Topside torpedoes

[Aktungbby]

Originally Posted by me

My bet is, externally stored U-boat eels began declining in June 1943 when Doenitz resumed his futile efforts...saving the Reich a few RieichsMarks for the Russian front ...pending further investigations of course!

Originally Posted by KriegsMarine

I guess it's gotta be the year of 1943, maybe after the Black May.

Originally Posted by Kapitän

Standing B.d.U. Order No.305, from 3 May 1943 states:


1. Type VII B, C, D - None
2. Type IX B, C - Normally, none - IX C only with Special Patrol Order, 2 Upper Deck Containers with 2 Torpedoes
3. Type IX D - 12 Upper Deck Containers with 12 Torpdoes

TAAAA daaaa! is there a web site for that order?

[Kapitän]

Originally Posted by Aktungbby

TAAAA daaaa! is there a web site for that order?

http://www.uboatarchive.net/index.html

[Aktungbby]

thanx!

[FUBAR295]

If you go to http://www.uboatarchive.net/BDU/BDUKTB30323.htm and on page 330 the following shows up on Doenitz's KTB for May 1 to 15, 1943.

Good hunting,
FUBAR295

VI. General: Provision of upper deck containers: On 30.4 the order was given to omit upper deck containers when fitting out all boats operating in the North Atlantic. This order was necessitated by the gradually increasing number of cases where, when the boats were depth-charged or bombed, especially at fairly great depths, the upper deck containers were cracked or started leaking, or were swamped and thus very gravely endangered the boat, especially the Type IX which carries 8 deck containers. It is suspected that this has been the cause of the loss of many boats. The following orders are now in force for the provision of upper deck containers: 1) Type VIIb, c, d - none. 2) Type IXb, c - normally none. Type IXc is to take 6 upper deck containers with 6 torpedoes when special orders are given, but only on operations in the south. 3) Type IXd - 12 upper deck containers with 12 torpedoes. Thus, the upper deck cargo for IXc boats operating in the
south has been reduced from 8 to 6 torpedoes to reduce the danger to the boat if containers should spring a leak.
In connection with the foregoing order Ob.d.M. made the following decision regarding new construction of upper deck containers. i) Containers on all boats in commission will not be replaced if they have proved faulty. ii) New construction Type VIIc will be equipped with stronger iron upper deck containers as already planned, also, as before, the loading gear for use at sea. iii) New construction Type IXc will be equipped with 6 upper deck containers built of light metal, but possessing greater stability; Type IXd will carry 12 containers. iv) Type IXb and c boats putting to sea without upper deck containers will not have their ballast redistributed, but will carry some 5 tons less fuel. v) Type Xb will be issued with 6 upper deck containers as before, but they are only to be put on board if special orders are given.

[John Pancoast]

Originally Posted by FUBAR295

If you go to http://www.uboatarchive.net/BDU/BDUKTB30323.htm and on page 330 the following shows up on Doenitz's KTB for May 1 to 15, 1943.

Good hunting,
FUBAR295

VI. General: Provision of upper deck containers: On 30.4 the order was given to omit upper deck containers when fitting out all boats operating in the North Atlantic. This order was necessitated by the gradually increasing number of cases where, when the boats were depth-charged or bombed, especially at fairly great depths, the upper deck containers were cracked or started leaking, or were swamped and thus very gravely endangered the boat, especially the Type IX which carries 8 deck containers. It is suspected that this has been the cause of the loss of many boats. The following orders are now in force for the provision of upper deck containers: 1) Type VIIb, c, d - none. 2) Type IXb, c - normally none. Type IXc is to take 6 upper deck containers with 6 torpedoes when special orders are given, but only on operations in the south. 3) Type IXd - 12 upper deck containers with 12 torpedoes. Thus, the upper deck cargo for IXc boats operating in the
south has been reduced from 8 to 6 torpedoes to reduce the danger to the boat if containers should spring a leak.
In connection with the foregoing order Ob.d.M. made the following decision regarding new construction of upper deck containers. i) Containers on all boats in commission will not be replaced if they have proved faulty. ii) New construction Type VIIc will be equipped with stronger iron upper deck containers as already planned, also, as before, the loading gear for use at sea. iii) New construction Type IXc will be equipped with 6 upper deck containers built of light metal, but possessing greater stability; Type IXd will carry 12 containers. iv) Type IXb and c boats putting to sea without upper deck containers will not have their ballast redistributed, but will carry some 5 tons less fuel. v) Type Xb will be issued with 6 upper deck containers as before, but they are only to be put on board if special orders are given.

