Have a look at "One of Our Submarines" by Edward Young. It's written by a British submariner and is very, very good. Much of it takes place in the far east, but the Atlantic and Mediterranean figure into it.
As a kid, I watched Das Boot when it was shown on British TV with my grandfather, a veteran of the British boats. He said it was just as representative of his experiences. When the saw aircraft, their reaction was to always crash dive because there were numerous cases of British boats being attacked and sunk by friendly fire. Even the establishment of "no fire zones" around the estimated positions of transiting boats did not stop friendly fire attacks. It was easier for any German aircraft because their boats were escorted in and out of their bases, and they knew the areas where they expected their boats to surface close to the coast.
1:53 for the 2 people that would like the name and class of the ship in the background it is SN Komintern (launched with the name of pamiat mrrkuria) of the bogatryr class
wasn't there a british submarine, that was captured by german aircraft at the start of the war? iirc, in the Skagerak area? Edit: it was in Kattegat and the submarine was the "HMS Seal" ( i got around to looking it Up)
That was very well done and so interesting. Thank you very much. My father worked at the Naval submarine shipyard at Manitowoc, Wisconsin, of all places. That's on the eastern shore of Lake Michigan. The completed subs were floated down to Chicago, through the narrow Chicago River to the Mississippi. I don't know how many people, even Americans, know about that. My father, who worked on wiring the ships, said all the subs he worked on, including the Swordfish, went to the Pacific.
These things are VERY fascinating. Really love seeing how these type of things are carried out. Knowing about the hardware is one thing, but it is how they are used that really makes them click.
@7:00 - absolutely. What you’re talking about is the difference between suppression, neutralization and destruction. Suppression - ie removing the enemy’s freedom of manoeuvre and action - is usually the goal. IE in artillery fire missions or during an infantry attack with, well, suppressing fire. A “destroy” fire mission is very very ammo intensive whereas if the fire mission is neutralize, then the end result is still the same when the infantry can close with and destroy the enemy. The RCN had EXACTLY this approach with convoy escorts - they didn’t seek to kill u boats, they sought to prevent loss of ships. A subtle but important difference. Instead of trying to kill every u boat, you just had to suppress them long enough for the convoy to steam out of range, then go rejoin your convoy you’re escorting.
Thank you Chris. This is a great review of tactical and operational procedures for aircraft searching for submerged/surfaced subs from the time period. You have one of the best military aircraft channels on UA-cam. Always enjoy your commentaries and walk arounds and cockpit introductions on the various models.
Retired US Navy P3 Orion Crewman. This brilliant video was interesting in describing basic surface search techniques without radar. Also, unless you have a constant coverage of a convoy with aircraft. spotting a submarine on the surface will be mostly luck. As early improved it was capable of detecting the conning tower of a submarine that had partially surfaced. Thanks again.
Submariners had an immensely dangerous job. If they were caught out by planes or destroyers, it was usually game-over for every man on board. Don't care what side they served on, they all had huge brass ones.
Interesting to see it from the other side. I wonder where this would have actually been used? I can only imagine the convoys to North Africa, but more likely in the Black Sea, which is where Soviet submarines were most present as far as I know?
A sovjet sub made a kill just outside Constanca port, where it sunk a transport from Turkia with a load of 1500 tons of crome-ore. Turky was one of the only sources of crome-ore, and the british bourgth all they could produce, but due to the old friendship between Germany and Turkia, Germany had mannaged to get this load. Imagine what it could have ment, had it arriwed in Germany, it was a very scearce commdity there, and in great demand.
Yep, I actually wanted to mention the Black Sea since it is often overlooked. Soviet Navy was pretty defunct and it was pushed more and more to the east in 1942-43, but supplying all those divisions in Kuban and later in Crimea (as well as evacuating both areas) created an environment rich in targets, also for the submarines. At least to some degree the entire zone had to be guarded by Luftwaffe airplanes.
The Italians used recognition units in cant 501 and 506 float planes using this bomb to attack allied submarines. forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/492094-italian-160kg-cs-bomb/ The Marina militare have released a book called the lotta antisommergibile which goes into detail about the anti submarine war.
Absolutely brilliant, as always! I thoroughly enjoy watching these videos covering primary source documents and original documents that contain information about opinions and "findings" concerning an adversary's equipment and/or ordnance.
It was a British submarine that scored a unique victory that has never been repeated. It sank a U- boat by torpedo when both ships were submerged. HMS Venturer sank U864 off the coast of Norway.
@@Mungobohne1 The general assumption is that the Germans were masters of submarine warfare, but as our friend points out , the Germans and Italians had their convoys decimated by British submarines in the Mediterranean, and American fleet submarines strangled Japan's war industries. It's surprising that neither the Germans nor Japanese took aerial warfare against submarines seriously. The example I quote is an example of the experience and quality of British submarines, which makes their attitude to combatting them inexplicable. You could make the argument that the Germans didn't bother because Allied submarines were no threat...but this unique kill illustrates just how dangerous they were.
I have enjoyed many of your videos, mostly those on the various aircraft and aerial battles. This one however gives rise to a question. Are there any records of Luftwaffe successfully attacking and destroying any of the allied subs?
Community question: Apparently, a Frenchman figured out how to distill high octane aviation fuel, the process was a heavily guarded secret by the allies. Production was primarily done in America, I think/not sure. Anyhow, I've heard the fuel could give Spitfires an additional 30mph to their top speed. Has Bismarck already done a video on this? Or are there any other videos on this topic that you guys recommend?
