General Discussions
This is the place to discuss general issues related to the U-boat war or the war at sea in WWII.
Re: This site says U309 was sunk by canadian...
Posted by:
Ken Dunn
()
Date: June 28, 2005 09:37PM
Hi Haken,
First of all the show in question only indicated that the U-boat seemed to not be moving and that is no guarantee that she was already sunk. She could have been disabled on the bottom with her crew busy repairing her at the time she was attacked. They didn’t dive on her either and even if they had dived her she is so broken up the reason she was on the bottom will probably never be known for sure. Since she was indeed attacked, depth charged and destroyed it is reasonable to credit the warship that did it with a kill.
Dr. Axel Niestle credits the Saint John with the kill in his book on the subject and so does this site and that’s how it should stay.
As to the History Channel I think they try to put credible historical special on the air – they just don’t know the difference between the good ones and the bad ones. Those of us on the forum can spot all sorts of errors in many of the History Channel specials but the general population (including those that work for the History Channel) doesn’t have a clue. Additionally, new information comes to light all of the time. Many of the films they show were believed even by historians back when the films were made. That’s the real advantage an Internet site has over a book of a film – the site can be updated when new facts become available.
As to the show Deep Sea Detectives it is certainly developing a reputation for poor research, bogus plots and very bad acting etc. They do interview some knowledgeable people on the show though. Unfortunately they don’t run the show or control the plot.
As to Chatterton and company they did all of us (and especially the families of the men serving on her) a service by identifying U-869. These guys are scuba divers not historians or actors and I don’t think they actually know anything about U-boats though. Unfortunately it seems that whoever is putting the shows together doesn’t either.
Still, the other footage aired on the History Channel is well worth watching and much of what is presented is correct. Sadly there is no way to correct the stuff that’s wrong. The historical quality of these shows is pretty much dictated by whoever does the research unless someone takes some “literary license†with the result and many of the History Channel specials have been very well researched so something shouldn’t be dismissed just because it appears on the History Channel.
In my opinion the series Deep Sea Detectives is currently below the standards that should be set for the History Channel. Perhaps our complaints won’t fall on deaf ears and they will improve their research techniques. The idea that someone is spending money to research U-boats really appeals to me and that should be encouraged though. We need all the help we can get and even their controversial shows have some value for us. At least we get to see some of those like Richard Skinner and Dr. Axel Niestle that post on the forum here from time to time. Their contribution to the show was the good part.
Regards,
Ken Dunn
First of all the show in question only indicated that the U-boat seemed to not be moving and that is no guarantee that she was already sunk. She could have been disabled on the bottom with her crew busy repairing her at the time she was attacked. They didn’t dive on her either and even if they had dived her she is so broken up the reason she was on the bottom will probably never be known for sure. Since she was indeed attacked, depth charged and destroyed it is reasonable to credit the warship that did it with a kill.
Dr. Axel Niestle credits the Saint John with the kill in his book on the subject and so does this site and that’s how it should stay.
As to the History Channel I think they try to put credible historical special on the air – they just don’t know the difference between the good ones and the bad ones. Those of us on the forum can spot all sorts of errors in many of the History Channel specials but the general population (including those that work for the History Channel) doesn’t have a clue. Additionally, new information comes to light all of the time. Many of the films they show were believed even by historians back when the films were made. That’s the real advantage an Internet site has over a book of a film – the site can be updated when new facts become available.
As to the show Deep Sea Detectives it is certainly developing a reputation for poor research, bogus plots and very bad acting etc. They do interview some knowledgeable people on the show though. Unfortunately they don’t run the show or control the plot.
As to Chatterton and company they did all of us (and especially the families of the men serving on her) a service by identifying U-869. These guys are scuba divers not historians or actors and I don’t think they actually know anything about U-boats though. Unfortunately it seems that whoever is putting the shows together doesn’t either.
Still, the other footage aired on the History Channel is well worth watching and much of what is presented is correct. Sadly there is no way to correct the stuff that’s wrong. The historical quality of these shows is pretty much dictated by whoever does the research unless someone takes some “literary license†with the result and many of the History Channel specials have been very well researched so something shouldn’t be dismissed just because it appears on the History Channel.
In my opinion the series Deep Sea Detectives is currently below the standards that should be set for the History Channel. Perhaps our complaints won’t fall on deaf ears and they will improve their research techniques. The idea that someone is spending money to research U-boats really appeals to me and that should be encouraged though. We need all the help we can get and even their controversial shows have some value for us. At least we get to see some of those like Richard Skinner and Dr. Axel Niestle that post on the forum here from time to time. Their contribution to the show was the good part.
Regards,
Ken Dunn
