Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Silent Victory

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> Silent Victory Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Silent Victory - 12/26/2002 11:28:48 PM   
zed

 

Posts: 268
Joined: 5/20/2002
Status: offline 		Just reread some pertinent passsages of SILENT VICTORY by clay Blair over the holiday. No American Submarines were destroyed by enemy action in all of 1942. Argonaut, destroyed in early 1943, was the first one to be sunk by a IJN destroyer off the coast of New Ireland. 3 others followed in rapid succession. Several S-boats crashed on reefs or otherwise proved unseaworthy and sank in 1942.

American sub commanders however, never kept their subs in enemy ports once an attack was made.
Post #: 1
Sub losses in 1942 - 12/28/2002 6:42:26 AM   
entemedor

 

Posts: 65
Joined: 6/14/2002
From: Barcelona (Spain)
Status: offline 		I don't have SILENT VICTORY, but other sources have at least two US subs sunk by IJN ships during 1942:

SHARK (SS-174) by DD AMATSUKAZE, 11 Feb 1942
PERCH (SS-176) by DDs AMATSUKAZE (again!) and HATSUKAZE, 3rd March 1942

A possible third victim is GRUNION (SS-216), missing July 1942, some sources have it sunk by IJN sub I-25.

Cheers,

Entemedor

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 2
- 12/28/2002 7:57:15 AM   
GunRange

 

Posts: 44
Joined: 12/26/2002
Status: offline 		I doubt that any skipper in RL had been stupid enough to park his boat in Truk harbour entrance along with 5 other S-boats...

_____________________________

-"Delete everything after crazy!"

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 3
Looks Like more than Two - 12/28/2002 9:37:14 AM   
Point Luck

 

Posts: 318
Joined: 4/27/2002
From: East Coast-US
Status: offline 		U.S. Navy Wartime Submarine Losses
52 U.S. submarines were lost to all causes during World War II. The vast majority of these boats were lost in combat with the Japanese navy. The combat histories and circumstances of loss are well documented in many places on the internet. This summary is included here for the informational purposes
Name Date of Loss Cause of Loss
Sealion (SS-195) 10 December, 1941 Japanese aircraft
S-36 (SS-141) 20 December, 1941 Grounding
S-26 (SS-131) 24 January, 1942 Collision with U.S. surface craft (PC-460)
Shark (SS-174) February, 1942 Japanese surface craft
Perch (SS-176) 3 March, 1942 Japanese surface craft
S-27 (SS-132) 19 June, 1942 Grounding
Grunion (SS-216) August, 1942 Unknown
S-39 (SS-144) 13 August, 1942 Grounding
Argonaut (SS-166) 10 January, 1943 Japanese surface craft
Amberjack (SS-219) 16 February, 1943 Japanese surface craft
Grampus (SS-207) 5 March, 1943 Japanese surface craft
Triton (SS-201) 15 March, 1943 Japanese surface craft
Pickerel (SS-177) 3 April, 1943 Japanese surface craft
Grenadier (SS-210) 22 April, 1943 Aircraft
Runner (SS-275) June / July, 1943 Unknown, but probably mine
R-12 (SS-89) 12 June, 1943 Flooded during training
Pompano (SS-181) August / September, 1943 Unknown
Grayling (SS-209) August / September, 1943 Unknown
Cisco (SS-290) Probably 28 September, 1943 Japanese aircraft and surface craft
S-44 (SS-155) 7 October, 1943 Japanese destroyer - surface action
Wahoo (SS-238) 11 October, 1943 Japanese aircraft
Dorado (SS-248) October, 1943 German Mine
Corvina (SS-226) 16 November, 1943 Japanese submarine
Sculpin (SS-191) 19 November, 1943 Japanese surface craft
Capelin (SS-289) November / December, 1943 Unknown
Scorpion (SS-278) January / February, 1944 Probable mine
Grayback (SS-208) 26 February, 1944 Japanese aircraft and surface craft
Trout (SS-202) March, 1944 Unknown
Tullibee (SS-284) 26 March, 1944 Own Torpedo
Gudgeon (SS-211) April / May, 1944 Unknown, possible aircraft
Herring (SS-233) 1 June, 1944 Japanese shore battery
Golet (SS-361) 14 June, 1944 Japanese surface craft
S-28 (SS-133) 4 July, 1944 Foundered during training
Robalo (SS-273) 26 July, 1944 Japanese mine
Flier (SS-250) 13 August, 1944 Japanese mine
Harder (SS-257) 24 August, 1944 Japanese surface craft
Seawolf (SS-197) 3 October, 1944 U.S. Surface Craft
Escolar (SS-294) October / November, 1944 Probable mine
Darter (SS-227) 24 October, 1944 Grounding
Shark (SS-314) 24 October, 1944 Japanese surface craft
Tang (SS-306) 24 October, 1944 Own Torpedo
Albacore (SS-218) 7 November, 1944 Japanese mine
Growler (SS-215) 8 November, 1944 Unknown
Scamp (SS-277) 13/16 November,1944 Japanese surface craft
Swordfish (SS-193) 12 January, 1945 Japanese surface craft
Barbel (SS-316) 4 February, 1945 Japanese aircraft
Kete (SS-369) 20-31 March, 1945 Unknown, possible Japanese submarine
Trigger (SS-237) 28 March, 1945 Japanese aircraft and surface craft
Snook (SS-279) 8-20 April, 1945 Unknown
Lagarto (SS-371) 4 May, 1945 Japanese minelayer Hatsutaka
Bonefish (SS-223) 18 June, 1945 Japanese surface craft
Bullhead (SS-332) 6 August, 1945 Japanese aircraft