Please don't whip me, if I get it wrong as I am writing this from what I remember reading elsewhere: Distillation is a very basic process, that can be tuned with temperature and pressure. Germany was able to distill different grades with B4 being the lower octane fuel and C3 being a synthetic grade, in part product of alkylation process. B4 contained a lot of the lower-boiling naphtha fraction of the same synthesis process. While C3 was a considerable improvement over B4 and was of roughly comparable quality to allied, unleaded high-octane rades, it was no match for high-lead, 130oct aviation fuel. The most important octane booster in allied aero-fuel was tetraethyl lead, which allowed fuel with very high octane ratings, higher that can be achieved through distillation (i.e. over 100) The main issue with German fuels lay in the ability to produce tetraethyl lead. Some think that this is the one single element that gave allied air forces the edge over German piston fighters. Incidentally, jets could be run on paraffinic diesel, a basic efflux of the Fischer-Tropsch synthesis process and much easier to produce. The fuel situation became most dire after the loss of Ploesti refinery in Romania.
@@daszieher Dang, are you a chemical engineer ? Thanks for your informative, and concise, reply! I'm totally out of my realm here; however, now that you've mentioned tetraethyl, and other lead, that will give me a great starting place to research. I'm kinda curious now about leads role in fuel. Is the lead bound to anything? How is lead added/process? Once again thanks, you've highlighted several interesting areas to do further research.
@@daszieher One other point is that high efficiency refineries that do more than 'basic distilling", that is 'Cracking" require semi-precious metal catalysts like Platinum. Given the shortages of other metals for jet engines, this may have been a limiting factor for the Germans.
At the start of the war, Britain and Germany were running on 87 Octane aviation fuel and the Russians on 67 Octane, by the end the Allies were running 150 Octane, Germans 130 Octane with methanol injection. 150 Octane will kill you through simple vapour exposure by lead poisoning.
Very interesting im looking forward to learn about the Japanese anti submarine Warfare since the Dutch submarines started a really effective submarine campaign right from the start of hostilities. And later the Americans and other allies added their might so I wonder how they tried to combat that and how it changed over the years.
Two platforms, (sub and aircraft) used by both sides. Similar tactics used by both. There are only so many ways to do anything different. As you pointed out, the "mark one eyeball" being a factor for search, the allies started using surface search radar later on that could get a return off of even a periscope. And you are absolutly correct in the fact if you can force a dive, you have taken the asset out of the fight. Excellent presentation. o7
Given the nature of submarines, a mission kill and a very lenghty and expensive repair at base is pretty much best case scenario for the sub's crew after a single penetration of the pressure hull...
@@zyzor Depends on various factors. Afaik the pressure hull of a Type VII sub was somewhere between 20 and 30 millimeters thick. But that wasn't "battle steel", not meant to stop projectiles, but withstand deformation by water pressure without cracking. So, AP projectiles would probably have fared better against it than actual armour of the same thicknes. I guess a 20mm using AP amunition could punch a hole into the pressure hull of a sub if it scores a lucky hit. And even if the shot doesn't penetrate, it will significantly weaken the hull at the point of impact. Possibly to the point where it will fail the next time the sub dives.
I like how you mention the disruption of submarine operations as being a big goal. I remember and still am in all my SH3 campaigns most disrupted by Sunderlands more than anything else. They force me to dive under and change my course, delaying my moves for days and making me miss my targeted convoys or even force me back into dock for repairs. Escorts, I know when and where they will appear, but for planes, you don't have that luxury.
What would be even more interesting is to see if the Luftwaffe published an over versions of this pamphlet at any other point in the war; either to see how this mid-war recommendation differed from pre-war theory, or how later-war guidance was modified from this 1942 pamphlet. But this single snapshot of what the Luftwaffe was sharing with their pilots was fascinating all on its own. (For example I'd wouldn't have thought that they'd use flares for identification as they approach a convoy they'd be escorting. I just unthinkingly assumed you'd use radio for that)
Detection, attacking and/ or suppression of a submarine while its intended prey moved on until out of range was the first round. Then the long game usually began with the alerted sub hunting vessels arriving on scene with their very sensitive and very lethal systems ready for action.
Great comments at 7mins on the importance of "keeping their heads down" and harrying the enemy, particularly with submarines - really good analysis - and it marries the history and accounts from other informed resources. Would be fascinating to see you do a video after this looking at both U-boat experience of allied air attack and allied airborne anti-submarine-warfare
I suppose the type of aircraft and their usual loadouts for maritime patrol/conwoy escort would have been nice to add, considering it's such a little known area of Luftwaffe operations. Perhaps an entire video could be made on how it differed to fly hours above water with a bomber, compared to the life of the majority of ground attack/recon aircraft that flew above ground, was it considered nore or less risky, did it perhaps come with a better reputation or status etc. The patrol patterns really make this seem a pretty resource extensive job, no wonder they didn't put much of an emphasis on it, with the whole never having enough planes thing going on.
