Glossary of Sealion Threads

The reason Michele uses that terminology is as follows:

A warship is not built like a cargo ship.
Exactly. It's not a few guns stuck onto a cargo ship built to civilian standards that turns it into a warship. And the fact that you had to explain why and how at length is a clear indication of why most Eumetopias Jubatus threads are a great waste of time.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
...wait, did the German PDNs just get excused their age on the grounds that the British DNs were also WW1 vintage?
What?
That's basically ignoring their very classification - PRE Dreadnoughts versus Dreadnoughts. The difference is not minor, it's basically a matter of DNs being faster, better protected AND better armed, by a considerable margin.

There's a REASON that everything not built like HMS Dreadnought was a "Pre" Dreadnought - the sheer scale of the change. And there's also a reason that Germany was allowed to keep those PDNs - they weren't a significant threat.
 
...wait, did the German PDNs just get excused their age on the grounds that the British DNs were also WW1 vintage?
What?
That's basically ignoring their very classification - PRE Dreadnoughts versus Dreadnoughts. The difference is not minor, it's basically a matter of DNs being faster, better protected AND better armed, by a considerable margin.

There's a REASON that everything not built like HMS Dreadnought was a "Pre" Dreadnought - the sheer scale of the change. And there's also a reason that Germany was allowed to keep those PDNs - they weren't a significant threat.
I have a quick question while we are talking naval capabilities ...

We all know that in terms of Destroyers the British had the upper hand as far as numbers goes but the range in quality of those Destroyers seems quite large ... just looking at displacement you have ships ranging from 900-1850 tons. In comparison a German Destroyer of the time was in the 2000+ ton range. German Torpedo Boats had a displacement of 1100-1300 tons, with speeds equivolent to the British Destroyers and those at the upper end had a similar armament. Moving down a notch or two are the F-Boats and M-Boats ranging from 850-1100 tons with a slower speed and lesser armament, in effect the equivolent of an RN Sloop, at least on paper. In total the Germans could muster probably about 50 such vessels.

So the question really is ho effective are each of these types of ship versus a typical RN Destroyer such as a V Class:-

RN V-Class Destroyer - Displacement 1300 tons: Speed 34 kn: Armament 4x4", 2x2 pdr

RN Grimsby Class Sloop - Displacement 990 tons: Speed 16.5 kn: Armament 2x4.7", 1x3"

German 1934 Class Destroyer - Displacement 2200 tons: Speed 36 kn: Armament 5x5", 4x3.7cm, 6x2cm

German 1924 Class Torpedo Boat - Displacement 1300 tons: Speed 35 kn: Armament 3x4", 2x3.7cm, 2x2cm

German Escort Vessel - Displacement 1000 tons: Speed 28 kn: Armament 2x4", 4x3.7cm, 2x2cm

German M Boat - Displacement 870 tons: Speed 18 kn: Armament 2x4", 1x3.7cm, 6x2cm
 

Saphroneth

Banned
I have a quick question while we are talking naval capabilities ...

We all know that in terms of Destroyers the British had the upper hand as far as numbers goes but the range in quality of those Destroyers seems quite large ... just looking at displacement you have ships ranging from 900-1850 tons. In comparison a German Destroyer of the time was in the 2000+ ton range. German Torpedo Boats had a displacement of 1100-1300 tons, with speeds equivolent to the British Destroyers and those at the upper end had a similar armament. Moving down a notch or two are the F-Boats and M-Boats ranging from 850-1100 tons with a slower speed and lesser armament, in effect the equivolent of an RN Sloop, at least on paper. In total the Germans could muster probably about 50 such vessels.

So the question really is ho effective are each of these types of ship versus a typical RN Destroyer such as a V Class:-

RN V-Class Destroyer - Displacement 1300 tons: Speed 34 kn: Armament 4x4", 2x2 pdr

RN Grimsby Class Sloop - Displacement 990 tons: Speed 16.5 kn: Armament 2x4.7", 1x3"

German 1934 Class Destroyer - Displacement 2200 tons: Speed 36 kn: Armament 5x5", 4x3.7cm, 6x2cm

German 1924 Class Torpedo Boat - Displacement 1300 tons: Speed 35 kn: Armament 3x4", 2x3.7cm, 2x2cm

German Escort Vessel - Displacement 1000 tons: Speed 28 kn: Armament 2x4", 4x3.7cm, 2x2cm

German M Boat - Displacement 870 tons: Speed 18 kn: Armament 2x4", 1x3.7cm, 6x2cm
Mind providing numbers attached to each of those? I mean, the total German DD count at this time is less than a dozen.

