U-Boats cost Germany WWII!

[Rockin Robbins]

In another thread comparing SH3 and SH4 I raised the irrelevent question of how different U-Boats were than American submarines. So I decided to start a new thread to discuss design and use of both types of subs.

Much has been made of the similarity of German strategy in the Atlantik and American stategy in the Pacific. They were both unrestricted warfare upon the shipping of the enemy nation with the intent of denying them supplies necessary to prosecute the war. So why the difference in outcome?

The German U-Boat was a badly designed vessel, used in an inappropriate manner which actually guaranteed total defeat for Germany. The American fleet submarine, while not built for the purpose and strategy with which it was used, fit its use perfectly.

Let's look at the German side first. Fundamentally, the greatest flaw in the dominant Type VII U-Boat design was that it was too small and did not carry sufficient firepower to make a difference when acting alone. Carrying only 14 torpedoes, some of which were carried on the exterior of the hull, against a 20 ship convoy, they were urinating on a forest fire. Even during the best times, the U-Boat fleet had only a few months where they destroyed more shipping than the Allies built. The battle of the Atlantik was a war of attrition and the U-Boat fleet didn't have the firepower to destroy quicker than the Allies built their fleets. It was only a matter of time before they were overwhelmed, even by inferior equipment. They were doomed by design.

Then there are fatal flaws in the German strategy, borne of the critical difference between Japan and Britain. Japan stood alone, with few supplies of her own and depended on her own merchant fleet to bring war supplies to the home island. Total submarine warfare sank the merchies, denying Japan supplies to produce ships, planes and weapons. The result was victory in the Pacific.

However, Germany's war against Britain was only superficially similar. The differences made unrestricted submarine warfare a foolish proposition. British supplies came not on British bottoms but on neutral ships as well. In order to starve the enemy, Germany had no choice but to sink American merchants. But America was not subject to starvation by U-Boat strangulation. Once American war production ramped up, even with poor defenses against U-Boat attacks, ships were being built faster than the U-Boats could ever sink them. The war was over, even though it took a few years for Germany to acknowledge the fact.

Using U-Boats in unrestricted warfare, then, was a colossal blunder, wasting valuable resources which could have been used to produce planes, tanks, weapons....you know, actually useful war materials! Coupled with the equally idiotic Battle of Britain, Germany could only choose to die then or later. The war was unwinnable.

Notice that I said nothing about Enigma machine follies or the incessant radio chat that doomed thousands of German sailors. They were just sidelights of the essential flaw.

Just think if after Dunkirk Goering had made a special broadcast: "To our comrades across the Channel. We have allowed your army to escape Dunkirk because we have no quarrel with our friends in England. We realize you had unfortunate obligations due to your treaties with European countries, but those obligations are now satisfied. Germany has realized her aims. It now lies to us to reform a new world in our own image, leading civilization on to the greatness that only we working together can achieve." No U-Boat unrestricted warfare. No Battle of Britain. No Americans in the war. I'd say Germany would have won. U-Boats lost the war.

Let's go to Japan! America did not merely copy German submarine strategy. First, they determined that it was appropriate to the situation and could result in victory. Japanese war materiel was entirely made in Japan from supplies shipped there on Japanese bottoms. Therefore, sinking Japanese merchants would deprive Japan of the ability to continue the war. American submarines were supplied with 24 torpedoes apiece, enough to justify the long transit times to and from reloading, and giving each submarine enough punch to remain on station for a telling amount of time, delivering significant blows to keep ahead of Japanese production. This minimized the need for excessive radio chat. In fact American boats acting in wolfpacks still did not use the radio very much. They knew the results of radio direction finding. And this appropriate use of a weapon which fit its theater of operations perfectly resulted in victory for the Allies in the Pacific.

So there you go! Pop out those "so many ways" that I am wrong.

The following has been a reasoned troll to generate discussion, not animosity. I hope we can have fun with this, not fight.