# Submarine hunters



## mosquitoman (Jan 24, 2005)

Has anybody got any idea as to which type of aircraft sunk the most submarines? I know that Liberator AM929 was the only a/c ever to sink 2 in one mission but I haven't got much information on the feats of others.


----------



## Medvedya (Jan 24, 2005)

The most successful squadrons were the No. 86 and No. 120 squadrons each with 14 U-boats sunk. These were the most successful U-boat hunters in the war.

86 120 flew Libs, although the Sunderland was very bad news for a U-boat crew too, I'd think it would be the Lib.


----------



## Erich (Jan 24, 2005)

if I may switch around this topic a hair..........anyone know how many RAF-US a/c were lost to U-boot Fla ?

E


----------



## evangilder (Jan 24, 2005)

This site has some great info on Uboats and what was used to fight them:

http://www.uboat.net

The link here has info on allied aircraft used for going after the u-boats:

http://www.uboat.net/allies/aircraft/forces.htm

The number 19 group of the RAF coastal command has the highest number of U-boat sinkings, with 65. Med is correct, according to the site:
_The most successful squadrons were the No. 86 and No. 120 squadrons each with 14 U-boats sunk. These were the most successful U-boat hunters in the war. No. 224 followed them with 12 kills and No. 179 with 11 kills._

The site is a great reference for uboats and those who fought against them.


----------



## Gemhorse (Jan 24, 2005)

At last, a fellow Mosquito-buff !!!....Welcome !
To answer your question, there appears to be a few...- I've been reading ' U-boat vs Aircraft ' by Norman Franks Eric Zimmerman recently, which is a detailing of who shot at who, when and where... - It seems that initially, Wellingtons, Hudsons, Halifax's, Catalinas, Sunderlands and Liberators were our main attack aircraft, and as the US Forces came more into play, Avengers, Mariners and assorted fighters all contributed to overwhelming the U-boat force....It's really abit hard to say any particular aircraft was the 'supreme' U-boat-hunter, as even Mosquitos and Beaufighters, in fact most aircraft coming across them, would usually have a go. - A study such as this book I'm reading, is well worth checking-out, as the battle over the six years of War, went through many changes on both sides......If you include the Pacific battles, it paints a very comprehensive picture that doesn't really show any favourites as far as Sub-hunters went....Perhaps the PB4Y Liberator and Sunderland feature pretty strongly, as the both had great range for convoy-escort duties and reconnaisance, and there has been discussion recently in one of the forums....possibly 'Best Bomber' or 'Best in many different roles'......


----------



## Udet (Jan 24, 2005)

Erich:

I have seen some statistics, and U-boats shot down around 450 enemy planes (both USAAF and RAF).


----------



## Erich (Jan 24, 2005)

yes that is THE book to have on U-boot vs RAF command. not in my library yet.........what was the most successful U-boot if it mentions it ?

E ~


----------



## evangilder (Jan 24, 2005)

The numbers vary quite a bit, Udet. I have seen that number even higher in some instances. It was a costly battle for both sides. uboat.net has a good bit on that as well:

http://www.uboat.net/history/aircraft_losses.htm


----------



## Udet (Jan 24, 2005)

Evan:

Yes Evan; my father is a naval engineer and also is a U-boat buff, and he showed me some book where the number of aircraft shot down by U-boats was around 550; can´t recall the author though.

My father gave me a while ago "Hitler´s U-boat War", a two volume work; a real cumbersome thing to read but has lots of very interesting statistics.


----------



## Gemhorse (Jan 24, 2005)

It doesn't really specify, but with it being published in 1998, it's a very comprehensive detailing of the many conflicts....the bibliography is impressive, many good books have been written on the subject and I only got it outa the library simply to read-up more on the subject....One certainly is left full of praise for the courage displayed on both sides in these conflicts, it was no easy fight..... 
- Having meet a chap last year [ he passed away a couple of months ago], who was a Merchant seaman on the Russian and Atlantic convoys, it's most humbling to learn of their War, particuarly when they 'volunteered' for these duties.....


