Expansions please

[Highbury]

I know alot of guys really like having the Fleet Boats in SH4. Since U-Boats were brought to the Pacific in an expansion for that game, why not an expansion that gives us Fleet Boat ops in the Atlantic for this one? Even better Allied operations in the Atlantic. British subs as well 2 things we haven't had in an SH game. I think it would be brilliant

[Undefined]

Russian WWII subs!

[tonibamestre]

2 expansions?? 1- Surface scort Vessel
2- British Submarine Operations

WOOOOOOOOOWWWWWW........ how does that sounds????????

[Kapteeni Rantala]

Soviet submarines of World War II achieved very little and did not have real effect on any Axis military operations - sinking around mere 248,310 tons of shipping during the entire war. So no, I would not have them.

Italian submarines (stereotypes; "we surrender" can go and hide under desks) on the other achieved success that would suprise many people. 32 Italian submarines took part in the Battle of the of the Atlantic - operating in a very wide area ranging from North Atlantic (all the way to US East Coast and Caribbean) to South Atlantic (West/South African coast and the South American coast). With few boats (that were meant for fleet operations in Mediterranean area) and wide operation radius, the Italian submarines in the Atlantic still managed to sink 600,000 tons of shipping, with an average of about 17,750 tons of shipping each, a slightly better average than the German boats operating in the Atlantic.

The best Italian submarine of WWII was Leonardo da Vinci, which sank 120,250 tons - more than the best American submarine (the Flasher with 100,230 tons) and more than the best British submarine (the Upholder with 97,720 tons).

In all, during three years the Italian submarines sank around 900,000 tons (+ around 200,000 tons sank by underwater servicemen of the Decima MAS - guided torpedoes*) - only 400,000 tons less than its main adversary, the Royal Navy, during the entire war. So, it would be interesting to have Italian submarines in an expansion.

*

[denis_469]

Originally Posted by Kapteeni Rantala

Soviet submarines of World War II achieved very little and did not have real effect on any Axis military operations - sinking around mere 248,310 tons of shipping during the entire war. So no, I would not have them.

You not right about soviet submarines in WWII. In my database submarine attacks from submarine logs. 248310 tons is false during rewriting history WWII in west. Unfortunale many russian @historics@ write what him payment.
Read http://sovpl.forum24.ru/?1-3-0-00000...0-0-1244279283 and 2nd part http://sovpl.forum24.ru/?1-3-0-00000...0-0-1249149772

And you unright about tonnage other you writing submarine.

[Kapteeni Rantala]

No, it is right. The Soviet submarines sank roughly that much of tonnage, For most of the war the Baltic Fleet, which was the strongest of the Soviet Navy, was bottled up inside its ports, because of Finnish and German minefields that covered the Baltic Sea. It was not until late 1944 that the Baltic Fleet set out to operate in way that achieved showing results.

The Black Sea fleet's submarines, which surface fleet alone was on paper superior to the small Axis naval presence, did not achieved much either - the German 30th U-boat Flotilla, which operated from Romania for less than two years and with only six old Type II U-boats, sank 100,000 tons of shipping - nearly half what all the Soviet submarines sank during the entire war.

The Soviet Union had very little experience in submarine warfare. Whatever was written in Pravda and Soviet history books, greater tonnage claims are not supported by naval losses suffered by Axis and neutral nations attacked by Soviet submarines. Combined circumstances prevented the Soviet submarines from achieving much during the war. Of all the major powers involved in World War II, the Soviet Union sank least tonnage.

why dont we wait for the game before we start asking to spend $ to buy extra expansions

[denis_469]

Originally Posted by Kapteeni Rantala

No, it is right. The Soviet submarines sank roughly that much of tonnage, For most of the war the Baltic Fleet, which was the strongest of the Soviet Navy, was bottled up inside its ports, because of Finnish and German minefields that covered the Baltic Sea. It was not until late 1944 that the Baltic Fleet set out to operate in way that achieved showing results.

The Black Sea fleet's submarines, which surface fleet alone was on paper superior to the small Axis naval presence, did not achieved much either - the German 30th U-boat Flotilla, which operated from Romania for less than two years and with only six old Type II U-boats, sank 100,000 tons of shipping - nearly half what all the Soviet submarines sank during the entire war.

The Soviet Union had very little experience in submarine warfare. Whatever was written in Pravda and Soviet history books, greater tonnage claims are not supported by naval losses suffered by Axis and neutral nations attacked by Soviet submarines. Combined circumstances prevented the Soviet submarines from achieving much during the war. Of all the major powers involved in World War II, the Soviet Union sank least tonnage.

I see Rohwer books and other on base books it's autor. In Rowher books near all data was false. You can see it's easer simple read what write in Rohwer and what was in real life from submarine attacks.

About more - all attacks soviet submarine in wwii you can see in my database.
About sinking near 100000 tons soviet ships in Black sea - I unknow about total I have many small results sinking german and romanian submarines in Black sea during wwii. I not place data, so I have not full KTB all german submarines in WWII. When I can have all KTB's I place data in my database.

About sinking - all attacks in my database was write from submarines logs. In USSR was many researche made in late 1940 - early 1950 with help germane sources from East Germany.