 | WWII Submarines| WW2 General Discuss WWII Submarines in the World War II - General forums; I've always heard and read about the German U-Boats
but i've only read few refferences to the ... |
|
07-06-2008, 04:34 PM
|
#1 | | Member
Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Vila Real
Posts: 87
Country: | WWII Submarines I've always heard and read about the German U-Boats
but i've only read few refferences to the allies submarines
i believe that they had them, right?
could anyone provide any information, please?
I would like to know more about them
PS: sorry if this theme was already been discussed
__________________ "A room without books is like a body without soul"
Confucius |
| |
07-06-2008, 05:46 PM
|
#2 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 354
Country: | Yes the allies had subs! The American subs choked the Japanese shipping in the PTO. You just never hear about them, like how the Bismarck is still more famous ,then say, the USS Wisconsin.
__________________ Four hostile newspapers are more to be feared than a thousand bayonets.
--Napoleon Bonaparte-- |
| |
07-06-2008, 06:19 PM
|
#3 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: London Ontario Canada
Posts: 193
Country: | A good book on the USA in the Pacific is a old book Silent Victory BY Clay Blair.JR. |
| |
07-06-2008, 09:30 PM
|
#4 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Prescott Arizona USA
Posts: 495
| The Japanese had lots of sub's...They may have had more then any country.. They just did not use them in the best way.. I would say the Pacific war would of been different ..Not the out come ..If the Japanese had used there sub's right...I wonder why they did not use there sub's in the way the Germans did ... |
| |
07-07-2008, 10:53 AM
|
#5 | | Member
Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Vila Real
Posts: 87
Country: | probably because they didn't believed it could be a real threat and so didn't used them
__________________ "A room without books is like a body without soul"
Confucius |
| |
07-07-2008, 11:14 AM
|
#6 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Pine Mountain Lake, California
Posts: 712
Country: | Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigxiko I've always heard and read about the German U-Boats
but i've only read few refferences to the allies submarines
i believe that they had them, right?
could anyone provide any information, please?
I would like to know more about them
PS: sorry if this theme was already been discussed | Yes, it probably has already been discussed, but I am the wrong person to tell you where it is; however, I can give you a reasonably good reference for the history of US fleet subs. There is an old US WWII sub not too far from where I live that is available for tours and overnighters (my Boy Scout troop is planning on doing the overnighter thing sometime this year). Go here for more info: Maritime Park Association - USS Pampanito Home Page
__________________ |
| |
07-07-2008, 12:13 PM
|
#7 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Phila, Pa
Posts: 2,381
Country: | The Japanese used their subs, initially anyway, as adjuncts of the Battle Fleet. They scouted and were supposed to wear down the opposing Fleet. At least that was the theory behind the Japanese battle plan. The US used this idea as well but they also used their subs as commerce raiders.
Later in the war, with better torpedoes, the US did a lot better with both rolls although the commerce raider had the best results.
Japan stayed with the fleet adjunct assignment except in those places where they were used as contact to cut off bases. |
| |
07-07-2008, 02:15 PM
|
#8 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 842
Country: | There is a new book out on the Japanese Submarines jointly written by a Japanese and American Naval Historians "The Japanese Submarine Force and WWII" Carl Boyd & Akihiko Yoshida, Bluejacket Books, 1995 -2002 (reprint)
It dispels nearly all the myths and legends around the submarine force.
The Japanese sub force was wedded very closely to the fact that the Japanese wanted the decisive naval battle fought in the central pacific, and were keenly aware of two things in their prewar planning. Firstly, the naval treaties condemned them to an immediate numerical inferiority in Battleship numbers, which they needed to redress by the use of their light forces, aircraft and submarines to attrition away, as the US forces advanced across the pacific for the decisive Jutland style battle in the Marshalls or the Marianas (the Japanese were right to assume this in their planning, because this was precisely what the Americans intended to do before PH came along). The second was that Japan in a prolonged war against the Americans could not hope to win. The war had to be short, and the naval victory sudden, to shock the Americans to negotiate peace.
Against this background, the Japanese submarine was perfectly designed. The US battleship force had a fleet speed of under 20 knots. So the Japanese designed their big subs to cruise at 24 knots on the surface, and to have very long legs. They also provided aircraft to many of their designs. These features would have allowed the Japanese subs to track the progress of the battle fleet, move ahead of the fleet, and then set elaborate and deadly ambushes for it, as often as torpedoes remained in the magazines.
