General Discussions
This is the place to discuss general issues related to the U-boat war or the war at sea in WWII.
RE: Drastic action!
Posted by:
kurt
()
Date: July 11, 2001 10:03PM
<HTML>WWII subs fought at very close ranges - thousands, or even hundreds of yards (meters) instead of the many miles (kilometers) of surface action, and over the horizon distances of air action.
It was not uncommon for a U-boat to broach in battle right in the midst of her attackers. This could be from loss of control due to damage and flooding, or because of a final surfacing as a fatally wounded boat rose in order to abandon ship.
A surfaced U-boat in the midst of attacking escorts was both very vulnerable and still dangerous. Gunfire could quickly destroy it, and even if the boat re-submerged, with its location clearly noted, a fatal depth charge attack was the likely outcome of its attempt to flee. But the U-boat might still fire torpedoes and try to take one or more of its attackers with it in its final battle. The crew might even choose to go down fighting by manning the guns for a hopelessly outmatched surface gun action. More than one sub managed to get away from such a close surface scarpe. U-333 is one, USS Growler was another.
Surface ships attacking the U-boat would be cautious and suspicous, taking no chances. Even when a U-boat crew was abandoning ship this might appear to the crew of the attacking ship like an attempt to man the guns.
So it is understandable if a crew abandoning a U-boat were fired upon in error.
But it was not always in error.
The British had a deliberate policy of using gunfire to 'keep the crew in the boat' so as to prevent them from abandoning ship. The idea was keep the crew from sinking the boat so as to give time for a boarding party to reach the boat before they destroyed the enigma materials. Men were gunned down while on deck, and even in the water, even when clearly in the act of surrendering.
I personally feel that this is carrying things too far.
</HTML>
It was not uncommon for a U-boat to broach in battle right in the midst of her attackers. This could be from loss of control due to damage and flooding, or because of a final surfacing as a fatally wounded boat rose in order to abandon ship.
A surfaced U-boat in the midst of attacking escorts was both very vulnerable and still dangerous. Gunfire could quickly destroy it, and even if the boat re-submerged, with its location clearly noted, a fatal depth charge attack was the likely outcome of its attempt to flee. But the U-boat might still fire torpedoes and try to take one or more of its attackers with it in its final battle. The crew might even choose to go down fighting by manning the guns for a hopelessly outmatched surface gun action. More than one sub managed to get away from such a close surface scarpe. U-333 is one, USS Growler was another.
Surface ships attacking the U-boat would be cautious and suspicous, taking no chances. Even when a U-boat crew was abandoning ship this might appear to the crew of the attacking ship like an attempt to man the guns.
So it is understandable if a crew abandoning a U-boat were fired upon in error.
But it was not always in error.
The British had a deliberate policy of using gunfire to 'keep the crew in the boat' so as to prevent them from abandoning ship. The idea was keep the crew from sinking the boat so as to give time for a boarding party to reach the boat before they destroyed the enigma materials. Men were gunned down while on deck, and even in the water, even when clearly in the act of surrendering.
I personally feel that this is carrying things too far.
</HTML>
| Subject | Written By | Posted |
|---|---|---|
Drastic action!
|
Arnaldo S. | 07/10/2001 06:38PM |
|
RE: Drastic action!
|
MPC | 07/10/2001 07:20PM |
|
RE: Drastic action!
|
walter M. | 07/10/2001 08:05PM |
|
RE: Let\'s get this correct
|
MPC | 07/10/2001 09:51PM |
|
Who was that and what Uboat?
|
adrian | 07/10/2001 10:32PM |
|
RE: F/O Trigg VC, DFC,RNZAF v U 468
|
MPC | 07/11/2001 06:51AM |
|
RE: F/O Trigg VC, DFC,RNZAF v U 468
|
Joe | 07/11/2001 07:34AM |
|
RE:Opps!
|
Joe | 07/11/2001 07:41AM |
|
RE: Let\'s get this correct
|
walter M. | 07/11/2001 08:56AM |
|
RE: please understand....
|
MPC | 07/13/2001 08:37PM |
|
RE: Drastic action!
|
Rainer Kolbicz | 07/11/2001 07:57PM |
|
RE: Drastic action!
|
kurt | 07/11/2001 10:03PM |
|
RE: Drastic action!
|
Ken Dunn | 07/11/2001 11:37PM |