How much danger would we get in sh-4

[Harry Buttle]

Originally Posted by TheSatyr

I really don't understand why people seem to think the japanese stunk at anti-sub warfare...must be a European bias thing. After all they did manage to take down over 40 US subs out of around 200+ that saw action so they couldn't have been THAT bad.(Out of a total of 52 losses,2 were training accidents,2 were friendly fire incidents, at least 2 were killed by their own torps and a couple ran aground).

That would be because the Japanese truly sucked at ASW.

They lost 50% of their Merchants to Subs, their ASW doctrine, training and equipment were all poor and they had a cultural bias against it.

Its covered in all the references.

A much less than 20% kill rate (most USN subs made multiple sorties during the war making the 'kill per cruise' rate much lower) is not something to boast about.