----------



## Erich (Jan 24, 2005)

not to change the subject matter as this is quite interesting but I understand that Franks work is the most comprehensive of the very few written on the subject matter. have hard of the U-boot flotille that sailed from the Baltic to Denmark/Holland at war's end and teh Russians tried to sink the boots but got slaughtered by the masses of 2cm and 3.7cm Fla on the boots. Not sure how deep the U-boot pattern was but they did all their sailing on the surface and one of the commanders-wives had a child while onboard/enroute to the surrender. Guess the Soviet tp bombers and ground attack a/c could not get close enough to do any damge as the Fla was so severe.................I have never ever heard what the scores were by the boots as this was end war and no scores were kept

E `


----------



## Gemhorse (Jan 24, 2005)

To diverse slightly, we had a news item down here just recently, about a U-boat that apparently put it's crew ashore in a remote place, to settle in NZ, and after taking all they needed off the sub, including some alleged plunder, they scuttled it....
Because it's been kept very quiet for so long, a couple of locals did get to know about it, and have apparently identified where it presently lies, a tricky spot, tidally-speaking, but efforts have been underway to pinpoint it's exact location, which may soon be accurately identified.....
The 'treasure' or plunder, is also now under these chap's investigation, having been stashed in an old mine apparently, and our general public have been told to await further developments......
One has to remember, that during the War, our population was around 1.2 million, and we were spread pretty thin over our rugged country....We now number around 4 million, and there's still alot of 'rugged country' out there, so it may prove very interesting what comes of it all......

I recommend a read of Norman Frank's book, Erich, his research is so very highly rated....he even comments on Herbert Werner, commander of U-415 of ''Iron Coffins'' fame, that his memory was possibly faulty in some of his accounts.......


----------



## Erich (Jan 24, 2005)

thanks friend, think it will be on my shopping list soon. aslo keep us posted on that "missing" U-boot. do you have the number of the boot ? would be a kick to do a little research on Kommandeur and crew....

E


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jan 24, 2005)

That's interesting to say the least, Gemhorse! I wonder what will be discovered, if anything.


----------



## Gemhorse (Jan 24, 2005)

I didn't catch the U-boat No., the news article caught me quite by surprise and I was captivated by the story....however, I'll make some enquiries from the news agencies, and get back to you.......

Gemhorse


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jan 24, 2005)

The Lib and the Sunderland are obvious choices, but what about the TBF/TBM Avenger? This was the primary aircraft of the Jeep Carriers and they did an aweful lot of damage to the U-Boats.


----------



## Cougar (Jan 24, 2005)

ive seen storys of catalina sub hunters, or "black cats" anybody know how many subs they sunk?? or ships sunk


----------



## evangilder (Jan 24, 2005)

Sounds like there are a couple of books and a news story to watch out for. Let us know if you hear anything else on that story, Gemhorse. I think you have our attention now.


----------



## Adolf Galland (Jan 24, 2005)

Loads, from 5 book I'd read about on the Atlantic war, the flying boats sunk about few hundred in the entire war, but that's because not ONLY flying boats sank U-boats, most were sunk by other types of air cover(escort carrier, merchant carrier, faster or anti-sub destroyers, and B-24s(working off the Greenland coast)


----------



## Adolf Galland (Jan 24, 2005)

Also the Sea Hurricane(well yea) armed w/ rockets keeps the boats from surfacing and some Wildcats too, but about which aircraft got the most"kill" on U-boats? Can't help ya.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 25, 2005)

as soon as i saw the name of this thread the B-24 and sunderland were shouting out to me............


----------



## mosquitoman (Jan 25, 2005)

I was thinking Catalina, Hudson, Whitley and Wellington aswell but I'm guessing the B-24 and the Sunderland got the most U-boat kills


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 25, 2005)

wellington was more anti-shipping than anti-submarine..................


----------



## mosquitoman (Jan 25, 2005)

Leigh Light equipped Wellingtons stopped nearly all night-time passage through the Bay of Biscay. The Leigh Light was a 16" naval searchlight that was switched on and aimed at the surface contact the aircraft had. This made it easy for the aircraft to fly down the beam of light and depth charge the U-Boat. Other planes were fitted with this later on but the Wellington pioneered this


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 25, 2005)

mosquitoman said:


> I was thinking Catalina, Hudson, Whitley and Wellington aswell but I'm guessing the B-24 and the Sunderland got the most U-boat kills



I think the Cat was the best 8)


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jan 25, 2005)

I am still thinking that the Avenger might have been the dark horse here. It would have had numerous chances, several squadrons opperated them by the end of the war and since they traveled with the convoys there wasn't a spot in the Atlantic they couldn't cover. They also carried a more versatile weapons load that any of the other aircraft including bombs, depth charges, rockets, and the FIDO homing torps.


----------



## MikeMan (Jan 26, 2005)

Are there any stats out there on FW-200 kills on allied subs/ships?


