Submarine Warfare WW1 vs WW2 - Differences & Commonalities

A comprehensive view that compares the Submarine Warfare in the First and Second World War. Due to the lack of a submarine warfare in the Pacific in World War 1, the Pacific isn't covered at all, but there will be an episode on it in the future.
Military History Visualized provides a series of short narrative and visual presentations like documentaries based on academic literature or sometimes primary sources. Videos are intended as introduction to military history, but also contain a lot of details for history buffs. Since the aim is to keep the episodes short and comprehensive some details are often cut.
» HOW YOU CAN SUPPORT MILITARY HISTORY VISUALIZED «
(A) You can support my channel on Patreon: / mhv
(B) Alternatively, you can also buy "Spoils of War" (merchandise) in my online shop: www.redbubble.com/people/mhvi...
» SOCIAL MEDIA LINKS «
facebook: / milhistoryvisualized
twitter: / milhivisualized
tumblr: / militaryhistoryvisualized
» SOURCES & LINKS «
Milner, Marc: The Atlantic War, 1939-1945; in: Cambridge History of the Second World War, Volume 1
Blair, Clay: Hitler’s U-Boat War - The Hunters 1939-1942
Owen, David: Anti-Submarine Warfare - An Illustrated History
Germany & The Second World War - Volume VI
Germany & The Second World War - Volume II
Breemer, Jan S.: Defeating the U-boat. Inventing Antisubmarine Warfare. Naval War College Newport Papers 36
www.usnwc.edu/getattachment/e...
Das Deutsche Reich und der Zweite Weltkrieg - Band VI.
Das Deutsche Reich und der Zweite Weltkrieg - Band II.
Rahn, Werner: Die Deutsche Seekriegsfürung 1943 bis 1945; in: Das Deutsche Reich & der Zweite Weltkrieg, Band X/1, S. 3-276
Erster Weltkrieg - Zweiter Weltkrieg: Ein Vergleich.
U-boat losses by cause
web.archive.org/web/201006112...
Differences German U-Boat Design WW1 vs. WW2
/ german_uboats_from_wwi...
» CREDITS & SPECIAL THX «
Song: Ethan Meixsell - Demilitarized Zone

[@oatka01]

(Long Story) I was a sonar operator in the 1951-54 navy, serving on the WWII diesel boats (SS245 and SS382). We had both active (W2) and passive (JT) sonar. The JT gear was extremely sensitive. In war games, headquarters would only tell us that there was a convoy, approx bearing such and such and we had to take it from there. I'd sweep the general direction and at some point would hear a very faint "pssst" over a small span of bearing (maybe 5 degrees), report it, and we'd head that way. After about an hour the width of the static band was 15-20 degrees and loud. We'd go to battle stations then. I would head a "thud", "thud", "thud" and dialed the MgHz spectrum, report the reading, which the book said was emitted by an XYZ class destroyer. They were still MILES away. We'd run on the surface until we were ahead of the convoy and then dive to 150 feet and wait. I could hear the screws quite plainly and would give a beat count, which the book would confirm the earlier ID as XYZ class destroyers. They usually formed a "V" in front of the convoy with a few on each side. We'd wait until the cans passed overhead, then would pop up and take out the oilers, and on one occasion, a carrier. We came so close to the carrier that it's cavitation sucked us up 20-30 feet or so. We'd fire a red flare indicating we fired a fish and the umpires would then figure out if it was a hit or not. That carrier reported that the flare we fired landed on it's flight deck, so they couldn't argue that we missed. Very rarely, when on the W2 gear, before firing a fish, I would be ordered to take one ping to confirm the range that the Torpedo Data Computer reported. I loved the old fleet boats, they rode nicely in heavy seas, with the flared bow pushing the water away from the deck. I'd be on lookout up in the shears and come off watch dry as a bone. The 382 boat was converted to a streamlined GUPPY (snorkel) boat and was wetter than Hell. You'd come off watch soaked to the skin. Also, when snorkeling, the waves would slosh across the intake valve and the diesels would suck the air out of the boat, so there was a constant pressure change. Pure Hell if you had a cold. One time they lost control of the bowplanes on a high-speed run and the diesels sucked enough air out to shut them down. A lot of us had colds that trip and I couldn't equalize as I was all stuffed up. Lost my high frequency hearing due to that. Have become pretty adept at lip-reading. :-)

[@Leo137156]

Great story, thanks for sharing it Sir.

[@sticcckkko7480]

Wow cool story I been fascinated by submarines since I was a little kid. Know alot about them I'm no expert of course but I wouldve never thought the engine would suck enough air that fast to create enough of a pressure change to fuck with you sinuses n shit but now that you mention it. That makes sense. Thanks for your service. My uncle Mike Stephens was a submariner probably around that time I think or a little after maybe like in the 60s or 70s didn't know him that well bh it he was about old enough to be my dads dad. My dad was the youngest of my grandparents kids and my gpa was pfc in the army. GPA on my moms side was airforce. When I was a kid I wanted to be a submariner but my life took a different path. I still have dreams I'm a mechanic on uboats I know wrong side lol and in them I can speak german.. weird because I cannot speak german at all but in my dreams I am speaking and understanding fluent German. It's hard to explain but that's what's happening ha. Idk cool story tho man.

