Never mind XXI...conventional U-boats could have been better

[gabriel pagliarani]

Hi Gabriel!!!...NSS. Gabriel did you guys also try refuelling while submerged???

Hallo, Karwats!
Italian COMSUBIN (ex X-MAS) is a leader in sub refuelling technologies. They begun during WW2 by refuelling in spanish neutral harbours sub assault vessels before attacking the Royal Navy in Gibraltar fortress, and now they are currently leading such technology. But all this stuff is probably the most "Top Secret" weapon hidden by NATO in South Europe. Any way sub fast-refuelling is also a too high risk operation to be attempted in peace time: it is considered the most dangerous sub-operation before the emergency evacuation of the vessel. The risk for life is extremely high.

[Alter Mann]

A few more thoughts.

I've read several fiction books recently about third world Diesel-Electric boats attacking the US. Most of these scenarios involved targets that a DE boat could attack with reasonable chance of success and without nuclear weapons, such as mining the Panama Canal, or attacking a carrier during the last 20 miles of its return trip to Norfolk, or some place like that. At this point in the voyage, most of the aircraft would have been flown off and the escorts released in times of peace.

The authors make the point that this would be dangerous because it is such an unlikely scenario that the US Navy would have difficulty accepting it as a real threat.

The connection between this and WWII is a little tenuous, but, IMHO, the Germans were handicapped by their projections of the dangers that the subs would actually face. I'm not sure that the Germans ever believed that their naval code had been compromised. I'm not sure that they took the threat of radio direction finding of the many radio transmissions from the U-boats seriously. I'm not sure that they ever accepted the fact that airborne to surface radar was much of a threat. To me these seem to be failures of leadership because U-boat losses due to these factors were high.

I don't think that adding AA weapons to U-boats was an effective step towards reducing the losses of subs in the Bay of Biscay. For one thing, this might persuade a highly motivated crew to stay on the surface and fight it out, against bombs and depth charges, rather than think in three dimensions and get under the surface. The aerial sub-hunters could only make passes after several miles of turning manoeuvers, and this time lag should have allowed the U-boats time to evade, even though the bay was very shallow. The Germans did provide escort vessels for part of the trip out of the bay, but it doesn't appear that the escort lasted long enough. Possibly, the Germans didn't want the Allies to know that there was a boat departing, but RDF and intercepts would have let the Allies know anyway, although the Germans didn't seem to take that into account.

Another problem was the use of refuelers and supply ships. The Germans seem to have lost almost all of these for various reasons. I would have thought that they would reconsider their tactics, but it does not appear that they did. Another problem with this is that the Type VIIC's effectiveness was affected by crew conditions as well as the amount of fuel and torpedos that they carried. A boat that had problems on the way to its assigned area was one thing, but a boat that had already been to its area to the limit of its endurance and was then re-supplied rather than going home for rest and re-fit, was probably not as sharp or effective as survival might require. Yes, I realize that transit time was a big factor in the number of U-boats that were available for war use, but I find it difficult to believe that re-supplying a good crew was as effective as letting them leave the area.

I have always felt that Germany's lack of technological progress in several important areas had a very bad effect on the outcome of the war for them. They seemed to have ascribed a number of Allied successes to luck rather than improvements in technology, and did not seem to consider trying to match, or exceed the Allied technological advantages a priority. As a matter of fact, I think they managed to ignore a number of Allied technological advantages because their scientists said it might be difficult or costly, and it was unlikely that, if Germany couldn't afford it, or didn't have the capability, that the Allies could afford it, or create the technology.

A major factor was the the way that the Allies handled information recieved from breaking the German Naval codes. As I said before, I think the Germans thought this was impossible, and never seriously considered it as a reason for sudden changes in the amount of successes they were having, or the number of submarines lost.

[gabriel pagliarani]

....I've read several fiction books recently about third world Diesel-Electric boats attacking the US. Most of these scenarios involved targets that a DE boat could attack with reasonable chance of success and without nuclear weapons, such as mining the Panama Canal...

this is not fictionary: nuc vessels couldn't replace DE. A modern nuc is 120 mt long: if you think that WW2 Air carrier Saratoga was 143 mt. you have an idea about all the things that such enormous vessels couldn't do, in the while little smart & ferocious DE vessels could attack the enemy at home, exactly where he thinks to be safe & sure. De vessels are not superseeded but deeply changed they are the worst menace possible inside harbours, rivers and so on. Any grounded marine building or structure could be reached and destroyed. Panama was just a target for X-MAS sub assaulters during WW2: for sure any possible enemy for USA has just planned a sub-attack to Panama. If not now he will try to do it in future.

[Alter Mann]

Hmmm. As I understand it, we don't have any DE boats anymore. Maybe that wasn't such a good decision.

[varjag]

Karwats

"U-977" by Heinz Schaeffer, appears under the title "66 Tage unter Wasser" in German.

Varjag

The interest in Schaeffer's book is for his observations in the earlier chapters that he was involved in underwater refuelling exercises in 1943 which proved perfectly satisfactory.

Ohrdruf

Ohrdruf - I took time to re-read what he wrote about underwater refuelling, related to Karwats question how it was done. They linked up on the surface with a sub-tanker towing Schaeffers boat, fuel-line probably attached to the towing wire or hawser. He is a bit woolly about the procedure - it wasn't an excercise - they had never tried it before, but says they both dived, the supply boat first - and then 'cruised' for three hours at 45 meters depth. Contact between the boats 'by hydrophones ?...to indicate our course and speed...' I wonder if he meant telephone, as telephone contact was used sometimes for surface refuelling. Schaeffer says this was a 'world first' - but one doubts an untried procedure would be tested operationally in the Atlantic? Both boats of course had to surface for separation. It sounds an imprecise and incomplete description of what must have been a pretty risky operation.

[Karwats]

Hi varjag

Thanks a lot. It makes more sense now. Actually quite a standard way of trying it,only underwater.

I haven't yet got the book,but I would assume that the fuel line would be streamed once the boats had connected up. Same for the sound power line, allthough at towing distance you could definitely use an underwater telephone-sometimes called a gertrude. That being said everyone would be able to hear you-UWT is not exactly clandestine It would be interesting to find out if the U-boats had an external connection for a sound power line. This would indicate some serious thought behind the refuelling at sea operations.

Do they state if the boats continued the towing underwater-this would make practical sense. It is notoriously difficult to keep station while submerged.

Also the connecting up on the surface is the easier/more practical option. I was actually refering to a completly submerged operation. As Gabriel pointed out this is extremely dangerous - read hair raising- and not for the faint hearted. Filed under the "Use only in case of war" heading

[varjag]

Hi varjag

Thanks a lot. It makes more sense now. Actually quite a standard way of trying it,only underwater.

I haven't yet got the book,but I would assume that the fuel line would be streamed once the boats had connected up. Same for the sound power line, allthough at towing distance you could definitely use an underwater telephone-sometimes called a gertrude. That being said everyone would be able to hear you-UWT is not exactly clandestine It would be interesting to find out if the U-boats had an external connection for a sound power line. This would indicate some serious thought behind the refuelling at sea operations.

Do they state if the boats continued the towing underwater-this would make practical sense. It is notoriously difficult to keep station while submerged.

Also the connecting up on the surface is the easier/more practical option. I was actually refering to a completly submerged operation. As Gabriel pointed out this is extremely dangerous - read hair raising- and not for the faint hearted. Filed under the "Use only in case of war" heading

Hi Karwats - I assume that the 'tanker' towed Schaeffers boat under water as well...stationkeeping would even then be extremely difficult. I cannot imagine any free-lance course-changes when blind but very well your assessment of 'war use only'. Incidentially this operation was not with U 977, Scaheffer only took command of her in 1944. The English edition is printed 1952 and true to German narratives of that vintage he's very coy about details like what boats he served in, firm dates etc. For instance - he talks about a towing 'wire' (not a floating hawser or manilla) used and one is entitled to wonder how the suppliers crew retrieved 100-150 meters of 1" steel-wire from the depths of the Atlantic on the slippery deck of a submarine.....but perhaps they had a winch or a capstan hidden somewhere?

