Torpedo Stowage

[rudewarrior]

In my research I just found a document that said in the type VIIC that:

1. G7a can be stored in all places except auxiliary stowage [the two extra stowage slots in the fore], because there the engine chamber would be positioned at the support point.
2. G7e can not be stored in both deck containers and in aft reserve stowage because access for maintenance is insufficient.

I knew about the deck containers, but not the aft stowage.

Did this go for all Type VII's?
Did this ever change during the war?

Edit: It did change during the war. In March of 1943 a standard load out was issued that called for 2 TIII Fat II's in the aft of type VIIb, c, and d u-boats. Three other sets of load outs were issued at various times that each called for 2 TV Zaukönig's in the aft. So they were certainly allowing eto's in the aft reserve by then. I figure one of three things happened. Either they figured out early in the war it was impractical and just forced the crews to maintain the torpedoes, their maintenance capability became more sophisticated allowing them to service eto's in the aft compartment (I find this unlikely), or the TIII was easier to maintain than the TII and it changed then. The last possibility seems the most likely, but I can't really find any indication that the TIII is anything other than a retrofitted TII with a functioning depth keeping mechanism. Anyway, hopefully someone might have an answer to this. Maybe next time I will check the sources of my own mod before I post.

Were there any conditions like this for the Type IX's?

Please include a source if possible.

Thanx in advance.

[Mittelwaechter]

Afair - they were able to heat the electrics in the tubes - all forward and backward VII/IX. In a VII the 2 eels internal reserve stored on the floor forward and the two outmost eels of the four torpedos under the floor plates forward could be heated and maintained (i.e. charged).
The two torpedos stored under the floor plates, directly under the two internal reserve had to be steamers, because they were unaccessable as long as the two above were not removed (into the tubes).
The torpedos were heated in pairs - in a VII 4 heaters for 8 torpedos forward. All were constantly heated as it took some time to get them to temperature.
The backward internal reserve was under the floor but accessable and the tube and the reserve made a pair to be heated (afair!)
You mentioned the backward internal was not accessable/insufficiently accessable? Where did you get that information?

A type VII had to load at least four steamers - two internal forward and two in the deck containers. All other torpedos could be electrics in all variants.

I don't know much about type IX, but they had probably similar problems/conditions.

The ordered standard loadout was more than often subject to the availability of torpedos at the base.
An electric was way cheaper than a steamer and they prefered to use the steamers for surface units (fast/bubbles no problem, as the attacker was visible anyway).

The general storage layout of a VII didn't change over the war, but with the allied air superiority they didn't use the deck containers any longer. A late VII may have carried only 12 torpedos - dependent on the area of operation.

I donated all my sources in the 90's to the local library, but maybe you've got some inspiration for further research.

[Aktungbby]

http://www.shipwreck.net/pdf/OME_Papers_35.pdf Some useful diagrams showing the storage below decks The pics may be distressing for Kaleuns though

[LGN1]

Hi Mittelwaechter,

the original VIIC manual (http://www.uboatarchive.net/Manual/Manual.htm) states at page 50:

"G7a can be stored in all places except auxiliary stowage, because there the engine chamber would be positioned at the support point.

G7e can not be stored in both deck containers and in aft reserve stowage because access for maintenance is insufficient."

Regards, LGN1

[Mittelwaechter]

Well let's think about it. There was a support device in the forward torpedo room to hold two internal reserve torpedos on the floor level.
This device was in such a bad position, it made it impossible to store steamers on it?
Would they have relocated the device? There may have been some weird U-Boot design reasons to hinder a reconstruction, a relocation of this support device.
Would they have installed an adapter, something to divide the support point into two seperate support surfaces, sparing the desired area to enable access as necessary? (And what maintenance was necessary with a G7a possible in the tubes but not possible outside?)
This position is the overall best storage area in the U-Boot concerning access - safe on the floor, not under plates, not in the tubes. And here they managed to cause such a problem?

In the aft compartment they were able to remove a G7e torpedo from the tube to maintain it, but couldn't lift the internal reserve from under the floor to do it?
How did they ever manage to load the reserve?

I know the Germans were funny enough to document misinformation, just in case the papers went into the wrong hands. Not sure, if this is the case here.
Someone mixed aft and forward, Eto and Ato, above and under the floor plates in this documentation. Maybe per design, maybe a mistake in translation.
In the forward compartment, the underfloor reserve was limited to two steamers in both center positions, because this area was not accessable while fully armed.
This makes sense to me (as the information concerning the deck containers).

Any person responsible for torpedo stowage would have known what to put where, they wouldn't have had to check this documentation.
As you stated yourself, the situation 'suddenly changed' in 1943, because you found some documentation of two Etos in the aft compartment.


Greetings.

[Mittelwaechter]

Addendum: a major part for the armament section of your online document is the loadout configuration for a torpedo/mines mixture.

If they filled the aft tube(s) with mines, they may have left any heating and recharging equipment for the aft compartment at home. Here they would have been limited to an internal steamer reserve aft.

[Leoz]

Originally Posted by Mittelwaechter

Afair - they were able to heat the electrics in the tubes - all forward and backward VII/IX. In a VII the 2 eels internal reserve stored on the floor forward and the two outmost eels of the four torpedos under the floor plates forward could be heated and maintained (i.e. charged).
The two torpedos stored under the floor plates, directly under the two internal reserve had to be steamers, because they were unaccessable as long as the two above were not removed (into the tubes).
The torpedos were heated in pairs - in a VII 4 heaters for 8 torpedos forward. All were constantly heated as it took some time to get them to temperature.
The backward internal reserve was under the floor but accessable and the tube and the reserve made a pair to be heated (afair!)
You mentioned the backward internal was not accessable/insufficiently accessable? Where did you get that information?

A type VII had to load at least four steamers - two internal forward and two in the deck containers. All other torpedos could be electrics in all variants.

I don't know much about type IX, but they had probably similar problems/conditions.

The ordered standard loadout was more than often subject to the availability of torpedos at the base.
An electric was way cheaper than a steamer and they prefered to use the steamers for surface units (fast/bubbles no problem, as the attacker was visible anyway).

The general storage layout of a VII didn't change over the war, but with the allied air superiority they didn't use the deck containers any longer. A late VII may have carried only 12 torpedos - dependent on the area of operation.

I donated all my sources in the 90's to the local library, but maybe you've got some inspiration for further research.

Brilliant sir. Thank you.

[Mittelwaechter]

The logic is flawless as long as the facts are true. The equippment may have changed over times - or the heating was considered necessary only for 8 eels forward constantly.

Topp/U552 must have had a fifth heater forward - or the access to the two center reserve under the floor plates was sufficient, to charge the eels - contradicting the conclusion to have at least two Atos internal.

Things may have changed over times...