[@MrMaffy96]

The sword against the baguette. Another like gained

[@MrMaffy96]

I would give you another like for the Monty Python reference

[@vonneely1977]

Actually, if you've ever tried to eat a stale French baguette... I'd give it good odds against a sword.

[@MrMaffy96]

Von Neely I have one right here now, I can kill a person by hitting his head with it

[@Formulka]

"Monty Python Doctrine" :D

[@MaxRavenclaw]

SPAM! SPAM! SPAM! SPAM! SHUT UP!

[@pnutz_2]

also note the source

[@Hebdomad7]

And another victory for the Vikings!

[@tru8637]

Well known for Bravely Running Away tactics.

[@pekkamustonen6654]

Yep. Likewise I was totally "WTF" for couple seconds. :D

[@robo336]

fun fact: dubstep was invented when an american sonar operator grew a liking to the sound of depth charge explosions.

[@MB-tb6jy]

robo336 thought it was some Jamaican sound engineer trying to play Mozart with dub music

[@neurofiedyamato8763]

I thought dubstep originated from a corrupted computer sound file of a machinegun firing. I heard it ended up causing a lot of window errors. The guy apparently enjoyed the sound and used it as music.

[@dereenaldoambun9158]

robo336 I thought dubstep was born when a group of underground artists make a secret party in 1990.

[@nootnootpenguino8586]

@@MB-tb6jy r/woosh

[@TH-wm5cu]

"...great great grand father of a War Thunder player" 😂

[@shawnjay615]

Instablaster

[@bobmcdonald1627]

wtf

[@hurivojeafrakovic3684]

Luftwaffe Recon Ltd. Thank you for inspiring me for my new company name. 7:15

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

;)

[@dariusniederer856]

Military History Visualized omg he replied.

[@IonoTheFanatics]

something Silent Hunter players can relate... early war aircraft??? nuisance... heck if you are feeling brave you can try and shoot them down with the deck AA without too much risk. late war??? you detect radar signal coming from somewhere and maybe u hear the dreaded engine drone??? CRASH DIVE!!! then pray.... heck usually you don't even bother checking with periscope because if they by chance see the periscope they'll depth charge you, and if they do enough damage then ur forced to surface... then the plane's buddy will swarm the area and you will be ripped to pieces in short order... so in late war if you are not on electric boat, and have the misfortune of still sailing on the older sub ... you sail on surface constantly in fear that a plane might just come out of nowhere and blow you to smitheren, and every time you detect a radar signal... you just crash dive because u never know if it's coming from an aircraft that is inbound in just minutes... in early war they are annoying mosquitos... in late war they are god damn piranhas sniffing for your blood...

[@starguy321]

Iono Sama in the early war you can also get into ports and wreck everyone (most of my sunk ships were in ports) whereas if you go near the British isles in the late war you get jumped by 100,000 planes at once, each dropping atomic bombs

[@dariusniederer856]

Are you the real Iono Sama?

[@JonTTu111]

I don't even bother diving if it is a swordfish. My men would need some action for sailing a month without any good action (Some coastal freighters and few ASW Steamboats sunk, but they were trivial.) Just a short burst on that plane and it goes down. Allisons aren't that bad either, but they'll have kinda nasty bite. I avoid them if possible. When Beaufighters come to the playing field, then it is a crash diving time. And I remember hunting some convoy, but never found it. i found a aircraft carrier only escorted by two Black Swan class boats. Took care of the escorts with a single attack and that carrier was a piece of cake. Well it ate like four torpedoes, but was still going. Had to give her two more to finally see her sinking enough to confirm that she would go to down.

[@JonTTu111]

@Jonathan Stiles Cold Waters is easy in that 86 campaign. At least if you take the LA class big boat. That 68 campaign is a bit harder, because you see a lot of diesel subs and they can't see you and you can't see them. Had many missions where I did sunk like a whole fleet of surface ships and never saw the two diesel subs. They were probably the reason why some random torps came from odd direction. China campaign is hardest of them all, even with a seawolf, because you can't use the thermal layers effectively because shallow waters. If you can intercept something in deep waters, you can pretty much just yolo without any real threat.

[@JonTTu111]

​@Jonathan Stiles Yea, I like the challenge. Diesel-electric subs are pretty hard to pick up, unless AI does something stupid, like diving at 20kt in 50ft depth. Nuclear subs are a lot louder than diesel-electric ones, because they run a pump to cool down the reactor. Electric ones run with batteries and are extremely silent if they move like 5kt speeds. If sea is bit rough and ambient voice is something like 100dB you really don't hear the electric boats unless they are pretty much in next to you. As for fighting ASW surface ships, there really isn't much you can do when they spot you. Try to pick up many of the surface ships as possible and fire your torps like from 80% of their max range. usually it is good to shoot torps at bit shallow depth and then silently dive and slip far as possible, before they spot your torps. If you turn 90 degrees after launching torps it lessens the change that enemy will get a lock on you when they fire their torps behind yours.

[@BaldPolishBiotechnol]

Great video. The broken baguette at 2:00 was hilarious...

[@cristians3446]

Love your channel, man. Professional, balanced, educational and interesting!

[@M2quared]

Keep up the good work! Avid watcher here. Love the subtle humor you weave into these too. The little creative umlauts and subliminal flashes make me smile while I learn. Kudos!

[@MrEvan312]

I very much enjoy your videos, very informative and interesting for such a brief format. Also, you have a wonderful accent and a natural teaching tone. I'll be on Patreon momentarily.

[@teethirtyfour7394]

Great video, you are great at researching this stuff and sharing it with us!

[@theDarkness558]

love your channel, have great content for warfare fans. keep up the good work, dude.

[@camiloparada9529]

thanks for these, i really enjoy the way you present information

[@Prometosermejor]

I think that without any doubt, this is your best video. Congrats!

[@christianlibertarian5488]

Outstanding video! More info here than I have ever seen anywhere else. Kudos!

[@jamesmonahan1819]

I like the accurate information and the little pictographs. Especially the sneak attack pictograph.

[@tomvobbe9538]

At 4:40 and 5:20. I really love the complexity of tactical warfare. Who would have ever think that more boat= better. Simply Genius.

[@Tommy-5684]

thankyou this was the subject of my undergraduate dissertation so i have a passion for u-boat warfare in both warfare so im glad you finally decided to cover the U-boat wars

[@andyz6994]

Anything you can add to the topic? I've become interested recently in the capablities of submarine warfare in modern warfare

[@sfsfinancing3299]

Quality presentation. You obviously did your research. Thanks.

[@piercegalactic]

This video earned a subscription. Great work and thanks!!

[@jameswilliams1085]

Fascinating, thank you, really liked the graphs, they do put things into perspective.

[@filip1408]

Brilliant video as always!

[@alejandrobetancourt4902]

Really appreciate the longer videos you've been making recently.

[@DavidGarcia-oi5nt]

Yeee

[@gsahrens]

My Great-grandfather was a sailor inside a WW1 U-boot. Thanks for the video.

[@jackcoleman5955]

Excellent video, as always! Well researched! "Fast & Fuhrious" @ 17:54. HA!

[@sleeperawake9818]

Great topic! I noticed the info in most docs on WWI and WWII, about subs, is virtually the same.

[@cosairfps]

Superb video, great to finally get an overview and insight into submarine warfare :) Bigger warships next? :D

[@MrMaffy96]

I would like to know how big naval battles in ww2 worked, like how they managed to land a salvo on the enemy ship

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

a Warships 101 for WW2 is definitely planned. Also there will be an interesting book out by Lavery soon that could be great.

[@cosairfps]

Military History Visualized Glad to hear that, keep up the great work!

[@Ensign_Cthulhu]

"Naval Firepower" by Norman Friedman is an in-depth look at the evolution of surface to surface naval gunnery from the late 19th Century to the end of the Second World War. The hardcover version is expensive, but there are some paperback editions on Amazon going for under $30 right now. He also has a book on Naval Anti-Aircraft Gunnery.

[@Perichron]

"fall of france" sword crossed with a broken baguette... Now thats funny!

[@gilgamecha]

Very good discussion. Re the US Hunter Killer groups being more aggressive than the Royal Navy (RN), you may have overlooked the RN "Support Groups" which despite the name were similarly aggressive hunter killer groups and developed tactics to overcome some of the limitations you describe. For example cooperating vessels in radio communication would cover each other's short range ASDIC (sonar) gaps during depth charge attacks. You might also want to look at centimetre-band radar and aircraft searchlights which further step changes in the ability to counter submarines.

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

Be sure to check out my video on Wolfpack & U-Boat Tactics of WW2 here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/gpKZc4BpfdOIb5o about Escort Carriers / Hunter-Killer-Groups it should be US Navy *and Royal Navy*. Sadly, KZbin doesn't let me use "end cards" (which are great) and annotation together. So I have this comment for any corrections etc.

[@Novedazazel]

Nice video MHV, keep up the good work!

[@tobiasbengtsson2112]

Military History Visualized Love the video. Could you make a video about Swedens1600-1700 army ( the caroleans ) and their tactics

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

Sweden is definitely on the list, but I already got books on Prussian Infantry/Cavalry/Artillery and nothing on Sweden yet, also my earlier searches on this back in Hamburg weren't successful. Hence Prussia will probably be first. Also videos of eras and nation I know little take way longer, right now I have to focus on popular topics.

[@tobiasbengtsson2112]

Military History Visualized Im patient. As long as it will happen I don't really care whether it's tomorrow or 2018

[@99IronDuke]

Yes I just pointed this out above.

[@3550rebel]

Excellent work. I have been interested in the U-Boat wars since reading a book by John Terraine - Business in Great Waters - The U-Boat was 1916-1945.

[@MrMaffy96]

Keep up the good work!

[@ryancartwright7487]

great video, keep up the work

[@scottparis6355]

Excellent. Thank you. Do you have, or have you considered, a video on WWII submarine warfare (both sides) in the Pacific?

[@Anastunsia]

Look at your like ratio, Amazing. Thats how you can tell people appreciate the work an research you put into these videos.

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

thanks, yeah, but I can't live from appreciation alone that video took 27 hours and probably mainly due to a recent KZbin change got way less initial views than expected, as a result it gets less suggested by KZbin. Thus, from the business side it was probably the worst decision so far, maybe it will be a profit over time, but right now, it was a grave mistake. Sadly, it seems I have to focus on "easier" yet more popular topics or at least reduce the time on videos as these by a huge amount to prevent myself from burning out.

[@Anastunsia]

Yeah, it sucks. KZbin really needs to be something you do by passion these days. If i had the money id fund you, this info is hard to find and put together, and sometimes hard to understand in the first place. Especially when its in another language. well, ect ect. You're worth more than you receive

[@MarkoLomovic]

Honestly I think you need more videos like this hell make them even longer. Most creators fall into trap and try to make some deadlines or focus on doing easy stuff and then you lose core viewership. I mean there are tons of stuff that you can do that is way more fun to make and can generate more then *Insert generic title here".

[@jimtalbott9535]

I love how you show the defeat of France as a broken sword crossed with a broken baguette. Lol!

[@doobydoes4956]

Great video helped me a lot, thanks!!!

[@eloutcrasborn7149]

What a quality video. really liked it

[@0ld_Scratch]

great video! will you do one on modern submarines as well? I'm quiet interested in nuclear submarines

[@patriotsquill]

Fascinating video. Thanks for this. Feel smarter after watching this. Not something you can say about most KZbin videos.

[@fsmoura]

Great presentation!

[@socio-historian7337]

I would like to say that your video helped me a lot in writing my seminar about the impact of submarines on naval warfare. Too bad i can't cite you as a sorce because youtube is not considered a "valid academic site" but oh well. Thank you for this great video anyway.

[@BandB1111111]

Thank you for this excellent history. My Dad of 1st mate on a Liberty ship on Mermansk runs. His ship was torpedoed in the White Sea and towed to shore where it became a Russian fishing boat after the war and was scraped in the 70's.

[@zhubajie6940]

I may have missed it but the reason submarines near the convoy or escort ships could not be detected by sonar easily was that they were notoriously sensitive to the nearby interaction of the ships either carrying them or the convoy itself. Further away this signal noise dissipated so that detection was possible. Another discovery was made by Canadians was of sudden temperature changes (and hence density) caused false echoes or otherwise distorted the distance and bearings of the target because of changes in the speed of sound due to density.

[@_tyrannus]

I'm currently binge-watching your channel, excellent content that resonates a lot in a military history addict like me. Your formats and sourcing are an amazing sight on KZbin, where the expected patriotic bias too often ruins information for the sole sake of clickbaiting. o7

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

thank you!

[@BigboiiTone]

Thanks for watching

[@vigneshpandian3829]

wow I often wondered how the uboat losses were so high in ww2 .here comes the reason excellent job altogether

[@amerigo88]

This is one of the most accurate and informational MILITARY history videos I have seen online. To better understand "the Battle of the Atlantic (WWII)", a great book is THE THEORY THAT WOULD NOT DIE - How Bayes’ Rule Cracked the Enigma Code, Hunted Down Russian Submarines and Emerged Triumphant From Two Centuries of Controversy. There are a few chapters in it on solving Enigma and the birth of "Operations Research" that did so much to defeat the U-boat menace. It was OR that helped push the Royal Navy back to the convoy system, to more efficient submarine search patterns for maritime patrolling aircraft, and many other techniques. Note that fast passenger liners were allowed to run full speed, alone across the Atlantic all through WWII and none were sunk. I know a LOT about the Battle of the Atlantic and kept waiting for you to miss a major issue that I would point out in the comments, but you didn't miss ANY of the pure military issues. HOWEVER, a POLITICAL comparison of submarine warfare between WWI and WWII was the risk that the U-boats would bring the USA into World War I and then into World War II. The Kaiser would allow and then disallow "unrestricted submarine warfare" based largely on the political tides in the USA during WWI. Ultimately, the shipping losses, the Zimmerman Telegram, and plenty of Allied propaganda brought the USA in very soon after Woodrow Wilson's ironic slogan "He kept us out of war" reelection campaign. He was sworn into office in March 1917 and had Congress declare war in early April of 1917. So much for the slogan. In WWII, Roosevelt did about all he could to get American warships and military aircraft into the Battle of the Atlantic, even getting the destroyer USS Reuben James sunk by a U-boat. I don't recall Hitler putting the brakes on "unrestricted submarine warfare" other than a western boundary to stay clear of American territorial waters until Pearl Harbor. The Kaiser was far more prudent than Hitler about getting the USA into the war. Hitler's army had just stalled out and was freezing near the gates of Moscow in early December 1941. Britain was impregnable behind the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force, and Germany was under no obligation to support Japan after Pearl Harbor, yet the maniac declared war on the United States! After breaking the French weenie's baguette, Hitler was like a drunken midget in a biker bar spitting on every guy there over six feet tall (UK, USSR, then USA)! They eventually pummeled him of course. Beating Poland, Denmark, and France did not equate to beating the UK, USSR, and the USA. President Roosevelt's team of advisors quickly committed to their "Germany first strategy", but Roosevelt's hands were tied until Hitler declared war. Congress had only declared war on Japan, not Germany or Italy. Hitler definitely brought on his own downfall.