----------



## redcoat (Jan 26, 2005)

Right folks
Here's the Top 7 Allied Submarine Hunter aircraft of WW2
(figures supplied by U-boat net.com)

1) B-24 Liberator with 72 kills*

2) Catalina with 37 kills*

3) Avenger with 35 kills*

4) Wellington with 29 kills*

5) Sunderland with 27 kills*

6) Lockheed Hudson with 25 kills*

7) Swordfish with 21 kills*


* includes Submarines sunk in joint air/surface forces attacks


A total of 249 U-boats were sunk by aircraft alone and 37 more were sunk by aircraft and ships together.

43 additional U-boats were bombed while in port and another 12 were lost to aerial mine



> Are there any stats out there on FW-200 kills on allied subs/ships?


The Fw-200 Condor had no submarine kills credited to it.

In fact, just off memory, only one Allied submarine was lost to Luftwaffe attack in WW2, and that was shared with surface forces


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jan 26, 2005)

I was pretty doubtful about the idea of a Fw-200 sinking any Allied subs. The Condor was used (exclusively?) in the Atlantic. What would an Allied sub be doing there? It's not as if there was any trans-oceanic German trade to interdict.


----------



## Erich (Jan 26, 2005)

the Condor worked with U-boots in transmitting Allied surface ship movements besides bombing and strafing on these surface shipping. The Condor was to be replaced but only in part by the stealth unit FAGr 5 and it's Ju 290's...............quite an effective but unknown unit.

v/r

E ~


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 26, 2005)

i was going to say that anti-shipping strike wasn't the -200's primary role, it was to guide u-boats onto convoys, perhaps with the odd attack thrown in................


----------



## mosquitoman (Jan 26, 2005)

Did any Whitley's sink a U-Boat? I've read somewhere that it was the first plane to damage a U-Boat using ASV MkII


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jan 26, 2005)

I would bet that they did. They ended up being one of the first dedicate ASW types didn't they?


----------



## redcoat (Jan 26, 2005)

mosquitoman said:


> Did any Whitley's sink a U-Boat? I've read somewhere that it was the first plane to damage a U-Boat using ASV MkII


According to the source I used for the list, the Whitley is credited with 5 U-boat kills.


ps, For all you Mosquito fans, 
The Mosquito is credited with 8 U-boat kills 

pps, Sorry P-38 fans. for some reason the P-38 isn't credited with any U-boat kills, I think the list must be incomplete


----------



## Gemhorse (Jan 26, 2005)

Ohhh, thanks for that one Redcoat !!... Hear that guys, Mossies did something P-38's didn't do.....

Gemhorse


----------



## redcoat (Jan 26, 2005)

Lightning Guy said:


> I was pretty doubtful about the idea of a Fw-200 sinking any Allied subs. The Condor was used (exclusively?) in the Atlantic. What would an Allied sub be doing there? It's not as if there was any trans-oceanic German trade to interdict.


British Submarines operated in the Bay of Biscay, and off the Norwegian coast. Attacking German coastal convoys and U-boats in transit to the mid Atlantic. They were quite successful against the U-boats sinking a total of 16. 

ps, British submarines had the 2nd highest kill to loss ratio of any submarine service in WW2 (after the US  )


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jan 26, 2005)

"A fine bunch of pirates!"


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jan 26, 2005)

The P-38 shot down Yamamotto! That's something the Mossie didn't do! 

Come on guys, this is getting a bit ridiculous.


----------



## plan_D (Jan 27, 2005)

How was the anti-sub bit ridiculous? The Mosquito sunk 8, P-38 sunk none. Score one, Mosquito.  

redcoat, do you know which Mosquitos (Marks) did it? Were they all 'Tse-Tse' that sunk the U-Boats, or what?


----------



## redcoat (Jan 27, 2005)

plan_D said:


> redcoat, do you know which Mosquitos (Marks) did it? Were they all 'Tse-Tse' that sunk the U-Boats, or what?


Going off memory, I remember reading that the Tse-tse sank 1 U-boat, the rest were by rocket-armed Fighter Bomber Mk IV's.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 27, 2005)

Gemhorse said:


> Ohhh, thanks for that one Redcoat !!... Hear that guys, Mossies did something P-38's didn't do.....
> 
> Gemhorse



Oh yes, and how many torpedoes coul Mossies carry? 1 if I remember correctly. And how insane would it be if a fighter could carry more torpedoes than a light bomber with a bomb bay...oh wait a sec...the P-38 COULD carry 2  

Yes LG this argument is ridiculous. No-one is ever gonna give in to the other so there isnt any point arguing about it. Now lets get back to the topic in question before this turns into yet ANOTHER P-38/Mossie thread...