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 4
- 12/28/2002 9:42:32 AM   
BigJoe417

 

Posts: 103
Joined: 12/19/2002
From: Somewhere over downtown Tokyo
Status: offline 		All still on patrol. God Bless them!

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 5
- 12/28/2002 9:50:18 AM   
Cap Mandrake


Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline 		Wow..Point Luck..that is sobering. Think of all those men!



Look at the first 8 losses, half were due to grounding or collison with friendly vessels.

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 6
re: that is horrible - 12/28/2002 9:53:08 AM   
Chiteng

 

Posts: 7666
Joined: 2/20/2001
From: Raleigh,nc,usa
Status: offline 		I think it takes major courage just to be willing to get IN
one of those coastal subs.

I can not imagine a more horrible death. Maybe being tossed into
molten lava comes close.

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 7
- 12/28/2002 9:54:15 AM   
Point Luck

 

Posts: 318
Joined: 4/27/2002
From: East Coast-US
Status: offline 		Yes I guess it takes alot to drive a pig boat.
Looks like IJN did have pretty good ASW afterall maybe Matrix might want to rethink the ASW capabilities by IJN.
I'm getting killed in my PBEM game by US subs and can't even slow them down

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 8
Jap ASW - 12/29/2002 12:48:10 AM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Point Luck
[B]Yes I guess it takes alot to drive a pig boat.
Looks like IJN did have pretty good ASW afterall maybe Matrix might want to rethink the ASW capabilities by IJN.
I'm getting killed in my PBEM game by US subs and can't even slow them down [/B][/QUOTE]

Haven't done any research, per se, but wasn't the real issue the Japanese aversion to escort duty for transports? Am I correct in recalling that they didn't escort their transports much until later in the war?

It is apparent that the certainly did and could use ASW.

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 9
- 12/29/2002 1:04:09 AM   
GunRange

 

Posts: 44
Joined: 12/26/2002
Status: offline 		US Silent Service; Force less than 2% of navy personel credited 55% of Japan losses at sea. 1300 ships sunk, 180 of those (about 725'000 tons) in 1942.

22% of of US submariners failed to return. Highest casualty rate of any service in US.

_____________________________

-"Delete everything after crazy!"

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 10
re: True but yet... - 12/29/2002 1:12:41 AM   
Chiteng

 

Posts: 7666
Joined: 2/20/2001
From: Raleigh,nc,usa
Status: offline 		That is very impressive until you examine the statistics for mines.
Mines were dropped by B-17, B-24, B-29 AND PBY!!!

That is why I am so surprised we cant do that in the game.
They started doing that in 3/43.

My point is that mines win hands down at sinking ships.

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 11
- 12/29/2002 1:21:48 AM   
GunRange

 

Posts: 44
Joined: 12/26/2002
Status: offline 		Mines were used extecively on later half of war ('44-'45), but as big ships were rare at this times, most ships sunk by them were coastal.

Tonnage for subs was higher.

*edit:removed word 'much', after checking the figures. But still higher.*

_____________________________

-"Delete everything after crazy!"

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 12
- 12/29/2002 1:48:44 AM   
zed

 

Posts: 268
Joined: 5/20/2002
Status: offline 		The ships that grounded their crews were rescured. Blair does not list any Submarines as sank by enemy action in 1942. He has an appendix listing submarine losses. I think it strange he does not list PERCH, SHARK AND SEALION. The ones listed as unknown were lost at sea, but IJN wartime records do not show them as being sunk by Japanese ships. After the war USN tried to determine if enemy records could indicate what happened to them. I am astounded actually that so few were lost.

