General Discussions
This is the place to discuss general issues related to the U-boat war or the war at sea in WWII.
Re: Ubersee Sud
Posted by:
DanOdenweller
()
Date: December 23, 2007 07:23PM
Geoffrey,
You stated that:
"Even if one could produce the hull of a U-boat in Chilean or Argentine waters with a full history of its crew and how it got there, that would not be enough to satisfy anybody."
No, produce one of the missing (unaccounted for) known U-Boats in Chilean or Argentine waters, and you will have advanced the hypothesis. The hull of U235, the third boat to come ashore in Argentina.
The referenced material about U977, is a bit of a problem, since the source is a history volume printed in 1985, and cited in "Ultramar Sur" in 2002. So we are basing this on the 40 year previously undocumented memories? Memories that are contradictory to the testimony of the survivor at the time?
This from another post in the thread:
Re: Ultramar Sur
Posted by: Paul (IP Logged)
Date: November 01, 2007 08:54PM
"To the best of my recollection, the Bahia Court of Inquiry concluded, through testimony of many survivirs, that an aft 20mm battery taking part in aerial target practice, accidentally discharged several HE shells, while the battery was fully depressed, into her (Bahia's) aft depth-charge racks, setting them off. Bahia sank by the stern in just minutes, with (I believe) about 340 Officers and crewmen lost."
And the U977 flak guns from several miles away vs. the ships own flak guns? Oh yes, a USN conspiracy (they ran the Board of Inquiry and wrote the results I suppose). But the balance of the secret files are untainted by USN interference, thus we can trust them, since only you have seen them.
After all, U977 had no ammunition for the flak guns, it was left behind in favor of supplies for the fleet of boats. This is getting complicated! Of course we again note the absence of any references to source material.
Dan B. Odenweller
You stated that:
"Even if one could produce the hull of a U-boat in Chilean or Argentine waters with a full history of its crew and how it got there, that would not be enough to satisfy anybody."
No, produce one of the missing (unaccounted for) known U-Boats in Chilean or Argentine waters, and you will have advanced the hypothesis. The hull of U235, the third boat to come ashore in Argentina.
The referenced material about U977, is a bit of a problem, since the source is a history volume printed in 1985, and cited in "Ultramar Sur" in 2002. So we are basing this on the 40 year previously undocumented memories? Memories that are contradictory to the testimony of the survivor at the time?
This from another post in the thread:
Re: Ultramar Sur
Posted by: Paul (IP Logged)
Date: November 01, 2007 08:54PM
"To the best of my recollection, the Bahia Court of Inquiry concluded, through testimony of many survivirs, that an aft 20mm battery taking part in aerial target practice, accidentally discharged several HE shells, while the battery was fully depressed, into her (Bahia's) aft depth-charge racks, setting them off. Bahia sank by the stern in just minutes, with (I believe) about 340 Officers and crewmen lost."
And the U977 flak guns from several miles away vs. the ships own flak guns? Oh yes, a USN conspiracy (they ran the Board of Inquiry and wrote the results I suppose). But the balance of the secret files are untainted by USN interference, thus we can trust them, since only you have seen them.
After all, U977 had no ammunition for the flak guns, it was left behind in favor of supplies for the fleet of boats. This is getting complicated! Of course we again note the absence of any references to source material.
Dan B. Odenweller
Array
Sorry, you can't reply to this topic. It has been closed.