U-Boat (The Evolution and Technical History of German Submarines)

Eberhard Rossler
T e evolution and technic I history of German submari es

THEU·BOAT
Half-title: The commissioning of U234 (TypeXB) on 2 March 1944. Her provisional armament
comprised 2cm guns without a protective shield. TItle page: U-boats of Types VIID, vile and
XB at GW's fitting-out piers, summer 1942.
Eberhard Rossler
The ev o
CASSEll&CO
Contents
Cassell & Co Foreword by Ulrich Gabler 7 Medium submarines for Turkey and Finland 90
Orion House, 5 Upper Saint Martin's Lane Preface 9 The Spanish project: E 1 91
London WC2H 9EA The 'Lilliput' project: CV707 93
Original German edition 1: Origins of the U-boat 10 Mobilization contingency plans to 1932 97
Geschichte des deutschen Ubootbaus The evolution of German submarine Preparations for new construction 1932-35 97
copyright J. F. Lehmanns Verlag 1975 construction 10 The Reconstruction Programme of 1932 97
This English edition The inventive genius of Wilhelm Bauer 10 Preparations to build Types IA and II 99
copyright Arms and Armour Press 1981 The Howaldt diving-boat 14 Other requirements: Types Ill-VII 100
First published 1981 Krupp. d'Equevilley and Fore/le 15
This edition 2001 The Imperial Navy and -boat construction 4: U-boat construction from 1935 to 1939 102
Reprinted 2001 to the First World War 17 The Replacement Programme of 1935 102
The decision to build 17 U-boat design developments: Types IX. VI I B
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be U-boat development and construction, and X-XII 103
reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means
electronic or mechanical including photocopying recording 1906-10 21 The evolution of Type IX 103
or any information storage and retrieval system without Setbacks about 1911 25 Improvements to Type V I I: Type VII B 105
permission in writing from the Publisher. The adoption of diesel engines 25 Larger U-boat designs: Types X-Xl I 110
English translation by Ul-U16 compared 26 Construction plans to 1939 and the future of
Harold Erenberg Single-system propul ion 31 the V-boat 114
The U-boat's role and construction plans. The Z-Plan of January 1939 114
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data Mobilization contingency plans. 1933-39 118
A catalogue record for this book is available from 1912 32
the British Library D 'Equevi/ley 's steam!caustic-soda drive 32 Furbringer and Dbnitz on U-boat tactics and
The U-Boat Inspectorate 33 defence 120
ISBN 0-304-36120-8 Germaniawerft export submarines 35
Distributed in the USA by 5: War construction, experience and
Sterling Publishing Co. Inc. 2: U-boat construction during the First development, 1939-1943 122
387 Park Avenue South World War 38 Construction programmes and problems.
New York NY 1006-8810
Construction at the beginning of the war 38 193H3 122
The Publishers wish to express their warm appreciation Coastal U-boats: Types UB and UC 39 The Enlarged Programme of October 1939 122
of much help and advice contributed by Arthur D. Baker Dry storage minelayers: Type UE 44 Problems: the Restricted Programme 124
III, Jak P. Mallmann Showell and Anthony Preston. Planning and construction. 1915-16 47 Problems: deuvery quotas, 1941-42 126
Edited by Michael Boxall, David Gibbons and Tessa Enlarged coastal U-boat: Types UBII and Building U-boats: the construction sequence 130
Rose. Designed by David Gibbons. UCII 50 U-boats for the Black Sea 142
Larger U-boats and Type UBlll 54 War experience: torpedoes. detection and
Printed and bound in Great Britain by
The Bath Press, Bath U-boat planning. January 1916 63 protection 143
Building contracts for 1917 65 Torpedoes 143
Cargo U-boats and V-cruisers 67 Underwater detection and protection 144
Deutschlane! Class 67 Projects and developments. 1939....:.43 146
V-cruisers: Projects 46 and 46a 71 Type VIID 146
Armoured V-cruisers: Projects 47 and 50 Types IXD j and lXD z 150
IK44) 73 Type XIII 151
Construction after the declaration of Types XIV-XVI 151
unrestricted warfare 75 Developments based on Type VIlC: Cl41,
Production problems and the Scheer C/42 and C/43 154
Programme 80 Supply U-boats: Type VIlF 161
3: Foundations of the new U-boat arm, 6: The development of single-drive

1925-1935 88 U-boats 168
Experimental projects abroad, 1925-32 88 The Walter process 168
Avoiding the submarine ban: IvS 88 The evolution of Types XVllB, XVIlG and
Clandestine organizations and plans 89 XXII 172
Th development of Type XVI I I 178 The terminal pha e 261 -boat specifications. 1935-1945 334
The exhaust-gas closed-cycle process 182 Survey of programmes and actual deliverie Midget V-boat specifIcations. 1944-1945 343
Development at FKFS, 1940-43 182 of Type XXI 265 Torpedo types of the Imperial German avy
Trials at Deschimag and Germaniawerft: at the beginning of the First World War 344
Type XVIlK 183 10: U-boat development at the end of 53cm torpedoes up to 1945 344
the war 266 V-boat specifications. 1960-1974 346
7: The move to high submerged speed 188 New boats on trials 266 Plans section 34R
Surfaced V-boats: problems and solutions 188 The Walter-boats 266 Type VII B (1940), outboard proftie and plan 348
Improved anti-aircraft armament 188 Type XXI 272 Type VlIB, inboard proftie and deck plan 350
The high-frequency war 196 Type XXIII 275 Type VI IC (1944), inboard proftie and
The schnorkel 198 Vnfmished projects 277 outboard deck plan 352
ew V-boat types, 1943 204 Electro-boat Projects XXIX to XXXI 277 Type VI IC (1944). deck plans 354
Transport V-boats: Type XX and alterna- Schnorkel Project 'Tummler' 278 Type I XD 2• inboard proftie. deck plans and
ti~ 2~ Closed-cycle project: Type XXIXK 2 0 section 356
The electro-boat: Type XXI 208 Type XXX II I 280 Type XVllG, inboard proftie and deck plan 358
The coastal electro-boat: Type XXIII 209 Type XXXIV 2 1 Type XXI, inboard proftie and deck plan 360
The Fleet Construction Programme of 1943 210 Oxygen-fed turbine boats: Types XXXV and Type XXI, sections 362
Donitz replaces Raeder 210 XXVI 282 Type XXI, hull form 364
\lore steel. more -boats 211 Postscript: German influence in the post-war Type XXII I, inboard proftie. deck plans and
The OKM Con truction Programme of July era 283 sections 366
1943 212 CIa s 240. inboard proftie and deck plans 368
11: Small and midget U-boats 284 Type XXVI, inboard proftie and deck plans 370
8: The change to Type XXI and XXIII Realized midget -boats 284 List of abbreviations 37 I
construction 214 Midget V-boats Hecht and Seehund (Type Glossary of German technical terms 372
The production line system 214 XXVII) 285
Otto Merker and sectional construction 214 One-man boats: Biber, Teger , Marder and Select bibliography 375
The Ingenieurburo GlUckauf IIBG) 216 Molch 290
ection construction for Type XXI 217 Projected designs 292 Ind~ n7
ection construction for Type XXIII 219 Type XXXIl 292
The a sembly equence for Type XXI 224 Seetellfel 292
helters for V-boat building 231 Closed-cycle Seehund 294
V-boat development, autumn 1943 to early Biber 1I and III 296
1944 234 Delphin 297
New ideas for coastal boats: Types XXV and Type XXVllF and chwertwal 299
XXVIIl 234 Manta 301
Side torpedo tubes: Types XXIV, XXJB and
XXIC 234 12: Submarine development in the
Walter Type XXVI 235 German Federal Republic from 1955 to
V-tanker alternatives 238 1974 302
V-transport alternatives 239 Clas es 201 and 202 302
Stopgaps: Hai, Hecht and Wilhelm Bauer 305
9: Construction in the twilight of defeat 240 Con truction of Class 205 30
Bottlenecks. shortages and air raids 240 Classes 206 and 208 312
The Type XXI programme 240 Export submarines: Classes 207 and 209 317
The Type XXIII programme 245 Postwar single-drive propulsion schemes 323
The Type XXVI programme 246 on-military submarines 324
Allied air raids 248
The fmal programmes, 1944-45 254 Appendices 327
The Construction Programme of 1 June. 1944 254 SpecifIcations section 328
'The Restricted I mmediate Programme' 259 -boat specifications. 1906-1918 328
CO TE TS 5
Below: The new generation of U-boats emerges.
U19 (Class 2(6) in the process of surfacing.
oreword
by Ulrich Gabler
The German Navy turned to submarine construction late by com- system totally independent of an air supply, and the Walter process
parison with other navies, and it is therefore true to say that when it would have been wholly suitable for this. Although a quick decision
did make a start a considerable amount of groundwork in diving was made to install it in U-boats carrying out long voyages submerged,
science had already been carried out. During the First World War, it was never used operationally. Then, U-boats were developed that
strategic circumstances conspired to make the submarine much more used large electric battery installations and schnorkels, and these were
important for the German Navy than for its enemies, which stimulated ready for operational use by the end of the war. Following the cessation
rapid developments on the German side. In addition to significant of hostilities, these most recent U-boats were the departure points for
improvements in overall construction techniques, further advan- all submarines in the rest of the world. The first 'true' submarine came
tageous circumstances were that Germany had developed the diesel into being only with the discovery of the nuclear propulsion unit.
engine and had available a very reliable electrical industry. In addition to the development work that had led to actual
In the main, submarines in the First World War had tended to travel construction, much research was done on projects that were not
on the surface and had dived only to carry out an attack or to escape an realized. All these undertakings, in which almost all aspects of
enemy. The period between the wars saw German submarines being engineering played their part, affected and continue to affect the whole
developed in this same direction. Improved technology ushered in technology. The influence of military submarine construction on the
electric welding and improved diesel and electrical installations. emerging civil underwater science cannot be over-estimated.
Further advances were made with the introduction of wakeless Up to now, there has been no comprehensive treatise on this
torpedoes which left no trail or tell-tale bubbles and provided a interesting facet of technical history. The author deserves the greatest
strengthening of the submarine's armament. The middle of the Second credit for achieving this in a most all-embracing way and for depicting
World War saw a reappraisal of the role of the submarine, however: the also the history of unrealized projects. There is no doubt that this
demand was now for submarines that could carry out all operational volume will be obligatory reading for all those interested in technical
functions submerged. The ideal U-boat would have a propulsion development and those who have participated in underwater travel.
BAL TIC SEA
NORTH SEA
The geography of U-boat construction
Upper Silesia
industrial area
Emden: Nordseewerko Emden Aktiengosellschaft Ifrom 1957, Rheinstahl Nordseewerke GmbH; from
1976, Thyssen Nordseewerke GmbH),
Wllhelmsheven: Kaiserliche Werft Wilhelmshaven, subsequently Kriegsmarinewerft Wilhelmshaven (until
1945).
Gee.temOndelWeoermOnde: Joh. C. Tecklenborg AG (until 19281; G. Seebeck AG (from 1928,
Deschimag Werk Seebeck),
Vege.ack: Aktiangesellschaft Bremer Vulkan. IThe U-boat division of Bremer Vulkan from 1938 to 1945
was designated 'Veges8cker Werfl'l.
Bremen: Aktiengesellschatt Weser (from 1926, Deschimag AG Weser); Atlas-Werke AG.
Hamburg: Deutsche Werft Aktiengesellschaft Werk Finkenwerder (from 1967, Howaldtswerke·Deutsche
Wenft AG (HDWI Work Finkenwerder; in 1973 the works was closed); Roiherstieg Schiffswenft und
Maschinenfabrik (from 1927, Deutsche Wenft AG Werk Reiherstieg; from 1967, HDW Werk Hamburg-
Reiherstieg); Blohm & Voss; H. C. Stulcken Sohn; Vulcanwerke Hamburg AG luntil 19261; from 1930,
Howaldtswerke AG Werk Homburg; Ifrom 1967, HDW Werk Hamburg-Rossi.
Flenoburg: Flensburger Schiff-Bau-Gesellschaft.
Kiel: Friedrich Krupp Aktiengesollschatt Germaniawenft luntil 19451; Kaiserliche Werft Kiel (from 191B,
Reichswonft Kioll; from 1925, Deutsche Werke Kiel AG luntil 1945); from 1953, Kieler Howaldtswerke AG
Werk Gaarden Ifrom 1967, HDW Werk Kiel-Dietrichsdorfl.
R·
LObeck: Lubecker Fiender-Werke AG.
Roatock: Aktiengesellschatt Neptun.
-AugsbUrg Stettin: Steninar Oderwerke AG; Stlttiner Maschinenbau AG Vulcan.
o Gotenhafen: Deutsche Werko Kiel AG Work Gotenhafen.
50 100 miles Danzig: Kaiserliche Werft Danzig (from 1918 Reichswerft Danzig); Danziger Werft; Schichauwerke Danzig
I I I
I (from 1929, F. Schichau GmbH Wark Danzig).
lclo 200 km Elbing: Schichauwerka Elbing Ifrom 1929, F. Schichau GmbH Werk Elbing).
PREFACE
reface
A veil of secrecy has always surrounded submarine 1922 from Dr. Techel, Dr. Werner and Schiirer on tabular works or even text books. Standard works
development, especially in Germany, and there is particular aspects of German submarine construc- such as those by Groner, Techel, Gabler, Lawrenz
no doubt that the concept of the submarine as tion and the comprehensive work in tabular form of and Herzog are earnestly recommended as a
representing the most advanced technology and Erich Groner on German warships, very little complement.
demanding the most skilled seamanship has additional information on German U-boat develop- As was the case in my earlier writings, a number
strengthened this. Even though Germany suffered a ment and construction has come from the archives. of distinguished experts gave their support. Special
complete military defeat in 1945, this veil was slow Nor, with just a few exceptions, has much mention must be made of Dr. Jost Diilffer,
to lift. Those documents and plans relating to information been forthcoming from the yards. I Professor Ulrich Gabler, Klaus Herold, Jiirgen
U-boats that did survive the war were appropriated therefore had to base my research for this period Friese, Dr. Dieter Jung, Wolf Kaliebe, Hans-
by the Allies and, therefore, became inaccessible. initially on the available documents put out by the Joachim Lawrenz, Lutz Nohse, Franz Selinger, Dr.
They remain largely so to this day. Reichs Naval Office and Imperial Navy Staff, which Bernd Stegemann, Professor Jiirgen Rohwer,
When the first reliable reports from foreign were in the possession of the Bundesarchivl Berndt Wenzel and Norbert Kriiger, Dr. Gert
technical journals concerning the German 'Wonder Militiirarchiv, but these lean more towards the Sandhofer and Wilhelm Wedelich for reading
U-boats' of the last war years reached me, it was military-political, strategic and economic aspects manuscripts, making helpful suggestions and
not solely technical and historical interest but rather than to technical data. It was therefore additions. The staff of the Bundesarchiv/Militiir-
equally the lure of 'archaeological' research and impossible for me to present as complete a picture archiv have earned my thanks for their kind aid in
reconstruction that impelled me to track down the of all U-boat projects evolved by the Torpedo and sifting through archives. Fritz Kohl redrew and
origins and properties of the legendary Type XXI U-Boat Inspectorate as I could of the OKM retouched many U-boat plans which he made
U-boat. The results of my research were presented projects of the Navy; nevertheless, one may regard available for this book. Among those who supplied
in 1966 in a first report, the second edition of which the chain of developments in this period as closed. photographs, special mention must be made of
(twelve months later) was to usher in a series of Much initial spadework had been done when J. F. Professor Jiirgen Rohwer, Christer Sahlin, Franz
articles dealing with aspects of military science. Lehmanns Verlag of Munich suggested that, Selinger, Udo Ude and the Deutschen Museum in
Research then followed into the development of rather than rework my report on Type XXI, I write Munich. Finally, I wish to thank especially J. F.
Type XXIII, the Walter U-boats and the closed- a complete history of U-boat construction. From Lehmanns Verlag, who made possible the initial
cycle propulsion for submersible vessels. Initially, the start, I had no illusions about the difficulties of production of this comprehensive work.
foreign publications and especially private incorporating information on such a wide subject Sadly, technical history remains the poor relation
enquiries, sketches and collections formed the basis into one manageable volume with the many of history and engineering, even though it should
for this research, but the subsequent return of diagrams and illustrations necessary. As far as was play a key role as a lynch-pin between these two
documents by the British to the Bundesarchivl possible, the landmarks in German U-boat develop- disciplines. Many historical events can only be
Militiirarchiv facilitated matters. A perusal of the ment were marked out by quotations, dates, explained within the framework of technical
unarranged technical data, pertaining mainly to sketches and photographs, around which I developments, of important inventions and even of
Yards and Naval Service Stations, elicited a mine of attempted a thorough analysis to give the reader an large misconceptions, just as technical develop-
information and detail, allowing-even without the overall and clear picture of the subject. Basic ments may only be appreciated correctly if one
most important source, the missing documents and information is given preference over comment. This takes account of the historical background. It is my
plans from the U-boat departments of the Naval method of presentation seems to me to be wholly hope that this publication will contribute a little to
Design office-a mosaic of German submarine justified, since it is out of the question for most this appreciation.
development to be put together. readers to study the multiplicity of different
I found that in order to provide a firm foundation sources. In view of the shortage of background Eberhard Rossler, Berlin
for my technical and historical research it was material, in certain of the most complex develop-
necessary to delve further and further back into the ments there is considerable variation in the
past. But the temporal gap separating historical completeness of information-especially in the
events multiplied considerabley the problem of matter of naming U-boat designers, frequently only
finding background material. Similarly, the period the head of a design team being stated. In these
preceding 1918, with a few exceptions, was devoid cases, his name must stand as representative of the
of essential U-boat documentation. And the paucity unnamed originators and collaborators but for
of material from the Technical Office of the U-boat whose work a creation as complex as a submarine
Inspectorate is the harder to bear in the light of the could not be achieved.
fact that those involved in U-boat development of The book we now present must not be taken to
that era are no longer alive. Apart from the three replace scientific treatises on aspects of U-boat
famous publications dating back to 1919/20 and construction, comprehensive reference books and
PREFACE 9
ORIGINS
OFTHE
U-BOAT
THE EVOLUTION OF marines. He suggested that an air chamber or air 30 Prussian talers from the naval budget for a
bottles be installed. model, which he built with the help of a mechanic in
GERMAN SUBMARINE 1798 Klingert constructed a diving apparatus. A Kiel. Its approximate dimensions were 70cm x
man wearing a diver's helmet and a watertight 18cm x 29cm, and Bauer demonstrated it to naval
CONSTRUCTION suit would stand on a platform, taking in air representatives in Kiel harbour. Driven by clock-
The ingenuity that has enabled man to develop through tubes from the apparatus. By means of a work, it dived and travelled horizontally under the
methods of leaving his land-bound environment, to handle, he could alter the position of a piston in a water for fIVe minutes. Its cross-section was similar
ascend into the skies and plumb the depths of the cylinder to affect the displacement of the appara- to that of a seal, and it had an outer hull of copper.
sea, marks the culmination of centuries of dreaming tus so that ascent and descent could be regulated. Two ballast cylinders were fitted inside the hull, but
and theoretical design. The Renaissance, with its 1799 A Surveyor of Mines, Joseph von Baader, their pistons could be operated from the outside to
burgeoning of science and the technical arts, led to published a plan for the construction of a two- make the model surface or dive. Careful adjustment
the projection of diving apparati and underwater man submarine. of a weight caused the model to remain motionless
vehicles that were technically feasible and well The technical breakthrough came in the nineteenth under the surface, or move forward propelled by a
thought out. In Germany, as in other countries, century, with the construction of a fully-functional clockwork-driven, three-bladed screw. An adjust-
inventors had experimented with diving tech- free-travelling submarine vessel, and the credit for able lead weight was also used to trim the long-
nology, but German participation in its develop- this must go to the Bavarian non-commissioned itudinal angle of the model. teering was effected
ment has been relatively little investigated and officer of artillery, Wilhelm Bauer, the first German by a movable rudder at the tern. In the forward
documented: 'submarine' engineer. part of the model was a superstructure with a
1465 A uremberg weapons designer named window in the front and an entry hatch at the rear
Kyeser designed a diving boat. The inventive genius of Wilhelm Bauer - a forerunner of the future conning tower. On the
1604 Magnus Pegel (Pegelius), a pedagogue from Sebastian Wilhelm Valentin Bauer was born on 23 sides, hand grapnels were provided for use when
Restock, published a technical description of December 1822, in Dillingen on the Danube. His attaching a mine (carried on the stem of the boat) to
flying machines, and basic ideas for a diving entire life was devoted to ceaseless invention, with the keel of a ship. An upper deck of cork improved
boat. an emphasis on submarines and their propul ion. the stability and flotation propertie of the
1691 The French physicist, Denis Papin, a His ability, ingenuity and iron will, coupled with an model.
professor at the University of Marburg, was unshakeable confidence, ranks him among those Although the model had all the essential features
commissioned by the Landgrave Karl von nineteenth century inventors who were inter- of later submarines (and Bauer's colossal ingenuity
Hessen, to build a diving boat. This elliptical nationally recognized in their own lifetimes. can not be over-estimated), the naval budget was
craft was propelled by oars, contained a ballast In April 1849, during the war over Schleswig- insufficient to allow production of a full-sized
tank and bilge pump and, significantly, was Holstein, the Danish Fleet was blockading the submarine. In his memoirs, Bauer says that he was
equipped with a lock chamber and a schnorkel- German coast. During the assault of the requested to deliver his model to the authorities,
like air circulation system worked by a centri- fortifications at Diippel on 13 April, the idea came but, as he considered the model to have been his
fugal pump. In 1692, after an unsuccessful to Bauer of using charges from boats to blow up the own brainchild and feared that others might steal
attempt in Kassel, he was said to have dived to Sonderburg bridge in an attempt to break the his ideas, he destroyed it with an axe. Later,
the bottom of the River Fulda in his boat and Danish blockade. After the Bavarian troops had however, his hopes were revived by the commander
returned safely to the surface. withdrawn from Schleswig-Holstein, he experi- of the Schleswig-Hoi tein Army, General von
1772 Count Wilhelm of Schaumburg-Lippe commented with models in Ingolstadt and Munich, and Willisen, who set up a commission charged with the
missioned his Chief Engineer and Instructor at completed the design of a submarine. either in his construction of a full-sized boat. Initially,
the Military Academy, J. Chr. Praetorius, to autobiography nor in his memoirs does Bauer give construction took place at Rendsburg, in Karl
build a narrow diving boat. This was 10 metres any indication that he was aware of the discoveries Holler's iron foundry (later known as 'Karlshiitte'l,
long, had a fish-shaped profile, and was propelled of other researchers into the problems of under- but the state of war in the summer of 1850 and the
on the surface by two oars. When submerged, it water travel, so it is quite possible that the design problems of transporting the finished boat to Kiel
was to be propelled by movements of the 'fish that emerged - Brandtaucher (literally 'Diving prompted Bauer to continue work in the iron
tail'. Armed with a small cannon (a falconet), the Incendiary') - was entirely his own concept. foundry of Schweffel and Howaldt in Kiel itself.
boat formed part of the Count's fleet on Lake In January 1850, he left the Bavarian Army, Funds had been raised by voluntary contributions
Steinhuder, but it is not known whether the 'fish' entered that of Schleswig-Holstein as a non- from the Army and the civilian population, but only
ever made a descent. commissioned officer of artillery, and immediately a part of the necessary sum was realized, and this
1792 J. A. Schultes, a Professor of Medicine at placed his plans for a submarine before his new forced Bauer to eliminate the diving cylinders and
Landshut, published the results of his studies commanders. The project was passed to the reduce the thickness of the hull from 12mm to 6mm.
regarding the problem of renewing air in sub- Ministry of Marine from whom Bauer was allocated The strength of the frames was reduced by 50 per
10 ORIGI S OF THE V-BOAT

lawrenz's sketches of Brandtaucher, 1850.
Above: Wilhelm Bauer, the first German submarine engineer. Below: A model of Brandtaucher by H. J. Lawrenz.
ORIGINS OF THE V-BOAT 11

cent, and the distance between them was increased. carpenter named Witt, entered the boat and closed Professor G, Karsten, Professor of Physics at Kiel,
Bauer gave warning that these changes would the conning tower. They hoped to demonstrate to the loss of Brandtaucher was a result of the
reduce the maximum diving depth from 30m to the Naval Committee the boat's ability to weakening of the boat's hull, Bethge calculates that
9.15m, but no-one would listen to him. Iron ballast submerge to a depth of 1 atmosphere and surface at Bauer's original construction would have allowed a
compensated for the weight lost by these changes. will. Although they had no experience of the diving depth of 25-27m. If Bauer's original plan
Construction was completed on 18 December 1850. apparatus, no safety precautions were taken. had been adhered to, that of installing two ballast
Brandtaucher was brought out of the factory on According to Bauer, at a depth of 9.4m, first the (diving) tanks together with a compensating
rails and, in front of an amazed crowd, was towed port side, and then the starboard side began to cylinder for fme adjustment, the admission of water
into the water by the paddle-steamer Bonin. In the distort, accompanied by groaning and cracking to the body of the boat would have been prevented.
evening, Bauer carried out the first surface trial in noises, The large tread wheel came adrift, and the Although Bauer had not planned to use hydro·
the Kiel Estuary - after which, according to his strong iron shafts and oak beams gave way. The planes, propulsion at a controlled depth would have
memoirs, the Danish blockade ships left Fried- boat reached the bottom in 54 seconds, and was been possible, by using a small amount of bow
richsort and anchored outside the estuary. then at a depth of 16,3m, at an angle of 34 0, The heaviness, controlled by careful adjustment of the
Brandtaucher's specifIcations were as follows. crew tried unsuccessfully to operate the bilge trimming weight, with a small amount of reserve
Length overall: 8.07m. pumps and rearrange its iron ballast. Later analysis buoyancy.
Maximum beam: 2.012m. by Hans-Georg Bethge, a qualified engineer, has Bauer's activities in Kiel came to an end when
Draught (including 20 tons of indicated that ballast water entering the keel Schleswig-Holstein was restored to the Danes and
ballast): 2,63m. compartment had so weighed down the stern that the army was demobilized, These changed circum-
Displacement surfaced (with 20 tons the boat had listed at an angle of 28°, which was stances prevented the construction of further
of ballast): 27.5 tons, beyond the corrective powers of its trimming submarines, In April 1851, Bauer returned to
Displacement submerged: 30.5 tons. weights, Additionally, the boat had taken in too Munich, via Hamburg, where he began to build a
Crew: 3. much ballast water, presumably through leaking model of a further version of his diving-boat,
The boat could travel ahead and astern, A man- valves, and so had sunk deeper and deeper. Because demonstrating it to all who showed interest,
powered tread wheel with two gears allowed the she was stern-down at such an angle, the bilge including King Ludwig I and King Maximilian II,
three-bladed propeller to revolve at 6Q-1l5rpm, pumps did not work well, and eventually failed. technical committees and scientifically-minded
according to the gear selected. Maximum output of Bethge's investigations showed that the boat must colleagues. In March 1852, he showed his model to
the tread wheel was approximately 20rpm, which have become unmanageable at a depth of 5.6m, The Emperor Franz Josef of Austria in Vienna, but,
gave the boat a speed of 3 knots, albeit for a short considerable hull deformation had caused rivets to although its merits were recognized, no fmance or
time only. The diameter of the propeller was 1.2m, spring out, and water had entered through these commissions were offered. He lost the model during
and the pitch of the blades was 0.373m, The steel holes, But the plates of the outer skin had not given a demonstration to Queen Victoria and Prince
hull consisted of a keel (V-shaped plates, 6mm way; they would have withstood pressure to a Albert in the Isle of Wight, but built another in
thick), vertical stem and stern supports, and twelve depth of 11m if the other components had been Munich, with fmancial aid from Prince Albert. At
frames of 5---6mm angle-iron, The outer skin made to their correct specifIcations. this time, he was also working on a gas-engine as a
consisted of 6mm iron plates, overlapped and Only Bauer's presence of mind saved his crew. propulsion unit for submarines, and was severely
riveted, A variation from Bauer's original design After the mishap, he waited six and a half hours injured during an explosion.
was that the space between the keel and the inner until the internal and external pressures had In November 1853, Prince Albert suggested to
deck was used as a diving and compensating become even, then opened the conning tower and Bauer that he have the boat built in Britain, and
compartment. To bring the boat to the surface, two the three men floated to the surface in a bubble of Bauer chose the yard of the celebrated naval
bilge pumps expelled ballast water. These were air. (In the meantime, attempts by the Naval architect, John Scott Russell, at Millwall, in
hand-operated piston pumps with a capacity of Committee to raise the boat by means of an anchor London. The contract stipulated that the boat be
1.31m 3/hr and 1.69m 3/hr respectively; their suction and chains had been ineffectual and had almost completed in March 1854, but the work progressed
heads were in the approximate centre of the prevented Bauer's escape.) very slowly. Too late, Bauer discovered that the
forward section of the keel chamber, The heavier- The sunken vessel was formally taken over by the contract was fmancially disadvantageous to him,
duty, forward pump ceased to function if the boat aval Committee on 15 February 1851, and and he could do nothing about the slow building.
became excessively stern-heavy (i.e., if the boat unsuccessful attempts were made to raise her. The Disappointed, he threatened to offer the invention
were too much down at the stern). A large valve, Danes were likewise unsuccessful in 1855 and 1856. to Russia, which was soon to be at war with Britain,
opening to the exterior, served as a diving valve, There she remained until 1887, when dredging but here he had gone too far, and he had to leave
while a second, small valve provided fme adjust- operations began for the construction of the England in a hurry, The yard fmished the boat
ment. Water pressure, and consequently diving torpedo-boat base, She was raised on 5 July 1887, without his assistance, but she sank with her crew
depth, was measured with a spring pressure gauge. and shown flIst in Kiel shipyard and later in the during the fIrst trials.
A 500kg cast-iron weight was used to alter the trim; garden of the aval Academy. In 1906, she was By now, the Crimean War had begun, and Grand
a handwheel in the steering compartment enabled taken to Berlin and put on show at the Nautical Admiral Grand Prince Konstantin invited Bauer to
this weight to be moved on rails under the deck Museum near the Friedrichstrasse Station. In 1950, St. Petersburg, as his ideas had aroused interest at
planking over a distance of 3.74m, Hydroplanes on the initiative of Professor Macklin, the the Tsar's court. In May 1855, the Imperial
wer not fItted, The vertical rudder consisted of an considerably weather-beaten structure was taken Russian avy commissioned Bauer to build his
longated plate, with an area of 0.766m 2 , controlled from the ruined museum and brought to Restock. third submarine at the Duke of Leuchtenberg's
from it steering platform by a handwheel through Between 1963 and 1965, the wreck was restored at machine factory in St. Petersburg. Seeteufel or Le
an arrangem nt of levers, rods and chains. When the Rostock eptun Shipyard under the super- Diable Marin ('Sea Devil') was completed on 1
th b at was on the surface, with its hatch closed, vision of Hans-Georg Bethge, and accurate November 1855, and this time was exactly to
ir could b r newed by operating a push-pull measurements were made. On 21 August 1965, the Bauer's specifIcations. She was twice the size of
piston in a cylind r. historic submarine became accessible to the public Brandtaucher (length, 16.32m; beam, 3,45m;
During her flIst trial, an operational fault caused in the War Museum in Potsdam. In 1972-73, part draught, 3.92m; thickness of outer skin, 13mm;
Brandtaucher to sink at her berth near the steam- of this museum was moved to Dresden and here, for distance between frames, 31cm; designed diving
ship Bonin, he was raised, cleaned and repaired, the time being, Brandtaucher has her resting place. depth 47m), As in her predecessors, propulsion was
and was ready for further trials, sixteen days later. Despite the mishap, Bauer was more than ever to be provided by man-power.
On 1 February 1851 at 9am, Bauer and two convinced that, theoretically, his calculations and It took the Russian Navy from 2 November 1855
volunteers, a blacksmith named Thomsen and a constructions had been correct, According to until 20 May 1856 to transport her from St.

Petersburg to Kronstadt, and the journey would following year, although obsessed as ever with the the event of an accident the State may well lose
not have been completed had Bauer, himself, not construction of a submarine, he turned his millions.
intervened. In the fortified port, Bauer now carried attention to the building of a diving-bell, a method 'It is immaterial whether the enemy hides his
out 134 trials. During the last of these, on 2 October of raising sunken ships, a gas-engine as the guns behind iron plates, ramparts or beneath
1856, it was intended to attach a mine to a ship, and propulsion unit of submarines, and underwater columns of water; his destruction is what deter-
explode it. The ship was moored in rather shallow guns. In 1860, he offered his diving-boat and other mines who is the victor and, if victory is to be
water, and the submarine grounded with her inventions to the Prussian War and Naval Ministry measured by the physical and moral impacts upon
propeller stuck on the bottom. Ballast was in Berlin, but this was of no avail and he returned the enemy and not on the expenditure of millions in
jettisoned and water was pumped out of the ballast once again to England. There he took out British the fight against him, then I submit wholeheartedly
tanks, and this brought the bows of the boat to the patents for the diving-bell and for a new method of my plans for an underwater fighting ship to the
surface. But the clumsiness of a Russian lieutenant underwater cable laying. He worked for a time in German State of Prussia without reserve, because I
caused water to enter the boat through the conning the London office of the construction firm of am convinced that in them are the best means for
tower and the vessel sank. The crew managed to Siemens & Halske, but soon left England for war and peace without a heavy expenditure in men
escape, and the boat was subsequently raised, but Trieste, where he demonstrated his diving- and money.'
was not put back into working order. There chambers and his method of raising sunken ships There is absolutely no doubt that Bauer's ideas
followed a disagreement between the Naval by using 'camels'. were far in advance of his time. His new design was
Technical Committee and Bauer, concerning Here at last he found success. His camels were for a vessel 37.3m long, 6.2m wide and 3.1m high,
fulfument of the building contract dated 20 June put to practical use in March 1861 when the mail with a displacement of approximately 412 tons and
1855 and the payment of money as set out in that steamer Ludwig, which had sunk in Lake with a single-drive internal-combustion engine for
surface and submerged propulsion. This engine was
Bauer's working model (length 112cml of a to have a capacity of 100hp on the surface and
diving-boat, February 1853. 230hp when submerged, giving a speed of 8-9
knots. For optimum propulsion, it was planned to
use a controllable-pitch propeller. Large hydro-
planes were to be fitted aft for rapid diving. A
transverse propeller forward of the bow planes
would assist tight manoeuvring, and ballast that
could be jettisoned would ensure fast surfacing.
On the surface, the boat was to be controlled from
a retractable observation tower, 2.8m high. This
would also provide ventilation for the crew and for
the propulsion unit. Underwater observation would
be from ports in the hull, which was to have an
elliptical cross-section. The hull frames were to be
spaced 38cm apart, and the thickness of the plates
above the waterline was to be approximately 25mm
reducing to 12.7mm below the waterline. The boat
contract. The money was initially withheld from Constance, was raised. This earned much esteem would be safe to a depth of 30m. She was to have
Bauer because, it was alleged, not all the points set for Bauer, and several honours were awarded him. been armed with five underwater guns, whose recoil
forth in the agreement had been fulfilled. But, on 20 Much of the credit for this publicity must go to Dr. was to have been so designed as to have no
November 1857, he received word from the Friedrich Hofmann, who was a whole-hearted sup- detrimental effect on the boat's stability. It was
Shipbuilding Department of the Russian Naval porter of Bauer's ideas and inventions. Hofmann estimated that the ten-man crew could urvive for
Ministry (letter No. 12,480) '... however, your boat was the editor of Gartenlaube, the most widely-read 24 hours before it would become necessary to renew
has shown that your ideas on underwater travel are family journal of its time, with a circulation of more the air, but, with an air purification system, using
basically correct and that if your boat is perfected than 200,000; its apparently sentimental format oxygen and caustic potash, a further 24 hours
more satisfactory results can be achieved'. concealed a great deal of liberal thought and would be gained. Each man would have a life-jacket,
In the same letter, it was suggested that he progressive ideas. In 1864, Hofmann founded in and an inflatable boat would be carried aboard.
remain in Russian service, with the same fmancial Leipzig a committee for the propagation of Bauer's Well in advance of Otto, Benz, Daimler, and
arrangements, and continue his trials in the spring underwater warships. Diesel, Wilhelm Bauer was proposing to use an
of 1858, with expenses to be met by the Naval The German-Danish war of 1864 seemed to internal-combustion engine for both urface and
Ministry. Bauer now busied himself with a model of promise favourable conditions for Bauer to realize submerged propulsion. Submerged, the engine
a 24-gun submarine corvette. The boat was to be his submarine projects and other inventions. He would burn paraffm with oxygen produced from
propelled by a high-pressure steam-engine, and entered Prussian service and began preliminary manganese dioxide (MnO); on the surface,
carry a crew of 80. Her planned dimensions were: work on what was to be his last important compressed air was to be substituted for the pure
length, 44m; beam, 6.3m; draught, 3.76m. It was submarine project, the building of Kiistenbrander oxygen. The engine was to be two-stroke, with two
intended that the boat should approach an enemy (literally 'Coastal Incendiary') at Arthusberg near groups of three cylinders filled with water.
ship underwater, surface and fire her guns, then Stettin. On 18 December 1864, he wrote to the Whichever means of combustion was used, whether
quickly submerge to reload. Meanwhile, the Royal Prussian War and Naval Ministry: paraffin with oxygen or with compressed air, the
Russian Navy had lost several ships in the ice so 'The most recent extraordinary developments of mixture could be fed into one group and ignited
Bauer also worked on the construction of an ice- artillery, machinery and ships are such that, in with an electric spark, creating a mixture of gas and
breaker. battle, distance needs to be kept; only the ironclads, steam in the cylinders of that group to force the
The spring of 1858 saw renewed problems with which would suffer lesser damage, will manage to remaining water through a turbine to activate the
the Russian authorities, however, and in July Bauer shorten this distance. boat's propeller. This water would then also expel
left by sea for Stettin, travelling thence to Munich 'It seems to me that the future for these ironclads exhaust gases from the cylinders of the second
by way of Leipzig. Here, he tried in vain to obtain a as weapons of war is limited because their sea- group. The process would then begin in reverse
post, appropriate to his knowledge and technical worthiness is questionable, they are unlikely to order from the second group of cylinders. A special
experience, in the Bavarian civil service. During the keep pace with the developments of artillery and in turbine was envisaged for reverse astern. The
ORIGINS OF THE U-BOAT 13

technology of the time could not cope with the
problem of driving a steam-turbine direct from a Vogel's diving-boat
mixture of gas and steam. Nevertheless, in this o 0,5 1m
After Busley
very detailed concept can be seen the first step on
the road to a turbine system independent of outside
air, which would one day come to fruition in the
Walter system. (See Hans-Joachim Lawrenz, Die
Entstehungsgeschichte der U-Boote, pp. 43-46.)
Bauer's design was inspected and approved by
the Royal Prussian Commission in Danzig, but,
after a short time, Bauer gave up working in
Prussia because he feared that his invention of an
underwater gun would be exploited to his
detriment. (His mistrustful nature and choleric
temperament probably alienated sympathy and Howaldt diving-boat of 1891
support, which he needed to carry out his After Burgoyne
submarine projects and other inventions. No doubt,
with greater support and assistance, many of his
ideas could have been realized.) In 1866 he was able
to put his ideas of an underwater gun to the test. In
an underwater shooting experiment in the
Starnberger See, near Munich, two metal plates
were pierced, but the weapon was found to have a
rather limited range. During the next two years he
worked again on a propulsion method for sub-
marines, a paraffm-engine, and on steerable
airships. This work was carried out in the Dingler
Machine Factory in Zweibriicken. By now, the Howaldt diving-boat, Construction Number 333
health of this restless inventor, ever careless of his After Lawrenz
own well-being, had been undermined: a nervous =- __---.....,.==r=:i'!---.d tO b.---F==,r--- _
condition and arthritis confmed him to bed or to a
wheelchair. Although a very sick man, he continued
to think up new ideas, but time was running out. On
20 June 1875, Bauer, the first German builder of
submarines, died in Munich. Now, more than a
century after his death, the following story of
German submarine construction is dedicated to
him. o 2 3m
The Howaldt diving-boat

The development of practical submarines, which IV, 1887); the Americans, Josiah H. L. Tuck approximately 35m in length, they were equipped
Wilhelm Bauer had started in Germany in 1850, (Peacemaker, 1886), John Philip Holland (Plunger with steam-electric propulsion, but it has not been
meanwhile continued in other countries. The first and Holland, 1897) and Simon Lake (Argonaut, possible to obtain any reliable information about
military success occurred during the American 1897); and the Frenchmen, Claude Goubet (Goubet them. Evidence exists of one 'German' submarine
Civil War, when on 6 October 1863, a David class I and Goubet II, 1885-89), Gustave Zede and in a photograph said to have been taken by
submarine (designed by McClintock and Howgate) Romanzotti (Gymnote, 1888, Gustave Zede, 1892) Howaldt at Kiel in 1891 and published by Alan H.
captained by Lieutenant W. T. Glassell, severely and M. Laubeuf (Narval, 1899). Burgoyne in 1903. This shows a spindle-shaped
damaged the 3,486-ton ship of the line, New In Germany, there was no lack of interest in boat, 16m long, with prominent external longi-
Ironsides. On 17 February 1864, the Confederate diving-boats and no lack of suggestions for tudinal supports, a superstructure similar to that of
designer H. L. Hunley's submarine sank the Union underwater travel. According to Busley, 181 the later Forelle, and a rudder arrangement and
sloop Housatonic (approximately 1,400 tons); the submarine projects were offered to the various diving planes having much in common with those of
submarine's commander, Lieutenant G. E. Dixon German navies between 1861 and 1900, but most the later Leps boat, with which it was subsequently
and his crew of eight died when the spar-torpedo came from unskilled non-specialists. From the repeatedly confused.
exploded. These boats, which looked like cauldrons building of Bauer's Brandtaucher until 1900, there Apart from Bauer's Brandtaucher, we have
bolted together, were 1G-15m long, and the crew of is evidence of only two practical submarines having knowledge and exact details of only one German
&-10 men operated the propeller by hand-cranks. been built in Germany - one by Vogel, and the submarine before 1900 - Construction Number
Th trials and use of these 'floating coffms' were Howaldt Yard's Construction No. 333. 333, built by the Howaldt Yard in Kiel in 1897, and
bli ht d by everal tragic accidents. Friedrich Otto Vogel built his small vessel at the referred to by Techel as the 'Leps diving-boat'. This
Until th end of the nineteenth century, the most Schlick Yard in Dresden between 1867 and 1870. experimental craft is said to have been the
ignifl ant p r onalities in submarine development Only 5.3m long, she was equipped with a steam brainchild of the German torpedo-engineer, Karl
w r th paniard, arciso Monturiol (Ictineo, engine specially adapted for use when submerged. Leps. The main body was cylindrical in shape,
1866) and I a P ral (Peral, 1887); the Russian, It is thought that she did not survive her first trials rounded off at the bow and tapering to the four-
Drzewi ki (at I t ven completed submarine in the River Elbe. bladed propeller aft. The length of the boat is given
projects from 1 79); th British inventors, Andrew The German Navy is said to have acquired as 14m, the maximum beam as 204m. It was
Campbell and J. A h (Nautilus, 1884) and licences for the building of submarines from propelled by a non-reversible 120hp electric motor,
Waddington (Porpoise, 1885); the Swede, Torsten Nordenfelt in 1885 and, in 1890, two submarines are which received its current from accumulators built
Nordenfelt (A bd·Ul·Hamid, 1886 and Nordenfelt reported to have been built in Kiel and Danzig. Of into the bottom of the hull. Diving tanks and trim
14 ORIGINS OF THE U·BOAT

Above: Burgoyne's photograph of the Howaldt diving-boat of 1891. Below and right: Construction Number 333
Ibelow, in 1899, right, in Kiel harbour).
tanks were situated in a box keel under the hull; of compressed air, the boat had to make frequent Length overall: 35.85m.
these could be flooded individually, and pumped out crossing of the deep wide bay at Diisternbrock. to Maximum beam: 4.05m.
with compressed air from a connected chamber. reach the torpedo range of the fIrm of Draught: 2.63m.
Additionally, several iron ballast weights were Schwartzkopf. On one occasion, in order to test her Displacement surfaced: 178 tons.
carried, and these could be detached from inside the watertight qualities, the boat was lowered to the Displacement submerged: 253 tons.
hull. Watertight collision bulkheads were fItted bottom of the floating dock, but the crew remained Propulsion surfaced: one 150hp diesel
forward and aft, the forward bulkhead serving to connected to the outside by gas piping. There was engine.
strengthen a torpedo tube, the orifIce of which clearly little future for a craft with such limited Propulsion submerged: one 130hp electric
could be opened from within the hull. capabilities; she was laid up under a wooden cover, motor.
Steering was effected by two horizontal rudders and is thought to have been scrapped in 1902. Speed surfaced: 9.25 knots.
at the ends of metal stabilizers approximately Speed submerged: 6.20 knots.
400mm wide, which ran all the way round the boat Krupp, d'Equevilley and Forelle Range surfaced: 1,300 nautical miles
and up to half its height. A vertical rudder, In 1902, the Spanish engineer Raymondo Lorenzo at 8 knots.
protected by a guard, was situated in front of the d'Equevilley-Montjustin approached the fIrm of Range submerged: 65 nautical miles
screw. Control operations were carried out from the Krupp in Essen with plans purporting to be a at 3.8 knots.
centre of the boat. An observation dome, consisting development in the construction of the French Armament: 4 torpedoes.
of a diver's helmet with four portholes, was riveted submarine Narual. D'Equevilley had been Crew: 14.
to the top of the hull, but visibility was restricted associated in Paris with Maxime Laubeuf, the most D'Equevilley would certainly have been familiar
by the effect of water washing over it on the famous of French submarine designers. With his with Laubeuf's designs and had probably used
surface. The boat could reach a surface speed of &-7 two-hulled Narual of 1899, Laubeuf had not only them a a basis for his own submarine concepts.
knots. The 2- or 3-man crew was under the won a French government competition, but also which he had offered to the French aval Ministry
command of Captain Arp. ushered in a new era in submarine building - a in 1901. Following a rejection, he made his overture
It is doubtful if any diving trials were made with switch from defensive submarines to offensive long to Krupps, and this step gave ri e to a host of
this very primitive craft, which had no air renewal range boats. In 1901, Laubeuf intended that his speculations and suspicions raised in foreign
or ventilation system, and whose interior would improved submarine Aigrette be powered on the publications. In 1937, in the journal Verein
have been very wet (which probably contributed to surface by a diesel engine. The main specifications Deutscher Ingenieure, Techel commented: 'it is
t~e many electrical failures). To replenish its supply of Aigrette were as follows. high time that we rejected with vigour the French
ORIGI S OF THE V-BOAT 15

claim that has repeatedly been made that Germany favour of a paraffm- or oil-burning engine, with fuel 205-ton displacement with 400hp engines from GW.
acquired knowledge of French submarine plans, in containers positioned on the outside of the hull. At An official contract was placed in June, but before
particular the plans of the Aigrette, in unethical the end of 1903, GW projected a 200-ton submarine this, on 6 May, six 200hp paraffm engines were
ways.' for the Royal Netherlands Navy, but nothing carne ordered from the fum of Korting Brothers of
On the advice of Germaniawerft (GW), which had of this. Hannover, who were able to offer engines burning
recently been taken over by Krupps, F. A. Krupp In 1904, however, Russia became engaged in a either lamp paraffm or heavy oil at competitive
authorized the construction of an experimental war against Japan and was interested in building prices. There was still a safety problem - hitherto,
craft in accordance with d'Equevilley's design, and up a modern fleet. GW invited a Russian technical Korting had built only 8hp engines of this kind.
concluded a long-term contract with him. committee to inspect Forelle and on 25 March 1904, Acquisition of Forelle had been included in the
Preliminary work began as early as February 1902. two Russian naval officers with submarine provisions of the Russian contract, and she left Kiel
The design called for a spindle-shaped boat of 13m experience examined her in Eckernforde, where her on 20 June by rail for St. Petersburg, where she
length and 15.5 tons displacement, powered by a diving capabilities were demonstrated, despite a carried out diving and fuing trials in July and
65hp shunt motor with fixed revolutions. A rather rough sea (waves 1 Y.m high). As a result, on August of 1904 before being sent by rail to
controllable-pitch propeller enabled different 20 April, Russia ordered three submarines of Vladivostok.
speeds to be obtained.
At fust, it had been intended to use peat storage
batteries (initially 108-, subsequently 94-cell)
supplied by the Watt Storage Battery Factory in
Zehdenick near Berlin. GW had already used Watt
storage batteries in picket boats, and it was
thought that the sandwich of peat between the
battery plates would be more suitable for sea-going
use, especially since this would prevent leakage of
acid from the batteries. But the decision to use
them carne to nothing, because peat storage
batteries did not allow for maintenance, had no
appreciable length of life, and were impossible to
develop further.
Diving and compensating tanks were fitted to the
small, single-hulled boat. Control was effected from Above: Forelle after her arrival at Vladivostock.
a platform placed centrally beneath the hatch,
through which ran a small, adjustable Zeiss Forelle. Cross-section directly Cross·section through the
periscope. Hydroplanes were fitted forward; aft, forward of the conning conning tower
tOwer
there was only a stabilizing plate, sloping forward
at an angle of 1.5 0 , the operation of which was
adjusted by rudder planes attached to it.
Tubes for two 45cm torpedoes were fitted at
the sides; the muzzle doors for these were
controlled by two small electric motors. Torpedoes
were fued by compressed air, but the fuing of a Cross-section aft
torpedo would permit sea water to enter the tube,
causing the craft to list by as much as 20 0 . The boat
was designed to be carried by larger warships, and
was fitted with lifting padeyes.
On 28 July 1902, she was given the code
designation 'Leuchtboje' ('lightbuoy') and
construction was handed over to GW. The keel was
laid on 19 February 1903, and the boat was
completed on 8 June 1903. From 23 June to 6
December of that year, yard trials were conducted
by d'Equevilley and Marine Chief Engineer
Kritzler, at that time Chief Engineer of GW. After
initial steering difficulties, the boat was found to
handle well, had an underwater speed of 5Y. knots
and a range of 25 nautical miles at 4 knots. She was
named Forelle.
In th autumn of 1903, Kaiser Wilhelm II
in p t d h r and, on 23 September, Prince
H inri h of Prussia took part in a diving trial and
t r d th b at. he was then demonstrated to the
rman avy and al 0 to representatives of foreign
countri. W also hop d to obtain building
contracts for larg r submarines and, to this end,
during the con truction of Forelle, ideas from
foreign countries and ideas of their own were being
worked out. In view of the possibility of explosions
from petrol and gasoline engines, GW decided in
16 ORIGINS OF THE V-BOAT

THE IMPERIAL NAVY German naval authorities are right when they
refuse to indulge in expensive and long-drawn'out
Ministry. It is hoped to make available several
naval construction officials (ship and machine
AND U-BOAT experiments with submarines, but confme builders) to study competitive plans.'
themselves to the construction of battleships, In the autumn of 1904, a naval engineer, Gustav
CONSTRUCTION TO THE cruisers and sea-going torpedo-boats.' (Busley was Berling (b. 6 November 1869), was seconded to the
FIRST WORLD WAR later said to have written to Berling that he had TI and commissioned to build a submarine, while.
made this speech at the request of Admiral von the following year, several similar projects were
The decision to build Tirpitz, Secretary of State of the Imperial aval planned - initially two smaller, single-hulled boats,
During the years 1898 and 1899, the French avy Office, in order to support him in his battle against and subsequently six double-hulled -boats
had built several successful submarines, and this the submarine lobby.) (Projects 1-8). The chief items of machinery were
development led the German Torpedo Inspectorate The TI, however, was strongly in favour of built in order to verify that they would fit the space
(TI) to suggest the construction of an experimental submarine development, and its Chief of Staff, allotted to them, and a number of towing trials
submarine for defensive operations, or for use as an Konteradmiral Zeye, and Councillor Veith were were carried out to check hull strength and dis·
auxiliary, carried aboard a large ship. The naval present at several trials in Forelle. GW kept them placement. Additionally, on 3 December 1904, a
authorities, however, thought that the time was not informed of its designs and ideas, but actual ubmarine similar in design to the three Russian
yet ripe for this. At the inauguration of the STG contracts were vetoed by von Tirpitz. His attitude boats was ordered from GW.
(Schiffbautechnische Gesellschaft, the Technical changed somewhat after the Russians had ordered The Russian boats (Con truction umbers 109,
hipbuilding Society) in 1899, the Chairman, the three boats from GW. On 11 May 1904, in reply 110 and 111, later named Karp cla s) were double-
Councillor Busley, at the request of the Kaiser gave to a question from Deputy von Kardorff as to why hulled, with ballast and fuel tanks on the outside of
a speech on the development of submarines to that no German submarines were being built, von the hull, and ballast and compensating tanks inside.
date. After covering the various attempts that had Tirpitz had stated that until then they had been Measurements and installation were significantly
been made to build underwater vessels, he considered of little value; on 22 July, however, he affected by the Russian insistence on the boats
concluded with the negative pronouncement that, wrote: 'I intend to have a submarine built by the being manufactured in sections, to facilitate
despite all efforts, these experiments had confirmed aval Ministry and authorize '8' (the Technical railway transportation. Their specifications were as
nothing save that the present state of the art Department) to carry out the construction. I follows.
was sadly inadequate. 'The present technical un- request 'B' to fmd an enterprising construction Length overall: 39.9m.
reliability of the underwater vessels, especially the official of the younger school who is prepared to Maximum beam: 3.1m.
factor of lack of longitudinal stability, was such dedicate himself to submarine construction. This Pressure-hull diameter: 2.7m.
that one can see very little future for them ... The person is to be placed at the disposal of the Naval Displacement surfaced: 205 tons.
Plans for the three Russian boats Karp, Karas and Kambala.
F
I
~
I'
l-
J J •• ,j
ORIGI S OF THE U-BOAT 17

Displacement submerged: 236 ton.
Propulsion: two 200hp engines.
Fuel supply: 16.9 tons.
Speed surfaced: 10. knots.
Speed submerged: 8.8 knots.
Range surfaced: 1,100 na utical miles
at 10.8 knots.
Maximum diving depth: 30m.
Armament: 1 bow torpedo tube,
angled downwards
50; three C/03
torpedoes.
Originally, d 'Equevilley had thought that the
speeds would be higher - 12 knots on the surface,
10.5 knots submerged - but GW had doubted this
from the start. While under way, the trim could be
altered by weights moved manually. Two hydro-
planes, the aftermost sited forward of the propeller,
could be regulated by handwheels, but electrical
steering had been provided for the rudder.
The individual sections of the pressure hull were
of 12mm sheet steel, of circular cross-section,
welded in the Laura Foundry. Cast iron rings,
serving as vertical supports, were riveted to them
and bolted together. Originally, d'Equevilley had
Above: Karp under Russian flag. Below: Kambala (in piecesl and UI under construction, 1906.

planned a construction without frames (which he in August 1905, but, shortly after the contract had ready before the engines could be delivered, and she
thought unnecessary), but he had seriously been placed, important variations from the design was launched without surface engines, undergoing
miscalculated the compression strength of the hull for the Russian boats were requ€sted: a horizontal trials in 1906 with electric motors only.
- only the fact that cast-iron rings riveted to the layout for the torpedo tube; an increase in the On 4 August 1906, twelve months later than the
section ends worked like strong frames prevented diameter of the pressure hull; a larger conning expected delivery date, the German submarine was
the boats from being crushed in only a few metres tower; an improvement to the frontal profile; a lowered into the water by crane. As a safety
depth. stronger ballast keel; a concentration of the interior precaution, the lifting vessel Oberelbe had been
The conning tower was manufactured of 40mm ballast in the centre of the boat; special fuel tanks hired from the salvage company, Nordischer
cast nickel steel, and had two periscopes. The fact on the outside - for it was feared that the pressure Bergungsverein. Under the direction of the Master
that nickel steel is non-magnetic made possible the hull rivets would not be absolutely oil-tight - and of Marine Construction, Berling, the boat was
use of a magnetic compass (which, of course, could so many other alterations that no pressure hull was lowered from Oberelbe to a depth of 30m, ftrst
function only when electrical power had been ordered from the Laura Foundry until the middle of without. and then with a crew. Finally, at a depth of
switched off). April 1905. There were also delays in the 30m, water was taken into the boat and then
As with Forelle, it had been decided to fit peat development and completion of the engines. As expelled from it. In September 1906, the boat left
batteries, one above another: 396 cells were used petrol was not to be used for starting these, Chief GW under her own power for her flTst sea trial. In
and, because of their small capacity, they had to be Engineer Kritzler suggested that heated air be November she was designated Vi and, on 14
connected 6 in parallel and 66 in series. As the sucked in through the cylinders; after three to five December 1906, was handed over by GW for
intended oil engines could not be regulated or minutes, the cylinder would be so hot that if service in the German Navy. On 16 December 1906,
reversed, controllable-pitch propellers were vaporized paraffin were admitted ignition would be the RMA (Reichs-Marine-Amt, the Imperial Naval
provided, but these had an unfortunate effect: even immediate. It is greatly to the credit of Kritzler Office) announced:
when the boat was motionless, the still rotating (who later was to be employed by the flTm of 'Vi meets German requirements:
propeller absorbed 65hp from the engines Korting) that the many difficulties. which at times 1. It is a diving-boat of reasonably large displace-
(approximately 40 per cent of the total capacity). must have seemed almost insuperable, were ment. Its capabilities on the surface are such as
The initial submarine for the German Navy overcome. Nevertheless. it was unavoidable that to meet the difficult water and weather condi-
(Construction Number 119) was to have been ready the flTst submarine for the Russians was almost tions of the German Bight.
U1.
.,_.oo!OO_
~.
Frame 4
'%'~TY~y
- "!-
,
[
r
Frame 44 I Frame 49
0 0 0 0 0 I' (l
~
t --
.... )
._----==-=- .r~
L-
~;~~-~. ~ Jb
~
~.
--~-
0 0 0 0 0 0 ()
ORIGINS OF THE U-BOAT 19

UU\'t;;I.;)\:i'tj;;I}UUU::: U J
und U 2
"
VI, above, with V2; left, at full speed; and, below, in the Kiel
Estuary.
2. It has paraffm-burning engine . Our defence

policy lays the greatest emphasis on operational
safety. Petrol engines cau e a very large number
of accidents and these are caused by explosions
which have occurred especially often in England.
Prior to 1904 it would have been impossible to
have built such a boat.'
During the period that followed, both these
arguments were u ed to justify the slow and much-
delayed acceptance of the German V-boat. It i a
fact that von Tirpitz commissioned a submarine
only after strong public pressure, and after the
Russians had ordered one from GW - he expected
very little of it, seeing it as a{weakening of his policy
of building up the German Fleet. The naval
estimates of 1907-9 were to include only four
submarines, and not until 1910 was there to be any
notable increase in numbers of this type of craft.
U-boat development and construction,

1906-10
On 4 March 1906, the first V-boat to be built by the
TI in collaboration with Berling was ordered from
the Kaiserliche Werft in Danzig (KWD) and was
known as 'Project 7', subsequently, U2. Great
stress was laid on achieving the highest possible
surface speed and, although the boat had a 50 per
cent greater displacement than U1, her improved
hull form gave her a surface speed of 10.5 knots
with the same 400hp engines. It was expected that
a surface speed of 12.5 knots could be achieved if
the engine capacity were increased to 600hp.
The necessary paraffin-burning engine were
ordered from Daimler-Benz because Kbrting engine
production was running behind schedule, and
Daimler were more successful in solving problems
of warm-up times and performance/weight values.
The technique of regulating speed by controllable-
ORIGI IS OF THE V-BOAT 21

Above: UI, U2, U3 and U4 at Kie!.
pitch propellers was abandoned and replaced by a Key: a, paraHin container;

GW boats Ub3 and Ub4 as built for Austria-Hungary. b, pressure-tight paraHin
system of three electric motors. (SignifIcantly, the compensation container; C, diving
latter made for more weight and demanded more tanks; d, lubricating oil tanks;
e, reserve torpedo chamber;
space.) When manoeuvring, the boat was propelled f, torpedo firing tube; 9, high-
by electric motors only. In this case, the electric pressure compressor; h, low-
motors, positioned abaft the paraffm-burning pressure compressor; i. leak
pump; k, telephone buoy;
engines, served as generators for the paraffm- I, retractable ventilation mast;
burning/electric cruising mode. m, silencer; n, ship's boat;
0, assembly hatch; p, lifting eye;
Further improvements over the design of Vi were q, trimming tanks; r, deck
the torpedo armament (two 45cm tubes fItted both porthole; S, driving rods for
forward and aft) and the use of large surface-plate flooding valves; t, capstan
engine; U, safety keel.
batteries from the ftrm of AFA, which meant that
130 cells in two parallel batteries suffIced. This type
of battery had proved superior to the peat cell
during systematic tests carried out in 1905 in a -f~-e 1-..=
specially established department of the TI. Another
innovation was the siting of the control room
beneath the conning tower. A third periscope was
provided for use in the control room, in addition to c
Aft living-quarters Engine room Control-room OHicers' Forward Torpedo room
the two in the conning tower. As in Vi, it was living quarters
6
living-quarters
planned to use a method, patented secretly by
Berling, for automatic trimming during the loading
and ftring of torpedoes. Finally, it was intended to
use an air-renewal device that had been developed
by Drager of Lubeck.
The building of this ftrst V-boat at KWD was
considerably handicapped by the fact that, while
many new constructional features were demanded,
experience of production was lacking. Furthermore, then a decision had been taken to use diesel engines the delivery of these was delayed still further and
Daimler-Benz did not succeed in producing the in future V-boats.) the boat remained at the shipyard. Even after they
improved paraffm-burning engines in the requisite U2 left the slipway on 18 June 1908, fItted with had been installed, V2 suffered dynamo diffIculties
time. (They were ready in 1909; but, after four-and- Korting engines, which gave a lesser performance. and was not used. The next two boats (which KWD
a-half days of trials, they suffered a crankshaft She carried out trials until the end of 1908 and. had been asked to build on 13 August 1907), V3 and
breakage, and the Navy fmally took delivery of early in 1909, her engine room was altered to V4, were considerably more reliable: with more
them in June 1910. They were not used because by accommodate the new Daimler engines. However, powerful Korting engines.

In September 1907, Ui had carried out an
endurance trial of some note - in bad weather, she
completed a passage of 587 nautical miles from
US-U8.
Wilhelrnshaven around Skagen to Kiel without
breaking down. This was encouraging, and GW now
offered an enlarged version with a surface
di placement of 325 tons, armed with underwater
bow torpedo tubes and an above-water, stern
torpedo tube. It was thought that two 225hp
Korting engines on each shaft would give an
Impressive speed of 15 knots. Submerged speed was
to be 8.5 knots; surface range would be 1,800
nautical miles at 15 knots.
But the Navy refused it, with the excuse that
they did not want more boats of this type from GW.
In fact, the TI did not want to hand over their
designs for the development of boats that would be
more suitable for the German avy to GW because
the latter was considerably involved in building for
foreign countries. In March 1907, GW had received
contracts from Austria-Hungary, for two smaller,
237-ton submarines (Ub3 and Ub4 ), and in October
1907 from Norway, for a similar boat (Kobben).
Improvements over the Ui design for both these
projects were: greater diving depth (50m); a new
conning tower, able to withstand greater pressure
(three-circle cross-section, Ub3 and Ub4; oval cross-
ction, Kobben) with a pressure-tight hatch at the
bottom; trim tanks operated by compressed air and ---------,
pumps; pressure-tight fuel tanks on the outside of
the pressure hull; hydroplanes operated from the Hi'
I
central control room; and, in the case of Kobben, a
,,
I
stern torpedo tube above the waterline in addition I ... nKII'l.
t'~~g~~~~-~-EE!~~~~~~~~~~i#~~.
to the two bow tubes.
Underlying the reluctance of the TI to make its
designs available to GW was its concern that a
foreigner, d'Equevilley, held a prominent position
.
in GW's submarine development department, and
d'Equevilley was eventually removed from this
post because GW wanted further orders from the U9-U12.
German avy. On 1 July 1907, at the suggestion of
Berling, Hans Techel was appointed departmental
head of submarine development at GW.
Hans Techel, certainly the best-known German
submarine engineer, was born on 12 February 1870,
and began his career with GW on 1 May 1895,
leaving them on 1 July 1901 to take over a job as
head of the newly-established offtce for warship
construction in the Howaldt Yard at Kiel.
The way was now open for GW to take part once
again in V-boat building for the German Navy.
Drawings were received from the TI and, under
Techel's direction, US to U8 were projected with the
following specifications: surface speed 15 knots;
submerged speed 10.5 knots; surface range 2,000
nautical miles at 15 knots; two submerged bow
torpedo tubes and two submerged stern tubes with
a total of six Type C/06 torpedoes; ftxed propellers;
storage batteries with large surface-area plates; and
the same air-purification system as in U2.
GW's design for a 500-ton boat with a surface gyroscopic compass, made by Anschutz-Kaempfe, in ftghting ability and seaworthiness to all foreign
speed of 14.5 knots was presented in February was fttted in the control room. Confrrmation of competition.
1908. The pressure hull differed from their earlier contract for UlrU8 followed on 8 April 1908 and, In 1909, a change took place in the top manage-
boats in that it was riveted with double-lapped on 15 July, four 500-ton boats on similar lines were ment of the Torpedo Inspectorate: Vizeadmiral
longitudinal seams and joints (but, despite the ordered from KWD. These eight V-boats, UlrU12, Zeye died and was replaced by Konteradrniral Lans.
streamlined form, the anticipated speeds and range from the 1907/8 naval estimates would form the In October 1906 meanwhile. Privy Councillor Veith
were not to be achieved). For the frrst time, a frrst real German V-boat force to be superior both had been transferred to the RMA. He was

succeeded by Privy Councillor Vthemann. A Above: U5 and U6 being filted-out at GW, 29 June 1910. Inset: Hans Techel.
further change was that Naval Construction
Master Schulz was appointed to the V-Boat
Department of the TI from the beginning of 1907 U13-U16.
until 1911.
In 1909, it was intended to place the construction
of a further four 500-ton boats with KWD, because
the avy considered G W's price rather high, but,
after delicate negotiations, GW succeeded in
obtaining the contract for one of them (U16). The
first three, Ul3-U15, were formally ordered on 23
February 1909, and U16 was ordered from GW on
23 August 1909. =
Meanwhile, the first tactical trials of Ul, U3 and
~.~~.
U4 were being carried out. With regard to the use in
action of several V-boats together, the TI reported
on 27 ovember 1910:
'In considering the use of and the carrying out of
tests of a tactical nature of several V-boats or
:z=:z=-s>.
groups of V-boats, there exists the real difficulty I
I
that, in using these boats to the full, collision
danger is a very real one, since it is obvious that
once submerged V-boats cannot see each other. As
long as there remains no feasible way of boats
signalling to each other underwater, it will be
necessary for the boats to keep to certain
-------------
t blished formations or to operate through within, but the three men inside it were dead. At the KWD.' Subsequently, a greater weight margin was
rtain stated commands when attacking.' inquiry into the cause of the accident, it was allowed for in submarine designs, and this was later
\ consequence of this was the suggestion that established that during fitting out the closure to to prove a wise precaution.
l lilts should only operate in certain arcs or sectors, the ventilation system had been installed in such a
lth clear zones left between them. way that, when open, the indicator showed closed. The adoption of diesel engines
The TI consequently issued the following GW had already considered the use of diesel
tbacks about 1911 directions: engines for the Russian submarines Karp, Karas
It r a prolonged fitting-out period at KW 'I. When a V-boat begins to dive, it must fIrst of all and Kambala. Even before the Ktirting paraffm
Kaiserliche Werft), Kiel, U3 embarked on her carry out an airtightness test - of 20 millibar engines had been ordered, Muller, the Construction
1 iden voyage on 17 January 1911 in stormy overpressure. Pressure must be maintained for Director of GW, had visited Maschinenfabrik
unditions. Combined with this voyage was an one minute. Augsburg- urnberg AG (MA I at Augsburg, to
n tructional course for new recruits, which had 2. It is most essential that a second salvage ship be inquire about the possibilities of a lightweight
rted in that month. Before leaving harbour, the built immediately. diesel engine suitable for V-boats. At that time,
bo t's commander was instructed to carry out a 3. Escape apparatus that meets the requirements of MAN engines had a performance/weight ratio of
I I ticulous diving trial in order to establish whether war operations must be developed as soon as 35--48kg per hp and were considered to be too
th yard had completed their work satisfactorily. possible. An appropriate sum of money for this heavy and too bulky. GW then considered ordering
'h n the upper deck reached the surface of the purpose is to be proposed in the Naval Estimates. its own design, a 200hp four-stroke diesel engine; by
ter, a considerable quantity of water rushed into 4. Vnderwater signalling equipment is also to be the beginning of March 1904, the drawings had
h engine room through the ventilation outlet, developed as soon as possible. been completed and sent to Augsburg. On 6 April
Ithough the indicator showed the valve to be 5. Emergency electrical hand-lamps are to be 1904, MAN made an offer which was declined
10 ed. Before anyone realized what had happened provided in all watertight compartments. because of the lengthy delivery time. For the time
(no one having dared touch the apparently closed 6. Each watertight compartment in a V-boat must being, therefore, GW stayed with the Ktirting
, lve), the boat had taken in so much water that have its own hatch. paraffm engines.
h b came stern heavy and sank to the bottom. At 7. All ventilation valves leading to the outside must In 1905, renewed inquiries to MAN from GW and
this juncture, the commander, who was in the have a double method of closure.' the TI elicited designs that required more weight
onning tower with the officer of the watch and the Between 1910 and 1912, KWD encountered and space than were deemed practical for V-boat
h Imsman ordered the entire crew to make their several setbacks in their V-boat construction construction. Techel, in his book on V-boat
ay to the bow compartment, in the interest of because of weight problems. Almost all fIrms construction at GW, was later to express regret
( ty. There were now 29 men gathered in the unlit exceeded prescribed weights, especially in the that no attempts had been made to build such
bow compartment, sharing approximately 8m 3 of manufacture of main engines and switch gear and, engines and to try them out in V-boats. Had such
ir, and three men trapped in the conning tower, as a result, U9-U15 were heavier than planned. In experimentation taken place, they would almost
hile the remainder of the boat had fuled with U9, the excess weight was compensated by certainly have obviated delays at a much later date
water. The men in the conning tower survived for removing eight battery cells. More serious was the in the introduction of diesel engines into V-boat
Ilnly 10-12 hours, as chlorine gas from the batteries position in U13; her excess weight of 4.8 tons could technology.
adually seeped through the speaking tubes and not be compensated by removing ballast, so 14 MAN were now working on a four-cylinder four-
{ rbon dioxide also began to concentrate in this battery cells had to be removed. On 22 January stroke engine that would develop 300hp at 500rpm,
mall area. The men in the bow compartment were 1912, the Chief of Staff of the TI, Konteradmiral and this was ready for demonstration to the TI in
ble to breathe because of the caustic potash futers Lans stated: 'There is no doubt that the blame for continuous operation in 1907. The TI then
( the Drager system, but the air became more and these regrettable occurrences is to be laid at the requested MA to formulate a proposal for a six-
m re stale. Some chlorine gas did make its way into door of either the Technical Bureau (TBI, the TI or cylinder engine, which was to be developed to its
lh bow compartment, but was dealt with by the air
purifiers.
The accident was reported some two hours later,
nd immediately two floating cranes, each with a
GW's design for a U-boat diesel
lIfting capacity of 150 tons, were sent by KW to the installation, 1904.
ne of the sinking (two nautical miles from the
yard).
The salvage ship Vulkan was out of commission in
dry dock, but was ordered to be made ready. Some
I ven hours later, divers had placed cables round
th fore part of U3, and the cranes began lifting, the
Intention being to raise the torpedo tubes out of the
water so that the crew could make their way to
afety through them. But the upper deck had
hardly begun to break surface when the boat began
to slip back: the cables parted and the boat sank
once more. A further fourteen hours elapsed before
second attempt succeeded; the torpedo tubes were
opened and the 29 men, by now in an extremely
xhausted condition, made their way out. They had
:. ,I,~\
been trapped for 27 hours in the small, dark bow
compartment.
Meanwhile, Vulkan had been towed to the scene
and had anchored above the boat. After a further
(Ive hours (i.e. thirty hours after the accident had
occurred), U3 was completely raised and the
conning tower was opened. It was almost dry

utmost limit. After a design had been submitted, a March 1908. This led to GW being requested to problems with exhaust valves. In November 1908,
test engine was ordered from MAN in the middle of formulate a design for a four-stroke and a two- GW, who were beginning manufacture of a 300hp
1908. stroke engine with a performance of 8S0hp at two-stroke diesel engine for a picket boat, received
At the beginning of 1906 meanwhile, GW had 4S0rpm. Requests for proposals of two-stroke an order from the TI for an 8S0hp two-stroke test
begun to build its own four-cylinder, 300hp four- marine engines were also made to FIAT of Turin, engine. Simultaneously, FIAT, MAN (Nuremberg)
stroke diesel engine. It employed a special crank Kbrting and MAN of Nuremberg, the German and Kbrting were requested to build a diesel sub-
gearing for starting and for reversing into the two- Navy being inclined towards the two-stroke process marine engine in competition with the Augsburg
stroke operation and was demonstrated to the TI in because of its lighter construction and absence of project.
U1-U16 compared Table 1. Pressure hulls, VI-VI2
According to the Imperial Navy's Ul U2 U3-U4 U5-UB U9-Ul2

official publication No. LXIII Stand
Maximum diameter (mm) 2,800 3,400 3,400 3,750 3.650
des Unterseebootwesens, Berlin Maximum thickness of metal Imm) 12 12 12 1l-12 12
1911. Maximum distance between frames Imm) 1,600 1,000 500 700 500
Frame profile Imm) 140X65X9 120X75X9 130X65X8 1l0X75X 12 130X65X8
Constructional diving depth 1m) with
1. PRESSURE HULL. In U3-U8, safety factor of 2.5 30 30 50 50 50
collision bulkheads, 1&-21mm thick,
and calculated to withstand pressure
at SOm, were fitted in the forward Table 2. Estimated and actual speeds, VI-V12
section of the pressure hull. In Estimated speed shown hrst; speed achieved during trials shown in parentheses.
U9-U12, two central water-tight Ul U2 U3-U4 U5-UB U9-U12
bulkheads were fitted. These were
designed to withstand pressure at Surfaced Iknots) 10.6 (10.6) 12.6 13 (13.3) 14.5 (13.7) 15 (14.5)
2o-S0m and divided the emergency Submerged (knots) -(8.67) 10.5 18.81 12 (9.5) 12.5 (10.31 12.5 18.11
control room from the remainder of
the boat. U2 and subsequent boats
had a conning tower of 30mrn nickel on the outside. In U3 and U4, the Table 3. Comparison of batteries in VI-V16
steel riveted to the pressure hull. compensating tanks were water-
US-UB, U9,
2. EXTERIOR HULL. The outer skin tight cylinders situated to port and Ul U2 U3-U4 Ulo--U12 U13-Ul6
consisted of 3.5---4mm sheet metal starboard in the middle diving tanks;
(as used in torpedo-boats) zinc- from US onwards they were water-tight Height of element Imm) 370 715 715 715 715
coated on both sides. The frames pockets secured to the pressure hull; Weight of element (kg) 124 405 372 372 350
were spaced SOOmm apart. From U2 in US-U8, the pockets were indented Number of cells 396 130 210 220 220
onwards, 8-13 diving tanks and 6 towards the inside of the pressure Total weight Itons) 49 65 78 82 77
bunkers were distributed along each hull. From U3 onwards, the fuel- Total capacity with 3Y, hours
discharge (ampere-hours) 3,660 6,300 6,300 6.300 8,000
side of the boat. In Ul-U4, the tank balancing tanks consisted of water- 210
Voltage of battery 130 150 210 210
top was horizontal; in US-Ul2, it tight cylindrical tubes, which had
was inclined towards the sides at an been moved to the centre of gravity
~
Arrangement of
angle of 6 0 • The upper deck was
covered with linoleum. Tank testing
of the fuel bunker and filled with
paraffm.
UI
'£-"~
I Crew's quarters propulsion layout
Key: 0, diesel; E. electric;
of model hull shapes was carried out
with regard to both surface and
submerged propulsion. Table 2
4. STEERING GEAR. In all boats, the
rudder was placed forward of the
propellers. Its upper and lower U2
El
o{D0e-09O-0~
P E2-3 I - Crew's quarters
P, paraffin.
shows the speeds estimated, with halves were separate, in order to 300hp
the speeds achieved during trials minimize heeling when submerged. El P~E2-3
shown in brackets. From U9 onwards, the rudder was U3-U4 ~~ _ Crews' quarters
3. DIVING AND COMPENSATING TANKS. electrically-operated from the control 300hp
In Ul, the tanks fitted to the centre. In Ul-U8, the forward
8 PI ~
exterior did not give sufficient hydroplane was positioned on a
negative buoyancy when diving, so common rudder spindle running U5-U8 -rom-ro---
four larger tanks were fitted through the pressure hull in a collar. 225hp 225hp
additionally to the floor of the From US onwards, the forward
~
1 PI E2-3 P2 \
pressure hull and these served also planes were electrically operated. In
U9-U12, as an experimental U9-UI2 - ~m~~ID¢OO+ Control-room
as compensating and fuel-trimming
tanks. The exterior diving tanks measure to lighten steering, both the 3~ 225hp
~
fitted to U2 were sufficient to enable forward hydroplanes were made in 1E2 PI P2\
the boat to dive. Six internal tanks the form of a shutter, with two U13-U16 Q;)Cg OOOOHtHWQ>OO f- Control-room
in the floor of the pressure hull rudder blades on each side of the 350hp 225hp
sufficed as trim tanks only. Two boat coupled by a linkage.
~
more interior tanks, sited under the S. PROPULSION. Until 1910, there
Q;XiO
PlIl:OlX)HtHQ),Q;) P
0000+
2\
boat's centre of gravity, were used were only two German power plants UI7·U18 Control· room
as compensating tanks. These flat- available for surface propulsion: a 350hp 350hp
shaped interior tanks were difficult
to construct and to maintain, so
from U3 onwards the compensating
and balancing tanks were situated
6-cylinder Kbrting engine of
22o-260hp and an 8-cylinder
Kbrting engine of 31o-34Shp at
SSOrpm with a consumption of 400g
UI9 ~n _ ~ ISlJoO
~
cSooor
850hp f\
Control-room

In 1908, the TI were contemplating the construc- and in the spring of 1910 two new V-boats were August 1910, after a two-year building time. The
lion of a diesel-engined boat that would feature a ordered from KWD. un and U18, as they were tests went well and, after slight improvements had
Il(Tliflcant number of improvements over existing designated, were to follow the new design, but been made to the engine and clutches had been
ubmarines and would be a great deal larger. The Korting paraffin-burning engines were substituted fitted, it ran for a further trial period of 24 hours in
placing of the contract for such a boat, however, for diesel engines. August 1911. At GW, certain technological diffi-
'IS postponed until at least one test engine could All firms experienced great difficulty in manu- culties and problems with personnel meant that the
I shown to run for six days continuously. Delays facturing lightweight diesel engines. MA of preliminary plan for the 850hp two-stroke trial
lI('curred in the manufacture of the diesel engines, Augsburg were the first to produce a test engine, in engine had been very considerably delayed. There
ropulsion curves from test data for KWD boats onwards, all boats had two V-boat without employing divers.
submerged bow torpedo tubes and Additionally, all boats were fitted
I J1 I
two submerged stern tubes. Ul with connection points on the
I I U/3-U/5 surfaced / / carried three C/03 torpedoes, and the outside for air and telephone leads.
I
/
others each carried six: C/03 The main ballast pumps of UI-U4
torpedoes in U2, C/06 from U3 could manage 60 tons per hour
1/ onwards. The C/06 torpedoes were against water pressure at 60m. This
/ / somewhat larger than the C/03, had was doubled from U5 onwards.
U3· U4 submerged a more powerful propulsion unit 10. AVIGATIO AL AND SIGNALLING
/ / V (four- instead of three-cylinder) and AIDS. The periscopes fitted in early
U9·UI5 submerged V / could be fired at an angle: initially, V-boats were rather short (those in
/ ±45°; later, ±90°. U~UI2 being 4.5m long), and it was
/ / 8. LIVING QUARTERS. In the first barely possible to maintain a course
/ / /
boats, UI-U4, the quarters were not beneath the surface at periscope
100
1/ / / suitable for a week's habitation. depth. Navigational safety of a
/ V From U2 onwards, the crew's V-boat, even when cruising alone,
V /' /' V quarters were above the batteries. left much to be desired. It was very
'00 ,/ ,/ From U5 onwards, officers occupied difficult to estimate surface speed
./'
compartments separated from the when the boat was being propelled
I /' v::: ........- V ,/ U3·U4 surfaced
rest of the boat by bulkheads and by its oil-burning engine. The
100
V ::;:p.-
-
V U9-UI2 surfaced
I I I
curtains. Initially, only electrical
heating was available. Subsequently,
magnetic compass was of somewhat
limited use. The gyroscopic
0
5 10 11 12 13 14 kn a steam heating arrangement was compasses used in U5 onwards were
built in, and this could be connected more reliable, but were complicated
of oil per hp per hour and a which had a noticeably higher cell to the sleeping quarters to reduce and expensive. Soundings could only
p rformance/weight ratio of 24kg per capacity. As an experiment, U9 had the damp that tended to persist be taken by a hand lead.
hp. For higher performances, two mass cells, but peat insulation was there. Chronometers were considerably
ngines were used in tandem. As the not used and the cells could be The 2-stroke en/rines required air impaired by the electrical and
p raffm engines could not be made, therefore, rather bigger. From in the ratio of 20m 3 of air for each magnetic effects of the boat and
r versed, were incapable of much in U13 onwards, all V-boats had mass kilogramme of paraffm burned, and were, therefore, correspondingly
the way of speed regulation and (as plates possessing a greater specific this was sucked from the boat, unreliable. Radio telegraphy (RT)
h s already been mentioned) capacity than large surface area providing adequate ventilation when and underwater telegraphy (VT)
controllable-pitch propellers had plates. From U2 onwards, V-boat surfaced. The TI and the Drager were the most important methods of
disadvantages, a new system was batteries consisted of two sections: Works had collaborated to provide signalling, and aU boats from U5
chosen for boats from U2 onwards. the individual elements in hard an air-purification system for use onwards were fitted with RT. Two
U~U12 were to have a complicated rubber containers were grouped when submerged, in which air was aerial masts were necessary, and
paraffm/electric 3-motor system, and together in a lead housing with a sucked by fans through caustic these could be lowered from inside
U16, a 2-motor system. In UI3-UI5, rubber surround. Numerous potash filters and enriched with the boat. Ship to V-boat range was
which did not have this system, problems soon led to an open oxygen. This would last a 24-man 5~2 nautical miles; that between
manoeuvring was carried out by ventilated layout of cells on a crew for 72 hours, and was fitted V-boats was approximately 30
battery current only. Both electric foundation of angle irons, with hard from U2 onwards. nautical miles. VT installations,
motors drove fixed shafts and, if a rubber insulators in the battery 9. RESCUE INSTALLATIONS. External initiaUy with a bell, the danger of
battery needed charging while under chambers. The danger of a build-up rescue fittings were designed for which was activated by compressed
way, one side of the propulsion plant of explosive gases from the cells was rapid lifting of the boat in case of an air, were likewise fitted from U5
was used as a generator while the kept to a minimum by sucking out accident. They consisted of a onwards, but were not particularly
other was used to drive the boat. gas from the cells with a strong telephone buoy with 80m of cable satisfactory.
6. BATTERIES. Ul had lead cells with concentration of air through hard and two lifting padeyes with lifting 11. DIVING TIME. In the normal state
mass plates (grid plates with built-in rubber pipes and soft rubber tubes. hooks spaced 12m apart on the deck, (bridge rigged; oil-burning engines
mass) with peat insulation between By using a block and tackle and corresponding exactly with similar running), the time needed to dive to
the plates, the whole contained in trolleys, batteries could be removed fittings in Vulkan, a ship being built a depth of 9m was seven to eight
hard rubber housings. As these in a week and re-installed in a by the Howaldt Yard and intended minutes. In a state of readiness -
housings were stacked in layers one fortnight. Battery life was as an escort, accommodation and i.e., with bridge unrigged, electric
above the other, a rather high centre approximately four years. At an salvage vessel. If an accident motors ready for submerged
of gravity resulted, which had to be approximate cost of 220,000 marks occurred, two wire-attached buoys propulsion and conning-tower hatch
counteracted by a lead keel of 23 per battery set, they represented a could be released from within the open - the time was reduced to
tons. U2-U8 and U1O-U12 used considerable part of the cost of a submarine. The wires ran through 2.5-4.5 minutes; 30 seconds could be
large surface area plates, which V-boat. the lifting hooks and could be taken cut from this time if some of the
AFA had used in 1904 for the 7. TORPEDO ARMAMENT. Ul had only up by Vulkan. Hence, it was possible diving tanks had already been
wedish submarine Hajen, and one bow torpedo tube; from U2 to connect lifting hawsers to the flooded.

were special problems, with too high a temperature
in the cylinders and pistons, and with the expulsion U17-U18.
of exhaust gases which had to be overcome by
compressed air, involving special scavenging
pumps. The GW engine carried out its six-day
endurance trial from 10 to 16 June 1911. (The
acceptance test of the 300hp engine for the picket
boat Mentor had already taken place in March of
that year: this non-reversible type of engine was
then installed, for the frrst time in Germany, in the
diesel submarine Atropo, built for the Italian
avy.) At the acceptance trial of the large GW
engine, it was impossible to demonstrate its
reversing properties and manoeuvrability because
the braking system failed to function. GW were
therefore instructed to rectify this as soon as
possible, then combine it with a 24-hour endurance
test, and this took place in October 1912.
Meanwhile, delays and design alterations to the
three other test engines ordered from FIAT, MAN
(Nuremberg) and Korting were of such magnitude
that they did not come into consideration for 0- -- - - - --0-<:3-0 - <3----{7 ~ - - - - -0- - - -- -
U-boat development. Only the four-stroke MAN

and the two-stroke GW diesel engines remained as
possible contenders. The four-stroke engine used
less fuel (l90g per hp per hour) and made less noise
than the two-stroke, but it had an arrangement of 4. Main rudder abaft the propellers. held against him were the many failures before and
six fittings on the crankshaft, which was not at all 5. Guaranteed maximum surface speed of 16.5 during the autumn manoeuvres of 1912. (From 2 to
well balanced when rotating, and caused starting knots. 23 September, of an average of 13 U-boats, 69.5 per
difficulties when the crankshaft was in certain On 18 March 1911, GW was awarded the contract cent were in efficient daily use, 27.2 per cent were
positions. Starting and reversing were only readily for four diesel U-boats of this type, designated partially usable and 3.3 per cent were out of action;
achieved when all the valves worked perfectly. U23-U26, even though the necessary engines were in a seven-day period, only 60 per cent were
There was also a phenomenon much feared in this not yet ready for testing, and had not been completely operational.) In a communication to von
era, the danger of torsion resonance in the shafts, accepted. Berling, the Naval Construction Adviser, Tirpitz dated 15 December 1912, the Shipyard
which could be corrected only by using a thick, ordered them from GW immediately after Administration demanded Berling's immediate
heavy shaft system. The two-stroke diesel engine acceptance of the 850hp trial engine. Although the dismissal.
had a fuel consumption of 220g per hp per hour and reversing problem had not been resolved, and On 1 April 1913, Berling was appointed Works
was noisier because of a faster revolving drive shaft despite the long development time of the test Director of new construction at KWK, Kiel: with
and the aspiration of scavenging air. However, the engines at GW, eleven diesel U-boats (U31-U41) hindsight, it can be said that he had been hasty in
horizontal movements were less uneven, and the were scheduled for building in 1912 at GW, using ordering the GW engines, but it cannot be disputed
engine started more readily. In addition, better- the two-stroke diesel engines. By using cylinders that he had done much to build up the German
balanced torque lessened the problem of torsion bored out to an additional 10mm, they were to submarine arm. His successor in the U-Boat
resonance. So it was considered that, given an develop 925hp at 430rpm. The fear of torsion Department of the TI was Naval Construction
improved performance, the two-stroke engine resonance in the four-stroke engines may well have Adviser Reitz, with Construction Official Werner
would be superior to the four-stroke, and would influence~ this decision. Only the four boats, succeeding Schulz in the shipbuilding section. After
furnish more scope for development. U27-U30, the contract for which was given to these appointments had been made, the position
After the acceptance trial of the MA test engine KWD on 19 February 1912, were equipped with regarding delays in the delivery of the GW diesel
had demonstrated the feasibility of using diesel four-stroke MAN diesel engines, each developing U-boats hardly changed at all.
engines, the TI reconsidered it programme for 1,000hp. From U27 onwards, all U-boats had a
diesel-engined U-boats. It was similar, in form and longer periscope (6.2m) and were able to maintain Table 4. Delivery schedule for U23-U41, April 1913
arrangement, to the design for un and U18, but periscope depth more easily than earlier boats. Approx.
was to have 50cm torpedo tubes for G6 torpedoes. In the matter of the ordering of diesel engines, Proposed Actual delay
Consideration was also given to fitting an 8.8cm the preferential treatment which GW received as Boats delivery delivery (monthsl
Ll30 gun. On 25 November 1910, a contract for the compared to MAN had its sequel at the end of 1912,
frrst four of these MAN-engined diesel boats, when it became evident that the delays in providing U23 20 May 1913 11 Sept 1913 3',
U24 31 July 1913 6 Dec 1913 4'1<
Ul9-U22, was awarded to KWD. Simultaneously, the GW diesel engines were growing and that the U25 31 Aug 1913 9 May 1914 8'/3
GW received the type requirements for the new reliability of the engines already produced left U26 30 Sept 1913 20 June 1914 8"3
diesel boats, and was able to present a plan for a much to be desired. GW excused themselves on the U31 1 Oct 1913 1 Sept 1914 11"3
650-ton boat by 21 ovember 1910. Following grounds that the TI, after acceptance of a U32 1 Dec 1913 3 ept 1914 9
further negotiations with the TI, the dimensions successful engine, had requested too many U33 1 Jan 1914 27 Sept 1914 9
U34 1 Feb 1914 5 Oct 1914 8
were somewhat enlarged. In comparison with the improvements and changes. 1 March 1914 3 ov 1914
U35
last GW boat, U16, the following modernizations The Shipyard Administration laid the blame at U36 1 April 1914 14 Nov 1914 7V,
were evident. Berling's door. It had been his decision to place U37 1 June 1914 9 Dec 1914 6Y,
1. Reduced number of fuel containers, and omission orders for GW engines for the GW boats, U31-U41, U38 1 June 1914 11 Dec 1914 6'/3
of trim tanks. and there were also other problems with propulsion U39 1 July 1914 1 Jan 1915 6",
2. Four water-tight bulkheads. U40 1 July 1914 29 Feb 1915
units for which Berling in the TI was held U41 1 Aug 1914 1 Feb 1915 6
3. 50cm torpedo tubes for G6 torpedoes. responsible, as well as the difficulties with U2. Also
2 ORIGI S OF THE U-BOAT

On 30 July 1914, a statement from the newly-
I rro d U-Boat Inspectorate (page 33) on the diesel- U19-U22.
nKine question established that:
'The 850hp engines of U1Ff-U22 have been
Irking well and efficiently. To be sure, in some
, they are not ideal for U-boats in that their
nstruction and accessibility leaves something to
d sired, but in detail they exhibit a satisfactory
Ii" from which future reliability can be
p ted. Voyages made up to now by U27 and LJ28
v hown that the l,OOOhp engines are reliable
d r ady for operational use. Report has already
n made of the disappointing experiences with
860hp GW diesel engines. The design of these is
n atisfactory, they have not been constructed
lth sufficient care, and they still can not be
n idered as satisfactory operational U-boat
gines. Their efficiency does not match that of the
IA engines.'
In time, however, GW succeeded in bringing their
I Is up to the standard of the MAN engines.
spite all these difficulties, the German yards .'1 ( ) 0 o---e:t· 0 -+- 0--- ••
ucceeded in producing operationally-ready diesel

t in a much shorter time than, for example,
=====:====-====::':=====~<Il.~·
rance, who had initiated similar trials as early as
U31·U37 (similar to U23-U26 and U38-U41l.
Frame 9
viewed from aft Frame 38 Frame 51 Frame 63
viewed from aft viewed from aft
I
'.
1 'I
r ' .
Stowage
ORIGI S OF THE U-BOAT 29

1903, only to return to steam propulsion after many
failures and accidents. It wa the die el engine that
changed the role of the German U-boat from a
defensive to an offensive one and made pos ible its
succes ful application in a war of blockade.
Single-system propulsion
Early submarines had a single ystem for both
surface and submerged propulsion - initially
muscle power, then steam and, fmally, electricity.
Not until the end of the nineteenth century was
surface propulsion separated from, and different
from, submerged propulsion. Advantage was taken
of two available systems: combustion engines for
high speed and range on the urface, with the
simplicity and safety of electric motors when
submerged. However, the idea ever present wa to
utilize a single reliable propulsion unit giving a
greater range, and this was only to be achieved by
the use of combustion machinery. At about the
beginning of the century, when the diesel engine
wa being further refmed, designs were being
prepared for a propul ion unit that would use an
internal-combu tion engine whose exhaust ga es
would be mixed with oxygen in a closed circuit
(patented by Jaubert in 1901, Sabathe in 1904 and
Winand in 1906).
In Patent Classification 65a No. I 8825, Dr
George Franc;ois Jaubert of Paris described this
process in the following terms:
'The essential point of the new drive is that
explosion engines with a closed circuit are used;
the'y use exhaust gases enriched with oxygen or
with oxygen containing ga , to produce an explo-
sive mixture which can be fed into the combustion
chamber. Washing devices would be nece sary for
the cleansing of the exhaust ga es, and in them the
surface of the free liquid will be kept as small as
pos ible so that stability is affected as little as
possible. In order to maintain a constant pressure
in the closed circuit, it is e ential to expel exce s
exhaust ga es out of the boat by means of a pump
or similar system, and thi should be an automatic
system that would start to operate when the
pressure reaches a certain point.'
In his Patent Classification 46a No. 196266, Paul
Winand of Cologne sugge ted the use of cooled
exhaust ga es to dilute the mixture of oxygen and
fuel in two-stroke engines and, in 1907, practical
tests following this principle were tried out by GW,
with a 30hp diesel engine. Long running times were
in fact achieved, but the system was not yet ready
for operational u e, because regulating equipment
for the supply of oxygen wa not available, and
diesel engines had still not been developed to the
right degree. There were also considerable doubts
about the use of pure oxygen in a drive unit.
In the Deutz Gas Engine Factory, work now
began on another system. In this, a mixture of
disintegrated nitrogen dioxide and the gas from the
burned paraffm was used. The avy supported this
research from 1906 to 1907, hoping that it would
lead to the following performance a pects in a
Left: U-boat construction at GW, Kiel, in the summer of

1913. U37 is on the left with U38 (right) on Slip 5. U25 and
U26 are behind her on Slip 4.
ORlGI S OF THE U-BOAT 31

V-boat of approximately 700 tons when submerged: confmes of a submarine using steam for surface when on the move, an hour and a half or two hours
225 nautical miles at 15 knots, or 360 nautical miles propulsion, and the increasing effIciency of the when motionless. He also pointed out the superior
at 12 knots or 800 nautical miles at 8 knots (as internal combustion engines combined to render surface and submerged speeds of craft driven by
against a battery-powered range of only 85 steam propulsion obsolete. Nevertheless, attempts steam. A further advantage of this system as
nautical miles at 5 knots in a boat of similar sizel. In to utilize steam continued to be made. These opposed to a combined oil/electric system was that
the summer of 1913, an explosion occurred which stemmed from the desire for high speeds, the it was much lighter. Adverse features were having
resulted in some deaths and completely destroyed danger of the petrol engines of the time (up to the to conduct away heat, erosion caused by the caustic
the test equipment. The research came to a halt. First World War), and the unreliability of the frrst compound, a large space requirement and a lesser
At about this time, greater safety and a quicker diesel engines. Even the initiator of GW's frrst surface range resulting from the generally inferior
result seemed likely by using a method proposed by V-boats, d'Equevilley, had proposed a steam-driven performance of steam engines compared to oil
engineer Moritz Honigmann of Grevenberg near boat in 1908; in several patents, he improved engines. It would take some time to solve these
Aachen. He suggested that, when submerged, upon the Honigmann steam/caustic-soda drive. various problems, and the outbreak of the First
exhaust steam be led into concentrated caustic In 1912, in collaboration with the frrm of AG World War brought an end to these developments
soda. Diluted in this way, the caustic solution Weser, d'Equevilley designed a steam-propelled at AG Weser.
would be raised to such a temperature that water, submarine of approximately 700 tons, which was
in a surrounding boiler, would be converted to intended to achieve a surface speed of 20 knots at The U·boat's role and construction plans, 1912
steam. The charging of this steam accumulator 4,OOOshp and a submerged speed of 12.5 knots at On 3 January 1912, the TI submitted a draft plan
would be carried out on the surface by evaporating 2,OOOshp. Surface range would be 1,600 nautical for the future V-boat programme. The main
the caustic solution, using steam from an ordinary miles at 13 knots; submerged range, 18.8 nautical emphasis was on defence; boats would form a so-
steam installation. As long ago as 1886, a miles at 12.5 knots. These speeds would certainly called submerged defensive line, each with its own
submarine using such a steam installation had been have been faster than that achieved by other particular zone of activity. A small number were to
built by the American Josiah H. L. Tuck. A 14hp submarines of the period. be considered for offensive purposes in the orth
steam engine had served as the propulsion unit; In a lecture delivered to a conference of the STG Sea or off the coast of Britain. It was not
underwater, it had received steam at 6.7 in 1913, Berling examined the steam/caustic-soda considered that they would play a strongly
atmospheres overload from a caustic boiler of the boat in a very detailed manner. He drew attention offensive role in a possible war against Britain,
type proposed by Honigmann. However, only short to the prevailing battery-charging time of six to ten even though Vizeadmiral Freiherr von Schleinitz
dives (of seven-minute durationl for this small, hours in the case of boats with oil/electric drive, had called for this in the Deutsche Revue of August
9.5m-long submarine were recorded. The severe compared with the relatively short steam-raising 1908. Von Schleinitz had demanded the building of
problem of cooling, which arose in the narrow time of the caustic solution - three or four hours large boats with a range of atJeast ~,OOO nautical
Engine layout of the d'Equevilley system.

(from G. Berling, Die Entwick- ____ _ ~ ~ [ _ i
lung der Unterseeboote und ihrer
":to [jj G~
Hauptmaschinenlagen, pp. 131-138):
'(1) The evaporation of the water
from the diluted caustic solution is gf
achieved by introducing some of the
steam from the surface steam engine '- ---- - - .. - - - - _--... ....... --_... __
- ... -
- -
- '- - - - - -
.- ---,
- .. - -
through water-pipe boiler 'D'. The
steam driven off is then precipitated Raising steam in the caustic solution during surface travel. Submerged travel 2
in the condenser of the steam-
engine.
'(2) Before submerging, the fire is
tmOd~~~ ~ [F[] r:l

extinguished and all surplus steam
is led into both caustic soda boilers
'C'. The caustic solution is greatly
.. .•.
~ WJJ mm•
heated by this and gives off heat to
the surrounding water pipe boiler - . ---..
-- -
_ ~
--
-
~_.'
~._-_.-.-
'D'. In turn, the steam from this is Submerged travel 1 Submerged trallel 3
. fed to a steam engine. Water-pipe
boiler 'D' receives its water from the
warm water container 'B'.
'(3l With increasing dilution of the
D'Equevilley-type steam-sodium diving boat
caustic solution, the counter-
built by A G Weser. 1913
pressure will build up and, after a
certain time, the exhaust steam that
has already collected behind the
medium pressure cylinder must be
led away.
'(4) If the caustic solution reaches
such a diluted state that the
introduced exhaust steam does not
bring about a significant heating, it
is condensed and used to refill the
warm water container 'B'. The
caustic boiler now becomes merely a
heat container.'

miles, and capable of sinking merchant ships. 'To Yard at La Spezia. Before this, Laurenti had sent ready by October 1912, and would include several
sink a large number of English merchant ships', he tenders to the German avy, and these had been innovations, some of which related to the FIAT-
stated, 'would be much more signifIcant than examined by the TI. After the Italian avy had Laurenti type. On 25 April 1913, however, Vulcan's
defeating the opponent in a naval battle. Sub- ordered the diesel submarine Atropa from GW request was turned down by the RMA, on the
marines with a greatly enlarged range should be (page 28), the German Navy thought it important grounds that it would not be in the interests of
able to leave the River Elbe or River Jade, be to get some idea of diesel boat development in other effIciency to have the planned 6 boats per year built
capable of making their way round the whole of countries, and the purchase of the Laurenti boat by more than two private yards, in addition to
Great Britain and creating havoc in the Channel would enable the avy to test it thoroughly and KWD. As AG Weser were now seriously involved
and inland waters.' But the TI's plan modestly determine its essential qualities. with their steam/caustic-soda boat, Vulcan could no
confmed itself within the possibilities suggested by Laurenti's design had an inner hull of elliptical longer be considered.
the Naval Estimates and only considered the cross-section, as he considered this to be a better The new V-boat type, for which Vulcan might
following: basic shape, and to provide more space. Frames and have been considered, was given instead to KWD
1. 36 V-boats for protection of the German Bight, beams between this inner hull and an outer hull on 10 July 1913, the contract being for two boats,
12 being necessary to make up the force needed gave rigidity, and the space between them housed U43 and U44. (The third boat, intended for 1913,
for a radius of 30 nautical miles around the various tanks. When submerged, the strains U45, was not ordered until 22 June 1914, but was
Heligoland, with an interval of 5 nautical miles imposed by water pressure were taken by both hulls fmished in a considerably shorter time than her
between each boat. To relieve them daily, 12 and, because they strengthened each other, the predecessors.) U43 differed in certain essential
boats, based in Heligoland, would be needed. sheet-metal construction of the inner hull could be respects from previous boats up to U41. She had
(These twenty-four boats to be allocated to two lighter than that in German submarines (despite external pressure hull framing; a different
V-boat flotillas in Wilhelmshaven.) A single the fact that the cross-section had departed from compartment layout (living quarters sited between
flotilla of 12 boats to be held as war reserve at the circular) in which only the inner hull took the the diesel compartments and the control room,
Kiel. pressure. In this way, the FIAT boat, offIcially moving the control room and conning tower
2. 12 boats to patrol the approaches to Kiel, known as 'VF', gained in terms of space and weight forward); an increase in the armament to six
distributed as follows: 1 boat in the Little Belt; 3 saving. The superstructure was watertight and torpedo tubes (four submerged bow, two
boats in the Great Belt and the Fehmarn Belt, could be flooded, which gave considerable reserves submerged stern) for 50cm G6 torpedoes; the
with 4 relief boats kept at Kiel; 4 boats kept in of buoyancy and stability. Control of the boat was incorporation of the upper deck in the outer skin;
reserve. These 12 boats to form a single V-boat from a central position - the conning tower was elimination of the so-called tank deck; and longer
flotilla at Kiel. merely a shaft equipped with an observation dome. periscopes (7.5m) to give a periscope depth of 12m.
3. 12 boats for offensive purposes in the North Sea The storage battery was housed in a special It was estimated that this new type would have a
blockade, to be kept as a V-flotilla at Emden. diving time of 60-90 seconds when in a state of
4. As experiences to date suggested that some- preparedness. It was not planned to change to the
thing like 1 in 6 of all V-boats would be out of U43-U44. G7 torpedo (50cm diameter, 7m in length), as the
action at anyone time, a further 10 V-boats to be boat would have to made larger to accommodate
kept as an essential reserve. them and the increase in range of these torpedoes
A total of 70 V-boats were necessary for this war was not seen as a particular advantage. Opinion at
commitment, apart from the training boats U1- U4. that time was that a V-boat should approach a
From 1 April 1912, two boats, ready for sea at all target to within 800-900m and fIre her torpedoes
times, would be stationed in Heligoland, and the from that close range.
First North Sea V-Flotilla (U1ff-U30) was to be
established in Wilhelms haven in 1914. The U-Boat Inspectorate
An operational problem with the paraffm-burning The years 1910 to 1913 saw a grave increase in the
boats US-U18 was the fact that their white exhaust burden borne by the TI. The problems posed by the
smoke could be clearly seen from a great distance. excessive weights of KWD's boats, diesel engine
A system of discharging exhaust gas below the watertight, pressure-tight compartment. For trouble in GW's boats, the increasing number of
surface was tried, but was not particularly success- propulsion, Laurenti equipped the boat with two tasks envisaged for V-boats, the commissioning of
ful. OLEX, a new type of paraffm giving very little 1,250hp FIAT diesel engines, which enabled the further V-boats - all resulted in a need for more
visible smoke, was tried successfully, and 3,000 boat to achieve a surface speed of 19 knots. and more staff and material at the TI. In the
tons of it were prepared; however, as it exceeded the However, following the rather discouraging autumn of 1913, it was requested that an
cost of conventional paraffm in the ratio of 13:9, it experience with the GW diesel engines, the German independent inspectorate be instituted, with the
was to be used only in the event of war. avy had inserted a clause in the contract following responsibilities.
On 17 June 1912, further TI plans for V-boat stipulating that, in the event of the FIAT engines 1. Control of training programmes in all submarine
building were announced. All but 7.2 million marks not giving the required performance or not being departments and all V-boat flotillas.
of the 1914 estimates had already been used for ready in time, MAN engines should be used instead. 2. Maintenance of V-boats on a war footing.
boats up to U41. It was desired to build a further 33 The order for the 728-ton FIAT boat, designated 3. Development of the V-boat arm and preparations
boats after these at a unit cost of 3 million marks. U42, was placed in the summer of 1913, and for its use, especially establishing and im-
To realize this sum, the estimates for 1915 allocated construction began on 18 August. Delivery was proving operational regulations.
19 million marks; for 1916 and 1917, 15 million promised for 1 January 1915, and the price was to 4. Control of operations at the Submarine School.
marks each year; for 1918 and 1919, 18 million be 3,658,000 marks. Vnder the control of this V-boat Inspectorate (VI)
marks each year; and for 1920, 96 million marks. In the summer of 1912, the Vulcan Yard at were to be:
Orders would be placed in the following sequence: 3 Hamburg indicated that they would like to receive (a) Submarine Departments.
boats in 1913; 3 in 1914; 4 in 1915; 5 in 1916; and 6 V-boat contracts from the German avy, and (b) Existing V-boat units and individual V-boats.
in each year from 1917 to 1919. In 1920, special offered to try their hand at building a submarine. (c) The Submarine School.
resources would fmance 2 experimental boats (1 The TI established that the only design in hand was (d) Technical experiments and trials of V-boats
from FIAT, and the steam/caustic-soda boat). for U23, and it seemed pointless to have boate of already built.
In 1912, it had been decided to have a boat built the same type built by two different private fIrms. By an Imperial Decree of 13 December 1913, the
for the German Navy by the well-known Italian It would be more appropriate to choose a new V-boat arm was separated from the TI. The new VI
submarine builder, Laurenti. at the FIAT-Laurenti design for test building. Such a design would be would be based at Kiel and, controlled by a Chief of

Organization of the Technical Bureau
(TB) at 16 February 1917. r------TB. 1 ---,
Construction: Naval
Construction Adviser Werner.
I I
r-----TB. I 'A' ----, r-----TB. I 'B' ----,
New projects, mines and Construction control and
torpedo armament: Naval artillery: Naval Construction
Construction Engineer Engineer Rasenack.
Schurer.
r----:----TB. 11 ...., ,-- TB. 111 ----,

Engine construction: Chief Electro-technics and optical
Naval Construction Adviser apparatus: Chief Naval
Mugler. Construction Adviser Engel.
,--
I
TB. II 'A' , ....--
I
TB. II 'B' ----, .-- TB. III 'A' -....,
.-- TB. III 'B'
Auxiliary electric motors and
low-power electrical
-....,
Oil-burning engines and new Auxiliary engines and auxiliary Main electric motors and installations: Naval
designs: Naval Construction installations: Marine optical apparatus: Chief Naval Construction Engineer
Engineer Schafer. Construction Engineer Has. Construction Adviser Engel. Mitzlaff.
taff of V-boat Affairs, was charged with the V-boats, but to employ them for engine construc- technology. Following the contracts for the three
execution of the tasks outlined above. The date for tion. An enlarged diesel building programme for the Russian and two Austrian boats, and the
setting-up the VI was left to the Secretary of State Russian Navy led to this decision. Based on GW Norwegian Kobben, discussions were held with the
in the RMA. In fact, it happened on 15 March 1914, designs, eight 1,500hp engines were to be built, two Italians concerning the building of a submarine for
after all preliminary organizational details had been at GW itself, and six more in Russia. The first them. Originally, a boat had been envisaged having
settled. The appointed Chief of Staff was Kapitan engine would not be ready for test until the spring a surface displacement of 255 tons, armed with
zur See ordmann, with Kapitan zur See Siemens of 1915; on the other hand, the new boat design had three torpedo tubes, as in Kobben, and having a
as adjutant and Kapitanleutnant Blum as Military been promised for 1914. It was not considered diesel installation that would give 14.5 knots on the
Liaison Officer. The Technical Bureau (TB) feasible to wait for the trial results of these new surface. However, economic requirements dictated
remained under the control of aval Construction engines. that the boat be made smaller and that the stern
Adviser Reitz until 1917. As at 16 February 1917, it In order to expedite at all costs the production of torpedo tube be dispensed with. Only 12 knots were
had the operational structure as shown in the operationally sound engines and to avoid now required as a surface speed, this reduction
diagram. From August 1917, the TB came under construction delays similar to those already having no essential significance because GW, when
the direction of Construction Adviser Muller, but experienced, the VI suggested that GW separate making their earlier bid, could only offer the 350hp
the individual departments remained unaltered. In the main propulsion from the ancillary - the main diesel engine. The order was not fmally placed until
the autumn of 1918, an attempt was made to engines would propel the boat, and a secondary the autumn of 1910.
separate the TB from the VI and control it directly diesel system would drive compressors, bilge The Italians stipulated that control of the boat
from the RMA in Berlin, but the Armistice pumps, etc. In this way it should be possible for when submerged must be from the central control
intervened, and nothing came of this. Further GW to supply 1,500hp engines with much the same room, so a periscope was provided in the control
V-boat developments during the years 1913 and cylinder dimensions as the 950hp two-stroke room, in addition to the one in the conning tower.
1914 were heavily dependent on the development of engines that had already been delivered. The For the first time in German submarine con-
propulsion units diesel engines and the advantages were the short, main engine, with its struction, both periscopes were given tapered ends.
steam/caustic-soda installation. The tendency was considerable reserve for operational safety, and the The conning tower was manufactured from non·
clearly towards the development of larger V-boats, facility for boosting the main compressor with the magnetic metal, and had a magnetic compass which
better adapted for combat, having faster surface auxiliary system. The disadvantage of requiring could be read from the central control room. The
speeds and a greater range, able to carry out more space and weight was' not considered too diesel engines could not run in reverse so
operations west of the British Isles and, therefore, serious in this larger V-boat type, which received controllable-pitch propellers were used. The time
to be considered as offensive boats. Following good the project numbers 31 and 31a. (See also page 54.) allotted for the diesel engines to reach trial state
results from the MAN 1,000hp six-cylinder diesel GW agreed to build propulsion units of this type was exceeded, and delays therefore occurred in the
engine, the VI considered that it would be perfectly and received a contract to design the new 1914 building of the boat. As compensation, the Italians
feasible to enlarge the engine by 500hp (by boring V-boats in accordance with the stated were given a top surface speed of 14.75 knots,
out the cylindersn without going to the trouble of requirements; but the outbreak of war put a stop to which far exceeded the required performance. The
building a test version. these plans, in favour of designs that had been boat was named Atropo.
Despite past experience, it was decided not only tried and tested. Kobben (Ai) having been a success, meanwhile,
to involve GW largely in the building of these new the orwegian avy decided to acquire more
Germaniawerft export submarines submarines and, in November 1910, asked various
Vp to the outbreak of war, GW made strenuous yards, including GW, for tenders. GW's design was
Left: U39 on the slips at GW, Kiel, in August 1914. endeavours to export their successful submarine based on the second version of Atropo, but with a

greater displacement and two submerged bow
torpedo tubes and two surface tubes at the stern for
45cm torpedoes. In May 1911, the Norwegians
ordered three submarines (A2-A4) from GW, and a
fourth boat (AS) was ordered in 1912. The design of
A2-AS differed from the previous boats in that the
rear hydroplanes were placed abaft the propellers.
These were the ftrst small submarines to have a
gyroscopic compass, an RT installation with only
one mast, and a transverse propeller in the bows to
give manoeuvrability when stationary for torpedo
ftring. The main specifIcations of A2-A4 were as
follows.
Length overall: 46.5m.
Beam: 4.8m.
Pressure hull diameter: 3.18m.
Displacement surfaced: 268 tons.
Displacement submerged: 353 tons.
Propulsion surfaced: two 35O-375hp non-
reversing diesel
engines.
Fuel supply: 12.8 tons.
Maximum diving depth: 50m.
Armament: 3 torpedo tubes, fIve
45cm torpedoes.
Early in 1914, A2, A3 and A4 were handed over to
the Norwegian avy and proceeded under their
own power from Kiel to Horten.
In December 1910, an inquiry came from the
Turks, who were interested in a larger submarine.
On 12 December 1910, GW asked the RMA if there
were any reason why one of the larger submarines
then being built should not be sold to Turkey.
Permission was given to GW 'so that the German
U-boat industry can get a foot into the Turkish
camp and because it is very likely that, in replacing
the boat that will be sold to them, we shall acquire
an improved design at the same price'. U7, U8 or
U16 were suggested for the sale, but nothing
further transpired, supposedly because the price
was too high. Five 635-ton submarines were ordered
in 1913 from GW for the Austro-Hungarian Navy,
and these were to have high surface and submerged
speeds. (See also page 319.) GW gave them the
construction numbers 203-207.
Further considerable submarine business with
Greece seemed imminent in June 1914 and, by the
beginning of July, negotiations had so far advanced
between GW and the Greek Navy that the sale of
U3~U37 seemed a foregone conclusion. The GW
had promised the RMA that the sale of these boats
to Greece would not bring about any delay in
promised building construction of German boats. It
was not possible to equip the boats for the Greek
Navy with G6 torpedoes, and the arrangement by
which hydroplanes were fItted abaft the propellers
in boats from U38 onwards was not employed in
exported submarines. However, the outbreak of
war effectively put a stop to this proposed sale.
These negotiations show clearly how little, in the
summer of 1914, the German Navy was thinking in
terms of a major war and how little importance was
attached to submarine resources by the RMA. Not
until after the sensational success of Otto
Weddigen in U9 against three British cruisers on 22
September 1914 did a reappraisal of the role of the
The centre section of Kobben, exposed to show the engine-room. submarine take place.
36 ORIGINS OF THE U-BOAT

Atropa. Key: 1, vertical rudder; 2. after
hydroplane; 3, vertical rudder
motor; 4, companion hatch; 5,
hand-wheel for activating wing
tr Diving tank 6"-<.PT""_

~iving tank 3
o
screw; 6. starter; 7. coolers for
main electric motors; 8, engine
telegraph; 9. sWitch panel; 10.
\ malO electric motor; 11, liftmg
hooks; 12, silencers; 13. diesel
engIne; 14, main bilge pump; 15,
auxiliary bilge pump; 16, turbo-
blower; 17, auxiliary air mast; 18.
conning-tower hatch; 19,
periscopes; 20. conning-tower
pons; 21, helm for vertical
rudder; 22. telephone buoy; 23.
accumulators; 24, torpedo
loading hatch; 25. warping
capstan; 26. anchor capstan; 27.
forward Iflmmlng tank; 28.
torpedo tube; 29, anchor-raising
engine; 30. forward hydroplane;
31, safety weights; 32, regulating
tanks; 33. lubricating-oil
consumption tank; 34,
lubricating-oIl tank; 35, Irimmlng
tank; 36-45, diVing tanks; 46,
torpedo·fJrlng cartridge; 47, fuel-
oil bunker; 48, fuel-oil
consumptIon tank; 49, main air
valve; 50, extra compressor .
• Iow: Atropo undergoing trials"
ORIGI S OF THE U·BOAT 37

U-BOAT
CONSTRUCTION DURING
THE FIRST WORLD WAR
troubles that GW had been having with the 16 two- building time of eighteen months was allowed for
CONSTRUCTION AT THE stroke diesel engines for U31-U41 , only 6 the flrst production boat of each order. The
BEGINNING OF THE WAR (U51-U56) of the intended 12 Mobilization (Ms) contract provided for these 17 Ms boats to be
boats were ordered from them on 23 August 1914. handed over between December 1915 and Dec-
At the outbreak of hostilities, 45 U-boats were The remaining 6 boats were to be given to AG ember 1916, but because it was considered most
either ready for service or in the course of Weser, who had been active for two and a half years unlikely that the war would last until then, all
construction. Of these, Ul-U28 (with the exception in the building of boats in the steam/caustic-soda U-boats that could possibly be made ready within
of U2 which was in need of a fairly lengthy period of category. AG Weser's boats were to be built to the the next three months were given priority over all
overhaul) were in service, and U29-U41 would have design of KWD's U27 (four torpedo tubesl, but the other building projects.
been if the promised delivery dates had been met. UI was not prepared to give them the contract Meanwhile, a number of submarines were in
The boat ordered from FIAT had not been handed unless they could be built more quickly than at various stages of construction for foreign navies.
over to Germany. KWD. After protracted negotiations, the contract At the beginning of the war, the building capacity
The mobilization plan provided for the immediate for U57-U62 was awarded to AG Weser on 14 of GW was taken up by the building of a small
placing of contracts for 17 boats of the most November 1914. submarine for the orwegian Navy, and the com-
recently built U41 type (four torpedo tubes) and It was intended that the MAN four-stroke diesel pletion of flve large submarines for the Austro-
U45 type (six torpedo tubes), 12 to be built by GW engines be used for all these boats, as the two- Hungarian Navy.
and 5 by KWD. On 7 August 1914, KWD received stroke engines which GW had used in U23-U26 and In May 1911, the Norwegian avy had ordered
their order for U46-U50, but, because of the U31-U41 had not proved sufflciently reliable. A three (and subsequently a fourth) submarines of
---- ------ ------------------------- ------ --------- ----- ------------ ---- ----V

U51 - U56. 18 January 1916. ,J. o 2 .> 6 8 10 12m
i
;:
if::
:~'
38 U-BOAT CONSTRUCTION DURING THE FIRST WORLD WAR

approximately 270 tons displacement, equipped brought into line with the other Ms U-boats by the could be completed in 14 months, but only if the
with three 45cm torpedo tubes (two submerged bow addition of a conning tower, which had the effect of building of the large U-boats already ordered were
tubes and one surface stern tube). Surface reducing one of their special properties - high delayed. They felt this would not be sensible, and
propulsion was by 2 non-reversing 350hp GW diesel speed. Despite the reduction in number of torpedo said as much on 25 August 1914.
engines. (Details of the essential innovations, stern tubes to five, the surface displacement rose to However, on 11 September, Dr. Werner (head of
hydroplanes abaft the propellers and a transverse 791m 3• TB. I) went over the heads of the Admiralty Staff at
propeller forward, have been given on page 36.) the RMA and suggested that small minelaying
While the first three boats were delivered to the Coastal U-boats: Types UB and UC boats be built for use off the French coast. The UI
Norwegians early in 1914, the fourth was taken After Belgium had been invaded, the Belgian was subsequently asked to look into the question of
over by the German Navy on 14 August 1914 and coastline afforded bases for operations in the building a purely electric-drive U-boat, intended
designated VA. After undergoing numerous small English Channel. With this in mind, on 18 August solely for minelaying. On 13 September, they
alterations to make her suitable for German 1914, the RMA asked the UI to investigate the reported that, under the most favourable
requirements, VA was used initially for coastal possibility of producing a large number of small circumstances, the building time for a wholly
protection and, later, for training purposes. U-boats that could be operational before the short electric-drive boat of approximately 80 tons, and
The submarines (Construction os. 203-207) war envisaged came to an end. They were to have a armed with a single torpedo tube (project 32) would
that had been ordered for the Austro-Hungarian range of approximately 500 nautical miles and to be be about four months. No information was available
Navy in 1913 had a relatively large surface armed with two torpedo tubes. The UI considered about the mines, - the military value of which, in
displacement of 635 tons. They were designed to that such boats, of a type displacing 150-200 tons, any case, the UI considered to be very slight.
U57-,U62.
Type UA.
~.
achieve the high speeds of almost 17 knots on the

surface and 11 knots submerged, which
necessitated the employment of batteries with a
large surface area. In order to maintain a low bridge
profIle, no conning tower was provided, which
\
considerably reduced submerged resistance, and
_\ __,____ ,--- -- -r----
the periscope was manned from the central control
room. For the first time in a GW U-boat, four bow
torpedo tubes were provided, and two submerged
stern torpedo tubes were added, but all torpedo
tubes were still of 45cm calibre.
On 7 August 1914, the RMA ordered that work
on these five Austrian submarines be accelerated.
After discussions with the Austrian authorities, the
German Navy took them over on 10 November
1914, as V66-V70 of Type UD. In the course of
completion, torpedo calibre apart, these were
U-BOAT CONSTRUCTION DURING THE FIRST WORLD WAR 39

