Who had the best submarines in wwII? - Page 4

Kpt. Lehmann · 03-19-08, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mikhayl

..."all you need is good men"

Amen to that.

Penelope_Grey · 03-19-08, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by danurve

Hey Pen! BDU found out where your hiding and the word is out.

That's it!?

THATS my cameo in GWX a badly damaged cruiser!? Well... somebody's head is going to roll for this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

My head hurt after reading that.

In a good way? :hmm:

AVGWarhawk · 03-19-08, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Quote:
Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk
My head hurt after reading that.

In a good way? :hmm:

Is there every a good way for a head to hurt :hmm:

Penelope_Grey · 03-19-08, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Quote:

Quote:
Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk
My head hurt after reading that.

In a good way? :hmm:

Is there every a good way for a head to hurt :hmm:

Ah come on... was good wasn't it?

ozzysoldier · 03-19-08, 11:48 AM

the dutch had some boats too

Kipparikalle · 03-19-08, 11:51 AM

And Finland too! (Tho there were only 5 of them, 2 got sunk)

And come to think about it... Why GWX Doesn't have the legendary finnish battleships "Ilmarinen" And "Väinämöinen"?

AVGWarhawk · 03-19-08, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Penelope_Grey

Quote:

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Quote:

Quote:
Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk
My head hurt after reading that.

In a good way? :hmm:

Is there every a good way for a head to hurt :hmm:

Ah come on... was good wasn't it?

Coming from you it was excellent. Have you tried the SH4UB addon yet?

predavolk · 03-19-08, 11:52 AM

These arguments are fun, but impossible to solve. I think the best argument one can make is which sub had the greatest impact on the overall war. And in that case, there is no doubt that the Type VII, just like the Me-109, had the greatest impact on the war BY FAR. You can also compare tonnages sank, and again, I believe the Type VII comes out well ahead. Neither the VII nor the Me-109 might be the very best sub/airplane from WW2, but of all those involved, they had the greatest impact. It's for the same reason that I consider the P-48 to be superior to the Mustang in terms of its importance.

You can argue about what COULD do forever. Even if it's fun! But as for what DID do, that's quite clear. If I had to pick a sub, I would pick one of the latest US boats because they had the most recent advancements. If I had was playing "pro-line" or betting on the number of "goals" a sub got, I would bet very heavily on the Type VII. I wouldn't bet much on anything non-nuclear vs. the Allies in the Atlantic circa 44-45!

Kipparikalle · 03-19-08, 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by predavolk

These arguments are fun, but impossible to solve. I think the best argument one can make is which sub had the greatest impact on the overall war. And in that case, there is no doubt that the Type VII, just like the Me-109, had the greatest impact on the war BY FAR. You can also compare tonnages sank, and again, I believe the Type VII comes out well ahead. Neither the VII nor the Me-109 might be the very best sub/airplane from WW2, but of all those involved, they had the greatest impact. It's for the same reason that I consider the P-48 to be superior to the Mustang in terms of its importance.

You can argue about what COULD do forever. Even if it's fun! But as for what DID do, that's quite clear. If I had to pick a sub, I would pick one of the latest US boats because they had the most recent advancements. If I had was playing "pro-line" or betting on the number of "goals" a sub got, I would bet very heavily on the Type VII. I wouldn't bet much on anything non-nuclear vs. the Allies in the Atlantic circa 44-45!

God damnit Predavolk! Now we don't have nothing to do in here!

Platapus · 03-19-08, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jas39

I have to say that I respectfully disagree with the opinions of the book. In the end of the war, the 2 XXI's that the US could have captured would have been of bad quality naturally because their manufacturing had been hurried in order to put them to sea. If the boats had ben built by the exact specifications as on the drawing board, then it might have been different...

May I ask, respectfully, what you base your disagreement on? Do you have dissenting evaluations of the Type XXI. If so, I would be very very interested in reading them. The evaluation of the Type XXI is becoming an interest with me.

I agree about the manufacturing but we have to evaluate the Type XXI as it was actually built not as it "should have" been built. But manufacturing aside, what about the Hydraulic System? That seems to be to be a pretty significant vulnerability that was a design issue not a manufacturing issue.

Anyway Love or hate the Type XXI as you like

That's what friendly debates are all about

I just think that in sub games the Type XXI seems to be elevated to mythological levels as the ultimate super-sub. In sub games the Type XXI may be the bestest boat but I believe that the original poster's question was focused on reality.

Based on the American evaluation (and I see no reason to suspect them lying), the Type XXI could have been the best boat, but in reality had significant problems that could have eventually been fixed if the Germans had time.

I am sure that given time (something the Germans simply did not have in 1945) that the Type XXI Mod 2 would have been a better boat.

In the context of "could have been" the best sub, an investigation of some of the Japanese subs with the Type 95 could have been the best subs if their design was improved and their implementation strategy changed.

But more importantly, as the other posters stated. Best Submarine is difficult to address as the missions and operating environments were different.

A better question would be "what was the best submarine for xxxx mission?

Platapus · 03-19-08, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by predavolk

And in that case, there is no doubt that the Type VII, just like the Me-109, had the greatest impact on the war BY FAR.

The maximum diving depth of the Me-109 sucked. It was able to dive quickly but once fully submerged it took forever to surface again.

The maneuverability of the Type VII stunk too. Split-s and Immelman's were awkward and ineffective.