And in those cases where RN DDs engaged German DDs, the result was pretty much a draw in terms of damage in spite of German numerical advantage. (The RN DDs in that battle were F and G class - 1850 deep load, 1350 standard - and the German DDs were 1934A or 1936). This suggests that a German DD was actually fairly equal in combat prowess to an RN DD. Which is interesting, as they appear to have used their greater mass exceedingly poorly - they had limited endurance and ammo capacity, for instance.

I quote:

1934 ships:
They were not very good ships. Built rapidly, they were too wet in heavy seas, which could make their forward guns unusable, there were structural weaknesses and machinery problems. The engines were newly designed high pressure turbines that promised much but disappointed once installed: maintenance was difficult and they caused excessive vibration. In addition, the class' range was limited (less than half of equivalent British ships) and they had limited magazine capacities (again half of the British equivalents). Only one ship survived the war.

1934A ships had the same problems.

1936 ships: all but one sunk at Narvik anyway.

1936A/B ships: not yet completed.
 
Mind providing numbers attached to each of those? I mean, the total German DD count at this time is less than a dozen.

And in those cases where RN DDs engaged German DDs, the result was pretty much a draw in terms of damage in spite of German numerical advantage. (The RN DDs in that battle were F and G class - 1850 deep load, 1350 standard - and the German DDs were 1934A or 1936). This suggests that a German DD was actually fairly equal in combat prowess to an RN DD. Which is interesting, as they appear to have used their greater mass exceedingly poorly - they had limited endurance and ammo capacity, for instance.

I quote:

1934 ships:
They were not very good ships. Built rapidly, they were too wet in heavy seas, which could make their forward guns unusable, there were structural weaknesses and machinery problems. The engines were newly designed high pressure turbines that promised much but disappointed once installed: maintenance was difficult and they caused excessive vibration. In addition, the class' range was limited (less than half of equivalent British ships) and they had limited magazine capacities (again half of the British equivalents). Only one ship survived the war.

1934A ships had the same problems.

1936 ships: all but one sunk at Narvik anyway.

1936A/B ships: not yet completed.
As far as I can work out there were 7-8 DD's, 14-15 TB's, 6 Escorts and 23 MB's.

There is a reason I chose the V and W Class as a representative of the RN Destroyer, it's because numerically this was the most common type in British waters at the time ... there were better and there were worse types, but this seems to be average.

And I'm not asking about the relative merits of British/German Destroyers as they were probably on equal terms but with only a handful of German Destroyers available that isn't going to make much difference. I was just wondering what the rest of the ships might be capable of even if the answer is providing target practice for the RN.

And you say "I quote" but not where you quote from ... I'd be interested to know where you do quote from at times.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
As far as I can work out there were 7-8 DD's, 14-15 TB's, 6 Escorts and 23 MB's.

There is a reason I chose the V and W Class as a representative of the RN Destroyer, it's because numerically this was the most common type in British waters at the time ... there were better and there were worse types, but this seems to be average.

And I'm not asking about the relative merits of British/German Destroyers as they were probably on equal terms but with only a handful of German Destroyers available that isn't going to make much difference. I was just wondering what the rest of the ships might be capable of even if the answer is providing target practice for the RN.

And you say "I quote" but not where you quote from ... I'd be interested to know where you do quote from at times.
Ah. In that case, it was Wikipedia - better than nothing, at least. Seems to be a summary of the references at the bottom.

As for why I asked for numbers, it's because it has to be stated. The Kriegsmarine's larger units were paste - and, as shown by Narvik, more modern ships than the ones they have left were handled roughly by RN DDs.
 
Ah. In that case, it was Wikipedia - better than nothing, at least. Seems to be a summary of the references at the bottom.