[FUBAR295]

Just a side note, this is used by the mod "Just Following Orders" or "JFO" which makes a difference in how you approach things, because of those orders. It shows just how thoroughly they research their material for use. A great mod that I think should be used.

Good hunting,
FUBAR295

[John Pancoast]

Originally Posted by FUBAR295

Just a side note, this is used by the mod "Just Following Orders" or "JFO" which makes a difference in how you approach things, because of those orders. It shows just how thoroughly they research their material for use. A great mod that I think should be used.

Good hunting,
FUBAR295

I downloaded it a long time ago, just haven't got around to trying it yet. Thanks for the tip.

[FUBAR295]

John, it is a must for me, as one who keeps a real full KTB, does both manual and Weapons Officer targeting ( depends on what is going on ), and try to follow orders coming from BdU. Keeps the SH3 interesting, at least for me.

Try figuring out some of those orders and implement them, it can be interesting.

Good hunting,
FUBAR295

[John Pancoast]

Originally Posted by FUBAR295

John, it is a must for me, as one who keeps a real full KTB, does both manual and Weapons Officer targeting ( depends on what is going on ), and try to follow orders coming from BdU. Keeps the SH3 interesting, at least for me.

Try figuring out some of those orders and implement them, it can be interesting.

Good hunting,
FUBAR295

Sounds good, once I get this campaign over I'll give it a try ! Though fishing season and summer is around the corner too.....

[FUBAR295]

Originally Posted by Aktungbby

My bet is, externally stored U-boat eels began declining in June 1943 when Doenitz resumed his futile efforts...saving the Reich a few RieichsMarks for the Russian front ...pending further investigations of course!

You were close on the date, and looks like 30 April 1943 is the time the orders went out and mentioned in Doenitz KTB on 7 May 1943. Gold star for you.

I always find reading Doenitz's KTB interesting as there are some gems of information in there if you care to look for them.

Good hunting,
FUBAR295

[Aktungbby]

I always find reading Doenitz's KTB interesting as there are some gems of information in there if you care to look for them.

The information is interesting but what strikes home is the consistent undertone of chaos and less than victory even in the daily reports. The Kreigsmarine is not winning at all; it is knee-jerk responding to the allied effort-particularly the air power- against which there is no solution.... In police work this is reactive not proactive. To win a global strategic war ya gotta be proactive and make the allies respond (knee-jerk) futilely to what you are doing to them. Minor tactical propaganda bright spots wll not carry the day. From may '43 of particular interest:

Originally Posted by May '43 ktb

The gaps caused by a rapid succession of convoy attacks in the North Atlantic during March had to be closed rapidly, as a large number of boats were needed to intercept the then widely scattered convoys. The IXc boats putting out in March and the steady stream of VIIc boats leaving port in April were able to make good this deficiency. b) Attacks on convoys during the past two months have definitely shown that Type IX boats are very vulnerable to bombing or depth charge attacks by reason of their more complicated structure. Comparative losses in the Atlantic give the following picture:

Losses:

Type IX Type VIIc March: 5 7 2 of these during attack on convoy 4 of these during attack on convoy - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - April: 7 and 1 boat that struck a mine 4 5 of these during attack on convoy 2 of these during attack on convoy - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The ratio of Type IX to Type VIIc boats is 1 - 3. Hence the losses of Type IXc boats are much heavier, now that enemy defences in the North Atlantic have been strengthened, and operations are only justifiable if chances of success are proportionally increased. c) The expectation of better opportunities in the North Atlantic which led to the order for operations there being issued on 6.4 has not been borne out by the final information reports for March and April made by boats in the Cape Town, Natal - Freetown and Caribbean area. Attacks made on convoys by U 510, 169, 515 showed that great successes are possible because of favorable anti-submarine conditions (few naval escorts with convoys and they lack experience). Thus despite less shipping in these areas chances are actually no less than in the North Atlantic. It has therefore been decided: Type IXc boats leaving French ports are to be detailed to remote western or southern operational areas. Boats of the same type from home ports will still make their first operational trip in the North Atlantic.