Fincuan · 03-19-08, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kipparikalle

And Finland too! (Tho there were only 5 of them, 2 got sunk)

Tsst tsst... None of them got sunk, but all except Vesikko, which is a museum boat in Helsinki, were scrapped after the Continuation war
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categor...nes_of_Finland

Graf Paper · 03-19-08, 01:44 PM

Platpus, that was classically..:rotfl:

I'd have to say that if you were to define "best" my own views are thus...

Assuming equally competent crews as a measuring stick:

Technologically and tactically, the u-boat in general is the better. Many advances in sub tech were copied by the Allies from captured u-boats, especially the XXI being the template for sub technology during the beginning of the Cold War. The Wolfpack and other tactics of the U-bootwaffe are still required reading at Annapolis. Germany demonstrated to the world that the submarine was a viable and deadly weapon.

The irony there being that it was an American that invented the modern submarine, yet it was Germany that exploited the technology and used the submarine to its fullest potential.

Strategically and logistically the American subs were the better. Their interdiction of Japanese shipping was far more successful than Germany's interdiction of Britain.

All the "what-if" comparisons aside, the Atlantic sub war was an entirely different beast from the Pacific sub war so it's difficult to make accurate comparisons.

msalama · 03-19-08, 11:42 PM

Quote:

But that would be something for a Mod... the Russion subs :hmm:

Yah, that would rock. Could be difficult to implement, though, because Russian sub warfare during WWII is a subject no-one seems to know anything about, at least in the West...

Gotta read this methinks: http://uboat.net/books/reviews.html/title/2247

Torplexed · 03-20-08, 12:02 AM

The Soviet Union had the largest sub fleet in the world when Germany attacked in 1941. Over 200 boats of various types. But they were victims of Russia's rambling geography being divided between four widely separated fleets; the Baltic, Black, Northern and Pacific. Given the Soviet Union's obvious army-centric approach, they also seem to have been poorly maintained and to have lacked sonar or modern fire control equipment. Other than the sinking of the Wilhelm Gustloff late in the war with heavy loss of life I can't think of too many Russian submarine successes that come to mind.

You can read about the Wilhelm Gustloff disaster here: http://www.wilhelmgustloff.com/

03-19-08, 01:44 PM	#58
Graf Paper Ace of the Deep Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Pacific Northwest United States Posts: 1,146 Downloads: 41 Uploads: 2	Platpus, that was classically..:rotfl: I'd have to say that if you were to define "best" my own views are thus... Assuming equally competent crews as a measuring stick: Technologically and tactically, the u-boat in general is the better. Many advances in sub tech were copied by the Allies from captured u-boats, especially the XXI being the template for sub technology during the beginning of the Cold War. The Wolfpack and other tactics of the U-bootwaffe are still required reading at Annapolis. Germany demonstrated to the world that the submarine was a viable and deadly weapon. The irony there being that it was an American that invented the modern submarine, yet it was Germany that exploited the technology and used the submarine to its fullest potential. Strategically and logistically the American subs were the better. Their interdiction of Japanese shipping was far more successful than Germany's interdiction of Britain. All the "what-if" comparisons aside, the Atlantic sub war was an entirely different beast from the Pacific sub war so it's difficult to make accurate comparisons. __________________ Still sailing the high seas, hunting convoys with those who join me.

03-19-08, 11:48 AM	#50
ozzysoldier Bosun Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 64 Downloads: 139 Uploads: 0	the dutch had some boats too

03-19-08, 11:51 AM	#51
Kipparikalle Samurai Navy Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Finland Posts: 580 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	And Finland too! (Tho there were only 5 of them, 2 got sunk) And come to think about it... Why GWX Doesn't have the legendary finnish battleships "Ilmarinen" And "Väinämöinen"?

03-19-08, 11:52 AM	#53
predavolk Weps Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 369 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	These arguments are fun, but impossible to solve. I think the best argument one can make is which sub had the greatest impact on the overall war. And in that case, there is no doubt that the Type VII, just like the Me-109, had the greatest impact on the war *BY FAR*. You can also compare tonnages sank, and again, I believe the Type VII comes out well ahead. Neither the VII nor the Me-109 might be the very best sub/airplane from WW2, but of all those involved, they had the greatest impact. It's for the same reason that I consider the P-48 to be superior to the Mustang in terms of its importance. You can argue about what COULD do forever. Even if it's fun! But as for what DID do, that's quite clear. If I had to pick a sub, I would pick one of the latest US boats because they had the most recent advancements. If I had was playing "pro-line" or betting on the number of "goals" a sub got, I would bet very heavily on the Type VII. I wouldn't bet much on anything non-nuclear vs. the Allies in the Atlantic circa 44-45!

03-20-08, 12:02 AM	#60
Torplexed Let's Sink Sumptin' ! Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 5,823 Downloads: 43 Uploads: 0	The Soviet Union had the largest sub fleet in the world when Germany attacked in 1941. Over 200 boats of various types. But they were victims of Russia's rambling geography being divided between four widely separated fleets; the Baltic, Black, Northern and Pacific. Given the Soviet Union's obvious army-centric approach, they also seem to have been poorly maintained and to have lacked sonar or modern fire control equipment. Other than the sinking of the Wilhelm Gustloff late in the war with heavy loss of life I can't think of too many Russian submarine successes that come to mind. You can read about the Wilhelm Gustloff disaster here: http://www.wilhelmgustloff.com/