That was the theory, but two things upset the plan,and the Japanese were very slow to realize it. The first, was Pearl Harbour, which effectively removed the slow moving battle force from the equation. Henceforward, the US was forced to rely on its fast carriers, and its light forces for the prosecution of its war. The carriers possessed two things that made them hard targets, speed (a fleet speed of 30 knots), and aircraft, which allowed the positions of the Japan subs to be often spotted in advance, and avoided.
Later, as the Americans brought into commission new battleships, these were also able to operate at speeds that the Japanese subs were unable to counter. One other factor began to be apparent from the middle of 1943 on wards, was the increasing allied proficiency in ASW warfare. At the beginning of the war, US ASW effectiveness was terrible, but later, as they learned new techniques (taught to them by the British), the weaknesses if the Japanese sub force really started to come to the fore. The weaknesses were both technological and doctrinal. The technological weaknesses were basically the large size (easy to spot on the surface), and slow diving times (longer to seek safety by diving). The doctrinal problems were the forced usage of the subs as transports for the army (a staggeringly large number of subs were lost on these missions, in which ULTRA allowed the allies frequent opportunities to set ambushes), as well as the continued use of the subs to support fleet operations despite its proven failure (this meant the Japanese were often attacking heavily guarded military TFs).
On those occasions where Japanese subs were used on merchant shipping duties, they were effective. They managed to sink, or capture (the ship would be damaged, return to port, and then be captured by the advancing Japanese....this happened very frequently in the Far East, where an estimated 300000 tons affected by sub damage was captured, and re-used by the Japanese). A very large percentage of merchantmen listed as damaged by allied sources, were actually never returned to service after hits by Japanese subs. IN the NEI, off the coast of Australia, and in the Indian Ocean, the Japanese subs proved to be very effective at mercantile warfare. But the commitment to total employment to attacking merchantmen was never there, there was no Donitz in the Japanese submarine arm to force the correct use of the force in its entirety.
__________________ Do not judge on abilities, but on choices
Last edited by parsifal : 07-07-2008 at 02:19 PM.
|
| |
07-07-2008, 04:17 PM
|
#9 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,473
Country: | Pick up a book named "Thunder Below!: The USS *Barb* Revolutionizes Submarine Warfare in World War II by Eugene B. Fluckey"
I read this book several years ago and it was very interesting. Pretty much covered one US Gato Class Fleet Submarines operations in the PTO, but was pretty indicative of all US Sub. operations in World War II.
Goes into some detail of the USS Barb actually landing men on the Japanese mainland which was quite interesting when I read it, but it's been a few years and I do not recall what they actually did. Something like a commando mission. |
| |
07-08-2008, 12:22 AM
|
#10 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: UK
Posts: 3,505
Country: | Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigxiko I've always heard and read about the German U-Boats
but i've only read few refferences to the allies submarines
i believe that they had them, right?
could anyone provide any information, please?
I would like to know more about them
PS: sorry if this theme was already been discussed | The Royal Navy had around 90 submarines at the beginning of WW2 with 9 under construction in total 270 were deployed and 80 lost.
This site should help with the RN side of things *British Submarines of World War Two - A History |
| |
07-08-2008, 08:38 AM
|
#11 | | Member
Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Vila Real
Posts: 87
Country: | Thanks guys,
thank you for the information and the links
__________________ "A room without books is like a body without soul"
Confucius |
| |
07-08-2008, 09:49 AM
|
#12 | | Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008 Location: carbon canyon
Posts: 154
Country: | yes,never forget the royal navies subs in the shallow med,those boats xploits can or should never be underestimated.starling.
__________________ fair and balanced,just like fox news. |
| |
07-08-2008, 11:25 AM
|
#13 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Montrose, Colorado
Posts: 2,121
Country: | If memory serves the IJN had about 63 subs at the time of PH. That does not include midget types. According to Janes, 1945, they lost about 125 subs during the war which was almost all. Their resources as far as new construction were limited so the IJN never had the numbers of subs the US or Germany had. |
| |
07-08-2008, 11:58 AM
|
#14 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Phila, Pa
Posts: 2,381
Country: | Quote:
Originally Posted by parsifal There is a new book out on the Japanese Submarines jointly written by a Japanese and American Naval Historians "The Japanese Submarine Force and WWII" Carl Boyd & Akihiko Yoshida, Bluejacket Books, 1995 -2002 (reprint)
It dispels nearly all the myths and legends around the submarine force.
