Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

GHG Gruppenhorchgerat vs KDB Kristalldrehbasisgerat

Discussion in 'The War at Sea' started by DesertWolf, Feb 9, 2006.

  1. DesertWolf

    DesertWolf Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2004
    Messages:
    848
    Likes Received:
    1
    via TanksinWW2
    The GHG was Germany's standard hydrophone installed in its Uboats upon entering World War II. It was installed in the Uboats from 1935 onwards. It consisted of two groups of hydrophones installed on each side of the bows. These groups each covered an arc of a 140 degrees on the sides of the Uboat. This meant that at any one time, the Uboat could listen to 280degrees out of the 360degree angle surrounding the boat. Under favorable conditions, single ships could be detected as far as 20kms away. (When the Uboat was underwater obviously).

    The KDB came out in late 1939 and it was designed to be an improvement over the GHG. The KDB was located on the upper casing and could be rotated from within the Uboat. Since the KDB could be rotated (like a radar dish), it could cover a +/- 160 degrees arc = total of 320 degrees. The reason the KDB does not cover the whole 360 degrees is because the Uboat engines usually drown out any noise coming from the rear of the ship. The conning tower also interfered with any detection from the rear. Still, this was a 40 degrees improvement on the earlier GHG. The one terrible defect that the KDB had was its extreme vulnerability to depthcharges.

    This leads me to the following question. For a Uboat commander, would you prefer being more able to detect surrounding ships but risk the loss of your hydrophone when depthcharged closely or would you rather detect less but have a much less fragile hydrophone? This is one of the kinds of choices that most of the Uboat commanders went through during the war.
     
  2. Ricky

    Ricky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,974
    Likes Received:
    105
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    First up - welcome back DesertWolf! Good to have you back :D

    Right, as to your question - I'd prefer to have both!

    But seriously, I would personally prefer the less vulnerable system. While you might worry about what was happening in that extra 40 degrees, there is a much better chance that you will not be 'blinded' any time an escort manages to drop a depth charge near you.
     
  3. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    Yeah, really; durability is a must in warfare.
     
  4. Quillin

    Quillin New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    2,313
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ghent, Belgium
    via TanksinWW2
    i would go for GHG. knowing where the enemy DD is crucial information when you are getting or about to be depthcharged
     
  5. DesertWolf

    DesertWolf Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2004
    Messages:
    848
    Likes Received:
    1
    via TanksinWW2
    Im sure you meant the KDB. (KDB is the improved but fragile version).
     
  6. Ome_Joop

    Ome_Joop New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    I would go for a combo of those two...or install the Balkon Gerat wich was an improved version of GHG. Where the previous had 24 hydrophones, the Balkon had 48 hydrophones and improved electronics, which enabled more accurate readings to be taken (Standard on the Type XXI and installed on some type VII).

    I conclude out of this that the KDB was not all to popular as the type XXI had an upgraded GHG
     
  7. Quillin

    Quillin New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    2,313
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ghent, Belgium
    via TanksinWW2
    no, i am talking about GHG. a destroyers does more depth charged runs. if your KHD is damaged by the first attack you won't know where the DD is comming from. although those extra 40 degrees come's in handy, i just don't want to take the risk of having it damaged
     
  8. DesertWolf

    DesertWolf Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2004
    Messages:
    848
    Likes Received:
    1
    via TanksinWW2
    KHD?? :-?
     
  9. Ome_Joop

    Ome_Joop New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    Typo he obviously means KDB :oops:
     
  10. Quillin

    Quillin New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    2,313
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ghent, Belgium
    via TanksinWW2
    nope, GHG. i rather have a strong device than something that is broken at the first attack.
     
  11. Ebar

    Ebar New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,006
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    On a space station in geosynchronous orbit above y
    via TanksinWW2
    On the other hand a more sensitive but more fragile piece of kit might help you avoid getting depthcharged in the first place.
     
  12. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    But the more fragile piece of equipment is more likely to break down under normal wear and tear. Remember, the U-boats operated mainly on the surface, which entails a lot of pounding from the sea itself.
     
  13. Quillin

    Quillin New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    2,313
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ghent, Belgium
    via TanksinWW2
    anyway, it's a tough choice. i rather play it on saftey and strength of the equipment.
     

Share This Page