If we had a time machine - Page 6

03-01-07, 11:16 AM

I would not, and not because of the conditions I'd be living in or the risk. I'd actually relish that challenge.

No, the real reason I would not wish to do so is quite simple, really: When I torpedo a ship on SHIII, I'm sinking pixels crewed by pixels. In combat, for real, I'd be sinking real ships (which wouldn't disturb me) but I'd also be killing real people . . . and that does disturb me.

Penelope_Grey · 03-01-07, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by STEED

Quote:

Originally Posted by Penelope_Grey

Hitler never really wanted war with the UK, and the main tactic of the U-boat forces was to try and starve the UK into complete submission, by cutting off its supply line which was the sea.

I think of it like this - the Uboats were like a hand around Britain's neck trying to choke us into unconsciousness. Rather than the fist slamming into our faces over and over till we were beat into an unconscious bloody pulp. Of course that changed with the bombing of the cities. Mind you, Churchill goaded Hitler to bomb cities rather than the airfields.

The whole idea of defeating Britain was very haphazard in my opinion. The U-boats were trying to cut off the supply lines and they very nearly succeeded.

No chance what so ever, two things the basic design of the U-Boats had hardly changed from WW1 and the second thing, Hitler ordered a massive cut back in the area of scientific research due the fact Germany was ahead of everyone else and mainland Europe was under Nazi control.

The cut back in research allowed the British to catch up and then over take Germany. It's true to say the U-Boats did indeed inflict major damage but they just could not win. When Hitler attacked Russia he sealed his fate as he bled his army white in Russia and not forgetting his other big blunder by declaring war on America.

As for the poll, some of you captains need a holiday.

Britain came within 4 weeks of total collapse due to the supply lines being cut so drastically. The government could only have stayed in the war another 4 weeks, before they would have had to bow out. The U-boat men came close.

ParaB · 03-01-07, 11:39 AM

To the original question:

Hell, no!

Jimbuna · 03-01-07, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Britain came within 4 weeks of total collapse due to the supply lines being cut so drastically. The government could only have stayed in the war another 4 weeks, before they would have had to bow out. The U-boat men came close.

I'd like to know the source of this because one of my sources 'Clay Blair-Hitler's U -boat War' states that the Germans seldom ever had more than 20 subs on station in the Atlantic at any given time....and NEVER sank any more than 3% of the merchant shipping available to the Allies. :hmm:

STEED · 03-01-07, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbuna

Quote:

Britain came within 4 weeks of total collapse due to the supply lines being cut so drastically. The government could only have stayed in the war another 4 weeks, before they would have had to bow out. The U-boat men came close.

I'd like to know the source of this because one of my sources 'Clay Blair-Hitler's U -boat War' states that the Germans seldom ever had more than 20 subs on station in the Atlantic at any given time....and NEVER sank any more than 3% of the merchant shipping available to the Allies. :hmm:

Are you stole my thunder.

Yep that's the point I was going to raise.

PS: Just as a side line the R.A.F during the Battle of Britain was not about too be knocked out. This is another historical error.

Sailor Steve · 03-01-07, 11:50 AM

The book I refered to earlier, The Battle Of The Atlantic, says something similar; that the rationing was so bad in 1940 that Churchill was begging Roosevelt for any help at all that the Americans could give. Also they show that at one point in 1943 there were as many as 90 u-boats on station.

As to which is right, I have no idea.

STEED · 03-01-07, 11:56 AM

One thing we must remember a lot of German records were destroyed.

CptGrayWolf · 03-01-07, 11:57 AM

Sailor Steve what did you answer buddy? I bet you're a one patrol kind of guy?

GlobalExplorer · 03-01-07, 12:07 PM

Everyone who answered this question with yes is a big idiot imo. He would prefer fighting and killing other people from this forum, instead of enjoying the games with them.

My answer is: never! The only place war is fun for me is on a computer screen.

CptGrayWolf · 03-01-07, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GlobalExplorer

Everyone who answered this question with yes is a big idiot imo. He would prefer fighting and killing other people from this forum, instead of enjoying the games with them.

My answer is: never! The only place war is fun for me is on a computer screen.

Well I don't think the people who answered yes, were thinking about it quite in that context...
Maybe going back and living as a simple crew member instead of the captain would have been a less complicated question.
My poll was really not meant to be so philosophical/ethical.

GlobalExplorer · 03-01-07, 12:48 PM

Certainly. Still I wanted to remind people of what the question means.

Seeing such a poll would be really frustrating to people who were there at the time. As far as I have seen it they are just glad to live, and asking them if they would go back would be mad.

I remember how I brought together my father (who was a flak gunner) and Johnny, a british bomber guy I met during my time in England. They didn't talk about the war, at least not that I remember, but they liked each other very much because they had been through the same experiences. If there is one thing I remember Johnny saying to me it was:

Don't forget how luck you are to live today!

Kumando · 03-01-07, 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GlobalExplorer

Everyone who answered this question with yes is a big idiot imo. He would prefer fighting and killing other people from this forum, instead of enjoying the games with them.

My answer is: never! The only place war is fun for me is on a computer screen.

I second that mate

.

Brag · 03-01-07, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbuna

Quote:

Britain came within 4 weeks of total collapse due to the supply lines being cut so drastically. The government could only have stayed in the war another 4 weeks, before they would have had to bow out. The U-boat men came close.

I'd like to know the source of this because one of my sources 'Clay Blair-Hitler's U -boat War' states that the Germans seldom ever had more than 20 subs on station in the Atlantic at any given time....and NEVER sank any more than 3% of the merchant shipping available to the Allies. :hmm:

In one of his books, Winston Churchil mentions the dire situation Britain was in (very close to what Penelope describes) I think in 1941. Fuel and food reserves together with goods coming through were only enough for a few weeks -- then the tide turned.

