Why did the U-Boats fail?

>>34335923
Not enough of them.

>>34335932
No


Sonar, depth charges, ASW aircraft.

>>34335934
No
Radar

>>34335987
No

Enigma crackers

>>34335995
No

US Navy Mermen Corps

No surface naval support, no safe port after 1943, and their enemies kept reading their mail without telling them.

>>34335923

ASDIC

>>34335934
Had there been more u-boats early in the war, the British might have been defeated and the US might have lost its will to fight before those countermeasures were deployed. Later in the war, more u-boats just would have been more targets.

>>34335923
Hedgehog mortars.

File: 2015-05-14 18.40.14.jpg (499KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

499KB, 1600x1200px

No snorkeling back then so always liable to get caught on the surface, and plenty of planes to hit them.

>>34335923
snorkel was not implemented until 1944 and also the U-BOATS that germany entered the war with got obsolete by late 1942 with radar/sonar/planes. if the germans had started development of their late war uboats sooner they would have had a better chance

remember before ww2 the submarines were nothing more than torpedo boats, the literally did 8 miles per hour underwater and spent most of the time above the water

>>34336199
the main reason they surfaced was to recharge their electrical engines rather than oxygen refilling. they also had potash cartridges. iirc the mk vii ran out of electrical power long, long before oxygen even became a problem. in my opinion there wasn't really anything they could've done, the allies had abundant q-boats, complete air domination, well organization convoys, etc. when u-boat loses began to outweigh their wins. winning the war would've probably helped to keep them from failing, kek, but that's about it.

>>34335932 This,
>>34335934 This,

And Convoy tactics. And some of this. >>34335995

>>34335923
Shoddy German build quality.

File: vlcsnap-2016-08-13-13h04m50s199.png (223KB, 980x718px) Image search: [Google]

223KB, 980x718px

>>34336039
>Mermen Corps

Submarines can't win naval campaigns.

They're supplements to surface fleets, not replacements. Even the greatest submarine is little threat for a well prepared Destroyer

File: Imperial Fleet.png (106KB, 740x572px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 740x572px

>>34336923

>Submarines can't win naval campaigns.

They can if you have enough of them.

>>34337142

Without the Island Hopping, there is no victory in the Pacific. Submarines supplemented that by making it very difficult for the Japanese to resupply the island garrisons, but they by no means won the war.

>>34337192

>but they by no means won the war

Dude, look at the fucking chart. FIVE MILLION TONS.

>>34337211

Could have been 10 million tons and it still doesn't make the Japanese surrender because submarine economic warfare doesn't work, as proved between Britain and Germany

>>34337211
You see where it says "carrier air" and "surface craft"

That's how the IJN got sunk.

The submarines raped their merchant marine, which prevented them from replenishing their losses.

It's a two-pronged thing. If you had to pick one, you'd be better off taking the carriers.

>>34337211
Nukes won the war. Nukes dropped from the sky.

>>34337252

I'm not saying that the carriers did nothing, they were definitely also important. But the submarines were objectively more important. They sank more ships.

>>34337249

>submarine economic warfare doesn't work

Damn, somebody better tell Japan, they'd be interested to learn that.

>the one singular isolated factor X is not the only thing that won the extremely complicated naval campaign of a World War
What a shocking position to take

>>34335995
>>34335987
Either history buffs. Or read cryptonomicron.... not sure which

File: man-thinking-small-e1415363287342.jpg (210KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 800x533px

>>34337380

>Five million tons of sunken warships & merchant vessels
>Isolated factor

What did he mean by this?

>>34336277
the snorkel allowed them to recharge while still submerged

>>34336199

Why not just surface during the night to recharge and then stay completely submerged during the day?

>>34335923

Churchill said that throughout the entire war, u-boats were the only thing that really scared him.

>>34337552
really? cause they recharged em with the diesel engine, which needed an exhaust..? maybe i just have the wrong picture in my head, but it doesn't seem like any of the pictures of snorkels i've seen would be large enough for said exhaust. also a big smoke signal like that would certainly be an easily spotted target

Um, they didnt. They were remarkably effective.