[O.P.]

Hi Gabriel!

Good to see you again!
I guess HY-80 ain't a secret anymore. All the boats I served on except for one was made out of that. On the pole thing, dude, last time I checked (a long long time ago) that was a bad guy thing. They were supposed to "three tier" it. Outer ring of skimmers. Inner ring of fast attacks. Boomers under the pack. I thought the seawolfs were fast attacks, they should be able get under the pack at them. Maybe the seawolfs have boomer capabilities. Multi role? It's been a long time.

Hi Karwats, Alte,

Let me preface this with, There's nothing quieter, and deadlier, than a Diesel Electric boat, with a good crew, being electric. That being said....
Nuc's didn't replace DE boats in the U.S. SOSUS, Tomahawks, Harpoons, ect,did. There was rumours/sea stories/bs when I was in, about using Diesel boats for coastal defence in the U.S.. It was just dreaming by a bunch of us who'd been to sea to long, hoping they could get stationed on a sweet port to port boat. A DE boat could make the big strike in U.S. waters, maybe, once. I have no doubt it can be done, right C.O., right Crew.

The best place for a DE strike on U.S., or any warships, besides on the open ocean, is on station. Just ask the Argentinians. One Guppy. Jeez, what nads. Hit the R.N. on station. That boats presence and the torpedos she fired did have a lot to do with what happened with the Sheffield and what happened in that bay eventually. Thats the way it's done. No offence to our Argentinian Dolphin bro's, or our R.N. bro's, or anyone, but the Royal Navy got away very lucky, they almost had their ass handed to them.
On their station, open ocean, or home waters. You don't have to deal with SOSUS tracking you inbound. Thats were I'd choose my fight.

Hi Varjag! And Everyone.

Kinda back on topic. There were refuel/rearm boats in the Kriegsmarine submarine force at that time. The Big Bob Marley "Nurse Shark". Nurse shark may be my own name for it, I don't remember, but there was giant German submarines designed for this purpose, and used. This was supposed to counter and get rid of the liabilities of using skimmers for resupply and rearming at sea. When it was used, it worked. I think the underwater refueling is very cool, but I can't see any use for it. If you could come off station, you have to, no matter what, you have to do it, if your going to do it above water or underwater, doesn't matter, you have to come off station. No food, no gas, no weapons, you go outside of surface search radar, aircraft, bad guys, everything,you have to, no reason to do it underwater. Thats what happened anyway, using skimmers, or subs.

I can think of a couple ten ways that uw refueling would be advantageous, but only in modern times, not in the 40's.


Karwats, Gabriel, whattdaya think? Toulon 05, Sardinia (Sardegna) 05, we gotta link up one of these years for a couple ten beers, and some topless volleyball(I love those beaches). We can get lit, then get lit up somemore, and watch volleyball..the good kind.....one of these decades.........

[Alter Mann]

What's going on in Sardinia? Submarine races?

For non-Americans, when local drive-in theaters closed, in the late 1960s, enterprising young men needed an alternative reason to get prospective girl friends in their cars and in a secluded place. One option was to go to a parking area near a local river or stream to watch the 'submarine races'. If the young lady asked where the submarines were, the man would explain that most of the parts of the race were run underwater and he had just picked a viewing area that was part of the submerged section of the race. (American women are not necessarily stupid, but I haven't met many that have been interested in submarines.)

[Karwats]

A DE boat could make the big strike in U.S. waters, maybe, once. I have no doubt it can be done, right C.O., right Crew.

Hi OP

Ja I have to agree. I'd even go as far as say the effectiveness of the boat is probably 70% old man & crew and 30% boat. Even a Foxtrot with a hot driver can make your life a misery. I must add to this doctrine and tactics, where the boat is deployed . As you well know the last place you expect a boat to be is normally where it is!!

