US vs. German subs - which was better?

[Puster Bill]

Originally Posted by predavolk

Oh, there's absolutely no doubt that nothing compared to the ASW in the Atlantic by the Allies. Not even close. The pacific and the German ASW were pathetic in comparison, especially towards the end of the war. The German boats, IMO, were the best design to take on that kind of intense ASW. They obviously weren't up to beating that ASW, but they did much better than the giant US boats, the archaic British boats (poor fire control and torps), and the passive Japanese boats. The fact that other boats may have sunk more or less is not only comparing apples to oranges, it's measuring their success in totally different contexts.

Absolutely, and that's why trying to compare the boats of different countries is iffy at best, because they served in totally different environments.

Now, Germany really didn't *NEED* to develop their ASW to the degree the Allies did, or to the degree that Japan should have. They get a pass pretty much because there was little submarine warfare against them.

Japan, on the other hand, should have started a crash program to develop and field any and every potentially useful ASW technique and technology as soon as it became apparent that the US was mounting a war of attrition against their merchant fleet. As it was, I believe that the IJN was so fixated on the "Decisive Battle" in terms of their main fleet clashing with the US fleet, that they didn't realize the decisive battle was actually the relentless sinking of their merchant hulls, and the supplies they carried.

I'm not sure what they could have realistically done. Probably the effort to make an equivalent of centimetric radar equipped VLR Liberators would have been problematic, although they did have maritime patrol aircraft equipped with metric radar if I recall correctly.

Certainly, they could have adopted some doctrinal changes, like "hunt to exhaustion", ie., you don't give up until you see the captains hat (preferrably still on his head) float to the surface. Having dedicated Hunter/Killer groups that can do that is another doctrinal change, as would recognizing that a couple of really big convoys, even if only minimally protected, are better than a bunch of small ones.

Almost certainly they would have failed on the codebreaking front: The SIGABA was much more sophisticated than even the 4 rotor Naval Enigma, and almost certainly unbreakable, given the technology of the day and the resources Japan could have used trying to break it.

I see no reason why the IJN couldn't have adopted a weapon similar to the Hedgehog.

Had Germany shared the technology from the T5, they could have also developed something similar to the FIDO anti-submarine torpedo. That would have been a *MAJOR* problem for US sub commanders, although I supposed countermeasures could have been developed.