WWI forum
World War One discussions.
Re: SM U 40
Posted by:
Michael Lowrey
()
Date: March 21, 2009 06:08PM
Simon,
I agree about the need for looking at British source documents on this one. There are too many positions given for the sinking of U 40, and they aren't all that near each other, or even all that near this wreck.
Also, the commonly listed location for U 12 also proved to be incorrect. I wonder if there isn't some sort of systematic problem here and whether the other positions commonly given for, say, 1915 U-boat losses in the North Sea are accurate.
Best wishes,
Michael
I agree about the need for looking at British source documents on this one. There are too many positions given for the sinking of U 40, and they aren't all that near each other, or even all that near this wreck.
Also, the commonly listed location for U 12 also proved to be incorrect. I wonder if there isn't some sort of systematic problem here and whether the other positions commonly given for, say, 1915 U-boat losses in the North Sea are accurate.
Best wishes,
Michael
Subject | Written By | Posted |
---|---|---|
SM U 40 | Matthias | 03/20/2009 10:07PM |
Re: SM U 40 | Freddy | 03/21/2009 09:33AM |
Re: SM U 40 | Simon S. | 03/21/2009 04:38PM |
Re: SM U 40 | Michael Lowrey | 03/21/2009 06:08PM |
Re: SM U 40 | Drew | 03/30/2009 04:47PM |
Re: SM U 40 | Uboat enthusiast | 03/30/2009 08:42PM |
Re: SM U 40 | Josephbremez | 03/30/2009 11:51PM |
Re: SM U 40 | Ron Young | 04/06/2009 11:41AM |
Re: SM U 40 | Matthias | 04/21/2009 12:49PM |