Aha! I know that one. They painted them yellow like big bananas .......Ah nope aint going there. Ask me about WW-2 Battleships or cruisers and I have a fighting chance, but subs?
I have no idea! LOL!

Garry

WAIT A MINUTE!!!!!! You guys have got to be kidding me..........I stumped you? Both of you?
You're probably just doing that to make me feel better, aren't you?
Well, HalfYank got the 'alteration' correct, but missed the sub name. Darn, and I forgot to tell you about the all expense's paid trip to the Carribean for getting the answer right!.....gee.

O.K. keep it focused on WW II era huh?

Lets seeeeeee........

Tread.

O.K....got another one that's bothered me.

Reflecting on the general success of both the U.S. PT Boats in the Pacific, and the German E Boats in the Atlantic. How come, even after the Japanese position in the Pacific looked bleak, the Imperial Japanese Fleet did not choose to build and develope their own version of these fast and effective strike craft??
I mean, for crikkey sakes, they (the Japanese) resorted to Kamikaze planes to destroy their enemy! One would think (and having discussed this very question several Christmas's ago over dinner with a friend who is in the boat building industry) that a large contingent of Japanese 'style' PT boats would have been very effective getting under the U.S. naval guns and delivering lethal torpedo's. Fact is, these torpedo's would be quite a bit cheaper than both complete military aircraft and trained pilots!?!

Tread.

(don't worry, I'll keep 'em comin'. That is, if you guys can keep the answer's coming as well! ;-) )

Hey Tread, The Japanese did have torpedo boats of more than one type. They had PT type boats, rather crude , but they worked. They also had Kamakazi type boat. And there most deadly, they had there Manned suicidel Torpedo's! One way trip package, kind of like strapping a saddle on a torpedo , pointing it at an enemy ship and drive it home.
I have pic's of there Torpedo boats around here somwhere, I'll have to srounge them up.

Garry

Hmmm, interesting. Then why didn't they build more of them? Weren't they effective? Or is it because of the politically incorrect idea that Orientals can't drive? #:-)

Just kidding guys. Don't 'vote' me off the island.

Tread.

Tread, the sucide subs that Garry is talking about were called Kaeten (sp). They were basically a torpedo with a man on it. The Japanese put a lot of effort into delivering this type of weapon. They made IBoats that could carry several ot these, I think the boat that got the Indianapolis had some, and also converted cruisers and others ships to carry them. I know they had some successes. One ot them sank a US escort ship, and a few mechantmen, but by that time they were just far too little and too late.

In reference to the sub technology question (sorry I'm posting kinda late)...

It was indeed the snorkel (or 'Schnorchel' as the Germans referred to it) that allowed the subs to stay under longer, eliminating the need to surface to run their diesels to recharge the batteries. It was a Dutch invention which was experimented with on a couple of their boats initially, but then when Nazi Germany invaded the Netherlands, they obtained and exploited the technology. The first German U-boat to use the Schnorchel system was U-58, which was scuttled at Kiel in 1945. The first Dutch boats to sport snorkels were the O-19 and O-20, nearly 6 years before the Germans.

As far as the ship model painting goes...

It's really just personal preference. Some like to show their models as pristine Shipbuilder's showpieces, some like to show them as they would appear in drydock after some amount of sea time, or some like to show them at sea in all of their mamoth, rusty glory (and still some like to stuff them with fireworks)...

As far as the PT boat question...

The Japanese did have such craft... as has been stated. I think that their unwillingness to produce significant quantities of them was because of the original reason that they had entered the war... resources. The Japanese were running out of natural resources, like oil, rapidly at the start opf the war, and their intension was to extend their dominion over the entire Pacific to meet their resource needs. They just underestiimated the Allied resolve.

