It was done quite often on the surface, but as you surmised, the more the boat moved the harder it was to load the fish. A rope and pulley system was used to pull the weapon into the tube. It was 100% muscle powered and with a weapon that weighed in at 3000 lbs a lot of Armstrong Engineering (:D) was needed to wrestle the fish around. If the boat was submerged, the diving officer would quite often put an up or down angle on the boat to give the TM's a hand.

12 minute Declassified navy film about the MK 45 torpedo:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKOEaPHxY5k

:D

Great stuff Ducimus! Thanks! Notice how the vid said 12000 yards max range? That's even worse! Almost within the kill zone!

1. There was nuclear tipped version of RUR-5 ASROC missile. If I remember corretly missile deployed nuclear depth charge.
2. Japanese used fuel-oxygen powered torpedo called Long Lance during World War II. Problem with torpedos using oxygen is their extreme flammability. If I remember correctly Japanese surface vessels sometimes disposed their torpedos when under air attack as single hit to torpedoes could cause them to explode and destroy or heavily damage the ship.

Imperial Japanese Navy tested fuel-oxygen torpedo in subs but they were not success, unfortunately I don't remember why. As speculation I would imagine that leaking "secondary air tank", which was code name for tank containing pure oxygen, could cause quite a hassle onboard submarine. When abnormally high level of oxygen is present many objects normally non-flammable can ignite spontaniously.

All this comes from memory so errors are likely. Please correct me as necessary.

Ah, okay. :)

There were more options as development proceeded. Sub museum in Groton has a great display on Cold War weapons systems inclluding SUBROC and others
http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-44.html

Budget cuts and end of the Cold War:

http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-125.html

Ahoy! This may have been asked already but as I'm lazy I didn't even try to wikipedia (yea it's a verb xD) this out..

As the ships sink only because of flooding (makes sense), how did (sub)captains measure destroyed if the ship was just burning furiously, for example after deck gun attack, but not sinking?

Non Naval Academy grads as Captains of Submarines?
 

I am re-re-re........re reading Ed Beaches "Run Silent Run Deep" for the millionth time. What a great book!

The book opens up with Bledsoe being examined for command of the S-16. Beach describes Bledsoe as an NROTC Lieutenant. The action takes place in December 1941.

Was it common for a non-Academy officer to have a command of a submarine that early? I know that later in the war, this happened.

Was it common for NROTC grads to have command of a submarine at the start of WWII?

I can't go back to lubbing my land until I know.

Type XXI design evolution
 

Hi folks,
Reading an encyclopedic book on the uboots at the moment. I was reading about the Type XXI, which seems like the first sub to be designed similarly to today's modern subs.

It struck me that it was kind of weird that it took until this point (1943?) to design a sub with a hydrodynamically efficient exterior. I would assume that any naval engineer worth his spanner would know that all the protrusions and flooding outer hull would greatly affect underwater speed. I know that the earlier subs were designed to spend most of their time on the surface and to be able to submerge for attack etc, but it still amazes me that they were covered in so much equipment.

So, I guess I'm wondering is why it took so long for them to design a hydrodynamic sub? Was it an engine issue...that only then did they get appropriate electric motors and batteries capable of spending longer times under water? Or was it that the deck guns etc were becoming redundant later on in the war? Or was it simply that one day they noticed that is they got rid of all the extraneous stuff the boat would be much more efficient underwater...though as I said, I assume they knew this long before?

As I am sure Steve will chime in, the S-boats designed in the 1920's were designed for high submerged speeds. While the S-Boat could not travel faster underwater than it could on the surface, it came close 15 knots surfaced 11 Knots submerged.

Interesting.
So why then the return, or continuation at least, of designing boats that were much slower submerged, with deck guns and AA and all that? Did the fast running submerged boats not work strategically for some reason?

I suppose that it may have just been down to battery characteristics...if you can only stay running submerged for a few hours and it takes a few hours to recharge on the surface, then you're going to have to spend a lot of time surfaced, and therefore you require AA and deck guns, and hence you go slower when submerged.