Warship forum  
A forum for the Allied Warships section. 
Re: HMSAS NATAL
Posted by: Brian ()
Date: September 18, 2003 02:08AM

<HTML>Credit should be given to those who deserve it. There is ample evidence to the effect the sub was still moving following the SINGLE attack by Natal. A 3-DC salvo from her Squid could not be expected to do the trick unless aimed with absolute precision. The sub was heard running for several more hours and was eventually sunk several miles from the spot where Natak fired.
There certainly are instances where a single DC sank a sub, USCGC Campbell did it, but this was not the case with Natal, and I don't mean to slander the South Africans, just stating some facts that may have been intentionally overlooked by the Historical Branch, it would not be the first time.....
Regards, Brian</HTML>

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Written By Posted
HMSAS NATAL Patrick Mooney 09/08/2003 12:22AM
Re: HMSAS NATAL Peter 09/13/2003 07:57AM
Re: HMSAS NATAL Brian 09/15/2003 02:06AM
Re: HMSAS NATAL Peter 09/17/2003 06:29PM
Re: HMSAS NATAL Brian 09/18/2003 02:08AM
Re: HMSAS NATAL Peter 09/18/2003 07:01PM
Re: HMSAS NATAL FNE 09/30/2003 05:31PM
Re: HMSAS NATAL Pepin 10/01/2003 02:28AM
Re: HMSAS NATAL leading stoker ducthy glass martin langford 11/11/2007 04:36PM
Re: HMSAS NATAL martin langford 12/26/2007 09:51PM
Re: HMSAS NATAL Richmond Wilmot 05/10/2008 11:25AM


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.
 **      **   *******   ********   **     **  **    ** 
 **  **  **  **     **  **     **  ***   ***  **   **  
 **  **  **         **  **     **  **** ****  **  **   
 **  **  **   *******   ********   ** *** **  *****    
 **  **  **         **  **         **     **  **  **   
 **  **  **  **     **  **         **     **  **   **  
  ***  ***    *******   **         **     **  **    **