Technology and Operations  
This forum is for discussing technological & operational matters pertaining to U-boats. 
Go to: Forum List•Message List•New Topic•Search•Log In•Print View
Good Allied Doctrine
Posted by: Mark K ()
Date: November 02, 2002 10:17PM

Late to this thread, sorry :)

It's been mentioned before, but the Allied doctrine used for dropping FIDOs was particularly well suited to preventing the U-boats from developing a countermeasure:

- FIDOs were referred to as "depth charges" or "mines" in all records.
- Aircrews weren told little about functionality (although they could figure a lot of it out, of course)
- Were only dropped after a sub was submerged.
- If sub was on surface, planes still carried depth charges and machine guns to force them to submerge.

I think the general rule of thumb with ASW torpedoes is that they need to be 50% faster than their targets to reliably catch them. So this means that in order to overmatch an XXI at high speed, you'd need something like a Mk37 torpedo (developed 1957 for ships/subs) or Mk44 (aircraft, 1960). Catching an unaware XXI would of course be easier.

Mark

Options: Reply•Quote


Subject Written By Posted
Fido(s) walter M 10/21/2002 09:48PM
Re: Fido(s) Rainer Bruns 10/22/2002 01:38AM
Re: Fido(s) walter M 10/22/2002 11:02AM
Re: Fido(s) Peter 10/22/2002 04:09PM
Re: Fido(s) walter M 10/23/2002 10:47AM
Re: Fido(s) MCE 10/23/2002 04:42PM
Re: Fido(s) walter M 10/23/2002 05:49PM
Re: Fido(s) MCE 10/24/2002 04:30PM
faster fidos and tired XXI's kurt 10/25/2002 01:01PM
Re: faster fidos and tired XXI's Rainer Bruns 10/25/2002 02:08PM
Ranier: fido speed kurt 10/25/2002 05:41PM
Re: Ranier: fido speed Rainer Bruns 10/25/2002 06:34PM
Re: Ranier: fido speed kurt 10/25/2002 07:48PM
Re: Fido(s) Rainer Bruns 10/23/2002 06:02PM
Re: Fido(s) MCE 10/24/2002 04:26PM
Re: Fido(s) Sander Kingsepp 11/06/2002 08:24AM
Re: Fido(s) Peter 10/23/2002 06:23PM
Re: Fido(s) Bram 10/23/2002 07:39PM
Re: Fido(s) ROBERT M. 10/27/2002 03:11AM
Re: Fido(s) Rainer Bruns 10/22/2002 05:44PM
Re: Fido(s) walter M 10/23/2002 06:00PM
Re: Fido(s) ROBERT M. 10/27/2002 09:06PM
Re: Ranier: fido speed Don 10/26/2002 12:46PM
Re: Ranier: fido speed MCE 10/26/2002 02:12PM
Re: Ranier: fido speed Rainer Bruns 10/26/2002 02:58PM
Re: Fido(s) Patrick Meagher 10/26/2002 05:08PM
Re: Fido(s) walter M 10/26/2002 07:34PM
Re: Fido(s) Patrick Meagher 10/26/2002 10:08PM
Re: Fido(s) Sniper 10/27/2002 09:59AM
Re: Fido(s) ROBERT M. 10/27/2002 02:04PM
Re: Fido(s) Patrick Meagher 10/27/2002 05:11PM
Re: Fido(s) ROBERT M. 10/27/2002 09:32PM
Re: Fido(s) Patrick Meagher 10/28/2002 07:03PM
Re: Fido(s) Patrick Meagher 10/27/2002 04:23PM
Re: Fido(s) ROBERT M. 10/27/2002 03:33AM
Re: Fido(s) Patrick Meagher 10/27/2002 03:39AM
Re: Fido(s) ROBERT M. 10/27/2002 02:32PM
Re: Fido(s) Patrick Meagher 10/27/2002 04:45PM
Good Allied Doctrine Mark K 11/02/2002 10:17PM
Re: Good Allied Doctrine ROBERT M. 11/03/2002 02:42AM
"mine" vice "torpedo" Mark 11/03/2002 09:08AM
Re: "mine" vice "torpedo" ROBERT M. 11/03/2002 02:27PM
Re: "mine" vice "torpedo" Sniper 11/03/2002 04:05PM
I think we agree then: Mark 11/03/2002 11:02PM
Re: I think we agree then: ROBERT M. 11/04/2002 04:26AM
Re: Good Allied Doctrine ROBERT M. 11/03/2002 03:26AM
Re: Good Allied Doctrine Sander Kingsepp 11/06/2002 08:15AM


Go to: Forum List•Message List•Search•Log In
Your Name: 
Your Email: 
Subject: 
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
 **     **  **     **  ********    ******   **       
 **     **   **   **   **     **  **    **  **       
 **     **    ** **    **     **  **        **       
 **     **     ***     ********   **        **       
  **   **     ** **    **     **  **        **       
   ** **     **   **   **     **  **    **  **       
    ***     **     **  ********    ******   ********