In short: the bigger badder IX types (with 33% more torprdoes??!!) are removed from the principle zone of conflict- the mid Atlantic convoy routes....and as in the post above only carrying 66% of their intended torpedo loads any way. (15 0f 22) Or as I pointed out with Hardigan (post#8) and his 15 eels as the prima facia example: 8 ships will not be sunk and he was an exceptionally proactive ace kaleun. Von C's rule 2: "whenever possible increase firepower" is kaput by '43; no victory at sea is feasible.

[John Pancoast]

Originally Posted by Aktungbby

[COLOR=palegreen]The information is interesting but what strikes home is the consistent undertone of chaos and less than victory even in the daily reports. The Kreigsmarine is not winning at all; it is knee-jerk responding to the allied effort-particularly the air power- against which there is no solution.... In police work this is reactive not proactive. To win a global strategic war ya gotta be proactive and make the allies respond (knee-jerk) futilely to what you are doing to them. Minor tactical propaganda bright spots wll not carry the day.

I agree completely with your thoughts; some of the ideas Doenitz et al came up with make one shake their head at their obvious silliness and no chance of success and that's not just from a hindsight point of view nor the usual "It was Hitler's fault, if he'd only listened to me" so common in memoirs.
"Chaos" is a perfect description for it. Always seems to be a "What should we do? ?" aspect, followed by a "I don't know" to many decisions.

Partly it's because Germany was so outclassed in manpower, industry, and technical areas but just as much because Doenitz was just plain "out Admiraled".

That's not meant to be braggadocio; more of what seems to be fact.

[John Pancoast]

Originally Posted by FUBAR295

Just a side note, this is used by the mod "Just Following Orders" or "JFO" which makes a difference in how you approach things, because of those orders. It shows just how thoroughly they research their material for use. A great mod that I think should be used.

Good hunting,
FUBAR295

Have an installation question about this mod. In reading the instructions about editing the menu.ini file, it seems he's saying you must use the items listed in the gui he used for the relevant .ini editing.
I.e., OLC this and that.tgas. (convoy map, etc.).

I have the FLB .tga equivalents in my current install; can I use those still with the needed to do so .ini editing of course, instead of the OLC ones the author lists ?
If not, which makman gui version is he referencing to get the .tga files from ?

[FUBAR295]

Originally Posted by John Pancoast

Have an installation question about this mod. In reading the instructions about editing the menu.ini file, it seems he's saying you must use the items listed in the gui he used for the relevant .ini editing.
I.e., OLC this and that.tgas. (convoy map, etc.).

I have the Fubar .tga equivalents in my current install; can I use those still with the needed to do so .ini editing of course, instead of the OLC ones the author lists ?
If not, which makman gui version is he referencing to get the .tga files from ?

If you have those items already installed , I would think then, you would need to change the location to OLC. According to the directions :

It is important that the location of the files (data/Menu/OLC/) remain unchanged as that directory is used to update the orders using the new executable file (see Section 4.2.2.1).

Its been a while since I installed this and went back to look at the file. I believe the .exe for JFO will look for and place the needed information on the drop downs so I would think the .ini needs to be pointing to OLC file.


Trust this helps.

Good hunting,
FUBAR295

[John Pancoast]

Originally Posted by FUBAR295

If you have those items already installed , I would think then, you would need to change the location to OLC. According to the directions :

It is important that the location of the files (data/Menu/OLC/) remain unchanged as that directory is used to update the orders using the new executable file (see Section 4.2.2.1).

Its been a while since I installed this and went back to look at the file. I believe the .exe for JFO will look for and place the needed information on the drop downs so I would think the .ini needs to be pointing to OLC file.


Trust this helps.

Good hunting,
FUBAR295

Yes, I was wondering about that. I'll make a OLC path jsgme folder with the tgas I already have and give it a try, thanks.