Second video I've watched and the 2nd time I've been Blessed with a fantastic, informative, video. I love the listening to what the actual procedures and instructional orders on how best to take out a Submarine. 2 from 2. I'm on a winner here!! Excellent work Brother 👍 Greetings from Drouin, Victoria, Australia 🇦🇺 💯⚡
You would be amazed how little Anti-Submarine Warfare has changed since 1942. Hold-down tactics (forcing a submarine to go deep and remain slow enough to avoid detection, giving the surface ships a speed advantage to escape), is still the go-to for Airborne ASW. Getting the kill is secondary, but even with the advances in sensors and weapons, the relative advantages and disadvantages of the environment haven't changed. (USN, 1988-2014)
Bismarck, the US had a dozen fleet submarines operating in the Atlantic in 1942. Adm. King wanted them all to go to the Pacific; but Churchill insisted on having some US "fleet boats" (Tambor and Gato classes), and Roosevelt agreed. Six fleet boats went to the Atlantic in 1942, and their experience was miserable. They had H.O.R engines that turned out to have been made with faulty steel, and they spent more time in repair than on patrol. Their role was limited by very strict rules of engagement because of the risk of friendly fire. In 27 war patrols, many in the Bay of Biscay, they achieved zero results. They were used as guides and to mark landing beaches for Operation Torch, and got fired on by friendlies. By early 1943, these boats received new engines and were sent to the Pacific. Thought you'd like to know, in light of your video here. I know little about aviation, so I am learning a lot from your channel. Thanks.
Great video! Also added an Me-262 to my shelf display and showing my support for the channel... but mainly for myself ;) Keep up the great work, always enjoyable, in depth content.
beautiful video :))). The only thing that I don't understand is why the escort planes can't fly over the ship convoy... Maybe it could seem a stupid question but i really don't understand why.
Flying over the convoy can cause an over excited anti-air defense to open fire. In addition, if a sub gets inside the convoy, there's not much you can do without possibly hitting your own ships. The air patrol's primary job is to detect the subs, keep them away, and possibly sink them.
Really interesting video! I found it interesting that they seemed to be using single seater fighters for this. Not what you would expect! Does the source give any indication of whether the U boats had any influence on the doctrine, in providing advice from the other side of things?
Good video. Thanks. A battle area in China you might want to investigate is in Northern China during WW2 at the great bend in the yellow river. I meet a person in Boston in the early '80s that flew there. The place had frequent dust storms and the town elders painted one of the towers white. When they came in for a landing in a dust storm they would circle the town till they saw a white tower and the head 45 degrees off of the tower, count to 10 and cut engines and they would be on the airfield. He flew P38's and P51's. Mostly did weather recon over Peking. Talked about encountering zeros over Peking and the advantages the P38 had over zero because zero did have a balanced propeller pitch while P38 did. He said that he was flying a P51 and was shot down by a Japanese 8-inch howitzer. He said he flew too regularly over the town. Was recused by Communist insurgents. They tried to aid in the ground was but the Chinese military said to stop it as they had an informal peace agreement with the Japanese.
Something else that may have had a bearing on the Luftwaffe not going into depth bombs, the early British depth bombs were not all that good. In one early 'blue-on-blue' involving Coastal Command and a British sub a direct hit on the conning tower with a purpose designed anti-submarine weapon resulted in the breaking of some light bulbs inside the sub, but no other damage. If reports like of incidents like this filtered back to the Luftwaffe via the Kreigsmarine from British attacks on their submarines it would have affected the desire to put the time and effort into developing specialist depth bombs. The other thing that I immediately thought of when looking at those search patterns is what is not shown, the flight out to the convoy and then back to base, which has to limit the aircraft's operational time over the convoy. It's when you start to think about those things that the true value of escort carriers starts to become apparent.
Nice video thanks. It is always good to hear the German point of view. Most of what we see and hear was written from the Allied perspective and it is important to remember that other sources are just as important. Based on your recent coverage of the lost flight from Hornet I decided to go ahead and buy the book Broken Sword which covers in part the Japanese view. Keep up the great work and enjoy your first Thursday of the month day off today :-)
What airplane types did the Luftwaffe use for ASW? ----- Suggestion for an episode: Luftschiff directed minesweeper operations in WW1 All the sources I have read are in German. Have not found any translations. These operations include one instance when the airship descended to take on board the minesweeper commander to show him the mines. Second suggestion for an episode: Operation Albion (1917) First air-land-sea operation in history.
I was anticipating more details on identifying the nationality of the submarine before attacking it. Just imagine how close the plane must be to see the flag that the boat is flying.
Japan isn't even really a competitor. Italy developed very good dual purpose anti submarine bombs that could act as depth charges and normal bombs at the same time and sank many British submarines. I don't think the luftwaffe had any antisubmarine specialist units like italy had as well.
Hey , I got talking on the forum of TFA , saying that thanks to you I learned of their game. I suggested a colab with them and Drachinifel. Was allready done ... But perhaps a colab with you , Drach and TFA ? I 'd certainly love that. They weren't opposed of the idea and should give you the hint ... so here it is.
The building I work from is an old airship hangar from WWII, which was built for the anti-submarine warfare once the U.S. entered WWII. The wooden hangar burned down in the 1990s.
No, that was a different thing entirely. The aerial minesweepers (Both German and Allied) were basicaly big electromagnets which were supplied with power from their own motor-generator sets. Thise produced a fairly strong magnetic field, which a magnetic mine could read as a ship within range, and trigger its detonator. It wasn't any use for detection. Aircraft could use Magnetic Anomaly Detection, which used a sensitive magnetism detector (Magnetometer) to look for the changes in the Earth's magnetic field caused by a large mass of metal. Flying at a height of about 200' (60m)above the water, it could detect a typical submarine submerged to about 200' (60m) depth, if you flew right over it. But - it could also detect shipwrecks on the bottom, Iron-bearing seamounts, and other things that would bend the magnetic field. That being said, the combination of high resolution microwave radar (S and X band), MAD, and better undersea weapons - Retrobombs = rockets fitted to depth charges, which cancelled the forward motion of the aircraft, allowing the weapon to drop directly below the release point, meaning that, when using MAD, you could drop when the magnetic signature was at its peak, and the Mine Mk 24, which was actually an antisubmarine Homing Torpedo, which would detect and home on the submarine on its own. The radar allowed a submarine to be detected before it could see the aircraft, day or night, even if the submarine was using its periscope or snorkelling, and the MAD systems would allow the target to be identified and attacked.