----------



## plan_D (Jan 27, 2005)

Thanks for the info, redcoat.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 27, 2005)

That list of U-Boat kills was interesting. Im surprised the Swordfish scored so many, it was a remarkable plane.


----------



## mosquitoman (Jan 27, 2005)

Swordfish worked off the British escort carriers out in the Atlantic Gap, where the U-Boats congregated, that's why they got so many kills


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 27, 2005)

along with their wide range of armourments...........


----------



## mosquitoman (Jan 27, 2005)

They mostly used rockets or depth charges, the rockets were designed to curve up and hit the sub under the waterline.


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jan 27, 2005)

And the fact that the British didn't have that many options to fly off their jeep carriers.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 27, 2005)

but you don't need options when you have the stringbag............


----------



## Adolf Galland (Jan 27, 2005)

lighting guy said:


> And the fact that the British didn't have that many options to fly off their jeep carriers.



thaqt is not true because the british can borrow planes from the US(wildcats, etc...) or they can use the sea hurricanes, and lot more including seaplanes


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jan 27, 2005)

I was specifically refering to hope-grown designs.


----------



## plan_D (Jan 28, 2005)

Home-grown. And why use anything different, if the Swordfish is doing the job?


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jan 28, 2005)

My point was what else was the RN going to use?


----------



## plan_D (Jan 28, 2005)

I know that was your point. And nothing, really. I suppose Sea Hurricanes could be used, equipped with rockets.


----------



## mosquitoman (Jan 28, 2005)

Fulmars, Fireflies, Seafires or Albacores could have been used, failing those the RN could have brought the Skua and Roc back into use


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jan 28, 2005)

Fulmars would have been a poor choice. You would have needed something able to carry rockets or decent sized guns. The Fulmar had neither.


----------



## mosquitoman (Jan 28, 2005)

I'm not sure but I think the Fulmar could carry a light bombload


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 28, 2005)

Hey hey, why havent we mentioned the Barracuda!?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 28, 2005)

because it wasn't as good as the stringbag..............


----------



## mosquitoman (Jan 28, 2005)

I'd forgotten about the Barracuda. I don't think it fitted on the escort carriers though as it's wings were quite long


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jan 28, 2005)

If you are wanting to talk about the Barracuda, go over to the 'butt-ugly aircraft' thread in the photo section.


----------



## mosquitoman (Jan 28, 2005)

The Barracuda ISN'T UGLY, it just looks like it's on stilts when it's on the ground


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jan 28, 2005)

Well it's non-fully-retractable flaps didn't help anything.


----------



## trackend (Jan 28, 2005)

I always loved the old stringbag although I think it was as much the skill of the lads behind the stick as the plane but with such a low stall speed
it must have made a really good platform for attacking subs. it didn't do the Italian Fleet much good either at Taranto


----------



## wmaxt (Jan 28, 2005)

Two of the very top anti-sub planes:

PBY-5 Catalinas - effective, long range, carried two torpedos and sometimes depth charges or bombs, AND the Brits liked them a lot!

B-24 Liberators - Effective, very long range, radar, search lights, Bombs, Depth charges and torpedos (loadout varied).


----------



## Gemhorse (Jan 28, 2005)

I always felt the Sunderland made a great contribution, especially the fact they were so big and hard to miss, as far as U-boat gunners went...

It was a shame they weren't more heavily armed, like the Jap 'Emily' [which was a Jap version of the Short aircraft], where even .50 cals like the Catalinas had couldn't have been as effective as 20mm's...

Unfortunately, the bigger the aircraft, the larger the crew-loss if they were shot down...but Sunderlands, and Catalinas overall service was pretty major, the rescue work they did especially, but I take my hat off to the crews, as in reading of their conflicts, the courage they had to take on heavily-armed subs was extaordinary.....they at least could alight on the water if emergency warranted it, something the Wellington, Whitley, Halifax, Liberator Fortesses couldn't do, along with the smaller anti-sub aircraft...

But all these aircraft battled-on, gradually reducing the U-boats from predatory wolves to hunted dogs. The Hunter-killer packs of Corvettes, Frigates and Destroyers certainly played a role here too, particuarly in the convoys, the co-operative venture of these ships and aircraft was the winning formula.....