U66- U70 (Type UD), 17 July 1915.
~~~~.iD!ftm ~
~~o :L@~.@~;Q£f~
The advances made by the German Army in side-by-side bow torpedo tubes. A short super- small submarine. The last of the 17 UB boats was
Belgium increased the demand for coastal U-boats structure was sited forward, and along the top of completed in May 1915. UBl and UB2 were tested
to be made available as soon as possible and, on 14 the boat ran a narrow, floodable upper deck on underwater to 5 atmospheres for 1-2 hours without
September, the UI were asked to look into the which a relatively large bridge was placed. ill effect. At their yards, the pressure hulls were
question of building small U-boats that could be The 60hp diesel engine provided surface tested with water pressure of up to 3 atmospheres,
transported by rail. Having received several propulsion, with a 120hp electric motor, from to try thoroughly the tightness of the rivets.
designs that met this requirement, the RMA Siemens Schuckertwerke, for use when submerged. Most of these boats were sent to their
accepted Project 34, which envisaged a torpedo- The diving tanks were situated amidships, with the destinations by rail, each boat requiring three
armed boat of approximately 125 tons. An batteries foward and aft. These consisted of 112 wagons - one for each of the three main hull
adequate range was achieved by the fItting of a 13 MAS 505/5 cells, which gave ten hours of compartments - and further wagons for the
small 60hp diesel engine, made by Korting for use submerged cruising at 4 knots. Maximum conning tower, parts of the upper deck engines and
in launches and readily available. It was suggested submerged speed was 5.5 knots. This was lower batteries. Assembly, at Hoboken and Antwerp -
that the boats be built at GW and AG Weser and, than had been envisaged, but operational and later at Pola - took approximately fourteen
on 15 October, the building of 15 of this new Type modifIcations demanded a heavier structure, and days. At these assembly points, the only test for
UB was authorized. this in turn, led to greater water resistance. The watertightness that could be made was by
Because of their limited size, only single-hull surface range of 1,600 nautical miles at 5 knots, compressed air at 50mm of mercury over pressure.
construction and single-propeller propulsion would however, seemed satisfactory for the planned role. From Antwerp, the boats had to be towed through
be used. Diving and compensating tanks and Because the diving tanks had many inlet valves, the Scheidt, and through the Ghent-Bruges Canal,
bunkers accounted for only 23m 3 , and were easily the new UB boat could submerge in the unbeliev- to their operational base at Bruges; this operation,
accommodated within the pressure hull, the ably short time of 22 seconds. Armament consisted using caissons and two tugs, took flve-and-a-half
diameter of which was restricted to 3.15m by the of two 45cm bow torpedo tubes for C/03 torpedoes, days. It had been thought that UB16 and UB17
gauge of the railways. The lines of these boats, plus an 8mm machine-gun. could be assembled at the Stenia Yard in
although single-hulled, were considerably different UB1-UB8 were ordered from GW on 15 October Constantinople, for use off the Dardenelles, but
from the similar-sized Holland boats produced in 1914, and UB9-UB15 from AG Weser. On 25 transportation would have been impossible, and the
other countries. This was because the Type UB was November, two extra boats, UB16 and UB17, were idea was abandoned. However, two of the boats
considered to be a seaworthy diving-boat rather ordered from AG Weser, because it had been made the journey by sea from Pola, and showed
than a true submarine. The pressure hull was decided that UBl and UB15 would be handed over themselves well able to undertake long voyages, so
formed from conical sections riveted together, to the Austro-Hungarian Navy after they had been six boats were eventually sent from there.
which gave a somewhat angular shape at the completed. On 17 October 1914, despite the UI's
waterline. The cross-section of the pressure hull was The contracted building time was four months, disapproval, the RMA ordered two experimental
almost circular throughout its length, but flattened but the fust of the series was completed by GW in (Project 35a), 150-ton minelaying U-boats. One was
slightly to an ellipse in order to accommodate two only 75 days - a sensational time for building a to be built by GW and the other by AG Weser, and

Type UBI.
Frame 11, looking aft Frame 14, looking aft Frame 25, looking forward
Frame 17, looking forward
U·BOAT CONSTRUCTION DURI G THE FIRST WORLD WAR 41

Type UCI.
Frame 6
Frame 11 Frame 16 Frame 29

/"
./'
Key: A, switch panels; B, trimming tank;

C, mines, compensating tanks;
0, freshwater tank; E, chain cover.
a building time of only four months was requested. that it was necessary to fmd a new yard, in addition V-boat personnel themselves were very sceptical of
The design and manufacture of a suitable mine (VCI to AG Weser. AG Vulcan of Hamburg, who had their possibilities.
120) and minelaying equipment was a new venture previously applied unsuccessfully for U-boat work,
for the UI. and took some time. Type UB was taken were chosen and, on 23 November 1914, orders for Dry-storage minelayers: Type UE
as a starting point: the torpedo hatch aft of the 15 of the new Type UC were placed: UC1-UClO The considerable emphasis placed by the RMA on
conning tower was replaced by a normal entry from Vulcan, and UCll-UC15 from AG Weser. the building of minelaying U-boats caused the UI to
hatch and the forward section of the boat was Both yards calculated a building time of ~ involve itself to a considerable extent in the
redesigned to accommodate mine tubes and 12 months for the first boat. As Vulcan were new to construction of improved, larger boats of this type.
mines. The modifications to the boat would increase the business of U-boat building, they were The small UC boats, because of certain
her resistance and the engine was uprated to requested on 14 December 1914 to expedite the constructional limitations (short building time,
compensate for this. The mine tubes were built-in at work and to give it precedence over the building of necessity to transport them by rail, use of ready-
a sloping angle, so that minelaying could be torpedo-boats already in hand. In fact, the first VC made launch engines) were very restricted in their
undertaken while the boat was moving; this, boat, UCl left the yard on 26 April 1915. deployment: their storage tubes were underwater,
however, caused problems with the pressure- UC1-UCll, broken down into components, were and depth settings for the mines could not be
tightness of the area adjacent to the tubes. sent by rail to Flanders, and UCl2-UC15 were sent reached for adjustment while at sea. It became
The VI completed their work so quickly that by to Pola. At the time, it was difficult to predict the imperative to produce a truly ocean-going
21 November 1914 they were in a position to award role that Types UB and UC would play, for there minelaying U-boat.
contracts. GW and the KWD were so overloaded was no previous experience on which to draw; but As early as 5 January 1915, the UI completed

Above: The completed UC2 on a crane at AG Vulcan, Hamburg. Below, left and right: Minelaying boat U73 in dock at KWD.
designs for Project 38 - Type UE - a minelaying Vulcan and KWD build only 2 boats each - it was engine room had to be moved forward into the
type of 600-700 tons, with dry storage for 34 not thought necessary to place a large order centre of the boat; the central control room, conning
mines. Additionally, a small torpedo armament was because it was assumed that the war would not last tower and storage batteries were moved even
to be provided. To achieve a short building time, a beyond the autumn of 1915. On the same day, U71 farther foward. As there was now insufficient space
simple, single hull form was adopted, and a 450hp was ordered from Vulcan, and U73 from KWD. The for the low torpedo tubes, the two 50cm tubes were
diesel engine was selected. Construction was to be other 2 boats, U72 and U74, were ordered on 9 sited on the upper deck, a bow tube to port and a
entrusted to Vulcan and KWD, and the first boat January. stern tube to starboard. The 8.8cm U-boat gun was
was to be ready in September 1915. Diesel engines The fmal concept of the UE type was Dr. fitted abaft the conning tower. Trimming now
were to be prepared so that 10 boats could be Werner's. In his article Das Hochsee Minenunte,... became difficult, and the requisite submerged
completed by the end of 1915. KWD could seeboot, Schiffbau vol. XXI/3, 12 ovember 1919, stability was achieved by fitting a 50-ton box keel
undertake this new contract only if they could be he describes fully the evolution of this new U-boat beneath the pressure hull_ In order to achieve the
allowed to suspend work on U47-U50 until the type, and only the most important points are given desired range of 8,000 nautical miles at 7 knots,
autumn of 1915, and take auxiliary engines and here. Mines were of the new UE/150 type, and were saddle tanks with fuel bunkers were fitted on both
batteries from submarines just being built by KWD stored astern. They were expelled by cog drive sides. There can be no doubt that the diesel plant
for the first four minelaying boats. GW and AG through two tubes of 100cm diameter, each tube was not powerful enough for these large boats, the
Weser were so overloaded that they could not being able to carry three mines at a time. The large displacement of which during successive planning
contemplate further building. space devoted to mine storage, weight stages had risen to 750 tons. In rough seas, they
On 6 January 1915, the RMA suggested that compensating tank and trim tank meant that the dipped deeply into the waves, which slowed them
U-BOAT CO STRUCTIO DURI G THE FIRST WORLD WAR 45

Type UE IU71-U80l. Glossarv: Trimmtank, trimming tank; Tauch
tank, diving tank; Luftschacht, air shaft;
Trinkwasser, fresh water. (See also Glossary,
page 372.1
Frame 48 Frame 51 Frame 54 Frame 57

Frame 44
------------ -
./
'---
:-.-.Floodi"ng----------- - - - - a l l bunker-- Oil bunker -·Flooding
compartment compartment
Outer casing
-- _. __.=---------~
[I~ -~
------~·----=·====::-----;-c--
~----
)- ~
//
~-------
46 U-BOAT CONSTRUCTIO DURI G THE FIRST WORLD WAR

down even more. The designers were well aware of
Type U E frame lines. this disadvantage, but there was nothing they
could do about it - all German submarine
construction was governed by the availability of
diesel engines and the boats were wanted in only six
months'time.
On 20 February 1915, the VI suggested that
more V-boats be built by GW, AG Weser and
Vulcan. On the 27th, the RMA (having accepted
that the war might continue beyond the autumn of
1915) authorized the building of 6 more Type VE
boats by Vulcan and 6 Type VF boats by GW and
AG Weser. Type VF, a variant of Type VE, was
developed because of the need to have a larger boat
armed with torpedoes, to be produced in a relatively
short time. On 9 March 1915, the 6 Type VE boats,
.. U75-UBO, were officially ordered from Vulcan, the
contract stipulating that they be completed
between 20 ovember 1915 and 20 February 1916.
The 6 Type VF boats, however, were not to be
built. Instead, the RMA informed the Admiralty
staff on 2 March 1915, that 3 Ms V-boats of U51
type, U63-U65, should be ordered from GW. The
building of the further 3 torpedo-armed V-boats
could be discontinued because AG Weser would
'1., _ deliver U57-U59 five months earlier than had been
anticipated. All 6 Ms V-boats would have the
fJ----------:
1,150hp two-stroke engines originally ordered by
the Russians and now almost complete, which
meant that a quick delivery could be guaranteed. In
the case of GW's 3 boats, U6J-U65, a further
saving of time was achieved by simplifying
construction (including a reduction in the number
of diving tanks). By these means, the 3 Ms V-boats
were built in the incredibly short time of eleven
months, an achievement that was to remain
unsurpassed.
PLANNING AND
CONSTRUCTION, 1915-16
On 4 February 1915, the German Government
declared the waters around the British Isles to be a
'War Zone' in which, from 18 February, commercial
traffic to and from Britain would be attacked
without warning or discrimination. (This
declaration was in reply to the British blockade of
Germany.) However, it would be impossible to
enforce this unless suffIcient boats were made
available and this was impossible in the early part
of 1915.
The following fIgures provided by the VI in April
1915, indicate progressive monthly totals of
I available V-boats (excluding the ten Type VE
I
I
minelaying boats) against an estimated monthly
.7 ....
~ • V-boat loss.
1 April 1915: 27 1 January 1916: 30
1 July 1915: 27 1 April 1916: 36
1 October 1915: 28 1 July 1916: 40
Hence, on 1 July 1916, the establishment stood at
40 V-boats, 32 short of the number allowed for in
pre-war estimates.
The construction plan for the building of larger
V-boats was greatly hindered by the fact that some
V-BOAT CONSTRVCTION DVRING THE FIRST WORLD WAR 47

yards were relatively new to this work. Foundries, required in the Baltic, with a further 12 at the cruising speed, long range, adequate engine power,
fIrms supplying engines, etc., all had to contend disposal of the Flag Officer, V-Boats (FdV). and an ability to stay longer at sea, which meant
with severe technical problems. The yards, too, had According to the VI, to provide these 72 boats, 32 better living conditions on board. The VI,
been deprived of trained workers by the mobiliza- extra boats would have to be laid down. In the fIrst thereupon, delivered its Project 31, a plan based on
tion of the Army, and the e vacancies could not be batch of these, it would be impossible to operational experience of the war up to that time. A
hUed adequately by personnel fit only for garrison contemplate any alteration to the Ms type already total of 46 boats with these characteristics would
duties, or by women. Delivery dates, therefore, in use, because of the lengthy delivery time for new be required, and would have next priority.
suffered considerably: delivery times for U57-U62 engines. Initial planning would be carried out by KWD
(AG Weser) were exceeded by two to four months, MAN could produce only a pair of diesel engines and GW in the shortest possible time, so that
and those for U71 and U75-U80 (Vulcan), by two- per month, and it was therefore necessary to call orders for more boats of this type could be
and-a-half to five months. Throughout the war, upon other fIrms such as GW and Sulzer for engine contracted out. Delivery dates were to be
V-boats delivered on time were the exception rather production. GW and AG Weser would each be determined by the availability of the new 1,500hp
than the rule. It is odd, therefore, that the VI did commissioned to build 3 more V-boats of the Ms diesel engines, three sets of which were to be
not urge an acceleration of the V-boat construction type, equipped with MA engines, to be delivered ordered as quickly as possible from GW and MA .
programme, but contented itself (in a memorandum between July 1916 and January 1917. The VI would Thus, shortly after completion of the initial work by
published in April 1915) with formulating a be requested to look further into the possibilities of GW and KWD, 3 boats of Project 31 would be
programme spread over a very long period (up to a simplifIed 650-ton type, and investigate delivery ordered from each yard for delivery in 1917-1918.
1924!), an attitude of mind more suggestive of times. For this, Vulcan, Hamburg, AG Weser, GW Construction of the remaining 40 boats would then
peace than of war. This programme laid down the and Blohm & Voss were considered; appropriate be so organized that, after delivery of the new
following requirements. To carryon the blockade of diesel engines would come from MA ,Sulzer and 650-ton boats had been completed, 1 large boat
Britain, excluding the most northerly part, 48 boats GW. The contracts were to be distributed in such a would be delivered monthly. In this way, all the
with a performance equalling that of the Ms way that all 26 V-boats of this new type could be large boats would be delivered by the end of 1922.
V-boats were seen as neces ary. Attempts would ready by the early part of 1919, which meant, Finally, in the light of experience gained from the
have to be made, however, to simplify this type and, roughly, a delivery of 1 boat per month. VA boat and the VB boats, a special V-boat of
if possible, reduce the displacement (600-650 tons) To wage an effective blockade in the Atlantic and 200-300 tons was to be developed for coastal
somewhat to keep down the replacement cost of in the northerly approaches to the War Zone, operations. Compared with 'offensive' boats, this
these boats, which were the ones most frequently greater performance was required from V-boats - new type would have a lesser surface speed and
sunk by enemy action. A further 12 V-boats were particularly high surface speed, adequate surface surface range, torpedo and artillery armament,
Ms boats U63- U65. o 2 4 6 8 10 12 m
,f
(
!,
'~
=0
48 V-BOAT CO STRVCTION DVRING THE FIRST WORLD WAR

Iralion and complement. A total of 18 of these generally assumed that the war could not last long. in the delivery of them from the autumn of 1916.
lal V-boats was thought to be necessary for the It was intended principally as a political weapon for Following this. on 17 May, GW were commissioned
nrlh ea and Baltic. Orders were to be so placed the post-war period. evertheless, some of the ideas to build U63-U65, which had already been decided
to achieve delivery of all of them by 1923-24. expressed were to have an important effect on upon. On 16 June 1915. the building of these 11
V-Boat Programme thus envisaged V-boat development. In an introductory argument additional boats was authorized by the RMA. 0
11\ lruction of 154 boats. excluding very small VB to the memorandum, the VI stated: decision was made. however. concerning the long-
nil VC boats, minelayers and experimental boats. 'Just as the V-boat is proving itself to be a main term building programme corresponding to
urlher development was seen in terms of steam weapon in the war against England, so will it playa suggestions in the VI memorandum. GW and AG
npulsion for higher surface speeds. The following vital role in the future if it forms the basis for a Weser competed for the new contract. GW stated
noted in the memorandum of the plan. V-boat fleet designed for blockade against England on 23 June 1915 that MAN engines could be
'Despite the main disadvantages for submarines as, being a positive deterrent that cannot be delivered for 6 Ms V-boats. but the remainder
h at, very large seals in the pressure hull, and overcome by threats. it will be a positive force for would have to have GW engines. On 24 June. GW
h fuel consumption - the construction of steam- peace. Although this point does not invalidate the received an order for 6 Ms boats. U81-U86. The
IV n boats must be seriously investigated and, need for battlecruisers and battleships, no matter remaining 5 boats. U87-U91 were awarded to KWD
lly, in two versions: how the war ends, the building up of V-boat fleets is on 1 July 1915. because prices and delivery times
I Steamfelectric drive. even more urgent than the building of these other from AG Weser were excessive and they wanted
I 'team/caustic-soda drive (single unit drive). fleets; beside the direct threat to English and Irish 400-500 more workers with the cost to be borne by
Il I suggested that (b) be pursued by AG Weser trade routes posed by our V-boats besieging all the avy, who regarded these conditions as
m diately after the conclusion of the war. But their harbours and trade routes - with later V-boat unacceptable.
rch must be carried out not only on the development permitting offensive operations On 13 August 1915. KWD's contract was
m/caustic-soda project: there is also the need to against England to be taken even further afield - a increased to 6 boats. as diesels for an extra boat
V tigate the steamfelectric method of propul- war against Germany will be very uninviting for (U92) were available from Vulcan. who had been
un, because, if high surface speeds are demanded, England, and we. behind our bulwark of a strong building them on an experimental basis. As there
I ems unlikely that a diesel engine, in the present V-boat fleet. will be able to build our surface fleets would be capacity for more Mobilization boats at
l le of the art developing at best 2,000hp, will give up in comparative security to take our place as a AG Weser and GW from the autumn of 1916. the
V·boat a surface speed in excess of 20 knots.' world power.' VI ordered 6 Ms boats from each of these yards on
This long-term programme could have no effect On 15 May 1915, the VI requested the immediate 1 September 1915. This meant that on 15
n lhe conflict at that time. early 1915, when it was building of 11 Ms V-boats. with no gaps permitted September 1915. U93-U98 had been authorized
Project 25 (U87 - U92),

13 December 1916.
/
/
V-BOAT CO STRVCTIO DVRI G THE FIRST WORLD WAR 49

from GW, and U99-Ui04 from AG Weser. Clearly, capacity, which was achieved by using Type 20 circumstances'. Daimler, Korting and Benz agreed
AG Weser's demands had been settled. MAS 820/5. All the storage batteries were placed to manufacture the 140hp diesel engines for 17
After a lengthy period, U96-U9B received newly- forward of the central diving tanks so that the boats in the specified time. Initially, 6 boats were to
built two-stroke diesel engines from GW; the other engine installation, which was now much heavier, be ordered from B&V, and 6 from AG Weser, who
boats received four-stroke diesels from MAN. would stay in equilibrium. demanded an additional 200 workers. The RMA
The development of the Ms U-boats was charac- The armament was increased by using 50cm G gave its assent, but it was decided that only as
terized by the adoption of six 50cm torpedo tubes, torpedoes, with twice as many reloads as hitherto, many boats should be ordered as could be
four submerged bow, two submerged stern (fitted and by the fitting of a 5cm gun for surface use. completed by the end of 1915, as no future was seen
by GW, from U93 onwards); the fitting of one Unlike the UB type (later called Type UBI), the for this type of submarine in peacetime.
10.5cm U-boat gun instead of two 8.8cm guns torpedo tubes were fitted one above the other in Meanwhile, Schichau of Elbing had asked to be
(fitted by KWD from UB7 onwards, and by GW order to provide better bow lines for surface travel. considered for U-boat building, but had been
from U93 onwards); and the altering of the rounded A second periscope, manned from the central rejected because they were already building a large
bow profile to a sharp, clipper-like bow (fitted by control room, a two-masted wireless aerial and number of torpedo boats, in addition to the battle-
GW, from UBi onwards), with which it was hoped to forward hydroplanes corrected other weaknesses in cruiser Liitzow, and would not be able to meet
break through submarine nets more easily. The Type UBI. delivery dates of their important existing war
step in the cross-section of the upper deck was programme. To give Schichau a new type of U-boat
eliminated, and the bulwarks were drawn upwards to build would overload them completely, and to
with a rounded fairing into the deck (fitted by KWD Type UBII frame lines. provide them with a larger work force would be less
from U43, by GW from U63, but not in UD boats productive than supplying the workers to yards
U66-U70). With regard to diesel engines, it had that were accustomed to U-boat constructions. So,
been hoped to go over to the MAN six-cylinder, on 30 April 1915, 6 Type UBIl boats, UBl8-UB23,
1,200hp four-stroke engine, or the GW two-stroke, were ordered from B&V and, on 1 May 1915, 6
but the general shortage meant that whatever was boats, UB24-UB29, were ordered from AG Weser.
available had to be used. In the summer of 1915, it became evident that the
In June 1915, KWD had been instructed to war would last into 1916, and the question of follow-
expedite Project 31, for which the UI was respons- up contracts for small U-boats became acute. On 1
ible; it was hoped to be able to start building June, the Reiherstieg Yard at Hamburg let it be
U-boats of this new type as soon as possible. In the known that they would like to undertake U-boat
meantime, following the sinking of the Cunard liner work and, on 22 June, the UI decided to use them
Lusitania on 7 May 1915, which brought sharp for the building of more Type UBIl, possibly as a
reaction from neutral countries, particularly the subcontractor to B&V.
United States, attacks on large passenger liners The Shipyard Department of the Navy had
were prohibited, and U-boat blockade activities doubts about the technical ability of Reiherstieg to
were considerably restricted. A new crisis with the build complete U-boats: they had no first-class
United States occurred after the sinking of the liner construction staff, and the number and quality of
Arabic in August 1915 and, on 18 September, their skilled workers were insufficient for U-boat
U-boat operations in the English Channel and construction. A further problem, which was only
Western Approaches were suspended. The High gradually resolved during the course of the war,
Seas Fleet and the Naval Corps in Flanders also was the lack of senior naval officials for supervising
suspended aggressive activities against merchant and overseeing building construcion in private
shipping in the North Sea. The U-boat menace was yards. But the UI's proviso that Reiherstieg be
now notably reduced. It was thought that the These improvements could only be achieved by subcontractor to B&V was approved. On 7 July
U-boat campaign could still have considerable significantly increasing the weight of the boats (270 1915, the building by B&V of 6 more Type UBIl
success in minelaying and against merchant ships if tons surface displacement), so it was no longer boats, UB3O-UB4i , was authorized, and the
the U-boats were armoured and mounted demanded that they be transportable by rail. This, contract was placed on 22 July. A further 6 boats,
sufficiently heavy artillery. By the end of 1915, it in turn, meant that restrictions on the diameter of UB42-UB47, were awarded to AG Weser as a
was thought that unconditional U-boat warfare the pressure hull were no longer necessary, so follow-up contract for 1916.
could re-commence during the spring of 1916. saddle tanks were fitted to the pressure hull to With the restriction imposed on offensive U-boat
house the greatly-increased fuel-oil supply, and warfare in the summer of 1915, and its virtual
Enlarged coastal U-boats: Types UBII and UCII these brought the overall beam to 4.36m. (Sub- cessation in the autumn, the significance of the
Although the small UB type of boats had fulfilled sequently, with the U-boat playing a greater role in minelaying U-boat became more prominent. The
the role for which they were designed, their the Mediterranean, it was demanded that the boats small UC type, later Type UCI, could not be
duration and armament were not equal to the be transportable by rail in separate components_ considered for future construction, for the same
increasing demands made on U-boats as the war Too wide for the gauge of the railways, they had to reasons that Type UBI was unsuitable.
progressed. A particular disadvantage was the be broken down into longitudinal sections of In the summer of 1915, the UI published its
single-shaft propulsion unit; in the event of an appropriate size.) Project 41 for a larger minelaying U-boat of 400
engine breakdown, the boat was completely help- On 20 April 1915, the UI announced its plans for tons, with wet storage facilities for 18 UC/200
less. It became obvious that, when new contracts the commissioning of these Type UBIl boats, all of mines, in 6 shafts situated in the forward part of the
for small U-boats were being considered, this type which were to be completed by the end of 1915. boat. In addition, three torpedo tubes for 50cm
would not be retained. In April 1915, therefore, the KWD, GW and Vulcan were not considered because torpedoes (two surface bow and one submerged
UI announced its Project 39, for an enlarged of lack of skilled staff or delays in the building of stern) and an 8.8cm U-boat gun were carried. In the
coastal U-boat with a two-shaft drive, greater Ms and UE boats. AG Weser could handle a interests of better aiming, neither angled tubes nor
surface speed and greatly increased surface range: maximum of 6 Type UBIl only, so that the use of a torpedo tube cowlings were fitted. Instead,
later it was designated Type UBII. new yard seemed unavoidable. Blohm & Voss, who pressure-tight, above-water torpedo tubes were
The submerged range was enlarged and the resis- until now had taken care not to involve themselves fitted alongside the mine shafts, which projected
tance caused by the greater profile of the outer hull in U-boat construction, agreed to undertake the from the pressure hull. The platform for the 8.8cm
necessitated a considerable enlargement of battery building of boats of this type 'in the present urgent U-boat gun was positioned in a well between the

f'·'
Glossary: Trimmtank, trimming tank; Treibolbunker, fuel-oil
Type UBII. bunker; Tauchtank, diving tank; Akkumulatoren, batteries or
accumulators; Munition, ammunition; Vorderer, forward;
.' . Trinkwasser, fresh water; reglertank, regulating tank; Kleider u
i I Wasche, wardrobe and wash-room; Kojen, berths; PrQviant spinde,
store cupboards; Luftpatronen, air cartridges; Mannschaft spinde.
crew's cupboards. (See also Glossary, page 372.)
Frames 1 and 2, looking forward Frames 12 and 9, looking aft Frame 14, looking forward Frame 17, looking forward Frames 22 and 27, looking forward Frame 32, looking forward

Type ~U:C~II.------
Outer frame 7 Inner frame 1 Inner frame 12 Inner frame 16 Inner frame 28
Inner frame 31 Inner frame 43 Inner frame 48 Outer frame 94
52
V-BOAT CO =:::~~~::===;;~~~~~~~~~~~~t]!~~~
NSTRVCTION DURING THE FIRST WORLDWAR
r i~ed fore section and the conning tower, and However, on 20 August, the Shipyard Department At the beginning of 1916, the increasing
h'nded to be awash in rough seas. To improve suggested that only 24 UClI boats be built. by signifLcance of minelaying U-boats led to the
urface handling, a return had been made to the B&V and Vulcan. GW and AG Weser would have to personal intervention of the Secretary of State in
lllluble hull principle, but the outer skin did not delay current building (U81-U86 and 4 torpedo- the RMA, Grand Admiral von Tirpitz. He ordered
11Irnpietely surround the pressure hull, being boats plus a light cruiser) to cope with an additional that a careful check be made to determine how
ttached to it from below. A relatively wide. 100cm- contract. On 29 August 1915, the Secretary of many UClI boats could be made ready by the end
harneter ballast keel was necessary because of the State in the RMA decided that B&V should be of 1916, if all new shipbuilding and torpedo-boat
mine shafts projecting below. Two 250hp diesel required to build 9 minelaying U-boats projects scheduled for completion after 1 October
ngines from MA (later also from Korting and (UCl6-UC24). that Vulcan should build a similar 1916, and all new U-boat building projects
Daimler) and two 230hp electric motors were number (UC25-UC33) , and that these should be scheduled for completion after 1 January 1917 were
provided. The storage battery. consisting of two delivered between March and June 1916. Following put back. The answer from the UI, on 8 January
'-cell 26 MAS units. was sited under the living the cessation of the U-boat blockade, the UI 1916, was 31 boats. These additional UClI boats
quarters forward and aft of the control room. recommended further building of the new Type were therefore ordered on 11 January 1916 and
A strong influence on the decision to increase the UClI minelaying U-boats, over and above the were allocated thus: UC49-UC54 to GW;
dl placement, was the requirement that these numbers already ordered. Additionally, con- UC55-UC60 to KWD; UC61-UC64 to AG Weser;
minelaying U-boats be able to reach the Austro- sideration was given to converting UBI boats to UC65-UC73 to B&V; and UC74-UC79 to Vulcan.
lIungarian U-boat bases in the Mediterranean by UCI boats, but it was evident that the considerable This represented the flfst large order, which
a, thereby obviating the vexatious problem of number of necessary changes would so delay this brought with it, especially at B&V, the advantages
transportation by rail. A building time of eight project that not a lot of use would come of it. On 9 of mass production. Originally, von Tirpitz had
months for the flfst boat was assumed: if a start November 1915, the RMA gave its approval to the placed little trust in U-boats. but as the war
w re made immediately, the fLrst boat of this new continued construction of the Type UClI. 'as many progressed he had become strongly convinced of
Type UClI could be ready early in 1916. as can be built by the end of September 1916'. On their indispensable role and. with this large order,
On 15 July 1915, the UI authorized contracts for 20 ovember, the UI ordered 21 boats of this type: made his feelings known. (His successor, Admiral
II of these improved UC boats, in addition to a 6 from B&V (UC34-UC39); 9 from Vulcan von Capelle, was not initially inclined to agree with
considerable number (20) of the UBlI boats. (UC4cr-UC45) and 6 from AG Weser (UC46-UC48). him.)
A Type UCII minelaying boat in dock at KWD.
U-BOAT CONSTRUCTIO DURI G THE FIRST WORLD WAR 53

Larger U-boats and Type UBIII the engine, and it was essential to wait and see how accordance with this project: KWD was apparently
For the VI, 1915 was a year of tremendous planning the diesel engines faired in U19 and U26, the first destined for the construction task.
activity, engendered partly by changing war tactics boats to have had them installed. As an alternative, The result was a new plan for a large Ms U-boat
and partly by their efforts to improve Types UB, KWD would determine the feasibility of a project (Project 42). Certain details of the former (project
UC and UE, the designs of which had been worked based on U43, but with additional upper-deck 31) boat (new pressure-hull shape and surface
out in the shortest possible time at the beginning of torpedo tubes. However, it was mid-May before all torpedo tubes) were omitted, which meant that,
hostilities. In a memorandum dated April 1915, the the dates for Project 31 had been sent to KWD, for with the enlarging of bunker capacity, the surface
VI emphasized the importance it attached to the their evaluation by 1 August 1914. At about the range was increased from 8,000 to 10,000 nautical
U-boat blockade of Britain by announcing an same time, GW received a similar task (Project miles at 8 knots. In the course of the project,
enlarged V-boat, Project 31. The former TI had 31a), to investigate a special 1,500hp diesel surface displacement increased to 1,200 tons,
originally formulated this design in the autumn of combination (see page 35). The outbreak of war length to 82m and beam to 7.5m. In order to give
1913, to some extent as an alternative to the delayed further evaluation of this project. such a large boat the hoped-for surface speed of
steam/caustic-soda project of AG Weser, but it was On 9 September 1914, the UI had authorized 18.5 knots, it was necessary to provide, in addition
to usher in the next generation of U-boats for the KWD to build, in addition to the 5 Ms U-boats to diesel engines with an optimum performance of
Imperial Navy. U46-U50, two U-boats of Project 31. The RMA 1,65O-1,750hp, two 450hp diesel dynamos. The
The most significant departure from current announced on 14 September that it was proposed freqently suggested arrangement of two diesel
boats, which hitherto had been built to the design of that KWD should build two of these U-boats, but engines in tandem acting on the same shaft had
Type U43 (Project 25), was the shape of the that Danzig should accelerate the preparation of been rejected by the VI designers for technical
pressure hull, the cross-section of which was altered the necessary plans, and produce them. However, reasons, and because such an arrangement was
to horizontal twin-circles, with a pressure-tight the performance of diesel U-boats to date, and the considered unreliable. Commensurate with the role
passageway between. This extended from the initial general operational experience, indicated envisaged for this boat, i.e_, as an offensive
control room to the forward and after sections of that a comprehensive examination of this U-cruiser against merchant shipping, the
the boat. It was, in fact, an extension of the control particular project was necessary on the part of the armament was strengthened to two 10.5cm guns.
room, and housed the most important valves and VI. On 16 June 1915, the RMA requested the UI to On 9 December 1915, the VI was able to present
controls. As in U43, the frames were exterior, but carry out a comprehensive investigation of Project the new Project 42, on 22 December it was
were spaced farther apart. The constructional 31, with the other departments in the light of discussed at the RMA, and on 3 January 1916 the
strength of the pressure hull was examined wartime operations. A boat could then be built in UI was requested to obtain prices and delivery
mathematically, and was thought sufficient to
merit the new demands. A diving depth of 75m was
estimated. The new pressure hull form rendered it
perfectly feasible to increase the battery capacity
(in three components) by 50 per cent over those in
existing U-boats, which, although the boat was
larger, would give a submerged range of 120
nautical miles at 5 knots, as against the 90 nautical
miles at 5 knots of U43, and would increase the
submerged top speed from 10 to 11 knots. The use
of new 1,500hp diesel engines would also improve
the surface performance considerably. A maximum
surface speed of 18.5 knots was calculated, while
the surface range was slightly greater than in the
case of U43. The torpedo armament consisted of
four bow and two stern tubes of 50cm diameter, as
in U43. Additionally, a twin torpedo tube, with
swivel mounting, was fitted on the upper deck. The
artillery armament was similarly improved over
that of U43, by fitting a second 8.8cm U-boat gun
abaft the conning tower. These very comprehensive
features meant that the new boat was 165 tons
heavier than U43 (875 tons instead of 710 tons);
5-7m longer (7o-72m instead of 65m.) and 1m wider
(7.2m instead of 6.2m); and cost 3.75 million marks
(instead of 3 million marks). A further slight
lengthening of the boat to approximately 75m
would improve the lines of this new type, and give a
surface speed of 19 knots.
The Shipyard Department gave its support to
Project 31, but were not sure about the proposed
GI7 torpedoes, as the question of appropriate
V-boat torpedoes was still under discussion. The
necessity for a second 8.8cm V-boat gun was not
thought to have been proved. It was decided,
however, that a thorough look at the whole project
from a building point of view should be made by
KWD. The governing factor in U-boat building was
Right: U135 (Project 42) running trials.
54 U-BOAT CONSTRUCTION DVRING THE FIRST WORLD WAR

Project 42 (U127- U130). o 2 10m
~= _ _g_C_·_ _ =(J
0_1._]_"_ _
U·BOAT CONSTRUCTION DURING THE FIRST WORLD WAR 55

times for 12 boats of this type. On 11 January 1916, early in 1916 made imperative the development of a
however, following the restoration of the long- Type UBIII frame lines. medium-sized, torpedo-armed V-boat that could be
delayed scheme for building 31 VCII boats, the built quickly. The Type VBII coastal boat was too
possibilities of building Project 42 seemed bleak. lightly armed for this purpose, and its range
Subsequently, on 14 January, the RMA requested confmed it to the North Sea and the English
the VI to deterrrune afresh how many Project 42 Channel. The new torpedo V-boats would need to be
boats rrught be constructed by the various yards. capable of operating around the British Isles, and
On 26 March, approval was given for a contract to in the Mediterranean.
be placed with KWD for 2 boats of the new type. Type VCII (Project 41) served as a prototype. A
The request from the Howaldt Yard in Riel to new profile was given to the forward section of the
participate was refused on the grounds of their lack boat, the minelaying shafts were replaced by a
of experience in building such a new, large V-boat. torpedo compartment with four 50cm submerged
On 25 May 1916, the VI was in possession of torpedo tubes and six G/6 torpedoes. Apart from
tenders for 12 U-boats of Project 42 type, from GW, this, the successful VCII construction was hardly
AG Weser and Vulcan. The VI recommended that changed, but as an improvement a larger conning
the RMA use only KWD and GW, and suggested tower with two periscopes was fitted, as in the Ms
that orders be placed at fixed prices. However, the V-boats, and a pressure-tight bulkhead separated
RMA decided to make use of AG Weser also. On 27 the control room from the conning tower. This was
May 1916, 4 V-boats of the new type (U127-U130) Project 44, later to be designated Type VBIIr.
were ordered from GW, 4 (U131-U134) from AG
Weser, and 4 (U135-U138) from KWD.
By the autumn of 1915, a new design for an Project 43 (U115- U116). Type UBIII.
improved Ms U-boat had been completed, under the
designation 'Project 43'. Its external lines were Glossary: Unteroffizier-Aaum, NCOs' quarters; Akkumulatoren-
sirrular to GW's U93 type (raked bow, set-back Raum, battery room; Trinkwasser-Tank, fresh water tank; Munition,
ammunition; Offizier-Raum, officers' quarters; Mannschafts-Raum,
conning tower, rounded cross-section), but had crew's quarters; Tauchtank, diving tank; Zusatzbunker, auxiliary
external pressure hull frames like the KWD's other bunker; Trimmtank, trimming tank; Aeglertank, regulating tank;
Ms V-boats and was, therefore, approximately 40 Torpedo Zwischen-Tank, torpedo intermediate tank; Kettenkasten,
chain cover. (See also Glossary. page 372.)
tons lighter. Project 43 also envisaged increased
bunkerage to provide a 27 per cent greater surface
range of 11,470 nautical miles at 8 knots, as against
the 9,020 nautical miles at 8 knots of U93. In some
respects, this type may be seen as a smaller version
of Project 42: the internal fittings corresponded to
-1I,'
those of U87-U92, except for a change of position
between the after batteries and the control room
(analogous to the development of Type IX from
Type UBIII, main frame.
17
Type IA). The drawings for U87-U92 could, for the
most part, be used.
KWD was heavily committed with existing
contracts and with Project 42, and there seemed
little likelihood of their building this new type. On 6
October 1915, Schichau of Elbing offered to build 2
V-boats at their own expense, because of the official
refusal to permit them to participate in V-boat
construction. This was very much to the liking of
the VI, as it presented the possibility of having the
new type built without interrupting current
building, and rrught stimulate other private yards
to take on Ms boats of Project 43, which would
introduce them to the construction principles of the
large Project 42 boats. The two boats were ordered
from Schichau, but the fum was so heavily engaged
in torpedo-boat construction, and lacking
experience and materials that building was very
much delayed. So on 22 September 1916, the boats
were designated 'war' boats U115 and U116, orders
for them were placed officially with Schichau and
delivery was scheduled for the beginning of 1918.
In their memorandum of April 1915, the VI had
called for a simplified V-boat of approximately 600
tons, for deployment in the blockade against
Britain. The shortage of Ms V-boats was
occasioned by their relatively long building time
and the use of the 1,200hp engines, delivery times
of which inevitably deterrruned orders for V-boats.
The renewal of unrestricted submarine warfare
56 V-BOAT CONSTRVCTION DURING THE FIRST WORLD WAR

During the design stage, in order to improve a that of the older U-boats. In the light of operational customary building delays occurred, and the last of
rather poor surface speed while increasing the experience, hitherto, this was held to be quite the boats did not leave the first three yards until
surface displacement by only a modest 20 tons, the acceptable. August 1917, those from GW in ovember 1917.
UI decided to install 45(}-550hp engines instead of The RMA had intended to award contracts for Time and time again, the yards - knowingly, or
the 300hp diesels as fItted in Type UCII. Range the new type in March 1916, but preparation of the with false optimism in their own production
was to be increased by greater bunkerage, which fmal construction drawings took the UI longer than capabilities - made delivery promises they were
meant that the length and beam needed to be had been envisaged. So, on 19 April 1916, the UI unable to keep, and no steps were taken to prevent
increased until the boat fmally displaced 500 tons, was requested to secure delivery of the more this until the beginning of 191B.
like the U16. The increase in offensive power (larger important components (chiefly engines) for 24 The construction programme for the BOO-ton
calibre torpedoes, two more torpedoes carried plus boats, well in advance of the actual ordering of the minelaying boats U71-U80 had been rushed
an 8.Bcm U-boat gun), was achieved at the expense boats. Negotiations with the yards began in May through in a short time, and this factor manifested
of a considerable loss in submerged speed and 1916, and the UI received tenders from GW, B&V, itself in the numerous defects and unreliability of
submerged range; this was caused by the battery AG Weser and Vulcan. On 2 May, 6 UBIlI boats the boats, and led, quite early on, to the desire for
being 40 per cent smaller and yielding an output of were ordered from B&V (UB4~UB53); 6 from AG an improvement of this type. Following the
only 72 per cent of that in U16. There were, Weser (UB54-UB59); 6 from Vulcan (UB6o-UB65) successful UCII construction, there was not the
however, certain improvements brought about by and 6 from GW (UB66-UB71). Building was to same degree of urgency for a large minelaying boat,
more modern building methods and, in any case, it commence after the UBII and UCII contracts had and, initially, it was considered part of the long-
should be remembered that the submerged resis- been concluded, with delivery of the last of the term plan. The urgent need for a boat equipped with
tance of this boat was signifIcantly greater than order scheduled for April 1917. However, the dry storage for mines did not crop up until the
U-BOAT CO STRUCTION OURI G THE FIRST WORLD WAR 57

58 U·BOAT CONSTRUCTION DURING THE FIRST WORLD WAR
beginning of 1916, when it was planned to resume requirement in the after part of the boat. The
the campaign against merchant shipping. This UI profile and cross-section measurements of the
Project 45 depended, in its principal features pressure hull had to be changed several times. In
(internal fittings, and all structural members, fact, the mine compartment had to be made
especially external frames), on Project 43. The stern elliptical, but, because of the double-hull form, the
compartment, however, requiring space for mine outer lines of the boat were not changed. On the
storage, was changed and was based upon that in surface, total propulsion efficiency was 50 per cent.
U71-U80. Armament consisted of two 10.5cm which was reckoned to be good. But, as a result of
U-boat guns and four submerged bow torpedo the numerous projections and additions, including
tubes (six G/6 torpedoes) and a minimum of 32 and the two 10.5cm guns and a large navigating bridge,
a maximum of 40 UC/200 mines. Surface speed was the submerged propulsion efficiency was naturally
14 knots, and surface range was 5-6,000 nautical inferior, amounting, after towing trials had been
miles at 9 knots. The submerged range was less made, to 32 per cent. A peculiarity of this design
than that of the Ms U-boats because mine storage was the storage of a further ten torpedoes in
had increased the displacement to approximately pressure-tight containers, positioned in special
1,000 tons, but battery capacity had remained the troughs on the port and starboard sides of the
same. The length was increased to 77m. upper deck. In place of these torpedoes, 30
The UI assumed that, bearing in mind the additional mines could be carried in deck storage
quantity of engines available, 9 boats of this type boxes and could be slid along rails to the after
could be built by Vulcan and B&V during the launching position.
summer of 1917, as Vulcan was experienced in the On 13 May 1916. the UI suggested building 10 of
construction of mine installations of an appropriate these Project 45 boats, and tenders were received
type. However, during verification of the plan, it from Vulcan and B&V on 25 May. On the 27th,
became clear that the pressure hull shape of Project contracts for 5 boats from each yard were awarded:
43 was inadequate for the exceptional space U117-U121 to Vulcan, U122-U126 to B&V.
U117-U126 frame lines.
I
I
lWL/
I
JWl1
I
I
I
I
it'Ll I
I
I
Wl.f k-
I
L .__~~~~~ •• _. . I
Left: Slipway launch of an UBIII boat at B&V. These series boats were not built entirely on the building-slips; the fittings were
added only after the incomplete boats had been transferred to a floating dock.

Project 45 (U117- U1261.
-------------0;
Glossary: Minen-Raum, mine compartment; Trimmtank, trimming
tank; Schaltafel. switch panel; E-Maschinen. electric motors; 01-
Maschinen, engine; Munition, ammunition; Kommando-turm,
conning tower; HiUmaschinen, auxiliary engines; Brunnen, well;
Zentrale. control room; Akkumulatoren, batteries; Mannschafts-
Raum, crew's quaners; Hinterer Oberdeckstank. stern upper deck
tank; Tauchtank, diving tank. Reglenank, regulating tank; Minen
Ausgleichtank. mine compensation tank; Proviant. stores. ISee also
Glossary. page 372.1
0-
Frame 64 Frame 52 _
--------
Frame 75
.~---.~\
f,)l\ ~
\
\ ~, / \
'; \
Frame 84
Frame 94
Frame 100
60 U·BOAT CONSTRUCTION DURI G THE FIRST WORLD WAR

II
~
1/
'1 Ii Frame 12
!, !;
I;
f
I Frame 20
;e,_--/
....')/
~--
U·BOAT CONSTRUCTION DURING THE FIRST WORLD WAR 61

U-boat planning, January 1916
On 6 January 1916, in a memorandum from
Department BlII of the Naval Staff to the Kaiser
'Concerning means for pro ecuting an economic
war of destruction against England', a
comprehensive U-boat programme to ensure the
successful blockade of Britain was demanded for
the fIrst time. More importantly, the planning
revealed in this memorandum looked beyond the
Continental conflict to a future, final confrontation
with Britain, with political and military aims being
complementary. It may be of interest to quote
extracts from this memorandum.
'I. Our war aim, apart from destroying the
English Fleet as the principal means by which
Britain controls its Empire, is to reduce its total
economy in the quickest possible time, bringing
Great Britain to sue for unconditional peace. To
achieve this it will be nece sary:
(a). To cut off all trade routes to and from the
British Isles.
(b). To cripple in all the seven sea , all ships flying
under the British flag and all ships under neutral
flag plying to and from Great Britain.
Ic). To destroy military and economic resources and
by means of air attack disrupt the trade and
commerce in the British Isles, showing its
population quite mercilessly the stark realities of
war.
'2. The shutting-off of the Briti h Isles from all
incoming and outgoing passenger and mail supplies
in such a way that the Briti h Isles are encircled by
blockade and forbidden to neutral shipping; any
ship attempting to breach the blockade will be
destroyed. Thi blockade will be enforced in the
inner waters, as far a our resources allow by
minelaying from mine-carrying U-boats and in the
more distant approaches by V-boat operation. It is
anticipated that defensive operations on the part of
our opponents will compel our V-boats frequently
to avoid the immediate vicinity of the coast and to
move from place to place, and all this will mean that
a very extended territory will need to be patrolled.
It is not advised that surface ships be used for this
blockade on account of danger from English
submarines and other warships.
'3. The German Bight i the main starting-point
for U-boat operations. The coast of Flanders is the
natural support-point for operations against the
mouth of the Thames and the Engli h Channel.
Most important for the carrying on of the U-boat
campaign in the orth Atlantic would be bases in
the Faeroes and in the Azores and also on the
pan ish coast. Bases in these places would reduce
considerably the lines of approach for V-boats and
facilitate greatly the task of blockading the British
Isles. One cannot tell at thi point in time whether,
when peace is declared, the Faeroes and the Azore
may be acquired and whether in the next war it will
be possible to obtain the use of Spani h ports for
our purposes: all this will depend completely on
future political alignments. But for the present,
none of these bases can be counted upon at all for
the present conflict.
Left: U//7-U/20 (Project 451 on the slips at AG Vulcan,

Hamburg.
63
'4. To designate the whole of the Mediterranean . . . b· hr h· ( f that our opponent has no time to work out
mamtam m emg our t eat to t e mam arterY~
as a Zone of War and a blockaded territory and to our chief opponent and not be dependent politica countermeasures, and it will shorten the war. At
deny it to all shipping, out of consideration for our and in the military sense on other powers. Howeve , the same time we must consider neutral
allies and for neutral countries, is not possible. in measuring the Mediterranean forces available t intervention against us in the event of England
However, all traffic through the Suez Canal and us we can, to some extent, reckon on the collapsing at our onslaught. Reorganization of
traffic bound for Egyptian harbours will be submarines of our allies, taking into account also V-boat fleets must take place in the shortest time
forbidden and any ship infringing this will be that their bases and yards are available to us and so that we have an effective weapon to back up our
treated as an enemy unconditionally. In the form a useful supplement. policies. This building-up must be done in at most
remaining Mediterranean areas a blockade against '6. The use of U-boats and surface cruisers in the five years. The possible disadvantage in the
merchant shipping will be enforced. As surface blockade of distant countries depends upon the building of a large number of similar V-boats, the
Above: UI22 (Project 451 running trials. future development of U-boats and on our attendant feature that developing technology may
possessing suitable bases. There is no doubt that overtake them, is outweighed by the need in which
ships are not ideal for mercantile warfare, the whole the appearance of German submarines around we fmd ourselves; we have to put up with this. As a
campaign rests on our U-boats. Alongside torpedo North American harbours, in the approaches to the corollary, the demands for U-boats, especially large
U-boats, minelaying U-boats play a most Panama Canal, at Cape Verde, or in the Indian ones, should be restricted to the number required
significant role in ensuring the constant closure of Ocean would be very effective. However, with the for realizing our war aims.
the Suez Canal and the large harbours. increase in operational distances, and the duration '8. The requirements that are set out below seek
'5. Whether and to what degree we should allow of journeys, ships to keep U-boats in supplies will to strike a balance between the foregoing points.
our allies to undertake sea operations in the be needed and bases will be absolutely essential for They take account of a similar grouping of opposing
Mediterranean is, both politically and from a all operations in distant waters. The number of forces as in this war, that is to say that England,
military point of view, a rather open question. Our U-boats that would be needed to maintain an France, Russia and Italy are our opponents and
experience of our allies in the war to date is not such economic blockade from such bases and the number Austria-Hungary, Turkey and Bulgaria fight on our
as to incline us to allow them to look after the of U-boats needed to defend these bases depends side....
Mediterranean aspect of hostilities on their own. solely on strategic considerations and local '9. For Western operations the requirements are
And this point apart, it behoves us not to look at conditions and they are not to be evaluated here. as follows.
the war situation in that sphere from a short-term The use then of U-boats in remote parts of the From the German Bight Base:
point of view only. We need to think ahead and in world must remain a question for the future .... (a). For sealing-off the British Isles by the constant
particular to the acquisition of bases in the Adriatic '7. Number of U-boats: Our V-boat fleets must be occupation of 27 positions, 170 ocean-going
and on the coast of Asia Minor so that we can so numerous that a decisive victory is not only U-boats.
maintain our position in the Mediterranean and certain, but can be achieved quickly. This will mean (b). For military operations in the North Sea, for

patrolling the Eastern Territory and for offensive reserve=20. (Among the. small minelaying V-boats at the beginning of 1917 some 170 boats of diverse
operations against the enemy fleet, 20 ocean-going the VC boats may be included.) types would be at the avy's disposal. Thus, the
V-boats. '13. Mediterranean requirements are: total necessary to reach the strength of 300 V-boats
(c). For keeping open the German Bight from (a). For preventing enemy commerce and sealing off would be 130, and these would be required in the
minelaying operations and from enemy submarines, the Suez Canal from six positions in the eastern and shortest possible time. Additionally, future losses
30 small V-boats (improved type). Among these, western Mediterranean, 20 ocean-going V-boats. would have to be made good, and it was assumed
small VB boats can be included. (b). For maintaining two further positions in the that 4 boats might be lost monthly from 1917
From Flanders: central Mediterranean, 7 small V-boats (improved onwards. This quantity seemed so high that the VI
(d). Westwards, Dover-Calais in four positions, 13 type). thought it unattainable even if all yards pushed
small V-boats (improved type). (c). For operations against enemy warships and their building to the limit and produced in 1917 as
(e). At the eastern approach to the English Channel against French lines of communication in the many V-boats as were projected for 1916, i.e., an
in two positions, 6 small V-boats (improved type). western Mediterranean, 12 ocean-going V-boats. average of 12 V-boats each month. (The actual
(f). For coastal protection, 6 small V-boats (d). For protection of necessary bases in the monthly average for 1916 turned out to be 9, and
(improved type). Among these, small VB boats may Adriatic and along the coast of Asia Minor, 6 small for 1917 was 7.25.) In reality, however, the
be included. V-boats (improved type). awarding of new V-boat contracts was governed
Total requirement: '14. Minelaying V-boats required in the less by planning and strategy than by the delivery
Ocean-going V-boats 190+10% reserve=209. Mediterranean: capabilities of the various engine-producing firms
Small V-boats 55+10% reserve=60. (a). For mining on a fortnightly basis from four and yards.
'10. Approach routes to the important ports used positions in the eastern and western Mediter-
by the English battle fleet and English ranean, 12 ocean-going minelaying V-boats. Building contracts for 1917
merchantmen must be kept mined at all times. (b). For mining at approximately ten-day intervals, On 12 February 1916, the VI emphasized in a
Therefore, each fortnight, new mines must be sown from three positions in the central Mediterranean, 7 report to the RMA that the engine contracts given
at the approach to each port. These mines are to be small minelaying V-boats (improved type). to MAN would expire at the end of 1916, and that
fitted with a time-unpriming device so that, after '15. If we assume that the Austro-Hungarian to avoid production gaps it would be necessary for a
they have been in position for a particular length of Navy can provide 10 ocean-going V-boats, 3 small further V-boat contract to be negotiated. Projects
time, they are unprimed or desensitized and sink, so V-boats and 3 ocean-going minelaying V-boats, we 41, 43, 44 and 45 were suggested, as many as
that our V-boats are not endangered on subsequent arrive at what is required from us in the possible of these types to be produced by the
occasions. Mediterranean, and this is as follows: autumn of 1917. All the private yards that had been
(a). The east coast of Great Britain in six positions, Ocean-going V-boats 32+ 10% reserve=35. used for V-boat building hitherto would be
l! ocean-going minelaying V-boats. Small V-boats (improved type) 10+ 10% reserve considered for this except KWD which would be
(b). The west coast of Great Britain in nine positions, =11. totally occupied with Project 42. The RMA deleted
29 ocean-going minelaying V-boats. Ocean-going minelaying V-boats 9+ 10% reserve Project 41 (VCI l) from the list because contracts
(c). For occasional mining of six positions, ocean- =10. for suffIcient boats of this type had already been
going minelaying V-boats. Small minelaying V-boats (improved type) 5+ 10% placed. On 1 April 1916, the Shipyard Department
(d). Operating from Flanders and for mining the reserve=6. and the VI discussed the 1917 contracts. The RMA
Thames approaches and Channel ports, 15 small '16. This leads us to the following grand totals for expressed the opinion that V-boat construction
minelaying V-boats. all three spheres of operation: should be governed by the capacities of the yards
Total requirement: Ocean and the availability of spare parts, without any
Ocean-going minelaying V-boats 49+ 10% going Small consideration of the fact that the war might end
Ocean- mine- mine-
reserve=54. going Small laying laying before the contracts had been completed. But the
Small minelaying V-boats 15+10% reserve=17. V-Boats U·Boats V·Boats V·Boats Total yards were only to be engaged with the short-term
'II. Baltic (including the Kattegat) requirements: West.ern 209 60 54 17 340 Project 44 (VBIII) during the first quarter of 1917,
(a). To repel any Russian offensive by guarding and Baltic 26 25 10 20 81 because it was not possible to issue contracts for
Mediterranean 35 II 10 6 62 the second quarter of 1917 until July 1916.
threatening the approaches of the enemy from his
main bases and to cut off his economic supply Total 270 96 74 43 483 Additional costs for this double allocation had to be
routes in six positions, 23 ocean-going V-boats. If we now take into account the figures as at 1
taken into consideration.
(b). For constant patrols in the Kattegat and in the With regard to the larger V-boats, the VI
January 1916, of V-boats completed and under-
Danish sea routes in three positions, 7 small suggested that no more Ms V-boats be built.
construction, and ignoring the expected sinkings
V-boats of the improved type. which will be made good by the replacement Instead, Project 42 boats should be built, following
(c). For coastal protection and for setting-up on immediately after the last Ms boats had been
building, the number required comes down to:
observation points in the Baltic, 15 small V-boats of Ocean
completed in the summer of 1917. A preliminary
the improved type. going Small inquiry by the VI revealed that it would be possible
Total requirement: Ocean- mine- mine- to build 24 of these 1,200-ton boats during the last
going Small laying laying
Ocean-going V-boats 23+ 10% reserve=26. V·Boats V·Boats U·Boats V·Boats Total six months of 1917, but it was decided that only 12
Small V-boats 22+ 10% reserve=25. should be built in the stated time, plus 10 of the
75 44 10 133
'12. The following minelaying V-boats are enlarged minelaying Project 45 type. Meanwhile,
required: Which leaves further investigation by yard managements had
to be built: 195 52 64 39 350'
(a). For mining the Russian and Finnish ports shown that, with regard to the possibilities for
approximately at fortnightly intervals in four With the resumption of unrestricted V-boat Project 42, the problems inherent in the building of
positions, 9 ocean-going minelaying V-boats. warfare, the VI reconsidered its V-boat large boats of this type had led to considerable
(b). For mining the inner waters and the Gulf of requirements. The figure of 154 large, torpedo- underestimation of delivery expectations, and it
Riga in eight positions, 18 small minelaying armed boats (or 200 if one includes minelaying and seemed likely that no Project 42 boats could be
V-boats. coastal boats) had been calculated in April 1915, ready before 1 October 1917. This meant that there
Total requirement: without including the Mediterranean requirements. would be a three-month gap in the delivery of the
Ocean-going minelaying V-boats 9+ 10% reserve Now, at least 300 V-boats were required and, of larger V-boats. This was a disaster in the eyes of
=10. these, 191 would be needed by the end of 1916. the VI who regarded the large boats as indispens-
Small minelaying V-boats (improved type) 18+ 10% Presuming the loss of 20 boats by the end of 1916, able for blockade purposes in the Western

Approaches and on the North Atlantic trade among the 50 passengers killed in the explosion. according to Prize Regulations. On the other hand,
routes. Worse, 2 or 3 large boats were being lost This event caused tensions with the United States, V-boats carrying out Fleet work were only
each month; to replace these losses adequately, GW and led the German Chancellor to order a successful in the sphere of reconnaissance, and they
would have to be given an immediate contract for restriction of U-boat activity on 24 April 1916. The were certainly not successful during the Battle of
12 more Mobilization boats of the U96 type, avy could see little future in carrying out U-boat Jutland on 31 May 1916. This vacillation on the
equipped with GW engines, to follow after U98 from operations according to the Prize Regulations laid part of those responsible for U-boat deployment
the end of March 1917. Delivery would be one boat down in the Hague Convention, and they feared was clearly to influence the awarding of further
each in March and September and two boats increased losses if they were obliged to carry out V-boat contracts during the course of 1916.
monthly from April up to and including August. surface attacks against merchant ships that were To be sure, certain contracts for which decisions
However, GW could only commit itself to the heavily armed and escorted by warships. After all, had already been made were confirmed in May
delivery of 10 Ms V·boats in the prescribed time. they emphasized. submarines were designed 1916: on 5 May, 10 Ms V-boats, UI05-U114, to GW;
By mid-April 1916, the programme for 1917 was as primarily for submerged attacks. So they ceased on 20 May, the 24 UBIII boats, UB48-UB71, to
follows: the patrols around the British Isles and confmed GW, B&V, AG Weser and Vulcan; and, on 27 May,
10 enlarged minelaying boats (Project 45) with U-boat activity to supporting the Fleet. The the 12 large Ms U-boats of Project 42, U127-Ul38
Vulcan, subsequently also with B&V. protagonist of the 'all or nothing' attitude to to GW, AG Weser and KWD, plus 10 large mine-
12 large Ms U-boats (Project 42) with various yards U-boat activity was the Fleet Commander, Admiral laying boats, U117-U126, to B&V and Vulcan. But
other than Vulcan. Scheer. He was in direct opposition to the Naval following this there was a gap in ordering for this
10 Ms U-boats of the U96 type with GW. Staff, who were of the opinion that for political type. which lasted until early 1917. The only
24 UBIII boats (Project 44) in the first quarter of reasons restricted U·boat warfare was better than contracts to be excluded from this gap were those
1917. From then on, a quarterly estimate of none at all. Future events would show that their of UBIII, which had been reduced to 16 for the
requisite boats of this type would be made. attitude was correct when, in the winter of 1916117, second quarter of 1917 from: Vulcan, UB72-UB74;
On 24 March, the cross-Channel steamer Sussex with relatively small losses, substantial - if not B&V, UB75-UB79; AG Weser, UB8D-UB87; and
had been torpedoed, and American nationals were decisive - successes were achieved by operating all orders being placed on 23 September 1916.
U105- U114, 28 June 1917.

o 2 6 8 10 12 I~ 16 18 20m

On the other hand, great efforts were now made design. They intended to present the boat to the only five months after the contract had been placed,
to develop a U-cruiser for operations against nation, provided it was used to transport their the fust boat, Deutschland, left the slipway and
merchantmen, and its development was undertaken nickel. was ready for trials six weeks later. The second
at the expense of conventional U-boats of other On 18 September 1915, Vulcan, having heard of boat, Bremen, followed shortly afterwards. Both
types already in the course of construction. The the project, suggested to the RMA that the boats were designed and built entirely as
altered concept manifested itself in different minelaying U-boats, U79 and USO be converted to commercial vessels, with registered tonnages of 791
conversion plans. Hence, certain of the large cargo U-boats. The suggestion was rejected on 2 gross, 414 net.
minelaying Project 45 boats were fitted-out for the October, whereupon Vulcan submitted a tender From January 1916, Ozean-Reederei had been
U-cruiser campaign with the mine storage three days later for 4 cargo U-boats, to be built purchasing rubber in various parts of the United
equipment replaced by extra fuel and extra along the lines of the minelaying U-boats, U71-USa. States, and a total of 1,800 tons, sufficient for three
accommodation for a prize crew. For the GW offered to deliver 2 cargo U-boats, with a cargo voyages, was gathered together at Baltimore for
resumption of U-boat activities according to Prize capacity of 600 tons (according to the plans) in a loading into the U-boats. Deutschland made two
Regulations, the Flag Officer, U-Boats (FdU) shorter time than AG Weser or Vulcan, and they voyages. On her fust trip, she carried 163 tons of
decreed on 30 August 1916 that all large U-boats be were awarded a contract for 2 boats (one to be concentrated dye worth approximately 1.4 million
immediately fitted-out for an eventful resumption charged to Deutsche Ozean-Reederei GmbH, the dollars. On the return jouney, she carried 348 tons
of commerce raiding in the Western Approaches. In other to Krupp; both to be controlled by the of rubber (257 tons externally), 341 tons of nickel
particular, U63-U65 were to be given an increased former). Building costs were calculated at and 93 tons of tin. The rubber alone was worth 17.5
range; U71-USO were to undergo a provisional approximately 2.75 million marks for each boat. In million dollars - which was several times more
conversion from mines to torpedo tubes; and all the Navy, these submarine freighters were known than the building cost of both boats. Bremen sailed
ocean-going U-boats were to be armed with a by the code designation 'U200'. on her maiden voyage at the end of 1916, but was
lO.5cm U-boat gun. In the large minelaying U-boats The design of these, the largest German U-boats lost at sea, cause unknown.
of Project 45, a 15cm gun would replace the two to date, presented problems. Certainly, the absence After Deutschland's successful trials, 6 more
lO.5cm guns that had been planned. of armament simplified internal installations, but cargo U-boats to this tested pattern were ordered
no data existed to show how a hull of such large from GW in the summer of 1916. GW, however,
cross-section would behave at depth. The strong were fully committed, and no slipways were
CARGO U-BOATS AND degree of urgency attending the project meant that
it was essential to use engines and fittings that had
available, so the hulls for 3 boats were ordered from
Reiherstieg of Hamburg, and hulls for the other 3
U-CRUISERS been tested and were available. Surface propulsion from Flensburger Schiffbau AG, the Stiilcken Yard
was provided by two GW diesel-generator engines, in Hamburg, and the Atlas Yard in Bremen. GW
By 1915, the British blockade of Germany had each of 400hp at 360rpm, which had been intended built the diesel engines and were responsible for the
brought about a distinct shortage of raw materials, for the new capital ships Sachsen and Ersatz fmal fitting-out. It was hoped to build these 6 cargo
especially nickel and rubber, and several attempts Gneisenau. For submerged steering the U-boats in the short time of approximately seven
to deliver essential commodities to Germany had corresponding unit from Ms U-boats was chosen. months: in fact, launching at the various yards
failed, to the detriment of the economic situation. Available electric motors were used, arranged in followed from April to May 1917.
The State Secretary of the Treasury hit on the idea tandem with open air cooling. The large diameter of Meanwhile, the proposed role of these boats had
of using U-boats to bring in supplies. A suggestion the pressure hull (5.8m) permitted the installation been changed. As early as 2 September 1916, the UI
that rubber could be transferred, at sea, from of a fixed deck above the battery compartment so had suggested that two of them be used for war
neutral cargo ships to U-boats was dismissed as that, for the fust time in a German U-boat, trolleys purposes. Of three possible conversion options -
impracticable; and the loading of operational could be used for maintenance and to stow and fuel-transporting U-boat, minelaying U-boat or
submarines in neutral ports was not permitted by unship the batteries. It was intended that rubber be U-cruiser with heavy artillery - the last seemed the
international law. The only solution seemed to be stored in the floodable compartments outside the most appropriate. A U-boat armed with 15cm guns,
the building of unarmed cargo U-boats. pressure hull. The designer of the boat was the with a long range and good submerged qualities
engineer, Rudolf Erbach. The main specifications of would, despite her slow speed, have good chances of
Deutschland Class U200 as at 24 April 1916 were: success when operating on distant trade routes. On
A similar idea had occurred to Alfred Lohmann, a Length (waterline): 65m. 16 December 1916, 4 cargo U-boats being built by
wholesale merchant of Bremen. Early in 1915, he Maximum beam: 8.9m. Reiherstieg and Flensburger were changed to a war
discussed his plan with the State Secretary for the Draught (outward journey): 4.25m. role and designated U151-U154. Following the
Treasury. He would form, with Norddeutsche Lloyd Draught (return journey): 4.8m. decision to restrict submarine warfare from 1
and the German Bank, a limited liability company Displacement surfaced: 1,440 tons. February 1917, it was also decided to convert the
with a capital of 2,000,000 marks to build and Displacement submerged: 1,820 tons. remaining 3 cargo U-boats (Deutschland and the
operate a cargo-carrying U-boat. The State would Propulsion surfaced: two 380hp. boats being built by Atlas and Stiilcken) and
guarantee the associates their capital investment Propulsion submerged: two 400hp. designate them U155-U157. These boats were
plus 5 per cent interest, and keep any ensuing Speed surfaced: 9.5 knots. taken over by the Navy on 18 February 1917. The
profits. By 8 November 1915, his terms had been Speed submerged: 7.5 knots (2 hours conversion of the seven boats was carried out by
accepted and 'Deutsche Ozean-Reederei GmbH' duration). KW Wilhelmshaven, who received the necessary
was established, with Carl Stapelfeld of Surface range with 215 14,000 nautical miles drawings from GW. In addition to two 15cm guns,
Norddeutsche Lloyd as honorary commercial head. tons of fuel oil: at 9.5 knots. the boats, with the exception of U155 (the former
The purchase of cargoes was to be undertaken, free Load (return voyage): 170 tons rubber Deutschland), were fitted with two bow torpedo
of charge, by the fum of Lohmann & Co. Originally, stowed internally, tubes (eighteen torpedoes). U155 had 6 lattice
it had been planned to design and build the boat at 230 tons rubber torpedo tubes in a double arrangement under the
AG Weser, who suggested in October 1915 that the stowed externally, upper deck, angled at 15° away from the boat's
RMA be brought into the affair. At about this time, and deadweight sides. A somewhat higher top speed of
the fum of Krupp, which had large quantities of cargo 340 tons. approximately 11 knots was achieved by using new
nickel stored in the United States, announced that I Total: 740 tons. propellers that allowed the use of electric and diesel
they were interested in having a cargo U-boat. The pressure hUllf. for both boats were ordered from engines simultaneously on the same shaft. From
Krupp had arrived at the idea independently of FienSburger7Cffbau AG; GW were responsible the summer of 1917, these fust U-cruisers came
Lohmann, and had asked GW to work out a suitable for machinery a d construction. On 28 March 1916, into service at monthly intervals.

Deutschland.
Glossary: Hilfsmaschinenraum, auxiliary engine room; Key: After auxiliary engine room;l1, motor for horizontal rudder 10. handwheer for forward hydroplane; 11, handwheel for horizontal
Maschinisten, engineers; Kojen. berths; Klapptisch, folding table; propulsion; 2, motor for hydro~ane propulsion; 3, auxiliary bilge rudder; 12, periscope winch; 13, gyro-compass; 14, repeater compass;
Trimmtank, trimming tank; Stutzschotl. support bulkhead; E-Masch.-R. pump; 5, emergency steering station; 6, oxygen bottles. Contra/- 15. periscope hoist. Forward auxiliary engine room. 1, motor for
electric motor room; Oelmaschinenraum. engine room; Lad ~raum. room. 1, high-pressure copiPressor; 2, main bilge pump; 3, auxiliary hydroplane propulsion; 2. anchor-molor; 3. auxiliary bilge pump,
cargo compartment; Gang, passageway; Zentrale, cuntrol room; bilge - and trimming Pytnp; 4, turbo·blower; 5, compressed air 4, auxiliary bilge valve casing; 5. oxygen bottles; 6. propulsion for
Kapitan, captain; F.r. Raum, WIT room; Obermaschinist, Chief distributor; 6, main bilge valve casing; 7, auxiliary bilge valve casing flooding- doors.
Engineer; W.C. 1. Offiz., officers' W.C.; Messe, wardroom; 8, propulsion for flooding-doors; 9, handwheel for after hydroplane;
Vorrate, provisions; Kuche, galley; Heizer, stoker; Koch, cook; F. T.
Gast, WIT operator; Matrosen, ratings; Assistenten, clerks;
Arzneischrank, medicine chest; Ladeluke, cargo hatch; Hilfsmasch.,
auxiliary engine; Akkumulatorze/len, battery cells; rr-------------------,---------------V
Lenzbrunnen, bilge well; Reglertank, regulating tank.
IS"" also Glossary, page 372.1
0 0
,, I
- Diving tank 11- .
/\
/ \
c::::J c::::J 0 0
~
c:::J CJ I
\\ i
\ /
~-

U-cruisers U151- U157.
Frame 47 Frame 60 Frame 65 Frame 78 Frame 91 Frame 104 Frame 117
I II
I , I
-L.Diving tank 1- Bunker I Diving tank III-Diving tank IV-8unker~Bunker IV -Diving tank V_~
Flooding (extra ounker) III
'€2§
Frame 60 Frame 65
Above: Cargo U-boat Deutschland prior to her launch from Slip 8 at GW.

Project 46 U139-U141.
eo
Key: Forward torpedo room - 1, torpedo lUbes; 2, reserve
torpedoes; 3. warhead; 4, motor for forward hydroplane; 5. anchor
motor; 6. auxIliary bIlge pump; 7. propulsion for flooding doors; 8.
air punfler; 9. cold cartridges; 10, handwheel for forward
hydroplane. COntrol room - 1, gyro-compass; 2, propulsIon for
ammunitIon hOist; 3. periscope shaft; 4, periscope wInch; 5. aIr
pUrifier; 6, helm for after hydroplane: 7, helm for forward
hydroplane; 8. helm for main rudder; 9, exhaust cases for diving
Frame 148
tanks. AuxIliary engine room - 1, cargo and extra engine; 2, main
bilge pump; 3. main ventilator; 4, cold air engine; 5, turbo-blower; Frame 119 Frame 130'===~~1;l Frame 140
t
6. battery ventilator; 7. auxiliary bilge pump; 8, shunt switch panel;
9. auxiliary SWilCh panel; 10, 011 cooler; 11, ammunition hOIst. Oil
engine room - 1, fuel-oil consumption tank; 2, lubricating-oil
pump; 3, cool water pump; 4, fuel-oil loading pump; 5, main bilge
pump; 6, 011 cooler; 7, friction clutch. Electric-engine room 1,
maIn electric engine; 2, cool air; 3, main SWItch panel; 4, auxiliary
SWitch panel; 5. thrust bearing; 6, aIr cooler; 7, motor for main
rudder, 8, extra compressor; 9, transformer for control installation.
Frame 20
After torpedo room - 1, torpedo tubes; 2, auxiliary bilge pump; 3.
motor for warping capstan; 4, Main rudder propulSion; 5, trimming Frame 41
pump; 6, propulSion for after hydroplane; 7, handwheel for main Frame 60 Frame 82 Frame 95
rudder. 8, handwheel for after hydroplane; 9, air pUrifier; 10, bilge
valve casing.
Glossary: Vorrate, stores; Kuche, galley; Kuhlraum, cold-

storage; Navigation. chart room; F.T. Raum, WIT room;
Kommandant, commander; Messe, wardroom;
Hilfsmaschinenraum, auxiliary engine room.
70 U-BOAT CO STRUCTIO DURING THE FIRST WORLD WAR

lJ.cruisers: Projects 46 and 46a The construction of the first cargo V-boats had On 29 July 1916, the placing of contracts for
By the end of April 1916, as a result of the German provided valuable experience in diving techniques three V-cruisers of this type was discussed at the
dmiralty's decree regarding Prize Regulations, as applied to larger V-boats, but for these RMA. The VI had its plans worked out to the
the V-boat blockade of Britain had ceased because V-cruisers a higher surface speed was desirable. extent where contracts could be awarded
the Fleet Command and the Marinekorps had The problem, then, was clearly one of engine power. immediately if the yards could realize them. GW
withdrawn their V-boats. The Naval Staff now Although MA were thinking in terms of a 3,OOOhp were chosen because they had shown in their
r quested large, powerful V-cruisers which could engine, there was no fast-running diesel available designing and building of cargo V-boats that they
rve as commerce raiders, and they ordered the with a power greater than 1,700hp, nor could such could construct large V-boats in a relatively short
VI, on 27 May 1916, to design and build a V-boat of an engine be expected in the near future. The use of time. GW declared themselves ready, provided they
this kind as soon as possible. At the RMA, steam turbines in submarines had, until now, been were allowed to put back the work in hand on the
r presentatives of the VI discussed this problem of rejected because of the difficulty of getting rid of large Ms V-boats U127-U130, and transfer to the
providing larger V-boats with an increased surface the boiler heat and the difficulty of constructing the Bremer Vulkan Yard in Vegesack, the complete
performance, which could successfully take on large exhaust valves. The VI were, therefore, faced building programme for Ms V-boats U111-U114.
rmed merchant ships. In the opinions of those with the task of designing a V-cruiser of medium Permission was granted on 1 August 1916, and the
involved, the V-cruisers would need to have speed, using the available 1,65O-1,750hp diesel order for three V-cruisers, U139-U141 of Project 46
powerful guns and be well armoured. engines. This was designated Project 46. was awarded to GW.
Kapitanleutnant Otto Weddigen's boat UI40 (Project 46),
V-BOAT CONSTRVCTION DVRI G THE FIRST WORLD WAR 71

Project 46a (U142- U150), 1918.
I
I I
_-./- ---fl--
'C,3 .{i~ •• l...

I
Although this programme was given priority

over almost all other contracts, the agreed building
time was exceeded by eight months because of Gun arrangement of U142- U144 and U173- U176, 7 February 1918.
various difficulties; compared with the cargo 12J'S67B910m
U-boats, these were more complicated craft, and no
account had been taken of this. There were
problems of supplies (shortage of coal) and there
was an acute deterioration of work performance. In
fitting-out, especially with regard to engine
installation, GW could fall back on the design it had
worked out for the large Ms U-boats of Project 42.
However, in contrast to those boats, Project 46
called for only one battery-charging generator of
450hp. As in Project 42, the forward hydroplanes
could be retracted into the upper deck for surface
travel. For the frrst time in German U-boats,
periscopes with fixed eye-pieces at the end were
used. The control room was separated from the
auxiliary engine room, and the command centre was
given a protection layer of 60mm metal - a total of
90mm! Thicker metal was also used for the pressure
hull (maximum 25mm) as a diving depth of 75m was
considered desirable. The deck was of 8mm sheet
steel, and the outer hull bulwarks were of lOmm
sheet steel. Two 15cm U-boat guns were provided,
with mechanical means for supplying ammunition,
72 U-BOAT CONSTRUCTION DURI G THE FIRST WORLD WAR

670,000 marks was for the gun armament and time to be optimistic in view of worsening labour
55,000 marks for the compass installation). and material shortages. He was concerned with the
o 2 4 6 8 ;0 12m In October 1916, five months had elapsed since possibility that the war might end sooner than was
the placing of the previous contract for larger expected, with the need to build more battleships
U-boats (apart from the three U-cruisers and with questions concerning the post-war
U139-U141). To make further use of the capacities development of the Navy. So, on 8 November 1916,
of the yards and engine builders, it was necessary he asked the Head of the I Naval' Staff to reduce
to decide which types should be built in the future. the 9 V-cruisers to 3. On 12 November, the
The RMA decided, once again, in favour of Admiralty Staff replied, saying that the 9
Project 46, for the same reasons that had led to the V-cruisers should be built 'without consideration of
ordering of the fust three U-cruisers on 1 August any other questions'. A further statement from the
1916. They asked the UI, on 14 October 1916, to Secretary of State to the effect that he would not
establish how many boats of this type could be take responsibility for the building of more than 3
completed by the summer of 1918. On 23 October new V-cruisers did not change the opinion of the
1916, the UI decided to place contracts for a further Admiralty Staff. Consequently, on 28 and 29
9 boats of the improved type, Project 46a, with November 1916, contracts for the 9 V-cruisers of
GW, AG Weser and Vulcan. They were to have the Project 46a were given to GW (U142-U144), Vulcan
new MAN ten-cylinder, four-stroke, 3,000hp (U145-U147j and AG Weser (U148-U150). The
engines, delivery of which MA had guaranteed. yards suggested a delivery time between the end of
These would give a speed of 18 knots, as against the 1917 and early 1918, if Vulcan were allowed to delay
15 knots of the Project 46 boats. The main completion of the large minelaying U-boats,
specifications of Project 46a were: Ul19-U121 , and AG Weser to delay completion of
Length overall: 97.5m. the large Ms U-boats, U131-U134.
DispJ.acement surfaced: 2,000 tons.
--
+-t- - --a- Range surfaced: 22,000 nautical miles at Armoured U-cruisers: Projects 47 and 50 (K44)
T!- 8 knots. As early as the summer of 1916, the VI had
Armament: two 15cm V-boat guns, considered the possibility of a fast, powerfully-
two 8.8cm AA guns. armed and armoured V-cruiser that could operate
Torpedo armament as in as a commerce raider in distant waters. The fust
Project 46, but with an sketch for an armoured cruiser, Project 'P'
additional twelve (Panzerkreuzer: armoured cruiser) dated 18 June
torpedoes in pressure- 1916, envisaged a",2,500-ton boat approximately
tight containers on the 110m long, equipped~th two 3,000hp diesel
upper deck. engines and two 1,750hp diese!.generators, giving a
=::0
Crew: 57, with 20 men for prize maximum of 21 knots. The boatwas planned as a
crews. three-shaft type. The two outer shafts were to be
Remaining specifications were as in Project 46. driven by a 3,000hp diesel engine and a 500hp
It was hoped that all the V-cruisers would be ready electric motor; the middle shaft was to be driven by
by the spring of 1918, but the Secretary of State in a 2,000hp electric motor receiving current from the
the RMA considered the promised short building diesel generators when the boat was travelling on
and a larger range-fmder for the guns was fitted
on the conning tower. Torpedo armament
corresponded to that of the normal Ms V-boat -
four submerged bow torpedo tubes and two
submerged stern torpedo tubes; twelve torpedoes
G/6 were carried. Further specifications of Project
46 were:
Displacement surfaced: 1,950 tons.
Propulsion surfaced:
U139 two 1,650hp GW two-
stroke diesel engines.
U14o-U141 two 1,750hp MAN four-
stroke diesel engines.
Speed surfaced: 14-15 knots.
Speed submerged: 8 knots.
Range surfaced: 12,000 nautical miles at
10 knots.
Range submerged: 90 nautical miles at
4.5 knots.
Crew: 55, with 20 men for prize
crews.
As voyages would now be of longer duration, an
apparatus for producing fresh water was fitted, and
this could be heated by the exhaust gases. Building
costs amounted to 8.7 million marks (of which U-cruiser UI45 on the slips at AG Vulcan, Hamburg.

the surface. Armament would consist of four
10.5cm guns, six 50cm torpedo tubes (four
Armoured U-cruiser Project 47. submerged bow, two submerged stern), two 45cm
side torpedo tubes and twin surface torpedo tubes
T6 sketches of 16 June 1916 fitted on deck. Further design work established
~G~'·\'\"·i~ {t~~iL'.:±--· X·.:U", '"',,, ";~,: that the estimated displacement was very much too
't,tt:llIA.kJ: A = 't~'lh·,;\,.!, .... 2.1.1 ... 0 fit
---1). , ~ 500 •
,. , .;:. :\11 t:. IH'~Nv'·vt A ~ 2 B 1 t~ ~ '2..D ;0 ~ooo
ff
/(, ~r.l/.w: '" t~ t?-,,-~ low, which meant that the estimated surface speed
ffl, ',' ' "_"'::~~_"~Y J.k.. .Hl)J.V1lwA~ had been optimistic. The gun armament was too
C' 6~wI4< ~ ooro • fll '"J./"';, '4,!"",
ttl': l5J.J t A'111ilD 09,\00 weak for the proposed operations, and the placing
J). 0L:(,.r"''''" .,75 0 • ,~ A.; 2..0.,,iD ...1450. ~ . . . 1~,S,
of guns between the two conning towers was
impracticable. A developed plan designated
'Project 47' was ready at the beginning of 1916, and
its main specifications were as follows.
Length overall: 110m.
Maximum beam: 11m.
Draught: 6.5m.
Displacement surfaced: 3,800 tons.
Performance surfaced: 9,500hp.
Speed surfaced: 18 knots.
Range surfaced: 13,200 nautical miles at
10 knots, or 16,200
nautical miles at
8 knots.
Range submerged: 80 nautical miles at
4 knots.
Armament: four 15cm U-boat guns
\ dJ"~')' ", S (300 shells each). *
1 lv-rrcL,l,.<.h;-><;u<lnvi'" two 8.8cm AA guns
(200 shells each).
six 50cm torpedo tubes
(four submerged bow
and two submerged
stern).
two 45cm side torpedo
tubes (total of sixteen
torpedoes).
Armour: bulwarks 4C>--60mm,
deck 20mm, conning
tower 60mm, outside
(+45mm inside).
Crew: 100, with 20 men for
prize crews.
Cost: 16.6 million marks
(without armament
and compass
installation) i.e.,
approximately twice
the cost of a small
cruiser.
Final design Building time: 20 months.
*This particular arrangement of the 15cm guns (see
sketch) was chosen in the interest of an acceptable
submerged resistance, and as protection against
wash.
The enormous building cost and long building
time provoked fierce controversy as to the
practicality of this design. On 1 May 1917, an
official pronouncement from the Admiralty
established that, compared with Project 46, the
UI's Project 47 called for a doubling of
displacement, crew and building costs without
achieving any notable increase in endurance,
submerged speed and radius, or accommodation for
a prize crew. On the positive side, there was a
significant increase in the surface top speed,
doubling of the gun armament, a strengthening of

the torpedo armament and a considerable increase immediately, by ordering two such vessels, as the
in armoured protection. But the design fell short of availability of two such experimental craft would Turbine arrangement in UD1
what was expected from a V-cruiser, in that speed allow a quicker and more certain evaluation of the (Project SOl.
was lacking and potential for good observation was type's possibilities.'
less than could be desired. Nor did the Navy Staff The TI had intended to use a new, twin-shaft
consider Project 47 as cost-effective in her proposed MAN engine, with two opposed pistons in each
r61e of commerce raider. In unrestricted submarine cylinder, for the diesel installation. It would take
warfare, the smaller, cheaper and more quickly- but six or seven months to manufacture a 4,OOOhp
built Ms V-boats (e.g., U35) were much more useful test engine, and a further seven months to achieve
than very large V-boats. For operations in more delivery of two six-cylinder engines, which might
distant waters, the auxiliary cruiser of the Mowe provide some increase in the surface speed. But the
~~~
type (approximate building cost, 5 million marks) Navy remained adamant. High construction costs
had proved herself suitable. and, especially, the long construction time for a rQloiVing
Finally, it was essential to wait for the results V-boat that in essence was hardly better than the
~lank
~
obtained from Project 46 before initiating the existing smaller types such as Project 46a led to the
building of very large V-boats. The most important end of Project 47.
questions were: 'What is the least depth of water in The VI now began to think in terms of a smaller Auxiliary engine room Turbine room
which such a large V-boat can safely dive and V-cruiser with a higher speed, for which only a and electric engine room
travel? How will she behave on touching the steam turbine could provide the desired
bottom?' The Admiralty concluded: 'At the present performance. Hitherto, the problem of boiler heat laid down and, at the end of the war, all drawings
time, the completion of V-boats under construction disposal while submerged and the technological and incomplete components were destroyed. Erich.
that could still be used during this war is suffering diffIculties of designing the necessarily large, Groner's Die deutschen Kriegschiffe 1815-1945, Vol
considerably through delays and through all kinds pressure-tight closures had ruled out this method of 1, p. 376, shows the main specifications as follows.
of procrastinations, which stem from the attitudes propulsion. A 'diving' boiler, patented by Naval Length overall: approx. 125m.
of those employed in their construction, in the Construction Master Schafer and Engineer H. Maximum beam: approx. 10.5m.
production of raw materials and their handling for Wolke of the Technical Bureau, provided a really Draught: ~rox. Dm.
war purposes and in transport problems. It is not in effIcient solution to the fIrst problem. Their Displacement surfaced: approx. 3,800 tons.
our best interests to increase the difficulties by invention stemmed from the discovery that the Propulsion surfaced: four 6,OOOhp steam
giving out contracts for a large constructional water-pipe boiler of a steam launch that sank turbines; two 450
undertaking such as this one.' To this, the Shipyard accidentally in Kiel Harbour, had not exploded as diesel generators.
Department replied on 30 May 1917: had previously been assumed. Wolke's patents Propulsion submerged: two 1,900hp SSW
'1. The range of Project 47 can, without any provided four diving boilers housed in cylindrical electric motors.
change of construction plan, be increased from recesses outside the pressure hull, and these would Speed surfaced: 25 knots.
16,200 nautical miles at 8 knots (14.5 per cent be flooded when the boat submerged. Between Speed submerged: 9.5 knots.
reserve displacement) to 19,300 nautical miles (11 them was situated the propulsion unit, consisting Armament: six torpedo tubes (four
per cent reserve displacement) by using two diving of four steam turbines, two electric motors and two submerged bow, two
tanks as fuel bunkers, or to 22,000 nautical miles 450hp diesel generators. submerged stern);
(8.5 per cent reserve displacement) by using four The V-cruiser plan, using a steam-electric drive of three or four 15cm
diving tanks as fuel bunkers. Through a suggested this kind, was designated 'Project 50' (or K44). The V-boat guns.
alteration made by the' VI concerning the hull was developed in accordance with Project 46a, Crew: approx. 104.
machinery installation, but without any other but a greater length (approximately 125m) was
constructional change, a further increase to 26,400 envisaged, to give an increased surface speed of
nautical miles at 8 knots (8.5 per cent reserve 22-25 knots. In order to facilitate safe diving for CONSTRUCTION AFTER
displacement) could be attained. such a long boat in the shallow orth Sea,
'2. Auxiliary cruisers could only put to sea in additional retractable hydroplanes were fitted
THE DECLARATION OF
winter, given certain favourable weather amidships. The torpedo armament corresponded to UNRESTRICTED WARFARE
conditions. The use of V-cruisers, on the other that of Project 46a. Guns consisted of three 15cm
hand, is not restricted in the same way. The quick-fIring guns, two forward and one abaft the In 1916, the tug-of-war between Navy and
argument that auxiliary cruisers have the conning tower, and two 8.8cm AA guns. On 24 Government on the question of stepping up the
advantage of taking prisoner the crew of a sunken November 1917, the Weapons Department ('W') V-boat campaign was resolved. Above all,
ship, thus concealing their presence, is irrelevant, demanded four 15cm quick-fIring guns, which the Chancellor von Bethmann Hollweg wished to avoid
as a V-cruiser, with its ability to dive, does not VI rejected as impossible because of weight anything that might bring America into the war,
require to take in enemy crews in order to remain problems, and suggested instead four guns in twin but the Naval powers demanded unconditional and
concealed. mountings. 'W' refused to consider twin mountings unrestricted submarine warfare, and the Supreme
'3. As a safe diving depth for submerged travel for V-boats, and insisted on four QF guns - if need Army Command (OHL) hoped for a decisive and
for the 4,OOO-ton V-cruisers, the VI suggested 40 be, at the expense of the AA guns. After further successful V-boat campaign against the Allies -
metres, which would be adequate for an outward work on the project, it was decided that the fIrm of for success on land now seemed beyond their grasp.
journey through the German Bight. BV is of the Erhardt should provide the new, hydraulically- After a German peace initiative had foundered, a
opinion that one must not retard the development operated 15cm L/45 V-boat gun in a special memorandum from the Navy Staff (BI) dated 22
of ever more powerful underwater vehicles, the submarine mounting. The question as to whether December 1916 forecast that, if unrestricted V-boat
performances of which can be obtained only by an three or four 15cm guns would be used was not warfare recommenced, Britain would be brought to
increase in displacement. If we are to keep our resolved. her knees within six months. Bethmann Hollweg
advantage in this submarine arm over all other In February 1918, 'War Contract AA' was consented to a resumption from 1 February 1917
navies, we must make a positive step forward, such awarded to KW Kiel for a V-cruiser of this type, and, on 9 January, the Kaiser signed the
as Project 47 will provide, without any delay. The K44 (Kreuzer 44). to be known as UDl. In May, Declaration, which was to present the V-boat arm
Shipyard Department "B" therefore suggests work started in the mould-loft and workshops in with an impossible task, and which was to bring the
putting in hand the building of Project 47 conditions of great secrecy, but the keel was not Vnited States into the war.

Pressure was now on to get the maximum number handy, medium size and their expected per- One therefore expects that in the coming year the
of V-boats into action in the shortest possible time, formance above and below water made them ideal same gaps in production will exist as now: 6-8
but the severe winter of 1916/17, with its attendant torpedo weapons for use in unrestricted submarine instead of 12-18 as in the winter. Improvement
transport problems, shortage of coal and the poor warfare. On 6 and 8 February, 15 boats of this type only in July: 130 operational boats and, with 3 per
morale of the workers, delayed the building (War Contract Q) were ordered from Vulcan cent monthly losses, never over 220. Losses may
programme to such an extent that, on 15 January (UB88-UB102), 15 from B&V (UB103-UBl17/ and well be greater however.'
1917, Field Marshal von Hindenburg sent 15 from AG Weser (UB118-UB132). KWD were not At the same time, MAN wrote to the OHL, point-
Lieutenant-Colonel Bauer, from the OHL, to the VI acquainted with VB construction and they were ing out the severe consequences for the V-boat
at Kiel to discover exactly what the problems were given only two new Ms V-boats, U158 and U159, programme posed by the non-fulfillment of orders
and how to solve them. In particular, it was agreed with an increased range (War Contract R). No more for engine parts. These letters led the Chief of the
that miscellaneous raw materials and V-boat boats would be ordered from KWD until early 1918 General Staff of the Army, on 9 June 1917, to
components would be given priority of transport, because of their existing contracts and the shortage urgently request the Navy Staff to prevent a
and the OHL would be furnished with the names of of diesel engines. GW were so overloaded with decrease in V-boat production at all costs: 'If the
soldiers who were skilled in V-boat building, with a cargo V-boats and V-cruisers that they could take ordering of new V-boats and V-boat engines is not
view to obtaining their release from the Army. no further contracts. Instead, the Bremer Vulkan made a matter of urgency, serious disruption of the
Furthermore, unofficial liaison was set up between Yard in Vegesack, having already carried out V-boat construction programme cannot be
the VI and the OHL. On 19 January 1917, the VI subcontract work successfully for GW in the avoided.'
used this liaison to complain that if a successful building of the Ms V-boats, were given a cOl}tract In the meantime, a new project was being dis-
unrestricted campaign were waged for six months, on 6 February 1917, for 4 Ms V-boats (U16o-U163). cussed. This stemmed from Navy Staff discussions,
it would mean that no new V-boats would be However, even the placing of these contracts did on 15 May, as to whether the surface range of the
ordered. They maintained that it was essential for little to bring about a noteworthy increase to the large minelaying V-boats, Ul17-U126, could not be
immediate contracts to be placed for 25 VBIII V-boat fleet, and the VI remained concerned that increased to at least 12,000 nautical miles; and
boats for the end of 1917, 10 further VBIII, and 28 construction would break down. On 15 May 1917, whether, in view of the importance of minelaying
Ms V-boats by the middle of 1918, plus a further 70 the RMA and the Navy decided not to look at and the heavy losses of VC boats, some of the
V-boats of various types by the end of 1918. The further V-boat construction for the time being. The newly-ordered VB boats could not be built as VC
RMA however, was not prepared to order boats VI, in a letter to Lieutenant-Colonel Bauer on 28 boats. Of 17 boats sunk since 1 February 1917, 12
unless they could be delivered by the beginning of May 1917, noted: had been minelaying V-boats. On 18 May, the RMA
1918. To do otherwise, they felt, would merely place 'Small yards could build by the end of 1917/ replied as follows:
an unnecessary burden on the already overloaded beginning of 1918 approximately 20 smaller boats, '1. The range of V-boats Ul17-U126 can be
armaments programme and on the post-war given the use of 12,000 to 15,000 skilled workers. increased to 12,000 nautical miles at 8 knots by
budget. What are the prospects? Some large yards have still using some of the diving and compensating tanks
Emphasis was now laid on the ordering of the not received (by January 1917) their necessary as fuel-oil bunkers. A further increase is hopefully
VBIII boats - their relatively short building time labour. RMA is not inclined to place orders: end of possible by filling the mine compensating tanks
and comparatively great offens~':ve power meant the war is in sight, there is concern for peacetime with fuel-oil. This, however, is only feasible when no
that they were ideal for an overall lockade around estimates, weakening of the Fleet plan [Flotten- mines are on board.
the British Isles, and in the Medit ~anean. Their gesetz], difficulties wIth providing materials, etc. '2. To rebuild the VB boats as VC boats would
involve such a quantity of alterations that one
U-boat deliveries, 1916-17. would be almost starting from scratch and would
16 lose the work done to date on the Type VBIII. We
151-~~--------~-------+-----------_-+!..i:\
strongly advise against this.'
;..r-'\\-f _ This was accepted by the Navy, but a request was
: '\ made that 15 new VC minelaying V-boats be built
14
:'. Contractual de~v~rtes to, ,~ ! as replacements for losses.
! "" J\ , \ ' '.. In a letter dated 25 May 1917, improvements in
13
:
/
\
~ I
:
\...
\
I \
,f \, J
I
'\
\
these new VC boats were requested to rectify
12 ; \ ! \/:\ : \ various faults found in the VCII boats:
" \ { : \ I \ 1. Diving qualities were not up to expectations;
II : ~: : \ : \ in winds greater than Force 5, it was exceedingly
" \ : f \
10 f--t'----.......ir----""":;+' --''----.:>I..--I;-+-+---T--+----f--+-+---IJH~_+--+-_T,-diffIcult to submerge_
/ \.
. \
\
\
\
2. Very wet bridge condition because of deck
tubes was noticeably unpleasant during the winter
months.
8
. •\
\
3. Very draughty in the boat. (Cause of much
sickness among personnel!)
Furthermore, the Admiralty desired a strengthen-
6 ing of the gun armament by one 10.5cm quick-firing
gun, the surface speed to be increased to 14 knots
and the submerged range to approximately 90
nautical miles at 3 knots.
\/ / \ This V-boat, designated VCIlI (Project 41a),
which had been projected by the VI and its details
/ !'\ j.;"'---- ""-.......J/

developed by B&V and KWD, differed only in
externals from the VCII type. In an attempt to
solve some of the above-mentioned faults, a new
Losses
ol-.-...JL.........._ - ' -........_..l.o--"-_.L--'-_'--......---'~....L.........._-'---'-_'---'-_'---'----'_-'-........_ ..........J..._'---'
hull shape was designed, which sloped gently
J MAMJJASOND MAMJJASOND FM downwards from the conning tower; the new 10.5cm
1916 1917 1918 quick-firing gun was raised higher than the gun in
76 V-BOAT CONSTRVCTION DVRING THE FIRST WORLD WAR

Type UCIII.
~ ~
~
--
•
'..
W . --T
~
~ , I
. ',1 .
. .'\.,'
• l'~
Frame 7 Frame 15 Frame 20 Frame 28 Frame 35
I.
Jbl
~~-w'~-
Frame 44 Frame 54· Frame 60 Frame 65 Frame 76 Frame 88
.. ~-~~..,~_._~_ ~---~5'--~-'-~--~"'':''!5-'-:':'''':'-
-'" ~ _ .. ..!=.::..-:-
~-=-='::=:====-=::::'=::"'-=--_._ . . .=.:-:-_.:::J. l.-.-
._....__
_
._ ~- 7 . . .

the Type UCII; and the external torpedo tubes were U-boats in the light of war experience and for operating at greater distances from the coast.l
brought aft abreast the bridge. This certainly operational losses: 'It was adjudged essential for Apart from these large boats, it was necessary to
solved the problems of water spraying over the gun the prosecution of the war that everything that order the quickly-built, medium size UBIII and
platform and bridge, but it did cause a stream of could be built in any possible way by 1 January UCIII types for torpedo and minelaying tasks in
foam to form at the torpedo-tube hatches, which 1919 be put in hand right away, as the general the War Zone. Consequently, at the end of June
was clearly visible from some distance away. By outlook of the war gave no justifIcation for any 1917, a total of 95 U-boats were ordered for
altering the flooding and ballast tubes, the flooding reduction in the most-committed work on, construction:
time of the diving tanks was reduced from 30 improvements to, and increase in numbers of 39 UCIII boats (War Contract S): UC8(}--UC86
seconds in the UCII boats to 20, as compared, but U-boats.' from KWD, UC87-UC89 from AG Weser,
the diving time of th.e boat remained unchanged at For ocean-going operations and for the UC90-UC118 from B&V; for completion between
45-50 seconds because of the numerous upper Mediterranean, large U-boats were required. The 1918 and early 1919.
works, which were freely floodable. The increase in 2,OOO-ton U-cruiser of Project 46a seemed to be the 37 UBIII (War Contract T): UB133-UB141 from
overall displacement meant a lesser submerged requisite type for tasks in the Atlantic, to the west GW, UB14:C----UBl53 from AG Weser, UB154-
stability and lesser submerged speed, but in view of of Ireland and France, and in the Mediterranean. UB169 froI)1 Vulcan; for completion between the
the purpose for which the design was intended (On the other hand, the continued building of the summer of 1918 and early 1919.
these still seemed adequate. Further departures relatively old Ms type could only be recommended 9 Ms U-boats (800-tonl: Ul64-U172 from Bremer-
from the UCII boats were stronger construction for if they were built by yards that specialized in this Vulkan, Vegesack; ready between the summer of
oil bunkers and an increase in the size of the storage type, and could not switch quickly to building other 1918 and January 1919.
batteries (plates being increased from 26 to 32l. types. Nor was there much in favour of continuing 10 U-cruisers, Project 46a (War Contract Uj:
On 2 June 1917, a discussion took place between to build the large Ms U-boats of Project 42, as these U173':"'U176 from GW, U177-U178 from Vulcan,
the U-Boat Department, the Marinekorps, the had no real advantages over the 800-ton Ms type U17f}----U180 from AG Weser, U181-U1812 from
RMA, the UI and the Navy to try and establish and the 2,000-ton U-boats, building time of which B&V; ready between the summer of 1918 and
requirements for the construction of further was no longer, and which were far better equipped January 1919.
The relatively large spread of orders for UCIII
and UBIII types gave the various yards the
Type UCIII frame lines. advantage of building entire series of boats. The
main reasons for the niggardly doling-out of many
small prders during the years 1915-16 - the
constantly changing view of the U-boat's role and
ever-variable operational requirements of indi-
vidual types - were no longer valid now that
unrestricted U-boat warfare had been resumed. The
main problems now were the crippling shortage of
materials and the lack of skilled labour. On 23 July
1917, the Secretary of State in the RMA made a
.~ r request to the War OffIce that production of the
: I U-boat series that had been initiated at the
__..""",.",._ --'0"4..i j~ beginning of 1917 and given the classifIcation of
'Most Urgent (Class I, Group A)' now be given even
.... higher priority, over all other forms of production.
The War OffIce agreed only to make the comment in
its 'Notes of Authority' that delivery of them
should be considered to be of the utmost
importance. (Such 'Notes of Authority' were given
preferential treatment.) The lack of skilled workers
was to be minimized by a rigorous curtailment of
certain aspects of surface-ship production. On 11
August 1917, the RMA gave the order that, at all
private yards, new U-boat and torpedo-boat con-
struction should take preference over new capital-
ship construction, and new U-boat construction
should take preference over all new torpedo-boat
construction, with the exception of the light cruiser
Coin at B&V, and the torpedo-boats at Schichau.
On 27 September 1917, the Production Control
Department of Vulcan, Hamburg, reported to the
RMA that U-cruisers U145-U147 could be ready by
the middle of 1918 only if the authorized number of
i
I workers were provided, and if all work on surface
I ships except one torpedo-boat could be suspended.
I
..""t=-_.__... Of the 655 workers allotted to Vulcan, only 133 had
been provided.
The Fleet Commander, Admiral Scheer, was of
the opinion that only an authoritative body, under
the control of the Naval War Staff, could deal with
such diffIculties. After some preliminary moves
concerning this, he wrote on 8 November 1917 to

lhe Secretary of State in the RMA: expectations. Relief in the form of quicker new 'The urgency of this question has led me to draw
'The V-boat enters a critical stage; the enemy is V-boat production and repair must be attained. the matter to the attention of the Chief of the Navy
lCTowing in strength and the convoy system con- Problems and hindrances that exist are known to Staff on his visit to Wilhelmshaven on 7 November,
centrates our opportunities for attack to ever- me. As I have told Your Excellency on several and to recommend him to authorize the formation
decreasing locations and fewer sea routes, and the occasions and have recently emphasised verbally of a 'V-Boat OffIce' directly under control of the
changing situations are not known by us. through my Chief of Staff, these problems must be Directorate for the war at sea. I have made it plain
":xperienced commanders are being lost, and new overcome. The course of events in the last few to him that it is not a question of increasing the
ones cannot initially replace them adequately. months has brought me to the conviction that Navy Staff in a sub-section or a department, but
Various measure.,s have been tried, including normal channels of organization are not suffIcient. that this 'V-Boat OffIce' demands complete
r moval of the specialization factor among Effective action will only be achieved by autonomy and must have its own Head to control
personnel (artillery, torpedo, electrical training) and unremitting support from the Naval War matters.'
lhrough re-grouping in military fashion (several Staff, but this essential and positive co-oper- Scheer was especially critical of the Director of
boats working together as a group, etc.) in an ation can only be supplied by the Naval War the Estimates Department. Vizeadmiral Krafft,
altempt to improve the effectiveness of various Directorate if a special Central Authority is whom he regarded as the principal cause for the
boats. The reduction in overall effectiveness can immediately set up, directly under its command. Its faltering aspects of V-boat ordering. At a meeting
only be arrested by our increasing the number of mandate should be: to demand the production of of the RMA at the end of November 1917 held to
U-boats available for the V-boat campaign. In V-boat materials. Its authorities: direct links with make decisions concerning new U-boat construction
actual fIgures, during recent months V-boat losses all bodies involved in production, especially with for the year 1919, Krafft had stated that, according
have exceeded new deliveries. the VI, the V-Boat Department in the RMA, which to an agreement between the Head of the Navy and
'We cannot anticipate what future losses will be. should be separated from the Shipyard Department the RMA, 18 V-cruisers and 60 V-boats of different
Developments in V-boat construction and the and placed under your immediate control, together types were envisaged for 1919. This was 'adequate'
repairs being made on boats at maintenance yards with the Imperial and Private Yards and with the and there was 'no point in further discussion' - a
during recent months remain less than our operational bases. pronouncement that aroused the disagreement of
Ms boats U166- U172.

Main specifications: length overall 71.552m; max. frame
pcrtStarboard PO~1Starboard
":'0 0
width, 6.3m; max. pressure hull diameter, 4.15m; design
r -
draught without keel, approx. 3.58m; design draught with keel, o r
aprox. 3.902m; displacement surfaced, approx. 828 tons. - -I. ~- '
o
Frame 36 Frame 46 Frame 8? Frame 96
Frame 11 Frame 68
I I I
I
Frame 11 Frame 36 Frame 46 Frame 68 Frame 87 Frame 96 Frame 126
I I

almost all those taking part in the discussion. The would like to give every kind of support to the using night shifts and additional personnel and
representat.ive of the Navy Staff made it plain that overriding importance of the U-boat campaign, but, workshop space could any increase be achieved.
this number of U-boats would not eve!). suffice to as to providing a labour force, the Army itself was First, however, the long-standing problem of
cover the losses (102 U-boats per year) that could be fmding it diffIcult to replace losses, and he could go constructional delays had to be solved. It seemed
expected in the light of sinkings to date (losses in no further than in what had been promised hitherto. necessary to make an exact analysis of the causes
1917, 63 boats). Nor should the armaments programme for the of these and, in a lengthy report from the UI to the
The UI stated that 118 U-boats, including 22 Army be reduced. The tempo of delivery of those U-Boat OffIce on 1 March 1918, it was established
U-cruisers, could be accepted provisionally from the boats that were under construction, and the general that, with regard to GW:
yards. It was thought advisable, however, to reduce implementation of the U-boat programme, however, 'In 1917, as a result of sub-contracting some
the number of U-cruisers to 14, because 3 UBIlI, or were directly geared to the numbers of skilled constructional items, the delivery tempo of new
4 UClII, or 5 new single-hull boats could be workers available. Although it was now possible, U-boat construction at GW was determined chiefly
constructed in place of a single U-cruiser. The UI following the cessation of hostilities with Russia, to by the work performance of two trades, that of
thought it completely feasible to build, additional use new yards, which hitherto had built such coppersmiths and locksmiths. Both of these have
to the 78 mentioned by Krafft, an extra 24 single- vessels as minesweepers, in order to bring about a increased in numbers, as compared to December
hulled boats. At this, Krafft made the rejoinder defmite increase in production, a yard experienced 1916, by 30 per cent and 45 per cent respectively,
that, of the number of U-boats mentioned by him, in U-boat construction, Schichau of Elbing, were through the provision of additional skilled workers.
there would be an overlap into 1919 of 38 U-boats, chosen to build the fIrst UF boats. (Schichau were However, with the delivery of U151-U157, the
and that only 10 single-hulled boats could be built already in the process of building two Project 43 position altered, in that, since the end of the
at most. boats, U115 and U116.) preceding year, certain shipbuilding trades such as
The new single-hulled boat, with the designation On 17 December 1917, the U-boat programme for riveters and caulkers were well under strength, as
UF (Project 48al, had been planned by the UI in the 1919 was fmally decided. Despite the inability of were, to some extent, shipwrights, and this
autumn of 1917, at the instigation of Kapitiin zur the OHL to provide further skilled workers for determined the maintaining of momentum, and will
See Bartenbach of the Marinekorps. It was U-boat construction, the number of boats was continue to do so in the future. In short, there is no
designed chiefly for use in the English Channel an~d s bstantially above that suggested by Krafft, and hope of increasing the trades that, in the light of
North Sea, in operations based on Flanders. Its ) omprised: experience, require strengthening and for which
principal virtue was that it did not have oil bunkers 36 UBlII boats (War Contract WI: UB17o-UB177 additional numbers have been requested previously
outside the pressure hull, which reduce~e from GW, UB178-UB187 from AG Weser, in July and November 1917.'
possibility of tell-tale oil leakages if the boat ere UBl88-UB205 from Vulcan, Hamburg. 'According to the calculations of the UI, in order
attacked by depth-charges, which the enellJ had 34 UCIlI boats (War Contract V): UCl19-UC133 to bring about a planned delivery of all new U-boat
developed to a dangerous pitch. The UF boat's had a from B&V, UC134-UC152 from KWD. construction in accordance with the dates set out
comparatively short diving time and a relatively 20 UF boats (War Contract X): UF1-UF20 from on 20 February 1918, 185,000 riveters' day-work
powerful torpedo armament. Their construction Schichau, Elbing. would be required during the current year. But the
was much simplified, giving a short building time, 12 Ms U-boats (800-ton) (War Contract Y): statistics for the second half of 1917 show that
and it was thought the boats could be built by U201-U212 from Bremer Vulkan, Vegesack. work will have to remain in full production with a
yards that were new to U-boat building. The main 18 U-cruisers (project 46a, War Contract Z): work force of only 145,000 riveters' day-work plus
specifications of Project 48a were as follows. U183-.ol90 from GW, U191-U194 from B&V, those drawn from torpedo-boat construction. One is
Length overall: 44.6m. U195-U2OO from AG Weser. talking, therefore, of a shortfall of 22 per cent from
Maximum beam: 4.4m. this particular trade against the optimum number.
Draught: 3.95m. In the case of caulkers, the shortfall is up to as
Displacement surfaced: 364 tons. much as 32 per cent; however, in our experience it is
Displacement submerged: 381 tons. PRODUCTION PROBLEMS easier to train caulkers than riveters .... '
Propulsion surfaced:
Propulsion submerged:
two 300hp.
two 310hp.
AND THE SCHEER Further reasons for delays were given as strikes,
delivery diffIculties and absenteeism during the bad
Range surfaced: 3,500 nautical miles PROGRAMME weather at the beginning of January 1918. On 23
at 7 knots. March 1918, KWD reported that workers were
Range submerged: 64 nautical miles at The U-Boat OffIce that Scheer had suggested refusing to work overtime. This could not really be
4 knots. started life on 5 December 1917 as a sub- held against them, because their diet was very
Speed surfaced: 11 knots. department of the RMA. Under the leadership of inadequate. In the summer of 1918, an epidemic of
Speed submerged: 7 knots. Vizeadmiral Ritter von Mann, it was to liaise with influenza led to further absenteeism. Inquiries at
Armament: five 50cm torpedo all RMA sections connected with U-boats, and was the yards elicited the information that their
tubes (four directly responsible to the Secretary of State. Its capacity would be considerably increased by going
submerged bow, main tasks were to accelerate delivery of U-boats, over to full day and night shifts and by restricting
one surface stern); construction of which had been severely delayed, production to one or two U-boat and engine types.
one 8.8cm U-boat and to make use of new yards. Indeed, B&V reported that their U-boat production
gun, two MG. On 28 January 1918, an order for 12 UF boats, could be increased by a third if only one type were
Crew: 30. UF21-UF32, was awarded to the Tecklenborg Yard built at a time, in full day and night shifts.
The vehement criticism that the Fleet levelled at at Geestemiinde (Bremerhaven). Three new yards However, this would require an additional
what was, in their opinion, inept political handling had been selected in December 1917 and, as their 3,000-4,000 workers, and engine delivery times
of the U-boat programme led to a discussion on 4 building of minesweepers was now discontinued, would have to be exactly as scheduled.
December 1917 between the RMA, the Navy Staff Atlas of Bremen was given UF3~UF38; Neptun of KWD suggested that, instead of allocating ship-
and the OHL. Agreement was sought as to exactly Rostock UF39-UF44 , and Seebeck of Geestemiinde building work to subcontractors, who invariably
what the signifIcance of the U-boat campaign was, UF45-UF48. This meant that 11 yards were now fell short of their delivery promises, their skilled
as seen against the overall war pattern; the engaged in U-boat construction. With the help of workers be taken into the yards, where they could
possibility of supporting the U-boat construction five 'new' yards, an additional 5 U-boats could be be employed on a more rational basis. In order to
programme, chiefly by the Army supplying further delivered each month from the beginning of 1919. set up a night shift at KWD, 317 additional engine
skilled labour, was also discussed. Ludendorff, the The remaining yards were pushed to the limit of fitters and 130 additional shipwrights were
Principal Quartermaster General, stated that he their capabilities as far as the end of 1919: only by required. To attract these additional workers, it
80 U-BOAT CONSTRUCTIO DURING THE FIRST WORLD WAR

was suggested that they be given an extra 35 VCnI boats. months. (Enlargement of building capacity=Large
allowance of 1,400g of bread per week, and 1 litre of 30 VF boats. Programme.)
oup free for each night worked. Obviously, the key As the boats built hitherto as large Ms V-boats of 3. Transferring of building contracts for torpedo-
to any increase in V-boat production lay in the Project 42 had given a good account of themselves, boats, minesweepers and steam trawlers to yards in
employment of additional skilled personnel and, in especially with regard to their submerged qUlilities, occupied Baltic territories. Yards thus freed of this
general, these could only come from the Army further Project 42a boats were to be built at the work in the Reich could be used for V-boat
front-lines. However, prior to and during the big expense of the VBnI boats. construction.
offensive in the west early in 1918, there was no For the coming year then, and taking losses into 4. The use of Austrian yards in Trieste, Fiume and
chance that the OHL would release any men. account, the increase in operational V-boats was Monfalcone for V-boat construction. By drafting
To clarify the question of which V-boat types calculated as shown in Table 5. 10,400 workers from Austria, it should be possible
could be delivered for 1920, a discussion took place to place orders there for 37 VBnI boats. In order to
In the RMA on 8 May 1918, between the V-Boat Table 5. Planned V-boats operational, 'lay 1918 to January acquaint Austrian yards with German V-boat
Office, the VI and the heads of individual 1921 practice, the following cartel relationships were
operational bases. The starting-point of the 1 May 1 Jan 1 Jan 1 Jan projected: Cantiere avale Monfalcone with AG
discussions was the avy Staff's opinion that: Position on 1918 1919 1920 1921· Weser; Danubius Fiume with GW; Austria Yard,
'(a). The further building of V-boat types suitable Trieste with B&V.
V·cruisers 6 20 25+ 2 All these measures should enable the production
for war purposes is of prime importance. Large V-boats 40 33 21 9+42
'(b). V-boat orders must be placed with various VB boats 42 53 48 20+50 of a maximum of 12.7 V-boats monthly in 1918 to
yards according to their full capacities without any VC boats 31 31 33 15+35 be doubled by the end of 1919.
thought of a possible ending to the war. VF boats 27 11 +30 In a communication to the Chief of the General
'(c). As each new type will mean a heavier burden Total 113 123 149 184 Staff of the Army, on 30 August 1918, even greater
being placed upon the personnel of the VI, delays in demands were made:
construction and problems in the yards, new types ·Minus 55 boats lost. 1. 20,000 specialist workers required by 1 October
or major changes to present types are to be avoided 1918, and a further 30,000 to follow them in order to
as far as possible. The actual requirements for V-boats made in June accelerate the current V-boat building programme
Following this, the avy Staff recommended the 1918 by the V-Boat Office was dictated by (a 25 per cent increase).
further building of 800-ton Ms V-boats, and VBln, operational demands and consisted of: 2. 70,000 men for the enlargement of the V-boat
VCln and VF boats. The Commander-in-Chief of 44 VEIn boats (War Contract AB): UB206-UB219 programme from 1919.
V-Boats and the head of V- boats in Flanders from AG Weser, UB22~UB249 from Vulcan, Instead of the present calculation of 54 large and
mphasized that 'through the increased Hamburg. 133 smaller V-boats from October 1918 to the end
urveillance by the enemy of the operational 40 VCnI boats (War Contract AC): UC15:rUC192 of 1919, the V-Boat Office calculated that the
territories, the increase in protection given to from B&V. labour force required under (1) would allow 74 large
convoys and the improved weapons carried by 48 Ms V-boats (800-ton) (War Contract AD): and 188 smaller V-boats to be built. If the labour
merchant ships, the use of V-boat artillery was U229-U246 from GW, U247-U262 from Bremer force enumerated in (2) could be used, an additional
becoming less and less effective, and that V-boats Vulkan, Vegesack, U263-U276 from Schichau, increase in output of 70 per cent would be attained
hould mainly employ submerged torpedo attack Elbing. in eighteen months. In 1920, therefore, 102 large
by day, and surface torpedo attack at night.' 16 large Ms V-boats (Project 42a, War Contract and 136 smaller boats (montWy average 28 V-boats)
Mediterranean conditions, however, were much AE): U213-U218 from KWD, U219-U224 from AG could be delivered.
more suitable for the use of artillery, and so it was Weser, U225-U228 from B&V. On 11 August 1918, Admiral Scheer became
not required that V-boats cease to use their guns. 44 VF boats (War Contract AF): UF46-UF48 from Head of the aval Staff in succession to Admiral
The 2,000-ton V-cruiser (Project 46a) had been Seebeck, UF49-UF60 from Tecklenborg, UF61- von Holtzendorff. To 'tighten up' the German naval
calculated to have a range of only 16,000 nautical UF72 from Seebeck, UF7:rUF76 from Atlas, effort, he had founded (with reference to the OHL)
miles at 7.5 knots; while adequate for operations off UF77-UF80 from eptun, UF81-UF92 from the Naval War Staff (SKL) which was to work in
the orth American coasts and the blockade areas Schichau, Elbing. close harmony with the Grand Strategic
between the Azores and Dakar, this was As War Contract AA, the steam-turbine Headquarters, with the OHL and with the Kaiser.
insufficient for the Gulf of Mexico and Brazil. An V-cruiser UDl had meanwhile been ordered in Scheer saw~ most important task as that of
enlarged version of this type was therefore February 1918 from KW in Kiel. (See page 75.) strengthenin. the V-boat arm. At the OHL on 12
required, of approximately 3,000 tons with a range After the German spring offensive in August August 191 ,four days after the British success at
of 20,000 nautical miles at 8 knots. But the 1918 had fmally failed, and the German Army had Amiens, ~ met Hindenburg and Ludendorff; both
considerable strain on the industry that the gone over to a completely defensive role, the acknow\,edged to him that 'the hope for a
building of a V-cruiser imposed meant that only decisive nature of the V-boat became more and favourable end of the war remains now chiefly in a
two were ever built. Additionally, there were strong more evident. Now, in the opinion of the V-Boat succis'sful V-boat offensive'. Ludendorff promised
pleas for the construction of large Ms V-boats of Office, the Army would have to provide the to do his best to strengthen the V-boat arm, despite
the improved Project 42a: with its higher speed of necessary labour for V-boat construction. the acute shortage of manpower that was affecting
17-18 knots and greater range of 10,000 nautical In a V-Boat Office treatise on the theme of the Army, but maintained that the Army must frrst
miles at 8 knots, it was better than the 800-ton Ms 'Extensive V-Boat Construction Programme' fmd replacements for its considerahle losses of the
type, and its better specifications allowed it to get prepared for a meeting of the Naval War Staff summer of 1918.
within frring range much more frequently when (SKL) on 15 August 1918, the following On 5 September 1918, discussions took place at
manoeuvring against convoys in the open seas. On recommendations were made: the War Office between various procurement bodies
the other hand, large minelaying V-boats were no 1. Immediate drafting of 15,000 workers for a 25 under the control of the OHL, in which considera-
longer of prime importance. In the course of these per cent increase in production from V-boat yards tion was given to the OHL's demand for immediate
discussions, the following requirements were used hitherto. (Accelerated construction of V-boats Army replacements of 80,000 men of Category A2.
mentioned: already ordered=Small Programme.) The railways and mines would have to supply some
2 3,000-ton V-cruisers. 2. Enlargement of the constructional facilities of of these, and much serious criticism was levelled at
6 l,200-ton Ms V-boats on the lines of Project 42a. the yards by the drafting of an additional 50,000 the idea. Furthermore, under the catch-phrase
36 800-ton Ms V-boats. workers for an additional increase in V-boat 'Bring down the age of the Army', younger men
50 VBnI boats. production of approximately 70 per cent in eighteen were to be taken from industry and replaced by
V-BOAT CO STRVCTIO DVRI G THE FIRST WORLD WAR 81

older men: by 1 December 1918, 30 per cent and, by
February 1919 40 per cent of men born between
1898 and 1900; and, by 1 April 1919, 25 per cent of
men born between 1894 and 1897. At this, the naval
representative stated: 'The Navy will also be
obliged to make worker claims on the OHL. A
reduction of U-boat production is not to be
contemplated. The Navy really needs to urge as
fmnly as possible that, in the affiliated naval
industries, as well as in the extraction of 10 per cent
of A2 men, that the most thorough and careful
consideration be given to naval requirements. The
supplying of the A2 personnel as demanded by the
OHL can really only be achieved at the expense of
other industries.' A Memorandum from Korvetten-
kapitiin Scheibe (BI) concerning the provisional
development of merchant ship tonnage on the
Allied side from August 1918, estimated an
increase in its cargo capacity for 1919 by 8.28
million gross registered tons and, to compensate for
U-boat losses, he demanded the building of 257 new
U-boats by the end of 1919. This number
represented an increase of only 19 on the 238 that
had been agreed in the U-Boat Office's most recent
production programme, and was considerably less
than the number called for, on 15 August, by the
U-Boat Office's demand for a 'Large Building
Programme'.
Scheer was palpably distrustful of Navy Staff
memoranda following their inaccurate forecasts on
the consequences of unrestricted U-boat warfare.
He calculated that increased defensive measures on
the part of the Allies would lead to a less favourable
ratio of sin kings per U-boat and judged that a
successful outcome of the U-boat campaign could
only be achieved by a steep increase in the number
of deliveries, far and away above the number called
for in the 'Large Building Programme'. He hoped
that tills could be attained by pushing the entire
industry to even greater efforts and by giving
U-boat construction absolute top priority. On 16
August 1918, he stated:
'It is most essential to limit U-boat construction
to a very small number of types; specialization and
the desire to work out improvements must be
subordinated to the more important aspect of
speeding up the construction programme. We must
also apply the American building methods of
factory, mass-produced ships, of willch we are not
completely ignorant in Germany, to the extent that
the whole German iron indu)ltry and engine
industry play their part in t.9iS operation for the
production of necessary p}lrts. The assembly of
boats will be made in 'col,hlcting' yards; and a big
advantage will be that tye' question of skilled labour
will be eased, as this system demands a smaller
number of really skilled workers in one place. It
would be essential to have a meeting between a
number of leading personalities from German yards
and from iron industries and engine industries and
the Navy Staff and the Imperial Naval Office, to
work out a programme as to the nature, scope and
Left: VB 155-VB 159 (Project 44) series production at Vulcan,

Hamburg. Launching was achieved through a gantry erected
on the quay walls.
83
division of responsibilities of this work. One must the capacity that Germany possesses, so that the essential to carry out the Large Building
set a distant goal in order to realize the greatest goal of achieving a worth-while peace is attainable. Programme, then there is every hope that the OHL
possible end results. Next, would be the setting up ... To make sure that in the future we continue to will release the workers ... The State Secretary of
of a small committee of dedicated industrialists, sink more ships than our enemies can build, we the RMA must grant extraordinary powers to the
whose careers to date would have shown them demand the essential monthly totals of new Head of the U-Boat OffIce so that the latter can
capable of extraordinary achievement in industry building: dedicate himself completely and utterly to a
... Under the control of the Secretary of State of Fourth quarter 1918: 16 U-boats (instead of 12.7) realization of the U-boat undertaking.'
the Imperial Naval OffIce, the committee would be First quarter 1919: 20 U·boats (instead of 12.7) Discussion was held concerning several further
responsible for carrying out the programme with a Second quarter 1919: 25 U-boats (instead of 17.3) points:
sweeping authority similar to that of the War Third quarter 1919: 30 U-boats (instead of 16.0) '1. Account must be taken of the need of further
OffIce, as regards the awarding of contracts to Fourth quarter 1919: 36 U-boats (instead of 22.3) workshops in the yards and supply organizations
industry and overall control of work in progress.' First quarter 1920: 36 U-boats (instead of 16.0) when U-boat building contracts are given out.
Following the removal of the SKL to the Grand Second quarter 1920: 36 U-boats (instead of 15.3) '2. A solution to the fuel-oil supply problem will
Headquarters in Spa on 10 September 1918, Scheer It is essential that the whole industry be have to be found if the Large Building Programme
began immediately to put theory into practice. On subordinated to this task. To achieve this it is again is to be carried through.
the 12th, he met Hugo Stinnes, a major essential that certain leading personalities in '3. Austro-Hungarian industry must be made to
industrialist. He summarized the result of their industry have discussions together. The play its part in U-boat affairs.'
discussions in a memorandum as follows: personalities chosen must work out the On 14 September, in the Grand Headquarters,
'In the light of the present military situation, the requirements and make known how many workers Scheer discussed these requirements and problems
U-boat arm is the only offensive means open to us. they require for realization of their own tasks in the with representatives of the RMA and of the U-Boat
H we go over to the defensive we shall not achieve a overall U-boat programme. When this number is Office. The RMA mentioned certain difficulties that
worthwhile peace settlement. It is therefore established, the SKL must approach the OHL. stood in the way of the Large Building Programme:
absolutely necessary, and there must be no delay, When the latter body understands the basis on that of providing crews for the additional U·boats,
that we develop our sole offensive means with all which this number has been calculated and why it is the question of recruitment (in 1918, the Navy was
Table 6. Delivery timetable for 1919
1918 1919: 1919: 1920:
Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. March April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Total Monthly
W
V-cruisers 8
Ms boats 3.5
Large Ms boats 4
'type VB 2 2 2 2 3 3 20
B V
V·cruisers % 6
Large Ms boats 1
'type UC 6 6 6 3 4 4 5 6 6 6 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6 66 6.5
Weser
V-cruisers 1 4
Large Ms boats I 1 1 1 4 1
'l'ype VB 2 2 2 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 29 2.5
Type UC 2 3
Vulcan
V-cruisers I' 1 1 4
1ype UB 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 5 4 6 7 46 7
KWD
Large Ms boots
M boats 1
Type UC 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 29
hichau
Ms boots 1 J 1 2 2 2 9 3
'J'ype UF 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 1 1 32
Bremer Vulkan
Ms boats 1.5 1.5 2 2 2 2 2 2 2.5 2.5 2.5 23.5 2.5
T cklenborg
Type UF 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 2 2 2 17.5 2
eptun
'J'ype UF 2 2 2 10
beck
TypeUF 2 2 2 2 2 12
Atlas
Type UF 5 0.5
Total 13 12 18 15 16.5 18 22.5 23.5 30.5 33% 33% 34% 37% 361 333 32.5'
Existing delivery
timetable 12 10 14 11 13 13 13 15 17 16 15 14 14 15 16 172
V·Boat Office's
Large Programme 12 13 15 15 16 17 17 18 19 21 22 21 22 21 23 232
cheer's demands of
12 Sept. 1918 16 J6 16 20 20 20 25 25 25 30 30 30 36 36 36 333
'Large minelaying U-boat. 'An additional U-cruiser in Jan. 1920. 'Plus 5 Ms boats per month at new yards.

10,600 men short; in 1919, this would become U-boat repairs. A further 5,000 fully-trained see the yards suffering air attack were set aside by
40,000'1 and the shortage of raw materials. The workers were necessary for subcontract work in the Admiral Scheer.
Minutes of this meeting concluded with the interior of Germany. Of the total number of In order to work out a new delivery plan for 1920,
comments: 'After much shilly-shallying, with the workers required, 17,000 would be needed by 1 the questions now were: which U-boat types would
SKL repeating its conviction that the only means ovember 1918, the remainder during the course of best meet the changing circumstances? More
that promised success were those which closely 1919. The requirement for the yards could be importantly, in addition to the 92 UF boats already
involved industry, the RMA gave its agreement to reduced by 8,000 if certain aspects of ship fitting on order, would more of this relatively small type be
have discussions with certain named individuals could be transferred to steel construction plants in needed? In fact, at the beginning of August 1918,
from industry. It was resolved to wait and see what the interior. Following this, on 26 September, the UI had been considering further development of
came of these discussions.' Scheer invited representatives from industry to Type UFo They felt that the 92 UF boats ordered by
Discussions then took place on 19 September meet representatives from the Naval Directorate June 1918 would be sufficient, and it was not
1918 at the RMA. Industry was represented by and the OHL at the Hotel Excelsior in Cologne on 1 intended that a considerable number of UF boats be
Hugo Stinnes, Director General Vogler and Dr. October 1918 to thrash out labour problems once built just so that the four new, smaller yards, and
Petersen (from the Association of German Iron and for all. perhaps some other yards, could be kept on U-boat
Foundriesl, Reichs Councillor von Rieppel, Director Meanwhile Germany's war was going from bad to construction. The UI felt that the complicated
Karstagne (from MAN) and Hermann Blohm (as worse. The collapse of the Bulgarian Front UBIlI boats, in which weight problems had called
spokesman for the yards). It was established that in prompted the OHL to report to the Kaiser on 29 for more than normal accuracy of construction,
the interior of the country industry was well able to September that the situation required inevitably were unsuitable for the smaller, less·experienced
accomplish its part in the Large Building that overtures be made for a cessation of hostilities yards. They suggested that, as an extension of the
Programme without much redirection of labour, if and for peace negotiations. The OHL's opinion UF building programme, an enlarged UF type be
only it could be relieved of certain other war strengthened the already widely-held view that any built, which in displacement and in essential
production tasks. MA could then bring about 70 conditions imposed by the enemy should be operational features would approximate to the
per cent increase in production with only 1,000 accepted - an attitude in no way changed by UBIlI type. If it were designed as a single-hulled
additional workers. The steel industry required Ludendorff's opinion that the Western Front could, boat (possibly with diving tanks on the outside), it
approximately 2,000-2,500 more men, and if necessary, be held throughout the winter. would be simpler to build, possess greater
requested that more rational and co-ordinated Although there was now very little chance of a submerged stability and, on account of its interior
orders be placed with the rolling-mills than had realization of the Large Building Programme, fuel tanks, would be less inclined to leave traces of
hitherto been the case. The main problem was the which by now had been designated the "Scheer oil if attacked by depth·charges. This new type was
considerable shortage of labour at the yards Programme", the measures thought necessary to given the designation 'Type UG'. Initially, a boat of
themselves. It was obvious that no more than bring it about were continued for the time being. about 600 tons was considered, but with the only
40,000 men could be extracted from the OHL. The On 1 October 1918, nine representatives from available UBIIl diesel installation this would have
riveters and caulkers required, over and above this industry met under the Chairmanship of Admiral given a surface speed of only 12 knots. As 13 knots
number, were to be provided by the bridge-building Scheer. In addition to those participants of the was held to be the lowest desirable surface speed,
and metal-container industries. A compulsory conversations of 19 September, these were Director the boat had to be made smaller in size. The main
transferring of personnel was rejected by Blohm Flohr (Vulcan, Hamburg), Director Zetzmann (GW) specifications were as follows.
and by von Rieppel. Von Rieppel suggested that and Director General awatzki (Bremer Vulkan), as Displacement surfaced: 530-550 tons.
voluntary transferring of labour be achieved by well as the responsible Staff officers of the SKL and Speed surfaced: 13 knots.
better pay and conditions at the yards. Blohm of the RMA under their new Head, Ritter von Range surfaced: 7,000 nautical miles
thought that it was unfeasible to award contracts Mann, plus Colonel Bauer as representative of the at 6 knots.
for pressure hulls to steel plants in the interior; they OHL. It was now generally agreed that the Scheer Fuel-oil: 60 tons.
should be considered for production of components Programme could be carried out if the OHL agreed Engine and battery
only. He would like to discuss this question further to the provision of 69,000 additional workers. Of capacity: as in UBIn
with the yards involved. He maintained that an these, 15,000-20,000 would be needed for 1918 and Armament: four 50cm torpedo
increase in U-boat production was absolutely the remairider for 1919. tubes (two sub·
practicable if only work on U-cruisers could be Colonel Bauer was of the opinion that the OHL, merged bow, two
suspended. following a running-down of war operations (which surface stern);
On 20 September 1918, Ludendorff telegraphed a was expected for the middle of ovember 1918), eight to ten G/6
letter setting out his attitude to the labour would release the 15,000-20,000 men. The workers torpedoes;
demands made by the Navy. Once again, he could then be requested by name. Additionally, a one 8.8cm U-boat
acknowledged emphatically the importance of the new inquiry could be initiated for technicians and gun, 300 rounds.
Large Building Programme, but, faced with the engineers from the Army. He also wished to get in Diving depth: 75m.
critical situation on the Western Front, did not feel touch with the War Office in Berlin, in order to I t was considered that the stronger and simpler
himself to be in a position to release labour forces to make known the wishes of the Navy. (A lesser method of construction, greater stability and
the extent demanded. Colonel Bauer of the OHL requirement of munitions for the Army was not greater reserve weight of this design, as opposed to
acted more obligingly, if with the same effect, when brought to the fore.) that of UBIIl, was sufficient compensation for the
one day later he approved the application for the During the discussions, the yard representatives reduced surface properties of the single-hulled boat.
use of 40,000 men for November 1918, if the emphasized that the question of extra rations for Not too much concern was shown at the surface
situation at the Front permitted. workers in order to maintain their morale was speed of 13 knots, and if this were reduced by 1
On 24 September, the Head of the U-Boat Office especially important, and it was agreed that the knot, a somewhat larger boat could be given a
telegraphed Scheer that, following consultation yards should take all possible steps to supply their larger battery and, therefore, have a better
with the yards, the Large Building Programme workers with extra food, the expenses of this being submerged performance than UBIlI. The U-Boat
could be carried out in its entirety. At the same set against the total calculations. The RMA was to Office decided, on 5 August 1918, that this Type
time, he presented a detailed delivery scheme for negotiate with the Ministry of Food over the UG (Project 51) was worthy of development and
1919, which the yards had approved as being within provision of extra rations. To secure supplies of coal that later, if the Type UF proved its worth, would
their capacity if only they could be given 48,000 and electricity for the yards, Colonel Bauer be built along with UF boats. By 26 August 1918,
fully-trained workers for new U·boat construction, proposed to get in touch with the Reichs Coal the design for the new Type UG had advanced to
and a further 16,000 fully-trained workers for Commission. Blohm's fears that the future might the stage where official discussions could be held.
/
In addition to the VI and the V-Boat Office, the August 1918!). As a result of this, the VI conceived VEIII, as it was just this particular type that had
Commander-in-Chief, V-Boats, and the Flag Officer a design for a new minelaying V-boat (Type I) of 800 proved itself in the Mediterranean, and he did not
for V-Boats, Flanders, took part. The Technical tons, which would have a building time shorter than expect similar results from the single-hulled design
Bureau of the VI suggested the alternatives shown that of Project 45 and would, supposedly, carry VG, with its inferior surface performance. For the
in Table 7. mines in wet storage in shafts, alongside the Mediterranean, therefore, he saw the following
Depth-keeping and turning qualities were pressure hull. proportions as desirable: 50 per cent VBIlI; 25 per
thought to be better than in the VBIII type, but The Commander-in-Chief, V-Boats, did not agree cent VCIII; 25 per cent Ms type. However, as the
the diving time was rather inferior to that of the VF with the suggested type ratios. He was of the displacement of the VBIlI boats built hitherto did
type. During the discussions, the VI and the opinion that, with the expected strengthening of not really allow of improvements in this type, the
Commander-in-Chief, V-Boats, commended VGI the enemy's defence systems and his blockade Flag Officer for V-Boats, Mediterranean, thought
because of its advantageous performance in depth operations in coastal waters, the main sphere of that efforts should be made to prepare an improved
of diving, stability, range and armament. The activity for V-boats would be farther out in the version of the VBIlI instead of building the Type
Commander of V-Boats, Flander , preferred the Atlantic, which gave greater significance to the VG - a double-hulled boat of 600 tons with a
smaller VG II, however, seeing advantages in a larger V-boat. With this in mind the following surface speed of 13.5 knots that could be
manoeuvrable and speedy boat; but, because he ratios were suggested: large Ms V-boats: Ms maintained without a supercharger, and of 15 knots
held that four bow torpedo tubes were essential, he V-boats: VG: VCIII:= 1:2:3\11:1 Y2. The Flag Officer with a supercharger. Other aspects of performance
too fmally came down in favour of the VG I type. for V-boats, Flanders, however, wanted the medium and armament would correspond with those of the
It was then decided that the shape of the bridge Type VG to be the most numerous, suggesting the VGI type.
should be that of GW's Type VCIII. The boat was ratios: large Ms V-boats: Ms V-boats: VG:VCIII:= The final determination of the type ratios
also to be given a negative buoyancy tank, which 1:4:12:4. followed on 2 October 1918, in a discussion between
would be situated considerably farther from the The Flag Officer for V-Boats, Mediterranean, the SKL Operations 11, the Commander-in-Chief.
centre of the boat. Four of the six reserve torpedoes who had not been present at the discussions V-Boats, the High Seas Fleet Command, the Flag
would be carried in the bows and two on the upper concerning Type VG in August 1918, and who had Officer for V-Boats, Flanders, and the Navy Staff.
deck; and, for the latter, attempts were to be made been kept in the picture only by letter, declared that After weighing all stated wishes, the following
to render the torpedo containers pressure-tight. he disagreed with the cessation of building of ratios were decided: large Ms V-boats: Ms V-boats:
Finally, the V-Boat Office stated (contrary to its
Table 7. Alternative designs for Type UG
pronouncement on 5 August 1918) that the various
yards building VF boats would be switched to Type UGI UGII
VG as soon as possible.
The V-Boat Office suggested further, in a letter Surface eli placement 640 tons 570 tons
to the SKL dated 11 September 1918, that with Engine installation As in Bill, but with supercharger. This would increase output from 2 X 550hp
regard to the Large V-Boat Programme, the to 2 X 950hp
Surface speed at 2 X 550hp 12.6 knots 13 knots
various types of boats to be built should be ordered Surface speed at 2 X 950hp Approx. 14.5 knots Approx. 14.5 knots
from those yards that could guarantee favourable Fuel-oil supply 75 tons 60 tons
constructional conditions. In particular, the Surface range 8.000 nautical miles at 6 knots 6.500 nautical miles at 6 knots
following five yards were mentioned: GW, Bremer Battery weight 67 tons 57.5 tons la in Bli I)
Vulkan and Schichau, but only for the Ms V-boats; Armament 6 torpedo tubes (4 submerged bow, 4 torpedo tubes (2 submerged bow,
2 surface stern) 2 surface tern)
and AG Weser and KWD only for the large I 2 torpedoes. 10 torpedoe .
1,200-ton Ms V-boats. After completing its series of I X JO.5cm U-boat gun 1 X 8. cm -boat gun
VCIII boats, B&V should build only large Ms Diving depth 100m 75m
V-boats, and building of the VBIlI should only be
carried out by Vulcan, Hamburg. As it appeared Table 8. The Scheer Programme and additional orders
likely that the Type VG could well replace the Type
VF and Type VBIII, both types built by Vulcan Large
and the smaller yards could later be replaced by the minelaying
Project 42a Ms type boats UCIII Bill UG Total
VG boat. V-cruisers, of which, at this point, 37 were
being built, would no longer be requested. GW 26 26
In their reply, dated 15 September 1918, the SKL B&V 13 69* 82*
asked for the following points to be discussed: AG Weser 6 31 ** 37**
1. The building of V·cruisers should continue, at a Vulcan, Hamburg 15 12 14 41
KWD 8 8
rate of approximately 12 per year. Schichau, Elbing 29 29
2. Types VEIII and the large minelaying V-boat Bremer Vulkan 20 20
(Project 45) should be discontinued. Tecklenborg 18 18
3. The remaining types should be built according to Neptun 12 12
the following ratios: large Ms V-boats: Ms V-boats: Atlas-Werke 4 4
Seebeck 8 8
VG: VCIII=1:2:3:3. Nordseewerke 24 24
As early as 19 September, the Commander-in- Flen burger SBG 19 19
Chief, V-Boats, expressed his reaction to these
suggestions in a lengthy telegram. The Scheer's new
construction of further V-cruisers was not seen to construction
programme 27 75 15 69* 43** 101 330
be of any urgency. Instead, further building of the Addn. to orders UF
large minelaying type should continue, as the range for 1920 16 35 13 15 79
of the small VCIII boats would be insufficient to
Total ready in F G
enable mines to be laid m the western approaches to
the French coast after the expected closure of the
1920
Type ratio
43
1
110
2.5
15 66
1.6
.55 15
I
101 405
Dover Straits had been completed. ( 0 German 4

V-boats had passed through the straits since 14 *3 UCIlI boats already marked down for delivery in 1919. **1 UBIII boat already marked down for delivery in 1919.
86 V-BOAT CO STRVCTIO DVRING THE FIRST WORLD WAR

,
Various Ms boats in front of the shelter 'Emden' (the forerunner of the Second World War bunkers) in January 1918.
VG: VClII = 1:2'12:4:1 '12; with, additionally, 15 large stuck to his V-boat programme so that, if the programme to commence in November 1918 (with a
minelaying V-boats. For the time being, UF boats proceedings for the suspension of hostilities broke planned increase from 150 to 1,000 tanks by 1 April
and V-cruisers were no longer to be ordered. It was down, he might have the means to pursue an 1919). If this programme came about, it would
not intended to build a boat specially for the increased U-boat campaign, perhaps gaining more mean a reduction by 30 per cent in the number of
Mediterranean as, in view of the Large Building favourable peace conditions thereby. U-boats by the middle of January 1919, but the
Programme, it had been decided to build as few At the end of the month, a further meeting OHL admitted that, as fuel for these tanks was in
types as possible. These proceedings meant that, concerning the Scheer Programme took place in the very inadequate supply, a realization of the scheme
over and above the Scheer Programme, the V-Boat RMA, when the question of crews for the new was rather doubtful.
Office had made the additional orderings shown U-boats was discussed. The building of extensions The cessation of hostilities on 11 November 1918
in Table 8, which were to be delivered by 1920. at the yards had already begun, but the additional put an end to all plans and preparations for the
Although organizational preliminary work for the workers agreed to by the OHL had not yet arrived. Scheer Programme. Even if the war had continued,
Large U-Boat Programme was continuing, German Long-term planning, however, had now become it is doubtful if it would have been fulfilled as
diplomacy was all in favour of the quickest possible completely unrealistic and, on 29 October 1918, the planned. In his book, Die Deutsche Marinepolitik
ending of the war, as can be seen from the peace Admiralty Staff pronounced: 'The construction of 1916-1918, p. 138, Dr. Stegemann states:
overture made by the new Chancellor, Max von all new surface vessels and U-boats that cannot be 'At the psychological moment, the exigencies of
Baden, to President Wilson on 5 October 1918. completed by the beginning of July 1919 is to be the situation called strongly for a programme such
Flanders had been evacuated by the middle of suspended in the interests of completing as many as was projected, and we have to assume that, while
October 1918 and, on the 21st, in accordance with V-boats as possible by the beginning of 1919.' What the SKL was not convinced that the programme in
Wilson's demand, the U-boat war against might possibly affect adversely the delivery of its entirety could be carried out, it was necessary to
passenger shipping was suspended. Admiral Scheer V-boats in the early part of 1919, was a plan commence preparations in order to impress the
recalled all V-boats from commerce raiding, but projected by the OHL for a tank-building enemy and our own population.'

