joins the war, Germany loses. Subs are out except for coastal defense. Second, Britain, once evicted from the continent is merely isolated and ignored. Resources that would have been used to build at least half the subs actually built in WWII are diverted to fighter, bomber, tank and AA gun production. Russia is not attacked until after the British accept the status quo of a harmless Germany owning the continent. Make a treaty with Britain and only THEN (if it blows Hitler's skirt up) attack Russia. Kiss all those Russkies goodbye, kill Stalin and his buddies. Declare victory and drink altogether too much Lowenbrau.

But a Hitler smart enough to do that would have been smart enough not to kill 6 million Jews and other assorted scapegoats. He would have used them as prime assets to prosecute the war, giving him an important advantage he chose to forego. In a real sense, his insanity destroyed any chance. His was a truly insane suicidal impulse from the first shot, and part of him just must have known it. There was no sense, and no advantage for the German people in anything he did. It is even doubtful whether Japan would have risked war if the US, Britain and the Dutch were not distracted in Europe.

I have gored enough oxen for one day! A heretic I will always be and a conventional thinker never be.:arrgh!:

Can somone help me out?
 

ive been playing sh4 awile now and one day when i loaded the game all the sub models are popoise class. i no a balao and a gar look nothing like one. Any ideas?:-? :doh: :huh:

The reasons the USN and Kriegsmarine both utilized unrestricted submarine warfare against enemy merchant shipping might have been different, but they still both conducted a submarine interdiction campaign against their respective enemy, with the aim of destroying his maritime supply capability.

Hence, the two campaigns are quite comparable. Sure, there are plenty of differences in detail. That's why it's educational to compare them.:D

Interesting thread, guys. :up:

Yup, comparable. Submarine stragegy was appropriate vs Japan and inappropriate to the point that it lost the war for the Germans. That was all a command decision above the level of Donitz and the whole U-Boat service. A stupid command decision.:down: (I just contradicted myself, didn't I? Think I just let Donitz off the hook!:up:)

Here's a picture of the crew of the S-44 circa August 1942. Those guys look like they'd be at home in the Kriegsmarine. :D

http://www.neptoonsorbit.com/BeardedAmericanSailors.jpg

Some of those guys look like they'd fit in perfectly on a Civil-War era ship! :p

Yeah...you're right. They look like they would be quite at home languishing on the deck of the USS Monitor in 1862.:)

Here's one more from the galley of the USS Bullhead showing quite a mix. At least you're spared shirtless guys playing SH4.

http://www.neptoonsorbit.com/MessRoom.jpg