Who had the best submarines in wwII?

[Ducimus]

True, we can drag this statistics and thinking all day and generaly we could not extract some good(exact) conclusion about which subs are beter. Generaly is mater of how opinion and perspective have someone over submarine warfare in those days.

Thats why these discussions are kinda pointless. And lets not kid ourselves, the majority here are biased for one type of sub or another. People tend to enter these discussions, like they were lobbying over who's football team is better. I admit, im a big fan of fleet boats, but im not so diluted as to compare apples and oranges. comparing a Gato or Balao fleet boat to a type 7c uboat is like comparing a sports car with an SUV.

[yamato9]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Thats why these discussions are kinda pointless. And lets not kid ourselves, the majority here are biased for one type of sub or another. People tend to enter these discussions, like they were lobbying over who's football team is better. I admit, im a big fan of fleet boats, but im not so diluted as to compare apples and oranges. comparing a Gato or Balao fleet boat to a type 7c uboat is like comparing a sports car with an SUV.

Thumbs up mate!

By the way i´m also a fan of fleet subs, i like their good look(design),impresive size and number of torpedo tubes, also on other hand i also like those much smaller u-boats (type VII & IX) and their nasty look.

Unfortunatly i dont have SH4 yet, to sail on those titans.

[Grayson02sept1980]

Originally Posted by Freiwillige

Excluding the Type XXI which is the clear winner! Before that type what was the differance between Japanese, American, German, British and Italian subs?

I know alot about U-boats but nothing much about any of the others.

It does seem that the American subs were huge in comparison to even the type IX Based on pictures from SH IV.

So Fire away, WHichs subs were better and which were worse and why.

Germany - most developed Sub type XXI - was father/origin for most modern Sub design
USA - biggest with the GATO (I think) - also very succesfull
Japan - first Sub carrying two planes - USA was astonished when they got hands on it
GB ... forget about it... jsut like tanks the British never really got a hang on subs..
Russia - :rotfl:

so when you ask about the "best" I would say it was Germany with the type VII which was - despite the high loses - the most successfull sub in history!


.... that is - as was asked for - my oppinion... no statistics - no numbers.

[Fincuan]

Originally Posted by Grayson02sept1980

Japan - first Sub carrying two planes - USA was astonished when they got hands on it

Make that three, and they were supposedly able to launch all of them within 45 minutes of surfacing. If the sub design was audacious, so was their final mission in the war: Bombing the Panama canal locks from the east. IIRC they got underway, but the mission was cancelled before the first sub was out of the Indian Ocean.

[Torplexed]

The Japanese actually cancelled the Panama Canal lock attack in favor of an attack on the closer Allied naval base on Ulithi Atoll where the US carrier fleet was anchored. However, before that could take place, the Emperor announced the surrender of Japan and the subs returned home to surrender.

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Grayson02sept1980

Germany - most developed Sub type XXI - was father/origin for most modern Sub design
USA - biggest with the GATO (I think) - also very succesfull
Japan - first Sub carrying two planes - USA was astonished when they got hands on it
GB ... forget about it... jsut like tanks the British never really got a hang on subs..
Russia - :rotfl:

so when you ask about the "best" I would say it was Germany with the type VII which was - despite the high loses - the most successfull sub in history!


.... that is - as was asked for - my oppinion... no statistics - no numbers.

Germany - Correct

USA - Wrong....I-400 Japan (they could actually carry 3 Aichi M6A Seiranaircraft )

GB - Check out the S, T and in particular the U class in the Med (Wanklyn VC)

As stated earlier.....this is a kind of pointless no winners/no losers debate.

Most countries had different requirements of their subs and as such, each was designed for a different specific purpose.

It could easily be argued all had differing strengths and weaknesses.

A bit like comparing apples and pears

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by privateer

The better subs were the ones that made it home.
The ones that made it home were better because they came home alive.

The ones that didn't make it home were worse. For obvious reasons.


Do I win a prize?

Although this might look like strange logic on the surface, in retrospect, it is not really. Particularly this line, 'the ones that made it home'. What caused a submarine not to make it home? The submarine itself or the crew? The uboat/fleet boat is only as good as its crew. Other than that, it is a cold steel hull in the water. It knows nothing and does not think for itself. So, it is not a comparison of which boat is better. All boats are great boats in the right hands. Just like a race car can only win if manned by the correct driver. All crews were aggressive, daring and sometimes depended on luck to bring the crew and boat through. It is all about the crew that makes the machine a awesome tool for which it was made. Let's face it, throw the whole lot of us in this thread in any of the WW2 designed boats for a patrol right now, we probably would not make it out of the harbor let alone get underway from the dock. It was all about training, working as a team, thinking ahead, understanding your actions or inactions can doom/save the entire crew. The leadership in the boat had to be top notch and most if not all were. So, the TypeII, S class, up to the XXI/Tench class were all great boats if used correctly and to the best of that particular boats ability.

[jas39]

Originally Posted by Platapus

Well let’s not just assume that the Type XXI is the clear hands down winner here.

I reference Clay Blair’s 1996 book “Hitler’s U-Boats” in two volumes.

Specifically I would like to quote from the Forward of the book where Mr. Blair discusses the United States’ evaluation of the U-2513 Type XXI Uboat. While 118 of the Type XXI boats were constructed, I believe only two (U2511 and U3008) had combat patrols.