As for why I asked for numbers, it's because it has to be stated. The Kriegsmarine's larger units were paste - and, as shown by Narvik, more modern ships than the ones they have left were handled roughly by RN DDs.
Yeah I agree with you there but just wondering if the other ships would have a bearing or not ... for instance the M-Boats are more than likely going to be next to useless against a destroyer even though they have a fairly potent armament they are a little on the slow side and I have no idea how nimble they are in the water.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
Yeah I agree with you there but just wondering if the other ships would have a bearing or not ... for instance the M-Boats are more than likely going to be next to useless against a destroyer even though they have a fairly potent armament they are a little on the slow side and I have no idea how nimble they are in the water.
I can't find data on the stats of the M-Boats, though evidentially I'd suspect them to be inferior to their RN counterparts (given that the same was the case with the DDs.)
There's also that the RN has more of them. Pretty much, it comes down to - there's no real way to square the circle and actually defeat the RN with the KM. There's too much more of the RN. (If the abundant DDs and light forces, against all expectation, start losing - then they send in the CLs, the CAs and a selected old BB. The RN has a massive margin to commit more resources, the Kriegsmarine is basically running on empty even before Sealion is launched.)
 
I can't find data on the stats of the M-Boats, though evidentially I'd suspect them to be inferior to their RN counterparts (given that the same was the case with the DDs.)
There's also that the RN has more of them. Pretty much, it comes down to - there's no real way to square the circle and actually defeat the RN with the KM. There's too much more of the RN. (If the abundant DDs and light forces, against all expectation, start losing - then they send in the CLs, the CAs and a selected old BB. The RN has a massive margin to commit more resources, the Kriegsmarine is basically running on empty even before Sealion is launched.)
Well the first thing you have to do is work out what the RN counterpart is to an M-Boat if there is one, and if there isn't then you have to find the closest comparison. I don't think anyone is suggesting that the KM is anywhere close to a match to the RN in most circumstances I think its more a case of the KM having enough force to counter the first half a dozen or so RN Destroyers that appear on the scene. And to determine what any outcome is you really do need to know what forces are available to either side and what their capabilities are. Yes if you found a huge expanse of water and put the RN forces at one side and the KM on the other and said last man standing wins we all know what the outcome will be, but if you concentrate the KM forces in the straights of Dover then hit them piecemeal with a few destroyers here and a few there things might not be so clear cut. So before people jump to the, no doubt, correct conclusion that the RN will rip the KM and the vessels they are protecting several new holes its worth taking into consideration every bit of information available.

From German-navy.de

In the mid 1930s, the minesweeping flotillas of the Kriegsmarine consisted of old ships build in World War I. To replace this old ships, a class of modern minesweepers, the "Mboot35" was designed.

The result was a very maneuverable and seaworthy ship exceeding the expectations. Heavily armed those ships were often called "Channel Destroyers" by the British during World War II. Despite the successful design, several factors prevented that a large number of ships were build during the war. The boats were very expensive and complicated to build, therefore a more simple design had to be developed (which later got the Minensuchboot 1940). The engines were difficult to maintain and needed specially skilled personal which was not available in the required numbers. Since the Mboot35 had oil fired boilers, they also suffered from the oil shortage in the later years of the war.

A total of 69 ships were build in eight different shipyards, 34 were lost during the war. After the war, 17 were taken over by the US Navy, 5 by the Royal Navy and 13 by the Soviet Navy which all were used in the Black Sea until the 1960s. Five of the ships taken over by the USA were returned to Germany in 1956/57 and were used by the Bundesmarine.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
So, in other words, if the RN does exactly what would minimize their own advantage and maximize that of the Kriegsmarine, then the Kriegsmarine will do better than a basic comparison will indicate.
Okay... no argument here.
The question is, why should the RN (who will have literally days of warning) straggle in piecemeal and allow the Kriegsmarine to act to best advantage?
 
So, in other words, if the RN does exactly what would minimize their own advantage and maximize that of the Kriegsmarine, then the Kriegsmarine will do better than a basic comparison will indicate.
Okay... no argument here.
The question is, why should the RN (who will have literally days of warning) straggle in piecemeal and allow the Kriegsmarine to act to best advantage?
You appear to suffering from crystal ball syndrome, i.e. the British will know immediately when, with what and where the Germans are planning to land.