@@peterstickney7608 wow! Thank you so much for the detailed analysis! I must admit I genuinely was illiterate on the subject of this system thank you very much for the information
maintaining a random but effective pattern must take a lot of concentration as well and would been very hard work for the pilots.....they probably took turns getting some rest .....
There is a passage in the book 'Das Boot', (Not the movie) when a frustrated crewman goes on about how Coastal Command was hunting them and 'why don't the Tommies drop all their bombs and say they sunk us'. He didn't seem to realize how angry the British were at losing merchant shipping. On another note, Joe Kennedy found looking for subs to be intensely boring, but absolutely necessary.
Subs are pretty delicate weapons it seems to me. I mean they're half sunk to begin with, right? Just a few holes is all it takes to sink them the rest of the way. Even if it isnt an immediate kill, as long as they cant get back to the surface its a death sentence.
Very informative video, loved it. Since the pamphlet is from relatively early in the war, what changes were made to the techniques later on? Lets get to the MAHD!!
Chris: Enjoyed the piece. Always interested in seeing "niche" information. One question, in the section on marking a sub's diving location, the translation was mark with a bouy or "paint". What was the original German? I wonder if it could possibly have been "dye"? Thanks again Dave Did you get the Kingfisher pics?
A Soviet Submarine (S-13) made the most deadly attack in history in January 30, 1945 with the sinking of the Wilhelm Gustloff with over 8-9,000 dead. Submarine and anti-submarine warfare was complex in the Baltic but the Soviets never stopped challenging the Germans. The Swedish, despite neutrality permitted the Germans to lay mines in Swedish waters. Both sides utilized mine warfare extensively.
Fabulous quality video and research again. Thank you. One question: is there evidence that the Germans copied any of the allied tactics against U boats?
Luftwaffe "How to Hunt U-Boots Guide"... Now, that is what we call "interservice rivalry".
LUFTWAFFE: How to convert a *temporarily submersible* _Kleigsmarine vessel_ into a *permanently submersible* _Kleigsmarine vessel._
😊😊😊
@@Allan_aka_RocKITEman Luftwaffe: *Laughs in sinking Z1 and Z3, whom albeit not submarines, the Luftwaffe made sure that they are
@@justsomehaatonpassingby4488 >>> Just as ANY naval vessel can be a _minesweeper_ ONCE...😉
this is quite interesting because we usually hear of the allies hunting submarines and barely the luftwafffe.
Yup, that triggered my interest too
Exactly
Have a look at "One of Our Submarines" by Edward Young. It's written by a British submariner and is very, very good. Much of it takes place in the far east, but the Atlantic and Mediterranean figure into it.
As a kid, I watched Das Boot when it was shown on British TV with my grandfather, a veteran of the British boats. He said it was just as representative of his experiences. When the saw aircraft, their reaction was to always crash dive because there were numerous cases of British boats being attacked and sunk by friendly fire. Even the establishment of "no fire zones" around the estimated positions of transiting boats did not stop friendly fire attacks. It was easier for any German aircraft because their boats were escorted in and out of their bases, and they knew the areas where they expected their boats to surface close to the coast.
Brilliant video, the research for this video, and all the preparations, must have taken some time, thanks!
Thank you, happy to hear you enjoyed it
1:53 for the 2 people that would like the name and class of the ship in the background it is SN Komintern (launched with the name of pamiat mrrkuria) of the bogatryr class
Even to this day today I wonder how tf people know these things out of the head
@@IHaevATajpo all i am going to say it takes a stupid amout of time
Consider me one of those two people. Top info!
wasn't there a british submarine, that was captured by german aircraft at the start of the war? iirc, in the Skagerak area? Edit: it was in Kattegat and the submarine was the "HMS Seal" ( i got around to looking it Up)
The Sub HMS Venturer has the first documented case of one sub sinking another sub while both were submerged. I love your content :).
Isn't it the _only_ documented case?
@@felixsantosa3815 Yes, it is. Thanks for the correction :).
That was very well done and so interesting. Thank you very much. My father worked at the Naval submarine shipyard at Manitowoc, Wisconsin, of all places. That's on the eastern shore of Lake Michigan. The completed subs were floated down to Chicago, through the narrow Chicago River to the Mississippi. I don't know how many people, even Americans, know about that. My father, who worked on wiring the ships, said all the subs he worked on, including the Swordfish, went to the Pacific.
Bis you should get a cat that lays around and does nothing... and call him Tirpitz.
😂😂
Seconded
Even more accurate name would be Yamato!
lol
@Opecuted True that, rest on the bottom of the sea Yamato.
These things are VERY fascinating. Really love seeing how these type of things are carried out. Knowing about the hardware is one thing, but it is how they are used that really makes them click.
A video on KM/LW torpedoes would be VERY interesting, public info is quite lacking.
That would be a great video topic. Campbell's Naval Weapons of WWII gives a starting point.