Ise dogged 26 american subs on its way from Singapore to Japan. That has got to be the all time record. Combat ships making 25+ knots were hard for subs to sink.

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 13
re: The Ise - 12/29/2002 1:57:21 AM   
Chiteng

 

Posts: 7666
Joined: 2/20/2001
From: Raleigh,nc,usa
Status: offline 		What is even more amazing is the comment of the Ise captain.
He said that the USN planes were not very accurate, and that
the only reason they hit anything is because there were so many.
He also said that the Ise was 'more manuverable'???? than
the CVs.

The Ise was a WWI Battleship obselete even by WWI standards.
That is why I am so surprised at his comment.

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 14
Sub patrols then and now (UV) - 12/29/2002 4:04:13 AM   
mogami


Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline 		Hi, Also I think the level of subs deployed in UV is much higher then in practice. Most players send all their subs out as fast as they get them. Actual practice was to only have about 1/3 of on hand subs deployed at any one time. This left 1/3 refitting and 1/3 on way to/from patrols.

(If you have 12 subs. 4 would be on patrol, 4 would be refitting, and 4 would be in route to or from patrol stations)
But in UV 12 subs are sitting on enemy base.

_____________________________






I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 15
Seawolf - 12/29/2002 4:32:49 AM   
smithmr

 

Posts: 12
Joined: 2/23/2002
From: Yakima, WA, USA
Status: offline 		The poor guys in the Seawolf are the real unlucky ones. Get sunk by one of your own destroyers. That was one destroyer captain who should have been hung from the flag mast.

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 16
Loss of SEAWOLF - 12/29/2002 6:38:47 AM   
entemedor

 

Posts: 65
Joined: 6/14/2002
From: Barcelona (Spain)
Status: offline 		In fact, the commander of that destroyer escort (USS ROWELL) was subject to censure by the Board of Enquiry, but no disciplinary action was taken, because the Board was only too aware that there had been serious 'errors of judgment' at several levels.
SEAWOLF arrived in the Morotai area one day behind schedule, but Commander Seventh Fleet saw no reason to relay this information to the air/sea forces in the spot. By sheer bad luck, IJN sub RO-41 torpedoed USS SHELTON just a few miles from the SEAWOLF position, and the counter-attack caught SEAWOLF instead of the enemy sub. The TBM pilot from carrier MIDWAY which first attacked the contact had not even been informed that he was in a submarine 'safety lane' (friendly subs possibly operating in the area, no ASW attacks authorised). The commander of the Hunter-Killer task force and all his ship commanders (including ROWELL's) did knew they were in a submarine safety lane, yet they disregarding all security provisions governing such a lane.
Even worse, between the successive 'hedhehog' attacks which eventually destroyed SEAWOLF, ROWELL heard the submarine sending signals by sound gear (her desperate efforts to establish herself as a friendly unit), but no measures were taken.

However, given the complexity of naval operations in the Pacific, it's even surprising that SEAWOLF was the only US sub victim of 'friendly fire'.
BTW, DORADO (SS-248) was also probably destroyed by US aircraft in the Caribbean.

The only other similar incident which I know of is the sinking of salvage ship USS EXTRACTOR (ARS-15) by US submarine GUARDFISH on 24th January 1945.

Entemedor

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 17
Seawolf - 12/29/2002 12:35:43 PM   
smithmr

 

Posts: 12
Joined: 2/23/2002
From: Yakima, WA, USA
Status: offline 		That's why I thought the destroyer Captain should have been hung, I knew about the Seawolf being in the "Don't attack any sub zone" when it was sunk, Didn't know it was a whole hunter-killer group that was involved. Will have to modiy my statement, They should have hung all the Captains in the H/K group. They all knew they were in the safe zone for subs and they were under orders not to attack any subs in that zone. No excuse for them. Mark

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 18
- 12/29/2002 9:57:54 PM   
CapAndGown


Posts: 3206
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline 		There are no friendly subs. There are subs made by us, and subs made by them. But none of them are friendly.

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 19
- 12/29/2002 10:41:06 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		Hi Smithmr
you are missing the point, there was a bad sub in the good sub zone, the bad sub was shooting, when the action was over, the good sub was the one sunk

what would the out come of been if the bad sub had sank 5 or 6 ships, and when they asked the H/K group what they were doing, they turned around and said they couldn't attack, as there may of been a good sub in the area

damned if you do and damned if you don't

there was a GB DD commander who tracked a GE sub under the crewmen of a just sunken ship, he sailed in and dropped DC's on top of it, they don't know if the sub was there or not, but the crewmen, didn't make it

HARD_Sarge

_____________________________


(in reply to zed)
Post #: 20
- 12/30/2002 12:39:29 AM   
zed

 

Posts: 268
Joined: 5/20/2002
Status: offline 		I think the american submarine force could have starved Japan into submission by the middle of 1946, without anything else being done. When I am waiting for turns I like to play silent hunter.

