OT: British Subs?

GerritJ9 · 08-30-07, 03:14 PM

The resources Churchill sent to Malaya were too little and too late, and, arguably, in part the wrong kind. Surely, it could have been argued even then, a flotilla of "T" class subs would have been more effective than HMS "PoW" and "Repulse"? Leaving aside the "small" matter of air power, the IJN had ten battleships in service with "Yamato" nearing completion (unknown to the Allies). If necessary, the IJN would have sent the four "Kongos" to deal with "PoW" and "Repulse", together with a large screen of cruisers and destroyers- which the British ships did not have.
Certainly British leaders (Shenton Thomas, Brooke-Popham, Percival, Phillips) in Malaya were hardly the right men in the right place at the right time, but the same can be said of many other Allied leaders in the Malay Barrier area- MacArthur, Hart and, to a lesser extent, Helfrich.
A flotilla of "T"s would have been most welcome at that time, given the relative ineffectiveness of the US submarines, handicapped as they were by their less than adequate torpedoes and, for a time, strict orders not to attack in waters where the depth was less than 60 metres. Submarines- and lots of them- were the only way in which the Japanese advance could have been seriously blunted.

Lafferty · 08-30-07, 04:18 PM

I've never heard of the restriction of 60 feet. How long was it in affect?

GerritJ9 · 08-31-07, 04:08 AM

My source for the restriction is note 67 on page 203 of Dr. Ph. M. Bosscher's "De Koninklijke Marine in de Tweede Wereldoorlog, deel 2" ("The Royal Netherlands Navy in WW2, volume 2). This refers to Hezlet's "Submarine and Sea Power", page 212, where it is mentioned that US submarines operating in NEI waters in February 1942 were, in principle, not allowed to attack in areas where the water depth was less than 90 metres (the 60 was a typo errror), or approx. 300 feet, and were preferably not to attack at "close range" if the target was escorted. It may well have been a restriction that applied ONLY to submarines of the Asiatic Fleet, originating from that fleet's HQ. Since the Asiatic Fleet is largely forgotten, it is not surprising that this order's existence is not widely known- I didn't know of it until I read the note in Bosscher's book.

08-30-07, 03:14 PM	#1
GerritJ9 Sonar Guy Join Date: May 2007 Location: Netherlands Posts: 389 Downloads: 47 Uploads: 6	The resources Churchill sent to Malaya were too little and too late, and, arguably, in part the wrong kind. Surely, it could have been argued even then, a flotilla of "T" class subs would have been more effective than HMS "PoW" and "Repulse"? Leaving aside the "small" matter of air power, the IJN had ten battleships in service with "Yamato" nearing completion (unknown to the Allies). If necessary, the IJN would have sent the four "Kongos" to deal with "PoW" and "Repulse", together with a large screen of cruisers and destroyers- which the British ships did not have. Certainly British leaders (Shenton Thomas, Brooke-Popham, Percival, Phillips) in Malaya were hardly the right men in the right place at the right time, but the same can be said of many other Allied leaders in the Malay Barrier area- MacArthur, Hart and, to a lesser extent, Helfrich. A flotilla of "T"s would have been most welcome at that time, given the relative ineffectiveness of the US submarines, handicapped as they were by their less than adequate torpedoes and, for a time, strict orders not to attack in waters where the depth was less than 60 metres. Submarines- and lots of them- were the only way in which the Japanese advance could have been seriously blunted. __________________ Quamvis Patiens Acris My SH3/SH4 mods: http://www.gamefront.com/files/user/GerritJ9

08-31-07, 04:08 AM	#3
GerritJ9 Sonar Guy Join Date: May 2007 Location: Netherlands Posts: 389 Downloads: 47 Uploads: 6	My source for the restriction is note 67 on page 203 of Dr. Ph. M. Bosscher's "De Koninklijke Marine in de Tweede Wereldoorlog, deel 2" ("The Royal Netherlands Navy in WW2, volume 2). This refers to Hezlet's "Submarine and Sea Power", page 212, where it is mentioned that US submarines operating in NEI waters in February 1942 were, in principle, not allowed to attack in areas where the water depth was less than 90 metres (the 60 was a typo errror), or approx. 300 feet, and were preferably not to attack at "close range" if the target was escorted. It may well have been a restriction that applied ONLY to submarines of the Asiatic Fleet, originating from that fleet's HQ. Since the Asiatic Fleet is largely forgotten, it is not surprising that this order's existence is not widely known- I didn't know of it until I read the note in Bosscher's book. __________________ Quamvis Patiens Acris My SH3/SH4 mods: http://www.gamefront.com/files/user/GerritJ9

08-30-07, 04:18 PM	#2
Lafferty Officer Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Hot Springs Arkansas Posts: 245 Downloads: 51 Uploads: 0	I've never heard of the restriction of 60 feet. How long was it in affect?