I feel the Avenger was significant in the PTO, as was the Catalina, and in the ETO, MTO also, as both Allies used them...As I understand it, the Swordfish is really in a class of it's own, the only biplane through the War, and the awesome courage and skill of Taranto, but it's replacement, the Albacore, was useful [although not liked by it's crews], but the Barracuda, for all it's wonky undercarriage, gave good service in the last two years of the War, particuarly in attempted sinkings of the Tirpitz [finally sorted-out by 617 Sqn. Lancasters].......


----------



## mosquitoman (Jan 28, 2005)

It may havew been put earlier but the Germans called the Sunderland "The Flying Hedgehog" because it could defend itself well. All an aircraft did if the U-Boat was firing back was stay out of range and bring all it's turrets to bear on the sub. Once the deck party were taking heavy losses. the U-Boat captains decided to get the hell out of there, leaving the aircraft with an immobile U-Boat to depth-charge. The fightback tactics weren't completely succesful


----------



## redcoat (Jan 28, 2005)

mosquitoman said:


> It may havew been put earlier but the Germans called the Sunderland "The Flying Hedgehog" because it could defend itself well. l


In one incident a RAAF Sunderland was attacked by 8 Ju88 fighter-bombers, it drove them off after shooting down two of them, with another crash landing on its return to base.


----------



## mosquitoman (Jan 28, 2005)

Normally when one aircraft saw a group of U--Boats, it radiodedin for other aircraft in the region to come and assist so the flak was divided, one plane could take the flak while the other came in unnoticed


----------



## KraziKanuK (Jan 28, 2005)

mosquitoman,

how does an a/c stay out of range of 20mm yet is still able to fire on the sub with machineguns?

I suggest you read the introduction, as well as the book, Osprey's *Sunderland Squadrons of WW2*.


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jan 28, 2005)

I don't think the Emily was a copy of the Sunderland. Granted the two types looked similar, but I think any relation was only superficial.

I've never seen any information on a B-24 carrying torps. Can anyone document this?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 29, 2005)

yes the sunderland was feared by german crews 'cos of her ability to defend herself, and she was the largest combat aircraft in the world on her entry into service..............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 29, 2005)

However the Bv-22 was larger, and although it never saw service the Bv-238 was the largest a/c of the war.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 29, 2005)

yes but please note i said when she entered service.........


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 29, 2005)

I did note it, I was just making an addition....


----------



## KraziKanuK (Jan 29, 2005)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> she was the largest combat aircraft in the world on her entry into service..............



The Tupolev TB-3 was bigger.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 30, 2005)

Wow really? I know the TB-3 was big but not bigger than a Sunderland, thats interesting.


----------



## mosquitoman (Jan 30, 2005)

There's a lot of info on U-Boats at www.uboat.net, the aircraft section there is also very good


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 30, 2005)

i was refering to weight..............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 30, 2005)

Then why didnt you say weight...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 30, 2005)

because i wasn't expecting him to say what he did, i was quoting a RAF coastal command video.............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 30, 2005)

Hmmmmmmmmm....


----------



## Gemhorse (Jan 30, 2005)

Prior to WWII, a Japanese delegation was in England and was shown through the Short Bros. factories....this did eventually lead to the 'Mavis' seaplane, in fact they also went through Supermarine too, because the 'Emily' was also a product of Japanese observation of other country's manufacturing prowess and products...- I don't have the book on hand now, it was a library one, but I have read about this, LG....
They have an adept ability, do the Japanese, to observe, even acquire, and copy, virtually anything....- As I've posted before, they learned the American tactics to attack Pearl Harbour, from US Naval exercises in 1933, and that also gave them the naval Aircraft-Carrier, which they used to such great effect, something Germany never really cottoned-on to...
Their Industrial strength and savvy was again illustrated in the post-war era, when they were allowed to re-generate their Business and Industry, and take-on manufacturing giants like the US, particuarly with their cars and motorcycles, and in virtually all industries, especially electronics....

Anyway......