OTL throughout September there were constant reports of shipping movements along the French coast, the codeword "Cromwell" (the highest level of invasion alert) was issued on the 8th September and stayed in place for a good 10 days and the British reaction was not to panic and send every available destroyer to attack. In fact during the 247th meeting of the War Cabinet on 11th September the following discussion took place:-
The Prime Minister drew attention to the fact that the enemy was continuing to pass convoys of ships westward down the French coast, although a small number of ships had been successfully attacked off Ostend on the previous night. A powerful armada was thus being deployed along the coasts of France opposite this country. The argument of the naval authorities was that if we were to send our ships to attack these concentrations of barges and merchant vessels along the French coast, we might well throw away forces which would be invaluable to us if these barges and merchant ships attempted to cross the Channel.
The British reaction was actually to attack the concentrations of barges from the air and maintain a Destroyer patrol at night 10 miles or so from the French coast so that they could intercept the invasion fleet once it was underway. When I talk about the first half a dozen or so RN Destroyers it's the ones that are on patrol, the ones that will make first contact.

However, this still doesn't answer my question which is how effective the TB's, Escorts, MB's and even the S-Boats would be against RN Destroyers. I'm trying to gauge how this would affect RN tactics, would they be comfortable sending groups of 4-6 destroyers in or would they prefer to send in more concentrated groups?
 

Saphroneth

Banned
You appear to suffering from crystal ball syndrome, i.e. the British will know immediately when, with what and where the Germans are planning to land.
As was discussed in a recent Sealion thread, the German plans involved taking about three days to debouche from their ports into the Channel, within sight of the cliffs of Dover. This is not crystal ball syndrome, this is merely granting the British with the ability to see.
 
As was discussed in a recent Sealion thread, the German plans involved taking about three days to debouche from their ports into the Channel, within sight of the cliffs of Dover. This is not crystal ball syndrome, this is merely granting the British with the ability to see.
You're still not answering the question though ...

And as I have just pointed out, the German shipping movements were constant throughout September, as were embarkation and other exercises. Also note from the text I just provided the RN were not willing to attack until after the moment of departure ... something they would need a crystal ball to predict. They knew the Germans were there, they knew there was a threatened invasion, they knew the German strength (roughly), they thought they knew the location of the invasion, the East Coast of England they just didn't know the exact departure date.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
You're still not answering the question though ...

And as I have just pointed out, the German shipping movements were constant throughout September, as were embarkation and other exercises. Also note from the text I just provided the RN were not willing to attack until after the moment of departure ... something they would need a crystal ball to predict. They knew the Germans were there, they knew there was a threatened invasion, they knew the German strength (roughly), they thought they knew the location of the invasion, the East Coast of England they just didn't know the exact departure date.
If there's two thirds of the invasion force in the channel (i.e. it's a day before the actual invasion date), then the RN attacking is entirely worthwhile, because it'll take them at least a few hours to scatter, then another two days at minimum to prepare.
Surprise is impossible when you take three days to prepare and you are within sight of the enemy for that entire time. You can conceal the precise hour, yes. But your enemy will be very, very ready for you.


Anyway. My POINT is that arguing that sort of thing is almost pointless, in so far as the Germans will never be able to achieve sufficient surprise to force the RN to engage on unfavourable terms when they could engage on favourable terms with a few hours preparation.

In terms of the question itself - I don't know much about small craft capabilities. Perhaps Astrodragon knows, he's a navy man.
 
In Sealion discussions it is always said that German submarines would be useless in the Channel, and certainly the planned German deployment reflected this. The Germans had a submarine designed for coastal waters, the Type II, which made up about half of their submarine force. It was a small submarine with a displacement of 250 tons. These were the only ones they planned to put in the Channel.

So what did the British have?

The British had three types of submarines operational in September 1940 – the Grampus, Parthian, and U Class. A fourth class of submarine, the V class, wasn’t ordered until 1941.