The "evil Nazi Uboats" were almost exclusively successfully attacked while surfaced flying a red cross and broadcasting their intention of humanitarian operations on all channels, providing rescue and aid to surviving crew of ships they attacked.

Remember that history is written by the victors.

>>34336211
SSKs are still pretty slow underwater.

>>34337591
> then stay completely submerged during the day
One, something would run out within six hours let alone an entire day, and two; dogshit slow speed. The Type VII's max speed using emergency power going flank speed while submerged is a grand total of 8 knots. On the surface they could hit 15 knots easily and 18~ knots max. Also, sometimes, depending on where they are, the ground might be too shallow to submerge.

>>34337862
>The "evil Nazi Uboats" were almost exclusively successfully attacked while surfaced flying a red cross and broadcasting their intention of humanitarian operations on all channels, providing rescue and aid to surviving crew of ships they attacked.

Cite

File: 607a29204d08ddfadbdd44f4f6152eefd84d6f81209a9ef08017fdbaf3dbefea.png (33KB, 899x547px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 899x547px

>>34337862
I want to believe you but that does sound a bit far fetched.

>>34337862
>the Glückliche Zeit was the entire Battle of the Atlantic

Nice try, Hans.

>>34337355
Merchant tonnage is less important than naval tonnage though.

>>34337973
>>34337966
>>34337948
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laconia_incident

Please read history that isn't written by (((them))).
No I'm not a nazi, and no I'm not a /pol/tard, but please realize that 90% of everything you learned related to history in public school is nonsense.

>>34338147
I know it's happening, I'm laughing at you for ignoring the part of the battle of the Atlantic where the Americans and British figured out how to fight U-boats and then started sinking the shit out of them.

>>34338147
You have provided a single incident, no evidence that Uboats were "almost exclusively" sunk under these circumstances.

>>34336277
The snorkel was for their ENGINES to breath you dumbass.

>>34337811
DIESEL ENGINES BREATH AIR

Snorkel allows you to run those engines while submerged.

>>34335923

Anglo tricks.

>break enigma
>launch massive disinformation campaign
making krauts think that their uboats were being sunk by anglo luck

>>34335995
Wasn't the German Navy the only ones who were fairy competent about using safe practices to make cracking their version of the enigma harder? Or was that the air force?

>>34337862
>The "evil Nazi Uboats" were almost exclusively successfully attacked while surfaced flying a red cross and broadcasting their intention of humanitarian operations on all channels, providing rescue and aid to surviving crew of ships they attacked.

Bahahahahahah

>>34335923
1. Brits hacked German mil communication and thus could roughly locate every U-boats.
(Germans didn't seem to know the necessity of EMCON)
2. long range bombers&ASW patrol planes with escort carriers, numerous destroyers surely did the job
3. Allied, especially Brits again sunk almost all oil tankers, supply ships, submarine tankers (Type IV submarine) designed to resupply U-boats,
thus severely diminished operational capability of U-boats.
4. Germany barely had any surface fleet and air power to distract enemy's ASW assets, air and sea. (Kriegsmarine surface ships were either sunk or anchored in harbor.)
5. use of snorkel was too late though the device was somewhat unreliable (but very useful anyway)

>>34340668
>Type IV submarie
*Type XIV submarine

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Type_XIV_submarine

>>34340487
Next you're going to tell me you don't believe Zyklon B was just a delousing agent.

>>34338154
I love how he somehow ignores that 99% of Uboats died either from depht-charges fired from escorts and aircraft, as well as the genuine interdiction-effort over the Bay of Biscay. But then again, such is the life in the "Nazi wuz the good guys dindu nuffuin"-club

>>34335923
Not enough of them.

If there had been enough near the beginning of the war it was game over for Britain. Even in the face of incredible merchant shipping losses Coastal Command never got the airframes they needed as priority was given to Bomber Command.

US convoys had virtually no COMSEC, and in some cases were still using cyphers from WW1.

Of course, this all changed with the advent of radar and crypto.

