View Full Version : POLL: What about the type XXIII ?

09-03-2004, 06:24 AM

09-03-2004, 06:24 AM
I guess most of you know the little coastal uboot type XXIII. It is my favourite submarine, certainly not the best looking boat but I love it !
I read that it wont be available/playable in SHIII, I am quite disappointed because even if it carried only 2 torps, this modern WWII sub had a very interesting design/capabilities.

Like its big brother the XXI, the XXIII was a very innovative submarine, and not only a submersible boat like the older types :
Fast underwater speed, advanced passive sonar, schnorkel...

It would be interesting to recreat the last mission of the U2336 (oh my god it is my user name, a coincidence ??? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/59.gif) or the missions of the types XXIII that lied on the bottom of the north sea evading the destroyers to attack lonely merchant ships (yeah I know thats not the most effective type of sub but 6 sunken ships is not too bad... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif)

SO my question is :

Who would like to see this sub in SHIII ?

[This message was edited by u2336 on Fri September 03 2004 at 06:40 AM.]

09-03-2004, 08:57 AM
The more the merrier I say http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Anyway - if it's not in the game, it can be modded I'm sure. I'll do the modelling for you if you can get me the blueprints.

09-04-2004, 12:50 PM
i will provide you the blueprints ! I have them as I am building a RC model of that type.

Thanks for your proposal !


09-04-2004, 08:38 PM
hummm type XXIII ?
Depends which theater u prefer.It was designed for shallows littorals,u can't go in high sea with it.

09-04-2004, 09:55 PM
Of course it should be available! ALL Types should be availableto be exact. And where are the enemy subs? Just because they weren't used in the ASW mode doesn't mean they shouldn't be included! DUH!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v325/hauitsme/KillerTomato-1.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v325/hauitsme/KillerTomato-2.jpg

09-05-2004, 03:11 AM
AKA, North Sea theater of course http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Another interesting feature of the XXIII,the crash dive capability :

The XXIII commanders developped a new way of cruising on surface, they had already flooded the ballast tanks and were running on surface with the help of the dives planes (both fully up). If an enemy plane was spotted, they could dive in 5 sec after the hatch was closed.

To reply a post I read that no XXIII was destroyed by the enemy, at least one (U2338) was bombed by an enemy plane (RAF Beaufighters) during a transfer on surface in May the 4th 1945.

This type of sub had a short but intense career, unlike the XXI.


09-05-2004, 05:16 AM
Lol i would have said Mediterranean http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

"The XXIII commanders developped a new way of cruising on surface, they had already flooded the ballast tanks and were running on surface with the help of the dives planes (both fully up). If an enemy plane was spotted, they could dive in 5 sec after the hatch was closed."

Reminds me something i read some time ago and which means the contrary:

In his "Notes on the Fenian Ram", John Holland described his experiences with the his first submarine as follows:
"Besides the engines, the most signal failure was the method of going under water - a pair of balanced rudders on a transverse axis at the center of buoyancy. They were positively no good, and showed no result at the best speed I could get, about 3-1/2 miles. When turned at a considerable angle, the speed dropped to next to nothing. On studying that point afterward I saw that the power for the submerged run, with any motor requiring air, would be all wasted in overcoming even a little reserved buoyancy. The equivalent of this plan - downhaul screws - is just as expensive in power, and more objectionable because more cumbersome, even though the boat is pulled down while lying still. More water ballast does the same thing and does it much better; every gradation of gravity being obtainable by employing compressed air and valves operated by water pressure, and it may be done automatically. Yet this was the subject of one of Nordenfeldt's Laws of Submarine Navigation, as promulgated by his friends in Engineering. My experiments were made in May 1887, in the Passaic River at Paterson, N.J. The longest time spent under water in this little boat was one hour."

Submarines progressed since...

09-05-2004, 06:21 AM
Mediterranean should have been the second area of patrol of the XXIII. After the capitulation, the allied forces found sections of type XXIII in a tunnel in Toulon, France and in a shipyard in Genua, Italy.
1000 XXIII was planned to be launched !!!

Even if it was a coastal sub and a not a "firing line" weapon, the germans put a lot of effort to design and launch this type of sub within a very short time (less than 2 years between the first drawing and the first dive !!!).
Maybe it was its main problem, a fast construction and the almost daily allied bombing caused many problems on the XXIII.
The biggest issue was the soldering of the hull and a design failure : the "8 shape" hull.
In France, we tested a XXIII (U2326) lent by the british navy during the operation "thankful".
The french navy didnt have any operation manuals of the boat nor the shipyard specifications ! We had to slowly test the boat to write them for further testings.
Unfortunatly, in decembre 1946, during a test dive, the u2326 sank with all crew and 2 civilians.
It seems that the french thought the crush depth was close to 200-250 meters and the max operationnal depth was 150 meters (these depths were written on some of the few documents taken in the german shipyard after the war). In fact, high pressure tests on the "Hai" and "Hecht" hulls in 1956 (Bundesmarine type XXIII) showed that the crush depth was only 160 meters and the max operationnal depth only 100 meters.
We can easily imagine what happened when the french commander dived his 2326 to the theorical max depth.
God bless the 17 sailors and civilians who died in this tragedy, another one among hundreds...


09-05-2004, 07:51 AM
Postwar was a sad period for walter u-boats(as for WWI battleships), but u have more here (http://uboat.net/technical/electroboats.htm)
The probleme with the XXIII in a sim is that it's a late-stage war sub in a small operation theater...
D'un autre coté si les walter u-boats étaient sortis au milieu de la guerre, on l'aurait eu en simulation mais on aurait perdu la guerre(en tout cas l'Angleterre http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/59.gif )

09-05-2004, 10:32 AM
Being a late in the war uboot would not be a problem for me as they saw action and fired on enemy vessels. You can live really nice missions with that type I think, be sure to save your torps and set the firing solution correctly. The u2336 did it "well" (I think of the sailors who lost their lives in the 2 cargos the uboot sank) by sinking 2 boats with only 2 onboard torpedoes. These two unfortunate boats were the last ships sunken during the WWII, sad record.

By the way, AKA, are you français ? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif


09-05-2004, 03:02 PM
Perspicace u are http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

"These two unfortunate boats were the last ships sunken during the WWII, sad record."

because of a faulty radio equipment.
But costal subs raise the question of the modeling of the seas's bottom.Would be interessing to know if they improved it since SH2.

09-05-2004, 03:11 PM
faulty radio ? please explain I do not know this version.

About the sea bottom, yes absolutly ! It would add the possibility to use it to hide etc...
But maybe for a SH4 ? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/crazy.gif

Where are you AKA ?


09-05-2004, 03:19 PM
Did u follow the link that i gave ?

"he only boat to score twice was U-2336 on 7th May which was also the last sinking by a U-boat in the war. Ironically, in this case the only significant technical weakness of Type XXIII was demonstrated - which was a faulty radio equipment. U-2336 would have not attacked, had she not missed the surrender signal on 4th May."

44 c'est mon département http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

09-05-2004, 03:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Did u follow the link that i gave ?
Not all the link, only the last chapter http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/52.gif

And I knew this story http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif, I thought you were talking about the 2 ships ! (Ne pas perdre la face.....ne pas perdre la face... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/88.gif)

Je suis dans le 92.