What were the key points about Battle of Atlantic?

[alephh]

What were the key points? I would love to hear comments and opinions about this...

- allied airforce cover
(forcing uboats off-surface and reducing their operational area/time)
- allied radar
- poor german codes and good allied codebreaking
(opposite of early war)
- efficient allied ship production
(liberty)


Something else...?

[Christian W.]

I wouldnt say the Enigma codes were poor. Not everyday Joe or scientist could break them.

If the codes would have been that poor I dont think all those Allied ships would be on the bottom of the Atlantic.

[Englander]

1, Telling the Americans to buck their ideas up! {Ref, the 2nd happy time}
2, Closing the air gap in Mid atlantic {Ref, the Liberator bomber}
3, British Know-how {Ref, Asdic, RDF, Ultra, Huff- Duff, Aggressive escort commanders}
4, Canada!
Btw, of the three services, the German navy were the most disciplined in coded transmissions, regarding Engima.

Since you are a Finn, can i asked, are you pro German?

[Christian W.]

Huh?

Since you are a Finn, can i asked, are you pro German?

?

[alephh]

4, Canada!

Can you explore this a bit?

Since you are a Finn, can i asked, are you pro German?

And what would "pro German" mean in this context?

I haven't fixed opinion to look at things way or the other, but the more I know about WWII the more I think that german achievements are diminished.

[Andy H]

Since you are a Finn, can i asked, are you pro German?

Please refrain from this type of question, its leading and has nothing to do with the thread.

Andy H

[Andy H]

alephh wrote:

What were the key points? I would love to hear comments and opinions about this...

- allied airforce cover
(forcing uboats off-surface and reducing their operational area/time)
- allied radar
- poor german codes and good allied codebreaking
(opposite of early war)
- efficient allied ship production
(liberty)

Englander wrote:

1, Telling the Americans to buck their ideas up! {Ref, the 2nd happy time}
2, Closing the air gap in Mid atlantic {Ref, the Liberator bomber}
3, British Know-how {Ref, Asdic, RDF, Ultra, Huff- Duff, Aggressive escort commanders}
4, Canada!
Btw, of the three services, the German navy were the most disciplined in coded transmissions, regarding Engima.

Without filling out some of the points already highlighted I would like to add

1. Escort Carriers
2. Convoy system
3. Bravery of the Merchantmen
4. Ship repair facilities in both the US & UK
5. Merchant vessel construction in the UK aswell as the US
6. Growth of Coastal Command assets
7. Allied Command & Control services
8. Bomber Commands 'Gardening' ops against U-Boat routes etc
9. Failure of German UBoat production to keep up with increasing losses
10. Lack of German strategic thought, and diversification of available assets (UBoats in the Med and S.Atlantic/Pacific

Andy H

[Englander]

Englander wrote:
4, Canada!


Can you explore this a bit?

Well, as always, Canada is over looked in the 39/45 conflict...A key ingredient for winning a war, any war is called logistics. Canada contributed a high calibre of men and ships in the Battle Of The Atlantic. To which some say created the 4th largest navy!...It all Helps.

[ChristopherPerrien]

Without filling out some of the points already highlighted I would like to add

1. Escort Carriers
2. Convoy system
3. Bravery of the Merchantmen
4. Ship repair facilities in both the US & UK
5. Merchant vessel construction in the UK aswell as the US
6. Growth of Coastal Command assets
7. Allied Command & Control services
8. Bomber Commands 'Gardening' ops against U-Boat routes etc
9. Failure of German UBoat production to keep up with increasing losses
10. Lack of German strategic thought, and diversification of available assets (UBoats in the Med and S.Atlantic/Pacific

Andy H

All of these were important, however I will add

Radar- by far the most important tactical weapon , especially when put on air-craft. After radar got effective , i.e. small enough band to spot periscopes and snorkels, the U-boat operations were severly restricted.
a. No wolf pack attacks at night
b. no real chance to "cruise the surface" looking for targets.

Most important was breaking Enigma, . When the U-boats had secure commo , losses of allied ships were unsubstainable i.e. "the Happy times", U-boats crews talked about .

When Enigma could be read, U-boats were uneffective.


