RE: sunk uboats
Posted by:
Michael Lowrey
()
Date: June 16, 2001 08:03PM
<HTML>Tony,
While Rainer provides the number currently listed as lost to an unknown fate, we should all keep in mind that the fate and/or exact location of loss of some of the boats where we think we know what happen to them is going to be wrong. In recent years, three U-boats have been discovered (U 869, U 297, and U 166) where, according to the conventional explaination as to what happened to them, they shouldn\'t be. The assigned fate/location of loss was simply incorrect. I have no doubt that this is true for other boats, though how many and which ones, I have no clue.
Best wishes,
Michael Lowrey</HTML>
While Rainer provides the number currently listed as lost to an unknown fate, we should all keep in mind that the fate and/or exact location of loss of some of the boats where we think we know what happen to them is going to be wrong. In recent years, three U-boats have been discovered (U 869, U 297, and U 166) where, according to the conventional explaination as to what happened to them, they shouldn\'t be. The assigned fate/location of loss was simply incorrect. I have no doubt that this is true for other boats, though how many and which ones, I have no clue.
Best wishes,
Michael Lowrey</HTML>
| Subject | Written By | Posted |
|---|---|---|
sunk uboats
|
tony | 06/16/2001 02:55PM |
|
RE: sunk uboats
|
Rainer Kolbicz | 06/16/2001 07:51PM |
|
RE: sunk uboats
|
Michael Lowrey | 06/16/2001 08:03PM |