U-boat vs. aircraft

[sublynx]

I found this extremely detailed description of a aircraft vs. U-boat combat from August 1943. Having read it I realise that it is not at all unrealistic for a U-boat to have some chance of survival against aircraft even in a surface fight.

http://www.uboatarchive.net/U-615ASW-6Crockett.htm

For the interested U-boatarchive also has all the war diaries of U-615. The fourth and last one reconstructed by BdU.

[Benti]

that read gave me some chills.
Thank you for sharing, I didn't know that u-boats were able to put up such a fight against so many aircraft.
In game I only risk a battle with an aircraft if it's late in war and my sub is equipped with two Flakvierlings and the double 3,7cm heeresflak.

benti

[Sailor Steve]

Part of the problem is that an aircraft downed can be replaced by a dozen more. A U-boat with a hole in the pressure hull is nothing more than a slow torpedo boat.

Aircraft shot down by U-boats - around 120.
http://www.uboat.net/history/aircraft_losses.htm

U-boats sunk by aircraft - around 250.
http://www.uboat.net/allies/aircraft/forces.htm

[Zosimus]

I think the concern over airplanes is overdone. Sure, they can damage you and sink you, but you can fire back and win. Destroyers are much more dangerous. When was the last time an airplane dropped more than 100 depth charges on you? Or rammed you? Or kept you under so long you thought you'd never shake him off?

[Vince82]

When surprised by an aircraft it's almost always better go full speed, take evasive maneuvers and fight. After the initial attack dive.

I'm sure it's in the GWX manual.

[scott_c2911]

The only time i have been surprised by an aircraft or a small formation is when ive missed the radar signals detected warning and even then I just dive. The only time an aircraft has caused damage is from its guns and not its bombs and thats if i choose to give it some lead out of boredom more than anything. Destroyers have accounted for all of my ingame deaths and I regard them as my most dangerous foes. I have homing torps now though so I can have a crack back. Its April 1945 in my career so its not long now before its all over. This is my last patrol. Ive been at it for nearly 12 months and have been going since August 1939. That report was a cracking read Ive got to say and thanx to the op

[Foggy]

I have an Officer that has multiple skills (one being cannon, another being torpedo, the third I think is Helmsman). He is always posted in either the torp room (giving a large bonus there) or on the top of the conning tower during surface runs. When I get alerted that we've spotted enemy aircraft, I make sure that he's on the conning tower, then I use a Petty Officer that has the Flak skill and I put him on the flak gun. With both of them present, the skill bar is full for the flak gun, and I tell him to engage targets at medium or long range and let him have at it. The guy never seems to miss. He'll take out 4 planes and we'll keep on trucking without a scratch. Sometimes I have to turn the boat to make sure the flak gun can still aim at where the planes are coming from, but his accuracy is ridiculous lol. His accuracy probably isn't realistic, but he sure keeps us safe from the birds lol.

[sublynx]

Thanks for the hint. I think I have fought against aircraft maybe twice during all the years I've played SH3. I'll try your specialisations in case I get into a situation where I have to fight.

[sharkbit]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Part of the problem is that an aircraft downed can be replaced by a dozen more. A U-boat with a hole in the pressure hull is nothing more than a slow torpedo boat.

Aircraft shot down by U-boats - around 120.
http://www.uboat.net/history/aircraft_losses.htm

U-boats sunk by aircraft - around 250.
http://www.uboat.net/allies/aircraft/forces.htm

I just recently read on uboat.net, concerning the Fight Back Order issued to the U-boats for a time, that Air Marshal Sir John Slessor, head of Coastal Command, said he would gladly trade an aircraft and its crew for a sunk u-boat.

http://www.uboat.net/history/fight_back_order.htm

I've gotten a little bored with aircraft in SH3. Same routine-aircraft spotted, crash dive, run submerged for a while, surface, repeat as necessary.

I've never really been surprised by aircraft. Not saying it will never happen though late war.

So with all that in mind, I've been experimenting with some randomness. Now when I get the aircraft spotted message, I pause the game, roll two dice, modify the roll by year, night, and/or radar warning. The result times 10 is the number of seconds before I can crash dive. Un-pause and start a timer and wait. If I get a "We're under attack!", I immediately crash dive or fight back, depending on situation.