@7:00 - absolutely. What you’re talking about is the difference between suppression, neutralization and destruction. Suppression - ie removing the enemy’s freedom of manoeuvre and action - is usually the goal. IE in artillery fire missions or during an infantry attack with, well, suppressing fire. A “destroy” fire mission is very very ammo intensive whereas if the fire mission is neutralize, then the end result is still the same when the infantry can close with and destroy the enemy. The RCN had EXACTLY this approach with convoy escorts - they didn’t seek to kill u boats, they sought to prevent loss of ships. A subtle but important difference. Instead of trying to kill every u boat, you just had to suppress them long enough for the convoy to steam out of range, then go rejoin your convoy you’re escorting.
Thank you Chris. This is a great review of tactical and operational procedures for aircraft searching for submerged/surfaced subs from the time period. You have one of the best military aircraft channels on UA-cam. Always enjoy your commentaries and walk arounds and cockpit introductions on the various models.
Retired US Navy P3 Orion Crewman. This brilliant video was interesting in describing basic surface search techniques without radar. Also, unless you have a constant coverage of a convoy with aircraft. spotting a submarine on the surface will be mostly luck. As early improved it was capable of detecting the conning tower of a submarine that had partially surfaced. Thanks again.
Submariners had an immensely dangerous job. If they were caught out by planes or destroyers, it was usually game-over for every man on board. Don't care what side they served on, they all had huge brass ones.
Interesting to see it from the other side. I wonder where this would have actually been used? I can only imagine the convoys to North Africa, but more likely in the Black Sea, which is where Soviet submarines were most present as far as I know?
To a certain degree probably in the North and Baltic Sea too
Norway and North Sea too
A sovjet sub made a kill just outside Constanca port, where it sunk a transport from Turkia with a load of 1500 tons of crome-ore. Turky was one of the only sources of crome-ore, and the british bourgth all they could produce, but due to the old friendship between Germany and Turkia, Germany had mannaged to get this load. Imagine what it could have ment, had it arriwed in Germany, it was a very scearce commdity there, and in great demand.
Yep, I actually wanted to mention the Black Sea since it is often overlooked.
Soviet Navy was pretty defunct and it was pushed more and more to the east in 1942-43, but supplying all those divisions in Kuban and later in Crimea (as well as evacuating both areas) created an environment rich in targets, also for the submarines.
At least to some degree the entire zone had to be guarded by Luftwaffe airplanes.
The Italians used recognition units in cant 501 and 506 float planes using this bomb to attack allied submarines. forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/492094-italian-160kg-cs-bomb/
The Marina militare have released a book called the lotta antisommergibile which goes into detail about the anti submarine war.
Absolutely brilliant, as always! I thoroughly enjoy watching these videos covering primary source documents and original documents that contain information about opinions and "findings" concerning an adversary's equipment and/or ordnance.
*_“Sneaky Buggers” As a navy man, If most people actually knew what that actually meant. They’d be much more insulted after being called this!_* 😂🤣😂
What does it mean?
"Buggery" means...relations...with animals
@@PhantomP63 It’s actually an old navy term. It means to sodomize another man. Usually in the night when they’re sleeping.
@@PhantomP63 no it means a man and another man having intercourse. Bestiality is sex with animals
@@onyourkilllist6880 Hey KillList hows the Kid? Funny how i find you in the Comment Section of this Video :D
It was a British submarine that scored a unique victory that has never been repeated. It sank a U- boat by torpedo when both ships were submerged.
HMS Venturer sank U864 off the coast of Norway.
Has basically nothing to do with the Luftwaffe
@@Mungobohne1 The general assumption is that the Germans were masters of submarine warfare, but as our friend points out , the Germans and Italians had their convoys decimated by British submarines in the Mediterranean, and American fleet submarines strangled Japan's war industries.
It's surprising that neither the Germans nor Japanese took aerial warfare against submarines seriously. The example I quote is an example of the experience and quality of British submarines, which makes their attitude to combatting them inexplicable. You could make the argument that the Germans didn't bother because Allied submarines were no threat...but this unique kill illustrates just how dangerous they were.
These kind of vids really help when planning games of Blood red skies and cruel seas.
I have enjoyed many of your videos, mostly those on the various aircraft and aerial battles. This one however gives rise to a question. Are there any records of Luftwaffe successfully attacking and destroying any of the allied subs?
Chris is always bringing the truth with these primary sources!!! You da true 🐐 Chris!!!!!
I wish I could make a lucid presentation in a second language! Fascinating. Thanks.
Absolutely fascinating! Thank you so much for bringing these original sources to light for us!
That "come out and play" really made me shiver
This is exactly why I follow your channel. Nobody talks about the other side of the battle. I want to hear both sides. Keep it up!
Community question: Apparently, a Frenchman figured out how to distill high octane aviation fuel, the process was a heavily guarded secret by the allies. Production was primarily done in America, I think/not sure. Anyhow, I've heard the fuel could give Spitfires an additional 30mph to their top speed. Has Bismarck already done a video on this? Or are there any other videos on this topic that you guys recommend?
Please don't whip me, if I get it wrong as I am writing this from what I remember reading elsewhere:
Distillation is a very basic process, that can be tuned with temperature and pressure.
Germany was able to distill different grades with B4 being the lower octane fuel and C3 being a synthetic grade, in part product of alkylation process. B4 contained a lot of the lower-boiling naphtha fraction of the same synthesis process. While C3 was a considerable improvement over B4 and was of roughly comparable quality to allied, unleaded high-octane rades, it was no match for high-lead, 130oct aviation fuel.
