Surviving and evading destroyers in shallow water

[bstanko6]

I don't think the Uboat was used properly. Doenitz had the right idea for a blockade... his boss uncle Adolf was an idiot and rushed things, forcing a war they were not ready for. I think if Doenitz had the right amount of boats, and a strong budget to increase Uboat tech, we may have had a different history.

[Aktungbby]

Originally Posted by bstanko6

I don't think the Uboat was used properly. Doenitz had the right idea for a blockade... his boss uncle Adolf was an idiot and rushed things, forcing a war they were not ready for. I think if Doenitz had the right amount of boats, and a strong budget to increase Uboat tech, we may have had a different history.

nope! once the surface (Hedgehog mortars) and air are totally dominated by 10 centmeter radar capable of spotting a schnorkel (apex hunter a B-24 Liberator (flown by my still living 95 year old uncle); Cutting the five French U-boat ports on the Biscay Bay off from the Atlantic and a FIDO mk 24:

from US Navy OEG Study No. 289, 12 August 1946 provides the following data related to Mark 24 effectiveness:
Number of attacks in which Mark 24s were launched 264 Total number of Mark 24 torpedoes launched - all targets 340 Number of Mark 24s launched against submarines 204; Number of Mark 24 attacks on submarines by US aircraft 142; Number of Mark 24 attacks by Allied (primarily British) aircraft 62; Number of German U-boats sunk by FIDO 31; Number of German U-boats damaged by FIDO 15; Number of Japanese submarines sunk by FIDO 6; Number of Japanese submarines damaged by FIDO 3; Total number of submarines sunk by FIDO (German & Japanese) 37 Total number of submarines damaged 18

and your enigma ain't so enigmatic....(even after Doenitz added a fourth rotor) your happy times are over, technologically, tactically, strategically and numerically BBYY! Doenitz had read his Italian warfare book too:

After (black) May 1943, the rate of loss of U-boats was greater than the rate at which new U-boats were commissioned, and the number of operational U-boats slowly declined. On 24 May 1943, Karl Dönitz — shocked at the defeat suffered by the U-boats — ordered a temporary halt to the U-boat campaign; most were withdrawn from operational service.
May had seen a drop in allied losses coupled with a disastrous rise in U-boat losses; 18 boats were lost in convoy battles in the Atlantic in the month, 14 were lost to air patrols; six of these in the Bay of Biscay. With losses in other theatres, accident, or other causes, the total loss to the U-boat arm in May was 43 boats.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_May_(1943) Part of the u-boat's success is attributaable to the Prime Minister himself, a former first sealord, who knew Germany had been defeated under the Kaiser and would be again: he prioritized his bombers against the German land-mass first and the u-boat threat second:

....claimed that if the Admiralty’s demands for more aircraft had been met, the Battle of the Atlantic might have been won six months sooner. A recent article by John O’Connell asserts that victory could have been achieved a full year earlier if the British had allocated their aircraft differently. Dimbleby puts the figure at “many months.” The implication is that millions of tons of merchant shipping and thousands of lives might have been saved if Churchill had not prioritized the bomber offensive over the U-boat war.

https://winstonchurchill.hillsdale.edu/churchill-prolong-battle-atlantic/

[bstanko6]

So you are saying if Doenitz had 300 uboat, was able to produce the type XXI earlier, and got Goerring forex for a more assisting Luftwaffe...

There would still be no chance to choke Britain?

Hard to believe. Since Britain had no intention of advancing Anti sub tech after WW1.

[Aktungbby]

Originally Posted by bstanko6

So you are saying if Doenitz had 300 uboat, was able to produce the type XXI earlier, and got Goerring forex for a more assisting Luftwaffe...

There would still be no chance to choke Britain?

Hard to believe. Since Britain had no intention of advancing Anti sub tech after WW1.

A MORE SEVERE LONGER CHOKING PERHAPS BUT THE RESULT WOULD BE THE SAME AFTER OUR TECHNOLOGY ULTIMATELY NUKED NAZI SUB PENS ENROUTE TO BERLIN-IF U WANT TO DREAM YA GOTTA DREAM ON BOTH SIDES OF THE WHAT IF EQUATION BECAUSE RABID 'BOMBER' HARRIS, A PROPONENT OF TOTAL WARFARE, WOULDN'T HESITATE...

"I ... assume that the view under consideration is something like this: no doubt in the past we were justified in attacking German cities. But to do so was always repugnant and now that the Germans are beaten anyway we can properly abstain from proceeding with these attacks. This is a doctrine to which I could never subscribe. Attacks on cities like any other act of war are intolerable unless they are strategically justified. But they are strategically justified in so far as they tend to shorten the war and preserve the lives of Allied soldiers. To my mind we have absolutely no right to give them up unless it is certain that they will not have this effect. I do not personally regard the whole of the remaining cities of Germany as worth the bones of one British Grenadier Whenever the bombing campaign of World War II is considered it must be appreciated that the war was an "integrated process". As an example, quotingAlbert Speer from his book Inside The Third Reich, "ten thousand [88mm] anti-aircraft guns ... could well have been employed in Russia against tanks and other ground targets". The Soviet commanders clearly recognized Harris' efforts, as shown by the 29 February 1944 award of the Russian Order of Suvorov First Class to the air marshal

[John Pancoast]

Originally Posted by bstanko6

I don't think the Uboat was used properly. Doenitz had the right idea for a blockade... his boss uncle Adolf was an idiot and rushed things, forcing a war they were not ready for. I think if Doenitz had the right amount of boats, and a strong budget to increase Uboat tech, we may have had a different history.