Further to my post on the first page, the U-boat that apparently landed here in New Zealand in 1944, was carrying a Nazi War Criminal, his wife and 3 children...Also, they allegedly had, plundered Nazi gold, jewellery and paintings...this was endorsed on the TV program, by a Leo Orphan, who was with British Intelligence...
I haven't as yet discovered the U-boat's serial No., there are apparently 55 U-boats still unaccounted for, but there may be a connection here to U-862, which is noted for action in the Indian Ocean, and for shooting-down a P-38 in Singapore Harbour during the War.- U-862 was known to have been re-fuelled by a mothership in Antartic waters, was sighted in Napier Harbour [a city on the East coast of NZ's North Island,] and then again in Aussie's Sydney Harbour...- Since the U-boats tended to operate in groups, this may have been a Southern Hemisphere Group, operating against the Allies in the Pacific area, as it is well known they had some successes in Australasian waters...- This one that landed in NZ is apparently in 5-6 fathoms deep, parallel to the shore, but just out off the breakwater line, and quite a difficult spot to get-to. The chap whose hunting it, his father was originally into or aware of the whole business, but the TV Channel covering-it has indicated we'll all be kept posted about developments....this is all I've been able to find-out since my first post........Can anyone gain any leads from this ????......


----------



## plan_D (Jan 31, 2005)

Gemhorse, the Japanese learned of the effectiveness of an attack on a harbour from the British Swordfish raid on Taranto. Yamamotos chief of staff was present at the time of the raid...

This U-Boat story is getting really interesting. I watched a programme on nothing to do with U-Boats yesterday, but it was to do with raiders of the Kriegsmarine. Merchant vessels with guns covered, would show themselves as a certain ship that would be in the area then attack when getting close. They had amazing success, and one (Atlantis) captured a report on British positions in Asia. Which lead to the sudden strike of the Japanese against Singapore. 
In the report it had said that if the Japanese realise how weak Britain really is in the Pacific they will take advantage straight away...

...I just felt like telling that little story.


----------



## Erich (Jan 31, 2005)

a U-boot gets it...........


----------



## plan_D (Jan 31, 2005)

U-862 - Type IXD2 
Laid Down - 15 Aug, 1942
Commissioned - 7 Oct, 1943
Commander - KrvKpt. Heinrich Timm (Knights Cross)
Career - 2 Patrols
Kills - 7 Ships, total of 42.374 tons

Became IJN I502 when captured at Singapore on 6th May 1945, laid down as I502 on the 15th July 1945. Scuttled 13 Feb, 1946. 

Also downed a RAF Catalina Sqn. 265/H


----------



## plan_D (Jan 31, 2005)

> 125 aircraft shot down by 97 individual U-boats for the loss of 31 U-boats either sunk during the attack or due to being located by other forces shortly afterwards and sunk.



Just for the success for aircraft against U-Boats. 

http://www.uboat.net/history/aircraft_losses.htm?sortby=squadron


----------



## Erich (Jan 31, 2005)

the U-boot pic is of U-849 being sunk by a PBY Liberator


----------



## Erich (Jan 31, 2005)

U-118 being clobbered by a/c of the USS Bogue


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 31, 2005)

very nice pics............


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jan 31, 2005)

The Bogue was the most successful of the Jeep carriers in terms of hunting U-Boats wasn't it?


----------



## mosquitoman (Jan 31, 2005)

Yes it was, I've just been reading up on it, a total of 12 submarines (10 German, 1 ex-German used by IJN and one Japanese). Not a bad haul really


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jan 31, 2005)

Certainly not a bad haul for a converted merchant ship.


----------



## Gemhorse (Jan 31, 2005)

I read about this Pearl Harbour thing years ago, written by Edwin Muller, entitled '' Blueprint for Pearl Harbour '', published in a Readers Digest...
At the time, an Admiral H.E. Yarnell was out on the Saratoga, and it was in company with the Lexington and 4 destroyers as a task force to try out the Harbour's defences, which he did with 152 aircraft at around dawn 7th Feb. 1932.....it was the Japanese spy organisation on Oahu and in sampans that sent the info back to Tokyo for analysis...they concluded at that point that the primary weapon of a modern navy is Air power and that the Striking force of a fleet should be based around the carriers...as did the US, as they realised bitterly on the 8th Dec. 1941, exactly how, from nine years previous, the Japanese had done it....they'd used exactly the same number of aircraft, and their losses were about the same as Admiral Yarnell's theoretical ones........

Those German merchant raiders were active down in the Pacific, there was one in particular, can't remember the name offhand, but it had quite a ' field day ', really capitalised on it's 'commercial camoflage and disguises'....
Thanks for the details on U-862, plan_D... - It was recorded in that book on 'Aircraft vs U-boats', by Norman Franks, that it shot the P-38 down in Singapore Harbour, which sounds quite unusual....they weren't known for sub-hunting, were they ?? ...and the U-862 was captured there too....?...I'm still wondering if it was part of a Hunting-group with this one that apparently landed here........

