Has anyone else been facinated by the Uboat that never was?
 

Ever since i first remember reading about the VIIC/42 in the manual that came with Aces of the deep i have been facinated by this sub.

In my mind its one of the most (or the most) advanced WW2 submarine. Yeah yeah i know the type XXI holds that crown, but it just seems too.... modern. When i play a WW2 sub sim, i expect WW2 subs, the type 21 is just.. different to me in this regard, perhaps because it was meant as a "True" submarine in the modern sense of the word. To me that just isnt as much fun, and honestly modern subs excite me about as much as watching paint dry.

So the object of my facination falls squarely on the sub that never was. The VIIC/42.

If you want to compare specs:
http://www.uboat.net/types/viic.htm
http://www.uboat.net/types/viic-42.htm

The sum is larger engines, more range, a bit wider, a bit longer, a bit taller, a bit faster, ALOT deeper, but still about the same profile as the VIIC. It looks like a meld of VIIC manuverablity, the range and speed of an IX boat, all packed into a relativly small deep diving hull offering increased survivablity.

Other intresting tidbits (albiet similar but a bit more descriptive)

http://www.uboatwar.net/VII.htm
http://www.uboataces.com/uboat-type-vii.shtml

Looking at all scant info avaliable, it seems the designers were foward thinking. The first two boats, U699 and U700 were first ordered in april, 1942.

I'll make this conjecture. I think more fuel was for two reasons. Extend range while snorkeling, or surface range to reach the us East coast. Deck gun was removed (and im guessing) because its wasnt very useful snorkelling, and its removal is what made room for the two extra external torpedo stores.

The deck gun was almost useless by 1942 except on the ultra-long range boats where ASW was almost nill. The u-boat made a lousy gun platform and the risk to the boat in a surface gun battle far outweighed any possible gain.

A bigger reason was to increase diving time and submerged speed since the deck gun vastly increased the drag on the boat as it tried to push its way through the water. In reality, any gains in this area due to deck gun removal were largely negated by the increased AA armament and the conning tower extensions needed to house it.

Thats true, and SH3 doesnt really model this very well, so i often forget this. :rotfl: A uboat rolled around too much in a pitching sea, and was generally to low in the water .

Hydrodyamics i think is the word your looking for. Yet another limitation in the game engine. heh. Something else i overlooked at any rate, and your absoluetely correct. But yeah, removing the deck gun is much to your advantage in the real world. Removes alot of dead weight, reduces drag, and could concievably make room for equpment you need more. WOuld be cool if you could emulate this ingame. The deck gun was probably a holdover mentality from WWI.

What i think is laughable is the VII/4 conning tower. (Uflak) If hydrodynamics were modled in this game, that sub would be alot less then ideal under water.

Ducimus, check your PM. :up:

Back at ya! :D

VII/42 sounds nice, but the U-cruiser is even better!

from uboat.net:

Type XI U-cruisers
Huge U-boats, designed in 1937-1938, with 4 127mm deck guns ( :o ) in two gun-towers (one fore and aft of the conning tower). 6 torpedo tubes (4 in the bow and two at the stern, all below the CWL). One Ar 231 small aircraft in a watertight 2.6m in diameter container shaft. These boats were to have a crew of about 110 men almost double that of any constructed German U-boat. 4 contracts (U-112 thru U-115) were awarded to the AG Weser yard in Bremen on Jan 17, 1939 but wisely cancelled at the outbreak of war in September that year and none of the boats had been laid down at the time (some sources mention U-112 as being laid down but that does not make sense).

I read that they were designed for 26 kn surface speed. I searched but didn't find any photos or a blueprint / sketch.

nope I never was

http://features.cgsociety.org/galler...1122152994.jpg

The XI U-cruiser

about th VIIC/42
the estimated crush depth is around 850ft
There is a reliable record of a VIIC reaching a estimated depth of 900ft! (274m) (the depth dial in the control room was accidentaly turned off, but other dials in the ship eventualy alerted the crew)

So chances are the VIIC/42 could have desended below 1000ft

@ Lectum

That's absolutely A-M-A-Z-I-N-G

Thanks!


These subs would definitly be useful in the first years of the war.

if the engeneers had really pushed them selves I wonder if they could have ever created a U-Battleship.
Its probubly possible with 1930s/40s engeneering, but it has many drawbacks; not least the cost and recources for such a huge project wich would mean it would have to be neer compleation before the war broke out.
The main task would be to make its hull strong enough to dive to a depth where it could not be seen from the air (~70m+ in calm, well lit waters), provide a stable gun platform and to achive a reasonable surface to dive time.
The tactics would be vastly diffrent to U-boat tactics as such a large sub could not hide underwater from a destroyer.
This presents another problem - you cant safely stay on the surface if there are aircraft about and you cant dive if there are warships about - what happens whern both are present? :doh:
It would be hard to defend such a craft from attack, however in open ocean it would be hard to defend against.

Its fun to imagine a modern day size sub or even larger, armed to the teeth with flack guns and 4-6 8inch main guns making 20+ knots with a snorkel surfaceing at long range in front of a convoy and letting rip.

there was 2 german u-boats in WWI that had very large main gun turrent. At least one of them sank
:hmm:
cant remember all the details

**edit**
I'm not sure why, but everyone puts a c in my name :doh:
It's LETUM as in de-letum (delete) or letumful (lethal)
Latin for death and a Roman god

People tend to put an E in my name. Kinda funny. Decimus, and Ducimus have entirely different meanings.

VIIC/42 Diving depth....
 

Accordig to UBOAT.NET they had a 'crush depth' of 400 meters, and most boats could go below their crush depth, so maybe 1400 ft? Interesting..., Boy would I love to have one of those babies in deep water, It would be fun to sneak away! :hmm: -Nightowl

I couldn't agree more about the change in tactics. This U-cruiser would definitly need 2-3 U-boats as "u-escorts" :roll: to keep the destroyers busy. You would require a lot of close (and almost blind) combat coordination, which would need both advanced training and communications.

It would be useful up to the second happy times, shelling lone ships in American waters

Later on it would get worse, because it would be:
- More "visible" to radar
- Easier to spot on the surface
- Bigger target for planes

After 1943 (if any of them went that far) the deck guns would be removed and converted to u-freighters :-j

:o :o :|\ :o :o