What if Germany navy enire made of subs and they used worf pack tantic in World War I

Was a single merchant ship in an escorted convoy during WW1 even sunk by a German U Boat?

Just thought i'd throw the question out there.....
 

BlondieBC

Banned
Was a single merchant ship in an escorted convoy during WW1 even sunk by a German U Boat?

Just thought i'd throw the question out there.....

Yes, even though it was harder to find the convoy's. U-boats hit battleships with escorts. I am curious why you think any of protection would be perfect?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Cornwallis_(1901)

Experienced British Warship, at sea. Sunk. While very early in the war, the British Navy would have sent out warships with no escorts, this pattern largely stopped after the live bait squadron died. Below is list of warships sunk.

http://uboat.net/wwi/ships_hit/warships.html?sort_by=date
 

BlondieBC

Banned
The problem with any new military technology whether it is gunpowder, the breech loading rifle, the machine gun, or the jet engine is that conservative elements always refuse to acknowledge the value of it until it has been proven in combat. Prior to 1914 U boats were seen as defensive weapons meant to guard a port or coastline in tandem with torpedo boats. All naval theory at this time was focused on the dreadnaught and ships of the line. Not only were they viewed as the key to any naval war they were also symbols of national pride.

Any admiral who would suggest not building battleships and instead concentrating on hundreds of tiny little U boats is not only going to get thrown out of the navy he will likely be brought to an asylum.

As for the wolf pack tactics no one came up with them during the entire war. To think this will be the established naval doctrine when no one is even thinking of them in terms of blockade and interdiction is just not realistic.

The best you could hope for is that German concerns for the defense of their coast and the colonies lead them to shift more funds away from large ships to cheaper more economic vessels.

A lot of what you say is true. The best description, and one used before the war, for U-boats is "daytime torpedo boats". So any task a PT boat in WW2 would be seen as good for, a U-boat would do that role. And your first paragraph was the dominant strain of naval thought, it was not the only. There are prewar authors who believed U-boats would dominate seas within 200 miles of fortified ports and authors who saw the merchant raiding potential. The carriers of the USN are a similar item today. USN states they are very effective, but there are people with credentials who have called them "floating death traps".

You overstate your case on the insane asylum. It would be a bad career move, but there are examples such as the French naval leader who was so pro-submarine, whose name eludes me now. Some types of justifications would be:

1) Costs. For example, you get 25 U-boats for a dreadnought price and crew. Which is better at defending the Colonial empire, on BB or two squadrons of U-boats. It is possible for even someone like the RN or RN of Australia to make that decision.

2) More for port defense. Just one example, the Germans had 144 "night time torpedo boats", so an argument for 144 (not 50) "day time torpedo boats" could be made. Based on RN doctrine at the time, I am not even sure the UK would have responded to a plan for 100-150 U-boats. When I did the TL, I concluded they would not. This is why when i moved the U-boats to African ports, there was no reaction from the British. The reasons I went with 40ish, not 140ish U-boat was partly to avoid dealing with Budget butterflies, but mostly I wanted a multi-year war, and 150 U-boats with experience crews with the right doctrine would have begun to collapse the British Empire within months. For example, with that many U-boats, I have doubts the BEF could have made it into France. Based on British performance at the time, Britain would be losing 1 million tons of shipping per month on a sustained basis, and the first month could be as high as 2-3 million. Also, if there was a surface engagement in the first weeks of the war, the RN would likely lose a majority of its surface ships. It was not what I wanted to explore with my TL

3) More ports to defend - This is what I went with, I chose to defend 3 of the 5 colonial ports. If I had wanted to defend all 5 with 2 squadrons each plus the historical NS/Baltic numbers, I would have needed 168 U-boats, and to be more realistic with 6+ squadrons in the German waters would be near 200. And from an RN perspective, it would not have been alarming and might have even made the RN feel safer, especially if Germany has 3-6 fewer dreadnoughts.

On the Wolf Pack, your statement is incorrect. There were cases where U-boat captains cooperated and communicated. There are prewar books talking about wolf pack tactics for port defense and the related communication issues. The main holdup in the war was not enough U-boats and no convoy's. As long as there are enough unprotected merchant ships out their, why go after the hard stuff? It was well into 1918 before the convoy system was fully implemented.

On the best one could hope for is this. They German Navy has 100+ U-boats. On about August 9, 1914, there is full sortie of the U-boats and the High Seas Fleet. The U-boats find the Grand fleet about the same time the Grand Fleet figures out the the High Seas Fleet is at sea. In a running 40 hour battle, the Grand Fleet lose over 40 capital ships and over 60,000 dead. The High Seas Fleet loses 20% of its capital ships and most of the rest are damaged. After the battle, the U-boats with torpedoes blockade the French coast preventing the BEF from land and sinking 1 million tons of shipping between August 10 and Sept 10, 1914. The German Army still fails to take Paris, but without the BEF holds the Marne and wins the race to the sea. The Kaiser issues what he considers moderate, but the Entente consider a harsh peace offer. Due to public fear of England being conquered, the British make peace in November 1914. A few weeks later, France make peace. The terms are harsh but provide a fig leaf of dignity for the UK. I.E. Belgium is technically neutral and gets some "reparations". France only lose 1/2 of the land conquered by German. German does not have a channel coast. German accepts these terms due to the pressing need to deal with Russia in the east. In January 1915, Germany launches an attack with the bulk of its army, and by late Summer, the Tsar makes peace.

Now this has everything going right for the Germans, but that is what a best you could hope for scenario means.
 
Top