FOUNDATIONS
OF THE NEW U-BOAT
ARM, 1925-1935
EXPERIMENTAL PROJECTS forces. Those submarines, vessels and docks which, Part of the German U-boat fleet was duly handed
in the view of the appropriate authority, can over to the Allies and the remainder was destroyed.
ABROAD, 1925-32 proceed under their own power or by being towed, Nevertheless, the yards and the new Naval
shall be delivered up by the German Government to Directorate were anxious that submarine
Avoiding the submarine ban: IvS those Allied ports as are designated. The other development work should continue, and so, with a
One of t-he essential conditions of the cessation of submarines, and that includes those under view to turning their considerable skill and
hostilities was the delivery of the German U-boat construction, will be completely dismantled by the experience to fmancial account, they sought to
fleet to Britain. A further condition went beyond German Government under supervision of the supply constructional drawings, workers and
this in stating that, from 16 January 1919, U-boats appropriate authority. This must be completed in advisers to neutral or friendly countries. By 1920,
that had not been delivered or were in the course of not more than three months after the the GW and Vulcan designs for the U-cruiser, U142,
being built should either be destroyed or implementation of the present Treaty. and for the large minelaying U-boat, U117, had been
dismantled. Concerning this, the State Secretary of 'Article 189: All parts, engines and material items sold to Japan: construction drawings for boats
the RMA wrote on 7 February 1919 to People's of any kind that derive from the dismantling of any designated 11-13 and 121-124 by the Japanese,
Delegate Noske in the Reichs Government: kind of German warship - service ship and were produced at the Kawasaki Yard in Kobe under
' ... As we cannot think about laying down new submarine - may only be used exclusively for the supervision of German designers from GW and
U-boats after the peace treaty has been concluded, industrial or trade purposes. They may not be sold Vulcan, and partly under the personal direction of
this means just this: Germany will have not a single nor be transferred to foreign countries. Dr. Techel. By permission of the German Naval
U-boat at its disposal in the foreseeable future. This 'Article 191: The construction and acquisition of Directorate, Kapitanleutnant Robert Brautigam
is unbearable. Even the smallest countries with a any kind of submarine, even for trade purposes, is (Retd.) acted as adviser during the trials of these
coastline have some submarines for their defence. forbidden to Germany.' boats. As a member of the former UAK (U-Boat
The complete lack of this method of defence would Furthermore, Article 181 stated categorically, Acceptance Commission), he possessed considerable
be an invitation for other countries to take regarding the forces allowed to the German Navy knowledge in this sphere.
possession of important islands, of fishing bases, that 'submarines are not permitted'. In 1921, the Argentinian Navy invited the former
and of ports on our coasts, in just the same way At the dictates of the cessation of hostilities and Head of the U-Boat Flotilla in Flanders, Korvetten-
that the lack of an organized defensive army has of these articles of the Treaty, a total of 176 boats (8 kapitan Karl Bartenbach, and two former naval
encouraged the Poles to take possession of parts of U-cruisers, 62 U-boats, 64 UB and 42 UC boats) architects, Friedrich Schiirer and Wilhelm
our border territory. The outside world will there- were delivered to Britain and fmally divided up Krankenhagen, to act as civilian consultants for the
fore be led to carry out deeds, the reversing of between Britain, the United States, France, Italy creation of an Argentinian submarine arm. At the
which will be infmitely harder than their and Japan - they were to have considerable beginning of 1922, Bartenbach informed the
prevention. . . . A complete ban on any kind of influence on submarine construction in all these German Naval Directorate that the Argentinians
U-boat defence - to the extent that we shall not countries. However, it was not decreed that all intended to build 10 submarines in their own yards.
even be able to train personnel in U-boat ways and constructional details be handed over, so the direct The Navy, therefore, asked Vulcan to form, with
means - signifies an immense and far-reaching copying of these models was not an easy matter. the two Krupp yards, GW and AG Weser, a
danger to our country against enemy sea attacks. I Those U-boats that remained in Germany, in an consortium to carry out the project, and work
stress therefore as a matter of urgency and make unseaworthy or unready state, were broken up together on future undertakings of this kind. The
full representations that, while we may perhaps not under the control of the Allied Commission. Krupp yards replied that they were quite willing to
be able to make it a condition of the cessation of The U-Boat Inspectorate and the U-Boat Office do this.
hostilities, we must at least try to press in most were dissolved, after dismantling had been On 12 April 1922, GW announced that a plan had
defmite terms the peace negotiations for the return completed. Subsequently, in 1920, a U-Boat Section been outlined by the three yards for a combined
of some of our U-boats.' was created within the new Inspectorate for undertaking. Apart from work on the Argentinian
The Peace Treaty of Versailles, signed by Torpedoes and Mines (TMI) in Kiel. This section project, there were also plans for participation in
Germany on 28 June 1919, nevertheless confirmed dealt chiefly with the war diaries, test records and submarine construction at an Italian yard (by
the conditions of 16 January for the cessation of other documentation relating to U-boat Vulcan) and in an undertaking with Sweden which
hostilities, and called for an absolute and complete development and U-boat warfare, the main objects had already begun (Weser). Essential requirements
ban on the production of U-boats: being to collect material for a history of the German for this combined work were the application of
'Article 188: Within one month of the U-boat campaign and to study the development of German U-boat experience and capacity to develop
implementation of the present Treaty, all German submarine defence methods. In 1922, this office ideas in the planning of designs for projects, the
submarines, submarine-lifting ships, submarine was similarly dissolved, and the complete preparation of construction drawings, consultancy,
docks - including tubular docks - must be documentation was handed over to the Reichs and assistance in submarine building and testing.
delivered up to the principal Allied and associated Archives. However, the conditions imposed by the peace
88 FOUNDATIONS OF THE NEW U-BOAT ARM, 1925-1935

treaty made these activities impossible for a remaInIng 12 boats of the programme were to be withdraw their offer, and transferred the MA
German fIrm, and it was necessary to set up such a put out to tender. The requirement was for a licence to the IvS design. Furthermore, it wanted to
venture in a foreign country: for geographic and I,OOO-ton boat, with high surface speed bring about the dissolution of the contract between
political reasons, Holland was chosen and, in July (approximately 20 knots) and an extensive range. IvS and UNL so that collaborations with Echevar-
1922, N.V. Ingenieurskaantor voor Scheepsbouw IvS offered an appropriate design, Pu53, through rieta could take place freely. But, in the summer of
(telegraphic abbreviation 'Inkavos'), commonly the medium of a Spanish contracting group closely 1925, a crisis in Morocco plus other political
referred to as I vS, was formed. The new hrm was associated with Krupp, UNL (Socieda Anonima difficulties caused the Spanish Government to
headed by Doctor of Engineering Hans Techel as Espaniola Union de Levante). The main specifica- shelve their entire submarine programme. For the
Technical Director, and Korvettenkapitan Ulrich tions of Pu53D were as follows. time being, any further endeavour by IvS in Spain
Blum (Retd.) as Commercial Director. A board of Length overall: 78.5m. would be pointless.
directors for overall control of the fIrm was chosen Maximum beam: 7.2m. Thus, by 6 July 1925, the receipts for IvS were
from the three yards, and all profits and losses were Draught: 4m. very meagre, amounting to only 93,000 marks for
to be shared. The start was quite modest: the Displacement surfaced: 990 tons approx. the designing of 53 possible projects. The largest
founding capital was only 12,000 Dutch guilders, Displacement submerged: 1,300 tons. single amount in this total was the gift of 39,000
each yard contributing a third. The opening of the Speed surfaced: 20 knots. marks from U L for their participation in
office in The Hague was delayed because the Dutch Speed submerged: 8.5 knots. negotiations. A further, largish sum of 31,000
Government rejected the application for Propulsion surfaced: two 2,440hp diesel marks came from the fIrm of C. lilies, Hamburg,
registration, so IvS was run initially from an office engines. who represented IvS in Japan.
at GW in Kie!. A team was gradually built up, Propulsion submerged: two 700hp electric In the summer of 1925, the eleven-man staff of
consisting of Hugo Seligmann, Georg Behrmann, motors. IvS moved from Kiel to The Hague, occupying
Hugo Peine, Karl Knorre and Richard Wagner. All Armament: six torpedo tubes business premises on the corner of Wagenstraat
were formerly on the staff of GW, and were skilled (four bow sub- and Gedempte Burgwa!. IvS was to stay here until
in U-boat construction. merged, two stern its dissolution in 1945. Until May 1937 and August
A start was made by sifting background material submerged; 1938, the fIrm was controlled by Blum and Techel,
and plans, and by working out tenders that bore fourteen 53.5cm respectively .
close resemblance to German avy U-boat torpedoes.
constructional practice - for Argentina, a design (A later version, with MAN diesel engines each Clandestine organizations and plans
for a 570-ton boat, Pu7, was similar to Type UBI II; developing 1,400hp, with a maximum surface speed In view of the existing competition, it seemed that a
and, for Italy, the design for an 850-ton boat Pu4, of 16.5 knots, was given the designation Pu53E.) commercial breakthrough would not be made by
was similar to the Ms type. In the meantime, Simultaneously, B&V, a French and an Italian I vS without fInancial guarantees and subsidies.
however, the Argentinians had given up the idea of fIrm were also competing for the tender. The IvS This applied also to the efforts of Ulrich Blum, who
a submarine project, and the business with Italy design, on the other hand, was to be built at a yard was trying to obtain a contract from Turkey for two
came to nothing either. Nor was the attempt belonging to U L. 500-ton submarines to be built at the Dutch yard of
successful to conclude a development project with The Spanish Government decided in favour of a Fijenoord in Rotterdam to IvS designs. The
Spain for 6 C class submarines. This work went to German design but with the new MAN diesel fmancial risks of the business could not be borne
the American Electric Boat Company, whose engines, offered only by B&V. This put IvS in a alone by the three yards represented by IvS, and it
designs had been built from 1924 by the Spanish difficult situation because the Spanish Government was necessary for the German Navy, which had a
state yard, Constructura Navale, Cartagena, a fIrm was unwilling to have its boats built by the Krupp- great interest in any submarine built to German
strongly connected with Vickers-Armstrong. dependant U L. Also sympathetically considered designs and under German control, to lend fmancial
At this time, the German Navy was greatly by the Spanish Government were designs from Don support. The means to accomplish this lay in the
interested in a close working collaboration with Horacio Echevarrieta, an industrialist strongly secret funds of BS (Seetransportabteilung im Allge-
Spain, and had sent Kapitanleutnant Wilhelm connected with the Spanish throne, who wanted to meinen Marineamt 'B', or 'Sea Transport
Canaris several times as an intermediary in build up an armament industry completely divorced Department') headed by Kapitan zur See Walter
armament deals between German fIrms and the from foreign influence, and to build submarines at Lohmann. But, as the Navy was not allowed to
Spanish Government. In 1924, Spain had in hand his own shipyard, Larrinaga y Echevarrieta, in have any direct part in IvS, BS set up a dummy
an ambitious building programme of 40 sub- Cadiz. He even wished to build accessory items fIrm with the designation 'Mentor Bilanz' (for book-
marines. Of these, the previously mentioned (MA diesel engines, AEG electrical fittings and keeping, fmancial transactions and consultancy).
construction company, Constructura Navale, had torpedoes) entirely in Spain. The German Naval From 1 July 1925, this fIrm was to serve as a
an option for 28 boats, which they proposed to build Directorate, fearing that I vS would once again be contact point between the Navy and IvS. It
according to Vickers designs (D class). The frustrated in their application, arranged for B&V to acquired as Director, the former Korvettenkapitan
FOUNDATIONS OF THE NEW U-BOAT ARM, 1925-1935 89

and U-boat commander, Robert Moraht, and joined Schottky) takes care of 'B' work on U-boats and is historical research in the Naval Archives into the
the three founding shipyards of I vS. Lohmann was the liaison man with IvS. It is expedient that he role of the German U-boat during the First World
ready to provide a subsidy of 1,000,000 marks for should remain unofficial collaborator with A II u War. His successor was Schottky, who now not
the 500-ton submarines for Turkey, and maintained for questions of mobilization operations and only represented the various U-boat affairs but also
that, if necessary, he was prepared to subsidise IvS training problems (A I -, A III - considerations). those of 'A' and 'B': for a former Oberleutnant zur
in difficult years to a total of 120,000 marks per '3. 'K' - questions remain, as before, the See, he fulfilled a unique role in German U-boat
year. In this way, the German avy became the province of the Schurer Office. Up to now, this history.
main backer for IvS. office has been fmancially dependent on 'Mentor'.
Apart from the fmancing and contact firm of If 'Mentor' is dissolved, which 'M' thinks should be Medium submarines for Turkey and Finland
Mentm Bilanz, Lohmann started another dummy done, the question arises whether BWu should be Discussions as to which type of submarine should
firm with the designation 'Tebeg GmbH' affiliated to 'Tebeg' like Schurer or be a direct part be built when Germany would eventually be free
(Technische Beratungs-und Beschaffungs- of BW.' from the Versailles ban resulted in the medium
gesellschaft MbH, or 'Technical Advisory and U-boat Type UBIII and UCIII from the First
Procurement Company'), which was to be a kind of World War being chosen (for mobilization
armaments and supply office for mobilization purposes). Research was carried out during the
preparations, especially those connected with winter of 1921/22 by Kapitiinleutnant von
submarine undertakings. The direction of this Mellenthin on the question 'Which of our U-boat
company was entrusted to Fregattenkapitan types that we used during the war are most
Herbert Goehle (Retd.) Both of these dummy firms appropriate for future development?' and Spindler,
were situated, together with BS, in the premises of Schottky and Schurer and many former U-boat
the Weapons Department BW of the General Naval personnel were also concerned with the issue. The
Office ('B') in Berlin, Lutzowufer 3. avy, through the medium of IvS, showed a strong
On the advice of Canaris, a clandestine U-boat interest in the development of testing of these
department, with the cover designation 'Au' (Anti- types, and especially in the two submarines being
U-Boat Defence Questions) was set up in the aval built in 1926 for the Turkish Navy. Designated
Command Office ('A'). Control of this department Pu46, they were based on Type UBIII and had the
was given to Kapitan zur See Arno Spindler on 1 following specifications.
September 1925. His task was to collaborate with Length overall: 59m.
IvS (through Mentor Bilanz), select U-boat types Maximum beam: 5.8m.
for mobilization plans, and make preparations for Draught: 3.5m.
U-boat construction. On 5 February 1927, this Displacement surfaced: 505 tons.
U-boat department was subordinated to the Fleet Displacement submerged: 620 tons.
Department, and was given the designation 'A II Power surfaced: two 550hp diesel
u'. To assist Spindler, and to act as liaison man engines.
between A II u, Mentor Bilanz and IvS, Ober- Power submerged: two 390hp electric
leutnant zur See Hans Schottky was appointed motors.
(meanwhile being officially placed on the Navy Speed surfaced: 14.5 knots.
retired list). Speed submerged: 9.5 knots.
Background material and drawings from the Range surfaced: 7,500 nautical miles
former Technical Office of the U-Boat Inspectorate at 6 knots.
(TB), which were available in the new Construction Range submerged: 80 nautical miles
Office ('K'), made possible the formation of projects at 4 knots.
for mobilization planning in the U-boat sphere Armament: six torpedo tubes
without any recourse to IvS. To this end, in June (four bow sub-
1927, under the control of Chief Marine Consultant merged, two stern
Friedrich Schurer.
(Retd.) Friedrich Schurer, a clandestine U-Boat surface); ten 45cm
Construction Office of the German avy was set up Mentor Bilanz was consequently placed under BS torpedoes.
as the 'Technical Department of Mentor Bilanz'. for organizational purposes, and was designated The contract with Turkey stipulated that IvS
When Moraht resigned from Mentor Bilanz, the 'BS I u'. Control of it was given to Schottky ('BS I should have the right to select crews and attend all
question arose as to who should replace him as ua'), and Schurer's office was given the designation trials of the boats. As no officers having the
Director of this office. On 15 September 1927, the 'BS I ub'. appropriate experience were available in Holland,
Naval Directorate made the following suggestions However, as the Lohmann affair began to come to IvS turned to Mentor for help: this gave the
to Offices 'N and 'B': light (his secret fmancial transactions having been German avy a fme opportunity to acquire precise
'The way that things have developed has led me disclosed by the Press and questions asked in the information as to the qualities of the boats. Out of
to the conclusion that 'Mentor' in its present form Reichstag), the beginning of the end of Mentor was political consideration for Holland, the Naval
may be considered either as superfluous, or merely in sight. Although itself not directly compromised, Directorate wished only officers no longer on the
as a negotiating agency for U-boat questions. The when BS and Tebeg were liquidated, Mentor was active list to be used; which meant that Mentor, in
present Director Dr. M[oraht] has left. It is similarly dissolved and replaced, in the autumn of collaboration with Spindler, had to either retire
essential that Oberleutnant zur See Schottky takes 1928, by the newly founded dummy firm 'Igewit' existing officers or fmd people no longer in service.
over the direction; U-boat problems and the (Ingenieurburo fur Wirtschaft und Technik GmbH, The first boat, Fij 304 (Birindci I noniil, left the
connection with IvS demand this. 'M' suggests that or 'Engineering Office for Economics and Technics slipway on 1 February 1927, and the second, Fij 305
the new organization be based in such a way that, GmbH'). Once again, Schottky (Military Questions) (Ikindci Inonii), followed on 12 March. Trials of the
as in all other arms, things run thus: and Schurer ('K' aspects) were placed in control. first boat started on 30 April and lasted until the
'1. A II u (Konteradmiral Spindler) works out all The Tebeg undertakings were taken over by the end of June. The other boat was tested after this
'A' undertakings. new department, BSt, in the General Naval Office. date because only one crew was available. (The
'2. A new office, called either 'Mentor' or better In the summer of 1929, Spindler left the U-boat commander was Kapitiinleutnant Werner
perhaps, BWu (Oberleutnant zur See (Retd.) department A II u, to devote himself solely to Furbringer (Retd.) and the engineering officer
90 FOUNDATIO S OF THE NEW U-BOAT ARM, 1925-1935

Kapitiinleutnant Walter Hiilsmann (Retd.).) down. The building time was very long - almost this design. Spain, however, had originally stated
Schottky, together with Schiirer and Naval three-and-a-half-years. The yard's lack of that its interest in future submarine building lay in
Construction Adviser Schotte from the experience, the diffIcult route for delivering the larger type (1,000 tons) with a higher surface
Construction OffIce, came to Holland towards the materials, but above all the lengthy breaks during speed, and was not yet ready to sign an appropriate
end of August 1927 for the fmal phase of the trials. the very cold winter months meant that CV702 did contract. The fact that IvS was still bound by
However, the Turkish Navy was not ready to not leave the slipway until 2 June 1930. CV703 contract to UNL, while the Spanish Government
accept the two boats until the spring of the followed on 2 August. gave preference to Echevarrieta, also militated
following year, so it was not until 22 May 1928 that As before, IvS organized the trials through the against the scheme. During further discussions, it
the boats left Rotterdam. They reached Istanbul Berlin U-Boat OffIce. On this occasion, as Abo was appeared that the Spaniards wanted to enlarge the
after an eighteen-day voyage during which much geographically very remote, the selection of deal and to include the submarine in a 'package' (an
valuable operating data was acquired. Fiirbringer personnel was not hampered by political oil-tanker, fIshing trawlers, torpedo-boats, etc.). On
and Hiilsmann were responsible for taking Fij 304 considerations. As it seemed likely that this Canaris' initiative, early in 1927, Oberleutnant zur
to Turkey and another crew was made up by particular submarine type might have considerable See Eberhard Messerschmidt (Retd.) was sent to
Mentor Bilanz for the other boat. This was signifIcance for the future construction programme Madrid as Naval Adviser to the Spanish Admiralty,
commanded by Kapitiinleutnant Karl Neumann of German U-boats, Schottky himself took over where he worked in permanent liaison between the
(Retd.) and the engineering offIcer was Senior Naval direction of the crew, which included Papenberg as German Naval Directorate, the Spanish Navy and
Engineer Papenberg (Retd.) The Naval Director engineering offIcer and the active offIcers, Echevarrieta.
authorized Fiirbringer and Hiilsmann to remain in Kapitiinleutnant Karl Topp, Kapitiinleutnant In July 1927, the Spanish Defence Ministry sent
Turkey to supervise the formation of a submarine (Engineer) Karl Thannemann, and Oberleutnant zur Echevarrieta to Berlin to carry out further
school. See Hans Rudolf Rosing, and the retired offIcers, negotiations, and Canaris informed him that the
Following his rather unsuccessful negotiations Leutnant zur See Plaas and Leutnant (Engineer) German Naval Directorate was ready to assist in
with Argentina, Bartenbach had been Naval Lorek, plus the young designer, Watje, from IvS. the construction of Type UG boats in Spain, in
Adviser to Finland since 1924, and had taken pains As Topp and Thannemann had to leave the trials' terms of both money and labour. In practical terms,
to persuade the Finns to have submarines built to crew for some time, Oberleutnant (Engineer) Bartel this meant that Echevarrieta would place his yard
IvS designs. His initiative was rewarded in 1926, was later included. After a shakedown cruise of at their disposal, and that all further expenditure
when the German Navy received a contract for 3 fourteen days (the crew, apart from Schottky and on submarine building would be fmanced in
torpedo-armed minelaying submarines, similar to Papenberg, having had no experience of advance by the German Navy. In the meantime,
the IvS design for Pu89, to be built by the Crichton- submarines), trials of CV702 began on 14 July 1930. Krupp had intervened to the extent that the
Vulkan Shipyard at Abo (now Turku) in Finland. In In all essentials, they had been completed by 6 contract between the UNL and IvS was dissolved,
contrast with the German UC boats of the war, the September 1930 and, at the conclusion of his report which meant that this obstacle no longer existed.
mines would be carried in wet storage, in shafts of them, Schottky claimed: 'With regard to the On 23 August 1927, a meeting to discuss fmance
next to the pressure hull; this enabled submerged diving qualities, the seaworthiness and the took place, chaired by Konteradmiral Pfeiffer (A),
torpedo tubes to be fItted forward and aft. With offensive abilities in relation to the displacement, with Fregattenkapitiin Assmann (A II), Canaris (A
this design, IvS achieved an operationally-sound Kapitan Bartenbach and I are of the opinion that I), Spindler and Schottky (A II ul, Schiirer (Mentor)
U-boat type, which greatly exceeded UCIlI in these are better than any foreign submarines.' and the naval architects Ehrenberg, Grauert and
handling properties without requiring larger Schotte from 'K' OffIce. It was agreed to support
surface displacement. The main specifIcations were The Spanish project: El Type UG building programme from the secret re-
as follows. Early in 1926, the 1918 Type UG (Project 51a of the armament fund to a total of 4 million marks, and it
Length overall: 63m. Imperial Navy) was chosen instead of the UBIlI was estimated that the total building costs would
Maximum beam: 6.1m. type by the U-Boat Planning Department in case a amount to 4.6 million marks. To justify this
Draught: 3.2m. mobilization plan became reality. This design had considerable expenditure, A II u explained in a
Displacement surfaced: 493 tons. not been fully worked out when the war ended. memorandum dated 17 October 1927:
Displacement submerged: 715 tons. First, IvS had to make a thorough evaluation of the 'In evading the Treaty of Versailles by
Propulsion surfaced: two 580hp Atlas available data, and the drawings were sent to them maintaining submarine development and, if
diesel engines. in May 1926. Then it was necessary to have a test possible, training a limited number of personnel, it
Propulsion submerged: two 300hp electric boat built in a friendly foreign country, with is essential that the far-from-prosperous IvS be
motors. German participation and under German direction. given all possible support.. Our contracts in
Speed surfaced: 14 knots. Finally, the German Navy needed an opportunity Spain make it possible that, currently, an
Speed submerged: 8 knots. to thoroughly test the submarine. expenditure of 1.5 million marks immediately, and
Range surfaced: 4,000 nautical miles For the furtherance of this scheme, Spain seemed in toto 3-4 million marks (spread over three years)
at 10 knots. especially appropriate. In support of this was the to be used as directed by the IvS, will enable us to
Range submerged: 75 nautical miles at fact that the ambitious Spanish industrialist, approach the target of building the best and most
3 knots. Echevarrieta, had stated that, in return for the modern submarines, of acquainting our architects
Armament: four torpedo tubes granting of a sizeable German credit 'immediately and yard personnel with all that is best in modern
(two submerged the Spanish Navy gave him the contract for the thinking, and of achieving the best military crews
bow, two sub- construction of submarines, he would authorize (both seafaring and technical) in the submarine
merged stern); six construction of the boats through a German fIrm field.'
53.3cm torpedoes. with assistance from the Naval Directorate and pay By the end of 1927, negotiations between
20 200kg mines, fIve special heed to the wishes of the German Naval Canaris, Messerschmidt and the Spanish
shafts on both Directorate with regard to building instruction and Admiralty had come to a decisive point. In the
sides participation in trials'. (Communication from meantime, Echevarrieta and I vS had agreed on the
The fIrst boat, CV702 (Vetehinen), was laid down Lohmann to the Reichs Finance Minister dated 31 construction of a test boat based on Type UG, the
in September 1926. At the beginning of 1927, IvS March 1926) hull of which would be built in sections by the
sent three experienced U-boat builders, Hugo On 18 August 1926, Lohmann and Canaris Dutch Fijenoord yard, and assembled at the small
Peine, Wilhelm Etzbach and Edgar Rickmeier, to travelled to Spain, taking with them designs that private yard of Echevarrieta in Cadiz. At the end of
supervise work at Abo and, at about this time, IvS had worked out for the Type UG, in order to see November 1927, Schotte and Schiirer travelled to
CV703 (Vesihiisi) and CV704 (Iku-Turso) were laid what the possibilities were of a test construction to The Hague and to Cadiz to discuss preliminary
FOUNDATIONS OF THE NEW U-BOAT ARM, 1925-1935 91

E1, 1930.
,
o 5 II
~ i
( P'f ,
• ,
A
.
~
'<\\l
-
~
B
IV/)'
r
nr-
C
AI I 'of'
!.91
CD
Ltl 1 .-.
t
>--I~
~
,
•
0
o
r'\
1. \ \
u
HtllJDoolJ
---------
....
,
~
....
?"\ I )
oJF
I~ I
0 0
LKT'
~
Til
j.Y --=l.c:1. , .. • 0 o 0
'111
o.
I l-
..... I r I
.
I I I
A B c
constructional details with IvS and Echevarrieta. The laying-down of this submarine, which was
Various circumstances (including the tardy Type I IE1) given yard designations Ech21 and E1, followed in
extension of buildings in the Cadiz yard) delayed frame lines. February 1929. Although much of the preliminary
commencement of work until 1928, and by then the construction work had been done in Holland, and
fmal design from IvS for the experimental the delivery of engines and most items of
construction, Project umber Pu1ll, had become a equipment from Germany went well, the assembly
considerably enlarged double-hulled submarine in work in Cadiz lasted eight months longer than it
contrast to the smaller, original Type UG of 640 should have, even though this work was under the
tons. The reasons for this change were requests supervision of Constructional Advisers (Retd.)
from the Spanish avy for l,400hp diesel engines Schotte and Hey, and a group of specialists
and for a greater surface range, which could not be including Ludwig (Engines) and Meesel (Electro-
achieved with the predominantly single-hulled technics) from the aval Yard at Wilhelmshaven. In
forms of Type UG. The new design included an the meantime, Echevarrieta had overreached
outer casing, which was drawn right down to the himself by his lofty projects and had become
lowest part of the pressure hull and contained bankrupt. E 1 was now to be completed solely by
diving and trimming tanks as well as fuel-oil IvS, with 100 per cent fmancial support from the
bunkers. It was planned to change the torpedo German Navy. Spain merely had the option to
armament from 50cm diameter to the international purchase the boat.
53.3cm (21-inch) calibre and to include several other On 22 October 1930, E1 was launched, but
modifications, such as using new electric (and thus grounded and stuck fast a short distance from the
wakeless) torpedoes. The main specifications of slipway. There were further difficulties with fltting-
Pull1 were as follows. out, which meant that the projected trials could not
Length overall: 72.38m. start until the summer of 1931. Early in that year,
Maximum beam: 6.2m. Range submerged: 160 nautical miles at the following active and retired naval officers had
Draught: 4m. 4 knots. been selected for the trials' crew: Kapitiinleutnant
Displacement surfaced: 745 tons. Armament: six torpedo tubes Robert Brautigam (Retd.) (commander), Papenberg
Displacement submerged: 965 tons. (four submerged (chief engineer), Oberleutnant zur See Rosing,
Propulsion surfaced: two 1,400hp MAN bow, two sub- Oberleutnant zur See (engineer) Heerhartz and
diesel engines. merged stern); Leutnant zur See Harald Grosse. Additionally,
Propulsion submerged: two 500hp electric ten 53.3cm there were several I vS architects (including
motors. torpedoes. Ebschner and Seidel) and a group of ship
Speed surfaced: 17 knots. one 10.5cm L/45 construction students, together with a detachment
Speed submerged: 8.5 knots. U-boat gun; one from the Torpedo Testing Establishment at
Range surfaced: 7,000 nautical miles 2cm AA gun. Eckernforde, with their chief, Kapitan zur See
at 10 knots. Crew: 32. Hirth, who were to test a new torpedo-firing device
92 FOUNDATIONS OF THE NEW U-BOAT ARM, 1925-1935

designed by Chief Torpedo Engineer (Retd.l Kunze. (BZ), Fregattenkapitan Goehle (Retd.) from Tebeg,
The trials lasted from May until 4 July 1931. together with his collaborators, Kapitanleutnant
Sch\lrer took part as an observer from 24 June and Kurt von der Borne (Retd.) and Constructional
reported favourably to the aval Directorate. The Adviser Hey, Ministerial Adviser Wilhelm
ubsequent fall of the Spanish Monarchy in 1932 Laudahn (Diesel Engines) and Constructional
and the unrest in the country prevented the Adviser Albrecht Ehrenberg (Mowe class and K
planned Spanish purchase of E1. cruisers) and, also from A u, Konteradmiral
Spindler. At this meeting, Hey's suggestion was
The 'Lilliput' project: CV707 fmally turned down, and it was stressed that a
i':arly in 1924, Finland had expressed interest in a 250-ton U·boat was the smallest possible unit for
mall minelaying submarine, for which IvS, via mobilization planning. This conference can be seen
Bartenbach, made a proposal (Pu23). The boat, of as the starting-point for the later Type II: a concept
only 99 tons, had been designed by Hugo was established that, though occasionally departed
Seligmann, and was intended for special operations from, was never really lost sight of during the
on Lake Ladoga. However, the Finnish Navy had development of the new German V-boat arm. The
been reluctant to give a decision, possibly because essential result of the discussion was as follows.
the boat was rather too small to serve as the 'The attitude of A u to Hey's Memorandum was
nucleus for a Finnish submarine arm. During the that, in view of wartime experiences with UBI
following years, the offer was repeated in the form boats and backed up by the evidence of War Diaries
of Pu78179, in connection with the larger design from the Flanders Flotillas and in the judgement of
Pu89, but it was not until 1929 that Bartenbach Kapitan Bartenbach, both types - Forelle and the
ucceeded in persuading the Finns to agree to the Finland boats - were, from a nautical and military
building of a small boat to an improved design, point of view, unsuitable for operations in a future
Pul09/110. She was built at Hietalahden war sphere. Bearing in mind the need for boats with
Laivatelakka in Helsingfors, left the slipway on 2 a short building time, and this is backed up by the
July 1930, and was given her trials by Schottky's opinions of Kapitan Bartenbach, it regards a
crew in the autumn of that year, together with 250·ton U·boat as the smallest type that is of
CV702 and CV703. After her acceptance by the nautical and military worth in war undertakings.
Finnish Navy, she was named Saukko, and was the The building time of such a boat, if sufficient initial
mallest submarine in the world at that time. The preparations are made and simplified layouts for
main specifIcations of PullO were as follows. engines and internal fittings are borne in mind,
Length overall: 32.95m. would be approximately five months for the fIrst
Maximum beam: 3.2m. boat and, all in all, the building time of this small Saukko (Pull0). shortly before her launch from Ihe slips at
Draught: 3.22m. Hietalahden Laivatelakka in Helsingfors.
type of boat would be signifIcantly shorter than
Displacement surfaced: 99 tons. those of 550-ton boats envisaged previously. [The design for a 245-ton submarine for Estonia, and
Propulsion surfaced: one 200hp diesel engine. construction time for engines had not been verified Bartenbach had tried to interest Finland in this
peed surfaced: 10 knots. at this stage.] also. The Finns, however, wished to await the
peed submerged: 6.25 knots. 'Moreover, A u regards the establishment of the completion of the three 493-ton boats of the Pu89
Range surfaced: 500 nautical miles at building time of the most useful type of V-boat in design (Vetehinen class), before making a decision
8 knots. case of war as fairly unimportant, and regards the about a new contract. For the time being, nothing
Range submerged: 50 nautical miles at whole question for the time being as more or less a materialized with regard to the 250·ton type in
4 knots. purely academic constructional operation. To this, Germany. Shortly after its concept had been
Armament: two bow torpedo Herr Laudahn asserts that the fast·revving diesel formulated, the 'K' OffIce began to lay greater
tubes (45cm, 5.7m engine will burn approximately 5 (as opposed to 22) emphasis on the more offensively-designed Type
in length); two kilogrammes per hp/hour - a very considerable UF dating back to the Scheer Programme of 1918
torpedoes in advantage from the point of view of weight and (page 85). and this was to be the smallest projected
tubes; special storage space, although this favourable ratio will be submarine type in mobilization planning until 1929.
reloading device. reduced somewhat by the need for a gearing ot until after 1929 was a small boat, in the
nine 80kg mines in mechanism. In the light of wartime experiences, 20Q-250-ton displacement category, considered for
three sets of guide A u suggests therefore that a smallish number of a mobilization programme. and only then because
rails. UBIII boats, which alone were under consideration, of its considerably short building time and the fact
one 13mm MG. be built and these would be of about 550 tons, and that it could be used equally for torpedo and
With regard to discussions concerning the most the main emphasis should be on a substantially minelaying operations.
suitable U-boat type that would be required in the smaller boat - a sort of improved VBII - of In a 'Programme Sketch concerning Chapter 3 of
event of mobilization, Constructional Adviser Erich approximately 250 tons surface displacement. Office "B"s Economy' dated 20 February 1930. the
Hey suggested on 10 January 1926 in a 'A u appends a memorandum; "K" has been given new Head of A II u, Hans Schottky, made a
'Memorandum pertaining to small, rapidly-built a copy (and "B" should also receive a similar copy). statement on the expenditure of funds received up
V·boats' from the clandestine Armament. Office, In the light of this memorandum, "K" will prepare to then for submarine projects and added a
Tebeg, that the 99-ton submarine planned for some preliminary designs, and these will ultimately statement on 'new requirements for the future':
Finland could be taken as a basis. Konteradmiral be handed over to IvS for thorough constructional '1. Especially important is the preparation of a
pindler (A ul, however, rejected this small type on working-out. It would be of great advantage if a small, simple and quickly-built V-boat type. We are
strategic and tactical grounds. On 23 April 1926, a friendly foreign power would build a boat of this thinking of a single-hulled boat of approximately
meeting took place at A II, consisting of: Kapitan kind according to the IvS plans so that experience 200·tons displacement with a 12-knots surface
zur See Loewenfeld with his staff officers, could be obtained from it and complete speed and a torpedo armament of three 53cm bow
Fregattenkapitan Kurt Assmann and Freg- constructional drawings prepared.' tubes. We should try to get a project on these lines
attenkapitan Canaris, Kapitan zur See Ernst As early as 14 April 1924, under the designations built and completed to the trials stage in a foreign
Bindseil from the Staff of the General Naval Office Project Pu22 and Pu26, the IvS had developed a country as soon as possible. If the 1.5 million marks
FOUNDATIONS OF THE NEW V·BOAT ARM, 1925-1935 93

cannot be allocated for this, the construction will
Type II frame lines (IvS Design J7). Type II (CV707) frame lines. have to be postponed until the "B Economy" is in
Main specifications: Length possession of the proceeds resulting from the test
overall, 35.82m; beam, without
saddle· tanks. 4.13m; beam, with
construction of the G-type (E1). It is to be assumed
that this will take place in the course of 1931. A test
saddle· tanks. 4.86m;
draught.3.32m; /In~~~rrimrnim construction, on these lines, of a boat of about 200
displacement
tons, would provide a valuable task for the
249.8 tons~
surfaced, ~~~~~~mf~~~~~~ architectural staff (I vS). The construction would
provide useful training for personnel both on the
active list and on the retired list, and would provide
us with essential building experience and
background (working drawings) and also sea-trial
experience and results, which are essential, when
we come to build vessels of this type for our own
use, in helping us avoid teething troubles,
breakdowns and crew mishaps.
'2. Immediately constructional details and trial
results are available for a type as outlined in Point 1
(above), ways must be found of preparing all the
important components necessary for a number of
boats: torpedo tubes, engines, auxiliary equipment,
-----Projecl 179 of IvS with saddle-tanks.
accumulators, periscopes, gyroscopic compasses,
Vesikko (CV707L
A 8
H H
C D G G
E E F F
-- --- --
H
-J
94 FOUNDATIONS OF THE EW V·BOAT ARM, 1925-1935

rllstings, pressure-hull plates, armatures, etc. In raised by the same electrical winch, to which the boat was at sea. As with the other boats built in
lhis way. one could achieve the assembly of a required periscope had to be connected. The galley Finland, the building time was very lengthy:
quantity of these boats, if day and night work were was conveniently sited abaft the control room, with CV707, as she was designated until handed over to
rllrried out, in a very short time indeed, that is to its entry hatch and two compensating tanks at the the Finnish Navy, was not launched until 10 May
ay in eight weeks at a selected yard. At least 6 sides. In order to provide a powerful diesel 1933.
uch boats are essential, as at anyone time only installation in the small boat (as had been requested The trials carried out with this boat presented yet
one-third of the complement of vessels is at a state on 23 April 1926), high-speed diesels had to be another opportunity of instructing young naval
of readiness. fItted. Since it was expedient to use engines that offIcers in submarine crewing and handling. Earlier,
'3. The U-boat training course at the TS, which were already at the disposal of the avy, the MWM on 15 June 1932, the order had been given that,
has been requested and which would supply a (Motoren-Werke Mannheim) type, producing 350hp with effect from the Autumn Reorganization of
certain number of offIcers trained step-by-step in at 1,000rpm, as used in the new motor 1932, Oberleutnante zur See Freiwald (Torpedoes),
theoretical and practical matters, could also supply minesweepers, were chosen. They took up much the Behr (Torpedoes), Ewerth (Torpedoes) and Grosse
personnel to man these boats... .' same space as the much less powerful 142hp six- (Wireless Telegraphy) and four unnamed Engineer
That is how Schottky outlined future cylinder, four-stroke diesels of the similar sized OffIcers should join a three-month course in
development policy in 1930. The new Head of the UBII boats of the First World War. On one shaft theoretical submarine science and tactics, under the
avy, Admiral Raeder, who was interested in the and clutch, each diesel was connected to a double direction of Fiirbringer, and be trained to take part
new type because of its short building time, laid electric motor of 180hp. The fuel-oil bunkers were in the trials of CV707. The course began on 3
tress on fmancial backing. Although the sited in the pressure hull beneath the propulsion January 1933 at the TNS (Torpedo und Nachrich-
construction of E1 in Spain had almost completely unit. As no stern armament was carried, an tenschule, the Torpedo and Communications School
xhausted the Special Construction Estimate of additional living compartment with four bunks at Flensburg-Miirwik). The Technical Instructor
1930, Raeder succeeded in having made available a could be installed at the rear of the stern section; in was the former U-Flotilla Engineer, Korvetten-
fIrst instalment of 1 million marks for the new practice, it was never really satisfactory when the kapittin Rusche (Retd.) In addition to the four deck
250-ton project, which was given the cover name of
'Lilliput'. The full building price of 1.5 million
marks was included in the 1931 expenditures. By
these means, the building of an appropriate
submarine was assured, and it was to be built in
Finland. In effect, until the boat was purchased by
the Finnish Navy, the German Naval Directorate
was the real commissioning body (as had been the
case with El in Spain), organizing and supervising
the enterprise through the disguised U-boat offIce,
Igewit, in Berlin.
After the fItting-out and successful trials of the 3
Vetehinen class and Saukko, Finland was prepared
to award a contract for the 250-ton boat. In
connection with this, Schiirer sent several I vS
designs (Projects 170 and 172) together with a
design of his own (15) to Bartenbach on 27 May
1930. The German avy was especially interested
in the Igewit designs 15 and, later, 17 (which was to
be the basic concept for the fmal design of Project
179, and was to be worked out by IvS). On 9
October 1930, after a successful trial of Vetehinen,
a contract was placed by the Finns for the building
of a 250-ton submarine by Crichton-Vulkan at Abo.
The fItting-out and constructional supervision were
entrusted to I vS.
In effect, Project 179 minus the saddle tanks
formed the basis of the design. The single hull was
chosen because of a desire for better resistance to
depth-charges and a shorter diving time - the same
requirements that had led to the building of Type
UF for North Sea operations in 1917. A charac-
teristic of the new 250-ton design was the
arrangement of three 53.3cm bow torpedo tubes (in
place of the four 50cm bow tubes in Type UF). The
bow torpedo compartment was fItted-out as
conventional living quarters with twelve bunks.
Beneath this compartment was the battery
installation of 62 cells (32 MAD 580;6,350 amp.hr
with 20 hours discharging) made by the Swedish
fIrm of Tudor. The control room was immediately
abaft the bow compartment, above the centre
diving tank in the pressure hull.
Two periscopes were fItted, one for the conning
tower and one for the control room. Both were The commissioning ceremony for Vetehinen (CYl02), Vesihiisi (CYl03) and Iku- Turso (CYl041.
FOU DATIONS OF THE NEW U-BOAT ARM, 1925-1935 95

. .'
, " --
-------.::~ -.... ,---.... -
-
fl
f '...._ ...... ..
, ", .. , .
•
-
... .. _-
-. •
....... _------ --------
96 FOUNDATIO S OF THE NEW U-BOAT ARM, 1925-1935

officers, the following personnel partici pated : and was named Vesikko. She survived the Second now consisted of 36 VF boats, 36 VG boats and 12
Oberleutnante (Engineering) Albert Muller, World War, and was later placed on display as a VI boats.
Heinrich Schmidt, Winkler and Droeschel, and submarine memorial in Sveaborg. When the Spanish boat, El, had been built along
two young construction officials, Aschmoneit and the lines of the enlarged IvS design Pul11, this
Friese. Mobilization contingency plans to 1932 design was used in place of the VG type in
Trials began at the end of May 1933, with In a memorandum dated 3 March 1926 'Concerning mobilization planning, although with its displace-
Furbringer as commander, and Papenberg as chief Military Requirements in Constructional ment of 745 tons it represented a significant
ngineer. (In addition to the 10 named participants Specifications for Medium and Small V-boats in the increase on the original idea of a medium boat of
from the instruction course, two external and light of our Operational Wartime Experiences', 50D--600 tons. As a corresponding temporary
retired officers, Hans Lorek and Johannes Kausch Spindler emphasised that, faced with the measure (1930-32) and following the successful
took part.) In August 1933, Brautigam took over possibility of mobilization (and assuming the trials of the combined torpedo and minelaying type
direction of the trials after Furbringer had suffered opponents would be France and Poland), the Pu89 of the I vS in Finland, this medium type was
n heart attack. The submerged handling qualities of medium V-boat types VBIII and VCIII were ideal especially favoured by Schottky for mobilization
the boat proved first class. It was possible to dive for torpedo and minelaying operations, with the planning. With the new development of 250-ton
safely and exactly to any desired depth, no matter VBII type for coastal operations. In this, Spindler V-boats, and the actual construction of a boat of
how the rudder was positioned or how fast the boat was in accord with the trends of thought of many of this type in Finland, Type VF was abandoned. A
was moving. At slow and at half speed, the boat the younger V-boat commanders who were greatly basic factor was the decision to change to the
could be kept at periscope depth by changing the influenced by the theoretical writings of von 53.3cm torpedo. Also, the possibility that torpedo
position of one man by only half a metre without Mellenthin and Marschall. Moreover, at that time, mines of 53.3cm calibre might soon be ready for use
using the hydroplanes. The boat kept a steady the Construction Office also considered that these meant that the design for the minelaying Type VI
course for five minutes at a speed of 4.7 knots, V-boat types, which were well proved and well was no longer necessary. In effect then, in 1932, the
again without using the hydroplanes. At slow tested, were a good basis for further development, most appropriate prototypes for a V-boat
speeds, the boat handled best with the forward having a short building time and the further mobilization programme were CV702 (Vetehinenl,
hydroplanes; from 6.5 knots to full speed (8 knots), advantage that, constructional plans being to hand, CV707 (Vesikkol and EI.
she handled best with the aft hydroplanes alone; a series could be built without initial delays.
and, at intermediate speeds, she handled best with However, in a very short time, the 'modern'
both hydroplanes. When a salvo of three torpedoes V-boat projects of the Imperial Navy from 1918.
was frred, the boat gently inclined 2 metres higher namely VF (350 tons) as replacement for VBII and PREPARATIONS FOR
in the water, but stayed safely below the surface.
The boat could be put into reverse without any
VG (640 tons) as replacement for VBIII, were
established as the basis for a new mobilization
NEW CONSTRUCTION,
fluctuation of depth. The submerged range proved programme consisting of 36 VF boats, 42 VG boats 1932-35
to be 122.6 nautical miles at 2 knots, 61.1 nautical and 6 VCIII boats. Improvements were to be made
miles at 4 knots and 15.5 nautical miles at 7 knots. to the latter type. IvS was required to work out The Reconstruction Programme of 1932
On the surface, she proved very seaworthy. designs for these, making use of all recent In the autumn of 1932, a so-called Reconstruction
Manoeuvrability was described as 'typical V-boat developments. A building time of six months was Programme was decided on, in order to build up a
handling': when going astern only vigorous calculated for Type VF, and twelve months of Type modern, battleworthy German Navy by 1938
movement of the helm would cause the boat to VG. In the event of mobilization, the 42 VG boats (Decree of the Reichs Minister of Defence dated 15
change direction, a rolling test produced 10 should be built by Vulcan, the VF boats by GW, November 1932). In a memorandum dated 2
oscillations in 61 seconds and, over a measured mile and the VCIII minelaying V-boats by B&V. November 1932, the Defence Department AI of the
on the surface, a speed of 13.002 knots was The minelaying boats were intended especially Naval Command Office had suggested, in
attained. for Mediterranean operations, but the Type VCIII connection with this, the construction of a small
On the debit side, the following points were was rather small for operations in this theatre. At a V-boat fleet consisting of eight 500-ton (Vetehinen
revealed: meeting of 14 February 1927 between Kapitan zur class) and eight 800-ton (El class) boats. The Head
1. The diving time was lengthy - 45 seconds to See von Loewenfeld (A Ill. Fregattenkapitan Kurt of the Fleet Department A II, Kapitan zur See
achieve a depth of 9.3m. This resulted from the fact Assmann (A II al, Spindler and Schottky (A II u), Guse, was in agreement. The objective now was the
that the central diving tank took 30 seconds to Korvettenkapitan Hermann Mootz (A III), completion of 16 V-boats by early 1938, and these
flood instead of the 20 seconds demanded when the Korvettenkapitan Heinrich Schickardt (BW) and would be divided into 3 half-flotillas, each
contract was placed. Constructional Adviser Friedrich Schotte (K I gl, it consisting of 4 boats, of which 2 would be for
2. Range was restricted (1,960 nautical miles at 8 was agreed to prepare plans for a larger minelaying instructional use and 2 for trials purposes. The
knots compared with the 3,700 nautical miles at 8 V-boat type, which, in the event of mobilization, programme was to be worked out in three stages:
knots in the case of the VBII of the First World would be able to sail from German ports for a the frrst from 1932 to 1934, the second from 1934 to
War). '45-day operation in the Mediterranean'. Again, 1937 and the third from 1937 to 1938. For the frrst
3. The unsuppressed noise of the high-speed diesel another V-boat project, dating back to 1918, stage, 8.6 million marks were to be made available.
engines was very loud. suggested itself: the 800-ton minelaying V-boat Of this sum, the aval Yard at Wilhelmshaven
In general, CV707 was criticized more sharply by Type VI. The constructional data for this was would receive 4 million marks for work on the
Furbringer than by Brautigam. Originally, it had available in the 'K' Office, and was handed over to proposed V-boat construction programme; 3.8
been arranged that CV707 would now be handed Tebeg, who could now include this type in their million marks would be the first instalment for the
over to the Finnish Navy, but Bartenbach mobilization planning. On 19 March 1927, Tebeg awarding of contracts for 2 V-boats, and 0.8 million
succeeded in extending the trial period into the suggested that, in the event of mobilization, 12 of marks, for the outline programme (V·boat
summer of 1934 so that the boat could be of use to these Type VI boats should be built by B&V. On instruction, etc.l.
the newly-founded V-boat School, set up in the this occasion, however, the further working-out of On 22 November 1932, the General Naval Office
autumn of 1933 under the cover name 'V-Boat this particular project was not passed to IvS; the 'B' discussed the measures that would be necessary
Defence School'. CV707 was eventually commis- intention was to have it processed through one of to establish the 'MVB Branch', as V-boat
sioned by the Finnish Navy on 13 January 1936, the Navy's own construction offices. To achieve development would now be designated (Motor-
this aim, a 'Technical Department' under the enversuchsboot, or 'Experimental Motorboat');
Left top and below: Two photographs of the preserved control of Schurer was set up at Mentor Bilanz in specially discussed were measures needed for a
Vesikko (CV7071, taken in August 1965. June 1927. The mobilization programme for 1928 commencement of V-boat construction. The Navy
FOVNDATIONS OF THE NEW V-BOAT ARM, 1925-1935 97

hoped that both the IvS boats El and CV707, in
which so much had been invested, could be acquired Type IA.
by Germany to provide the basis for the new
o 5 10 15 20 25 30 m
German V-boat arm. For any manufacturing

preparations within Germany itself, only the
quickly-built CV707 type was considered. The
conference established two alternatives for the first
stage: either that materials and engines be
prepared for six 250-ton V-boats, or an immediate
start be made on the building of four 250-ton
V-boats. Either alternative would require
approximately 6 million marks. For the building,
the Kiel-Gaarden yard of Deutsche Werke Kiel AG
<H(JZ:
(DWK) was exclusively selected. It was also
suggested that a V-boat base, with docking
facilities for 6 boats, be constructed at Kiel-Wik.
Rather than the Navy's own yards in Wilhelms-
haven, DWK in Kiel was preferred, for geographic
and economic reasons. Type IIA.
On 10 December 1932, Admiral Groos (A) decided
that, until further notice, only the El type code-
named 'MVBI' and the CV707 type (MVBIl) should
be considered, and that planning should take
account of both types in numbers appropriate to an
equal cost outlay, i.e. three 250-ton boats to one
750-ton boat. The development of a useful
intermediate type of approximately 500 tons
(similar to the earlier VBIlI) should be borne in
mind for a later date. The establishment of the
V-boat base in Kiel-Wik and the personnel on 1 October 1933. For undercover reasons, the were now available for the small boats and 4.5
requirements for the basic V-boat organization (lOO official designation was 'V-boat Defence School' million marks for the large boats.
men and officers) were now authorized. (Vbootabwehrschule, or VAS), and it came under After a lengthy discussion at 'B' on 3 July 1933,
An examination of the IvS designs for El and the control of the Torpedo Inspectorate. the ratio between small and large boats was once
CV707 gave rise to some desire for detail changes: On 17 March 1933, a total of one million marks again established as 3:1, and it was agreed to build
in both types, it was desired to reduce the size of was put aside for the provision of components for 6 small and 2 large boats - 3 small boats at DWK
the conning tower in order to diminish the these two small V-boats. To assist in the and 3 small boats at GW, while B&V, Hamburg,
silhouette. In the case of MVBI, it was felt that the construction of further boats, three plans were were envisaged for both the large boats. In the
sub-structure for the gun, which extended to half presented on 8 April 1933, each envisaging the event of mobilization, a decision would be made to
the height of the bridge, should be removed. In building of 32 MVBI boats (800 tons) and 16 have six 250-ton boats built at the two yards that
MVBIl, it was thought that the bridge, which had MVBIl boats (250 tons). could provide the quickest construction. The
been enlarged in accordance with the wishes of the Plan 1 (for quick construction): 16 V-boats, modified CV707 type was now designated
Finns, should revert to its original size, and the 1934-36; 32 V-boats, 1937-41. Construction No. 1110 or 'MVBIlA', while the
bridge steering position was eliminated. The Plan 2 (for construction by 1945): 16 V-boats, modified El type was designated Construction o.
torpedo installation was to be converted to use G7a 1934-38; 16 V-boats, 1938-43; 16 V-boats, 1120 or 'MVBIA'.
and G7e torpedoes, as well as torpedo-mines. 1943-45. As planned, the VAS was opened on 1 October
Arrangements would be made for MVBI to carry as Plan 3 (replacement plan for existing shipbuilding 1933 for training purposes, under the direction of
many as possible of the newest mines in wet plans): 16 V-boats, 1934-36; 12 V-boats, 1937-38; Korvettenkapitan Kurt Slevogt. The instructors
housing beneath the upper deck; in MVBIl, inves- 20 V-boats, 1940-42. were Ftirbringer and Htilsmann and two V-boat
tigations would be made to determine whether a These plans however, had no noticeable effect on officers, Rosing and Freiwald, who had received
further one or two reserve torpedoes could possibly further developments, and were soon displaced by their training in submarines built by the IvS. Eight
be accommodated. From a shipbuilding point of other considerations. On 31 March 1933, 1gewit officers (Looff, Ewerth, Werner von Schmidt,
view, it was intended to go over to comprehensive concluded a 500,000 marks contract with IvS for Michahelles, Scheringer, Meckel, Weingartner and
welding of the pressure hull - the scrapping of building preparations for a 250-ton boat. On 26 Looschen) attended the first course, plus 70-80
interior straps, and the weight saved thereby, could April 1933, this contract was increased to take in 3 non-commissioned officers and men who had been
only strengthen the skin of the pressure hull. boats of this type. In a discussion at Head Office assembled in Kiel since the summer of that same
The building time for the MVBI type was (Amtschef 'B') on 2 May 1933, it was discovered year. The V-boat building programme, however, did
estimated as two years, for the MVBIl type that negotiations with DWK were planned to not get under way as quickly as it might have done,
approximately one year. The actual building times commence in June, with a view to begin building and this first course continued until the autumn of
would be determined by the delivery of new-type the 3 boats on 1 October. An additional 3 large 1934. As it turned out, Hitler's foreign policy
torpedo tubes, which meant, effectively, that MVBI boats were to be prepared, and the (especially towards Britain) made a commencement
completion of the first MVBIl boat could not be construction of these was to be in the hands of GW. of building during 1933 no longer possible and, on
expected before 1 July 1934, and of the first MVBI In the interests of concealment, however, 28 October 1933, Amtschef 'B' discussed fmancial
type before April 1936. To provide personnel for the negotiations with GW would not begin until 1 terms for a new plan. For 1933, the preparation for
first two boats, which were to be built in Germany October 1933. Building was to start on 1 April the building of only 6 small V-boats (3 million
from the autumn of 1933, Reichs Defence Minister 1934, or even earlier if possible. IvS was to act as marks) and 2 large V-boats (2.3 million marks) were
von Blomberg authorized, on 2 February 1933, the the authority placing the contracts for all these now envisaged. Planning for the following years
foundation of a V-boat School in Kiel-Wik, to start boats. For building preparations, 1.5 million marks was now to be as follows.
98 FOVNDATIONS OF THE EW V-BOAT ARM, 1925-1935

1934: Completion of preparations for 2 large keeping the whole business concealed, a similar was ready at DWK: the first shed was ready, and
U-boats (0.7 million marks); completion of 2 small arrangement was entered into with regard to the other two were in course of construction. Vp to
V-boats (2 million marks). periscopes. Fitting-out items that had been ordered that time, 0.7 million marks had been spent on each
1935: Completion of 4 small V-boats (4 million in 1933 for both the Type IA boats, at a cost of 1.5 boat, and each would cost a futher 0.8 miUion marks
marks). million marks, were to be stored for the time being to assemble. For Type lA, procurement of
1936: Completion of 2 large V-boats (6 million at DWK, Friedrichsort (near Kiel) , where the appropriate material and its storage in Kiel was
marks); new construction of 6 small V-boats (9 torpedo tubes for this type were being manu- still in progress. As things stood at that time, it
million marks). factured. was calculated that assembly would take between
1937: New construction of 6 small V-boats (9 On 17 February 1934, it was decided to enlarge ten and twelve months. Financial outlay for the
million marks); new construction of 2 large V-boats the conning tower of Type IA on account of the preparatory work for each boat amounted to 1.5
(9 million marks). change to a periscope with a fIXed eyepiece. The million marks, and for assembly 3 million marks per
This would mean that, together with El and erection of two further construction buildings at boat were calculated. For the torpedo armament,
CV707, at the beginning of 1938, 5 large and 19 DWK was authorized on 18 May 1934, foUowing eleven electricaUy-propeUed torpedoes were ready
mall V-boats would be at the Navy's disposal. On the agreement that a total of six 250-ton V-boats or being manufactured, although, of these, six had
19 March 1934, this was enlarged to provide a total should be constructed there, and this left GW free been allocated to Turkey. A further thirty G7e had
of 72 V-boats by 1949, of which 24 would be of Type for the two large boats, for which constructional been ordered. Of conventional compressed-air
MVBIA, and 48 of Type MVBIIA. items were now being prepared and stored. torpedoes, thirty G7v were ready, with a further
In the summer of 1934, the hoped-for fleet Although the fmal assembly of the first two boats 270 in the course of manufacture. The proposed
agreement with Britain had an influence on V-boat had not begun at DWK, Raeder gave orders on 27 improved G7a and the torpedo-mines were still in
planning. Because of a British:German tonnage June 1934 that building preparations should be the process of development.
relationship of 100:33V3 which meant a initiated for an additional six 250-ton boats. For The order for the boats to be assembled was not
Hubmarine tonnage ratio between the two countries these, Igewit requested 'B' on 29 June 1934 for an given, however, for the actual commencement of
of 52,700:17,566 - the planning of 72 V-boats improvement in the diving time to 30 seconds as assembly was not so much a problem of organiza-
totalling 31,200 tons by 1949 had to be abandoned. well as an increase in range to 4,000 nautical miles tion as of politics. Having come to power, Hitler
On 4 June, therefore, A IV suggested at 8 knots. Increasing the surface range to double was not willing to risk possible hostility from
20 boats of 800 tons (Type IAj 16,000 tons that of IIA would be achieved by including an Britain and France, bound together as they were by
6 boats of 250 tons (Type IIA) 1,500 tons additional oil bunker beneath the control room, if treaty; the Saar Plebiscite was pending, and an
which, in fact, represented a distinct preference for the boat were enlarged by three frame spacings. agreement with Britain concerning relative fleet
the large boat. In the Shipbuilding Replacement This design, enlarged to 275 tons, was designated limitations (The Anglo-German Naval Agreement)
Plan of 1934, however. the emphasis was still on a Construction No. 1110B, or 'MVBIIB' and was also was still unresolved - it might yet permit 'legal'
large number of small V-boats to get V-boat to be built at DWK. Completion of the design of V-boat re-armament. During a discussion on 27
construction off to a quick start. It was now this Type IIB was to be handed over in January June 1934, he instructed Raeder to maintain
intended by 1938 to have ready 10 Type IA and 18 1934 to the fifteen-man construction office in DWK, secrecy about building preparations, and not to
Type IIA boats, totalling 12,500 tons. and personnel from GW would also be taking part authorize the commencement of assembly work
in this. Vntil now, for reasons of concealment, before the end of 1934. On 6 October of that year,
Preparations to build Types IA and IIA orders had been placed through IvS; but for this the new delivery date for the first V-boat was
On 15 December 1933, a discussion took place at series, they would now be placed directly by Igewit scheduled for 1 April 1935, and 11 small V-boats
DWK chaired by the Head of (Amtschef) 'B', or by DWK. In a further discussion at 'B' on 17 would foUow at half-monthly intervals. Assembly of
Konteradmiral Heusinger von Waldegg, with Yard July 1934, however, it was decided to have Type the 2 large V-boats was now scheduled to take place
Directors Middendorf, Serno, Loflund, Immich and IIB built at GW. To this end, GW were to set up at Deschimag-AG Weser, and they should be ready
Drechsler, concerning preparations for the their own construction office. GW was not to be on 1 February and 1 March 1936. As it was more
proposed building of the 250-ton V-boats. It was considered any longer for the two large boats, but difficult to conceal the building of large boats,
decided that the next step should be the erection of the engines and fitting-out items were to remain at preliminary work would not start at AG Weser
a shed where the two boats could be built secretly. DWK, where they were being stored, and construc- before 1 January 1935, with assembly on 1 April
While this could not be completed before the middle tional materials at GW. For the manufacture of 1935.
of June 1934, the laying-down of both boats could torpedo tubes for the new Type IIB, Pintsch and To cope with the V-boat construction planned for
begin in May, in the still incomplete shed. The Navy DWK, Friedrichsort, were the intended manufac- the beginning of 1935, another class was initiated in
estimated a building time of five months for the turers. the V-boat School (VAS). This meant an increase in
first boat, and flve-and-a-half for the second: this Now that measures had been taken to make V-boat personnel to the extent that, by the middle
meant that delivery dates would be 1 November preparations (in Germany) for a rapid building of 1935, there were at the avy's disposal 15 deck
and 15 November 1934. Components and materials programme of a sizeable number of submarines, officers, 9 engineering officers and 190 non-
for a total of six 250-ton boats should be prepared and as neither an immediate lifting of the V-boat commissioned officers and men. On 1 December
and stored at the DWK. Appropriate contracts restrictions imposed by the Treaty of Versailles nor 1934, it had been agreed to admit a further 580 men
between Igewit and DWK were concluded in an impending mobilization were to be expected, it to the VAS on 1 October 1935, which meant that
January 1934. was resolved not to take over El and CV707, but to crews for 14 large and 12 small boats would be
Rolled-steel was shipped from the Ruhr via seU them. El was offered to Turkey at 3 million ready by the middle of 1936.
Holland (lvS) to DWK, and arrived at Kiel in marks, that is to say, at a considerable loss. On 12 October 1934, in a discussion at 'B', it was
January 1934. (The purpose for which this material Furthermore, the Turks had to be encouraged by a agreed that, to aid construction purposes, a branch
was required was a strict secret, and this gave rise simultaneous gift of six new electrically-propeUed office of the I vS would be placed at the disposal of
to problems in Customs clearance.) The main and torpedoes. (Supplying the new German G7e AG Weser, and this would be established in Bremen
auxiliary engines followed in the early part of 1934. torpedoes to a foreign power before they had ever at the beginning of 1935. As a number of IvS
The torpedo tubes for the first two Type IIA boats been fitted in a German boat was to cause a storm coUaborators had come from The Hague to the new
were manufactured and made ready for installation at a later date, but it was too late to withdraw the V-boat Construction Office at GW (Etzbach,
at Pintsch, Fiirstenwalde 40km east of Berlin. In offeL) Negotiations were started with the Finnish Stotzel, Strehlow, Buhr and Freitag), and others
view of the limited life of batteries, none was Navy for the sale of CV707. had left or were leaving to join the Construction
actually supplied, but an agreement was made for By the middle of August 1934, aU the material Control Department of the Navy in Kiel (Jany and
their provisional preparation; on the grounds of necessary for the assembly of the first 6 V-boats Reimer), Techel's construction office, which was
FOUNDATIONS OF THE NEW V-BOAT ARM, 1925-1935 99

now dissolving connections with the German Navy, would then be taken into the buildings and stored The central control room and conning tower, which
was very considerably weakened. In order to ensure near the keel blocks. In Building 67, a start would at the present were forward of the centre of gravity,
speedy assembly work and smooth-running com- be made with the construction of the engine would automatically be moved back to the centre of
missioning of V-boats as soon as the command was installation on its original foundations. gravity. Additionally, there would be four
given, Igewit, VAS, the Construction Control and On 12 December 1934, discussions took place minelaying tubes. If an arrangement in the after
the proposed Acceptance Authority for the new with Deschimag concerning the preparations for part of the boat became necessary, the control room
V-boats were amalgamated into a special building both the large V-boats. IvS would deliver and rear battery compartment would have to swap
organizational V-boat Department, under the all workshop drawings to AG Weser. In order to positions to avoid the conning tower being placed
control of Kapitan zur See Bartenbach (who had ensure secrecy for these preparations, it was too far forward. The two halves of the battery
returned from Finland), and this body was given suggested that the lofting be carried out in a special system would then be joined together in one
very extensive jurisdiction. building entirely separate from the yard's compartment. The boat would then be approxi-
By 16 October 1934, it was evident that, as the shipbuilding operations. Before starting work on mately 80m long, displace 870 tons, and have a
order to commence assembly could not be expected the boats, the slipway was to be surrounded by a maximum surface speed of 18.5 knots (instead of
before 1 February 1935, the corresponding delivery fence. the estimated 19 knots of Type IA).
dates must be postponed. The intervening time was On 11 January 1935, GW were requested to Building costs were estimated at approximately
to be used for increased preparations for Type IIB. deliver Deschimag the constructional material that 4.8 million marks (i.e., only approximately 300,000
And, if lack of official sanction for commencement had been assembled for Type IA boats, so that, marks more than Type IA), and the building time
led to further postponements, more V-boats were to with effect from 1 February 1935, all three yards would be very little longer than that of the Type IA.
be prepared. In this connection, 'A' wanted 4 large would be in a good position for speedy commence- As an alternative, the possibility of accommodating
V-boats to be prepared, and these could eventually ment of their actual constructional work. mines in dry storage containers on the upper deck
be built in the dry dock at DWK. was also discussed. On 9 April 1934, Schottky
Between 7 and 9 November 1934, personnel from Other requirements: Types 111- VII presented an outline sketch for this project and,
the V-boat Department of the General Naval Office Given that Types IA and IIA had been chosen for following further work on the constructional
(Ubootabteilung im Allgemeinen Marineamt, or the start of a new V-boat re-armament, and that details, the main specifications were nOw as follows.
Maximum beam: 6.2m.
Draught (normal): 4.05m.
Type III (conjectural). Draught (fully laden): 4.35m.
Displacement surfaced
(normal): 880 tons.
------- Displacement surfaced
(fully laden): 970 tons.
Speed surfaced: approx. 18.5 knots.
Range surfaced: 12,000 nautical miles
at 10 knots (fully
laden!)
Installations were to be as in Type IA except for
the mine-storage compartment abaft the bow
torpedo tubes, which could also serve as a supply
store for twenty-one reserve torpedoes, and for the
BV) visited Kiel to acquaint themselves with the preparations for building had already begun, the group of compensating tanks, of necessity placed
state of preparations and to discuss possibilities of question arose as to what further types would be farther forward. An increase in ballast made for
speeding up construction work. Workshop draw- necessary when Germany had received permission improved stability, and this permitted the
ings in the new construction office of GW, under to build her own submarines. A special minelaying installation of a second 10.5cm gun (on the after
the control of Wilhelm Etzbach, and lofting work V-boat was thought essential. It was a fact that, deck). In addition, Igewit contemplated the
(Building Section 1) had been partly completed, through the development of special torpedo-mines building of a housing for small motor torpedo-
which meant that the official commencement of -anchor mines (Torpedo-Ankertauminen, or TMA) boats. Once again, Type IA was chosen as a
workshop work (Section 2) could be established for 3.64m long and sea-bed mines (Torpedo- starting-point. Two small speedboats could be
1 December. Assembly (Section 3) could then follow Grundminen, or TMB) 2.3m long - any V-boat carried in a pressure-tight hangar abaft the conning
at GW on Slipways 1 and 2 of the large construction could perform basic minelaying; but there was still tower. This weight would be compensated by a
building. As camouflage, these building sites were need for a boat capable of carrying a large supply of mine compartment forward of the stern tubes. The
fenced-in with corrugated iron. Temporary mines. pressure hull arrangement of Type I A could be used
construction numbers (the numbers of six On 13 February 1934, a discussion with Igewit right up to the engine compartment, and only outer-
minesweepers being built at that time) were used, established that the requirements for a minelaying casing enlargement would be necessary. After the
with an additional designation 'Group 950'. When V-boat would be secured in the simplest and restoration of this project in the summer of 1945,
building commenced, 3 boats could be completed at quickest way by increasing the length of the the main specifications became as follows.
each slipway. A total of 600-900 workers was available IA by approximately 7.5m. A mine- Length overall: 78m.
authorized for boat-building, and the same number storage compartment of that length could be built- Maximum beam: 7 Am.
for engine construction. The additional two sheds in, and would contain either 30 TMA or 45 TMB, Mean draught: 5m.
were to be completed at DWK by 20 December plus the necessary mine-compensating tanks. If no Displacement surfaced: 1,500 tons.
1934, and the keel blocks would immediately be torpedoes were carried, the total number of mines Displacement submerged: 2,000 tons.
prepared in these buildings (l14a-c). It was would be 54 TMA or 75 TMB. The mine-storage Speed surfaced: 15.5 knots.
envisaged that the welding and matching-up of compartment could be installed either abaft the Speed submerged: 7 knots.
frames for the upper deck, foundations, stringers, bow torpedo tubes, or forward of the stern tubes. Range surfaced: 7,500 nautical miles
outer-hull tanks, central keel, etc., would take place Vsing the fore part of the boat had the advantage at 10 knots.
outside. Once prepared, these constructional items that very little conversion work would be required. Fuel-oil supply: 100 tons.
100 FOVNDATIONS OF THE EW V-BOAT ARM, 1925-1935

Armament was to be as in Type lA, but with The idea of building an MVB as a motor torpedo- the keel which, however, had bulges at the sides.
\'ight reserve torpedoes and forty-eight TMA. In boat carrier (designation MVBVIl) was abandoned, each of which contained diving and trimming tanks.
pressure-tight housings would be two motor as the expenditure for an item that would not be Saddle tanks of this kind had already been
torpedo-boats, each of 10 tons weight and 12.5m used very often seemed too high. Furthermore, investigated during the development of CV707 and
length. The cost of each U-boat was estimated at 7 there seemed to be serious practical difflculties in in towing tests on models. Additional diving tanks
million marks. the way of launching and recovering the small were situated outboard in the bow and stern; the
On 29 June 1934, Igewit informed the General boats. It was argued that with a similar large main diving tank was placed in the pressure
aval Offlce 'B' that the requisite development expenditure it would be possible to build an hull, beneath the central control room. All this
tasks in suggested sequence were: operationally-sound U-cruiser, the value of which made for a short diving time. The fuel-oil containers
1. Reconstruction of Type MVBIl to achieve a would be greater at all times than that of U-boats were situated abaft the control room in the pressure
diving time of 30 seconds. built for such special purposes. hull. which meant that if damage were caused to the
2. Reconstruction of Type MVBI I to achieve a At the end of 1934, it was decided that Types outer hull by depth-charges, oil would be unlikely to
range of 4,000 nautical miles at 8 knots. IV-VI were not to be proceeded with, partly leak to the surface. These ideas, like the Type II,
3. Improvement to the loading and stowing of con- because the state of development of new types of date back to the First World War UF concept.
ventional torpedoes in Types MVBIl and MVBI. engine installations did not permit further work on On 10 January 1935, BU discussed this new type
( .B. The above remarks (1-3) were to be applied them, and partly because tonnage limitations in the and, in view of the abandoning of the MTB carrier
to the preparation of the second series of six impending Anglo-German Naval Agreement would project, it now received the designation MVBVII.
:l50-ton boats, with the condition that no delay be call for a concentration on operationally-sound, It was not possible to incorporate all the original
caused in the preparation and building dates for medium sized U-boats. This, then, was probably the requirements, particularly a submerged stern
that series.) real reason for the construction of a medium-sized torpedo armament, in a boat displacing 50(}--550
4. Reconstruction of Type MVBI to achieve a U-boat, that can be seen as an enlarged version of tons, and certain requirements were dispensed
diving time of 30 seconds. the well-tested CV707. It had a single-hull shape, with. The result can be summarized as follows.
5. Recon truction of Type MVBI to achieve a extending to the forward and after parts of the Maximum displacement: 550 tons.
diving depth of 100m. ship, to the upper deck, with its small bridge. and to Speed surfaced: 16.5-17 knots.
Speed submerged: 8.5-9 knots.
at knots.
Type VII. Range submerged: 75 nautical miles at 4
knots.
Propulsion: two 1.050hp
(corresponding to
six-cylinder
performance of the
E 1 diesels).
Battery weight: provisionally 55 tons.
Diving depth: 100m (i.e., the same
diving capacity as
MVBIA)
Armament: four bow torpedo
tubes, and one
fIxed stern tube on
6. Reconstruction of Type MVBI to carry a supply the upper deck;
of at least 50 mines (MVBIV). Type VII frame lines. nine torpedoes
7. Construction of an MVB to serve as a supply maxImum.
and workshop ship for offensive MVBs (MVBIlI). one 10.5cm U-boat
8. Construction of an MVB according to the gun; one 2cm MG.
suggestions of Engineer Walter (MVBV). The control room could be sealed by a pressure-
9. Reconstruction of an MVB approximately of the tight bulkhead (capable of withstanding pressure at
size of MVBI, and to make use of the steam engine 50m); the remaining compartments were divided by
as sole propulsion system for surface and bulkheads of lesser strength.
submerged cruising. as designed by Schmidt- In further discussions at Offices 'b' and 'c' of
Hartmann (MVBVI). Igewit. it was agreed to try for a maximum
10. Construction of an MVB as a motor torpedo- propulsion installation weight (MI and MIl) of 176
boat carrier (MVBVIl). tons. If possible, the two diesel engines were not to
On 6 August 1934, these tasks were approved by weigh more than 38 tons, i.e., 15-16kg per hp, but it
'B' with a very few changes, such as the re- was thought doubtful that this could be achieved
designation of the minelaying U-boats mentioned in with the available engines. The HSV A then
6 (above) as MVBIlI. For the supply and workshop evaluated the proposed specifications by
V-boat mentioned in 7, the designation MVBIV performing towing tests with a model of the new
was now suggested. This boat was intended to Type VII. They found that, at 11-13 knots, the
supply operational U-boats with torpedoes, mines, saddle tanks caused a deterioration in the C. values
fuel, lubricants, provisions, drinking water and of the boat which had no saddle tanks, and at 14-18
spare parts, and was to be able to carry out the knots an improvement in these values. This V-boat
more common repairs at sea. She would be a large Type VII, conceived by Schurer and Broking,
boat of approximately 2,500 tons surface determined German naval strategy during the
displacement. and would have to be able to remain Second World War, to a greater degree than any
at sea for at least three months. other warship.
FOU DATIONS OF THE EW U-BOAT ARM, 1925-1935 101

U-BOAT
CONSTRUCTION
FROM 1935 TO 1939
The Replacement Programme of 1935 on the 6 lIB boats started at GW a month later. Building co=encement 1937: 4 boats of 600 tons,
Following the agreement on the main specifications The contract for a further 12 boats, with slight in service by the su=er of 1939.
of the new U-boat Type VII, it was decided to start changes in the lIB design (Con. o. 1110C) had Building commencement 1938: 2 boats of 600 tons.
building it as soon as possible, in preference to been released on 2 February: 8 were to be built at in service by the beginning of 1941.
ordering further IA boats, and GW was chosen as GW and 4 at DWK, these differing from Con. No. Following a vote by the Defence Department AI
the building yard. On 16 January 1935, Igewit 1110B by having a longer conning tower with direct of the Naval Command Office, large U-boats were
wrote to GW to say that 6 boats of Type VII were steering facilities on the top. All the 24 250- no longer to be built. In future, emphasis was to be
to be laid down on Building Slips III and IV during ton submarines were to be delivered by 15 May 1936. on 500-ton boats. In the Replacement Programme
1935. However, it was thought that initial planning U-boat construction in the Replacement for 1935, of 11 May, therefore, it was recommended
would take until 1 June 1935 before workshop Programme of 1935, now consisted of 24 boats of that the building of 500-ton Type VII boats
drawings could be prepared. Project drawings, 250 tons; 10 of 500 tons and 2 of 750 tons, making a continue. This, from a tonnage point of view, would
adequate for building work, were to be prepared by total tonnage of 12,500. According to the proposed make possible the building of a further 2 boats, and
the Branch Office of IvS at Deschimag. For official 35 per cent clause in the Anglo-German aval would give considerably shorter building times. In
correspondence, the new design, MVBVII was Agreement, there would still be approximately total, U-boat planning now consisted of 36 MVBs
designated 'Con. No. 1115 '. On the assumption that 6,000 tons at the disposal of the German Navy. At from the 1934-35 Estimates, and these should be
working drawings would be delivered to GW by 1 Amtschef 'A' on 8 April 1935, a Construction Plan ready by the summer of 1936. Additionally:
June 1935, the following delivery dates were was formulated to make full use of all available Estimates for 1936: frrst series of 4 boats of 500
published: frrst boat 1 June 1936, second 15 July submarine tonnage by 1942. Although these boats tons (U37-U40), ready by 1 October 1937.
1936, third 1 September 1936, fourth 15 October were said to be of only 600 tons, in view of their cost Estimates for 1937: second series of 4 boats of 500
1936, fifth 1 December 1936, sixth 15 January estimated on 11 April 1935 at 5 million marks per tons (U41-U44), ready by 1 October 1938.
1937. A fmal decision about this proposed boat, it is highly likely that they would have been Estimates for 1938: third series of 4 boats of 500
construction was not taken, but inquiries were Type IA boats, which were some 150 tons larger. tons (U45-U48), ready by 1 October 1939.
made as to the possibilities of building Type VII at Building commencement 1936: 4 boats of 600 tons, Following the conclusion of the Anglo-German
DWK. On 21 January 1935, Director LOflund in service by the beginning of 1938. Naval Agreement on 18 June 1935, to the amaze-
replied:
'1. There is no large enough space free before
1 September 1935.
'2. From 1 April 1937, there will be one
Type IIA (U1·U6). o I 1 J , 5 6 7 8 9 10m
construction place free (Building Slip 1) and some

shipwrights and welders (who would not be free
before this date) available for additional work.
'3. No personnel will be available for fitting-out
work on additional construction before the
beginning of 1938.'
DWK could no longer be considered for construc- •
------------
tion work on Type MVBVII before 1 April 1937,
and was left out of further discussions. On the other
hand, AG Weser did have building capacity for an
immediate start. On 28 January 1935, Deschimag
was informed that it must build 4~ 550-ton MVBs, Type liB (U7-U12).
which meant that the total number of proposed
Type VII boats had risen to 10: of these, fmally,
GW would build 4, and Deschimag, 6. Project
drawings suitable for both yards were to be
produced by the I vS Branch Office at Deschimag;
the workshop drawings would be prepared at GW,
with additional help in the form of personnel from
Deschimag. The green light for starting the
assembly work for the frrst 6 small Type IIA boats
was given to DWK on 8 February 1935. The work
102 U-BOAT CONSTRUCTION FROM 1935 TO 1939

ment of the world, the first small Type IIA U-boats fleet would then proceed with all speed. For this, U-BOAT DESIGN
came into service, after an ostensible building time the 1936-37 Estimates provided for 8 boats which
of a mere four months, thanks to the comprehensive would likewise be laid down on 1 April 1936, 4 at DEVELOPMENTS: TYPES IX,
preliminary preparation of components. The treaty, GW and 4 at AG Weser. This construction plan was
while fiXing the total German Fleet tonnage at 35 to be well advanced by the end of 1935, with VIIB AND X-XII
per cent of overall British tonnage, allowed ultimate completion of the 8 boats by 1 October
Germany parity in submarine tonnage. The 1937. The remaining boats, whose number had been The evolution of Type IX
Germans, however, had stated that they would not increased to 5, was similarly postponed by a year In a statement issued by Naval Command Office on
make full use of this concession initially, but build (i.e., commencement of building 1937, completion at the military, political and strategic situation of
to only 45 per cent of the British submarine the end of 1938). The following plan was confirmed Germany at the end of 1935, Paragraph 7, U-boats,
tonnage (i.e., they would not build an amount on 16 November 1935. declared:
xceeding 22,050 tons). It is very likely that it was U21-U24, U31, U32, U35, U36: laying down 1 April 'U-boat tonnage at 45 per cent means 22,050 tons
not political consideration that dictated this, but 1936, completion from 1 September 1936; the are availabe, of which 12,500 tons are in use
restricted building capacity and a desire to proceed decision to lay down earlier if possible remained through boats complete and under construction
with caution until those U-boats under construction open. [Ul-U36j and 9,550 tons are unused. The planning
had proved themselves. U37-U44: laying down April 1936, completion for U-boat construction goes back in time prior to
The speedy completion and commissioning of from 1 April 1938. the Naval Agreement. It was formerly a question of
Ul-U12 was the result of smooth collaboration U4frU49: laying down April 1937, completion evolving types the assembly of which would take
between Igewit (Schottky, Schiirer and Braking); from 1 April 1939. only a short time so that, in the event of an
good supervision at the shipyards (Papenberg, Additionally, two U-boat depot ships were outbreak of war and of the abolition of the
Jany, Ludwig, Kluge and Reimer), the newly authorized. restrictions of the Treaty of Versailles, boats could
formed U-Boat Trials Commission (EAU, or Erpro- However, nothing came of the proposed building be ready as soon as possible. The use of knowledge
bungsausschuss fUr Unterseeboote: Brautigam, programme for these additional 500-ton boats of gained through the building of boats for Finland
Hiilsmann, Aschmoneit and Friese) and the U-boat Type VII (U37-U44) for 1936. In October 1935, the and Spain gave birth, therefore, to the first types of
chool (UAS: Slevogt, Fiirbringer) in the special U-boat Department (BU) was dissolved and its U-boat fleets. Initially, the Naval Agreement
U-boat Department (BU) of the Supreme aval responsibilities were distributed among opened up the way to recognize the military
Command under Kapitan zur See Bartenbach. The departments of the OKM. At the same time, the requirements for future U-boat construction. It is
method of working in the new offIce was marked by 'fathers' of the new U-boltt arm, Schottky and essential for the continuance of operations that the
a freedom from bureaucratic restrictions, and was Bartenbach, who had championed the building of especially important sea lines of communication in
made possible by the fact that, in essential matters, the medium U-boat very strongly, retired from the Mediterranean be cut, and that the U-boat be
it was directly under the control of the German further U-boat development. In June 1935, Raeder used in that sphere of operations as a torpedo- and
Naval Directorate, which from 21 May was given had selected Kapitan zur See Danitz to be in mine-carrier and also for reconnaissance purposes,
the new designation Navy High Command command of operational boats and for U-boat as the enemy superiority in surface vessels and in
(Oberkommando der Kriegsmarine, or OKM). training outside the U-boat School. At first, Danitz air force potential makes the employment of
On 23 July 1935, U-boat planning in the - also a champion of medium U-boats - had little U-boats the only possibility for success. The
Replacement Programme was reduced to 10 boats, influence on U-boat development, which was now fulfilment of all these military requirements hangs
but the 500-ton type remained. being increasingly influenced by the aval on the knife-edge of the very small amount of free
1st series: 4 boats to be ready January 1938 Command OffIce. Contrary to the U-boat tonnage' still available - 9,550 tons. I t is therefore
instead of 1 October 1937; philosophy that obtained in the First World War, clearly a question, on the one hand, of effecting as
2nd series: 4 boats to be ready January 1939 the Naval High Command now tended to regard the large a number as possible of units and, on the other
instead of 1 October 1938; U-boat not a the weapon of destruction in a war of hand, of achieving the most urgent military
3rd series: 2 boats to be ready January 1940 commerce, but as one integral component of the requirements. Therefore, the following require-
instead of 1 October 1939. Fleet, to whose strategic aims it must be ments need to be met in the new construction of
Political considerations (the intended occupation subordinate. Furthermore, in the eyes of many staff U-boats:
by armed forces of the demilitarized Rhineland) led, officers, the signifIcance of the U-boat seemed 'A range to be suffIcient for a lengthy stay in the
in October 1935, to the postponement of the laying questionable when faced with the detection devices Western Mediterranean.
down of the remaining Type lIB (U21-U24) and of being developed (especially by Britain) and in the 'A sufficiently high cruising speed to keep as
the 4 Type VII boats; following a planning revision light of the restrictions imposed by the London short as possible the time spent in getting to and
of 21 October, this would not commence before 1 aval Treaty of 1930, to which Germany was a from the zone of operation and to facilitate quick
April 1936. However, the rebuilding of the U-boat party. and sp'!edy results when in action.
U-BOAT CO STRUCTIO FROM 1935 TO 1939 103

'The ability to carry a suffIcient number of
torpedoes or mines, whichever has to be carried, to
bring about the maximum effect on all operations Type IX.
undertaken.
'Boats built recently and those under construc-
tion of the larger type do not fill these requirements
satisfactorily. They can reach the Western
Mediterranean at a reduced cruising speed, but
after a relatively short time there, need to return on
-------
account of insuffIcient fuel reserves. Also, for the
scope of such operations, the supply of ammunition
is too small. The application of present U-boats and
those planned for the future can be considered for
the following undertakings: the small 250-ton boats
can be used first in home waters as far as Biscay
and the Gulf of Finland, both in a reconnaissance
role and as torpedo- and mine-carriers. Their use in
these areas will be greatly influenced by what the
Fleet has to carry out. The larger boats are
primarily for operational use along the French
coast, in the Atlantic, in the Mediterranean and
along the African coast, unless they are required for
special purposes to work alongside the Fleet. profile. The fore section of the boat was drawn out workshop boat.) AI u was requested 'together with
'The provision of a special mine U-boat [Type III) in a slimmer form and, as value was placed on short SK I, to clarify the question whether the construc-
is rejected. The present situation is not such that torpedo tube shutters (which involved a full bow tion of a cargo-carrying submarine for commercial
we can afford the building of a special type, but if back to the shutters), the line of this section had a purposes could legally be built under the Naval
speed of construction were to become a prime con- distinct'S' curve. The more comprehensive and Agreement, and not be included in the military
sideration, then such a project might be worth- weightier diesel installation required a different tonnage figures.' However, there is no further
while. The current development of U-boat mines division of compartments. The engine rooms mention of this suggestion in subsequent
permits the equal and interchangeable use of adjoined the control room and the battery discussions on the development of the German
torpedoes andlor mines and this suits the military compartments, and all crew quarters were moved to U-boat arm. In any case, the building of a commerce
requirements most fully.' lie forward of the control room. The conning tower submarine in peacetime would probably have
In the Construction OffIce, these requirements was moved farther aft, in contrast with Type lA, been seen as a questionable and shady business.
led to development of a new U-boat type closely and was now situated in the centre of the boat. The In his attitude to the new Type IX, Raeder
connected in size and shape with Type lA, but pressure hull diameter increased by 12cm. The showed a noticeable reticence. At a further
responding to the desire for an increased surface upper deck had to be widened in order to discussion on 9 March 1936, he suggested
range and torpedo supply. The resemblance to Type accommodate the torpedo containers, which led to postponing a decision on it until the following
IA guaranteed a short development time and some reduction in the maximum submerged speed. questions had been resolved:
reduced diffIculties in building preparations. An Finally, an increase in the AA armament (one 3.7cm 1. Could a further MG/30 be installed?
initial list of speciflcations made at the end of 1935, gun at the stern and one 2cm gun on the bridge). 2. Would it be possible to increase the cruising
envisaged the following. This new project was designated Type IX. speed while keeping the same range and displace'
Displacement: 730 tons. At the end of 1935, it was decided that the 13 ment by using MAN, double-acting, two-stroke
Maximum speed surfaced: 20 knots. additional boats be of this type, which meant that engines?
Cruising speed surfaced: 14 knots. the 9,950 tons still outstanding from the Anglo- 3. Could quicker reloading be guaranteed by
Range surfaced: approximately 10,000 German Naval Agreement were now completely adopting the suggestion of Amtschef MWa relating
nautical miles at 10 taken up. The following plans had now been made to the arrangement of the torpedo- or mine·
knots. by 'A': 2 boats of Type IA; 24 boats of Type IIA or containers beneath the upper deck?
Armament: four bow torpedo B; 10 boats of Type VII; 13 boats of Type IX. Of The next day' A' stated:
tubes and two the new Type IX boats, 8 were to be laid down in 'Re. 1. 'A' considers the anti-aircraft weapons as
submerged stern 1936 and the remaining 5 in 1937. The yards presently envisaged, that is one 3.7cm and one C/30
tubes, with twelve suggested were Deschimag for U37-U40 and GW machine-gun which is greater than the original
torpedoes carried. for U41-U44. weaponry by the 3.7cm gun, are satisfactory. The
Additionally, an On 31 January 1936, 'A' made its first report on installation of further anti-aircraft weapons would
installation for the the new Type IX to Admiral Raeder, Supreme be difficult, people would get in each other's way
storage of further Commander-in-Chief of the avy. On this occasion, when using them, and there would be manning
torpedoes in Raeder raised the point as to whether 'it is possible problems, all of which adds up to the fact that 'A'
pressure-tight to build a commerce submarine for carrying cargo, cannot recommend them. The armament of one
containers on the which could be excluded from the existing U-boat 3.7cm and one 2cm is preferred to an anti-aircraft
upper deck. If tonnage arrangement. In the event of mobilization, armament of two 2cm.
needed, the storage the boat could be used for general supplies or for 'Re. 2. 'A' stresses that the most reliable and fully
of 22 new TMC, 44 military supply purposes.' To this, AI replied: 'The tested engine installation must be used, which will
TMA or 60 TMB project for a U-boat of this kind for use for the last- provide the increased requirements.
mines. mentioned purpose has, at the request of AI, been 'Re. 3. 'A' is not in agreement with the change
The increased surface speed was to be achieved thoroughly evaluated by BU, as a war game at the suggested by MWa, as it will mean forfeiting at
by using nine-cylinder diesels (instead of eight- Naval Command Office, and documentary details least two mine containers (possibly even four). A
cylinder, as in Type IA), by installing super- should be available.' (It is very likely that this was maximum complement of mines is more important
chargers and by slightly changing the boat's being confused with Project IV, for a supply and than the ability to discharge mines more quickly

improving the 500-ton boat in respect of deck In order to speed the development of the V·boat
Type IX frame housing of reserve ammunition, improvement in arm, and to acquiesce in the Commander of
lines. engine installation and so on, without any V-Boats' desire for the smaller boats, Raeder
appreciable increase in tonnage. further requested, on 9 June 1936, that results
'Argument: Operational considerations demand obtained with the fust Type IA and Type VII
the completion as soon as possible of Type IX, as V·boats be evaluated with the utmost speed, so
these boats are the only ones which could move that by approximately the beginning of October
quickly into the battle area, which, with regard to 1936 the implementation of a further six 500·ton
the tasks at the beginning of a war, is important. boats, with improvements suggested by these
This advantage apart, if it should come to a war in results, could be decided on. 'K' was now requested,
the near future, these boats will be the only ones as a precaution, to make a careful consideration of
with the ability to carry out operations in distant the possibilities of improving the 500-ton boats by:
waters, such as the Central and South Atlantic, the (a) deck storage for torpedoes and mines, if
Caribbean, etc., as the radius of action of the necessary, by dispensing with above-water stern
500-ton boats is insufficient for any of these areas. tubes and (b) improvement of speed and range by
A task for these boats, which has not been using superchargers, etc., without any appreciable
mentioned in discussions hitherto, is, in the opinion increase in displacement. Because the Commander
of AI - and great stress should perhaps be laid on of V-Boats had expressed his concern at Fleet
this - the use of the Type IX in direct protection of Command regarding the manoeuvrability of
our own commerce. Through their high cruising medium and larger boats, 'K' was requested la) to
speed and their large radius of action, the e boats make comparative tests of the turning circles of
are ideal for the taking over of the tasks of 250-ton, 500-ton and 712-ton boats at different
from two or four containers. The reloading of the V-cruisers, for example, to accompany important speeds, and when submerged, and (b) to test
mines into their shafts can, in any case, only be cargo ships across the Atlantic, or to protect trade possible improvements in the manoeuvrability of
carried out away from the area of operations and routes in these waters, in other words, exactly Type IX and in the projected improved versions of
this is only worth doing when a sizeable number - those tasks which normally fall to surface warships. the 500·ton boats.
at least four - are to be discharged, so there is no In the opinion of AI, the new type represents a However, shortly afterwards, Raeder expressed
particular advantage to be gained from saving a happy amalgam of all the different qualities that his doubts concerning the ordering for construction
few minutes only if the minelaying performance is various V-boats should have. It also seems of of the 8 Type IX V-boats, but decided fmally on 22
restricted. The discharging of the fust two doubtful value to A I to continue the construction of June 1936: on 29 July 1936, the fust 4 boats of
containers according to the arrangement pertaining the 500-ton type further, before experience with Type IX (U37-U40) were contracted to Deschimag.
at the present, will not require any more time than larger V-boats is available. This enables us to On 28 September 1936, projected specifications for
the preparation of the torpedo hatch, derrick and thoroughly evaluate the new boats, quite apart the new Type IX were as follows.
pedestal, all of which take place at the same time.' from the consideration that, as far as AI can see, Designated waterline
In the meantime, however, resistance to the idea the question is still not clear whether the immediate length: 75m.
of using this new large type for the whole of the continued building of these additional boats is Maximum beam: 6.5m.
V-boat tonnage still outstanding had increased. An practical from the point of view of providing crews Mean draught with keel: 4.25m.
essential argument was that, in place of 2 large and training. Standard displacement: 740 tons.
boats, 3 medium-sized boats of Type VII could be 'AI is further of the opinion that experience of the Speed surfaced: 20 knots.
built. The point was also made that the 500-ton larger V-boats will be to hand by the autumn, with Speed submerged: .5 knots.
boat to be built at Deschimag would require an the result that account can be taken of the wish of Range surfaced: 11.000 nautical miles
average of only eight months on the slips. the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the avy to at 10 knots.
Certainly, on 18 March 1936, the OKM intended make a quick start to the building of these boats, 15,000 nautical miles
that 8 Type IX (U37-U44) were to be laid down on 1 and, in any case, to lay them down before the end of at 8 knots.
ctober 1936, with completion cheduled for 1 this year. An initiation to build more 500-ton boats Armament: six torpedo tubes
April 1938 (one boat at the end of 1937); yet Raeder is also still possible in the course of this year. Ifour submerged
delayed the fmal decision until the summer. 'A's should experience with them make it desirable to bow, two sub·
stipulation on the new Type IX and Raeder's use up the outstanding tonnage for the boats. AI merged stern);
indecision resulted in the notorious 1937-gap in pleads strongly that the placing of contracts for the twenty-two
German V-boat construction. In a communication building of at least 8 and, if possible, 9 boats of torpedoes (twelve
dated 8 June 1938, AI took up the initiative again: Type IX should not be delayed by considerations in pressure hull, ten
'For the initiative of the coming new V-boat concerning the further construction of 500-ton in pressure-tight
constructions, AI makes the following suggestions: boats, and that it be suggested to the Supreme containers on deck);
'1. Type IX should be, as planned, laid down as Commander-in-Chief that the fmal decision as to one 10.5cm V·boat gun,
soon as possible on the building slips in a series of 8 whether Type IX boats or 500-ton boats be built one 3.7cm gun,
and, if possible, 9 boats. before the end of the year could be deferred until one C/30 MG.
'2. The decision whether the tonnage still the autumn.' Crew: 40.
outstanding should be used up by further Following these arguments, which to some extent
construction of Type IX or whether it should be represented a somewhat unreal concept on the part Improvements to Type VII: Type vila
made up by an improved 500-ton boat can be of the AI as to the operational capabilities of the On 6 April and 11 May 1936, Type IA boats U25
postponed until experience with the fust larger boat, Raeder decided that in the 1936 Estimates 8 and U26 came into service. followed on 25 July by
boats has been evaluated. This will possibly be done V-boats of Type IX (U37-U44) corresponding to the fust Type VII boat, U33. The V-Boat Trials
in the autumn of this year so that, if a decision is construction drawings available should be put in Commission (EAV) were to carry out numerous
made in favour of the smaller boat, the construction hand. The question of the AA armament was tests with these boats during the next few months.
of some of these boats could still commence before deferred, to be settled when the aval Weapons and these resulted in a defmite preference being
this year is out. In the meantime, 'K' ha received Office (MWa) had carried out experiments and come expressed by both D6nitz (Commander of V-Boats)
the request to investigate the possibilities of to some conclusions as to which was the best gun. and the EAV for the smaller, manoeuvrable Type
V-BOAT CO STRVCTION FROM 1935 TO 1939 105

VII: in this, no doubt the wartime experience of
Dbnitz and Brautigam played its part. In a report
comparing the 712-ton and 500-ton V-boats, Dbnitz
fmally came into conflict with the Command Office
regarding the use of V-boats, in the event of a war
with France. Among other points, he stated:
'Compared with the speed reached by surface
warships, the V-boat - even if it ach.ieves 17-20
knots - is a relatively slow craft. In this respect,
the V-boat is at an even greater disadvantage than
was the case during the war: the submerged speed
of a V-boat has remained the same, while the speed
that surface vessels can attain has become notably
greater. The prospects for V-boats in unrestricted
sea space to attack opponents - even slow
merchantmen - are poor unless the V-boat is, at
the beginning of the attack, in a favourable position
in the line of approach of the enemy ship. It is not a
practical proposition for a V-boat to improve
matters by making an approach on the surface, for
it then exposes itself to observation from the air
and to the risk of attack by urface escort ships
forcing it once more below the surface. The simple
corollary is this: the V-boat can best attack when it
is in a stationary position, as near as possible to
strategic focal points for enemy commerce, and as
near as possible to enemy bases; there it must wait,
having taken up a good submerged position. Its
attack prospects consist of: la) being in the
appropriate line of approach that opponents must
take, and (b) in the use of as large a number of
V-boats as possible.
'Inference: individual V-boats used for torpedo
purposes, in these times of limited V-boat tonnages,
should be as small as is practical; for the greater the
number of boats at our disposal, the greater the
number of sea lanes that we can invest with our
V-boats; this means a greater likelihood that our
opponents will have to cross our position. When
used as a torpedo carrier, the V-boat must have
good offensive qualities; above all, it must handle
well when submerged. This calls for: short diving
time, simplicity of installation , which reduce the
risk of mishaps when repeated alarms cause
frequent diving, good depth·keeping properties,
noise reduced to the lowest possible level, small
turning circle; then, for night attacks,
manoeuvrability, low silhouette, short diving time.
It is the smaller boats that have these properties in
the greatest measure.'
Dbnitz then went on to compare the prepared
data of the V-boat types in detail. The turning
circles were unsatisfactory: surfaced at full speed
and full rudder, U26 325m, U33 305m; submerged
at full rudder, U26 280m, U33 360m. By using
double rudders, which would be more affected by
propeller wash, it was calculated that considerably
improved results could be achieved, especially in
the case of the shorter, 500-ton boat.
The 500-ton boat was superior in diving time, and
could be taken to a depth of 10m in 20 seconds from
maximum speed, if Balla t Tank III were already
open (opening time 8-10 seconds) and with forward
hydroplanes at 25°, below and behind at 0°, and
trim down by the head to a maximum of 10°. It was
Left: Commissioning of U28, September 1936.
107
calculated that an improvement to the aperture occasioned, which we estimate to be approximately named from 24 November 1936), which was in
bars would bring the diving time down to 25 0.5 knots. None the less, a decrease in the reserve progress in 'K' OffIce. First priority was given to
seconds from the time of giving the alarm. By displacement of approximately 10 per cent is to be increasing the Type VII's surface range, the
comparison, the 712-ton boat at a maximum speed reckoned with, which means a reduction of the surface speed and the torpedo supply. The fIrst and
and with 6 tons negative buoyancy required 40 buoyancy in the case of damage at sea.' third of these were to be attained by increasing the
seconds to reach a depth of 10m. When moving in a Saddle tanks were suggested as the best means of length of the boat by 2m and by fItting larger
forward direction, both boats maintained depth storing additional fuel, although a signifIcant saddle tanks, as had been suggested by EAV. To be
well. However, depth-keeping was a much more advantage of Type VII as planned hitherto (no oil sure, this increased the surface displacement of the
arduous business in the case of Type IA than in traces if the outer skin were damaged because the boat by 120m3 (120 tons), but it only increased the
Type VII. In Type lA, when submerged, the fuel bunkers were inside the pressure hull) would be standard displacement of this type from 500 tons to
dynamic centre of gravity was not in the control forfeited. The Commander-in-Chief, V-Boats, gave 517 tons, a point of great importance in the tonnage
room, but had moved, depending on the speed, to a his support to the suggestion, so that the only limitation of the Anglo-German aval Treaty. As
point up to 6m forward of the control room. interior diving tank should be retained, so as not to had been done with Type IX, the steering was
Another point was that the ventilation system of lose too much reserve displacement. The fuel improved by fItting a twin rudder in place of the
the fuel bunkers did not work absolutely reliably. supply could be increased by 40m 3 , by storing in single blade, and this arrangement also benefitted
According to the trim, the air bubbles wandered the saddle tanks and by lengthening the boat. the stern torpedo tube, which was now situated in
forward or aft, and the volume changed according the pressure hull. The torpedoes could be ejected
to the depth kept. (Also, what very possibly between the rudders. The torpedo complement was
influenced Donitz in his evaluation of the depth- Type VIIS frame lines, increased from eleven to fourteen by the provision
keeping properties of Type IA was a diving of two additional torpedoes in pressure-tight
operation that went seriously wrong, while he was containers in the upper deck and a further torpedo
on board, when a faulty connection in the in the stern compartment. The performance of the
electrically-operated forward hydroplanes caused diesel installation was increased by 20 per cent by
the boat to bottom almost as far as the gun the inclusion of superchargers, which meant that
position.) Nevertheless, the good depth-keeping the maximum surface speed was greater by
properties of the 500-ton boats were specially approximately 1 knot, despite the increase in size.
mentioned by both the EAV, and the Commander Nevertheless, even with the improvement in profile
of the V-Boat Flotilla at Saltzwedel, Fregatten- and positioning of the side bulges, and increased
kapitiin Scheer: streamlining of the full bow, the C w values, with the
'The superiority of the medium boat with regard exception of the minimum at 12 knots, could not be
to depth-keeping is reflected not in statistics alone. I improved.
had the feeling with the 500-ton boat that the very 'K' OffIce now saw as its fl1'st task the repair of
effective hydroplane functioning and its tautness the existing gap in V-boat building, by securing an
under the surface give one a very reassuring feel in immediate decision as to how to use the
the hand, in all situations and to a degree that I outstanding tonnage. As an indication of the gap,
have not experienced hitherto in any other boat: in GW, for example, had received no contracts since
this respect it is very superior to the 712-ton boat.' 25 March 1935. The very short building times that
The surface qualities of both types were regarded had been achieved up to now, as a direct
as satisfactory, although at maximum speed the consequence of diligent initial preparation and the
712-ton boat was considerably bow heavy. Tests in pre-assembly of all necessary components, were no
adverse weather had not yet been carried out: when longer to be attained, and this meant an interval of
these had been made, the Type VII showed an Donitz regarded the inferior surface speed of more than a year in the building up of the V-boat
unwelcome tendency to instability. Boats of this Type VII, as compared to lA, as of no significance. arm. In a letter dated 7 October 1936, 'K' OffIce
type took so long to recover from rolling that the While Type VII had a greater number of torpedoes asked for the decision to be expedited in time for
functioning of the diesel engine could be inter- in relation to the number of torpedo tubes, if one GW to be given a new contract in October 1936. It
rupted. expressed torpedo armament in terms of relative requested, additionally, that in the future Type IX
Needless to say, in terms of range and surface displacements, both types were equal. should only be built at Deschimag, and Type VII
speed, the 500-ton type came off worst. To the In order to effect an improvement in Type VII, it only at GW, this to prevent further lengthy delays.
question of how these defects could be improved, was suggested that, in place of the stern tube above On 27 October, the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of
without materially affecting the construction of the the waterline in the outer ship, with its many the Navy discussed means of allocating the
boat, the EAV stated: disadvantages (no maintenance or reloading remaining tonnage. While, in the opinion of the
'Any increase in the fuel supply will necessitate facilities and no surface firing!) two tubes should be Commander-in-Chief, V-Boats (Donitz), and
alteration to the saddle tanks in order to included in the pressure hull, together with two Bartenbach, the remaining 6,666 tons should
compensate for the reduced height of the reserve torpedoes. (A single interior torpedo tube, consist of 13 boats of the improved Type VII, 'A'
transverse metacentre at 'F' which occurs through with only one torpedo, would not be worth the demanded that 6 boats of the new Type IX be built,
the increase in weight causing the boat to be lower expenditure of alteration.) If this relatively strong and only 4 of the improved Type VII. Raeder made
in the water. It is assumed that the highest point of armament should make the boat too heavy at the the decision of Solomon: 4 Type IX boats and 7
the saddle tanks will then be approximately 5.2m stern, with the result that she would lose some of boats of improved Type VII. Told by 'K' that a
below the waterline and the tank will curve in her favourable submerged qualities, the original building time of two years should be allowed,
underneath to the existing ship's outline. The armament would be reverted to, and in this event Raeder ordered 'special and express aid for the
contents of the saddle tanks can be increased by two further reserve torpedoes could be accom- V-boat construction programme as an urgent
approximately 50 per cent by this means. The modated in the bow compartment without any armament measure', but did not consider that
improved surface stability when the tanks are great changes. Donitz did not suggest that any organizational measures (along the lines of the
blown (i.e., at approximately 25-30m 3 residual torpedoes be stowed outside the pressure hull in the special V-Boat Department BV of 1935 under
buoyancy) will be an additional advantage. 0 outer ship. Bartenbach) would be helpful. He contented
matter how the additional fuel is arranged, a These suggestions had a considerable effect on himself, therefore, with an urgent written comment
diminution of the maximum speed will be the evolution of Type VIIB (as it was offIcially to all appropriate offIcial parties.
108 V-BOAT CONSTRVCTIO FROM 1935 TO 1939

On ~1 November 1936, 4 Type IX boats,
U41-U44, were contracted to Deschimag, and the 7
Type VIIB U45-U51 , to GW. Raeder had not
chosen to make decisions based on one or other of
the conflicting opinions as to practical and
strategic use of the V-boats. It was to be expected,
therefore, that when a new distribution of tonnage
was made, the tug-of-war between the champions of
Type IX and Type VIIB would begin once more.
On 17 July 1937, a modified Anglo-German aval
Treaty was signed. With certain modifications, it
corresponded to the British-French-American naval
treaty (London aval Treaty) of 1936, regarding
qualitative limitation of naval rearmament. It gave
Great Britain 70,000 tons in submarines until 1942,
and Germany 31,500 tons.
On 8 July 1937, AI (Marschall) presented a
memorandum that solved the mystery of why an
additional 9,450 tons had been acquired from the
new naval negotiations. It proceeded directly from
the potential enmity presented by France and
Russia, who had been bound together by a non-
aggression pact since 1935. It was regarded as the
chief task of the German Navy to protect trade
shipping in the Baltic and North Sea. In view of the
strong dependence on these sea lanes in the event of
a war on two fronts, 'A' took the attitude that
absolute priority should be given to this, rather
than to operational measures against enemy lines of Above: U60 being lifted into the water at DWK, 1939.
communication, and demanded that the number of
small 250-ton V-boats be increased. It was
calculated that in the Baltic 8 V-boats would be Type lie (U56-U631.
needed permanently; for the North Sea, up to a line The bridge of U61 wa,s slightly lower, similar to Type 110.
Brest-Orkneys-Central Norway, 6 boats of 250 tons
plus 3 of 500 tons were reckoned to be necessary for
control of the outer waters. These fIgures, however,
could not be achieved with the 24 boats of 250 tons
built hitherto. It was essential, therefore, to
augment this class of boat by 9 small V-boats.
The remaining tonnage was to be used for
------------ .
operational V-boat warfare in non-German waters.
For the nearer operational theatres, e.g., the 250-ton V-boats in contract to DWK on 17 June tons would be available for the proposed building of
western Mediterranean, off the orth African 1937. They were not regarded as being of great the 2 large V-boats (a minelayer and a V-cruiser).
Atlantic coast and in the White Sea, the new Type urgency, and were to be inserted into any gaps in This suggestion was approved by Raeder and
VIIB seemed the most appropriate; but of this construction. They were to be built according to a appropriate contracts were awarded; on 16 July
type, only 7 were currently under construction. AI somewhat enlarged version of the Type lIB. In 1937, 2 Type VIIB to GW and two Type IX to
suggested an increase of 5 boats of this type, so order to provide more space for communications Deschimag; and on 21 July, four Type IIC to DWK.
that 4 could be stationed permanently in these equipment in the control room, the length of the The two new Type IX boats, U64 and U65, were to
theatres. For more remote operations, especially boat was to be increased by the distance between be built according to an improved design, and were
minelaying, in the eastern Mediterranean and mid- two frames. At the same time, the fuel bunker to bear the designation Type IXB. They were
Atlantic, Type IX was envisaged, and 8 of these beneath the control room was to be enlarged by noteworthy principally for the fact that the outer
were under construction. To these could be added approximately 1m 3 , and this slightly increased the ship was made wider, which allowed for an
both boats of Type IA. In order to have 4 boats range. This new model was given the designation increased fuel supply. The only external difference
permanently in these theatres, 2 more Type IX Type IIC. was that the large gun was shifted from its position
were held to be absolutely necessary. All this meant In anticipation of the tonnage increase, two VIIB forward of the entry hatch to a point aft of this
new demands from AI to the following total. boats had been contracted to GW on 15 May 1937 hatch and forward of the conning tower.
9 V-boats of 250 tons = 2,250 tons. to help flll the building gap. On 30 June 1937, with This apportionment of types, however, was not at
5 V-boats of 517 tons = 2,585 tons. regard to the outstanding tonnage, the aval all to the liking of the Commander-in-Chief,
2 V-boats of 740 tons = 1,480 tons. Command OffIce made the following suggestion, V-Boats, who in the early part of 1937 had
Total 6,315 tons. which took account of the new requirements of AI repeatedly called for the V-boat tonnage to be
In the opinion of AI, the remaining 3,200 tons that had been made on 8 June. heavily weighted (up to 75 per cent) in favour of the
should be used to build 2 larger V-boats, and these, 4 boats Type IIC = 1,000 tons. medium-size Type VII. In December 1937, the
depending on how planning was functioning at the 2 boats Type VIIB = 1,034 tons. outstanding tonnage (approximately 4,000 tons) for
time, could either be one large minelaying V-boat 2 boats Type IX = 1,480 tons. further boats of available types, were placed in
and a V-cruiser, or 2 large minelaying V-boats. Total 3,514 tons. contract. Again, Donitz' desire that preference be
In response to this, the Supreme Commander-in- This took no account of the ninth IIC and the given to Type VIIB went unheeded, and the
Chief of the Navy placed the fust 4 additional fIfth VIIB boat, in order that approximately 4,000 distribution was as follows: 4 boats of Type VIIB
V-BOAT CONSTRVCTIO FROM 1935 TO 1939 109

(U69-U72) and 3 of Type IXB (U66-U68). This minelaying U-boat from the thoughts of the Table 9. Specifications of Types X. XA and XB
meant that the permitted tonnage to 1942 was now Operations Department. Certainly, the
completely accounted for. development of torpedo-mines TMB (length x XA XB
On 21 January 1938, it was decided that, with 230.6cm, weight 740kg, explosive charge 580kg) Form displacement
effect from 1 October 1939, a new chain of and TMC (length 338.5cm, weight 1,115kg, surfaced Itons) 2.284.1 2.500* 1.710
command would control this U-boat Jleet, which explosive charge 1,000kg) made it possible for Length Imetres) 103.2 103.1 89.
would total 72 boats (a number that coincidentally mines to be ejected through 53.3cm-diameter Beam Imet.res) 8.85 9.52 9.20
corresponded exactly with provisional U-boat torpedo tubes; this meant, in effect, that any Draught Imetres) 4.41 4.41 4.20
Vs Iknots) 14 14 18
estimates made on 19 March 1934!): U-boat could become a minelayer. These mines were Cw 190 201 181
U-BOAT HEADQUARTERS, KIEL. (Operational Control essentially mines with remote detonation (mostly 'w Ishp) 2.523 2.392 3.854
of U-boats in outer home water ). magnetic, some acoustic), designed only for a depth
Baltic: of water of up to 20m. *Approx.
Commander of U-Boats East, Kiel (later The development of the torpedo anchor-mine with
Riigenhafen). remote detonation. TMA. which had been planned
1st U-Flotilla (Kiel, later Riigenhafen). U7, U9, U11, with Type III in mind, and which could be used in Type XA frame lines,
U13, U15, U17, U19, U21; Escort Ships: Donau, water up to a depth of 270m, proceeded slowly.
Memel and 1'23. However. although of the same length as the TMC,
3rd U-Flotilla (Kiel, later Riigenhafen). U8, U10, its anchor weight resulted in its charge being
U12, U14, U16, U18, U20, U22, U24; Escort Ships: reduced to only 215kg. It seemed advisable,
Weich el, Mosel and T156. therefore, to evolve a minelaying U-boat suitable
5th U-Flotilla (Kiel). U56, U57, USB, U59, U60, U61, for laying larger anchor mines - a special mine,
U62, U63; Escort Ships: (A merchant ship, yet to Sonder-Mine A. or SMA (length 215cm, diameter
be purchased). 133.1cm, weight 1,600kg, explosive charge 350kg),
7th U-Flotilla (Kiel, later Riigenhafen). U45. U46, with magnetic remote detonation having been
U47, U48, U49, U51, U52, U53; Escort Ships: I chosen. At the beginning of 1937. 'K' OffIce was
and T157. given the task of designing a large minelaying
North Sea: U-boat that could carry these mines. Initial
Commander of U-Boats North. Wilhelmshaven. planning with types designated 'X' and 'XA'
2nd U-Flotilla (Wilhelmshaven). U25, U26, U27, harked back to a considerable extent to the large Type XB frame lines.
~,W~~,~,~,~,~,~,~; minelaying U-boats, Ul17-U126, of the Fir t World
Escort Ships: Saar and T1SB. War. In these boats, mines were carried in a stern
4th U-Flotilla (Emden). U50, U54, U55. U69, U70, compartment in dry housing, and were expelled
U71, U72; Escort Ships: III and a torpedo-boat. through two chutes. In addition to this method,
6th U-Flotilla (Wilhelmshaven). U37, U38, U39, plans now envisaged a row of lateral shafts next to
U40, U41, U42, U43, U44, U64; Escort Ships: II the pressure hull, each containing two SMAs in wet
and T155. storage. To suit this method of housing. the
8th U-Flotilla (Wilhelmshaven). U65, U66, U67, submarines would be given an almost rectangular
U68; Escort Ships: IV and a torpedo-boat. cross-section. The forward part of the boat was to
When it came to the consideration of how the have a torpedo installation, with four bow tubes. . \' ~
{ '-......
available new U-boat tonnage should be Design 'XA' differed from Design 'X' in having a
apportioned, it became clear that the 45 per cent greater beam and, consequently, a greater
ruling represented only a little more than the displacement.
number of boats required for defensive purposes off Dry storage for mines was thought to be
the German coast. The remaining tonnage available necessary because, at the time these boats were Glossary: Wasserdichtes Heck, watenight stern; Trimmzelle.
for offensive purposes against the two potential being planned, it was not yet possible to adjust the trimming tank; Torpedozelle, torpedo tank; E.-Maschinenraum,
enemies. France and Russia, was wholly in- detonating mechanism inside the wet storage electric motor room; Dieselmotorenraum. diesel engine room;
Wasch u. Trocken·raum, laundry room; Kuhlschr., cold storage;
adequate, no matter what tactical measures were shafts. But the mines took up a lot of room, being Kuche, galley; Akkuraum, battery room; Turm, conning tower;
used. During the Anglo-German aval Treaty very bulky with their anchors. Wet storage
negotiations of 1936-37, it became obvious that the presented a better proposition in as much that it !
,.-r-f.,.-
,-J_ ..A-1t ~ -
I •• ~ -
Soviet-French non-aggres ion pact had greatly was only necessary to compensate the negative
changed the strategic position at sea, and that the buoyancy on a weight basis. When, subsequently.
German Fleet now faced greater problems than had the problem of adjusting wet-stored mines had been
been the case during the negotiation for the treaty solved, Project 'XA', which had proceeded quite 'LJ...i.~ I.
of 1935. In a report to the Supreme Commander-in- some way, was dropped in favour of a smaller
tt.\(ii
-r-,
1'- ...... ".
Chief dated 18 November 1937, it was recom- design with wet-stored mines only. This replaced . . -- J
Zentrale, control room; Munitionskammer, ammunition chamber;
mended that it be proposed to the British Govern- dry mine storage in the stern by six shafts in the Kommandant, commander; Pro\liantraum, store room; Offizierraum,
ment that German U-boat tonnage (compared to forward section of the boat, each containing three wardroom; Oberfeldwebelraum, warrant officers' quar~e~~;_ _~
the treaty of 1935) be increased to parity with wet SMA mines. The torpedo armament was ! _~.1--
British submarine tonnage. The resultant loss in reduced to two tubes, and these were positioned for
surface tonnage was to be taken into consideration. defensive purposes in a stern compartment. The
but it was assumed that Britain would react with space and weight gained in the after part of the
some sensitivity to any such increase in the boat helped provide a stronger diesel installation
German U-boat fleet. and, therefore, an increased surface speed. This
design was given the designation ·XB'. ~
Mannsch. R., ratings' quarters; Bugminenraum, bow· ______
Larger U-boat designs: Types X - XII On 25 September 1937, it was decided that a boat of mine compartment; Hecktorp R., stern torpedo room; Regenzeug 5chr
The abandonment of the Type III had not this type should be started at GW on 1 October oilskin locker; ische F. Regenzeug, recess for oilskins; Funkraum, radl
completely driven consideration of the large 1938, with completion scheduled for 1 October
110 U-BOAT CO STRUCTIO FROM 1935 TO 1939

Above: UI16 (Type XBI before launching in May 1941.
Horchraum, listening room; Nische fur Ledezeug, recess

for leather equipment; Destillatbehalter, distilling chamber; Type XB.
Minenzelle. mine compartment; Untertr;ebzelle, lower fuel tank.
----- ~ also Glossary, page 372.1
-----;---~~.-::-j::;::~~-
!l ''ET ......
I• ... -£I..-.==i
. ~ . J 1. ,.::
J
U·BOAT CONSTRUCTION FROM 1935 TO 1939 III

1940. Building costs would be in the region of 7.5 turrets forward of the bridge. Whichever was
million marks. Type XI and XIA frame lines. chosen, it was essential that a good arc of fLre
------ - The widened stem of Type XA, suggested by HSVA
The desire of the Naval Command OffIce for a forward and aft be achieved from both gun turrets.
balanced fleet, called for a V-cruiser with a strong The new Anglo-German aval Treaty, which was
gun armament (for distant operations), as well as now ready for signature, mentioned in Article 7 the
the large minelaying V-boat. In a letter dated 24 following limitation for V-boats: ' 0 submarine
March 1937, the following requirements for the should exceed 2,000 tons (2,032 metric tons)
V-cruiser were stated: standard water displacement, or be fItted with a
'1. Tasks: offensive operations against gun of greater calibre than 5.1 inches (= 13cm).'
merchantmen in distant waters. The V-cruiser has Consequently, on 7 July 1937, the armament was
to be able to take over the role of a surface ship, and changed to four 12.7cm guns, either in twin turrets
have the fLrepower of an auxiliary cruiser or escort or twin mountings. It was suggested that
ship, when protecting or attacking merchantmen. investigation be made into the pos ibility of an
Her diving abilities should be such that: armament consisting of six 12.7cm guns, in several
(a) She can evade strong enemy action, so that she turrets or in triple mountings. Certain requirements
can be used in offensive operations without support were set out in connection with this installation:
of her own surface vessels. (a) Fire control to be contained within the pressure
(b) She can appear suddenly and unexpectedly hull; capability of remote control of elevation and
when approaching, leaving or changing from one depression; special ignition device to compensate
operational zone to another, and can evade enemy side movement of gun barrel during discharge.
reconnaissance forces. (b) Mechanical handling of ammunition directly to
Compared to a normal-sized V-boat, the V-cruiser each gun from ammunition storage in the pressure
can make the enemy split up his forces very hull. Rate of fire: 10 rounds per barrel per minute.
considerably, her offensive power being very much Type XI B frame lines. Munition supply: if possible, 250 rounds per barrel.
greater. The greater the distance from the epicentre (c) Fire control apparatus to be the same kind as in
of the sea war that she can be employed, the greater Destroyer Type 34.
the disruptive effect will be. The required AA armament consisted of two 3.7cm
'2. Operational territory: Consequently, in the guns in a single mounting with 2,000 shells per gun.
event of a war with France and Russia, the The torpedo armament was to consist of four bow
V-cruiser will be used to best advantage in the tubes and, later, a stern tube, with a total of twelve
following zones: in places adjacent to all theatres of to thirteen torpedoes. Other required specifIcations
war where, because of weakly-organized anti- were:
submarine defence, she can function as a V-boat, Speed surfaced: 20 knots.
and which are so important to the enemy that he s-ID Maximum speed surfaced: 23-25 ~nots for
has to adopt special countermeasures. The principal several hours
territories that come into this category are: continuously.
(a) The American and African shores of the Maximum speed
Atlantic, with the exception of French European submerged: 6-8 knots.
coastal waters, and the seas outside well protected Range surfaced: 20,000-25,000
African harbours such as Casablanca and Dakar. na utical miles at 10
(b) The north European coast as far as the White knots.
Sea (blockade against Russian sea-routes, Range submerged: approximately 100
protection of German ore routes from northern nautical miles at 3
orway). underwater attack. Armament of four bow torpedo knots.
(c) The eastern Mediterranean, if the political tubes is therefore necessary; corresponding storage Diving depth: 100m; if possible,
situation makes operations necessary there. space for reserve torpedoes and/or mines must be 120m.
'3. In order to fulfil 1 and 2, the following provided. Pressure-tight division into three safe
requirements must be met: (d) A long-range RT with direction-fmding compartments. Therefore, as many watertight
(a) Gun armament capable of effectively engaging apparatus which allows full evaluation of our own bulkheads as possible to be provided, so that
an auxiliary cruiser or escort at distances greater radio signals. surface buoyancy would still be feasible if complete
than 10,OOOm. Stress is laid on the ability for rapid (e) Speed: 20 knots crUlsmg speed. Good flooding of one of these watertight compartments
fLring and good gun-laying. The V-boat must be seaworthiness on the surface. should take place.
able to open fLre immediately on surfacing and, (f) Radius of action: 25,000 nautical miles at 10
when necessary, must be able to submerge very knots. Table 10. Specifications of Types Xl, XIA and XIB
rapidly without the need for lengthy preparations. (g) Quarters and supplies suitable for tropical XI XIA XIS
With regard to what may be expected from possible service.
opponents, an armament of approximately four (h) The strength of the V-cruiser must lie, above all, Form displacement
15cm guns, or fIve 12.7cm guns is required. in its diving properties and weaponry.' surfaced (tons) 2,659 2,725.4 2,830.4
(b) AA artillery against low-level attacks. As a On 24 June 1937, 'K' was asked to carry out Length (metres) 105.3 110.3 II5.0
Beam (metres) 9.20 9.20 9.50
V-boat presents a relatively small target, a special preliminary design work for this V-cruiser, which Draught (metres) 5.73 5.73 5.52
defence against high-level attacks is not absolutely was to receive the designation Type Xl. Meanwhile, Vs (knots) 21 21 21
essential. As this kind of boat is not likely to be required specifications were made more specifIC. Ce 407 451 495
used in theatres where heavy air attacks are First, four 15cm guns were demanded (with Cw 237
expected, two 3.7cm guns mounted singly or in a performance similar to the 15cm C/28) in twin N w (shp) 7,819
twin turret are sufficient. turrets (not watertight or pressure-tight!), and
lc) Torpedo armament. The V-cruiser must be positioned in one of two ways: with one turret An attempt should be made to protect the conning
capable of dealing with superior enemy units by forward of and one abaft the bridge, or with both tower against direct hits by 13cm shells striking at
112 V-BOAT CONSTRVCTIO FROM 1935 TO 1939

Type XI. 13 April 1939. o } , 6" a to I} It I' II ;0",
g
G
D B
~ A
-- c
/
I t I I
D C B A
I I
I
- "-
o
<2""
c
--- ----'-------
(') :~.
~ Commander's room
~ in conning tower
an angle of 60°, and to protect the pressure hull by providing interior frames and intermediate the boat, which ensured the quickest possible state
from splinter damage down to one metre below the girders. Apart from the forward and after sections of preparedness for firing, and as great as possible
surface of the water. A diving time of up to one of the boat (only interior frames), the pressure hull independence from weather conditions.
minute would be acceptable. Good surface and was stiffened by interior frames at the top and with The AA armament fulfilled the wishes of 'A': two
submerged stability were. however, essential. exterior frames overall. 3.7cm guns in single mountings on the upper deck
Further requirements concerned installations for The large boat now had many appendages and, in abaft the bridge, and a single 2cm C/30 on the
living quarters, corresponding to lengthy order to give it an acceptable submerged speed of 7 bridge. In order to provide the large gun crews with
operational cruises. knots, the storage battery consisted of 2 X 124 cells entry and exit facilities, two conning-tower hatches
Design work started in 'K' Office in the summer of the largest accumulator type used by the were provided. The bridge was of the same shape as
of 1937, and Type IX was taken as the starting- German Navy, AFA 28 MAL 1000W (12,000 that in Type IX, but was rather higher, and the
point. To achieve the required high maximum amp.hr, with 20 hours discharging). This was conning tower, which formed part of it, was divided
speed, a powerful diesel installation was necessary, situated in the forward sections to counterbalance into two storeys; the upper one being the
and this occasioned a special pressure-hull shape in the massive diesel installation. observation platform, with two periscopes for
the after section of the boat. lOW, for the first time The torpedo armament was similar to that in submerged control of the boat, and two special
in a German U-boat, the double-circle cross-section Type IX, four forward and two stern torpedo tubes. periscopes for artillery spotting; the lower storey
was to be used. The two pressure-hull cylinders, set The number of torpedoes carried was less: the lack forming the commander's quarters. Later, the
side by side, formed one compartment, 6.8m wide of provision of exterior storage limited them to bridge was given a roofed surface-control platform
and 5Am high. In each cylinder it was possible to twelve. What was unique in this type was the with portholes, similar to those used in Italian and
install four large MWM, twelve-cylinder, RS38Zw proposed artillery armament, which was disposed Japanese submarines.
diesel engines. Two diesels were coupled to one in two enclosed twin-turrets forward and aft of the Two special features of the design were, the half-
gearing. In all, the eight diesel engines should give conning tower, so placed as to be able to fire over it. submerged facility, and a small reconnaissance sea-
the boat a maximum of 17,600hp. To render this Rangefmding equipment was placed in an armoured plane. The half-submerged facility had been
large engine housing pressure-tight brought a host action-station on the bridge. Gun turrets and proposed to Igewit by Chief Engineer Hans Vogel
of problems to the designers, and these were solved action-station could be reached from the interior of as early as 24 August 1935, without any particular
U-BOAT CONSTRUCTION FROM 1935 TO 1939 113

/
interest being aroused at the time. In the event of 28 MAL 1000. The armament was to be similar to CONSTRUCTION PLANS TO
surface attack, the half-submerged condition was that of Type IX. The construction specifIcation was
achieved by an installation which could take the as follows. 1939 AND THE FUTURE OF
boat down to a depth where the upper edge of the Length: 92.35m.
pressure hull was one metre below the surface of the Beam: 8.50m. THE U-BOAT
sea. Vogel had demonstrated that shots from Draught: 5.40m. The Z-Plan of January 1939
opposing vessels very quickly lost their velocity in Total displacement surfaced: 2,040.8 tons. The early part of 1938 was notable for the
a small amount of water. Thus, without any Speed surfaced: 18 knots. considerable political tensions that arose. Britain
additional armour, the pressure hull would be safe Ce: 487 was now seen as a potential enemy, !ind had to be
from splinter damage. This 'swimming situation' At the commencement of hostilities in 1939, included in operational considerations. On 12 April
was achieved by buoyancy chambers, placed low however, this project was still in the planning stage 1938, Raeder declared, in discussions during War
down at the sides of the boat, remote from the in 'K' OffIce. Manoeuvres 'A': 'We must now have to take
danger of shell damage.
For reconnaissance purposes, a small unarmed
seaplane (an Ar 231) was to be carried on board. The Type XI, seaplane installation.
aircraft was so constructed that it could be
contained in a pressure-tight tube, 2.25m wide and
7.50m long. A special method of construction
enabled the 1,050kg aircraft to be assembled by
hand on the upper deck: a folding crane on the
starboard side helped to prepare the aircraft, and
was then used for swinging it out and recovering it.
The range of the seaplane was 500km. Use of the
machine, however - as tests with six experimental
prototypes had shown - was only practicable in
good wind and sea conditions. The method of
housing, in a tube placed vertically in the boat's
hull, was regarded as a very satisfactory solution to
a problem that had troubled the builders of foreign
submarines; the German method required no
further construction on the upper deck, save a
single enclosing-hatch.
On 25 September 1937, it was planned to start
building this type and Type XB on 1 October 1938, ,,
with completion scheduled for 1 October 1940.
Deschimag was proposed as the building yard, and \
\
costs were reckoned at 7.5 million marks. However, \
as with Type X B, the design of this complicated

and costly boat took longer than had been
expected. On 1 October 1938, Naval Construction
Adviser Aschmoneit was given special
responsibility for Type XI, which was now to have
special significance in the Z-Plan (see below).
Finally, in 1938, the aval Command Office
demanded a special, large Fleet U-boat, for
operations in conjunction with surface raiders. account of England also, if it comes to a war against
Type IX had originally been designed for this, but Type XII frame lines. France, which means that the basis on which the
its maximum surface speed of 18.2 knots was waging of a sea war depends is altered.' After the
considerably below the 20 knots that had been Czechoslovakia crisis of May 1938, even Hitler, who
requested. A new design was deemed necessary. all along had desired in all circumstances to avoid a
Sketches for a boat of approximately 2,000 tons conflict with Britain, was convinced that in the
displacement were given the designation Type XII. event of war British intervention must be expected.
In outer form, this corresponded to Type IX. It was Prior to discussions with the Supreme Commander-
to have a maximum surface speed of 22 knots and a in-Chief of the avy on 27 May 1938, he desired
submerged speed of 10 knots with a range of 20,000 clarification of the possibilities of accelerating the
nautical miles at 12 knots, performances to be building programme for the Battle Fleet, and of the
achieved by using two ten-cylinder, 3,500hp GW following points:
diesel engines and two 840hp electric motors. (It is '(d) Quick completion of 100 per cent of U-boats,
doubtful, however, if this total capacity of 7,000hp once the word of command has been given.
would have enabled the boat to reach its required '(e) Design priority for V-cruisers and, when the
surface speed. As a comparison, the similarly-sized, designs are satisfactory, rapid construction of a
British Thames class submarines, according to the considerable number.
British fleet handbook, required 10,000hp to '(f) Against the contingency of mobilization, the
attain 22.5 knots.) Apparently, the boat was also to most rapid assembly of a considerable number of
be given an additional diesel-electric propulsion medium boats (Type VIIB) by disposition and
unit, in order to achieve the considerable range ordering of parts and components at various yards
required. Storage batteries were to be 2 X 62 cells (e.g.. Howaldt Yard, Hamburg).'

Glossary: Tauchzelle, ballast tank (water); Trimmzelle hinten, after trimming tank;
Type Vile, 1940. Torpedozelle. torpedo tank; E.-Maschinenraum, electric motor room; Diesel-Motorenraum.
diesel engine room; UnteroHilier-Aaum, NCOs' quarters; Akkus.-Raum, battery room;
Turm, conning tower; zentrale, control room; Proviant, stores; Kuche, galley;
Triebolbunker. fuel-oil bunker; Abort, w.e.; Kommandant, commander; Funk-Raum,
radio room; Horch·Raum, listening room; Trinkwasserzelle, fresh water tank; Spreng-
munition, explosive ammunition; Mine Schiff, amidships. (See also Glossary, page 372.)
I
.-. -------I
I
I
I
Layout of the Junkers air compressor, Compensating Compensating fuel tank 2 (water or fuel)
Rt3-=l Midsh,ps fuel tank 1
(water or fuel)
// Ballast tank 5
. Ballast tank 1 lwaterl- ~ (water or fuell. ...,
~-- .
---.
. --~~--. ~ .- - \
Frame 41/42
Frame 55
.~
l~
Frame 70
I
:-
Ij 1-' ~ ~~r-l--"'~."T"'-"'1 .............,

o 1 ) J I S 6 , , 9 10 " I) IJ II IS loS".
Consequently, at a preliminary conference at 'Re (f). According to existing mobilization orders for a total of 8 VIIB U-boats for two yards
Supreme Naval Command on 25 May, it was stated: planning, 4 Type II, 4 Type VIIB and 2 Type IX new to U-boat construction, Bremer Vulkan,
'Re (d). Negotiations with Britain concerning this boats are planned each month. The Head of BW is Vegesack (U73-U76), and Flender-Werke, Lubeck
point are to begin on 1 October 1938, and be of the opinion that the building of these boats, (U84-U87). On 8 August, a further Type IX boat
concluded by the end of 1938, so that building could necessary for mobilization, can be accelerated if we (Ulll) was added at Deschimag, while at Flender
actually start on 1 January 1939. Prudently, involve smaller yards in initial preparatory the export order of Hapro for a 500-ton submarine
engines and periscopes have already been ordered. constructional work before war begins.' was taken over by the German avy, as U83.
A V (Fuchs) is of the opinion that if the yards were Based on this, an outline 'Improved Reconstruc- The stimulus for going over to Type VIIC, was
to employ more people, 36 boats could be built tion Plan for 1938-1945' (27 June 1938) was the planned installation of an effective sound-
yearly instead of 24. However, in that case, it would increased in scope in view of the imminence of the detection device (S-Gerat, or Special Apparatus),
be necessary to see that the yard got the right type conclusion of the Anglo-German Naval Treaty. In which involved increasing the size of the control
of workers. From 1941, boat deliveries could be as the U-boat sphere, it restricted itself to a desire to room by the distance of half a frame forward of, and
follows: Bremer Vulkan 8 U-boats, Flender-Werke attain only the hoped-for 100 per cent limit_ By the half a frame aft of, the periscope. This meant that
8, Deschimag 10 and GW 10. At the Howaldt- end of 1941, it was planned to have in service 98 the boat was 600mm longer, and involved the
Hamburg Yard, it will first be necessa~y to make U-boats, comprising 32 Type II boats, 2 Type lA, following improvements:
certain alterations to existing workshop facilities. 10 Type VII, 31 Type VII BIC, 21 Type IX, 1 Type 1. Enlarging the rather inadequate dimensions of
This means that by 1942-43, 129 U-boats [= 100 X and 1 Type XI. In anticipation of the desired the conning tower in VIIB by 60mm in width and
per cent] will be available. increase to the 100 per cent parity in U-boats, 8 300mm in length.
'Re (e). A V states that 2 large minelaying Type IXB boats (UlO3-UllO) had been placed in 2. Inclusion of two' pressure-tight negative
U-boats are being built at GW, and 2 U-cruisers at contract with Deschimag on 24 May 1938, and 8 buoyancy tanks, one on the port side and one on the
Deschimag. A larger number of U-cruisers would new Type VIIC (U93-UJ(X)) with GW on 30 May. starboard side, forward of the compensating tanks,
considerably disturb other building projects. At the beginning of June 1938, there followed to improve diving, especially in heavy seas.
U-BOAT CONSTRUCTION FROM 1935 TO 1939 115

3. Enlargement of the interior fuel-oil bunkers by At a meeting of a special Planning Commission in Table 12. Yard planning, 16 December 1938
5.4m 3 . October 1938, the steps necessary for a building-up
The engine installation was to be improved in the of the Fleet were sketched out - significantly, no Type Nos. Yard Delivery dates
following ways: representative of the U-boat arm nor the Air Force
1. Inclusion of an engine-oil purifying installation, (Luftwaffe) belonged to this body. On 1 November lIC 1-8 DWK ( -1.11.39)
lID 1 DWK (1.4.4 2-1.1.44)
to increase reliability and to economize in the use of 1938, Raeder presented Hitler with three 2-13 DWK (1.4.42-1.1.46)
lubricating oil. alternative plans for the building-up of the Fleet to 14-28 DWK (1.4.44-1.1.481
2. Replacing the starboard electrical compressor the end of 1947. Hitler approved the third plan, VlIB/C 1-15 GW I -20.8.401
by a Junkers Compressor, to reduce consumption of which gave a certain building priority to heavy 16-25 GW (10.5.38-1.11.42)
electrical current. An important innovation was naval units, and to U-boats. He made the further 26-39 Br-V (2.6.38-15.10.421
40-53 FI-W (2.6.38-15.10.421
the replacing of the BBC control panels with knife demand that, by the end of 1943, the 6 battleships 54-61 Br-V 11.9.41-1.1.441
switches, which had been used in U-boats since of Type Hand 4 new pocket battleships be given 62-69 FI·W (1.9.41-1.1.441
the First War, by AEG handwheel switch gear. absolute building priority. On 24 ovember, in line 70-80 Br-V (1.4.42-1.9.451
The ideas of the aval War Staff for 'the with this modified, third construction plan, U-boat 81-90 FI·W (1.4.42-1.9.451
prosecution of naval war against England, and the lX 1-13 Deschimag ( -20.3.39)
14-22 Deschimag (29.5.38-5.5.41)
concomitant strategic aims and the building-up of 23-28 Howaldt. Hbg (1.4.41-1.1.441
Table 11. The Z-Plan. third version: V-boat deliveries
the avy' necessitated a 'balanced fleet' for the 29-32 GW (1.4.41-1.1.441
lead-up to war: 'The waging of warfare against Chief of 33-44 Howaldt. Hbg (1.4.42-1.1.461
merchant shipping by all types, from U-boat to the aval By end 45-56 GW (1.4.42-1.1.461
heaviest capital ship, and including air-force units, By end War Staff By end of 1947 57-60 Howaldt. Hbg
Type of 1943 demands of 1945 (full amount) and GW (1.4.44-1.1.471
will make a stronger impre sion than such warfare XB 1-3 GW (1.4.39-27.10.41 )
waged by restricted types ... From an offensive sea IA 2 2 4 GW (1.4.41-1.12.431
2
operation carried out with U-boats only, not a great Jl 48 (33) 60 60 5-9 GW (1.4.42-1.9.451
amount of success is to be expected.' Reasons for VII 10 10 10 XI 1-4 Deschimag (1.4.39-1.8.421
this last statement were given as follows: the VIIB/C 69 190) 90 90 5-6 Deschimag (1.10.40-1.12.43)
IX 26 1601 44 60 7-9 Deschimag 11.4.42-1.12.451
progress made by the British in the held of U-boat XII 1-3 Deschimag 11.9.39-1.4.421
XB 4 19) 9 9
detection (Asdic). and the possibility that, under XI 7 (9) 9 9 4-6 De chi mag (1.10.40-1.10.43)
the terms of the naval treaty, U-boat warfare would XlI 8 (9) 9 9 7-9 Deschimag (1.4.42-1.6.451
have to be waged according to Prize Ordinance
Total 174 233 249
Regulations. (plus 12 V-boat escort ships at Howaldt. ](jel.)
Type 110.
Glossary: Tauchzelle, ballast tank (water); Oberkante f1utschlitzen, overhead
flooding slits; Trimzelle hinten, after trimming tank; klasen, w.e.; Spreng
patronen behalter, explosive cartridge container; MOlorenblvorratstank, engine-oil
tank; Trebolbunker, fuel-oil bunker; Regelbunker, compensating fuel tank;
Trinkwasserzelle. fresh water tank; Munitionbehalter, ammunition compartment;
Echolotbehalter, echo-sounding compartment; Torpedorohr, torpedo tube. lSee
also Glossary. page 372.1
116 U-BOAT CO STRUCTION FROM 1935 TO 1939

requested an agreement by which this increase in The offIce known hitherto as the 'Construction
Type vile frame lines. submarine tonnage would be carried out in stages. OffIce' now became the 'Office for Warship
The German negotiator was not prepared for this, Construction', with complete responsibility for the
but stated (without giving any guarantee) that by building and punctual delivery of all new ships. In
the end of 1939, only 65 per cent at most would be June 1939, Konteradmiral Fuchs was appointed to
achieved. The first orders for the new programme be its head.
followed in January 1939: 13 Type VIIC (Bremer- With preparations starting for the third Type H
Vulkan U77-U82, Flender-Werke U88-U92, GW battleship, the question of abandoning the Anglo-
UlOl-U102); 3 Type XB (GW Ul16-U118); and 4 German aval Treaty became acute. Although, in
Type XI (Deschimag Ul12-Ul15). This meant that reality, there was no pressing need, the Navy was
a total of 64,573 tons had been allocated, so the 100 desirous of a speedy rejection of the treaty so that,
per cent (70,000·ton) figure had still not been without let or hindrance, a total re-armament could
reached. be carried out. Nevertheless, when Hitler
On 17 January 1939, Raeder placed the fmal draft repudiated the treaty on 28 April 1939, it came as a
of the Z·Plan, as the modified third construction complete surprise to Raeder.
plan was now designated, before Hitler; the latter Final V-boat planning in the framework of the
reiterated the priority for battleship construction Z-Plan is shown in Table 13. For organizational
and demanded that six ships of Type H be purposes, these U-boats were to be assembled by
completed by 1944. At this, Raeder appointed the 1948, in 22 flotillas and a training flotilla. From this
erstwhile Head of the Fleet Command (A V) and V-boat planning, by the outbreak of war on 1
architect of the plan, Konteradmiral Fuchs, to be eptember 1939, a total of 136 U-boats were under
Special Delegate for this immense battleship building contract, and only 57 (30 small 250-ton
building programme. However, in spite of the boats, 10 Type VII, 8 Type VIlB, 2 Type IA and 7
special powers that Hitler had granted to the Naval Type IX) were actually in service. The ten IXC
Rearmament Programme, it seemed doubtful if it U-boats of new construction, which had been placed
could be fulftlled in the time required. During the in contract on 7 August 1939, differed from Type
first months, considerable diffIculties were IXB principally in their increased displacement,
noticeable in the provision of labour and material, although they had much the same dimension . This
despite the very involved personal efforts of the was the result of an altered cross- ection shape.
responsible Naval Offtcials. Although of the same beam as Type IXB, the outer
deliveries - if yards worked to full capacity - were

established as hown in Table II.
The 28 additional Type II boats were along the
lines of IIC, but with saddle tanks. This provided
an increase in surface range to 5,680 nautical miles
at 8 knots, which permitted operations off the west
coast of Britain. As had been noticed in Type VII,
the saddle tanks reduced resistance in the higher
speed range (9-12 knots). The bridge was kept to a
low profIle, and this meant that when ubmerged,
despite the increased displacement, there was no
penalty in performance. These boats were given the
designation Type I1D. As shown in Table 12, yard
planning for the period from 16 December 1938
showed only minimal delays.
On 10 December 1938, the negotiations with
Great Britain that had been planned during the
spring began; these concerned the 100 per cent
parity in ubmarines. On 30 December, the British
Admiralty acceded to German wishes, but A Type 110 boat in dock. Note the X:ort nozzle to the left of the starboard propellor.
V-BOAT CONSTRUCTION FROM 1935 TO 1939 117

Type vile.
Glossary: Tauchzel1e. ballast lank (water); Tauchbunker, ballast lank (waler or fuel);
Hecktorpedoraum, stern torpedo room; Treib61bunker. fuel oil bunker; E.-Maschinenraum,
electric motor room; Oieselmolorenraum, diesel engine room; Regelbunker. compensating
fuel tank (water or fuel); Regetzelle, compensating tank (water); Zentrale. control room;
Untenriebzelle, negative buoyancy tank; Funkraum, radio room; Horchraum, listening
room; OHz. Raum. ward-room; Luke. hatch; Kucke. galley; 5chr., locker; K. Sehr., main
periscope; Oberfeldwebelraum, warrant officers' quarters; Unteroffizierraum. NCOs'
quarters; Bugtorpedoraum, bow torpedo room; Trimmzelle. trimming lank; Torpedozelle,
torpedo tank; Trinkwasserzelle, fresh water; Lenz, bilge; Munitions kammer, ammunitIon
compartment; Motoren61vorratstank, engine-oil storage tank; SchmulZwasserzelle, bilge
water; Akkumulatorenraum, accumulator room; Flurboden, floor.
~.~.
A.·~
\¥
Frame 8 Frame ,,' Frame 24 I.
~
ship was carried farther downwards. to almost meet completion could be expected. The results of a Large U-boats (Type IA) 5 boats per month (B&Y
the upper edge of the keel. From the point of view of discussion on 13 October 1933, concerning 'A' New 2, Deschimag and Bremer-Yulkan 2; reserve KMW
water resistance. it would have been better if the Constructions' was that in the event of mobilization Wilhelmshaven).
outer ship had been drawn down to the lower edge work done to date on the 2 large and 6 small Small U-boats (Type IIA) 6 boats per month (DWK
of the keel, although the large ballast keel would U-boats would immediately be completed. Then, 3, GW 3).
not then have been so acces ible. On the other hand. following a certain lapse of time in initial building, To follow on from this timetable of V-boat
the loss in surface speed brought about by this form further large boats would be completed production. in the early part of 1935 it was
was negligible. as the surge impedance of the boat 'commensurate with the utmost production necessary to set out a new construction plan for
was the dominant factor. The wider outer hull capacities of building yards that would be used', i.e. mobilization. However. according to a resolution of
meant an increase in fuel storage by approximately 6 small boats per month. On 12 March 1934, the A 1, Type IA wa to be di continued. and a further
43 tons. and this increased the surface range. The monthly delivery quotas for mobilization building problem was that the anticipated number of
control-room periscope wa eliminated. of large boats was fIxed at 5, which meant a deliveries as stated in the new construction
monthly building of 5,250 tons in the event of Mobilization Plan of 1934 had to be reduced in
Mobilization contingency plans, 1933-39 mobilization. With regard to the small boats. it was accordance with the restricted output capacities of
At the end of 1932. it had been decided that until especially noted that effort should be made to the yards and on account of an anticipated
further notice the aval Rebuilding Programme shorten these delivery times. On 26 November increased demand for destroyers and torpedo-boats
would restrict itself to two U-boat types. El and 1934, BSt prepared a plan for "A' - New in the event of mobilization. Following a discussion
CY707, and that in the event of mobilization these Construction for 1934' together with a distribution at A II on 25 September 1935, it was established:
would be the only two types for which quick of mobilization U-boats among different yards: Large V-boats (Type YII) 4 boats per month.