>>34337811

The whole point of the snorkel was to run the diesel engines while submerged. The main detection method of surfaced U-Boats moving across the ocean was relatively primitive air-surface radar mounted on patrolling aircraft. At the very least the snorkel would reduce the detection range considerably, it would have probably made these early air-surface radar near useless in practical terms.

>>34335923
Because they were fighting the entire world

>>34335923
they failed because the enigma machine failed

it's crazy how advanced german submarines were compared too other nations. even in '44 we (americans) and the british didn't have the depth and speed in our fleets despite devoting a considerable proportion of our navy research towards it.

though our torpedo tech had outclassed them by then.

>>34337665
>Churchill said that throughout the entire war, u-boats were the only thing that really scared him.
not everything Winston did or said is true or good

>He believed that the main thrust into Europe should have been via Italy aka Europes soft underbelly
>primary force behind Gallipoli

File: KDqRJbF.jpg (94KB, 992x744px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 992x744px

>>34337862
>>34338147
>>34340698
Two more posts and you will have earned this prize!

>>34341016

What's so wrong about invading through Italy? People always point this out but what is actually wrong with doing that?

File: bc9adce05a7e22c2dd7ff62caa1a71fc.jpg (366KB, 1024x573px) Image search: [Google]

366KB, 1024x573px

>>34335923
slow underwater speed is why they failed, if the Germans had built something like the type XXI at the beginning of the war they would have been impossible for destroyers to depth charge, they would have sank every single ship in a convoy instead of 4 or 5 (which was considered a huge success), we would all be speaking German right now if someone with a brain was in charge of the u-boat fleet instead of an old fogey WW1 u-boat captain who wanted subs exactly the same as he used in WW1

>>34341284
>What is the Alps.

>>34341308

You might have a point there.

>>34341308
churhill's proposal was of course to make a naval landing near marseilles. wasn't a great idea only because there were a huge amount of supplies in britain compared to the med. that said the vichy forces would have propbably surrendered rather than opposed the landing and we wouldn't have the high death tolls of normandy.

>>34341373
actually, after reading some more churchill even opposed operation dragoon. churchill was just a retard apparently.

File: uboatloss.jpg (97KB, 800x573px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 800x573px

>>34338147
Does this pic hurt you, Bockwurstboy?

>>34341298
you are a shit. the type xxi was a long range submarine which had a lower cruising speed submerged and surface in order too preserve fuel.

>>34341420
14.5M tons in merchant ships vs. 1M tons in german submarines
that map would literally be one big union jack if it's loss pattern were reversed

>>34337395
That's probably correlated.

>>34338612
The Enigma had a number of rotors that could be placed in different orders to increase the strength of the cipher. The Air Force and Army used three rotors (the minimum) while the Navy had 5. This brought the complexity from 3! (6) to 5! (120) and increased the time to break each day's codes by such a dramatic factor that it wasn't feasible until automated cracking methods were developed.

>>34341424
>the type xxi was a long range submarine which had a lower cruising speed submerged and surface in order too preserve fuel.
youre an idiot

>>34336923

>Even the greatest submarine is little threat for a well prepared Destroyer

Does that hold to this day? Are submarines only good at murdering auxiliary vessels?

>>34341620
of course not and i'd say that even in 1944 an escort destroyer group was in deep shit should a german sub flottilla decide too attack their convoy

modern attack subs have long range torpedoes and missiles. so pound for pound the ability to attack and dive deep outweighs any surface ships speed and defensive weapons

>>34340698
To be fair, any lice they had would have been killed in the room too

>>34342487
>germany has the largest stockpile of sarin nerve gas on earth
>decides to use a slow asphyxiating cyanide instead

>>34335923

Because boats are supposed to be above water, not in water. That's for submarines

>>34341284

Fighting in mountainous terrain is just fucking stupid and favors the defender.

It's why nobody ever fucked with Switzerland, and why even the Italians were able to hold off enemy forces most of the time in WWI . It's just not worth it.

File: 1479527591649.jpg (261KB, 962x1200px) Image search: [Google]

261KB, 962x1200px

>>34335923
The reasons are multitude as always in war, and anyone claiming that one single thing caused it is a fucking moron. It's like things aren't simple when the side taking less losses loses over 700 ships...

