What was the most advanced type of submarine used during WW2?

>>33128276

Probably the Type XXI, but the Balao was very successful in the Pacific certainly not as advanced though.

>>33128276
XXI most advanced and most aesthetic

>>33128276
>What was the most advanced type of submarine used during WW2?
Most technically advanced would be one of the late-war Kriegsmarine U variants, maybe the XXI.

Best mix of advanced tech, ease of manufacture and manning, cruise range and crew comfort and finally, most importantly, battle effectiveness goes to the Gato/Balao class boats. One can make an argument for the Type VIIC U-boat, but their range and patrol duration and inability to adapt to convoys, naval patrol aircraft, radio direction finding and CVEs leaves them a little less attractive for the title.

>>33128276
XXI hands down, it was responsible for the total shift in design philosophy of subs post war.

Late war versions of German subs likely had superior hydrophone gear, and had deeper maximum depths. Their acoustic torpedoes were also the most advanced.

US subs had the best radar equipment, the late war subs were excellent and no longer suffered from faulty Mk 14 fuses.

>>33128276
The jap sub aircraft carrier. Unmatched till today.

>>33128276
Type XXI.
Those krauts were making huge leaps in sub technology by the end of the war.

>>33129729
There was literally nothing advanced or remarkable about IJN submarine design. The I-400 series, while very large and interesting for carrying aircraft, were deficient in every area that really matters for submarine ops of the period: sensors (both sonar and radar), comms, speed and test depth. Only in range was it a match for contemporary designs (once overall size and cost are scaled).

Pic related. The only surviving Type XXI in the world.

File: Wilhelm Bauer.jpg (125KB, 800x536px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 800x536px

>>33129905
Forgot the pic.

>>33129914
is that the one the allies scuttled at the end of the war to keep the Russians from getting the tech, then the germans raised it up in the 50s?

>>33129682
>it was responsible for the total shift in design philosophy of subs post war.

No it wasn't. At the beginning of WWII it's just that everyone conformed to the idea that most of a sub's time would be spent on the surface, diving only to attack. The Germans soon discovered however that they were spending a lot of time under. The XXI was a response to the shifting design philosophy of subs, it was not responsible for it.

>>33129914
aesthetic as fuck. Where is this at? I'd love to see her sometime if she's open to the public

Late war US sub's.
They singlehandedly killed Japan's merchant fleet.

>>33129974
No, you're thinking of the Japanese I-400 submersible aircraft carrier.

>>33130020
Pretty easy to do when the Japs had no concept of convoys or convoy escorts. It was literally shooting fish in a barrel for the most part

>>33130020

this. they were also shitting them out at an incredible rate. no one really came close to their capabilities at the end of the war.

>>33130013
>>33130013
She's permanently docked at Bremerhaven as a museum ship. She is open to the public.

>>33130054

One-to-one, German type-XXI were objectively superior in every way. The classic German issue. Too much tech, not enough numbers.

>>33130001

>After the war, several navies obtained XXIs and operated them for decades in various roles, and almost every navy introduced new submarine designs based on them. These include the Soviet Whiskey-class submarines, US Tang-class submarines, and the UK Porpoise-class submarines, all of which were based on the XXI design to some extent. The design remains the basis for diesel-electric submarines.

>>33130095
wasn't the first nuclear sub built using the hull of a captured XXI?

>>33130149

>The Type XXI design directly influenced advanced post-war submarines, the Greater Underwater Propulsion Power Program (GUPPY) improvements to the United States Gato-, Balao-, and Tench-class submarines and the Soviet submarine projects designated by NATO as the Whiskey, Zulu[17] and Romeo classes. The Chinese built Romeo-class submarines were based on Soviet-supplied designs. The subsequent Ming class, some of which were still in operation during 2013, was based on the Romeo.

>>33130032
Two were scuttled off Oahu and one off Gato Island
They were not relocated until recently 2005, 2013 and 2015.
Actually the University of Hawaii's research subs.

No Germans involved : )

>>33130048
>It was literally shooting fish in a barrel for the most part
Not so much the 50,000 tons plus of warships the USN subs put on the bottom, though. And that's not even counting the incredible number of ships they damaged and forced to return to port for serious repair.

USN fleet boats, in conjunction with USN/USMC naval aviation, were the primary naval combat war winners of the Pacific.

File: USS_Sealion;0831502.jpg (76KB, 845x435px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 845x435px

Just looking up some info on the Balao class because i know fuck all about it. pretty neat it served so long and they made so many conversions, like a version that shot a massive cruise missile and a cargo transport version (pictured)

also interesting the argentina navy used one during the falkland wars but it was captured .

>>33130149
>wasn't the first nuclear sub built using the hull of a captured XXI?
The USS Nautilus was most certainly not built on the hull of a captured XXI, anon. The XXI had a very significant impact on submarine design, but I think you're overstating it by a pretty large margin.

>>33130095
That's not at all what my point was. You said that the XXI was responsible for the shift in naval doctrine to saying that submarines should spend most of their time below the surface and run off of electric power. I am saying this is false. This was realized to be the case with the Type VIIs. The XXI was merely a response to this new data. The VII is what gave them the idea.

File: 1000px-SSN571.svg.png (13KB, 1000x190px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 1000x190px

>>33130149
>wasn't the first nuclear sub built using the hull of a captured XXI?

USS Nautilus (SSN-571) was a new build in 1951. It still had the immediate post war hull design which was influenced by the XXI.
The Navy (Rickover) had decided to use the GUPPY program improvements for hull but did not want to have too many untried technologies. It was a test bed submarine but was only using tech they knew would work. It still had problems near the end of it's operating life relating to the hull design.

>>33130212

YOu've got the wrong Anon, Anon.
Personally I think you both should put a little more thought into your woirding before you put more cheeto dust on your keyboard.

File: 1479517063397.jpg (26KB, 500x378px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 500x378px

>>33130318
No, you haven't proven shit because you don't even understand my argument, asshat.
>It was responsible for the total shift of design philosophy

How could it have been responsible for the design shift if it wasn't even designed until halfway through the war? How did they come up with the idea that submarines should spend the majority of their time underwater?

They came up with the idea based on the opinions of what U-boat commanders skippering Type VIIs in the Atlantic were telling them. They were telling them that they were spending more and more time underwater either following convoys or avoiding escorts, and that they needed something that could travel faster, longer, and quieter underwater. Thus the Type XXI was born. It was a RESPONSE to the change in design philosophy. A mother cannot give birth to herself, dumbass. You're the one that needs to put thought into your wording.

And yes I know this is arguing semantics but I don't give a shit. Learn how reading comprehension works, nigger

No one else has said it, but it was the type XXI

>>33129905
That's why you lost the war