Small U-boats (Type IIB) 4 boats per month. delivery quantities. From a projected 4 Type VII Following the decision in favour of U-boat Type
In place of Type IIB, a special mobilization boat boats per month, 2 were to be delivered by VIIB, on 25 June 1937, BWi presented a new 'New
IIf 600 tons was to be produced later. Conjecturally, Deschimag, 2 by Bremer-Vulkan; of 4 Type IIB Construction Plan for Mobilization 1937-38':
this project would-have involved U-boat Type VIII, boats, 2 were to be delivered by DWK and 2 by GW. U-boat Type VIIB 4 boats per month (Deschimag 2,
hut no exact details were issued, nor are any It was further established that in the event of GW I, Bremer-Vutkan, Vegesack, 1).
vailable. In the planning that followed, however, mobilization, if necessary and for the length of time U-boat Type IIB 4 boats per month (DWK 1.5, GW
the point did not arise again. it took to fIt-out the proposed auxiliary boats, the 2, Flender-Werke 0.5).
On 27 January 1936, BWi presented a new proposed construction of U37-U44 could be Compared with the previous plans, this timetable
Construction Mobilization Plan for 1936, which suspended, but must subsequently recommence covered a longer period, a consequence of the
corresponded with the 1935 Plan in its monthly with all priority. increased size of contracts awarded to each yard.
On 24 September 1937, it was decided that in the
".ble 13. V-boats in the Z-Plan, flDal version event of mobilization the completion of the
Vlt. following vessels would be speeded up: U56-U63
1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 (Type IIC, DWK); U52-U55 (Type VIIB, GW); U64
and U65 (Type IXB, Deschimag); the U-boat
U ·boats for coastal Testing Dock (Flender) and the experimental ship
waters 32 32 32 32 33 39 45 52 60
V·boats for distant for the projected Type X (GW). Finally,
operations consideration was being given at BWi for a new
IType lA, VII. IX) 34 52 73 88 112 133 157 161 162 Construction Mobilization Plan for 1939. It was
V·boats for special proposed that the new Type IIC should replace
tasks (Type Type IIB. A I urged an extension of the existing
XB, XI, Xli) 6 10 16 22 27 27 27
new plan for 1937-38, by a further 4 Type IX boats.
Totals 66 84 111 130 161 194 229 240 249 It was also decided that future mobilization plans
take account of the projected U-cruiser (Type XI)
Table 14. V-boat organizational intention as at 17 May 1939 and the large, minelaying U-boat (Type X). On 17
January 1938, BWi put out two alternative
Number Establi hment
of boats' Types date proposals for a new Construction Mobilization Plan
for 1939:
1st V-flotilla (at Kiel until 1943, then at Riigenhafenl 9+2 IUIB Operational 'Proposal A':
2nd V-flotilla (Wilhelmshavenl 9+2 VlI. VIIB Operational U-boat Type VIIB 4 boats per month correspond-
:lrd V-Flotilla (at Kiel until 1941 then at Pillau) 9+2 liB Operational ing to 1937-38 Plan.
lth V-flotilla (at Wilhelmshaven until 1941, then at Emdenl 9+2 VIIB/C 1.10.39
Operational
U-boat Type IIC 4 boats per month corresponding
r.th V-flotilla (at Kiel until 1943, then at Memell 9+2 IIB/C
Hth V-flotilla IWilhelmshaven) 9+2 IXA/B from 3.6.39 to 1937-3 Plan.
7th V-Flotilla IKiel) 9+2 VIIB/C from 4.6.40 'Proposal B':
11th V-flotilla lat Wilhelmshaven until 1941, then at Bremerhaven) 9 2 IXB 1.10.40 U-boat Type IX 2 boats per month (the flTst boat
9th V-flotilla (at Kiel until 1943, then at Rugenhafenl 9+2 VIIB/C 1.4.41 after sixteen months).
10th V-Flotilla (Emden) 9+2 VIIC 1.4.42
U-boat Type VIIB 3 boats per month (the flTst boat
11th V-Flotilla IKiel) 9 2 VIIC Middle 2.43
12th V-Flotilla lat Wilhelmshaven until 1942 then Cuxhaven) 9+2 IXB Beginning 1942 after fourteen months).
13th V-Flotilla (Riigenhafen) 9+2 IXB 1943 U-boat Type IIC 2 boats per month (the flTst boat
14th V-Flotilla (Bremerhaven) 9+2 VIIC 1943 after ten months).'
15th V-Flotilla (Riigenhafen) 9+2 VIlC 1943 A decision, however, was not taken on this.
16th V-Flotilla (Emden) 9+2 lXB 1945 The increased possibility of war (Case 'Green '),
17th V-Flotilla (Riigenhafen) 9+2 lID 1944
18th V-Flotilla (Cuxhaven) 7+2 XB 1944 ushered in a number of additional measures
19th V-Flotilla (pillau) 9+2 lID 1946 (proposals for accelerating the construction
20th V-flotilla (Wilhelmshaven) 7+2 XI 1944 programme, deferment of yard laying-down times,
21st V-flotilla (Kiel) 7+2 VIIC,IXB 1945 etc.). However, a new ew Construction
22nd V- flotilla (Bremerhaven) 7+2 XII 1943
lA, IIA, VII
Mobilization Plan, which in the event of war would
Training Flotilla (Neustadt) 15 ?
replace the ambitious Z-Plan, was not presented by
'In the 'number of boats' column, the second figure indicates reserve boats, which would not be manned initially. BWi until 18 February 1939. It was to be valid from
1 April 1939 to 31 March 1941, and called for the
Table 15. The New Construction Plan for Mobilization, Table 17. The New Construction Plan for Mobilization, following monthly deliveries of U-boats:
1934 1937-38 U-boat Type IX 2 boats per month (Deschimag 1.5,
Deli very after month Delivery after month Seebeck and Wesermiinde, 0.5).
U-boat Type VIlC 4 boats per month (GW 1.25,
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Flender-Werke, 1.25, Bremer-Vulkan 1.5).
U-boat Type IlC 3 boats per month (DWK 1.5, GW
Type IA J 2 3 4 5 Type VIl B 1 2 3 3 4 1.5).
Type lIA 2 4 6 6 6 6 6 6 Type liB 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
This plan could be carried out with normal yard
Table 18. The ew Construction Plan for Mobilization of 18 manning. With an increase in yard personnel,
Table J6. The ew Construction Plan for Mobilization, February J939 peacetime contracts for types embodied in the
1935-1936 Delivery after month
Mobilization Plan, which are outlined in the
Deli very after month mobilization preparations, could be accommodated.
JO 11 J2 J3 J4 15 16 17 J8 If, however, other and specially-demanded larger
9 JO 1J 12 13 J4 15 warships were required on the outbreak of war and
Type IX I 2 2 were given building priority, the assumed timetable
Type VII 1 2 3 4 TypeVIIC 1 1 2 3 4
Type liB 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 Type IlC 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
could not be met, and delivery delays would occur in
all the above monthly predictions.
U-BOAT CO STRUCTIO FROM 1935 TO 1939 119

Furbringer and Donitz on U-boat tactics and new one: as early as 1906, the Siemens surface. The boat was controlled from a small
defence Schuckertwerke AG was working on a radio- superstructure that protruded above the surface.
After the disbanding of BU and the distribution of controlled torpedo which was to have a range of On 15 November 1937, Korvettenkapitiin (E) Max
its personnel to various other departments of the 20km.) Valentiner, an experienced and reputable U-boat
Supreme Command, only Werner Fiirbringer was 2. A small torpedo with rocket propulsion. (In commander from the First World War, had drawn
later to make his presence felt by several connection with this, some preliminary work was the attention of the aval Command Office to this
suggestions concerning the development of being carried out at the fLrm of Walter.) invention, in which Construction Adviser Fenselau
U-boats. His particular concern was that the pecial 3. A small torpedo with cable or wire linkage. of the Construction Office had been much involved.
advantage that the U-boat enjoyed, namely that of (Advantage: no chance of the oppo ing vessel On 22 December 1937, the Naval Command Office
being invisible when submerged, would be nullified interfering with it.) Aiming would be carried out gave it as their opinion that a boat of this kind had
by the British development of effective underwater either by visual means (observation through the a limited application for coastal work only, where
detection equipment. He saw it as a hopeless task periscope) or by direction-fmding. its seaworthiness would be better than the existing
for U-boats to expect to blockade Britain without 4. Floating mines, which could be jettisoned in the motor torpedo-boat. A continuous speed of 30
corresponding anti-detection devices. In a path of the opposing ship. knots with a range of 500-1,000 nautical miles was
memorandum from the early part of 1939 entitled In a considered opinion delivered on 27 demanded.
'Which development projects and which September 1938, B (KJeikamp) lent support to By order of the upreme Commander-in-Chief of
operational preparations should be given priority in Fiirbringer's views on the dangers of underwater the avy, following trials on a test model built in
order to prepare for a U-boat blockade against detection; he also went on to emphasize that 'any accordance with Engelmann's suggestions, at the
England?', among other points he stated: use of radio by a U-boat gave an opportunity to the beginning of 1939 a large test boat was placed in
'At the present moment, U-boat blockade of enemy for detection, whether on the way to the contract with Deschimag. The commencement of
England has very little prospect of success for sphere of operations or on the return journey and, hostilities, however, meant that all constructional
Germany. Any contradictory opinion, which takes therefore, use of radio was to be avoided unless work was interrupted and the project was
comfort in the large number of our U-boats or in the absolutely essential'. He too acknowledged the postponed. Fiirbringer nevertheless took this as his
idea that the English U-boat defence will not be necessity for some defensive weapon to be provided starting point in a further item of correspondence,
effective far out into the Atlantic, can be dismissed for U-boats. Of Fiirbringer's suggestions, he saw which, having the approval of Head Office 'B',
as misleading. It can be taken as proven that every the small torpedo with cable or wire linkage as the carried considerable weight: he emphasized that, in
English convoy, no matter whether it operates best means of providing this defence. his opinion, this type of boat had considerable
along the coa t or on the high seas, will be secured A further suggestion of Fiirbringer's was that possibilities in a blockade of Britain. A 600-ton
by defensive forces, fully capable of destroying with success in the U-boat campaign would be more Engelmann-type boat should have the following
certainty any attacking U-boat, even under the easily achieved by close liaison with naval aircraft. properties:
surface.' In his memorandum, he expressed himself as 'Its radius of action should approximate to that
On the other hand, it was abundantly clear to follows: of a U-boat, so that it can be used around the coast
Fiirbringer that the U-boat blockade of Britain In any future war, the tasks of naval aircraft are of England or at even greater distances. Its
represented the sole means of striking a decisive so integral a part of naval operations that, maximum speed is to be more than double that of a
blow against her. Therefore, in his opinion, it was immediately war breaks out, both naval aircraft U-boat and, similarly, its cruising speed. . . . Its
absolutely essential to reinforce efforts to fmd a and warships must be fused together as one force if torpedo armament should be similar to that of a
method of protecting U-boats from underwater serious mishaps are to be avoided.' U-boat of similar size.... Possibly two 10.5cm guns
detection and to remedy their defencelessness Fiirbringer considered it a further danger that, as can be installed.... The low profile and the almost
against attack by escort vessels and submarine- in the First World War, Britain might well succeed completely submerged characteristic of the
chasers. As early as 1936, he had championed the in cutting Germany off from the Atlantic by laying Engelmann boat makes it much less visible than a
development of the so-called Positive Buoyancy mineflelds. If this were to happen, the U-boat U-boat. If a ballast tank is built into the vessel, the
Bombs (Wasserauftriebsbombe, or W AB.) These offensive against merchant shipping would soon boat can be flooded and rest out of sight on the
were small explosive charges that, ejected from a disintegrate, unless supported by reinforcements. bottom. Almost the entire hull shape of the boat is
U-boat, would rise towards the surface and explode As a solution, he suggested the use of large supply beneath the surface and is thereby protected from
beneath the keel of a pursuing vessel. But, in a U-boats. Each would provide a floating base in the artillery hits. The fact that very little of this boat is
letter dated 14 March 1936, the aval Command Atlantic for 5-10 U-boats. These bases would be above the waterline means that it needs only light
Office turned this proposal down as impracticable. replenished by large flying-boats, e corted by armoured protection.... The Engelmann boat is
Their basic objections were the lack of accurate special fighter flying-boats. Fiirbringer admitted especially good for night attacks against convoys.'
detection means (Vertical Direction Finding); the that this idea was somewhat fanciful. However, in There is no doubt that Fiirbringer overestimated
inadequate effect of the suggested 10kg bomb; the his overall evaluation of future possibilities, the capabilities of the planned test vessel and its
discovery of, and great danger to, U-boats in the Fiirbringer rightly saw various weaknesses in potential worth. The 'K' Office replied in these
event of unsuccessful attack with W AB; the limited current thinking concerning a future U-boat terms on 18 September 1939:
possibility of U-boat activity during defensive campaign, and suggested possible solutions that 'The Engelmann boat, in the light of recent
moves at minimum speed; and the excessive risk of later - mostly too late - were proved true. On the preliminary te ts, would seem to be capable of
almost-certain discovery if U-boats carried out other hand, he underestimated the scope for taking over the tasks of motor torpedo-boats, with
offensive attacks at speed. A decent alternative U-boats that would be available during the opening an increased radius of action and ability to function
was suggested in the shape of a homing acoustic phase of the coming war. in inclement weather. The Engelmann boat has a
torpedo to be used as a defensive weapon. I n anticipation of the fact that efforts to nullify further advantage of being less easily visible by the
On 11 March 1938, Furbringer made a further underwater detection of U-boats, and the provision enemy and being harder for their artillery to hit.
proposal for a defensive weapon. In his opinion, the of a suitable defensive means could not be achieved Concerning the further proposals made by 'B',
acoustic torpedo had the disadvantage 'that one's in a short period of time, he suggested fmally in his there is at the moment little prospect of further
opponent, as soon as he realizes that the torpedo is memorandum that construction of a new type of development.... '
homing in on him, can throw overboard an object 'commerce-destroyer' be started, one that could be In 1940, however, an unarmed test boat of
capable of emitting noise'. He proposed therefore: rapidly built, and which could take over the task of approximately 250-tons was placed in contract with
1. A remotely-controlled, small torpedo, running on the U-boat, but in different ways. Fiirbringer had in Deschimag and was completed on 10 April 1941.
the surface, which could be aimed by radio (an aerial mind the Engelmann high-speed boat, whose Concerning the trials that followed, Appendix 7
on the periscope). (Incidentally, this idea was not a spindle-shaped hull lay almost entirely beneath the (Supreme Command Document 1591/41), read at a
120 U-BOAT CONSTRUCTIO FROM 1935 TO 1939

meeting of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Kapitanleutnant Wassner, stated the view of the U-boats, had opted for a 'balanced fleet' in which
avy with Hitler on 13 November 1941, stated: Supreme aval Command on 21 July 1922: the large U-cruisers, large U-boats (Type IX) and
'With the test boat the following questions were 'In my experience, surface U-boat attacks in the medium-sized boats (Type VII B/C) were equally
to be investigated: last years of the war were amongst the most represented. However, Dbnitz kept to his opinion,
I Can a favourable towing-curve be attained with successful. .. In September 1918, while carrying which he had made the basis for all U-boat training.
the actual boat? out surface attacks on two nights, I was successful He was able to demonstrate the probable success of
:l. Is the hoped-for good handling in heavy seas in obtaining nine shots at targets, three of these in hunting in packs during a large convoy exercise
actually a fact? a period of twenty minutes. It is very costly in that took place from 11 to 15 May 1939 between
:1 Are the doubts concerning the longitudinal terms of time for a single U-boat to search for Cape St. Vincent and Ushant, and in which 20
tability, with regard to the small amount of ship convoys in open waters, and it must be considered U-boats took part. As complete long-distance
above water, justified? that the use of a boat in this way is unwise control of the U-boat groups in the operational zone
'The present tests have shown that a favourable (uneconomic). In the future, it will be essential for was not possible at that time, and it was probably
result is to be expected concerning all points. The convoys to be hunted by sizeable numbers of better to judge the situation from close by, it was
conclusion of the tests is imminent. However, in the U-boats acting together, and this will require decided that a number of U-boats then in course of
higher speed ranges the following has emerged: as further increases in signalling techniques.' construction should be fitted with special,
the boat has one propeller only and no basic He agreed with Marschall and Mellenthin that operationally-effective communications equipment,
~tability on account of the small amount of the boat the best U-boat type was the medium Type UBIl!. and these boats would subsequently be used as the
above the waterline, the propeller torque causes a He considered the mo t important technical leaders of U-boat packs. As a result of this
listing effect, which at high revolutions amounts to improvements to be the wakeles torpedo and the suggestion, it was decided that 13 of the Type
13°. At this point, the vertical rudder begins to act long-range, doubling-back torpedo, which could be IXBIC boats being built should be given approp-
as a hydroplane, so it has not been possible to run shot without any tell-tale bubbles and 0 increased riate equipment as so-called 'communications
the boat at top speed. Up to now, a speed of the chances of success in daylight attacks against U-boats'.
approximately 28 knots has been achieved. convoys. The impending war with Britain stimulated
However, the results of the test boat show that a As early as 1922, Wassner had elaborated the Donitz, at the end of August 1939, to et down his
boat with twin propellers would reach the required principles which the Commander-in-Chief, U-Boats, 'Thoughts on the Development of the U-Boat Arm'
specifications and rectify the vertical rudder Kapitan zur See Dbnitz, believed were necessary for and to communicate these in a memorandum to
problem. The turning-circle of the te t boat is too a successful U-boat blockade of Britain. There wa Raeder on 1 September 1939. Taking the same
large. It seems possible to us that an enlargement no doubt in his mind that when war was declared attitude as Fiirbringer, he considered that in the
of the boat by 100 tons would enable it to be used as the convoy ystem would be introduced event of a war with Britain 'the avy and especially
a motor torpedo-boat in adverse weather immediately. Above all, hunting by U-boats in the U-Boat Arm will simply not be in a position to
conditions. Other possibilities for use of this type of packs, in open seas without mutual reporting of carry out the tasks that will be demanded of it.
boat in the War hip Construction Programme have positions and tracking signals was almost Although we hope that war will not break out, we
not yet been evaluated .... ' unthinkable. However, the main objection of the must not assume that the political climate between
Appropriate further development was not Supreme aval Command to this, was the u e of England and Germany will not change greatly in
continued, presumably because in con tructional radio. They considered it important for U-boats to the next few years.... The most significant weapon
terms the expenditure did not seem justified by the maintain radio silence. that can be prepared quickly - compared with the
performance that could be obtained. Another factor As a consequence of U-boat manoeuvres during time a Fleet would take - is the U-boat.' Donitz
may have been the increasing significance of the the winter of 193 139, Donitz demanded 300 then went on to repeat his demand for 100 boats to
high-speed Walter U-boat (see page 16 ). operational U-boats for a convoy war against be ready for operations at all time; this meant a
Meanwhile, the available U-boats had Britain (at anyone time, 100 to be in the proces of minimum of 300 operational U-boats of Types
demonstrated that, despite their con iderably fitting-out and overhaul; 100 to be on the way to, or VII BIC and IX in the ratio of 3: 1.
lesser speeds, they were able to achieve success in returning from, their operational sector; and 100 to 'In addition to these boats, which will bear the
night surface attacks. ight attacks had been be actually operating). 75 per cent of the e should main burden of the U-boat war, there will be a
employed against British convoys with good be of the handy, medium-sized Type VIIB or VlIC. further requirement for approximately 1 artillery
results at the end of the First World War. After This demand had the support of the Fleet Com- U-boats and 30 boats of Type XI I for operations in
examining Kapitanleutnant Marschall's re earches mander, Admiral Bohm, but had little influence the more distant seas, to serve a long-distance
into 'Surface attacks carried out by submarine, upon the planning already embodied in the Z-Plan, reconnai sance vessels liaising with U-boat group
and the requirements that arise from them', which, without consulting the Commander-in-Chief, in the Atlantic, and as Fleet U-boats. This overall
force is ab olutely necessary if a successful war
against England is to be waged. With the numbers
The Engelmann boat VS5. of boats we have at present, and with those
embodied in the Construction Plan as formulated at
.--==---==: -=-'C'TI
~
the moment, this aim is simply not to be achieved.
The Supreme aval Command must therefor~
examine carefully which building tasks can be put
back, the better to serve the interests of the U-boat
Construction Programme; which yards can be
released for U-boat construction; which supply
industries can be used to bolster further U-boat
construction; and whether a high-speed construc-
tion programme, with special regard to Types
VIIBIC and IX, is possible.'
To assist his recommended priority construction
of the U-boat arm, Donitz requested the formation
of a central office with wide-ranging powers, and
directly responsible to the upreme Commander-in-
Chief of the Navy.
U-BOAT CO STRUCTION FROM 1935 TO 1939 121

WAR CONSTRUCTION,
EXPERIENCE AND
DEVELOPMENT, 1939-1943
At flISt, an attempt was made to raise V-boat it envisaged V-boat increases as shown in Table 20.
CONSTRUCTION production in the Mobilization Programme to the This meant that from 1942 an average of 29.3
PROGRAMMES AND maximum without disrupting the other prog- V-boats (attainment of programme) would be
rammes, by ensuring that total works capacity delivered monthly, in the ratio of 1:3 between Types
PROBLEMS, 1939-43 was being used. On11 September 1939, the Supreme IXC and VIlC. The programme was also to include
Commander-in-Chief of the Navy (Raeder) received 16 small, Type lID boats, 4 long-range boats, 4
The Enlarged Programme of October 1939 the suggested programme shown in Table 19. This large minelaying boats and 4 V-boat tankers. In a
With the commencement of hostilities, the would yield a monthly delivery of 4 Type lID, 9.5 further pronouncement of 22 November 1939, a
Mobilization Programme of 1939 got under way. Type VIIC and 4.25 Type IXC, i.e., a total of 17.75 plan was formulated for development in V-boat
Apart from new constructions of motor torpedo- boats per month, or 213 per year. To this figure construction, taking into account losses estimated
boats and motor minesweepers, this called, after could be added 4 V-cruisers of Type XI and 2 large at 10 per cent, as shown in Table 21.
the initial building time, for the yearly delivery of minelaying Type XB. As the programme would carefully, and V-boat deliveries were raised very
24 destroyers, 48 torpedo-boats, 132 minesweepers, take time to get into its stride, 6.5 boats were considerably at the expense of destroyers, torpedo-
and 108 V-boats (24 Type IXC, 48 Type VIlC and scheduled for delivery in 1939, 99 in 1940 and, boats and minesweepers. 'K' called for the following
36 Type IlDl. During the initial phase, the major fmally, 211. 25 boats in 1941. maximum yearly deliveries: 7 destroyers, 9 torpedo-
combatants Bismarck, Tirpitz, Oraf Zeppelin, Prinz However, even this enlarged programme would boats, 60 minesweepers and 275 V-boats, of which
Eugen and Seydlitz, whose building had proceeded be insufficient for Donitz's requirements, especially 68 would be of Type IXC and 207 of Type VIlC, to
considerably, were to be completed. Construction of
all other large ships, especially the new battleships Table 19. The Enlarged 1obilization Programme of 8 Table 20. The Enlarged V-Boat Construction Programme, 6
of the Z-Plan, was immediately stopped, and partly September 1939 October 1939
assembled components were broken down.
Monthly deliveries lID VIfC lXC 1939: 1940: 1941: 1942:
When Britain and France entered the war on 3 small large mall large small large small large
September 1939, the great fear of Donitz had KMW. Kiel 1.5 boats boats boats boats boats boats boats boats
materialized - that of facing the greatest sea (Howaldt)
power in the world without an appropriate fleet. DWK, Kiel 1.5 Jan I 1 12 30
The only sensible measure to be adopted in this GW 2 Feb 2 2 12 27
Schichau, 2 March 2 1 17 28
situation was the rapid build-up of a large V-boat Elbing April I 16 31
force, according to the suggestion already made by Danziger 2.5 May 2 20 28
the Commander of V-Boats. Raeder saw the Werften June 2 3 18 30
wisdom of this, and ordered the establishment of a DW, Hamburg 2 July 1 4 22 29
special Group Office of V-Boat Affairs AG Weser, Bremen 1.5 Aug 2 4 24 30
Bremer Vulkan 1.5 Sept 1 5 26 28
(Seekriegsleitung, or SKL-V) at the Supreme Seebeck, Wesermunde 0.75 Oct 1 2 4 26 31
Naval Command. Donitz wanted to be in the Flender Lubeck 1.25 ov 2 1 5 27 28
controlling position in this Office, as he considered ordseewerke Emden 0.5 Dec 1 2 8 25 29
that only from there could he exert a significant Flensburger SBG 0.75
Total
influence on the realization of his plans. Raeder, Strength 31 33 45 73 50 318 50 667
however, turned him down: in his opinion, the if one took into account an estimated monthly loss
Commander of V-Boats (from October 1939, of 5 per cent. During a discussion at Hitler's give the ratio of 1:3 required by Donitz. This would
Commander-in-Chief, V-Boats) should not be Headquarters in Zoppot on 23 September 1939, the yield a monthly delivery of 23 V-boats.
diverted from the conduct of operations. He did Head of Naval War Staff, Admiral Schniewind, At the beginning of October 1939, it was clear
promise Donitz that the new Office would carry out, called for an enlargement of the programme to that, although German troops had rapidly overrun
without restriction, all demands made from the 20-30 boats per month, this to be achieved by Poland, Britain would want to continue the war. On
theatre of operations; but, sadly, Donitz was in curtailing less-urgent building tasks and by giving 4 October, therefore, Hitler gave top priority in re-
practice excluded quite extensively from V-boat it priority over other sections of the armed services. armament to a larger V-boat programme, and this
development and construction right up to 1943. In addition, he suggested that Russia and Italy be now became the most important task for the
Instead, Raeder chose Vizeadmiral Siemens, who induced to build V-boats for Germany. For political German Navy. On 7 October, the aval War Staff,
had been aval Attache in London from 1937 to reasons (Hitler's peace overtures), a decision was in the presence of all available heads of offices and
1939; consequently, on taking over his office, he postponed for a fortnight, but appropriate plans departments, laid down an 'Enlarged V-boat
was rather poorly informed about the planning and were drawn up immediately by 'K'. The avy's Construction Programme (to commence 6th
problems of V-boat construction. mobilization planning was again re-examined very October 1939)'. Without taking losses into account,
122 WAR CO STRVCTIO ,EXPERIENCE AND DEVELOPMENT, 1939-1943

Table 21. V-boat planned strengths. November 1939 to October 1943" In October 1943. therefore, a grand total of 320
U-boats would be available, of which 75 would be
U-Boat School Boats at training boats. From that date. it was anticipated
Total at start and training disposal of Operational Total at end
Date New arrivals of month boats C-in-C, U-Boats boats 10% losses of month that losses. which had been assessed at 10 per cent,
---------------------------- would rise; but so too would new deliveries, so that
ov 1939 I 57 12 45 15 5 52 a strength of approximately 270 operational
Jan 1940 2 52 18 34 II 3 49 U-boats could be maintained. However, the actual
April 1940 3 51 24 27 9 3 48 monthly losses suffered up to April 1943 were
July 1940 5 51 37 14 5 I 50
Oct 1940 6 63 42 21 7 2 61 considerably lower than had been anticipated,
Jan 1941 13- 88 55 33 11 3 85 amounting to an average of 5.7 per cent of
April 1941 18 113 55 58 19 6 107 operational boats. Consequently. although
Oct 1941 26 191 75 116 39 12 179 additional boats were not supplied in the quantities
Mar 1942 27 253 75 191 64 19 245 hoped for. the number of available U-boats
Oct 1942 29 312 75 237 79 24 288
Mar 1943 29 334 75 259 86 26 308 considerably exceeded the planned number. They
Oct 1943 29 347 75 272 91 27 320 amounted, for example, in March 1943 to 426 boats
·Taking account of losses at 10 per cent per annum. Below: U514 (Type IXC) running constructor's trials.
WAR CONSTRUCTION, EXPERIENCE AND DEVELOPMENT. 1939-1943 123

as compared to an estimated 308; however, the 235 was reorganized in October 1939 and given the new and delays would be absolutely inevitable. Nor had
V-boats fully available for operational work were designation of 'Head OffIce for Warship Construc- attempts to obtain submarines from Japan and
less than the plan called for, because the number of tion' (Hauptamt Kriegschiffbau). Administrative Italy been successful. At an earlier date, a
training boats required and the duration of training sections with special responsibilities for V-boat suggestion that boats be purchased from Russia
had been very much underestimated. construction were formed from the various had been rejected by Hitler, for political reasons.
The implementation of this large plan would departments of 'K'. Special mention should be So, at the beginning of the war, the only additional
mean the complete cessation of merchant ship made of Department K I V, which was responsible strengthening of the V-boat fleet consisted of 3
construction, abandoning the construction of for the overall planning and maintenance of boats that had been intended for export but had
surface ships larger than destroyers (except those V-boats, under the control of Ministerial Counsellor been requisitioned by the avy (2 small Type lIB
that could still be delivered by the end of 1940) and Dr. Schurer, and Department K II V, responsible intended for China, and a large minelaying boat
a curtailment of the building of destroyers, torpedo- for engine and electrical installations in V-boats, which had been constructed by the IvS for Turkey
boats, motor torpedo-boats, minesweepers and under the control of Ministerial Counsellor and was designated VA after the mine shafts had
motor minesweepers. Compared with the Mobiliza- Broking. been altered to fuel tanks).
tion Preparation Plan, which, as a result of To achieve smooth-running construction of a During the course of that December, the requisit
preparatory work carried out so extensively in series of Type VIIC and IXC boats, it was essential conditions for fulfilling the V-boat programm
peacetime, required no further enlargement of that close liaison be maintained between the became even more remote in view of the absolut
capacity, this Enlarged V-Boat Construction various yards. GW (VIlC) and AG Weser (IXC) priority given to the provision of munitions for th
Programme required an additional involvement of were to be responsible for main construction, with Army and the dovetailing of other programmes into
yards and subsidiary industries, and could not be other yards used for assembly. To co-ordinate the the top priority bracket (machine tools, power
achieved without special diversion of personnel and various tasks (supply of materials and assembled plants, roller-bearing production, anti-aircraft
materials. On 10 October 1939, the Supreme construction items, common construction plans, equipment, etc.). In view of the limited reserves of
Commander-in-Chief of the Navy published the etc.), ass\;mbly offIces were set up at GW and AG raw materials (especially tin) held in Germany, th
programme at Hitler's Command Headquarters Wese)', manned by personnel from the large continuous implementation of the Enlarged V-Boat
and demanded raw materials and extra labour as subs,i;diary yards. The largest construction Construction Programme was quite out of th
set out in Table 22. For the furtherance of the programmes went to B&V, which originally had not question, and on 30 December 1939, it was
programme, Raeder demanded that absolute featured at all in the mobilization programme for announced during a conference at Hitler's
priority over all other programmes be secured by a V-boat construction. Their task was to produce 52 Headquarters: 'It has been arranged with the Head
special High Command Decree. Hitler, however, Type VIlC boats per year, and AG Weser's of the Armed Forces High Command that in
was not at the time ready to accede to this: in the approximately 30 Type IX boats. It was decided to anticipation of the Navy receiving the apportioned
opinion of the High Command of the Armed Forces, dispense with Schichau, Elbing, where construction metal (tin) in the next few years, a programme can
the build-up of the Army for the campaign in of mobilization torpedo-boats had been transferred. be carried through that, by 1 January 1942, will
France should have priority, but it was agreed that A total of 20 boats was given to each of the large yield an increase of 316 V-boats over the present
a new look at naval requirements should be made in yards: Schichau, Danzig, Bremer Vulkan, Vegesack number. A fmal decision as to whether this
December 1939. Vntil then, the Enlarged V-Boat (Type VIIC), and DW, Hamburg-Finkenwerder programme is feasible or whether further delays
Construction Programme should carryon without (Type IXC). The medium yards, such as Lubecker must take place, can be postponed until May 1940.'
any special note being made as to its absolute Flenderwerke and ordseewerke, Emden, were This lesser plan was designated 'Restricted
priority. On 23 October 1939, the Head of the High each required to supply approximately 10 boats. In Construction Programme'. The delivery quotas of
Command of the Armed Forces stated that: (a) the all, the construction of VIlC boats was distributed the Enlarged V-Boat Construction Programm
Fuhrer was in agreement with the avy's plan (the among 13 yards, and IXC between 3 yards. From were to be reached at all costs by the end of 1941,
continued construction of 5 large units, the the beginning of the war until the end of 1939, but, because of the shortage of raw materials, thi
restricted mobilization construction plan and the V-boat contracts were placed as shown in Table 23. could only be achieved by accepting delays and
fulfilment of the suggested V-boat programme) and postponements of other projects. In connection
(b) Generalfeldmarschall Goring would have Problems: the Restricted Programme with this, on 22 February 1940, the aval OffIce at
comprehensive powers for the realization of these On 22 November 1939, at a conference with Hitler, Wilhelmshaven stated:
plans. Therefore, no special powers would be the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the avy '1. The very unsatisfactory state of deliveries of
necessary for the V-boat construction programme. reviewed the planned Enlarged V-Boat metals in recent months is certainly going to b
On 25 October, in connection with this, Raeder Construction Programme and indicated that it with us for some considerable time, and obliges th
directed: could be carried out only if certain considerations avy to agree to the Restricted Construction Plan
'1. Following discussions with Chief of Staff 'B' were met. (deadline 1 January 1942), to make the most us
on 24 October, I have made decisions and 1. Fulfilment of all requests for labour. and best possible application of allotted raw
communicated them to those offices involved: the 2. Enlargement of shipyard and industrial capacity materials. This plan will only take account of new
new construction programme of 6 October 1939 is through acquisition of necessary workers and raw constructions which can be completed by 1 January
to be retained. Any difficulties that arise to materials. 1942. The Head of 'K' is in agreement with th
December 1939 are to be settled in such a way that 3. Priority to be given to V-boat programme in Chief of Naval War Staff and with 'A', that the
the V-boat construction task remains the chief one. transportation and distribution of machinery and construction of V-boats must be ensured, with th
Other tasks are unless indispensable raw materials. most acute restriction of all other ship
subordinate to V-boat construction. 4. Attention to be given to claims for increased construction. The establishment of new building
'2. Increase in torpedo production: It is essential repair facilities. yards that could subsequently only build relatively
that this keep pace with the increased V-boat He pointed out that the High Command of the few V-boats will be dispensed with and V-boat
production without any special directives from the Armed Forces had promised an examination of construction can be better passed on to other
Fuhrer. these points for December. But, as early as the next yards.
'3. Skilled workers who have been conscripted conference on 8 December 1939, it was clear that in '2. It is impossible to over-stress the need for an
into the Army are to be returned to work for the the fIrst quarter of 1940 the Navy would receive increase in new construction after 1 January 1942,
avy.' neither the 170,000 tons of pig-iron they had asked as V-boat losses will have to be reckoned on th
In order to realize the avy's war programmes, for, nor the other necessary metals. The approved basis of 5 per cent monthly.
especially the Enlarged V-Boat Construction amount of 140,000 tons meant that the proposed '3. In spite of all these measures, one must still
Programme, the Office for Warship Construction war programme for the avy could not be reached, be prepared for the avy's restricted building
124 WAR CONSTRVCTION, EXPERIE CE A D DEVELOPMENT, 1939-1943

rable 22. Material and labour requirements plan. 10 Table 23. V-boat contracts, September to December 1939
October 1939
23-25 Sept 9-12 Oct 16 Oct 24 Oct 30 Oct 23 Dec
From the second quarter of 1940 (monthly):
Type !ID:
Iron and steel 195.000 tons DWK 16
('opper 5.850 tons Type V1Je
IA'ad 3,900 tons GW 4 8 6
Tin 342 tons Bremer Vulkan 5 6
ickel 274 tons ordseewerke 4
Aluminium 2.950 tons Flensburger SBG 4 4
Howaldt, Kiel 4 8
Additional labour: Danziger Werft 4 4 4
Ship and engine construction 20.000 Schichau. Danzig 4 4
Torpedoes and mines 60,000 Blohm & Voss 8 4 12
Instruments and optics 5,000 Howaldt. Hamburg 12
Other work 35,000 Stiilcken, Hamburg 6
KMW, Wilhelmshaven 12
Total manpower required 120,000' DWK
Type IXe
·Of which 35,000 required immediately AG Weser 6 8
DW, Hamburg 6 6
Seebeck 6
Table 24. The Restricted Construction Programme. 15 June 1940

1940 1941 1942
Type April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar April May June July Aug Sept Oce ov Dec Jan Feb Mar Toeals
lID I 1 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 I I 18
VIIB/C 2 1 1 2 3 3 3 6 9 9 14 9 17 14 13 14 16 12 15 14 9 5 191
VIID 1 2 3 6
IXB/C 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 3 4 4 6 5 6 6 5 3 2 65
IXD 1 I 4
XB I 4
XIV 1 1 4
Totals 3 3 2 6 7 6 8 10 13 12 17 14 21 18 20 20 24 22 21 19 14 7 292
(\n addition to this programme, the construction of a further 20 Type VJJC boats was envisaged, without using any of ehe scarce materials. I
programme to be still further disrupted in terms of carrier Gra! Zeppelin at the end of April 1940 meant
delays and curtailments by the further that these delays could be made good. and the
unsatisfactory supply of raw materials.' delivery dates of the last boats were even advanced.
This Restricted Construction Programme was At GW and AG Weser there were also delays.
promulgated by Raeder on 8 March 1940. In ampli- occasioned by changes of mind \\lith regard to the
fIcation. he stated on 9 March: 'We cannot count on design of the new Types VIlD and IXD. It was
an increase in the numbers provided in the decided that further placing of contracts should be
Restricted Construction Programme. The amount made in such a way that the total U-boat plan could
that can be assumed to be produced by the be fmally completed by 1 January 1942. Flender-
Supplementary V-boat Timetable is. at the most. Werke, Lubeck, were exceptional in that during
300 V-boats. As a matter of urgency. allocations for peacetime they had received sufficient raw
U-boat construction. U-boat torpedoes and mines materials to cope with their long-term programme
must be considered. I shall make a decision by 1 up to and beyond 1 January 1942. As an additional
June 1940 as to the continuation of the U-boat measure. it was intended that Flender take in
programme from 1 January 1942.' V-boat repairs from the autumn of 1940. The
In addition to material supply diffIculties. the previously mentioned delays could only partly be
harsh winter of 1939/40 brought further building made good, and led to a non-attainment of delivery
problems. During V-boat construction. water- quotas so that the number delivered in 1941 fell
pressure tests were delayed or prevented. cables behind that called for in the Enlarged U-Boat
could not be attached to boats lying on the open Construction Programme. Table 24 shows the
slipways or in the water. and heavy components Restricted Construction Programme as at 15 June
could not be installed by crane. Despite ice blasting. 1940.
it was not always possible to carry out launchings On 1 March 1940. the Chief of Naval War Staff
at the appointed time. The proposed completion of 'V' published a Flotilla Plan for the future U-boats.
the Vulcan shipyard at Stettin was fmally It envisaged 10 flotillas of Type VIlB/C. 4 flotillas
abandoned after it had almost come to a standstill of Type IX. 2 training flotillas and 3 school flotillas.
at the end of 1939 through shortage of raw Each V-flotilla should consist of 25 boats. and a
materials and workers. This meant that the new flotilla should not be set up until a full
building of 3 U-boats scheduled to have been complement of boats was available. It was
completed by 1942 had to be abandoned. Progress calculated that a small U-boat would require one
on Type lID construction at DWK was delayed month. and a larger boat two months, from
because of the numerous auxiliary ship commissioning before being ready to join a Admiral Werner Fuchs (left) congratulating Fritz Broking on
conversions. but cessation of work on the aircraft U-flotilla for operations. and that losses of 4 per the occasion of his 65th birthday, 11 March 1942.
WAR CONSTRUCTION. EXPERIENCE AND DEVELOPME T,1939-1943 125

cent must be anticipated. From these calculations 12,000 for maintenance work). Hitler gave his 20-30 boats.' Hitler spoke in favour of boosting
the following disposition was evolved: assent, but absolute priority could not be given to V-boat production, but also stressed the urgency of
Type VIIB/C: U-boat production at this moment. Preparations for the Russian campaign, for which the Army would
Ready No.7 U-Flotilla at Kiel. the invasion of Britain (Operation 'Sealion') was need to have priority: only then could a full
1 March 1941 No.8 U-Flotilla at Konigsberg. now given absolute priority, and shipyards were concentration of means be put at the disposal of the
1 May 1941 No.9 U-Flotilla at Konigsberg. ordered to provide transports and landing barges at Air Force and avy. However, two new priority
1 June 1941 o. 10 V-Flotilla at Danzig. the expense, to some extent, of the U-boat stages (S I and S II) should provide some
1 July 1941 o. 1 V-Flotilla at Kiel (after programme. improvement. At this, Raeder noted sourly: 'It is a
delivery of the small boats). The shortage of skilled workers created a special basic error to allocate non-existent workers. If
1 Sept 1941 o. 11 V-Flotilla at Flensburg. bottleneck in the production of torpedoes and these are not available, no amount of decrees
1 ov 1941 o. 12 V-Flotilla at Hamburg. torpedo tubes - according to a letter to Keitel, concerning stages of priority or any other such
1 Dec 1941 o. 6 V-Flotilla at Danzig (new dated 3 August 1940, it was estimated that 2 Type methods can effect any improvement.'
formation). IX and 21 Type VII boats would be delayed by On 18 March, Raeder tried once more to persuade
1 Jan 1942 o. 5 U-Flotilla at Gotenhafen between four and six months because of the Hitler to strengthen naval re-armament, and stated
(new formation). shortage of torpedo tubes. On 13 August 1940, the clearly the requirements for workers up to the
1 March 1942 o. 14 V-Flotilla at Kiel. Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the avy autumn of 1941. The workers being allocated to the
Type IX requested that this branch of construction be given avy in January 1941, following his appeal of 27
1 Oct 1940 No.2 V-Flotilla at Wilhelmshaven fust priority over all aspects of the programme, or December 1940 could arrest only the growing
(after delivery of boats Type IA the entire V-boat campaign would be in jeopardy shortage of workers, but not ameliorate the
and VII). from October 1940. On 20 August 1940, Hitler shortage of them that already existed. The decree
1 Jan 1941 o. 3 V-Flotilla at Stettin (new ordered a new degree of urgency 'Special Stage' of 20 December 1940, which exempted from call-up
formation). ('SS'), to take precedence over 'First Priority' which personnel engaged in special work for the avy and
1 Sept 1941 o. 4 V-Flotilla at Danzig (new had been somewhat diluted through overuse in a Air Force, was somewhat nullifIed by a
formation). multiplicity of programmes. In this 'SS' stage, the considerably increase in the use of'S' and 'SS'
1 Feb 1942 o. 13 U-Flotilla at Kiel. war construction plan for V-boats, including classifIcations for many undertakings. Approx-
Training flotillas: torpedoe and torpedo tubes, was included imately 10,000 workers on leave would have to
1 Jan 1940 Tactical V-boat operational alongside tank construction, anti-tank weapons and rejoin their branches of the armed services by I
training flotilla in Warnemiinde (9 construction of aircraft of especially important April 1941, which meant that the shortage of
boats of Type 1I). types. In a new decree dated 20 September 1940, workers would continue to rise during the coming
1 April 1940 Training flotilla for gunnery and the maintenance and repair of V-boats was months.
crew training in Travemiinde (only included, as well as training in the use and In the second half of 1940 (following H;tler's
operational V-boats). maintenance of torpedoes. decree of 30 June), supplies of raw materials had
School flotillas: For training, initially Type I I The awarding of contracts for the continuation of been adequate, but were till insuffIcient to meet
boats, then Type VlI boats from the U-boat programme followed on 15 August 1940, the increasing demand. Until now, the V-boat
2nd Flotilla; later, boats from 7th and comprised 60 Type VIlC, 18 Type IXC40, 2 programme had been kept going by careful
Flotilla. Type IXD z and 2 Type XIV. (Type IXC40 was a management, but the supplies allocated by th
By June 1940, the Restricted Construction further development of Type IXC, with a somewhat Supreme Command of the Armed Forces for the
Programme was suffering from inadequate enlarged outer hull and, consequently, an increased second quarter of 1941 had been considera bly lower
distribution of raw materials, lack of skilled fuel supply, and was better equipped.) than had been demanded, and the efforts of Special
workers and tardy extension of the shipyards. Priority Stage'S' had been successful in obtaining
Raeder brought this to Hitler's notice on 4 June, Problems: delivery quotas, 1941-42 only 45-48 per cent of material sought. Th
and the Fiihrer promised that when the campaign in Because preparations had been inadequate, situation with regard to supplies of aluminium and
France was over he would reduce the size of the Operation 'Sealion' was postponed, and in copper was in a similar state.
Army in order to favour the new points of emphasis December 1940 it was decided to attack Ru sia What most affected V-boat construction was th
- the Air Force and the Navy - and would solve (Operation 'Barbarossa') so as to eliminate this last increasing shortage of workers at the yards. It had
the latter's labour problems. On 20 June, Raeder potential opponent before invading Britain. Once to be accepted that in the course of the year th
reiterated the urgent need for immediate again, it was thought that control of the Continent number of deliveries would fall from a high mark of
distribution of the required means, and stressed must take priority over the defeat of Britain, 18 per month in the second quarter to
that if they were not forthcoming further delays reflecting exactly the philosophy that had obtained approximately 15. If, however, the desperately
would occur. at the beginning of the First World War (' ... it is needed workers could be made available, th
Following the capitulation of France, on 29 June important that the war on land be waged number would rise to approximately 20 per month
1940 an immediate allocation of the necessary raw successfully, then can we think of attacking in 1941, and to 24 per month in 1942. Therefore.
materials, workers, works capacity and machine England' - Reichs Chancellor to Admiralty, 27 three further yards (Stettiner Oderwerke, Stettiner
tools was ordered. After France had been occupied, December 1914). But, on 27 December 1940, the Vulcan and Neptun, Rostock) were taken into th
a large supply of raw materials was discovered so Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the avy raised VIIC programme. Following this, steel distribution
that the shortage of non-ferrous metals (especially serious doubts as to the wisdom of embarking upon for the third quarter of 1941 reached the record
copper) was eased. This made it possible to continue 'Barbarossa' before Britain had been defeated. total of 190,000 tons. Table 27 shows the position
the Restricted Construction Programme, which With regard to the V-boat campaign, he told Hitler: as at 15 June 1941. I n the light of this stocktaking,
scheduled approximately 25 boats per month by 1 'The position that U-boat construction has been the Chief of aval War Staff - without actually
January 1942. This number would comprise 18 given in the general framework of total armament placing additional contracts - investigated th
Type VIIC, 5 Type IXCID and 2 boats of other production does not correspond to its great need for further V-boat orders which would yield
types. On 31 July 1940, Raeder asked Hitler for importance. Attempts to increase V-boat 212 operational boats by about the end of May
permission to carryon the V-boat programme at production are thwarted by the chronic lack of 1942,313 by the end of 1942 and 477 by the end of
this level, which would, however, still require more skilled workers. With the number of workers 1943. In this calculation, however, the estimated
materials and workers than had been allotted available at the moment, the monthly maximum average monthly loss of six boats seemed rather
hitherto. The number of workers required would delivery can be only 18, possibly only 12. It is low. If orders were to continue at the present level,
amount to 20,000 (8,000 for new construction and essential that monthly deliveries total at least maintaining the same supposition as to losses, a
126 WAR CO STRVCTION, EXPERIE CE A D DEVELOP E T,1939-1943

I.ble 25. Manpower shortages, 1941 Table 26. Progressive table of iron and steel monthly supplies for the Navy
Other Total 4th quarter 1st quarter 2nd quarter 3rd quarter 4th quarter 1st quarter 2nd quarter
naval naval 1939 1940 1940 1940 1940 1941 1941
armament work
Yards firms trength Required (tons): 160,000 170,000 150,000 145,000 155,000 180,000 229.000
Supplied (tons): 125,000 140.000 120,000 140,000 155,000 155.000 176,000
hnrtage on 1 Feb 1941 8.500 8.000 16.500
I urther requirement to
:11 May 1941 10.500 12,000 22,500
urther requirement to Table 27. U-boats under construction on 15 June 1941
:10 Sept 1941 9.000 9,500 18.500
In use by UAK: Released from Ordered bu t not
lolal requirement 28.000 29,500 57,500 On slip Fitting-out ' Delivered Commissioned U AK control' yet on slips
IA 2
liveries of Types VIIB, VIIC and Cf41. [lA 6
liB 20
IlC 8
lID 16
VII 10
VllB 2 1 21
VIlC 127 25 3 15 53 296
VllD 6
IX 8
IXB 14
IXC 24 12 3 9 6
lXC/40 2 60
IXD, 2
IXD, 6 16
XB 4 4
XIV 6
Total boats completed 189 Operational boats 36

Boats under construction 216 School boats 50
Boats projected 382 Training boats 41
Total 787 Total boats available 127
1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 'After launch. 'By 15 June 1941.
trength of 618 boats could be achieved by the end Navy must have all the workers it required. Hitler Britain, it was only a matter of time before
of 1944. In his efforts to persuade Hitler to provide promised he would solve this problem, and Germany and America would be at war.
more men and supplies for naval re-armament, promised also to release Army personnel to make The considerable increase in deliveries of U-boats
Haeder used the much more pessimistic estimates up U-boat crews. In a communication dated 31 July in the second half of 1941 meant that additional
of the 'K' OffIce, which reflected future 1941 to Keitel and Dr. Todt, Raeder made much of personnel were required for repairs and
d velopment rather more accurately. this discussion and Hitler's approval, and stated maintenance and, on 13 ovember 1941, Raeder
Following the postponement of 'Barbarossa' to among other points: . renewed his request for workers - 'a minimum of
the summer of 1941, occasioned by the Italians' 'The Fuhrer and Supreme Commander of the 20,000 immediately! '. Hitler recognized the
Balkan venture, 'Sealion' was not thought to be Armed Forces has acknowledged in all respects my urgency of the Navy's need, but did nothing to
f asible before the early part of 1942 - and then representations and decided that the U-boat change the situation. The offensive in Russia
only after a successful 'lightning campaign' in the construction programme must be carried through became bogged down in mud, and the severe frosts
":ast_ On 25 July 1941, therefore, Raeder took pains without restrictions. That involves the con- that followed brought it to a halt; Soviet resistance
to renew his representations on behalf of the U-boat struction of 25 U-boats monthly. Furthermore, consolidated, and a quick success in the East
ampaign, which was now the only means of hitting he confirmed to me expressly that the existing became no longer possible. The U-boat construction
t Britain. In addition, he suggested that when the naval strengths as embodied in the U-boat programme was also adversely affected by the
campaign in the East was over, capital ship programme will be fully carried out as his directive harsh winter of 1941/42, and the whole situation
construction (Seydlitz and Grar Zeppelin) be of 14 July dictates ... Bearing in mind the fact that further exacerbated the anticipated breakdown in
r commenced. He emphasised the urgent need for is absolutely vital for a successful prosecution of production during the early part of 1942. U-boat
monthly U-boat deliveries to total at least 25, the V-boat war that, in the next few months, as deliveries now looked as follows.
because a total of 300 operational boats, which with many U-boats as possible are brought to a state of June 1940 3 May 1941 18
a monthly increase of 21 boats and 5 per cent losses operational readiness, I make the request that July 1940 2 June 1941 17
would not be reached until 1 July 1943, would only measures now be taken to reorganize the armament August 1940 7 July 1941 15
r present an effective increase of 6 boats per programme in such a way as to secure the U-boat September 1940 7 August 1941 20
month. Indeed, if losses were 10 per cent, there programme and that necessary directives be issued October 1940 7 September 1941 18
would be no increase at all. Therefore, 21 U-boats so that matters can start immediately the Russian November 1940 7 October 1941 25
per month were an absolute minimum if the arm campaign is over ... ' December 1940 8 November 1941 20
was to carry out its operational tasks. However, after initial successes, the war against January 1941 12 December 1941 21
The chronic labour shortage, amounting at that Russia became a veritable Moloch that increasingly February 1941 8 January 1942 15
time to 25,000 men, meant that from the end of consumed the German war economy, and the hope March 1941 12 February 1942 19
1941 the U-boat programme would only produce that priority might be given to the Navy's needs April 1941 15 March 1942 16
approximately 14 boats per month. Therefore, became more and more remote. Moreover, as had With regard to these problems, Raeder, at a
Raeder asked Hitler for a directive to be sent to the happened in the First World War, the Battle of the conference with Hitler on 13 February 1942 stated:
Reichs Minister for Armaments and Munitions, Dr. Atlantic moved increasingly westwards and, when 'If, after adjustment of the construction
Todt: at the end of the campaign in the East, the the United States began to side more and more with programme to the reduced distribution of raw
WAR CONSTRUCTION, EXPERIE CE AND DEVELOPMENT, 1939-1943 127

materials and re-apportionment of workers for new quarter of 1942, which was approximately 50 per being currently delivered could not be supplied, and
construction and repairs, the position with regard cent of the requirement. This, together with the that copper would have to be withheld from
to workers were to remain stable, the number of intensified equipping of the Army, led to a very construction where it was not absolutely necessary.
V-boats that could be delivered would fall only to considerable curtailment of the Warship In the long term, however, Raeder's dire warnings
19-20. However, as the number of workers will fall Programme. The building of destroyers was did have an effect on Hitler and, on 13 May 1942, he
because of conscription into the armed forces, the especially affected and would have to cease in 1943 spoke out against the suspension of destroyer
monthly number that will be delivered in the course - from 1944, the monthly total of surface ship construction. As a result (through the intervention
of the year will go down to 1&-17.' construction amounted to only 1 motor torpedo- of Speer), the Navy could now receive an additional
In addition to the considerable shortage of steel boat and 2 motor minesweepers. Even V-boat 1,000 tons of copper monthly, and Raeder declared
(153,000 tons monthly in the first quarter of 1942, construction had to be further restricted, and in himsel~ ready to recommence the building of all
150,000 tons monthly in the second quarter of 1942) 1944 only 15 boats (Types VIlC and IXC) or 12-13 suspended vessels from destroyers downwards.
there now occurred serious shortages of copper. Only boats (Types VIlC, IXC and larger boats) were There is no doubt that in the constant tug-of-war
1,600 tons monthly were available for the second delivered monthly. On 12 March 1942, Raeder for raw-material distribution, Raeder had
communicated this threatening development to somewhat dramatized the possible consequences of
Below: Repair and construction work at GW Kiel, 9 July 1942.
Hitler (see Table 28). evertheless, Hitler rejected the shortages, especially for V-boat construction,
Right foreground, VI18 (Type XBI undergoing repairs in the utterly the request for an increase in the quotas for But a very real bottleneck was the shortage of
floating dock. In the background is V227 after launching. the Navy, saying that greater quantities than were skilled workers, and it was this that effectively
restricted production rather than the shortage of approximately 20,000 workers to the armed forces (Organization Todt, the German paramilitary
materials. In order to achieve a delivery quota of 25 had to be taken into account. In connection with construction organization) workers might be
V-boats per month, only about 20,000 tons of steel this, Raeder requested that V-boat construction diverted to naval armament.
and 450 tons of copper were needed, i.e., a fraction and repair work, at least, be protected from the caU- The increasing importance of the V-boat
of the allocation. But to build these 25 boats up. Hitler saw the point that, in the last analysis, campaign and the mounting losses made it
r quired 60,000 workers out of a total naval work V-boat war could be a decisive factor, and imperative that V-boat production be increased to
(orce of about 136,000 in the summer of 1941. suggested that Keitel approach Speer, the new 25 boats per month. The planning of the newly-
Although more and more men were being recruited, MirJister for Armaments, to try to settle the naval formed Main Committee for Ship Construction
the number was never suffIcient in view of the requirements. On 26 August 1942, Hitler lHauptausschuss Schiffbau, or HAS), under the
rapidly-mounting repair and maintenance tasks. questioned Raeder concerning the labour situation. direction of State Counsellor Rudolf Blohm,
Raeder disagreed with the idea of a radical Raeder, disagreeing with Speer, thought it quite forecast only a slow increase (23 boats by the
cessation of all inessential surface vessel building in likely that 8,400 skilled workers from other parts of middle of 1943, 25 boats by the end of 1944). The
order to benefIt the V-boat campaign. Even D6nitz, the armament industry might be given to the naval increasing requirement for labour was to be met
who had spoken out in July 1941 in favour of such a armament programme in exchange for foreign principally by moving certain aspects of the
step after V-boat workers had been transferred to labour, and suggested additionally, that OT industry, such as pressure-hull sections and
work on larger surface vessels, opposed Hitler by components, to the interior and by bringing about
retaining these ships when he became C-in-C of the Table 28. The threatened programme, 12 March 1942 organizational improvements at the yards.
Navy. In effect, he thwarted Hitler's command to Large Medium The further reduced distribution of raw materials
'Scrap them!'. U-boats U-boats Total for the first quarter of 1943 (137,550 tons of steel
The shortage of labour dominated Raeder's and 2,082 tons of copper per month) prompted
efforts to increase V-boat production during the Original production plan I: Raeder to appeal again to Hitler on 22 December
econd half of 1942. On 15 June 1942, he stated that Monthly 6 19 25 1942, announcing serious deficits in completed
Yearly 72 228 300
he was lacking 2,200 workers for V-boat overhauls Production plan after curtailment of Dec 1941: boats. It was decided, however, that V-boat
and 1,000 for surface ship repairs. A further 3,641 Monthly 5 15 20 construction (increased to 25 boats) and V-boat
workers were required for fmishing work on Grar Yearly 60 180 240 repair must continue at the present production
Zeppelin, conversion work on the battleship Reduced production for the 2nd quarter of 1942:' level. Hitler sympathized with the Navy's
Gneisenau and overhauls to the heavy cruiser Prinz Monthly 3 12 15 predicament and hoped that supplies could be
Yearly 36 144 180
Eugen_ The number of workers available at the improved for the second quarter of 1943, but in
V-boat yards permitted completion of only 19 I Continuation of the Restricted Plan as authorized by view of the critical situation in the East, he could
V-boats per month, and the call-up of Hitler. ' Caused by shortages of raw materials. not make any firm promises.
Table 29. HAS Plannjng at 1 December 1942
GW Br.V Fl.W HOW, DWK Danz.W. SchichauB+V Flensb. NSW HOW, Stillcken KMW, Stett. Stett. Neptun Oeschi- OW Seebeck
IDel SBG Hbg. W·havenOderw. Vule. mag
Oct 1 2 1 1 2 1 5 1 2 2
Nov 2 1 1 1 1 2 4 1 1 1 3 2
Dec 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 6 1 1 1 1 2 2
Total 20 21 10 8 11 12 16 53 7 7 9 8 5 24 23
1943:
Jan 2 2 1 1 2 4 2 2
Feb 1 2 1 2 2 5 2 2
March 3 2 1 1 1 4 2 2
April 1 1 1 1 2 5 2 2
May 1 2 1 1 1 2 4 2 2
June 2 2 1 2 2 1 4 1 2 2
July 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 5 1 2 2
Aug 3 2 2 1 1 1 2 4 1 2 2
Sept 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 5 1 2 2
Oct 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 4 1 2 2
Nov 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 4 1 2 2
Dec 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 5 1 1 1 1 2 2 1
Total 22 23 13 10 12 15 22 53 8 8 10 10 7 2 2 4 24 24 5
1944:
Jan 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 4 2 2
Feb 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 4 2 2
March 2 2 1 1 1 2 3 5 2 2
April 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 4 2 2
May 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 4 2 2
June 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 5 2 2
July 4 2 1 1 1 1 2 4 2 2
Aug 4 2 2 1 1 1 3 4 2 2
Sept 3 2 1 1 1 2 5 2 2
Oct 3 2 1 1 1 1 2 4 2 2
Nov 3 2 1 1 1 2 2 4 1 2 2
Dec 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 5 1 1 I 2 2
Total 31 24 13 12 12 15 26 52 9 9 10 9 6 2 8 24 24
1945
Total 26 24 13 13 12 18 26 52 10 9 12 11 13 8 24 24
1946
Total 26 24 13 13 12 18 26 52 10 9 12 II 13 8 24 24
Monthly totals: 1942,238; 1943, 274; 1944.290; 1945, 299; 1946,299. Approx. monthly averages: 1942.20; 1943,23; 1944,24; 19145,25: 1946, 25.
WAR CO STRVCTION, EXPERIENCE AND DEVELOPME T,1939-1943 129

Building U-boats: the construction sequence
Although series production had been agreed upon,
after the outbreak of hostilitie U-boats - like large
ships - were still being built as individual units. In
each building hall, metal plate and spar were
marked out piece by piece to the drawings issued by
the Construction Office, and were ubsequently
worked on to become sections, tanks, platforms,
conning towers and other fini hed components, to
be finally assembled into a complete boat on the
slip. The most important step forward from the
building methods of the Fir t World War, was the
increasing use of arc-welding. Only in a few places
on the outer hull and at the conning-tower fairing
was riveting carried out, and only then because
there were not enough welders available who could
carry out perfect welding of the thinly-galvanized
metal sheeting. As arc-welding needed protection
from the weather and could be carried out more
reliably in favourable conditions, more and more
parts were built in the work hops instead of on the
slips. In this category, the most important single
part was the pres ure hull, which in Type VI [C
can i ted of eight sections and in Type IXC of ten
sections. Each section was made up of four to six
pressure-hull plates, with their shortest sides
curved to fit around the circular frames. Their
maximum thickness was 18.5mm, except beneath
the conning tower where it was increa ed to 22mm.
The plates were welded to the circular supports to
make short cylinders, as can be seen in the
photograph on the right: thi was done by laying
the first two plates on roller jacks, with support
blocks underneath: the longitudinal earn between
these two plates was then welded from the top, i.e..
from the inside of the boat. The next tep was to
place the circular frames on top of the two plates:
these were then correctly lined up and attached to
the plates. The third plate was now attached to this
with bolts and nuts. ow it was possible to rotate
the entire structure so that the next longitudinal
seam came to the bottom, and this too was welded
from the top, again, from the in ide. This
performance was then repeated until the pressure-
hull drum had become a closed cylinder. The last
plate had to be cut to fit into the gap. However, this
measuring was only carried out for the first two
cylinders of each series and then the same sizes
were used for the other ections. The outside edges
Table 30. Section lengths in Types VIIC and IXC
Type VIIC (cml Type IXC (cml
Section J 600 385

Section 2 350 490
Section 3 550 420
ection 4 7JO 700
Section 5 910 630
Section 6 720 770
Section 7 790 630
Section 310 700
Section 9 770
Section 10 280
Right; Pressure-hull plates being welded on to the frames of

U1I6 (Type XB). Far right; U98 (Type Vile) being launched at
GW. 31 August 1940.
130 WAR CO STRUCTION, EXPERIENCE AND DEVELOPME '1',1939-1943

WAR CO STRUCTIO . EXPERIE CE A D DEVELOPME T.1939-1943 131
Above, left and right: Sections for Type IXC. On the left, the prefabricated foreship of UI225 is being manoeuvred into
position at OW; on the right is a Section X with forward pressure bulkhead. Below: Series production of VIIC boats at GW, of the seams were then also welded from above. A
with U94 (rightl prior to launching lying beside the pressure hull of U72. maximum of approximately 250mm were left
unwelded at the ends to make it easier to match the
sections when on the slip. If a bulkhead occurred
within a section, it was assembled together with the
circular frames; bulkheads at the end of a section
were welded-in before the last plate was fitted. If
the section were shut off by a bulkhead at either
end, large components such as tanks, decks, walls
or flooring were built-in and made temporarily
secure before the ends were sealed. The ballast-keel
sections were also built in the workshops, and these
were assembled from vertical and horizontal keel
plates, and transverse girders.
On the slips, these items were fIrst laid on blocks
in the slipway, set up and welded together. At first,
it was found that the thrust of the vertical, middle
keel plate was transmitted to horizontal keel plates
several frames' distance away, and this meant that
a further row of transverse girders had to be welded
in position at the slipway. When work was being
done on Type IXB, two thrusts were encountered in
the same frame area, but this did not in any way
impair the strength of the construction. When it
came to Type XI, the builders went a stage further
and allowed the thrusts from pressure-hull sections,
keel plates and outer hull all to fall in the same area
which, in fact, made possible the assembly of these
parts as complete crude sections in the workshop.
The various pressure-hull sections were now
assembled on the ballast keel. A start was made
with the control room section, which established
the middle part of the boat. After it had been placed
in position it was welded to the keel. Further
sections were now added simultaneously forward
and aft; to assist in this, a sighting line with a
sighting jack was set up at the forward and after
ends of the boat. Welding together of margin seams
was carried out as a simultaneous operation by
several welders in the so-called 'Pilgrims' Step'.
After assembly of the pressure hull, the conning
tower was set up. This meant that the pressure-
tight portion of the boat was now complete, with
the exception of the compensating tanks, which
132 WAR CONSTRUCTION, EXPERIENCE AND DEVELOPMENT, 1939-1943

were an exterior feature, and the hull could now be
Mubjected to a watertightness test to 3 atmos-
pheres overload interior pressure.
Only then was a start made on the fItting out of
the interior, and adding the outer hull. Here, too,
work began in the centre, working out from there to
ach end, First came the heavy pressure-tight
interior compensating and ballast tanks with their
trong transverse bulkheads; then followed the
transverse frames and longitudinal support for the
outer ship. The bow and stern sections of the boat,
which had similarly been prefabricated to such an
'xtent that they had already received their outer
kin, were now attached. Finally, the outer skin of
the mid-ship section was welded, plate by plate, to
the frames, decks and stringers.
The upper deck was assembled almost entirely
from smaller components, and the subsequent
fitting had to be carried out hand-in-hand with the
t·ngine installation, because it was essential to lay
the sizeable tubes and conduits for diesel
ventilation, air-intake and exhaust systems flISt,
because these lay between the pressure hull and the Above: U67 (Type IXC) outside the dry bunker at Lorient. Below. left and right: Two boats shortly before launching, The Type
upper deck. The latter had a wooden floor of 80mm- XB on the left is U119 in January 1942, and, on the right, is a Type VIIC on Slip 3 at Blohm & Voss.
wide planks, which were laid by hand with a 20mm
pace between them. The upper deck trapdoors •
were flIst prepared in accordance with the exact
positions of the hatches so that they would be a
good fit in the deck apertures above them.
ormally, building-slip time did not extend to this
work and consequently, after launching, a number
of workers were obliged to carry out completion
work on the upper deck. The conning-tower fairing,
on the other hand, had already been completely
assembled in the workshops, and had only to be
secured like a hood over the conning tower and air-
masts.
Items for interior fittings were prefabricated in
such a way that they could almost all be brought
aboard in sections through the narrow hatch
openings. The largest hatch was that for the diesel-
engine installation, and all bulky items were
brought in through this. As it was desirable to leave
this open as long as possible, there tended to be a
congestion here after the welding, because the
exhaust heads and silencing installations had still
to be fitted. In order that electric motors and other
large components could be brought into the electro-
control compartment, the bulkhead between the
diesel compartment and this area was given a large
right-angled opening, which was later closed and
welded-up. Then such items as thrust bearings,
shaft couplings, electric motors, main
switchboards, and diesel engines with diesel
couplings were set up and installed.
Work was being carried out simultaneously in the
other compartments, and it was necessary to
formulate an exact timetable so as to avoid one
operation hindering another, especially when
installing tubes and cables. Although the
construction offices issued general drawings for
instellation of tubes and cables, no precise
instructivns with exact measurements were
furni~hed, and these had to be worked out on the
spot by the engineers and technicians, which
certainly saved design-office time, but made more
work for the dockyard staff. The after sections of
WAR CONSTRUCTION, EXPERIENCE AND DEVELOPMENT, 1939-1943 133

the torpedo tubes were brought in through the
torpedo·hatch opening, and then the coamings for
these hatches were welded into place. The last
sizeable task was the installation of batteries
through a special hatch. Launching took place as
soon as possible in order to free the slip, but this
increased the fltting·out time at the quayside and
the distance that material and workers had to
travel.
Following delivery and commissioning, all
U-boats were given a thorough testing by the
U·boat Acceptance Commission (Ubootabnahme·
kommando, or UAK), which included, if possible,
a pressure·dock test. The pressure dock had been
built by Flenderwerke in 1937-38, and consisted of
a pressure-cylinder of 12m diameter resting in a
floating dock. A U·boat could be taken into the
submerged dock, with the cylinder half full of
water, and secured; the dock was then raised and
the boat was shored up as in a normal floating dock.
The dock was then lowered once again, the sluice
was opened and the boat was subjected to water
compression, which took 90-120 minutes. On board
would be 9-12 men, including the commander, the
chief engineer and one or two representatives of the
UAK. The dock was used to establish any
shortcomings in construction and lack of
watertightness, but could not of course be used to
test and evaluate maximum strength qualities.
From 1941, as a result of the grievous shortage of
workers, the construction of sections and outer·hull
parts was handed over to steel construction plants
outside the yards. In this way, work forces and
yard installations in other areas could playa direct
part in U·boat construction. The difficulties of
transporting longer sections or those with
projections, such as longitudinal bulkheads, decks,
platforms, etc., resulted in these being redesigned
sectionally for assembly on the slip. The
transporting of sections and the larger components
for the outer hull was carried out by barges on
canals.
In 1942-43. a total of 24 steel firms were engaged
in section and outer·hull construction for the 16
yards building Type VUC boats. Almo t all
production of components had been handed over to
firms outside the shipbuilding industry, and this
left the shipbuilders free to concentrate on yard
assembly work.
These innovations led, notably in the medium
yards, to a considerable saving in work time from
1942. For example, the Flensburg Shipbuilding
Company required for the first 8 Type VUC boats
Ito July 1942) approximately 400,000 yard·hours
per boat, when most miscellaneous tasks, excluding
work on delivered engines, had to be completed at
the yard. Engines were excluded because they were
delivered fully assembled. In the case of the ninth
boat, by order of the Construction Office,
approximately 35,000 hours were subcontracted,
and simultaneously the piece·work system at the
yard was examined from a time and motion aspect
and modified. By the time of the 22nd boat at the
beginning of 1944, production methods had been so
well improved that no decrease in boat-hours from
the existing 240,000 could be expected. At the same
time, the best yard, Blohm & Voss, managed with
136
Type vile boats at
launching. Far left: U442 at
Schichau Werft, Danzig in
January 1942. Left: A boat
leaving Slip 7 at Blohm &
Voss. Below, left: In the
winter of 1943/1944. Top
right: At the Howaldt Yard,
Kiel. Below: U69 on 19
September 1940 at GW. In
the left of the photograph is
U70 under construction.
Right: The commissionmg
ceremony for U80 (Type
VIIC) at the Vegesack Works
IBremer-Vulkan) on 8 April
1941. Middle: UI11IType
IXBI in spring 1941. Far
right: U651 (Type VIIC), the
first boat from Howaldt
Werke, Hamburg, after a
submerged trimming test at
the beginning of 1941.
Below: U205IType VIIC)
after launching at GW on 20
March 1941.
138 WAR CO STRUCTIO . EXPERIE CE A D DEVELOPMENT, 1939-1943

180,000 hours per boat. Even if this difference in
hours per boat was the result of the greater
facilities at B&V, and their more comprehensive
subcontracting to outside firms, it is still certain
that a very considerable portion of the hours saved
can be attributed to the considerably larger quota
of boats built at B&V, which made possible a more
thorough specialization and distribution of work
processes. In being called upon to deliver 1 boat per
week, the assembly workers were performing
similar work at least every seven days, so that total
work schedules could be formulated according to an
exact timetable, and the course of construction
could follow an absolutely inevitable plan. A
statement of costs at the large B&V yard at the end
of 1943 ran as follows.
Work hours for a single 180,000 marks (at 1

V £IC boat 180,000 mark per hour)
State addition 160 per cent 288,000 marks
Materials and delivered
fInished components
including engines 1,420,000 marks
Profit 5 per cent 95,000 marks
Total price 1,983,000 marks
To be sure, the considerable differences in work

hours did not affect total costs per boat as much as
might have been expected, because the State
addition was correspondingly smaller, as a result of
the reduced expenditure on works organization, and

the subcontracting of certain work to smaller
yards, to be carried out in their own workshops,
which reduced transport costs.
On 8 February 1942, the Reichs Minister for
Armaments and Munitions, Dr. 'Fritz Todt, was
killed in a flying accident and, next day, Hitler
named as his successor the 37-year-old Albert
Speer, the 'architect' for the redesigning of Berlin.
Speer began immediately to organize the
armaments industry afresh, taking control of it
more positively in his Ministry. His first step was
to ensure that various orders, which hitherto had
been sent by various branches of the armed forces
direct to industry, should now be sent to the
Armaments Ministry for distribution to appro-
priate firms. In order to control procurement.
he extended the system of Production Committees,
and completed it by setting up bodies which should
supply the committees. As early as 20 March 1942,
Speer suggested to Hitler that this system be
extended to naval armaments, and Raeder agreed
with this. Consequently, in the early part of 1942,
two main committees were set up, Ship Construc-
tion (Schiffbau), under State Counsellor Rudolf
Blohm (B&V), and Special aval Equipment
(Marinesondergeriit), under Paulus. A special Main
Committee for U-Boats was considered by Speer
and Raeder, but was not actually formed
The Main Committee for Ship Construction, a
civil authority for the industry, was subdivided into
lower committees (Special Committees): Warship
Construction (Kabelac), Merchant Ship
Construction (Scholz), Ships' Engines and Boilers
(lmmich), Ships' Electronics (Buff), Coastal and
River Boats, and small boats (Volker), Special Ships
and Amphibious Installations (Wendel). In June
1942, there followed, as an additional body, the
Special Committee for Concrete Ships. In place of a
Special Main Commission for U-Boats, so-called
Work Committees were set up for the most
Table 31. Yard bours expenditure
IBest achievements as at 1 April 1943)
Ship Engine
Type construction construction Total
VJJC 147,000' 107,000' 254,000
VIIC/41 150,000' 105,000' 255,000
VJJC/42 175,000' 115,000' 290,000
VIID 271,000' 130,000' 401,000
VIIF 235,000' 125.000' 360,000
IXC/40 200.500' 141,300' 341,800
IXD2 257,000' 167,300' 424,300
XB 525,000' 320,000' 845,000
XIV 400,000 164,000' 564,000
WKj202 133,000 87,500' 220,500
XVIIG/B 115,000 85,000' 200,000
XVIII 564,000 196,000' 760,000
I Components made of steel uch as ballast keels, pressure-

hull sections, forward and after parts of boats, upper decks,
conning towers, torpedo hatches and exterior tanks de-
livered from outside sources.
'Without main engines, but including the installation of the
electrical system and all tubing.
, AIl steel components prepared at the yard itself.
• Steel components apart from Section 4a, upper deck and
ballast keel supplied by outside sources.
'All steel components built at the yard.
'Including manufacture of the main engines (65,000 hours).
'Hours excluding time spent on the Walter System.
140
Left and above: Completed Type VIIC boats training in the Baltic, summer 1942.
Work hours on Types VIIC and IXC.
SOO.OOO I----+--------~r_""
GW
WAR CONSTRUCTION, EXPERIENCE AND DEVELOPME T,1939-1943 141

The hulls of the boats were dismantled and
lightened as far as possible, and were then turned
Organization of U-boat construction at the end of 1942. through an angle of 90° to achieve the lowest
possible height for travelling. They proceeded from
Kiel along the Kiel Canal to Hamburg, and were
SKL U II K-Amt • Main Committee for towed from there along the Elbe to a point near
(Military requirementsl • (T d' ) Shipbuilding Dresden. As the draught for shipping on the upper
1 yP' egn, 1'' +'00 Elbe and Danube was limited to approximately
1.2m, each U-boat hull was placed on its side on a
raft made from five pontoons, each approximately
3.1m long and 104m high. At Dresden, each raft was
Operations - - - - - - - - -~Additional work .. • Drawing offices at the yards pulled far enough out of the water for the pontoons
(Commander of U-boats) (Completion) (Drawing back-up and to be removed, then each hull was loaded on to two
building preparations) Kuhlemeier transport vehicles, each of which could
be steered independently. The vehicles inched their
way along the autobahn to Ingolstadt, an operation
that was especially critical at curves and when
crossing bridges. The vehicles were powered by
U23,1944. 150hp Kiilble tractors and Luftwaffe Faun engines,
and these were used either four in line or in two
Flooding-slit arrangements on the starboard side of Black Sea U·boats
parallel sets according to the road and weather
conditions. On the autobahn, the convoy could
------ .. =====~= .. = U9
achieve a top speed of 8km per hour, and it moved
------ ------_ .. - by day and night, even when there was danger of air
U79 -- . =============__-"== U24
attack. A breakdown would no doubt have brought
about the loss of a U-boat and a lengthy blocking of
- ======.=::= U20
the autobahn, but the undertaking was carried out
with extreme precision and without delays.
Meanwhile, the pontoons were sent by rail from
Dresden to Ingolstadt, where they were secured to
the appropriate hull. As the level of water in th
Danube was low, the flIst boat could not leave th
slip-vehicle until additional pontoons had been
employed.
In Linz, after the pontoons had been removed, th
boats were brought to a normal upright position by
important U-boat types, and these were affiliated to weight after removing engines, keels, sections of flooding its main diving tank. The pontoons wer
the Special Committees for Warship Construction; upper decks, conning tower, hydroplanes, attached once more, and the boats were lifted from
there was thus a Work Committee U VIIC under propellers and other items of this type would be 140 the water. Now the dismantled components
Dir. Cords; Work Committee U IX under Dir. Neeff tons, which could just about be carried overland on (engines, batteries, conning towers, etc.), but not
and, in the early part of 1943, the Work Committee two special 70-ton vehicles. The manufacture of the ballast-keels, were reassembled and the boats,
U XX under Dir. Kabelac. At the end of 1942, simple pontoons for transporting the boats on the in the interests of camouflage and security, wer
U-boat construction was organized as shown in the Elbe and the Danube was also discussed. The total towed between two wherries along the Danub
diagram. time from dismantling in the Baltic to a state of towards Galatz. Here, in a floating dock, th
readiness for operations in the Black Sea was pontoons were detached and the keels were welded
U-boats for the Black Sea estimated at approximately ten months, of which on; fmally, the completed boats were taken over by
As early as 18 March 1941, consideration had been approximately six weeks would be spent in transit. their crews. After arriving at the operational bas
given to the idea of sending small U-boats to But Hitler decided not to proceed with the long- of Constanza, the boats were recommissioned in
Rumania, for use in the Black Sea during the term project. If the almost complete mastery the October 1942.
planned attack against Russia. The idea stemmed Russians enjoyed in the Black Sea were to be On 26 August 1942, Hitler spoke in favour of a
from the activities of the Germano-American challenged, then the rapid transportation of MTBs further 3 small U-boats for use in the Black Sea, as
Petroleum Company, which operated tanker barges and minesweepers, Italian miniature submarines, they might have a favourable political effect on
on the River Danube. However, the voyage would the Finnish small submarine Saukko (by rail) and Turkish opinion. Raeder agreed with this and gav
have taken 4Y..-5 months and, as a relatively short other small vessels was vital. Nevertheless, in the orders that U18, U20 and U23 be sent to the Black
war with Russia was envisaged, it seemed unlikely early part of 1942, three 250-ton Type lIB U-boats Sea. These boats were in transit during the winter
that the boats would arrive in the Black Sea in time were allocated for transportation, the intention of 1942/43, which brought additional transport
to play an operational role. For this reason, the being to assemble them at Linz, which lies on the problems, and they came into service in Constanza
Naval War Staff shelved the plan. Danube, approximately 150km west of Vienna. It in May 1943. A total of 6 U-boats were used
However, in the autumn of 1941, when it had was hoped that the time needed to transport them without loss in the Black Sea until Rumania ceased
become clear that no decisive blow had been struck could be shortened. Ministerial Counsellor active participation in the war; although they did
in Russia, the use of operational U-boats during the Dykmann of Supreme Naval Command was given not achieve spectacular success, they did exert an
planned offensive against the south Russian front the task of organizing the affair, and the engineer important operational pressure on Soviet naval
was discussed again. On 12 December 1941, the Karl Baumgarten worked out a detailed plan at the forces, and sank supply vessels and tankers. On 20
feasibility and time requirements of transporting Ship Construction OffIce of DWK. By the early August 1944, U9 was sunk in Constanza harbour by
U-boats by land and water to the Black Sea were summer of 1942, preliminary work was so far Soviet air attack. U18 and U24 were damaged and,
discussed. Investigation established that only advanced that U9, U19 and U24 could be taken out four days later, when the harbour was evacuated
Types IIA and lIB would be suitable, as the dead of service and broken down by DWK. they were blown up by their crews. U19, U20 and

U23 were in use until their fuel was expended and, Although, in the interests of safety, the T III had that it would not easily be solved. It was reckoned
after Turkey had refused to purchase them, they been envisaged as running at a shallow depth, a that this torpedo, designated G7es 'Zaunkbnig' (T
were sunk off Turkey on 2 September 1944. series of magnetic detonations at the beginning of V) (sound homing torpedo), could not enter service
1943 confrrmed the effIciency of the new proximity until the beginning of 1944 at the earliest. At this
pistol. The introduction of the G7a Fat was also time, however, the state of the U-boat campaign
hailed as a complete success by Dbnitz who compelled Dbnitz to demand that 'Zaunkbnig' be
AR EXPERIENCE: recorded a hit rate of 75 per cent. Meanwhile, the ready by 1 October 1943 and, on 13 July, he asked
TORPEDOES, DETECTION conditions in which U-boats had to carry out for it to be ready by 1 August. Amazingly, 80
attacks had worsened, so that the effectiveness of acoustic torpedoes were ready for service on that
AND PROTECTION these new weapons was reduced. It was becoming date. The specifIcations of the torpedo were: speed
essential to provide a defensive weapon against the 24.5 knots; running range 5-5.7km depending on
Torpedoes growing offensive power of escort vessels and battery heating; proximity-and-contact pistol. It
At the beginning of the war, both G7a (T I) and G7e Support Groups, which were preventing U-boats was suitable for use from any position against any
(T II) torpedoes were available. Each contained from approaching convoys. vessel having a speed of 10-18 knots.
280kg of gun-cotton 36, which could be detonated It had long been thought that accuracy of frring Unfortunately, the short arming-range made it
by impact fuze (Aufschlagzundung, or AZ) or would be improved if an acoustic, homing torpedo necessary for the boat to dive deep after frring,
magnetic proximity fuze (Magnetzundung-Pistole, were used, but only the development of ultra-sonic which severely reduced the chances of observing
or MZ-Pi). With MZ, the increased magnetic field receivers and practical amplifiers could make this the result of the attack, and this led to a
surrounding the iron mass of a ship activated a possible. After the Communications Test Institute considerable over-estimation of the effectiveness of
pistol, which exploded the charge under the ship's (Nachrichtenmittelversuchsanstalt, or NVA) had this weapon, as very many near-miss detonations
keel. A switch regulated the pistol's sensitivity to laid down the physical principles, Atlas, Elac and were reported as hits. From 20 to 24 September
differing strengths of magnetic fIelds. When the AEG began work on the development of suitable 1943, of 24 acoustic torpedoes frred only four hit the
torpedoes were used operationally, however, a direction-fmding receivers in 1934, the intention target, yet reports spoke of the certain destruction
multiplicity of premature detonations and failures being to produce a torpedo with a speed greater of 12 destroyers.
occurred, and these reached catastrophic than 30 knots for use against warships. Laboratory While the main task of the Torpedo Test
proportions during the Norwegian campaign of models were available at these three frrms by the Establishment (TVA) at Gotenhafen was to test
April 1940. After restrictions on their use had been beginning of the war. Development was then and improve the acoustic torpedo, work was being
enforced, an order was given in June 1940 that handed over to TV A-Eckernfbrde, but progress here carried out on a further development - 'Zaunkbnig
neither type of torpedo be used except with the AZ was slow, because they were engaged in other work 2' (T XI). This had an improved guidance system
impact/contact system. Both the contact pistol and and were short of personnel. The objective was which was less vulnerable to jamming from
the torpedo's depth-keeping were unreliable - a modifIed so that the torpedo could be used against equipment towed behind enemy vessels. At the
consequence, in part, of inadequate operational merchant shipping, which necessitated increasing same time, other frrms were carrying out tests on a
tests by the TVA. The fluctuations in depth- sensitivity at the cost of reducing the speed of the number of improvements, the most important of
keeping had been recognized by that body, but had torpedo to 20 knots. The weapon was tested in which bore such cover names as 'Pfau', 'Lerche' and
been dismissed as of no great importance in the 1940, and development was switched to Gotenhafen 'Geier'. 'Pfau' (AEG) was a passive-acoustic
development of the new magnetic torpedoes. in 1941, being intensified by the formation of a guidance system that, in contrast to the
Furthermore, new developments of other torpedo 'Special Department for Acoustic Torpedoes'. The 'Zaunkbnig's' 'Amsel' (Magneto-Striction Receiver
types with higher speeds and better depth-keeping frrst model, G7es 'Falke' (T IV), for use against - Amplitude Method), used crystal microphones
qualities, to replace the G7a, were considered to be merchant ships was available in t\1e late autumn of and a phase-differential method. Development had
more important. These new types were the G7a6 1942. It had a contact fuze, a speed of 20 knots and begun in 1937 - originally for aerial torpedoes (F
(six-cylinder engine, maximum 420hp) and G6a a range of 5-7krn, depending on storage battery 5). When the war started, development work was
(3krn at 50 knots). These specifications according to heating. The weight of the warhead had to be shelved for some time in favour of other projects.
a statement of 30 October 1934! reduced to 274kg because the sound-detection gear 'Lerche' (AEG) had a passive homing-head with a
During 1941 and 1942, when the U-boats had had to be accommodated in the head. It could be remotely-controlled directional microphone (swivel-
their greatest successes, only the contact system used against deep-draught vessels moving at 7-13 mounted magneto-strictive microphone, able to
was used. Because of the uncertain depth-keeping, knots, from a bearing 0°-180°. but was not suitable focus critically) connected to the V-boat by a wire.
both types of torpedo were usually set to run fairly for use in the tropics. The frrst tests under This enabled the torpedo to be steered to a target
shallow, which further reduced the effect of the operational conditions took place with 6 U-boats in from a distance of 6krn' The steering wire was of
dl!tonation. February-March 1943. As a safety precaution with hard copper with a dimeter of 0.45mm with Igelit
At the beginning of November 1942, a new, regard to the lack of a safety-device on the pistol insulation, and ran through the torpedo's hollow
improved magnetic proximity fuze, Pi39H (Pi2), while still in the torpedo tube, its use was restricted propeller-shaft. 'Geier' (Atlas-Minerva) had an
which was also effective with contact detonator, to the stern tubes. Only three torpedoes were frred active homing-head with two sending and two
was ready for operational use with a specially and two of them secured hits. Following certain receiving oscillators. It was difficult to jam, but its
developed, electrically-propelled torpedo (T III); it changes (enlargement of the arming-range, i.e., the sensitivity range was essentially smaller than that
was acknowledged that there were still certain distance the torpedo must run before the detonator of 'Zaunkbnig', and it was necessary to steer the
weaknesses present in this development. At the will function) the 'Falke' was ready for general weapon, passive-acoustically, to a distance of
same time, a device had been prepared for the G7a operational use on 1 July 1943. approximately 250m from the target. A forerunner
that permitted running in circles. The torpedo thus The heavy U-boat losses sustained in May 1943 of 'Geier' was the active homing-head 'Boje',
modifIed was designated G7a Fat (Federapparat, or made it imperative that an acoustic torpedo be developed by the Luftwaffe.
spring-loaded), and could be set to run in the developed, suitable for use against fast-moving Other special guidance systems, proposed or
following ways: circling to right or left, circle long warships. It was necessary that the torpedo have a actually developed before the war ended were:
or short and an initial straight run of 500-500m up higher speed and a proximity fuze because the 1. The 'Ackermann' 'Wake-Homer' (Prof.
to 15krn, surface speed = 30 knots, running shallow draught of its intended targets and the Ackermann, Danzig Technical College), guidance
distance 12.5krn. The G7a was at first permitted need to run deeper to avoid sound interference according to the variable pressure-relationships of
ol}1y for night attacks because it left a slight meant that a contact pistol could not be considered. vessels' wash; and 'Ibis' (Dr. Grutzmacher,
bubble-wake, and its introduction into service was The last-mentioned problem was the most diffIcult, Imperial Physical-Technical Institute) guidance
to be concealed for as long as possible. and the very high incidence of failures indicated through ultrasonic noise echoes in vessels' wake.

2. 'Marchen' (Prof. Schwenkhagen, Danzig torpedoes. A small number of G5e (a 5m-long In 1937, work on the 'closed-cycle torpedo' wa
Technical College), guidance by magnetic field electric torpedo with one battery only and recommenced, this time at the fITm of Junker .
distortion in the neighbourhood of ships. correspondingly shorter range) were made availahle Here, Dr. O. Hohlfelder carried out similar
3. 'Taube' (S&H), passive-acoustic guidance using for the small Walter submarines (see page 175). development work for the Supreme av I
very deep natural frequencies (50-100Hz.). These boats were also to be equipped with the fast Command. The objective was to produce a high
4. 'Fasan' (Dr. Unkelbach, OKM), independent Walter torpedoes, which were propelled by special performance torpedo with a circuit-drive in the shell
torpedo-triggering using the reflection of ultrasonic turbines. of a G7a. After extensive studies, based in part on
impulses in vessels' wake. Walter torpedo development began in 1938 with the research of Prof. Becker and Dr. Kauffmann, an
5. 'Kondor', a combination of the passive 'Geier' the preparation of project studies on engine and eight-cylinder V-engine of a maximum 425hp at
and 'Fasan' for long-range torpedoes. pulse-jet drive. The intention was to produce a high- 4,500rpm and a cylinder capacity of only 4.3 litr
Further improvements to the G7a and G7e were speed, long-range torpedo which left no track. The was developed, and was given the designation K
the development of a reliable proximity pistol for flTst result was the G7u 'Klippflsch' with the G7a 8. Trials began in 1941 and, at a charging pressur
the G7a on the lines of the Italian 'Pi Sic', the piston engine. It was driven by a gas/steam mixture of 2.5 atm, 0.68kg/hp/hr oxygen and 290g/hp/hr fu I
incorporation of a circling function and, also in the from the 'hot Walter process' instead of by paraffm in circulation, yielded 300hp at 3,800rpm. The flTst
G7e (Fat I I and Lutl, the use of high-performance burned in compressed air, and had a range of 6.5km flTings of this new torpedo, designated G7m, too
batteries (T IlIa) and the adaptation of acoustic at 40 knots. In 1942, it underwent trials at place at Neubrandenburg in the summer of 1943,
torpedoes (OT I up to 50m and OT II to a maximum Eckernfbrde and Gotenhafen, but was not put into and at the same time trials began at Eckernfbrd
of 100m depth firing capability). service because the turbine-drive principle offered Ranges of 12km at almost 40 knots were achieved
The introduction of the G7a with the new better performance - the G7ut 'Steinbutt' gave but the regulating apparatus was too primitive and
magnetic flTing (MZ3 and Pi3) followed in August 8km at 45 knots. However, the very complicated presented severe co-ordination difficulties, so that
1943. The G7e Fat II was released at the end of installation of such a turbine gave rise to a operational reliability had not been established b
March 1943. In contrast to G7a Fat I, it could be multiplicity of problems which delayed production. the time the war ended. Development w
used only with a long loop or as a circling torpedo, By the time that trials of one version had been suspended by the fourth meeting of the Midg t
because of its shorter range. These operational concluded, improvements had so advanced that Weapons Commission on 2 February 1945.
alternatives, however, were not very successful: the basic work had to be undertaken once again, so that
orbit that the weapon described when fired G7ut 'Steinbarsch' torpedoes were not ready for Underwater detection and protection
defensively against oncoming destroyers did not operations until the end of the war. On the other The most important device for detectin
result in any hits. hand, a very much simplified 'Butt' torpedo, underwater noise was the Gruppen-Horch-Ger t
The Lut was a further development of the Fat without negative buoyancy, was in series (GHG), or Group Listening Apparatus) which had
(spring-apparatus torpedo). By incorporating a new production by the end of the war. Designated been installed in all German U-boats since 1935. At
articulation joint in the looping mechanism, the Lut 'K-Butt' (T XIII), its range was 3km at 45 knots, fITst, the receiving diaphragms were integrated in
could be made to follow a path parallel to that taken and it was intend~d for use by midget submarines. the outer skin near the forward diving tank
by the enemy in any situation, so that this torpedo The last development stage of the Walter torpedoes Eleven receivers were positioned on each side of th
could be flTed from any bearing. The circling-track was that of the long-range 'Wal' and 'Schildbutt'. boat, in the form of an arc with its open sid
took the shape of a zig-zig, and the speed was By using sea-water injection, the otherwise underneath. In time, the number of receivers wa
adjustable between 5 and 21 knots. Lut I was built essential feed-water would be dispensed with, increased and, in Type IXC, numbered 23 on each
into the T IlIa, and the torpedo was given a high- allowing a larger supply of 'Ingolin' (Hydrogen side of the boat. To avoid welding problems, th
performance battery allowing a range of 9km. Peroxide, H 2 0 2 ) which increased the range receivers were now no longer set singly into th
Trials with Lut were carried out by U970 from 9 considerably - in the case of 'Wal', to 21km at 45 outer skin, but were assembled on a common flang
October to 9 December 1943, and 60 torpedoes in a knots. to provide two or three listening chambers. The
total of 233 flTings were used. The results were A different propulsion method for a high- flanges were so cast that their shape exactl
stated to be 'very satisfactory'. T IlIa with Lut 1 performance torpedo that left little detectable trail followed the curved outer skin and there were n
became operational in February 1944 and, by 1 was provided by the Otto closed-cycle engine. As proj ecting parts. An electric pulse-timin
July, approximately 50 operational boats had been early as 1927, the TV A of the Research Institute compensator enabled this arrangement of receiver
equipped with the new torpedo. A true evaluation for Vehicles at the Berlin Technical High School to provide a crude directional sounding in which th
had not yet been made, however, and it is doubtful had been given the task of developing a torpedo time differences of noises reaching the variou
if the good results suggested by the trials were engine based on the exhaust ga~xygen receivers could be levelled at a determined setting
achieved during operational use where harsher overcharge process of Prof. G. Becker. Work was and a maximum volume could therefore be obtain
conditions obtained. Just as keel-wash detonations controlled directly by Prof. Becker until 1932 when in a head-set connected with the equipment. From
had presented problems in the use of Zaunkbnig, so Dr. Kauffmann took over; by early 1933, a the settings of the compensator could be read th
now the new torpedoes with magnetic detonators of reasonably satisfactory stage of development had bearing of the received noise.
the G7c and G7e series, detonated frequently at the been achieved. The propulsion section consisted of At the beginning of 1943, an attempt was mad
end of their run and often prevented a true an eight-cylinder, water-cooled carburettor-motor with a Type IXC boat to determine wheth r
assessment by the U-boat. in a 90° V-form, with a total capacity of 7.45 litres receivers set lower down would be more effectiv
From 15 April 1944, a Type VIIC U-boat and maximum 134hp at 2,200rpm in the air and whether listening would be possible in
operating in the Atlantic had the following options operation. Cooling of exhaust gas was carried out surfaced boat. Initially, the receivers were simpl
for torpedo armament (according to Ordinance 40): by injected water, which was then led through two built into the ballast-keel, which was mad
1. Forward: three T V, two Fat I, three T III Fat II water extractors. The exhaust gas remaining in somewhat wider at this point, but subsequently 2
(or five T IlIa Fat II); Aft: two TV. circulation was enriched with oxygen and led back 24 receivers were collected into a special gondol
2. Forward: three T V, five T IlIa Lut; Aft: two T V. to the carburettor. At a charging pressure of 1.4 (balcony) in front of the keel. This arrangement
Lut II, with four armatures in the gyroscopic atm, 120hp at 2,200rpm were achieved in the proved extraordinarily successful, and critical
apparatus (GAl. was provided for the faster G7a. circulation; at 2.7 atm, as much as 250hp was bearings could be obtained from all directions with
This allowed changes of course of over 180° to be achieved. The reliability of the regulators was good, the exception of an angled segment aft of
made in the looping-path, which permitted the and flTe in the carburettor hardly ever occurred. 150°-210°. The installation was retained and, to
torpedo's speed to be significantly reduced during Then racial pressures caused Dr. Kauffmann to fact, was being further developed long after th
the flTst stages of its approach, which was leave Germany, and experiments were discon- original requirement had become obsoletl
necessary when engag'ng convoys with fast tinued. Following the rewarding experience with th

b lcony on Type IXC, an almost identical (S-Analage passir, or SP-Anlage) designed for object, using only a small number of impulses,
arrangement was envisaged for new types of boats. passive short-range detection astern. 1twas which made it almost impossible for an opponent to
In 1944, balconies for group listening apparatus intended as an aiming-device for underwater take a bearing on it.
ere built into some VIlC boats. missiles (Project 'Ursel'), which were to be used When emphasis changed to the new U-boats,
In order to provide adequate listening in the fast against pursuing U-boat hunters, and consisted of a whose travel was predominantly underwater, the
Walter U-boats (page 1618), and to be able to listen crystal swivel-base, with two receiving components echo-ranging gear became increasingly important
t higher submerged speeds, a much larger number of the active echo-ranging installation; with the as a navigational aid and as an aiming device,
of receivers was built into the Type XXVI. In this help of this, the horizontal and vertical angles of especially for planned 'direction-flDding deep-
('ase, the balcony was built as a bow-bulge, with 8 x incidence of propeller noise could be determined. shooting'. In the Type XXI boats, the forward edge
12 receivers arranged one above the other on each Using one's known submerged depth, the exact of the bridge provided a very favourable position
aide of the boat (i.e., a total of 192 receivers). In position of a pursuing sillp could be evaluated. The for the swivelling base with its 2 x 4 magneto-
order to increase the effectiveness of this range of this gear corresponded to approximately strictive oscillators. These provided a bearing of
rrangement in a rearwards direction, the bulge five times the submerged depth. The swivel from 0° to ± 100°. The directional accuracy of ±
was given a pronounced S-curve and was tapered receiving-base was mounted under a streamlined, 0.5° was good. In the Walter Type XXVI boats an
lmost to the line of the keel. A provisional fitting hooded fairing on the after part of Type XXI even better position was found. The swivel-base
was made to the conning tower of U38 and was U-boats (see page 209). Although the underwater was situated beneath a streamlined hood on the
tested in 1944. Subsequently, Dr. Maas, the Head missiles were still in the development stage at the forward section of the boat, making it possible to
of the Development Group 'Listening Devices', had end of the war, the echo-sounding devices had given take bearings in almost all directions (except for a
the bow of a mock-up of Type XXVI built to its good results during trials. segment aft). Of course, the new SU-Apparatus was
original measurements, and tried out the group of An additional listening device destined for new not available until the end of 1944, when a small
U-boats was the torpedo-warning and indicating number were fitted immediately in some Type XXI
equipment (Torpedowarn· und -anzeigegeriit, or U-boats (page 209). Tests of the new installations
Underwater detection devices in TAG) produced by NVK/Atlas and Elac. Tills were made by Test Group 'Sultan' and, at the end
Type vile. equipment consisted of 2 x 6 receivers in the bow. of January 1945, an exercise using 13 sillps in
Using four delay-members, four receiving- convoy was carried out in the waters around
directions (35°, 120°, 240° and 325°) were made Bornholm. The following tactics were employed:
available. A rotating scanning-device gave initially, group listening apparatus was used, and
automatic warning through four lamps and there the target was detected as accurately as possible at
was, additionally, a loudspeaker for acoustic long range. When the sound was being received
warning and observation. sufficiently loudly, the echo-ranging installation
The incorporation of a submerged detection was switched to 'listen' and the swivelling base was
installation activated by the U-boat was envisaged brought into the correct direction as indicated by
as early as 1938, when the Type VIlC U-boats were the GHG. When reception had increased in
being built - the so-called S-Geriit (Sonder-Geriit strength to the point when propeller noise could be
fUr aktive Schallortung, or 'Special Equipment for detected on the cathode-ray tube, the volume was
receivers incorporated in it in Lake Constance. This Active Sound Location'). However, work on tills turned down and an impulse was transmitted by
experiment showed that an arrangement of 3 x 48 'horizontal sounder', which was designed to depressing a key. Given favourable circumstances,
receivers invariably gave better bearing responses, measure the distance and direction of objects in only three impulses were needed to determine the
with higher vertical focussing, than the arrange- water by using the echo process fonsound impulses, distance, course and approximate speed of an
ment of 4 x 48 receivers. suffered delays. Not before the beginning of the war opponent.
Before the balcony arrangement had been was a 'Mobilization Echo-sounding Apparatus' To translate measurements on the echo-ranging
introduced, the group listening installation had not with a two-strip base suitable for U-boats ready for apparatus into torpedo firing calculations, coupling
given very exact bearings, but many VIlC and IXC mass production, and in the course of the war it was equipment was being developed. By the addition of
boats had an additional item built into the forward replaced by an improved SZ-Apparatus (SZ=S- 'Sarotti' to the echo-sounding gear, panoramic
part of the boat, in the form of a swivel hydrophone Apparatus for destroyers) with a four-strip base. presentations on a picture-tube (i.e., the simul-
(Kristall-Basisgeriit or KDB). Tills contained six Tills equipment worked on 15kHz impulses of taneous presentation of several objects on the
crystal receivers arranged on a swivelling base of 20m/sec length. The output of the transmitter screen) would be possible. This would mean that in
approximately 50cm length. By turning to and fro, amounted to 5kw. Again, the detection ranges were the future, without using a periscope, the U-boat
a maximum listening accuracy of ± 1° could be strongly influenced by water conditions, and varied would have at all times an exact view of what was
acilleved. Using this 'deck hydrophone', a U-boat between 5 and 10km in the case of large objects taking place on the surface. However, the war
lying on the bottom could register an exact bearing, (when proceeding slowly while submerged). However, ended before tills could be brought to fruition.
but the range of the apparatus was nothing like so this equipment was very seldom used by U-boats Up to about the end of 1942, the Supreme Naval
large as with group listening apparatus. Given because it was essential for bearings to be taken Command regarded the British Asdic device as the
favourable circumstances, using GHG, single ships continuously in order to determine an opponent's most dangerous anti-submarine weapon, and the
could be heard at a distance of 20km and convoys at exact position. Allied detection devices could pick development of protection against acoustic
a distance of 100km. The range over which listening up these impulses at a far greater range than detection was therefore pursued by the German
was possible, however, changed considerably U-boat noise, which meant that the U-boat revealed Navy with corresponding vigour. It concentrated
according to the acoustic conductivity of the water. her position before she had located the enemy. on two processes, 'Alberich' and 'Bold'. 'Alberich'
Consequently, the strength of an audible bearing Subsequently, more space was needed for radar was a 4mm-thick layer of rubber, which muffled
gave no certain indication of the distance of a equipment, so the echo-sounding devices were echo reflections in the range of 1Q-18kHz up to
target. On one occasion, Kapitiinleutnant Prien removed from U-boats because installations for the approximately 15 per cent, but not at all diving
detected what was thought to be a bombing attack more essential surface operations were given depths. Practical evaluation was impeded because
on his U47: it turned out to be German aircraft priority. Later, an improved echo-set, with the it was difficult to make comparative tests at sea.
attacking a British naval formation 100 nautical designation SU-Apparatus (SU=S-Apparatus for Exact location of a boat was not determined by the
miles away (War Diary, 9 April 1940, 16.21 hours). U-boats), 'Nibelung', was projected for the enlarged rubber covering alone, but the air content,
Another kind of listening device with very exact Type VIlC/42 (page 157): this could pinpoint the temperature and salt content of the sea water all
bearing-recognition was the SP apparatus exact position and approximate speed of a detected had to be taken into account. The fust tests with a

hull of synthetic rubber coating (Oppanol) followed
in the early part of 1940, with the VK test boat
Ull. In 1941, a larger boat, U67, was similarly clad.
Tests with this boat were considerably influenced
by the fact that the covering did not stick very
efficiently to the hull; when parts of the covering
came loose, they set up eddies and noises in the
current caused by the boat's passage, which had
the opposite effect of what was desired. Trials of a
similar nature were then made with the former
Dutch submarine 026 (UD4j, but difficulties were
again experienced with the covering material and it
seemed that this process could not be used as a
general measure. Attention was now directed more
strongly at an increase in diving depth as a means
of securing improved underwater protection.
ot until the advent of the schnorkel in 1944
(page 1918), did 'Alberich' take on renewed
significance as an operational possibility for use in
shallow, off-shore waters. The hrst operational
U-boat to be so equipped was U480, and she
reported positive results during Channel operations
in August 1944. On 11 July 1944, it was decided to
cover some of the Type XXIII coastal V-boats. It
was hoped that at least two or three of these
boats could be treated each month, and at least two
per month were to be c~mpleted by the end of 1944.
However, a suitable hall or hangar where the boats
could be dealt with while completely protected from
the elements was not available, so the first boat to
receive the 'Alberich' treatment, the Type XXIII
U4709, was not ready until February 1945.
Furthermore, the avy wanted 'Alberich' applied
to the Walter Type XXVI medium boats, but
delays occurred and the programme was not
implemented. The 'Alberich' cladding would have PROJECTS AND in the Atlantic together with torpedo-carriers. (It
added a total of 5,000-6,000 work hours to the could be used to locate convoys near their
production of each boat. DEVELOPMENTS, 1939 - 43 departure point, America, being better adapted for
Another kind of protection system was the tracking and maintaining contact than a slow r
releasing of objects designed to deceive the enemy. In a letter to the Supreme aval Command on 8 boat, and could lead waiting torpedo U-boats to
'Bold' was a container with positive buoyancy, September 1939, Donitz made the following convoys on the eastern side of the Atlantic.) It
filled with calcium hydride. With a diameter of suggestions regarding V-boat types. could also be used as a Fleet V-boat. It is suggest d
10cm, it could be expelled from a tube similar to '1. Continuation of building Types VIlC and IX, it be given the designation 'Long-Range U-boat'.
that used for torpedoes. It floated in water at a in the ratio suggested by the Commander-in-Chief, '5. This would make superfluous th
depth of approximately 30m, producing hydrogen U-Boat's Secret Memorandum 172 dated 1 construction of the Type XII Fleet U-boat, which
bubbles intended to present a false target to Asdic September 1939. has been proposed earlier. In any case, it is doubtful
while the endangered U-boat made its escape. This '2. 0 construction of small U-boats, as their use if Type XII could reach the required specihcation
relatively simple equipment was installed in is basically restricted to home waters, and no of speed and range. Type XI would seem to
U-boats from 1942 and was considerably operational application in the Baltic seems likely in better adapted for fulfilling these aims.
successful. Preparations were also being made for a the foreseeable future, and their use in the orth '6. Construction of 3 submarine tankers to carry
'Bold 5', which would work in greater depths up to Sea seems doubtful. The latter function could, fuel and supplies; these to be of approximately
200m. however, be undertaken by boats of Type VIIC. 2,000 tons - low-speed boats, but equipped with
Towards the end of the war, two further means of This type could also be used for Atlantic duties all necessary means for effective transferring of
protection were envisaged: 'Sieglinde' and (Azores). fuels and supplies to U-boats.
'Siegmund'. The first of these was a 'noise- '3. Continuation of building the Type XB boats 'Summary: The following list of U-boat
deceiving body'; the second, a 'noise-disturbing that have been placed in contract. The prospects of consequently represents those that we feel ar
body'; both were intended to be ejected by the minelaying in more remote waters are very worthy of construction.
U-boat. 'Sieglinde' emitted the noise of a U-boat rewarding (Capetown, Simonstown, Colombo, (a). Torpedo-carriers; boats of Type VIlC and IX
proceeding underwater at a speed of approximately Singapore). (For the last two ports, see o. 6. re (b). Long-range minelaying boats of Type XB.
6 knots, and was switched on at the same time as a V-boat tankers.) (c). Large, high-speed, long-range boats.
'Bold' was released. 'Siegmund' produced a series of '4. Continuation of building Type XI. The main (d). U-boat tankers.'
detonation-noises designed to block the enemy's value of this type lies in applying strategic pressure These demands by Donitz were considerably to
listening devices so that, for a short time, the in very remote territories. The opportunities of influence future type development.
U-boat could proceed at top speed without being using its artillery are rather doubtful. The Flag
detected. The 'Siegmund' installation was planned Officer, U-Boats, suggests reducing the artillery Type VIIO
initially as a series-production item for Type XXVI armament to provide a high-speed boat with a very At the beginning of the war, the torpedo anchor
V-boats. large radius of action. This boat could then be used mine TMA was still not ready for operational us(
146 WAR CONSTRUCTION, EXPERIE CE A D DEVELOPME T,1939-1943

The 4 large Type XB minelayers, which carried
SMA mines, had been designed specially for
minelaying in distant seas, but there was a lack of
medium-sized operational boats that could also
carry SMA mines for use off the coasts of Britain
and France. As the Type VIlB/C had shown itself
to be especially suitable for minelaying in coastal
waters, the idea was born of developing the VIlC
boat as an SMA minelayer. By incorporating an
additional pressure-hull section between the CO's
compartment and the pressure-tight bulkhead that
formed the control room's aftermost frame,
sufficient space was made for the fitting of five
vertical mine shafts to contain fifteen SMA mines;
the shafts ended in a narrow superstructure
projecting above the deck abaft the conning tower.
This section lengthened the boat by 9.8m, and the
saddle tanks were correspondingly lengthened,
which allowed the inclusion of an additional
compensating tank, an additional diving tank and
an additional diving bunker. The enlargement of
the fuel supply was an unlooked-for bonus, which
increased considerably the operational possibilities
of the boat_
The mine shafts were covered at the top by
Venetian-blind-type sheeting, slatted or pierced, to
provide effective ventilation; at the bottom they
were open. The use of the VIlC drive installation
affected speed very little. On 16 February 1940, 6
boats of this type, designated Type VIlD, were
placed in contract with GW; the laying-down of the
flTst boat, U213, followed on 1 October 1940.
,
Type VIIO
Glossary: Wasserdichte Hecht, Watertight stern; Tauchzelle, tube; Schuss. section; Schmutzwasser, bilge water; Waschwasser,
ballast tank (water); Trimmzelle hinten, after trimming tank; fresh water; Minenzelle, mine compartment; Knick. break; Proviant
Torpedozelle, torpedo tank; E.-Maschinenraum, electric motor Raum, stores; Bugtorpedo-Raum, bow torpedo room; Mundungsklappen-
room; Diesel Motorenraum, diesel engine room; Kuche, galley; vorn, forward opening flaps; Tiefenruder, hydroplane; Kmdt. Raum,
UnteroHizier-Ra'um, NCOs' Quarters; Akku-Raum, accumulator commander's Quarters; Horch-Raum, listening room; Zentrale, control
room; Treibolbunker, fuel-oil bunker; Zentrale. control room; room; Bruche, bridge; Druckkorperachse, pressure huH axis; Hauptachse,
Munitionskammer, ammunition compartment; Kettenkasten, chain main axis; Turm, conning tower; Bb. port; Stb. starboard; Kielsohle, keel
cover; Wasserdichte Back, watertight forecastle; Durchfluteter bottom.
Raum, flooding compartment; Mine Torpedo Rohr. mIddle torpedo
~ 't t
,E.
I .. I
.......1
b
L "!
"
;
. I _
j
I
I
..
"
.,
,~
.
;
J
!
"I I
I •.
~ \ ~
~ J I l
148 WAR CO STRUCTION, EXPERIE CE A D DEVELOPMENT, 1939-1943

Frame 100
Frame 78
Frame 66
o_~ __ ~
----..- ---"7 - - ! -. j ..........
'\ 1 , ~. ""'.
-- Frame 55 Frame 41/42
Frame 39C Frame 36
--t-:
Frame 14 Frame 24

Types IXD 1 and IXD 2 diesel compartment, the fittings corresponded
The suggestion by Dbnitz concerning the further approximately to those of Type IX, but the living Type IXD frame lines.
building of Type XI as a long-range and Fleet quarters and stowage space were considerably
U-boat, but minus the characteristic, heavy enlarged to meet the requirement for greater
artillery armament, would certainly have been too endurance. The outer hull, however, was rather
costly and would have overloaded the already- wider and higher, and now enclosed the whole
stretched capacity of the yards. A completely new pressure hull.
working-out of the design based on Type XII would At the bow. the S-curve of Type IX was avoided by
certainly have delayed considerably the using longer torpedo tube flaps, and this lessened
commencement of construction of such U-boats. the formation of spray at the bow. The stern was
Ideally. the long-range boats should be built as now drawn-out in a very slim profile, and the
cheaply and as quickly as possible, so an attempt torpedo tubes now were more effective at the
was made to enlarge Type IXC into a U-boat with a otherwise unencumbered stern. In the upper speed
higher surface speed and an increased range. In ranges, the longer boat had - from 18 knots -
order that the displacement should not become too more favourable Cw - values, so that even in Type
large, these requirements were sought not in a IXD 2• a higher maximum speed was attained than
single boat, but in different projects, which would in Type IX. The first 4 boats of Type IXD (3 of
differ only in the disposition of the engine Type IXD 2 and 1 of IXD 1) were contracted to AG
compartment. Type IXD, would be given a large Weser on 28 May 1940, being intended as a
installation of six 1,500hp motor torpedo-boat replacement for the suspended U-cruisers of Type
diesels for a high surface speed (20.8 knotsl; Type IX.
IXD 2 would receive the normal Type IX propulsion While Type IXD 2 was quite successful with the
unit, but with a diesel-electric addition for increased conventional engine installation, the heavy diesel
range. The pressure hull had the same strength and concentration with fresh water cooling in Type
the same diameter as Type IX. Apart from the IXD 1 caused such serious problems during trials
Type IXD,. 1942.

Glossary: Schmutzwasser R., bilge; E.·Maschinen Raum. electric motor room;
Trimmzellen. trimming tanks; Matoren Raum. engine room; Trinkwasserzelle. fresh
water tank; Treibolbunker. fuel-oil bunker; Zentrale, control room; Akku·Raum.
battery room; Proviaot Raum, store room; Torpedozellen. torpedo tanks;
Kettenkasten. chain cover; Hecktorpedo·Raum, aher torpedo compartment;
Tauchzelle. ballast tank (water); Kuhl·Raum, cold storage; Kuche, galley;
Bugtorpedo-Raum, bow torpedo compartment; Fundament Fur E.-Maschine, base for
electric motor; Munitionskammer, ammunition compartment; Motorenolllorratstank,
engine oil tank; Flurboden, floor. (See also Glossary, page 372.)

nd on her sole operational voyage - strong build- request prompted 'K' OffIce to develop Type X:;:V. Type XIV 'C' curves.
up of exhaust smoke, leakages in the cooling-water The exterior shape was taken from that of the long-
Installation, lack of space and high temperatures in range IXD, which was being designed at the same 600
th engine compartment, leaking exhaust outlets,
te. - that this installation was removed.
time, but the ratios of length:beam and
length:draught were considerably reduced (by "- -
approximately 60 per cent) so that the proposed ""- f--t-- .............
OKM design
'\ ",al "';90
Ce lS/T1OO1hl
ype XIII size would provide sufficient storage capacity for 500
'-.....
~
t the beginning of the war, designs were also

prepared for a larger coastal U-boat for North Sea
an additional 432 tons of fuel-oil, approximately 45
tons of provisions and four torpedoes, plus a I \ \
\
../
/""'\
perations, with similar tasks in mind as had been

arried out by the UF type of the First World War.
It was to have a displacement of 400 tons, a heavier
suffIciently wide and dry upper deck for the easy
transfer of supplies at sea.
The fIrst towing tests of the Type XIV 'shape' 400
I
...-, -....
\
~ ~
rmament (4 bow torpedo tubes), an increased
urface speed (approximately 15 knots) and a
followed as early as February 1940. The very bad Ce
values in the Froude-Numbers range, 0.26-{).34 ~
Ce 1witfl awendagesl ~ i
greater range than Type II. This project,
d signated Type XIII, probably owed its
13-16 knots, of the Supreme Naval Co=and's
design were considerably improved by a greater 300
\:b \' ~ (..-
origination to the Flag OffIcer, U-Boat's refusal to sharpening of the bow lines in the modified HSVA 1\\
ontinue construction of the small Type II boats of (Hamburg Shipbuilding Test Institute) Model 2119. ~ (with appendagesl \
the Mobilization Programme, but it did not get On the basis of these fmdings, the original official p WIth Ko,t no~zle
further than the outline design stage. design was reworded and, on 15 April 1940, had the 200
r-.
Types XIV - XVI
following main specifications.
~ -
In his letter to Naval Headquarters, D6nitz had Maximum beam: 9.3m.
r quested the construction of 3 submarine tankers Mean draught (loaded): 6.52m. 100
6 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
for fuelling and supplying offensive U-boats. Thi~ Pressure-hull diameter: 4.9m. knots
Type IXD2' 1943.
~
-(
•. , ~.
Glossary: E.-Maschinen Raum, electric motor room; Treibolverbrauchbehalter, fuel·oil
I • •
supply tank; Trimmzellen, trimming tanks; Torpedozellen, torpedo tanks;
• • ~. o. -I - 0
Schmutzmoloren Oltank, engine oil waste tank; Malorenol sammeltank, engine oil
J '. J 1
collecting tank; TreibOl Semmelt., fuel-oil col!ecting tank; Motoren-Raum, engine
room; Motorenol·vorratstank. engine oil supply tank; Zentrale. control room; Akku-
Raum. battery room; Tief-Kuhlraum. deep-freeze; Proviant-Iust. stores; Kettenkasten,
chain cover; Hecktorpedo-Raum, after torpedo companment; Funkraum. radio room;
Kommandant, commander; Horch-Raum. listening room; Kuhl-Raum, cold storage;
Kuche. galley; Bugtorpedo-Raum. forward torpedo companment; Flurboden, floor;
,' ..
Fundament fur E.-Maschine, base for electric motor; Trinkwasserzeile. fresh water
lank. IS.. also Glossary. page 372.1
---

Type XIV frame lines.
OKM design of 16 February 1940 OKM/OWK design of 6 May 1940
Displacement surfaced
(loaded): 1,670 tons.
Displacement submerged: 1,922 tons. Type XIV.
Hull displacement: 2,300 tons. Key: B, bunker; BT, ballast tank; C, compensating tank; F,
Engine installation: as in Type VIlC. fuel-oil bunker; NIB, negative buoyancy tank
Battery: as in Type XII (2 X

62 Z. 28 MAL 1000).
Speed surfaced: 14.5-15 knots.
at 10 knots.
Range submerged: 76 nautical miles at 3
knots.
Crew: 5l.
A
In order to effect a further improvement in the
propulsion, it was proposed that Kort
nozzles (conical shrouds fitted around the
propellers) be fitted, but this was not carried out.
The relatively light-weight cargo of fuel made
possible something that had been proposed for
Type XI, the use of stronger sheet metal for the
pressure hull, to a maximum of 2l.5mm (as opposed
to 18.5mm in Types VII and IX), which meant a
greater margin of safety from depth-charges for
this U-boat, which did not have torpedo armament.
The surface armament was restricted to a
reasonably heavy anti-aircraft defence consisting of
two 3.7cm quick-frring C/30U guns forward and aft
of the bridge and a 2cm C/30 machine-gun on the
bridge. In addition to the propulsion unit, various
features were borrowed from the series production
of Type VIlC, including hatch closures, pumps,
anchor winch, etc. The conning tower derived from
that of Type IX. This design, therefore, eased itself,
without great difficulty, into the current U-boat
construction programme. The design work was
given to DWK, who received a contract on 14 May
1940 for 4 U-tankers of this type, and the frrst boat,
U459, was laid down on 23 ovember 1940.
152 WAR CO STRUCTIO ,EXPERIENCE AND DEVELOPME T,1939-1943

Above and below: Type XIV supply boats. The top photograph shows U459 on operations in mid-Atlantic.
After the First World War, Germany had no 2,500-ton (Type XV) and a 5,OOO-ton (Type XVI) compiled a memorandum on 'Technical
foreign bases and, when consideration was being boat, the pressure hulls for both of which should be Development of the V-boat in the Light of War
given to the planning and building-up of a new considerably wider to accommodate workshop Operations'. The main theme was his concern that
V-boat fleet, requests were made for large supply machinery and spare parts. To achieve this, a cross- V-boats available at that time would soon no longer
and workshop V-boats, which would not only section of a horizontal three-cycle shape was measure up to the requirements of the U-boat
increase considerably the radius of operational suggested, after the fashion of Flamm's V-cruiser campaign and that, therefore, new developments
V-boats by supplying fuel-oil, provisions and projects. As with Type XIV, constructional were necessary, even at the expense of current
ammunition, but would be able to undertake small components were wherever possible to be drawn production. Ideally, these new V-boats should be
repairs and give technical assistance. It was from those in current use, so it was intended that ready for operations in two years to replace the
considered that such mobile and submersible the propulsion unit of the Type VIlC be installed in present Types VIlC and IXC.
V-boat bases should be capable of remaining at sea these boats, although this would have provided The stated demands for the new boats
for at least three months. In 1939, Fiirbringer inadequate speeds for such large and complex corresponded to the prevailing offensive tactics and
reiterated this suggestion as he feared that the vessels. Because of their size, neither project found operational experiences at that time. No attention
German Fleet might find itself cut off in the 'wet much favour, and both were rejected by Dbnitz. was paid to the development of radio high-
triangle' (the German Bight). After hostilities had With the fall of orway and France, and the frequency detection or to aircraft surveillance. As a
commenced, together with Type XIV, large consequent acquisition of well-situated V-boat result, his prime consideration was to increase
workshop V-boats on these lines were projected bases on the Atlantic seaboard, the need for them surface speed to 22 knots, because the boats -
with the ability to carry out simple technical repair was no longer so pressing. especially the VIlC - were too slow for surface
and overhaul tasks for operational V-boats in calm attack against convoys. As a quick means of
seas. Two projects were discussed concerning a Developments based on Type vile: Cf41, Cf42 improving this problem, he suggested the
and Cf43 installation of a second diesel unit in a lengthened
Below: The commissioning ceremony for UI171IType
VIIC/41l at Danziger Wertt on 22 March 1944. Far right: U995
On 27 February 1942, at the request of 1. SKLIlb VIlC. Experiences with Type VIID suggested that
IType VIIC/41l being set up as a U-boat memorial at Laboe Supreme aval Command (Planning), the Chief this could be achieved in one year. However, to cope
on 13 March 1972. Engineer of U157, Oberleutnant (Eng.) Kiesewalter, with the increased surface performance, a jaw
154 WAR CO STRUCTION, EXPERIE CE A D DEVELOPME T, 1939-1943

clutch would need to be installed in place of the developed!' '... Efforts must be made to enable a already in development or test stages, but that it
friction clutch and, because of the considerable boat to dive to 300 metres. At that depth, the effect 'was completely out of the question to complete the
discrepancy between high surface revolutions and of depth-charges is greatly restricted and, planning and construction of a new' U-boat type in
low submerged revolutions, a set of gears or furthermore, the time it takes for depth-charges to two years to the extent that series-production could
variable-pitch propellers would have to be used. descend to such a depth enables a boat to take commence at the end of this time'. After
Furthermore, the hull shape would need to be avoiding action.' considering the arguments, the Supreme Naval
modified for the increased surface speed. At the Concerning armament, he stated: Command came down firmly on the side of
very least, the watertight forecastle should be 'The torpedo armament is sufficient in terms of continued further development of the current
enlarged, and the external torpedo tube flaps of the numbers. There is no need to lay special emphasis U-boat types, especially of the successful Type
Type IX should be changed because their on a more reliable, faster and deadly torpedo which VIlC, which meant an avoidance of risks in a
treamlining left much to be desired. As a further could reach 50 knots, because this has been brought completely new development programme and
means of bringing about an increase in up often enough. For the medium Type VII boat avoidance of impairing current production. Long-
performance, especially in Type IXC, consideration operating in the North Atlantic, gun armament is term development was seen in terms of the Walter
hould be given to supercharging the MAN not necessary apart from anti-aircraft armament on U-boat.
ngines. the bridge. The tactical and weather conditions in The first further development of Type VlIC
The next requirement concerned an increase in this region allow the use of artillery only very manifested itself in Design VIlC/41. In this, the
the diving depth. On this point Kiesewalter stated: seldom.' question had been posed: how far can one develop
'If we cannot actu.ally succeed in concealing (U157 was sunk by depth-charges in the Gulf of Type VII in respect of increased diving depth
U-boats from detection by ultrasonics, then only Mexico on 13 June 1942, with the loss of all hands, without disturbing current production lines? The
two possibilities remain: either one dives to 300 including Kiesewalter.) main problem was one of weight. In the first
metres and waits until depth-charging is over. or In an opinion expressed by the V-Boat instance, the weight requirement was
one must be equipped with an attacking weapon Department (Amtsgruppe Ubootwesen SKL-Vl on overestimated by the KIV. A more thorough
such as an acoustic torpedo with which to destroy 5 May 1942, it was established that certain calculation then showed that an increase in diving
the pursuer. Something on these lines must be important suggestions made by Kiesewalter were depth of 20 per cent was possible without stability
WAR CONSTRUCTION, EXPERIENCE A D DEVELOPMENT, 1939-1943 155

being affected too greatly. Subsequent calculations per cent Si, 1.23 per cent Mn, 0.1 per cent V, 0.13 had been made, a maximum surface speed of 18.6
concerning the weight of the engine installation, per cent Cr and had a strength of 55-70kg/mm 2 , a knots was calculated (compared to 17 knots in Type
simplification of the electrical installation and of yield point of 45kg/mm', a 60 per cent reduction of VIlC).
weight-saving in other ways, showed it possible for area and an expansion of 28 per cent. The provision The large surface range of 12,600 nautical miles
11.5 tons to be saved; this meant that the of this significantly stronger pressure-hull skin at 10 knots (50 per cent more than that of Type
strengthened pressure hull could increase by increased the weight of a Type VIlC boat pressure VIlC) was made possible by larger saddle tanks and
approximately 10 tons without any signifIcant hull by 68.3 tons to 154.3 tons. This was to be interior bunkers, which, together with the greater
reduction in the effective ballast. The maximum compensated by increasing the pressure-hull ctiameter, increased the beam to 6.85m. The
thickness of pressure-hull plates would now amount diameter from 4.70m to 4.90m, later to 5m. Supreme Naval Command imposed more conditions
to 21mm compared to the present 18.5mm. The In order to realize the design as quickly as and expressed further wishes concerning the
constructional diving depth now rose from 100m to possible, Chief Naval Construction Adviser installation of other equipment, only partly
120m, the test diving depth (60 per cent of the Aschmoneit urged that, apart from essential dictated by the increased diving depth and the
destruction diving depth) from 150m to 180m, and modifications, as little as possible of Type VIlC be better surface performance. In particular, the
calculated destruction depth from 250m to 300m. changed. In the course of time, however, more and following points were mentioned to the VIlC Work
This altered constructional plan was designated more demands were made on the Type VIlC/42, and Committee at GW, which had taken over the design
Type VIlC/41, because the fmal decision on it had it was accepted that a speedy realization of the work in the summer of 1942:
been made in the year 1941, and more complete basic requirements was no longer possible. As 1. A strong and common base for diesel engines
working-out of details was then undertaken. The and electric motors.
concept, however, was an older one. The first 2. Hydraulic clutch between diesel engines and
contracts for this new type were placed on 14 electric motors.
October 1941, with the first boats being delivered in 3. SuffIcient space to be provided for the interior
August 1943. The boats were given the enlarged exhaust-gas installation and the supercharger.
forecastle ('Atlantic Stem') demanded by 4. The shaft must rotate smoothly in the stern
Kiesewalter, which increased the length of Type sleeve, even at considerable water pressures.
VIlC by 13cm. 5. Attention to be paid to increased water pressure
Following the unsatisfactory state of affairs with in the thrust bearings.
measuring the effectiveness of the' Alberich' boat, 6. As compared to Type VIlC, the shaft-sleeve to
U67, in the autumn of 1941, Chief Naval be extended far enough outside for the distance of
Construction Adviser Aschmoneit suggested to the propeller circle from deadwood to be 200mm
Ministerial Counsellor Dr. Schurer (Head of KIU) to instead of 170mm.
abandon further efforts with this Asdic-avoidance 7. Two Junkers air compressors and an electric
device and press on with the doubling of the diving compressor.
depth for Type VIlC, something which was also 8. Bilge-pumps. Three centrifugal pumps
desired by the Chief of Naval War Staff; this would envisaged, all of the same size, made by Amag-
give a threefold benefit: Hilpert (working pressure 30 atmospheres overload
1. Shielding from Asdic by a considerable depth of at 15m 3 per hour required performance); to be
water. installed in the bow and stern compartments and in
2. Obliging the enemy to use a greater number of the control room.
depth-charges. 9. Trimming, preferably by an IMO spindle pump
3. Making the pressure hull more resistant to or by compressed air (double trimming tanks!).
rupture. 10. Increase of compressed-air supply over that in
It was recognized that echo-sounding gear Type VIlC.
worked much less well with any increase in depth. 11. Compartment ventilation to be that of the
Early in the war, experience had also shown that a Drager (Lubeck) system, with compartment-
slow U-boat could avoid detection by diving deeper. ventilators and turbo-ventilators of the quietest
U-boats had repeatedly escaped by sinking to the possible type. Compartment heating by exhaust
destruction diving depth at 200m. The required gas and electrical heating; all this to be made
doubling of the diving depth, however, implied so Christoph Aschmoneit.
possible by recirculation of the compartment air-
great an extra weight that, without enlarging the cooling and drying installation ('thermal pump').
boat, compensation could not be achieved. Designs convoy operations were now dispersed over a wider 12. Naszogen installation with Naszogen (Oxygen)
were therefore prepared for constructional depth to area, and the speed of convoys had increased, the cartridges made by IG-Farben.
be 200m, test-ctiving depth 300m and calculated VIlC boats increasingly required the surface 13. Cooling installation with three similar BBC
destruction diving depth 500m; the proposed performance of the larger Type IXC. It was hoped cold air compressors for deep freezer, refrigerator,
construction resulting from these demands was that the proven six-cylinder MAN diesel engines potato storage compartment and compartment air-
given the designation VIlC/42. The metal-rolling M6V 40/46, with incorporation of effective drying installation.
facilities at the yards and at most of the sub- supercharging would give the required high 14. An autogenous welding unit to be installed.
contractors permitted a maximum pressure-hull performance. The six-cylinder MAN engines were 15. Main periscope and night navigation periscope
skin thickness of only 28mm to be worked, which already used in Type VII U-boats and, without in the conning tower (with no periscope in the
meant that normal U-boat steel St 52 KM could not charging, had a performance of 1,050hp at 470rpm control room!).
be used for doubling the diving depth. Specially and, with simple charging, 1,400hp at 490rpm. 16. Simplification of the electrical network, by
tempered, armour-plated Krupp steel CM 351 was High-charging would increase these values to ctispensing with three transformers and reducing
therefore envisaged for the pressure-tight 2,200hp at 530rpm. The installation of the various the constant-voltage network.
components. CM 351 contained 0.17 per cent C, 0.3 auxiliary engines required for this uprated The wish was also stated for an arrangement
performance meant that the length of the diesel whereby the main switch panels could be manned
Left: Two views of U995 taken at Laboe on the Kiel Estuary. compartment had to be increased by 80cm. The from the front instead of from the central passage.
After the war this boat served for ten years in the Norwegian fmal design for Type VIlC/42 increased its length This would offer a number of advantages in
Navy as KNM Kaura before being returned to Germany. by 1.54cm over Type VIlC. After towing tank tests operating and servicing as well as making for a
WAR CO STRUCTIO ,EXPERIENCE AND DEVELOPMENT, 1939-1943 157

Type VIIC/42 frame lines.
10
VIIC/42A. showing broader stern and enlarged VIIC/42B, design of October 1942 VIIC/42C, GW design of 3 April 1943
saddle·,anks, 9 October 1942
Type VIIC/42 structural layout. 2 April 1943.
I. \ \ i I I 11 :
\-I+-I~""'\\I-+-T-~i-,IJ-~ , •;I
,=,r-.'Q
~
0'0"00'1 0 : 0 :0, "",; : ,,1\
~o.=.'<..::.J"9"'.:=:t=/:t10~:;"<:O~;..':O~:~O~,O~:10;O:0:0:nstringerIY.. \
~
--'-"'-", , I I t I 1'1' -III!!]
-
A I I ~ III
, ( : t--' 0:0: ..,- -r • , J-:-_ ~- - ~-
I
Stringer III .. -. . - - : I ..- .-
- - - .• Ballast tank 1 (water) I '
i I . ;:
I
I,.............,!,~-'-_'-.,
1:-;- trlnger I
Diesel·engine room
I;
:
,
e-r-e
L. I I I
I . ~<' - .•'::. ~ • -L ~ . ",~ .;>,,'1 - - --Floor . '. .- ~ ~.,. ,~ •
I ;: ri ~iiL- ~ 160~~-1)-~~I~'~I~~~-I~dii III( -)~;~~uLa\or~~i·l:_·~:'~lf~;

>~--;'-;: 001'
T
~V I I ~ °B0t-~ gl/~*mrrl(llf /---~,,-; . ~ . ~-

'-' " "'" "" " ! ' . , , . ,. """"I II I 1 + I 1"'1 I I'l"!m I I I 1'-'1 I I I I I I
,5 I 1"'1 1 I I
r-_,,:,5..:.e-,-ct,,:,io..:.n,,:,1_ _ ~ectio~n,:,2 __ -+ ,,:5..:e.:.ct,,:io_n_3:, + 5_e_c'_io_n_4 ,__ -+ 5_e_ct_io_n_5 -+-I_ _
, '
I
, After trimming~ Torpedo~ ~- - Fuel-oil tank 2 _ _ Co~~~(~~rgl.
compartment I compart· I or water)
\ ment 1 . I
-Watertight stern-I - Ballast tank 1 1------_, :

I , I
Stringer III
I ~..,;~~5~~tri~n~~e~~II~~,=~I'-'~Q~:O~IL;~~f-'--~:~Ef~"!J:
........... -~ I
l,~I:['T-~,~-q:;:r:_.~~_~,,-,,-:M,:;g,,9~sl~;-~~!=~;#}~:~~-~i'=:;!;;..--~!~-~~:~:~j,,\~-T~~,-~-J,-S_
::Y;:I;~.:"I;..i..j-;"~-;-
. ..
~ I'I:HIH ~Pr.1
I ~ I ---:-i:~ :: ',I
~ L 5tringerl,j . ;_~: ~ [':,' , ~ : ~ ~1
-.t.--L..-.:-----'" ~ 0 ~12 ~~ .:~1-~~- ~~-::!~- _

Stringer IV ~.....,.: ~;
158 WAR CONSTRUCTIO ,EXPERIENCE A D DEVELOPMENT, 1939-1943

more compact layout, but the idea was not Naval Command and these had lar'ger dimensions. problems and the increase in work hours at these
employed until AEG installed their cam-operated On 15 August 1942, they declared that Design other firms. The pressure hull of Type VIlC/42 was
switchgear in the Walter U-boats. In their system, VIlC/42B with a length of 73.4m and a beam of to be assembled from ten sections, and it was
the switch elements were activated by cams and 6.92m, would be more appropriate, and B&V made thought advisable that one efficient delivery body
could be programmed to perform specific functions. the point that the building sites used hitherto for be responsible at anyone time for each section;
Developments along these lines were carried on by VIlC would be too narrow for these boats. On 10 however, this was regarded as inadequate for the 13
AEG and BBC as prototype panels for Type November 1942, the Main Committee for Ship- proposed yards, if one took into account the
VIlC/42. In other respects, compartment division building Construction decided in favour of Type transport routes. It was especially emphasized that
and fIttings corresponded to those in the Type VIIC/42A, with a length of 68.73m and a beam of the risky sea transport of sections be avoided if
VIlC boats. 6.7m. This led to the final design VIlC/42 early in possible.
In June 1942, the first drawings were available 1943. Naturally, the changes delayed completion of A subsequent discussion on 20 January 1943, at
from GW for the hull shape of Type VIlC/42: length the drawings. GW was now to deliver the first boat Krupp AG of Essen, established that Krupp could
68.73m, beam 6.46m, pressure-hull diameter 4.9m. on 29 August 1944, and B&V would deliver their produce a maximum of 2,150 tons of tempered CM
On 16 July 1942, GW were given an initial contract first boat three months later. A further series of 351 steel per month - sufficient for only 10 boats.
for 12 boats (Ul069-Ul080), the first boat to be five VIlC/4l (U1435-U1439) was to be added. As the timetable for the series production called for
delivered on 1 August 1944. The large B&V yard The discussion on 10 November 1942 had taken a monthly total of 21 boats, either other rolling
was to deliver its first boat (U1423) on 1 November. account of fabrication problems. It had been mills must produce appropriate tempered steels
However, at this time, the boat's ultimate intended to put as much work as possible to outside (and possibly French armour-plate firms could be
dimensions had not been settled because of the firms so that the yards, suffering from acute labour used for this), or the remaining boats would have to
many additional requirements that had been called shortage, might be spared some part of the burden; be built from ordinary 52 KM steel with corres-
for. Two counter-projects (VIlC/42A and however, Counsellor of State Blohm made the point pondingly reduced strength. As the establishment
VIlC/42B) were being worked on by the Supreme that one should not lose sight of transport of new installations to produce tempered steel could
, ; I ,.... i :
KJ 11 12 13 Ii, 15 m
Bow torpedo room
6 Section 7 Section 8 Section 9 Section 10

- ------+-
Negative
buoyancy I ,
I lank I-Ballast tank 4 (fuel or water)~ ....__Torpedo compartments : Forward' :---- -Ballast tank 5 (water)
, I 2 and J I trimming:
t compart-
I
ment
I I
I
Stringer III

not be achieved quickly, particularly in view of the for Type VIIC to 30 weeks, it was thought possible but to complete towing tank tests with this project.
shortage of labour, Director Cords, the head of the to deliver a yearly total of 66 boats, i.e., one boat On 17 April 1943, a further contract was placed
VIIC Work Committee, suggested on 26 January every 5Y2 days instead of the current 1 boat every 7 with all of the 13 yards chosen for the building of
1943 that the 10 boats that could be constructed days. The intended subcontractors for pressure Type VIIC/42; in all, 174 boats were ordered, with
from CM 351 be distributed between GW, B&V, hulls and outer-hull construction are shown in Table B&V receiving the largest allocation of 24 boats. On
Bremer Vulkan, KMW Wilhelms haven and Kiel 32. 29 May 1943, building notes were sent from
(Howaldtl, while the other yards should build their In the meantime, 'K' Office, in response to Supreme aval Command to the yards. Detailed
boats from 52 KM steel. It was further suggested operational demands for a U-boat with the greatest design work now proceeded apace, but various
that GW use 52 KM steel to start with, as Krupp possible number of torpedo tubes ready to fire at all requests for changes continued to delay
would not achieve full production before October times, had projected a version of the Type VIIC/42 completion. On 8 June 1943, for example, 50 per
1943. with six bow torpedo tubes and two stern tubes, cent of the completed engine-floor drawings were
On 22 February 1943, the first large allocation of but with otherwise identical dimensions, and this scrapped and had to be redrawn. By 14 July 1943,
contracts for Type VIIC/42, totalling 42 boats, was was designated VIIC/43. During the course of 1942, approximately 80 per cent of the constructional
distributed among six yards. On 4 March 1943, it had become increasingly difficult for U-boats to work had been decided upon, but in the meantime,
therefore, appropriate quotas were allocated to the reposition themselves suitably after the first the operational conditions which had demanded a
steel firms. Notes of authority for the iron were to attack, and it seemed essential that, when a U-boat boat of this type had changed significantly.
be prepared twelve months prior to keel-laying, as found itself in a favourable ppsition, as many However, after the Supreme Commander-in-Chief
between four and six months were needed for torpedoes as possible should be flIed. Obviously, in of the Navy had decided in favour of large series
production and delivery of materials, one month for the long term, a large number of tubes would be production of the new Type XXI (see page 208),
Comparison between the frame

Type VIIC/42. 10
lines of Types VIIC/42 and VIIC/43.
---
----------=============-
bending of metal and spars, three months for preferred to a good supply of torpedoes. On 3 April General Director Merker, the new head of the Main
construction of sections and one month for 1943, Director Cords suggested that, in order to Committee for Ship Construction, suspended all
transport. Sections should be ready at the yards avoid a second type change, an immediate change work on the Type VIIC/42. All contracts were
one month before assembly. However, during the to the new Type VIIC/43 be made at the expense of withdrawn on 24 July 1943. Attempts were still
initial phases of production it was acknowledged further VIIC/41 boats. But constructional details being made in October i943 to save the extensive
that the sections due to arrive at the yards between for C/43 had not yet been formulated, and Cord's preliminary work that had been done on VIIC/42, in
February and April 1944 would require a period of suggestion would inevitably have delayed the the hope that work could continue until the Type
up to 15 months. building of the urgently required deep-diving boats, XXI programme began, with construction from
At B&V, 38 sites were planned on the building which would have been wholly undesirable at this then on being undertaken by those yards not
slips for the series production of Type VIIC/42. By critical phase of the U-boat campaign. On 11 May involved in the Type XXI programme (H.C.
shortening the slip time from the current 38 weeks 1943, it was resolved not to pursue Type VIIC/43, Stiilcken Sohn, Hamburg, and Nordseewerke,
Emden). But this was all to no avail, and the
Table 32. Subcontractors for Type VlIC/42 construction cessation of work was fmal.
Pressure-hull section Length Max. diameter Subcontractor By the end of the war, 572 Type VIIC and 87
Type VIIC/41 boats had been delivered. These bore
I 3.3m 3.29m Thyssen, Miilheim the main brunt of the U-boat campaign and, at first
2 Electric motor compartment 4.2m 4.42m Thyssen, Mtilheim glance, it is difficult to understand why, following
3 4.8m 5m Carl Spaeter, Hamburg the decision to favour the electric U-boat, with its
4 Diesel compartment 5.9m 5m Carl Spaeter, Hamburg
5 After battery compartment 5.6m 5m J. Gollnow Sohn, Stet tin increased submerged performance, no attempts
6 Control room 9.lm 5m Dortmunder Union/Krupp, Stahlbau were made to redesign Type VIIC to meet new
7 Forward battery compartment 5.9m 5m Krupp-Druckenmtiller, Berlin requirements. Very possibly, even if inessential
8 5. 5m 4.33m Eggers & Co., Hamburg construction and appendages had been removed,
9 Bow compartme'lt 2.95m 3.757m Thyssen, Mtilheim
10 3.3m 2.5m Thyssen, Miilheim
and a more streamlined bridge shape adopted, no
Ballast keel Thyssen, Millheim significant increase in submerged speed could have
After-ship (length 8m) Ottenser Eisenwerke AG been achieved by the rather poor performance of
Fore-ship (length 9. 5m) Ottenser Eisenwerke AG existing electric motors. This opinion is supported
pper deck Carl Spaeter, Hamburg by post-war trials carried out by the orwegian
Die el floor Carl Spaeter, Hamburg
Conning-tower construction J. J. Sieta and Carl Spaeter
Navy using the former U926 redesignated K M
Kya. Using the reshaped bridge style of the Walter
160 WAR CONSTRUCTION, EXPERIENCE A D DEVELOPME T,1939-1943

U-boats, instead of the usual VIlC bridge (minus Office. The experience gained from this first conditions of high or steep swell, the boat lay very
'wintergarden', the AA platform behind the bridge, operation is embodied in a report, here quoted in well in the water with only a small amount of
and armamentl, only an insignificant increase in extract, which set out the problems encountered by movement and little shipping of water at the
speed (38 revolutions per knot as opposed to 40 supply ships: conning tower. What is disadvantageous in my
revolutions per knot) resulted, but the depth- 'Fuel was supplied in quantities of 20 to 55 cubic opinion is the unexpectedly high loss of speed in a
keeping properties were greatly improved. metres. Lubricating oil was requested only in one head sea, amounting to approximately 4()-50 per
A decisive improvemeqt could only be brought instance, and was supplied in two instances only. cent. The crew behaved magnificently in these
about by changing the shape of the outer ship and Time to supply fuel varied according to weather operations, which were often most difficult,
enlarging the battery capacity and submerged conditions, the amount and the nautical and pushing themselves to the limit of physical
power unit. As early as the summer of 1943, in an technical skills of the boats involved; variation was endeavour. For example, the provisioning of 4 boats
'investigation into the increase in submerged speed between 1 hour 35 minutes and 5 hours.... Weather in a period exceeding 16 hours in one day; on
of the VIlC/42 boat', suggestions were made conditions varied between wind and sea 1-2 and 4. another day, working 8 to 10 hours with lifelines
concerning the trebling of the submerged power in The higher figures are the limit at which efficient attached, with seas and breakers constant-
Type VIlC. Additional battery capacity was to be execution of the supply operation is possible. ly washing over them. Severe injuries did not
obtained by removing the surface armament, by a During the replenishment of supplies, a speed of occur, but this must be ascribed to Fortune smiling
reduction of the four reserve torpedoes and of the 3-4 knots on electric motors was achieved. Present on us ....
interior fuel-oil bunkers. A further proposal was the equipment would not seem to allow any greater 'On board our vessel in about 10 hours,
installation of larger battery cells even at the cost speed. . . . In the case of eight boats, mishaps approximately 80 fresh loaves each of lkg can be
of accessibility. A more difficult problem would occurred causing greater or lesser delays, through baked. Some 800 of these loaves were baked at
have been the provision and installation of night, were then distributed to various boats and
appropriate electric motors giving a higher received with great joy. Additionally,
performance. Almost certainly, the entire engine Bridge-work of Kya (U9261. approximately 250 loaves were baked for our own
installation would have had to have been changed, This streamlined conversion was suggested bV von Heggstad use. The rye-bread that we produced has an
and it would have been simpler to have in 1959. excellent taste, is nourishing and keeps well.... [In
incorporated variable pitch propellers, giving an toto] 14 boats were supplied with 13,100kg of
increased number of revolutions from an increased provisions for 137 days.... It had been thought
voltage in the normal electric motors. (Without any that the 6m rubber dinghy would serve as a means
change of shape of the outer skin, an increase in the of transporting 'provisions from one boat to
submerged speed to approximately 12 knots was another. Just how it should have performed this
calculated.) In any event, such conversions would task was not clear. Large iron davits were provided
have taken up a significant part of yard capacity at all deck hatches for the hoisting up of provisions.
and, inevitably, would have delayed the Type XXI However, during the entire operation conditions
programme, and this would have been totally ••.p ...., permitted the hatches to be used on only one day,
unacceptable. :: ..
-:~ ~:.: .. - and that while homeward bound. Otherwise, only
Supply U-boats: Type VIIF