The most important octane booster in allied aero-fuel was tetraethyl lead, which allowed fuel with very high octane ratings, higher that can be achieved through distillation (i.e. over 100)
The main issue with German fuels lay in the ability to produce tetraethyl lead. Some think that this is the one single element that gave allied air forces the edge over German piston fighters.
Incidentally, jets could be run on paraffinic diesel, a basic efflux of the Fischer-Tropsch synthesis process and much easier to produce.
The fuel situation became most dire after the loss of Ploesti refinery in Romania.
@@daszieher Dang, are you a chemical engineer ? Thanks for your informative, and concise, reply! I'm totally out of my realm here; however, now that you've mentioned tetraethyl, and other lead, that will give me a great starting place to research. I'm kinda curious now about leads role in fuel. Is the lead bound to anything? How is lead added/process? Once again thanks, you've highlighted several interesting areas to do further research.
@@daszieher One other point is that high efficiency refineries that do more than 'basic distilling", that is 'Cracking" require semi-precious metal catalysts like Platinum. Given the shortages of other metals for jet engines, this may have been a limiting factor for the Germans.
At the start of the war, Britain and Germany were running on 87 Octane aviation fuel and the Russians on 67 Octane, by the end the Allies were running 150 Octane, Germans 130 Octane with methanol injection. 150 Octane will kill you through simple vapour exposure by lead poisoning.
Very interesting im looking forward to learn about the Japanese anti submarine Warfare since the Dutch submarines started a really effective submarine campaign right from the start of hostilities. And later the Americans and other allies added their might so I wonder how they tried to combat that and how it changed over the years.
Two platforms, (sub and aircraft) used by both sides. Similar tactics used by both. There are only so many ways to do anything different. As you pointed out, the "mark one eyeball" being a factor for search, the allies started using surface search radar later on that could get a return off of even a periscope. And you are absolutly correct in the fact if you can force a dive, you have taken the asset out of the fight. Excellent presentation. o7
Afew well placed 20mm cannon shells maybe a mission kill for a submarine. This is a desirable outcome in itself.
Given the nature of submarines, a mission kill and a very lenghty and expensive repair at base is pretty much best case scenario for the sub's crew after a single penetration of the pressure hull...
Could 20 mm shells puncture the hull?
I suppose subs hulls weren’t armored at all.
@@zyzor Depends on various factors.
Afaik the pressure hull of a Type VII sub was somewhere between 20 and 30 millimeters thick. But that wasn't "battle steel", not meant to stop projectiles, but withstand deformation by water pressure without cracking.
So, AP projectiles would probably have fared better against it than actual armour of the same thicknes.
I guess a 20mm using AP amunition could punch a hole into the pressure hull of a sub if it scores a lucky hit.
And even if the shot doesn't penetrate, it will significantly weaken the hull at the point of impact. Possibly to the point where it will fail the next time the sub dives.
it hits the captain?
I like how you mention the disruption of submarine operations as being a big goal.
I remember and still am in all my SH3 campaigns most disrupted by Sunderlands more than anything else. They force me to dive under and change my course, delaying my moves for days and making me miss my targeted convoys or even force me back into dock for repairs. Escorts, I know when and where they will appear, but for planes, you don't have that luxury.
I wrote my dissertation on RN subs during the war so this is giving me slight nostalgia to my student days.
Allied submarine efforts outside of the Pacific deserves much more attention.
Very cool! Because you never know when you might be assigned to provide air cover for a convoy.
THIS IS PURE GOLD. LOVE FROM POLAND.
What would be even more interesting is to see if the Luftwaffe published an over versions of this pamphlet at any other point in the war; either to see how this mid-war recommendation differed from pre-war theory, or how later-war guidance was modified from this 1942 pamphlet.
But this single snapshot of what the Luftwaffe was sharing with their pilots was fascinating all on its own. (For example I'd wouldn't have thought that they'd use flares for identification as they approach a convoy they'd be escorting. I just unthinkingly assumed you'd use radio for that)
Detection, attacking and/ or suppression of a submarine while its intended prey moved on until out of range was the first round.
Then the long game usually began with the alerted sub hunting vessels arriving on scene with their very sensitive and very lethal systems ready for action.
Looking forward to the episode about japanese ASW !
Water your plant. Please
I have, she didn't like the repotting
Yet another informative video on an overlooked topic regarding the Luftwaffe. Excellent work as always Bis, I very much look forward to the next ones.
I would like to see more of the unknown topics like this - e.g. coastal, SAR/Seenotd., long range recon, Bordflieger...
Love the video and information quality. Not thrilled by the title transitions, but they don't keep me away :)
Great comments at 7mins on the importance of "keeping their heads down" and harrying the enemy, particularly with submarines - really good analysis - and it marries the history and accounts from other informed resources.
Would be fascinating to see you do a video after this looking at both U-boat experience of allied air attack and allied airborne anti-submarine-warfare
I suppose the type of aircraft and their usual loadouts for maritime patrol/conwoy escort would have been nice to add, considering it's such a little known area of Luftwaffe operations. Perhaps an entire video could be made on how it differed to fly hours above water with a bomber, compared to the life of the majority of ground attack/recon aircraft that flew above ground, was it considered nore or less risky, did it perhaps come with a better reputation or status etc.
The patrol patterns really make this seem a pretty resource extensive job, no wonder they didn't put much of an emphasis on it, with the whole never having enough planes thing going on.
Second video I've watched and the 2nd time I've been Blessed with a fantastic, informative, video.
I love the listening to what the actual procedures and instructional orders on how best to take out a Submarine.
2 from 2.