As to # 10 that Andy mentioned " lack of Strategic thought". Most of that would fall into "prewar planning" Doenitz figured with 300 U-boats he could beat England, German high command squandered alot of resources, building useless surface units right before and at the start of the war and the Germans started the war with 56 U-boats. I would say given the advantage of being able to look at what occured, is that England was very lucky that Germany did not start the war with even 150 U-boats, as that many would have well been decisive, Doenitz's 300 would have been sheer "overkill".

[alephh]

Englander wrote:
4, Canada!
Can you explore this a bit?

Well, as always, Canada is over looked in the 39/45 conflict...A key ingredient for winning a war, any war is called logistics. Canada contributed a high calibre of men and ships in the Battle Of The Atlantic. To which some say created the 4th largest navy!...It all Helps.

Canada is over looked, that is a sad fact. But some percentages/amounts would be nice to know, for example how much they really produced ships. US build about 3000 liberty type ships, that which was essential.

[alephh]

1. Escort Carriers
2. Convoy system

But how essential the Convoy system really was? Dönitz anticipated the Convoy system long before war and created wolfpacktactic to eliminate advantages gained from Convoys. Without good equiptment (radars, aircover,e tc) wolfpacks sank more than enough ships to win the war.

8. Bomber Commands 'Gardening' ops against U-Boat routes etc

Are there any numbers on what was achieved by this? Or was this mainly just forcing u-boats to travel underwater and slowing them down and cutting down their operational area?

9. Failure of German UBoat production to keep up with increasing losses

Personally I feel that German u-boat production was high enough (later in the war), it was just matter of technical superiority and other elements. So I see this so that German production was high enough, they just lost too much u-boats - matter not being how much they produced - they produced enough. Uh, that was not the clearest possible phrase

10. Lack of German strategic thought, and diversification of available assets (UBoats in the Med and S.Atlantic/Pacific

Yes, diversification (Med, North) was essential error, because it gave time for Allies to recover during crusial/difficult moments.

[Andy H]

is that England was very lucky that Germany did not start the war with even 150 U-boats, as that many would have well been decisive, Doenitz's 300 would have been sheer "overkill".

Hi Christopher

Your point is being discussed within the What If section of the forum (see the link below). Without discoursing the whole arguement(s) here, its hard to see the RN not responding to this pre-war build-up by investing more shipyard time to Anti-Submarine vessels and Anti-Submarine technology.

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=17055

The Enigma contribution was covered under the Ultra title earlier.

Andy H

[Andy H]

alephh wrote:

Canada is over looked, that is a sad fact. But some percentages/amounts would be nice to know, for example how much they really produced ships

During the war Canada built some 191 Escort vessels.
(Escort Destroyers, Frigates, Corvettes and Sloops)

Andy H

[ChristopherPerrien]

is that England was very lucky that Germany did not start the war with even 150 U-boats, as that many would have well been decisive, Doenitz's 300 would have been sheer "overkill".

Hi Christopher

Your point is being discussed within the What If section of the forum (see the link below). Without discoursing the whole arguement(s) here, its hard to see the RN not responding to this pre-war build-up by investing more shipyard time to Anti-Submarine vessels and Anti-Submarine technology.

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=17055

The Enigma contribution was covered under the Ultra title earlier.

Andy H

Thanks for the link, those guys are getting pretty specific for a "what If", I prefer a more general discussion of history/military history as I have forgotten most of the "specifics".

However as is stated over there I don't see England as perceiving the real need of building/ maintaining an escort force 2 or 3 times larger to counter the "unknown threat" that a u-boat force 2 or 3 times bigger ( i.e a 100 or 150 U-boats) as opposed to 56, would have represented.

Churchill said "the only thing that really scared me was the U-boats" and I think he also said something to the effect, about the War in the Altantic as, "The nearest run thing you ever saw"- an American saying, but then again, HORROR OF HORRORS FOR YOU ENGLISH , he was half-American himself.

[red devil]

I wouldnt say the Enigma codes were poor. Not everyday Joe or scientist could break them.

If the codes would have been that poor I dont think all those Allied ships would be on the bottom of the Atlantic.

enigma was excellent, when it worked.

http://www.mikekemble.com/ww2/enigma.html