Prefered Deckgun

[Julhelm]

He means if the germans had used fleet boats instead of u-boats the fleet boats would have been sunk.

Which is funny since the fleet boats had much better radar and far superior fire control. Not to mention more weapons.

[Rockin Robbins]

Originally Posted by Subnuts

Where did you hear that the first encounter between a Fleet boat and a German warship ended with the American submarine being sunk?

Actually the Japanese ASW capability was limited, although they learned as t he war went on to be quite dangerous.

In contrast, the Germans had NO ASW capacity at all! Zero. Zilch. Nada. No way to hunt and destroy submarines. Their only defense was to hightail it out of there fast enough that the submarines couldn't catch them.

So it's another baseless statement there by padi.

The German U-boat campaign was the best Allied attack of the war. It alone was sufficient to ensure the defeat of Germany. Every man in a U-boat was wasted precious manpower that would have worked for Germany instead of against, had they been employed on land. Every worker who built and repaired U-boats, every ounce of steel, fuel, ordinance was one that would not contribute to German war aims. They were all working for the Allies and a fine job they did.

[Rockin Robbins]

Originally Posted by padi

If the american subs have changed place with the germans they were sunk on their first battle...

There was a meeting between an American Submarine and a U-Boat in the Atlantic. The U-Boat was blown to smithereens. I'll let you research that as you're the one taunting.

People who are right don't need to taunt. U-Boats had no meaningful impact on the shipping between the new world and the old world because there weren't enough of them, they were too slow, they didn't carry enough firepower to make them effective, they chatted on the radio like a bunch of schoolgirls with cell phones. The Type VII was a coastal defense boat designed in WWI, not updated, and then pressed into ocean duty for which it was totally unsuited.

The American boat had twice as many motors, had a much better diesel/electric system, actual food preservation and preparation, valving systems that made sense and worked much better than the German systems, they were quieter, they were faster both on the surface and submerged, they carred enough armament that it made sense to send them the distances they had to go to do battle, there were no jokes like externally stored torpedoes that could help any depth charges sent their way, the crews had much higher morale and resolve (there was not a single case of an American submarine unhurt and surfacing to surrender like dozens of U-Boats did), great enough range to cover their assigned territory and a design newer than 1915!

Padi that is a very incomplete list of the absolute superiority of the American Submarine over the German U-Boat. No, the Germans could not have won the war with American submarines. Submarines were not appropriate for German war ends and the type of submarine that lost the war was an irrelevant detail. Daniel Gallery would just have had to draw a bigger circle to kill them.

But the American submarine was absolutely necessary for victory in the Pacific. German U-Boats would have been as useless as a screen door in a submarine. The American S-boats proved that beyond any shred of doubt. They shared some of the defects of U-boats while beating the U-boat in underwater speed.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Subnuts

A Type VII or Type IX would barely have enough fuel to make to make the journey from Pearl Harbor, to Japan and back.

I completely agree with you on the merits of the US boats and their purpose. I just wanted to point out that the Type IX had a longer cruising range than the Gato, and just as slow a dive time.

[Subnuts]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

I completely agree with you on the merits of the US boats and their purpose. I just wanted to point out that the Type IX had a longer cruising range than the Gato, and just as slow a dive time.

Yeah, I'm not sure why I didn't remember that the Type IX had a greater range at 10 knots when compared with the Gato and Balao.

Let's assume that one morning in 1944, all the Gatos and Balaos in the USN disappeared and were replaced by Type IXCs. Yes, we'd have a boat which could dive slightly faster and had a slightly longer surface range, could dive deeper, and have a smaller surface profile. We'd also end up with boat which was two to three knots slower on the surface, carried 12 fewer torpedoes internally, and didn't have effective surface or air search radar. We'd also end up sending boats without a shower, refrigerated storage, air conditioning, or sufficient bunks for the crew, into humid tropical waters for weeks on end. Sounds like a bum deal to me.

The funny thing is, despite how "huge and yachtlike" the fleet boats were, the Bureau of Ships were designing submarines even bigger than the Gato and Balao in 1945. Two of their designs submitted in May 1945 displaced between 330 and 490 tons more than the Tench class, featured an extra pair of stern torpedo tubes, six athwartship tubes for anti-escort torpedoes, much more powerful diesels, and thicker hulls giving a crush depth around 800 feet. Of course, these designs were put together before the Allies had a chance to examine the Type XXI.

Sorry this is getting off-topic.

[Jimbuna]

Don't forget the ice cream making machine