Until the summer of 1941, it had been possible to
..
o the conning-tower hatch could be used. On this one
favourable day, the rubber dinghy might have
served as a means of transporting goods if it had
replenish U-boats operating off Freetown and in the not been lost during the first supply operation. I am
South Atlantic from fleet auxiliaries, but, after the hose leakages caused by poor .manoeuvring, by fully convinced that, even on calm days, handing
battleship Bismarck had been sunk, the British repeated passing-over of hoses, by inept handling over provisions by means of rubber dinghy would
eliminated the auxiliary-ship network that supplied on deck (chafmg and tearing because of the lack of have taken four times as long as my well-tested
surface commerce raiders. The fmal attempt at a chafmg mats and such like) or through hooks on the rope method which could be used in any conditions
supply operation by surface ship in the Atlantic hydroplanes. The apparatus would then have to be of weather: the receiving boat would come to a
ended in ovembe~December 1941, with the loss hauled in, mostly by me, and the torn length of hose distance of 25-40m with the sea somewhat astern
of the auxiliary cruiser Atlantis and the supply changed and, in one case, it had to be disconnected and wind to the port side. Through pennant-pistol,
vessel Python. In the Indian Ocean, on the other on the deck of the receiving boat. While the hoses a line-connection is made of about 300m of manila
hand, supplying by surface vessel was possible were being passed over, one boat fouled the hoses hawser, 5-£cm circumference, with a central round-
until the beginning of 1944. with its forward hydroplanes, tore the hawser and thimble with 0.5m steel-wire pennants, with 2-3
On 13 September 1941, the first two Type XIV both hoses away and, when this was cleared, let go spring-hooks attached. Goods are sent over in
U-tankers left the slipway at DWK. They were the whole equipment. Very much to be regretted packages (sea-sacks which can be quickly slit open),
subsequently commissioned on 15 November and was the fact that out of 15 boats, of which 13 came mesh-nets the size of a mesh hammock. For articles
24 December 1941, just when their employment had from their bases, only 5 had knowledge of the oil- that could be damaged by water, transport
become a matter of urgency because of the failure of transferring procedure, although this had been containers made of light metal 30 X 35 X 50 with
surface-ship supplying, and because of the entry of given to the flotillas by the Second-in-Command, watertight closures....
the United States into the war, which necessitated U-boats, on 23.3.1942. Although I gave preliminary 'Above all, the handing over of provisions is an
an immediate extension of U-boat operations to the instruction, it is impossible to state just how many operation to involve all personnel; seamen on deck;
east coast of America. During trials, the boats were abortive manoeuvres took place and how many off-duty stokers on the lower deck attending to
difficult to keep on a straight course - which was technical delays occurred ... which shows that the provisional tasks in the control room, all attending
hardly encouraging in view of their intended role - instructions were not understood. The operation of to packing of supplies according to the pre-
but which could, however, be eased by enlarging the taking into tow (necessary for oil-provisioningl did conceived plan.'
stern deadwood. On the other hand, despite their not go at all well with the Type lXC boats. In the At about the same time, UA (the ex-Turkish
wide upper deck, depth-keeping was satisfactory. case of Ul08, the slip-hooks kept giving; in the case Batiray, taken over on the outbreak of war) and,
The first U-tanker, U459, sailed at the end of of Ul03, in quite a light swell, the towing-cable just a litttle later, the first large minelayer, U116,
March 1942, under Korvettenkapitiin von parted at the U459 end. With the VIlC boats it could be used for supply purposes. Because of the
Wilamowitz-Mollendorf, to a rendezvous south of went well on one occasion, badly on others. We continuing embargo on SMA mines for U-boat
the ewfoundland Banks. Aboard was Chief aval proceeded in echelon formation. That made the operations (page 110l, Type XB could not be used
Construction Adviser Grim, representing 'K' heavy hawser unnecessary.... In heavy seas and in for its designed task. Later, too, XB boats - even
WAR CO STRUCTION, EXPERIE CE AND DEVELOPMENT, 1939-1943 161

after mine operations had been resumed - were United States to the Mediterranean. Having
still used as auxiliary supply vessels. encountered U-boat supply groups by accident, the
Now, in quick succession, six Type XIV boats Allies thereafter sought them out systematically. Type VIIF.
(U459-U464) were ready for operations and, in 1942, Once detected, these large, slow boats had little Glossary: Trelbolhochbehalter, high fuel oil container; Mitte
they noticeably improved the effectiveness of the chance of evading a combined air and sea attack. Torpedo Ausstossrohr. middle torpedo exit tube; Hecktorpedo und
VIlC and IXC boats, despite increased defensive July 1943 was an especially unlucky month for E.·Maschinenraum, stern torpedo and electric motor room;
Oieselmolorenraum, diesel engine room; Unterotfizersraum hinten,
measures by the enemy, and they contributed supply boats. On the 13th, during her maiden NCOs' quarters after; Torpedolagerraum, torpedo store-room;
initially to successes off the American coa t and in voyage, U487 was detected by the enemy and Kombuse. galley; Zentrale, control room; Offillers und
the large convoy battles of thi ,the most successful Oberfeldwebelraum, ward room and warrant officers' quarters;
destroyed by fIve aircraft from the escort-carrier Bugtorpedoraum. bow torpedo room; Rohr. tube; Frei durchflutet.
year of the U-boat campaign. Each U-tanker's Core. On 24 July, her replacement, U459, was free-flooding companment; Wasserdichte Back, watenight
supply of fuel-oil could replenish twelve VIlC boats bombed. The next attempt to put to sea in a group, forecastle; Treibolbunker. fuel·oll bunker; Tauchbunker, ballast tank
(water or fuel); Untennebzelle, negative buoyancy tank; Regelzelle.
with four weeks' supply. or fIve IXC boats with from Bordeaux on 27 July, was a complete ha co. compensating tank (water); Regelbunker, compensating fuel tank
eight weeks' supplies. These ucces fuloperations Three days later, north-west of Cape Ortega!, U461 (water or fuel); Tauchzelle. ballast tank (water); Kettenkasten,
led on 22 September 1942 to a further contract with and U462 with the operational U504 were chain cover; Tnmmzelle, trimming tank; Torpedozelle, torpedo
tank; Trinkwasserzelle, dnnklng water tank; Torpedozelle, torpedo
DWK, for 6 and, on 17 April 1943, for Type XIV intercepted and destroyed by Allied aircraft waShing water; Dete-Anlagerraum, detection equipment room;
boats, which brought the total number ordered to working in conjunction with a submarine-hunting Akkumulatorenraum, accumulator room; Schmutzwasserzelle, bilge
water tank; Munltlonskammer. ammUnitlon compartment;
24. In fact, only U491-U493 were laid down. group. On 4 August, U489 was unk south of Druckolbehalter, pressure·oll container; Kartoffellast, potato cargo;
In addition to replenishing fuel-oil, the supplying Iceland on her maiden voyage. Gefechtspistolen, contact pistol; Motorenolvorratstank, engine 011
of torpedoes was also very important. Time and The situation for a homeward-bound V-boat, storage tank; Gummboot, rubber dinghy; Sammehank, collecting
tank; Destillatbehalter, distilling chamber.
again, in conditions of the greatest diffIculty, boats short of fuel, was extremely critical, and the
that had quickly exhausted their torpedoes were solution to its problem seemed to be the
forced to re-arm from other U-boats whose fuel replenishing of its fuel while submerged. In his
upply was running low; alternatively, uch boats book U97766 Tage unter Wasser (Wiesbaden, 1950,
would hand over their fuel, and this too was a p. 135), Heinz Schaeffer describes the initial trials
complicated operation. Even Type XIV could carry of a submerged oil-supplying operation involving
only four torpedoes in upper deck housings, and the U445 and the supply U-boat, U460, on 7 December
larger Types XV and XVI (page 154) were not 1942. The boats proceeded in line astern connected
further developed to any extent. In the summer of by a hose for three hours, at a depth of 50m. Cour e
1941, it was decided summarily to modify the well- and speed signals were exchanged by underwater
proven Type VIlC as a torpedo transporter by telegraphy. It is astonishing that this system was
incorporating an additional pressure-hull section, not used morEl' often; in fact, it was not thoroughly .' '.; '.;' ·.u . I. ...
7.8m long, abaft the control room. A early as 1940, tested until the trials held with UD4 in the Gulf of
a similar modifIcation of Type VIlC had resulted in Danzig in September-{)ctober 1943. In these trials,
the medium minelaying Type VIID for fast UD4-Dutch 026, travelling on the surface at a
operations with SMA mines ( ee page 147). Apart constant speed of 2-3 knots ahead of the V-boat
from this, on 13 August 1941, the Chief of Naval that was to receive the fuel, frrst released a buoy
War Staff's U-Boat Department demanded the with a 96m towing hawser, ho e and telephone
development of a torpedo transporter of a size cable. The hose was filled with air so that both it
similar to Type XIV, but this project did not get and the hawser connected to it floated. The
beyond the initial planning tages and, like the very telephone link was found to be more reliable than
large Types XV and XVI. was rejected on account underwater telegraphy, and a pressure-tight socket
of 'unwieldiness'. The only prospect now for for the telephone had been obtained from the
torpedo transporters lay in a vessel ba ed on VIlC, captured British ubmarine Seal. The buoy was
which was designated VIlF. Thi , apart from taken aboard the receiving boat and stowed on the
additional storage for twenty-one torpedoes, bridge, the towing hawser was made fast and the
incorporated considerably widened saddle-tanks hose was connected. Both boats went to peri cope
for a large fuel supply and a roomy deck abaft the depth, with the supplier maintaining a con tant
bridge to accommodate the tran ferring parties. On speed and towing the receiver. After repeated
22 August 1941, four of these boats were placed in practice, the time from releasing the buoy until
contract with GW, but their delivery was not diving was reduced to about nine minutes. The
expected before the beginning of 1943. In order to boats now dived to about 3O-35m, with the towing
have a torpedo transporter available as soon as speed increased to 3-4 knots. In the absence of a
possible, it was decided on 9 eptember 1941 to fIt special pump, UD4 had to use water pressure to ... Tr""'U/~ !w'/~" Q"9M J -_lUtll-lkJiJ'-
out the captured Dutch submarine 027 (UD5) as a force the fuel through the hose. The transfer of -~,~~, - ..
-IJf"~r,':~J "'(~
- JSs",J - rtyWou/~1 flj~

makeshift. In addition, the Type XB boats could 80m 3 took approximately four hours, after which -.:It -IJI",I-'
carry nine reserve torpedoes, six of which were both boats surfaced simultaneously. The receiving
stored in upper-deck housings. boat let go the buoy and turned directly to port,
During the fIrst year of upply operations, the which took about three minutes with an _
...
r ~
,.
rendezvous appointed for U-boats were beyond the experienced crew.
,-; I'
zones of enemy air-surveillance, and losses were In August 1943, with the cessation of work on all
slight; only one (outward-bound) U-tanker, U464, older-type vessels in favour of Type XXI, further
was lost up to May 1943. In the summer of 1943, construction of Type XIV at DWK was also
however, when the Allies adopted an offensive role terminated. Even after this contract had been ~ JS,.,J
against U-boats, the U-tankers' mid-Atlantic transferred to GW, U-tanker construction was not ~ -'{)f~«U;'"
network was torn to pieces. Meanwhile, the restarted, and the loss of U490 on her frrst JJ't ,..1
'<
:.. fr~ /1I.fcl""'/~1
Americans had begun to provide air-cover from operational voyage on 11 June 1944 meant that no
escort-carriers on the convoy routes from the more boats of this type existed.
162 WAR CONSTRUCTION, EXPERIENCE A D DEVELOPME T,1939-1943

t
tr 1-
......
~
~;;
!'
~~
.~
~. •
~
,
~
~
~
l
~
~
~
t ~, 11~ -,- l
! ~
~~ t ;
>
~ ~
~ 'Sl1lJ~1 UKK
~
.1 :t
00
. ;., ------- ~ - :s ~-;- l "( ,; t ; ; 1; ~ i ...... I' • ; i".", ....u ..... ~ ~
.. - -.--- - -;,-~~~ ,. ..".' oH' .... ;,. • ';,' I,. . rU'

... ~;. 9 ; ~ ~ .J' ..j 1"",,' ~:;;.-+ ~ . S4 " II '---"lll''''''- - rs-------;;-r-
l,,#osi"lI!l . (jussef~Jfplale , ,()~. ~1J·oM INX1 a"
--'
I
If¥¥ U~( 118u· 77 SlXJ
I If) _ oR~/(J"9I(iJ'5plJ9'SIJ'L) IIbt~,lun,.f.JJ-SplSD'11 -84)
QIIILWfJ tmd IIMfHlwb#lr,uIn Bu91lJirp#dlnwm

~~
~
i,. .JrruArrlt!AiM _
(lib) 1. -Spf'f6'11 bls ')4 !II r«K"biKI~/lSUJ(&} _ ",.t1u.rr1teM'~·lIl,..",I_
Ul. 1 ;- ;;-N.6S. J
.
.' "
~
~
"
RUf/'"lJIoll1rtyJrqlJ/t1 f f1Il6f~I.ull7Mf tU.) Tr~I/)t)/~lt 'l,fJD",'
1
;;:;-,-t.... .w ~~ r"~s.urn~
-'1(fM8/) -
I
T ..
~..... ;~;...UO'~,.,,~u46l
,.{.,J 4"".1 R
&."'~ .!iU»tI/IW.SJ~U'rle (
.. ..
J-.L..,
. I·
W xtL <t-
i
"; i
I \
, ,
.1-t-.........,
,, ,
,...,....,
10
-- -.-
·W- -
--~
.ar:
,
~
f--
, ~
-
_._- - -
-:.-- -~ --:
- <~
~-::>
~
\r'
\ 1, ,(
' I \ '.
I,
/ I
1r:. ll!l}f r,.
! GY
h141~·~I~.~
I i f"iH~ I: I
..-
- -,
. , .
,
,
'", '""
--"
'"""'
.
~ r
- ~!~ t tt;T!- .~
,3l
-3
~I
!-l-
,
r
II ~ I ID"t-
_ 1°,'"
: ~ • • -
1\
,~
r .
~ 'i ~_.
i1 .~" '~'.~~ _.,".-y_J J l}" i Ii i.J ~ r~

I
L • 11.1
"
-...:
~urrJ~ ,,IJS.I
"",..!..prdfu.'~ ~ _ fiI,,'U<1tU.I.tf~SS_1 ...
~ )IS. 1 J,IJ. J ,...,.,~.w-J ~
~ D.f6S;;T "I";-~"")
--
l' ~ ~ O,/~·"".muM
i~f,-18fD.. 1 q firy~_ Nbp.«uU"_lJen'.... ~ "" q r(&KItJ.kJ·H~.1 Q ft..I/Jtll"""''''u JI . J~80,.1
- ~~sJ .,$llrI t./J.9 --
J(J/)".J
WAR CO STRUCTIO . EXPERIENCE A D DEVELOPMENT, 1939-1943 163

80 60 40 20 o
YE
ww HH HJ HK HL HM
60
...
Above: Ul060 (Type VIIF) before launching in April 1943. Right: A standard German naval chart showing the supply U-boats'
broad areas of operation. (See pp. 166-167 for a brief explanation of the system and a summary of operations.)
164 WAR CONSTRUCTION, EXPERIE CE A D DEVELOPMENT, 1939-1943

I I
~O ~o 1~0 160 1~0 160 100
YS YC YO YE
~~ 'C " ' " " " 'M~f~'

~PD ~(
AC
;f; ~
1/
ct> ~ 6I:~~' Zl~r---+~-'--e"~=-----.------i
If '" K '" 1 ~[) C ,,~ "::J ;l, c "
J<Y 1 I :-l!»~~'o '~p--~'G' ~o,'

'I " '1 '" ! "~Iil"" ,)", 'M ,I' '0 ,,1.1\ '0 ) \,
~ ~~ "/ ~f" "' ,u "' 'w "' "' ~ ,.~~

,;' j("=lcsl\ '\ U
~.!~
~--~
CT ..... J 09\§s
,./
v~G 00 OE ~ OG OH OJ OK OL OM ~N
1
r /1]7'-
I cs
I
cc
~ MA ~ MC o~ o~ 00 OR OS 6 ou ov ow ox OY OZ OA~~S fA -I -D)s( DC DO I
CR\ ~O Mt " MG ~H MJ MK ML M~ MN 'bc 00 OE OF OG OH <3 OK OL OM ON 00 OP 00 OR OS O~ \(U OK J!, ~ ON DO OP
'M~~M~ MQ MR J\IYT MU 'Ml '--oM' MX '6~ OW OX OY OZ RA ~ RC RO RE Rr- RG RH RJ RK RL RM RN PA Ei, ES EC ED EE
MY /,j,Z LA LS LC' Qo LE ~ LG )H" R6J RP RO RR RS RT ~ RV RW RX RY RZ SA SS SC SO SE SF PS PC ~ EM EN "1:0_
(LJ LK LL LM LN LO LP Ld\~R LIJSG ~St-l:~J ~K SL SM ~ SO SP SO SR SS ST SU SV SW SX SY PO PE 1

~T ~ LV LW LX LY LZ KA K;-f--)KC SZ T~ __/S-'T2' TO TE ~ TG TH TJ TK TL TM TN TO TP TO TR PG PH ~\
KC(/KE) K~ KG KH KJ KK KL KM KN ~I-T~ TU 'T/ ~Y( TX TY ~ UA US UC UO UE UF UG UH UJ UK UL PK PL PM 'p~
::! 5f Kci-'" KR KS KT KU KV KW \ KX UN uo U1 UO gj US UT UU UV UW UX UY UZ:; PO PP PO Pl~
I-Ii KZ JA JS JC JO JE JF JG lJHrv-;s......I'\c )6 VE !;: t( VH VJ VK VL VM VN VO ~ PS PT pu) Gy-l
JK JL JM -IN JO JP JO JR VO
M
VR VS 1T
",1.
VU VV vw vx VY vz:;:
<t PV PW p1'j J~l GT
JS JT JU JV JW JX JY JZ WS WC WO WE WF WG WH WJ WK WL ~I PY P Z ! ?HA
~ ~
WV WW HH HJ
HO HP HO HR HS HT HU WO WP WO WR WS WT WU
WAR CO STRUCTIO ,EXPERIENCE A D DEVELOPME T,1939-1943 165

Table 33. Summary of operations carried out by supply U-boats
(Compiled from material from BdU war diaries, amplified by Prof. Dr. Rohwer).
Boat Op. o. Duration of operation Main supply territory V-boats being supplied
U459' 21 March 1942-15 May 1942 CC Ul08, U98, U333, U582, U352, U564, U571, U566, U594,
U558, U69, U572, U751, Ul03, U753.
2 6 June 1942-20 July 1942 CC U558, U566, U594, U571, Ul06, U84, U107, U575, U502,
U437, U203, U134, U432, U653, U135, U754.
3 19 Aug 1942-5 Nov 1942 GG (Cape Town operation of the U68, U504, U172, U159, U333, U552, Ul07, Ul25, U174,
'Eisbiir (Polar Bear) Group) U506 (on the return trip this boat was, in turn, supplied
by U462).
4 20 Dec 1942-8 Mar 1943 GG (Africa boats) U506, U509, U516, Cagni in FD and U160, U161 in FU.
5 21 April 1943-4 June 1943 AKlBD U306, U258, U648, Ul68, U381, U226, U260, U378, 0709,
U454, U466, U402, U448, U569, U650, Ul29, U403, U92.
6 22 July 1943 left Bordeaux with U461 and Ul17. U461
had to put back because of damage. The other two boats
were escorted by three destroyers to B F 4751. From here
they carried out their individual operations alone. On 24
July 1943, after being damaged by bombs from two
aircraft of 172 Squadron, U459 scuttled herself. Some of
the crew were taken prisoner.
U460' 7 June 1942-30 July 1942 BD (Originally intended for U89, U132, U406, U173, U96, U576, U171, U402, U458,
Brazilian operation) U202, U584, Ul26, U509, U508.
2 2 Sept 1942-14 Oct 1942 DF/DT (Freetown boats) U201, U202, U511, U332, U109, U406, U107, U333, U87,
U590, U507, U16O.
3 16 Nov 1942-19 Dec 1942 BD U224, U84, U43, U106, U608, U383, U663, U623, U445,
U611, U373, U67, Ul83, U606, U518, U303, U358, U405.
4 30 Jan 1943-12 Mar 1943 AKlBC U707, U632, U594, U414, U608, U135, U402, U454, U89,
U614, U456, U606, U303, U403, U525, U607, U226, U223,
U186.
5 24 April 1943-26 June 1943 ES (Freetown boats) U515, Ul18, Ul23, U126, Ul54, Ul05, U511, U513, U92.
6 30 Aug 1943-5 Oct 1943 CE (Zaunk6nig boats) then in BD U338, U645, U386, U305, U260, U448, U610, U603, U422,
After an additional refuelling of U264, U460 was attacked U170.
by several carrier-borne aircraft. A defensive action
lasting 30 minutes ensued, after which U455 and U264,
which were also present, made their escape. U460 was
then sunk by 3 aircraft from the carrier Card. There were
no survivors.
U461 , 28 June 1942-19 Aug 1942 CC/CD U332, U454, U43, U607, U552, U597, U71, U161, 0704,
U86, U437, U379.
2 7 Sept 1942-18 Oct 1942 BC U594, U92, U411, U218, U96, U380, U91, U211, U404,
U407, U584, U171, Ul64, U217, U558.
3 19 Nov 1942-3 Jan 1943 DGIDS U753, U606, Ul26, U174, Ul28, Ul34, U176, Ul29, Ul54,
Ul59, Ul61, Ul63, U172, U508.
4 12 Feb 1943-22 Mar 1943 DG/DF U522, U202, U558, U382, U87, U707, U106, U521, U504.
5 20 April 1943-31 May 1943 AKlBD U631, U610, U267, U706, U108, U598, U532, U266, U662,
U707, U413, U552, U264, U221, U666, U642, U603, U228,
U217.
6 27 July 1943 sailed from Bordeaux with U504 and U462.
At 10.00 on 30 July the group was attacked by aircraft of
502 Squadron. At 11.57 U461 reported herself under
attack from 5 aircraft in BF 7124 and requested air
support. She was sunk soon afterwards. There were no
survivors.
U462' 23 July 1942-22 Sept 1942 CD Ul61, U94, U558, U373, U569, U176, U755, U596, Ul35,
U512, U516, U98, U6OO, U66, Ul63, Ul73.
2 18 Oct 1942-7 Dec 1942 DGIEH U459, U125, UD5, U516, U156, UlO7, U590, U87, U332,
Ul34, UD3, U505, U552.
3 Planned for mid Jan 1943, but damage forced BD U332, U603, U383, U753, U226, U91, U653, U621, U6OO,
boat to return. Intended territory DF U468, U598, U358, U454, U707, U134, U303, U306, U381,
19 Feb 1943-25 April 19~3 U415, U438, U604, U628, U631, U523, Ul86.
1. First operational departure on 20 June 1943. Saw
U462 attacked and damaged by 5 aircraftr in BF 81. Put
back. Entered Bordeaux on 6 July 1943.
2. U462 became non-operational on 13 June 1943 through
bombing attacks and U847 had to supply the 'Monsoon'
U-boats.
3. 27 July 1943 sailed with U461 and U504. On 30 July
the group was attacked by aircraft (see U461). U462 was
sunk with the loss of one man.
U463' 11 July 1942-3 Sept 1942 CD U84, U564(2x), U654, U658, U510, U598, U6OO, Ul29, U125,
Ul54, U217, Ul64, Ul34.
2 28 Sept 1942-11 Nov 1942 BD U216, U661, U620, U382, U260, U662, U706, U610, U442,
U437, U356, U69, U753
3 6 Dec 1942-27 Jan 1943 CD U130, Ul03, U653, U86, U442, U436, U575, U381, U571, U620,
U225, U336, U406, U455, U615, U628, U664, U123, U524.
U409, U59112x), U89, U758, U664, U91, U230, U615, U84,
4 4 March 1943-19 April 1943 BD U642, U641, U333, U336, U440, U666, U373, U590, U527,
U526, U305, U523, U610. U86, U618, U228. U616.

Duration of operation Main supply territory U-boats being supplied
12 May 1943 sailed from Bordeaux, assigned quadrant

BD. Destroyed by bombers of 58 Squadron south-east of
the Scillies on 15 May.
4 Aug 1942-20 Aug 1942. Supply assigrunent in AJ.
Sunk by US aircraft on 20 Aug south-east of Iceland with
loss of two men.
27 March 1943-11 May 1943 AK U260, U270, Ul68, U584, U662, U630, U57J, U4I5, U84,
U6I8, U257, U404.
15 June 1943-13 July 1943 DF I'Monsoon' boats) U382, Ul95, U598, U4OO, U604, U662, U59I, U382, U359,
Sunk (29 survivors) by 5 aircraft from the carrier U466.
Core in DF 99 on 13 July.
18 May 1943-8 July 1943 CE U64I, U603, U22I, U608, U228, U211, U666, U558, U95I,
U953, U435, U232, U642, U336, U193, U590, U6I8, U57I,
U3OO, U653, U358, U634, U732, U257. Large supply
capacity resultant on embarking the remaining fuel from
UI99, U536 U17I and U535.
2 7 Sept 1943-12 Dec 1943 CEIDE U68, Ul55, U214, U103, U402, U378, U64I, U758, U220,
Ul29, U530, Ul93, U731.
3 22 Feb 1944-26 April 1944 DR Ul23, U543, U843, U537.
Sunk with all hands at her supply point by US escorts
Frost, Huse, Barber and Snowdon.
U489' 22 July 1943-4 Aug 1943 CD
Bombed and sunk (I man lost) by aircraft of Canadian
423 Squadron south of Iceland on 4 Aug.
U490' 6 May 1944-11 June 1944 CD and Indian Ocean
After lengthy training and trials, sunk on 11 June north-
west of the Azores by 2 aircraft from the carrier Croatan
and escort destroyers Frost, Inch and Huse. Crew
rescued.
UA 1 14 March 1942-24 April 1942 CC
U116' 1 15 May 1942-9 June 1942 CC U203, U202, U84.
2 27 June 1942-23 Aug 1942 BE U590, U4OO, U94, Ul24, U569, U96.
U582, U752, U572, also five (?) VUC boats IUI301 during
3 22 Sept 1942-Dct 1942 BD her southbound passage.
Last report on 6 Oct then missing in North Atlantic. U6I8, U356, U22I, U258, U43, UlOO.
UlI7' Oct 1942-23 Nov 1942 BD after minelaying off Reykjavik,
Iceland.
2 24 Dec 1942-8 Feb 1943 BD U753, U454, U402, U38I, U438, U89, U624, U6OO.
3 30 March 1943-15 May 1943 DG after minelaying off Casablanca
and Fedala. U628, U6I5, U59I, U435, U336, U66212x~ U260, U7OO.
4 22 July 1943-7 Aug 1943 U5I6, UI85, U5OO, U68, U509, U183, U460, U160, U5I8.
Minelaying off New York, before supplying U66 in CD.
Then scheduled to take over supplying of north-bound
boats in DF 14, in place of the unavailable U-tanker
U489. But on 7 Aug the refuelling of U66 in CD 64 was
interrupted and UI17 was sunk with all hands by 3
aircraft from the carrier Card.
UlI8' 1 19 Sept 1942-18 Oct 1942 AK U4I0, U607, U2I6, U6I5, U599.
2 11 Nov 1942-13 Dec 1942 DH U564, U653, U86, U92, U5I9, U124, UI05, U160, UI85, U9I.
3 25 Jan 1943-26 Feb 1943 DH after minelaying off Gibraltar. Ul75, U558, U258, U202, U2I4, U87, U264, U514, U217.
4 25 May 1943-12 June 1943 DG after minelaying off Halifax.
Sunk (5 survivors) in DG 47 by 8 aircraft from the carrier
Bogue.
U119' 6 Feb 1943-3 April 1943 BD after minelaying off Reykjavik. U608, U377, U359, U659, U405, U448, U566, U603, U638,
U6I6.
2 25 April 1943-24 June 1943 AKlBD then minelaying off U92, U954, U628, U584, U6I4, U383.
Halifax.
Homeward bound, supplied U603 in CD. In company with
bomb-damaged U449 and U650 depth-charged and
rammed by HMS Starling. 0 survivors.
U2I9' 16 Oct 1943-1 Jan 1944 AKIEH ('Monsoon' boats). U9I, U5I0, U170, UI03, U172.
Original assignment: minelaying off Cape Town and
Colombo, then to Penang.
2 As a transport U-boat after receiving schnorkel. Sailed
from Bordeaux on 1 Sept 1944, arrived Djakarta on 11
Dec 1944. Taken over by the Japanese in Singapore as
1505 On 8 May 1945.
U22()2 8 Sept 1943 left Bergen for minelaying off St. John's. She
was then to carry out supplying in BD. To this end, U220
was to embark the remaining fuel from U455 and U488.
On her way to the rendezvous, U220 was sunk with all
hands in BD 61 by 2 aircraft from the escort carrier
Block Island.
IType XIV boats. 'Type XB boats. The Type XB boats, U233 and U234, were not used Germans on their standard naval charts IMarine-Quadratkarte). Letters such as DG, CD
subsequently for supplying (U233 was lost while minelaying off Halifax in CB 34 on 5 July and BC denote broad areas. Precise positions within these areas may be recognized by the
1944; U234 was to proceed to the Far East as a transport U-boat). four-digit numbers (eg BF 7124) after the letters.
Note. All abbreviations shown in the table above refer to the grid system used by the

THE DEVELOPMENT
OF SINGLE-DRIVE
U-BOATS
fIgures. One looks, therefore, to the use of a light-
THE WALTER PROCESS weight closed-circuit engine, impelled by air on the
surface and by a carbon dioxide/oxygen mixture
I n the early thirties. the German engineer, when submerged. For reasons of operational
Hellmuth Walter. was involved with the Germania expediency and weight, the oxygen is to be carried
Yard. Kiel, in the design of a gas turbine. which was in the form of hydrogen super-oxide. In the best
to have an effective performance of 2.000hp. It interests of engine layout and weight considera-
occurred to him to develop a thermal engine as the tions, of armament and manning. the following
single propulsion unit for a high-speed U-boat, design is most appropriate for a high-speed U-boat.
which would obtain necessary oxygen through the Obviously. we can only give a broad sketch, but
disintegration of hydrogen peroxide (HzO z) when from this one can shape a judgement on how one
submerged. One kilogramme of 80 per cent HzO z may best dispose the various compartments and
solution contains approximately 0.38kg of Oz (i.e., a weights.
quantity that in normal condition is usually found 'General Description
in 1.15m J of air). This would enable O.lkg of fuel to The outer casing is haped like a fIsh. with a
be burned. At that time, however. the normal completely smooth exterior presenting no sharp
commercial solution contained a maximum of only projections. A small amount of positive buoyancy is
45 per cent HzO z. The use of hydrogen peroxide, as present when the boat is travelling on the surface,
opposed to oxygen gas in U-boat technology and the boat does not break surface in the usual
eemed to offer possible advantages in that it sense of the term. i.e., it does not travel 'on the
required lower container weight (4.5kg steel for Ikg water'. In effect. it 'sticks its essential organ up
of Oz at 400 atmospheres) and lent itself to easier through the water-surface' - those organs that are
storage on board. necessary for suction of air, for combustion and for
At fIrst, Walter regarded HzO z only as a navigation. As the normal U-boat weight-allotment
convenient and pure carrier of oxygen. He was for the casing would be unacceptably high for high-
hoping that a diesel engine could be driven by the speed boats, such boats would be over-pressurized
circulation of exhaust gas enriched with oxygen internally when submerged, so that the thickness of
obtained from catalytic disintegration. and casing-walls can be kept thin. These could then
Professor Hellmuth Walter.
intended to test the principle with an available withstand pressures of 2-10 atmospheres, de-
250hp diesel engine using commercially available only of keeping up with fleets at fighting speeds pending on wall thickness and method of con-
HzO z. His aim was a high-speed submarine with an but of attaining speeds which will enable it to take struction. The crew and life-support equipment
underwater speed of 25---30 knots - an attacking up a favourable attacking position against fast are situated in a special pressure hull which is
weapon that, with the aeroplane, would opponents. Discussions with representatives of the always at normal pressure. The main engines are
revolutionize warfare. Supreme Naval Command have established that a arranged one above the other. as it is essential to
In March 1933, Walter contacted the Electro- boat with approximately the following specifi- achieve a two-fold purpose: a low water resistance
Chemical Works in Munich, which produced cations would be suitable for the e requirements: and a narrow and high cross-section in the interest
industrial HzO z, requesting information and Displacement: surfaced 300 tons, of the centre of gravity. The boat will be only 32m
delivery possibilities. and succeeded in arousing the submerged 320 tons. in length, and so its manoeuvring properties should
interests of Albert Pietzsch, the founder of the fIrm. Maximum speed: surfaced 26 knots. be adequate. The exhaust-gas cooling system, the
He also made simultaneous representation to the submerged 30 knots. oxygen-producing equipment and the absorbers are
Naval OffIce, and here Laudahn's successor, Chief Maximum power of main surfaced 4,800hp. situated in the same compartment as the forward
Naval Construction Adviser Brandes, took the engines: submerged 7,500hp. engine, with the rear engine in a similar com-
matter up. In a communication to the Naval High Total range of action: 2.500 nautical miles partment abaft this. Hydrogen super-oxide is
Command dated 5 October 1933. Walter set out a at 15 knots, of which stored as far forward and aft as possible. with the
detailed suggestion for his high-speed boat: 20 per cent is carried fuel supply in a centrally-placed compartment. The
'Design for a High-Speed Submarine out submerged = 500 tanks containing hydrogen super-oxide are only
The following design arises from the efforts to nautical miles at 15 two-thirds full, because the specifIc gravity of this
increase surface and submerged speeds of U-boats knots. substance is approximately 1.4 and this weight
to the point where they can work with fleets in all The propul ion system and hull construction at must be balanced by sea water after the fuel has
contingencies. The U-boat must also be capable not present in use do not permit the attainment of these been consumed. Various empty compartments,
168 THE DEVELOPME T OF SINGLE-DRIVE U-BOATS

which in normal vessels would contain air, will be however, Valve 1 must be closed and air aspirated
kept under pressure during submerged travel, as Walter-boat with closed-cycle through Valves 4 and 5, i.e., through the body of the
will also, for example, half-filled tanks and crank drive, 1933 boat itself.
casings for main and auxiliary engines to the extent 'In submerged travel, i.e., when hydrogen
that they can be made effectively air-tight. In the peroxide is being used, exhaust gases are in
interests of more effective working at high circulation in the closed circuit. Nitrogen is then
revolutions, as well as helping to achieve a smooth gradually replaced by carbon dioxide. In this
hull outline, the propellers will be housed in circulation process, one is not tied to the pressure of
shrouds. Hydroplanes and rudders will be placed the outer atmosphere as an aspirating means, and
abaft these shrouds so that the stream of water can as one is likewise not tied to the oxygen content of
act against them and send the boat in the desired the air, it then becomes possible in submerged
direction. The boat's hull is designed to withstand a travel to achieve considerably increased speeds
slight outside over-pressure of approximately 1 with conventional engines. What helps this process
atmosphere, and a very strong internal over- is the fact that the specific heat of carbon dioxide is
pressure, which may amount to a figure of up to 8 greater than that of the air, which means that the
atmospheres. engines require less heat, leading in turn to the
'The following methods of travelling are possible: Walter's proposed closed-cycle engines giving a considerable increase in
'On the surface with air; the conning-tower (air- engine, October 1933 performance at identical heat. An increased
shaft) is raised. In this condition, one can travel Air shaft Escape valve performance of 56 per cent over urface travel is
either with the boat's hull under pressure, or, if it calculated.
suits the requirements of the situation, with the 'In submerged travel, the exhaust gases from the
hull freely ventilated. In the fIrst of these cases, the engine pass from Valve 3 (Valve 2 being closed) into
boat is completely ready for diving at all times; in the cooler and, from there, through Valve 6 and
the second case it can, however, dive to a maximum past the oxygen-generator once again, into the
depth of 10m. To this depth one can keep the boat engine. At Valve 6, the exhaust gas compressor
at a pressure of 1 atmosphere and carry out sucks in the carbon dioxide that is constantly being
functions inside the boat's hull. Repairs can Charging valve formed by combustion, and forces it through Valve
therefore be carried out both in a surfaced position 8 into the body of the boat, or through Valve 9 into
and in a condition of moderate submergence. the absorber, in which the carbon dioxide is
'When the boat's hull is under a high internal travelling, air will be circulating through the engine dissolved and the urplus oxygen collected and led
over-pressure, for example at 8 atmospheres, and and in the boat, and it will therefore be necessary, back once again into the oxygen generator. In this
this is maintained, the boat may be taken at will to by repeated charging and exhausting, to drive off section the exhaust gases are enriched again with
depths of (}--90m. If one had time to put the interior the nitrogen in the engine and replace it by soluble oxygen. This takes place through the fact that a
of the boat under sufficient pressure and if the carbon dioxide. All kinds of thermal engines could continuous supply of H 20 2 is passed by a pump,
pressure hull were built with sufficient resistance, it be used, combustion gas engines, gas turbines or rigidly connected to the fuel pump, into the oxygen-
would be possible to achieve even greater depths, steam engines. generator where it is disintegrated by a catalyst.
and the boat would be able to move as quickly at 'The sketch represents a method of circulating The introduction of fuel takes place in conventional
such depths as on the surface. However, the attain- the propulsion agent, using diesel engines in a ways, by pump to the engine or to the separate
ment of such depths in the orth Sea and the Baltic coupled arrangement. For surface travel, fresh air cylinders. Exhaust Valve 7 serves to reduce the
could only have minimal significance. is taken through the aspirating pipes via Valve 1 over-pressure in the interior of the boat.
'The switching from air to oxygen drive will be an into the engines, leaving again as exhaust gas 'Another species of propulsion plant is a steam
automatic process, and will be controlled through Valve 3 and through Exhaust Valve 2 to installation driven by the circulation-process. In
automatically by closure of a slide-valve in an air- the outside of the boat. If, during surface travel, the this, the large exhaust-gas cooler is unnecessary, as
duct of the conning tower, and activated by boat's hull should be loaded up, the exhaust gas the temperature at which gases enter the boiler can
increases in water pressure. This will also directly compressors take some of the exhaust gas in be high. Additionally, the exhaust-gas compressor
control the chemico-technical apparatus. It is through Valve 6, which in the meantime has had its for the loading of the boat's body is dispensed with;
essential that we succeed in so arranging the temperature reduced in the coolers, and this is first, because a boiler, even with a high initial
switching process as to be automatically activated forced through Valve 8 into the engine pressure, can be driven; and, second, higher
by the diving of the boat, that is, to have the switch compartment (which is separate from the performances are attained; and another benefit
linked to the hydroplanes. At the commencement of accommodation area). For this to be accomplished, accrues - loading takes place automatically
THE DEVELOPMENT OF SINGLE-DRIVE U-BOATS 169

through carbon dioxide build-up. The pressure high-speed U-boat remained his favourite brain-
difference before and after the supercharging is so The Walter 'Direct' and 'Indirect' child. The design progressed slowly. The frrst step
considerable that the frictional resistance of the Process came at the beginning of 1939 with the contract for
circulation system is just exceeded. The Schematic drawing of the' Direct' a small test vessel (V80) of approximately 80 tons,
employment of a second circulation system (gas process fo, Type XVIIB to test speed-keeping and steering capabilities at
Disintegrator
and water) and the provision of a larger fuel supply, high submerged speeds. This vessel was not to have
NOlzle ljetl valve
and division into compartments, are all possible; a 'Hot Installation' with combustion chambers, but
however, tests with steam should frrst be -c=l C:'J- t·omb~l?ii~~ha~b~e,r·-
a disintegrator with a rear-connected turbine. The
undertaken. ' Vapou • S V O...l-' -, Valve for
oxygen bubble trail from this vessel would have
pump Vapour ," • !combustible
At the end of 1933, as a result of these sugges- , condenser fuel prevented its operational use, but it was used for
tions, Walter was given permission to undertake an l 1 '3-fuels' checking the results of further trials. V80 was built
appropriate project-study for a high-speed boat eanng r i r---I I control
at GW in 1939-40, on slipway V, behind a high
~ r=-;gulatin
with a displacement of 300--400 tons, a submerged Oust separator tank wooden screen. After completion, she underwent
top speed of 24 knots and the following ranges: ElectriC Motor '4.fueI5'
trials in the ScWei Estuary. Her base was a covered
Injection condenser regulator
2,000 nautical miles at 15 knots surfaced and dock. The converted tanker John Rehder, renamed
400-500 nautical miles at 15 knots submerged. This Polyp, was used as combined living quarters and
project, which was designated Type V by the aval supply-ship, and a small motor-boat, Ingo, was
Office, was to include work on a diesel engine I provided as an escort. The trials were conducted
L- - __ Fuel
propulsion system in addition to steam propulsion. from April 1940, under great secrecy. and the
With the higher H 20 2 concentration (initially 60 per results were considerable - even sensational.
cent, later up to 85 per cent) it turned out that the Condenser container The hull shape of V80 harked back to Walter's
disintegration was accompanied by a considerably first designs of 1933. Vertical rudders and
increased build-up of heat. At 80 per cent of H 20 2, 'Indirect' process for Type XXVIII hydroplanes were controlled by an original dual-
the disintegration heat amounted to 552Kcal/kg, Pre-steam unit 400°C control unit taken from a Ju 52 aircraft. At high
i.e., approximately 50 per cent of the amount of Combustion chamber 1000 0 C 25atms speed, the boat steered well with dynamic surfacing
heat that resulted from the combustion with
1_ Overheating
and submerging. With the aid of depth-control
released oxygen. This considerable extra heat, 38atms apparatus taken from a torpedo, automatic depth-
Disintegrator Pressure retaining valve
however, could not be used in an engine installation; keeping was possible. The high number of
rather, it worked to the disadvantage of this c~~a~~~ ~a2s0 revolutions (20,000rpm) of the 2,000hp turbine was
system. After further consideration it became reduced, for the first time ever in ship-construction,
obvious that the steam installation was preferable, by a Stoeckicht-Planetary Gearing, to 1,000rpm.
that is, an installation in which the combustion For the H 20 2 (cover-names: 'Aurol' for ship propul-
circulation is separated from the propulsion sion units, 'T-Stoff' (literally, T-Substance) for air-
component. craft engines and 'Ingolin' for torpedo propulsion
On 15 March 1934, Walter laid an appropriate units) an excellent storage medium has been found,
design before Chief aval Construction Advisers using plastic bags surrounded by sea water. Just as
wat""e''---_F_eed-<PJ"_m_p_-=:'E. with fuel-oil, H 20 2 could be forced into the interior of
Brandes and Braking of K II. On 10 April, the Condenser
Commander-in-Chief of the Supreme aval the boat by water pressure, and its weight could be
Command authorized GW to work out a tender for a compensated by the sea water. The shallow water of
test steam installation (to consist of a combustion atmospheres over-pressure, into a gas turbine and, the ScWei Estuary restricted submerged speed to
chamber with burners, a gas circulation system depending on the working arrangement, condensed 14 knots. ot until the test centre was moved to
with supercharger and an oxygen-generating in a combined injection and surface cooler. The Hela in the autumn of 1940 could the maximum
installation) and to carry out as soon as possible its condensed water could be partly used again as submerged speed be attempted in the Gulf of
own evaluation and presentation of a carbon- injection water, while the CO 2 was led outside the Danzig, where 28.1 knots were achieved. The crew
dioxide absorption installation. boat by its own pressure or by using an exhaust gas of the boat - a maximum of four - were all
Following further research, Walter decided to compressor. The CO 2 dissolved readily in water - civilians. Walter usually took charge of the boat
abandon the exhaust gas-circulation operation, this which, of course, was useful when one did not wish himself, together with his right-hand man, Heinz
being unnecessary in view of the dilution of oxygen to leave any trace of the submarine's passage. The Ullrich, the Test Engineer of the Walter Works,
that occurred in the steam arising from the 'Indirect Process' raised considerable problems who made 100 voyages in V80, and 200 voyages in
disintegration. This simplifIed considerably the connected with the high-combustion chamber the Walter U-boats that followed.
entire structure: the disintegrated H 20 2 was led temperature of approximately 2,000°C, and of The next step was to build a test boat for the 'Hot
into a combustion chamber and burned with providing a suitable heat-exchanger. Nor was any Installation' and in January 1940 GW were ordered
injected fuel. In the 'Direct Process', more water great progress made with the development of the to produce such a design. In 'K' office of the
was simultaneously injected, which had the effect engine process. The heavy onset of water into the Supreme Naval Command, Walter's suggestions
of reducing the very high combustion temperature, lubricating oil, and other problems, caused and the commissions he received were worked on
from approximately 2,100°C to approximately operational difficulties that delayed its general faithfully by Dr. Pflaum (1933-34), Dr. Piening
550°C, and approximately doubling the amount of development. On the other hand, as early as 1936, (1934-38) and lastly, until the end of the war, by
steam available for the operation. In the 'Indirect GW could report that a 4,000hp turbine Engineer Waas. These engine-builders were
Process', the exhaust gas from the combustion installation, built according to the Direct Walter supporters of Walter's ideas, were inspired by his
chamber gave its heat to a secondary circulation in Process, had been instaUed on a test-bed and elan and gave him all possible support. In a
which steam was produced. In the fmal engine proved successful. The process had passed its test. memorandum of February 1940, Waas suggested
process, the disintegrated H 20 2 was cooled to In the summer of 1936, Walter left GW and, with that, in order to assist in a wide-ranging system of
approximately 100°C, and was then led as 'intake a rapidly increasing staff, set up his own research trials for the new propulsion unit, an immediate
air' into the working cylinders of the diesel engine. establishment in an old gasworks in Kiel-Wik. His start should be made with the construction of a
The simplest solution was the 'Direct Process', in sphere of interests proliferated: apart from the series of 6 small Walter U-boats. If the production
which the steam-exhaust gas mixture was led, at an avy, the Luftwaffe was greatly interested in his of 12 U-boats from current building could be
approximate temperature of 550°C and 35 new, high-performance research. However, the sacrificed, then in three years the trials of Walter
170 THE DEVELOPME T OF SINGLE-DRIVE U-BOATS

Above: V80 under construction behind a wooden screen at
Germaniawerft in early 1940. Below: A stern view of V80 in
Walter-boat V80. 1939 the covered floating dock at GW.
10m
+
I
A

Above: V80 preparing for a trial.
should be made, but instead of the procedure with for this to be considered. All these propulsion
V80. administerial direction should remain in the systems were to work through two sets of gearing
V-boats could be completed to the extent that U-Boat Department of the Supreme aval on only one propeller shaft. As with V80. forward
operational use of them would then be pos ible. In Command. To co-ordinate Walter's idea with the hydroplanes were dispensed with. Steering was to
addition to using experienced U-boat builders, views and experiences of V-boat building staff at be carried out with one control-stick for lateral and
personnel would have to be employed whose minds OW, an office, 'KIW' (Krupp/Walter), was set up in depth purposes. The boat's shape and speed would
were open to innovations. Personnel could also be the new Walter Works in Kiel-Wik. make possible dynamic surfacing and submerging
used from the aviation sphere. The most (i.e.. at full speed without additional ballast-water,
appropriate development centre would seem to be The evolution of Types XVIIB, XVIIG and XXII using hydroplanes only). A conning tower was not
at B&V. However, conditions at that time were not The fLrst design for the test boat, designated envisaged. which meant that the bridge could be
in favour of such far-reaching planning: there 'V300', envisaged a small U-boat of 320 tons. with kept to a low profile. The armament consisted of
existed in the U-Boat Departments of the Supreme the typical 'Walter' shape, which, with two turbines two 7m-Iong torpedo tubes and four torpedoes.
Naval Command a certain scepticism regarding a producing a total of 4,000hp, would reach an In the fmal version of 16 September 1941 (Design
quick, operationally-reliable realization of the underwater speed of 25 knots. However. in Design Ill), the size had increased to over 600 tons. The
Walter-Drive, and there was also a reluctance to 11 of 30 September 1940, the boat had become boat had a conning tower and forward hydroplanes,
sacrifice current production of U-boats that were considerably larger. This second design took and the bridge was now enclosed, but the
urgently needed. The Heads of the V-Boat thorough account of the basic principles of underwater shape of the body and bridge had
Department. Schiirer and Broking, were of the conventional V-boat construction and the become so large that the calculated submerged
opinion that the reliability of the new installation requirements necessary to bring about the higher speed using the intended turbine installation
should fLrst be proved in a land installation: only submerged speed. The propulsion installation amounted to only 19 knots. On 18 February 1942,
when it had proved itself satisfactory in all respects consisted of two diesel engines developing a total of OW was given a contract for a test boat (U791) of
should it be tested fully on board a test boat: and 600hp for surface travel, two turbines developing a this type, but, in the light of its anticipated
only then could the reponsibility be taken for total of 4.000hp for fast submerged travel and two submerged speed, it no longer corresponded to
interrupting the current construction programme small electric motors for quiet, slow travel. Walter Walter's idea of a high-speed boat. Therefore. in
of conventional V-boats. Consequently, a test boat had also intended that the diesel installation be collaboration with his colleagues, he developed in
only should be placed in contract with OW. Admiral made suitable for use with Aurol, to facilitate an the autumn of 1941 his own ideas for a small U-boat
Fuchs, the Head of the 'K' OffIce. decided that no economic cruising speed when submerged, but the of approximately 220 tons, with two 2.500hp
departure from well-tested construction principles engine system had not been developed sufficiently turbines and a submerged speed of 26 knots. Walter
172 THE DEVELOPMENT OF SI OLE-DRIVE U-BOATS

Design II of 20 September 1940
Walter's designs for test-boat 'V300'.
00000
A B C
Design III of 16 September 1941
c A
B
00 00
o 1 :I J , 5 6 7 5 9 10 11 '2 13 K IS m
Walter's design for a 220-ton U-boat, 13 January 1942.

o ~, ',S 1 ~s J,5 , m
0·1 2 3' S 6 7 a 9 'Om
Main specifications: Length overall, 55.3m; beam overall, 5.8m;

length of pressure hull, 4O.1m; max. hull diameter 3.9m; mean
draught, 3.68m; approx. displacement, 516 tons.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF SINGLE·DRIVE U·BOATS 173

rudders with hydraulic steering, while the B&V
Type Wa201, 1942. boats had balanced rudders with additional
Flettner ancillary rudders to minimize the effort
o , 1 3 , 5 6 7 6 9 10m needed to steer at high speeds. Additionally, an SAM
(Siemens Apparate und Maschienen GmbH)
installation for course and depth-keeping was
planned for the Wa201 boats, but this required such
@
complicated electrical impulses to be sent to the
guidance-engines, resulting in such frequent
interference that in later series-production of B&V
only hand-steering with servo-engine assistance
was envisaged. As with VSO, forward hydroplanes
B
were dispensed with, the fIrm of Walter being of the
opinion that what applied to aircraft applied
equally to the high-speed U-boat.
The fust designs were ready in March 1942.
GW's WK201 was 34.03m long; the B&V design,
Wa201, was 35.9m long. Models of both designs
were thorougWy tested at the HSVA
(Hamburgische Schiffbau-Versuchsanstalt GmbH,
or Hamburg Shipbuilding Test Institute), and the
steering and depth-keeping properties of the
~~
proposed rudders and hydroplanes were measured
in a wind tunnel at the LFA (Luftfahrtforschung-
sanstalt 'Hermann Goring, Braunschweig' or
Hermann Goring Aviation Research Institute,
Brunswick). This proved Wa201 to give signifl'
t5:~
cantly better results. Compared with the value ot a
rotating body of the same volume and at the same
submerged depth, the resistance value at 20 knots
was 20 per cent higher in Wa201 and 35 per cent
~8HHlECD
higher in WK201, which was attributed to the
influence exerted by the differing appendages on
each boat - in Wa201 an enclosed bridge, while
WK201 had an open bridge with wind protection,
and different fm and rudder shapes. At 24 knots,
and Waas were convinced that this small boat could was, in all circumstances, absolutely necessary. the B&V design had a considerably better total
be built quickly and be available in quite a short In a telex to the Supreme Naval Command on 18 propulsion ratio than WK201, 75 per cent against
period of time for fundamental testing of the 'Hot January 1942, Donitz requested emphatically that 57 per cent, and this could have resulted from the
Walter Installation'. the Walter U-boat be developed in accordance with better outline provided by the fms and rudders and
In order to win over the Supreme Naval the foregoing points. But 'K' OffIce continued to by the better propeller design. Measured screw-
Command to these ideas, they offered a show reluctance and, in a letter dated 23 February, performance in model tests amounted, at 24 knots,
demonstration of V80 at Hela on 14 November stated that it was imperative to concentrate efforts to· a converted 2,400shp of Wa201, while WK201
1941, which Grand Admiral Raeder and Admiral on the production of the standard Types VIIC and required approximately 70 per cent more, at
Fuchs (Head of 'K' Office) attended. Although IXC, in view of the critical state of the U-boat 4,120shp. (It should also be mentioned that in
Raeder showed great interest, the desired approval sector. The introduction of any special type would Wa201 the original spade-rudders were under-
from the decisive bodies within 'K' OffIce was not disrupt the smooth progress of series production. dimensioned.)
forthcoming. On 3 January 1942, therefore, Walter Finally, however the Head of the 'K' OffIce, In order to improve the rather unsatisfactory
and Waas made representations to the Commander- Admiral Fuchs, did consent to provide yard results achieved with WK201, a number of model
in-Chief, U-Boats, in Paris. At this discussion, capacity for a test construction of the new small tests were carried out with different bridge versions
Donitz declared that 'the gift of a high speed which Walter boat - not as Waas had suggested at B&V, and rudder shapes. These showed that, with a
had been bestowed on him overnight, as it were, by but at the Liibecker Flenderwerke. Only when it closed bridge, an 18 per cent improvement in
the Walter-Process' would justify his doing became obvious that conditions there were not performance could be expected. Rudder tests
everything he could to make boats of this kind suitable for such a complex task were B&V and, showed that the rudder-cross (the vertical rudder
available. What was most signifIcant for him was later, GW (after cessation of the V300 project) and after hydroplane in a cross arrangement)
the high submerged speed, which far outweighed all involved. adversely affected the propeller, reducing the
other considerations. What he saw as most GW's boat was designated 'WK201' (Walter- performance by 952shp at 24 knots. Later, a more
important was a large, high-speed boat for Atlantic Krupp), B&V's, 'Wa201' (Walter). Walter's original favourable rudder shape was devised for better
use. If, however, a small boat of this type could be design, apart from the sharper and more sloping streamlining of the spindle-stern; this arrangement
built quickly and in large numbers inland and bow to give better surface travel, was strongly had a movable Kort nozzle as lateral rudder and a
without any hindrance to the Naval Programme, reminiscent of V80. The working-out of the basic deep-set hydroplane with a small fm. These deeper-
there would be nothing at all against this, especially shape, the distribution of compartments and the set rudders and fms gave an increase in
if this small boat could also attain a suffIciently engine installation were carried out by the yards. performance at 24 knots of approximately 7.5 per
high speed. The radius of action, however, would However, the fIn-cross (the horizontal and vertical cent, and the Kort nozzle provided a further gain of
have to be suffIcient for boats to be able to operate fms) was no longer included in the outer hull, but 6.5 per cent. The total propulsion ratio
to the north of the British Isles from the existing was separated from it and positioned on the correspondingly increased by 70 per cent. However,
bases. The ability to carry at least four torpedoes spindle-stern. The GW design had normal balanced these fmdings came too late for the GW design,
174 THE DEVELOPMENT OF SINGLE-DRIVE U-BOATS

Type WK202, 1942. Type WK202 frame lines.
o 1 2 J , ""'Om
~ 1-13
"
15
,.,
16
Main
aXIs
'"
19
~~~
Base
"
which, during further development work, had been 'C' values, Type WK202.
given the designation WK202 to further
Cw
distinguish her from Wa201. 4UO
To keep the boats as small as possible, only two 1
5m-long torpedo tubes and four torpedoes were
envisaged. The restricted range of the 5m torpedoes
~~.1~ c=J}.75m
350 -6.725m-·"~
was regarded as satisfactory for these high-speed .- -e.725m-
and manoeuvrable small V-boats. Additionally,
torpedoes equipped with Walter-Turbine
~ VertiCal stern fi'ns·
Open brldge Enclosed bridge
propulsion suitable for 5m tubes, with a range of 300
3.8km at 45 knots, were being specially designed for
the Walter V-boats, under the cover-names and
'Goldflsch' and 'Goldbutt'. hvdroplanes set lower
250
In the summer of 1942, building contracts were Wa 201 Compllralive Ya'ves
awarded for the fmal versions of Wa201 (length
With enclosed bridge and lower hydroplanes
37.15m), and WK202 (length 34.64m). But the
extensive development that had been hoped for 200
------~-----
would not be achieved with these four boats. Six of
each type seemed the minimum if war experience
------
were to be obtained in respect of production, 150
testing, handling, training. and experience in
handling HzO z on land and at sea. However, only
after various interventions by Dbnitz was it
100
decided in the autumn of 1942 to award contracts
for a series of 24 small boats of this kind, as soon as
results with the new Walter installation were
available. On 4 January 1943, these boats were 50 Cw surfaced
ordered in equal quantities from B&V and GW.
Enlarged and developed for operational use, Wa201
and WK202 were given the designations 'Type oI f I ! ! ! ! I ! t I I I ! l I I ! 1 I
XVIIB' and Type XVIIG' respectively. 5 8 9 10 " 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Kn
THE DEVELOPMENT OF SINGLE-DRIVE V·BOATS 175

U1405-U1409 (Type XVIIBl.
Glossary: Tnmmz .. trimming tank; Tauchz .. ballast tank {water);
Tlefenruderleltung. main hydroplane; Turb. R., turbine room;
Sammellank. collecttng tank; Settenruder, side rudder,
Trelbolbunker, fuel 011 bunker, E.·Masch. u. Diesel, electriC motor
and diesel, Trelbstoffbunker. fuel (motor) bunker. Regelz,
compensatlng lank (wated; Kombuse. galley; Bugtorpedoraum.
bow torpedo room; Wd Back, waterughl forecastle; Zentrale,
control room, Schnltl. seCtion; Druckkorper. pressure hull; Kond.
Kuhler. condenser cooler Bb., POrt, Stb., starboard; Hauplachse.
main aXIs
~
~ -'---
:'l'i--
~~ -39r-
Frame 28.35 Frame 33.75
.......... ..........
~ ~---- =
~
.... -",
=.. === - -
oo~
_ ___--:, . ~._.M
0 · 0..... 0
,~~~:.'
-- ~ --- i S? - - "": ~ J:. ~ ~ )"'~.'" St.
~
...
- ~ -_ - " - -. .
. -
0"

Walter Type XVIIG. 1943.
o I 2 ] ( 5 6 7 6 9 10 II 12 I] " 15 m
m
~
'
~~~ ~.~
tt ~<... '
Left: Professor Ulrich Gabler. Right: Dr. Karl Fischer.
Dr. Karl Fischer and the engineers Heinrich Heep

and Ulrich Gabler. who had joined Walter's fIrm for
V-boat development in the early part of 1943. soon
recognized that a bottleneck in the production of
the complicated turbine installations would occur.
Corresponding to this. they considered lhe Wa201
installation of 2 X 2.500hp as LOO complicated a
unit for further development. If a Walter V-boat
were required quickly for operational lrials. only a
small. simply-built coastal V-boat would be
possible. bearing in mind the engine problems in the
current series production. In line with this. in the
early part of 1943. the Walter Works originated a
design for a small Walter U-boat of 155 tons
displacement. with only one Walter-Turbine of
approximately 1.850hp. As with the existing
Walter design. the boat's shape was distinguished
by having the H 20 2 bunker under the pressure
Walter Type XXII. 1943. hull. This gave the boat's cross-section the shape of
an upright ellipse. In contrast to Wa201 and
10m WK202. however. the stern was projected as a
knife-edge. with fm and hydroplane set low down
beneath the rush of water from the screw. The
knife-edged stern was intended to increase the
surface waterline and. hence. the sea-keeping
properties of the short boat; propulsion was to be
increased by the deeper-set hydroplane. As the boat
was to be kept as small as possible. once again only
5m-long torpedo tubes were considered. and these
formed protuberances in the outer casing of the
sharp bow outline. A further torpedo tube was
considered for a position in the outer hull abaft the
bridge. It was only possible to load torpedoes from
the outside. Surface propulsion of the boat was to
be diesel-electric. The surface range of 1.200
nautical miles at 8 knots and the extremely narrow
internal measurements considerably restricted
operational possibilities. The use of an exhaust-gas
compressor was intended to increase the effIciency
of the turbines. consequently increasing consider-
ably the range. especially at greater depths of
travel. This boat was designated 'Type XX II'.
<:::i:ij'.E
The construction of the four test boats of Type
'~
~mr~r~
Wa201 and WK202 had begun on 1 December 1942
0 :/00 at B&V. and at the beginning of February 1943 at

GW. During the course of construction. the B&V
boat had to be enlarged. by the distance between
three frames. to a length of 39.05m in order to allow
sufficient space for the turbines.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF SINGLE-DRIVE V-BOATS 177

In April 1943, the test-bed for the flTst boat of
Type Wa201 was almost ready. The complete
propulsion unit was mounted in a U-boat mock-up.
In order to save Aurol, a battery of six small
Henschel high-pressure boilers was prepared
especially for the test-run, and this assembly was to
drive the installation with steam. First tests began
in May 1943. The construction of the four small
boats proceeded slowly, but one should take into
consideration the fact that no special priority
declaration had been given to the undertaking.
Furthermore, the difficulties that occurred were
part and parcel of the construction of any
completely new U-boat, and enemy air attacks
interrupted building. Not until October 1943 were
the flTst two Walter Boats U792 and U794 delivered
by B&V and GW respectively.
The development of Type XVIII

In a discussion with the Commander-in-Chief,
U-Boats, in Paris on 3 January 1942, Dbnitz
emphasized his preference for a large high-speed
boat suitable for Atlantic use. Given the project
designation 'V301', constructional preliminaries
began immediately at the Walter Works for a test
Above: U793 IWa2011 at the Howaldt Yard, Kiel, in the summer of 1945. Below: U794 being raised from the slipway on 7
October 1943. boat of this kind. An initial rough outline envisaged
a U-boat of approximately 800 tons, with a surfaced
speed of 15 knots and a submerged speed of 26-27
knots. The surfaced range would correspond with
that of Type VIlC, and a torpedo armament of four
tubes with a total of sixteen torpedoes was
envisaged. It was obvious that a boat as large as
this with a high submerged speed would require a
considerably more powerful Walter-Drive instal-
lation than all previous high-speed boats. This
meant that the test U-boat U791 (V300) no longer
had any significance in the future development of
Walter U-boats suitable for the Atlantic: after
relatively few building preparations at GW, it was
scrapped on 15 July 1942.
The very numerous design tasks that were an
integral part in the new development of a large
U-boat and a new engine installation gave Walter's
flTm considerable personnel problems. Naval
Construction Adviser Waas had hitherto tried in
vain to obtain from the constructional and
development offices specially qualified and
operationally experienced officers to serve as
permanent advisers in constructional matters and
to act as collaborators. However, the Personnel
Office at Supreme Naval Command was unwilling
to weaken the operational sector by granting this
request. Furthermore, the interest aroused by the
pronouncement of Dbnitz in January 1942 was
beginning to fade. It was clear that a new emphatic
declaration by the Commander-in-Chief, U-Boats,
to the Supreme Naval Command was necessary to
keep interest alive.
In June 1942, therefore, at a further discussion
with Dbnitz in Paris, Walter and Waas attended
with Admirals Kleikamp (as Representative of the
Head of 'K' Office) and Gutjahr (as Chief of the
Torpedo Office). The points for discussion were the
new Walter ocean-going U-boat, the 5m-long
torpedoes suggested for Walter projects, and
personnel problems at Walter's flTm. Dbnitz
demanded twin-shaft drive for the large boat, six

torpedo tubes for 7m torpedoes, and anti-aircraft remarks by Hitler on the necessity of bringing new Battery: two X 62 type 33
armament. The importance he attached to the new technical developments to a prompt state of MAL 800W cells.
Atlantic Walter boat could be measured by his practical implementation, Dbnitz declared in a Maximum speed surfaced: 14 knots.
Kranting immediate permission to Waas to make report on the existing situation in the U-boat Maximum speed
use of highly-quaLifled operational officers. campaign and prospects for the future: submerged: 26.8 knots,
(Subsequently, the U-boat engineering offIcers, 'Technical improvements in U-boats and U-boat Range surfaced: 11,500 nautical miles
Beep and Gabler were seconded from U-boat weapons are required, not because losses have at 8 knots; 8,500
operations to the fum of Walter. Heep was climbed to the degree they have, but so that in nautical miles at 10
requested by Walter on the recommendation of Dr. tactical terms, in spite of the increase in anti-U-boat knots.
Pflaum, and began work in October 1942; on the measures, we may retain at least the same Range submerged: 243 nautical miles at
recommendation of Heep, Gabler joined the fum at successes as we have enjoyed hitherto. Most 25 knots.
the beginning of 1943.) In line with the general tone important of all is the requirement that underwater Constructional diving
of the discussion, Dbnitz declared, among other speeds be increased and this is possible by the depth: 130m.
points, on 24 June 1942 in a lengthy report to introduction of the Walter boats. A U-boat with Armament: six 5m bow torpedo
Supreme Naval Command: 'The quickest high underwater speed has a greater chance of tubes, twenty G5u
development triaLs and, fmally, the speediest getting into a good fuing position against a convoy torpedoes.
construction for the Walter U-boats of large despite enemy protection vessels. It would also one twin 2cm AA.
dimensions are of major importance for decisive mean that a U-boat would be more readily capable Crew: 45.
war operations.' of evading its pursuers.' The lines of the large boat, Pr476, were based on
During a discussion at Hitler's headquarters on Hitler gave his approval to these ideas and stated those of Wa201 (designation Pr477), which meant
26 August 1942, in Appendix 5 of a speech made by that, in his opinion, the introduction of a U-boat that the available towing tank results could be used
the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Navy, it with a high submerged speed would mean as a basis for calculation for the new design. As in
was stated: incontrovertible success. At the close of the Wa201, forward hydroplanes were not provided,
'In the interests of providing U-boats suitable for discussion, there followed a special treatment of the but in their place cross-shaped stabilizing surfaces
Atlantic operations and with a high submerged development of Walter U-boats to date. Raeder were attached to the fInely tapered spindle-stern. In
speed, for the time being it was necessary to reported that 2 boats of the smaller type had been contrast to Wa201, however, in Pr476 a decision
continue work on V300 and the building contract placed in contract with B&V and 2 with GW; that a had been made in favour of a twin-screw drive, for
given to GW in February 1942. This boat was prototype design for the larger type was being greater reliability on distant voyages. The propeller
thought of as a boat to train crews to tryout developed by the fum of Walter; and that in about shafts lay within the horizontal stabilizing surfaces,
weapons and their usage. The year 1942 has seen two months' time, a decision would be made with the lateral rudder on the vertical fInS, but still
the introduction of new buiLding methods and new concerning series-production for the larger type. forward of the propellers. Especially noteworthy in
knowledge concerning engine installations for small Regarding the small type, a series of 24 boats this design was the low bridge superstructure (no
boats (Wa201), and these suggest the suspension of should be placed in contract as soon as possible. conning tower!) with a collapsible bridge screen. On
work on V300, because in the light of the present This discussion led to a complete change of heart the forward side of the bridge was an observation
situation this boat no Longer represents a stage inside the Supreme Naval Command. From then on point, pressure-tight to a depth of 130m and with a
along the path to providing a Large boat suitable for (i.e., some six months before the total collapse of cross-section of 1.6m. This was covered on top by a
Atlantic use. The construction of a boat suitable for the U-boat campaign in the North Atlantic). Piexi-glass cover of a similar pressure-tight quaLity.
Atlantic use must therefore be approached in a new enthusiasm was rekindled in the construction staff, Initially, anti-aircraft armament was not
way. Planning at the fIrm of Walter and subsequent who until then had viewed their task as that of envisaged, but, at the request of Dbnitz, planning
drawing-up of plans at a ship construction yard (if merely effecting improvements' to current types. later envisaged a two-barrelled 2cm anti-aircraft
needs be, Germania and Blohm & Voss in Admiral Fuchs now strove to take all possible gun on the bridge superstructure.
competition) will take approximately six months; decisions to support Dbnitz. The most important The Walter-installation differed from that of
after that, a decision can be made as to whether one question now was the actual construction of the Wa201 principally through the use of an exhaust-
of these constructional plans for an appropriate large Walter U-boats, which were given the Project gas compressor so that the turbines no longer
boat should be put in hand as a building task. Designation 'Pr476' at the firm of Walter, and the needed to work against the counter-pressure of the
Planning at the fum of Walter is suffering designation Type XVIII at Supreme Naval depth of water. Additionally, the electric switching
currently, among other problems, from a shortage Command. On 10 October 1942, Walter presented apparatus for the turbine system had been
of personnel. The 20 engineers who have been its Design II for an Atlantic high-speed boat. simplified by dispensing with voltage regulating.
requested by name by the fum of Walter shouLd, if Length overall: 67.7m. The steering installation in the rear compartment
possible, be released by the Navy. Tests continue.' Maximum beam: 5.75m. was to be hydraulic, using oil pressure; steering
Special priority was not granted to Walter U-boat Draught: 6.25m. impulses from the control room were to be
deveLopment. Dbnitz acknowledged that his efforts Pressure-hull diameter: 5.1m. transmitted electrically. Torpedo armament was
in the Supreme Naval Command on behalf of the Maximum pressure-hull 26mm. concentrated forward so that the favourable
Walter U-boat had not had the desired result. He thickness: streamlined properties of the stern would not be
therefore informed Hitler's Naval Adjutant, Interior frames: 220 X 15 at 800mm impaired by projecting torpedo tubes. As in the
Kapitan zur See von Puttkamer, that he was distance. small Walter boats, the tubes were of the air-
greatly concerned at the development of the Hull displacement: 1,524.25 tons. expelling type, i.e., without piston ejection. This
enemy's air-surveillance which would soon be Displacement submerged: 1,181.7 tons. was to ensure that even with the most rapid fIring
effective throughout the Atlantic, and added a Propulsion: two X 6,OOOhp at of torpedoes, with 2.3 seconds between each,
request that this danger be met by an acceleration 7,500rpm BKC- movement of the boat would be so slight that
in development and compLetion of Walter U-boats. Walter turbines. compensatory trimming would be unnecessary. As
This was communicated by von Puttkamer to two X l,200hp at the boat did not have a jumping wire to prevent the
Hitler, who ordered that an appropriate report be 700rpm Deutz T12 conning tower fouling a net, an extensible rod aeriaL
made to the Navy. This took place in the Reichs M133 diesel engines. was provided.
Chancellery on 28 September 1942: apart from two electric motors. In November 1942, Walter, Schiirer, Brbking and
Hitler, the participants included Keitel, Raeder, Aurol: 175 tons. Waas visited Dbnitz in Paris, taking with them
Dbnitz, Fuchs and Waas. After introductory Fuel-oil: 136 tons. appropriate basic drawings. The design of the boat

Pr476, 1 October 1942.
o 1 2 J , S 6 ., 8 9 J{J 11 11 IJ " IS '"
~~:~~j~fi~~;"~O=:1]IC==§
.= ~
~
"1:
=- "::~D 0
~ -....... 0-'
met with his approval apart from certain take account of results obtained at the end of 1943
alternative wishes (7m torpedoes and pressure- with the Type XVII boats. but no large series could Turbine compartment Turbine control
~sition
tight conning tower). Donitz demanded that yards be initiated before these were to hand. This meant of Pr476.
capable of such work should, as soon as possible, be that a delay in series production of at least a year i Disintegrator ~ "'~r;;~~~t~~~
...L--1 ->C.. fI;;-; ~
given a change of tasks to accommodate this new was unavoidable. At this meeting, Waas also Injection
condenser"1'- .. 3·fuels'l'
type. and that the production of a large series be mentioned that while the production of H,O, had in ___l -< pumi<-...
commenced. Broking and Waas made the
immediate point that the engine installation was
fact begun in Bad Lauterberg. an essential item for
the future changeover to Walter boats, the second ~~
~ --.RJ:..J,J-
not yet ready for such series production, and even works in Rhumspringe (planned a considerable time
Walter, who was usually over-optimistic, hesitated previously), had still not been built. At this time.
on this point. Waas declared that the more-quickly the Navy was concerned to secure only those
built Type XVII would need to have adequate time amounts of H,O, necessary for U·boat contracts
spent on it before the large Type XVIII. but there already awarded and, as far as could be seen, the
was argument for initiating the building of two production of H,O, for the Walter boats would rise
boats of the large type immediately. These could only slowly. This question would have to be cleared
180 THE DEVELOPMENT OF SINGLE-DRIVE U·BOATS

The evolution of Type XVIII.
-go.
~,.
=
~ovember
I
Design II (19 19421
""." ":. I
~) .- 1
~ t?5
DWK designs, early 1943
----
:~
~Q
~
Walter designs
- -'- ..
~c
-;J
~--_. e
- ----
10'' " '" '" ''"~oo, ,~"
~-
- ---
~l / ~o
~.
Final design
-~
Design lid
j
§
-===e IlIIl>
Walter Type XVIII. 1943.

Final design
=~
1
A B
, c
Jo , E3
o
o 5 10 /5 20m
THE DEVELOPMENT OF SINGLE·DRIVE V-BOATS 181

up before a decision was made on series production. On 4 January 1943, the building contract for two 'oil-oxygen engine'. Conditions of secrecy meant
The meeting ended with Dbnitz urgently requesting boats of this type was handed over to DWK. with that they knew nothing of the Walter-drive.
that pressure be applied in appropriate quarters to the Yard Designation 'K330/331' (U796-U797). In March 1941. the FKFS began building a
provide. in addition to the proposed 24 Type XV II I n the detailed working-out of plans, a further single-cylinder test installation for the closed-cycle
boats. at least the 2 suggested Type XVI II boats: enlargement of the boat was made, the spindle- operation. Under the control of Professor W. Kamm
and that H 20 2 procurement should be investigated stern changed to a knife-edge, a closed, roomy (Institute Head) and Dr. L. Huber (Department
in the light of all future aspects and requirements. bridge and conning tower were provided and Head), a staff of engineers and scientists had been
The working-out of constructional details was forward hydroplanes that could be swung out were formed, and they approached this task with
now given to DWK. The requirement concerning a installed. In versions lIc and lId, the design had a enthusiasm and scientifIc zeal. The initial closed-
conning tower and 7m torpedo tubes altered the length of 69.35m, a beam of 6.2m and a pressure- cycle operation of this engine showed that much
outer hull considerably. In order to make good the hull diameter of 5.3m, but similar draughts. might be expected from it. The engine ran very
loss of stability brought about by this. the diving I nitially, both versions were given a lateral rudder stiffly (too Iowan inlet-temperature) and. compared
tanks were placed higher up and the stabilizing between two horizontal stabilizing fills abaft each with air-operation, a fall-off in performance was
surfaces were widened. which gave the boat a more propeller; later, this was changed to a semi- observed. Tests with CO 2 absorption then followed.
pronounced double-hull shape. As the length, balanced rudder positioned amidships and a In May 1941. the closed-cycle operation was shown
despite the 7m torpedo tubes, was not to be altered, stabilizing fill placed level with the propeller shafts. to representatives of the Drager Works, and in
the battery compartments had to be made shorter. The knife-edge stern was intended to increase the June there followed an hour-long running of a
This could be done by going over to external urface speed: in surface towing tests carried out at
frames, which was now possible, and this resulted the HSV A in the early part of 1943, this had proved
in several further advantages for the layout of the a more successful shape than the spindle-stern. Closed-cycle diesel installation for
boat's interior. A further step was that the bunker Comparative surface measurements with a model Type XVIIK, 1943.
capacities were enlarged. The engine installation corresponding to Design II showed that, at 17
was also somewhat changed. Instead of the knots. the spindle-stern required 2.748shp and the Exhausr·gas compressor (Oxygen :
previously intended 1.200hp Deutz T12 M133 cut-away stern only 2.682shp. A noteworthy result
engines, 2,OOOhp MWM Type RS12 V26/34a were of the trial was that in the version with knife-edged
used. This four-stroke engine was preferred to the
Deutz two-stroke because it was better able to blow
stern, the forward part of the boat was not awash at
16 knots, but remained dry - so, despite the
'~
I~ Exhaust-gas filter
~I
the diving tanks. The main specifications for this enlarged size. a maximum speed of 18.5 knots was I
I
new Design IIb (15 January 1943) were as follows:
anticipated, and the Chief of Naval War Staff
requirements were met beyond any question.
Exhaust gas cooler
EXhauG
,
~ I
I! Y
I
,
I
_/
Maximum beam: 5.8m. However, to meet the required maximum
Draught: 6.57m. submerged speed of 24 knots. a sizeable increase in Exhaust pump Q
Pressure-hull diameter: 5.1m. performance was necessary in view of the larger
Maximum pressure-hull 25mm. size. and it was hoped to achieve 'this by increasing
thickness: the performance of both BKC-Walter turbines to
Outer frames: 260 X 14 at 800mm 7.500hp at 10.000rpm for each turbine. closed-cycle operation under partial loading. This
distance. In the fmaI version, which was to have been very successful beginning prompted the Supreme
Hull displacement: 1,836.7 tons. submitted in about May 1943, Type XVIII had a aval Command to give a development task to the
Displacement submerged: 1,453.1 tons. length of 71.7m. a submerged displacement of 1.652 FKFS on 3 July 1941: 'To investigate the
Propulsion: two X 6,OOOhp at tons and a form displacement of 1.887 tons. The possibilities of a working-process for a diesel engine
7,500rpm BKC- bridge had been changed once again. It now had an for underwater operation and achieve a state of
Walter turbines. open control position on the bridge deck, and two development that would make it suitable for use on
two X 2,OOOhp at anti-aircraft turrets. placed forward and aft, each board a vessel'.
85rpm RS12 V261 with two 3cm anti-aircraft guns (see pages 208 and The fll'st closed-cycle operation under fully-
34a MWM diesel 2416). loaded conditions showed that either higher
engines. compression or a greater concentration of oxygen
two electric motors. was necessary, as the compression-exponent is less
Aurol: 245 tons. in closed-cycle than in air. In August 1941, the
Fuel-oil: 247 tons. THE EXHAUST-GAS single-cylinder. closed-cycle engine was demon-
Battery: two X 62 type 33 CLOSED-CYCLE PROCESS strated to representatives of the Supreme Naval
MAL 800W cells. Command. It was shown, furthermore, that the
Maximum speed surfaced: 17 knots. Development at FKFS, 1940-43 unwanted exhaust gases could be absorbed in fresh
Maximum speed In December 1940. Dr. Heinrich Drager gave the water completely and without trace. In all. seven
submerged: 24 knots. Research Institute for Motor Vehicles and Vehicle different processes for removing unwanted exhaust
Range surfaced: 18.500 nautical miles Engines at the Stuttgart Technical College (Forsch- gases were discussed.
at 8 knots; 15,000 ungsinstitut fUr Kraftfahrwesen und Fahrzeug- It seemed as though development of a closed-
nautical miles at 10 motorenbau an der TH Stuttgart. or FKFS) a cycle engine for U-boats could be developed rapidly.
knots. development task for a closed-cycle diesel engine. so on 1 October 1941. Dr. Drager added to his
Range submerged: 270 nautical miles at The fll'm of Drager, Lubeck, which produced 'small U-boat' research programme two projects of
24 knots. oxygen equipment among other items, was greatly 70 and 120 tons, to be 'oil-oxygen operated with
Constructional diving 130m. interested in an 'oxygen-engine', which it regarded exhaust-gas connection'. Both small boats were to
depth: as having special significance for small U-boats. In be equipped with a large 'attacking diesel' of
Armament: six 7m bow torpedo one composite experiment they had compared 80o-1,OOOhp. developed in closed-cycle and giving
tubes. twenty various thermal engines working under conditions an underwater speed of 16-18 knots. For cruising
torpedoes. in which air was shut off. The item showing the purposes. an additional small diesel engine of 60hp
one 2cm AA. most favourable results and which seemed to was envisaged. The armament would consist of two
Crew: 47. promise the simplest realization was the so-called bow torpedo tubes (5m long and 45cm in diameter).

In March 1942, the Drager Works, which had A second closed-cycle test-bed, incorporating an
Drager's projected oil-oxygen aroused little interest by its suggestions for small OM5911 diesel engine built into a boiler, was
drive of 1941. V-boats, also withdrew its support. Research now prepared on 20 July 1943, and was given its tests
7Q-ton Project made very halting progress, partly through lack of only two days later under conditions in which air
•
----.-~~~~
1"" ~
urgency, partly through a shortage of skilled staff. was completely excluded. On 16 October 1943, a
Dividing junction Nevertheless, the test-bed with the MB502 diesel running time of more than ten hours in the enclosed
F=TI- engine was ready in June 1942. After considerable boiler was achieved without interruption. This
effort by the FKFS to obtain new authority for meant that the installation had, at this stage,
future work, they received on 13 July 1942 a achieved forty-six hours of closed-cycle running
EXhaust-gas connection
priority requirement from the Army Ordnance without any attention to the engine. The fmal step
E:: Office, for test-bed trials of a diesel engine in the was the incorporation of the OM59/1 boiler test-bed
exhaust-gas, closed-cycle process, and the in a water trough so that information could be
defmitive development and testing of an automatic collected as to its behaviour in fully-submerged
mixture-regulating installation. In November 1942, conditions, and in the interests of further research.
a contract arrived from the Reichs OffIce for
Economic Development, Stuttgart, for the Trials at Deschimag and
::., evolution of a diesel unit working independently of Germaniawerft: Type XVIIK
air, and this involved renewed Drager participation. At the beginning of 1943, the Navy showed interest
<Q:) <D ;;: ') In November 1942, the mixture-regulating once again in the 'closed-cycle drive'. This interest
installation of Dr. Rixmann could be put into use was stimulated by Deschimag, who, at a much
with engine OM59/1 (initially without load- earlier date, had been experimenting with
dependency). Following this, it was possible to advanced processes (project for a caustic-
OM59/1 engine test installation. develop a mixture-regulating installation with soda/steam V-boat in about 1912, and the
temperature control mechanism which was construction of the Engelmann high-speed boat of
adjusted by the uncooled bypass air current. At the 1940-41). On 11 January 1943, theoretical
beginning of 1943, work began on a mechanically- evaluations were available from Deschimag
and hydraulically-operated pre-exhaust gas valve (Obering, Eckert) concerning the exhaust gas-
which was installed in the test engine in March oxygen, closed-cycle operation in submarines. On 9
1943. The first trials showed that a complete February 1943, Deschimag presented the Supreme
expulsion of excess exhaust gas was achieved, and aval Command with the preliminary sketch for a
the endurance running time exceeded thirty hours. high-speed, closed-cycle V-boat of approximately
Further tests showed that increasing the closed- 350 tons, with two MB501 diesel engines, each
. cycle pressure was only economic in conditions of developing 1,500hp, which in certain respects
full-loading and over-loading. resembled the Engelmann boat. There is no doubt
Further tests at the FKFS showed that conditions
leading to better operations were to be achieved by
an increase in closed-cycle temperature, and that an Deschimag's closed-cycle preliminary design, 9 February 1943.
exhaust gas cleaning unit was necessary. The o 1 J l S Ii 7 (I !l lQm
I !i[J§l
development of an automatic regulating system for II "11'"
the operation of the installation was handed over to
the closed-cycle specialist, Dr. W. Rixmann,
Construction Head of the fum of Kienzle AG,
Villingen.
In November 1941, the FKFS commenced the
planning of a V-boat engine incorporating the
closed-cycle operation, and for this they chose the
1,400hp MTB engine of Daimler-Benz, MB502, a
sixteen-cylinder, four-stroke diesel engine with
fresh-water cooling. Additionally, so that further
extensive basic testing could be carried out, a
-=- ~
closed-cycle installation was constructed using a
53hp four-cylinder motor-car engine OM59/1. The
necessary exhaust-gas compressor came from
Ljungstrbm, Sweden, whose Lysholm screw
compressor was also considered suitable for a
~)::~~:6::3E=3
similar purpose in the Walter-Drive. In January
1942, the OM59/1 was to be seen in operation,
initially without regulating mechanism. However, a
considerable setback was experienced by the
withdrawal of the Supreme Naval Command's A
9 CJEm:RU~IID
contract. They justified this step by the shortage of
raw materials and especially by the 'considerable
progress that has been made in other solutions, in
other places'. This meant, more particularly, the
Walter-Drive, which at that time, was also having A
to fight for its existence.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF SINGLE-DRIVE V·BOATS 183

Form displacement 352.3 tons.
surfaced:
Deschimag's closed-cycle project, o , 1 J t 5 6 7 , 9' 10m
Form displacement 400.7 tons.
23 August 1943. submerged:
Propulsion: two 1,500hp at
1,500rpm MB501
diesel engines
(closed-cycle).
one 50hp electric
motor.
Fuel·oil: 30 tons.
Oxygen: 12 bottles (total 9.6
tons at 400
atmospheres).
.._._.,_._ .._.._-_.
_._------------------- Battery: two X 62 cells and
\~ - - - - ~~~..::-~..::.:-~•._~_.~~
===:~,_
2,100amp.h at 1.5
hours discharge.
Maximum speed surfaced: 15.75 knots.
Maximum speed 22.5 knots.
~'~:'o.'~(}1:~':~
submerged:
Diving depth: 150m.
Armament: two 5m torpedo
, tubes; four
torpedoes.
When the decision had been taken to switch
V-boat construction to the new 'electric' V-boat
Types XXI and XXIII (page 216), the outlook for a
~~
---- _ c >.)t~~ rn
l_ ~ )~
). __ --- .. ----- -- -
o ] , 6 -
810m
that Deschimag, which was not involved with Design suggested by the
Walter V-boats, was influenced in producing this
'competitive project' by the interest shown by the Engineering Office for Ship
avy in the high-speed Walter V-boat. Their boat Construction, 13 December
was to travel on the surface (half-submerged) at a 1943.
maximum speed of 23 knots and, when submerged,
a closed-cycle installation would enable it to achieve
22.5 knots. The oxygen supply amounted to
approximately 7.5 tons and was stored in 10
pressure bottles at 400 atmospheres. It was armed
with two bow torpedo tubes and five 5m torpedoes.
In March 1943, the Supreme Naval Command
decided, as a result of this, to have a test boat built
along these lines by Deschimag and Daimler-Benz
in collaboration. The FKFS was therefore
instructed to supply information on the closed·cycle
process as applied to the MB501 diesel engine. In
May 1943, the undertaking was given the 'SS'
priority designation by the Supreme Naval Krupp-Germaniawerft design,
Command, and in June at their request, the Reichs 14 January 1944.
Minister for Armament and War Production, gave
it the 'DE' (Dringlichkeitsstufe, or highest priority)
designation.
All conditions now pointed to a prompt construe·
tion and testing of a full-sized installation. On 20
June 1943, Daimler-Benz delivered an engine,
MB501C, with a converted suction line, and various
regulators were completed for it. The Drager yard
provided the pressure-reducing apparatus.
~~~:~
In the meantime, work on the design of the boat
had made progress. As planned in August 1943, the
main specifications were as follows.
Maximum beam: 4m.
184 THE DEVELOPMENT OF SINGLE-DRIVE V-BOATS

upreme development effort, bearing in mind the The task of co-ordinating the development and
fact that yards were already working to capacity, Closed-cycle conversion for Type construction of the planned experimental closed-
med bleak. On 7 August 1943, at the instigation VIIS. 15 January 1944. cycle boat was given to Chief Naval Construction
!If the Ship Construction Commission, Deschimag Adviser Kurzak of the Supreme Naval Command.
had to suspend all work on its closed-cycle test At a discussion on 20 January 1944 between
U·boat. Three days later, Daimler-Benz had Kurzak, representatives of the FKFS and Daimler-
likewise to terminate work on its contract for the Benz, the question was raised of fmding the
propulsion unit. However, the FKFS continued its quickest way of setting up a second test-bed for the
research as far as circumstances permitted. An closed-cycle testing of the frrst engine actually to be
Improvized test-bed was made for Engine MB501C, used on board a vessel and due for delivery in May.
and the trials with the OM59/1 engine continued. The improvized, closed-cycle test-bed of the FKFS
t the request of the FKFS, representatives of GW was too open to air attack and, in any case, was only
Inspected the closed-cycle test facilities on 22 fitted with provisional coolers. When the new test-
September 1943. GW was not directly involved in bed was ready, trials were to take place under
the large, electric U-boat construction programme, L I I I I I I I I I I I I! I I conditions resembling, as closely as possible, those
but had been obliged to take over the more essential (2Oxygen bottles. each 104m J by 350 atmospheres overload on board ship. The most appropriate seemed to be
U-boat contracts that had been suspended from ~ . (9.8Om1--====== one of the three air-screw test facilities under
other yards. For this reason there was the construction in Wendlingen. These were inspected
possibility of an individual test construction by on 26 January 1944 and the necessary conversions
them. and installations were established. They included
'~
~
After completion of the improvized test-bed for the erection of a building to house a container with
the MB501, there followed, on 5 November 1943, I~III a capacity of 25m 3 of liquid oxygen, a
the frrst air- and, on 9 November 1943, the frrst ,r-t!-r\;-n---, l ~-~
L Rl 400-atmosphere oxygen pump with an evaporator,
closed-cycle operation. On 15 November, the and four high-pressure bottles for storage of the
installation was demonstrated to the HAS- gaseous oxygen at 400 atmospheres.
Director, Otto Merker. Merker was very impressed Daimler-Benz took over construction of the
nd promised to try to bring about a change of complete installation, while FKFS organized
mind on the part of the Ship Construction delivery of necessary items for the closed-cycle
Commission and to plead for a continuation of the operation - regulators, fittings and measuring
tests with Engine MB501C. equipment. Exhaust-gas coolers and exchanger
Then on 6 December 1943, the Supreme Naval flaps were to be supplied by GW (who had
Command looked once again at the project for a prudently been carrying out such work from the
closed-cycle U-boat. A test boat was to be built so autumn of 1943). Steel high-pressure bottles were
that the operation could be tested aboard, and then 7. The forward periscope to be dispensed with. procured from the Zeppelin Airship Company;
fully developed. Additionally, the safe storage of 8. Engine compartment bulkhead to be normally used for helium transportation, these
oxygen at high pressure (400 atmospheres) could be repositioned further forward in the pressure hull by were 10m long and held 1,200 litres. The oxygen
investigated, and other ideas could be tried out on the distance of 2.5 frames and to be made to serve apparatus, liquid containers, pump and evaporator
board, such as hydraulic rudder gear driven by as a watertight, upright bulkhead (gas-tight). were produced by the IG-Farbenindustrie, Autogen
high-revolution engines (a development of the Test 9. Living quarters to be simplified. Works. The high-and middle-pressure reducers were
Institution for Air Travel at Berlin-Johannisthal) 10. Engine insulation to be changed fundamen- to be delivered by the Drager Works, while the
and a relatively high-performance schnorkel with tally. regulators necessary for the closed-cycle operations
special safety fittings. 11. Hydroplane control-position in the control were to be produced by the frrm of Kienzle.
GW, which was greatly interested in the room to be provided on the starboard side. The work of completing the test installation
construction of this test boat, wanted to use the Equipped with an MB501 closed-cycle engine, the progressed so well that, as early as 28 February
hull of the Type XVIIG Walter U-boat, which had boat was to reach a maximum surface speed of 1944, an ordinary MB501 diesel engine could be
been designed but was as yet unbuilt. By 13 approximately 14 knots and a maximum given preliminary trials in air-operation. At GW,
December 1943, a frrst suggestion of the submerged closed-cycle speed of approximately 16 the working-out of constructional details proceeded
Engineering Office for Ship Construction, Lubeck knots. By using large 400-atmosphere high- well. On 15 January 1944, for purposes of
(Engineer Ebschner), for the necessary amended pressure bottles, an oxygen supply of comparison, a plan was also discussed for a test
construction was available. As compared with Type approximately 10 tons was calculated, sufficient for boat using a closed-cycle installation that could be
XVIIG, the following changes were made: submerged travel of 120 nautical miles at 16 knots. produced quickly, by converting a Type VIlB
1. An Aurol bunker to be used for the storage of The electric motor was to be developed from the training boat. The oxygen bottles would be carried
oxygen bottles, positioned in the lower outer hull. AEG-type GU4463/8 of the Type XXIII (page 210). in the upper deck (three bottles forward, in place of
2. Lubricating-oil tanks, water tanks and coolers As the number of revolutions that this developed the capstan, and two bottles aft, near the torpedo
for the Aurol operation to be removed from the was too high, some modifications would be hatch) and four in a widened ballast keel. By these
lower, outer hull, which would make some space for necessary. means it was hoped that a total 12.6m 3 of oxygen at
oxygen storage. On 21 December 1943, verbal contracts were 350 atmospheres could be stored.
3. Stowage of ballast to be changed. given to GW by the Supreme Naval Command for a However, the Supreme Naval Command decided
4. Forward torpedo tubes to be removed, to make closed-cycle test boat; to Daimler-Benz for the in favour of a test boat with the more useful high
space for oxygen storage. MB501C engine, and to FKFS for the appropriate submerged speed provided by the hull shape of
5. Compressed-air containers in the upper deck to closed-cycle installation. On 23 December 1943, an Walter's Type XVIIG, and this was designated
be removed to bow compartment and auxiliary endurance-running of ten hours was now achieved Type XVIIK. Type XVIIG's shape lent itself better
engine compartment. Space to be used for oxygen in the closed-cycle operation with the available to the incorporation of the closed-cycle installation,
storage. MB501C test motor. In accomplishing this, the once the parallel midships section had been
6. Schnorkel to be installed on the forward edge of engine had achieved a total of 48 hours' closed-cycle lengthened by 1.8m, but of course the already-
the conning-tower superstructure and in the upper operation, and seventy hours' air operation without available hull would not necessarily provide a
deck. any significant interruption. perfect housing for a new installation of this kind.

SJ:voa-n 3AI'HO-3'1DNIS dO .LN3Wd0'13A30 3H.L 981
I /
j J~fI~"#-" "l'#jj·/iiii"
'''i1Z·'''N'aIO~
L ~:""''fI'I_.m~1
'''';litl~~1f'
~~~d'"'''''''''''t''',,_~
1~/-"""""'ftJiiiw~
r==T'T""'n7tT-fn.,...-,.~_rF'='
i·'-.Ir--~.,--,q
I
I
I I i I
/I . ,i i i, ,I
(For example, a special property of the closed-cycle The exhaust-gas filter was destroyed by fire and a
drive is that the surface speed is relatively high new one had to be made by Daimler-Benz_
Type XVIIK. because the air-power of the engines is determined Consequently, in March. construction of the closed-
Glossary: Tiefenrudergestange. hydroplane rods; Oelverbrauchs-
by the power of the closed-cycle. This demands a cycle installation was making but slow progress. As
behalter, oil supply tank; Oelkuhler. oil cooler; Abgaskompressor, good hull shape for full attainment of surface delivery of the high-pressure bottles and
exhaust gas compressor; Frischwasser, fresh water; Kuhler, potential, and this was not present in the available appropriate fIttings and connections was delayed
cooler; RaumluftkLihler, air conditioning; Mot. Del Vorrats Tank.
engine oil storage tank; Dusennadel verstellgerat, nozzle adjusting Walter boat type, whose floating waterline was too by air raids. construction and assembly could not
equipment; Gestange z. Regulierung der Mischduse, articulated rod short.) Nevertheless, for the envisaged test begin until the latter part of April. On 10 May 1944,
for regulating the blending nozzle; Funkpeiler, radio beam; Seerohr,
periscope; Schwimmventil, floating valve; Luftmasl, air mast;
purpose. the boat's hull was adequate. Armament, the installation was ready and trials could begin.
Schnorchel Kopf, schnorkel head; Flaschen, bottles; Wd. Back, the second periscope and special communications On 16 May, it was run for the first time in an hour-
watertight forecastle; Zuluft. air intake; Tauchzel1e, ballast tank installations could be dispensed with because it was long, closed-cycle operation, but closed-cycle
(water); Turmluk, conning tower hatch; Kombuse. galley;
Funkraum, radio room; Proviantraum, stores; RegelzeUe, intended only to test the propulsion unit. pressure could not be increased, and its
compensating tank (water); Schmutzwasser Z., bilge water tank; On 15 February 1944, the official contract was temperature was controlled by hand. Several slight
E.-Kompass, electric compass; Luftverdichter, air compressor; placed with GW under the construction number changes and improvements followed. These
Druckoelpump, pressure-oil pump; Zentrifugal-Abgasreiniger,
centrifugal exhaust-gas purifier; Haupt·Schahafel. main switch 'G787' (U798). The materials were gained by ceasing preliminary trials were concluded on 21 May, after
panel; Flachlenzpump. level bilge pump; Tiefenruder. hydroplane; work on the sixth B&V Walter V-boat U1410 (Type which the test engine was removed and the
Seitenruder, side rudder; Sauerstoff. oxygen; Hilfsmaschinen-
Raum, auxiliary engine room; Drucklager. thrust bearing; Kuppling,
XVIIB), and the work force was acquired by MB501C engine, intended for the boat, could be
coupling; Wohnraum, living Quarters; Zentrale, control room; Funk- postponing completion of the large Walter V-boat installed on the test bed with its exhaust-gas pump.
Horchraum, radio listening room; Leerzelle, empty companment; U797 (Type XVIII) by six months. Once the keel This twelve-cylinder exhaust-gas pump had been
Umwalzpumpe, revolving pump; Suswasser, fresh water;
Lenzbrunnen, bilge well; Sammelbehalter, collecting tank;
had been laid on 23 April 1944, construction began developed by Daimler-Benz from a petrol engine
Druckwasser. pressure water; Trimmzelle, trimming tank; in the roofed slipway at GW. When the detailed and was electrically driven. It was tested in air
durchfluteter Raum, flooding compartment; Treibolverbrauchs- construction design had been completed, delivery conditions to the desired back-pressure of 10
Behalter, fuel-oil storage tank; Auspuff, exhaust.
was envisaged on 12 September 1944. atmospheres. On 30 May 1944, tests were
..........<.""
...-.-- ,,-
The Walter Works, which (not without reason) continued with this engine, and with temperature-
feared a considerable delay in its own submarine and closed-cycle pressure regulators, which had
programme, expressed itself in critical terms been tried-out on the FKFS test-bed. Meanwhile.
concerning the 'competitive' closed-cycle drive the 400-atmosphere oxygen pump with vaporizer
(Report S71 dated 5 February 1944). Special and the high-pressure reducer, had been delivered
reference was made to the more favourable storage and installed so that, on 1 June 1944. as planned.
facilities for Aurol and the better performance-to- the complete installation could be set into operation
weight and performance-to-size ratios of the Walter up to the operating pressure of 400 atmospheres.
turbine as compared with a diesel engine. While a After necessary test adjustments, the complete
diesel installation, as in Type XVII. would yield installation in closed-cycle operation was
only approximately 1,500hp, use of a Walter- demonstrated to the directors of Daimler-Benz AG
Turbine could provide 5,OOOhp. If, however, one on 5 June 1944 and a day later to representatives of
looked at the submerged range rather than the the Supreme Naval Command, when it ran for four
submerged top speed, the closed-cycle drive seemed hours without interruption. On 12 June 1944, the
superior, as Kurzak confirmed in his report 'The double-gearing was installed and tried out. On this
Ranges of V-Boats with Drive supplied by Closed- occasion, the crank-case exhaust process was
Cycle Diesel Engines and by Walter-Turbines. carried out using the Drager-Lysholm compressor,
-~-,. using Oxygen and Aurol' dated 4 May 1944. The but the results were not as expected because too
.......-....... ~. ranges for a Type XVIIB with a 1,500hp large a quantity of oil collected in the crank-case.
installation at a diving depth of 30m were as Following the acceptance and approval of the
follows. installation for operational use. the engine was
Walter-Turbine without 340 nautical miles at 8 dismantled and prepared for despatch to the actual
compressor: knots, or 225 nautical V-boat. After a water-pressure test on 15 June
miles at 17 knots. 1944, the boat was ready to receive it, but in the
Walter-Turbine with 490 nautical miles at 8 meantime GW had become involved in the Type
compressor: knots, or 305 nautical XXIII Programme (page 224) and the Type 127
miles at 17 knots. Midget V-boat Programme (page 2818), both of
~ Closed-cycle diesel with 720-800 nautical miles which were considered more urgent in view of the
gaseous oxygen at 400 at 8 knots. or 184-208 critical war situation. In consequence, considerable
atmospheres: nautical miles at 17 delays and cessation of work occurred, so that even
knots. by the autumn, the test boat still lay incomplete on
Closed-cycle diesel with 1.080 nautical miles at 8 the slip.
liquid oxygen: knots, or 284 nautical During an armament discussion on 6 December
miles at 17 knots. 1944. it was stated that a fIgure of 90,000 work-
Closed-cycle diesel with 1,160 nautical miles at 8 hours still remained to be done on U798; i.e. 63 men
Aurol: knots, or 396 nautical would have had to work on the boat in order to
miles at 17 knots. make it ready for the new date of 1 June 1945. In
In the meantime, the closed-cycle installation view of the events of that time, it is most unlikely
using the MB501 test engine had been set up in that any resumption of work on this boat was
Wendlingen. The exhaust-gas coolers were undertaken. It had been intended to put the boat
available as early as the middle of February 1944. into the water on 16 February 1945. but at the end
but deliveries of certain conduits from Daimler- of the war she lay in an overturned position in the
Frame 21.5 Frame 17.45 Frame 15.2
Benz and of an exhaust-gas filter from Mann & yard, alongside the oxygen pressure bottles
Hummel were delayed considerably by air raids. intended for her use.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF SINGLE-DRIVE V-BOATS 187

THE MOVE TO
HIGH SUBMERGED
SPEED
and a similar one on the anti-aircraft platform.
SURFACED U-BOATS: Bridge Conversion III: two 2cm C/38 on a widened Bridge profiles of Types VIIB
PROBLEMS AND bridge (especially necessary for Type VIID) so that and vile.
the mine-shafts would not be overhung).
SOLUTIONS Bridge Conversion IV: two twin 2cm C/38 on the
bridge, and one quadruple 2cm or an automatic
Improved anti-aircraft armament 3.7cm anti-aircraft gun on the platform abaft the
From 1940. the first change from peacetime bridge.
armament in all Type VII V-boats had consisted of Bridge Conversion I I was intended only as an U73-U76 (Type VIIBI.
AA: 1·2cm C/JO in LCJO/37
a widening of the bridge for the 2cm C/30 machine- intermediate solution until the 2cm twin. the 2cm mounting.
gun positioned there. This was rarely used against quadruple and the new automatic 3.7cm anti-
aircraft. however. as commanders deemed it more aircraft guns were ready for operational use, and
prudent to evade air attack by diving. By 1942, Bridge Conversion IV was to be the final solution.
/ft3l
Type Vile, usual profile,
however, the growing threat of air attack and 1940-43.
Bridge Conversion II began in December 1942. AA: 1-2cm C/JO in LC30/37
detection by radar, and the unreliability and Following some teething troubles, the first two mounting; from mid-1942
limitations of the C/30 machine-gun led to a request quadruple 2cm mountings were fitted to two additional 4·8mm C/34
machine-gun.
by the Commander-in-Chief. V-Boats, on 16 June operational U-boats (U75S and one other) for trial
1942, for a strengthening of the armament by two purposes in April-May 1943. (Originally, one boat
twin 15mm MG151, and the designing of a 3.7cm hould have received the new 3.7cm anti-aircraft
\~~~;r
Type VIIC with
twin mounting for V-boats. gun M42V for comparative purposes. but this was . I 'winter garden'
3~0 ~~ersionll.
<oc Fu (Bridge
The Supreme Naval Command required, not ready for use.) However. because of the high
therefore, two twin MG 151 on the existing bridge losses through air attack. it was not expedient to
and a 2cm twin anti-aircraft mounting on a await the operational fmdings of these two boats i'ffi Sz - AA: i-2cm C/38
in LCJO/37
platform half the height of the bridge and situated and, from May 1943, the quadruple 38/43U wa mounting.
abaft the conning tower (in what was known as the produced as a series and, from June 1943 fitted in
'winter garden'). Special pressure-tight box all current production.
W!;=L
mountings had to be designed for the 15mm From 27 April 1943. the removal of the 8.8cm gun
MG 151s which were not pressure-tight. As, at that was authorized. because there were very few
time, the 2cm twin mounting was not available, opportunities to use it and, furthermore, the
initially only one 2cm gun was used on the platform. necessity was borne in mind for balance in the
This was Bridge Conversion 1. U553, fitted out in weight-momentum and height-momentum. Only
this way. was tested in the autumn of 1942, but the the Mediterranean and Polar boats were allowed to
UBI (Type VIIC) with
installation was unsatisfactory, especially because keep these guns, if specially applied for. Some large enlarged bridge.
of the lack of penetrating power of the MG151. At U-boats retained their 10.5cm gun, or exchanged it AA: 4-1.32cm Breca
machine-guns (2x2.
the end of January 1943. the boat was lost in the for another 3.7cm quick-firing C/30V, the position rc= retractable into a
orth Atlantic. cause unknown, and in the of which. abaft the bridge. had to make way for the watenight housing). and
meantime the improved 2cm anti-aircraft C/38 new 'winter garden'. In the summer of 1944, for '·2cm C/38 in LCJO/37
mounting.
introduced in December 1942 offered better results. operations in the Gulf of Finland, a few V II C boats
A modification of Bridge Conversion I, involving had their 8.8cm gun refitted. Flak U-boat U44I.
two twin 13.2mm Breda machine-guns and one 2cm From 14 June 1943. no U-boat was allowed to go AA: a·2cm (2)<4) 38/43U with a shield. and 1-3.7cm SKC/JOU in
anti-aircraft gun on an enlarged bridge (without into action without an increased anti-aircraft LC/39 mounting.
'winter garden'), was built into certain armament (at least two 2cm). Following the
Mediterranean U-boats and used operationally in delivery of the first 40 twin M38 guns on 15 July
1943 (USi and U453). Following the testing in 1943, no boat was allowed to be used in operations
October 1942 of two quadruple 2cm C/38 Army- from August 1943 without Bridge Conversion IV.
type machine-guns for suitability in V-boats. a Initially, the two twin 2cm guns were mounted
discussion with the Commander-in-Chief. U-Boats. without a protective shield; only when they could be
on 14 November 1942 resulted in the following anti- placed farther apart were protective shields Right: U81 (Type VIIC) with longer bridge and two extra twin
aircraft installations being called for: provided, and these were welcomed by operational 1.32cm Breda machine-guns, 1943. Far right: A 2cm
Bridge Conversion II: one 2cm C/38 on the bridge crews. quadruple 38/43U on U745(Type VIIC), 1944.
188 THE MOVE TO HIGH SUBMERGED SPEED

68T Q33dS Q3D1:I3WHnS HDIH 0.1 3AOW 3H.1
I
The enlarged bridge of 'Flak' U-boat U441. Above: Model under construction at GW, early 1943; below, on operations after conversion. Opposite page: U362 with Bridge Conversion V.
. ~ .
o,,~: ,..,.,.~ ..... . , . ... ~., __ , t:. _~;:r""""'~," ... ;................ _ _ .
• 1fiI.!l:l!~~..:2:.~~.~~~~;!<'. "'-'- '? ._

In October 1943.4 U-boats could be equipped for
the first time with the new 3.7cm automatic M42U
in mounting LM43U. As the quadruples, even in
the improved M43 version made by Hanomag. did
not fully come up to expectations, an exchange of
the 2cm quadruple with the more effective 3.7cm
automatic was ordered on 15 October 1943.
However, because of delivery problems. some
U-boats (approximately 20 per cent) remained
equipped with either the 2cm quadruple or a single
3.7cm quick fuing C/30U.
As a further strengthening of the anti-aircraft
armament, on 14 August 1943. tests were ordered
of an additional anti-aircraft platform forward of
the bridge. These Bridge Conversions V and V I
(differing versions for the forward platform)
provided: aft above, two twin 2cm M38: aft below,
one 3.7cm M42: and, on the forward platform, a
twin 2cm or a further 3.7cm M42. The first two test
boats. U973 and U673 (Conversion V I) were
intended for the Polar regions. Additionally. U362
(Conversion V) was similarly fitted-out. The added
structure did not prove satisfactory. however. and
had an adverse effect on stability. Finally, as
Bridge Conversion V II. around the bridge itself a
raised platform was provided. on which two anti-
aircraft guns were placed side by side forward of
the bridge. and a similar two abaft it.
These Bridge Conversions V-V II should not be
confused with the conversions to the so-called anti-
aircraft, or 'Flak', U-boats. These had different
offensive tasks (protecting groups of U-boats) from
those of normal V II C U-boats and were provided
with only five torpedoes. but their anti-aircraft
armament was considerable (two 2cm quadruple
and one 3.7cm gun). The repair boat U256 was the
first to serve as a Flak U-boat. but its fitting-out
suffered considerable delays and. on 16 April 1943.
a speeded-up conversion of U441 to a Flak U-boat
was ordered. I n the period ending 20 May 1943. 7
U-boats 1U441, U256, U621, U211, U953, U271.
U263) were ordered to be converted. However, the
first operation of U441 showed that even these
strongly-armed boats were no match for the Allied
air superiority in the Bay of Biscay and, for more
distant operations. their fuel supply was
inadequate and their torpedo supply too meagre.
On 11 November 1943, the re-conversion of all Flak
U-boats to normal operational boats with Bridge
Conversion IV was ordered.
Parallel with the strengthening of the anti-
aircraft armament. an armoured shield for the
bridge crew was ordered. From July 1943. the
initial all-round armouring was replaced by anti-
splinter shelters to port and starboard, but these
were not popular and were hardly ever used. Their
removal, therefore. was ordered on 31 October
1943.
By the end of 1943, it was obvious that all
attempts to win back a measure of surface 'battle-
power' for the U-boats, by increasing their anti-
aircraft qualities, were in vain. Nevertheless. until
the end of the war. all larger U-boats proceeding on
operations carried a heavy anti-aircraft armament.
which considerably hampered the submerged
qualities of the boats. The Chief of Naval War Staff
made it a significant requirement. even for the new.
THE MOVE TO HIGH SUBMERGED SPEED 193

large U-boats whose development went back to the
spring of 1943, that they possess a strong anti-
aircraft armament, so that when making rapid
Bridge profiles of Type vile.
changes of position over considerable distances,
which even the Walter U-boats could only do on the U345wilh a-2cm 14x2138MII
surface, they should not be defenceless. On the (Bridge Conversion VI. ~"..-.oJO"
F~IfM'S
other hand, it was necessary that the anti-aircaft

weaponry should not create too great a submerged
resistance for the envisaged high submerged speed. ~dj'
Therefore, in the case of Type XVIlI, a plan was Version at the beginnlng of 1944.
Pan-side bulwark (front to back), anll-
formulated for the construction of enclosed anti- splinter shelter 12 people), 2 FuMB
aircraft towers streamlined into the conning-tower aerials and FuM030; starboard-side
superstructure, initially only aft, but later both bulwark (frOnt to back), DfF frame.
anti-splinter shelter (3 peoplel.
forward and aft. These towers, which could turn, AA: 4 - 2cm 12 x 21 38MII ,n LM43U I,.
were entered either from the bridge or from above mounting, 1 - 3.7cm M42U in LM42U
mounting.
by bascule-type doors, and each was served by a
3-man crew. The armament for each tower consisted 1944/45 version.
AA: 4 - 2cm 12 x 21 38MII in LM43U
of two 3cm Flak M44 in LM44 with 3,800 rounds mounting, and 1- 3. 7cm M42U in
and a hydraulically-operated aiming device. It was LM42U mounting. At this time. the
3.7cm AA was being replaced by
then decided to use this item of weaponry for Type either 1 - 2cm quadruple 38/43U With
XXI, but the development of these new weapons a shield or 1 - 3cm twin M42 in
took longer than had been expected, and special LM42U mountIng
Bridge Conversion VII with 4 - 3.7cm
difficulties with their pressure-tight qualities arose. 12x 21 M42U.
As a result the well-tested 2cm twin Flak C/38 were
installed in the anti-aircraft towers, which meant
that the new boats were under-armed compared to
the old U-boats. Then again, the towers were
unpopular because they were not particularly
accessible and they delayed the diving-process.
They may have had some psychological Below: U2502, U3041. U3515. UI70 and UII08 alongside the torpedo-boat Panther at Horten, May 1945. Opposite page,
significance, but they were of very little practical top: U5151Type IXCI with increased AA armament Isix 2cm and one 3.7cml, autumn 1943. Opposite page, below: Type VIIC
use. boats in the shelter at Trondheim, May 1945.
III
'The high-frequency war' factor was never actually used in detection.) The process with a signifIcantly shorter wavelength
At the end of 1940, the British began to equip their first low-radiation observation and warning device (i.e., in the centimeter range), could be responsible
aircraft with a new detection device working on a was that produced by Hagenuk and installed from for the failure of the warning installations.
wavelength of 1.5m - ASV (Air to Surface Vessel) August 1943. This was the automatic search Thinking, however, was still obsessed by the fear
radar. By April 1941, 110 aircraft of Coastal receiver FuMB9 'Zypern' (also called W. Anz g 1) that the enemy could zero-in on German heterodyne
Command had been so equipped and, from early in which was intended especially to detect the receivers, and this led to the replacement of W. Anz
1942, all aircraft operating against V-boats had this erroneously-assumed short impulses. The g 1 by W. Anz g 2 which was less prone to emission.
equipment installed in them. From the summer of equipment consisted of a heterodyne receiver with Additionally, the completely emission-free, untuned
1942, V-boats increasingly reported unexpected indicator valves in series. When used for automatic detector adaptor FuMBI0 'Borkum', introduced by
attacks by enemy aircraft even at night, when they frequency-scanning, using a movable condenser VK/Telefunken, using an attached NF-impulse
would suddenly be illuminated by strong activated by a motor, the radiation issuing from amplifier, formed a wide-band receiving installation
searchlights. Radio observation had already shown this apparatus was quite slight. with a relatively large frequency spread (up to
that the cause was to be sought in radio detection approximately 20cm wavelength), but with a
equipment (radar). With all speed, VHF-heterodyne somewhat restricted range.
receivers, made by the French firms of Metox- Early in 1943, an aircraft was shot down over
Grandin and Sadir, together with a primitive Rotterdam and was found to contain one of the new
wooden frame aerial ('Biscay Cross') were fitted to British radar installations, H2S, with a 9cm
U-boats. The detection beam was indicated by a wavelength. Only after thorough investigation and
loud 'pinging' in the receiver. reconstruction of this equipment was the full extent
From August 1942, all V-boats were given this of the new danger realized, and the development of
equipment, and losses in Biscay declined sharply; a suitable warning device began immediately. In
however, the Allies possessed new radar equipment June 1943, the prototype of a simple detecting
operating on much shorter wavelengths that the receiver, designated FuMB 7 'Naxos', was available
Germans did not think could be successfully from NVKJTelefunken. An impulse amplifier was
employed. German industry was requested to used as a receiver. The first V-boats were furnished
produce an operationally-effective observation with this installation at the end of 1943, but its
equipment for the range of 3-<l.75m wavelength. range of approximately 5km was too low to provide
The result was a pressure-tight, all-round dipole, security from sudden air attack, which left the
designated FuMB29 'Bali' (FuMB being short situation very much as before. Not until the advent
for Funkmess-Beobachtungsgerat, or 'Radar of the sounding combination, FuMB26 'Tunis' with
Observation Equipment'), and the Butterfly aerial dipole aerial 'Fliege' for a wavelength of 9cm, and
'Palau' (already tried on surface vessels) with the horn radiator 'Miicke' for the new American
direction-fmding. At first, the receiver to go with 3cm radar, did the position improve. This new
this was to be the VHF-heterodyne receiver warning system was incorporated into U-boats
'Samos' made by Rohde & Schwartz. from May-June 1944 and attained ranges of up to
When, therefore, in the early part of 1943, 70km. The aerials, however, were not pressure-
U-boats were once again subjected to unexpected tight. For surface travel, they were simply
air attack by night, and illumination by search- incorporated into the direction-fInder frame and
lights without the evidence of any detection rotated with it. Only at the end of the war was a
equipment, it was assumed that the enemy were now pressure-tight cm-wavelength aerial with an
using a higher impulse-sequence which could not be extensible mast available operationally for the 9cm
detected acoustically. As a counter-measure, the and 3cm ranges, with a rough direction-fmder
Metox equipment was fItted with a 'magic eye' installation; it was designated FuMB35 'Athos'.
from March 1943. The catastrophic V-boat losses in The next step followed on 12 September 1944, with
May, however, showed that the detection problem the decision to introduce a combination of 'Athos'
besetting U-boats was nowhere near solved. One and 'Bali', designated FuMB37 'Leros'.
consequence was the dismissal of the Head of the Apart from the development of warning devices,
aval Communications Arm, Vizeadmiral experiments were carried out with little success in
Maertens, and his replacement by Konteradmiral disguising V-boats against high-frequency
Stummel. High-frequency research in the field of detection (e.g., with the Bachem 'net', a wire net of
U-boat operations was greatly widened and 120 ohms resistance, set a quarter of a wavelength
intensified. The scientifIc control of this was FuMB aerial 2 ('Biscay Cross'). from the boat's hull). More success was seemingly
handed over in December 1943 to Professor Karl offered by the idea of disguising certain smaller
Kiipfmiiller. Nevertheless, the months that The first boat fitted with W. Anz g 1 ('Wanze') components, e.g., the schnorkel head, with
followed were still characterized by uncertainty and was U161, which proceeded through the Bay of detection sumps. Swimming bodies ('Thetis') and
underestimation of the enemy's detection Biscay without attack. Following this, and balloons (' Aphrodite') with reflectors were intended
processes. successive possibly fortuitous experiences with the to deceive by providing apparent targets. Even the
At the ~nd of July 1943, it was believed that the W. Anz g 1, the U-boat Directorate concluded: supposed infra-red detection was investigated, and
cause of the high U-boat losses lay in the fact that 'After the switching-off of Metox and the tests were carried out on certain V-boats. A
the enemy could zero-in on the intermediate introduction of "Wanze" hardly a single boat has significant measure against the infra-red emission
frequency of the heterodyne receivers carried been sighted or attacked. Thus, the anti-detection given out by a boat was the re-positioning of the
aboard U-boats. This led in August to an order position has changed basically.' However, at the exhaust under the surface of the water. All these
forbidding the use of Metox, and the resumption of beginning of September, despite being equipped strivings were carried out almost wholly to defeat
U-boat operations in the North Atlantic was with 'Wanze', U386 was surprised and attacked by the enemy's radar equipment. Right up to the end
postponed until designated V-boats had been fitted an aircraft at night, without any evidence of of the war, it was not comprehended by the German
with new detection receivers. (Certainly the British detection. Only gradually did the Chief of Naval U-Boat Command that the homing-in of even short
knew that the Metox emitted radiation, but this War Staff realize that a completely new detection WIT messages on short-wave with the aid of the

British HF-DF equipment (high-frequency
lhrection-fmding) represented, at the very least, a
l'Ilnsiderable danger for V-boats, and was often the
precursor of an exact detection by radar and asdic,
followed by an accurate attack on the V-boat, or the
urrounding of it by convoy escorts. It has recently
Iwen made known that the British had been in
possession of a German Enigma machine through-
out the war, and their systematic deciphering of
(;erman radio transmissions greatly assisted them
to fmd and destroy V-boats.
As early as the summer of 1939, two V-boats were
to have been fItted for test purposes with an active
radar equipment (Dete-equipment). Various
discussions between the NVK and the V-Boat
ommand took place, in which a general basis for
the installation of such apparatus was thrashed
out. On 3 November 1939, a letter from the V-Boat
Command to the NVK stated:
'The general basis for the installation of Dete-
('quipment in V-boats worked out in the previous
discussion is confIrmed and stated below. Chief of
aval War Staff - V estimates a maximum range
of &-7,OOOm. Without any special expenditure, .the
detection accuracy that can be attained with the
help of a maximum detection of 2° is regarded as
adequate. In these installations, care must be taken
that all opportunities be taken to avoid an increase
in the silhouette of the V-boat or at least any
increase must be kept to a minimum. At the
moment, there is no objection to the intention to
make the complete aerial structure either
collapsible or to make certain components portable.
Chief of Naval War Staff - V has taken note that a
provisional test on Stdrtebecker or on a similar
vessel is envisaged for December of this year.'
However, there was no move to install such
apparatus in V-boats, presumably because of the
considerable amount of space that would be taken
up and the general lack of urgency at the time. It
was not until June 1942, at a conference with the
Commander-in-Chief, V-Boats, concerning the
problems of V-boat detection by aircraft, that
Dbnitz demanded that boats be fItted with an
active detection equipment. This led to the
conversion of the Naval FuMO (Funkmess-
Ortungsgeriit, or Radar-Detection Equipment)
made by GEMA for U-boat use: Designated
FuM030, the equipment consisted of 2 X 4 dipoles
on a turntable installed in the bridge
superstructure. The aerial assembly had to be
specially reduced in size, but the frequency of
368MHz (82cm wavelength) was retained. It did not
give very accurate information. In certain V-boats,a
fIxed aerial with 2 X 6 dipoles was fItted forward of
the bridge (FuM029). Installation began in the
autumn of 1942, but the results were not
satisfactory.
More was hoped for from the Luftwaffe ship-
detection gear FuMG 200 'Hohentwiel', made by
Lorenz in the summer of 1942. It had a frequency of
556MHz (56cm wavelength) and allowed the
disposition of 4 X 6 dipoles on an assembly of 1 X
1.4m 2 . The Naval designation was FuM061
Right: A Type vile bridge with FuM030 radar and armoured

conning tower.
THE MOVE TO HIGH SVBMERGED SPEED 197

'Hohentwiel V'. By 20 September 1944, 64 an extensible air mast in an attempt to facilitate the using the entire interior of the boat as an air
operational boats had been fItted with use of diesel engines when submerged, Possibly this cushion from which the diesels could freely
'Hohentwiel', and it was intended to install a was prompted by the wish to be able to undertake aspirate. On 19 May 1943, Walter reported
further 32 in Type VIlC and Type IX boats. On 17 diesel-powered voyages, in the flooded condition. in progress of the work in a letter to D6nitz:
September 1944, U862 reported from Penang: the very considerable heat of the Dutch East 'Dear Grossadmiral,
'FuMO Hohentwiel has worked well throughout the I ndies: the calm seas that prevail in that part of the When, on the occasion of my visit on 2.3.43, I asked
voyage. The range against loaded freighters in the world meant that a relatively short air-mast could for the Construction Director, Dr. Fischer, who
tropics amounts to 7.2km. No impairment of be used. incidentally has taken up his task zealously and
performance has been occasioned by the tropical Wichers improved the concept several times, and with success that is already apparent, I mentioned
climate.' A further 16 boats used the installation planned an automatic head-valve for the air-mast. the possibility of running engines during
uccessfully as an active air-warning gear, but with a spherical float (valve seating and counter- ubmerged travelling at periscope depth by the
these were almost certainly exceptional cases. As pring) as an intermediate cushioning for pressure taking-in of air through a tube. In the intervening
boats hardly ever operated on the surface now, and variations. In the interior of the boat, he proposed a time I have put this proposal to 'K' OffIce. A fresh-
their commanders hardly ever switched on the pecial air container with connections for air-mast air tube and an exhaust tube will be extended and
equipment for fear of being themselves detected, it and oxygen bottles. For test purposes, his air-mast retracted Like a perisope. When water washes over
was rarely used on the few surface voyages and its was fitted in Dutch submarines from 019. In 1939. the top, the tube will open and close itself
efficiency seems highly doubtful, as does that of its 019 and 020 had air-masts with automatic head- automatically. At a speed of 7 knots. the engine can
later development, FuM065 'Hohentwiel-Drauf' valves and a motor-drive for lifting and draw air from all compartment air for about 60
which was fItted to all new Type XXI boats. retracting it. The exhaust-gas mast was not seconds. The spray that is sucked in by this
retractable. 019 used her air mast during the war operation can be ejected by a special water-
against Japan. but it is not known whether lengthy remover.
submerged voyages using the diesel engines with 'The increasing threat to V-boats from the air has
this arrangement were undertaken. 021-027 had led me to these thoughts, which have been in my
an improved installation in which the exhaust-gas mind for some time. What we would achieve by
mast could be extended and retracted by hand. A using these means would be:
more comprehensive design, of 1940. even 1. The outward and return journeys could proceed
envisaged an automatically extensible, two-section almost without any danger. The detection of
air-supply and air-expulsion mast. periscopes and air-tubes by radar installations
Both the German and British Navies knew of would only be possible at close range and, on the
these installations through submarines captured or high seas. would probably not occur at all.
handed over. but showed no particular interest in Additionally, the reflection qualitities of these
them. In fact, the air-masts for 021-024 were tubes could be eliminated without great
dismantled in 1940 by the British Navy, expenditure. Visual detection from aircraft would
supposedly at the suggestion of a Dutch offIcer. In be diffIcult in normal sea conditions and, in any
1941, the air mast of 026 WD4) was subjected to case, would be possible only at distances at which
tests by the UAK. Certain problems were the V-boat would have spotted the opponent.
encountered, but at the end of 1941, despite Chief 2. The exact position of U-boats in operational
aval Construction Adviser Aschmoneit's territories will be impossible for the enemy to
protests. the trials were discontinued. and the air- determine. I am assuming that the enemy is
masts were dismantled from the captured currently able to establish the whereabouts of most
submarines 025-027. It was considered that, in the of the hostile V-boats through his air-
turbulent European and Atlantic waters, the air- reconnaissance network using radar. Even if a boat
mast could be used, at best, to supply air while should be obliged to surface for a time and proceed
surfaced in heavy seas, but the German diesel air- at top speed, subsequently and to a considerable
masts were preferable for this. The authorities degree, it will be able to change its position by sub-
FuM065 'Hohentwiel'-Drauf radar aerial on a Type XXI.
decided that there was no future in trying to merged travelling, and then will also be able to
At the end of the war, two items of active develop an apparatus for introducing fresh air while recharge its battery for purposes of slow travel.
detection equipment that could be used at submerged. 'The air-tube could be of considerable worth to
periscope depth were still in the test stage. These ot until the early part of 1943 was the idea the high-speed underwater boat. From a technical
were the German 9cm FuM084 'Berlin 11', which taken up again, on the initiative of Hellmuth viewpoint, this would then not need to travel on the
had a stern emitter in a pressure-tight casing on an Walter. On 2 March 1943, Walter and D6nitz surface at all. From a military viewpoint this would
extensible mast. and the active surveillance discussed the future development of the Walter be necessary for detection of the enemy, but the use
apparatus for use against aircraft. FuM0391 U-boats, the diffIculties of the U-boat campaign and of radar and sound-location would mean that
'Lessing' (204m wavelength) with an extensible the severe losses sustained. Walter suggested that surface travel could be kept to a minimum. Type
vertical aerial. These were intended for new V-boats U-boats should travel submerged, even when using XVIII fItted with an air-tube and suitable location
from the summer of 1945, their diesels, taking in air for the diesels through a devices would come very near to the ideal V-boat.
tube - this would inhibit radar and make the The value of artillery armament for U-boats of this
The schnorkel enemy's task more difficult. Walter illustrated his kind represents more of a problem, as the resistance
Walter's first proposal for a high-speed V-boat in proposal with a sketch, relating it back to hi of the boat would be thereby increased by 20-25 per
October 1933 included an installation for original idea of 1933. D6nitz was immediately cent, so its use would endanger a boat more than its
introducing atmospheric air while the boat was just intrigued and asked Walter to develop the idea. At non-use.
below the surface, through an extensible air-shaft. Kiel, Walter handed the concept to hi 'I suggest the following for full evaluation:
The reason for the latter was that the boat. having collaborators, principally to the U-boat specialists 1. A lIB boat with an air-tube in place of one
a fIsh-shaped hull without upperworks. was awash Gabler and Heep, who took account of the Dutch periscope.
on the surface even at low speeds, At about the spherical float for the automatic head-valve. The 2. A similar arrangement with one of the Type
same time. Lieutenant-Commander J. J, Wichers of vital point that made possible the use of the air- XVII test boats when one of them has been
the Royal Netherlands Navy took out a patent for mast in the rough Atlantic seas was the principle of delivered.

'Following favourable outcome of these triaL,
individual boat types could be fItted with the air-
tube. In the above short outline I hav!! omitted, to
be sure, several disadvantages that, from a military
aspect, could give rise to criticism. As an engineer,
I see the project in an 'avowedly single-minded'
light. I request you, dear Grossadmiral. to ascribe
that sentiment to me in the best way possible.
Yours sincerely, Walter.'
On 27 May 1943, Dbnitz replied:
'Dear Herr Walter,
I thank you for your letter and for your suggestion,
which I shall immediately have thoroughly tested
out. You and your collaborators will be able to take
part in the tests. It is a matter for conjecture how
things will turn out; however, at all events we shall
proceed to investigate each possibility with energy.
For this reason I welcome all such 'single-minded'
proposals. Yours, Dbnitz.'
Walter continued to concern himself with the
further development of the air-tube, which was
given the suggestive name of 'Schnorchel'
(generally spelt 'schnorkel' in English). At a
conference in Wolfenbuttel. he suggested reducing
the size of the schnorkel head by the incorporation
of electrical switch elements (an electro-pneumatic
head-valve).
In March 1945, Walter received the highest Order
of Merit that could be given to a civilian in wartime,
the 'Knight'S Cross for War Services, with Swords'
- not only as Dbnitz said in his introductory note,
for his 'considerable services in the development of
the Walter U-boat', but also 'for the introduction of
the schnorkel'.
Meanwhile, the first schnorkel with a floating
valve at its head had been placed in contract with
DWK. On 8 June 1943, the constructional drawings
were available for a test version, which was to
replace the after periscope in the training boats US7
and USB. Directors Middendorf and Immich of
DWK worked on this undertaking with such energy
that the first schnorkel was ready in only three
weeks. In August 1943, the initial tests were
successful and showed that, if travelling were
undertaken carefully, damage to health need not
occur. A collapsible air-mast forward of the bridge
was envisaged for Type VlIC boats, and this wa
fitted for test purposes in the repair boats U23S and
U236 as early as September 1943. Although the
test journeys that followed were similarly
successful, conservative technical circles remained
sceptical and operational crews refused it.
Schnorkel-travel seemed too ponderous and too
risky, for it was thought that only a slight error in
depth-keeping might lead to the poisoning of the
entire crew.
The installation of schnorkels in further boats
began very tentatively during the winter of
1943/44. The differing structural features of the
various U-boat types meant that different locations
were necessary for the collapsible schnorkel.
Wherever ,possible, it was sited on the starboard
side abreast the conning tower, at approximately
left: The head of an extensible schnorkel fitted in U2518

IType XXII.

Head of a schnorkel with a floating Schnorkel installation for
valve (for Type VII). Type XVIIB.
Clfcular dipole Air Intake

Air valve with
camouflage cylinder
Exhaust-gas exit
Exhaust-gas mast
Exhaust-gas connection
and main Air intake mast
Extenor exhaust valve
Falrlead sleeve
exhaust-gas flap
Exhaust-gas
T' Silencer for
Diesel !ngine~
valve I EXhaust-gas
expulsion distributor
------=r-'LL5t?= to'r1a--------
Interior Control room and
exhaust-gas
flap Diesel engine F, bow
Electric motor torpedo room
and diesel Hand activator
engine room II ~~ ----- Electric cable winch
Stores
Above: The schnorkel being fined in U235, November 1943. Interior valve pressure meIer exhaust and schnorkel exhaust dUClS 1
Interior valve draInage and pumping mast 2
the height of the after periscope (Types LXC and Schnorkel exhaust-gas mast 3 Spring shock absorber _'.
XIV) or abaft the periscopes (Types XB); the best Drainage connection 4
arrangement was a position amidships abaft the

periscopes, but this was only possible in boat
deveLoped after Type XX I I I; the worst
arrangement was that in Type VIlC, in which the
schnorkel head and exhaust vapour obscured
forward observation by the periscope. Design and operation of a schnorkel system with an electro-pneumatic
The fIrst 20 VIlC schnorkels had been ordered a
early as 12 August 1943. On 24 September 1943, head-valve for Type 110.
the Naval Arsenal at Kiel and the KMW
(Kriegsmarinewerft Wilhelmshaven) were required Schnorkel head valve opening
to produce, as a matter of urgency, a further 100 All
schnorkels for the VlIC in service, and 40 for the Intake 24·volt water contact
1XC and IXD boats in service. With effect from 27 Waterline
Exhaust _
September 1943, it was similarly ordered that
various new boats be equipped as quickly as
possible. In a letter to GW and AG Weser dated 15 Air intake mast
November 1943, Broking, the head of K II U
tated: 'The completion of these schnorkel Air eXit mast Pressure reductIon valve
installations for operational boats and new boats is Low·pressure air duct, 12 atms. overload
Hlgh·pressure air duct, 25 atms. overload
to be accelerated by every means. In the
Schnorkel
discussions at Supreme Naval Command, it has Exhaust-gas flap exhaust-gas valve
been expressly stated that no delays must occur in
the delivery programme through efforts to bring Silencer Flexible tube (airP
about improvements in the first installations'. Pressure meter
Nevertheless, production proceeded slowly, and
schnorkel installations remained a bottle-neck until Wireless
telegraphy room
the summer of 1944. ~.~
This led, in the early part of 1944, to the decision o.=r
that schnorkels should be fitted as a priority to ~.~
operational boats, then to other service boats and, g-~~
§ ~
only then, to newly-constructed boats. (Meanwhile,
the first operational boat to be fitted with a .,, 0....
schnorkel, U264, was lost in the North Atlantic on o.~
§'~
19 February 1944 during her fIrst operational trip, fr~
which did nothing to increase 'enthusiasm' for the Exhaust-gas flap
5~~1ta ~
schnorkel in operational circles.) Information sent , "
by the Arsenal at Kiel to the Supreme Naval
Command showed that, up to April 1944,

DWK's schnorkel test installation
for US7 and US8 (Type IIC), 8 June
1943.
A B
A: Ring floating valve

B: Spherical floating valve
S m
Schnorkel arrangement
in Type IXC.
." .... :; ..
The folding schnorkel on U889IType IXC/4QI, May 1945.