Penelope_Grey · 03-01-07, 02:06 PM

I didn't actually know the source, my brother told me, If Churchill himself said that... then I guess I was right then?

mookiemookie · 03-01-07, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbuna

Quote:

Britain came within 4 weeks of total collapse due to the supply lines being cut so drastically. The government could only have stayed in the war another 4 weeks, before they would have had to bow out. The U-boat men came close.

I'd like to know the source of this because one of my sources 'Clay Blair-Hitler's U -boat War' states that the Germans seldom ever had more than 20 subs on station in the Atlantic at any given time....and NEVER sank any more than 3% of the merchant shipping available to the Allies. :hmm:

Having read that same book, I got the distinct impression that Clay Blair had an axe to grind and he was awfully slanted. Just my opinion though.

As I recall, the figure was 97 or 98% of allied shipping reached their destination safely. This is all well and good, however when you average out the percentage reaching port safely over the total war, you lose a sense of the ebb and flow of the way the war went. I could be wrong, but I find it hard to believe that during late 39 and throughout 1940 98% of shipping reached port safely. I feel Blair has distorted the numbers there.

uboataces says:

"The wolfpack attacks were extremely successful, leading to a colossal slaughter of British shipping. In the three month period from September 2 to December 2 1940, 157 allied ships had been sunk for a total of 847,000 tons. In the same period, only three u-boats had been lost, making the exchange rate of 1 to 52 - a horrendous rate of loss. Oil imports in Great Britain fell to half the normal rate covering only two thirds of her consumption. This rate of loss would soon bring Britain to her knees. Such was the calamity of the looming crisis, that it was at this point that British Prime Minister Winston Churchill had privately confided that he feared the Battle of the Atlantic may have been lost – along with Britain’s ability to continue fighting." http://www.uboataces.com/boa-fall-france.shtml

View Poll Results: would you go back and live a full career as a U-boat captain?
Yes I would! Commanding a U-boat and living those days would be an amazing experience!	26	16.25%
Hmm... I would, but no patrols past 1943!	13	8.13%
Hmm... I would, but just for one patrol only, no more!	22	13.75%
No way! Are you nuts!? Sitting in front of my computer is as close as I ever want to get to WWII.	99	61.88%
Voters: 160. You may not vote on this poll

03-01-07, 11:50 AM	#81
Sailor Steve Eternal Patrol Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: High in the mountains of Utah Posts: 50,369 Downloads: 745 Uploads: 249	The book I refered to earlier, The Battle Of The Atlantic, says something similar; that the rationing was so bad in 1940 that Churchill was begging Roosevelt for any help at all that the Americans could give. Also they show that at one point in 1943 there were as many as 90 u-boats on station. As to which is right, I have no idea. __________________ “Never do anything you can't take back.” —Rocky Russo

03-01-07, 11:56 AM	#82
STEED Lucky Jack Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Down Town UK Posts: 27,695 Downloads: 89 Uploads: 48	One thing we must remember a lot of German records were destroyed. __________________ Dr Who rest in peace 1963-2017. To borrow Davros saying...I NAME YOU CHIBNALL THE DESTROYER OF DR WHO YOU KILLED IT!

03-01-07, 11:57 AM	#83
CptGrayWolf Commander Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Saint Lawrence Seaway Posts: 459 Downloads: 11 Uploads: 0	Sailor Steve what did you answer buddy? I bet you're a one patrol kind of guy? __________________ Thomas Voltz, U-93 VIIc, Aug 1940, at sea patrol 1 GWX3 Gold, 100%

03-01-07, 12:07 PM	#84
GlobalExplorer Admiral Join Date: May 2005 Location: Berlin Posts: 2,015 Downloads: 165 Uploads: 0	Everyone who answered this question with yes is a big idiot imo. He would prefer fighting and killing other people from this forum, instead of enjoying the games with them. My answer is: never! The only place war is fun for me is on a computer screen. __________________

03-01-07, 11:16 AM	#76
Albrecht Von Hesse Stowaway Posts: n/a Downloads: Uploads:	I would not, and not because of the conditions I'd be living in or the risk. I'd actually relish that challenge. No, the real reason I would not wish to do so is quite simple, really: When I torpedo a ship on SHIII, I'm sinking pixels crewed by pixels. In combat, for real, I'd be sinking real ships (which wouldn't disturb me) but I'd also be killing real people . . . and that does disturb me.

03-01-07, 11:39 AM	#78
ParaB Chief Join Date: May 2005 Location: Germany Posts: 327 Downloads: 16 Uploads: 0	To the original question: Hell, no!

03-01-07, 12:48 PM	#86
GlobalExplorer Admiral Join Date: May 2005 Location: Berlin Posts: 2,015 Downloads: 165 Uploads: 0	Certainly. Still I wanted to remind people of what the question means. Seeing such a poll would be really frustrating to people who were there at the time. As far as I have seen it they are just glad to live, and asking them if they would go back would be mad. I remember how I brought together my father (who was a flak gunner) and Johnny, a british bomber guy I met during my time in England. They didn't talk about the war, at least not that I remember, but they liked each other very much because they had been through the same experiences. If there is one thing I remember Johnny saying to me it was: Don't forget how luck you are to live today! __________________

03-01-07, 02:06 PM	#89
Penelope_Grey Sea Lord Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: UK Posts: 1,893 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	I didn't actually know the source, my brother told me, If Churchill himself said that... then I guess I was right then? __________________ I SURVIVED THE FIRST EVER SUBSIM WEREWOLF HUNT - and... I actually won the game for the humans too!