And I agree, really awesome U-boat pics, Erich....


----------



## lesofprimus (Jan 31, 2005)

Excellent pics..


----------



## Erich (Jan 31, 2005)

U-185 about to be sunk by VC-13 a/c from the USS Core in 1943


----------



## Crazy (Jan 31, 2005)

Does anyone have the number of U-boats built compared to the number left after the war ended? I read them somewhere, but can't find where anymore. It was some incredible number, like 80-85% sunk and more damaged


----------



## Erich (Jan 31, 2005)

Gem: not sure which of the 11 Aux. Schiffe you are talking about in the Pacific, the Orion which scored all but 2 kills in the Pacific and the Michael which on it's second journey was returning from Japan to Germany and sunk by a US sub.

the Komet actually circled the globe

the Kormoran on it's last op sank the HMAS Sydney but was damaged so bad with the Allied ship that she was abandoned and blown up. The demise of the Sydney is still a mystery today.

the Atlantis had an incredible journey under Rogge as well aas an impressive number of ship kills. Rogges book Ship 16 is still a classic....


----------



## Erich (Jan 31, 2005)

heres a shot of the Kapitän of a surrendering boot U 234 at war's end, Fehler on the right with 11th U-boot flottilla Co Korv.Kpt. H.-L. Willenbrock


----------



## Adolf Galland (Jan 31, 2005)

> Does anyone have the number of U-boats built compared to the number left after the war ended? I read them somewhere, but can't find where anymore. It was some incredible number, like 80-85% sunk and more damaged


ummm...the total loss of u-boats is 749 by the Kriegsmarine and the total number commissioned was 1161


----------



## Crazy (Jan 31, 2005)

closer to 65% then, but still, it's an impressive number. *shrug*


----------



## Erich (Jan 31, 2005)

according to one source, and of course there are many

total number of U-boots was 1150 of which 781 were lost, 213 were scuttled at wars end and another 154 surrenderd. U-boot personell was roughly 40,000 men with losses of 28,000 KIA and saome 5,000 POW.

U-boots sunk some 2603 Merchant ships and 175 Warships and Auxillaries


----------



## plan_D (Feb 1, 2005)

Atlantis captured vital information too, regarding the positions of the Royal Navy and ground forces in the Pacific. Atlantis hunting ground was South Atlantic and Indian Ocean.


----------



## Erich (Feb 1, 2005)

speaking of German Aux. raiders, here is a very rare shot of the Orions Kapitän


----------



## mosquitoman (Feb 1, 2005)

probably a stupid question but what was his name?


----------



## Gemhorse (Feb 3, 2005)

Yep, that was it, the Orion....I've read about it's mission somewhere....[If I can just remember where, now....]

- I will have to wait and see what develops with this TV programme....

Good pics there, guys.......


----------



## Erich (Feb 7, 2005)

Gemhorse and others interested check this out as it might be of interest on the Aux. Kreuzers.....

http://www.merriam-press.com/mono_075/m062.htm

E ♪


----------



## Erich (Feb 7, 2005)

and a littel something to go along with that book on the Aux. Kreuzers....


----------



## The Jug Rules! (Feb 7, 2005)

redcoat said:


> mosquitoman said:
> 
> 
> > It may havew been put earlier but the Germans called the Sunderland "The Flying Hedgehog" because it could defend itself well. l
> ...




Could you get me a pic??


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 7, 2005)

Getting a picture of the attack would be immensely difficult...but if you just want a Sunderland picture I can post one.


----------



## Gemhorse (Feb 7, 2005)

Awesome...thank you for that, Erich, I will chase that up.....
Oddly enough, Turakina is a little township about 15 km from my hometown, and I've read mention many times on the Rangitane, used as a troop/merchant ship from down here....
I take it that that's a Kreigsmarine badge you've posted....they were right-into the 'Viking' thing, eh?.....I have Gerald Reitlinger's ''The SS - Alibi of a nation 1922-1945'', which details particuarly Himmler's facsination with the Norse Legends and Aryan beliefs, which came through in alot of German badges and motifs/logos....Many folk are quite taken with them and one can see what a draw-card they must have been in the early days of the Reich, to help foster the patriotism of the people........

