When interviewed after the war he said that had he had three hundred fleet-boats, as was the earlier plan, Germany would have won the war. But since submarines are comparatively swift to construct they were given low priority compared to 'capital' ships. History tells the capital ships did little during the wa when compared.
yes but there were also the type IV seacow sub re-suppliers that were unarmed but could refuel 4 subs at once.
XI C or what some times nick named Seekuh, pobably the most successful unterseeboot of the War. Some 50 + have been served so far in between '39 - '42. XI D series is to be remembered for their unmatched speed (IX D1) ~ range (IX D2) capabilities during those days. IX D2 were capable to complete a round trip of 25,000 nm. This range covering ability ensured them for covering Atlantic (S), US Coast (N), Pacific as well as Indian Ocean. A full double hull 9 cylinder supercharged diesel (MAN) power plant deliverd the requirement of controll room. Some 25 + were built so far.
I can't help thinking it would simply have attracted more emphassis on anti-submarine warfare! 'When did Germany start losing the war' Luftwaffe General Galland was asked....'maybe the day it started' he answered.
If it weren't for the 3.5 million tons of shipping sunk by U-boats Allies woulds have had easy victory
HISTORY does not bother our choices, what is favorable or something of what we likes etc .. I just try to follow Its course and whenever possible searches for less influencial stuffs! The word WAR, to me, itself a crime ..
a good book to read is The Sea Wolves by Wolfgang Frank and the most influential area of U boat operation is in the atlantic off the U.S and England. Not Norway.
So not interested in Norway ? https://archive.org/search.php?query=subject:"World War, 1939-1945 -- Naval operations, German" Black Sea: https://archive.org/search.php?query=subject:"World War, 1939-1945 -- Naval operations, German -- Sources" http://www.uboatarchive.net/Uboatlist.htm