[@deaks25]

Great video, really interesting subject.

[@maconescotland8996]

The submarine was most effective attacking at night on the surface (when and where possible), then using its underwater capability to escape, preferrably undetected. When radar became available to naval escort ships relatively early in WW2 this tactic quickly became outdated.

[@martincotterill823]

great analysis

[@ldmitruk]

Another great episode. Love the humour included. Also do you do your own graphics for the icons?

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

thx, yes.

[@tomvobbe9538]

There was no humor that's just how the man speaks.

[@Asdayasman]

@@tomvobbe9538 There was humour. Did you miss the part about War Thunder?

[@Callsigngrizzly]

The Fast and Furherious at 17:30 had me in stitches hahaha

[@Green0-3]

One recommendation. Whenever you include a long citation, see if you can highlight the most important parts of it on the screen, if possible in a dynamic fashion as you read it. That way, if we want to pause the video and reread, we can easily go back to the bits that matter the most.

[@SuperMadman41]

Good vid . Very well researched & presented. I grew up in a city with an extensive naval tradition so I have lot interest in this subject plus museum based information . A Canadian fan . P.S. the city is Victoria BC . Pacific fleet base Esquimalt

[@majorborngusfluunduch8694]

One weakness of early active sonar not covered here was that you could only ping on a single bearing and had to maintain that bearing to hear the return. It wasn't until later on that it was possible to scan an entire arc like you would imagine active sonar doing.

[@MorroTreece]

Always love the little humor tid bits.

[@alexanderbenkendorf688]

Gotta love the Monthy Python and War Thunder references! P.S. If you occasionally do play WT what is your Id there? :))

[@ccaptorchen]

Hello =) military History visualize, big fan.. Im really interested on how effective anti aircraft guns was in WWII? and what tactics did they use? could you make a video about that?

[@avalonangeloflight]

i swear on my British infantry division i flames of war your videos are getting better and better

[@LawatheMEid]

I like PC game called: Silent Hunter, about submarines campaigns in WWII

[@niume7468]

Especcialy Sielnt hunter III or Silent hunter IV with operation monsun mod its excellent

[@ilmari132]

Silent hunter III has GWX which makes it a lot better.

[@Scythl]

Try Cold Waters, its pretty cool too, recently released. It isn't world war 2 however, there is a 1968 campaign and a 1984 campaign I believe but am probably wrong, somewhere around that though.

[@HaloFTW55]

Too bad the series is now dormant.

[@theprezydent6250]

Artyom Liu that’s Ubisoft’s fault for ending this amazing series. Same thing happened to Rayman and Heroes of Might an Magic. All of these were my favorites and now they’re gone because I don’t count mobile games aimed for Chinese market as games I would ever check out. :(

[@xxxoof_lordxxx2655]

Hey Military History Visualized, I love the channel. I'd like to ask: What program are you using for your awesome info-graphics? Thank you.

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

PowerPoint 2015 and earlier 2013, my PowerPoint Channel: kzbin.info/door/pRuyypmcZCetQHittuPkFw

[@Ensign_Cthulhu]

17:46 - Fast and Fuhrious. LOL no, not in that war; he was in the _Army_ then. :D 23:30 The other thing about the first vs second world war is that in WW1 the Allies did not have the ability to interdict German industry with air power in the same manner as in WW2. It would be fascinating to see research which looked at or attempted to calculate the proportion of U boats that were "destroyed" because of lost construction time after factory bombings or raw resource denial (e.g. how many more could they have built if the bombings had not happened?) and/or straight-out destruction of unfinished hulls. I can recommend "Atlantic Escorts" by David K Brown for a Second World War account from the escort vessels' perspective. An English-language account looking at the evolution of U boat technology would be a valuable thing - can anyone recommend anything?

[@Ensign_Cthulhu]

Riceball01 He had some really way-out plans for huge battleships, e.g. Super-Bismarcks with 16 or even 20 inch guns and "unsinkable" levels of protection that would have been bigger and heavier than the Yamato, but they got no further than design studies. You get to a point eventually where the ship becomes too big for its own good; the Yamato class were probably the pinnacle of big-gun ship development in purely structural terms (Musashi absorbed some incredibly high number of hits before sinking).

[@folterknecht1768]

These outlandish plans and other wrong assumptions (surface fleet) was what prevented Dönitz from "winning" the U-Boot war, when it was still possible according to him. 1) Dry docks ware build (huge) and 1-2 keels were even laid down for the Z-Ships (Super Battleships) 2) Dönitz was of the opinion that with 300 operational UBoots (Type VII C and IX D) he could have won the Atlantic War in 1939-41. And he also asked for this number "long" before the war started. What he got was around 100 operational boats, a big part so called "Einbäume" only suitable for coastal operation. Only after seeing the early successes (and the losses of the big ships) of the U-Boots did german strategy shift from surface to submerged vessels. But by the time Dönitz became not only Kommandant der U-Boote but Chef der Kriegsmarine (Navy boss) and the shift happend, it was already to late to win the war in the Atlantic despite increased efforts to produce U-Boots. An other aspect worth mentioning is that the german Superboote of 44/45 (Type XXI) had a comparable fate as the german atom programm and the Me-262. First ideas and drafts for them were made long before serious work started, because they weren't deemed "kriegsentscheidend" (relevant for the war effort) at the beginning of WWII. Serious attempts to get them into production came only when the tide had already turned. So what would have happend if Dönitz would have had 300 "Atlantik-Boote" at the start of WWII? We ll never know, but it isn't unlikely that Churchills greatest nightmare would have become reality and negotiations as Hitler wanted them in 40/41 would have started.

[@Riceball01]

Folterknecht Great information, I really don't know much about the Kriegsmarine during WW III and you helped fill in the many gaps in my knowledge of that area. So it's safe to say that the Kriegsmarine from some of the same nonsense about wunderwaffe that afflicted the rest of the Wehrmacht except that much of it wasn't actually produced unlike Hitler's dream of super tanks, and super planes.

[@folterknecht1768]

The topic of "Wunderwaffen" is complex and multi-layered - some where utter nonsense from a military standpoint (Panzerkampfwagen Maus, Bachem Natter) others were to far ahead of their time (Hortens america bomber, Walters H2O2 propulsion for Uboots only became reality in the late 1990 or early 2000s with the new german conventional submarine designs.) and others could have been decisive (or at least prolong the war - Me262/Ho 229 and the Type XXI), if implemented earlier and in sufficiant numbers. You have to look from case to case. Germany did have opportunities to "win" WWII up to '41-42 in Europe or at least reach a peace treaty, which would have made certain developments a total "what if". The term Wunderwaffen is a Goebbels product anyway. Their "inventors" and the military were more realistic when it came to judging their capabilities than Goebbels, though they also overestimated it from time to time or where to optimistic when it came to time tables. The Type XXI for example formed the foundation of many russian U-Boats types till the 50/60s (non nuclear). You can visit Wilhelm Bauer (U-2540), preserved as a museum ship at Bremerhaven.

[@oddballsok]

man, you won't believe all the nonsense Wunderwaffen the Kriegsmarine invented in WW III. I believe they even deployed UFO 's ? That's right ww 3.

[@Warmaker01]

One ping. One ping only, please!

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

:)

[@WorshipinIdols]

Warmaker01 “one ping, one ping ONLY! please!”

[@oatka01]

@Kelly Arthur In the early '50s wargaming, we did that on occasion, just before firing, to validate the range computed by our TDC (analog computer), which was sometimes off by a couple of hundred yards. This was with WWII gear.

[@zachmays1642]

fast & fuhrious, love it!

[@deadwolf2978]

would love to know your opinion on the use of torpedo boats in ww 1 and ww2. especially the german s-boats during the battle for Jutland.

[@henrikg1388]

It would be interesting if you could make a video about the Elektroboats that came in to service just as the war ended. Would it have been possible to put resources on this development at an earlier stage, and would it have made any difference. Thanks for an interesting video anyway.

[@rayanthonyarnaiz6485]

This video really showed some interesting info and points of view. Like the fact that for the u-boats to be successful they had to sink shipping, where as for the convoy defenders survival is more important rather than sinking subs. Which if you think about it really favors the defenders rather than the attackers. It gives more options to the defenders. But for the attackers, it puts more pressure on them. A lot of things have to go right for the sub to be successful and survive. As explained in the video. There is also the resource advantage that the defenders get over the attackers. Every successful convoy gives more resources to the defenders, with failure of course not getting them anything. For the attackers, success only denies resources to the defenders, not give them resources. In fact whether they succeed or not, the attackers will be using resources. So the only way for the attackers to win is to sink a lot of ships consistently. But as shown, is really a hard plan to follow. A long war of attrition seems to really favor the defenders rather than the attackers.

[@johnpatz8395]

Not sure how I haven't seen this until now but I have to say it's very well done, thank you for your hard work. While the ship tonnage lost is large, I've often look to see if there was a breakdown, even an incomplete one, of the amounts of cargo lost with those ships? For example X number of tanks, Y # of aircraft, Z tons of steel, etc...

[@cameronfrost5924]

You might enjoy an interesting kickstarter game 'Naval Battle in Archipeligo' that is on at the moment. I'm not trying to spam, it actually seems relevant for naval history buffs. I backed it.

[@ComradeArthur]

Note that airborne Radar was effective in locating subs even when only the snorkel was showing. In good conditions, the plane could detect a snorkel from 100 miles away.

[@z_actual]

You could benefit from looking at Linybeige channel, he has 3 videos on WATU, Western Approaches Training Unit based in Liverpool in WW2. In particular Jean Laidlaw. There is some discussion on U Boat tactics you should find interesting

[@Telsion]

please remember to in the future link videos you are talking about at 1:34 or in other comparabke cases in info cards (I icon)

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

not possible anymore, because I can either use annotation or (exclusive) the end cards.

[@Telsion]

Military History Visualized no no no, I meant the info cards you see appearing in the upper right hand corner, you know, where you can also put in a poll or something. those I mean :)

[@kyouhyung]

Speaking of aircraft, how effective were the Zeppelins during the great wars?

[@Andersng1]

1:38 The Danish and Dutch coastlines were insignificant for the submarines. The Norwegian coastline however, was one of the most important areas of the entire kriegsmarine. Submarine bases in Bergen and Trondheim provided extended range for submarine operations in the north atlantic and arctic oceans. The fjords also provided excellent cover for German warships operating in the area. Later in the war when the bases in France became cut off and the ports in Germany was constantly bombed. Most of the remaining operational submarines were transferred to Norway.

[@Pommeswerfer3499]

Hey just a friendly reminder from a half German half British chap: You always pronounce Comparison like if it had an 'sch' or 'sh' in it. It doesn't. It just gets spelled Com-pa-ri-son not Com-pa-ri-shon. Like your videos! Mach weiter so!

[@bruceparr1678]

Many Irish also pronounce S like this. Spud becomes Shpud.

[@unknown0soldier]

Well, I'm kinda surprised that there aren't any comment wars for this vid :D Nice & and educating video, thanks. BTW, wasn't the loss of experienced U-boot crews in the initial years of WW II a key factor in the downfall of U-boot successes?

[@morgan5127]

taken not tooken btw great video i always look forward to your vids

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

I am pretty sure I didn't say tooken. Maybe it was "took in"? or shitty pronounciation of "taken" timestamp?

[@morgan5127]

Military History Visualized ok np it wasn't that noticeable

[@niume7468]

Please make video about XXI how it changed the submarines for ever !

[@bigsteve6200]

Can you do a comparison video between U-boat and American Pacific action.

[@NumptyGrumble]

Reading the Cruel Sea and Das Boot (English translation) books back to back was interesting to compare, each side thinking the other had it better. I don't know if any WWI books cover the subject in the same way.

[@cjackmond]

Strange but true about the Battle for the Atlantic: No convoy escorted by Dirigibles lost a ship. This is perhaps more of a tribute to the spotting platform that a dirigible is than is combat effectiveness, still compared to a submarine, a dirigible is pretty fast. And I am not sure that dirigibles operated singly or in small groups.

[@EarlJohn61]

I have an issue with the narrator calling the Entente Powers the "Allies"... The Allies was a WW2 term NOT used in WW1.

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

next time I will call them the Anglo-French

[@maciejniedzielski7496]

Buzz! Buzz! Buzz! UNTERTAUCHEN !!! (great vidéo as usually ....)

[@commissarsebastianyarrick9054]

can you do a video about the greco-italian war?

[@hobototalwar]

Please make a video about Operation Mercury. Thanks!

[@karldubhe8619]

Nicely done, again. It's a shame you didn't mention that part of the RN's reluctance to do convoy duty was the idea that it was a 'defensive' operation, rather than an offensive one. In part, as the RN viewed the ocean as their property, operating a convoy of merchant ships was an admission that they did not really "Rule The Waves." :) There are a number of navies who have suffered from that kind of quasi-Napoleonic idea of 'attack, always attack!'

[@UL42]

Can you do a video on post ww2 submarines?

[@tomriley5790]

One way of looking at the U-boat becoming unimportant is that it was extremely important early in World war 2 (roughly 1940) had Germany started the war with more U-boats (for example rather than battleships) they could well have led to britian being defeated before the advances in ASW were introduced. One other thing that you didn't mention was improvements in drilling - a rigorous system of simulatiors and and drilling for escort captains was introduced replacing the rather amateurish preparations prior to the outbreak of war.

[@shamfarm1973]

Any chance of a video about how The Irish resistance fought British offensives 1600-1925? I think people might like how depopulation and repopulation mixed with asymmetrical warfare works, I'm probably wrong but the Ireland case is amazingly informative about a lot of military tactics. Great channel btw 😎

[@neithanm]

Great information, very well thought out. However the accent could use improvement, I'm having trouble understanding some words :( 17:40 Fast & Führious, too good 😂

[@zlovredniyTip]

+Military History Visualized so if a uboat was at a periscope depth could it be pinged by allies? (09:00)

[@LeArquebus]

Why did you leave out the Q-ships?

[@MattyDardani]

I have one question what was the uboat loss rate out of uboats operating in both world wars?

[@Justanotherconsumer]

Does anyone have any recommendations on discussions of allied submarine activity during WW2, e.g. against Japan?