There is a way to get a picture of ''8 Ju-88's attacking a Sunderland''....this is the work that's done by Aviation Artists.........
- Robert Taylor's ''Caught on the Surface'' painting is probably the best action Sunderland one I've seen, which was specially commissioned to aid the preservation of Sunderland U-461 [the sub in the painting] artefacts, which reside now in the Australian War Memorial, in Canberra. It's a very accurate painting of an action in July 1943 when Sunderland 'U' of 461 Sqn. caught 3 U-boats on the surface in the Bay of Biscay, sinking one from just 50 ft, using it to sheild itself from the fire of the two other U-boats......it's hailed as the ''greatest Air/U-boat battle of WWII'', but perhaps ''8 attacking Ju-88's'' must also fit in there somewhere too....It requires alot of research and crew-survivors memories to put paintings like such together, usually......I think you can view Robert Taylor's painting at www.aviationart.com.au ...........


----------



## Erich (Feb 7, 2005)

Gem I ordered the book from Merriam press today. the badge I presented was the standard issue Aux Kreuzer badge to all personell aborad the disquised merchant raiders. The commanders of the ships depending on the amount of toll taken receved the bade altered with diamonds presented in the swastika if I remember correctly. The Atlantis ship CO Rogge comes to mind. Enjoy the book I will and there is another one I want to find and I think it can be picked up through Amazon, covering all the KM Merchant Kreuzers during the war. will post that laer once I find where I put the title....

E `


----------



## Gemhorse (Feb 15, 2005)

That's great, Erich...Von Lucknow captained the raider that sank the Rangitane, just 300 miles north of New Zealand, around May 1941...caused a stir down here, a book I'm currently reading, of a Kiwi who became Bomb-Leader of RAF 75 [NZ] Sqn. mentions it as he heads off to Canada on the RMS Awatea for aircrew training....Von Lucknow seemed to have quite a 'field-day' down here raiding....gotta get that book, eh ?......

Gemhorse


----------



## Jan7 (Nov 30, 2007)

mosquitoman said:


> Leigh Light equipped Wellingtons stopped nearly all night-time passage through the Bay of Biscay. The Leigh Light was a 16" naval searchlight that was switched on and aimed at the surface contact the aircraft had. This made it easy for the aircraft to fly down the beam of light and depth charge the U-Boat. Other planes were fitted with this later on but the Wellington pioneered this





Erich said:


> thanks friend, think it will be on my shopping list soon. aslo keep us posted on that "missing" U-boot. do you have the number of the boot ? would be a kick to do a little research on Kommandeur and crew....
> 
> E



Dear friends: As all you seen in my counter post, its my second in this Forums. In my first, my presentation, * I explain the motifs of this joint*


Erich and me coincided in another Forums as WW2F or WWII_Talk  

I research more dates of my investigation with the help of Internet spreadsheets, documents, datebases,.......

I found by a search machine this document in PDF format. I hope it is in your interest:
*Appendix 3 - Submarines Sunk by Patrol Aircraft (USA) During World War II *


Excuse me if my English isn't well  

Jan.


----------



## machine shop tom (Nov 30, 2007)

How fortuitous that this old thread has been resurrected.

A good friend's dad recently passed away. The man was a bombardier aboard a PB4Y-1 (USN version of the B-24 Liberator). He was a member of VP103, which was a part of FAW-7. I have been researching the unit's history and have found that a LOT of the planes were damaged and/or shot down by U-Boat flak. 

Here is a pic of his aircraft:

http://www.vpnavy.com/pb4y/vp103pb4y_01_14jul2006.jpg

It is an actual pic of his plane. My friend has found a pic that his dad took of the same plane (B-14).

tom


----------



## Jan7 (Mar 20, 2008)

Dear friends:

Excuse me if that question are explained in other place of this Forum.

I read in a site web very famous, *Tecnical Pages of U-Boat.net, The Deck guns* this hit:


> Sometimes the gun was used to shell shore-based targets like in the Caribbean where they fired at various installations like oil storage's and alike or in the Northern Sea where they damaged some radio stations. An excellent hit was landed by U-242 on 10 Oct, 1944 when it shot down a Russian aircraft with her 8,8cm deck gun!





Do all you says me about this amazing fact  ?




Jan.


----------



## merlin (Mar 21, 2008)

Gemhorse said:


> I recommend a read of Norman Frank's book, Erich, his research is so very highly rated....he even comments on Herbert Werner, commander of U-415 of ''Iron Coffins'' fame, that his memory was possibly faulty in some of his accounts.......



Interesting to read about the 'Iron Coffins' I still have it in paperback - 2nd printing 1972 cost then - £0.40!!


----------