The Japanese sub force was wedded very closely to the fact that the Japanese wanted the decisive naval battle fought in the central pacific, and were keenly aware of two things in their prewar planning. Firstly, the naval treaties condemned them to an immediate numerical inferiority in Battleship numbers, which they needed to redress by the use of their light forces, aircraft and submarines to attrition away, as the US forces advanced across the pacific for the decisive Jutland style battle in the Marshalls or the Marianas (the Japanese were right to assume this in their planning, because this was precisely what the Americans intended to do before PH came along). The second was that Japan in a prolonged war against the Americans could not hope to win. The war had to be short, and the naval victory sudden, to shock the Americans to negotiate peace.
Against this background, the Japanese submarine was perfectly designed. The US battleship force had a fleet speed of under 20 knots. So the Japanese designed their big subs to cruise at 24 knots on the surface, and to have very long legs. They also provided aircraft to many of their designs. These features would have allowed the Japanese subs to track the progress of the battle fleet, move ahead of the fleet, and then set elaborate and deadly ambushes for it, as often as torpedoes remained in the magazines.
That was the theory, but two things upset the plan,and the Japanese were very slow to realize it. The first, was Pearl Harbour, which effectively removed the slow moving battle force from the equation. Henceforward, the US was forced to rely on its fast carriers, and its light forces for the prosecution of its war. The carriers possessed two things that made them hard targets, speed (a fleet speed of 30 knots), and aircraft, which allowed the positions of the Japan subs to be often spotted in advance, and avoided.
Later, as the Americans brought into commission new battleships, these were also able to operate at speeds that the Japanese subs were unable to counter. One other factor began to be apparent from the middle of 1943 on wards, was the increasing allied proficiency in ASW warfare. At the beginning of the war, US ASW effectiveness was terrible, but later, as they learned new techniques (taught to them by the British), the weaknesses if the Japanese sub force really started to come to the fore. The weaknesses were both technological and doctrinal. The technological weaknesses were basically the large size (easy to spot on the surface), and slow diving times (longer to seek safety by diving). The doctrinal problems were the forced usage of the subs as transports for the army (a staggeringly large number of subs were lost on these missions, in which ULTRA allowed the allies frequent opportunities to set ambushes), as well as the continued use of the subs to support fleet operations despite its proven failure (this meant the Japanese were often attacking heavily guarded military TFs).
On those occasions where Japanese subs were used on merchant shipping duties, they were effective. They managed to sink, or capture (the ship would be damaged, return to port, and then be captured by the advancing Japanese....this happened very frequently in the Far East, where an estimated 300000 tons affected by sub damage was captured, and re-used by the Japanese). A very large percentage of merchantmen listed as damaged by allied sources, were actually never returned to service after hits by Japanese subs. IN the NEI, off the coast of Australia, and in the Indian Ocean, the Japanese subs proved to be very effective at mercantile warfare. But the commitment to total employment to attacking merchantmen was never there, there was no Donitz in the Japanese submarine arm to force the correct use of the force in its entirety. |
Pretty good post, short, too the point and effective. Good job Parsifal. |
| |
08-10-2008, 07:42 PM
|
#15 | | Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1
Country: | Another Interesting WW2 Submarine Book The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor launched the greatest naval war of all time. The attack was brilliantly timed and executed, but fatally flawed. Many say that failing to catch the U.S. carriers in port was the biggest error. Possibly so. In any case, the carriers weren’t there to be attacked.
The U.S. Pacific ww2 submarine force was there however, and it was totally ignored. Hundreds of Japanese torpedo-plane pilots flew right over—and sometimes next to—the submarine base and it’s munitions dump on neighboring Kuaha. In doing so, they missed a golden opportunity to destroy the one arm of the U.S. Navy capable of attacking the weakest link in the Empire’s chain: shipping.
Japan was an overpopulated island nation totally dependent on imports for everything from rice to oil. The large surface ships either damaged or destroyed at Pearl Harbor were impressive and powerful, but it would have been many months, or even years, before the ships could operate deep into Japanese controlled areas of the Pacific. However on the afternoon of the attack on Pearl Harbor, December 7, 1941, the order was given: Execute unrestricted air and submarine warfare against Japan. The subs, with their supplies and harbor facilities spared in the attack, were the only forces capable of responding immediately, and respond they did—slowly at first, but with gathering speed. WW2 Submarine War Patrols - From the Captain's logs |
| | | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:51 PM. |  | |