The Grampus Class (5 subs) was a minelayer that carried a total of 12 torpedoes in six torpedo tubes at the bow. It was used extensively to supply Malta. All were sunk in the Mediterranean. It was too large for coastal operations, at 1,760 tons.

The Parthian Class (6 subs) was meant to be a long range patrol submarine for Far Eastern Waters, but most of them were sunk in the Mediterranean. At 1,760 tons, it was too big for the Channel.

The U Class was originally meant to be a training and target submarine but found to be useful for operations in the North Sea. It was much smaller, at 630 tons. 15 might have been available in September 1940. 34 more were ordered, starting in March 1940, but the first of these wasn’t delivered until November 1940.

So, for British submarines, we have a total of 15 just about suitable for work in the Channel, however, checking each on Uboat.net we find:

HMS Undine – lost 7 Jan 1940
HMS Unity – Lost 29 Apr 1940
HMS Ursula – Patrolling Channel on anti-invasion duties 20 September 1940
HMS Umpire – Launched 30 Dec 1940, not available
HMS Una – Launched 1941, not available
HMS Unbeaten - Commissioned 10 November 1940, not available
HMS Undaunted – Commissioned 30 Dec 1940, not available
HMS Union – launched 1941, not available
HMS Unique – Commissioned 27 September 1940, partly available, though training and trials not completed until 24 October, when she moved to Portsmouth.
HMS Upholder – the most famous sub in the RN, not commissioned until 31 October 1940, not available.
HMS Upright – not Commissioned until 3 Sept 1940, finished training 26 September and moved to Portsmouth, arriving 30 September – available(just), patrolled English Channel.
HMS Urchin – not launched until 30 Sept 1940, not available
HMS Urge – Commissioned 12 Dec 1940, not available
HMS Usk – Commissioned 11 October 1940, not available
HMS Utmost – patrolling English Channel 25 September 1940, available
HMS P32 – Commissioned 3 May 1941, not available
HMS P33 – Commissioned 30 May 1941, not available
HMS P 36 – Commissioned 24 Sept 1941, not available
All the others were commissioned in 1941 or 1942 even if they were ordered in 1940.

So, only three (really two) British submarines were available for use against the invasion forces in the Channel. If they were firing torpedos at barges, it is likely the torpedos would go under the barges because of their shallow draft, but they could do some damage to the other ships in the invasion force.
 
Last edited:
As was discussed in a recent Sealion thread, the German plans involved taking about three days to debouche from their ports into the Channel, within sight of the cliffs of Dover. This is not crystal ball syndrome, this is merely granting the British with the ability to see.
That wasn't discussed, there was merely a lot of hooting and misrepresentation, during which a one day delay somehow became three days. You misread what Schenk has written in the English edition, where as I later stated in that discussion (with most of the relevant page quoted) Schenk says that at the most there was a 9.5 hour wait for one convoy out of the four (the one heading for beach "C") but he also says it in a most confusing manner so you can read that section to mean that in fact there was no wait at all, as he also also says the convoy would be leaving 8.5 hours before S hour.

By the way, comparing British destroyers supported by a battleship involved in a fight with German destroyers which were out of ammunition and fuel in the narrow confines of a fiord is hardly a fair comparison.

The German destroyers had an equivalent firepower to the smallest class of British cruisers (the "D" class). Most of the destroyers were of older types, such as the V and W classes (4 x QF 4 in Mk.V (102mm L/45) guns, mount P Mk.I[1] 2 x QF 2 pdr Mk.II "pom-pom" (40 mm L/39) anti-aircraft guns or 1 x QF 3 inch 20 cwt anti-aircraft gun). Nearly all lacked dual-purpose guns and those that could fire anti-aircraft shells used the defective HACS fire control system.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
The RN had other submarines, however:

So what did the British have? etc.
There were 20 modern S-class boats built in the 1930s, and designed specifically for the North Sea and Baltic; there were also 15 of the larger T class built prewar to augment the large boats of the 1920s designed for the Pacific, but the T class were used in European waters throughout the war.

In addition, there were 3 older L-class (roughly comparable in size to the S class) and 9 H-class (about the same size as the V class small submarines); these boats were all separate from the 1920s-era minelayers and "Pacific" boats built after that...

