General Discussions
This is the place to discuss general issues related to the U-boat war or the war at sea in WWII.
RE: U-166
Posted by:
Michael Lowrey
()
Date: June 13, 2001 08:51PM
<HTML>Walter,
That is not a dumb question at all. It is possible to positively identify an unknown WWII or even WWI U-boat wreck, but not easy. As a practical matter, you\'d have to inspect it very close up, looking for items with a serial or identifing number or crew member name. (The identification of U 869, which took six years and ultimately involved a dangerous dive deep into the interior of the boat, is a case in point.)
As a practical matter, in this case no such detail is really necessary. Only one U-boat was lost in the Gulf: U 166. Combine the location of the discovery and its general characteristics with a known counterattack and no viable alternatives gives you a pretty definite identification without matching part numbers. (Of course, finding part numbers on a wreck nearly a mile down while respecting its status as a wargrave is extremely difficult if not impossible.)
Is this absolute certainty? No. Unfortunately, given the nature of submarine warfare, more often then not, we can\'t achieve anything close to it. Many boats were lost on both sides in both world wars where the best thing we can say is \"missing\" or \'lost by unknown cause.\" That\'s the nature of the beast.</HTML>
That is not a dumb question at all. It is possible to positively identify an unknown WWII or even WWI U-boat wreck, but not easy. As a practical matter, you\'d have to inspect it very close up, looking for items with a serial or identifing number or crew member name. (The identification of U 869, which took six years and ultimately involved a dangerous dive deep into the interior of the boat, is a case in point.)
As a practical matter, in this case no such detail is really necessary. Only one U-boat was lost in the Gulf: U 166. Combine the location of the discovery and its general characteristics with a known counterattack and no viable alternatives gives you a pretty definite identification without matching part numbers. (Of course, finding part numbers on a wreck nearly a mile down while respecting its status as a wargrave is extremely difficult if not impossible.)
Is this absolute certainty? No. Unfortunately, given the nature of submarine warfare, more often then not, we can\'t achieve anything close to it. Many boats were lost on both sides in both world wars where the best thing we can say is \"missing\" or \'lost by unknown cause.\" That\'s the nature of the beast.</HTML>
| Subject | Written By | Posted |
|---|---|---|
U-166
|
Walter Gallant | 06/13/2001 06:00PM |
|
RE: U-166
|
Michael Lowrey | 06/13/2001 08:51PM |
|
RE: U-166
|
Walter Gallant | 06/14/2001 12:45PM |
|
RE: U-166 & answer for Marc Singleton
|
Robert Church | 06/15/2001 11:47AM |
|
RE: U-166 & answer for Marc Singleton
|
Jim | 06/15/2001 02:29PM |
|
RE: U-166 & answer for Marc Singleton
|
Tim | 06/16/2001 02:54AM |
|
RE: U-166 & answer for Marc Singleton
|
Jay Baker | 06/17/2001 03:23PM |
|
Human remains & other possible U-boat discover
|
David E. Brown | 06/18/2001 02:16PM |
|
raising the U-166 ?
|
kurt | 06/16/2001 11:46AM |