american subs

the question popped just out of my head. did the US subs also opperated in the atlantic or mediteranian (against the italian navy) or did they only operated in the pacific?

 

I don't know the details but I'm fairly certain that some US subs operated in the ETO. The US lost 52 subs during the war and only 43 in the PTO so I assume the others were lost in the Atlantic or Med.

 

in all? i thought there would bemore

 

Well the Axis were never really involved in a protracted anti-Submarine war the same way the Allies were. I would also hazard a guess that there were far fewer US submarines than German (For example) although that is really just a guess.

 

all 52 losses...
http://www.battlebelow.com/losses1.htm
http://www.bluejacket.com/ww2_ship_loss3.html
Amly one last in the atlantic (Dorado (SS 248) wich was on it's way to Panama !)

also from that site:
By May of 1943 US submarine involvement had almost ceased in the Atlantic except for training and sea trials of new subs. US submarine losses in the Atlantic were few and may have been the result of an aggressive anti-submarine program by US and allied powers.

 

simon wrote:

You are correct. There were about 250 US fleet submarines which were larger, more comfortable for the crew and had much greater range and long patrol capability as one might imagine given the vastmess of the Pacific. Approximately 1150 U-boats were manufactured althoguh I think that only about 1000 actually made it out on patrol..about three fourths of them were lost- 743 IIRC.

 

That's the generally accepted figure for U-boat losses in WW2.

 

man for man,ship for ship the u-bouts had the largest losses of any service in the war.

 

Indeed they did. That is not however the kind of record one is desirous of achieving

 

Yeah, really. I'm amazed that they kept going out on patrol right up to the end of the war, despite the losses.

 

in the end, the americans would have little to fear. very good radar (i heard that radar was so developed because the Silent Service was always asking for better equipment), good sonars (or hydrofones), good torpedo's and almost no enemy destroyers left and, this i see as the biggest limitation, was the lack of experience in war at the first two years. the crews had to learn a lot (how to approach, best shooting range, how to use the weather for your advantage, best speed under water to avoid detection,...). once all this knowledge was written down, it was easier to train better crews who had a bigger chance of surviving.
problem with the germans was that the allies made more DD's then they could sink. more DD's are more depth charges, more depthcharges is a higher change of beeing hitted,.... resulting in a loss of the experienced crews and a slaughter ammong the new crews

 

You forgot the complete air cover the Allied convoys enjoyed from 1943 onward, either land based or from the CVEs.

 

idd, i forgot that. possibly the most important factor

 

Yep. U-boat losses skyrocketed when complete air cover from start to finish was available for the convoys. The more powerful escorts added to the Germans's dilemna.

 

makes you wonder what if the japs gave their convoys aircover

 

Do you think the thought didn't occur to them? They would have done so had they been capable of fighting off the US Navy and USAAF airpower.
A significant number of their merchant ships were sunk by aircraft as well as by US submarines.

 

Indeed. The 5th Air Force proved particularly adept at antishipping operations, which was not an area the USAAF was terribly interested in normally.

 

Donitz didnt like sending his boys out to almost certain death. In the end tho he did it in order to tie down a percentage of Allied resources, not with any hope they would actually win the war in the Atlantic.

 

Hey Rich, welcome aboard

Regards,
Che.

 

And they died for nothing.