Hope this answers your questions adequately

Todd

Man alive Tread - I miss this thread for a day and a half (have two computers on the cable modem and can't get near either for the teenagers running amuck #:-) ) and you have gone wild

I want to go back to the hide your sub from the Chinese, how to find subs, and depth charge questions -

Submariners have the ability to use different layers of water which are different temperature, thus different density and or salinity (much like tankers use cover and concealment to defeat detection). Different density salt water affects sonar and can cause false echoes or even reflect/refract sonar signals (especially during WWII - newer sonar systems made negate some of the is advantage). Have you ever watched the old WWII sub movies where the sub hides under a colder layer of water? Second, for NUC boats, along with cooling pumps as mentioned above, propeller cavitation (bubbles generated off the blades during manuevers) are a major give away for subs. I do not know the science, but the quietest sub propellers have an odd number of blades - being quieter than an even number You may recall 15 years or so ago - there was a big controversy when Japan allowed the sale of computerised machine tools to the USSR that allowed them to machine state-of-the-art sub propellers. The comment about sneaking away at slow speed, is correct, speed causes more cavitation and more noise for passive sonar to detect! Concerning surrender - The subs would be forced to the surface, the crew would attempt to scuttle and abandon ship - if they weren't sunk outright!! Occassionally, a sub could be captured and scuttling charges or flood ports could be closed before crew could sink their sub.

Good sonar operators had the ability to determine speed, direction of subs movement, bearing to target and depth - allowing depth charges to be set in a pattern above, on and below the estimated subs depth - OUCH!!! Sub drivers countered by trying to change direction, speed and depth, or play dead - whatever it took.

Got to look back - you have just too many great questions - knew all that reading would pay dividends

Finding a sub - Part has been answered - a naval commander wants to locate and track enemy subs as far out as possible. The US has muliple layers of detection:

- An underwater lines and fields of detectors that track enemy subs transiting certain areas - in fact there is a true story of American subs penetrating Soviet territorial waters near Valdivostok and tapping into underwater telephone cables (that is how quiet US subs can be :-) ) Now I may miss something, but this is what I recall:
- Next are satellites, using IR and other technologies - as a sub will show up on IR to a certain depth (I do not know the stats, but I saw a picture in a magazine of the "shadow" cast by the sub under water!!)
- Interior defenses include fixed wing aircraft, P-3 Orions for off shore work, and S-3 Vikings for carrier based outer ring work. The fixed wing aircraft carry MAD devices (as explained earlier), sonabouys (floating sonars linked by radio back to aircraft) and aerial antisub torpedos
- The next layer consists of antisub helos, similarly equipmented like the fixed wing, but they also carrying a more powerful dipping sonar - attached to the helicopter which can hover directly over the sub and dip its sonar into the water.
- Final layer is the passive and active sonars on the anti-sub warfare ships - though just about every naval combatant carries sonar.

Once a ship or a fixed wing asset detects a sub, the team goes into action - strings of sonabouys are dropped allowing, thru computer plots, to triangulate the subs location, they can also try to herd the sub (the sub can hear the sonabouys and even the dipping sonar enter the water!!! - depending on range, I have read that the subs passive sonar can also hear a helicopter hovering close to the water) The helos can dip there tethered sonar to confirm data from sonabouys and then torpedoes can be dropped to kill the sub.

Computer technology has allowed both submarines and surface ships to catalog contacts - A good operator with a good catalog uploaded can not only give range, bearing, speed, depth, etc., they can tell the class of the contact, but if identified in the catalog, the name of the specific contact!!! New contacts are recorded and shared throughout the fleet.

Plus the US has a Los Angeles class attack boat following most if not all Soviet/Russian boomers, just waiting for the word that war has started

Whoever said watching TV was waste - It not if you only what Histort Channel, Tech TV, TLC, etc.

P.S. Sorry for all teh spelling errors, I got tired editing - spend all that money for a computer, and the darn thing can't spell

Another thing about IJN Torpedo tactics. They took alot of pride in there Destroyers with there Longlance Torpedo's! And rightfully so. They were very good, specialy when it came to night fighting! They were well trained and deadly. Early in the war, the US destroyers and cruisers were helpless against these Japanese Destroyers untill the US got there radar controlled firing. Then they did not need to see there enemy to hit them. But before radar came on the seen, the Japanese were Deadly in the dark!
Just maybe this could be why they didnot use to many PT boats. That and like what was said before, they just did not have the resorces to build many. At any rate, the longlance Torpedo boys were a force to be feared!

