The U-Boat War Pt.1

[1775Cerberus]

I thought that this would be of interest to the members on this board. The U tube channel "Drachinifel" has partnered with Michael Lowrey, the WW1 lead researcher on Uboat.net to do a two part episode.

I have referenced him a couple of times on other threads. His three parter on Jutland is a good watch. His hypothetical on the last ride of the High Seas fleet is also a very good watch/listen.

There are also some very good videos done on WW2 subjects also.

https://youtu.be/k9TSAmtjYm4

Edited to add link

[stockwellpete]

Thanks very much for posting this. Just had a very interesting hour and a half listening to it. So German subs sank a greater tonnage of shipping in WW1 than in WW2! I didn't know that.[:)]

[Tanaka]

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

Thanks very much for posting this. Just had a very interesting hour and a half listening to it. So German subs sank a greater tonnage of shipping in WW1 than in WW2! I didn't know that.[:)]

Not reflected in this game [8D]

[OldCrowBalthazor]

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

Thanks very much for posting this. Just had a very interesting hour and a half listening to it. So German subs sank a greater tonnage of shipping in WW1 than in WW2! I didn't know that.[:)]

Not reflected in this game [8D]

Would be if you let me be the Central Powers next match.

[stockwellpete]

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

Thanks very much for posting this. Just had a very interesting hour and a half listening to it. So German subs sank a greater tonnage of shipping in WW1 than in WW2! I didn't know that.[:)]

Not reflected in this game [8D]

When I play as Central Powers against the AI I sometimes inflict over 100 MPP's worth of damage in a turn on the Entente with my submarines. Obviously this is the exception rather than the rule, but it would be interesting to add up the total MPP loss in a game for the Entente from convoy raiding. I think the figure might be surprisingly high. What that figure would convert to in tonnage of shipping lost is unknowable, but submarines can be very effective between 1914 and 1916. They tend to get hunted out of the war later on in 1917 and 1918.

The YouTube film also said that mines were the biggest danger to submarines. In Stevenson's book he talks about the adoption of the convoy system by the Entente in 1917 as being really decisive in the submarine war. He stresses the point that it was only after the USA entered the war that the convoy system was really secure as they had lots of destroyers and light cruisers available for escort duty. In the game at the moment Entente anti-submarine warfare can be very effective even if the USA is still neutral. Maybe that is something to look at? Stevenson also says that once the convoy system was in full swing the Germans withdrew their submarines to coastal waters rather than continue with their attacks on merchant shipping in the Atlantic.

Also, the YouTube film says that submarines also had an important mine-laying role, which I did not know. In the game there are three levels of research each for Submarine Warfare and Anti-Submarine Warfare. I appreciate this is abstracted to a considerable degree, but from the film I can perhaps see three areas where submarines were improved during the war - deck gun/bigger deck gun, torpedo size, and general technical improvements - but I am not sure what the advances in Anti-Submarine Warfare were, apart from the introduction of the convoy system. Any ideas?

[Tanaka]

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

Thanks very much for posting this. Just had a very interesting hour and a half listening to it. So German subs sank a greater tonnage of shipping in WW1 than in WW2! I didn't know that.[:)]

Not reflected in this game [8D]

When I play as Central Powers against the AI I sometimes inflict over 100 MPP's worth of damage in a turn on the Entente with my submarines. Obviously this is the exception rather than the rule, but it would be interesting to add up the total MPP loss in a game for the Entente from convoy raiding. I think the figure might be surprisingly high. What that figure would convert to in tonnage of shipping lost is unknowable, but submarines can be very effective between 1914 and 1916. They tend to get hunted out of the war later on in 1917 and 1918.

The YouTube film also said that mines were the biggest danger to submarines. In Stevenson's book he talks about the adoption of the convoy system by the Entente in 1917 as being really decisive in the submarine war. He stresses the point that it was only after the USA entered the war that the convoy system was really secure as they had lots of destroyers and light cruisers available for escort duty. In the game at the moment Entente anti-submarine warfare can be very effective even if the USA is still neutral. Maybe that is something to look at? Stevenson also says that once the convoy system was in full swing the Germans withdrew their submarines to coastal waters rather than continue with their attacks on merchant shipping in the Atlantic.

Also, the YouTube film says that submarines also had an important mine-laying role, which I did not know. In the game there are three levels of research each for Submarine Warfare and Anti-Submarine Warfare. I appreciate this is abstracted to a considerable degree, but from the film I can perhaps see three areas where submarines were improved during the war - deck gun/bigger deck gun, torpedo size, and general technical improvements - but I am not sure what the advances in Anti-Submarine Warfare were, apart from the introduction of the convoy system. Any ideas?

Mostly referring to playing against Human players...

[BillRunacre]

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete
I am not sure what the advances in Anti-Submarine Warfare were, apart from the introduction of the convoy system. Any ideas?

At the start of the war, no one had any weaponry that could attack a submarine that wasn't on or near the surface, and so the war saw the development of weapons that could do so, the most famous and long lasting being the depth charge.

However, it's not just about the weapon design, but also the numbers carried on Destroyers and other vessels, because this also increased as the war progressed.

The wiki page on this is worth a look:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_charge

[stockwellpete]

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete
I am not sure what the advances in Anti-Submarine Warfare were, apart from the introduction of the convoy system. Any ideas?

At the start of the war, no one had any weaponry that could attack a submarine that wasn't on or near the surface, and so the war saw the development of weapons that could do so, the most famous and long lasting being the depth charge.

However, it's not just about the weapon design, but also the numbers carried on Destroyers and other vessels, because this also increased as the war progressed.

The wiki page on this is worth a look:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_charge

Thanks Bill.

I posted this link in the other thread that shows German submarine losses in WW1 . . .

http://www.gwpda.org/naval/sml00001.htm

It gives the following list of reasons for the loss of a German submarine. . .

Mined (including hitting German mines) - 57
Depth Charges - 30
Rammed - 20
Gunfire - 20
Enemy Torpedo - 20
Caught in nets/Paravane - 6
Miscellaneous - 6
Stranded - 5
Bombed by Seaplane - 1
Unknown - 22

It is quite an interesting list with Seaplanes not having too much luck, by the looks of it.