View Full Version : Eine Wahl des U-Boots
12-21-2010, 11:06 PM
Just wanted to learn your way of choosing an U-Boot to take command of.
What is the main thing you consider on choosing whether it would be a VIIB, or VIIC, or IX etc ?
As for me, I prefer VIIB type, as the most optimal variant: the SM and SF speed, torpedo qnt, deck armament. But the main reason why I choose VIIB instead of VIIC or any other type - is speed.
In fact, I have no idea why Kriegsmarine stopped their choice on VIIC as being a "workhorse" and the most massively produced U-Boot. Cause VIIB obviously has all advantages over VIIC.
So, what is your idea as for that and what are your preferences and principles on which you make your choice???
12-22-2010, 04:54 AM
Well, i always prefered to keep things historically correct.
Uboat commanders had not much of a say over the question to keep a boat or get a new one. To decide that was up to the flotilla commander or even up to Dönitz directly.
Sometimes this was also a necessity , for instance when the pressure hull took so much damage during battle that the shipyards said that it was not worth the time and effort to repair them.
In that case the commander and crew were assigned to a new boat as soon as one became available while the old one was either scrapped and recycled or used for shallow water training purposes by the naval academy.
12-22-2010, 05:13 AM
IIRC the VIIC had an increased radius of action. Nothing worse in my mind than having to cut short a patrol due to low fuel when you still have torpedoes left. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif
I have more than one skipper going at the moment but the career path they each follow is more or less the same.
1939-40; Boat No.1: Type IIA or D, North Sea and English Channel. Short patrols so the starting crew get their medals and qualifications built up pretty quickly. They form the core of my crew when I upgrade to a bigger boat. After France has fallen and the Atlantic coast bases are available I upgrade to a...
1940-41; Boat No.2: Type VIIB or C, depending on what's available at the time. I love my deck gun but you can only really use it up until mid/late 1941. After that too many aircraft and the merchants all have their own guns. After about a year and a half of this, the USA is due to join the war and I then upgrade to a...
Late 1941-1943; Boat No.3: Type IXC. Soooo many torpedoes and patrol areas a long way (hopefully) from aircraft. I do the assigned patrol grid and then head down to my favourite hunting ground between the Azores - Freetown/west Africa. plenty of fat, unescorted tankers to be had and you can still use the deck gun on some of them.
1943; Boat No.4: Don't really know. Usually been sunk by this time. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif
I don't like the Types IXD2 (too big and clumsy) or the Type XXI (too may breakdowns), so after 1942 I try to find a job ashore. Somewhere like the Eagle's Castle, waiting for Richard Burton and Clint Eastwood to turn up.
About as far away from the ocean as you can get! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XKGhG0W0LQ)
12-22-2010, 07:40 PM
I prefer the VIIB as well for early war, but eventually get into a VIIC. As Celeon states, it is historical. I believe the reason why the Kriegsmarine relied upon the VII's so much is a combination of their abilities and ease of production. Sort of the way it was with the ME-109 fighter; it was a proven type and could be produced in large quantities. For Germany, it was a matter of trying to produce as much as they could and that came at the expense of possible future production of better types.
12-22-2010, 10:47 PM
I got it!
But still the question stands between VIIB and VIIC. They are almost equal, but after all VIIB turns out to be quicker. And Kriegsmarine chooses VIIC, that is longer and taller and a bit more clumsy...
Why so? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif
It would have been clear if they had commissioned somewhat equal qnt of each of these two types, but the facts are as follows:
VIIB - 24 commissioned (U-45, U-46, U-47, U-48, U-49, U-50, U-51, U-52, U-53, U-54, U-55, U-73, U-74, U-75, U-76, U-83, U-84, U-85, U-86, U-87, U-99, U-100, U-101, U-102).
VIIC - 568 commissioned ( http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif ).
This means that Kriegsmarine had the least quantity of VIIB-type (among battle submarines). So strange....
Still, I believe, that Kriegsmarine bore no fools within their organisation, so there probably were CERTAIN REASONS I do not know...
So why "C" and not "B"?? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif
What do you think of that?
12-23-2010, 12:16 PM
I think the C model dives deeper.
12-23-2010, 12:52 PM
Originally posted by Paul..Siegmann:
...so there probably were CERTAIN REASONS I do not know...
No need to shout at us, can hear you quite well. The type VIIC was more easily mass produced and was cheaper than the previous marks. Even the Kriegsmarine had to keep within budget.
I disagree with your assertion that 'the Kriegsmarine bore no fools within their organisation...' The Nazis, and everybody in Germany who allowed them to come to power bore a share of responsibility for the eventual outcome. As Hitler's successor and the last 'Reichsfuhrer', Grand Admiral Doenitz was complicit in the destruction of the navy he had ultimate responsibility over. Not much of a strategy, or showing much signs of higher leadership.
The type VII was still sailing into combat in 1945, long after it had become obsolescent. The failure of the German navy to procure a suitable replacement helped us (the Western allies) but condemned thousand of gallant u-boat men to a wasted death.
12-23-2010, 01:46 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kielhauler2010:
The Nazis, and everybody in Germany who allowed them to come to power bore a share of responsibility for the eventual outcome.
So, who brought Nazis to power then? Could't you be more detailed, starting from here??
12-23-2010, 02:44 PM
No, you answer my question before I respond to yours. How do you affirm that the Kriegsmarine bore 'no fools' when its actions and strategy were so fundamentally flawed? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
I feel that this discussion could go on and on...and would bore our comrades on this forum. PM me if you want, we'll discuss this in private (while I have breath left!) I used to drive a London bus, love a good argument... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
BTW, your handle wouldn't have anything to do with this chap, would it?
Iron Coffins (http://www.uboat.net/men/werner_herbert.htm)
12-23-2010, 10:58 PM
No. My handle connected to some other guy (http://uboat.net/men/commanders/1194.html), but still relation is obvious http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif