WI U-boats sink 20% more Allied tonnage in 1941-43

Anaxagoras

Banned
Suppose that the German U-boat campaign is rather more successful than IOTL, resulting in 20% more Allied merchant ship tonnage being sunk. How much does this delay Operation Torch and the Allied buildup for other campaigns? How might this affect Lend-Lease supplies to the USSR?

POD? I guess they just get lucky.
 
There's a limit to how lucky you can be, and I think 20% is beyond it, so you're somehow going to need to squeeze out some extra U-boats somewhere.
 
If they start to sink 20 percent more in 1941, that just motivates the Brits to reorder their priorities and put the war against the U-boats first over strategic bombing. They might end up defeating the U-boats six months or more earlier than in OTL.
 
If they start to sink 20 percent more in 1941, that just motivates the Brits to reorder their priorities and put the war against the U-boats first over strategic bombing. They might end up defeating the U-boats six months or more earlier than in OTL.

Oh, be realistic...

Harris would rather bomb Coastal Command to oblivion than let them use HIS toys ;)


20% is a lot, but some options spring to mind (w/out checking details):
- Defective torpedoes, catching that earlier would help in the first Happy Time
- Wasn't there something about switching production to newer types of uboats being unnecessarily delayed
- earlier introduction of schnorkel ?
- IIRC Dönitz insisted on uboats crossing the Bay of Biscay surfaced at night rather than submerged, which cost quite at few uboats
- ENIGMA could definitely have been handled better, either for wehrmacht in general or just for the KM (use one time pads for obvious targets such as weatherships, have a plan for handling enigma material & data in case of sinking rather than each crew having to make it up on the spot, follow through when it looks like enigma could be broken...)

I'm sure there are others, but whether you get 20% is another matter.
 
ENIGMA could definitely have been handled better, either for wehrmacht in general or just for the KM (use one time pads for obvious targets such as weatherships, have a plan for handling enigma material & data in case of sinking rather than each crew having to make it up on the spot, follow through when it looks like enigma could be broken...)

A potentially high impact POD: the Wehrmacht, Kriegsmarine and Luftwaffe decide to synchronize in a very teutonic way the rotor changes.

IOTL changes happend staggered way so at Bletchely Park they were never confronted with a traffic wholly encoded with new rotors; this enabled the cryptographer to use decoded traffic as a hint to messages encoded with the new rotors, helping decryption.

With the POD all of a sudden ULTRA stops providing intelligence for weeks if not months. If the time the cryptographers take to go back into business is comparable to the cycle time of the german changes, ULTRA is in deep trouble.
 
The problem is, changing all the rotors at once means sending some boats out with the new rotors, and then ordering them not to use them for a period, which having made a close study of the subject, I can't be sure would even be possible, unless you sent some boats out with two different machines. Also, if they think the codes are still safe, then what's the point of scrwing around with the crews like that?
 

BlondieBC

Banned
The problem is, changing all the rotors at once means sending some boats out with the new rotors, and then ordering them not to use them for a period, which having made a close study of the subject, I can't be sure would even be possible, unless you sent some boats out with two different machines. Also, if they think the codes are still safe, then what's the point of scrwing around with the crews like that?

You basically have to build two sets of machines. You send out all boats with two machines. Once all the boats with one machine that you expect to return to port have, you have a blackout period (24 hours), then go on the new codes.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
Suppose that the German U-boat campaign is rather more successful than IOTL, resulting in 20% more Allied merchant ship tonnage being sunk. How much does this delay Operation Torch and the Allied buildup for other campaigns? How might this affect Lend-Lease supplies to the USSR?

POD? I guess they just get lucky.

Seems like Torch ran from the USA direct, so it still happens. In WW2, you "German do better butterflies" often end up in the Pacific. This will be a good example. At this time, the Navy was fighting for the right to begin the Solomons campaign. Higher losses will probably mean you cancel Guadalcanal more than delay Torch.

Now the Russians probably do lose 20% of lend lease, with a hard to quantify effect, but it is positive for Germans in noticeable way. Some attacks will be canceled or delayed.

Bomber loses were high. Bombing campaigns are supply intensive compared to sitting on the English coast with infantry training. More Bomber pauses.

Net/net: War last a few months longer. Germans still lose. Pacific gets a much bigger delay for a while, then it a rapid acceleration to catch up as the hoard of new ships appear.
 
If they start to sink 20 percent more in 1941, that just motivates the Brits to reorder their priorities and put the war against the U-boats first over strategic bombing. They might end up defeating the U-boats six months or more earlier than in OTL.

This. And let me add that in order to achieve an overall 20% better over three years (1941-43), since there will be in any case a decrease over time, the Germans would need to do something like 40% more (!!) in the first year.
 
20% could be achieved through:

1) Torpedo issues fixed earlier.
2) Germans came up OTL with topedos that could do turns and zig zags, but after their main sucess time, perhaps this could happen a year or two earlier.
3) When Goering was on Winter holiday 40-41 the Navy managed to get operational control over the FW Condors for a while, maybe this lasts longer in this TL.
4) Any better Navy recon aircraft would help, Wilking has about a score of time lines on this for reference.

But assuming you got 20%. What would be the effects:

Most of Allied shipping is being used to do bulk imports into Britain, ultimately there is probably just going to be a decrease of British production. Most likely effecting the long term build up of forces in Britain.

Torch and Lend Lease are just too important not to do, both practically and politically. If the Allies have to give up something it should be in the Pacific or just slow the Allied build up in Africa after Torch or delay El Aliamen.

Torch gets you a lot, even if the push into Tunisia is delayed, if Torch was delayed by a couple of months, German forces like the 1st SS Panzer which was used to help occupy southern france might be in reserve on the Eastern front which could change things with Stalingrad or the attempted rescue attempt.
 

Deleted member 1487

20% could be achieved through:

1) Torpedo issues fixed earlier.
This is huge; the dud rate probably saved much more than 20% in the first three years. Had the Kriegsmarine spent as much as they did on battleship gunnery research on torpedoes and had fully functional and improved torpedoes in 1939 British shipping loss rates would have been catastrophic until about 1942. Of course it would have been far more than just the merchant shipping lost, rather the warships lost would have horrific:
http://uboat.net/articles/23.html

Nevertheless, on September 17 Kapitänleutenant Glattes of U-39 spotted the HMS Ark Royal in his patrol area and was able to close in on her unnoticed. And there occurred the first major disappointment of the U-boat war. Glattes fired a salvo of three torpedoes with magnetic pistols at the carrier, all of which exploded prematurely. Worse yet, the failed attack revealed the boat's position to the escort and the destroyers quickly sank U-39. The crew, fortunately, was saved.

The Admiral was proven once again correct. On October 30th Kapitänleutnant Wilhelm Zahn of U-56 sighted in his area a truly juicy formation: the battleships Rodney, Nelson, the battle cruiser Hood (later blasted by the Bismarck) and a dozen destroyers. With great daring and skill, Zahn eluded the destroyer screen and struck Nelson with a salvo of three. The impact pistol torpedoes clearly slammed against the ship's hull and…simply fell apart. The commander was so depressed by this misfortune for which he was not to blame in the least that Dönitz took him off active duty for a while.

. Consequently, he was proven right when late on April 15 Gunther Prien of U-47 arrived at Bydgenfjord and spotted three large British transports (some 30,000 GRT each) and several smaller ones disembarking troops in fishing boats. Immediately the Raging Bull fired 8 torpedoes with impact pistols at the stationary and overlapping targets, but all of them missed. This could have been a major disaster for the BEF and a valuable help for the outnumbered mountain troops defending Narvik.

The previous day, Kapitänleutnant Herbert Schultze of U-48 (the boat that was to become the most successful vessel of the Kriegsmarine with 312,000 tons sunk over almost 6 years) had attacked the Jutland-veteran battleship Warspite without success near Westfjord.

Again on April 19th Gunther Prien closed in on the Warspite and lobbed in a salvo of two. Those, too, were failures, which robbed the Kriegsmarine of a much-needed respite. The second stage of Operation Hartmuth was hardly going well, with British troops closing in on Narvik and the Royal Navy inflicting heavy losses on German warships as well as on troop and supply freighters.

The next day Prien sighted a convoy south-west of Westfjord, but refrained from attacking because he had lost all faith in his torpedoes. Upon his return he was so infuriated that the told Dönitz: "Herr Admiral, I could hardly be expected to fight with a dummy rifle" (89).

Later into the war, in an analysis of torpedo performance in the period January-June 1942 (Paukenschlag and the apex of U-boat activity in American waters - the richest single harvest of the whole war), it was estimated that only 40% of the ships had been sunk by a single torpedo during that period, while the rest had either required two or more, or had escaped after one or multiple hits. In light of the more than two million tons of shipping actually sunk (a third were tankers), it is easy to imagine what could have been the outcome had the U-boats been armed with the weapon they really needed.

http://www.uboataces.com/articles-wooden-torpedoes.shtml
As 1939 drew to a close, at least 25 percent of all shots fired had been torpedo failures.


As expected, the Norwegian seas were filled with Allied ships. Almost immediately, the U-boats began attacking. Every day and every hour, U-boats were attacking warships or were being attacked themselves. Day in, day out, night after night, the U-boats fired their torpedoes one after another, relentlessly against their targets. Not one of them exploded. Their efforts remained completely fruitless. Worse yet, when the data was analyzed back at BdU, it was found that four attacks were launched on the battleship HMS Warsprite, fourteen on cruisers, ten on destroyers, and a further ten on transports – yet only one transport was sunk. Discounting marginal attacks, Donitz concluded that had the torpedoes not failed, the U-boats would have “probable sinkings” of one battleship, seven cruisers, seven destroyers, and five transports. In summary, about twenty enemy warships had escaped certain destruction because of torpedo failures.

PDF warning:
http://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1599&context=etd

But assuming you got 20%. What would be the effects:

Most of Allied shipping is being used to do bulk imports into Britain, ultimately there is probably just going to be a decrease of British production. Most likely effecting the long term build up of forces in Britain.

Torch and Lend Lease are just too important not to do, both practically and politically. If the Allies have to give up something it should be in the Pacific or just slow the Allied build up in Africa after Torch or delay El Aliamen.

Torch gets you a lot, even if the push into Tunisia is delayed, if Torch was delayed by a couple of months, German forces like the 1st SS Panzer which was used to help occupy southern france might be in reserve on the Eastern front which could change things with Stalingrad or the attempted rescue attempt.
The 1939-41 years would be very hard with more sinkings like this. Britain is probably prevented in taking a lot of offensive action as a result, such as in Greece or North Africa (I don't think they would delay too much on the East Africa campaign, as those resources mainly came from India).

Torch might well be delayed here, as Paukenschlag did really hurt Allied shipping, which caused them to delay some of their ops in the Pacific; with heavy losses early on due to no torpedo crisis, things get much hairier in terms of time tables, as there will have been very valuable warship losses/cripplings. A 40% or more loss rate on top of the OTL losses in 1939-41 would get exacerbated by a more effective Paukenschlag as having functional torpedoes at the start of 1942 would have made that even more effective, which doesn't even count the potential of having better naval recon. Torch can easily be delayed into 1943 in this case, while LL to the Soviets is badly curtailed to shore up British shipping. Frankly though I think this goes well beyond what the OP was looking for, as loss rates would well exceed the 20% extra rate stipulated from 1939-42.

The build up for Normandy would be delayed too, which would seriously impact the situation in Europe come 1945. Even the Italian invasion/exit from the war would be delayed by this, not to mention the fighting Asia would probably take longer too. 1943 on the Eastern Front would affected somewhat, especially as the Allied bomber offensive would be diverted to going after Uboat production and bases well into 1943 to make sure the Battle of the Atlantic is won, but it will be weaker as a result of attenuated supply to Britain due to the huge extra shipping losses. So the bomber offensive as we know it could potentially take an extra year to build up a head of steam due to the supply situation in the Atlantic. That has all sorts of butterflies.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You basically have to build two sets of machines. You send out all boats with two machines. Once all the boats with one machine that you expect to return to port have, you have a blackout period (24 hours), then go on the new codes.
But again, this requires you to know the codes are being broken, and the Germans plain-out didn't.
 
Sorry to repeat the obvious.
The Germans achieve a 20% increase in the success rates and the enemy does...
nothing. A classic.
 

GarethC

Donor
Sorry to repeat the obvious.
The Germans achieve a 20% increase in the success rates and the enemy does...
nothing. A classic.
Front-load the loss increase by assuming that all the improvements that can happen do so in Jan 1941, then work out the Allied response - which probably curbstomps the u-boat force so much that there may not be a Second Happy Time a year later.

Alternatively, assume that Doenitz winds down u-boat ops in mid-1941, so that Paukenschlag has significantly more forces assigned to it and that's where the loss increase happens - and then figure out what the Allies do.

Though yes, as with many threads on AH it starts with a butterfly instead of a POD, and asks for consequences, without examining the viability of the butterfly, which is not the best way to go about things. A better approach would be "here's a butterfly - what POD(s) would get it to come about" or "here's a single POD, what could happen next?"
 
Bomber Command gets less aircraft and more is done to provide air cover for the convoys sooner.
 
Whilst the Battle of Atlantic isn't really my speciality it does seem like 20% is something of a stretch. I do remember reading a scenario where Enigma remains in cracked and basically everything goes in the KM's favour, North Africa takes a lot longer to finish up, no invasion of Italy or France leaves the Soviets effectively fighting the war themselves. By August 6 1945 they still aren't in Germany when the sun rises for a second time over Berlin.
 

Rubicon

Banned
Sorry to repeat the obvious.
The Germans achieve a 20% increase in the success rates and the enemy does...
nothing. A classic.

And always followed by posters claiming that the UK would immidietly and effectivly enacts countermeasures that not only nullifies the German actions but also shorten the war with a couple of years :rolleyes:


Bomber Command gets less aircraft and more is done to provide air cover for the convoys sooner.

Like this one. If that fails they always inevitably bring up Anthrax. Or the A-bomb

By August 6 1945 they still aren't in Germany when the sun rises for a second time over Berlin.
 
Top