033dS 03D1I3WHflS HDIH 0.1 3AOW 3H.1 WZ
ii'
'JXI adAl UI
;;..--------- ~~========!.. L-J lnoAel la~JOu4~S a4l
£OZ G33dS G3Dll3WaOS HDIH 0.1 3AOW 3H.1
.:.. --4-H---
.y\, £InN$?
I III I ~--
~'t1.4p!Yrp(}OSN.."JI
~ - "lIpjPIIfH/11q7JQf~ -I i»lf~j()< Wl.pi,ll
9 D 1 J I
L.....:i • W'~.,,""":"..".J
r
---
9SjrJ§
J It, I Ir t'y I.' 1r Ir
•
--
I
4J
.........
(_N6¥""ptJtI-Lt~)
-
'lUlJ/.IlJAlU.I'!1. i
I I~
.'
NEW U-BOAT TYPES, 1943
vile.
The Oelfken schnorkel for a Type
C
fllJ
. M JLll
B
Transport U-boats: Type XX and alternatives
V-boats had been used for transport purposes early
on during the operation of Norway, and werE: in fact
used to carry munitions and aircraft fuel from
A Wilhelmshaven and Kiel to Trondheim. The follow-
ing deliveries were carried out up to the summer of
_.
~~.----~--
~i_~~·=--== ~~-..~ 1940:

.,. ~"""oc- .. ...: CJ CJ
U26: first voyage 9 tons of 2cm ammunition, 7 tons
- Ai b::C:::>C:::>-="::"::: hand-grenades. three 2cm anti-aircraft guns with
accessories and the handing-over of her own MG
C/30; second voyage 12.7cm and 3.7cm destroyer
ammunition, aircraft bombs, aircraft fuel and
lubricating oil.
U29: 5 tons of 2cm ammunition, 0.7m 3 of distillate
water,1,300 phosphorus shells and the handing-over
of her own 8.8cm gun.
U32: one 8.8cm anti-aircraft gun with steel base,
~ -- 0 0-:° ~ __ and 706 shells, 20m 3 aircraft fuel, 1,200kg of
lubricating oil and a high-speed petrol-tank pump.
A B C U43: first voyage 13 tons of infantry ammunition, 7
tons of mortar ammunition and 15 tons of 2cm
schnorkels had either been fItted, or were being By the middle of June 1944, B&V had received a ammunition; second voyage turbine components
fItted, to the following U-boats: total of 14 schnorkel installations for VI IC boats, of and generator for the destroyer Paul Jacobi.
Operational yards: St. Nazaire, U264, U269, U575, which 6 had already been built into U978, U998, UiOl: one 8.8cm anti-aircraft gun with accessories
U667; Lorient, Ui07, U530, U543, U547; La Pallice, UIOl9, UI020, UI021 and Ui022, and a further 3 and 774 shells, eight 250kg bombs, 60m 3 of aircraft
U275, U953; Brest, U984; Bordeaux, Ul80, U195; were intended for U979, UI023 and UI024. fuel and 1,200kg of lubricating oil.
Toulon, U642. The schnorkel gradually gained ground. U122: one 8.8cm anti-aircraft gun with accessories
Home yards: GW, U235, U236, U237, U24l, UI05l, Increasingly, from the summer of 1944, boats fItted and ammunition, aircraft bombs, 90m 3 of aircraft
UI053, UI054; DWK, U490, U719, U743, U191; there with the device reported successes, even from those fuel and lubricating oil.
were also a few boats at other yards which had not sectors regarded by the British as safe from UA: one 8.8cm anti-aircraft gun with accessories
submitted a report. V-boats. But the next problem was the concealment and 1,150 shells, sixteen 250kg bombs, 165m 3 of
of the schnorkel head from radar. The so-called aircraft fuel, 5 tons of lubricating oil for aircraft and
'ring' float, with its cylindrical surface, offered 9 tons of engine oil for V-boats.
Operation of the Oelfken advantages in providing a shielding layer. Because Additionally. during the Allied invasion of 1944,
schnorkel. of its simpler technicalities, it was intended that it similar transport voyages were undertaken to bring
replace the spherical float early in 1945; however,jt supplies to the Atlantic bases, cut off from normal
suffered from being too inert in operation and was supply routes.
easily affected by wash. Only a few were fItted for The first V-boat transport of supplies from the
operational trials, and it was hoped that a decided Far East to Europe was undertaken by the
improvement would be obtained from the smaller, Japanese V-cruiser 130 on her 'good-will' visit to
electro-pneumatic head-valve. Lorient on 5 August 1942. Vp to that time, the only
A big disadvantage of the existing schnorkel means for Germany to obtain important war
installations lay in the low schnorkelling speed of materials such as rubber, tin, refmed metals and
5-() knots. V-boats fItted with it spent most of their quinine from the Far East was by surface blockade-
time outward and homeward bound, with only a runner, but it was obvious that it would become
short time in their operational zone. Obviously, the increasingly diffIcult for such vessels to make
next stage of the development must be to increase successful voyages. The decisive stimulus for the
schnorkelling speed. The basic operational demand construction of special transport V-boats, however,
that periscope observation be possible while using had its origins elsewhere, and followed a discussion
the schnorkel meant that it was necessary to ensure at Hitler's headquarters on 19 November 1942. The
freedom from vibration of the periscope in higher minute ran as follows:
speed ranges. To this end, the Oelfken schnorkel 'The Fiihrer requires the construction of trans
was developed. This contained, in an extended port V-boats because, following the occupation of
streamlined shape, a free tube through which the Iceland by the Americans, he has conceived the idea
periscope could be raised when the extended of a sudden invasion of Iceland and the consequent
schnorkel was locked in position. Only the head lens setting-up of an air-base there. The Chief of Naval
projected from the schnorkel's outer cover, and the War Staff suggests handing over this task to the
periscope could not suffer any stronger vibration Shipping Commissioner, as these boats should be
from motion through the water than the schnorkel. built as commerce V-boats and could be used for
At the end of the war, two VIIC boats were commerce purposes (blockade-breakers). The
apparently being converted at DWK for this type of Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Navy agree~
schnorkel, which was also given an electro- with this.'
pneumatic head-valve. It was calculated that this There is no doubt, however, that the construction
would enable a schnorkelling speed of of special transport U-boats was regarded by the
approximately 10--11 knots to be reached. Supreme Naval Command principally for the

upplying of materials from East Asia. The carrying rubber in external containers. For this The task of working out the constructional details
transport U-boats Deutschland and Bremen of the large boat of 2,700 tons. eight outer containers were was given to AG Weser, and the initial model
First World War had given Germany a good basis envisaged to take a total of approximately 820m 3 , towing tests were carried out in the earlier part of
of knowledge for boats of this kind; it is, therefore, which meant that with a stowing coeffIcient of 0.5 1943. On 3 March, 15 of these large boats were
the more surprising that the German Navy took so tons per m 3 a load of approximately 400 tons of ordered from DW in Hamburg-Finkenwerder, and
long to show interest in transport U-boats during rubber was possible. There was additional dry 15 from Bremer Vulkan, Vegesack. The frrst boat
the Second World War. After the Italians had storage capacity in the interior of the boat for was to be delivered in August 1944. From then on, a
begun to use their operational submarines in approximately 220m 3 . It was proposed that on the monthly total of 3 boats was to be delivered, the
lC'"owing numbers for transport purposes (supply- loaded return passage the keel-compartment, which last by the middle of 1945. An essential condition
routes to North Africa) in 1940, special transport could be reached from the outer-loading com- was that these large, transport V-boats were to be
ubmarines were laid down by the I talians in the partments, be used to carry tin in ingots, or moly- additional to current U-boat production. The HAS
ummer of 1942. bdenum and tungsten concentrate in pewter or tin announced that 2,810 more workers would be
The frrst German design for a special transport cases. The use of the keel for stowage meant that required.
V-boat, designated Type XIX, was being developed the altered trimming moments occasioned by other As the rapid introduction of transport U-boats
by the end of 1942. Of approximately 2,500 tons, cargoes could be compensated without need of dry- into operations was obviously not possible, Ddnitz
he was to have received a new-style diesel docking. The total load capacity on the return suggested in a Situation Discussion on 8 February
installation, but, as this was not forthcoming, the journey was calculated approximately as follows. 1943, in Hitler's Command Headquarters that, as a
project was abandoned in favour of a boat that Raw rubber: 400 tons temporary bridging measure, the large Italian
could take the well-tried engine installation of the Tin: 200 tons Atlantic U-boats (which were not particularly
Type XIV. The project was designated Type XX, Molybdenum and tungsten concentrate: 150 tons suitable for operational conditions anyway) be
and the hull took its box-shaped cross-section from Interior cargo (quinine, mica, oils): 50 tons converted for use as transports for the Far East
Type XB, which offered considerable capacity for Total: 800 tons run. To make the most effective use of the
Type XX. Glossary: Treibolbunker, fuel·oil bunker; Akku Raum, battery room; Kuche, galley;
Beuiebsgang, gangway; Ketten Kasten, chain cover; Tauchzelle, ballast tank (water);
Proviantraum, storeroom; zentrale. control room; Hilfsmaschinenraum. auxiliary engine
room; MCleren Raum, engine room; UnteroHiziere, NCOs; Lade-Raum, cargo hold;
Trimmzelle. trimming tank; Kuhlraum. cold storage; Matorenol, engine 011; KartoHel
Kuhlraum, potato cold storage; Tief Kuhlraum. deep freeze; MUnitlons R.. ammunition
compartment; Trinkwasserzelle. fresh water tank.
.L!=-.#_~
~-
7
I
'-=:-
,j o u
- .C'')-
d'.,
""'I ~'l a
~. '1
oS.
o· .~~~ -~ - 2> J
~I ,,;~ J( (1__
r
l. ~~ ~-; o G o
.. ..
~ ---
..!~
_ ... ·~FC"-:l~~~inn'b1.~
~~~~~-~
---.L. L .~

restricted payload of these boats, they should be U-boats was only to be considered as a last Penang. After leaving Singapore on 14 February
used only on the Atlantic legs that Allied air power resource. 1944, UIT23 (ex-GiuLiani) was sunk by a British
had rendered too dangerous for surface blockade- In the meantime, an investigation had been made submarine in the Malacca Straits. The last ex-
runners; for the Capetown-Madagascar leg, cargo into the possibilities of converting the Italian Italian transport U-boat to leave Bordeaux, UIT22
could be transferred to normal surface ships. Hitler Atlantic submarines: 3 large and 7 medium boats (ex-BagnoLini) was sunk by· aircraft south of the
basically agreed with this suggestion and planned were available and, as they stood, each could carry Cape of Good Hope on 11 March 1944, and with
to talk to Mussolini in an effort to speed up the 60 tons of internal cargo. If the diving bunkers were this, the Supreme Naval Command abandoned the
conversion. used, the load capacity would increase to 150 tons, idea. The two surviving boats, UIT24 (ex-
On 13 February 1943, the conversion of VIlC but fuel-replenishment would be necessary in the CappeUini) and UIT25 (ex-ToreLLi) were now to be
U-boats to transport boats, with a range of 14,000 South Atlantic on both outward and return used for supply and transport between the
nautical miles at 8 knots, was discussed for com- passages. The total capacity for all 10 boats would Japanese mainland and the harbours of Borneo and
parative purposes. Two possibilities were contem- amount to a maximum of only 1,500 tons. German bases in the Southern Hemisphere.
plated: A, alterations only to the interior of the Approximately six weeks was estimated for the Consequently, combat U-boats returning from
boat; and B, the building-on of a new, enlarged conversion. On 26 February 1943, Hitler turned the Far East were now to be used to the full in
down the idea, but the Supreme Naval Command carrying urgently-required raw materials. It was
persisted in their desire to use these boats for envisaged that a Type IXC could carryon its return
Type XX frame lines (Design 1). transport purposes. On 18 March, Dbnitz was able voyage 115 tons of tin (of which 100 tons would be
to inform Hitler that the Italians had given carried in the keel), 10 tons of molybdenum, 9 tons
permission for their U-boats lying in Bordeaux to of tungsten, 10 tons of rubber, 0.5 tons of quinine,
be used as transports to the Far East, with the 0.2 tons of opium and 0.3 tons of other cargo, i.e., a
exception of the most modern boat, Cagni. total cargo of 145 tons. The larger Type IXD 2 was
However, this permission was purchased somewhat to carry 120 tons of tin, 15 tons of molybdenum, 80
expensively - at the price of handing over to the tons of rubber, 1 ton of quinine and 0.2 tons of
Italians 10 VIlC boats (U428-U430, U746-U750 opium, a total of 216 tons. The rubber was carried in
and U1161-U1162). The Italian boats were given the free-flooding diving bunkers beneath the upper
the cover-names AquiLa 1 to AquiLa IX. The deck, and in the upper deck chambers; the tin was
conversion of the first boats was under the control carried in ingots in the keel and in the interior of the
of Kapitan zur See Grossi and was carried out very boat; and the other precious metals were soldered
speedily, so that by May 1943, the first three were into tin containers and stored in the bilges, the bow
able to leave Bordeaux: they were AquiLa I (ex- and stern compartments and in the empty torpedo
TazzoLi), AquiLa 1I (ex-Giuliani) and AquiLa III (ex- tubes. The fust to return with such a cargo was
CappeUini). The German tanker BurgenLand was U178 on 24 May 1944. In June 1944, Ul88 followed.
intended for supply purposes. In June 1943, there The next combat U-boats carrying raw materials
followed AquiLa V (ex-Barbarigo) and AquiLa VI were U843, U861, U510 and U532, but they reached
(ex-ToreUi). However, only 3 boats completed the Europe only a short time before (or even after) the
voyage, reaching Singapore in July and September German capitulation.
1943. In the autumn of 1943, it was decided to convert
The attempt, in June 1943, to obtain the use of the large U-boats of Type IXD, (U180 and U195),
two special RomoLo class transport submarines for whose diesel plants had not given complete
outer ship. In the case of A, cargo compartments the Far East was thwarted by Admiral Riccardi, satisfaction, to transport U-boats. The removal of
could be made available by removing the complete Chief of the Italian Naval Staff, who wished to keep the torpedo armament and the reduction in
torpedo armament and part of the forward living these modern submarines under his own command propulsion to that in Type VIlC meant that a total
quarters. Additionally, rubber and metals could be (even though, after the loss of North Africa, there storage capacity of 252 tons was made available.
carried in the outer ship (water-tight forecastle and was no longer any role for these boats in the The conversion took place in Bordeaux from
stern, ballast-keel). This would yield the following Mediterranean). During the ensuing period, the October 1943 to April 1944. Of the two boats, U195
approximate cargo possibilities: 25 tons in the Japanese sent 4 transport submarines (18, 134, 129 reached Batavia at the end of 1944, but U180 was
pressure hull, 35 tons in the outer ship (rubber) and and 152) laden with raw materials to Europe and, of sunk by mines while outward bound in the Bay of
45 tons in the ballast-keel (metals), giving a total of these 18 and 129 survived, to arrive at Lorient on 31 Biscay on 22 August 1944. Additionally, two Type
105 tons. By using the torpedo tanks, the fuel-oil August, and at Bordeaux on 10 March 1944 XB minelaying U-boats (U219 and U234) and two
supply was to be increased to 125 tons, but this was respectively. torpedo-supply U-boats (U1059 and U1062) were
rather inadequate for the lengthy voyages being Two further AquiLa boats, AquiLa IV (ex-Finzi) sent to Japan as auxiliary transports. However,
considered. A conversion building time of two or and AquiLa IX (ex-BagnoLini) were to make the next only U219 and U1062 arrived safely. The two
three months was calculated. voyages to the Far East on 18 July 1943, but the remaining VIlF U-boats (U1060 and Ul061) were
In the case of B, apart from the measures fall of Mussolini and the resultant defection of the used for transport duties in Norwegian waters.
considered in A, the pressure-tight outer tanks Italians delayed the whole AquiLa programme. In Outside sources concerned themselves in 1943 in
were to be enlarged. This would mean that Diving Singapore, the three Italian boats were re- the planning of a transport U-boat. On 20 June
Tank 3 in the pressure hull could be dispensed with, quisitioned by the Japanese, and only after 1943, Engineer Kohrs, a former colleague of
and an additional 100 tons of fuel-oil could be prolonged negotiations could the German Naval Professor Flamm, showed the head of the HAS his
carried in the outer tanks, i.e., a total of 175 tons of Attache succeed in having them released for design for a 4,000-ton 'U-ship' with a length of 93m
fuel. This meant that the following approximate transport undertakings by the German Navy. and a beam of 11m, which would have a special
cargo possibilities were available: 75 tons in the However, problems now arose in fmding German pressure-hull construction. Just as in Flamm's
pressure hull, 120 tons in the outer ship (rubber), 55 submariners who could man these unfamiliar boats, U-cruiser projects, the pressure-hull cross-section
tons in the ballast-keel (metals), giving a total of and it was not until the beginning of 1944 that the was to be of a three-circle format, which would
250 tons. Conversion B would have taken longer, hrst boat, UIT24 (ex-CappeUini), sailed for home make possible a high underwater stability without
and could not have been realized before the end of with a cargo of rubber, quinine and precious ores. ballast and, therefore, a greater laden weight.
1943. It was also recognized that the conversion of As her tanker, Brake, failed to appear, however, the Kohrs wanted to avoid the drawbacks of Flamm's
German offensive U-boats for use as transport voyage had to be broken off and she returned to method (the complicated interior stiffening) by a

Type IXD, after conversion to a transport boat,
"'"
om
~ A B C
c:=:J
=...::::11
CI AI
c=:J o o OCJ 0-
~('~::
~OJ¢.#;:::~~:o::~t';:;":~: .~
'" 15m
]lila.
different frame system: he envisaged longitudinal circles. A further innovation was in the containers for U-boats, holding 150 tons and 450
frames of double-T profue, which would be construction of the upper outer ship, where a tons respectively, intended principally for trans-
positioned between pressure hull and outer ship. pressure-hull cylinder was to take the water- porting fuel to North Africa. The unsophisticated
Stiffened transverse bulkheads would be provided pressure forces of the sectional circles underneath construction was reminiscent of similar towing
at regular distances apart to support the pressure it. The idea was not pursued, however, and it is hard projects of the Japanese. After the loss of Tunisia,
from the longitudinal frames. This would play a to judge the value of these suggestions. the project was continued as a research task. In
special part in avoiding the dynamic concentration In the early part of 1943, projects were also October 1943, off Hela, towing tests with a 90-ton
at the point of intersection of the pressure-hull formulated for the construction of two towing- underwater towing-body showed the basic
suitability for U-boat-towing. At the beginning of
1944, the Chief of Naval War Staff took up the idea
~~
Kohrs' design for a 4,OOO-ton 'U-ship', of towing-bodies as they wished to use them in the
Aegean. There were requests for the construction of
•
10 15 20m similar containers for use off north Norway and
Key: C, cargo; CO, crew's
East Asia. Two improved test units, one of 90 tons,
quarters; CA, control room; and a 300-ton 'underwater lighter', were worked on
0, diesel·engine room; E, electric B
at the Vulcan works at Stettin and tried out
engine room. A B successfully in the summer of 1944. But this trial
I I
showed very considerable reduction in the range of
the towing U-boat and, after acrimonious conflicts
of opinion, and the placing of orders for a series of
C C
o 50 underwater towing-bodies, the project was
fmally killed-off at the 26th Armament Discussion
of 20 December 1944, the sources that required this
([eC] "0
o 0
i
-- ~?- : -
()
j)-
0
--0 )--
0
0
. - 0 --
0
E --
~
item not being prepared to make available
materials and labour at the expense of other
projects. A different underwater towing-body,
which would have transported and launched V-2
rockets, remained on the drawing-board.

Type XXI electro-boat.
Key: A, accumulator hatch; D, rubber dinghy; OT, diving tanks; E, electrics
hatch; F. fuel-oil bunkers; T, torpedo hatch; V, ventilation hatch; WF. watertight
forecastle; WS, watertight stern.
~
• _j_d-
_.
WS
:_:_:.;';=;~:;;;'i
..
:........, .
: ~ ~:'
"}~
~~
... -- - - ..... - --- - - -. - - -- -

':::;;;;;:.~; DT5
l-.-J t~-- . uu_
Fl
-.- - _ .. ,
F2
DTI
. _~_._-~--~. -_._~.~-~.~~._~.
F3
DT2
F6
DT4
.~ _=:.~~.~~.~-~_.:_.~-~_.~.~ .
F7
I,. • . .II'_II
."
"' ... __ .. -- .. _.- l.. •••••• __
The electro-boat: Type XXI using conventional engine installations. Further- Its most important innovation was the powerful
After the fmal design of Type XVIII had been more, if the submerged properties are considered to electric installation which was to be built into the
presented to 'K' Office, it became evident that, be more important than surface properties, then we original turbine compartment of Type XVIII. The
because of the extensive Walter-installation and shall naturally make use of conventional propulsion large gearing assembly remained more or less in the
large Aurol supply, the electric installation would methods in ways different from those we have used same place, but, instead of the turbine installation,
have to be small. Consequently, once a boat's Aurol in the past.' two 2,500hp electric motors, two small motors for
had been expended, its submerged performance When, in April 1943, it was acknowledged that low, silent running and two switchboards were to
would be poor. In March 1943, therefore, the Walter conventional U-boats were unable to overcome the be accommodated. By the beginning of July 1943,
specialist, Heep, suggested that Braking's defensive measures of their opponents, Oelfken the specifications for the new, powerful electric
reviewing offIcer, Naval Construction Director embarked on a rough plan for building the two- motors had been prepared, and they were to be
Oelfken, examine the possibility of using the very circle form, and discussed it with the Head of 'K' built by SSW (Siemens Schuckertwerke AG) and
elegant shape of Type XVII I in an advantageou Office, in the presence of Schurer and Braking. AEG (Allgemeine Elektricitats-Gesellschaft) in co-
manner with conventional propulsion means. Hi Admiral Fuchs thereupon gave permission for this operation. By the end of July, tenders had been
investigations showed a possibility of trebling rival to Type XVIII to be prepared to the stage prepared showing the main measurements of the
battery capacity over existing U-boats by enlarging where decisions could be made and, on 19 June motors, including fan and radiator arrangements.
the pressure hull downwards, to give an a-shaped 1943, it was placed before Grossadmiral Danitz. He The project was designated '2 GU 365/30' (cover-
cross-section extending for approximately a third had certain reservations about the considerable name 'Hertha', after a lady secretary at SSW). The
of the boats' length. This would give a significantly bulk of this 'electro-boat'lthe result of the proposed propulsion unit was a ten-pole, separately-agitated
higher submerged speed and a greater submerged large battery capacity), but he accepted it as a shunt motor, with auxiliary stabilizing series wind-
range. During a discussion in 'K' OffIce concerning replacement of Type IX and ordered that plans be ings, com mutating pole windings and compen-
Type XVIII, he stated: 'If we intend to build such a worked-out immediately. sating windings. The usual tandem arrangement
large boat and have so much space at our disposal, This new type, which had the outer shell of of two motors in one housing and two rotors on
we can accomplish much more than hitherto by Walter's Type XVIII, was designated Type XXI. one shaft was retained. The commutator - the

most important part of a direct-current motor - The armament and most of the boat's control in conventional submarines. offers such remarkable
was appropriate for the severe requirements. The systems were taken over from the plans of Type qualities that I have ordered its immediate
l'onstruction of the rotor had been developed by XVIII, or were adapted to suit the altered introduction.
f(·ference to fast-running railway engines. The propulsion. Other installations. such as the SV .Apart from the indemnities which are due to you
l'ommutator segments and the lug-throats were of echo-set, had been destined for Type VIIC/42. Also on account of existing arrangements, I express my
copper, massively built, the lug-throats functioning available was the outer-hull planning and the special gratitude for the fact that through your
as radial superchargers and contributing towing-test results for Type XVIII, which meant ideas and spadework it has been found possible to
igniflcantly to the cooling of the commutator. that the fmal design could be pushed through by achieve the development of an important new
Each double-motor had a diameter of 1.3m, a length AG Weser in the shortest possible time. With U-boat type. I hope further that in the autumn of
of approximately 3m (length of shaft, 3.26m). and a charged batteries, these new boats should be able to this year, the anticipated first journeys that your
weight of 10.33 tons. The SSW and the AEG travel underwater at 18 knots for 1 y, hours or boats will make will be successful, for I - as
motors differed only in the pattern of the split 12-14 knots for 10 hours. At the economic speed of previously - lay great value on the development of
conductors. 6 knots, they should even manage 48 hours of silent Walter-boats with their high submerged speed with
For the main switchboard, a method of travel. The estimated surface range exceeded that Walter-engine installations.
('onstruction previously planned for Type VIIC/42 of the IXC boats, and made possible operations Yours sincerely. Dbnitz.'
was used: switchboards in the form of controller throughout the Atlantic without intermediate
cylinders, which operated behind the winding-end supply. That the maximum surface speed of 15.6 The coastal electro-boat: Type XXIII
face. However, in contrast to the design of Type knots lay well below the speed achieved by existing During the design work on Type XXI. Naval
VIIC/42, specially developed SSW switch elements operational boats was not regarded as too Construction Director Oelfken came across
with roller contacts were used. However, this important. With the help of a quick-loading device, Walter's new Type XXII coastal U-boat (page 1'77).
arrangement required. in place of the simple cams, a it was intended that up to eighteen torpedoes which stimulated him to investigate whether it had
link-motion with double cams. The electrical should be able to be fired within twenty minutes. any properties suitable for a coastal boat of similar
teering position in Type XXI, being at the The boat would be superior to all previous diesel- shape, but with good submerged performance from
winding-end face. with visibility in the direction of electric types. These factors offered the means of conventional drive. It turned out that a
travel. could be kept small and was very well laid- surmounting the V-boat crisis, with a new. considerable increase in displacement would be
out. Space-saving instruments and switches in operationally-effective boat of considerable necessary. mainly because of the larger batteries
connection with the cam-switching made possible submerged speed. which could be produced quickly. and the heavy engine installation. A preliminary
the forced speed adjustments in the running-in The Commander-in-Chief, V-Boats. intended, outline was proposed to Dbnitz at the time of the
times. Resistance to impact and shock was therefore. to use Type XXI, despite its size, for the presentation of Type XXI. Although he was much
increased considerably, switch noise was reduced, convoy war in the North Atlantic, and decided in more interested in large boats, he accepted the idea
and better access to the controls was provided. favour of a large series of them. This meant that the of the small electro-boat and ordered planning to
Now that the central passage was free, the Walter Type XVIII U-boats quite simply no longer proceed. He required that the development work
complete switch assembly could be tested or had any priority or special building capacity. On 29 should include 7m torpedo tubes. and that the boat
repaired when the cowling had been removed. June 1943, Dbnitz wrote to Walter: should be capable of being transported by rail for
The main switchboards of Type XXI were 'Dear Herr Walter, use in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea. These
likewise designed as a combined operation by AEG In line with the ideas stemming from you on the requirements strongly influenced the detailed
and SSW, working from common drawings, models concept for a high-speed submarine. and following planning of the design, which was carried out by
and castings, etc.• and were mass-produced by both the development work achieved in collaboration Chief Naval Construction Adviser Grim.
firms. at Berlin-Siemensstadt and Berlin-Trep- between yourself and the Naval High Command in The new coastal design. designated Type XXIII,
tow. this sphere, through a design developed and showed only marginal similarities to Type XXII
The motors for slow, silent running were devel- planned by the Naval High Command, we have the - its relative narrowness. single-shaft installa-
oped by SSW. and were designated 'GW323/28'. possibility of developing a new U-boat type. This tion, knife-edge stern, bow torpedo arrangement
They were eight-pole extraneously-agitated shunt type. when fitted with engine installations as used and lack of anti-aircraft armament. It was very
motors. with auxiliary frequence winding and
reverse poles. They attained a maximum of 83kW
at 350rpm and 360 volts. Without gearing, they Original design for Type XXIII, December 1943.
could drive the main shaft directly, by a system of
twelve belts, and the boat could travel at speeds up o , 1 ) ,
to 6 knots with very little noise (except in the speed-
~ 9 10m
II
range between 4.3 and 5 knots). I
With regard to surface propulsion, the planners
went back to a development that had previously
been destined for Type VIIC/42, namely the super-
charged six-cylinder MAN M6V 40/46. The lesser
performance, compared with the 2,200hp nine-
cylinder MAN M9V 40/46, was to be compensated
by a BBC Biichi exhaust-gas turbo-supercharger. A
maximum performance of 2.000hp at 522rpm from
the engine and 12,240rpm from the supercharger It::"
were calculated. Because of the high-charging (90 :_1
per cent over effective pressure), a larger valve
overlapping of 150 0 (compared to 130 0 in the nine-
cylinder diesel) was necessary. which signified an
increased counter-pressure sensitivity over the
simultaneously-issuing exhaust gases. This was
later to have disadvantageous effects for the r:-
schnorkel operation.

different, however, in its increased length and piston-ejection tubes from current production could cent, came down to 62.2 per cent with the crossed
displacement, comprehensive single-hull shape, be used. The boat would have only a single 7.5m rudder arrangement. A comparison with Type XXI
almost symmetrical double-circle cross-section and, 'knee-bend' periscope, and a conning tower was showed that the boat's hull, without a bridge, gave
especially, in its conning tower with a higher bridge. necessary to give it a reasonable height. Unfor- roughly the same submerged C w values as the
Initially, it had been believed that the bow tunately, this had the effect of increasing water almost unhampered shape of XXI. The better
hydroplanes could be dispensed with, as in the resistance considerably in an otherwise very propulsion efficiency coeffIcient of the single-screw
smaller Walter U-boats. However, in the light of successful design. boat compensated, therefore, the shape resistance
experience gleaned from the Walter boats U792 and Appropriate measuring tests were carried out in of the fuller stern. However, through the large
U794, fIrst a rigid fm was fItted, and then bow September 1943 at the Towing Test Institute in resistance provided by the bridge, the Cw values of
hydroplanes were fitted to the forward section of Type XXIII in its fInal version were no better than
the boat. The fm was retained as a rudder guard. In 145.
order to be transportable in four sections by rail, Comparison between the For comparative purposes only, theoretical
the after section was completely reshaped and the silhouettes of Type XXII (shown calculations were made for an electric boat with the
forward section was kept as short as possible, shaded) and II hull shape of Type XVlIB. This study was given
which prevented interior loading of torpedo tubes. the designation XVIIE. As a result of the more
The inclusion of a schnorkel was not decided upon
Type XXIII. favourable submerged shape, half the V[] C battery
until after the boat's shape had been determined. installation provided a submerged range of 224
As there was no outer upper deck, the schnorkel nautical miles at 4 knots, compared with 175
had to be extensible, but it was strongly built and nautical miles at 4 knots in Type XXIII. With a
favourably sited, amidships abaft the periscope. 1,160hp electric motor, a maximum, submerged
In contrast to the large electric U-boat, for which speed of 14.5 knots could be achieved. However,
many innovations were planned, Type XX II [ was Test with Type XXIII in Vienna, there was no prospect for an eventual realization of
kept very simple as regards installations and this electric motor; moreover, this design did not
engines, and was to be assembled from well-tried September 1943. fulfil the conditions of transportability by rail, or of
components. having 7m torpedo tubes; and it would have been
Closed bridge (Mod.557) Open bridge (Mod.561)
The six-cylinder diesel RS 348 made by MWM considerably more expensive from the construction
~
was envisaged for the engine. It had been developed point of view. So Type XXIl I remained the chosen
in 1938 for the electrical generator in the ,/, boat.
battleships Bismarck and Tirpitz, and had been
tested in U-boat operations as a diesel-generator in / ) r
Type IXD 2' The G U 4463/8 electric motor was

developed by AEG from the VIIC motor. In THE FLEET CONSTRUCTION
particular, the armature, field-disposition and
sections from the Type VUC were taken over, but PROGRAMME OF 1943
the costly revolving yoke was replaced by a simpler
construction. The yoke had feet screwed onto it and Donitz replaces Raeder
round bulges on which, when the feet were Following the failure of a German surface battle
unscrewed, the housing could be rolled down and Different group against North Sea Convoy JW51B at the end
turned. The cover-name for this electric motor was stern shapes of December 1942, Hitler in his initial agitation
'Ursula'. Gearing enabled the relatively high- decided that the bulk of the large ships, the
revving engines (maximum 85O-1,OOOrpm) to be retention of which in his opinion could no longer be
reduced to economic propeller revs. A smaller, justifIed by their practical use, should be taken out
lower-revving 25kW engine was envisaged for slow, of service and their artillery armament used on
silent running, and this, as in Type XXI, worked land. On 6 January 1943, he demanded that Raeder
directly on the propeller shaft through a V-belt. Vienna. With the original length of 32.48m, in formulate an appropriate laying-up programme,
BBC had developed a simplified switchboard, submerged tests at 12.5 knots, a total resistance of and make proposals for an enlargement and
according to the principles as used in Type XXI. 3,I40kp was arrived at for the smooth hull with acceleration of the U-boat programme. Raeder
Access to this had to be from the passageway, appendages and enclosed bridge. Of this total, 70 considered Hitler's decision to be an unjustifIed
because of lack of space. per cent (63.5 per cent frictional resistance) could be slight on the Navy and a personal insult to himself,
On 30 July 1943, the project was ready for written down to smooth hull with vertical rudder; and he offered his resignation, which Hitler
presentation. The boat was to be able to travel 23 per cent to the enclosed smooth bridge (8 per accepted. As his successor, he suggested Admiral
underwater at a maximum of 13 knots and have a cent frictional resistance); and 7 per cent to fms and Carls or Admiral Donitz; Hitler decided in favour of
submerged range of 106 nautical miles at 6 knots hydroplanes (2.5 per cent frictional resistance). In the latter, considering him to be a good
(i.e., almost four times that of Type lIC). The the fmal version (the boat made longer by representative for the young, keen, offensively-
battery installation suggested was half the approximately 2.2m, with an open bridge and minded and successful U-boat arm. In him, he
installation of Type IXC, i.e.. 62 cells MAL 740, and flooding-slits), the total resistance rose by 40 per hoped to fInd a collaborator for the laying-up and
in this, for the fIrst time, double cells were to be cent to approximately 4,400kp, of which 26.5 per scrapping of the large warships that he had
used in order to achieve 240 volts. The projected cent could be written down to the open bridge, and ordered. A certain tragic element is to be found in
surface range was rather smaller than in Type IlC, approximately 13 per cent to the flooding slits and the fact that Donitz took over command of the
but, at 4,300 nautical miles at 6 knots, was other apertures. Further towing tests were under- avy at a time when his own arm had reached its
adequate for the intended coastal operations. At taken to establish the most favourable arrange- zenith, and was shortly to suffer its greatest
the maximum surface speed of 10 knots, the ment for the after hydroplanes, and these showed reversal. So that the rupture would not be too
schnorkel would be fully extended. that the crossed rudder arrangement abaft the evident to outsiders, Raeder suggested the date of
As no active submerged detection installation screw considerably increased the resistance and 30 January 1943 - the tenth anniversary of the
was planned for these small boats, torpedo firing propulsion relationships. At 12 knots, the deep-set ational Socialist seizure of power - for this
would have to be carried out visually, at periscope fms and rudders, which had yielded a very change in the offIce of the Supreme Commander-in-
depth or on the surface, so that conventional favourable total propulsion efficiency of 75.4 per Chief of the Navy.

In a memorandum dated 10 January 1943, on put the minimum quantity for naval requirements Total additional engine iron 39,596 tons
'The Significance of the German Surface Forces in at 181,483 tons monthly. (Even with this amount, Present allocation in the second quarter
the Conduct of War of the Tripartite Powers' representing an increase of over 50 per cent on what 164,795 tons
Raeder expressed himself positively opposed to the Navy had been receiving, the total quantity New monthly allocation 204',390 tons
lIitler's idea, pointing out the considerable allocated to the Navy would be no more than 7.3 per (b) Further quantity of construction iron:
drawbacks that would ensue from the lack of a cent of the country's total steel production.) On 6 12,000 tons
Hurface fleet and the very small gain in items for March, Donitz succeeded in obtaining Hitler's 'Hitler gave his approval to these representations
other purposes that would accrue. With regard to consent to a monthly increase of 45,000 tons from and stated that the increase in U-boat planning
the U-boat programme, the following would become the second quarter of 1943. must be accomplished if possible. The problem was
available: at most, 50 officers from the crews of the On 14 March, he submitted a report to Hitler on where to get the iron. With his absolute authority,
large ships with knowledge of U-boat operations. the measures he planned to raise U-boat production he could clearly command that the required
During the period of time it would take for to 30 boats per month. A complete new Fleet quantities be made available, but they had to come
dismantling work (the amount of iron yielded would' Construction Programme for 1943 was placed from somewhere. He therefore ordered an
be 125,800 tons) and the setting-up of guns on before Hitler for approval on 11 April 1943. In immediate meeting with Speer, Roehling and
land installations, the building of new U-boats addition to the increase in U-boat production, a Duisberg to discuss the raising of the programme
would hardly increase. That large ships would no considerable strengthening of light surface forces from 2.6 to 4 million tons of steel monthly. It was
longer be required to be repaired would mean the was called for. The new U-boat programme was to clear to him that this demanded an immediate
saving of 800 workers and of 600 tons of be shown in Table 34. The additional requirement of building of new installations (blast-furnaces, etc.)
materials each year, but this would enable only iron for the increase in U-boats was stated by and an extension of existing works. Speer
approximately 6 extra U-boats to be built each Donitz as follows: suggested the much speedier way of using steel
year. From the total amount of iron available from Required for U-boat construction works in occupied territories, chiefly Belgium and
the dismantling, an additional 7 U-boats per month monthly: 4,500 tons France. This made it possible in March 1944 to
could be built, given the condition that a further Required for the increase in achieve the record amount for steel production of
13,000-14,000 skilled workers were made available. torpedo production: 1,500 tons 3,173,000 tons, of which 2,674,000 tons were
The U-boat construction programme, set currently Monthly total 6,000 tons produced in German territories including the Saar,
at 25 boats per month, could then (following the For the comprehensive construction programme of Lorraine and Luxembourg. The protection from
dismantling process, i.e., in 1Y. years) become a light forces, Donitz demanded additionally a deportation afforded to workers in occupied
theoretical 32 boats per month; however, in a monthly iron supply of 20,590 tons. At the same territories, however, seriously interfered with
further 18 months, it would fall once more to 25 time, he presented a detailed memorandum in which Sauckel's programme for supplying workers. The
boats per month. he confirmed a total iron supply of 216,390 tons: bottleneck in labour was the second obstacle to the
In the discussions with Hitler that followed, (a) Engine iron (monthly): realization of the Fleet Construction Programme of
Donitz never showed approval for such a time- 1. Shortage in the second quarter of 1943 for the 1943. In a memorandum, Donitz set out the
consuming and largely ineffectual method of completion of present undertakings (181,000- requirements shown in Table 35. During the
providing materials for his U-boat programmes. 165,104 tons) 15,896 tons following weeks, the Main Committee for Ship
Although he had earlier made representations as 2. For increasing U-boat production 4,500 tons Construction produced a new plan on the basis of 30
the Commander-in-Chief, U-Boats, to the effect that 3. Armaments and increasing torpedo production U-boats per month.
large ships should not continue to be produced or 1,500 tons The heavy losses and meagre successes of May
serviced at the expense of U-boat repairs, now as 4. Increase in the new construction of light forces 1943 brought a renewed plea from Donitz to Hitler
Supreme Head of the Navy, he supported the (20,600-7,000 tons already included in 1.) to corroborate the urgency of his programme,
maintaining of offensive-readiness. Indeed, after 13,600 tons despite existing crises elsewhere. Donitz stated
some initial hesitance in this connection, he 5. Repair of additional U-boats and surface forces, that, in fact, the U-boat campaign was foundering
persuaded Hitler to allow larger units to operate in yard requirements, service vessels, initial on the technical question of weaponry, but that the
North Norway, and in this way effected in practical fitting-out, weapon repair 4,100 tons stepping-up of U-boat production would provide a
terms the lifting of the laying-up order. Hitler
remained extremely sceptical about the success of Table 34. The V·Boat Construction Programme of April 1943
these measures, but clearly did not want a
difference of opinion with the new Chief of the Navy. 1943 1944 1945
second half year first hal f year second hal f year first half year second half year
More steel, more U-boats Increasing to 27 27 per month" 27 plus 3 Type XX 27 plus 3 Type XX 30 per month
Donitz also utilized the opportunity presented by per month per month per month
his being in favour at this particular time, by using
his direct contact with Hitler to achieve his hoped- "Despite changeover to Type VllC142.
for increase in U-boat production. As early as 8
February 1943, Donitz obtained Hitler's signature Table 35. Manpower needed for the Fleet Construction Programme of April 1943
to an exemption from call-up for workers engaged
Auxiliary yard
on U-boats and their weapons, and on surface Yards industry' Total
Purpose for which used
vessels also used in U-boat operations, such
exemption from military service being total and Existing (previous) shortage 13,000 14,000 27,000
absolute. The next step was aimed at bringing In order to increase U·boats'
about an increase in the extremely low steel quota New construction 3,000 1,000
of 119,795 tons monthly in the first quarter of 1943. Repairs 8,000 2,000 14,000
In order to increase light naval forces'
Of this quantity, ship construction took 58,000 New construction 5,000 4,000
tons, gun armament 20,490 tons, torpedo arma· Repairs 3,000 2,000 14,000
ment 8,650 tons, and mines 9,490 tons; the balance, 55,000
Total
23,165 tons, went to buildings, yard construction,
bomb-damage repairs, etc. A memorandum from I Plus weapons production, including torpedoes
the Supreme Chief of the Navy, on 1 March 1943, 'The labour forces were required in quotas by the end of 1944.

Table 36. Nominal planning by HAS of May 1943 to achieve the 30 boats' programme from 1944 on struction programme be pushed through fully
whatever the circumstances.
Actual delivery Target Distributions of steel to the Navy, however,
Yards 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946
continued to fall below the amount requested by
Germaniawerft 18 VI IC 19 VIIC 22 VIIC 24 VIIC 24 VI IC Donitz. Hitler's consent on 11 April to a further
+2 XB +3XB +9XVIIG +3XVllG increase of 30,000 tons was reduced by the
+2 WK202 Armaments Minister to a one-off delivery. Speer
Bremer Vulkan 21 VlIC 23 VllC 15 V llC 11 VllC 26 VlIC had no mind for long-term delivery promises,
+6 XX +9 XX
Plenderwerke 10 VIIC 14 VIIC 19V1IC 22 VUC 26 VIIC preferring to make allocations on a day-to-day basis
Howaldt-Kiel 8 VlIC 11 VIIC J5 VllC 18 VIIC 18 VIIC and according to priorities. Donitz realized that he
Deutsche Werke Kiel 6 VllC 12 VIIC 4 VllC - - could not force his large Fleet Construction
+5 XIV +3 XIV +7 XIV 12 XIV 12 XIV Programme through, alongside or in competition
Danziger Werft 12 V lIC 17 VIIC 25 VIIC 26 VIIC 26 VIIC with the Armaments Minister, who controlled 83.3
Sch.ichau, Danzig l6 VIIC 25 V II C 36 VllC 36 VIIC 36 VIIC
Blohm & Voss 54 VlIC 60 VllC 54 VllC 54 VllC 56 VllC per cent of the total industrial capacity. The overall
+2 Wa201 +9 XVIIB +3 XVIIB production facilities of the Navy were too small to
Plensburger SBG 7 VlIC 9 VUC 9 VIIC 9 VIIC 9 VIIC make good temporary shortages. No help was to be
Nordseewerke 7 VlIC ]0 VlIC II VIIC 12 VIIC 12 VIIC expected from Goring and Milch, who were
Howaldt-Hamburg 9 VllC 12 VI IC 15 VIIC J 5 VIIC 15 VIIC
8 VllC ]0 V llC ]2VlIC ]2 VIIC 12VIIC
involved in their own struggle to keep up the
Stulcken
KMW Wilhelmshaven 5 VIIC 9 VIIC 19 VlIC 26 VIIC 26 VIIC strength of the Luftwaffe. On 20 June 1943. Donitz
Oderwerke, Stettm - I VIIC 2 VllC I VlIC asked Speer to take over responsibility for naval
Stettiner Vulcan - 1 VIIC I VllC - armaments. This step was not lightly taken, and it
Neptun Rostock - 4 VIIC 9 VllC 9 VllC 9 VllC received little support from Naval Command
AG Weser 121XC 151XC 20 [XC 20lXC 20lXC circles, who feared that they would no longer be
+121XD +151XD +201XD +201XD +20 IXD
Seebeck 4t1XC 5 [XC 71XC 71XC 7 [XC masters in their own house. After examining naval
DW, Hamburg 231XC 251XC 181XC 17 ]XC 251XC requirements, Speer declared himself willing,
+7 XX +8 XX provided that Hitler would allow partial cessation
Total No.: 239 307 373 374 379 of civilian industrial production. The mobilization
Monthly average: 19.9 25.6 31.1 31.2 31.6 of hitherto-unused home reserves was a condition
for the accomplishment of such an ambitious
programme, as it was essential that neither the
remedy of sorts. He wanted the planned increase to there was no question of stopping the V-boat Army nor Luftwaffe programmes be adversely
remain at 30 boats per month and believed even campaign, but that, with regard to allocation of affected. Hitler consented and the programme was
'that the number of 30 V-boats is not sufficient as, personnel, one had simply to get by in a hand-to- confirmed by official decree on 8 July 1943.
in the last analysis, we need large numbers of mouth manner and pay due heed to priorities. He
V-boats to wage a successful defensive campaign in would make no concrete promises, but confirmed The OKM Construction Programme of July
the Atlantic. I feel I am right in asking for the his protection from call-up for those workers in 1943
number of boats to be 40'. Hitler agreed, and naval production. He repeated that it was Following Hitler's signing of the Fleet Construction
without further ado, changed the prepared Fuhrer especially necessary that the increased con- Programme of 1943. 'K' Office began immediately
Decree for the projected Fleet Construction to work out a plan that would raise the present
Programme of 1943 to show delivery as 40 boats Table 37. Planned manpower requirements, 15 June 1943 V-boat production to 40 boats per month. This plan
per month. was to provide the increased delivery numbers as
Men
Neither the material aspects of the new I. Warship construction: required soon as possible, but, on the other hand, also to
programme nor the question of personnel were take account of the new U-boat types. Type XXI
considered secure, and gave rise to grave concern. Yards: boats were to be built in larger numbers because
At a discussion with Hitler on 15 June 1943, Donitz New construction they were due to replace Type IX. On 6 July 1943,
reported on the additional labour requirements for U-boats 25.300 the following contracts for a total of 282 new
Light na val forces 24.000
the increase in naval completions by the end of 1945 Repairs U-boats were placed.
that Hitler had authorized, and made the requests U-boats 8,000 Walter U-boat Type XXII: Preliminary building
shown in Table 37. He mentioned a shortage of Surface vessels 18.000 and assembly yard Howaldt, Kiel (36 boats):
335,000 men, who would be needed during the next Supervisory staff 2.500 additional construction yard Howaldt, Hamburg
sixteen months to serve as crews in the new boats. Auxiliary yard industry 40,000 (36 boats).
He hoped to obtain these from 163,000 recruits, Total 117,800 Walter U-boat Type XVIIB: Preliminary building
140,000 from the Army and Luftwaffe and 32,000 and assembly yard B&V (48 boats): additional
internal transfers (replacement of personnel by 2. Weapons and equipment manufacture: construction yard Nordseewerke, Emden (12 boats).
Guns (without ammunition) 8,000
female naval staff and prisoners-of-war). In the Torpedoes 8,500 Walter U-boat Type XVIIG: Friedrich Krupp:
light of the current allocation of 30,000 men per Mines and mine-defence 850 Germaniawerft: AG, Kiel148 boats).
year, however, these numbers were to be considered Communications equipment 1,150 V-boat Type XXI: Preliminary building and
more as a hopeful expectation. Hitler reacted Nautical equipment 500 assembly yard Deschimag, AG Weser (24 boats):
Other kinds of naval equipment 5,000
testily: 'I have not got these forces. It is essential additional construction yards: Deutsche Werft,
that we strengthen anti-aircraft defences and night- Total 24.000 Hamburg (24 boats); Danziger Werft (12 boats):
fighters to protect German cities. It is essential to Overall total for warships and equipment' 141,800 Schichau, Danzig (18 boats): KMW, Wilhelmshaven
strengthen the Eastern Front. The Army needs (12 boats); Flenderwerke, Lubeck (12 boats).
whole divisions for the task of protecting Europe.' 3. Construction undertakings It was estimated that if the highest priority stage'
But Donitz did not give up, and indicated the Building workers 25,000 (DE) were granted, the first 3 prototype boats of
dangers to the entire conduct of the war if the 'Of these, at least 55,500 to be German skilled workers. of Type XXI could be ready from Deschimag in
V-boat campaign were terminated. Hitler which 23,500 necessary to meet demands within 3 months. November 1944. Series production at the additional
acknowledged the truth of this, and declared that and 4,400 monthly from Oct 1943 to the end of 1945. construction yards was calculated for March 1945

The maximum production of 15 boats monthly was Works involving some fifty leading personalities calculated for ship and engine fitting,) The
10 begin in August 1945. On the other hand, the from yards, armaments factories and industry to development of an ocean-going Walter V-boat was
mall Walter V-boats were to be available in discuss armaments and. in particular, the to continue despite the decision in favour of the new
ronsiderable numbers from the middle of 1944. realization of the new V-Boat Programme. The Type XXI. Following this conference, orders for
There were to be, therefore, some changes in the main point for discussion was the large contract for 212 Walter-installations were placed. for delivery
present contracts. Where their production got in a total of 72 boats of the new Walter Type XXII. by the end of 1944. In previous years, Walter
the way of the new boats, they were to be Donitz wanted these for Mediterranean operations developments had proceeded with caution and
transferred to other yards or even deferred. The and they were to be transported via the Rhone. As delay - now, with the failure of conventional boats
deliveries envisaged to the end of 1945 under this had happened with the small lIB boats (page 142), in the V-boat campaign, all inhibitions were put
planning (without taking account of any necessary it was intended to transport them on their sides, aside and the series production of a total of 204
follow-on contracts) are shown in Table 38. The first boat, U1153. was to be delivered by the Walter boats was to commence, When this decision
On 10 July 1943, in connection with the Howaldtswerke, Kiel, in December 1943, (A was made, however, the test V-boats were still on
foregoing, a meeting took place at the Walter production time of 120,000 hours per boat was the building slips,
Table 38 V-boat deliveries planned. July 1943
1943 1944 1945

Yards U-boat type Dec Jan reb Mar April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan reb Mar April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
lIowaldt. Kiel VIIC/4J 1 I j 1 1

XXII 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
lIowaldt. VIIC/4J J 1 1 1 1 1
llamburg XXii 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
B&V, Hamburg VIJC/4J 5 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3
VIIC/42 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 4
XVIIS 2 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3
"ordseewerke, V II C/4 J 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I
Emden VIIC/42
XVIIS
('ermaniawerft. VIJC/4J 2 2 2
Kiel VIIC/42 1 1 1 1
XVlIG 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 4 5 4
XS
Deschimag. iXC
Bremen IXD 1
XXI 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 2
DW. Hamburg IXC 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
XX I 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1
XXI 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 2
Schichau. Danzig VIIC/4J 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
VlIC/42 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
XXI 3 3 3 3 3 3
Danziger Werft V II C/4 J 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
XXI 2 2 2 2 2 2
KMW. VIIC/4J 2 2 2 2
Wilhelmshaven V IIC/42 2 2 2 2 2 2
XXI 2 2 2 2 2 2
Flenderwer ke VIIC/41 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
V IIC/42 2 2 2 2 2
XXI 2 2
DWK. Kiel VIIC 2
XIV
XVIII
Bremer Vulkan V 11 C/41 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
XX 2 2 2 2
Seebeck,
Wesermunde IXC
H. C. Stulcken
Sohn VIIC/41
Flensburger,
SSG VIIC/41
Neptunwerft. VIIC
Rostock VIlC/41
Totals by type of V II C or
boat VIIC/41 21 20 19 22 20 20 20 19 17 14 13 9 7 7 10 6 6 3 3 3 2 3 3
VIIC/42 4 4 998 7 9 10 6 4 6 6 6 6
IXC 4 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 3 2 3 2 2 I I I I
IXD 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
XS 1
XIV 1 I I 1 I I
XX 2 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 :3 2 2
XXI 3 3 3 3 8 9 10 9 II 15
XVIIS/G 234 8 9 9 9 10 9 9 10 9 9 10
XXII 1 I - - J 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
Overall totals 2 27 26 31 33 38 40 39 37 40 39 41 43 41 40 43
Note: A dot signifies 'unknown', a dash 'no delivery'.
THE MOVE TO HIGH SVBMERGED SPEED 213

THE CHANGE TO
TYPE XXI AND XXIII
CONSTRUCTION
THE PRODUCTION LINE additional 262,000 men, especially technical staff, Committee for V-boats at the beginning of August
by the autumn of 1944 for the enlarged programme. 1943, he criticized current V-boat construction
SYSTEM Hitler, however, could only see his way - methods and suggested that V-boats be assembled
additional to the already planned measures for from pre-fabricated sections, these to be put
Otto Merker and sectional construction raising V-boat production - to providing 10,000 together like automobiles on an assembly line. If
The Supreme Naval Command's new U-boat technicians, the class of 1925, for the Navy on an this process were used, the first Type XXI boat
Programme of 6 July 1943 highlighted the dilemma exchange basis. could be ready by 1 April 1944, and series
in which the Chief OffIce of Warship Construction production could begin immediately afterwards.
found itself, as a result of the Chief of Naval War This would mean that by the autumn of 1944, 30
Staff's demand for new V-boats with a much higher V-boats per month could be delivered. It would be
submerged speed. In accordance with usual necessary, however, for constructional plans for
planning procedures, the large V-boats of Type Type XXI to be prepared by a new Central
XXI should have required a development and Construction OffIce by 1 December 1943, and for
building time of at least 1 Y2 years. It was the entire U-boat industry to go over almost
understood, therefore, that the fIrst 3 boats of this completely to the new process and the new type.
type would be ready in November 1944, and not This plan suited admirably the wishes of the
until March 1945 would series production begin at Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Navy for the
appropriate yards. In the meantime, current V-boat quickest possible operational availability of the new
construction would continue with small changes, Type XXI boats. No objections were raised by the
but strengthened by an ambitious Walter Head of Department K I V, Ministerial Director
Programme. It was hoped that small Walter-boats Schiirer, against the intended section construction.
of Type XVII and XXII could be delivered quickly It had been by no means an infrequent occurrence
in order to meet, to some extent, the demands of the for V-boats to be built in sections, but this had been
Chief of Naval War Staff. This large Walter in the case of smaller boats, or when it had been
Programme was, however, inseparable from certain intended that boats be transported for ultimate
conditions that had to be met, notably the assembly elsewhere. Various attempts had been
allocation of special skilled workers, necessary made between 1940 and 1942 to achieve series
materials and the production of an adequate supply production of V-boats in this way, but the results
of Aurol. had been disappointing because the problems of
Donitz, however, was principally interested only producing sufflciently precise section components
in the larger Type XXI, which he wanted to use in had not been solved. The yards, therefore, tended to
the Battle of the Atlantic. There was, at the time, regard Merker's ideas with scepticism. An opinion
no clear idea as to possible applications for the of B&V on V-boat sectional construction stated:
small Walter V-boats, apart from using Type XXII '1. Section construction at one yard, i.e.,
in the Mediterranean. The large boats, on the other construction of all kinds of sections with assembly
hand, according to the existing Construction carried out at the same yard. From a shipbuilding
Programme, would not be ready for operational use point of view, an exact tolerance of 2mm in section
before 1946 - in 2Y..-3 years. So long a delay as length is regarded as feasible. For diameter
this seemed out of the question to Donitz, who was measurement, frames and internal items working to
conscious of the critical situation in the V-boat such exact dimensions will not be possible, as we
Otto Merker.
campaign. He made application, therefore, to shall not be able accurately to evaluate shrinkages
Armaments Minister Speer for an alternative Speer now authorized the new head of the Main due to existing tensions and stresses in construc-
programme for the quickest possible construction Committee for Ship Construction, General Director tional materials. This point is specially applicable to
of Type XXI. Merker, of the Magirus-Werke in Vim, to draw up a double-hulled boats, as in these it is absolutely
During a conference with Hitler on 8 July 1943, suitable plan. Otto Merker was experienced in the essential to obtain complete and perfect accuracy in
Donitz demanded that the construction of Type automobile industry, and was familiar with modern the pressure hull and also in the outer hull. Th('
XXI be pushed forward with all available means. methods of series production. He was convinced production of the battery compartments in their
The fIrm decision must be taken for three-shift that the relatively lengthy construction times in appropriate construction sections which are open
working round the clock. He also reiterated his ship-building were a legacy of conventional, single- on both sides will be especially time-consuming on
personnel requirements and demanded an construction on the slips. At a meeting of the Sub- account of the extreme accuracy that they requin'
214 THE CHANGE TO TYPE XXI AND XXIII CONSTRVCTIO

millimetres are of great importance here. All thi sections are being constructed. That would mean, in the section and again following completion of the
precision work demands highly-skilled workers, and the case of a diesel engine, almost all pipes and pipe- boat. The fIrst of these cannot be dispensed with,
will involve the expenditure of an increased number lines (exhaust pipes, cooling-water pipes, fuel-oil because all tubing will be so fitted that, if leaks
of hours in many tasks even though improved pipes, lubricating-oil pipes and compressed-air occur, it will not be possible to rectify them.
quipment be made available for use. The pipes). Then during the assembly time on the To facilitate the work, two-shift working must be
manufacture of bulkhead gauges and of the building-slips, the most appalling conditions would provided. As during the winter months a large part
numerous other items of equipment, which are rule in these compartments because, in the very of working time would occur in the blackout period,
mostly of considerable size, will make very severe shortest space of time, engines would need to be set special measures will be necessary for the welding
claims on all yards in terms of expenditure of up and made secure while other essential work was together of sections on the building-slips. With
material and work-hours. The installation of neces- taking place in other installations of such sections. existing construction methods involving con-
ary equipment will also involve a considerable All this would have to be carried out alongside the siderably longer time for each boat at these
expenditure in terms of time, which will make for connection of mutually interdependent items with building-slips, welding work could be so arranged
further problems in getting the schedule under way. cables and tubes. that it could be carried out essentially during the
'Pressure-testing of pressure hulls will no longer 'It is, of course, anticipated that very great care day. However, with sectional construction, the time
be possible. Pressure-testing with air, and fmding will be taken in the planning, that connecting cables each boat spends on the building-slip is now so
leaks by means of soap will require many hours and tubes that have to run through sections will be short that welding will have to take place during
work, and is quite unsatisfactory especially in kept to a minimum and that they will be so both shifts. Covering in the building slips is hardly
winter. Pressure-testing in a pressure-dock when positioned and access so provided that assembly practical as it would entail an enormous
the boat is complete would subsequently require work is made simpler. But this will inevitably mean expenditure in corrugated iron or wood and would
considerably greater dismantling work to rectify that these connections will require more space than require many working hours.
faults that appear than would be necessary if they are given in present construction methods. We '11. Section construction with two fabrication
normal pressure-testing were possible. remain unconvinced that it is completely possible points for each kind of section with assembly at
'The greatest difficulties are anticipated in the to build-in all cables in such a way that they may be three assembly yards. In this method of
sphere of transportation. Each construction yard so connected by cable connections and tubes that construction, not only the difficulties enumerated
will have to have special carriages and lifting gear they can fmally be secured to each other by simple under I. occur, but other weighty considerations
available in order that sections may be transported screwing. One must certainly anticipate a certain become manifest. The solution of transport
to the building-slips. Very few yards will be in the amount of additional laying-work on pipes and problems becomes even more diffIcult as there is
position of being able to remove sections weighing cables following assembly. not just the factor of transportation from produc-
70-130 tons and - even more difficult - get them 'It is an important question whether the conning tion point of sections to the building-slips, but
to the building-slips. A case in point is provided by tower should be constructed in sectional form with additional transportation between individual yards,
the fact that, in Hamburg, the non-availability of the control room or added as a subsequent task. including transportation by water. Apart from the
the 150-ton floating crane paralysed the whole The second alternative would have many advan- organization of essential lifting gear for loading
U-boat construction and it would be essential for tages with regard to the handling of the section and into lighters or ships and of cranes and like lifting
each yard to provide itself wi~h new transport its transportation, but, on the other hand, the most apparatus for placing the sections on the building-
means suitable for the new purposes. It is only important items of tubing are positioned in the slips, there is also the not inconsiderable claim for a
right and proper that we draw special attention to upper deck around the conning tower, and these sizeable amount of shipping space. Emphasis must
these problems. Most difficult from the transport could only be put in place after erection of the also be laid on the possibilities of further difficulties
point of view will be the bulky after-deck with its conning tower, which would have marked effect on posed by floating ice. The supply of sections to the
smooth, considerably overhanging outer building-slip construction time. In methods of individual yards can thereby be delayed by months.
components and heavy mountings. The fore-ship construction as used hitherto, the tests on auxiliary Under the old construction system, Blohm & Voss
gives similar problems. engines, hydroplanes, rudders, etc., were carried at the beginning of 1943 could not make any trials'
'It is completely out of the question to install in out one after the other. In the case of sectional trips with U-boats for a period of three months.
one section the propeller shaft in its stern tube, in construction, all this will have to be carried out in a evertheless, one boat was completed each week.
another section, the electric motor and in a third, hort period of time and this will involve careful That would now no longer be possible with barge-
the diesel engines, Electric motors and diesel advance planning. The trial period in water transportation of sections from other building
engines must at all costs remain unfIXed, and only following the slip way launch will be a longer one. points.
be fmally installed and made secure after the Considerable difficulties will arise also in the 'In present building methods it is the case at
welding together of various sections. This means, installation and testing of tubing that runs from available yards that their various workshops and
further, that everything that is connected to these compartment to compartment. Two pressure tests trades are fully utilized. That is partly achieved by
engines cannot be given its fmal position while will be necessary; once during the construction of the fact that certain appropriate manufacturing
THE CHANGE TO TYPE XXI AND XXIII CONSTRUCTION 215

processes are carried out at factories elsewhere. 5. Type XVII (Walter) U-boats to continue to be Sections of Ministry for Armaments authorized to
Such full use of capacity is desirable for use of built; 4 + 24 = 28; development of these also to deal with such points.'
works' installations. This would not, however, be continue. To cope with the numerous tasks of the Main
the case if one adopted the proposed construction 6. Type XVIII (large Walter) U-boats: work to Committee, Central Constructional Offices were set
methods for boats involving only two fabrication continue on both test boats. up. The office for U-boat construction was the
points and three assembly centres. Many 7. Construction of Type VIIC/42 to be sacrificed in Ingenieurbiiro Gliickauf (IBG) in Blankenburgl
workshops and skilled labour teams would be favour of Type XXI. Halberstadt, which had taken over the task of the
inadequately used or no longer used. This would This meant effectively that the new large Walter former Yard Construction Offices for new U-boat
apply in the greatest extent to assembly yards. programme for Types XVII and XXII had 'died'. types. (In the interest of security from air attack, it
Restricting the assembly yards to three seems And from this time, with very few exceptions, no was evacuated to a position in the Harz
especially poor judgement. If one calculates a U-boat of the old types was laid down. With a Mountains.) This meant that the new organization
building-slip time of eight weeks, for each of the minimum building time of nine months, the existing shown in the diagram existed for U-boat
three assembly yards, 24 building-slip sites would programme (with certain deletions) ran until April construction, while the following was the new
be necessary. It would be far better to provide a 1944. From then on, deliveries decreased sharply. distribution of tasks in U-boat construction:
larger number of assembly yards. In Hamburg, for By telegram, dated 30 September 1943, various 1. Military requirements: Supreme Commander-in-
example, one would wish to see two yards each with contracts dating back to 6 July 1943, as well as Chief of the Navy (Chief of Naval War Staff).
12 building-slip sites in the interests of dispersal as earlier contracts involving 162 boats of Type VIIC 2. Preliminary design: Head Office for Warship
a means of minimizing the effect of air attacks. As, or VIIC/41; 174 boats of Type VIIC/42; 71 boats of Construction (K).
with regard to expenditure on building-slip Type IXC/40; 22 boats of Type IXD/42; and 18 3. Authorization: Supreme Commander-in-Chief of
assembly installations, it is the number of building- Walter boats of Type XVIIB and XVIIG-all were the Navy.
slip sites that is paramount not the fact of their suspended or cancelled. Only the Flensburger SBG, 4. Finished design: Ship Construction Commission.
being situated in one place, nothing is saved by which was not involved in the programmes for Type 5. Overall construction: HAS/IBG.
imposing a restriction of assembly yards to three. XXI and XXIII, was to continue to build Type 6. Authorization for constructional drawings: Con-
In the interests of using workshops to the full, it VIIC/41. The last keel-laying at this yard took place structional supervision of the 'K' Office at the IBG.
would be advisable for assembly yards in the on 28 January 1944, and then it too was required to 7. Distribution of contracts: HAS.
immediate vicinity also to be involved in sectional cease work on all older constructions. 8. Construction executions: Steel construction-
construction. establishments, yards, etc.
'Consequently, Blohm & Voss make the following The Ingenieurbi.iro Gli.ickauf (lOG) 9. Procurement of components: HAS.
represen tations: Following the subordination of Naval Armaments 10. Construction overseeing: Steel construction,
1. The old construction methods should remain to the Ministry for Armament and War Production, yards. Shipyards, naval construction-supervision.
fundamentally the same, but where possible to various changes were necessary in the organization. 11. Acceptance: U-Boat Acceptance Commission
work in two shifts, and appropriate measures must A mutual decree by the Supreme Commander-in- (UAK).
be taken to meet this. Chief of the Navy and the Ministry of Armaments, The constitution of the IBG followed in
2. Greater reliance needs to be placed on the dated 22 July 1943, announced the following new September 1943. At the head of operations was
completion of component parts outside and a distribution of tasks and responsibilities: aval Construction Director Oelfken, who also held
stronger concentration of completion of such parts '1. The working-out of sketches for new ship a position in the Ship Construction Commission. H
at a few fLrms on behalf of all yards is re- types will be continued by the Supreme Naval had direct control of naval supervision at the IBG,
commended. Command. was the controlling authority for the total
3. In consideration of the extraordinary expen- '2. The working-out of completed designs for new timetable, aneY was in charge of the lines of
diture on heavy and very heavy installations,lifting types and of changes in current types will be made communicatiop to the yards. The organization of
gear, special transport means, etc., and of what we by a Ship Construction Commission formed by the the IBG in its details was as shown in the diagram
have shown by our observations above to be in Minister for Armaments and Munitions. The head On 8 December 1943, the staff totalled 1,020; from
many respects a difficult constructional system, we will be provided by the Navy, the 12 members will September 1943 to March 1945, the average staff
maintain that an economy in work hours can only be chosen in equal numbers from Navy and was 650. 25 per cent of the staff were female. Th
be achieved by long-term execution of the building industry. In addition to these, will be the Head of working day was twelve hours long with thr
programme and, even then, not in the proposed the HAS, the authorized Office Group Head of the Sundays worked monthly. Only two holidays per
volume.' Ministry for Armaments, the delegate for the Ship year were allowed, each of 6--8 days.
However, in the meantime, the design for U-Boat Construction and Naval Programme, and a member Initially, the various ordering agencies were con
Type XXIII was available and this was a simple, of the Imperial Commission for Merchantmen. To centrated in Halberstadt. When, however, th
small 'Electro-boat' lending itself to quick building. deal with certain specialized tasks; sub-com- number of their tasks increased, they wer,
Diinitz therefore directed, on 13 August, a basic missions with a similar organizational structure decentralized early in 1944 to a number of yard
changeover in U-boat construction to the two new will be formed. and other centres. Details of groups working in thi
Types XXI and XXIII. Details of his directive '3. The Ship Construction Commission author- way were:
were: izes the Head Office for Warship Construction to Pressure-tight hatches, doors and closure
1. The U-boat programme be reshaped around carry out tests, calculations and design work. Seebeck, Wesermiinde.
U-boats Type XXI and XXIII. '4. The Main Committee for Ship Construction Gearing and forged components: Deschimal(
2. Type XXI for Atlantic use; XXIII for coastal or will be reconstructed. It is placed under the Bremen.
Mediterranean work. Ministry for Armaments and takes over the Propellers, shaft piping and schnorkels: Blohm
3. XXI to take over tasks of present Types VII. detailed working-out of completed designs, and the Voss.
IX, etc.; XXIII initially 120 boats; from March- allotment of contracts to the yards, by directing Flexible and cast parts: Howaldtswerke, Ham
April (1944) 20 per month. repair contracts, spare-part production and burg.
4. Total U-boat production to remain at 40 per deliveries. It also looks after the fIXing of quotas, Auxiliary engines and pumps: Howaldtswerk
month; no production gaps to be tolerated through the control of stock and machine tools, and the use Kiel.
the changeover process; a split-up of the monthly of labour and the planning of necessary construc- Electric motors and fitting-out items: Germani
quota into different types still to be established. 20 tional undertakings. Allotment of contracts to the werft, Kiel.
Type XXIII boats would equal (by provisional yards and the supply fLrms will take place in future Rolled steel and profiles for upper works: D\\ K,
estimate) the expense of 5--6 large boats. only through the Main Committee or through the Kiel.
216 THE CHANGE TO TYPE XXI AND XXIII CONSTRUCTION

)
Steel alloy and electrodes: Stiilcken Sohn, Ham-
The distribution of tasks and responsibilities between the Navy and burg.
Special outer-ship fittings: Bremer Vulkan, Vege-
the Ministry for Armaments sack.
Screws and other standard parts, compressed-air
leads and oil-pressure pipes and bottles: MBZA
Navy Ministry for Armaments Central Procurement and Equipment Office of the
Navy, Hildesheim.
Installations for assembly work: Danziger Werft
AG, Danzig (later Halberstadt).
Walter-Drive installations: H. Walter KG, Kiel, in
2 Chief of Naval War HAS Oldesloe/Holstein.
Staff -- (Production) U-Boat Type XXIII: Deutsche Werft, Hamburg.
, Midget submarines: Germaniawerft, Kiel.
(Military requirements)
The quota section was moved to Cottbus, and later
I to Sangerhausen, while rolled steel for ships' hulls
was distributed by the Stahlbau-U-Steuerung (Steel
/
I Construction Control, U-Boats) in Liinen/West-
I
/ phalia.
/
I Section construction for Type XXI
/
I When the basic ideas of the sectional construction
I proposed by Merker had been explained at the
/
/ beginning of August 1943, it was fmally decided
/ Head of Office for that Type XXI should be carried out in section
I
I Warship Construction construction according to the following plan:
/ (K) Section 1: length 12.7m; weight approx. 65 tons
/
\ (Preliminary design) (stern with stern compartment, steering
\
\ installation and workshop).
\\ I
I Section 2: length 10m; weight approx. 130 tons
\ I (electric motor compartment).
\ / Section 3: length 804m; weight approx. 140 tons
\ /
\ I (diesel engine compartment).
\ / Section 4: length 5.3m; weight approx. 70 tons
\ /
\ / (crews' living quarters).
\ / Section 5: length 7.6m; weight approx. 140 tons
\ /
\ I IBG (control room and galley).
,/ Ship Construction (Completion, Section 6: length 12m; weight approx. 165 tons
Operations . Commission
(Completed designs)
--
fabrication and
ordering)
(forward living quarters).
Section 7: length 6.8m; weight approx. 92 tons
(torpedo storage compartment).
Section 8: length 14m; weight approx. 110 tons
(bow with torpedo tubes).
Section 9: length 14.1m (conning-tower super-
The organization of the IBG, structure).
Steel construction of these sections was to be
IBG completed as fully as possible at steel firms. This
meant assembly of the pressure hull, the building-in
Blankenburg
, 1_------" Halberstadt
of bulkheads, understructures and other items
necessary to the production of the crude sections.
Selection of these firms was made with regard to
their being widely dispersed in the interior of the
country, so that additional labour forces could be
(Head: Director Cords) (Head: Director Arndt) available for U-boat construction. and a further
consideration was accessibility of such firms by
waterways as it was intended that these large crude
sections would be transported by ship. On the other
hand, experience in ship construction was not
required. The largest number of the selected steel
K (Design) firms were in western Germany, a small number in
KS (Construction) Silesia and Danzig, with the remainder in central
KM (Engine construction) F (Production planning) B (Ordering control) Germany. Sections 1-8 were allocated as follows:
KE (Electrics) FK (Estimates) BK (Quota management) Section 1: Hannemann & Co., Liibeck;
KN (Standardization) FF (Fabrication) BB (Procurement) Norddeutscher Eisenbau, Sande near
V (Administration) FV (Preparations) BL (Delivery targets) Wilhelmshaven; Gresse & Co., Wittenberg (Elbe);
Strassburger Werft, Strassburg (Neudorf).
Section 2: Gutehoffnungshiitte, Oberhausen-

Sterkrade; Seibert, Aschaffenburg; Dellschau, The selection of section yards was dictated by armament, especially of the torpedo
Berlin; Eilers, Hannover. their capacity and by other important tasks to be reloading installation 15 Jan 1944
Section 3: MAN, Mainz-Gustavsburg; Krupp- carried out (e.g., the Hansa-Programme). The Delivery of the fust conning-tower
Stahlbau, Hannover; MittelstaW, Riesa; Gollnow, supply industry was also slotted into the new superstructure to the assembly yards 1 Mar 1944
Stettin. programme. The main engine installations that Completed section construction for the
Section 4: Fries-Sohn, Frankfurt am Main; Hein, would decide delivery dates had to be developed in fu~b~t 5Marl~4
Lehmann & Co., Diisseldorf-Oberbilk; Kelle & good time and then built by the manufacturers with Beginning of complete assembly of the
Hildebrandt, Dresden; Gebr. Heyking, Danzig. all speed. The proposed diesel engines - MA fust boat 15 Mar 1944
Section 5: Krupp-Stahlbau, Rheinhausen; Eggers & Type M6 V 40/46 KBB - were contracted to MAL, Delivery of the fust complete boat 15 Mar 1944
Co., Hamburg; H. J. Jucho, Audorf near Klackner-Humboldt-Deutz and Wumag, Garlitz. This planning, therefore, was not in line with
Rendsburg; August !G<inne, Danzig. The new, large electric motors were to be built by Merker's promise to have the fust boat ready for
Section 6: MAN, Hamburg; Dortmunder Union, SSW, AEG and BBC. The first contracts were sent delivery in April 1944. He now demanded that
Gelsenkirchen; (Werk Orange); Demag, Boden- to industry as early as August 1943, and the fust delivery of the first boat be made on 30 April 1944.
werder; Krupp-Druckenmiiller, Stettin. steel requirements followed in September. Three To achieve this, the other dates would have to be
Section 7: Schafer, Ludwigshafen; Grohmann & weeks later, the necessary ship-construction steel advanced. His programme of 20 August 1943, for
Frosch, Wittenberg (Elbe); Uebigau, Dresden; was available thanks to the energetic intervention Type XXI (officially published on 1 November
Beuchelt & Co., Griinberg (Silesia). of Speer. The race against time began. 1943) envisaged the following deliveries in 1944.
Section 8: Hilgers AG, Rheinbrohl; GHH In the meanwhile, designing was going ahead at April 3
Rheinwerft, Walsum; Carl Spater, Hamburg; full speed at the IBG. At a delivery discussion on 25 M~ 9
Beuchelt & Co., Griinberg (Silesia). September 1943, the following ship constructional June 18
This meant that almost 50 per cent of German planning was presented. July 27
steel production was involved. The chosen Materials disposition for pressure hulls, August 33
ironworks had to break off current armament plates and frames 22 Sept 1943 September 33
undertakings not of the highest priority, and Dispatch of these to Diisseldorf 4 Oct 1943 October 35
devote themselves completely to the new Delivery of pressure-hull materials November 37
requirements. (As a case in point, the fum of for 30 U-boats 10-15 Oct 1943 December 38
Hilgers-AG had produced pioneer equipment, Completion of the main dimensions 5 Oct 1943 Total 1944 233
before having to take on the construction of crude Completion of drawings for the main 1945 monthly 3
sections.) frames 9 Oct 1943 Of these, a maximum of 15 boats were to b
Ship and engine assembly of the crude sections Winding-off the pressure-hull housing delivered by B&V and 15 from AG Weser, as well as
was to follow in special section yards, each section and the frames to the steelworks 10 Oct 1943 8 boats from Schichau. In the meantime, however,
being handled in at least two yards. For the fmal Bending of frames and plates for the the Type XXIII programme had been decided
assembly, three large yards were envisaged. These pressure hulls 15 Oct-l Nov 1943 upon, and such a wide-ranging programme wa
had to be experienced in U-boat construction and Materials disposition for the outer ship 23 Oct 1943 simply not to be entertained, in spite of
had to be able to cope with modern series Completion of drawings for cast rationalization and the scraping the barrel for
production. It was desirable that they should be in components and forged components of labour and material reserves. Correspondingly, th
the vicinity of the section yards in order to keep the hulls 25 Oct 1943 maximum delivery instalment for Type XXI had to
risky sea transport to a minimum. The distribution Deschimag delivers templates for outer- be restricted to 33, of which 13 boats went to B&V,
was as follows: ship plates 25 Oct 1943 12 to Weser and 8 to Schichau. On 6 November
Western Area: Final drawings of the pressure hull and 1943, the fust overall contracts for 170 boats of
Section 1: Howaldtswerke, Kie!. for flanges and fittings from the Type XXI were awarded. Written detailed
Section 2: KMW-Wilhelmshaven. construction office to the steel contracts followed in the middle of December. By
Section 3: DW, Hamburg- construction office 1 Nov 1943 this time, it had been planned that at the end of
Finkenwerder; Bremer Vulkan, Commencement of crude section 1944 the assembly side of AG Weser would be
Vegesack. construction. (The crude sections for moved to Bremer Vulkan in the large 'Valentin'
Section 4: Flenderwerke, Liibeck. the fust 10 boats to be delivered by the shelter. The envisaged delivery timetable for th
Section 5: Howaldtswerke, ship construction fums with under- entire western area is shown in Table 39.
Hamburg; Bremer Vulkan, structures, etc., but without flanges, On 8 December 1943, the IBG was able to announc
Assembly consoles, etc.) 1 Nov 1943 the completion of design and fabrication drawings
Vegesack.
yards: Blohm
Section 6: DW, Hamburg- Drawings for the pressure bulkheads (From September 1943 up to this date, a total of
& Voss, from the construction office to steel 18,400 constructional drawings had been prepared. I
Finkenwerder; Bremer Vulkan,
Hamburg; AG
Vegesack. construction. (The fust 10 bow and stern In the case of the fust 3 boats, for which a
Weser, Bremen. parts, including pressure bulkheads, to maximum building time of three or four month
Section 7: Deschimag Werk
Seebeck, Wesermiinde. be constructed by the section yards) 15 Nov 1943 from the commencement of section building had
Section 8: DWK, Kie!. Commencement of material deliveries been estimated, the total development and
Section 9: Hitzler, Lauenburg for 20 outer-ship hulls. (Simultaneously, construction time after the hnished design wa
(Elbe); Biisumer Schiffswerft; models and templates for these to the available amounted to approximately nine month!
Sietas; Bremer Vulkan, Vegesack steel construction fums) 25 Nov 1943 During this same period, preparations had to
Liibecker Last drawing for the outer hull from the made for their series production: variou
Maschinenbaugesellschaft. design office to steel construction 1 Dec 1943 installations had to be set up for this completely
Eastern Area:
Sections 1, 2, 3 and 8: Danziger
Werft.
1 Patterns for the pressure bulkheads
ready for sending to the steel works
Completion of the fust forward
1 Dec 1943
new production method, together with buildinj(
directives, assembly plans and so on.
In the planned production of 33 boats per month
. . Assembly
. 4 and 5: Schichau,
SectIOns d S c h'IC h au,
yar: pressure bulkhead 15 Dec 1943 from October 1944, a total building time of
D anzlg. D . Crude sections ready for transport 1 Jan 1944 approximately six months for each boat WI
Sections 6 and 7: Deutsche Werke anzlg. Commencement of section construction 9 Jan 1944 anticipated. In this building time were includl·d
Gotenhafen. Completion of the last drawings for the sixteen days for the rolling of metal and transport
218 THE CHANGE TO TYPE XXI AND XXIII CONSTRUCTIO

.ble 39. Deliveries of Type XXI by shipyards in western Germany (HAS plan of 6 November 1943) Table 40. Man-hours per Type XXI construction at AG
Weser
1944 1945
Feb Mar April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar April
Worked Attainable
Estimate by 1944 target
:tions for:
"'(; Weser, Bremen 1 3 6 8 10 10 10 8 6 4 2
Steel construction 60,000 80,000 64,000
Bremer VulkanNalentin - - - - - 2 4 6 8 10 12 12 12 12
Section construction
Blohm & Voss, Hamburg I 4 8 12 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13
2 7 14 20 23 23 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Section 1 4.800 5,000
Tutal
Section 2 14.000 16.000
II·hoat deliveries: Section 3 17,000 20.000
AG Weser, Bremen - 1 3 6 8 10 10 10 8 6 4 2 Section 4 6,000 6.000
Bremer Vulkan - - - - - 2 4 6 8 10 12 12 Section 5 25.000 26.000
- 4 13 13 ~202,000
llIohm & Voss 1 8 12 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 Section 6 20.000 24.000
rutal 2 7 14 20 23 23 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Section 7 9.000 8.500
Section 8 7,000 6,000
Total 102,800 111.500
to steel frrms, forty days for the production of the 1. To establish correct and completely accurate
mpty crude sections, five days for the transport to compatibility of all constructional items, including Assembly work 95.000 140.000
tion building centres, 50 days for fitting-out the tubing of a diameter greater than 30mm. According Total work 257.800 332,500 226.000
various sections at the section yards, four days for to the constructional measures evolved hitherto.
transport to the assembly yards and, fmally, 50 these tubes were to be supplied ready-bent by the Table 41. Man·hours per Type XXI assembly at Blohm &
days for assembly work on each boat at the building tube-construction frrms, and already fitted with Voss
lip. Following the slipway launch, six days were flanges.
V-boat Calculated Actual
lIocated for fitting-out work at the pier and in the 2. As a study for the building-in sequence of
dock. Finally, after fIVe days' yard testing, each components. U2501 152.000 255.000
hoat would be handed over to the Navy. As regards 3. Educational purposes for those frrms involved in U2502 130.000 223.000
the series production of Type XXI, total work the construction. U2503 124.000 204.000
hours per boat from the manufacture of the steel It should be 'pointed out that in these quoted U2504 117.000 196.000
U2505 110.000 187.000
onstruction items to the handing over was hgures of work hours the wide-ranging, pre- U2506 105.000 178.000
8sessed at 257,SOO. However, the frrst boat at AG building preparations carried out at the yards has U2507 101.000 169.000
Weser, to which this calculation was supposed to not been included. According to Counsellor of State U2508 98.000 164.000
apply, took 30 per cent more hours (this boat was Rudolf Blohm, Blohm & Voss spent 820,000 work U2509 95.000 158.000
upposedly U3(09). A breakdown of work hours is hours in preparation for assembly construction of U2510 93,000 155.000
U2520 78.000 130,000
hown in Table 40, and an analysis of assembly Type XXI at a cost of 4,100,000 marks. Of the work U2540 110,000
65.000
work hours at B&V is shown in Table 41. hours, 475,000 were to be attributed alone to the
The Supreme Naval Command did not expect any construction of section sledges and supports.
Table 42. Man-hours for Types VlIe. IXD, and XXI
aving in fmancial terms or work hours in going
over to section construction: what was wanted, Section construction for Type XXIII VUC IXD, XXI XX]
above all, was a shorter period from beginning of On 30 July 1943, a preliminary discussion took (autumn (autumn (December (Final
construction to the frrst deliveries and a shorter place on the proposed preliminary sketch of Type 1943) 1943) 1944) phase)
overall construction time per boat. Nevertheless, XXIII, which was to be presl:nted at Hitler's
Steel 35.000 45.000 80,000 64.000
the estimated cost per ton of ship's weight was headquarters on 2 August. It was established that construction
3,600 marks (i.e., 5.75 million marks for the the boat would be assembled from four sections, all Yard 180,000 405.000 252,500 202,000
complete boat) roughly the same as for Type VIIC. of which would be capable of being transported by Total hours 215,000 450.000 332,500 266.000
(Note, however, that the new type incorporated rail; section 3, however, would be minus conning Hours per ton
more costly installations and special items of tower and superstructure. The lengths and steel- weight 280 278 205 164
quipment.) A comparison between the requirement weights of the individual sections were as follows:
in hours of U-boat Types VIIC, IXD z and XXI planning was to be carried out by the IBG. and a
Section 1: 9.1m; 11.33 tons (stern with steering
(likewise built in series) presents Type XXI in a number of conferences took place, at which various
installation, silent creep-speed engine and gearing).
very favourable light, as shown in Table 42. The questions were thrashed-out. For example, on 26
Section 2: 5.95m; 13.99 to:1S (main engines).
comparison illustrates the relative similarity in August 1943, problems concerning the completion
Section 3: 7.45m; 18.2 tons (control room and part
expenditure of hours in single construction of the proposed MWM RS 34 diesel engine were
of the forward living quarters).
methods on the building slips, and makes plain the discussed. A subsequent conference, on 14
Section 4: 9.98m; 16.5 tons (bow with torpedo tube
clear superiority of section construction, even in the September 1943, dealt with the question of
installation).
initial building phase. schnorkel design. As a folding schnorkel would
There was not much change in the greater con- The development and construction time for the have involved changes in the boat's shape, an
structional expenditure (including work prepara- frrst boat was estimated at seven months, and extensible schnorkel produced by Heep-DWK was
tions and contractual planning at the IBG) of should, therefore, have been ready in February decided upon for Type XXIII, as it had been for
550,000 hours for Type XXI as against 270,000 1944. Then, from March 1944, 20 boats would Type XXI. A suggestion, made by Naval
hours in the roughly similar sized Type IXD z, not follow monthly. The yards envisaged for con- Construction Adviser Grim, to strengthen the
very significant per boat when one takes into structional work were: Deutsche Werke AG, Kiel pressure-hull skin of Type XXIII was rejected on
account the whole series. Approximately 40 per and Gotenhafen; the Howaldtwerke, Kiel and the grounds of weight. The conning tower, however,
cent of this extra expenditure of 280,000 hours in Hamburg; and Germaniawerft, Kiel. was to be separated from the control room by a
Type XXI was necessitated by the construction of On 5 August 1943, the Supreme Commander-in- pressure-tight bulkhead.
new engines and the considerably more compre- Chief of the Navy decided that the small electro- In the meantime, it had been decided to hand over
hensive electrical installation, with 27,000 hours boat should be built in large series alongside Type the complete Type XXIII construction to Deutsche
alone being required for the construction of a XXI, and be intended in the frrst instance for Werft. With the sphere of operations of the North
wooden model in 1:1 scale. This model was operations in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea. Sea and Atlantic coast in mind, the section
constructed to fulfil the following purposes: The working-out of the design and contractual construction and assembly would be carried out at

the principal yard in Hamburg, Finkenwerder; The timetable planning of the IBG for the middle connection with this, that the series is
those boats destined for operations in the of September 1943 envisaged the design and order to be increased to 140 boats.] DW to
Mediterranean and the Black Sea would be built by sequence shown below: deliver the cast models.
their foreign outlets in Toulon (Arsenal); Genoa Completion of arrangements for provision AEG promise to deliver the first main
(Ansaldo); Monfalcone near Trieste (Cantiere of materials (with small exceptions) 25 Sep 1943 electric engine 15 Jan 1944
Riuniti); and Nikolayev. On 20 September 1943, Final ship's drawings to the steel While, in the main, the crude sections were to be
DW was given a contract for a total of 140 of these construction offIce 15 Oct 1943 built at the steel firms that had already been chosen
small boats, of which 50 would be built at Completion of the last steel construction for the Type XXI programme, it was envisaged
Hamburg-Finkenwerder, 30 each at Toulon and drawing and delivery of the materials that the named yards would carry out both section
Genoa, and 15 each at Monfalcone and Nikolayev. for 6 boats to the steel construction construction and assembly. The transportation of
As early as December, the yard at Odessa (at that firms, which were to deliver the crude crude sections to the yard could be carried out by
time under Rumanian authority) was mentioned as sections in January 1944. (The first two rail, as the components were small. The long
suitable for Black Sea boats and, later, following boats to be built completely by DW) 1 Nov 1943 distance to the foreign yards did, however, make
reverses for the German Army in this region, the Delivery of the total amount of rolled for certain diffIculties. In the case of DW.
Linzer Schiffbauwerft was named. Deliveries steel for 120 boats to the steel Finkenwerder, the ship-building hangar on the
required under the Ship Construction Programme construction firms to be completed Rusch Canal, and another shipbuilding workshop
of 6 December 1943 are shown in Table 43. by 15 Jan 1944. [Merker says, in were chosen for sectional construction. In a very
short space of time, four sequence lines were built
Table 43. Deliveries of Type XXIII V-boats in 1944 under the Ship Construction Programme of 6 December 1943 to facilitate the conversion of delivered crude
sections to complete sections; the completed
Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total
sections could then be taken from this spot by
Western Mediterranean 2 4 9 9 9 9 9 9 60 special vehicles directly to the building slips, where
Adriatic 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 - 15 they would be welded together as a complete boat
Black Sea - - - 2 2 2 3 3 3 - - 15 in eight weeks. This meant an elimination of all
Foreign Yards those diffIculties that had occurred during the
Total - 2 6 13 13 13 14 14 15 - - 90
Hamburg-Finkenwerder 2 4 6 8 8 8 8 6 - - - 50
transportation of sections of Type XXI to the
assembly yards.
Total 2 6 12 21 21 21 22 20 15 - - 140 On 18 May 1944, the Main Committee calculated
a monthly requirement in hours for the overall
Type XXIII.
_
."""
.... _-. programme of DW in Finkenwerder (approximately
8,000 employees) as shown in Table 44. However,
for the first 10 boats of Type XXIII at
Finkenwerder, a fIgure of about 90,000 work hours
was stated. The building costs of the yard (without
section construction) per boat are shown in Table
;1
45.
'7,::':
Waterline ::..,(-:/ ~ Table 44. Man·hours per month required at OW,
Finkenwerder, 18 May 1944
--
~
~'~~~
~
"' i~'J
Metal '., u.cl. I" • t ,,.,r, I, .
~~,
L~oo_ '" o_ooo"'~~~
TypeXXIlI' 400,000
cladding ~t , . / //J '
0 •
.,
~.
. ~
Sections 3 and 6 of Type XXI 280,000
amidShipS~\ \ \ \ . 'fI,W,
'liD Hansa Programme 250,000
to 29m \\\' :.1 Repairs 170,000
, I· /;,
\ 'iV/
'~?/
'1' Total 1,100,000
'50,000 man·hours per boat.

Frame lines Bow view Stern view
(without aerial)
Table 45. Cost per Type XXIII boat at OW, Finkenwerdtr
Mark"
Boat construction:
Materials
Man·hours 142,000 at 1.10 marksl
Total
Engine construction:
Waterline
r ~--
.........,1
Materials and engines
Man-hours 134,110 at 1.10 marks)
L J
Total
Fj~ )
Works expenses: 1
<l> ~~§
/l- TntAI ~n.t per boat'
1
1185 per cent of the labour costs.
'Excluding cost of steel construction.
- ----,"'~="',------
_ _--;::::=:---
.... -
, :Wi.,.§ij
-
•..• •.. ~~ J L -- ~~~.~_~
Opposite page, top: Series production of Section 2 for Type
XXIII in a construction hall at DW Hamburg. Below: Bridg,
of a Type XXIII with partly welded-on flooding vents.

As the threat of an Allied invasion grew, the
importance of the small U-boats grew corre-
spondingly. But production remained considerably
behind planning and, above all, the foreign yards
had not yet begun their deliveries; it was decided,
therefore, at the beginning of July 1944 to include
Germaniawerft, Kiel, in the Type XXIII pro-
gramme, and to authorize further construction
(185 boats by the end of 1945) on German territory.
By now, the sheltering from air attack of the Type
XXIII production centres had become an actuality.
As there was only capacity at Hamburg for section
construction of Type XXVI (page 2135) and Type
XXI, it was decided, in September 1944, to trans-
fer Type XXllI construction from early 1945
completely to GW, and to carry out the complete
section construction in box 2 of the 'Kilian' shelter.
Assembly work could then be moved from the open
building-slips at GW into the 'Konrad' shelter, once
this had become available. The proposed monthly
delivery quota for this protected U-boat
construction was 10 boats.
The assembly sequence for Type XXI

The fIrst constructional stage in hull manufacture
took place in the steel works, where the requisite
steel plates were rolled and cut, and pressure-hull
rings and cast items were manufactured. All were
then assembled into so-called crude sections. A
departure was made from the usual method of
constructing the pressure-hull rings: the plates
were not rolled out along their length, but along
their width, and were then connected to so-called
discs. These discs were, in effect, very short
pressure-hull rings, of a length equal to the distance
between 2-4 frame spaces. They were then welded
together with circular seams between them, to The movement and assembly of sections for Type XXI. Above: The first Section 5 on a pontoon at HDW, Hamburg, shortly
before transportation to the assembly yard B + V. Below: Installing a diesel engine in Section 3 of U3001 at AG Weser in April
become section pressure-hull rings. The original 1944. Opposite page: Raising the stern section of U3001.
reason for this disc method of construction wa
that flat discs were easier to transport. However, a
contributory factor was that the steel plants
selected for Type XXI did not have rollers
sufficiently strong, or long enough, to bend the
26mm sheets over their longitudinal extensions. A
drawback to the new method was the increased
number of welded seams.
Initially, the permitted tolerance in the pressure-
hull diameter was ± 2mm, but, because this limit
could not be adhered to, soon after the start of the
system changes were made to ± 2.5mm in the
diameter and ± 5mm in the circumference.
Furthermore, although the manufacturers adhered
to these tolerances, temperature variations during
fabrication of the pressure-hull rings led to even
greater variations when assembly was later
undertaken. In the steel construction industry,
unlike the shipbuilding industry, exact detailed
information was the rule. The IBG took note of this
and formulated more precise building instructions
and welding techniques.
The manufacture of section pressure-hulls, and
the installation of understructures, decks,
partitioning and tanks (i.e., the fabrication of so-
called crude sections) followed next in sequence
process. It was possible to accommodate only part
of the lines in the building halls, and working in the
open air presented many diffIculties, especially with

regard to welding. The welding-together of
sections, and the welding-on of exterior frames was
to have been carried out principally by 'Ellira'
automatic machines, a process in which the sections
were rotated in front of the machine. The welding
seams were thoroughly checked and compre-
hensively 'x-rayed'. The first crude section, No.1,
made by the frrm of Hannemann & Co., left the
factory on 18 December 1943.
Further steel ftrms were earmarked for
construction of the outer-hull casing, the so-called
upper deck, the bulkheads and the subsidiary and
supporting bulkheads. The outer-hull casings were
given their outer skin, together with the appro-
priate frames and bulkheads. They were built to
such a size that they could be transported by rail
to the section yards, but the large, crude sections
had to be carried by river boats.
In the section fitting-out yards, these crude
sections were now put together into complete
sections, and received all necessary installations
and engines, with the exception of those parts that
Comparison of section
construction in Types IX and XXI.
Type XXI Ring seams ._ Frame. rings Type IX
f?r~~
~II/It/'{
~~/i/-rrr~
,.,1: ,"1J1~~~-,
\. Cladding Vi I
~ J .§S<
W/
Longitudinal seams {;)"
Lfi7 Former
were either too heavy (diesel engines), or extended

through two or more sections (main shafts). For
these jobs, sequence-lines were set up in the large
shipbuilding halls at the yards. At the Liibecker
Flenderwerke, the 250m assembly-line functioned
from the middle of December 1943. At other frrms,
the commencement of flow-assembly was delayed
by air raids. Thus, the 350m assembly-line at the
Howaldtswerke, Kiel, was not in operation until the
middle of January; the line at DWK started at an
even later date_ Smaller sections rested on carriages
that could be used to transport them from one
construction point to the next, while the larger
sections remained in one place. Yet here, too,
identical workers were employed continuously at
identical work processes. A good example of this
stage of building is provided by a description of
completion work on section 5 at the Hamburg
Howaldtswerke:
'Crude sections and individual items delivered by
the steel construction hrms were taken, after some
preliminary work in Hall VII, on pontoons into
V-Boat Shelter 'Elbe II', where they were
assembled and fitted-out to become complete
sections, minus the conning tower and part of the
upper deck. Part of the electrical cables that go
through the length of the boat were cut to size in
advance and ·coiled up at the section ends. The
conning-tower deck and the periscope jack had been
delivered in finished state, apart from the drilling
for the after periscope, by a steel-moulding ftrm.

These items were screwed together in the
workshops amd drilled as a single entity. The jack
then had to be separated from the decks, so that
decks and conning-tower housing could be better
positioned for the welding process. Decks had to be
fIxed exactly vertical to the housing surfaces. It
was not possible to drill holes after the welding of
decks to the housing, as no machine tool large
enough was available. The setting-up of the conning
tower on its section took place beneath the large
"hammer crane" at the Imperator Quay. The
section had been transported from the shelter to
this point by a special pontoon. Careful work then
ensured that the approximately 12-ton conning
tower was welded into place with millimetric-
precision in both length and breadth, so that it was
in equilibrium with the main ships' installations
and in respect of the torpedo tubes. The fust
complete section was handed over to the
appropriate assembly yard, B&V, on 28 March
1944.'
In accordance with an exact timetable, predeter-
mined to a single day, sections complete to the last
paint-brush stroke were delivered by sea to the
assembly yards. When the sections arrived, diesel
engines had still to be fitted in section 3 before
assembly could begin. In order to utilize fully the
large building-slips (and this had been carried out in
the series construction of Types VIlC and IXC), on
occasion two boats, one behind the other, and three
boats abreast, could undergo assembly at each
building-slip.
Single sections were now conveyed by single
pontoons to the building-slips and, at B&V, using
the floating crane 'Anton', set-up in the correct
building sequence on sledges at the end of the Line.
Skids were then moved into the assembly position.
The skids consisted of two runners and two
transverse bearers, which could float, coupled
together by hydraulic jacks. The transverse bearers
remained underneath the boat for the entire
building-slip time, leaving the slip way only on
launching, and then together with the U-boat.
Recesses in the transverse bearers permi tted the
accommodation of 50-ton presses for the alignment
of sections according to their height. Lateral and
longitudinal alignment was carried out by changes
of position of the hydraulic jacks sliding on rails.
Fine adjustment was ensured by small holes that
had been bored in bulkheads, and in built-in
auxiliary bearers, in certain, exactly-prescribed
places. These had to match up exactly - when
exact alignment had been achieved, one could
observe through these holes, from both bow and
stern, a Light in the control room. Simultaneously,
the diesel engines were connected in complete
equilibrium with the shaft-housing of section 2, by
means of adjustment pieces and small amounts of
lateral movement. To assist in the assembly task,
the complete boat had two main axes; these were
the ship-architectural/weapon-technical main axis,
which ran through section 5 (control room and
conning towerl, and the propulsion main axis, which
ran through section 2. After alignment, the sections
were put onto keel-supports beneath the transverse
bearers side of the line and the hydraulic jacks were
removed.

The sections were then welded together. Around
the impact-edges of the pressure hull, the outer hull
was left open to a width of 80cin, so that the
welders could have entry to the pressure-hull
sections. These were welded by four workers in a
diametrical work process, a method necessary in
order to maintain the aligned axis. Stresses could
not be avoided. It usually took eight hours to
complete seven welding seams in the pressure hull.
In no circumstances could welding be interrupted,
if 100 per cent perfect seam-welding was to be
guaranteed. In connection with this, it was laid
down that such work should not be suspended, even
during air raids - special black-out blinds were
designed, to enable welding to continue. The next
stage was the building-in of the missing
longitudinal braces of the inner and outer ship; and,
fmally, the outer ship was closed by the welding-in
of the outer-casing belts, In order to establish
whether any welding tears or weaknesses were
present in the outer ship, exterior tanks and
bunkers were placed under water pressure and
hammered, which caused strongly over-stressed
parts to tear open. Such parts were then cut out and
welded afresh.
Now, in section 2, bushes were drilled into the
shaft bossings from outside. and the main shafts
were inserted and connected in line with the shaft-
housings. Tubings and conduits between sections
were connected, and any main cables running
through them were also taken through; likewise,
battery cells, periscopes. rod aerials and the
schnorkel were installed in appropriate positions.
After application of a top coat of paint, boats
were ready for launching. The only items still
lacking were the gun armament, various minor
items of apparatus and the inventory. In practice,
however, many boats were given a slipway launch
in a much less complete state of readiness. For
launching, the rails were greased and the launching
hydraulic jacks were brought into use. The boat
was then wedged and, with the 50-ton presses in the
recesses of the transverse bearers, pumped to a
height sufficient to come free from the supports. To
secure stability, trimming tanks, trimming bunkers
Above: The stern of U3503 (Type XXII, after being lifted into
the floating dock at Gothenburg, 1946. left: Two views of
U2502lType XXI), after her delivery to Great Britain.

NOI.10mI.LSNOO IIIXX Q V IXX 3dA.1 0.1 3DNVHO 3H.1 azz
Type XXI's on the slips at Blohm and Voss. Opposite page: Two views of U2501 before U2564, U2562 and U2560; in the background are the five boats shown In the top photograph,
launching in May 1944. Above, below and overleaf: Boats lying abandoned after Germany's but in reverse order. The photograph overleaf shows, top row, U3502, U3048, U3504, U3506
capitulation, May 1945. In the top photograph can be seen, from left to right, U2561, U2563, and U3060 and, front row, U3501, U3049, U3055 and U3057.
U2555, U2556 and U2557. The photograph below shows in the foreground, from left to right,

lind negative-buoyancy chambers were filled to because of the transferring of a large part of its station in the large assembly hall. In the first
IIpproximately 60 tons, and a positive buoyancy V-boat yard to Lorient, and Kiel's because of its station, the 8 sections on the building·slip carriages
tunk of 124m 3 was secured to the sharp stern. After reportedly good anti-aircraft defences, Not until the were welded together. During further operations
luunching, boats went for fmal fItting-out at the beginning of 1942 did construction begin in Kiel of they were twice (stages 2 and 3) advanced forward
pier. a shelter with 2 'boxes', which was set up at the Kiel by one boat's length. Between stages 3 and 4, the
Only eight hours after a slipway launch, a Howaldtswerke under the cover-name 'Kilian', At whole boat was shunted sideways to a parallel
building-slip could receive transported sections for this same time, a fIfth compartment was added to sequence route, on which the boat, after passing
the next boat. 'Fink II', On 22 December 1942, Raeder presented through stages 4 and 5, could be transported
the following further construction plans: backwards by one boat's length each time. A
Shelters for U-boat building ew construction undertakings in home similar operation was repeated once again. Above
From the point of view of safety from air attack, the territories: stations 10 and 11, two protected shelter
section construction of Type XXI did not mean any 1. V-boat shelters for new V-boat construction superstructures were provided, containing in their
decentralization, but rather the opposite, for there yards (20 berths with 95,000 tons of steel). roofs a 5-ton crane for the installation of periscopes,
was a growing concentration on relatively few 2. 30 air-raid shelters for personnel (8,000 tons of rod aerials and schnorkel. At the end of the line,
fabrication points, all with increasing steel). stations 12 and 13 were positioned in a docking
constructional facilities. The crude ships' Construction undertakings in French territory: chamber. The 'launching' took place in station 12,
components, which did not have great value, were 1. Roof strengthening of the present V-boat shelter by the flooding onhe chamber to a point ilt which
produced in a well-decentralized manner, but (65 shelter berths with 52,000 tons of steel). the boat floated free from the building-slip carriage.
section construction and subsequent assembly 2. New construction of a further 45 V-boat shelter At station 13, a fmal inspection was carried out,
construction took place at only a few places. It is berths (each with 5,000 tons of steel, i.e., a total of and the boat then entered the fItting-out basin, The
specially to be noted that sections 1, 2, 4, 7 and 8 for 225,000 tons of steel), space available here suffIced for trimming and
both the Western Area assembly yards, with a 3. Air-raid shelter for yard staff in western France heeling tests. The completed boat then passed
maximum output of 25 boats monthly, were (11,000 tons of steel necessary). through the bomb·proof doors of the shelter into
constructed during that period at one section yard. Among the planned new shelters in German the outer basin and, from there, via the branch
For such centres, special protection from air attack territory were the large 'Valentin' shelter at Farge canal to the River Weser.
had to be provided. The Luftwafte, it is true, on the Weser, and a second shelter in Kiel, cover- It was intended that here too, for the first time,
provided additional anti-aircraft and fIghter name 'Konrad', which was set up over DWK Dock large and very complicated ships would be
protection, but - and this is especially to be seen in III in the construction harbour, and was given only assembled in consecutive stages in one hall (as in an
the destructive attacks on Hamburg between 24 one compartment, Further constructions were automobile factory), Quite apart from the hoped-for
July and 3 August 1943 - the protection was contemplated at Lorient and La Pallice, and a protection against bomb damage afforded by the
inadequate. Only the covering over of workshops shelter with 20 berths was to be built in Marseilles, shelter, the advantages of this method of
and of the large assembly yards with concrete The Trondheim shelter was also to be enlarged, shipbuilding were beyond question, and would
seemed to promise truly effective protection. Following reverses in the V-boat campaign and the certainly lead to an abbreviation of the time spent
The first V-boat shelter in home territory was considerable losses of the summer of 1943, however, by a vessel at the building-slip. A total of 30 days
ready in 1940. This was the 6-berth 'V-boat shelter' these extension constructions in foreign bases were per boat was envisaged for assembly construction
in Heligoland. It was proposed to convert the large no longer regarded as essential, and were not again in the shelter - in other words, every 56 hours, one
construction dock in Wilhelmshaven to a shelter, contemplated, On the other hand, construction of complete V-boat should be able to leave the shelter.
with workshops, dock facilities and 18 berths, but, shelters in home territories were held to be of It was intended to build nearby, as an addition, a
because of shortage of constructional steel and of priority, large subterranean reserve store, which would be
workers, this project was postponed for a time, as A short time after the beginning of its planning in connected to the assembly bunker by tunnels. To
were other proposed V·boat underground shelters autumn 1943, the Main Committee decided that the aid in the accomplishment of this mammoth
in Kiel and Hamburg. On the French Atlantic coast, large shelter project 'Valentin' should be an undertaking, a special construction bureau, with
with the help of Organization Todt, V-boat shelter assembly bunker for Type XXI. In the contract the designation 'V-Weser', was set up. The
construction was started in the operational bases placed witb KMW, Wilhelmshaven, on 6 December construction contract was principally entrusted to
(Lorient, with 28 berths and a hauling-up slip; 1943, it was anticipated that deliveries from the the firm of Wayss & Freitag, who already possessed
Brest, with 20 berths; St. Nazaire, with 21 berths). 'Valentin' bunker would begin in October 1944. The considerable experience in erecting V-boat shelters,
In Norway, the base at Bergen was provided with a assembly shelter had external measurements of The construction advisers were the firm of Agatz &
shelter for 9 berths, and Trondheim a shelter with 8 450m by 100m, The concrete walls were to be Bock.
berths. By the end of 1941, complete shelter for 3-4,5m thick and the roof 7.3m thick, to afford When complete, in the autumn of 1944, the
V-boats had been provided at Lorient and La protection against the heaviest (at that time) complex would be taken over by Bremer Vulkan, in
Pallice; by the middle of 1942, for those at Brest known bombs. In the interior, measuring 430m X Vegesack, and then AG Weser would carry out the
and St. Nazaire and, at a rather later date, at 85.5m, there was room for 24 single sections (=3 section construction of the Vulkanwerft.
Bordeaux. V-boats) and 13 complete boats in their varying Consequently, a shelter with the designation
At the beginning of 1941, work began in stages of assembly. Flat-bottomed vessels of up to 'Hornisse' was planned for Bremen and fmally, one
Hamburg for a shelter with, initially, 2 'boxes' at 3,000 tons were to ferry sections directly into the further large shelter, with the cover-name 'Wenzel',
the Deutsche Werft in Finkenwerder. This first shelter along a connecting canal 7m deep. In the was to be erected in Hamburg. However, in the
construction phase was completed in October 1941; fItting-out basin they would then be loaded, by early part of 1944, this was 'pie in the sky'. Of the
the second phase began in the winter of 1941/42 and means of a large 200-ton crane, on to special available V-boat shelters at this time, only 'Elbe I I'
ended in October 1942. The complete construction carriages running on four sets of track. On the could be used for the construction of section 5 by
now consisted of 4 'boxes', and was given the name south side of the shelter, the sections could be the Hamburg Howaldtswerke, and a part of 'Fink
'Fink II', A shelter with 2 'boxes' was erected at unloaded by means of a second 200-ton crane. II' could be used for sections 3 and 6 by DW, It was
this same time near the Hamburg Howaldtswerke, The planned construction sequence was as further envisaged that KMW, Wilhelmshaven,
This shelter was given the name 'Elbe II'. Initially, follows, When the sections were in place, in the should move its sectional construction likewise into
these shelters served the Hamburg yards, mainly right sequence one behind the other on their shelter 'Fink II', Sequence-line working in the
for the fItting-out of their V-boats after launching. assembly carriages, assembly construction could ahelters took place on flat-bottomed boats.
The proposed shelters for Wilhelmshaven and Kiel begin. During this, the boat on its building-slip Construction work in wet shelters led to a whole
were postponed yet again, Wilhelmshaven's carriage rolled along in 12 stages from station to host of problems, but these could be overcome,
THE CHANGE TO TYPE XXI AND XXIII CONSTRVCTION 231

In a report to Hitler on 4 May 1944. Donitz Fiihrer considers it essential to roof over further completed 'Konrad' shelter; the Howaldtswerke
bewailed the fact that the new V-boat construction docks. and orders it to be established whether or Kiel used Box 1 of the 'Kilian' shelter for its section
was still very inadequately protected: not the fourth inlet to Wilhelmshaven can be roofed 1. Section construction for Type XXIII was to be
'Since on one site. 30-40 sections of the same over and used for section construction.' moved into the second compartment. After the
kind are being built simultaneously. a single stick of In consequence of this discussion. the 'Hornisse' completion of Type XXI section construction in
bombs can disrupt at one fell swoop the production shelter at AG Weser was given preferential Kiel, the ovenl1l section and assembly construction
of 30-40 boats. A similar position exists with treatment. It was now to deliver sections 2, 5 and 6. for Type XXIII was to be carried out by GW in the
assembly; for example, in Hamburg at anyone which hitherto had been constructed by the 'Kilian' and 'Konrad' shelters. However. things did
time, 30 boats lie next to each other for assembly Vulkanwerft in Vegesack. to be worked on at not progress as far as this. In October 1944, Donitz
purposes on the building-slips. Only a very small 'Valentin'. A second shelter. designated 'Wespe' stressed once more the provision of shelters as
percen tage of overall sectional construction is was to be erected for KMW, Wilhelmshaven. In being the only effective measure against increasing
protected by concrete. Assembly in Hamburg and accordance with V-boat planning as at 12 October air attacks on harbours. 'Large-scale shelter
Danzig is completely unprotected; while an 1944. 'Wespe'. was from 1 September 1945 to be at construction is most urgently required in the home
assembly shelter is being constructed for Bremen the disposal of 'Valentin' for the remaining sections harbours. The requirement is for 196 shelter berths
['Valentin'] it will not be ready until early 1945. A 1,2.4.7 and 8. At a later date, building preparations in addition to those already prepared or those under
similar undertaking for Hamburg ['WenzeI'j hangs began for this shelter. construction ..
fIre in its initial stages (foundation work). A large dry dock near AG Weser was used for the Shown below is a detailed plan of V-boat shelters
Completion will be 1946 at the earliest. erection of 'Hornisse'. The loss of repair facilities in available for V-boat repair and fItting-out and for
'The Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Navy the Atlantic shelters after the Allied invasion of training V-boats, either available or planned. as at
1
has therefore discussed this question with Europe prompted the adoption of an alternative 28 November 1944:
Ministerial Director Dorsch. who now has charge of proposal for 'Hornisse·. which had been meant for Completed shelters:
Home construction. He believes he can bring section construction only. The dock character was 1. Nordsee III (Heligoland) 6 berths
forward the date of the protection installations for to be preserved, and the forward part of the shelter 2. Fink II (Hamburg-Finken werder)
Bremen ['Valentin'] - from early 1945 to autumn was to serve as a repair shelter with 4 wet and 4 dry 10 berths
1944 and, secondly. that he can have a dry-dock berths at any given time. In the after part. section 3. Elbe II (Hamburg-Tollerort) 4 berths Type XXI
roofed over (in Bremen) to serve the purpose of construction in 7 stages was to be carried out. and 4. Kilian (Kiel-Dietrichsdorf) 8 berths J
protecting section construction ('Hornisse']. The this was to involve sections 1.2 and 3. 5. Bruno (Bergen) 9 berths
Fiihrer wants to discuss this question with Dorsch in From September 1944, section construction was 6. Dora I and II (Trondheim) 13 berths
the next few days and instruct him to accomplish carried out in shelter conditions in the Kiel area. N.B. 2-4 currently involved in V-boat section
erection of the protective buildings at all costs. The DWK moved its section 8 construction into the construction, 6 being completed.
Internal layout of the 'Valentin' shelter.

~ .. _._-_._-- --..-.--.-----.---- ----1
~--------. -- ' ".. :::~_ ~:.~::;~.~.' ~:~~: .:.<~~:.~.;- i":
::;; .
.-:J..;'
Section A
Section B
A
I
:''':'2.'.;.,~,.,'.T: ...;;:-:'..:.:...,\~. ::" :.: :~:; ::::',' ~':i "-:. j_'~;.~j~!i ..;;'·~/_;.·:{'_:..:; ;'•.1 .... :
~J
Fining-out basin
\~
>-> ;~Stage12
Dry dock
t .>; "'~":;:~:' " . , " . " , " " " ' . , , , . . ,••• ' " " " " . " •., ••
Stage 10
L1§(j rrT.·, '."'.0.·
i!
::t - Stage 7 Stage 8 Stage 9 Stores
~~ ~
~
~,' Stage 6 =-Stage5 ~ Stage 4
_> s • " «" "iii 'l' "i LGl is!! '"' e,g 'Ii E i en up I Sri !
t t
Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3
It:;~L_ Items necessary for 25 sections ~ qti ::.:.·:~ ~._,:,- ..'_',. ·;,·:t:I~.:.
~~:"I~;<···::,"··{:· ·'®'··;;···:··:.. ,-c..[:,:~'i!i&tj;;··:.' ,·.. :.·:,'y:..·.. <~.:,.::·,',·;-.,.BQ
.. 0 10 '0 60 IJ() !OOm

Internal layout of the 'Hornisse' shelter.
10 10 JO 40 50 60 70 fX) 90 03 In
A
I
-- :=--- =r:-=-=-=---
----_.;
.:::.::~--~::--::~-~-=- ==-:~~----~~->
L _
4 dry berths 4 wet berths
Type XXI section building Repair section
Section B
....- ... ~T
,"""'-'- "'-'i"
The shell of the incomplete U-boat bunker 'Hornisse' at AG Weser in Bremen (photograph taken in 1977).

Planned shelters: XXIII, a submerged range almost three times as developed suffIciently, and the realization that the
1. Elbe XVII (Hamburg-Tollerort) 12 great could be achieved. The electric motor could indirect process could not be operationally-feasible
berths remain small, at 160hp (silent, creep-speed motor of in the near future, caused the project to be
2. Wenzel (Wedel near Hamburg) 12 Type XXI), as there was the danger that a more abandoned on 27 March 1944.
berths ~ Type XX I powerful motor would exhaust the batteries too
3. Wespe (Wilhelmshaven) 16 berths soon. As one would expect, the maximum Side torpedo tubes: Types XXIV, XXIB
4. Valentin II (Farge near Vegesack) submerged speed was only 9 knots. This project and XXIC
14 berths was designated Type XXV. It did not satisfy Despite the use of a quick-loading installation in the
5. Kaspar IKie!) 11 berths requirements, however, because in relation to its new U-boat Type XXI, the number of torpedo tube
6. - (Rugen) 36 berths range (400 nautical miles at 6 knots) the boat was ready for fIring at anyone time was inadequate.
7. - (Swinemunde) 24 berths too big. This disadvantageous relation could only Early in 1943, Project VIIC/43, eight torpedo tubes
8. - (Gotenhafenl24 berths r Type XXI be rectified by some other method of propulsion. At (six bow and two stern tubes) had been intended for
9. Underground gallery construction that time, suitable remedies could be provided by the last stage of VIIC development; this demanded
in Bergen 12 berths the closed-cycle and the Walter-process. Especially a large number of ready-to-fIre torpedo tubes,
10. Underground gallery construction uitable seemed to be the indirect process, tested rather than a large supply of reloads, better suited
on Bornholm 12 berths from 1943 in the Walter Works, a process in which operational requirements that, in the face of
In Speer's opinion, however, the provision of heating and turbine closed-cycle were separated, growing defensive measures, saw few opportunities
shelters for fIghter aircraft production was more and which promised a signifIcantly higher effic- for a second attack. This demand went some way to
important. He promised Dbnitz that, when these iency at low speeds than the direct process avail- meet the requirements of the shipbuilders, who
had been completed early in 1945, he would then able at the time. In addition, the system was inde- considered it easier to construct tubes with ready-
supply sizeable labour forces for additional U-boat pendent of depth. For such a propulsion method, to-fIre torpedoes, than to provide accessible space
shelters. Neither 'Valentin' nor 'Hornisse' were ever 'K' OffIce projected, in the winter of 1943/44, a for reserves.
finished. Up to the time of the Russian occupation, special V-boat of 200 tons displacement for The Walter U-boats had dispensed with stern
U-boat construction in the Danzig area was Mediterranean use. It would have four bow torpedo tubes - the turbine compartment being closed off
completely unprotected. In the west, only a part of tubes. As it was considered, at that time, that it by bulkheads would have made access tubes
the section construction in the Hamburg and Kiel would be suffIcient for a 'pure' U-boat to have a diffIcult, and the slim, streamlined, stern profIle
areas could be carried out in the wet shelters submerged top speed of 10 knots, the turbine militated against their incorporation anyway. Type
available there. Following the termination of output could be limited to 250hp and a readily- XXI, which had almost the same outline as Type
section construction, these shelters were used for available turbine could be used. The calculated XVIII, took over armament identical to the Walter
U-boat repairs from March 1945, with the exception ubmerged range of 2,000 nautical miles at 6 knots boats, as a change would have involved com-
of the 'Konrad' shelter. GW used this for the was considerable. In addition, to provide silent prehensive replanning and consequent lengthy
construction of the Midget U-boat type Seehund creep travel and for battery charging, a small delays. The possibility seemed to exist of increasing
(page 288) until the end of the war. electric motor was envisaged. The range on this the number of torpedo tubes by inserting an
installation was similarly sizeable - 250 nautical intermediate section housing side tubes pointing
miles at 5 knots - which meant that the boat, obliquely aft. This arrangement was later given the
running 144 nautical miles daily at 6 knots, designation 'Schneeorgel' (after Korvettenkapitiin
U-BOAT DEVELOPMENT, could submerge for 14 days. This project, which Schnee who, as Admiralty Staff OffIcer for Combat
AUTUMN 1943 TO EARLY was designated Type XXVIII, was initially Against Allied Convoys, had represented the
postponed because the new engine had not been interests of the Chief of Naval War Staff in the new
1944
New ideas for coastal boats: Types XXV Torpedo tube arrangements in Types XXIB and XXIC.
and XXVIII
In July-August 1943, U-boat planning in the
Type XXIS Type XXIC
Walter Works was geared to the task of changing
basic Type XVII into a small U-boat, appropriate
for the new motto 'Submerged endurance is more
important than submerged high speed', and able to
compete with the small, electric U-boat Type /
XXIII. At initial discussions on 30 July 1943, a
modified Type XVIIB, with only one small Walter-
Turbine of 1,160hp was suggested; with an Aurol
supply of 100 tons, it would have a submerged -
range of 660 nautical miles at 15.7 knots, or 3,200 -., :>
nautical miles at 8 knots. By dispensing with the
diesel engine, and using a 2,500hp turbine at a
maximum submerged speed of 20 knots, a
submerged range of 2,500 nautical miles at 8 knots,
or 1,700 nautical miles at 8 knots plus 80 nautical
miles at 20 knots would be possible.
Consideration was also being given in 'K' OffIce
---
to the feasibility of having a 'pure' U-boat for
coastal operations, but equipped with conventional
propulsion. Type XX III was used as the starting-
point for this. By dispensing with the diesel B r---,~t- D
installation, the volume could be reduced to 160m 3 .
At the same time, by doubling the batteries of Type

Ship Construction Commission in requesting larger
quantities of ready-to-flre torpedo tubes). From Type XVIIA with six side torpedo tubes
Type XVIII then, evolved the U-boat Type XXIV,
which, in addition to six bow tubes would have (Project 477 A5 of 12 October 1943).
t'ither two triple or two quadruple side tubes. This o I 1 J l. 5 6 .. 8 9 '0 II /2 JJ " 15m
meant that the surface displacement increased
from 1,485 tons to approximately 1,800 tons.
Discussion also took place of another version with
twelve side tubes (2 X 2 X 3) and of approximately
1,900 tons displacement. As the Walter installation
@ @
was to be retained, the maximum submerged speed
dropped from the 24 knots of Type XVIII to 21
knots in Type XXIV.
The corresponding variations from Type XXI
were given the designations XXIB (2 X 3 side
tubes) and XXIC (2 X 2 X 3). In a discussion at the c
Ship Construction Commission on 19 November
A B o
1943, Type XXIB was seen as the successor to
Type XXI. However, because of their considerable
ize, these boats were actually long-range,
operational boats, which did not need a multiplicity
of ready-to-flre torpedo tubes.
Walter Type XXVI

V-boat Type XXI was too large for the convoy
campaign in the North Atlantic; it was also too
costly and could not, therefore, be considered in the
long term as a good replacement for Type VIIC.
Following the decision to switch U-boat production
to the new electro-boat Types XXI and XXIII,
Walter Works had been thrust into the background
with its projects for Types XVII, XVIII and XXII.
They now saw a chance of re-emerging.
In September 1943, after the commitment to anti-aircraft armament (a bridge with conning extensible apparati. The maximum diameter was
Type XXIII had been decided upon, an attempt tower and anti-aircraft guns as in Type XXI). This increased by approximately 40cm, which meant
was made, by enlarging Type XVII, to provide a made the boat considerably larger, which in turn led that the displacement was increased to 720 tons. In
new, more offensively-equipped U-boat, especially to a corresponding increase in diesel and electrical the fmal version, the surface displacement of Type
suitable for the convoy war in British waters. It installations. Additionally, for the purposes of XXVIW amounted to 841.6 tons, but this was still
would be small, manoeuvrable and as strongly reliability and for recharging while schnorkelling, a considerably under that of Type XXVIB. It was
armed as possible. In planning this, thought was diesel generator was intended. In order to keep the intended that the bow armament would be similar
also given to the various constructional ideas that displacement below 1,000 tons, initially - as with to that in Type VIIC, which made it possible to use
had gone into Type XXII - for example, the Type XXIII - interjor loading of torpedo tubes the forward section of this type, thus avoiding the
simplified turbine installation with only one turbine was dispensed with. This project was designated bottleneck in cast steel. The side-tube arrangement
and (something that had been proved in towing Type XXVIA, and the drawings and design were to of Type XVIIA was retained, but differed from that
tests) good results obtained from the knife-edged have been ready by the middle of November 1943. used in Types XXVIA and B in that the tubes were
stern and deep-set hydroplane. This new type was Exterior loading of torpedo tubes would only be situated internally, right up to their exit-flaps,
designated Type XVIIA. In the version dating possible in dock. This was quite unacceptable for which would make for easier pressure-hull
from 12 October 1943, it was to have four bow and training operations and had serious drawbacks for construction. Nevertheless, the arrangement wa
two triple side tubes for 7m torpedoes. The length operational purposes, because dock capacity was not particularly satisfactory, as it meant that the
of the boat was only 46.7m, so that, with a very limited. An alternative was a lengthening of bow compartment became very high, while the
maximum beam of 4.9m, the length-to-beam ratio the design by approximately 4m, which would bring battery compartment underneath it became very
was 9.5:1. The displacement would be in the order of the surface displacement to 1,050 tons. This made low. As reserve torpedoes had been dispensed with,
500 tons. the new Type XXVIB design rather large, with a it was possible to house most of the crew in the bow
As with Type XVII and XXII, no forward maximum submerged speed correspondingly lower compartment. The fittings of this compartment
hydroplanes were envisaged. The boat would have at 21.5 knots. included sound-proofed, removable walls, part of
as its turbine installation half the installation of Meanwhile, the V-boat designers at the flTm of which had to be removed during torpedo-tube
Type XVIII. The diesel engine and the electric Hellmuth Walter KG, Dr. Karl Fischer and loading. On the other hand, torpedo maintenance
motor were to be approximately three times as Engineer Ulrich Gabler, had worked out an during training or on operations (withdrawing of
powerful as in Type XVII. The bridge was similar improved Project XVIIA, and this was given the torpedoes approximately 2.5m from the tubes) only
to that in Type XVIIB. It was not intended that it designation Type XXVIW. It differed from the required the lifting up of several bunks every 3-4
should have anti-aircraft armament, but this was project of 12 October 1943, principally by a days. Installation planning was very successful in
an indispensable military requirement of the lengthening of the midships section by reducing crew discomfort to a minimum.
Commander-in-Chief, U-Boats, for larger V-boats; approximately 7m, thus providing more space for In order to achieve a streamlined, narrow bridge,
in October 1943, 'K' Office projected a counter- essential detection installations and auxiliary it had been decided to do without a conning tower,
design to the Walter Type XVIIA. This had engines. A corresponding increase in length was and the shortage of cast steel also played its part in
affmities with Type XXI, a stronger torpedo also made in the narrow control-room this decision. For the fust time in German V-boats,
armament (twelve torpedo tubes) and, notably, an superstructure that enclosed the bridge and a large boat was directed from the control room.

This step could be risked because gm instead of
Type XXVIB, 15 February 1944. 7.5m periscopes were now being used. The overall
loss in periscope depth as compared to Type VII,
, n was only 0.7m. This seemed acceptable, as the boat
would be considerably shorter than the equal-sized
Type VIIC boat, and it could therefore be assumed
that the depth-keeping properties would be better
than in earlier types. The passageway from bow
compartment to engine compartment ran beneath
the control room through the auxiliary engine
compartment, so that the helmsman and hydro-
plane operators were no longer distracted by
A movement in the boat. This solution also permitted
~.~ooo~ ~
the commander's accommodation and detection
and communications departments to be positioned
~ in the immediate vicinity of the boat's control
installations.
The submerged speed was to be as high as was
technically possible, so that attacks would be
feasible even at some future date when the expected
fast convoys using 'Victory' ships would be
travelling at approximately 17 knots. As the escort
vessels of the time could use their detection devices
up to a speed of approximately 18 knots, it would be
essential that boats be able to travel faster than
this in order to ensure their escape. It is of interest
that a speed in excess of 18 knots was required; this
was the previously hoped-for submerged top speed
~
of Type XXI. Calculations for Type XXVIW
foresaw a maximum submerged speed of 24-25
knots. which could be maintained for six hours, and
this would surely be sufficient for quick approach to
a convoy, effective attack and safe disengagement.
D I } J , , , •• , 10....
A B c In line with the Chief of Naval War Staff's views on
the possibilities of successful surface attacks at
night, the opinion was mooted that, although short,
Type XXVIW, July 1944. the boat would achieve a respectable 18 knots on
the surface with its turbine. It was intended,
therefore, to fit an optical aiming apparatus (UZO.
or Uboot-Zieloptik, Column) on the bridge.
A smaller diesel engine was necessary, as the
engine compartment was smaller than that in
Types XXVIA and B. Two engines were
considered: the 580hp MWM engine as used in
Type XXIII, and the two-stroke T12 M133 diesel
engine developed at the beginning of the war by
KlOckner-Humboldt-Deutz. Developing 1,200hp, it
had approximately the same length as the RS34,
The Deutz engine had the advantage of a
considerably higher performance. but the not
inconsiderable disadvantage that there was no
experience of the schno'rkel used in conjunction
with two-stroke engines, and the fact that series
production had not yet begun. On the other hand.
the MWM engine as used in Type XXIII had
certain advantages: spare parts were available;
technical staff were fully conversant with it; thE.'
engine was already being mass-produced; and it
matched-up well with the electric motor of Type
XXIII.
@
The proposed surface range of 11.000 nautical
miles at 8 knots, or 15,000 nautical miles at 4 knots.
was far in excess of the length of time a crew could
be expected to exist comfortably at sea in thi~
cramped boat, and was hardly called for by tht·
A B c o I ] J , S , 7 • J lCl n Q rJ ~ 1.5 f7l tasks envisaged for the boat. However, it provided
a very great safety margin and certainly measurE.'d

raised against the design, its presentation on 6
Turbine room of Type XXVIW. February 1944 (GKdo HWK B No. 313) contained a
lengthy appendix in which the decision to dispense
with anti-aircraft armament was justifIed. The
3m
disadvantages of such an armament for this boat
were stated as follows:
'1. A streamlined arrangement of the anti·
aircraft armament in turrets, as in Type XVIII or
XXI, would mean in the case of Type XXV1W
taking up the whole width of the upper decks and
rendering impossible free passage from foreship to
after ship.
'2. An anti-aircraft turret reduces the surface
stability. The boat would need to be made wider in
its f1otational waterline.
'3. The crew would need to be augmented by the
number of personnel manning the anti-aircraft
armament (6 men); it would not be possible to
accommodate them without increasing the length
of the boat.
'4. Additional space would have to be provided
Turbine layout of Type XXVIW. for storage of ammunition, which once again would
involve a lengthening of the boat.
'5. An anti-aircraft turret would increase profile-
Creep-speed electric motor . ~
resistance in submerged travel. A further increase
.. -~vapour ~ Vapour pump in resistance would take place through the greater
:' condenser
Wedge·belt +- Quick-closing displacement.
gearing 3.41:1 - .... ': valve '6. To give the larger boat the required diesel and
• Turbine
gearbox: electric ranges, the fuel supply and the storage
5.65:1 I - .. Regulating
tank batteries would have to be increased.
'7. Stronger batteries would need a stronger
electric motor and a stronger diesel engine to
. \ -<I From the sea preserve identical short charging times.
Shaft gearing! ....• \
'8. The installation of anti-aircraft defence would
3471 ~':-6t.~' ".:..:.: -"---j ~ 3·tuels pump involve an increase in total displacement from 720
~ ~ 4 Injection, condenser
tons to approximately 1,150 tons (Type XXVIB).
=---+-' Regulati~g valve
I -------;--------
____ -+ J 1I The speed of the larger boat, with anti-aircraft
Engine fuel armament, may be calculated as follows:
PorI condenser cooler a.~. Light oil
The present bridge of Type XXVI W carries
approximately 15 per cent of the total boat's
resistance, the bridge as in Type XXI
up to the demands of the Chief of Naval War Staff. As regards the turbines and gearing;nstallation for approximately 40 per cent. We can deduce for Type
The submerged range with the electrical the fIrst boat, appropriate components, ordered and XXVIW the following distribution:
installation was, at 2 knots, exactly the same as already in production for Type XVIII, were to be Bridge 990shp= 15%
that of Type VIIC. At higher submerged speeds. used (installations suffIcient for five shafts, i.e., for Boat's hull 5,6l0shp= 85%
however, the better submerged profile of the five boats of Type XXVIW). Similarly, from the Total 6,600shp= 100%
projected design was more effIcient. It was abandoned installations for Type XVII, approxi- Propulsion performance for the 1,150·ton boat with
intended that the electric, submerged top speed of mately seven engines were available, which could be anti-aircraft armament, to provide 25 knots:
10.5 knots could be maintained for 1 Yz hours. The made ready in a very short time. It would therefore Boat's hull 5,610 (I,m) % =7,620shp
battery installation was similar to that in Type be perfectly possible, using available parts, to Bridge (40%) =3,050shp
XXIII. As far as possible, engines, technical initiate a preliminary series of approximately 12 Total 1O,670shp
apparatus and installations intended for this design boats before the inception of series production, if As only 6,600shp are available. however, we arrive
were ones that had already been well tested or were only the work capacity of two yards could be made at a boat's speed for the 1,150-ton boat with anti-
in series production for other U-boat types. It was available. If an immediate start could be made with aircraft towers as follows:
intended to use the turbine installation developing these boats (early 1944), completion of them could V= 25 3 ..) I~:~n = 21.3 knots
7,500hp that had been designed for Type XVIII take place in the course of that year. There is no '9. Over and above all this, it must be assumed in
and was in the course of construction. Only in cases doubt, however, that this opinion was totally the light of the war situation, that opportunities for
where available items of equipment had not unrealistic - at this time, the design was far from surface operations will become fewer and fewer,
been used (e.g., the Lysholm compressor) was new fInished. especially in the intended sphere of operations, i.e.,
equipment employed. By using the MWM engine, In contrast to Project XVIIA, it was intended to the Mediterranean and the North Atlantic.'
an installation similar in all essential parts to the equip Type XXVIW with forward retractable On 17 February 1944, an inter-offIce discussion
engine and constructional components of Type hydroplanes, a consequence of the poor results was held corrcerning the new Walter Type XXVI:
XXIII could be used, which is why this engine was experienced with the Walter test boats U792 and under consideration were the competing designs,
subsequently selected. U794, which did not have forward hydroplanes. XXVIB and XXVIW. On 22 February 1944, both
Everything had therefore been done in the However, with Type XXVIW, the decision not to versions were presented to Ddnitz at his head-
planning stage to make the timetable and building have anti-aircraft armament was adhered to. As it quarters at Koralle near Bernau, together with two
time as short as possible for this new U-boat type. was feared that objections on this score would be electro-boat versions of Type XXVI, in order that

clarification could be made concerning a successor 1945,200 boats could be built and kept at tills level 'K' OffIce was of the opinion that it could soon
to Type XXI. The electro-boat designs had, in place by the building of an appropriate number of follow- make a proposal for relieving GW of some of it!
of a Walter-installation, a strengthened electric up boats. However, this would almost certainly work-load. occasioned by the desire of Departmenl
installation with three half-batteries and the large mean the restricting of activities of other sections 2 of the Chief of Naval War Staff to retain Typ
Type XXI electric motor. Design XXVIE , (lBG- of the armed forces and, in my opinion. a XVIII by combining Types XIV and XX into a
Oelfken) would have the side torpedo tubes. which recommendation should be made that the OKM Type XXB. This would involve an attempt to com
took up much shipbuilding time, replaced by four request the GB Chern to initiate the construction of to terms with the danger from increased air
tern tubes, which would be grouped around the a 100,000-ton works to be constructed by the end of observation in the Atlantic, by doubling thl'
boat's screw; Supreme Naval Command-design 1946. This would mean that the construction battery capacity and consequently the submerged
XXV IE z was related in shape and armament to programme 'could later be increased still further. range. If the displacement of Type XX were to bl:
Type XXVI B. However, both these designs from a 2. Military Value of a High Submerged Speed. As retained. additional batteries would have to be
performance point of view had little in common an argument for this extensive undertaking, I installed at the expense of the exterior loadiny
with either the Walter design or the electro-boat should like to stress once again that the detection facilities. or at the expense of interior loading space
Type XXI. Dbnitz consequently decided that Type battle can only be won by our boats possessing a The only alternative to these was a considerabl
XXV IE was inferior to Type XXI. 'The Walter high cruising speed. I am convinced that radar increase in displacement. which was not at all
V-boat of Type XXVI is to be considered as urgent detection from the air can be nullifIed if we use the desirable. These projects were worked on under th
and must be built as long as Aurol is available.' A schnorkel and protect it from reflection in all radio designation XXB and XXB2: the fust of thesl'
choice between XXVIB with anti-aircraft wave ranges. And I am just as equally convinced would have an additional trough under the pressur
armament, or XXVIW without it, would be made in that detection from ship to ship can only be hull to accommodate additional batteries; in the
eight days. nullified by higher submerged speeds. A completely second. dry storage accommodation would have to
However, the decision was delayed longer than black, noiseless V-boat is, to be sure, safe against be converted to serve as a battery compartment.
that_ During the period of indecision. an most detection devices. but this means. from a Further design changes in Type XX made Il
acknowledgement was made of the failure to tactical point of view, the boat is also somewhat possible for the outer tanks to be used when
achieve satisfactory results by increasing the anti- immobile. The detection war. therefore. has to be necessary. for the transport of fuel-oil or rubber.
aircraft armament of old V-boats. Quite apart from fought on a different level, as has been done already which would enable it to be used as a supply vessel
this, the schnorkel made it possible for boats to with, for example, the schnorkel. The way to A discussion that followed on 18 October 1943.
remain under the surface even when cruising. This accomplish this is by high speed. Only a turbine between 'K' Office, the Armaments OffIces and th
meant that the question of anti-aircraft armament installation can supply this, and the requirement Chief of Naval War Staff. decided that tht
for a new V-boat type was by no means as for a relatively lengthy submerged cruising combined Type XXB was not to be given seriou
signifIcant as it had been in the autumn of 1943. On performance will only be fulfilled if one uses the consideration. Department 2 was foremost in
28 March 1944. a fmal decision was made by the right kind of fuellAurolj; not oxygen in gaseous or rejecting it as a supply V-boat. Effectively then, .
upreme Commander-in-Chief of the Navy in liquid form. I am therefore completely convinced combination of Type XIV and XX had been
favour of large series construction of Type that the path I am following is the correct one since thwarted. Apparently Type XIV had to be kept In
XXVIW. dependent on K II V confuming the 1, now 10 years ago, for example tested practically being. In order to make it more suitable for thf
suitability for operational use of the new Walter- the closed-cycle and abandoned it on the grounds of changed nature of operational requirements, on II
installation. too great complexity and too little performance. November 1943, 'K' OffIce presented an enlarged
The manufacture of the Aurol is certainly more version, XIVB, of 1,895m 3 volume, and a length of
Appendix: Communication from Walter to Dbnitz diffIcult than that of oxygen. However, these 70.9m, which. with a battery loading time of 5.f1
on the position with regard to Walter V-boats. difficulties do not have to be faced in the bases or hours. would have a considerably increased
on board ship. but in the interior of the country. submerged range of 90 nautical miles at 4 knots. A
'To: The Commander-in-Chief of the Navy, Moreover, I am of the opinion that the goal set with Type XXB, tills was to be achieved by an
Grossadmiral Dbnitz. initially - that of constructing a 30-knot V-boat - additional battery in a pressure-tight trough under
Berlin 20th February 1944 (;an only be realized by continuing along the path the pressure hull. It was intended to alter the last Ii
W/Rb we have initiated in a foreseeable period of time. boats of Type XIV to be built in 1945 accordingly
Registered Letter I remain with friendly greetings On 19 November 1943, a fmal decision was taken to
RM 1l00-Secret Command Yours truly, Walter.' carryon building Types XIV and XX for the tim\'
Headquarters Matter being. On 14 December 1943, appropriate buildiny
B.No.498/44 U-tanker alternatives contracts were awarded to GW for 11 DWK-boat
Dear Grossadmiral, As the intended construction of 30 special of Type XIV, and for the proposed 30 boats 01
In this letter I must refer to various problems of transport V-boats of Type XX cla~hed with both Type XX.
the situation regarding underwater high-speed the construction of Type XXI I I at DW in The increasingly diffIcult problem of which
boats. Finkenwerder and the section construction of Type armaments to provide, and the preference given to
1. The Aurol IHzOzJ Position. Shortly. production XXI at the Vegesack Shipyard, and since transport the Type XXI construction meant, however, thal
will amount to approximately 20,000 tons per year. V-boats could not be dispensed with, a discussion further constructional delays occurred in thesl"
3 large works are under construction. which, took place at the Main Committee on 8 October supply and transport V-boats. The first two Typl'
together with those currently in use, will supply by 1943, at which it was resolved to move the XX boats were laid down at GW at the beginning of
the end of 1945 a total amount of approximately construction of Type XX to GW in Kiel, which March 1944. Completion was calculated for 10 April
84.000 tons per year, if the works are fmished should additionally take over the Type XIV supply 1945 and 22 May 1945. The last Type XX boal
according to programme_ At the moment. supplies V-boat commissions from DWK, the construction were to be delivered early in 1947. From March
amount to approximately 10,000 tons. If the Navy of which had not been commenced. It was 1944. therefore, the Clllef of Naval War Staff took
were to demand for its needs from the end of 1945 a estimated that this alteration of contracts would up the suggestions of the 'K' OffIce that Type XX
total production of 60.000 tons per year and indeed involve a delay of only five weeks, provided GW did boats should be replaced as soon as possible by
receives them. if one leaves out of reckoning other not have to take on the two large Walter V-boats of converting Type XXI boats for transport and
naval requirements (torpedoes. tests). then on 100 Type XVI II from DWK. But the necessity of supply purposes.
tons of Aurol per boat. 500 complete operations taking on the urgent and diffIcult Type XV III When it became clear in May 1944 that a furthl'r
could be carried out in a year. In other words, construction would inevitably mean a building delay of three months would occur in lhf
according to my estimations. by roughly the end of delay of eight months from the fIrst Type XX boat. construction of Type XX. it was decidl'd

ummarily, on 27 May 1944, to cancel the pressing underwater operations for which Type bow torpedo tubes to serve as defensive armament
rllnstruction plan for Type XIV and XX boats. XIV was less suitable. This modified type. against U-boat hunters. The working-out of thi
Only 3 Type XX boats, U1701-U1703, the delivery designated Type XXID2, was now to have the version, Project XXIE2, took account also of th
III which was anticipated now at the end of 1945, normal Type XXI bridge and two bow torpedo newly-changed requirements for carrying-qualiti
w('re to be constructed for the transportation of tubes positioned one above the other on the port of Type XX, both in total capacity and in th
\urol to Norway for Walter-boats. These were to side as defensive armament. The enlarged outer composition of this capacity. As against Type XX,
furry 600 tons of Aurol and 100 tons of other ship of Type XXID or XXID2 meant that it was the rubber cargo was proportionately reduced.
upplies. Conversion of these boats was to be not possible to use sections from the Type XXI while other cargo items were correspondingly
romplete by 1 October 1944. A total of 400,000 series production. This involved a considerable increased. The displacement of this large boat wa
work hours per boat was calculated. However, the constructional effort for a relatively small series - 2,809 tons. which exceeded that of Type XX.
worsening war situation meant that the which was undesirable with the war situation as it As had been remarked with Type XXID, the u
('onstruction made no headway. was at that time. The goal was a supply U-boat of Type XXI sections was not possible because of
During the discussion that took place on 8 based on Type XXI. with as few changes as the considerably changed outer ship, as long as th
ovember 1943 concerning the continued building possible in the normal constructional components demand for the Type XX rubber cargo of 450 ton
of Type XIV. two alternatives to Type XIVB were of this type. The requirement that it should be able was retained. However, if the transport capacit
uggested by the 'K' Office: a larger Project XXIC, to carry the same amount of supplies as Type XIV were reduced, especially with regard to rubber. a
developed from Type XXI, which would provide a had been dropped; clearly it was not going to be solution was possible using the normal Type XXI
upply U-boat by removing the comprehensive possible to achieve both of these. I n order to outer ship; a version based on this was designated
lorpedo armament of eighteen torpedo tubes, and provide adequate capacity without changing the Type XXIT. To be sure. complete interchange-
by reducing the batteries by a half; and of providing outer ship of Type XXI, as had been proposed in ability of Type XXI sections for operational or
a U-tanker with a capacity equal to the Type XIV the use of Type XXIC as a supply vessel, the transport U-boats could not be achieved
by enlarging the outer ship of a normal Type XXI battery system was reduced to three half-batteries. completely. but one was getting nearer the goal
and removing its torpedo armament. The second However, in this design XXI V, there was no and. in effect. a decision on the use of sections could
proposal concerned a type designated XXID. In escaping an altered deck, as the deck shape of Type be deferred to a later stage of construction. It wa
lhis, the pressure hull. the propulsion unit and a XXI would made deck operations impossible even calculated that the decision as to whether a boat
large part of the installations of Type XX I would be in light seas. Moreover. room had to be provided for should be completed as an operational or as a cargo
retained. The following alterations, however, were connecting tubes and oil-transfer equipment. while U-boat would have to be made seven months befor
required: towing hooks and hawse-holes were also necessary. delivery of the boat. The necessary transport
1. Removal of the torpedo armament and the However, there was no implementation of the compartment would be provided by dispensing with
fllting-out of the bow compartment with an construction of these projects, as the military the following installations of Type XXI:
enlarged workshop (and other items), which would situation of 1944 hardly permitted the idea of 1. After part of crew compartment, port and
not then be needed in the stern compartment. supplying at sea and the Type XXI boats, on tar board - Cargo Compartment I.
2. Enlargement of the trimming tanks to be account of their great range. were regarded as more 2. Lower battery compartment, midships and
accomplished by dispensing with torpedo tanks. or less indispensable. Closer working-out of the forward - Cargo Compartments II and III.
3. Alteration to the compensating units. designs, therefore. was not proceeded with. 3. Upper battery compartment, forward - Cargo
4. A widening of the upper deck and installations Compartment IV.
necessary for transferring oil. U-transport alternatives 4. Torpedo tank. starboard - Cargo Compartment
5. Additional accommodation for oil-transfer Parallel with the design of U-tanker XXID, in the V.
pumps, including necessary tubing in the auxiliary winter of 1943/44, consideration was given to the 5. Torpedo storage compartment (bow compart-
engine compartment. To accommodate these. the possibilities of providing a transport U-boat based ment) - Cargo Compartment VI.
compressed-air bottles, stored there, to be moved on Type XXI. The tasks such a boat would carry The following loading suggestions were intended
elsewhere. out envisaged a vessel with the same overall for a return journey.
6. Enlargement of the refrigerated compartment to pressure hull as Type XXI, but without torpedo A: 125 tons of rubber.
contain provisions intended for supplying. armament, and with the same payload as Type XX. 12 tons of Molybdenum concentrate.
7. A new anti-aircraft bridge in place of the Type These conditions were not easily to be achieved, as 67 tons of tin in ingots.
XXI bridge. so that an adequate anti-aircraft the pressure hull of Type XXI was too heavy for a 67 tons of tungsten concentrate.
armament would be available in the event of transport U-boat with these qualities. and it would 4 tons general cargo.
unexpected aircraft attacks during supply also be necessary to have a large outer ship to 275 tons total
operations. 3.7cm guns would be carried in twin accommodate the cargo. To cope with this weight. B: 153 tons of rubber (max. rubber load!).
mountings on a raised platform forward and aft of pressure-tight outer tanks would have to be 122 tons of tin. tungsten and Molybdenum
the bridge. With two 2cm twin M38 provided on the provided. Additionally. the following significant concentrate.
bridge. Additionally, an open bridge was seen as modifications to the Type XXI design would be 275 tons total
necessary in the interests of manoeuvring when necessary: Both these suggestions envisaged using th
supplying. 1. The use of the bow compartment as a dry ballast compartments beneath cargo compart-
8. The addition of a ballast keel. storage compartment with a large loading-hatch, as ments II, II I and IV for storage of the tin on th
9. The incorporation of a pressure-tight fuel bunker a replacement for the existing small torpedo hatch. return passage, while reflOed steel could be carried
aft, in the interests of trimming compensation on 2. Enlargement of the trimming tanks. accom- beneath them when outward bound. Finally, as an
the homeward passage, when conditions of loading plished by dispensing with the torpedo tanks. improvized measure, a Type XXI U-boat with
might be unfavourable. 3. Changes to the compensating components. normal batteries was planned. to be used for
Later, this Project XXID received a modification 4. An open anti-aircraft bridge as in Type XXID, transport purposes and equipped to carry 95 ton
in the light of changed operational demands. On 27 because it was anticipated that a large part of a of cargo in the interior of the boat and 65 tons of
March 1944, the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of long journey to East Asia would be carried out on cargo in the keel.
the Navy ordered that certain U-boat types should the surface. In the autumn of 1944. a decision was to be mad
receive oil supplies only when submerged. This 5. Additional anchor installation. about the placing of contracts for appropriat
meant that the large anti-aircraft bridge was This project was designated Type XXIE. Parallel transport U-boats. but this was deferred in view of
unnecessary. Furthermore. Type XXID was now to with the modification of Type XXID, Type XXIE the vicissitudes of the war. It was not, in fact
be ready as soon as possible in order to carry out would be given the Type XXI bridge and the two subsequently taken.
THE CHANGE TO TYPE XXI AND XXlll CONSTRUCTION 239

CONSTRUCTION
IN THE TWILIGHT
OF DEFEAT
BOTTLENECKS, At the majority of the section yards, however, the extent of additional tasks existing at this time
cause of delays in production was the tardy arrival cannot be foreseen, delivery dates cannot be made
SHORTAGES AND AIR of crude sections and, to some extent, their for the time being; the overall construction
inadequate construction. In a report from KMW, planning that stems from the previously-notified
RAIDS Wilhelms haven, of 25 January 1944, the delayed work schedule issued by IBG Blankenburg is not a
section construction at this yard was discussed in workable proposition, not only through changes
The Type XXI programme these terms: of building that become necessary for various
The implementation of completely new production 'Order-planning of the IBG in Halberstadt had components, but equally through additional work
methods posed great problems for yards concerned set the following dates for delivery of the first that has to be carried out. Reference is made here
with U-boat construction. Both the Navy and yard sections for building component 2 at the yard: only to problems existing with the pressure-test,
management feared that great diffIculties would 0.1 Eilers, Hannover 23.12.1943 when, on account of late receipt of casings, this has
arise during the initial stages, and that section 0.2 Gutehoffnungshutte 24.12.1943 to be carried out after completion of the inner
construction would lead to a lengthening of other 0.3 Seibert Aschaffenburg 27.12.1943 construction; if leaks are found, then possibly
aspects of construction. On 1 December 1943, the As it was not absolutely clear from previous sizeable dismantling work becomes necessary.
monthly report of Armament Command at Kiel instructions whether the quoted dates were 'According to reports, it seems that, at the
stated: 'The impression exists generally that, in despatch dates from steel construction or were to direction of IBG in Bremen, a container component
spite of series production which is now to unroll, the be regarded as delivery dates at the section yards, ready for despatch from GHH Sterkrade to KMW
first months will throw up diffIculties or a non- it was necessary at the yard to make certain Wilhelmshaven (according to the delivery note of 30
achievement of expected production fIgures .... A changes in work planning in both ship construction December 1943) was diverted to Danzig. At all
factory manufacturing accessories has already halls in such a way that work on the sections could events, no pressure hull has been received by us by
reported that, apart from drawings, materials are begin on 23.12.1943. By this date, the rearrange- 25.1.1944, only certain casing components from
not so readily forthcoming.' In the case of the first ment of work tasks in ship construction Hall 3, Seibert Aschaffenburg which came by rail ....
boats, therefore, 'K' Office suggested that section where sectional construction was to start first, were 'A report will be made on delivery dates once
yards be by-passed and the boats be regarded as so far advanced that building construction could parts have actually reached us, when the position
prototypes to be built entirely by the assembly have begun according to plan. However, the first with regard to construction can be ascertained. We
yards. But this was not to be: Merker carried crude sections from the firms of G HH Sterkrade also point out, in addition, that inspection of parts
through his plan, and an immediate start on section and Seibert Aschaffenburg were not ready for a t steel construction firms has allowed differences
construction was made. despatch until 4.1 and 5.1, and then not in a state of of up to 35mm against those called for in drawings,
It soon became evident that, despite the very completion. From the firm of Eilers Hannover, no but, originally, a ± 2mm tolerance was allowed to
greatest efforts, the short delivery times could not construction component was ready for acceptance the steel construction firms. The additional work
be met. In addition to bottlenecks in the during January. will have to be carried out by the section yards, for
construction of accessories, and in other areas, 'In a letter dated 3.1.1944, the Building Planning the assembly yards B&V and Deschimag refuse to
delays occasioned by damage through air attack Department of IBG at Blankenburg had informed accept containers that exceed these tolerances.'
disrupted considerably the commencement of the yard of changes to the upper deck, and the A similar picture was presented by DW in
fabrication. In western Germany, DWK wa modifIcation that this necessitated in the upper Hamburg- Finkenwerder:
especially affected. This yard was scheduled to casings. This change meant that the delivery of the 'By 31.1.1944, DW had received only one each of
complete the bow sections of the first two Type casings was delayed to the extent that casings for the 7 crude sections III and 7 VI, one called for by
XXI boats by 20 February 1944, using the available the first section did not arrive at the section yard at the timetable: on 29.1.1944, one crude section III
pressure bulkheads of Type XVIII. Preparatory the same time as the rest of the section. arrived from Gollnow from which various casings
work, however, was interrupted when workshops Consequently it was necessary, in the case of the were missing, and one crude section VI on 11.1.1944
were destroyed during an air raid on 13 December first sections, that completion of the interior had to from the Dortmunder Union, which was incomplete
1943, and further air raids on 4 and 5 January 1944 be carried out before attachment of the casings. in respect of casings, drilled parts and various other
meant that section construction could not be 'I t can therefore be stated in the light of the constructional components. On 31.1.1944, a further
started in January and February 1944. At an HAS diffIculties and changes of plan that have been crude section VI arrived from the MAN
meeting on 7 February, it was resolved that all mentioned, that the originally determined delivery Motorenwerk Hamburg, on which additional work
section building, which was carried out in one place dates to the assembly yards (3 items in February, 7 had to be carried out because of unsatisfactory
only for the entire western area, would take place in items in March) will not be met, as IBG in measurements. This additional work took the yard
shelters, but DWK would be unable to move its Blankenburg has apportioned 9 weeks for the almost the whole month of February.
section construction into a bunker before the completion of section 2 and this has now been 'The constructional planning called for thl'
autumn of 1944. reduced to 8 weeks at the yard. Moreover, as the completion of 8 sections of III and 8 of VI for the
240 CONSTRUCTION IN THE TWILIGHT OF DEFEAT

month of April. But up to 1.3.1944 only one crude U3501 was not delivered to the Navy until 11 July, Defects caused by the pressure of delivery dates
ection III was delivered. By this date, and in total, and was not put into service until 29 July 1944. The showed themselves during the trials of the fIrst
only 5 crude sections had been received instead of first completed Type XXI boat was B&V's U2501, boats, and delayed systematic testing and training.
the stipulated 26.' which was delivered on 15 June, and entered service After commissioning, U2501 had to go back to the
Commencement of the series was also consider- on 28 June 1944! yard for ten days at the beginning of July 1944 so
ably hampered by the bomb damage sustained by The directors of the other two assembly yards, that various faults could be rectifIed, all stemming
MAN and SSW, the most important suppliers of B&V and AG Weser, had refused to allow their first from inadequate work on section 2 (entry of sea
main engines and motors, in February 1944. An boats to be launched in such an incomplete water into the lubrication system of the gearing and
HAS note dated 10 March stated: condition merely in the interests of simulating a electric motors!). Furthermore, unsatisfactory
'As a consequence of delays in completion of delivery date that simply could not be achieved. work on the new and unfamiliar installations
V-boat sections and interruptions caused by enemy Thus were born the first, weighty, partly political caused a series of breakdowns that delayed training
action in the production of electric motors and differences between the yard directorates and procedures. It had not been taken into
diesel engines, the Navy will have to accept that Merker's HAS, which were to lead later to the consideration that an electric motor running in
only 63 U-boats of Type XXI will be ready for introduction of Konteradmiral Karl Topp as Head reverse would drive the diesel engine in the same
delivery by the end of August 1944.... Bombing of the Ship Construction Commission, whom way, and the latter would then suck water in
has caused much damage to electric motors at SSW Donitz intended as 'moderator' to keep a balance through the open exhaust-gas closures and through
and this can only partly be made good by affiliated between Loilposed opinions; he succeeded in calming the submerged exhaust! Thus, in the case of three
works in Niirnberg and Vienna. . . . Especially ruffled feelings, but tensions remained. When series boats, the unrush of water into the cylinders
damaging was the attack on MAN; in this, 80 per production got under way, delivery quotas began to severely damaged the propulsion unit.
cent of the test-beds were destroyed and 11 climb, but remained well below the level called for in Technical teething troubles further delayed the
completed diesel engines so considerably damaged initial planning. In fact, delivery quotas never programme. In an attempt to achieve the utmost
and burned that it will be necessary to dismantle reached any of the planned levels, even when these technical perfection in the design of the new boats,
them completely and overhaul them.' were reduced from time to time. complicated measures were developed (a hydraulic
By the end of March 1944, most of the sections
for the first boats were ready at the various
assembly yards, but sections 2 and 7 did not arrive
at Deschimag until the beginning of April. Diesel
engines for the first boats were not ready for
despatch until 10 April, which meant that the
maintaining of the April delivery was out of the
question, and would not be achieved even for
slipway launching. At Schichau of Danzig, sections
for the first boat were delivered from outside
sources on 20 March as planned, but with dummy
items built in to replace fittings that were not yet
available. Here, too, through late delivery of diesel
engines, assembly work could not begin until the
beginning of April - although, for prestige reasons,
Schichau's first boat, U3501, was put into the water
as early as 19 April 1944, one day before Hitler's
birthday. However, the boat was by no means
complete, and was not self-buoyant. Open parts of
the hull were sealed with wooden closures, and it
was necessary to tow the boat immediately into a
floating dock. The consequence of this over-hasty
launching was a lengthy time spent at a yard berth.
Right: Buoyancy tanks being installed in U2501 after launching,

May 1944.
CONSTRUCTION IN THE TWILIGHT OF DEFEAT 241

system for all control systems, movement of are connected in series, the charging of the weakest
periscopes, anti-aircraft armament, and torpedo of them can only take place when the strongest
hatches) which could not be carried out with the battery is fully charged: this meant that a battery
building experience available, or which did not would stay only half-charged and could not be used
measure up to operational requirements. Moreover, effectively when the main engines were running.
not enough thought had gone into the disposition of Despite representations to the BdU, the fear of
various installations and auxiliary engines in terms delaying delivery schedules prevented any change.
of ducts, and various other items had been lacking ot until AG Weser's fIrst boat, U3001, had
in the wooden model, so that constructional demonstrated this shortcoming in drastic degree at
decisions concerning the auxiliary engines had UAK, Kiel, was this latter body able to push
often been taken on inexact or even incorrect through changes in this and other urgent matters.
presumptions Ifor example, the layout of the almost Magnetic measurements showed that, when
inaccessible Junkers compressor). travelling at maximum speed, an extra magnetic
In order to give the relatively small six-cylinder field was set up by the boat through the battery
diesel engines as high a performance as possible, an lead to the main engines, which passed along one
especially powerful, supercharging system had side of the boat and back along the other. The
been developed. Initial tests, however, showed that disposition of the lead had to be changed
the supercharger did not provide any increase in immediately, to minimize danger from magnetic
performance during schnorkel travel. As surfaced mines. In order that a system of clear commands
performance was of secondary importance at this might be maintained in the event of a power failure,
time, the supercharger was not installed in later Type XXI had a built-in 'Telekin' (a wire connection
boats, and valuable planning and construction work running through tubing, similar to a Bowden cable).
were thus wasted. Battery ventilators proved to be Many diffIculties were experienced with this
superfluous and, once again, were either dismantled installation, because of the curvatures resulting
or were no longer incorporated. It was found that from section construction.
the two compartment ventilators sufhced, and the The hydrogen £lIter did not function properly
exhaustion of battery air during schnorkel because, despite an air drying device, the dampness
travelling could be accomplished via the diesels. of air reduced the catalytic effect of the platinum-
The schnorkel was not envisaged until after the asbestos. This caused an explosion of oxy-hydrogen
designing of the Type XVIII had been completed. gas in U3002, during operational group training,
In order that the shape of the boat should not be when, after the failure of the battery ventilator,
altered, an extensible schnorkel was planned, the battery exhaust air, which was no longer being
design of which turned out to be unsatisfactory. ftltered, reached the battery turbo-ventilator. Gas
The chief disadvantages were inadequate would have accumulated here through weaknesses
watertightness, considerable noise from the and been ignited by the commutator. Two further
compressed-air motor when the schnorkel was battery explosions were caused by over-fIlling the
being extended, high resistance set up by the accumulator cells after full charging. During
circular cross-section of the mast and considerable subsequent recharging, the battery gases could not
oscillations in the higher speed ranges. The be adequately ventilated because of their high acid
requirement for a schnorkel speed of 10-12 knots content.
could not be obtained with this type and, towards It was inevitable that such problems would occur,
the end of the war, it was suggested that the when, in order to meet delivery dates, no
schnorkel be of the hinged type (as in Type prototypes had been constructed, but the IBG was
XXVIW), and be positioned at the after edge of the of the opinion that the fIrst 6 boats from each yard
conning-tower superstructure, in place of the would serve only as training boats, and that by the
aftermost AA turret. time that the seventh boat was commissioned most
The bilge piping had too many bends, which of the diffIculties would have been surmounted. The
allowed air pockets to form, and valves and suction Chief of Naval War Staff, on the other hand,
heads were, to some extent, diffIcult to operate and regarded it as vital to have immediate delivery of
were completely inaccessible. Operating the operationally-sound boats of this new type.
centrifugal pumps required a £ertain amount of However, from the very beginning of the design
skill: a closed pressure valve was opened until all air planning, no opportunity had been taken to furnish
had been withdrawn, and was then opened further, the IBG with operationally-experienced engineers.
but just enough so as not to break the ftlament of Not until early 1944 were technical crews found for
water. At fIrst, operators restricted themselves to the first 3 boats. At the request of the Commander-
removing air pockets, but in later boats the bilge in-Chief, U-Boats, Kapitiinleutnant (Engineer)
installation was redesigned in the light of experience. Fuchslocher went to Blankenburg as First
The design had provided for the three port or Operational OffIcer. He arrived in Bremen on 7
starboard sectional batteries to be charged only in February 1944, in order to prepare constructional
series. As the boat's main supply was fed at 120 instructions for U3001. As no overall plans were
volts, the auxiliary engines and other items that available at the yard or at KLA, he occupied
used electricity took their supply equally from the himself initially in preparing at the IBG a
various sectional batteries. However, operational erviceable description of Type XXI from the
usage gave rise to the fear that by, say, above- constructional drawings available there and
average use of a bilge pump in dealing with an entry
of water, one battery might be exhausted more
quickly than the others. However, when batteries Right: Launching of a Type XXI at AG Weser.

£vZ .LV3d3G .'10 .LHDI'lIM.L 3H.L NI NOI.LJmI.LS OJ
.1,\1333030 .LHDI1[M.L 3H.L NI NOI.LJml.LSNOJ ppC;
/
L_ _
Section assembly of Type XXIII's at DW, Hamburg, in June 1944. Above: A bow section being manoeuvred into position on
the building-slips. Left: Assembly in progress on U2324-U2326.
through questioning the engineers who had worked delay of six weeks had to be expected in the
on the design. Frequently, then~ was literally no-one timetable of the Type XXIII series construction.
available with the requisite knowledge - in the On 10 February, at a further conference, the
interests of secrecy, either background information delivery date for the frrst Type XXI1I boat was set
or detailed instructions were missing. Many for the end of March 1944 - but, during an
sections of the wooden model had items built-in armament discussion on 23 February, it became
without anyone knowing why or by whom! For clear that even this date would not be met, and that
example: compressed-air bottles, which required no the delay would amount to eight weeks. The frrst
attention, were positioned where they were easy to boat from foreign yards would not be delivered
get at, while important auxiliary engines were sited before August 1944. A special bottleneck was
where access was diffIcult. caused by the schnorkel installation of Type
In April 1944, Kiipitanleutnant Fuchslocher XXIII, so that the eighteenth boat was the frrst to
spoke to the Commanding Admiral of U-Boats, von have the complete installation, and the earlier boats
Friedeburg, and Konteradmiral (Engineer) Thedsen received their installations during the course of
concerning the new U-boat type, and indicated further work.
technical problems that could be anticipated. Meanwhile, weight checks revealed that the
However, because production was beginning and addition of various installations had rendered the
delivery dates had been fIXed down to the day and boat too heavy and robbed her of her buoyancy. On
hour, it was decided that no changes could be 23 February 1944, it was decided to rectify this
instigated until after the frrst boats had been normally grave fault by the insertion of a 2.2m-long
handed over to UAK, Kie!. portion (section 3a or 'Oelfken-sectionl Only
section construction made possible such a change
The Type XXIII programme without further considerable delays. Through this
While the first two sets of electric motors for Type lengthening of the boat, the narrow bow
XXIII were delivered by AEG, punctually in compartment was usefully enlarged and, beneath it,
January 1944 despite bomb damage, in other areas an additional storage compartment was acquired. A
of production, especially that of fIttings and steel further enlargement by 1.3m would have been
construction, delivery diffIculties and bottlenecks useful in the bow compartment to accommodate
made themselves felt. In an armament discussion of interior loading of the torpedo tubes, and two
26 January 1944, Merker acknowledged that a reserve torpedoes could have then been carried;

however, as this would have involved further the proposed series construction could be carried
design changes and, therefore, further delays, the Type XXVIW: Construction out as economically as possible. As with Type XXI.
suggestion was turned down by the Ship method for Hull Section 4, series production was to be carried out on three
Construction Commission. The complicated
exterior loading of tubes. accompanied by a ,,; ",...-- '.- - --- 7'
levels: crude section construction at the steel
construction organizations; section construction at
necessary trimming of the boat. remained. J'- Casing 3, pon experienced U-boat yards; and, fmally, assembly at
,f: _ _~
Assembly of the fust Type XXI II boat, U2321,
(
,. ~.............. and starboard a large yard commanding the necessary skills. The
began at DW Hamburg-Finkenwerder on 10 March, Pressure hull total production should be concentrated in the
and she was launched on 17 April. Like the fust I, "- - ;~ Living-quarters Danzig area and the Type XXI series construction
Type XXI boat launched at Danzig at the same ~--;- was to be discontinued there. Schichau of Danzig
time, U2321 required a lengthy period of further Section 41 Tanks was proposed for the assembly yard and received a
work in dock. and clearly the launching dates were Accumulator contract for 100 Type XXVI U-boats on 26 May
~
adhered to for prestige reasons rather than because compartment 1944. (Almost certainly, this decision was
Casing 2, influenced by the fact that there was less danger
the boats were structurally ready. U2321 was not
commissioned until 12 June 1944 (a week after the _ '. _ ~ starboard from air attack in this part of the country.) On 3
~ ; [ Casing 1. port May 1944, an initial production plan for Type
Allies had invaded France), but the delivered Type and starboard
XXIII boats gave less trouble than their large Type XXVI, commencing March 1945, was issued:
~
XXI sisters. .. ~a~o~d F~ March:
April:
2
'·'BUI~~
The Type XXVI programme
When, on 28 March 1944. the Supreme C-in-C of the
avy decided in favour of the new Walter Type
~~
.
•... _• . . . . . .
;~:_ . ,......
Supporting Frames
bulkhead Casing 2,
May:
June:
2
4
July: 8
port
XXVIW, the problem was that of getting the new August: 10
Casing 2, starboard
type into service as soon as possible, and it was \- - J September: 10
thought that construction could be got off to a ~ ~
October: 10
quick start by using as many components as Edge pl;'e - ovember: 10
possible from Types XVll and XVlll - which had F~ December: 10
been scrapped in the meantime - and components Total 1945: 66
from current production jobs. However, rather \- In Berlin on 17 May 1944, Speer, Donitz, Merker
excessive optimism was shown in this, because Casing 1, starboard and Waas discussed the new Type XXVI. It
most of the corresponding installations in Type transpired that the equipment for the side torpedo
Bridge construction
r.[1
XVIII were only theoretical. While 'K' OffIce tubes could not be delivered before January 1945,
calculated that the fust complete boat would be of Type XXVIW, but HAS wanted delivery in November 1944 in
ready by the middle of 1945, representatives of the
Armaments Ministry thought that February 1945 .'
I;
I!
r
• I order to facilitate the start of series production in
May 1945. It was also required that steel
Bridge deck
was a possible date. \ 1 construction commence in November 1944, and
During an armament discussion on 22 March lcasin g 1·~ . Casing 2 . - Casing 3· Upper drawings would have to be ready at IBG as early as
1944, the Navy stated its Aurol requirement for ---4= ==1 \-. I deck July 1944.
this programme: 2,000 tons per month J • j
Upper edge of the pressure hull
The IBG's initial work planning of 24 May 1944
immediately, 3,500 tons per month by the end of envisaged eight weeks for steel construction, six
1944 and 7,000 tons per month by the end of 1945, weeks for the construction of sections and seven
which would allow 70 operations, each using 100
tons of Aurol. At this time, lkg of this fuel cost 2
marks, so that a single operation would cost
200,000 marks. The yearly output of the works at
-~~
S upport 1
o
Support 2
(periscope Jack)
l J -)
Support 3
weeks per boat for assembly. According to
planning, the prototype, U4501, was to be delivered
on 15 March 1945. To accomplish this, steel fIrms
should commence their work on 16 September 1944,
Bad Lauterberg amounted to only 12,000 tons, of construction of sections should begin on 10
which a sizeable portion had to be delivered to the attacks. It should be as noiseless as possible in all December, and assembly should start on 25
Luftwaffe. An additional works in Rhumspringe speed ranges. It would be ideal if it could switch January 1945. Meanwhile, production planning for
near Bad Lauterberg would be able to deliver quickly from diesel to turbine. The battery for the the series was raised to 12 boats per month from
25,000 tons per year, but this was still in the course schnorkel should be as quiet as possible. Electric September 1945, and this now gave a total of 74
of construction. As a further measure, two more motor slow silent running to exceed 3 knots, electric boats for 1945. The achievement of these dates
works were planned in Heidebreck and Walden berg cruising submerged 6 knots and surface travel on required principally that construction drawings bl'
in Upper Silesia, each of which was to produce diesels 12 knots. The bridge should have positions ready punctually, and these, for the fust time in
yearly 30.000 tons of HzO z based on the for a 4-man lookout and provision made for it to be German ship construction, were being prepared
Antrachinon process, which had been developed by covered at will by a 'cheese-dish cover'. It should be according to the section page system used by steel
IG-Farben. However the suitability for U-boat possible to carry out mine operations and construction in the interior of the country. (In thl~
purposes of fuel produced by this new process wa submerged oil refuelling. The boat should be able to system, drawings depict not only the object beinll'
doubtful. Indeed, it must be said that the entire remain at sea for 8 weeks. Diving depth to constructed, but also indicate clearly the step~
supply system of Aurol for submarines was on a correspond to that of Type XXI.' necessary for its fabrication.) As a construction aid
somewhat uncertain footing. At this conference, it was fmally decided to use the for the working-out of details, a full-scale model in
At a further conference on 5 April 1944, the Chief MWM RS34S diesel engine of Type XXIII, and the wood was built at Blankenberg, equipped not only
of Naval War Staff's demands regarding the new gear arrangement of Type XVIII. The design and with engines and larger installations, but also with
boat, now offIcially designated XXVI, were dealt building preparations were to be handed over to tubes and conduits. To help in this considerabh~
with. IBG, and control of these aspects were given to Dr. undertaking, Schichau sent to the IBG variou
'The boat should have good speed on the surface Fischer of that body. From the very beginning, the members of its staff who, as well as helping, could
and submerged, and be suitably equipped in equal working-out of construction details at IBG went assimilate information on various constructionlll
measure for submerged day and surfaced night hand-in-hand with construction planning, so that points.

During the following weeks, it became increas- familiarize themselves with drawings and assist in ordering details directly from the Constructional
Inl{ly clear that only Blohm & Voss of Hamburg had the fmal design. They criticized the arrangement of Department at Blankenburg. ZBP, as the
lilt' necessary experience to build the section tubing in the model, pointing out that it was authoritative service body, had only organizational
l"Ontaining the Walter-installation. On the debit suitable only for single construction methods as and distributive functions. To deal with the Walter-
Ide. though. there was the not inconsiderable used hitherto. B&V therefore suggested that. for installation, a special ordering body was set up by
Irunsport problem posed by a long. risky sea the series construction, where tubing was to be Walter's firm in Bad Oldesloe/Holstein. The
\"Oyage from Hamburg to Danzig. The fact that built-in, valves should be collected together into delivery dates for the constructional drawings
)('hichau was less exposed to air attack lost some of groups. and be assembled with their appropriate could not be adhered to. On 19 August 1944, a new
I ~ significance if one faced the fact that not a single tubing at the workshop stage. It was suggested, in disposition of section yards was made:
hoat could be assembled if delivery of sections were the interests of simplification, that the sections be Section 4: DW. Hamburg-Finkenwerder.
prevented. To concentrate the Type XXVI joined together from casing plates with flat. Section 5: Construction of the fore-ship (steel
programme in the Hamburg area seemed the only longitudinal welds. instead of using the curved- construction) KMW (Kriegsmarinewerft). Wil-
(-nsible solution. Only B&V, with their experience piece section construction of Type XXI, which helrnshaven: section construction in 'Fink II'
uf Type XXI, could be considered for assembly, and involved circular seams. In a pressure hull with a (outside department of KMW. Hamburg). At a
Type XXI construction was therefore to cease here length of approximately 40m there would be discussion between B&V and the IBG on 26 August
III the summer of 1945. A further decisive point was sections and. therefore. pressure-hull lengths of 1944, clarification was achieved concerning
Ihat the Hamburg U-boat shelters 'Elbe II' and more than 8m, which would have to be split-up into constructional details of the first 4 boats, which,
Fink II' would then be available for Type XXVI 2-3 portions. with the exception of certain bearing components,
(-ction work. In line with this. a plan was prepared Similarly, improvements were planned in the were now to be built at B&V. This meant that
fur the Supreme Naval Command on 21 July 1944; design and construction of the outer hull, as prepara'tions for the commencement of the series
details of the proposed construction of sections compared with the casing-construction of Type could be carried out more efficiently. The highest
w('re as follows. XXI. In Type XXVI. the outer ship no longer priority designation (DE) was obtained for the first
Section 1: Stern (approximately 1O.5m, 42.4 tons); completely enclosed the pressure hull. For this 3 boats. Agreement was reached that the first
DW in Box 4 in 'Fink II'. reason - and because the boat was smaller that prototype, U4501, must be ready before
S('ction 2: Propulsion installation (l3.55m, 174 Type XXI - when the sections of the outer ship commencement of section construction of the first
tnns); B&V in Box 3 in 'Fink II'. were ready (four large and two small casings), they series boats. However, B&V calculated a total
Section 3: Control room and side torpedo tubes could be welded in a simple way to the pressure hull. construction time of approximately seven months
(l1.65m. 184 tons); HowaJdt of Hamburg in 'Elbe To assist this, the transverse bulkheads had for U4501 in contrast with the IBG's initial
II'. already been built-in with the casings, and an planning, which had estimated 4 2 '3 months, which
Section 4: Bow compartment (6.8m. 66 tons); adequate space between outer shell and pressure meant that the first boat would not be delivered
KMW. WiJhelmshaven. in Box 2 in 'Fink II'. hull permitted efficient welding. until 8 May 1945. This delay stemmed from
Section 5: Bow with bow torpedo tubes In this Type XXVI. the designing of the Production Planning, who estimated too low a
(approximately 13.7m, 60 tons); DW in Box 5 in schnorkel went hand-in-hand with the designing of number of work hours (a total number of hours per
Fink II'. the boat. so that both aspects of construction could boat of only 145,200, instead of 180,000 as B&V had
The requirement for raw steel amounted to 462.4 be made compatible. The result was a streamlined. estimated). It was further established that to reach
tons per boat, i.e., 46.240 tons for the complete sheathed. folding schnorkel, positioned at the after a monthly delivery quota of 12 items, one box of the
eries. Steel construction for the first four boa ts edge of the bridge superstructure to avoid the Finkenwerder shelter was insufficient for the
was to be carried out by the section yards. This disadvantages of the Type XXI schnorkel (sealings construction of section 2. On 8 September 1944,
would enable the steel construction time for the for lips, considerable noise when extended, high therefore, a new construction plan was drawn up,
first 4 boats to be shortened and, despite certain resistance). As soon as the design details had been which both lengthened the total building time to
delays that were already apparent in the prepara- completed orders were immediately distributed. In 6 Y2 months for the first boat. and set the
tion of design drawings, as well as longer time contrast to what had taken place with Type XXI. commencement of construction at an earlier date.
taken by steel production firms in their preparation blanket orders were no longer issued by Central so that. overall, the March delivery date for the
planning. the March delivery date for the first boat Procurement Planning (ZBP) in Halberstadt, but first boat could just about be retained. Details of
could be kept, as well as the delivery date of 14 July only by those ordering bodies that received this planning are shown in Table 47.
1944 for the first 4 boats. For the series to follow,
steel construction was planned among the following Table 46. Schedule for the f.rst 4 Type XXVIW boats, 14 July 1944
firms: Nordd. Eisenbau, Sande Wilhelmshaven;
Heyking Danzig; Beuchelt & Co., Griinberg/Silesia; U4501 U4502 U4503 U4504
Stahlbau Eggers. Hamburg. and MAN, Mainz- Commencement of steel
Gustavsburg. For these firms. the maximum steel construction 5 November 1944 26 November 1944 21 January 1945 4 February 1945
construction time per crude section amounted to Commencement of construction
twelve weeks. To this figure could be added a four- in section yards 24 December 1944
week period for transportation and other Commencement of construction
at assembly yard 4 February 1945
requirements. The commencement of steel Delivery 25 March 1945 15 April 1945 10 June 1945 24 June 1945
construction for the first series boat. U4505. wa
scheduled for 17 December 1944; commencement of
sections for this boat could be achieved by 8 April Table 47. Revised schedule for the f.rst 4 Type XXV1W boats, 8 September 1944
1945, and assembly work could begin on 20 May
1945. The provisional delivery date for U4505 was 8 U4501 U4502 U4503 U4504 U4505
July 1945.
Although written permission for the transferring Commencement of steel
construction 17 Sept 1944 8 Oct 1944 3 Oec 1944 16 Oec 1944 24 Nov 1944
of assembly work from Schichau to B&V was not Commencement of section
given by the Supreme Naval Command until 2, construction I Oec 1944 21 Oec 1944 15 Feb 1945 28 Feb 1945 15 March 1945
September 1944. appropriate preliminary work was Commencement of assembly
being done at B&V as early as the end of July, and construction 4 Feb 1945 25 Feb 1945 22 April 1945 5 May 1945 20 May 1945
Oelivery 31 March 1945 22 April 1945 17 June 1945 30 June 1945 15 July 1945
members of the staff were sent to Blankenburg to
CONSTRUCTIO THE TWILIGHT OF DEFEAT 247

Allied air raids
The hrst RA F raid directed specifically against a Bremer Vulkan, Vegesack.
-boat yard had taken place on 18 May 1940.
Blohm & Voss was the target, and the raid was not
particularly successful. Sporadic night raids were
subsequently made against various harbours, with
Wilhelmshaven featuring frequently as a target.
The ftrst real damage sustained was to U593 on 13
March 1941, when 49 aircraft bombed B&V. Two
heavier raids by 44 and 36 aircraft on 7 and 8 April
1941 caused short-term disruption at Kiel. On
May 1941, Bomber Command launched the
heaviest attack to date on Germany, with 359
aircraft. The main targets were Hamburg and
Bremen, but V-boat production suffered no
damage. Not until Kiel was attacked, on 24
February 1942, was U-boat production affected: at
DWK, U466 and U474 were hit, which delayed
delivery of the former by about eight days. A
further raid on Kiel, on 12 March 1942, caused
additional delivery delays at GW, involving 4 Type
VHF boats, Ul059-U1062, U791 (V300) and all
VIlC boats from U247.
Sir Arthur 'Bomber' Harris had now been
appointed Head of Bomber Command. His goal was
the systematic destruction of German cities by
nightly saturation raids, using incendiary and high-
explosive bombs, and the first such raids were
carried out against the cities of Lubeck (28/29
March 1942) and Rostock (24 and 25 April 1942).
I,OOO-bomber raids followed against Cologne (30
May 1942) and Bremen (25 June 1942). The
immediate effect was the laying waste of residential
areas and the destruction of cultural monuments -
Deutsche Werke Kiel AG.
only incidentally were industrial installations
destroyed, and the amount of such destruction bore
no relation to the effort expended. V-boat
production was little affected by these attacks. The
tempo of these air raids slowed down towards the Kie/ Harbour
end of 1942; official RAF records show that the
I,OOO-bomber raids were suspended because of high
losses and lack of effective result. In order to
achieve the spectacularly high number of bombers
for these operations, insufficiently trained
formations had had to be used.
During the second half of 1942, the only yard to
receive any severe damage was the Flensburg
Schiffbau-Gesellschaft. Of three attacks carried out
on this yard, the daylight raid of 2 July 1942 by 5
Mosquitoes at low level is especially noteworthy, in
that sections of U361 and U366 were damaged.
However, both boats were in an early stage of
construction and their completion date was not
affected. In a later attack on the Flensburger SBG
on 27 October 1942, U364 and U368 suffered
damage by bomb splinters. Apart from ports with
yards. the RAF also included delivery ftrms for
V-boat construction among their targets: on 17
April 1942, 8 aircraft made a precision attack on the
MAN works in Augsburg, but damage was slight
and production was hardly affected. In 1942, RAF
Bomber Command flew approximately 7,000
aircraft sorties against V-boat yards and supply
industries (approximately 20 per cent of total
operations) and dropped approximately 11,000 tons
of bombs. No appreciable effect on V-boat
production was caused.
248 CONSTRVCTIO THE TWILIGHT OF DEFEAT

ot until the United States Eighth Air Force
t'ntered the fray on 17 August 1942 did the picture Production centres for Type XXVI at Blohm and Voss, 1944-45.
change. While the British, with their nightly
uturation bombing, concentrated on areas with a
('t'ntral aiming-point, the Americans concentrated
un more risky, but more exact, daylight attacks. At
the beginning of 1943, the two air forces
t'Ollaborated in an endeavour to eliminate U-boat
bases in France and U-boat production in Germany.
On 14 January 1943, heavy joint attacks were
carried out against U-boat bases on the French
·\tlantic coast. The French targets were indeed
knocked out, but the large U-boat shelters suffered
very little damage and no U-boat was hit. In the
period up to and including May 1943,3,568 aircraft
~orties were flown and 9,133 tons of high-explosive
und incendiaries were dropped. The first daylight
raid by the Eighth Air Force, using 58 8-17
bombers, took place on 27 January 1943 against
Wilhelmshaven. Simultaneously, smaller attacks
were launched against Vegesack and Emden. The
first large raid by the Eighth Air Force against a
U-boat yard was on 18 May 1943 against Bremer
Vulkan in Vegesack, when 73 B-17s and 24 B-24s
dropped 268 tons of explosive and achieved 76 hits.
However, relatively slight damage was caused to VI··-'_ ..
building-slip installations. Of 18 boa ts lying at
them, only two, U287 and U295, were severely
damaged. However, this daylight raid caused
severe casualties - 108 dead and 103 wounded.
Loss of production amounted to one month, but
delivery of U287 was, in fact, delayed by three
months. It is a matter for some surprise that this
yard was not attacked again until the autumn of
1943, when the only damage was an oil tank that
was set on fire. Until the end of the war, U-boat
production at this yard suffered no further damage
from air attack.
The next severe raid by the Eighth Air Force Friedrich Krupp, Germaniawerft AG, Kie!.
employed 126 bombers, which dropped 250 tons of
bombs on Kiel on 14 May 1943. GW suffered the
most damage. Bomb hits on the conning tower of
Ul061 and on the adjacent Ul062 caused damage. A
lifting installation was damaged and sunk with
U236 and U237. U235 was hit in the forepart of the
ship. Bombs struck the foreship of U234 on
Building Slip VII, and the newly-built U1051 at
Building Slip V. Finally, the staging around U244
was set on fire by exploding anti-aircraft
ammunition, but the boat was not burned out.
In all, to the end of May 1943, the Eighth Air
Force flew 3,414 sorties, dropping 9,745 tons of
high-explosive and incendiary bombs on German
ports.
The British meanwhile concentrated their
energies on the destruction of Hamburg. On the
nights of 24, 27 and 29 July 1943, the RAF
attacked Hamburg with 700 aircraft, dropping
approximately 6,900 tons of bombs. This caused a
fire-storm that destroyed the larger part of the
inner town. The Eighth Air Force supported this
attack by daylight raids on the yards of Hamburg,
Kiel and Wilhelmshaven on 25 and 26 July 1943.
However, a subsequent night attack on Hamburg
by the RAF on 2 August 1943, using 425
bombers, was less successful. It must be pointed out
that, despite all these efforts, these attacks caused

little damage to the port of Hamburg, and even less
Howaldtswerke. Kiel. to the U-boat yards. B&V had 38 U-boats lying at
~ .~
building slips, of which only U10n and U1012 and
the two Walter-boats U792 and U793 were
~~o1J/
damaged. One of the Walter-boats was overturned
by high-explosive blast, while the other was
Q, displaced from its blocks. Additionally, U996 was
sunk in the yard basin. At Kiel, U395 was badly
~/ \ <:\~(\ [J~'n~lf~
~G7r::::::;UO B _~ ~
~rL[j[jjj
damaged at the Howaldtswerke. The greatest
'b o
vU
<>e:3 ~ ~
~ o~
disruption experienced by U·boat construction in
the weeks that followed was caused by the absence
A~~~~~U"<"
\
·.v <I)
Oeo
\\~1J<'"
'\./ • <::> J 0, of Hamburg yard workers, some of whom had been
bombed-out and others killed. In this way, B&V
alone suffered the loss of 20-25 boats. After these
V V catastrophic raids, the delivery rate of 5 boats in

four weeks fell to 1 boat every fourteen days and
later to 1 every twelve days. However, in the light
<0 '/\\)
v~~ .. of the crisis in the U-boat campaign at that time
~~ (},."-,,~
and a decision to switch to new types, the practical
effects were small.
The Eighth Air Force sustained heavy losses in
their attacks on industrial targets in southern
Germany. On 13 December 1943,349 aircraft again
Kie/ Harbour attacked Kiel by day. DWK was the most severely
affected, and U485 and U486 were damaged. U288
sustained a small amount of incendiary damage and
U345 was hit aft. Most significant was the wide-
ranging destruction of workshops, which caused
considerable delays in the deliveries of the last two
boats, U492 and U493, and caused special delays in
the initial section construction. At the same time,
important supply industries such as AEG and SSW
in Berlin, AFA in Hagen and MAN in Augsburg
Deschimag - AG Weser. Bremen. were suffering damage through nightly, large-scale
RAF attacks.
R. Weser On 1 October 1943, 236 RAF bombers attacked
c...
----=====
I
'
\ \
Hagen, with the object of paralysing the most
important production centre for U-boat batteries.
Apart from four high-explosive bombs, only
incendiaries were dropped on the closely-spaced
buildings of the works complex. Approximately 35
per cent of the vital buildings were destroyed, most
~\~
"" C=:Jo importantly the rubber factory, woodworking
sections, installation section and plate preparation
w",' section. Repair work was set in hand immediately,
through Organization Todt, and was carried out so
D~~Q~~(1Jg[]~~\O
systematically that production could recommence
" after only a few weeks. The major part of the
damage was made good in approximately six
months. Some time previously, the initial stages of
increased production of the new Type XXI had
)~ V. o~E[J~a'DOQD 0 0
been transferred to sister firms in Hannover,
~~'" ~O.OO E:J ~0\/

?'A~
= Vienna and Posen, to ensure that production of this
new boat would proceed efficiently .
.I\~'» 'flJio ~
. or was the attack on the Berlin SSW Dynamo
CJ 0= Works on 15 February 1944 able to halt production,
\ \)0 ~~~»~/ but only delay it. Five steel construction firms with
mobile cranes, including the Dortmunder Union,
\ \\?' ~~ (/"~ were immediately given the task of rebuilding work
\)(\ \) <0 <J at this, the main supplier of electric motors for the
';, ~I' t <;( Slips 6-11 new U-boat Type XXI. The Navy supplied two
companies and technical personnel to help in clear·
ing work and repair of machine tools. Approxi-
mately two-thirds of the production halls and test
beds had been destroyed, and the power supply was
paralysed. Nevertheless, two weeks later, machine
tools for stamping-out metal were at work in the
250 CONSTRU~TIO THE TWILIGHT OF DEFEAT

open air under temporary roofmg, and replacement
Howaldtswerke AG Hamburg. stands had been set up for the destroyed test beds.
All obstacles had been overcome by July 1944. No
further destruction occurred at the Dynamo Works
during subsequent raids on Berlin, but, during a
period of twelve months, 200 air raid warnings
caused a loss in work time of, on the average 1 Y,
hours - with a production force of approximately
500 workers, that represented in this area alone a
total time loss of approximately 150,000 hours per
year.
The night attack by 528 aircraft of the RAF on 25
February 1944 against MAN at Augsburg had a
similar effect. It is quite astonishing tha t these
destructive, saturation bombings of towns did not
have more far-reaching effects on the industrial
firms that suffered damage. In connection with
this, Donitz explained to Hitler on 19 August 1943:
'I am convinced that in a material sense the air
attacks on our armament programme will have very
little damaging effect. I have observed how in the
engine hangars of yards in Hamburg, engines
standing on the very edge of craters caused by
direct hits penetrating the hangars are completely
undamaged. as the bomb effects seem to have no
sideways power but to be dispersed in an upward
~-; direction. The iron construction of these buildings
with glass roofs seems to work in our favour in
these cases. as the roofs disintegrate immediately
and no shock waves are caused. I believe, therefore,
that ship construction, carried out as it is on the
coast in the west, will survive despite air attacks
and, indeed, it is necessary that it should do so.'
Deutsche Werft (Hamburg, Finkenwerder), 1944. During 1943. the Eighth Air Force dropped a
total of 20,362 tons of bombs on U-boat installa-
tions and production centres - i.e., 41.8 per cent of
their total bombing. During the first eight months,
these remained their main targets, but with the
R. E1be lessening of the U-boat menace in the summer of
1943, the weight of Allied air attacks was turned
towards other targets. Now. only 16 per cent of
bombs dropped by the Eighth Air Force were
directed against U-boat yards and bases. During
the first quarter of 1944, this dropped to 4.4 per
cent of the total bombing, i.e., down to 3.509 tons.
It is possible that. with the change-over to section
construction, empty building slips at many yards
gave an outward impression that U-boat produc-
tion was declining. Bombing was subsequently
distributed over the entire country. and this chiefly
affected the supply industries, so that section
construction and assembly construction for the new
U-boat programme of 1944, which was being carried
out in a centralized manner at a few yards, was
relatively free from attack, save for a few incidental
attacks - notably in July - on Kiel, Hamburg and
Bremen.
On 23 July 1944, DWK especially suffered
damage in Kiel. Section construction was delayed
as a result of destruction of the engine-building
workshops. More serious were the direct hits on the
power plant, in Docks 7 and 9, and on the last
available 150-ton floating crane. At the Howaldts-
werke, U239 and Ul164 were damaged. and delivery
delays were caused to the Seehund prototypes. On
26 July, to the west of Moltenort near Kiel, the new
Type XXIII boat, U2323, hit an aerial mine and

sanle On 28 July 1944, the RAF attacked Hamburg bomb hits on 31 December 1944, had been cut apart Effects of air raids on employment
and Bremen with 305 bombers. During this raid, at for this operation and was now capsized in sections. at B + V. Hamburg, during the
B&V in Hamburg, the bow of U2503 was damaged Dock V disintegrated. The east section, with U2530,
by a delayed-action bomb. In Bremen, U872, U890 which had recently been raised, was sunk. Also summer of 1943
and U3009 were hit, and U872 sank. The large, sunk were the salvage ships, Hieu and Griep, which Figures from USSBS report
100-ton floating crane was out of action until 8 were engaged in lifting U2532. Finally, U2523 was
September 1944. sunk, while U2541 and U2534 were damaged. This L.-
10.000
In July and August. the Eighth Air Force attack also caused further delays to the fIrst Type V ~ f-....
concentrated on the U-boat base at Toulon, and XXVI boat, U4501. Section construction could now Total staff i-- i--
almost all U-boats lying there were destroyed. On 6 not begin before the middle of March, which meant
/
August 1944, the port at Hamburg was once again that delivery would not be possible before the V
their target, and sections 2 and 3 of U2505 were so middle of July 1945 at the very earliest. During 8.000
badly damaged that they had to be replaced.
Subsequent attacks by the RAF and the Eighth Air
February 1945, B&V were spared further attacks
and most of the damaged boats were able to be / V
Force against different ports did not cause actual
U-boat losses, but work was constantly interrupted
repaired. Only the sunken U2523 had to be
completely written off. The Eighth Air Force now 6.000
if
by air-raid warnings and miscellaneous destruction, concentrated on central Germany, apparently in rJ
especially of electricity supply lines to workshops. support of the Russian offensive. ,;'" -:-:- --- ....... - --- --. -,
-'
It was not until 4 November 1944 that further Precision attacks on AG Weser in Bremen began ,
,, Those el1lJll9ed in
U-boats (5) were damaged by the Eighth Air Force on 17 February 1945. As had happened in 1943
4.000
." shipbUilding J
during a raid on fuel storage installations and oil against various steel works in the Ruhr, the RAF .. ' :
"
refmeries in Hamburg harbour. The night-raid on attacked the Weser yard using only 3-6 long-range ,
the harbour by 345 aircraft occurred on 21 Mosquitoes, achieving relatively great damage and ) I
November, when U2529 was hit while in dock, and a considerable loss in production. On 17 February,
U2532, on a slip at B&V. U3042, at Building Slip 1, suffered damage to the 2.000I
The total expenditure in terms of time needed to stern by a near-miss from a 254kg bomb, and this ,
rectify bomb damage, to the Type XXI programme blocked-in U3043, lying behind it. More serious, i
:;;
in the autumn of 1943 amounted to 300,000 hours during a raid on 22 February, was hit by a 2,032kg D
E
per month (= 1.25 per cent of total work time), but it bomb on Building Slip 5 between the fore-ships of ~
z 0 I
climbed in 1944 to an average of 2,200,000 hours 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11
U3052 and U3048. The bomb exploded 1942 1943
per month (=7 per cent of the total work time). approximately 4.5m above the ground, twisted the
During the same period, time lost through air raids bow sections and forced U3052 from its launching blocking-in U3061 which was lying behind it. The
amounted to approximately 10 per cent. In relation slip, blocking-in U3053, which was lying behind impact of three bombs caused considerable damage
to the overall war situation, these fIgures were them. In a discussion on 23 February 1945, Dbnitz to 4 boats on the building slips, and prevented or
acceptable. Meanwhile, from aerial photographs drew Hitler's attention to this problem. The considerably delayed the slipway launch of 4
and reports from agents, the Allies had become appropriate minute stated: others. An additional consequence was, of course,
aware of the threat posed by the new U-boats, and 'The report of the renewed boomerang air attacks that these building slip berths were not available
these would be their targets for air attack at the on the Deschirnag U-boat construction yard in for the boats that were scheduled to follow. The
end of 1944. From then until the end of the war, Bremen leads the Supreme C-in-C of the Navy to non-availability of Dock V was to have a
efforts were concentrated on the destruction of the make the following points: considerable effect on new construction and
U-boat yards, against which 138 attacks were 'As the [artifIcial] fog is totally ineffective at the maintenance work.
directed. Additionally, four saturation raids were considerable heights that these attacks are carried The last big attack by the Eighth Air Force on
made on the most important supply industries. out - 9-11,OOOm - and as the anti-aircraft defence Deschimag took place on 30 March 1945, when 433
The first of these took place on 31 December 1944 is of limited use, defensive measures must take aircraft dropped 830 tons of bombs. No further
when 72 aircraft from the Eighth Air Force place using jamming transmissions and night- damage was caused to the building slips, but 8
attacked B&V. Although most of the bombs fell in fIghters. The Supreme Commander of the boats were lost in the fItting-out basin: U72, U329,
the south-eastern sector of the yard area (on the Luftwaffe is arranging that two jamming U430, U870, U884, U886 and the two new boats,
East Hall and the Steinwerder Bank) the extensive transmitters be set up as speedily as possible in the U3045 and U3046. A simultaneous attack was made
damage considerably delayed section construction area to the west of Bremen. They will be functional on Wilhelmshaven, in which 916 tons of bornbs were
of the fIrst Type XXVI Walter-boats. Of the Type in approximately 8 days. The employment of dropped. U96, U429 and U3508 were sunk, and the
XXI boats fItting out at the Steinwerder Bank, fIghters to hunt Mosquitoes during night attacks in electricity power-station was badly damaged: since
U2532, U2530 and U2537 were sunk; section 7 of the Bremen area seems urgently necessary... .' pumps could not be used because of the breakdown
U2515 was hit and U2547 and U2556 suffered lesser On 24 February 1945, 195 bombers of the Eighth of the power supply, the docks began to overfill. In
damage on the building slips. Air Force made a daylight attack on Deschimag, order that U3008 could be kept floating in the dock,
On 17 January 1945, this yard was attacked and U3007, which had just been cleared for fmal the open floor valves of the bilge installation had to
again by the Eighth Air Force, with 71 aircraft. fItting-out, was sunk at the quay. Further damage be wedged tight in a makeshift manner. Then
Hits were scored by 132 high-explosive bombs over was caused to a 100-ton and a 25-ton floating crane, temporary cables were connected from U3008 to the
the entire yard area. Building Slip 9 alone received and to the crane installation on the fItting-out power-station. By using the boat's electrical
eight direct hits. Now, for the fIrst time, a large quay. installation, an emergency supply of current was
number of boats lying at building slips were On 25 and 27 February, and on 4 March 1945, made available until the power-station was
damaged: in particular, U2557 was badly damaged further boomerang attacks were made by functioning again.
by hits in the control room, U2551 suffered Mosquitoes, the most severe result of which was On 11 March 1945, the Eighth Air Force began
moderate damage, while U2542, U2544, U2545, the sinking of Floating Dock V by near misses. On again to attack the harbour of Hamburg. A total of
U2546, U2547, U2548, U2550, U2555 and U2556 11 March, the Eighth Air Force attacked 466 aircraft dropped 983 tons of bombs on the area
suffered slight damage. Dock III, occupied by Deschimag once again, with 403 aircraft, dropping occupied by the Rhenania oil refmeries. Severe
U2515, was sunk. U2515, which had been earmarked 861 tons of bombs. A 254kg bomb tore through the damage was caused around the large 250-ton
for the replacement of two sections damaged by outer hull of U3060 and detonated beneath the boat, hammer-head crane at B&V, and the crane itself

Deployment of labour at DWK, 1944 Deployment of labour at AG Weser
Figures from USSBS report Figures from USSBS report
~
-- --
16,000 ,. ".
i"
/-
NoJpro~ -- \
12,000I
~ -
.'"
l.(
b '"
~ --r----.f'--
I'-- r--..: 14.000
~ v
,/
l.---
~
f'...
10,000,
Vc
d
.
I-"
.......... ~ V
l" t:::-- '---. -:::
12.000 - Ships Illpa!r~ and suriac.
. --
va....1bUilding --..;
-/
..- - /
~
8,000I
Ve 10.000
1" ,/
,/
----
6,000I
V 1\ /
V
8,000
E
"5
:8E / I-- ~ /
1\..--1/ /
::>
Z
Bomb daniage repo".
/ ~
4,000I
6.000
-- ~
~
--- ---- I /
/ U·boat bu;ldi;;;;-
~
."'' ' _" ' ' JI
/
4.000 ........ V
2,000 I - - b Build,ng Ty~ vile and
~~
c U-boal lepai", I
d Bomb demoga Illpa;",
XlVI
'oo<M'
2.000
------- V \
~iO
EO. .e 0rer 'i
skS
aj nQrp!odrn~erOlf
Z~ 0 o
I 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 S a N D J M A M A s- o N D J M A
1944 1943 1944 1945
was destroyed by direct hits. At Building Slip 6, ship Ausdauer). No victualling possibilities!' This serves to confIrm once again the continued
U2549 and U2550 were damaged and fIve high- Howaldt-Hamburg suffered 52 direct hits, value in providing smokescreens for objects to be
explosive bombs fell on the unoccupied Building including hits on the stern of U3502, on Dock V, protected.'
Slip 7. The dock area of the Hamburg Howaldt yard which held U3512 and U2519, Salvage Vessel 5 and Two further severe attacks by the RAF on the
was hit: in this, U682 was sunk together with a Dock II. nights of 9 and 13 April 1945, with 359 and 467
lifting installation, and U1201 together with Dock On 9 April, a precision attack by the RAF with 17 aircraft, set the seal on the destruction of DWK.
V. Lancasters on the large Finkenwerder shelter During the raid on 9 April, U2516 and U1227 in
On 20 March 1945, 13 B-17s of the Eighth Air brought an end to attacks on U-boat installations in Dock I were badly damaged by bomb hits, and
Force made a precision attack on these two yards, the Hamburg area. During this raid, two 10-ton U1131 and U3512 were sunk. At GW, a Type XXIII
but caused very little damage. Simultaneously, 415 'Grand Slam' bombs and 15 5.5-ton 'Tallboy' bombs V-boat, U4708, was destroyed, three days before its
others dropped 770 tons of bombs on harbour were dropped. Six of the latter penetrated the commissioning. The fmal attacks made by the RAF
installations in Hamburg. The next large attacks 3-3.5m-thick shelter covering of reinforced on Kiel and Bremen were carried out in conjunction
were carried out by the RAF, and were directed concrete; another exploded. approximately 30m with the occupation of these cities by British
against the whole of Hamburg. On 31 March, 454 from the west wall of the shelter and twisted it. In troops; they were not aimed at V-boat production
bombers dropped 2,217 tons of bombs; on 8 April, all, Boxes I, 2 and 5 were damaged in this raid. In which had already come to a standstilL
414 aircraft dropped 1,481 tons of bombs; fmally, Box 5, a lifting installation with 2 U-boats (U677 Although much devastation had been caused in
on 9 April 1945, 424 aircraft dropped 1,571 tons of and U747) was capsized. the yards, an overall look at the situation shows
bombs. These attacks destroyed a large number of Kiel provided the third focal-point of the Allied that, even in the early part of 1945, Allied air
V·boats, as well as causing much destruction at air offensive against U-boat yards in the early part attacks could not actually prevent V-boat
B&V, Howaldt-Hamburg and, for the first time, of 1945. The Eighth Air Force made the fIrst attack construction. The Type XXI section construction,
DW, Finkenwerder. The attack of 31 March 1945 on 11 March, with 340 aircraft. No V-boats were especially, suffered little damage. From the fact
caused the greatest damage at DW, Finkenwerder: hit. In their next attacks on 3 and 4 April, U1221 at that both the sensitive centres for this section
large fires in V-boat construction installation with Howaldtswerke, Kiel and U2542 and U3505 at the construction, namely the unprotected production of
destruction of the ship construction hangar for the Hindenburg Shore were sunk, and U2516 was sections 4 in Lubeck and of 3,5,6 and 9 in Vegesack
Type XXIII section construction; two U-boat damaged at DWK. On 4 April, U3003 was sunk by were not attacked at all, one can conclude that
docks and a V-boat lifting installation sunk; U350, direct hits. These attacks, by approximately 700 details of new V-boat production were not known to
U348 and U1167 capsized and sunk; U1131 , in its aircraft, were the heaviest to date on the harbour of the Allies, and that the lack of V-boats on the
lifting installation, capsized; U2340 sunk with its KieL The yard installations of GW and DWK were building slips at both these yards had clearly
lifting installation. But the attack of 8 April was also hit. During the Fuhrer Situation Discussion of conveyed a misleading impression. The majority of
especially severe for B&V and Howaldt. A fIrst 4 April 1945, Donitz stated in connection with this boats lying at the building slips at the time of the
report from B&V to the Armaments Inspectorate, (extract from a minute): 'The air attacks on Kiel on capitulation were either undamaged or only slightly
Hamburg, stated laconically: 'At least 250 high- the 3rd and 4th April have given the Supreme damaged. Frequently, damaged boats blocked-in
explosive bombs, 20 unexploded bombs, no deaths, ClinIC of the Navy proof that our opponents other undamaged boats behind them, which meant
two slightly wounded. Several boats [U982, U2509, achieve better bombing results when they get a that for some time these latter could not be used.
U2514 and U2516J, Salvage Vessel 2 and Dock I direct view of their target than when cloud cover is The most crippling damage occurred to floating
sunk, other items severely damaged (e.g., salvage provided by use of the 'Rotterdam' Equipment. docks and floating cranes. The sinking of a large

Deployment of labour at Blohm and Voss, Hamburg, early in 1945 the scattered attacks on the larger cities and their
Figures from USSBS report
neighbourhoods and on the overall armaments
industry.'
10.000 • i I It must, however be doubted whether, from the
production point of view, the early part of 1945
Type XXVI could have seen a full-scale resumption of the
U-boat campaign. Furthermore, the Navy's
Type XXI Type'XVIlB supplies of diesel fuel, which had remained at about
the minimum-necessary level of 100,000 tons since
8.000 I I ~ I I - "R:, I the middle of 1941, had become inadequate
following the loss of Rumanian and Hungarian
oilflelds and the destruction of the Hydrierwerke.
Topp was also certainly over-optimistic concerning
the prospects for undisturbed U-boat production
from May 1945.
6.000 I I III \\ .... ~ / v / V' ---=t- <::: \ \ I On 27 March 1945, a special British formation of
17 Lancasters attacked the almost completed
'Valentin' assembly shelter. Thirteen 'Grand Slam'
(10-ton) and 4 'Tallboy' (5.5-ton) bombs were
dropped. Two 10-ton bombs struck the still un-
reinforced 4.5m covering and the tremendous
4000
• I 4j(,(
I ~9
, ; I' I I "'............... L \n::1:
\\ I explosion caused it to collapse over Assembly
Stations 5 and 8. Although the major part of the
explosion dispersed upwards, the destrucion of
roofs occasioned a considerable interruption in
production, because the system had only a single-
track rail-launching system. While this shelter,
Nonproductive 1\/ IV I v I \ I with its proposed reinforced roof of 7m thickness,
2.000 I 1 A "
would have been immune against 10-ton bombs, the
section shelters, with much thinner coverings,
could not have withstood these bombs, as was
shown in the bombing of 'Fink II' on 9 April 1945.
either were roof reinforcements an absolute
remedy in the long run, as was proved when a near-
Dec miss caved-in the west wall of 'Fink II'.
Furthermore, the bomb hits in front of 'Elbe II' on
number of U-boats in harbours must be seen in the 'No stoppage of production was brought about by 8 April 1945, in which the anti-splinter aprons were
light of the fact that the harbours were consider- Allied air attacks until almost the end of the war. shattered and the interior workshop walls forced
ably overcrowded and suffered obstructions during Germany succeeded in keeping the production of inwards, clearly show that if further such attacks
the latter stages of the war. new V-boat construction at a considerable level had been carried out, the shelters, with their
With regard to air attacks against the supply until the beginning of 1945. From the beginning of concentration of production methods, could easily
industries during the latter part of the war, only the 1945, it would have been very possible from the have become traps. Only the thwarting of precision
attack on Hagen on the night of 2 December 1944 production point of view to recommence the U-boat attacks by fIghter defence and jamming transmis-
was particularly signifIcant. Here, 43 high- campaign with the new, possibly very effective sions could have allowed U-boat production in
explosive bombs and several hundred incendiaries Types XXI and XXIII (and later on, also XXVI) ... shelters to continue successfully in 1945.
fell on the yard complex of AF A, and destroyed Destruction at U-boat yards and in the supply
approximately 50 per cent of the buildings. industry certainly caused a noticeable diminution
Especially badly hit were the lead works and the of production, but never an effective cessation of THE FINAL PROGRAMMES,
production shops for steel batteries. The track production. That this was so is due to U-boat
systems were completely destroyed, and shunting production, including section production from May 1944-45
operations could not be carried out for several 1945, being carried out in the whole western area in
weeks. Following irnprovized repairs to the bomb-proof shelters. Serious stoppages in U-boat The Construction Programme of 1 June 1944
damaged buildings, the lead works was able to start production occurred only when the yards in Danzig The two new focal points of concentration - the
restricted production again at the beginning of were no longer available - through the Russian Walter Type XXVI and the Seehund midget
February 1945. However, the general transport advance, and, in Hamburg, through the British U-boats (page 287) - required a reallocation of
position had become so acute that hardly any advance. New U-boat construction in Bremen had armament capacity, and due account had to be
batteries produced by AFA-Hagen could reach the been suspended, however, following the taken of the long-term plans for series production of
yards. Alongside the destruction of the railway 'boomerang' bombing of Deschimag as early as Type XXI and XXIII. The new programme, as set
netwClrk, the bombing of the Ruhr waterways had March 1945, i.e., prior to the occupation of out by the Armaments Minister on 1 June 1944,
far-reaching effects on V-boat construction in the Bremen. . . . A greater concentration of bomb called for deliveries as shown in Table 418. To thi!l
Bremen and Hamburg areas, and caused attacks on bottleneck supplies for V-boat had to be added a rapidly-growing Seehund
considerable delivery delays. construction (batteries, periscopes, part-sections production from September 1944, which was
In the autumn of 1945, when interrogated about and sections that were only produced in one supposed to deliver 80 boats per month by
the effects of Allied air attacks on V-boat particular place) and, above all, on the single December 1944 and, following the commencement
construction, the former Head of the Ship production centre for hydrogen peroxide in of production at Ulm in the early part of 1945,
Construction Commission, Vizeadmiral Topp, Lauterberg (Type XXVI) would have been more would reach approximately 100 boats per month
stated: effective in shortening the U-boat campaign than The overall programme now amounted to 580 Typl.'

XXI, 260 Type XXIII, 100 Type XXVI plus 1,000 Monfalcone. When the Allies invaded France, 'Every couple of weeks the programme crumbles
Seehund. To cope with this, steel construction Toulon became untenable, and the contract' which a little more. In spite of the many views to the
would have to supply monthly from the middle of had been allocated to Toulon was transferred to contrary, the HAS is of the opinion that the output
1944: OW at Hamburg-Finkenwerder on 7 July 1944. figures could be considerably higher if all bodies
22 sets of crude sections Type XXI = 17,300 tons or After it had been decided not to continue building involved put their full energies and their full
2 million man hours. transport and supply U·boats, GW, Kiel, was enthusiasm into the stated programme. In effect,
10 sets of crude sections Type XXIII=900 tons or involved in Type XXIII construction: GW and OW, the yards have blamed poor production on lack of
0.2 million man hours. Hamburg-Finkenwerder, were now to bear the supplies. That means partly by the bottleneck in
Total: 18,200 tons or 2.2 million man hours. weight of the entire Type XXIII programme, electric motors, partly by incomplete delivery of
By the end of 1944, 257 sets of crude sections for following the loss of almost all foreign yards. So components, which have to be built-in later than the
Type XXI and 95 sets for Type XXIII were to be that GW could embark on production at the earliest timetable had envisaged. In the steel construction
ready. The fact that steel deliveries reached record possible moment, in addition to the contract for the frrms there may be a bottleneck suddenly in fore-
proportions in August 1944 shows that the steel 48 U-boats U4701-U4748, they were given the parts of the ships. This bottleneck is quickly
construction industry realized what was expected assembly construction of boats U2332 and U2333, settled.
of it, even if, during the initial phases, many crude the sections for which had already been produced at 'At the beginning of production, the bottleneck in
sections were incomplete. The shipbuilding OW. GY'I. was to deliver both these boats by August the work force was not too decisive a factor. It
industry was unable to emulate this. 1944, with series production following from October began to have an effect when the programme called
The comprehensive foreign building programme 1944, and a monthly delivery of 5 boats from each for an increase in numbers. It must therefore not be
for Type XXIII was frequently revised and yard. left out of our reckoning that, as the programme
progressively reduced in the light of changing On 12 July 1944, Merker appointed Johann increases in tempo and with production experience
circumstances. After Nikolayev and Odessa had Kohnenkamp, Director of the Stiilcken Sohn yard growing, a considerable decline in work hours will
been retaken by the Red Army early in 1944, the of Hamburg as 'Supreme Authority for the XXIII follow. .. It can be shown that the present
contract for Type XXIII was transferred to Linz Programme', because 'the urgency of the new shortage of workers, adduced by certain yards as
Schiffbauwerft on 1 May 1944. But, just two construction programme Type XXIII' demanded the reason for the non-fulfilment of their pro-
months later, Linz was rejected on the grounds that extraordinary measures for its handling. gramme, is principally to be attributed to inade-
it would take so long to produce boats there that With regard to Type XXI, the principal task now quate preparation of the practical construction
there would be little chance of using them for was to achieve the planned objectives without preliminaries. Correct planning suitable for the
operations in the Black Sea. At the same time, the further delays and to complete the changeover to tasks in hand, construction preliminaries, and the
delivery quota for Type XXIII boats for use in the construction in shelters. While delays had been adoption of practical measures etc., can bring about
Mediterranean was considerably reduced. While it caused by bottlenecks in supplies during the initial the saving of many productive work hours. It
was still intended, on 1 May 1944, to liquidate the building phase, now once again - and in increasing is unthinkable theoretically to formulate con-
whole programme by March 1945, and have only a measure - the delays resulted from a lack of skilled structional preliminaries for a programme that
follow-up programme of 3 boats per month from workers at the yards, and the intended call-up of is thwarted in its practical realization by such
DW in Hamburg-Finkenwerder and 2 boats per workers classed as dispensable (special call-up) happenings and has to suffer variations and
month at each of the other yards, just eight weeks hung over industrial frrms like the sword of immediate modifications. With energy and with
later only a considerably restricted construction Damocles. Thus, the plan of 1 June 1944 was not to positive organizational thinking, production can be
was envisaged at foreign yards, namely 18 boats in be fulfilled, and delivery dates had to be put off increased significantly. Poor production would
Toulon, 18 in Genoa and only 7 in Monfalcone. If time and time again. At the Nineteenth Armament have been signifIcantly better if correct application
necessary, further construction with complete Discussion on 7 September 1944, the programme of organizational principles had been made and all
sections sent from Germany could then follow. shown in Table 49 was laid down. It was to run from potential realized and, likewise for the future, to
By the beginning of July 1944, German steel 7 September 1944. ensure that the programme delivery promises are
construction frrms had sent sections for a total of While the production planning of the IBG now kept to, the yards must increase their output
eight boats to Italy, but these were found to be had to formulate afresh delivery plans for various considerably.'
incomplete on arrival at the yards. Certain missing supplies and disposition plans for section A discussion followed, at which the various yards
components and the sections for a further 8 boats construction in the U-boat shelters, Merker, on 13 stated their positions:
were to have been produced in Italy. In May 1944, September 1944, held a meeting of directors of 1. KMW, Wilhelms haven:
construction for the frrst boats began in Genoa and those yards involved in the U-boat programmes, 'KMW, Wilhelmshaven, draws attention to the
Monfalcone, but it cannot be established that any both to co-ordinate matters and to stress their interrupted and irregular delivery of steel
assembly took place at these yards and, at the obligation to fulfil the new programme. At this containers. which has meant the loss recently of 3
beginning of July, it was decided to dispense with meeting he stated: whole days production. KMW also levels the
Table 48. The Ministerial Construction Programme of 1 June 1944
1944 1945
April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
Type XXI 2 5 9 18 26 29 33 33 30 28 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22
Type XXIII - 3 5 8 12 15 18 18 18 17 16 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Type XXVI - - - - - - - - 2 - 2 4 8 10 12 12 12 12
Table 49. Revised construction programme of 7 September 1944
1944 1945
May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
Type XXI - 1 7 5 14 28 32 33 33 30 28 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22
Type XXllJ - 2 4 6 9 9 11 15 15 14 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Type XXVI - - - - - - - - 1 1 - 2 3 8 10 12 12 12

criticism that, a short time ago, 6 completed has 1,000 fewer workers, achieves 51 boats, that is working time in the shelter cannot be used to the
sections were not collected. In August, KMW lost 2 to say over a dozen boats more than Deschimag. full because the shelter has to serve at this time as a
whole days work through air·raid alarm. KMW is to Professor Bauer points to poor black-out conditions personnel shelter, and the work timetable is
deliver 21 sections by the end of September, and and premature stoppages for air-raid alerts. Saur consequently hampered. Schmauterer from the
achieve its production target in the following has established that the programme imposed by Armaments Staff has been required by Saur to
month. Merker reproaches KMW with the fact that Merker on Deschimag is too stringent.' investigate this problem and to rectify this
they have not yet moved into the shelter in 5. Deutsche Wer(t, Hamburg: particular prevention of production. Merker blames
Hamburg. KMW argues that they are faced with 'Dr. Scholz has still not received the programme of the poor practical work preparations and
the alternative either of delivering the required 7 September in respect of sections 3 and 6, and inadequate pre-planning of the work timetable.
sections or of moving into the shelter. Becker quotes delivery dates that are incompatible with Howaldtswerke points out that blame for poor
points out that, by the end of September. 22 rather the target. Saur and Merker have decided that organization should really be levelled at the missing
than 21 sections are to be delivered, as one section decisions will be made tomorrow concerning supplies. Furthermore, they themselves had
that was not delivered in August will be added. September and October targets, but that from expended 131,000 hours in an effort to resolve
KMW indicates delivery bottlenecks in: friction October the programme of 7 September must be supply bottlenecks. Attempts, however, would still
clutches, shaft brakes, air futers, 8 electric motors, adhered to.' be made to keep to the programme.'
5 control panels, electric motor fans, etc. KMW 6. Blohm & Voss, Hamburg: 8. Howaldtswerke, Kiel:
asserts that only 40 per cent of fittings are 'Walter Blohm states an assembly time of 64 days 'Section 1: a target of 20 for September. 25 for
available for assembly purposes. and that of 500 instead of the planned 56 days, and justifies this October, 26 each for November and December.
soldiers promised, only 150 have been supplied by extra time by the poor state of fmish in sections ovember and December would be achieved, but
this date. The previously stated shortage of welders that have been supplied. B&V will deliver 7 boats not September and October on account of the
will be made good by the middle and end of October. instead of 8 in September, 8 instead of 9 in October. effects of heavy air-raid damage. Dealing with
KMW agrees that 22 sections instead of 21 will be By 13 September 3 boats less than the quota will unexploded bombs alone has accounted for 10 days.
delivered by the end of September. Use will be made have been hauled up the slipway. In addition to Workshops are up to 60 per cent burned out. At the
of Kemper to resolve transport problems.' this, a further 3\1, boats will not be able to be hauled moment, there is no railway line connection to the
2. :::>eebeck, Wesermiinde: up according to timetable on account of non- works. 50 per cent of work area is without a roof;
'Seebeck states that keeping to programme dates in delivery of sections, thus making a total shortage in out of 37 electric trucks, only 2 are in use; out of 36
the face of lack of welders of Grade 1 and Grade 2 the planned quota of 6\1, boats. There is a special hangar cranes, only 9 are in use. During September,
proflciencies makes for difficulties. Seebeck will be shortage of section 2 from KMW, Wilhelmshaven; only 8 of section 1 were delivered instead of 20.
able to deliver only 18 in September instead of 24, blockade by mines prevented their delivery and, Becker states that this will suffice because initial
20 in October instead of 24,23 in November instead when delivered, they were in a poor state of work can be done in other quarters. Saur and
of 26, and 26 in December. Seebeck blames this non- completion. Blohm also points to a compulsory Merker have ordered that the October target of 25
achievement of quota on the shortage of 20 welders, curtailment of lighting [power cuts during the night must be kept. Saur has requested, as Liaison Officer
but for whom the set target could have been shift], which has lost the production of approxi- for the Supreme C-in-C of the Navy, that soldiers be
achieved. Schmelter has received the request from mately 1,000 men. The condition of sections that made available for the purpose of clearing debris
Saur to look into the question of welders together arrive are as bad as they were formerly. At present, from the Howaldtswerke, Kiel. Up to now, the Navy
with an appointed commission, and to remedy this. only appro«imately 56 per cent of fittings are in has made available as a vanguard only 130 men,
Merker and Saur order that the programme of 7 position and only 38 per cent of tubing. Blohm Many times this number are necessary.'
September be carried out.' states that the expenditure in work hours for 9. Deutsche Werke, KieL'
3. Bremer Vulkan, Bremen- Vegesack: subsequent incorporation of tubing is something 'The programme of 7 September will be adhered to
'Kabellac states that he has currently 394 welders, like 2\1, times that of such work done at the section with the exception of September, when only 17
of whom 16 are required for plastering work, yards. Saur uses this as proof of the immense instead of 20 will be delivered. The missing 3 will be
leaving 378 welders for section construction. These advantage of the section method of construction. delivered 3 days later. The 60-ton crane has been
would suffice if he did not have to take on Saur also states that the question of supplies out of use for 16 days. This has meant that 10 fore-
additional work, and he is 70 welders short for such shortages is being cleared-up by a thorough ships could not take their place punctually in the
work. Kabellac has appointed personnel to be investigation and subsequent settlement of the sequence lines as planned. Only 20 out of 250 red
trained as welders as follows: 8 in April, 29 in May, shortages by a commission with participation by dockets have been cleared to date.'
64 in June, 96 in July, Currently, 112 men are being the Armaments Delivery Offices, and that he 10. Liibecker Flender- Werke:
trained in 3 shifts. Nevertheless, it will be expects a report within a fortnight to settle this 'Flender-Werke will deliver fewer sections than
November before sufficient welders are available to bottleneck in a defmite way. Saur states further required by the following quantities: 4 in
maintain the programme. Kabellac cites shortage of that the night shift at B&V can be retained by September, 5 in October, and one section each in
oxygen as an additional bottleneck.' intervention with the Air Raid Protection November and December. Bunte cites shortages of
4. Deschimag, Bremen: authorities responsible for lighting restrictions.' oxygen and in the work force as the reasons. The
'Target: 38 boats by the end of the year and 7 boats '7. Howaldtswerke, Hamburg: shortage of oxygen has been made good. Through
by the end of August. Only 4 have been delivered. 'The programme of 15 in September, 16 in October, the intervention of Dr. Wolf, 40 bottles per day will
Damage by air attack has been cited as the reason November and December will not be achieved by be delivered by DW, Hamburg. Saur decrees that
for reduced delivery. The programme of 5 in the Howaldtswerke. Hamburg, because approxi- the stipulation of 7 September is to be kept.'
September, 9 in October, 11 in November, 12 in mately 50 per cent of the supplies will not arrive 11. Deutsche Werke, Gotenha(en:
December could not be realized owing to shortages punctually and it will therefore not be possible to 'DW, Gotenhafen, states the target for sections 6
among the labour force. The allocated concentra- carry out the sequence working as planned. and 7 will be met by the required date.'
tion camp inmates were completely unsuitable for Howaldtswerke asserts that 26,500 work hours are 12. Danziger Wer(t:
assembly work. Changes in the interior operational currently having to be expended per section instead 'The Danziger Werft says its programme is on
organization could not be carried out so quickly of the 24,000 hours set out in the planned sequence time.'
because Deschimag, Bremen, was involved in working, that they themselves are having to 13. Schichau, Danzig:
important engine construction as well as in improvise a sizeable portion of the missing supplies 'Schichau, Danzig says its programme is up to
shipbuilding. Merker makes the comparison and that they are short of 60 coppersmiths for these schedule as regards sections. As regards assembly,
between Deschimag and B&V with regard to their tasks. The Howaldtswerke is additionally con- it will achieve 4 instead of 5 in September, 8 instead
number of workers and finds that B&V, although it cerned over the fact that, during air attacks, of 9 in November and December. Saur orders thl'

achievement of target for November and 3, with steel construction supplied by Stiilcken. work hours per ring-section are being lost.
December.' Section 2: B&V in 'Fink II', Box 4 and 5. Therefore, if steel construction now remedies this it
14. Deutsche Werft, Hamburg (Type XXIII): Section 3 and bridge superstructure: Howaldt- must make good the hours that it has already lost.
'Scholz asserts that he is not familiar with the new Hamburg in 'Elbe II'. 'Desch: Steel construction cannot make better
target of 7 September. Saul' commands the Sections 4 and 5: DW in Hamburg-Finkenwerder (4 deliveries as it has a shortage of many supplies.
intervention of Dr. Wolf and yard delegates to unprotected, 5 in 'Fink II', Box 2). 'Merker: The 400,000 hours that have been saved
investigate and adopt the strongest measures.' Initially, assembly work would then take place in have now to be made good by the yards; that means
15. Germaniawerft, Kiel (Type XXIII): an unprotected condition at B&V. Building Slip 7 1,000 men - 2 months. That is a fact which has to
'Germaniawerft will deliver monthly from October was intended for the hrst 3 series boats; Building be noted against steel construction.
1.3/6, and attributes non-achievement of target to Slip 6 for the next 3. However, the flJ'st 4 boats were 'Use of Women:
the considerable delays caused by air-raid alarms. to be built completely by B&V and, in detail, 'Merker: 11,000 currently in the yards, with yards
Schmauterer is to investigate air-raid alarms also in sections I, 4 and 5 in Engine Factory II and the requiring an additional 8,000. That is to say 14 per
Lubeck. large sections 2 and 3 in the yard's east hall. cent of personnel. According to available reports,
'Saur demands that all yards inform Schmelter Assembly work would then take place on large the percentage of women including those requested
within 3 X 24 hours in all details how many women work-pontoons beneath the hammer-head crane. but not yet actually employed are: Neptun 28.6 per
can be used in building work by the application of Type XXIII assembly work at DW in Hamburg- cent, Howaldt-Hamburg 10.1 per cent, Seebeck 7.8
the strongest measures. When the yards make this Finkenwerder was to cease after the 67th boat in per cent, B&V 7 per cent, Kiel Area 15-20 per cent,
declaration, the possibility of providing accom- March 1945. This would allow commencement of KMW 16.5 per cent, DW 9.3 per cent, Deschimag
modation is to be stated. Desch is immediately to Type XXVI section construction in the Finken- 12.6 per cent, Eastern Area 20 per cent. Merker is
introduce acceptance engineers into the section werder shelter. Type XXIII section construction of the opinion that, on the average, the yards
construction yards to receive deliveries of sections.' and assembly work only then would be carried out should use 20 per cent.
Following a reappraisal of the state of shelter in the Kiel area by GW in the 'Kilian' and 'Konrad' Dr. Schmitz (Neptun): But the use of a large
construction, and the delay of four weeks to the shelters. The contractor for the flJ'st 140 boats was number of women makes for many diffIculties.
commencement of the Type XXVI programme still DW; for the subsequent 120 boats. Women complain about the lack of clothing and
because of late completion of drawings, the The main stumbling-block was still the footwear. There are additionally severe problems
construction plan at the beginning of October 1944 bottleneck in labour. In order to reduce the amount with open-air working, as there is no assembly
was as shown in Table 50. Assembly work on Type that ship construction lagged behind steel hangar at Neptun.
XXI at Deschimag was to cease with the 82nd boat, construction the latter - under the slogan 'Helping 'Merker: Hamburg and Bremen have especially
and be replaced by Type XXI section construction Hand' - was ordered to lend welders and htters to large percentages of those born in 1906 and later.
in May 1945. The 18 boats that remained from the ship construction from 15 October 1944. This loan They will therefore have to take on in good time
contracts dated 6 November 1943 and 6 May 1944 was intended to last only until 20 December 1944, especially large numbers of women and
were transferred to Bremer Vulkan in the 'Valentin' but it was extended, in part, to 31 January 1945. concentration-camp inmates. One must anticipate
shelter. Assembly work was to cease at B&V with The impending special call-up (SE-Aktionen) of the call-up of all men from 1906 and later with the
the 108th boat in July 1945, so that series those born up to 1906 was to be countered by an exception of a few key skills.
construction of Type XXVI could commence. Of increased use of female labour. With regard to 'Desch requests a decree by 15.11. that welders
the remaining 154 boats of B&V's contracts, existing diffIculties, the minutes of a meeting of the born in 1906 and later will be replaced by new
Bremer Vulkan would receive 101 and Schichau, aval Armaments Staff on 11 October 1944 stated trainees. Merker is releasing personnel from later
Danzig, 53 boats. On 27 September 1944, these among other points: years from the construction offices.'
transfers were given to both yards as new 'B&V is currently experiencing considerable At a subsequent Naval Armaments Meeting on
contracts, which meant that they were now difficulties in hauling sections to the slipway on 25 October 1944, Saur stated with regard to this
committed to delivering 195 boats; however, 11 account of mining operations. In connection with problem:
boats were cancelled at Schichau, which left only this, HAS should try to procure more steamships 'Ship construction must take a unihed attitude in
184 boats under contract. Type XXI section for carrying sections. The Reich' s Sea Commission this. At the moment there are still 26,000 men born
construction for Bremer Vulkan ('Valentin') was to for Merchant Service has given approval for one in 1906 and later in the yards. A breakdown in
follow from February 1945 in the 'Hornisse' shelter steamship. In addition, two Finnish lighters can be production by their call-up is unthinkable. During
(sections 3, 5 and 6) of Deschimag, and from June used. the First World War, the iron-producing industry
1945 in the 'Wespe' shelter (sections I, 2, 4, 7 and 8) 'Welders - Additional Measures at Steel employed 17 per cent of women; today 25 per cent.
of KMW, Wilhelmshaven. Construction. Yards should use not just 20 per cent but 40 per
The following construction centres were now 'Merker: HAS calculates that steel construction cent of women, even in repair work. Russian
envisaged for Type XXVI section construction. has worked 400,000 hours fewer on ring-sections women should be used not simply in subsidiary
Section 1: KMW, Wilhelmshaven in 'Fink II', Box than were laid down. Even now, on the average, 400 work, but in the main aspects of work.
Table 50. Revised construction programme of October 1944

1944 1945
to Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan reb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct NOV Dec
Type XXI:
Desch.imag
'Valentin' 8 5 9 12 12 12 12 9 3
B&V - - - - - - - 3 9 12 12 14 14 14 14 14
Sch.ichau 12 9 9 15 12 Jl 11 9 8 6 6
Total 6 5 9 9 9 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
26 21 27 36 31 31 31 29 28 26 26 22 22 22 22 22
Type XXVI:
B&V - - - - - - I I - 2 8 10 12 12
Type XXIII:
OW 17 7 10 9 8
GW - 1 3 7 7 7 7 7 10 10 10 10 10 10 to 10
Total 17 8 13 16 15 15 15 7 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
CONSTRUCTIO THE TWILIGHT OF DEFEAT 257

Distribution of labour at naval shipyards in 1944. Distribution of man hours for
U-boat construction in 1944
JJJ.,~
9
32
j .~Otdseewell<e, Itmden:j J ~
160,000 2 KMW, W~hoilmsl1aven v- 11"
30
--:rm:.IP;id.,;ii-- -- .... ~-... ~
"".". -'''_. ......- ..
............ . ....... -.- dV~~
" r-:-: 150,000
3 OeschimaQ, ~
4 Srem,tVu"",n. v e g e s a ( : l </ / ,
5 Oeschimag, Sremen. I
e
8.lohm & VOlOS, HarnbtJ'lI
8: 7-Deu,scheWetft, Hamb<!rll
'
.
18 \
\
I
.......
\~
28 .... ~ . -- .... - '-- 140,000 8 Howaldt, HaiYlbut \
9 StUlcktin f "
/
26
17 l.-
.~
........ V NQtiprodue;m
30,000
10 dWl<, l<1eI I
11 Germanlawetft
2 Neplur>1 I
3' HowaJdt, Ki,l
4 51enln Y'¥'ds
II
II
. /-h,.,.
;/
V..... to.--..~
I 11
\
•
'
\
\'
24 120,000 15 Ae()der lube<:k 16
16 DWK, G<itenhefen p- --=: f::=, I<-
22 10,000
17 O),n.ige,Wefft /. t..-:::- ",4
18_SCh~hau, Oan69 .11U.
, 19 Schichtlu. ElblnQ /
20
,/'
;...-- ,........
100,000
'" V----:.- /h
. " / /'IJ
f-- 10 9
VV ~, t-r- V
18 !90,000
I 'I.~~%ilr/
.-/ ~ ""-."V.. .6'. III
~ ."'"
16
\ V
I--
/
180,000
/
~/.
~~/
.-v:~'/
14 Other manufacture 70,000
I V
/-~=~ --
Repairs
12 I60,000
10
Ih t:=:: ~ !50,000 V~......:::::V r- V ...---
shiP construction
~ R....-
/ V V
~ ~> __ v _A
1\
fI. erchant 40,000
Other v.arsh'is;; CoilS-tNetjQh
V
II 30,000
.
vf--- I/r-
V
V -
6 ~ -.;
4 '" "---
New U·boat building
:..t
:20,000
c
~
i
~
1
Ii"'"
/f-;rV'
,~
~~ 5
o
.. >
.00
EO.
.c
c
~ L.
~
::> E
0 Z .. 0 2
M A M J J A SON 0 MAMJJASDND F 1 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
1~3 1~ 1~
Table 51. Revised programme, 18 October 1944
1944 1945
to Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
Type XXI: 26 18 26 32 33 33 33 33 26 26 26 22 22 22 22 22
Type XXVI: - - - - - - 1 1 - - 2 4 8 10 12
Type XXIII: 17 7 12 14 14 14 12 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
-
Table 52, The New Construction Plan, end October 1944
1944 1945
Type Construction yard Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
VIICI41 Flensburger, SBG - 2 1
Other yards - 2 2
IXD/42 AG Weser - - - 1 1
XVllB B&V - - 1 2 2
XVIlK GW
XX GW
XXI B&V 9 5 12 12 12 12
AG Weser 5 7 9 11 12 12
Schichau, Danzig 3 7 8 8 8 8
Bremer Vulkan - - - - -
XXIII DW 5 12 9 8 8 8
GW 1 2 5 6 6 7 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
XXVI B&V - - - - - - 1 1 - - 2 4 8 10 12
127 ISeehundl GW 17 25 25 25 24 23 6 - - - - - - - -
Schichau, Elbing 17 37 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45
Klockner, Ulm - 3 10 10 11 12 29 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35
Note, A dot signifies 'unknown', a dash 'no delivery',

'Saur orders that, within a fortnight, the Labour components that could not be delivered punctually which had been heavily bombed, was rendered
Vnit of the Armaments Staff should set 40,000 to section yards. If items were refused on grounds adequate for the purpose by a drastic curtailment
women to work in the yards.' This was not of incomplete fittings, this had to be reported of all necessary transportation. The password for
implemented, however; Donitz obtained permission immediately to the delegate responsible for the preferential consignments was 'Tanks'; con-
from Hitler on 31 October 1944 to exempt yard section yard and to the Special Committp.e for signments with the password 'Navy' had secondary
personnel from the special call-up and all further V-Boats, together with an estimate of work priority. While most of the yards had supplies of
draftings. necessary for rectification and the extent of the materials because of the considerable delays in
The pressure of delivery dates for the new delay that this would cause. The amount of work deliveries, the fll'st noticeable effects were severe
construction programme had meanwhile had the involved was calculated by the appointed engineer shortages of coal and power. A minute from a
effect of increasingly pushing repair work into the in the section yard. The Special Committee for meeting of the Navy Armaments Staff on 27
background. In the short term, the repair organiza- V-Boats then decided the fmal hauling-up date at October 1944 stated: 'The supply of coal at Seebeck
tion had to supply urgently needed tonnage for the the assembly yard. If, as a result of sections being is sufficient only until 31.10. Working will now have
numerous operational and transport undertakings, refused, blame could be apportioned to a section to be restricted to an 8-hour day'. And on 1
particularly in the Baltic. Concerning this, Saur yard, Merker reserved the right to take special November 1944, it was notpd:
stated on 25 October: measures 'for such blame must be considered as 'As the situation in the Ruhr has now become
'Repairs: Repair work is a special concern of the damaging to our waging of war'. critical by the loss of 70 per cent of production,
Navy's and, according to a direction of Speer's, is
one step above new constructions. One notices
psychological inhibitions in all places, but repair The revised organization of the armament and equipment branches olf
work must be given preference.
'He draws comparisons with locomotive the Navy, November 1944
construction and tank construction and demands Supreme C-in-C of the Navy Reichsminister for Armament
that HAS make a basic research into the repair (Donitz) and Ammunition (Speer)
question. Efforts must be made to use once again
the smallest yards and repair undertakings that are Chief of Navy Armament Armaments staff (Saurl
still capable of such work. (Backenkohler)
'He demands comradeship and mutual support I _
along the single chosen way. Head Office for Warship - - Ship Construction Commission--Main Committee for Ship
'He will take to task any fll'ms that oppose the Construction (K) (Ruge) (Topp) Construction (HAS) (Merker)
goal.
'Every opportunity must be taken with all Section shipbuilding and Committees for V-boats Special committee for V-boats
possible resources to protect work from air mechanical engineering (Oelfken): motor torpedo-boats, (Sperling)
attack. ... ' (Heimberg) torpedo-boats, minesweepers Committees for minesweepers,
But, even with such threatening words further and landing-craft torpedo-boats, wooden boats
delivery delays were not to be avoided. As early as K I V (Aschmoneit) _ and merchantmen
18 October, therefore, a new plan had to be issued in Construction inspectorate
which the shortages to December 1944 would be K II V (Oelfkenl --Central construction offices
made good by a greater production at the beginning V-boats: Ingenieurbiiro
of 1945. The start of series construction of Type Gliickauf (IBG) (Fischer)
XXVI had to be delayed by a further month. Minesweepers: Ingenieurbiiro
The yard delegates regarded the scheduled East, Konigsberg
deliveries of Type XXI for November and Landing-craft: Ingenieurburo
December 1944 as impossible, because insufficient West, Walsum
sections could be brought to the ways. As was
usually the case, this excuse was not immediately
recognized by Merker and Desch, who invariably In November 1944, in connection with more wide- construction workers and other skilled workers will
believed that they could rectify an insufficiency of ranging personnel changes in the Supreme Naval be drafted in large numbers into the Ruhr. The very
material items by organizational methods. The new Command, a new organizational chain of command continuation of current production undertakings
construction plan of the end of October 1944 did, was set up in Armament and Equipment branches and the alleviation of bomb damage is therefore
however, take account of some part of the reduced of the Navy. seriously being placed in jeopardy. The non-arrival
production expected for Type XXI. It was not clear of steel items from the Ruhr makes a basic change
whether, and how, the quantities could have been 'The Restricted Immediate Programme' of programme necessary. Herr Desch is preparing a
made good in the following months. A decision On 11 September 1944, the United States First new, essentially smaller programme. A 45-hour
regarding production of Type XXI from April 1945 Army reached the border of Germany, north of week has now been introduced at Deschimag. There
was, therefore, postponed. Trier, but German resistance now began to will be no working on Saturday and Sunday. The
In order to do something about the constant increase. The tenacious defence of the mouth of the tramway system in Bremen is not working from
delays occasioned by the delivery of incomplete or Scheidt and of the Aachen area thwarted Allied today through lack of electricity. All yards report
inadequately-built sections, Merker authorized plans for a quick occupation of western Germany. difficulties in procuring of wagons.'
engineers in the assembly yards, by circular letter Continuation of the war effort was unthinkable However, during the next months, thanks to
on 14 November 1944, to refuse acceptance of while this direct threat was posed to the Ruhr, and foggy weather, the assembly yards managed to
incomplete sections. In the interpretation of this a counter-offensive into Belgium was planned as a achieve something like their targets for the fll'st
decree, a section was considered to be complete method of easing it. In order to take part in this time. In December 1944, 28 Type XXI, 6 Type
when it could be shown that all the items sent by a important battle, battered and weary armoured XXIII and one each of Type VIIC/41 and XVIIB
section yard contained all necessary fittings, To divisions had to be reorganized and supplied with were delivered. This made a total of 36 V-boats or
assist in the assessment, therefore, the Procure- ammunition and fuel, and all the resources of the 47,981 tons of V-boat tonnage (excluding midget
ment Department of HAS sent a fortnightly list of Ruhr were to be geared to a powerful armament boatsl, i.e., more than three times the monthly
bottlenecks to various yards. enumerating those effort to aid this undertaking. The railway network, average between autumn 1941 and summer 1944.
CONSTRVCTION IN THE TWILIGHT OF DEFEAT 259

However, it was evident to Merker that this high Part IV: 238 each of 11 tons=2,618 tons. this body, too, has been hit several times recently
rate of delivery could not be maintained. It had Part V: 224 each of 29 tons=6,496 tons. by bombs.
resulted from a large armament effort in the Part VI: 248 each of 21 tons=5,208 tons. 'In contrast, this delivery of the main electric
summer, contained some overspill from the poor Part VII: 246 each of 17 tons=4,182 tons. motors and switchboards is in line with HAS
delivery situation of November and, in the Total: 28,468 tons. requirements. Individual delivery problems are
meantime, the position had changed, especially This gives a total amount of 137,006 tons. The compensated for by existing delays at the yards. In
with regard to steel supplies. It was therefore portion supplied by the steel construction firms up the field of electrical items, the main problem at the
decided that a new plan ('Restricted Immediate to 31 December 1944 amounted, however, to moment is in the production of batteries. Air
Programme') should be drawn up, based almost 146,000 tons because as a result of different bases attacks have meant that the main suppliers for
solely on items already available from steel of calculation, the total weight of steel was Type XXI have suffered the following losses:
construction. According to this, it should be approximately 7 per cent higher than the quoted AFA, Hagen: 6 sets (bomb damage).
possible to build a total of 350 Type XXI and 135 amounts. Of the rest of the material, amounting to AFA, Hannover: 7 sets (power shortage).
Type XXIII boats by the autumn of 1945. In approximately 83,400 tons, a further 3,400 tons AFA, Vienna-Floridsdorf: 2 sets (bomb damagel.
reports made at the beginning of January 1945 by was delivered to the yards. This left 80,000 tons. Total: 15 sets, i.e" 50 per cent of the monthly
the Main Committees for Ship Construction, Steel However, for a further 100 sets of crude sections, target.
Construction and Electro-Technology to the an additional 95,000 tons would be necessary, that To these must be added the hoped-for production of
Industrial Control Section of the Technical OffIce, is to say 15,000 tons more than we calculate is 3 sets from AFA Posen. The signifIcance of these
the conditions necessary for this new plan were available without taking into account amounts lost figures is that in January no more than 20 sets will
evaluated and a picture was drawn of the state of by enemy action. In the estimation of the Main be available; in February, at the most, 23 sets of
production at that time: Committee for Steel Construction, 17,000 tons batteries for Type XXI. This means that only
'The extent of the ship construction programme must be provided additionally for the immediate approximately two-thirds of the planned V-boat
is really decided by the bottlenecks in steel programme for Type XXI and 1,200 tons for Type production will be possible. Extraordinary
construction. I n order to fulfil the ship construction XXIII. measures will have to be taken in the matter of
programme authorized by Hitler in 1943, including 'Thus the Immediate Programme could be battery production if a catastrophe in V-boat
the Hansa programme, a monthly delivery of secured by the production of a further 18,200 tons production is to be avoided.'
55,000 tons of steel are necessary, of which 46,000 of steel by the end of January. The vicissitudes of Questioned by the Allies after the war,
tons are ships' plates. However, the average steel deliveries for V-boat Programmes XXI and Vizeadmiral Karl Topp stated:
amount of steel delivered up to September 1944 was XXII I leaves, however, little hope that this 'The sole bottleneck that really mattered in
only 39,000 tons, In October, 31,000 tons were quantity of steel will be forthcoming: V-boat production and which had the effect of
delivered. In November, as the result of almost no Planned Delivered Discrepancy preventing yards from fully accomplishing their
shipments from the Ruhr, a mere 11,000 tons. 1944 tons tons tons monthly V-boat deliveries was that of batteries.
Consequently, in December 1944 an immediate August 15,000 15,000 This shortage . . . came about because (a) The
programme was decided upon which should permit Sept 15,000 12,000 3,000 Armaments Ministry, after its assumption of
the delivery of 350 boats of Type XXI and 135 Oct 15,000 7,000 8,000 responsibility for naval armaments in 1943, did not
boats of Type XXIII by July/August 1945. For ov 15,000 5,000 10,000 carry out the Navy's intention to set up in good
Type XXI, steel construction received by 31 Dec 15,000 2,000 13,000 time additional battery factories in Vienna and
December 1944, 225,000 tons from the rolling mills In order that at least the crude sections can be Bohemia, or initiated their construction too late.
and 7,000 tons by HAS allocation, making a total of delivered for which a considerable quantity of Thus, when production facilities at Hagen were
232,000 tons of steel. Steel construction despatched accessories is already available, it has been destroyed and Hannover was unusable through
2,000 tons of this amount to the yards for outer necessary to move the production of rolled steel paralysing of power-stations in west Germany,
hulls and pressure hulls for crude sections I and from the steel works in the Rhineland and the Ruhr Vienna [LiesingJ had not yet commenced
VII I constructed at the yards. This meant they to central Germany, as it is very likely that, in the production. No preparations were in force for
retained 230,000 tons. Production up to 31 coming weeks or perhaps months the western additional production undertakings to rectify
December 1944 was reported by Steel Construction rolling mills will not be available. matters. (b) At this same point in time, the battery
as: 'It had been planned to commence crude section factory in Posen was lost through the Russian
Crude Section I: 153 constructed and 31 construction of Type XXVI in January 1945. advance.'
incomplete, i.e.. total 184 each of 37 tons=6,808 However, as there are not even materials for the And further, in the Main Committees' memo·
tons. Type XXI and XXIII Immediate Programme, randum:
Pressure Hull II: total 231 each of 59 tons=13,629 there is, at the moment, no prospect for the Type 'The situation with regard to transport is
tons. XXVI series construction. catastrophically bad. The large V-boat sections can
Pressure Hull III: total 230 each of 69 tons=15,870 'While, due to the shortage of materials, there is only be transported by water. The different breaks
tons. less pressure on steel construction, the con- in the canal system has hit ship construction
Pressure Hull IV: total 254 each of 48 tons= 12,192 tinuation of the 'Helping Hand' activity at the especially hard. In November, bombing of the
tons. yards is evening matters up. A large number of Dortmund-Ems Canal held up approximately 80
Pressure Hull V: total 231 each of 86 tons=19,866 workers is also occupied with Ruhr relief, with crude sections. As far as possible cargoes have had
tons. improving output of the armaments industry there to by-pass the points where damage has occurred
Pressure Hull VI: total 213 each of 96 tons=20,488 and with repair work occasioned by bombing. by road, and, from Munster to Meppen by the
tons. Remaining work capacity has been funnelled off coastal canal, which has not received as much
Pressure Hull VII: total 245 each of 43 tons= 10,535 into various programmes (e,g., anti-aircraft). damage as the more heavily used Dortmund-Ems
tons. However, fums can only work even in these ways Canal. As the railway system in the present state of
Crude Section VIII: 133 constructed, 50 incom- when materials and acetylene are available, The affairs cannot nearly cope with requirements, a
plete, i.e., total 183 each of 50 tons=9,150 tons. bottleneck in acetylene has occurred through large portion of important deliveries have to be
Total steel used in construction: 108,538 tons. bombing of the Knappsackwerke, which supplied made by lorry [wood-gas propulsion]. However, not
Additionally, the following outer hulls were the whole Rhine/Ruhr district. An additional enough lorries are available.
supplied for crude sections: bottleneck is that of electrode production. The 'The very large number of ships requiring repaIr
Part II: 266 each of 24 tons=5,424 tons. Westfiilische Vnion in Hamm supplies over 50 per following air attacks in ports or through mini'
Part III: 227 each of 20 tons=4,500 tons. cent of electrodes for the V-boat programme and damage has meant that an enormous increase in tht·

labour force is necessary and this requirement has crude section 2 was to be built at Elbe 17 Dock, However, the new Russian offensive. which led to
been aggravated by the fact that, the speedy alongside the Type XVIIB small Walter the loss of the Upper Silesian area and of the yards
('vacuation of Holland has caused 170 ships needing U-boats being constructed there. As the middle in the Danzig area, made nonsense of this
attention and repair to be collected in German ports portion of crude section 3 was at this time in the programme even as it was being formulated. Only
from Dutch ones. East Hangar and could not be brought out because top-priority armament undertakings 'of an
'Following the Fuhrer's decree that yard workers of destruction of train and track systems, it was importance crucial to the war' could bring about
should be protected from call-up, the Navy had obvious that assembly of this crude section would such an 'emergency programme'. The repair
the temporary use of over 11,000 soldiers and have to take place in the East Hangar if much time programme was the most important one in the
additionally prisoners-of-war and Dutch workers, were not to be lost. Consequently, at least one crane aval Sector that could be accorded this treatment.
and the situation at the moment is rather better. and the track would have to be made good once
However, the need to take over the more urgent again. A new date for the commencement of section The terminal phase
ship repairs means an interruption and post- construction was set for 18 February 1945. On 22 January 1945, the HAS prepared a list of
ponement of new construction. U-boat repairs are With regard to U-boat Type XXIII. the following probable losses to be expected in the shipbuilding
to be given especially the highest priority. Initiated new decisions were taken on 11 January 1945. industry as a result of the Russian offensive in
by Donitz, a special action is to commence whereby '1. U-boat Programme DW GW Total Prussia. The loss of these yards meant the
the number of repair workers for January will To 31 December 1944 33 2 35 following production losses.
increase from 27,000 to over 40,000. This can only January 1945 11 4 15 30 per cent of Type XXI U-boat production.
be achieved if at least 4,400 men engaged on new February 1945 6 5 11 60-70 per cent of Seehund production.
construction are handed over to U-boat repairs. March 1945 2 5 7 50 per cent of minesweeper production.
'The severe power crisis occasioned by the non- April 1945 2(4) 5 7(9) 100 per cent of torpedo-boat production.
arrival of coal supplies reached its climax at the end May 1945 - 5 5 20 per cent of MTB production.
of December 1944. However, since then, efforts June 1945 - 7 7 33 per cent of repair capacity.
made by the Navy, by the Armaments Staff and by From July 1945 - 10 10 The well-timed transfer of skilled workers, however,
the Coal Authorities have reduced the seriousness Total to the end of 1945: 54 93 147 meant that some repairs could be carried out at
of the situation somewhat. The position with regard 2. The section yard for all sections, apart from yards in western Germany. As had already
to power supplies is now that, apart from smaller section 4, is - from the fIfteenth GW boat (U4713) happened, with the evacuation of Holland,
and medium shipyards, they are more or Ie - DW until March 1945, when DWK in Kiel can whenever possible, all ships awaiting repair, and
reasonable. ' take over sections 3 and 4 as long as punctual vessels launched but not yet complete were towed
Despite the abysmal state of the armaments delivery of crude sections can be made. In order to to ports in western Germany. Among these were
industry, preparations went ahead for the benefIt the production of Seehund and the the incomplete Type XXI boats U3526-U3534 from
commencement of construction of the new Walter- 'Alberich' covering (from April 1945. 6 boats per Danzig, and perhaps U3535-U3537 which had been
boats. On 8 December 1944, a new timetable was month) at GW, the latter will transfer a number of lowered into the water. When the Russians entered
necessary for the start of Type XXVI at B&V. its crude sections to the smoothly-functioning Schichau. Danzig, only U3538-U3542 were on the
Director Suchting suggested 20 February 1945 as sequence construction at DW. Steel construction slips. (Swedish photographs show two captured
the commencing date for section construction for section portions being brought back from Italy will Type XXI in Danzig being towed by the Russians
the ftrst prototype, U4501. I n particular, he be taken first to DW, Hamburg. From there, all to Kronstadt.) Additionally, the Russians acquired
justified the two months' postponement by crude sections 3, 3a, and 4 will be taken to DWK.' a further eigh t sections 1. twelve sections 2,
outstanding deliveries (e.g., gearing to be supplied Not until 26 January 1945 was the Restricted fourteen sections 3, fourteen sections 4. twelve
by Krupp), the fact that steel construction was four Immediate Programme authorized as Reichs State sections 5. ten sections 6, ten sections 7 and eight
weeks in arrears by delayed delivery of Secret No. 82. With the title 'Completion sections 8. But certain valuable supplies had been
constructional drawings from the IBG, and bomb Programme for Type XXI. XXIII and XXVI'. the transported in the steamship Celebes to Hamburg.
damage caused on 4 and 21 November 1944. An new total delivery was determined as: 336 Type where they arrived at the beginning of March 1945.
additional reason was the shortage of personnel. Up XXI, 140 Type XXIII and 20 Type XXVI. Any The available yards in western Germany were
to then, only 100 men had been approved by the boats that had been placed in contract over and now to carry out only important tasks that could be
Labour Authority for Type XXVI. Some of these above these were not to proceed; in the case of Type completed quickly - principally repairs. But they
reasons (bomb damage) were not accepted by the XXI, only from the 401st; Type XXIII, from the would complete, from the new construction
Special Committee for U-Boats, and the 171st and Type XXVI. from the 25th boat. programme. those U-boats whose construction time
commencement of section construction was set for
1 February 1945. No precise date was set for the Table 53. Estimated capacity loss expected upon Russian advance. 22 January 1945
series production that would follow, because of the
confused situation in the Ruhr. Personnel:
For the fust boat, an internal decision suggested Yard Type of construction Repairs Total
commencement of assembly on 5 April and delivery
I. Lindenau, Memel lIater Pillaul Older minesweepers and M43 Sections few 400
on 4 June 1945. Only the fust two boats counted as
prototypes and these were to be built as a matter of 2. Schichau, Konigsberg Minesweepers M43 14 per month) and M43 2.400 9,200
urgency. It was now decided that sections 1 and 4 sections
should be constructed in Engine Factory II (M-II) 3. Maureb. Pillau 425 500
with sections 2, 3 and 5 constructed on a concrete 4. Schichau. Elbing Torpedo·boats (1 per month) and Seehunds 600 6,400
155 per month)
strip on the west side of the East Hangar, which 5. Schichau. Danzig. V-boats Type XXI 18 per month) and 300 .300
was to be ready in January 1945. However, on 31 sections 1V and V
December 1944, an air raid on B&V thwarted this 6. Danziger Werft. Sections I. I I. II I. VIII for U-boat Type 2.500 9,200
intention. Especially badly damaged was the East XXI
Hangar, by several direct hits, with trains and 7. Deutsche Werke, Gotenhafen Sections VI & VII for U·boat Type XXI 2.200 6.400
8. Danziger Waggonfabrik Motor torpedo-boats 1.300
track systems destroyed. Of necessity, the 9. KMA, Gotenhafen 600 1,500
assembly of section portions was interrupted by the
need for clearing-up and urgent repair work. It was Total 9,000 43,200
Percentage of total Naval Armaments 33% 28%
to recommence on 15 January 1945 and, in fact,

was short. On 26 January 1945, Speer told Hitler within the framework of the repair programme. with an unconditional priority over all other
that 170 Type XXI and 70 Type XXIII boats, from Above all, the repair programme was to secure armament programmes not part of the Emergency
the new construction programme, should now be capacity for the increasingly important transport Programme.
included in the emergency programme, which now tasks in the Baltic and to Norway. It was also 'To aid this task the Armament Commissions will
had absolute priority over all other urgency stages intended that the majority of training U-boats guarantee production supplies such as coal, power
and was to be prosecuted energetically. Sections for which, with the virtual cessation of training, had and transport space. As it is unlikely that power
these boats were already available or were being been tied up in ports, should be converted or supplies will be available in sufficient quantity for
constructed. By the end of January 1945, 95 Type equipped for operational use. At this juncture, the the New Construction Programme, repair work is to
XXI were ready and a further 60 were on the slips; German U-boat arm totalled 416 boats, including be carried out with the use of all possible work
sections for a further 15 were in position on the 272 school and training boats, but only 144 forces at the expense of new construction - with
sequence assembly lines of the section yards. In the operational U-boats! On 6 February 1945, a telex the exception of certain U-boat programme
case of Type XXIII, the corresponding numbers from Merker to B&V expressed the absolute described in the separate letter; such repair work
were 50, 11 and 9. By 1 April 1945, 70 Type XXI II priority accorded to the repair programme: must certainly be carried out in 2 shifts and, if
and 125 Type XXI boats were to be delivered. If the 'By command of the Fuhrer, the sphere of ship possible, in 3 shifts.
overall U-boat programme could no longer be repair is to be included completely in the emergency 'I have to expect that in the light of thl
protected against call-up, at least the completion of programme of the Reichs Minister for Armament. seriousness of the situation, the works director
boats lying on the slips of B&V, AG Weser, This means that repairs, including the supply of will do their utmost to carry out this requirement
Schichau, Danzig, DW and GW should be essential items and spare parts, is to be carried out and that in the next weeks the Navy and the Reich
Table 54. The Emergency Programme of 10 February 1945
'1. TYPE XXI PROGRAMME 'II. TYPE XXIII PROGRAMME
. J. Section Construction:
'I. Programme at 10 Feb 1945:
Target for Available as
Emergency at 10 Feb 1945
Programme 1945 Balance By 1 Feb Feb March April May Total
Section I Howaldt-Kiel 150 144 6 OW-Hamburg 41 7' 49

Section II KMW, Wilhelmshaven 150 137 13 GW 7 5' 4' 5' 25
Section III Bremer Vulkan 70 68 2 74
48 12 5 4 5
OW-Hamburg 80 66 14
Section IV Flender Werke 150 157
'The February boats. three of them being retrospective to January. were not compIN",
Section V Bremer Vulkan 65 61 4
because of shortage of batteries,
Howaldt·Hamburg 86 74 12
'Among these two' Alberich' boats.
Section VI Bremer Vulkan 88 78 10
'From April. all boats have' Alberich '.
OW-Hamburg 64 57 7
Section VII Seebeck 150 141 9 2. Section Construction:
Section VIII DWK 150 150 OW is to deliver the sections for the 14th-21st and for the 25th GW boat, The 74 n"
construction boats (4 more than originally called for in the Emergency Programmel or
'Steel construction items for deliveries still outstanding are guaranteed apart from 1-2 guaranteed their steel construction items. Over and above these, the following crucl,
crude sections III and VI at OW, Hamburg. sections are available:
'Section yards have been instructed that all available supplies surplus to those required by ection I II III IV
the Emergency Programme are to be placed at the disposal of assembly yards for use in new o. of items 8 2 - 6
constructions. repairs and remaining work on U·boats.
'3. Boat deliveries by 10 Oct 1945:
'2. Assembly Construction: Slippings'up in the western area as per the Emergency
OW GW Total
Programme
Available as at (a) Boats ready for operations. 1 1
Target 10 Feb 1945 (bl Boats at the yards before operational use. 6' 6
(cl Boats in operational group training. 10 11
Deschimag 65 57 (dl Boats delivered to KLA. I' 1
B&V 75 59 (e) Boats at UAK trials. 13 1 14
Total 140 116 (f) Boats commissioned prior to UAK testing. 7 5 12
(g) Delivered boats Istill at the yard). 1 1
'A further 18 complete sets of sections are available for additional slippings-up as at (hi Delivered, very badly damaged boats. 3' 3
10.2.45. The remaining 30 boats will be delivered by Schichau. Danzig. 42 7 49
'3. Boat Deliveries by 10 Feb 1945:
AG Weser B&V Schichau Total
, U2324.
lal Boats at the yards before 'U232J, U2322, U2325, U2326, U2328, U2329.
, Reported for remaining work: U2335, U2336, U234o.
operational use.' - 3' 3
Ib) Boats in operational training 'U2327.
groups. 7 9 11 27 'U2323 (Minel. U233J (Accident), U23421Minel.'
(c) Boats delivered to KLA.' I 2 1 4
Id) Boats at UAK·testing. 12 9 9 30
lei Boats commissioned prior to
UAK·testing. 9 7 2 1
(0 Delivered boats Istill at the yardl. 6 5 2 13
(gl Delivered, very heavily damaged
boats. 5' 5
35 40 25 100
, Reported for remaining work: U3OO7, U2502, U2506, U3504, U3508.
'U2503, U2511 , U25l9.
'U250J, U2504, U3ool, U350J.
'U2508 IAccident). U25l5 (Mine). U2530 (Aerial bomb), U2532 (Aerial bomb).

Sea Commission for Merchant Service will have 'General: because of the boomerang air attacks be given to the Sea Transport Chief that shipping
more shipping space at their disposal. I regard it as [see below] on Deschimag, the boats there that are space be made available for this transport under-
your duty, by personal model and unflagging capable of floating should be taken to smaller yards taking. I request that the same be carried out at
enthusiasm, to make sure that the yards carry out and ship workshops for further construction. Stettin by Gauleiter Schwede-Koburg with GW,
the above request with full zeal. Above all, I bid you Increased fighter protection is necessary.' Kiel, as the reception point.'
to try to achieve the use of as many workers as Following the conclusion of work on Type XXVI, The next naval armaments discussion, on 14
possible in 3 shifts. A single ship made ready in the the Design Department at IBG had prepared some March 1945, indicated a further worsening of the
next weeks is worth far more than 3 ships in the further design details for other projects, especially battery situation, as deliveries from the works at
coming months. midgets, but such work ceased in Blankenburg at Hagen were no longer to be counted upon in view of
'I anticipate that any problems that you cannot the end of February 1945. Dr. Fischer was rail transport diffIculties. It was decided, therefore,
solve by your own powers will be reported either to appointed Special Commissioner for the Weser that 50 sets of battery-maintenance equipment for
the Special Committee for Repairs or to me area, charged with the task of accelerating the Type XXI and other urgently required material
personally. ' preparation of available V-boats for operational should be collected from Hagen by lorry. In order to
Details of U-boats to be constructed under the use. He arrived in Bremen at a time when the increase production at AFA-Hannover, additional
Emergency Programme were announced on 10 almost-daily precision attacks by British long- skilled labour would be necessary, and these could
February 1945, as shown in Table 54. However, range Mosquito squadrons (German code-name perhaps be transferred from Hagen. Finally,
even this V-boat Emergency Programme was not to 'Boomerang') were threatening to paralyse work at Vienna-Floridsdorf was also ruled out because of
be realized. In addition to catastrophic happenings AG Weser, and when the unavailability of the transportation difficulties. Following stronger
in eastern Germany, the new Allied bombing docks meant a parlous situation for the completion pressure and forced by the turn of events, the
offensive was exacting an increasing toll from of boats that had been launched from the slipway. Supreme C-in-C of the Navy had at last agreed that
assembly yards, deliveries and traffic installations. Dr. Fischer ordered, therefore, that the boats in a two-thirds of the normal battery installation could
With regard to this, a minute of the 30th floating condition (those to U3041) leave Bremen be used in the Type XXI new-construction U-boats.
Armaments Discusssion on 26 February 1945 by 5 March 1945. It was envisaged that This meant that only the five installations that
stated: dock work should now be carried out at Wilhelms- could be delivered in March would be used to equip
'Delivery of batteries: from 28.1.-17.2.45, 7% haven and in the large dock at Wesermunde. From approximately seven boats. Batteries from the
sets of batteries were produced for Type XXI, and then on, new construction boats were to be KLA boats could be used for the boats scheduled
of these on 23.2., 1% were still in Hannover and 1'/3 launched from the slip way in such condition that for April, and each KLA boat could then be given,
in Hagen. In the same period, 5 sets of batteries they did not subsequently need to be docked. in exchange, two-section batteries from VIlC
were produced for Type XXIII and, of these, one V-boats no longer in commission, so that they could
set is still in Hannover and one in Hagen. At the Table 55. V·boat fItting-out in Weser area. 13 March 1945 remain usable for training purposes.
yards there are increasing problems through the The distribution of deliveries between B&V and
Type Type Type Type
shortage of coal, gas and electricity. Similarly there XXI IX VII II Deschimag had changed in the light of the delivery
are difficulties with battery accessories, especially situation. An HAS decision of 12 March 1945
with those for Type XXII 1. (20 complete sets of Wilhelmsha ven 6 6 9 stated that B&V should now provide only 67 boats
these were left behind in Posen!) Difficulties with Bremen - 2 4 and Deschimag 73 boats. Type XXII I production
coal and power are present also at delivery firms in Wesermiinde - 5 3 depended also on battery availability. Only five sets
Vegesack - 2
Ilmenau and Conti Hannover. Director Merker of batteries arrived at the yards in February and
states that the delivery plan for batteries Total 6 7 15 13 fIve sets in March. In order to remedy the battery
formulated at the 29th Armaments Discussion crisis, it was suggested that batteries be
cannot be achieved. On 13 March 1945, distribution of V-boat fltting- manufactured in the 'Valentin' shelter. But this
'New construction of V-boat Type XXI: in out in the Weser area was as shown in Table 55. Its shelter was already intended for 'Alberich'
February, provisionally 14; however, only 8 have excellent dock facilities meant that Wilhelmshaven covering, and was claimed by Deschimag for V-boat
been produced up to now. Delivery in March, was now to be the focal-point of V-boat fitting-out, repair work. Schwarzenbach, near Hof, was also
provisionally 9; if batteries can be made available but the severe shortage of labour prevented its intended for use as an emergency centre for battery
from KLA [construction-training] boats, a further 3 immediate use to full capacity. Dr. Fischer ordered, construction, and it was decided to direct all efforts
are possible. The idea of fitting boats with two- therefore, that this deficiency be made good by the to a speedy production of batteries there. When
thirds of the batteries was turned down by the new construction sector of AG Weser. Additionally, production slowed almost to a standstill on the last
Supreme Commander in Chief of the Navy. he proposed that personnel be allocated from yards two Type XVIIB Walter-boats at B&V, the
'Type ),XIIl: in February 7; 5 delivered up to in eastern Germany, and that those workers Admiral, U-Boats, raised an objection, but to no
now. Further deliveries depend on supply of occupied in the 'Fink II' shelter at Hamburg be avail. Likewise the request made by the Supreme
batteries. Schnorkel problems at GW. The first returned to KMW, Wilhelmshaven. However, C-in-C of the Navy for continued construction of
'Alberich' boats delivered by GW l U4709j. instead of the requested workers from eastern Type XXVI in excess of the 4 boats 'if sufficient
Suggestion: the 'Valentin' shelter to be used for yards being made available, management staff were Aurol is available' was pointless.
'Alberich' covering. GW to continue with its sent from Schichau who wished to take over part of On 24 March 1945, in 'Reich Secret Matter No.
provision of a covered-over building for' Alberich' the yard. This prompted Dr. Fischer to write to 138', the Supreme Naval Command authorized
covering. 'Alberich' materials are guaranteed for 54 Merker on 13 March 1945: 'What is necessary to cancellation of any V-boat construction that had
Type XXIII boats. The request that VIIC boats be cope with V-boat repairs in Wilhelmshaven are not yet commenced. This meant that in the Type
covered with' Alberich' means that each VIIC will qualified skilled workers, certainly not manage- XXI Programme, only 82 boats remained at B&V",--
require a similar amount to 2'1, Type XXIII boats. ment staff who neither know the area nor the 108 boats at Deschimag and 166 boats at 'Valentin'
'Type XXVI: the first 4 boats of Type XXVI are method of operations.' On 21 March 1945, Merker Bremer Vulkan, i.e.. a total of 356 boats. No
included in the Emergency Programme. Further sent the following telex to Donitz: 'An evacuation cancellations were announced for Danzig, but it was
ones will not be constructed. The Navy, however, order for the Danzig yards has still not been calculated that only 30 boats would be delivered
will try and obtain a complete clarification between received even though yards are under artillery fire. from this source. With regard to Type XXIII, 56
Donitz and Speer as to their further construction. Gauleiter Forster is requested to have an boats remained in contract at DW and 114 boats at
'The last two XVIIB boats at B&V will not have a evacuation order issued after which special yard GW, a total of 170 boats. This was many more than
completion date, as specialists are urgently personnel can be removed together with hand-tools the Emergency Programme called for and, for the
required for repair of operational boa ts. and special tools. I request further that instruction time being, the discrepancy was regarded as a
CONSTRVCTION IN THE TWILIGHT OF DEFEAT 263

quantity on which work had been suspended. On Travemunde. It was to be the fust Type and welding equipment. Repair job
the other hand, of Type XXVI, almost the entire XXI boat to undergo this aspect of carried out by our crew.
contract, with the exception of the 4 prototype training. This meant that U2516 lost 10 2.5.45 Travel submerged to Kristiansand.
boats that were to be built wholly at B&V, was days. 3.5.45 Build-in strengthenings in the shaft
cancelled. 14.2.45 Commencement of torpedo-fuing bosses, Frame 10.6, and effect
These offtcial cancellations corresponded more or training in the Travemiinde Bight at a strengthening in the torpedo hatch,
less to the resolutions that Merker had made on 23 depth of 23 metres. based on Schnee's experiences. The
February 1945, during a discussion with the Head 21.2.45 End of fuing training. Against the parts were fabricated at the Howaldt
of the Main Committee for Electro-Technology, wishes of the commander, the boat had hipyard in Kiel. The yard, however, wab
Director Luschen: no U-boats were to be built over to stay once more in Travemunde for not in a position to work on them
and above those contained in the Emergency depth-charge tests on 23.2.45. mechanically any longer, but such work
Programme. Work on all boats from Nos. 171-336 24.2.45 Arrive at the Kil'l base. was possible at the base at
of Type XXI were to be stopped, with Nos. 171-236 26.2.45 Hand over weapons to the arsenal. Kristiansand.
earmarked for use in providing available materials 27.2.45 hift berth to DWK. 5.5.45 17.15 hours. Discussion with escort
in case of renewed production at any time. All boats 29.2.45 Yard discussion concerning remaining concerning sailing on a hostile mission
from Nos. 337 were to be cancelled. In the case of work. fixed for 21.00 hours.
Type XXIII, the cancellation was from No. 141, 4.4.45 16.30 hours, in effect two days before 19.00 hours, sailing agreed. Boat is
with work stopped on Nos. 71-140, materials from completion of remaining work, during an required to moor by warp to a buoy and
these being retained. Finally, all Type XXVI boats air attack on Kiel, hit by bombs beneath prepare itself for immediate sailing for
with the exception of the fust 4 were likewise starboard bunker Ia. 8 square metres an operation to the south. The crew now
cancelled. hole caused. Sluice-door damaged. has to keep out of touch with shore
The increasing tempo of air attacks in March and Repairs not being carried out. installations.
at the beginning of April virtually halted new 9.4.45 20.15 hours, during air attack on the 8.5.45 Boat receives command to carry out a
production, and work continued only on boats that yard area, hit by 1,0001b bomb through deep diving test in which 220 metres is
were almost complete. The last Type XXI, U3051 , the pressure hull, and explosion in the reached. 20.15 hours, boat passes the
left the slipway at AG Weser on 20 April 1945 engine compartment. Port diesel Lighthouse of Oksoy. Its signalling
(seven days before the British occupation); and at shattered. Blast disintegrates the position carries the Norwegian flag.
Kiel, the last Type XXIII, U4714, at a date as late complete wood installations right Germany has capitulated, and this is thl'
as 26 April. With great tenacity, attempts were through to the fore-ship. Two men on fust intimation of it that the boat has.'
made to the last to prepare at least a few boats of watch killed, the third rescued alive. A Of those Type XXI U-boats transferred to
the new type for operational use. Over and over further hit outside on the bow torpedo Norwegian waters, only U2511 was used
again, crews that had already been trained, or hatch starboard. operationally. By the time it met a larger British
commanders with special operational experience 10.4.45 Report to Admiral Thedsen. Boat is to warship formation on 4 May 1945, U-boats had
had to change boats because the boat destined for be withdrawn from service. As the crew already been ordered not to carry out attacks
them had been destroyed while fmishing work was of U2516 is the fust one for Type XXI Likewise, a second U-boat of this type, which had
being carried out. As a specimen outline of the that has completed its training left Wilhelmshaven only on 3 May 1945, U3001:1,
great difftculties that constantly delayed the according to plan, by personal command with Manseck's crew, fell in with a large British
operational use of Type XXI in the fmal phases of of Admiral von Friedeburg, a second unit in the Skagerrak, but, in view of the impendinjl
the war, despite the relatively large number that boat, U2529, which at the moment is in capitulation, did not carry out an attack.
had been delivered, here is the laconic report of Kiel in its UAK period, is procured. Of Type XXIII on the other hand, from February
Kapitimleutnant Fritz Kallipke: 15.4.45 Take over U2529. Necessary conversions 1945, seven boats were used operationally and
'2.2.45 After the conclusion of operational are carried out to the torpedo carried out several operational voyages from thl'
group training, U2516 leaves Hela in a installation and equipment for a 5 bases of Kristiansand and Stavanger along the easl
westerly direction. months undertaking. To this end, the coast of Britain and in the Thames Estuary
4.2.45 Arrive Travemiinde. The following boats following items are taken on: 196 tons of Without loss, they sank at least fIve cargo ships,
are already there: U2506 (von Schroeter), fuel, 22 tons of supplies, 20 torpedoes of and severely damaged another, a considerablt·
U2519 (Cremer), U3007 (Manseck) and the newest type. achievement for these small boats, each of which
U2502 (Mannesmann). [U2511 (Schnee) 26.4.45 Following the conclusion of a fmal carried only two torpedoes.
with special powers, had used his trimming test, the estimated time of On 27 April, Bremen was occupied by British
judgement to cut short the training departure of 20.30 hours had to be troops; Vegesack was occupied on 30 April and
timetable and was already lying at a delayed in consequence of an air attack. Hamburg on 3 May. Following the lifting of Hitler'·
yard berth in Hamburg. This boat, as 27.4.45 06.00 hours, leave for Norway. 'scorched earth' order, the yard installations stili
the fust Type XXI, left Kil'l for Norway 28.4.45 After joining escort, enter Kattegatt. available were not destroyed. A large number 01
on 16.3.1945. The four boats already After the reef of Zeeland, dive to avoid available ships and harbour vessels were scuttled
lying in Travemiinde were likewise detection and travel underwater to prior to the actual occupation (Operation
urgently required for operations and Anholt. On surfacing part company with 'Regenbogen'), including all U-boats in servicl'
were therefore to proceed to their yards, escort, Surface travel: Anholt-Laso. Despite much destruction, the yards were still
without torpedo-fuing training, for After reaching a depth of 40 metres, functioning. When the war ended, 14 Type XXI
remaining work to be completed. At the submerge again to 40-metres line in Oslo U-boats, in different stages of assembly, were at thl
yards, during air attacks, U3007 was Fjord. building slips of B&V. Only one of these (U25iiOI
sunk, U2519 damaged and the 29.4.45 13.00 hours, arrive Horten. was seriously damaged. At Deschimag, however
commander of U2502 was killed by bomb 1.5.45 Propeller repairs necessary there were as many as 16 boats, including 4 rathl'r
splinters.] U2516 [on the other hand] (straightening of 6 deformed propeller more badly damaged W3042, U3048, U3052 and
was ordered to remain in Travemunde to tips); carried out in a remote fjord the U3060). There was, additionally, a very larKI'
await the training flotilla for torpedo other side of Horten with the boat just quantity of fully-equipped sections, either at tht·
fuing which, in the meantime, had been floating, flooded apart from diving tank ection yards or at various collecting points (e.K.,
transferred from Gotenhafen to 1. Engineers lend help with a pontoon the Veersmann Quay at Hamburg).

rvey of programmes and actual deliveries of Type XXI
I.hle 56. Type XXI programmes to December 1944
Merkers HAS Armaments Armaments Armaments Ministerial HAS HAS Armaments Armamems
Programme, Programme, Meeting, Meeting, Meeting, Programme, Programme, Programme, Planning. Meeting, Meeting,
1 Nov 1943 26 Jan 1944 22 Mar 1944 3 May 1944 15 May 1944 I June 1944 21 July 1944 7 Sept 1944 5 Oct 1944 18 Oct 1944 15 Nov 1944
I\IH:
.prj[ 3 3
IllY 9 9 3 3 3 2
'UIW 18 19 9 5 7 5 I 1 1 1 I
luly 27 27 18 8 10 9 7 7 7 7 7
uj.,"Ust 33 31 30 12 21 18 13 5 5 5 5
'ptember 33 31 30 15 30 26 22 14 13 13 13
(klober 35 31 28 20 30 29 30 28 21 18 17
\nvember 37 29 28 20 30 33 34 32 27 26 17
Il.....ember 38 27 27 18 30 33 36 33 36 32 32
I'nlal 233 207 173 140 161 155 143 120 110 102 92
1\145
,J"nuary 38 20 30 33 31 33
Ft·bruary 38 20 28 30 31 33
\larch 38 20 22 28 31 33
-\pril 22 22 29 33
lay 22 22 28 26
,June 22 22 26 26
.July 22 22 26 26
August 22 22 22 22
S\'ptember 22 22 22 22
(ktober 22 22 22 22
'ovember 22 22 22 22
Ilt'Cember 22 22 22 22
---
'Hereafter changing to Type XXV l.
'ate. A dot signifies 'unknown'. a dash 'no delivery'.
Table 57. Type XXI deliveries achieved. Table 58. Orders for Type XX 1 diesel engines
1944: 1945: 1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Yard June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total Jan Feb Mar April Total order order order order Total
-- -- -
Il&V 1 2 3 6 9 3 10 34 4 6 2 I 47 MAN 87 55 84 13 239
Ileschlmag 2 2 4 5 2 11 26 7 8 2 43 Moha 17 20 30 31 98
Schlchau 2 I 2 4 4 7 20 5 4 29 Deutz 40 23 36 16 115
Wumag 45 32 48 21 146
Total 1 6 6 12 18 9 28 80 16 14 8 I 119 Total 189 130 198 8J 598
Table 59. Type XXI section deliveries Table 60. Deliveries of diesel engines for Type XXI from Table 61. Electric motors for Type XXI
MAN-Augsburg
Section number: SSW AEG BBC Total
3' 5' 6' 9' 5' 83 Projected Completed - -
--- Orders:
1944: 1944: 1st order 57 13 20 90
March 1 1 I 1 I 2 March 16 2 2nd order 116 36 48 200
April 1 I 1 J J 4 April 16 4 3rd order 197 73 20 290
May 3 3 3 3 4 6 May 16 20 Total 370 122 88 580
June 3 3 3 3 3 13 June J6 28 Deli veries:
,July 5 4 4 4 6 9 July 16 26 To 30 Sept 1944 74 30 6 110
August 6 4 5 5 8 15 August 16 12 To end of war 252 160
September 8 8 12 9 7 17 September 20 20 -
October 9 8 14 10 11 28 October 20 20 Note: a monthly average of 20 electric motors was to be
November 9 9 11 9 7 27 November 20 26 supplied by SSW Dynamowerke and 18 by AEG, Berlin.
December 10 8 11 10 12 13 December 20 21 The first motors arrived from SSW in March 1944, and
Total 176 179 from AEG in June 1944.
Total: 65 49 65 55 60 134
A dot signifies 'unknown'.
1945:
1945:
January 20 24
January 10 10 11 9 5 13
February 20 21
February 7 5 6 1 4 4
March 13
March 1 I 2 1
April 10
Total 73 65 84 65 70 151
Total 239 224
--- ---
'From Bremer Vulkan, Vegesack.
Note: more than 400 engines (over 200 setsI were delivered
'From Howaldt, Hamburg.
by the end of the war.
'From DWK.

U-BOAT
DEVELOPMENT AT THE
END OF THE WAR
NEW BOATS ON TRIALS 300m be achieved at a speed of 8 knots with full
rudder. Subsequently in Hela. both the spade
on 17 and 19 November and by U794 on 20 and 22
November. showed that. when submerged. thl'
The Walter-boats rudders were replaced by a single lateral rudder boats could only be controlled at fast speeds (t,
On 28 September 1943. the first Walter boat. U792, positioned in the propeller wash. This arrangement knots). At slower speeds. changes of depth could
entered the water at B&V and, on 7 October. U794 provided a submerged turning circle diameter of not be made by use of the hydroplanes. The boat
followed at GW. Between 15 October and 9 180m at a speed of 4.8 knots with full rudder. On i 1 certainly became down at the head with
November. initially only with U792. comprehensive November 1943, the initial surface acceptance trip hydroplanes inclined downwards. but the effect of
surface tests of the lateral rudder installation were was carried out, after which U792 was commis- this was nullified by positive buoyancy. A
carried out by the yard. These showed that the sioned on 16 November. corresponding effect appeared when th
divided lateral rudder was considerably under- During submerged trials using the electric motor. hydroplanes were inclined upwards. when the boat
dimensioned: only after increasing the area of the it was evident in both boats that the lack of forward became stern heavy. At even slower speeds. and
rudder surfaces several times. fmally by 62 per hydroplanes showed to considerable disadvantage with very precise controlling of the boats. it wa
cent. could a surface turning circle diameter of at slower speeds. The ftrst submerged runs by U792 possible once again to achier changes of depth by
Walter U-boat Wa201.
,
'0 \ \
(
Conning-tower minus hood IU793l
.1·.+
I D D 1
~-- --:-.!~::==::.: --'- - -;.- --T-t - --,;;-.. _. ---:~I ,D
r-
.1
0< - ' I ,.
-,
r'
-, J
"
- --~';'-'I-~'+--~-l -J-
-2
_0
•D
• I
D
KJ
" " IS . " " " 20
266 U-BOAT DEVELOPMENT AT THE END OF THE WAR

~
parallel steering': - slow ascent with hydroplanes had been expected, which was attributed to more the turbine compartment and, next day, the first
Inclined downwards, or slow descent with hydro- favourable resistance properties than had been loggings were made with the Walter-installation.
planes inclined upwards. On 22 November 1943, the manifest in model tests at the HSV A. In surface On 19 December, however, trials had to be halted
following measures were suggested as a remedy: travel, too, the boat's resistance proved to be because of poor Aurol concentration.
I. Reducing the size of the fms in order to bring smaller than had originally been calculated, and On 6 January 1944, the necessary new Aurol
about a reduction of the considerable hydro- this was verified after measurements of fuel arrived at Hela, and was supplied to U792. After a
dynamic stability. consumed during the trip to Hela. closed-cycle test at the pier, the boat sailed on 8
:.!. Reduction of the weight-stability to the smallest At 75 seconds, the diving time of U792 was quite January, to carry out a test of the Walter-system
permissible measure by re-stowing ballast. lengthy, certainly in the light of opinions under travelling conditions. After unsuccessful
:I. Installation in the fore-ship of a turnable fm that concerning submarines at that time. During a attempts to ignite the system, the boat had to be
('ould be swung out, providing a reduction in the diving test on 11 January 1944, at I-ton negative put back to port. The combustion-chamber cover
dynamic stability at slow speeds. buoyancy, the following results were obtained: 15 was buckled and torn. After the repair. as there was
However, on 26 November 1943, the UAK seconds flooding time for diving tanks; after 19 till no ignition. the ignition valve unit was
decided: 'In order that, at all costs, tests of the
Walter-installation shall not be delayed, both boats
ore to proceed in their present condition to Hela. It
is suggested that depth-controlling tests be carried
out by the UAK Branch Department at Danzig on
one of the boats with fixed fms on the fore-ship, as
long as this can be done without any hindrance to
the Walter trials.' On 1 December 1943, U792 and
U794 reached the testing unit for Walter-boats in
Hela. Initially, further trials were carried out to test
diesel and electric drives in the interests of
investigating the steering capabilities. On 16
December, U794 and, on 17 and 19 December, U792
made several submerged measured-mile runs, with
a fixed fm, 3.40m long, secured to the fore-ship.
After the results of wind tunnel tests at the LF A, it
had been expected that U792 would show better
depth-controlling properties than U794, given the
same conditions. However, at the very start of
depth-controlling, it was noticeable that U792 had
greater stability with less control than U794.
U792 (Wa201) in Kaiser Wilhelm Canal. November 1943.
Equipped with a fm, the lowest speeds for normal,
acceptable controlling was 2.7 knots for U794 and seconds, upper deck beneath the surface; after 42 removed and exchanged for that from U794 (which
3.6 knots for U792. Above all, in these tests the seconds, upper edge of bridge beneath the surface. was not ready for trials because of turbine damage).
weight-stability of U792 was still larger; even when Apparently, during diving, the boat was in a On 10 January, a further attempt was made, using
it was reduced, the depth-controlling properties of position of suspension from its bridge super- the Walter-installation. During this trip, consid-
U792 remained unsatisfactory. Sudden trimming structure. erable temperature fluctuations occurred in the
and weight changes, such as occur when, for The first trials voyage with a Walter-installation combustion chamber, caused by the jamming of a
example, a torpedo is hred, just could not be was made by U792 on 21 December 1943, after a turbulence disc in the feed-water meter. Neverthe-
compensated dynamically. test scheduled for 20 December had been less, a submerged run was attempted with the
Even at higher speeds, U792 did not come up to abandoned when the quantity-regulating Walter-installation. High combustion-chamber
expectations as regards directing force supplied by mechanism had not functioned (quantities of four temperature caused the insulation jacket of the
the hydroplanes: at 13 knots, it amounted to only different substances: Aurol, fuel, feed-water and dust separator to ignite, but it extinguished itself
56 per cen t of the LF A measuring value, and the compensation water). The installation was tried out from lack of oxygen in the partitioned-off
counter-turning moment of the bridge was twice as for ten minutes on the surface, and twelve minutes compartment. Exhaust gas traces were observed in
big as had been planned. The measured propeller submerged. But the effect of this was that steam the water by an escort ship. When in use, but not
revolutions at 300rpm at 13 knots were higher than made its way through the labyrinth of turbines into ignited, the Walter-installation caused a clearly
U-BOAT DEVELOPMENT AT THE END OF THE WAR 267

wanted to use U792 in preference, as he considered
U792 turbine compartment. this boat the more reliable, but this would have
meant that Aurol would have to be transferred and
a 2 3 m Dbnitz did not want to waste time on this. Apart
from an initial failure of the regulator, the trial run
of U794 went smoothly, however. Heller took the
boat through all speed ranges, and carried out
appropriate alarm manoeuvres. He repeatedly
switched from electric drive to Walter-drive. Dbnitz
and his entourage (Admiral von Friedeburg,
Admiral Backenkbhler, Admiral Thedsen, and
Konteradmiral Godt) were most enthusiastic. This
must have been the only occasion when five
Turbine oil .'C~~dense; -"-: 4-fuels

Oiving·tank 1 Packing- cooler _ ~regu,ator
. storage
:; tank water tank ::
' .
... ,~f-----------_·_--·_·.\,:;-:'... :
'--._._. -~.
Fuel-oil bunker 1a ......... ~
visible light-green trail in the water, which, when first run without closed water. The feed-water
the installation was ignited, immediately dis- packing of the turbine stuffing boxes had shown
appeared. itself to be relative1y ineffectual; if it were not used,
The difficulties experienced with the quantity- the closed-water installation could be simplifIed.
regulating system, which almost certainly had not Above all, the electrically-driven packing-water
been developed to a point of functional reliability, pump, which was liable to break down, could be
as well as the above-mentioned temperature dispensed with. In its place, a simple hand pump
variations in the steam mixture strained the was used to empty and fILl the closed-water gravity
turbines considerably. Further breakdowns were tank.
caused by the unsatisfactory piston-rod coLlar On 20 February, for the fIrst time, the Walter
tightness of the turbines, and the unsatisfactory installation ran for 50 minutes underwater without
lack of pressure caused by over-pressure in the interruption. However, difficulties involving the
closed water tank. This meant that vapour was not regulator and ignition valve occurred in subsequent
sucked into the stuffing boxes, but entered the runs. During measured-mile runs and progressive-
turbine compartment where this oxygen-enriched speed runs with the bridge partly covered by two
steam caused damage to the insulations of the fIeld flaps and without a guard rail, an average Cw value
windings of the electric motors of the various of 203.5 was obtained, which was well above the
auxiliary engines. After this had caused a total value obtained in model tests. At a lower speed
breakdown of the vapour-pump motor on 11 (5.39 knots) this value was reduced to 198.5 because
January, U792 was taken into dock for an overhaul of the more difficult depth-controlling previously
on 16 January. However, the problems were not described, which meant that the rudder had to be
solved. The vapour pump worked badly, with over- hard over. In all these tests, performance was
pressure in the packing-water tank causing the same measured by the Maihak-torsion indicator. The
effects. There were additional ignition problems performance of the electric motor was also
caused by a leak in the ignition valve unit, which evaluated. In order to establish the towed
was difficult to rectify. On 22 January, when performance of the boat, on the surface and
warping, a collision with the jetty occurred and this submerged, a test was carried out by a Type IXD 2
caused slight damage to the fore-ship. The boat was boat towing U792, without her propeller. But no
docked once again on 26 January for an intended absolute conclusions were drawn from these tests.
exchange of turbines, and the opportunity was As the water regulator kept breaking down when
taken to improvise repairs to the damaged fore- the Walter system was in use, it was often operated
ship. The hydroplanes were also enlarged, and the by hand. On 31 March 1944, the installation ran
divided rudder blades were replaced by a single perfectly in U792, apart from a sticking exhaust
rudder blade of a larger surface area. Dismantling valve. The fIrst teething troubles had been
the vapour pump showed that the cellular blades of overcome.
this water-ring pump had been damaged by pieces At the end of March 1944, Dbnitz visited the test
that had broken off. On 19 February 1944, U792 unit at Hela and took part in a trial in U794. The
was ready to sail once more. The new turbines were test commander, Kapitiinleutnant (Engineer) Heller
268 V-BOAT DEVELOPMENT AT THE END OF THE WAR

admirals sailed together in one V-boat. On leaving, glvmg confirmation of values obtained by month, the installation was due for a complete
Donitz declared: 'With more courage and speedometer. The lack of audible detection and of overhaul. Between 19 February and 21 May 1944,
COnfJd~Ce in the Supreme Naval Command, we audible propeller noise in the Walter-boats was the turbine installation had been subjected to 1
could h ve had this boat 1-2 years earlier.' observed later by the Nexo monitoring service on combustion operation hours, of which almost 11
On 4 April 1944, U792 carried out an endurance Bornholm with U793: at higher turbine speeds, hours had been underwater. U792 was taken into
test u~derwater for 125 minutes, making several instead of propeller noise only an indistinct 'heavy dock and the complete steam-producing installation
speed t~ts on the Hela Mile. The highest speed breathing' type noise was distinguished, which did with its various auxiliary engines, items of
measure· was 20.63 knots at 475rpm. It was not allow positive audible detection. It was found apparatus and tube ducts were dismantled, and th
diffIcult to determine the exact speeds of that much of the noise was absorbed by the carbon- turbines were sent for overhaul to the BKC-Turbin
submerged measured-mile tests because below the dioxide emission from the stern of the boat. Factory, Dresden. Two new turbines were delivered
surface, it was difficult to carry out exact plotting When the U792's starboard turbine became
of the boat. I t was possible to measure exact speeds unusable, the port turbine only was used from the Below: Walter U-boat U795 laid up at GW in February 1945.
only by induction when electric cables were crossed, middle of May onwards and, at the end of that In the foreground is a Type XXIII boat.
V-BOAT DEVELOPMENT AT THE END OF THE WAR 269

to replace them, but these could not be built-in establish the surface speed limit of the Walter- system. The GW boats had 23 per cent larger
immediately because of different-sized understruc- drive. All that could be achieved (and then only for cooling surfaces in the gear-oil cooling system, and
tures and tube connections, The inner components a short time) was 13.14 knots at 395rpm, as it had the temperatures here were considerably lower;
of the combustion chamber and dust remover not been established how fuel-oil and Aurol would however, this boat, on account of her greater
showed considerable damage. which was attri- behave with high consumption and with low water resistance, could not achieve the higher speeds
buted to the frequent breakdowns of the regulator. pressure. However, the limit of revolutions before either.
The question of expediency in overhaul work was unintentional diving of the boat would take place In the autumn of 1944, U794 was subjected to
considerably influenced by the shortage of labour was obviously very little above 400rpm. As the depth-charge tests, and a number of faults became
at B&V. Various tasks that should really have been disintegration temperature of larger concentrations apparent. The most serious was that the
carried out by B&V had to be performed by the firm of H 20 2 was less than 300°C, it was decided on 4 disintegrator functioned imperfectly, apparently
of Walter KG. or by the V-boat test unit. The October to replace the stone lining of the because the particles in the disintegrator were no
shortage of coppersmiths was specially onerous. disintegrator, which had already withstood a total longer in their correct position. Faults also
and rebuilding work was also made more difficult concentration of 40 tons. appeared in the combustion chamber. However,
by the shortage of berths. All of this combined to Following testing of the Walter-installation in Walter KG hoped that these various faults could be
delay the boat's being ready for use again until 12 progressive speed stages, VAK measured-mile rectified by the time the ftrst Type XXVI boat was
August 1944. testing began again on 7 October. At different ready for commissioning. No faults of any
Meanwhile. in April 1944, U793 and U795 had speed stages, speed, number of revolutions and importance were apparent in the Aurol storage: the
been commissioned, with only one turbine each. Of performance were measured. The highest sub- method of storing H 20 2 in plastic bags had been
the two, U793 proved to be considerably more merged speed travelled was 21.575 knots at 470rpm well-tested in a test-bunker long before completion
reliable than her predecessors. After the first three and 2.720shp corresponding to Cw= 186.3. of the frrst Walter U-boat, and it had been found
trials of 25, 26 and 29 May had been accompanied On 10 October, U792 carried out a lengthier trial, that this storage method was proof against
by the usual troubles (regulator not working, describing a submerged square. For approximately explosions, and was as effective with full as with
starter winding of the vapour-pump motor burned four hours, the installation was driven with. on the empty bags.
out), this boat then functioned without any average, 435rpm. When the H 20 2 was almost To sum up, it can be stated that the Walter-drive
particular breakdown until the conclusion of the totally consumed, the number of revolutions was showed its value during tests despite numerous
trials on 4 July 1944. VAK trials of U793 followed reduced to 336rpm and this was maintained for just initial difficulties. Almost all breakdowns had
on 20 June, after a depth test on 15 June in 55m of about half an hour before Aurol was completely identical causes - principally, the unproved
water (345rpm. steam consumption 15.8 tons per consumed. The total duration of the run amounted quantity regulator and the poor design of the
hour) and a submerged endurance test (331 to 4 hours 25 minutes; H 20 2 consumption 28.96m 3; electric motors. Other faults could be attributed to
minutes) on 17 June 1944. These provided a diving depth 18 metres; under-pressure in the boat inadequate yard work. It is noteworthy that,
maximum speed of 20.3 knots at 425rpm. U793 was 260mb. Further trials (H 20 2 consumption during these breakdowns, the installation showed
then handed over to Training Command and. by 22 measurements at depths of 18m, 30m, and 50m, itself to be robust and safe, in that the effects of
August 1944, its Walter-installation had achieved a turning circle measurements and crash-diving tests breakdown were local and did not lead to mishaps
total combustion operation time of 46 hours 37 with the electric motor and deep-diving to 70m) involving loss of life. The various faults were able to
minutes. followed on 11 October. On the 12th, certain be rectifIed in a relatively short time and with little
The first voyages made by U792 in August 1944 malfunctions occurred in which pressure in the trouble, so that the second B&V boat. U793, ran
with the new turbines were once again marked by turbine compartment climbed to 0.25 atmospheric almost faultlessly. Design shortcomings - as
various failures, not, however, with the quantity- overload, and a small fire occurred in the Ju-com- for example the under-dimensioned steering
regulator, but mainly as a result of unsatisfactory pressor. This was caused by diesel oil escaping and installation and the gear-oil installation in the B&V
assembly conditions in Hela - partial burning of being ignited by the H 20 2 injector. The H 20 2 was boats, or the ill-chosen rudder shape of the GW
the dust remover; Stoeckicht shaft gearing seized present at that place because of a leak in the valve boats (factors which considerably inhibited
up; Aurol supply line leaky: combustion-chamber through which H 20 2 was taken on board. After performances of these boats) - were nothing to do
cover unsatisfactory: and, finally, entry of sea thorough ventilating of the turbine compartment, with the Walter-installation, and reflected, rather,
water in bag group 4 on 14 September. This meant the Walter installation could be run once again. On the difficulties inextricably bound up with the
that the boat had to return to dock where bag 17 October, because of destroyed insulation development of new U·boat types with many
groups for hydrogen peroxide. numbers 1. 2 and 4, (supposedly a consequence of the pressure rise on untried innovations (as was also experienced in
were changed. 12 October) an electric motor in the turbine Type XXI).
On 28 September. U792 was ready for sea. During compartment was once again burned out. On this
the following days, certain tests were carried out on occasion it was the motor of No.1 condenser pump. Type XXI
behalf of Walter KG without incident. VAK There was also a short circuit in the vapour-pump The material for the pressure hull of the Type XXI
acceptance tests for this boat with the Walter motor. As no replacement was available, the fault U-boat was St 52 KM alloyed with aluminium. The
installation began on 2 October 1944. Initially, was not easily to be rectified. so these particular armour material intended originally for Type
measured-mile (measured distance of 2 nautical parts were borrowed from GW boat U795 as a VIlC/42 had also been discussed initially, but this
miles) tests were carried out. the speeds of which short-term measure. was not available in any quantity and required a
were exactly computed by inductive measurement On 27 October 1944, U792. after a submerged longer delivery time. The upper pressure hull had a
with the aid of an electric coil. After speeds had cruise of one hour without fault being found in her maximum thickness of 26mm amidships,
been calculated in this way, loggings were carried Walter-installation, was handed over to the decreasing in thickness to I8mm forward and aft.
out exactly. These showed that, at 14.40 hours. the Training Unit. By this time, the total running time The double-hull shape meant that, for the large
maximum attained measured-mile speed of 24.784 of U792's installation amounted to 41 hours 21 part, outer frames (240mm X 11mm flat bulb
knots was achieved at 527rpm. However. during minutes, of which 28 hours 45 minutes had taken frames, 80cm apart) could be used. Only the conical
this high revving. the ambient temperature in the place underwater. pressure-hull rings in the bow and the stern were
gearing climbed to over 100°C: the gear oil became UAK trails had shown that in U792, the stress- given interior frames. This would provide adequate
so hot that its colouring matter separated and limit of the installation for sustained running was strength for a designed diving depth of 135m, i.e.,
completely blocked the oil filters. Most of the oil 440rpm or 19.7 knots, much below the required 26 2.5 times as safe as the calculated destruction
flowed into the bilges by foaming up over the oil knots. This was not the fault of the turbine depth of 330m and 1.5 times as safe as the test
smoke catchers. The gear sump was refIlled and. on installation, but resulted from the high temper- diving depth of approximately 200m (60 per cent of
3 October, surface measured-miles were run to atures of the lubricating oil and bearings in the gear the destruction diving depth).

However, only the upper part could accurately be deformation, and were not thought to be It had originally been intended that charging
considered as a circular pressure hull for dangerous. should also take place during schnorkel travel, but
appropriate calculations to be made. The lower part Donitz showed displeasure that no greater depth the danger existed that, with considerable valve
could not be considered in the same light because, had been attempted. Consequently, on 14 April overlapping, the engine might come to a standstill
on the one hand, the frames from the upper part 1945, the KIU Head, Ministerial Counsellor through reversal of the charging pressure caused
overlapped considerably and, second, this lower Aschmoneit, left Kiel in U2506, bound for Horten, by strong counter-pressure. In order to prevent
part had floor timbers. The lower part had therefore to superintend personally the next deep diving test. this, a second cam arrangement was provided on
to be designed without the benefit of exact basic This took place on 26 April, with built-in hatch the control shaft (schnorkel adjustment), which
calculations, and its strength would have to be tried support beams and a strengthened pressure-hull reduced the amount of valve overlapping. The
out retrospectively. A pressure test of a model at Frame 10.4. Apart from a loud noise at 160m, from diesel performance then went back to 1,400hp at
GW showed that the lower part of the pressure-hull the collapse of the GBT (acoustic buoy) secured on 470rpm, and the supercharger ran at only
was approximately 10 per cent weaker than the deck, nothing particular occurred down to 220m. 10,000rpm instead of 12,240; on the other hand. the
upper part. This meant a destruction depth of The shape change remained minimal, tensions counter-pressure sensitivity was decreased, as were
300m, a test diving depth of 180m and a designed measured in the vicinity of the strengthened the unpleasant effects it had caused.
diving depth of 120m. It was intended that these torpedo hatch were insignificant, and the On 21 October 1944, during schnorkel travel,
values should be established before the boats were deformation noises were normal. At 220m a U3503, using both diesel engines and supercharger
made operational. With Chief Naval Construction 'pressure-tight' rubber dinghy container imploded (supercharger pressure 0.35 atmospheres overload
Adviser Diestelmeier in charge, the flJ'st Type XXI, with a loud noise and the test was broken off. and 7.500rpm supercharger revolutions) attained a
U2511 , left Kiel for Horten on 16 March 1945 to A further deep diving test was carried out with speed of 10.4 knots at 395rpm on the engine shaft,
carry out her first deep diving trial. The IBG had U2529 just before the capitulation on 8 May 1945. with a total fuel consumption of 412kg per hour.
been informed that, in order to accommodate a The Test Controller on this occasion was Naval With battery charging carried out (starboard
shaft-brake at pressure-hull Frame 10.4, two Construction Adviser Grim. When 140m had been engine charging only, 625A and port engine drive) a
interior frame rings had been cut away by 20mm, passed, slight frame deformation was discovered at maximum of 5.6 knots was obtained. In operational
but, inadvertently, this had not been reported to one interior frame beneath the conning tower. At use, it turned out that this schnorkel performance
the Design Department. With calculations 190m, implosions of the rubber dinghy containers could also be achieved without supercharging. As
appropriate to rectification of the cut-away proftle on deck occurred. At 210m, the diving test was pure surface performance was no longer of
being incomplete, the test diving depth for U2511 discontinued because of the colossal din caused by paramount importance for this type of boat in
was restricted to 160m until the frame- imploding containers. After surfacing, it was 1944-45, there was no particular gain in using a
strengthening, ordered by the Supreme Naval established that the implosions had not endangered supercharger during schnorkel travel, and it was
Command, was completed. This depth was achieved the boat, and a further diving test was carried out, therefore omitted from later boats. The effect of
at the first deep diving test in Oslo Fjord at the end this time to 220m, when nothing untoward this was that the maximum surface performance
of March. The most important result established occurred. It is known that, during a diving test off went down from 2 X 2,000hp (=2 X 1,760hp on the
was that measured tensions at the unsupported southern Norway at the beginning of May, U3008 shaft, corresponding to 15.4 knots) to 2 X 1,400hp
torpedo hatch were much greater than the touched the bottom at 170m. (=2 X 1,230hp on the shaft, corresponding to 14.6
calculated values. At 160m depth, these exceeded On 21 November 1944, during a measured-mile knots). The maximum schnorkel performance was
the yield limit, reaching values up to run on the surface, using both diesel engines and now 2 X 1,200hp (=2 X 1,060hp on the shaft,
4,000kg/cm 2. superchargers (supercharger pressure 0.44 atmos- corresponding to 10.9 knots). However, in practice,
Immediately after the Easter holidays, work was pheric overload) U3005 attained a speed of 15.23 due to oscillations in the periscope and schnorkel, 6
carried out in the State Yard of Horten, when, with knots at 486rpm of the engine shaft, and a total fuel knots was hardly ever exceeded in schnorkel travel.
very great difficulties for the fItters, the cut-away consumption of 640kg per hour'. When operating on The test bed results for the large main motors
pressure-hull Frame 10.4 was strengthened without diesels only, the electric motors and gearing and had shown a maximum 1,800kW performance at
removing its electric motors, and a transverse associated pumps were being driven at all times, 5,500A current-intake, and engine revolutions of
support was incorporated in the torpedo hatch. which corresponded to a constant performance loss 1,675rpm. With fully-charged batteries, this
A second deep diving test took place off of 7 per cent. This meant that the mechanical diesel performance could be maintained for one hour.
Kristiansand at the beginning of April 1945, when, efficiency was only 88 per cent. A deliberate Normal boat practice, however. was that each
deformation measurements in the region of the cut- decision had been made to do without a clutch for double motor would attain only l,650kW for 20
away Frame 10.4 and tension measurements in the disconnecting the electric motors during diesel minutes, or 1,550kW (=2,100hp) for 50 minutes,
area of the strengthened torpedo hatch were operation, as it was assumed that the large because batteries, even when fully charged, did not
calculated. This time, no limit had been set on the batteries would never be fully charged and that hold their intended 360 volts charge at maximum
diving depth;.the decision was left to the discretion charging would be constantly taking place during performance. A test in U3506 showed that with
of the Test Controller. When a depth of 160m had diesel operation. However, the mechanical perfor- batteries carrying a charge of 361 volts and a
been passed, a cracking noise, increasing with mance loss could be reduced, and 95 per cent constant discharge of 2 X 5,540 Amps, the charge
depth, was heard from the after battery trough, and effIciency obtained, if the electric motors were in the electric motors not supplying power was 350
was interpreted by the Test Controller, in the light allowed to turn over electrically, without supplying volts, and when supplying power, only 336 volts.
of model tests, as signifying the imminence of dent any propulsion to the propellers. This would mean After thirty minutes, the charge was down to 332
formation. This test was therefore abandoned at that, supercharged, 2 X 1,900hp could be delivered volts. after fifty minutes, discharge was down to
170m. Deformation around the cutaway frame was to the shaft (15.7 knots). The flattened part of the 305 volts. After that it went down very rapidly.
slight at this depth (only approx. 1.5mm decrease in performance-curve in the 15-18 knots range could In a submerged measured·mile run on 8
the cross-section), but tensions around the torpedo only be used with electrical supplement because of November 1944, at a diving depth of 20m, U3506 (in
hatch, despite the added support, were so high that the relatively small diesel power. On 15 December her original version) achieved a speed of 15.93 knots
it was considered necessary to use two supports. 1944, with electrical supplement (drawing from the at 316rpm. This was 2 knots below the theoreti-
The Test Controller then returned to Kiel and batteries each side 1,347A=6 hours current), U3507 cally-calculated value. It corresponded to a Navy
initiated work on corresponding torpedo-hatch reached a maximum surface speed of 18.08 knots at Constant of C w = 149
strengthening in the boats lying there. After 544rpm of the engine shaft, and 0.4 atmospheric Since Type XXI was conceived originally as a
thorough discussion, the cracking noises were overload supercharger pressure. The corresponding diving-boat, it was necessary that the diving time
attributed to plastic deformation of outer-ship performance on the boat's shaft amounted to be as short as possible. Consequently, numerous
components. caused by the elastic pressure-hull 2 X 2,380hp. flooding and ventilation openings had been made in

1:!VM 3H.L dO GN3 3H.L.LV.L 3Wcf013A3G .LVOS-n HZ
the outer ship, but these considerably increased after hydroplane. after 13 seconds. was moved from
resistance. Towing tests established that the the 15° angle to its former position, so that the
figures obtainable with a smooth hull would be stern did not 'stick' to the surface. However. the
decreased by 17-19 per cent by a vented hull. Tests speed of descent decreased rapidly. If the boat was
in which the flooding slits were made smaller or to be brought quickly to considerable depth, the
welded up showed that the slits increased rudder would have to be set at 25° until the
resistance by approximately 28 per cent, which, requisite depth was achieved.
from a performance point of view, represented a In diving at top speed. the negative buoyancy
consumption of approximately 850shp at top speed. tank, which in all previous U-boats had been
Although the total cross-section area of the essential for the diving operation, had only minimal
flooding slits and other openings were radically effect (shortening of the diving time by a mere 5
reduced (flooding slits reduced to 2o-30mm width; seconds). The boat was so well designed that, when
openings in the bridge covering closed; upper-deck the negative buoyancy tanks were empty. by an
gratings covered with sheet metal; complete increase in dynamic forces (increase in speed), the
openings left only in the water-tight fore-ship and in diving process was considerably accelerated. On the
a row of lower flooding slits in the bridge bulwarks; other hand. with flooded negative buoyancy tanks,
ventilation holes and small slits in the upper deck) even when the boat was motionless, one could
the diving time increased by only approximately 10 almost achieve the minimum diving time. When
seconds to a maximum of 30 seconds, and the diving from rest or at the lower speed ranges.
decrease in resistance was reduced by only 5 per negative buoyancy tanks did indeed enable a
cent. So a compromise was agreed. The fmal version reduction to be made in diving time. but this
envisaged a flooding slit proportion of 1.98 per cent requirement was of lesser importance. so that it
of the total surfaces, which increased resistance by was possible to dispense with the negative
15 per cent, and allowed a diving time of 25 seconds. buoyancy tanks. When submerged. the boat
With the drastic, two-thirds' reduction in the reacted with sensitivity to adjustments of the
flooding slit surfaces, U3507, on 21 November 1944, hydroplanes. In the higher speed ranges (over 6
attained 17.2 knots (Cw= 197) at 3,100kW (2 X knots) the boat could be controlled by the after
2,100hp). Using the originally intended power of hydroplanes alone (adjustment ± 5° for ± 0.2m
3,500kW, this version would have been capable of stability). Use of the forward hydroplanes was more
18 knots. I n the fmal version (reduction of flooding- of a hindrance than a help.
lit surface by one-third), on 30 November 1944, As designed, the 8m-wide fms were over-
U3507 achieved 16.8 knots for 20 minutes, and 16.5 dimensioned: after towing tests. they were reduced
knots for one hour (Cw= 175). to 6.4m, thus providing less resistance. Later,
The shape of the conning-tower fairing was 5.5m-wide fms were to be tried out on the completed
decided by the necessity to accommodate anti- boat. and these would certainly have been
aircraft turrets, the echo-ranging installation and adequate, as the fm width of Wilhelm Bauer (ex-
various items of extensible apparatus. Although U2540) was to show.
the anti-aircraft turrets were faired neatly into the Less favourable was the effect of the Type XXI
streamlined conning tower, they still caused an lateral rudders. The boat's slim shape and the lack
increase in resistance of 7 per cent. On the other of rudder effect (the lateral rudder. except at
hand, the open, surface control position let into the extreme rudder angle. lay outside the propeller
bridge roofmg had very little such effect. Tests wash) made the turning circle very large; in
carried out with U3001 (a bridge with just such a submerged travel. with the most favourable
cut-into structure) and U3507 (a fully-enclosed conditions (rudder hard over=25°) and with outer
bridge) showed that the fully-enclosed bridge had a screw alone (at about 11 knots) it wa
peed advantage over the normal bridge of only approximately 365m. With both screws and at top
0.15 knots. When wind protection screens were speed, it was approximately 420m: at 6 knots. it
raised, there was a speed loss of 0.35 knots and, in was approximately 450m. In surface travel. a
the cut-into bridge, a loss of 0.45 knots. The turning circle of 80o-1,000m resulted. which wa
maximum surface speed with electric motors was almost twice as large as in previous boats of the
higher than the maximum submerged speed, same size. and made for difficulties in surface
amounting in U3506 (fmal version) to 16.93 knots at manoeuvring. The propeller shafts, inclined very
5,994A, and in U3005 (with covered flooding slits) slightly outwards, had an effect that was not
to 17.94 knots at 5,798A current intake per engine. expected at that time: when turning. it was
This result showed clearly that the boat's hull had necessary to let the inner propeller run more
been well designed for good surface performance. quickly than the outer, so that as small a turning
Tests of the silent creep-speed engines showed that circle as possible be achieved.
the expected results were indeed attained. In a
submerged measured-mile run. U3506. using these Type XXIII
silent engines, achieved a maximum of 6.1 knots at U-boat Type XXIII had a pressure hull of
123rpm. shipbuilding steel St 52 KM. with a maximum
The diving time (20 seconds) of the first boats at thickness of 11.5mm. Rigidity was provided by 140
maximum speed was very short; even in the fmal X 7mm flat-bulb interior frames at distances of
version (25 seconds) they were lower than in Type 45Q---550mm. This design was to reach a designed
VIlC. The best diving time was achieved when the diving depth of 100m (2.5 times safety), a test
diving depth of 150m and a destruction diving
Left: The conning-lower fairing of U2502. depth of 250m. As in Type XX I. however, the basic

calculations concerning the double-circle shape
were conjectural, so that only a diving test could
establish the fmal safety factor. On 24 January
1945, the first test was made under the control of
aval Construction Adviser Grim with U2324 off
the coast of Norway. A depth of 150m was reached
quite uneventfully, and apparently the assumed
diving depths were wholly attainable. Not until 6
December 1946, when U2326 (with a French crew
aboard) sank off Toulon, did doubts arise
concerning the estimated strength. Exact
calculations by the Lubeck Engineering Office
subsequently conflTmed these doubts - the
assumed diving depths were too large. The
serviceable diving depth for Hai (ex-U2365) and
Hecht (ex-U2367) was only 80m.
V-boat Type XXIII was designed principally for
submerged performance; even the propeller was
designed with submerged travel in mind. From
approximately 9 knots on the surface, over-flooding
of the forward deck caused a considerable increase
in the boat's resistance. Above 9.5 knots, the
surface power requirement became so high that
each increase in power, above the normal diesel full
power of 575hp (=405kW on the shaft) had no
effect, and no increase in speed was possible over
approximately 10 knots. The theoretically-possible
maximum load on the diesels of 630hp at 880rpm
(=445kW on the shaft) only brought about an
increase in speed of 0.1 knots.
While there was no over-flooding of the deck
forward of the bridge, the wave resistance stayed
relatively small (up to approximately 6-7 knots); in
fact, the surface resistance was less than the
submerged resistance at this same speed. In this
speed range, with the same power, a higher speed
was reached above water. The cause lay mainly in
the considerable resistance of the bridge. The
schnorkel results were especially favourable. The
high bridge made it possible for the fIXed length of
schnorkel and periscope to be relatively large (2m) U2321 (Type XXIII) being positioned at Slip 8, GW, for an overhaul. Note the upper part of the bridge, which had been rounded
and the free part to be extremely small, which off for submerged test runs.
meant that in all speed ranges there was no XXIII, as in Type XXI, that a reduction of the creep engine drive, U2321 achieved 4.8 knots at a
oscillation. As the resistance figures at top speed flooding slits and a removal of all inessential maximum 28kW on the shaft. The submerged range
underwater were considerably superior to those on appendages brought about an increase in the was greatest at 2.5 knots and amounted to 215
the surface, the maximum schnorkel speed was submerged top speed. Originally, to help achieve an nautical miles. At this speed, the propeller noise
greater than the surface speed. (Measured value of extremely short diving time, many flooding was almost undetectable. At the beginning of 1945,
U2321 in its fmal version: 10.75 knots at 380kW on apertures and ventilation openings had been tests were made in U4703 and U4705 to fIt
the shaft.) Full diesel performance could be provided, especially in the conning-tower super- thickened propellers (with 20mm and 30mm bulges)
achieved during schnorkel travel, the schnorkel tructure. which would cause considerably less propeller noise
cross-section being relatively large and the In her original version, with an upper-deck in the higher speed ranges. The loss of speed caused
underpressure (38mb) and the exhaust-gas counter- gangway and a forward fm, U2321 reached an by this thickening was negligible (0.3 knots at top
pressure (0.35 atmospheres overload) supplied by underwater speed of 11.2 knots at 405kW on the speed). It was decided to introduce the 20mm bulge
the generously proportioned engine (without haft; after a 70 per cent reduction of the flooding in all Type XXII I boats.
loading) were endurable. This boat was the first to slits on the bridge and the sound-proofmg fairing, Being an almost 'pure' submerged vessel, Type
achieve a relatively high operational schnorkel 11.6 knots at 410kW on the shaft. The highest XXIII did not have negative buoyancy tanks.
endurance. submerged speed was achieved after further When diving from a position of rest without any
The test bed results for the electric motor had reduction of the flooding slits at diving cell 3 (each enforced trim down by the head. it took only 21
shown a maximum 427kW (=580hp) at 240 volts, by 3 flooding slits aft). removal of the 'upper deck' seconds for the fmal component, the high bridge, to
1,960A current intake and 850rpm. This result was and all fms; 12.58 knots at 415kW on the shaft. In become submerged. With the aid of the deep-set.
also obtained with practical tests at sea. Through her fmal condition (flooding slits reduced by forward hydroplane when diving in motion. the
friction losses in the gearing and shafting, 95.5 per approximately 30 per cent, 'upper deck' removed, boat quickly came down steeply at the head. which
cent, or 408kW, was delivered to the screw. During minus the forward fms) U2330, on 29 October 1944, produced a strong, dynamic negative buoyancy,
diesel operation, the electric motor, when not achieved 12.25 knots at 390kW on the shaft and, on enabling complete submergence of the boat after
connected for charging, acted as a performance 1 November 1944, 12.5 knots at 415kW, both approximately 14 seconds. In this case, too, the last
balancer, which guaranteed a uniform running of underwater. The appropriate Navy Constants were part of the boat to be covered by water was the
the diesels even in a swell. It was noted in Type C w =146 and C w =148. At a depth of 20m on silent upper edge of the bridge. The considerable

reduction in the flooding slits did not increase this knots it was approximately 570m. With full rudder, therefore, was a small, manoeuvrable, ocean-going
extremely short dynamic diving value, but it later the corresponding values were 280m and 250m. In boat for operations between the North Cape and
turned out that the fms forward of the hydroplanes other words, Type XXIII was also very Gibraltar, i.e., not a real 'Atlantic' boat. This
lengthened dynamic diving by approximately 1 manoeuvrable on the surface, requirement was made in the light of judgements
second. formed on those VIlC boats equipped with
The very high descending speed made it schnorkels. The required range was set at
imperative, when deep dives were being undertaken UNFINISHED PROJECTS approximately 7,000 nautical miles at 10 knots.
in motion, to make a timely adjustment of the There was an additional requirement for a rather
hydroplanes so that the permitted diving depth Electro-boat Projects XXIX to XXXI larger boat with twice the range, which was to
should not be exceeded. The low reserve With the preliminary sketch for the new Walter replace Type XXI for long-range operations, even
displacement of 10.5 per cent meant that the boat Type XXVI, two electro-boat projects were though it would have only half the engine
would sink extremely quickly in the event of water presented on 22 February 1944 for the purposes of installation. A decisive factor in this was the
entering, as was amply demonstrated by accidents comparison; instead of a Walter-installation these bottleneck in engines for Type XXI at that time.
with Hai (ex-U2365), described on page 3Jl2, and would have a large electric installation. Donitz An important design condition was that use
U2331 , which sank with all hands on 10 October turned them down, however, on the grounds that should be made of already-available and tested
1944, during surface travel off Hela. After the boat their performance would have been much inferior to engines and building components - which was not
had been raised, a reconstruction of events showed the already-available Type XXI. (See also page at all the way to set about achieving the hoped-for
that, before the accident, U2331 had been travelling 240.) As the situation in 1944 favoured the use of a optimum results, but which promised a quick
in reverse, with forward hydroplanes set at 0° and mailer and more simple V-boat than the large Type realization. The largest possible number (at least
after hydroplanes at 4 0 upwards. The dive must XXI, for operations against convoys around eight) of ready-to-fue torpedo tubes should be
have taken place so suddenly that no one could Britain and in the North Atlantic, consideration installed in such a way that the requirements for a
escape. Tests with U2330 established that, with was given once more to an electro-boat with a simple design, simple to build, should not be
diving cells flooded in advance and when reversing, ingle-shaft installation, and of the same size as impaired.
the danger existed of an unintended dive. With Type VIlC. A further contributory factor was that During the summer of 1944, in response to these
diving cell 1 flooded to 25 per cent, and forward and there was scepticism concerning a prompt entry demands, a number of designs from inside and
after hydroplanes inclined 10° upwards, after 50 into operations of a large number of Walter-boats - outside 'K' Office was produced. The Office designs
seconds' reverse top speed, a trim down by the head especially on the grounds that insufficient Aurol all featured a new bow torpedo-tube arrangement,
of 18° was already apparent. was available. the result of work carried out under the control of
The boat was very easy to control underwater. Design XXVIE I presented by Naval the new Head of K I V, Ministerial Counsellor
The submerged turning circle was small and almost Construction Director Oelfken on 22 February Aschmoneit. The forward section of the pressure
independent of speed. At 10° rudder inclination, it 1944, already embodied most of the points that hull was constructed in an 8-shaped section, which
amounted to approximately 350m diameter; with prompted such considerations. Also making use of housed four torpedo tubes in each of its upper and
full rudder, as little as 150m. Steering was also good other suggestions from departments outside the lower parts. This meant that the bow compartment
on the surface. In U2321, at a speed of 10 knots the V-Boat Departments of the Supreme Naval could be divided into two storeys and could be used
lateral rudder could be brought right across from Command, he invited the Chief of Naval War Staff to much better effect than in Type XXVI. Of these
one position to the opposite one in 14 seconds. early in 1944 to have 'K' OffIce produce a design for designs, those with a surface range of approx-
During VAK tests, U2330, on the surface at 4 knots a medium-sized electro-boat of 800--900 tons (not imately 7,000 nautical miles at 10 knots were given
with 10 0 rudder inclination, had a turning circle above 1,000 tons), which would have half the engine the designation XXIX. The projects based on Type
diameter of approximately 830m; at top speed of 10 installation of Type XXI. What was to be planned, XXI, having ranges of approximately 15,000
nautical miles at 10 knots, were designated XXX
and XXXI.
Type XXIXB2 (reconstruction), Glossary; Wd. Heck, watertIght stern; Wd. The presentation of Office Designs XXIXA-D,
Back, watertight forecastle; Tauchzelle.
~ ballast tank (water); Treibol. fuel oil; v. XXXA and XXXB, XXXI, and IBG Designs
Trimmzelle. forward trimming lank; XXIXG were made at an Office discussion on 29
Funkraum, radio room; Ortungsraum, radar August 1944. After close deliberation on
A c room; Zentrale, control room; Waschr. u.
XXIXA-D, which differed from each other mainly
@
.~
we, washroom and we; E.-Masch., electric
~Q
~ motor; Hilfsdiesel, auxiliary diesel; in size and, therefore, in their electric motive
- ..,.1 Hauptdiesel, main diesel; Regier, regulating
capacities, the most appropriate type was judged to
~\I? '~ -:~"

tank; Ortungsgerat, detection equipment;
Hilfsmaschinen, auxiliary engines; KLJche, be XXIXB, with regard to the relationship between
galley; PreVlant, stores; Kuhlr., cold storage; outlay and performance. The charging time of nine
Torpedozelle, torpedo tanks.
hours was too high, and the maximum submerged
rt'f"""~- speed of 15.4 knots was inadequate, but only a
~~ ~.- 1 - ,.r
small increase in size to this design, putting in a
rl nfri more powerful diesel engine, and an increase in the
tr~
number of cells per battery would rectify these
weaknesses. This new design was given the
Stern trimming tank
-A _8 _A -c designation XXIXB2. For tactical operations when
~ submerged, this type, although only half the size
.
z-o-.J2:...,"'.J
~i~L=:~~
~-....-. _
~.~
·l'-~~'''''-
~
00 0
_
7~,.(,....
r--tt-.. ~ ..... -~ r
"'-,j--'
and with half the engine installation of Type XXI,
had almost the same performance. (But whether, in
practice, the designed surface speed of 16.6 knots
could really have been achieved must be doubted in
the light of experience with Type XXI.)
Projects XXIXF, G and H, designed by the IBG,
were aimed especially at adequate noise-
suppression during schnorkel travel and at high
schnorkel speeds. In all of them, the diesel

installation consisted of two MWM RS34 diesel the production expenditure as regards the '1. It is essential that maximum diesel
engines. The performance of the electric motors propulsion unit and two-thirds of the production performance be attainable while schnorkelling.
corresponded to the maximum battery voltage. The outlay in terms of batteries (which constituted a '2. As, even with the fullest application of
smallest design, XXIXH, had only two batteries, similar bottleneck problem). On the other hand. in defensive means, losses will still occur, boats must
XXIXF had three, and XXIXG had four. These the field of armament there was a doubling of be made as small, simple and easily manned as
three designs differed from the OffIce designs in ready-to-fire tubes and a 20 per cent increase in the possible, so that the least possible outlay is made
their torpedo installation. The IBG had not number of torpedoes carried. This design was with regard to personnel and materials in the
formulated any new ideas concerning this, but designated Type XXXI. With all these favourable shortest possible building time.'
retained the available XXI and XXVI installations. properties, the project had one real disadvantage, The project for a coastal U-boat, worked out
Unusual features for XXIXG and H were a and that was its considerable draught, 7m. Its according to these ideas, was given the descriptive
schnorkel periscope for high schnorkel speed, and a realization, therefore, would involve a large number name 'TUmmler' ('Porpoise'), as it could proceed
special 'anti-detection' boat shape (K-shape). of constructional measures in the ports, which dynamically from surface travel to schnorkel travel
Of the designs intended to produce a successor to would mean that advantages in the saving of work (and vice versa). As the exhaust gases were fed into
Type XXI for longer operations, Type XXXI was time as compared to Type XXI would be devalued a special, high-positioned diving tank (exhaust gas
judged the best. In Type XXXA, four side tubes by additional work in other directions. tank), a small amount of residual bouyancy was
had been planned in addition to the eight bow present during schnorkel travel. The hull of this
torpedo tubes, as in design XXIXD, so that an Schnorkel Project 'Tummler' 200-ton boat was completely streamlined, and
appropriate number of torpedoes could be carried In the light of favourable reports on schnorkel designed without an upper deck. The armament
for longer operations. Although the provision of a performance in Types VIIC and IXC in the summer envisaged consisted of four bow torpedo tubes (no
large number of reload torpedoes would have been of 1944, the U-Boat Delegate in the Construction reserve torpedoes) with a fire-control system
useful for a long-range U-boat, this was not Commission, Korvettenkapitiin (Engineer) Hans identical to that of Type XXIII. The propulsion
considered, as it would have meant, willy-nilly, Miiller had arrived at the following conclusions: unit consisted of a 2,OOOhp MAN diesel (Type XXI)
going back to a costly design on the lines of Type '1. The introduction of the schnorkel to combat to provide a maximum schnorkel speed of 17 knots,
XXI. Type XXXA had a single-circle pressure hull, detection by the enemy was a correct basic step. and a small 60hp Biissing diesel generator (the
except for the sections in the vicinity of the torpedo '2. However, boats are too slow when schnorkel- Seehund propulsion installation), which would
tubes. The intended submerged speed for this ling. When using the schnorkel, one is not really in a serve to charge the small battery (the size of twenty
project, 15.6 knots, was not considered satis- position to out-distance, to attack or to disengage. torpedo troughs) and provide almost noiseless
factory. and the armament, with only twelve '3. U-boat losses are especially hard to bear in schnorkel travel of 5-6 knots. Electric propulsion
torpedoes, did not measure up to what was that, when they occur, many highly-trained was by the creep-speed motor of Type XXIII, which
expected in a long-range U-boat. These factors led individuals, much material and much skilled took its current from the battery during submerged
to Project XXXB. in which the side tubes were building capacity are lost at one blow.' travel. Theelectrical installation was. therefore, quite
dispensed with and, in their place, eight reserve He went on to state the following construction small, a big point in its favour in view of the battery
torpedoes were carried in the lower deck bow requirements: bottleneck. It possessed the advantage that, during
compartment. In place of the living quarters which
were originally in that space, an intermediate
section was to be inserted abaft the bow Type XXIXH.
compartment. which was to contain only crews'
quarters. Even with this addition, the length and 10 IS m
displacement would still be less than that of Type

XXXA, because of the removal of the side torpedo
tubes. The submerged speed was increased to 15.
knots, but still remained distinctly below the
hoped-for speed of approximately 16.5 knots.
Real improvements were only to be attained
when insistence on the simplest possible hull
cOnstruction was abandoned. A further increase in
submerged speed could only come about, using the
same power, by effecting a reduction in the
frictional resistance, i.e.. of the surface and form
resistance. Only a very squat shape would serve the
purpose. An increase in the pressure hull cross-
enion was not wanted. for it would need great
steel strength and therefore involve production
problems. so the symmetrical two-circle shape was :CDn:::::w
therefore chosen. The considerable increase in ~I
height that this brought about made possible the
installation of several decks (four amidships) and a
relatively low positioning of the extensible items of
equipment. with correspondingly low resistance.
Above the engine compartments there was also
sufficient room for a stern torpedo compartment
with four torpedo tubes. This meant. therefore. that
a tOtal of twelve tOrpedo tubes was available with
an additional twelve reserve tOrpedoes. Also. at
16.4 knots. the submerged speed corresponded to
the requirements for a successor to Type XX [ and.
with only three-quarters of the displacement, half

Type XXXA. '"I~
1.
m
~ @
3~
~
.~ ~
.r?·.-
.. . hf·'
./
Section A-A Section B-B Section C-C Section 0-0 Section E-E Section F-F Section G-G Section H-H
~ " }Ud····· "'/f:

-----, "
~'- ~,'- ."-~~~~~~ '>~ :"
<
~'I_y'"
t:< J
'~L '7, ,',

.--- -,---,.
ts:t;;-~:~:.Ili LI, , J iii i iJ , j I IllWl • ," J,
~ .. •
:: -',
---:-C,r
T! ~ ;~ • •: ' 'J )
'1 ·1 ~
~- ~-:j' ----==-
r •,
[" L i..J
~=:~-~:;. 0~~~j
'" I / '- fl
.~.
"t_-
'-f
1t,;;;q~ .... 1
Glossary: Bilgewasser, bilge water; Tnnkwasser, fresh water;
Trimmzelle, trimming tank; Ortungsraum, radar room;
L-'
Ortungsgerate, detection equipment; Funkraum, radio room;
Proviant, stores; RegIer, regulating tank; UT zelle, underwater
telegraphy compartment, Kuhlraum, cold storage. 01, oil; T .Z.
-:PI ,~
~i~~
.. , I " T .
. ~. 0,
.1 :t
(Tauchzellel, ballast tank (water).
Type XXXI (reconstruction). I.6

». " -
Glossary: Wd. Heck, watertight stern; Wd. Back, watertight
forecastle; Trlmmzelle, trimming tank, Trelbol, fuel all;
Torpedozelle, torpedo tank; Stauraum, stowage; Kuche, galley;
Waschr u WC, washroom and WC; Prov., stores; Funkraum, radio
.~
room; Horchraum, listening room; Zentrale, control room; ) ... '1 Vd 30ck
Horchgerate, lIstening equipment; Tnnkw" fresh water; Kdt., L
commander; MOL 01, engIne all; Hltfsmaschlnen, auxiliary engine; -:r
Off., officers; Regier, regulating tank. T.Z. (Tauchzellel, ballast
tank (water). l.:(": ,?
". jl
rT'T=l~ r I : l~ I
l' j • I OonxYt
-
IB IA
- _
~ I . '.n'
7' no.. i ~__ I "._
r ••• _ I.~..;:::=--------
t'~."..... ~ _____
cc
- Sto"'Q,, ...
.=:>
B C 1 _ ~ - )~-
" 1~i!8~~I.-=-o co.-

=
'-::J
-l

schnorkel travel, the battery was constantly being Type XXIXB, and which had been designated investigations were also made into the properties a
charged. The disadvantage was that the submerged XXIXKI-K4. However, the relatively large volume V-boat would need in order to carry such an
range was small when, for any reason, schnorkel of oxygen gas carried in bottles and the installation. The closed-cycle range was to be
travel was not possible. However, it was believed in considerable weight of the bottles necessitated a limited only by the amount of fuel-oil carried.
1944, following successful use of it by V-boats in rather large displacement - which, on the other In Project XXIXKS, just as in Type XXIXK4,
the Channel, that the schnorkel was difficult to hand, in the case of Types XXIXKl, K2 and K4, two 2,000hp diesel engines served as propulsion.
detect, and that escape opportunities were, worked in favour of a stronger armament (eighteen Work on this project, however, showed that it was
therefore, good, especially when a high schnorkel torpedoes!). Sketches for Types XXIXKI-K3, not feasible to incorporate an oxygen-producing
speed was also available. High schnorkel speeds together with modified Type XXIXB2, were installation in a boat of tbis size (approximately
demanded principally a strong streamlined, presented on 14 September 1944. 1,000 tons). The size and weight of such equipment
sheathed schnorkeL and this sheathing would Types XXIXKl and K2 differed in size and would necessitate a large boat of 1,500-2,000 tons
incorporate - as a special feature - a schnorkel performance. Type XXIXKl had two six-cylinder displacement, with a pressure-hull height of at least
lookout beside the periscope. diesel engines, each of 1,000hp (probably RS34S 5.5m.
A crew of only six men was envisaged. One or two with high supercharging); for Type XXIXK2, four
men, from a combined rudder and control position, of these were proposed. Design XXIXK4 Type XXXIII
would be able to supervise the propulsion and corresponded to Type XXIXK2, except that it After some thought it became apparent that recon-
steering. Additionally, when travelling, the would use two twelve-cylinder diesel engines structing Type XXIII to have a closed-cycle drive,
commander would be at the periscope or in the (probably RS12 V26/34a, with high supercharging) with oxygen gas stored in bottles, would be
'schnorkel look-out', one man would be listening instead of the four six-cylinder engines. Weight completely unsatisfactory: only liquid oxygen could
(i.e., monitoring) and, when attacks were being saved in this way should enable a greater oxygen provide the desired large submerged range.
carried out, one extra man would be in charge of supply to be carried. It was additionally proposed Certainly, in the case of Atlantic V-boats requiring
torpedo firing. The engine compartment was shut to carry part of the oxygen in liquid form, which a large surface range, the constant evaporation of
off by bulkheads, and would not normally need to would enable a considerable increase in the liquid oxygen would have been a big problem,
be entered during schnorkel traveL which meant submerged range to be achieved. restricting considerably the closed-cycle opera-
that the crew could avoid pressure variations Type XXIXK3 took a different turning. It was tional time; but this drawback was not too serious
caused by closing of the schnorkel head. At the proposed that this type be given the high in the case of coastal V-boats. With the idea of
beginning of 1945, the HSV A carried out towing submerged speed of a Walter-boat by installing a matching the length of operations with the evapora-
and propulsion tests on a 1:8 model of this type, but closed-cycle drive, but it turned out that this could tion time of the liquid oxygen, Type XXXIII was
no building contract was ever awarded. It seems not be attained, even by comprehensive restriction formulated. It could be assumed with reasonable
very doubtful, in view of the extremely tight enemy of armament and crew's quarters. Nevertheless, the accuracy that the whole oxygen supply would have
air observation over the proposed operational result was quite considerable. With four MB501C evaporated after the operational period of 30 days.
areas, that a pure schnorkel boat on the lines of the diesel engines, the boat could achieve in closed- Logically then, after 20 days at sea, during which
'Tummler' could have reasonably justified itself. cycle when submerged a maximum of 21.5 knots. there had been constant consumption of oxygen,
It is arguable whether further development Once again, to achieve a satisfactory submerged despite its tendency to evaporate the supply
would have gone over straight away to a closed- range, part of the oxygen was to be stored in liquid available for the attacking run would still be in
cycle drive. form. excess of that needed for the actual attack. With
Post-war studies of this design (Type 126K) by pure submerged travel, the boat could
Closed-cycle projects: Type XXIXK Oelfken and others showed that a somewhat subsequently close on its target from a greater
The favourable outcome of test-bed trials of the shorter boat, fitted with three MB501C diesel distance, as an electro-boat might do.
MB501 C closed-cycle installation for the GW test engines could have achieved a maximum sub- The range of operations was expected to be
boat U798 (page 187) gave rise to expectations that, merged speed of 20 knots. This project anticipated approximately 1,500 nautical miles. Calculations
in a relatively short time, it would be possible to using only oxygen gas storage, in order not to be showed that, assuming twelve hours of schnorkel
have available for trials operationally-suitable restricted to the closed-cycle range when making an cruising, complete emptying of the batteries, and
closed-cycle installations for larger V-boats, and 'K' endurance voyage. The daily evaporation of daily closed-cycle operation consumption of
Office, therefore, included this method of approximately 5 per cent of the liquid oxygen oxygen, decreasing through evaporation, a day's
propulsion in its considerations for a follow-up boat supply would otherwise have necessitated the run of 152 nautical miles could be achieved. Thus,
for Type XXI. It seemed that even in strongly constant use of some part of the oxygen supply, ten days would be necessary to reach the intended
patrolled waters, in which schnorkel travel would even if there were no pressing need for closed-cycle area of operations, and ten days could then be spent
be very restricted, the closed-cycle drive would travel, or the use of a special installation to convert in this zone if the return trip were to be carried out
enable boats to achieve positions from which evaporated oxygen back to liquid. Furthermore, in the same way as when outward bound. Closed-
attacks might be made while completely sub- despite its incontestable advantages, the large cycle speed during the outward and return voyages
merged. In comparison with the Walter-drive, the number of high-performance diesel engines, part of would be as low as possible without causing
considerable range at submerged endurance-travel which would be used only for peak speed, but would sooting-up of the engine; this would keep
in the medium speed ranges was seen as an be merely ballast for the greater part of operations, consumption of oxygen as low as possible. Three
advantage, and even more advantageous was the put Type XXIXK3 in a problematic light in view of knots was anticipated for the electric motor
use of the very much cheaper and more readily the situation as it was in 1944. A judgment given performance, this being a speed at which depth-
available pure oxygen. by Ministerial Counsellor Aschmoneit shortly after control would be good and the electric motor (creep-
Early in 1944, therefore, various studies were the war, named Type XXIXK2 or K4 as the most motor Type XXI) would be reliable. The electric
undertaken to establish what properties would likely of these versions to have been considered range should be 52 nautical miles at 3 knots. This
accrue from incorporating a closed-cycle diesel worthy of realization. method of travel would yield a maximum range of
installation in the available Walter Types XVIIB A more feasible possibility of achieving Type 4,600 nautical miles, and a smaller battery could be
and XXVI. However, the retention of the shape of XXVI's submerged performance in an 'oxygen fitted than in other V-boats of the same size.
these boats yielded unsatisfactory results, in that it boat' was that of feeding a Walter-turbine The boat would have a displacement of 360 tons.
was not possible to store a sufficient quantity of installation with pure oxygen instead of Aurol (see The pressure hull could be given a very stable
gaseous oxygen. A comparable investigation was page 282). Further improvement of the closed-cycle shape, as the simple storage of the oxygen tank
therefore carried out in August 1944 with four drive in V-boats could only be achieved by having together with its insulation and the compensating
different designs, all of them based on the shape of an oxygen-producing installation on board, so tanks meant that adequate weight was available.

This made possible a considerable diving depth of as in Type XXIII, but the armament would consist by 2 knots, to be achieved by fItting a diesel engine
180m (designed diving depth 2.5 times the safety of four bow torpedo tubes (plus two reserve with twice the performance. Because more space
margin). torpedoes). was needed to store a greater quantity of oxygen,
In order to provide a good shape for the oxygen The project was placed before the then Head of the displacement climbed to approximately 450
tank so as to curb expenditure on insulation, the 'K' OffIce, Admiral Fuchs, but there was no OffIce tons, and this did not please 'K' OffIce. Only sub-
whole pressure hull cross-section was to be used to discussion. It was then shown to the Chief of sequently was it shown to the new 'K' Head,
accommodate it, and passage between control room Second Naval War Staff, Konteradmiral Godt, who Vizeadmiral Ruge.
and bow compartment would have to be made criticized the low submerged top speed of 11.5
through a flat conning tower. Equipment including knots. An altered design, XXXIIIB, was discussed, Type XXXIV
periscope and communications apparatus was to be which would be given a submerged speed increased Apart from Type XXXIII, during the winter of
1944/45, another closed-cycle V-boat with a high
submerged speed, intended for coastal operations,
Closed-cycle Type 126K. was projected. The stimulus for this was not that of
i3~
military requirements. The starting-point was a
o 1 } ) ~ S 6 7 e !J 10m technical, theoretical one - to establish, through
this project, the extreme limits in submerged speed
for the closed-cycle in a smaller V-boat. A large
range was therefore not considered. The boat was
to be as simple to build as possible, and to have a
A B c short building time.
With a surface water displacement of 90 tons. the
project bordered on the small V-boat size. Having a
schnorkel range of 1,200 nautical miles at 11 knots,
operational endurance would be one week, which
-~=C"l was considered adequate for use in the North Sea
and the English Channel. The choice of the boat's
shape and size was dictated by a desire to use the
MB501C diesel engine, which had already been
tested in closed-cycle. The hull was to be designed
=>
IA IB in four sections bolted to each other for simple
assembly and maintenance; the separating-joints
¢=:= ~ =)
would be directly abaft the diesel engine and on
both sides of the oxygen tank. Rubber would
provide tightness for the sections. A similar, simple
sub-division had already been used successfully in
midget V-boats (page 284). The frame distance was
to be small, at 300mm, so that small frame heights
~<]:E@i~
could be achieved. The 8.5mm pressure-hull skin
was suitable for a designed diving depth of 100m.
As torpedo tubes would have involved a consider-
able increase in displacement, the suggested
torpedo armament was of a freely· flooding nature,
but, to avoid too great a resistance from the two
~~~~
torpedoes, they were positioned in the upper deck in
departure boxes or on rails. When they were to be
fired, the upper deck would be opened by a hinged
flap; the torpedoes would be released from their
fastening and the torpedo propulsion unit would be
set in motion. As the negative-buoyancy compens·
ation, amounting to 300kg in a normal torpedo, was
not easily achieved with such a small boat,
Type XXXIII, 12 October 1944 Main specifications: length, 4Om; beam, 4m; mean draught, 4.2m;
displacement surfaced. 360 tons; diving depth, 180m IX 2.51; torpedoes without negative buoyancy were to be
(reconstruction). propulsion, one MWM diesel engine (closed-cycle), one SOOhp AS used. Their smaller range was acceptable because
34S. one SSW GV322/28 JOhp x 190rpm electric engine; battery.
this boat had a high submerged speed and was very
o I 1 J , S , 1 1!I 9 'Om -f 32-cell 2XB MAL 570; fuel·oil. 23.6 tons; oxygen. 25.5 tons; speed
surfaced, 9.5 knots; closed-cycle speed submerged, 11.5 knots; range manoeuvrable.
surfaced, 1,550 n. miles at 9.5 knots, or 2.850 n. miles at 8 knots; A three-man crew was intended: helmsman,
c1osed·cycle range submerged, 1.6(X) n. miles at 6 knots; range at
30m plus extra battery power, 960 n. miles at 8 knots, 690 n. miles at engineer and an observer. The entire engine
10 knots and 500 n. miles at 11.5 knots; total range, 4,750 n. miles - installation could be operated from a control
18 hours schnorkelling per day at 6 knots, plus 6 hours closed-cycle position forward of the engine compartment
Affi , at 6.8 knots; range on electric engine, 52 n. miles at
3 knots; charging time, 6.75 hours. bulkhead. As the height of the hull did not permit of
a sufficiently long periscope and as it was
considered inadvisable to fIt a high periscope jack,
because of resistance, a folding periscope was
planned.
With closed-cycle use, the boat was to achieve a
maximum submerged speed of 22 knots; with
schnorkel use, bearing in mind oscillations of
V·BOAT DEVELOPMENT AT THE END OF THE WAR 281