No offence to our Argentinian Dolphin bro's, or our R.N. bro's, or anyone, but the Royal Navy got away very lucky, they almost had their ass handed to them.

Amen!! I heard the RN fired of something like 500 ASW fish on "spurious" contacts. We actually had a lecture by the Old man from the boat and the RN Pilot that hit him. it was literally a 1 in a million longshot that they got a visual on him.

As far as USN policy goes. Well look there is a lot to be said for a pure Nuke fleet, but I personally think the USN has lost a lot of its ASW expertise by only playing with Nucs. There is a lot to be learned from operating against Diesels, probably more importantly as it is the likely enemy. Also there is some stuff that the SSK is simply better at like..... hmmm better not go into that.

Back to the refuelling bit. I'm pretty sure what they did is completly feasible. But as OP stated it is not simply a question of fuel. You need to load torpedoes as well. I know this was done at sea but obviously on the surface, personally I think the crews that achieved a full loadout while at sea deserve medals. I did this a few times alongdside and it is a bitch of a job.

Weapons rate: The winch is stuck
Weapons Off: Whaddya mean the winch is stuck
Rating: I mean it doesn't work...
WO: F*** F*** F***
WO: Chief Confirm this is the life Fish!!!
W Chief: Affirmative Sir
WO: F*** F*** F***
WO: Chief get a tommy bar!!!!!
CO: Weps everything allright??
WO:F*** F*** Old Man F*** F*** Paper Work F**** F**** (sotto voce)
WO: Affirmative Sir- in loud voice
WO: Chief are you applying enough force???
Chief: Winch is now co-operating sir!
WO: Roger, get another tommy bar from that useless Loggie and get the mechs to order another winch.

Of course the above conversation never really happened and is based entirely on fictitious events.

Sorry guys but Meet '05 will have to be in Germany or Thailand for me!!!
I' going back to the Fatherland for a long overdue wedding and I intend to do a pretty good beached whale imitation on a beach in the east.

AM. I wouldn't try the submarine race bit on one of our local species of woman

Some pics of the good ol" days over here.

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 925#553925

[Alter Mann]

Frankly, I never had the nerve to try the 'submarine race' tactic myself.

Slightly off topic, your pictures reminded me of the equipment density in subs. How long does it take to train people to deal with that much equipment in such a small area?

[Karwats]

Hi AM

Well for everyone.
We did a 10 week General Submarine Knowledge course, Basically Mechanics,Electrics, Weapons.

Thereafter the ratings had a "taskbook" to complete this took about 4 months of hard graft and culminated in a walkthrough with either the Engineer and/or the 1st Lt where anything could be pointed out and asked about throughout the entire boat took about 3 hours. Thereafter various specailist courses Mech,Lec and Weapons.

For myself I qualified in about 20 months,but that is quite quick as I was a qualified Surface watchkeeper before I went straight.

For us the qualifications went basically like this.
Casing,Duty Elec, Duty Mech, OOD (Day), OOW (like USN OOD)Surface , OOW Dived with Control Centre Chief in between the 2. Various course in between as well plus laid down sea time surface and dived. Very long haul and our attrition rate was horrendous, I was the only one that qualified out of 11 that volunteered.

But as a tanker you should feel right at home with all the "stuff" on the bulkheads

[Tim Smith]

Karwats, Alte Mann,

You seem to have gone off topic and hijacked my thread. Can you please continue your discussion of post-WWII submarines elsewhere? Thank you.

[Karwats]

Hi Tim

Sorry about that.
Can we mark it down to genuine passion for this subject from all of us ex sub-drivers and tankers.

I've opened up a new thread in the Post WW2 section-where we can continue.

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 993#554993

NS. Do you want all the non-Type XXI stuff moved???

[Tim Smith]

Anything that doesn't relate to U-boats and WWII.