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 21
- 12/30/2002 5:36:18 AM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline 		Yes, I have noticed that "vulching" at enemy bases is a common tactic in UV. (Tried it myself a bit :-) But very ahistorical and dangerous as enemy asw air activity is bound to be very intense the closer you get to his base.

Would like to see subs more suppressed by air activity. Airplanes did not sink much in 42-43 but they served to drive subs under and keep them out of mischef.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 22
- 12/30/2002 7:18:24 AM   
GunRange

 

Posts: 44
Joined: 12/26/2002
Status: offline 		Tactics of using own subs in enemy ports or imidiattely next to them, could prove dangerous in WiTP.

I can see all UV veterans placing their subs in Tokyo/Pearl entrances in early war and by '43 asw planes/ hunter-killer groups would have experience of 90 and no subs left.

_____________________________

-"Delete everything after crazy!"

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 23
Seawolf - 12/30/2002 10:45:33 AM   
smithmr

 

Posts: 12
Joined: 2/23/2002
From: Yakima, WA, USA
Status: offline 		The trouble is Sarge, the no shoot rules were very direct. The Destroyers were not supposed to be attacking any sub in the "safe zone" for any reason. The orginal Sub attack happened outside the safe zone and they thought the Jap sub retreated into the "safe zone" The navy got lucky and only lost the 50+ men on the Seawolf, could have been worse. The Seawolf was there for Life Guard duty. Could have had several downed pilots on board if it had been returning from duty instead of going on duty. To me it would have been one thing if the H/K group had a solid contact they were attacking and had accidently gotten switched over to the Seawolf due to the subs being in close proximity, but when you are just out conducting a search and enter a zone where you have been ordered not to attack subs as you have friendlies in that zone its a good idea to call off the search. Just my opinion though. Mark

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 24
- 12/30/2002 11:43:41 AM   
lupi

 

Posts: 37
Joined: 8/20/2001
Status: offline 		Listing of submarines lost during 1942 with cause from official history. Only 1 confirmed due to enemy action.


Submarine (SS)

USS Grunion (SS-216) missing off Kiska, Aleutian Islands, at the end of July 1942. Probably sunk by the Japanese submarine I-25, 30 July 1942.

USS Perch (SS-176) scuttled after being damaged by Japanese destroyers Sazanami and Ushio north of Java, Netherlands East Indies, 3 March 1942.

USS S-26 (SS-131) sunk after collision with submarine chaser PC-460 in the Gulf of Panama, 24 January 1942.

USS S-27 (SS-132) lost by grounding on a reef off St. Makarius Point, Amchitka, Aleutian Islands, 19 June 1942.

USS S-36 (SS-141) lost by grounding on Taka Bakang Reef, Makassar Strait, 20 January 1942.

USS S-39 (SS-144) lost by grounding south off Rossel Island, Louisiade Archipelago,
14 August 1942.

USS Shark (SS-174) probably sunk by Japanese destroyer Yamakaze east of Menado, Celebes, 11 February 1942.

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 25
- 12/30/2002 11:54:47 AM   
OG_Gleep

 

Posts: 308
Joined: 12/27/2002
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Cap Mandrake
[B]Wow..Point Luck..that is sobering. Think of all those men!



Look at the first 8 losses, half were due to grounding or collison with friendly vessels. [/B][/QUOTE]

Germany lost so many Subs its sick. Good thing for us their best and brightest often went out for sub duty.

39' - 9
204 men died and 148 men survived those losses

40' - 24
643 men died and 331 men survived those losses

41' - 34
887 men died and 645 men survived those losses

42' - 85
3277 men died and 818 men survived those losses

43' - 235
10081 men died and 1826 men survived those losses

44' - 219
8020 men died and 2408 men survived those losses

45' - 122
3856 men died and 440 men survived those losses

http://www.bv.net/~gaffer/U-BOATS.html

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 26
- 12/31/2002 6:10:37 PM   
zed

 

Posts: 268
Joined: 5/20/2002
Status: offline 		2 american subs also collided in WW2.

Gilmore on the Gudgeon told the XO to submerge the ship even though he was wounded and on the conning tower.

(in reply to zed)
Post #: 27
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> Silent Victory Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.765