Anyhow, for one of the lesser known factors, early in the war (when they had a better chance of actually being effective, no matter what the buffoons shouting about how the Type XXI would have changed the war say), German torpedoes were fucking garbage. Their magnetic pistols were calibrated at Kiel, and they didn't realize that the changes in the Earth's magnetic field would fuck up the nice settings on them. Ergo, they wouldn't recognize a ship, or they might recognize open water as a ship. So, they could explode randomly or just pass on by.

Even more stupidly, somehow they didn't get contact pistols to work well either, so there's a lot of reports early in the war of U-boat commanders complaining of hearing thuds of torpedoes just bouncing off Allied ships. HMS Nelson took three goddamn torpedo hits, with none detonating.

Their depth keepers also routinely failed, and their gyroscopes weren't that accurate either. U-47 missed with three torpedoes at HMS Royal Oak, with nobody chasing him at only 4 kilometers at a fucking stationary battleship.

The depth keeping and gyroscopes were mostly figured out by the Norwegian campaign, although they still had tons of problems further on with their pistols.

The Americans had similar problems, although in 1942 they didn't have to care quite as much about torpedoes. Really only the Japanese came up with a good torpedo design, even though it did leave nice "shoot here to detonate ship" spots on the decks of their destroyers and cruisers.

>>34335923
Loss of bases and resupply vessels
Communications were cracked
Improved allied air-power limited U-boats time on the surface.
U-boats were faster on the surface and lacked speed and endurance when submerged.

Before communications were hacked U-boat 1 would sight a convoy, radio it in, and U-boats 2 through 10 would position themselves as fast as possible ahead of the convoy then wait for it submerged. Convoy would sail into this "wolf-pack" and get torpedoed if there were escorts or deckgunned if there weren't.

After the enigma-machine was cracked and allied air-cover got better: U-boat 1 would sight a convoy and radio it in. Allies would intercept the message and reroute the convoy, increase escorts, and/or focus airpower ahead of convoy. U-boats 2 through 10 would attempt to sprint into position on the surface but would have to submerge to avoid allied planes. If they had to submerged chances are good they would miss the convoy. Those that did manage to get in place then had to contend with escorts that would depthcharge and hedgehog the hell out of any sub that launched torpedoes or shoot them to shit if they surfaced. So instead of getting 4-5 ships in a convoy the sub might only get 1-2 before being forced to hide or die.

There were more merchants then subs, so even a 2:1 ratio was a loosing one for the U-boats.

If the germans had developed and widely fielded subs that could move at speed when submerged and had figured out their codes had been cracked then the battle for the Atlantic would have been much more contentious.

>>34342873

Actually, it was possible to home on on a U-Boat simply from their transmissions. Even once breaking the tougher German naval enigma code, the code-breaking didn't necessarily have quick enough turn-aruond to be useful in the space of a couple of hours which might happen with a wolf-pack closing on a convoy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-frequency_direction_finding#Battle_of_the_Atlantic

>>34342960
Additionally, you don't WANT to be providing information that's too accurate too often. Your advantage is useless if they realize their communications have been so thoroughly compromised.

>>34337591
Radar.

>>34335923

They didnt. If it wasnt for the British empire trading EVERYTHING for US support, Germany would have blockaded them to death.

>>34337811
The exhaust ports remain underwater.

File: 0Cut_Short_Sunderland.jpg (582KB, 1600x1109px) Image search: [Google]

582KB, 1600x1109px

>>34335923

>>34340949
Advanced German submarines? Brit boats were crap (using bronze conning towers because only magnetic compasses), but the USN fleet boats had better speed, fire control, radar, sonar, tenperature sensors; the U-boats might have better depth and periscopes.

>>34341284
Lrn to history.
Clark vs Kesselring.

>>34343441
>>34337591

Radar alone wasn't enough to target a surfaced U-boat at night, so they fitted the aircraft with a spotlight.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leigh_light

>>34335923

They didn't use nuclear propulsion.

>>34336199
What is that?

>>34335923
Uboats didn't fail, they were extremely successful. Hitler failed and took the uboat with him.

>>34345667
Barrier to block ships and subs.