Nah, Germany didn't have the industrial nor human resources for any of their plans especially once the US entered into it.
Plus, the Allies left the Germans in the ASW/Batlle of the Atlantic dust technology-wise.
The Royal Navy wasn't any pushover either.

[bstanko6]

I understand that...

What I am saying is Germany entered too early.

Had they not, and invested in Uboat tech, and to add not declare war on US. They would have had fighting chance.

[Aktungbby]

ADOLF NEVER COULD TELL TIME; NEITHER POLITICALLY OR HISTORICALLY....

[bstanko6]

I'll give you that. Germanys worst enemy was Hitler!

[Fifi]

What’s funny is that you are BOTH right!

That said it remains the biggest fear of mister Winston for the whole war was the U-Boat ... nothing else of what he wrote

[Aktungbby]

^ INDEED JOHN PANCOAST'S SIGNATURE AND I ALSO AGREE: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=2591183&postcount=2 THE TIMING FAILURE INCLUDED THE FACT THAT IN A THIRTY YEAR SPAN OF THE 20TH CENTURY, THE AXIS TECHNOLOGY FOR AN OFFSET SUBMARINE WAR-WINNING WAS PREMATURE-STILL ESSENTIALLY WW-I TECHNOLOGY; STILL IN THE IDEA PHASE; AND AT ONE POINT HAD MISERIES WITH TORPEDOS (ON BOTH SIDES). ONE EPISODE WHICH IS GENERALLY KNOWN BUT NOT FOCUSED ON IS DOENITZ'S 'STAND AND FIGHT ORDER' WHICH POINTS UP TOTAL CONCEPT FAILURE:

Standing War Order 483 in defiance of conventional wisdom. The “Fight Back Order” instructed German submarines transiting from French bases through the Bay of Biscay to fight off attacking aircraft on the surface rather than evade with a hasty crash dive. (FOUR UBOATS (RENAMED U-FLAK) WERE ENHANCED TO HELP WITH THIS INSANE AGRESSIVE CONCEPT AND SWIFTLY RECONFIGURED BACK TO THEIR ORIGINAL CONFIGURATION...) U-441 ie FLAK-1> show U-Boats shot down thirty-two aircraft, including seventeen four-engine types (B-17s, B-24s, Mariners, Halifaxes and Sunderlands), ten twin-engine bombers (Whitleys, PV-1s, Wellingtons and Catalinas), four single-engine fighters and attack planes (an Avenger, a Swordfish, and two Wildcats) and the anti-submarine blimp K-74 over the Florida Strait.


In return, aircraft sank twenty-six U-Boats and heavily damaged seventeen. Four-engine bombers were highly expensive—but submarines even more so. A U.S. Navy study concluded each standard Type VII U-Boat cost Nazi Germany $2.25 million dollars—while a four-engine B-24 cost about $297,000 and a twin-engine Catalina seaplane $90,000. Just as importantly, U-Boats had crews of around fifty, while the bombers were manned by five to twelve crew. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/nazis-ordered-their-u-boats-fight-airplanes-it-was-massive-mistake-29117

THE CHEAP SOLUTION TO AN EXPENSIVE UBOAT PROBLEM I REFERENCED EARLIER....TACTICAL AIRCRAFT TAKING OUT STRATEGIC UBOATS... A THING NO CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS CAN AFFORD TO DO TO WIN AN OFFSET WAR-THE SINEWS OF WAR MATH ALONE DOES NOT HOLD UP. DOENITZ FAILED : TO REALIZE THE FIGHTING ABILITIES OF A SUBMERSIBLE TORPEDO BOAT; AND TO REALIZE THAT THAT ALLIES AIR COMMANDERS WERE PERFECTLY PREPARED TO LOSE AN AIRCRAFT TO SINK A U-BOAT WILLING TO REMAIN SURFACED TO FIGHT IT OUT-EVEN A WOUNDED UBOAT WAS NEARLY AS GOOD A A SUNK ONE AS ATLANTIC REPAIR FACILITIES WERE JAMMED, CREATING YET ANOTHER 'TIMING' FAILURE.

[prozac919]

Guys, I just want to successfully complete the Airship Escort (GWX) single mission. I can sink the required tonnage but can't get away from the destroyers without getting wrecked (not enough torps left to take them on). I don't care how Doenitz did it (actually I do) but for game purposes, how do u successfully complete and survive this single mission?