From the Blair book

“In the classified report [the American evaluators] sent to the Chief of Naval Operations, dated July 1946, they wrote that while the Type XXI had many desirable features that should be exploited, it also had many grave design and manufacturing faults. The clear implication was that owning to these faults, the XXI could not have made a big difference in the Battle of the Atlantic. Among the major faults the Americans enumerated:

Poor Structural Integrity.

Hurriedly prefabricated in thirty-two different factories that had little or no experience in submarine building, the eight major hull sections of the type XXi were crudely made and did not fit together properly. Therefore the pressure hull was weak and not capable of withstanding sea pressure at great depths or the explosions of close depth charges. The Germans reported that in their structural tests, the hull failed at a simulated depth of 900 feet. The British reported failure at 800 feet, less than the failure depth of the conventional German U-Boats.

Underpowered Diesel Engines

The new model, six-cylinder diesels were fitted with superchargers to generate the required horsepower. The system was so poorly designed and manufactured that the superchargers could not be used. This failure reduced the generated horsepower by almost half: From 2,000 to 1,200, leaving the Type XII ruinously underpowered. Consequently, the maximum surface speed was only 15.6 knots, less than any ocean going U-boat built during the war and slightly slower than the corvette convoy-escort vessel. The reduction in horsepower also substantially increased the time required to carry out a full battery charge.

Impractical Hydraulic System

The main lines, accumulators, cylinders, and pistons of the hydraulic gear or operating the diving planes, rudders, torpedo tube outer doors, and antiaircraft gun turrets on the bridge were too complex and delicate and located outside the pressure hull. This gear was therefore subject to saltwater leakage, corrosion, and enemy weaponry. It could not be repaired from inside the pressure hull.

Imperfect and Hazardous Snorkel

Even in moderate seas, the mast dunked often, automatically closing the air intake and exhaust ports. Even so, salt water poured into the ship’s bilges and had to be discharged overboard continuously with noisy pumps. More over, during these shutdowns, the diesels dangerously sucked air from inside the boat and deadly exhaust gas backed up, causing not only headaches and eye discomfort, but also serious respiratory illnesses. Snorkeling in the Type XXI was therefore a nightmarish experience to be minimized to the greatest extent possible.” End of quote

So on paper the Type XXI should have been the best submarine of the time. If the Germans had the proper manufacturing capability the problems with the pressure hull and the diesel engines could have been fixed. The design of the hydraulic system being outside of the pressure hull is, in my opinion, a bad idea, just for the reasons listed in the Blair book.

Did the Type XXI have a reputation that was greater than the reality?

In the 1995 book “Count not the dead: The popular image of the German Submarine” Michael L. Hadley wrote “During both wars and during the inter-war years as well, the U-boat was mythologized more than any other weapon of war.”

Perhaps the greatest capability of the Type XXI was the myth of the Type XXI.

Since only two of them were used in combat (if memory serves me correctly) we will never know how effective the Type XXI would have truly been.

I think that a good Type VIIC or IXD2 might have been a better all around boat.

I have to say that I respectfully disagree with the opinions of the book. In the end of the war, the 2 XXI's that the US could have captured would have been of bad quality naturally because their manufacturing had been hurried in order to put them to sea. If the boats had ben built by the exact specifications as on the drawing board, then it might have been different...

[Elmer Kosterman]

One thing US boats had in WWII that the Germans didn't was a torpedo computer that could update solutions while the submarine itself was manouvering.

[Grayson02sept1980]

I have to apologize... the Russians quite had some different Subs....
How "good" or "not good" they were... I cannot say.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...orld_War_2_Era

But that would be something for a Mod... the Russion subs :hmm:

[Penelope_Grey]

See... the word "best" is very up in the air even at the lol... best of times.

There are always going to be "fanboys" in every walk of life, though I prefer the U-Boat I like to believe that I'm not so jaded that if somebody asked me a question, and fleet boat was the right answer, I would give them that answer.

That is the mark of a true fan, giving the right answer, even if you don't like that answer.

[danurve]

The best Sub I know is right up the street from me.
Lucky 7 Deli. Meatballs, light sauce & a little parm sprinkled on top.


Hey Pen! BDU found out where your hiding and the word is out.

[Kipparikalle]

OMFG AMERIKANZ SUBMRZN R BEST LOHL!!!1111oneone

Srsly Sniper, take a time to think before opening your mouth.

Germans have the best submarines AND submarine crews & tactics.
German's had better tactics than Americans, according to my knowledge of course.

But What really matters in combat is how exprienced the fighting opposites are. You can have ****load of high-tech weapons but you're unskilled, and then your opponent is rambo with Bow, you're ****ed up.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Kipparikalle

OMFG AMERIKANZ SUBMRZN R BEST LOHL!!!1111oneone

Srsly Sniper, take a time to think before opening your mouth.

Germans have the best submarines AND submarine crews & tactics.
German's had better tactics than Americans, according to my knowledge of course.

But What really matters in combat is how exprienced the fighting opposites are. You can have ****load of high-tech weapons but you're unskilled, and then your opponent is rambo with Bow, you're ****ed up.

Easy there. Like I posted a few back. It ain't the boat, it is the crew. I see you recognize that with the "unskilled" remark. Therefore, the are all good if you use the boats abilities to your advantage and are trained enough as a crew to do so.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Penelope_Grey

See... the word "best" is very up in the air even at the lol... best of times.

There are always going to be "fanboys" in every walk of life, though I prefer the U-Boat I like to believe that I'm not so jaded that if somebody asked me a question, and fleet boat was the right answer, I would give them that answer.

That is the mark of a true fan, giving the right answer, even if you don't like that answer.

My head hurt after reading that.