Protecting convoys(Submarines escorts)

[captain_wright]

I'd like to know if submarines were ever considered to protect convoys from the America's to Europe or China, Australia and New Zealand during World War II?

captain_wright

[LWD]

I believe British subs managed to bag a few uboats. I think I recall something about them even beng towed behind merchantmen.

[Andy H]

I'd like to know if submarines were ever considered to protect convoys from the America's to Europe or China, Australia and New Zealand during World War II?

captain_wright

Hi CW

This thread http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 14&t=69638 started by yours truly in 2005 has at least one instance of Submarines acting as escorts!

Regards

Andy H

[Orwell1984]

http://warsailors.com/forum/read.php?1, ... #msg-18288

The thread above has quite a lot of detail on British and French submarines acting as convoy escorts in 1939 and 1940.

This thread has some of the same information but also touches on the submarines used as escorts in the PQ/QP convoys as well as in the Indian Ocean for an Australian/New Zealand troop convoy (HMS Otus).

http://uboat.net/forums/read.php?22,785 ... #msg-78548

[captain_wright]

What were the losses to axis submarines and surface ships when allied submarines escorted convoys?
Oh BTW, thanks!
c_w

[mescal]

Regarding the successes of Allied subs escorting convoys, below is the list I have of German U-boats sunk by Allied submarines

U-36 : Sunk by HMS Salmon in the North Sea, Dec 1939
U-51 : Sunk by HMS Cachalot off Nantes (FRA), Aug 40
U-144 : Sunk by SC-307 (USSR) in the Baltic, Aug 41
U-168 : Sunk by Zwaardvish (Dutch) in the Java Sea, Oct 44
U-183 : Sunk by USS Besugo in the Java Sea, Apr 45
U-301 : Sunk by HMS Sahib off Corsica, Jan 43
U-303 : Sunk by HMS Sickle off Toulon, May 43
U-308 : Sunk by HMS Truculent in the Norwegian Sea, Jun 43
U-335 : Sunk by HMS Saracens N of Faeroes, Aug 42
U-374 : Sunk by HMS Unbeaten off Sicilia, Jan 42
U-486 : Sunk by HMS Tapir off Bergen, Apr 45
U-537 : Sunk by USS Flounder in Java Sea, Nov 44
U-639 : Sunk by S-101 (USSR) in Kara Sea, Aug 43
U-644 : Sunk by HMS Tuna in the Norwegian Sea, Apr 43
U-771 : Sunk by HMS Venturer off Harstad, Nov 44
U-859 : Sunk by HMS Trenchant off Penang, Sept 44
U-974 : Sunk by Ula (Norwegian) off Stavanger, Apr 44
U-987 : Sunk by HMS Satyr in the Norwegian Sea, Jun 44

I do not see many which could have been sunk while attacking a convoy defended by a sub.
We can rule out all the losses in the Far East & Baltic. The losses in the Med were also not while attacking convoys.
Many were sinkings while the U-boat was entering or exiting harbor.
This leaves U-308, U-644 & U-987 which may have been attacking a Murmansk convoy at the time of their loss and thus be credited to an allied sub acting as escort of convoy.
But looking at the JW schedule, there were no such convoys when U-308, U-644 & U-987 were sunk.

This certainly does not prove that no allied subs escorted convoys, only that no sub escorting a convoy sank a U-boat.

[Andy H]

Hi Oliver

HMS (Submarine) Truculent, left Lerwick on June 2nd 1943 on her 4th war patrol and she was tasked to undertake anti-U-Boat patrol in the Norwegian Sea. She sighted U308 two days later, fired 6 torpedo's, of which 2 hit and sank the U-Boat.
So no convoy protection duty there.

Regards

Andy H

[mescal]

Hello,

I came across some more information on this topic :
While re-reading Roskill, I found a mention that the limited assets of submarines of the RN in 1941 were compounded by the detachment of four boats to Halifax or commerce protection.

After a little more research, mainly at uboat.net, which has a huge lot of data regarding the British boats, I found the following info :
In early 1941, the submarine depot ship HMS Forth and three T-class submarines were deployed at Halifax (out of four planned), the mission of the subs being the escort of transatlantic convoys.
They were not deployed to protect convoys from U-boats, but from the Kriegsmarine surface raiders then at large in the Atlantic.

They did not achieve any success, and were redeployed to other theaters late in the spring.

For the record, here are the submarines in question :

HMS Thunderbolt :
Arrived at Halifax 5 March 1941.
Escorted convoys SC-25, HX-115, SC-30, and took position to intercept Bismarck.
She attacked but missed U-557 on 15th June (IIRC, there is a description of this attack from the German POV in Werner's Iron Coffin)
Left for Gibraltar and Mediterranean deployment on 30th June

HMS Talisman :
Arrived at Halifax 26 March 1941.
Escorted convoys SC-28 and SC-32.
Left for Gibraltar and Mediterranean deployment on 30th June

HMS Tribune :
Arrived at Halifax 11 March 1941
Escorted convoys HX-117 and HX-126.
Arrives back in GB on 26 May.
(she was plagued during the whole detachment by engine defects which limited her speed)

HMS Taku :
Departed for Halifax 24 Feb.
Damaged by heavy weather and turned back.
Thereafter redeployed in Biscay.