[@puma7171]

Thanks for video! Please, in a nautical context, make sure to use nautical miles to limit confusion. :)

[@willnettles2051]

I had no idea the Allied shipping losses were so similar in both wars. That is a remarkable statistic that I don't remember ever seeing before. Have you made a video comparing U-Boat to the US Submarine operations in WW2? Some of the things U-boats were criticized for were also practiced by American submarines. It's also interesting that the Japanese and I think the Italians made excellent submarines but were not able to use them as effectively as did the U.S. and Germany. And British subs? I know almost nothing. Some of the first hand accounts of American submariners are some of the most interesting and exciting first hand accounts of war. I recommend them. One of my high school teachers was in US Naval Intelligence during the war, stationed in China. They were plotting Japanese ship movements. He said that commanders were so embarrassed they weren't reporting losses, so Japanese Naval command was ordering around ships that no longer existed. He said they'd order a convoy of ships and almost none of them showed up. Of course I don't know how his memory of what his unit observed matches the historical record. If the Japanese were not reporting losses, they certainly weren't mentioning that they were embarrassed by radio. It's also interesting that all the U.S. Submarine captains at the beginning of the war had to all be replaced by more aggressive captains. (This both supports your Mattis video and to a lesser degree my snarky remarks. In that video when you mentioned 'agressiveness' I scoffed, yet here is a clear example. The captain's were indoctrinated to one way of thinking (fleet submarine operations) But apparently were not capable of shifting to the more independent and aggressive way of thinking.)

[@artistjoh]

I found your information that the British Admiralty was reluctant to use the convoy system in the early stages of the First World War due to the contrast with the Australian experience. While the Royal Australian Navy was independent of Britain by 1914 I would have expected a strong influence from London on the young Australian Navy doctrine at that time. However, Australia did use the convoy system from the inception of the war. This can be seen from the Battle of Cocos, one of the first German defeats of the war. In that case a convoy of Australian and New Zealand troop carriers bound for Egypt was defended by two Australian light Cruisers, the HMAS Sydney and HMAS Melbourne, a British heavy cruiser, HMS Minotaur and a Japanese battlecruiser, the Ibuki. The flagship was the Melbourne. At the time the German cruiser SMS Emden had sunk or captured 27 ships in the Indian Ocean including a French destroyer and a Russian cruiser, and had shelled Madras. The Emden had entered the Indian Ocean due to the presence of the Australian battlecruiser Australia in the eastern Pacific where it had been previously. This extreme danger forced the use of the convoy system. When the Emden attacked the radio station at Direction Island the attack was broadcast and Melbourne ordered Sydney to break off and engage the German ship which it did on the morning of 9th November 1914. British intelligence had determined that the Emden's gun had a smaller range than the Sydney so it was a surprise when Emden opened fire at 10,000 yards and Sydney had to sail 10 minutes directly into the German fire with shells landing every 6 seconds. Both forward and aft gun sighting mechanisms were hit on the Australian ship before it was in range to open fire. Despite firing by dead reckoning the Sydney's guns were far more accurate than the Emden's guns and were larger. The Emden was hit in the magazine and engine room and started sinking. Von Muller, the German captain, ordered the ship run onto the beach of the island. 134 German sailors died in the battle, and 4 Australian sailors died. Following the battle the other main German ship in the Indian Ocean, the SMS Konigsberg became blockaded in the Rufiji River in Africa and German power in the Indian Ocean was neutralised. As a result there was no need for convoys in the Indian Ocean until 1917 when the German navy returned to operations there in a last ditch effort to try to stem food and manpower supplies reaching Britain from India and Australia and convoys were reintroduced. I walk past a gun from the Emden which is positioned near my apartment. It is there as a memorial for the dead. The thick steel of the barrel has gouges out of it where shells have melted the steel testifying to the ferocity of the battle. Most people walk past it without giving it a thought, but I often see flowers left on the railing in memory of those who died, and I often pause in respect for those who fought so bravely and those who paid the ultimate sacrifice. Perhaps the Australian Navy, being younger, was more open to more flexible ideas in naval doctrine than the more tradition minded Royal Navy and so adopted the convoy strategy earlier. Perhaps being a smaller navy it felt more vulnerable than the massive RN and so was forced to be more adaptable in meeting naval threats. But I think it more likely that the influence of the Admiralty was strong, even in Australia, and that they were more adaptable than is given credit here. Most of the history books focus on major events in the main theater of war and thus produces a view of actions that might be a little different if taking a more global view. Thus I think that the early adoption of the convoy by Australia may have had an element of new-guy new-ideas but was almost certainly a strategy carried out with the full cooperation of the Admiralty. This is supported by their contribution of RN ships to the Australian convoys.

[@Bob1942ful]

Something you might find of interest is Nomohan the Russian Japanese war from 1937 to 1939 in Manchuria. I only recently read about this and the various political alliances that surrounded it. Would make and interesting video.

[@BHuang92]

Bob1942ful The Japanese had two plans for their conquest. First plan involves the army pushing through Manchuria and into the Mongolian steppes. Second plan involves naval expansion to Southeast Asia and other Pacific territories. The Battle of Kaklin Go between Imperial Japan and the USSR was an very important battle between the two nations, both in technical and political advancements.

[@hussard2062]

Just a request but could you perhaps do a video on the napoleonic wars or Victorian era wars (colonial)

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

my playlist on the napoleonic era contains 3 videos already: kzbin.info/aero/PLv0uEimc-uN_87_JCNpmM-zj8dx5qK0A9

[@hussard2062]

the waterloo video is one of my favorites

[@thunderorhun]

Loved the Luftwaffe Recon Ltd.