German u-boats in World War II

[Windogg]

The Liberator having less range than a Sunderland? A regularly loaded B-24 could cruise around 2,000 - 2,200 miles while a Sunderland could get probably get 1,700 - 1,800 miles. The 5000+ mile range is probably the maximium ferry range where planes are basically turned into plying gas tanks. The overall combat radius is a smaller number because of fuel reserved for attacks, bad weather, and other uncertainties. If you look at it, "Air gap" over Atlantic was only a few 100 miles. That little extra range out of the Liberator can make a huge difference between a convoy going down to the bottom of the ocean or arriving with vital cargo.

Windogg

 

[dennilfloss]

Dabanshee,

Just a detail... It wasn't 4 destroyers, who took on the Graf Spee at the Battle of the River Plate, The 3 Royal Navy units consisted of the HMS Ajax(light (6-inch gunned) cruiser), HMS Exeter (8-inch gunned cruiser) and HMS Cumberland (8-inch gunned cruiser) while the New Zealand unit was the HMNZs Achilles (light (6-inch gunned) cruiser). After Cumberland was dispatched to the Falklands for repairs, Commodore Harwood was left with one medium and two light cruisers when the Graf Spee was spotted due west of the Plate estuary in the morning of December 13 1939. I agree with you calling the Graf spee a battlecruiser. Though called a pocket battleship, the Graf Spee was better classed as an overgunned cruiser for it had cruiser-class armour, just like its sister ships the Deutschland (Lutzow) and Admiral Scheer.

Good Kriegsmarine site

"Exeter and Graf Spee exchanged fire at 0620, while Achilles and Ajax moved at speed to flank the Graf Spee. Exeter was hit badly within minutes, many of her crew killed or wounded, afire and covered in smoke with the forward part of the ship flooding. Ajax and Achilles drew fire while the Exeter and Graf Spee were both turning, Graf Spee evaded Torpedoes fired by the Exeter.

0700, The Graf Spee headed north-west with the light cruiser on her starboard quarter and the damaged Exeter to port. The Battle continued through the morning, with the British ships taking damage but not fatally hit. Graf Spee taking damage from the cruisers guns, despite the cruisers losses they hung on and Kapitan zur See Langsdorff decided to put into Montevideo, a neutral port at 0500 on December 14.


For three days frantic diplomatic activity filled Montevideo. The British filled the skies with light aircraft so that only they could observe the sea approaches while radio broadcasts told of the approach of a large fleet of British Capital ships. In fact only the Cumberland arrived on the afternoon of December 16.

Believing that the British capital ships were waiting, Langsdorff exchanged signals with Berlin and on the late afternoon of December 17, Graf Spee accompanied by a German merchantman crept out of harbour into the main channel of the Plate estuary and, at sunset - 2054- having disembarked the crew onto the merchantman, Langsdorff saluted and gave the order to scuttle the ship.

British reaction was mixed, but relief was prevalent due to the fact that the Graf Spee could probably have escaped sinking one of more of the British cruisers in the process. Three days later, Langsdorff committed suicide in a Buenos Aires hotel room."

Commemorative Graf Spee site.

As for the Hood vs Bismarck battle, I have posted numerous times and at length on this, describing the revised version of the effectiveness of 8-inch gunfire against her, and whoever is interested can use the search button in the archives. To keep it simple, the Hood was a battlecruiser, a class of ships designed to outgun cruisers and outrun battleships, not engage the latter. She did just that, engage a capital ship, and her design proved true to anticipation. Even though recently upgraded, her armour was too thin to stand in battle against a battleship and she lost the battle, as had been theorised for such an encounter more than 20 years before. The lessons of Jutland just had been forgotten thanks to her reputation. However, reputation does not stop 8+" armour-piercing shells from penetrating cruiser-class armour, particularly thinner deck armour at longer-range higher-angles).

By far the best description of Hood's final battle, from Admiralty documents, from the Hood's comprehensive site.

The Scene (Big Sugar)

 

[DaBoneHead]

I've heard the arguments too on the Hood design. But a battle cruiser against a battleship only hastened its demise. It was simply out-classed.


The Graf-Spee was scuttled. It was never actually defeated in combat with the Brits, and it was smaller than the Bizmarck.


If you want to see bad designs... look no farther than japanese and american air craft carriers of WWII. Japanese carriers were just bad designs (largely conversion jobs) period. And the wooden flight decks of the American carriers lead to so many deaths. But that was a philosophy problem. The "Yanks" actually thought they could keep enemy planes at bay with their own navy planes.

It didn't work.

 

[starlitt]

I don't know if anyone posted this but a VERY good U-boat URL is Uboat site It has a little history on U-boats 1 through 1407.

Hope this helps

 

[NesuD]

yup gotta agree That the Hood was a battle cruiser kinda the 800 pound gorilla of the cruiser classes but the lack of any really effective armor for the main magazines was still a serious design flaw even if nothing else is armored on the ship they should at least try and armor the most potentially dangerous part of the ship. The fact that a single 8 inch heavy cruiser class shell hit took the Hood down in 3 minutes or something like that says that the magazine armoring was a serious design flaw.

