Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tater
Dive times... yeah, u-boats were faster on average, but in the fleet type books I've read (written by the skippers or crew) they were aiming for 30-something second crash dive times.
|
I recently read war patrol reports of the USS Drum. In one of them the skipper wrote that they achived 45 sec (IIRC) and that that was an improvement over the crash dive tests done prevoiusly by the same boat and crew.
*Edit*
Found it:
http://www.drum228.org/warpatrol09.html#personnel
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Commander Willamson
Daily dives for all watch sections were made enroute to the area. Many dives were timed in 45 seconds, which time is 6-7 seconds less than ever before.
|
*/Edit*
Quote:
|
I actually agree the fleet type would not have been as effective against the allies by a considerable margin, though I'm a little at doubt as to how much worse it could have been than the u-boats. What % of u-boats were sunk? 90%?
|
Well there are still 10% to go.
Quote:
|
There's really not much room to do worse than that, and even if the fleet type WAS worse (probably true in the ATO, I'll grant you), it only had a few % points worse available to it. So if the u-boat was not at least that much better than the fleet boat in the PTO, the fleet "wins."
|
Well it can be worse by sinking less ships than the u-boats did. The large fleet boats are easyier to detect (but to stay fair I have to admit that if the fleet boat gets a shot it can do more damage).
I think we are again at my first post in this thread. Each type of sub was best for it's theatre.