In addition, I'd guess there were at least a few Allied boats (Polish and Dutch) that were in the UK and presumably operational.

So (presumably) a dozen or boats, including the V class, certainly could have been made available if necessary...although from the British perspective, the fewer friendly submarines around, the simpler the ROE.

As far as the German M class minesweepers, the RN's interwar minesweepers (classed as "sloops" under the Washington and London agreements) would be more than capable of dealing with them; the British ships of the Halcyon class had a main battery of two 4 inch guns, plus AA. The "Admiralty" and converted merchant trawlers usually had a 4 inch gun and light weapons, which was the same armament (generally) of the older coastal minesweepers, as well.

Bottom line, the RN had hundred of these types of vessels, which were all faster, better armed, and with better seakeeping than the vast majority of the German small craft that made up the bulk of their transport forces; the qualitative edge was vast, especially in terms of personnel, but the quantitative edge was even greater.

ZEELOWE was a pipedream.

Best,
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Um, no...

The German destroyers had an equivalent firepower to the smallest class of British cruisers (the "D" class). Most of the destroyers were of older types, such as the V and W classes (4 x QF 4 in Mk.V (102mm L/45) guns, mount P Mk.I[1] 2 x QF 2 pdr Mk.II "pom-pom" (40 mm L/39) anti-aircraft guns or 1 x QF 3 inch 20 cwt anti-aircraft gun). Nearly all lacked dual-purpose guns and those that could fire anti-aircraft shells used the defective HACS fire control system.
An RN Danae class cruiser was a 5,000 ton ship with six 6-inch guns, AA, and six 21-in TT; the smaller C class ships were 4,200 tons, with four or five 6-inch guns, AA, and 8 21 inch TT; the AA conversions were the same displacement, but had 8-10 4 inch DP pieces.

The largest German destroyers operational in 1940 would have been about half the size of the smaller British cruisers, with five 5 inch guns.

And I think there might have been what, a half-dozen in commission that could have been in the Channel? The RN had 11 Cs and 8 Ds in 1939; even if only half were available...

Then include the more modern E class, and the even more modern ships built under the Washington and London treaties in the 1930s...

The British could have had more cruisers in the Channel than the Germans had destroyers; they would have had more destroyers than the Germans had escorts; more escorts than the Germans could have had patrol craft; more patrol craft than the Germans could have had patrol boats; and (presumably) more patrol boats than the Germans could have had landing craft...

As far as RN AA, how many Allied warships maneuvering at sea did the LW sink, again?

Again, the British would have bested the Germans both in quantity and quality; there's no way the Germans could have surmounted either disadvantage, much less both...

Best,
 
S Class Submarines (Displacement: 640 tons 1st group, 670 tons 2nd group )

HMS Seahorse – lost 7 Jan 1940
HMS Starfish – lost 9 Jan 1940
HMS Swordfish – lost 7 Nov 1940
HMS Salmon (N 65) Lost on 16 Jul 1940
HMS Shark (i) (N 54) Lost on 6 Jul 1940
HMS Snapper (N 39) Lost on 12 Feb 1941
HMS Spearfish (N 69) Lost on 1 Aug 1940
HMS Sterlet (N 22) Lost on 18 Apr 1940
HMS Sealion (N 72) - operating off Norway and Denmark in 1940
HMS Seawolf (N 47) - operating off Norway August 1940 – Feb 1941
HMS Sturgeon - operating near Denmark September 1940

The next group (ordered 1939) were of 842 tons. A type VII U-boat was 757 tons. A type IX U-boat was 1,016 tons. If you say these could operate in the Channel successfully, then so could German U-boats.
HMS Sunfish – operating in the Kattegat 1940
HMS Safari - Commissioned 14 Mar 1942
HMS Sahib - Commissioned 13 May 1942
HMS Saracen -Commissioned 27 Jun 1942
HMS Satyr - Commissioned 8 Feb 1943
HMS Sceptre - Commissioned 15 Apr 1943

The following (842 ton ships) were ordered in 1940 and not available
HMS Seadog
HMS Sibyl
HMS Sea Rover
HMS Seraph
HMS Shakespeare
HMS P222 which was lost before a name could be alloted to her.
HMS Sea Nymph
HMS Sickle
HMS Simoom
HMS Sirdar
HMS Spiteful
HMS Splendid
HMS Sportsman

The rest of the S class were either cancelled or not ordered until after 1940.