It can be a little disconcerting watching a B-24 Liberator bearing down on you and not being able to do anything while the clock is ticking.

I think it nicely simulates the possibility of a surprise attack out of the sun or clouds, a lookout daydreaming, or a slow dive.

I'm still experimenting with the times though to find a happy medium. 15 seconds is waaay too long, and 5 seconds seems too short but it feels like 10 seconds may be too long as well. I've been noticing that with fighter type aircraft, they're on you really quick and attacking and then I've seen Swordfish coming and the bridge crew can finish their morning coffee before they have to crash dive.

[Vince82]

simulates the possibility of a surprise attack out of the sun or clouds

@Sharkbit: Many don't understand, I think, that this is what actually happend a lot. And that is a big reason why planes where really feared by commanders.

I like that you use dice to simulate a more realistic outcome.

In game Metox and radar can be edited a using silent3ditor to make it less effective. Decreasing the Metox arc to say 270 for example. This simulates detecting less aircraft due to new secret 10cm radar which was introduced by the allies. I'm curious to know what you think of this.

[U-15]

Originally Posted by Zosimus

I think the concern over airplanes is overdone. Sure, they can damage you and sink you, but you can fire back and win. Destroyers are much more dangerous. When was the last time an airplane dropped more than 100 depth charges on you? Or rammed you? Or kept you under so long you thought you'd never shake him off?

Zosimus,

http://www.uboat.net/boats/u570.htm

It's not a risk worth taking.
Stay deep, and hopefully stay safe.

I always tell my crew that if I wanted to shoot planes down I would have joined the Luftwaffe

[Vince82]

Recently posted by Armistead in the SH4 forum, same thing, they are also discussing air attacks:

depends on your mods, if playn stock you can survive a couple direct bomb hits, when in real life, that would be it for your sub. same with surface ships, one shell could easily be the end of your ship. a few mods give these results, so you don't mess with planes or gun battles with escorts on the surface....

[vanjast]

Read the book 'Conflict over the Bay' by Norman Franks, which covers RAF Coastal Commands hunt for Uboats during May-August 1943.
This is the critical time period where tactics on both sides were evolving wrt to UBoat-vs-Aircraft.

Essentially the Allies developed 'search blocks' in the Biscay Bay, where many aircraft would patrol. This area was wide enough so that a UBoat would not be able to cross it without surfacing to recharge batteries, thus a better chance of being detected by ASW - Aircraft as well as Hunter Killer groups.

Every one of Donitz's fight it out tactics brought only limited success and was quickly nullified by a change in allied tactics.

- If a single UBoat tried to fight on the surface, a single aircraft would attack. Invariably it meant a damaged or sunken UBoat. A damaged Uboat would have to return to port.
Allied aircraft usually carried only enough 'DCs' for one attack (sometimes they would use half their ordinance for a second attack to foil the Kaleun).
If the Uboat did not sink, if the aircraft wasn't badly damaged, it would circle the sub until other aircraft, hunter killer groups arrived, or had to leave for shortage of fuel.

- Eventually Donitz ordered 3 Uboat formations to transverse the search blocks on the surface.
What the allies did when discovering this, was to circle the sub group calling in more aircraft and HK groups. Up to five aircraft would be circling the 3 boats like vultures waiting to pounce.

Communication between aircraft, and between subs did not exist so neither in each group knew what the other was up to until they did something. Also keeping subs in formation while watching the vultures was a big problem and usually one sub went out of formation - the aircraft would nearly crash into each other descending on this unforunate sub.
With the ensuing chaos, the other subs would then try to submerge - very few got away unscathed.

If not enough a/c coulld be called in, a HK group could arrive within a few hours... and the Kaleuns definitely didn't want this. Some subs got away only to be hammered by HK groups that were guided in by the aircraft.

I'm not sure whether SH3 takes all these factors into account but one can confidently say that you should crash dive.. even for a seagull

[CCIP]

I think it's also important to remember the difference between individual crews and situations, and progress as a whole. It took hundreds of hours of patrolling by air to make a single sighting. Although trained and experienced, the vast majority of Coastal Command air crews had, in fact, never encountered a U-boat during the war. Those who did were far from guaranteed success - only a small number of attacks netted a hit, and the attack took an immense risk. There were no Coastal Command aces - so rare were their encounters. In actual duels between the aircraft and U-boat, the odds were slightly in favour of the U-boat. Even during the infamous Black May of 1943, a single U-boat sinking took more than 1250 flight hours of patrols by air. The probability of an airplane even making contact with a U-boat during a single (often grueling and lengthy) patrol was no more than 2%.