I'm on a winner here!!
Excellent work Brother 👍
Greetings from Drouin, Victoria, Australia 🇦🇺 💯⚡
You would be amazed how little Anti-Submarine Warfare has changed since 1942. Hold-down tactics (forcing a submarine to go deep and remain slow enough to avoid detection, giving the surface ships a speed advantage to escape), is still the go-to for Airborne ASW. Getting the kill is secondary, but even with the advances in sensors and weapons, the relative advantages and disadvantages of the environment haven't changed. (USN, 1988-2014)
Very interesting. I really like these primary source videos.
Bismarck, the US had a dozen fleet submarines operating in the Atlantic in 1942. Adm. King wanted them all to go to the Pacific; but Churchill insisted on having some US "fleet boats" (Tambor and Gato classes), and Roosevelt agreed. Six fleet boats went to the Atlantic in 1942, and their experience was miserable. They had H.O.R engines that turned out to have been made with faulty steel, and they spent more time in repair than on patrol. Their role was limited by very strict rules of engagement because of the risk of friendly fire. In 27 war patrols, many in the Bay of Biscay, they achieved zero results. They were used as guides and to mark landing beaches for Operation Torch, and got fired on by friendlies. By early 1943, these boats received new engines and were sent to the Pacific. Thought you'd like to know, in light of your video here. I know little about aviation, so I am learning a lot from your channel. Thanks.
Laughed at the Elmer Fudd silhouette. Another great video from primary sources.
i thought it was interesting. I am a Patreon and I loved the 'emojis' you used to describe the various aspects of the manual
Great video! Also added an Me-262 to my shelf display and showing my support for the channel... but mainly for myself ;)
Keep up the great work, always enjoyable, in depth content.
I watch your channel all the way from Patna, India. Thankyou !
Sinking ship to German Coast Guard: "Help, help, we're sinking". German Coast Guard to sinking ship: "Und vat are you sinking?" Sehr gut mein freund!
beautiful video :))). The only thing that I don't understand is why the escort planes can't fly over the ship convoy... Maybe it could seem a stupid question but i really don't understand why.
Flying over the convoy can cause an over excited anti-air defense to open fire. In addition, if a sub gets inside the convoy, there's not much you can do without possibly hitting your own ships. The air patrol's primary job is to detect the subs, keep them away, and possibly sink them.
Always enjoy these archive videos, thank you.
Really interesting video! I found it interesting that they seemed to be using single seater fighters for this. Not what you would expect!
Does the source give any indication of whether the U boats had any influence on the doctrine, in providing advice from the other side of things?
Good video. Thanks. A battle area in China you might want to investigate is in Northern China during WW2 at the great bend in the yellow river. I meet a person in Boston in the early '80s that flew there. The place had frequent dust storms and the town elders painted one of the towers white. When they came in for a landing in a dust storm they would circle the town till they saw a white tower and the head 45 degrees off of the tower, count to 10 and cut engines and they would be on the airfield. He flew P38's and P51's. Mostly did weather recon over Peking. Talked about encountering zeros over Peking and the advantages the P38 had over zero because zero did have a balanced propeller pitch while P38 did. He said that he was flying a P51 and was shot down by a Japanese 8-inch howitzer. He said he flew too regularly over the town. Was recused by Communist insurgents. They tried to aid in the ground was but the Chinese military said to stop it as they had an informal peace agreement with the Japanese.
Amazing - that's a one-of-a-kind story.
Something else that may have had a bearing on the Luftwaffe not going into depth bombs, the early British depth bombs were not all that good. In one early 'blue-on-blue' involving Coastal Command and a British sub a direct hit on the conning tower with a purpose designed anti-submarine weapon resulted in the breaking of some light bulbs inside the sub, but no other damage. If reports like of incidents like this filtered back to the Luftwaffe via the Kreigsmarine from British attacks on their submarines it would have affected the desire to put the time and effort into developing specialist depth bombs.
The other thing that I immediately thought of when looking at those search patterns is what is not shown, the flight out to the convoy and then back to base, which has to limit the aircraft's operational time over the convoy. It's when you start to think about those things that the true value of escort carriers starts to become apparent.
Absolutely interesting. Keep up the primary document episodes.
The PBY Catalinas and B24 Liberator were having a field day hunting U-boats.
I momentarily forgot I had the app set to play at 1.5x and was wondering when Bismarck discovered Adderall...
Would like to see "the Luftwaffe vs the Allied Navy"
Something new and interesting: Fightrouds. Like in the German AA video information we usually dont get
Love this primary source content. Keep it up please!
Will do :)
Interesting information on a topic I don't believe I've ever seen covered.
Nice video thanks. It is always good to hear the German point of view. Most of what we see and hear was written from the Allied perspective and it is important to remember that other sources are just as important. Based on your recent coverage of the lost flight from Hornet I decided to go ahead and buy the book Broken Sword which covers in part the Japanese view. Keep up the great work and enjoy your first Thursday of the month day off today :-)
What airplane types did the Luftwaffe use for ASW?
-----
Suggestion for an episode: Luftschiff directed minesweeper operations in WW1
All the sources I have read are in German. Have not found any translations. These operations include one instance when the airship descended to take on board the minesweeper commander to show him the mines.
Second suggestion for an episode: Operation Albion (1917)
First air-land-sea operation in history.
I was anticipating more details on identifying the nationality of the submarine before attacking it. Just imagine how close the plane must be to see the flag that the boat is flying.
Considering the forces used and the results, which were the best submarine hunters in the Axis, Italians, Germans or Japanese?