 

[ElFenix]

one more correction - dirigibles are rigid airships, not blimps. unless you look at the dictionary in which case its any steerable airship.

 

[DABANSHEE]

The way I understand it rigidables are ridid airships (such as Zeppilins), while derigidales are non rigid airships (basically motorised gas filled cigar shaped balloons, AKA Blimps). Buty maybe I've got the terms all whong & 'derigidable' means the same thing as 'rigidable', the same way 'inflammable' means 'flammable'.

BTW, I think your spelling ('dirigibles') is more accurate than mine so you could be right.

Sorry Denni, I meant 'Cruisers', when I typed 'Destroyers'. No way would an fleet commander put 4 destroyers up against a battlecruiser.

"yup gotta agree That the Hood was a battle cruiser kinda the 800 pound gorilla of the cruiser classes but the lack of any really effective armor for the main magazines was still a serious design flaw even if nothing else is armored on the ship they should at least try and armor the most potentially dangerous part of the ship. The fact that a single 8 inch heavy cruiser class shell hit took the Hood down in 3 minutes or something like that says that the magazine armoring was a serious design flaw."

There were no design flaws in the Hood, Nexud, it was simple a post WW1 Battlcruiser & had the limitations that all battlcruisers of that era (1915 to 1925) had.

Sure its a gamble putting multiple battlecruisers up against a battleship, but that's war. The alternative was to have all the Cruisers (include lightcruisers, heavycruisers, battlecruisers & ones without a prefix), Suffolk, Hood, Norfolk & Repulse, withdraw from the pursuit & leave the attack on the Bismark to the old early 20's era battleship, HMS Rodney, the new but not fully commisioned & run-in 'Prince of Wales', & the great new 'King George V' (Bismarck's equal in the Royal Navy). Which would of lessoned the odds of victory even more.

"I've heard the arguments too on the Hood design. But a battle cruiser against a battleship only hastened its demise. It was simply out-classed.

The Graf-Spee was scuttled. It was never actually defeated in combat with the Brits, and it was smaller than the Bizmarck.

If you want to see bad designs... look no farther than japanese and american air craft carriers of WWII. Japanese carriers were just bad designs (largely conversion jobs) period. And the wooden flight decks of the American carriers lead to so many deaths. But that was a philosophy problem. The "Yanks" actually thought they could keep enemy planes at bay with their own navy planes."

Hey Dabonehead, nothing I said conflicted with your statements.

BTW, as well as the British Aicraft carriers having armoured flight decks, they had better names (well except for Hermes, Eagle, Ark Royal, Argus, which are pretty parsee names), such as Courageous, Victorious, Glorious, Furious, Illustrious, Indominable, Indefatigable, Invincible, Formidable, Indomitable. Even many of their escort carriers (converted merchant ships) & light carriers had great names - Audacity, biter, Dasher, Avenger, Battler, Attacker, Stalker (definitly not politically correct), Hunter, Chaser, Fencer, Pursuer, Striker, Searcher, Ravager, Tracker, Slinger, Ruler, Arbiter, Trouncer, Smiter, Puncher, Reaper (this is just an example of them - they were supplied with about 50 Escort & Light carriers, via the Lend-Lease, from the US, plus many more were built in Canada & the UK, too & converted from prewar merchant ships)

Also many of their replacement flag carriers (mostly launched & commisioned in 44 & 45 & 1st saw action in Korea, well those that weren't sold or scraped) continued this tradition of great names - Implacable, Colossus, Terrible (saw service as HMAS Sydney in both Korea & Vietnam in the Australian navy), Magnificent, Vengeance, Venerable, Hercules, Majestic (also saw service in both the Krean & Vietnamese wars as the HMAS Melbourne), Powerful, Glory, Triumph, Warrier (actually ended up in the Argentine navy & fought against the British in the Falklands War).

These British flag carriers that were built arround the end of WWII were the 1st carriers in the world to have the new British innovations - the angled deck, which provided separate take-off and landing areas; the steam catapult; and the mirror landing system. Wich were all needed in the jet age.

 

[dennilfloss]

NesuD,

The type of armour present in the Hood was not a design flaw had she been employed for her intended purpose, to scout for the fleet, to dispatch enemy cruisers and for commerce raiding. Her need for speed was necessary to fulfill those three purposes. Her armour failed her when she did not act following her design and fought a battleship instead of running away from her. BTW, the latest scenario appears to show that while an 8" shell from Prinz Eugen did do a lot of surface aftdeck damage early on in the battle, it was a high-angle 15" AP shell from Bismack that got through the magazine. Unfortunately, Hood was still in the high-angle kill zone at that time and did not close the range fast enough to use her more effective side armour against flatter trajectories. The Prince Of Wales, which was still manned by a trainee crew, with civilian advisors still on board, suffered several 15" hits from Bismarck and survived because she was built like a brick outhouse.

it's Gonna Kill Me (Filter)