Regards,
Garry

Howdy all,

Let's see if I can make this happen...I'm not very good at 'computerese'

Came across this neat picture of the Big 'Mo' hanging 'ten'.....



......did it work?

I give up.

Dang, another dreaded red X !
Thats my kind of luck posting
pic's Tread. I have better
luck fishing !

Garry

Tread, try this. When you put your mouse over the URL of the picture you want to send move your mouse down, and to the right. This will pick up the entire URL. They are usually three or four lines. I think you didn't get it all.

TH - Sometimes technology can be a curse

Jeff

To me it is. The pic I was trying to post was a great pic (you've probably all seen it) of the bow of the Missouri splashing through a wave, as seen from the command bridge(?).
Just thought it looked very cool...........that's all.
I do really need to work on my computer skills.

Tread.

Muuaahhhhahahaaaaa! Just when you thought it was safe to visit the 'Warship Forum'.....BANG! Another one of Tread's inquisitive questions for the 'floaty' challenged rears it's ugly head once again!
BTW, you all have garrybeebe to thank for it ).

O.K.....since apparently most of the 'floaties' here enjoy the WW II era questions, here it goes.
I have read many times that a couple of the things that the german troops really feared about the ground war with the Americans, was One; the U.S. M2 .50 caliber Machine Gun for it's devastating effect on human beings. And Two; the use of White Phosphorous rounds from Sherman tanks, for the same reason as above. Additionally, tanks had different types of shells they could fire at the enemy.
On surface ships such as U.S. Destroyers, did they also have 'different' kinds of shells they could employ from their deck guns?

Tread.

Oh, oh....follow-up question. Did they have those deck guns that shoot out a small flag that says "BANG!" on it?? Huh?

They certainly had different types of shells, though I don't know if they had "willy pete" white phosphorous or not. The big guns could have AP, armor piercing, or HE, high explosives, or star sells, for illuminating at night. At the first naval battle of Guadalcanal, Nov 13 1942, there is some that say the two Japanese battleships were firing HE shells that they had loaded for shore bombardment of Henderson field rather than anti armor shells. The Japanese employed special ammo for their battleship guns that were for anti aircraft. The idea was to throw up a huge splash in front of torpedo planes coming into attack. There was also the proximity fuse that was like a little radar set in a shell. It could send out signals to tell it when to detonate close to an aircraft.

On a somewhat related note the French, and possibly others, employed a dye system for their big shells. The idea was to throw up splashes of various colors so different ships could spot the fall of their own shells easier. One time when the French navy and the Royal Navy were operating together the French admiral asked, "what color shells do you want to use." When he got a questioning replay back from the RN admiral he said, "Never mine, you use white."

Yeppers, Destroyers, Cruisers and Battleships had different rounds for there guns. Battleships main guns had armor pierceing rounds for other armored ships. And they had HE rounds for shore bombardment, also I beleave they used timed fuse airburst rounds. I know the Japanese Battleships used time fused white fosforus insinerary rounds for there main guns that they used on aircraft! There is a photo of the Battleship Ise manuvering to dodge bombs from an US air attack, it shows her firing her main guns forward at aircraft while at full speed ! The 5 inch multiporpose guns on all the US ships could use AP rounds, HE rounds, Timed fuse and procsimity rounds. And also fire flares. I would think that any of the Willy P rounds would be the most feared from the recieving end !

Cheers,
Garry

P.S. Yes Tread, they had guns that shot a flag out of the barrel, but it said oop's !

NEXT!