Japan isn't even really a competitor. Italy developed very good dual purpose anti submarine bombs that could act as depth charges and normal bombs at the same time and sank many British submarines. I don't think the luftwaffe had any antisubmarine specialist units like italy had as well.
Outstanding video and presentation.
Like the content.
I primarily prefer prefer flying, floating, and driving military models, but thanks for the decor tip nonetheless.
As they were limited for detection to a maximum of periscope depth, it makes sense to stick to bombs.
Hey , I got talking on the forum of TFA , saying that thanks to you I learned of their game. I suggested a colab with them and Drachinifel. Was allready done ... But perhaps a colab with you , Drach and TFA ? I 'd certainly love that. They weren't opposed of the idea and should give you the hint ... so here it is.
The building I work from is an old airship hangar from WWII, which was built for the anti-submarine warfare once the U.S. entered WWII. The wooden hangar burned down in the 1990s.
I wonder if the Germans were able to use their magnetic system for detonating naval mines to detect submarines
No, that was a different thing entirely. The aerial minesweepers (Both German and Allied) were basicaly big electromagnets which were supplied with power from their own motor-generator sets. Thise produced a fairly strong magnetic field, which a magnetic mine could read as a ship within range, and trigger its detonator. It wasn't any use for detection.
Aircraft could use Magnetic Anomaly Detection, which used a sensitive magnetism detector (Magnetometer) to look for the changes in the Earth's magnetic field caused by a large mass of metal. Flying at a height of about 200' (60m)above the water, it could detect a typical submarine submerged to about 200' (60m) depth, if you flew right over it. But - it could also detect shipwrecks on the bottom, Iron-bearing seamounts, and other things that would bend the magnetic field.
That being said, the combination of high resolution microwave radar (S and X band), MAD, and better undersea weapons - Retrobombs = rockets fitted to depth charges, which cancelled the forward motion of the aircraft, allowing the weapon to drop directly below the release point, meaning that, when using MAD, you could drop when the magnetic signature was at its peak, and the Mine Mk 24, which was actually an antisubmarine Homing Torpedo, which would detect and home on the submarine on its own.
The radar allowed a submarine to be detected before it could see the aircraft, day or night, even if the submarine was using its periscope or snorkelling, and the MAD systems would allow the target to be identified and attacked.
@@peterstickney7608 great info, always interesting to see the amount of advancement in certain areas
@@peterstickney7608 wow! Thank you so much for the detailed analysis! I must admit I genuinely was illiterate on the subject of this system thank you very much for the information
I have learned that patrolling for subs must be really boring and tiring.
Makes you wonder if tedium takes a toll.
maintaining a random but effective pattern must take a lot of concentration as well and would been very hard work for the pilots.....they probably took turns getting some rest .....
There is a passage in the book 'Das Boot', (Not the movie) when a frustrated crewman goes on about how Coastal Command was hunting them and 'why don't the Tommies drop all their bombs and say they sunk us'. He didn't seem to realize how angry the British were at losing merchant shipping. On another note, Joe Kennedy found looking for subs to be intensely boring, but absolutely necessary.
An unexpected choice of subject Bis, and for some reason amusing to hear you say sneaky buggers👍🏻
Video on how pilots navigated in wwi & wwii please 😇
Another great video thanks Chris.
Subs are pretty delicate weapons it seems to me. I mean they're half sunk to begin with, right? Just a few holes is all it takes to sink them the rest of the way. Even if it isnt an immediate kill, as long as they cant get back to the surface its a death sentence.
Very interesting as always! Keep up the good work!
WUHU Primary Source Document Time everyone! :D Greetings from the flight deck :)
Very informative video, loved it. Since the pamphlet is from relatively early in the war, what changes were made to the techniques later on? Lets get to the MAHD!!
Ever thought about doing a video on american bombers like the B25 and B17 in RAF service?
What sort of weird copyright laws allow you to read the document to us but not show us? Germany is a weird place
You got it. 😁
Chris: Enjoyed the piece. Always interested in seeing "niche" information.
One question, in the section on marking a sub's diving location, the translation was mark with a bouy or "paint". What was the original German? I wonder if it could possibly have been "dye"?
Thanks again
Dave
Did you get the Kingfisher pics?
Like most videos I thoroughly enjoyed it. Keep up the good work.
Excellent video! Very informative, and great insights
Great work Chris, as usual! Thank you.
Rich.
Great Video as always, Many thanks
One of the most important aircraft used in anti shipping was the Italian Isotta Francini Spaviero.😉
Cool stuff, keep up the great work... are you the Bizmark that plays war thunder with Bo? 🤓
How proficiently trained were the submarine crews to handle anti aircraft weapons?
love some Primary Source Document Time!
Super interesting to have actual archive always learn new thing super video
Not a subject I knew much about on the Axis side, given the anti-sub warfare and/or convoy patrols are mostly known from the Allied side.
A Soviet Submarine (S-13) made the most deadly attack in history in January 30, 1945 with the sinking of the Wilhelm Gustloff with over 8-9,000 dead. Submarine and anti-submarine warfare was complex in the Baltic but the Soviets never stopped challenging the Germans. The Swedish, despite neutrality permitted the Germans to lay mines in Swedish waters. Both sides utilized mine warfare extensively.
Fabulous quality video and research again. Thank you.
One question: is there evidence that the Germans copied any of the allied tactics against U boats?
Love your graphics! Are you taking lessons from Bernard?
Quality as ever Chris. Thx!