The T class was 1,290 (or 1575 BRT) tons. A type IX U-boat was 1,016 tons.

Triton (sunk in the Adriatic on 18 December 1940) – operating in the Mediterranean, not available.
Thetis sank during trials, was salvaged and recommissioned as Thunderbolt, serving in the Atlantic and the Bay of Biscay in 1940, not available.
Tribune – patrolled the North Atlantic and Bay of Biscay August- September 1940
Trident – refitting September 1940, otherwise patrolling North Atlantic/Hebridies/ northern Norway
Triumph patrolling off the south-west coast of Norway September 1940
Taku - patrolling the Bay of Biscay September 1940
Tarpon (probably sunk by German minesweeper M-6 on 14 April 1940)
Thistle (torpedoed by U-4 on 10 April 1940)
Tigris patrolling Bay of Biscay September 1940
Triad (sunk by gunfire from the Italian submarine Enrico Toti in the Gulf of Taranto on 15 October 1940) – operating in Mediterranean, not available
Truant - based in Gibraltar, operating in Mediterranean, September 1940, not available.
Tuna – commissioned 1 August 1940, finished training 25 August 1940, patrolling northern North Sea September 1940
Talisman – patrolling west of the Hebrides September 1940
Tetrarch, the only boat completed with mine laying equipment , moves to Gibraltar and joins the Mediterranean Fleet September 1940, not available.

L Class - 890 / 1080 BRT
HMS L 23 (N 23)
HMS L 26 (N 26)
HMS L 27 (N 27) 15 Oct 1940: HMS L 27 attacked a German convoy in the English Channel off Cape Barfleur, France. All torpedoes fired missed their target.

H Class - 423/510 BRT. This class was mainly used for training. Actions off Brest and the Dutch coast are mentioned though.

HMS H 44 (N 44) the ship's log for H44 September 1940 http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/Details?uri=C3859509 can be viewed by visiting the National Archives, it has not been digitised.
HMS H 28 (N 28)
HMS H 31 (N 31)
HMS H 32 (N 32)
HMS H 33 (N 33)
HMS H 34 (N 34)
HMS H 43 (N 43)
HMS H 49 (N 49) Lost on 18 Oct 1940
HMS H 50 (N 50)

R Class (1475 / 2030 BRT ) – large, long range patrol submarines
HMS Rainbow (N 16) Operating in the Mediterranean September 1940, Lost on 4 Oct 1940
HMS Regent (N 41) Operating in the Mediterranean September 1940
HMS Regulus (i) (N 88) Operating in the Mediterranean September 1940 Lost on 6 Dec 1940
HMS Rover (N 62) most probably Operating in the Mediterranean September 1940


So, although little is known about the H and L classes NONE of these other submarines are known to have been operating in the Channel in September 1940 or assigned to anti-invasion duties. Furthermore, only the H class was comparable in size to a Type II U-boat. Hopefully somebody knows a bit more about the H and L class operations!!

The early German destroyers had 5" guns. The rest had 4 or 5 X 5.9" guns.
 
Last edited:

Saphroneth

Banned
Sit - why are you apparently not including all the S class subs lost in 1940? The one lost in November should certainly go on the list of available ones for any reasonable Sealion... what time are you using as basis? (You'll notice that in my case, I'm treating any AMC that was in Germany at any point from June onwards as available if a Sealion was planned - by those lights, you should list ALL the S-class subs still intact, as well as all the ones in the Med, because if Sealion looked like a possibility they'd pull back to home waters! You're tacitly assuming that the Germans achieve complete surprise, which means you're also assuming that the RAF is not severely attrited and that the RN's forces are intact... including the Dunkirk DDs, because I suspect - though can not prove - that some operations were only restarted once there were the Dunkirk DDs back in action)

Also - the RN subs have an advantage: excellent depth maps. The Kriegsmarine don't have that "home field" advantage, since the RN has had the channel as theirs for over a century whereas the Germans got easy access to it months ago.
 
Top