This has to do with the D-Day bombardment. What was the count (how many Battleships, how many Destroyers) of ships engaged in bombardment duties offshore that morning, and as a follow up question relating to my WP query. Knowing the innate fear the germans had for the two things mentioned, wouldn't it make sense(?), at least for a little while, after observing that even the monstrous 16-inch AP shells of the Battleships were having almost NO affect on the fortified german bunkers, to switch to WP and concentrate on the other manned Axis postions including the multitude of MG/cross-fire set-ups?
Been awhile since I've read this stuff in particular, but wasn't there a significant amount of inland shelling as well? If I had something in a 'can' that scared my enemy poopless, I'd sure as heck use it.

Tread.

Here you go Tread. Once again I owe it all to Google. http://www.eurosurf.com/ddaynavy/ddaynavy.6.html

Good Googling Rodger! I thought I had more info in my books. But all I found was a map of the Invasion, its pretty cool though. It shows the position of all the ships (exept it dont show any destroyers) and it shows each ships mission targets. This is a very interesting subject! One I will check out in more depth. Great Questions Tread !

Regards,
Garry

Hmmmm, no input on the WP part of the question? I think I'm finally wearing you guys OUT!

Tread.

Thought you 'floaty' guys had more salt. #:-) #:-)

Just an opinion really, in reply to Tread's WP question. I'm not sure how available these rounds were to the Allied navies on D-day. I imagine they were rare and expensive rounds in ship-caliber packaging. There was also probably some fear, on the part of the Allies, of shelling their own troops.

Really just an opinion as I don't have any written evidence.

Todd

Whew I can't believe I really just read every single post in this thread. Ok a few observation from another tanker (me). The info was dead on target and the post about the oil in the bulges is absolutly correct. This was pointed out to me when I visited the USS Alabama in Mobile. There were open hatches on top of the bulges so I asked. About the Iowa class or "the greyhounds of the sea". They were specific built to keep up with the carrier task groups. I believe the Yamoto could do 28 knots? The Iowa's with 250,000 horses could and did keep station with the carriers and the carriers ran what about 32 to 36 knots when launching and retreiving planes? All American Battleships I believe after BB 53 were constructed with an internal armored box which ran from in front of the first babbit back beyond the last babbit. The top of this box was an anti-bomb shield comprised of armor plate 16" thick. All important functions were incased in this box including CIC, como, the gun control center, ammo storage and propulsion. Crew spaces were along both sides of this box and the deck just above the armor plate deck. The Marines of course were in the bows. Where they should be. These factor added to the superior fire control systems and manuverability of the Iowas, gave them a vast edge over the competition. Think about it, America only lost 2 battleships in WW2 both by sneak attack. The Utah dosen't count. she was classed as an auxilery because her main function was to train dive bombers. Yep, she was bombed more times by us then anyone else. Range. What I've read is that the Iowas could fire a 3200 lb shell more than 23 miles. Kill marks. On tanks we call them kill rings. Don't know what the sailors called them I think the Air Corps called them flags? Clean sweep. Hey I have seen every damn war movie made and if "The Duke" was in it then way more than one time. Anyway they were always saying that clean sweep ment that they had fired all they're torpedos and some of them had actually hit something Obsolete. Funny calling a class of ships with such awsome abilities obsolete. When you think of the ships that have been sunk by missles and sabatoge in the last 15 20 years, and then take in to account the capabilities of the Iowas you wonder whos running the store. Or who was, they're gone now. In they're day they didn't just intimidate, they scared the hell out of em. They didn't just ingage an enemy, they assulted them. The Montanas. They were infact streched Iowas. When the Missouri collided with another ship her bows were severly damaged. What they did instead of rebuilding her bows, they cut the front off the Kentuckey I think, and welded it on the Mo. The Montana had already been launched before the class was declared obsolete and the Kenucky was still on the ways.

Ohhhh man! Another 'landlubber' coming up with the '411'!!!

:-) Thx ARMDCAV!.......I guess I really have worn out the 'floaties'........ #:-) #:-) #:-)

Hey......I love you guys!

Tread.