I also found the following info while digging the uboat archives :

Tuna, which operated from Gibralatr, also escorted a convoy, HG-54 from 20 feb 1941 to 5 march.

[bronk7]

subs were too slow for ''close-in'' protection....

[Andy H]

Hi

HMS Pandora joined convoy OG55 7 days out (Mar 14th 1941) from Liverpool on route to Gibraltar, where it arrived 7 days later.

Regards

Andy H

[phylo_roadking]

Mescal...

I came across some more information on this topic :
While re-reading Roskill, I found a mention that the limited assets of submarines of the RN in 1941 were compounded by the detachment of four boats to Halifax or commerce protection.

After a little more research, mainly at uboat.net, which has a huge lot of data regarding the British boats, I found the following info :
In early 1941, the submarine depot ship HMS Forth and three T-class submarines were deployed at Halifax (out of four planned), the mission of the subs being the escort of transatlantic convoys.
They were not deployed to protect convoys from U-boats, but from the Kriegsmarine surface raiders then at large in the Atlantic.

They did not achieve any success, and were redeployed to other theaters late in the spring.

...any correlation between the RN's losses in the first half of 1941 in various theatres, and this submarine deployment in the Atlantic as some sort of "repalcement"?

[mescal]

Hello phylo,

...any correlation between the RN's losses in the first half of 1941 in various theatres, and this submarine deployment in the Atlantic as some sort of "repalcement"?

No, there is no correlation with the escort/destroyer losses.
Actually, the submarines were committed to the escort of convoys for entirely different reasons than the corvettes / destroyers.

There were four different kinds of threats (on the high seas, here I discount problems related to coastal convoys) :
1 - submarines, against which destroyers and similar ships were employed;
2 - luftwaffe : here it was the deployment of AA guns + escorts & CAM ships (before the arrival of CVE)
3 - auxiliary cruisers : the RN deployed its own auxiliary cruisers (+ regular cruisers) against this threat
4 - Kriegsmarine heavy units : they were countered by the commitment of RN heavy units.

It's against the threat n°4 that submarines were committed to the escort of convoys.
I never found explicit orders to confirm it, but given the time frame and the escorted convoys, it's quite clear : it fits the timing of the most serious Kriegsmarine surface warship raids (Scheer, Hipper, Scharnhorst & Gneisenau).
The idea seems to have been that, given that the German battlecruisers had to come to the convoys, an escorting submarine could have a chance to torpedo them - delivering them helpless to the RN battleships.
Of course, it didn't work

And given
- the potential for blue on blue incidents
- the need for submarines in other areas
- the diminution of the threat after Rheinübung and the damage to S&G in the spring/summer 1941
it comes as little surprise that the experiment (that's how I see it) was discontinued.

I also think that the non-replacement of Taku after she suffered weather damage is a significant clue as to how the expected reward was seen at the Admiralty.


To come back to your question, if one looks at the losses of ships able to counter German heavy units, there is only Resolution in dockyards hands (after Dakar in September). Malaya took a torpedo on March 1941, but the decision to commit submarines pre-dates this event.

The list of convoys escorted by BBs in the spring of 1941 is here :
Malaya : SL-067 & SL-068 (march 1941)
Ramillies : HX-106, HX-110, HX-118, HX-123, HX-127 & HX-130 (feb to june 1941)
Revenge : HX-119A, HX-121, HX-125, HX-128, HX-132, HX-134 (apr to june 1941)
Royal Sovereign : HX-113, HX-114, HX-116, HX-120, SC-028, HX-124 (march to may 1941)
Nelson : SL-075 (june 1941)
Rodney : HX-108, HX-114 (feb-march 1941)
Renown : SL-067 (march 1941)
KGV : HX-115 (march 1941)

I can't find data on outbound convoys - but there is no reason for them not to be escorted by BB : it seems inefficent to escort inbound convoys and make the BBs come back westward independently.
(I have no time right now to check the exact dates of escort and see what westward-bound convoys would fit the gaps)

Note that the SC weren't provided with a battleship escort (probably because the low speed would endanger the battleships against submarines).
But four of the seven patrols I listed by submarines were for SC convoys.
Thus I think it's more a complementary deployment than a replacement.

[mescal]

subs were too slow for ''close-in'' protection....

They were faster than the convoys they escorted, but once they submerged, they could not hope to close with a fast heavy unit unless the latter let them do it.

Basically, a liberal supply of luck was mandatory to get a crack at a German battlecruiser while escorting a convoy.

[bronk7]

yes, mescal, by the time they got into position, game over...also, I was thinking antisub escort-, but the DDs had much quicker reaction time<> [''close-in/tactical protection ]...if I remember correctly, some nations [Japanese ] did put a 'scouting' sub/subs ahead of fleets, but it seems they couldn't do much for escort duties...

[Felix C]

I think that it must have been dangerous for an Allied submarine escorting a convoy as the mm were likely to let fly at any submarine.