All that sounds bad for airplanes hopeful for the U-boats on an individual scale, but when you start looking at the strategy, the picture changes drastically. Put enough airplanes in the air, and they will find the U-boats. Run enough risks, and there will be kills. sharkbit's point about Slessor's view is right - losing a plane-U-boat duel means losing 6-12 crew and a machine that can be replaced in a matter of a few weeks or even days (or in the extreme case - even hours, as illustrated by the record assembly of a complete Wellington at Broughton in 1943 in less than 24 hours). Losing a U-boat is losing 45-55 crew, a number of them substantially more specialized and much harder to replace, and a machine that takes at minimum months to build and costs dozens of times more than the best bomber. Worse for Germany, it also requires hundreds of tons of high-grade steel which is already in short supply. The loss of a U-boat is many more times costly to Germany than the cost of 1250 hours of flying and several downed allied planes put together. The U-boats had nothing to offer to counter the threat - and it took mere days for Coastal Command airmen to see through the new group tactics and flak defenses in battle, to which they adapted right away by shadowing, calling for help, and attacking in groups.

The air crews up against the U-boats were good - really good - and you can't judge them by individual encounters or scores, because it was not a duel. It was a system of patrols that was, in a sense, designed to "fail" - it was known and calculated in advance (with impressive exactness) that most patrolling airplanes would never encounter a U-boat, most attacks would miss, and airplanes were at least as likely to be shot down as they were to score a hit. And with all that in mind, it was a system where even by pure attrition, the U-boats were doomed. And when technological advantages were thrown into the mix, well, they were really really doomed!

And with all that said of course, it's also important to remember that the U-boats had already lost the Battle of the Atlantic BEFORE the effective air efforts actually kicked in. But the air power was one heck of a finishing move, and can rightly be considered the most dangerous. I think the only real reason for disdaining a realistic approach to it that I see emerging in this thread is its randomness. It's like artillery in trench warfare of WWI - deadlier, more technologically-sophisticated and more significant than any other type of combat, but it doesn't make for tall tales most of the time. More often than not, it's just a bolt from the blue that kills you indiscriminately and without warning, and you have no control over it or fault for it whatsoever. It's a bitter truth - but from a gameplay or storytelling perspective, most people find it either bland or infuriating. It breaks the dramatic, heroic, tragic narratives that people love playing out in their heads in games like SH3. A random death breaks that kind of story completely and makes players feel bitter. But I actually think that when you stop focusing on your own story and look at what it means in a bigger context, what it means for the war and for history, that story becomes fascinating again. And when you play DiD and introduce some house rules - like that dice roll sharkbit mentioned - you really start appreciating it!

[Zosimus]

Originally Posted by U-15

Zosimus,

http://www.uboat.net/boats/u570.htm

It's not a risk worth taking.
Stay deep, and hopefully stay safe.

I always tell my crew that if I wanted to shoot planes down I would have joined the Luftwaffe

WTF?

http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/s...ipher-machine/

"On the morning of Aug. 27, 1941, U-570, under the command of Kapitänleutnant Hans-Joachim Rahmlow, surfaced off the coast of Iceland and was immediately spotted by a British Hudson bomber on anti-submarine patrol. As the Hudson dove to attack, Rahmlow ordered a crash dive..."

As we said before, don't crash dive. Fire back, wait till the attack passes, and then dive.

"... but before U-570 could escape, it was bracketed with four depth charges. The U-boat suffered only minor damage, but the inexperienced crew, many suffering acutely from seasickness, panicked."

Second mistake. Don't panic. The boat was barely scratched.

"Rahmlow himself was new to U-boats and U-570 was his first operational command. U-570 surfaced and crew members unfurled a white sheet. Rahmlow, meanwhile, sent out a radio message to U-boat command stating what happened and that he had surrendered."

Don't surrender. What's the point?