the pressure hull diameter was 5.3m. The compart-
Type XXXIV, the enlarged version 5m
ment distribution from aft forwards was as follows:
turbine compartment, electr\'c :notor and diesel
with fixed schnorkel designed by compartment, control room (including auxiliary-
Grim and Kurzak. engine compartment), oxygen tank with passage-
Main specifications: length 238m; beam. 25m, mean draught,
way to the starboard side (passage-way with a
26m; form displacement, 121 IOns; displacement surfaced. 98 tons; circular cross-section), bow compartment (sub-
displacement submerged, 106 tons, propulsIOn, one... l,500shp divided into two decks, each deck having living
at 1.5CXlrpm diesel engine, Gne . 35shp at 135rpm electric motor;
battery, 7 troughs 7 MAL 210; closed cycle speed submerged. quarters and four torpedo tubes). As in Type XXVI
22 knots: closed-cycle range submerged, 90 nautlcal miles at 22 knots: - apart from the commander's cabin abaft the
schnorkel speed. 11 knots; schnorkel range. 1 200 nautIcal miles at 11
knots; armament, 4 torpedoes; crew, 4
control room - all the crew were accommodated in
the bow compartment. Also located in this area
were an additional four reserve torpedoes, the
Compensating and galley, the WC and provisioning.
11 trlmmmg tank 5.5 tons
tons As the situation in 1944-45 made it almost
impossible to carry out completely new U-boat
development, especially in terms of production, an
attempt was made to redesign Type XXVI, already
in production, to use oxygen as a propulsion fuel.
To this end, components from Type XXVI were to
be used as far as possible. This led to Project
XXXVI. The most simple way was to store oxygen
bottles in those compartments in the outer ship
intended for Aurol bunkers. For reasons of weight
and trimming, only 16 large bottles, containing a
total of 10 tons of oxygen gas at 400 atmospheres
could be accommodated, but this quantity would
only suffice to provide one-fifth of the turbine range
-~. ;.;
- --_. _. -- ----- - - - - --- -- _.- -"\.... _.' of Type XXVI. This solution, then, was completely
;;1.----····---·
impracticable. It was intended, therefore, to fit an
- - - - .. c· ~
-;";;,,; additional interior bunker containing liquid oxygen

in Type XXXVI. To accommodate this, a 5m
section was to be inserted between diesel
periscope and schnorkel-mast, and the considerable meant inevitably that the range of Walter-turbine compartment and control room. The upper part of
surface influence of depth-keeping, 11 knots; with use would depend on the length of the operation. It this bunker was to be taken up completely by the
the electric motor (Seehund-EM), 6 knots. As was desired that the boat, on entry into operations, oxygen tank. The portion of the outer ship beneath
Project XXXIV, it only got so far as being should have the same turbine range as Type XXVI, this was to be made into a pressure-tight trough,
presented to the Head of 'K' Office: it was the last and an operational zone approximately 2,000 which would serve as a corridor from control room
coastal U-boat project to be formulated before the nautical miles from base was assumed. Duration of to diesel compartment, and would accommodate
war ended. operations was estimated as six weeks, of which the oxygen compensating tanks. Through this
two would be spent outward bound, two homeward enlargement, the displacement was now approx-
Oxygen-fed turbine boats: Types XXXV and bound and two weeks in the operational zone. These imately 1,000 tons, while the turbine range was
XXXVI requirements were not wholly met in the design somewhat below that of Type XXXV.
If insistence were made on a speed higher than 22 calculations. The increased space requirement for The proposed use of the Walter installation with
knots, this could only be achieved by using a storage of the oxygen bottles beneath the pressure pure oxygen in U-boat Projects XXXV and
turbine for propulsion. Towards the end of the war, hull, the oxygen tank in the interior of the boat, and XXXVI, to provide a performance identical to that
attempts were made to establish if and how the the larger engine installation necessitated a of Type XXVI, necessitated a number of design
Walter-installation could be used with pure oxygen. displacement larger than that of Type XXVI. changes in the installation of this latter boat. The
Basically this seemed quite possible, and two Consequently, a more powerful diesel engine than combustion chamber developed for Aurol operation
designs were formulated for comparative purposes. that of Type XXVI would be needed. The intention could not simply be used for oxygen operation.
They were designated Type XXXV and XXXVI, was to use the twelve-cylinder RS12 V26/34a Aurol splits up into steam and oxygen in the
and were the last U-boat designs formulated by the V-engine by MWM, which would provide, when disintegrator and, having the same properties as
Navy. They did not reach the stage of being supercharged, 2,000hp at 850rpm. This engine was air, is taken into the combustion chamber where
presented to the Supreme Coin-C. already intended for Walter U-boat Types XVIII combustion temperature is kept at controllable
Type XXXV took as its starting-point work done and XXIV, and probably for the closed-cycle Type limits. If this were to be achieved with pure oxygen,
on the Project Series XXIX: eight bow torpedo XXIXK4 boat. It was not intended to use both the it was necessary that, before contact with the fuel-
tubes and a struct~rally simple construction BBC superchargers in the diesel destined for Type oil, the oxygen be so mixed up with steam that the
without side tubes. The arrangement in which XXXV, because it was considered, in the light of resulting mixture would have an oxygen content of
batteries were placed near the living quarters experience with Type XXI, that they would not 15-30 per cent. In practical terms, this meant that
against the pressure-hull wall was a new departure. bring about any increase in performance during all the water that was to be added had to be mixed
As it was intended to achieve the performance of schnorkel travel. The diesel range was to be 7,000 as steam with the oxygen prior to combustion. This
the Walter Type XXVI, for reasons of weight, nautical miles at 10 knots. A total of 65 tons of necessitated the use of a conventional water-pipe
oxygen gas storage was excluded: the 60 tons of oxygen was proposed, in order that the submerged boiler, which, unlike the Aurol installation,
oxygen that would need to be carried would, at 400 range of Type XXVI, 160 nautical miles at 24 demanded much cleaner feed water. The extra
atmospheres, require more than 90 steel bottles, knots, might be achieved; of this amount, 25 tons compartment space that this required was hardly
each containing 1.25m J, with a total weight of 207 would be carried in gas form in bottles, and 40 tons to be found in the small turbine compartment of
tons. On the other hand, the use of liquid oxygen in a tank. The length of the boat was 50rn and Type XXVI. A better possibility seemed to be the

use of a cooled combustion chamber with water Cuxhaven without great damage having been personal experience, could have assisted in the
injection, but this would have required a complete caused to them. testing of these completely unfamiliar installations.
design and testing of a new part of a turbine Until 1946 the U-boat construction departments In contrast, the Royal Navy showed a greater
installation. of the German Supreme Command were not interest in the Walter-drive, particularly in the well
Unlike the Aurol operation, in the oxygen dissolved, but worked with reduced staff for the advanced and fmished U-boat design Type XXVI.
operation it is essential that in the regulating British occupation forces reconstructing projects During a British Commission interrogation on 22
installations, apart from three liquids (fuel-oil, for which no background material was available, June 1945 (Commander Hall, Lieutenant-
additional water and compensating water), there be and collecting reports concerning developments in Commander Welbourn), Naval Construction
an additional 1-2 gaseous substances (oxygen and, weaponry and detection techniques, engine and Director Dr. Fischer was asked whether it would be
eventually, the steam mixture for the oxygen) kept constructional development. possible to build a series of 10 Type XXVI boats at
in a constant, exact weight relationship with each France, which, like the Soviet Union, was treated B&V. The minutes of the interrogation state at this
other. But the volumes of gases are dependent on in niggardly fashion in the matter of distribution of point:
pressure and temperature and, therefore, these U-boat prizes, showed similar considerable interest .In view of the lack of background material and in
elements must be kept constant at all times if one is in the most recent German U-boat development. the light of ignorance of existing conditions at the
to achieve a particular relationship of quantities by She supported the formation of an Engineering yard and at delivery firms, no commitments could
simple volume regulation. This brings in a furtl-ter Office in her occupational zone, and here German be made with certainty. Construction Director Dr.
technical problem: that of considerable temperature developments and tests carried out in the U-boat Fischer thinks that it should be possible to
fluctuations when running at lower power, and sector were evaluated. During 1947-49, reports complete two boats within &-12 months using
resulting from the constantly-changing oxygen totalling several thousands of pages were compiled turbines available in the British Occupation Zone.
container pressure. The proportion of steam in the for the French Navy, concerning basic and The opinion of the British was that there was very
operating mixture is 6 per cent smaller when using particular points resulting from U-boat develop- great interest in such an undertaking from the
pure oxygen than when using Aurol, with a ment during the Second World War. Parts of these technical point of view, but that higher authorities.
corresponding increase in the amounts of gas reports were subsequently communicated to on the grounds of political expediency, would flrst
(carbon dioxide and remaining oxygen). Therefore, a Sweden. The Soviet Union, apart from the few have to be consulted before approval could be
larger quantity of gas is expelled outside the boat, U-boats handed over by the British in 1947 (most of given. The opinion of Construction Director Dr.
which means that a compressor with a 35 per cent the surrendered U-boats had been sunk in the Fischer was that it would be advisable to set up an
larger capacity is required. Weight compensation in North Atlantic by the British as early as the winter Engineering OffIce in the event that such work
the oxygen operation must be on a much larger of 1945/46) acquired the sections still lying in would be recommended.'
scale than in the Aurol operation, as the quantity of Danzig together with the unfmished Type XXI However, the authorities had other ideas, and
consumed oxygen cannot be replaced directly by boats. It is not considered likely that they acquired ordered the complete dismantling and demolition of
sea water, as is done with Aurol or with fuel, but much in the way of useful design material. B&V. The British were to take fully ten years to
must be compensated to the full level above the The fITst acknowledgement of German and build, with their own resources, two Walter test-
regulating tank. It therefore needs to be approx- Japanese development was manifested by the submarines of the same size and engine installation
imately twice as large as in Aurol operation. United States with her 'fleet' submarines, equipped as Type XXVI, Explorer and Excalibur, but before
Furthermore, the supply of fuel-oil in turbine with schnorkels, and the gradual turning towards this, they carried out comprehensive tests with the
operation with supplied oxygen is higher than with electric submarines, i.e., to submarines with a overhauled Type XVIIB prize U-boat, Meteorite
Aurol usage in terms of tons per hour of steam larger battery capacity, stronger electric motors (ex-U1407). in which they had the assistance of one
consumption. However, no problem was presented and an outer hull shape more conducive to a high of Walter's colleagues. Heinz Ullrich, as chief test
because there was a considerable reserve displace- top speed - the so-called 'Guppy' submarine engineer. In addition, from the beginning of 1946
ment caused by storing oxygen in bottles. ('Guppy'=Greater Underwater Propulsion Power). until 1949. Hellmuth Walter (accompanied by five
The idea of using the Walter-turbine installation The fITst new submarines to be built to of his staff) worked as constructional adviser for
with pure oxygen was certainly a way out of the specifications based on Type XXI were six Vickers-Armstrong in Barrow-in-Furness, on the
Aurol shortage. Over and above this, there was the 1,600-ton boats of the Tang class, which entered construction of Walter-installations.
factor of overwhelmingly lower production costs service in 1951-52, and which had a submerged Meanwhile, the Soviet Union built up a large,
and simpler production methods of pure oxygen (in speed of 17 knots. The construction of these had conventional submarine fleet. using her W class,
1944 1 hp/hr with Aurol cost something like 20 been preceded by large-scale tests carried out with based on Type XXI, as the backbone. The Soviet
times as much as 1 hp/hr with oxygen!). Apart from two of the surrendered Type XXI, U2513 and avy preferred well-tried and tested methods and
this, the use of pure oxygen offered no advantages, U300s. components rather than revolutionary innovations
but should rather be considered as a poor solution, The U.S.A. did not stop at this stage of to achieve series production of a reliable submarine.
especially in the light of oxygen storage and with development, but made further constructional Only slowly did they turn to the design of faster
regard to the production of operating steam. strides, both in hull shape ('tear-drop') and in the submerged boats with streamlined outer hulls.
matter of propulsion. Here, too, German patent France, too, based the design of her fIrst post-war
Postscript: German influence in the post-war origins can be proved. The midget U-boat Delphin submarine type, the Narval class, very much on
era and a 36m-long high-speed submarine project, Type XXI, but changed the 8-shaped pressure hull
After the capitulation, although a great deal had which were being investigated at the HSV A in to a circular cross-section.
been destroyed, the British and the Americans April 1944, at the request of the Research Institute It can be stated, with certain reservations, that
acquired much background material concerning of the Reichs Post OffIce, had the tear-drop shape of many recently developed submarines of
U-boat development, especially from B&V and GW. the later American atomic submarines; and the first conventional propulsion are continued
By order, secret microfilm (such as, for example, the design for an atomic submarine, by the American developments of the German designs and projects
Walter test reports) was handed over. From official Dr. Abelson in 1946, used the German Type XXVI for electro-boats, even if - particularly during the
documentation the War Diaries of the Chief of design, but fItted with a sodium-graphite reactor in 1950s - development has progressed far beyond
aval War Staff were handed over to the British, place of a Walter installation. The Americans were what the Germans had achieved when the war
but the major part of the Constructional OffIce not particularly successful with the Walter-drive. ended. For the Walter and closed-cycle drives there
records had been lost by voluntary destruction. True, they had received the captured Walter boat was no future in post-war, large submarine
Additional captures made by the victors were the U1406 from the British, together with duplicate construction. however, as interest in them was
new Type XXI and XXIII U-boats in Norway, and copies of acquired Walter reports, but they did not effectively ended by the introduction of atomic
raised Walter-boats that had been scuttled in have the help of the German specialists, who, from propulsion.

SMALL
AND MIDGET
U-BOATS
REALIZED MIDGET U-BOATS
Designs for small and midget V-boats had been Drager's idea for midget series construction,
rejected by the German Navy, while available
boats, especially Type VIle, proved successful and
so long as the main tactical objective was the
Heavy industry ~ D ~
attacking of convoys. The antipathy of the Navy Pressure dock
towards very small V-boats was of very long
standing, going back to the origins of German
submarine construction. There had been no lack of
Installation of:
suggestions as to their employment, and it had
been proposed that small or midget submarines be
used as single units and for hunting in packs from
'mother' ships. A noted champion of the small
V-boat concept was Dr. Heinrich Drager, the owner
of Drager-Werke, Lubeck. In a memorandum dated
1 October 1941, he presented a series of designs for
small V-boats of between 70 and 120 tons, with
diesel-electric and diesel-closed-cycle drive: Pressure dock
'I. To build the required number of units, present
warship construction methods must be abandoned.
Instead of building a complete boat, from keel
laying to launch, at one particular building slip on
the coast, we must adopt the production methods of
AAB c@?s ~
aircraft, of tanks and of locomotives. The sizes of
boats and designs must be adopted for mass- Transport to coast
production by these methods.

'2. The construction of larger boats must be sub-
divided (cell-construction). It is necessary that the
cells lend themselves to transportation by rail, by
road, by waterway, etc., so that pressure-hull
construction and time-consuming interior assembly
I 15.000 I
can be carried out in those places where, at any
time, spare industrial capacity, both in terms of
personnel and construction installations are
available in areas as safe as possible from air Central European railway gauge
attack.
'3. One estimates the following production times:
Pressure-hull construction
)
and cells: 14-20 working days.
Interior assembly of cells: 30 working days.
Welding together of cells
and the remaining
completion tasks: 30 working days.
Including an additional period for transportation, Bogey laden, 30 tons Swivelling frame Reinforcement
Sundays, etc., we arrive at a period of 6 months
from heat-forming to slip way launch, given
uninterrupted working. After things have been in
progress for some time, some reduction of this time
will probably be possible.
284 SMALL AND MIDGET V-BOATS

'4. It is essential to try and achieve as accurate a conditions. heavy seas do not allow small vessels to considerably smaller, however, and, in contrast to
uniformity of various components in manufacture be used adequately in operations. Furthermore, the the X class would reach its target purely by
as possible, so that repair and yard times can be a radius of operation, in the light of the increasing submerged travel. Naturally the radius of action
half of the usual times, through the quick and distances over which we are having to wage war, is was very restricted, and the boat would have to be
simple interchangeability of components.' insufficient. Concerning an increase in launching of carried to the vicinity of the target by surface
Thus, in 1941, he anticipated Merker's ideas on Types being currently constructed, capacity is transport. I n order to trim the floating boat. and as
the section construction of U-boats. Dr. Drager totally dependent on personnel and materials. As it was anticipated that the boat would have to
went on to suggest the construction of midget regards materials in providing power and fuel break through nets, adjustable weights on spindles
U-boats of only 23 to 25 tons, which could be supplies, bottlenecks in such areas as non-ferrous were provided in place of hydroplanes. This
carried to their operational zone by surface vessels, metals are highly significant.' method, which harks back to Bauer's Brandtaucher
or be used by auxiliary cruisers or aircraft carriers (page 10), proved to be completely unsuitable
for their own protection. Finally, for the two most because in conditions of considerable inclination
important aspects of operation, he regarded the 'K' Office midget U-boat project, these weights could not be moved by hand quickly
development of special 100-ton V-boats as feasible, March 1942 enough for them to be effective. Hecht. therefore,
and for them to be built in very large numbers for was given forward hydroplanes, with stabilizing
10m
the following purposes. fms aft, an improvized measure that did not make
'1. A U-boat for surface night attacks. with a for particularly good depth keeping. With only
good surface shape and a submerged propulsion as submerged travel in mind. no diving tanks were
is in general present use (night-hunter type of provided. The residual buoyancy of approximately
submersible motor torpedo-boat). Required: 300 of 200 litres necessary before the crew en tered the
these. Main specifications: boat was, in submerged travel, destroyed by the
displacement surfaced, 97.95 (pressure hull), 2.7m; draught to
'2. A U-boat for submerged attacks, shaped like tons; displacement submerged, lower edge of keel, 2.34m; flooding of the compensating tanks. The propulsion
a torpedo and, if possible, a new type of submerged approx. 112.6 tons; length speed surfaced. 9 knots; unit consisted of a 12hp AEG torpedo engine.
overall, 25.33m; max beam armament, 3 torpedoes.
propulsion to provide a high submerged speed. whose revolutions were reduced by a V-belt drive.
Required: 150 of these.' The battery consisted of five 17T torpedo troughs.
In fact. test vessels for both types did exist at A small U-boat design was worked out in 'K' the plates of which were replaced by stronger ones,
that time, but Dr. Drager knew nothing about them Office at the beginning of 1942, with a length of so that the battery would have a greater capacity
because of the secrecy surrounding them. These 25.33m and a displacement of 97.95 tons, but it did and a longer life in conditions of low discharge. The
were: 1. The so-called Engelmann High-Speed Boat not get beyond the project stage. One assumes that designation of this altered battery was 8 MAL 210.
of 256 tons (page 120) which, in its originally it had its origins in the impression caused by the The largest installation was a gyroscopic compas
planned form. could not dive, and which was exaggerated reports of Japanese midget V-boat with a transformer, for it was believed that this was
unstable at higher speeds. but which, with its low successes during the attack on Pearl Harbor on 7 indispensable for pure submerged travel.
surface silhouette (half-submersible boat) and its December 1941, and would have had, as they did. a When design work had been completed. the Chief
strong dieser concentration, came very near to torpedo-shaped hull. Three torpedo tubes would of Naval War Staff made an additional demand that
Drager's conception. and 2. The Walter test boat have been fitted in the bow. this midget V-boat be able to carry torpedoes. so
V80, which did, in fact, measure up to requirements that it could be used against moving targets in the
with regard to a high submerged speed and great Midget U-boats Hecht and Seehund (Type immediate coastal vicinity. As the volume of the
manoeuvrability, but which would not be suitable XXVII) boat was only 9.47 tons. only torpedoes without
for operations of this kind, because of its very ot until the autumn of 1943 was there a change of negative buoyancy could be used, and these,
noticeable wake of bubbles. However, Drager's opinion regarding the possible successful lacking a battery trough, had a restricted range.
ideas did not elicit any support from the Navy, or application of midget V-boats. On 23 September Hecht therefore had the choice of a mine or a
other ship-construction circles and, on 22 January 1943. the British 30-ton boats X6 and X7, torpedo under its keel as armament. If she were
1942, he received a fmal rejection for his U-boat succeeded in placing detonation charges under the being used for torpedo carrying. a battery head
suggestions from Counsellor of State Rudolf battleship Tirpitz, damaging her and putting her with a further three battery troughs could be
Blohm: out of action for at least six months. installed: in practice, however her range of 69
'Even if the small U-boat can be brought to the Subsequently, 'K' Office worked out a design for nautical miles at 4 knots was too small for this type
point of fulfilling technical requirements, we cannot a German two-man V-boat designated Type of operation.
regard it as adequate for operational purposes XXVIIA Hecht ('Pike'), which, like the British On 18 January 1944. Dbnitz discussed with Hitler
because, carrying only 2 torpedoes, it has a minimal prototype, would attach limpet mines to ships lying the plan for building 50 midget V-boats of this type.
armament and because, in adverse weather in otherwise safe anchorages. It was to be Hitler regarded it as good judgement to develop
SMALL AND MIDGET U-BOATS 285

Type XXVII, Hecht.
Gyro cooling equipment
A B C D
'"
'" '" -",
1 '" '\
-",
Ei
Gyro transformer
Gyro repeater compass

\ Compensating tank (wated, port
Potash carfridgeS / Bilge pump \

Torpedo battery
Depth gauge Controller Compensating tank (water), starboard
286 SMALL AND MIDGET V·BOATS

this type for both mine and torpedo use and, on 9 Chief Naval Construction Adviser Kurzak's flI'st The complete design for 'Small U-Boat K' was
March 1944, GW was given a contract for a design, involving a closed-cycle drive was 'Small ready on 21 May 1944, and was discussed at a
prototype and, on 28 March, a contract for a series U-Boat K', which had very little in common with Supreme Naval Command meeting chaired by the
of 52 boats. In April, it was decided to carryon Hecht. The boat's hull was suitable for surface Commander of the Midget Weapons Units,
building the Type XXVII midget V-boats in large travel and had diving cells arranged on the sides, Vizeadmiral Heye. Chief Naval Construction
numbers. which partly enclosed the torpedoes and replaced Adviser Kurzak was requested to plan a closed-
Meanwhile 'K' Office had produced numerous the torpedo attachments. This had the effect of cycle installation appropriate to such a boat.
designs under the Type designation XXVIIB, reducing somewhat the considerable submerged The shape of his design was to exert a
which would have an increased range (a true V-boat resistance of the underslung torpedoes. The considerable influence on the fmal version of the
propulsion installation with diesel and electric propulsion engine planned was the ship's-boat 95hp small V-boat Type XXVIIB intended as the
motors) and a heavier armament (two torpedoes). diesel engine MWM-GS 145S, produced in large successor to Hecht. Designated XXVlIB5 Seehund
An initial design for which the HSV A carried out ('Sea]'). later Type 127, a completely fmished
shape research in June 1944, strongly resembled midget U-boat evolved under the direction of Naval
Hecht. However, a fore-ship for surface travel had Type XXVIIB. Construction Adviser Grim, with a relatively
been added to the torpedo·shaped hull, and the keel powerful diesel-electric installation (60hp Bussing
had been enlarged to receive battery troughs. lorry diesel and 25hp AEG electric motor), which
Saddle tanks were arranged close to the midships had all the essential installations of a larger diving
section. All this meant that the surface displace· boat. Without exterior bunkers, the surface range
ment, without torpedoes, rose to 12.95 tons. A ~ amounted to 270 nautical miles at 7.7 knots and,
small 22hp diesel was provided for surface travel, with exterior bunkers, as much as 500 nautical
and it was estimated that this would provide a miles at 7.7 knots, but this would have been rather
speed of 5.5 knots on the surface and 6.9 knots much for the crew in such a cramped boat. The
submerged. numbers by Suddeutschen Bremsen AG, Munich, battery capacity of 8 troughs of 7 MAL 210 (better
At about this time, the Supreme Naval and used by the naval spare-parts organization. It capacity than the 8 MAL 210!) made possible a
Command's representative for closed-cycle develop- was expected in closed-cycle operation that this submerged voyage of 63 nautical miles at 3 knots or
ment at GW, Chief Naval ConstruCtion Adviser engine would supply a submerged top speed of 19 nautical miles at 6 knots. The submerged
Kurzak, stimulated by the successful closed'cycle 11-12 knots and a range of 70 nautical miles and. properties of speed and range were not good, and
testing at FKFS of the two OM59/1 vehicle engines for long-range travel at a speed of 7 knots. a range this was evident from the towing tests at the
(each of 55hp maximum performance), set about of 150 nautical miles. Oxygen was to be stored in a HSVA in July 1944. Without torpedoes in
designing a midget V-boat that could use this large pressure bottle containing 1,250 litres in the submerged travel. a Cw value of 73 was measured:
propulsion unit. It was evident that the closed·cycle keel, and 4 accumulator troughs 8 MAL 210 were to with torpedoes, it was only 59. From its very
drive in these small boats would have to be much be accommodated in the fore-ship. The boat was to conception, Seehund was rather more of a 'semi-
more efficient, a sentiment that Dr. Draager had have a length of 11.74m and a submerged submersible' with a very low surface silhouette and
uttered as early as 1941. displacement of 13.8 tons. superior diving qualities.
'Small U-boat K' with closed-cycle drive.

Kurzak's deSign of 25 May 1944
, m 1.0 60 BO
Distance between frames 1m
Regulator
Ballast tank (water)

Type 127. Seehund.
......
~
Key: 1, diesel engine; 2, diesel clutch lelastic bedding); 3, electnc
'"
C) engine; 4, tachometer drive; 5. fixed coupling; 6, thrust beanng; 7,
shaft bearing; 8. air intake mast; 9, magnetic compass; 10.
~I
periscope, fixed length 10m swivelltng; 11, oxygen bottles; 12.
compressed air bottle; 13, battery trough; 14, SWitches; 15. fuel-oil
consumption tank.
, , I
-0:3 cio I
1.0 /.0 3.0 ".0 .5,0
I
6:0 7,'0 8:0
I
9.0 10.0 11.0 11.56m
Initially, a proftle-rudder was intended for the of W. Schenk in Hall, using Elbing personnel, and Sequence production was carried on there from th,
lateral rudder, but the turning circle was to raise production to 50 boats per month by July middle of March, while production at UIm, which
unsatisfactory. An improvement was subsequently 1945 as shown in Table 63. was not very accessible from a transport point ot
expected by using a Kort nozzle rudder, but this view, was stopped and construction at Hall did not
was not realized. Finally, a two-surface rudder on At the same time, GW was to continue to deliver. begin. The main difficulty that developed in th
one axle ('box rudder') was tried out, and this did The total programme was reduced to 600 boats in latter stages of the war, and was to affect even th
improve the turning circle, but was liable to flutter. the Emergency Programme (page 2'62). As the Seehund programme, was the bottleneck in
The detailed planning of the 11.865m boat, which 'Konrad' shelter in Kiel was now required neither accumulators. Thus, in March 1945, instead of 60
had a displacement of 12.3 tons, was handed over to for Type XXI nor for Type XXIII, it could be used Seehund batteries, only 40 could be provided.
the IBG, with Naval Construction Director Dr. additionally by GW for Seehund construction. The total of Hecht and Seehund delivered i
Fischer in charge, and Howaldt-Kiel received a shown in Table 64. 3 Seehund were produced at
contract for 3 prototypes on 30 July 1944. Series Table 62. Delivery programme for Seehund, January 1945 Howaldt-Kiel, 136 at Schichau, Elbing, and th
construction would subsequently be carried out at Schichau. GW. Southern remainder at GW. The Hecht boats saw servi<'
GW; Schichau, Elbing; Klockner-Humboldt-Deutz, 1945 Elbing Kiel Germany only as training vessels; the Seehunds were put into
Vim, and at CRD-Monfalcone. Most of the --- service from January 1945, operating from
contracts and V-boat numbers had been awarded January 55 25 Ijmuiden in the Netherlands.
by April 1944, even before the design of Seehund February 55 25 3
March 55 30 5
was completely ready. April 55 30 10 Table 64. Hecht and Seehund: actual deliveries
The Ministerial Programme of June 1944 (page May 55 25 20
2(5) planned a total of 1,000 Type XXVII midget June 55 - 30 Hecht Seehund
V-boats, of which Elbing was to supply 45 and GW July 55 - 35
25 boats per month. Initially, it was intended to 1944:
May 2
manage without other production centres. When June 1
GW took over the complete Type XXIII construc- Table 63. Revised Seehund construction programme, 30
January 1945 (excluding Gw) July 7
tion, it would then cease to take part in the Seehund August 43
programme, and production of these would then 1945 Vim Hall September 3
begin in southern Germany. At the beginning of October 35
January November 61
January 1945, the delivery plan for Seehund was as February December 70
5
shown in Table 62. March 10 1945
When Schichau, Elbing, was no longer available, April 10 5 January 35
it was decided, on 30 January 1945, to accelerate May 10 15 February 27
the commencement of construction of Seehund at June 10 25 March 46
July 10 40 April 8
Klockner-Humboldt-Deutz in Vim, and at the firm

Above: A Seehund with saddle tanks to accommodate extra fuel. Below: Series production of Seehund type midget submarines in the 'Konrad' bunker at DWK, May 1945.
quantity could be supplied and were, furthermore,
almost noiseless. Consequently, an immediate
Biber. series of 24 was ordered from Flenderwerke, to b
delivered by 31 May 1944. Additional contract~
[
,..,
were placed with Klockner-Humboldt-Deutz and
with other firms.
Without armament, the mass-produced boats of
'-4' the Biber type had a displacement of 3.645 tons, a
length of 9.035m and a pressure-hull diameter of
0.96m. The surface propulsion was provided by a
32hp Opel-Blitz Otto engine. The danger from
poisoning or explosion by using an Otto petrol
engine was the weakest part of this design, but no
suitable diesel engine was available in large
quantities, and there was certainly pressing need
4'l for the early entry into operations of a vessel of this
kind - more suitable than Hecht for coastal
operations in view of the impending invasion. With
approximately 225 litres of petrol, the surfacI'
range was 100 nautical miles at 6.5 knots. For
~.,
submerged travel, three torpedo battery trough!
Type 13 T 210, and a 13hp electric torpedo motor
were provided, giving the boat a submerged rang,
of 8.6 nautical miles at 5.3 knots plus 8 nautical
miles at 2.5 knots. The armament consisted of two
suspended torpedoes without negative buoyancy,
which were carried in curved indentations in th,'
hull.
, The pressure hull was formed from 3mm sheN
3m steel, and was intended to have a permissible divin"
depth of 20m. Efforts to produce a pressure-hull
shape with a small displacement and a small
transportation weight were not conducive til
strength. Compensating and trimming tanks had
been dispensed with. Before beginning a voyagl',
solid ballast had to be stowed. During travel,
weight and trimming changes could only bf
compensated dynamically or by partial flooding of
the diving tanks. This represented a considerabll'
headache for the boat's controller who, on thi
account, was very much stretched during rapidly
changing manoeuvres, especially when diving. Thl'
restricted proportions meant that periscopl'
observation could be provided only in a forward
direction. As the boat could not be kept at
periscope depth, because of her rather primitiv,
design, attack would be carried out only when
surfaced.
Delivery of Bibers in 1944 was as follows:
One-man boats: Biber, Neger, Marder and bubble, from the mass-produced boats that M~: 3
Molch followed, and had the following specifications: June: 6
The smallest V-boat in the German Navy was the Length: 7m. July: 19
Biber ('Beaver') type, developed by Lubeck Beam: 0.96m. August: 50
Flenderwerke, at the instigation of Korvetten- Draught: 0.96m. September: 117
kapitiin Bartels. Once again, a British midget Displacement: 3 tons. October: 7:1
submarine provided the lead: on 22 November 1943, Surface: 7 knots/13h=91 nautical miles. ovember: 5fi
during an attack on Bergen, a British midget of the Submerged: 6 knots/2Y.h. December: -
Welmancraft type was captured. Without its mine Diving depth: 25m. Total: 32·\
charge, this vessel had a length of 5.13m and During the acceptance trials in the River Trave on The first Biber flotilla was prepared so quickl)
weighed 2.075 tons; it had only electric drive, and 29 May 1944, the boat created a very good that an operation was carried out on 29-30 Augu~l
trimming was effected by a movable weight. Its impression. To the fears expressed by the Head of 1944, against the Allied invasion fleet, but withoUl
range was 30 nautical miles at 3 knots. 'K' Office concerning the use of a petrol engine in success. All the boats returned, but had to h
Initial negotiations concerning Biber began on 4 this midget V-boat, Director Bunte and destroyed next day when their operational base at
February 1944 at Flenderwerke. By 15 March, the representatives of the Marinegruppenkommando Fecamp was evacuated. During further operation
first 'Bunte boat' (after Director Bunte of Lubeck ordlFlottenkommando in Kiel said that they had from Den Helder, in the winter of 1944/45, the~.
Flenderwerkel, the so-called' Adam', was ready. It no objections to petrol engines, which had the 'fair weather boats' suffered considerable loss!
was very different, as regards bow and observer- considerable advantage that an almost unlimited without achieving any success worth mentioninl(.

The TV A-Eckernforde also provided stimuli for
the development of submersible small formation
Molch. units. As early as 21 December 1943. Naval
Key: 1, electric engine; 2, gyroscopic compass; 3, periscope. fixed Construction Adviser Richard Mohr, during a
length 1.5m; 4, battery troughs; 5, oxygen bottles; 6, compressed
air bottles; 7, trimming and compensating (water) tanks. discussion concerning anti-invasion measures, had
suggested that an inexpensive torpedo-carrier
could be acquired by using a manned torpedo,
which - used in great numbers against an
unsuspecting enemy - must achieve success. This
equipment was later given the designation Neger in
association with the name of its enthusiastic
progenitor (a German pun on the name Mohr, which
means, in English, Moor). It was developed very
quickly, and was ready in time for the Allied
landing at Anzio. The operation. however, was
carried out over-hastily in an improvized manner,
and brought no success; on the contrary, it led to
the Allies' capturing a Neger, which meant that the
element of\ surprise was lost. Searching for the
domes of Neger and Biber craft was a favourite
sport for both enemy fighters and motor torpedo-
boats.
A further development of Neger was the rather
longer Marder which had a small diving tank and
could. therefore, submerge for a short time.
Approximately 500 of these were constructed for
harbour and coastal defence. Consideration was
also given, for a time, to the construction of a
manned 'Dackel' torpedo (T III d) designated Hai
('Shark'), but only a test vessel was built. As Neger,
Marder and Hai must really be considered as
weapons rather than submarines, no further space
will be devoted to them.
Only midget U-boats, travelling mainly
I
OZO
I
a •
f.O Z.O
I
J.O
I
.. 0
1
5.0 .. 0 7,0
1
8,0
1
9,0
I
3.71
underwater, could approach an invasion fleet
without being discovered and without suffering
considerable losses. With this in mind, the TV A
1,-1 ").n ~._-----_._-
-- -----If ------1[- -----'IF -----,

evolved the midget U-boat Thomas II, later called
Molch ('Salamander'I, an all-electric one-man
U-boat, which had similar propulsion to Hecht, but
which, from the beginning, was planned as a
I torpedo-carrier for two torpedoes without negative
I buoyancy. As with all TVA developments, it was
designed to use as many available torpedo parts as
l_ possible, with simple production a main objective.
The complete vessel resembled a rather enlarged
torpedo, and contained 12 battery troughs Type 13
T 210 in the fore-ship.
Midget U-boat Type Molch, camouflaged.

The after part of the vessel contained simply the
after part of an electric torpedo for propulsion; but,
PROJECTED DESIGNS Sonderfahrzeug,
because of its lower speed, the stabilizing fms and Alongside the more or less improvized projects for
hydroplanes were given larger dimensions. The quickly-built midget U-boats, certain projects with
high battery weight made the displacement considerable potential for operationally-sound
considerably greater than that of Biber, and this vessels were being developed in the early part of
amounted (without torpedoes) to 8.4 tons. The total 1944. Prototypes of certain designs were
range was lower than Biber's, but the submerged manufactured and these had considerable qualities.
range of 50 nautical miles at 3.3 knots, plus 50 Series production was no longer possible after the
nautical miles at 5 knots, was considerably greater. Supreme Naval Command, at the beginning of
However, the submerged operational capabilities 1945, had ordered a cessation of aU projects not
were impaired by the restricted periscope already contained in the current programme; As built, the test vessel had a two-man crew and
observation (approximately 30° to each side) and however, the multiplicity of bodies engaged in was correspondingly larger than the other types (35
by the lack of underwater detection installations. midget U-boat development, and the independent tons displacement, length 14.2m, beam 2m).
As with Seehund and Biber, instead of the position of the Admiral for Midget Weapons Propulsion was provided by an 80hp petrol engine,
complicated gyroscopic compass installation as ensured that design work went on in great measure which could be switched to drive either the
fitted in Hecht, a simple magnetic compass, on a until the very end of the war. caterpillar tracks or the propeller for surface and
mast outside the hull, could be observed from the schnorkel travel. For submerged travel, the boat
interior. Only a few test boats were fitted. Type XXXII had the Seehund 25hp electric motor, which would
additionally with an automatic course-keeping With the designation Type XXXII, a midget give a submerged speed of 8 knots despite the
mechanism and a listening device. The ballast U-boat of approximately 20 tons displacement was numerous appendages. The petrol engine was
tanks represented a combination of diving, developed during the autumn of 1944; it was similar installed in the bow compartment beneath the ftxed
compensating and trimming tanks, which had to be to Hecht, but, from the very beginning, was schnorkel mask. Immediately aft of this was the
adjusted exactly prior to each voyage. designed for torpedo operations. Seehund, despite control room, then the batteries (electric torpedo
The first appearance of a test vessel on 19 March all its merits, was a conventional submarine troughs) and the petrol tank. The electric motor
1944 gave the impression, in comparison with designed to operate mainly on the surface, and a was situated in the stern. Apart from conducting
Biber, of a still incomplete and inadequate design. disadvantageous factor was that its torpedo air, the schnorkel mast contained the periscope, a
An attempt at diving was unsuccessful in that the arrangement beneath the hull meant that loading rod aerial and the magnetic compass with lighting
boat, with her long fore-ship, could not be made to was only possible in dock or on land. In contrast to transmission. All controls for the rudder and after
submerge. The first acceptable boat was not shown this, the Supreme Naval Command's Design hydroplanes (forward, the boat had only one ftxed
until 12 June 1944 in Eckernforde. The series XXXII placed both torpedoes above the hull, so stabilizing fm) were grouped together in a control
construction immediately put in hand was as that loading in water was possible and the boat, column placed forward of the driver's seat beneath
follows. even when armed, could rest on the bottom when the Plexiglass dome. Control of this rather fat boat
June 1944: 3 the current was against her. She was to have a was apparently very good. When submerged, the
July 1944: 38 conning tower so that periscope depth could be commander directed the vessel from his position at
August 1944: 125 greater while using the same periscope length, and the periscope, which, however, was rather poorly
September 1944: 110 the conning-tower height was such that the supplied with light. The greatest diving depth
October 1944: 57 commander could stand at the periscope. A 25hp achieved by the test boat was 21m. A special
November 1944: Seehund motor was intended for electric flooding device enabled See teufel, unlike all other
December 1944: 28 propulsion. She was to have an endurance at sea of midget U-boats, to ftre even the normal 7m
January 1945: 32 approximately four days, and was intended to torpedoes with negative buoyancy without running
February 1945: operate in the Channel. the risk of breaking surface after firing.
Total: 393
Production was carried out mainly at Deschimag- Seeteufel
AG Weser of Bremen. While these boats had a Apart from Molch, other designs for midget units Seeteufel.
considerable displacement, their specifications were were being developed at the TVA early in 1944. The
kept simple so that a large number might be most advanced of these was certainly the Seeteufel
completed in the shortest possible time. of Engineer Alois Lodige which was developed and
The Molchs were used from the autumn of 1944 built in four months by its designer and a few
against Allied supply lines off Anzio and, from the colleagues at TV A-North, and was ready for testing
beginning of 1945, off the coast of Holland. As with as early as July 1944. The considerable diffIculties
Biber, losses bore no relationship to their meagre experienced in putting even the small one-man
successes. In the case of Molch, the essential double torpedo of the Neger type into the water
reasons lay in inadequate training, technical stimulated the designer to create an amphibious
shortcomings and, once again, the fact that the midget U-boat with a tracked arrangement for
boat's controller had far too many tasks to motion on land. In March 1944, the TVA had
complete. invested in the towing canal of the HSV A a one-
Biber and Molch were regarded as intermediate man U-boat design with tracks for land travel; this
solutions, designed and built as a short-term was designated Sonderfahrzeug (special vessel). It
improvization. The only possible success was based had a length of 9.825m and a submerged
upon the element of surprise, but this was not displacement of 16 tons without armament. The
achieved, as the very ftrst operation was a disaster, two torpedoes were to be carried next to the tracks.
inadequately prepared as they were and with all Although this design enclosed the commander's
circumstances against them. It was not until lookout position in a streamlined fashion, the vessel
Seehund had been produced that the Germans had had a considerable submerged resistance, and had
a midget U-boat with some chance of offensive easily the greatest friction value of all researched
success. midget U-boats. Opposite page: Seeteufel at the TVA, Eckernfbrde.
292 SMALL AND MIDGET U-BOATS

7; .Lvos-n .L3:QaIW GNV TlVWS
Tests on Seeteu(eL were carried out by Test Command's decision regarding limitations on the application in midget U-boats, especially as such
Command 456 of the Midget Weapons Units in construction of midget units put an end to the boats would be carrying out operations of short
conjunction with TV A-North. These showed that, project. Following the conclusion of tests in duration.
on land, the petrol engine was too weak and the Eckernfbrde, the TV A Test Boat was taken to the Kurzak then projected a closed-cycle midget
caterpillar tracks too narrow for the heavy vehicle. 'Blaukoppel' Depot of the Midget Weapons Unit at U-boat to carry liquid oxygen. This design was
In water, the design proved satisfactory. Vizead- Lubeck, where it was destroyed at the end of the similar in shape to 'Small U-Boat K' (page 285), but
mira I Heye (Admiral for Midget Weapons) con- war. with slightly enlarged dimensions. However, the
tacted the automobile firm of Carl Borgward to diesel engine selected was the Daimler-Benz
determine the possibilities of mass-production and, Closed-cycle Seehund OM67/4 of 100hp at 2,000rpm, this being very
in October 1944, Seeteu(eL was demonstrated to On 4 May 1944, Chief Naval Construction Adviser similar in the matter of consumption to the
Borgward and Director Kynast in Eckernfbrde. Kurzak reported that the use of liquid oxygen OM59/1, which meant that available test results
Finally, Borgward was authorized to prepare series instead of gas might be possible in midget U-boats could be transferred to the newer engine with
construction of an improved Seeteu(eL which would with closed-cycle drive, and might furnish consequent quicker development of the closed-cycle
have a 250hp diesel engine in place of the petrol considerable saving in volume and weight. On 12 installation. The engine installation was to be
engine, and wider tracks; three such prototypes June 1944, appropriate tests were carried out by K mounted on a common frame, which could be
were to be produced. But the Supreme Naval II. These confrrmed the basic feasibility of such an introduced into the stern section and secured by a
few screws to give easy access. To muffle the noise,
the complete frame was given an elastic bedding,
Seehund. closed-cycle installation. using four rubber buffers at the edges of the frame,
and the vibrations were so fmely adjusted that the
engine ran smoothly. It was hoped especially that,
QUick-clOSing deVice at low revolutions, noise from the hull could be so
reduced that ultimately the silent creep-speed
To exhaust-gas expulsion
installation could be dispensed with, the propulsion
installation then becoming extremely simple and
~~e~lse p~~h light. As an interim measure, while awaiting the
maximum achievable noise-damping to be estab-
lished, it was intended to use an electric, silent
Freshwater cooler
creep-speed plant for the lower speed ranges. This
was to be a fast-running electric motor with V-belt
. _. After exhaust-gas cooler _
Main exhaust-gas cooler
drive, which was the installation with the shortest
possible dimension. If the Seehund electric motor
had been used, a lengthening of 55cm would have
been necessary.
If liquid oxygen were to be used, the greatest
possible care would have to be taken to avoid gas
g problems during the intervals between operating.

For this reason, the oxygen container was to be
~ondenSed ,,~".. _ ro~~romro"~"'I

made pressure-tight to 6 atmospheres overload
n J'
F,om operating pressure, and 9 atmospheres overload
wate,
L~, "
c...J• IlL "mro"'"" L_..• •
L '- - - pressure
regulating test pressure. The normal operating pressure of
Autom~t:c water L~ . liquid oxygen was 1 atmosRhere over pressure.
__ separ~
Through the possibility of an increase in pressure

from 1 to 6 atmospheres overload (the escape
pressure of the safety valve), if the insulation were
carried out effIciently, escaping of gas could be
prevented for approximately two days. With each
use of a quantity of oxygen, the pressure would
sink of its own accord to 1 atmosphere overload,
and would be kept at this level when the engine was
operating by a regulator that controlled the flow of
liquid oxygen to the evaporator.
Heat necessary for the evaporation process and
for heating the liquid oxygen was taken from sea
water and introduced through an exterior maze of
tubes. With a full oxygen supply of 650kg, a
submerged closed-cycle range of 69 nautical miles
at 11.5 knots or 150 nautical miles at 7.25 knots
was calculated. The project for these midget
U-boats was given the designation Type XXVIIK,
and was made available to the Supreme Naval
Command on 10 August 1944.
left: A GW-built Seehund (Construction Number 1027)

after a pressure test at the beginning of 1945. Right:
Bussing-NAG LOG closed-cycle installation for Seehund.
1945.

In order to have an early testing of the closed- limited by their small fuel-oil supply and battery Seehund engine were as shown in Table 65. The
cycle installation under working conditions in a capacity (only two troughs). total range of approximately 200 nautical miles,
midget V-boat, Chief Naval Construction Adviser Having regard to the Seehund hull shape, the with an endurance of 24-30 hours was too small for
Kurzak suggested, on 8 September 1944, building ranges ascertained for the OM67/4 and the Bussing an operational boat of this size. Later calculations,
some closed-cycle test boats by making use of after test-bed closed-cycle consumption measure-
Table 65. Comparative ranges of engines for closed·cycle
Seehund hulls and components already in ments had been taken, yielded rather better values.
Seehund plus
production. Lengthening Seehund by 1,800mm The development of this closed-cycle Seehund
(incorporation of an intermediate section between submerged, plus submerged suggested by Kurzak was carried out by the IBG in
c-c surfaced electric
control room and rear section) would afford Blankenburg and was given the designation Type
sufficient room for the larger installation. Kurzak DB-OM67/4' 227. Contracts for test boats along these lines were
did not consider construction of a large number of n. miles 96 85 21 awarded to GW, Kiel and Schichau, Elbing. By the
these closed-cycle Seehunds or their operational use knots 8 8.5 2.7 end of the war, the construction of a further three
to be practicable, because they did not possess Bussing- AG LDG' boats lU5188-U5190) had been awarded to GW.
n. miles 78 96 21
submerged shapes truly compatible with the higher knots 7.9 7.75 2.7 These boats were to be given the Seehund diesel
submerged performance and speeds that closed- engine (Bussing-NAG) converted for closed-cycle
cycle drive could supply, and their range was too '100hp at 2,OOOrpm. '60hp at 1.400rpm. operation. In a letter dated 8 September 1944,
Type 227 (closed-cycle Seehundl.

a 2 3 5m
-'~.i:
;,.: lV
"l{-
~ ~~~~~~~~~~~q~I~I: Ballast
lank ~
_.'
..
i
.
f-- ---,--- - - ~ - - - ,- -\- - - - - - - --7 ...:,~- - -
: ./------_l \ J "'--::.:...._
SMALL AND MIDGET V-BOATS 295

Kurzak had indicated the important advantages with the screw replaced by a water brake. During designated Biber II, with a two-man crew who were
that the production and tactical use of the closed- this test, a maximum closed-cycle output of 75hp on to take turns regularly in controlling the boat. This
cycle midget U-boat would gain by using the the shaft with a fuel consumption of 300g/shp/hr changing of duty was intended to facilitate longer
Daimler-Benz OM67/4 engine. However, HAS Chief and an oxygen consumption of approximately operations, but the noteworthy property of the
Otto Merker decided that Bussing engines were to 1.2kg/shp/hr were obtained. In accordance with the original design, namely the low weight and
be used because Daimler engines were not available HAS requirement that the Bussing Seehund engine consequent ease of launching, was lost by the
in large quantities. It was therefore decided that a be used for the closed-cycle Seehund, a Bussing- necessary increase in displacement.
Bussing engine should be given closed-cycle tests NAG LD6 diesel engine was tested in closed-cycle. The successful closed-cycle tests with smaller
alongside the OM67/4 as soon as possible. These engine tests were carried out likewise by vehicle diesel engines led to a change in this project
On 20 September 1944, test-bed trials of the FKFS in Kirchheim, again with success. However, in the autumn of 1944. Designated Biber III, a
OM67/4 closed-cycle installation began at the the war situation meant that such units were never midget closed-cycle U-boat of 10.34 tons surface
FKFS in Kirchheim. By 1 December 1944, it had incorporated into those hulls under construction. displacement (without torpedoes) and with a length
been tested for 30 hours in air operation and 52 of 11.82m was developed in collaboration with the
hours in closed-cycle operation with liquid oxygen; Biber II and III Engineering Office for Ship Construction, Lubeck.
for the last part of these tests, the complete engine The disadvantages of Biber - its petrol engine and Externally it differed from other midget U-boats in
installation was incorporated, as for operational the fact that the driver had far too much to do - led its stern shape, rudder arrangement and torpedo
use, in the after section of the closed-cycle Seehund, the Flenderwerke to develop an enlarged version, attachment. Instead of ending with a vertical stern
Biber III.
o 0.5 /.5 1.5 3m
e::r
'1
i
I " ...·r..... I"-~""\
i L ,
I
l,,--r-j I '. ,
\-T·)-
I .... ~i ..../ "--1- ,;
D ( :
( )
:::::JItt
--
r~---:--:---iT(:7.~'T;
,----,--..-.. ~" . :W' ~~ ,
_'
., :__ ,;. J.: ¢ >Ai:'Q-h"'~"Lt..;
"... I--;~;;L_.i '\"'_ :~

with the screw rotating in a well as was usually the knots and the submerged' silent creep speed (Equipment 205). At the beginning of July 1944,
case, the stern ended in an edge almost approximately 2 knots. thorough investigation was made into this new
horizontally, with the screw shaft and screw Construction of the test installation began in 'Haug-shape' by model tests in the wind tunnel and
projecting under the stern in a V-shaped strut. December 1944. The first trials on a test-bed took in the towing canal of the HSV A. These showed
Lateral steering was carried out by a double rudder, place in January 1945, but still on an open that, by a slight change in the dome construction,
and depth keeping by a hydroplane beneath the installation. During endurance tests in air the total resistance could be reduced by 25 per cent.
double rudder. Torpedoes were carried at the same operation, the engine recorded 58hp at 1,800rpm, Test results showed the Navy Constants to b
level as the main axis. I n a position of flotation they and in closed-cycle operation corresponding to a extraordinarily large for a midget U-boat: Cw for
could be secured relatively simply. The transitions water depth of 30m, 45hp with a fuel consumption submerged travel=210. Considerably large, too,
between the various compartments of the boat were of 30o-350g/hp/hr. By the end of March 1945, the was the scepticism of the shipbuilders who had no
made very flat, and the fore-ship was given a very installation had passed its numerous examinations confidence in outsiders from the automobil
full shape at the waterline, with a raised forecastle. and tests and was ready for incorporation into a industry. It was especially doubted that principl
The boat was given two strong, shallow keels which boat's hull. At this stage, it was intended to run the applicable in light industry could be used to give a
allowed secure resting on the bottom. engine once again in a completely enclosed cylinder, submerged vessel adequate strength.
On 14 November 1944, the HSVA received a simulating hull conditions, but the military The construction of the three test boats wa
request from the TV A at Eckernfbrde for towing situation in the Stuttgart area at that time entrusted to the coach-building factory Ambi-Budd
tests to be carried out with this new shape. The prevented this. The installation was, therefore, in Berlin-Johannisthal, where the bodies for th
tests showed that at quite low speeds, the hull fore- partly dismantled, loaded on to lorries and sent,
ship produced a dense bow wave that considerably accompanied by its service engineers, to Lubeck,
impeded the driver's view, but a wave-diverter but the planned tests were not possible here, either, Delphin.
fitted at the most forward part of the forecastle and the installation was dismantled once again. At
pushed the wave to one side and kept it low. The the capitulation, it was hidden in various places. At ~
increase in resistance caused by the two lateral the end of the war, those parts still available were G7e lorpedo
after section
rudders and the hydroplane amounted to 8 per cent searched out under the supervision of the British
at a submerged speed of 8 knots, which was occupation forces and collected together at the
regarded as very satisfactory. Submerged results ,
Kronshagen Camp. ~
3 battery ~ \~'
,. l:-.x
are no longer available. The originally selected lroughs' r--
central position for the torpedoes meant that, at 7.5 Delphin ..i ,
• -
--~-O_.
f 8. MAL~ ~ -r-~
knots, the boat was forced beneath the surface, but A lesson learned from the use of midget weapons
putting the torpedoes farther aft improved the trim during the Allied landing in Italy was that only
when in motion so considerably that this enforced midget submarines with a high-submerged speed
submerging no longer occurred. had much chance of successfully penetrating the long-range V-I and V-2 missiles were being
The Supreme Naval Command did not pursue trong screening and defensive measures of large manufactured. Departing from normal shipbuilding
this design any further because experience with the concentrations of ships. The designs projected practice, the boats were manufactured there, using
closed-cycle installation did not justify series hitherto - Neger, Biber, Molch and Hecht - did propulsion methods from modern coach building
production, and the requirement for test boats with not meet these requirements for an adequate techniques. Parts that were curved in two
closed-cycle engines was being met by the submerged speed; long journeys would have made directions (head section, engine compartment and
construction of the closed-cycle Seehund. The very very considerable demands on their operators. It after section) were formed in the stretchingl
stretched position of industry at that time would was clear that automatic steering and a suitable drawing-out process on so-called Az presses, whil
not have been enhanced by a parallel development. direction-finding equipment for use when attacking the cylindrical centre portion and the frames wer
However, at the request of the Midget Weapons were absolutely necessary. The most advisable formed by rollers. The metal used was pressed steel
Unit, this project was researched further. The propulsion engine would seem to be a simple, with a thickness of 2.5-4mm. The maximum sheet
FKFS was requested to develop and construct a closed-cycle combustion engine. Following thickness of 4mm for the cylindrical centre section
closed-cycle installation suitable for Biber III. The successful results obtained with the closed-cycle was dictated by the limited mechanical handling
engine was the Daimler-Benz four-cylinder diesel torpedo engine, an Otto engine also seemed facilities. The use of a pressing machine-tool was
OM4/65 with a maximum 65hp at 2,200rpm. The suitable. planned in the event of mass-production of a large
construction of the necessary closed-cycle At a meeting in May 1944 between the Admiral series, and this could be used to produce these parts
installation corresponded to that already tested for for Midget Weapons, Vizeadmiral Heye and the in two casing-halves.
the closed-cycle Seehund, 100hp OM67/4. The Head of the Test Institute for Engine Design at the The connections between sections were: head
engine was to be made suitable by reduction TH Berlin, Professor E. A. Cornelius, it was decided section with centre part (driver's compartment),
gearing for the different speed stages (1st gear 1:2.5 that the Test Institute should design a new type of welded; centre portion with engine chamber,
for endurance travel; 2nd gear 1:4.5 for silent creep; midget U-boat. In mind was a high-speed, one-man screwed; engine chamber with after section welded.
and an additional gear for reversing). Gear U-boat with a well-proportioned submerged shape, Frames were rolled in the shape of U-frames: by
changing was hydraulically operated. a displacement of 2.5 tons, a length of 5m and a splitting one U-frame, two L-frames were obtained.
In the interests of noise suppression it was diameter of 1m, driven by a simple closed-cycle During the construction of the first boat, the hull
intended to line the engine compartment with a Otto engine. had to be lengthened because the closed-cycle
3O-40mm layer of cork. Electrical energy was Dr. K. Haug was given the design task and he engine, which had been developed meanwhile in the
supplied by two lorry lighting dynamos driven by worked out an appropriate design during the Test Institute, required more room than had
the diesel engine, and by three small vehicle Whitsun holiday of 1944. The boat had a tear-drop originally been calculated.
batteries each of 12 volts. shaped cross-section, with a Plexiglass dome (which In order that practical tests could be carried out
With extra bunkers the surface range was to be served also as a hatch) on the top and a cross- before completion of this installation, the test boat
1,500 nautical miles at 6 knots (approximately 250 shaped rudder at the stern. The well-proportioned was fitted fLrst of all with the propulsion component
hours duration!). The 430 litres of oxygen (liquid in submerged shape was to allow considerable of a normal G7e torpedo. To this end, three battery
the fore-ship), suffIced for additional submerged submerged speed at even low engine outputs. troughs were fitted in the engine chamber. The fLrst
closed-cycle travel of 100 nautical miles at 5 knots. Diving and trimming tanks were not provided. The test boat was ready in the autumn of J 944, and its
Without torpedoes, the maximum submerged speed boat was to be able to dive dynamically and, strength was tested in a pressure tank at the
was 7.75 knots, the submerged endurance speed 5 therefore, was given the suggestive name Delphin Flender-Werke in Lubeck. This showed that the hull

had a denting-strength against outward over- one hand) was installed for control of depth and with its frequent failures, was abandoned and a
pressure of more than 6 atmospheres overload. lateral movement, but an automatic pilot was also special suction-pump was fitted which made
Prior to testing in the sea, the boat was subjected available. For constant speed at schnorkel depth, operating conditions in the closed-cycle completely
to basic towing tests at the HSV A. The first automatic depth adjustment was provided. During compatible with atmospheric operations. This made
submerged test runs in the Trave estuary showed a surface travel, air was introduced through a fixed the installation still more simple. The performance
lack of stability caused by the uncompensated schnorkel, 1.32m long, in the driver's compartment; figures achieved are shown in Table 66.
displacement volume of the Plexiglass dome, which during schnorkel travel there was a direct
projected during surface travel. This problem could connection to the engine - otherwise, with the Table 66. Tests on 2.5-litre Opel Kapitan engine for Delphin
be rectified by the incorporation of a small diving balancer volume being so small, the submerging of Air operation Closed-cycle
tank under the driver's seat. During the test runs, the schnorkel valve would have made conditions
by overloading the electric motor for a short time unpleasant for the driver. The maximum schnorkel Performance 32hp 32.4hp
while submerged, a maximum of 17 knots was peed was calculated as 14 knots. The schnorkel Revolutions 2,500 2,550
achieved. These tests were ended on 18 January valve was activated by an electro-magnet_ Puel (g/hp/hrl 422 536
Oxygen (g/hp/hr) 1,010
1945 by a collision with the escort vessel. Additionally, mechanical activation by a foot pedal ---
The original concept of Delphin envisaged a boat was provided.
purely designed to carry an explosive charge of Tests on the Otto engine closed-cycle installation
500kg in the bow. However, during the design of commenced in the autumn of 1944 at the TH Berlin
the boat, an alternative was suggested in the form under the direction of Chief Engineer Dr. Urbach.
of a Type Grim towed mine of 500kg. Depth of the As the Junkers KM8 torpedo engine, which had
towed body was to be controlled by an air-bubble. already been tried out, seemed too costly, the
The use of a towed charge had the advantage that, 2.5-litre Opel Kapitan four-stroke engine (80hp) was
unlike a suspended torpedo, it did not affect chosen. Initially, work was carried out using the
adversely the very good streamlined properties of Junkers regulation of the torpedo engine. During a
Delphin, and an attack could be repeated endlessly second phase of testing, from the middle of October
until a hit on the target was achieved. The to the middle of December 1944, the regulators
direction-finding equipment for Delphin was the were developed afresh, in a simpler form more Suction:
same as had been developed for torpedoes: it was appropriate for series production. Additionally, the pump!
screwed into the head section forward, and with it relatively high consumptions of fuel and oxygen
an attacking run could be carried out in a 'pursuit' were brought to a lower level and the whole
curve, so that the attacker was head-on to the installation was reshaped in a more reliable form. Delphin, closed-cycle installation,
quarry. A control-stick (which could be used with During the last phase, the back-pressure operation,
left: Delphin prior to a

pressure test at Flender-
Werke, lubeck. Right:
Detphin on trials in 1944.

When standing nearby, one could not tell by the the state where it would be ready for series
noise of the engine whether it was running in air Delphin II. with production, it was planned to incorporate a normal
operation or in closed-cycle. The engine ran Seehund drive. Seehund propulsion unit into the frrst test boat. A
perfectly over the whole range of revolutions from greater submerged speed was to be achieved in
1,100rpm (3.3hp=8 knots) to 2,550rpm (32.4hp= 17 these boats (as with the 'Small' Delphin) by short·
knots), and could readily be switched, at any period overloading of the electric motor.
number of revolutions, from air to closed-cycle Calculations showed that a maximum submerged
operation and vice versa. After much research, the speed of 14 knots for approximately 10 minutes
spark plugs also worked perfectly, but endurance could be expected. However, no test vessel on these
testing involving a very large number of hours was lines was constructed.
not carried out in view of the shortage of fuel at As with 'Small Delphin', the hull was to be built
that time (February 1945). When these tests ended, using light industrial methods as in coach-building. Type XXVIIF and Schwertwal
the installation, apart from the missing suction Control and navigational installations were to be Following the good results obtained from the
pump, was quite ready for testing under similar to those of Delphin and, as with that craft, development of a Walter-turbine installation with
operational conditions, but no incorporation of the special diving tanks were not planned: it was sea-water injection, it was anticipated that in a
installation in a Delphin hull was ever carried out. intended that she submerge and surface short period of time a corresponding drive would be
On 14-15 April 1945, the two remaining test boats dynamically. As she was to carry out most of her available for long-range torpedoes. In the light of
completed at Ambi-Budd were transported on travel submerged, she had a fixed schnorkel, into this, the torpedo-turbine seemed to have additional
lorries to Piitenitz on the Trave estuary where they the housing of which a periscope was incorporated. significance for use as a drive for a high-speed
were destroyed on 1 May 1945 before occupation by This meant that a lookout dome, involving a midget ·U-boat.
British troops. considerable increase in resistance, could be In the summer of 1944, 'K' Office designed a
In the light of the good towing test results dispensed with. For endurance travel, a schnorkel small, torpedo-shaped, midget U-boat designated
obtained from the Delphin shape, the IBG at the speed of 14 knots was calculated. Type XXVIIF, for which this drive was suitable.
beginning of September 1944 made investigations Two versions, with a one-man and two-man crew, The torpedo envisaged as a weapon was to be
into the submerged properties that the relatively were projected. The one-man boat (7.5 tons) was to carried in an indentation beneath the hull. The
slow Seehund (C w =73!!) or the closed-cycle have a maximum submerged speed of 18 knots and driver sat in the bow section, which had a larger
Seehund would have with a similar shape. The a range of 400 nautical miles; the two-man boat (8.5 superstructure with a periscope above the control
resulting design for a high-speed midget V-boat tons) a maximum submerged speed of 16 knots and position. Through its consumption of I ngolin, the
with a displacement of approximately 8 tons and a range of 800 nautical miles. In order that the boat would become lighter during a passage.
the c1osed'cycle Seehund propulsion unit was given shape of this new boat could be tested before the Nevertheless, a compensating tank was not to be
the designation Delphin II or 'Large Delphin'. closed-cycle propulsion unit had been brought to provided, as it was calculated that the difference in
SMALL AND MIDGET V-BOATS 299

Below: Schwertwal. Top, a mocel; below, on the land testing area at the Walter works prior weight could be compensated dynamically at the
to being scuttled in May 1945.
relatively high speed. Nor was the boat given a
diving tank. When starting, the boat was heavier
than was appropriate for her displacement. The
negative buoyancy was to be equalized by a
buoyancy container that could be jettisoned.
As the intended sea-water-injected Walter-
turbine was still some way from being ready for
series production, the project was postponed when
the design had been completed. In its place, a
previously suggested version of a high-speed,
midget V-boat, using the tested Walter-torpedo
turbine with fresh-water injection, was to be
designed and embodied into Project XXVIIF2.
Because of the necessity for carrying fresh water,
the boat would have to be larger than Project
XXVIlF. Dynamic compensation of weight
difference was not possible when fresh water was
used, and compensating tanks had therefore to be
provided. This meant that the submerged
Schwertwal I,
,
~~
a 1m

would be necessary. With the two unsheathed which 10 tons alone were necessary for carrying
Type XXVIIF2. torpedoes positioned to best advantage beneath the Ingolin. Without torpedoes, the submerged range
boat, however, this dropped to Cw = 120. With a at 32 knots maximum was to be approximately 100
streamlined bow sheathing that enclosed the nautical miles. The enlarging of the boat made for a
Cd torpedoes, rt amounted to 165. The appropriate
propulsion effIciencies of 73 per cent, 59.7 per cent
roomier shaping of the driver's compartment and
permitted the incorporation of a small electric
and 66 per cent were regarded as satisfactory, but installation unit, which, including a 25hp electric
displacement rose to 7.9 tons, the length to l1.28m the double propeller available was regarded as very motor, allowed manoeuvring and silent creep speed
and the beam to 1.5m. Otherwise, the new design inadequate, enabling the boat to achieve only of up to 8 knots.
was similar to that of Project XXVIIF. Towing 350shp (=25.6 knots) without torpedoes (otherwise
tests were carried out on the enlarged shape of the resulting large turning moment would have Manta
Type XXVIIF in August 1944 at the HSV A. These endangered the turbine drive). Initially, therefore, An additional project worked on jointly by the
yielded, without a torpedo, a Cw value of 153 and, it was necessary to prepare a single-screw propeller Walter Works and Experimental Command 456
with a torpedo, a Cw value of 124. suitable for a maximum turning moment of 215mkp was the underwater-hydroplane high-speed boat
Although the torpedo was recessed into the and a performance of 500shp. (USG-boat) Manta. She was designed in an effort to
shaped indentation on the underside of the boat, Schwertwal was to be fast, and as manoeuvrable unify in one design all the advanced ideas that had
the increase in resistance caused by the torpedo underwater as an aeroplane in the sky, and was gone into the different midget U-boat projects.
was considerable. At 20 knots it accounted for intended also as an underwater hunter of Among these was the avoidance of the high
50hp, i.e., one-third of the total resistance of the submerged enemy submarines. Consequently, the resistance caused by underslung torpedoes, and the
boat without a torpedo. The basic resistance of the use of a small rocket-propelled torpedo developed problems of launching such equipment.
torpedo alone was only 16-17hp. The remaining by the fIrm of Walter was planned. Apart from the Project Manta had a hull similar to a trimaran,
34hp could be written down to the unfavourable two 'K-Butt' torpedoes suggested as the main consisting of three torpedo-shaped cylinders
overall influence of torpedo and boat in the total armament, there was also discussion regarding the connected by a platform. The middle cylinder had a
construction concept. At a propulsion output of use of the Type Grim towed mine, and buoyancy· cockpit forward for a two-man crew and a diesel
300hp, the boat could achieve a submerged speed of mines and underwater rockets for use against generator. The remaining section, like the two side
22.6 knots without a torpedo and 20.4 knots with a pursuers. cylinders, contained tanks for I ngolin and fuel.
torpedo. The restricted range was especially As the high speed meant that a periscope could There were also trimming and compensating tanks.
unsatisfactory and, in the light of this together not be used, development was initiated on an The propulsion unit was housed in two side keels
with the unfavourable war and industrial advanced detection installation to locate the enemy beneath the outer cylinders. It consisted of one
situations, in the autumn of 1944 all non-essential underwater. An orientation device consisting of a Schwertwal II installation in each. In addition to a
development projects were curtailed and the design gyroscopically-stabilized aircraft compass, made by diesel-electric drive for endurance speed, there was
was not pursued by 'K' Offlce. the firm of Patin (Berlin), with automatic control for discussion of a diesel-hydraulic transmission. Each
Despite the offlcial cessation, work continued on lateral movement and depth was incorporated, and side keel was to take two large aircraft wheels, to
the development of a midget U-boat with a Walter this functioned perfectly during tests. The master enable the heavy vessel (50 tons total weight, 15
drive, with collaboration from Experimental compass was positioned in a streamlined addition tons empty) to roll of its own accord into the water.
Command 456 of the 'K' Force in the Walter Works. to the rudder assembly unit. Between the side keels, adjustable gliding surfaces
On 1 July 1944, work began on a high-speed, two- At the beginning of 1945, Schwertwal I was for surface hydroplane travel were arranged. The
man U-boat, with a length of 11.2m, a diameter of constructionally ready and awaiting practical following possibilities were envisaged:
1.26m and a form displacement of 11.25 tons. trials. Test-bed trials of the driving unit had 1. Surface gliding travel (maximum 50 knots with
This project was given the cover-designation concluded, yielding the requisite endurance Walter·drive).
'Schwertwal'. performance of 800hp. At the end of the war, the 2. Schnorkel endurance (10 knots with diesel-
The first constructional design for Schwertwal I boat, lying in the test area of the firm of Walter at electric installation).
(SWl) was in no sense a fmal one, but served really Bosau on the large lake at PIon, where practical 3. Submerged top speed (maximum 30 knots with
as a vehicle for the testing, under sea conditions, of tests were to be carried out, was sunk by special Walter-drive).
the 800hp installation specially developed for this command. About two months later it was detected 4. Submerged creep speed (maximum 8 knots with
purpose from the Type 'Wal' torpedo-drive with and raised by a British investigation group, but the electric motors and a battery of four torpedo
sea-water injection, and for the testing of the British were not interested in this small vessel, and troughs).
properties of the boat at high submerged speeds. it was scrapped in Kiel. A maximum range of approximately 1,180
Shaped like an enlarged torpedo, the driver's I n the light of experience gained in construction nautical miles was calculated and, at maximum
position and control room lay in the bow section; of Schwertwal I at the beginning of 1945, an speed, approximately 320 nautical miles. The wing
abaft them were trimming tanks and Ingolin improved Schwertwal II had been projected, the surface between the outer cylinders was to carry
bunker and, fmally, the propulsion unit in the stern. design of which was made even more streamlined. four tubes for torpedoes or mines - thus, this
The entry hatch above the driver's seat was fItted It had a length of 13.5m and a maximum cross- midget U-boat had a very strong armament, The
with Plexiglass as a small observation dome. A tail section of 2m with a total weight of 18 tons, of automatic and detection equipment was similar to
unit was added at the stern, with a lateral rudder that planned for Schwertwal. Model testing in the
and flxed stabilizing fillS, this design being based towing channel was never carried out, however.
upon aviation practice. The hydroplane was fltted Schwertwal II. Despite many interesting ideas, this project was an
forward at the same level as the control room. especially striking example of how, particularly in
The hull was tested in the wind tunnel of the times of military disaster, certain designers
Aviation Research Institute in Brunswick, and consciously or sub-consciously lose touch with what
measurements taken on a 1:3 model in the towing is capable of positive realization and take refuge
Regulating tank
channel at the HSV A; this was so that all influences from harsh reality in never-never land. After years
affecting speeds could be obviated, and the best
possible disposition of the proposed two torpedoes
could be made. The results showed that, to achieve
the intended submerged speed of 30 knots, a
C§S, .ontrol~
iroom~ ~
.
~
~
in which military circles had shown the utmost lack
of understanding and scepticism towards such
ideas and accorded their originators only refusal, in
the face of a total defeat they now cling to any idea,
performance of 562shp, corresponding to C w =240, no matter how fantastic!
SMALL AND MIDGET U·BOATS 301

SUBMARINE
DEVELOPMENT IN THE
GFR FROM 1955 TO 1974
Classes 201 and 202 submarines planned as the basis of the first Liibeck, or IKL) for further working-out. IKL had
Under the pressure of the attempt made by the construction programme for the Federal Navy, in been established as early as 28 July 1946, with the
Communist hierarchy to take control of South 1956. Alongside this, in the summer of 1956, Dr. collaboration of Ulrich Gabler, as a firm succeeding
Korea at the beginning of the fIfties, the Western Grim (Atlas-Werke, Bremen), projected a design for the former lfS, but, in those early post-war years,
Allies regarded a West German defence con- a quickly constructed, coastal-defence midget concerned itself with the design and production of
tribution as essential. But this German re- submarine of 58 tons displacement, 14.3m length, equipment for agricultural, farming and fisheries
armament was, for political and psychological 2.35m beam, with a six-man crew. The drive was to use. Now that it was handed the planning contracts
reasons, only possible in the framework of a close consist of a diesel engine and an electric motor, each for both these submarine types, it could once again
relationship with the Western Powers. After the of 85hp, permitting a maximum submerged speed take up the work of its predecessor and thus begin a
collapse of the 'Pleven' plan, which called for of 10.5 knots, a surface range of 400 nautical miles steep ascent to its position today as a leading
German participation in European military forces at 10 knots and a submerged range of 270 miles at 5 design offIce in world submarine design.
(EVG, Europaische Verteidigungsgemeinschaft, or knots. Work commenced with the small submarine-
European Defence Community, EDC) the only Both designs were handed over in 1957 to the hunter designated IK6 or Class 202. It was very
alternative was for national German armed force Engineering OffIce Liibeck (Ingenieurkontor soon apparent that electronic equipment, regarded
to be created with the Federal Republic being
incorporated into NATO by treaty. On 23 October
1954, the so-called 'Paris Treaties' were signed:
these both established and limited the German Class 201.
defence contribution, and accorded the Federal
10m
Republic the necessary sovereignty required for 2
@~
membership of the WEU (Westeuropaische Union)
and NATO. In view of its strategically important
situation at the outlet of the Baltic, it was
necessary to allow the Federal Republic small
Stern view Section A Bow vIew
submarines for coastal operations. The size of these
was restricted by the treaties to a displacement of
less than 350 tons.
On 8 March 1955, Dr. Fischer and Engineer
Gabler of the Blank OffIce, forerunner of the later
Federal Ministry of Defence, were requested to
work out suggestions for an appropriate submarine
type. They used information gained from coastal
U-boat Type XXIII of the former Navy, and ideas
dating back to the last stages of the war. In the
light of the restrictive impositions of the Paris
Treaties, the abruptly-terminated wartime o
development work on the closed-cycle and Walter- o
drive, and the desire that an operationally-sound h"';'i1«: I~~:
submarine be quickly available, only the diesel-
I
electric principle with a large electric capacity and A
schnorkel-charging was considered as a propulsion
unit. The resulting .suggestion was a single-shaft
boat with an electric motor of 1,30o-1,350hp, a ~.....--~-~
~ C~~I~~ .._.~
~.
- ~oc;:)o~·°!I?D
separate creep-speed electric motor and a diesel
engine of 950hp for battery charging, which would
provide a maximum submerged speed of 16-16.5
knots. The armament suggested was four bow
tubes.
This design was initially designated Type 55, ~~82~oQ
later Class 201, and was to be the pattern for 12
302 SUBMARINE DEVELOPMENT IN THE GFR FROM 1955 TO 1974

as essential in modern submarine technology, could
not be accommodated in a boat of only
Class 202.
approximately 60 tons, so the displacement was o 2 5 ~ 10m
increased to over 100 tons, the length to 23.1m and
the beam to 3.4m. Obviously the propulsion unit "
had to be made more substantial. It was decided,
because of restricted space in the short boat, to
install a diesel engine and electric motor, each of
350hp, next to one another, both connected by
gearing to the shaft. The last designs of the
wartime Navy had envisaged, for silent creep
speed, a special creep-speed electric motor that
could be coupled to the propeller shaft by a V-belt
drive. Next to the switch-couplings between diesel
and gearing, gearing and propeller shaft and V-belt
drive and propeller shaft, it was necessary to fIt
three additional elastic couplings on both sides of
o
the gearing, to reduce the emission of noise and
vibration. The electric motor was operated by a
switch-cam arrangement in the control room, which
==== . ~= ,.::::=::::::> 8
formed a roomy unit with the fore-ship. The fore-
ship contained the torpedo installation (two tubes
for submarine hunting torpedoes of 3.5m length)
and two-section batteries placed beneath it. The
submerged detection installations consisted of a
passive bow-array with 144 receivers in three
groups; a passive side-array with 24 crystal
receivers on each side in a slightly curved bulge on
the outer hull; an active equipment with a rotating
base beneath a small dome on the bow; and an
active panorama detection installation positioned
around the entry shaft. Abaft the open bridge,
which could only be protected from wind and spray
by a tarpaulin. a fairly high superstructure enclosed
the extensible items: periscope, radar aerial, rod
~~g~
aerial, FuMB (radar warning) aerial and schnorkel.
Forward hydroplanes of the conventional kind were
dispensed with. In their place, scoop-shaped fms,
which could be extended outwards, were provided;
by their shape, these imparted an upward moment
to starboard and a downward moment to port. As
in U-boat Type XXI II, the after hydroplanes were
positioned beneath the flow of water to the screw.
~§ ~'::i:.:::::.'.'::.:::: ~
~ . /QF;bH!Hr"i~~¢
Two lateral rudder versions were planned: one was
a movable Kort nozzle, while the other was a lateral
tail unit with two lateral rudders set on the ends of
a horizontal fm.
In February 1959, Bremer Atlaswerke was given r.. _ _ /'<. [_'.f.._'.:::._.:::::~=.' :.. ";>-.
the construction contract for 3 small U-boats of this

type, which were planned as the prototypes of a
SUBMARINE DEVELOPMENT IN THE GFR FROM 1955 TO 1974 303

large series of approximately 40 units. However, scoop-shaped blades which could be turned than 20 per cent) and a life 3-5 times that of the
during the following years, the more offensively outwards were provided. lattice-plate battery. The 3 X 92 cells were arranged
designed Project 201 was given preferential The IKL proposal, with the doubled number of as double cells in 138 GFK boxes (glass-fibre
treatment, so that commencement of building was torpedoes, was welcomed by the Federal Defence strengthened plastic containers). Additionally -
delayed several times. In the course of further Minister, yet doubts existed concerning their and this was in contrast with all previous German
development, it became apparent that a small accommodation in the bow compartment. It was V-boat construction practice - the battery
V·boat would not be large enough to take max- decided, therefore, to construct a 1:1 model of the ventilation was conceived as compartment
imum advantage of the available technical devices bow compartment. This model was inspected on 4 ventilation. In this respect, the practice common in
and the decision was made that only two September 1958, after which the new arrangement foreign countries had been adopted, it having been
boats should be built as experimental acoustic was fmally authorized. The IKL alternative design, shown that so long as appropriate measures were
equipment carriers. IKI0, formed the basis for Class 201. taken there was no greater danger for the boat than
Design 20 I was developed in line with Meanwhile, the engine installation of the original with individual ventilation; and, on the other hand,
requirements specified for it in 1957-58 by IKL. design had been reshaped. The gearing was there was a substantial reduction in the amount of
Two plans were presented on 29 and 30 January dispensed with and the two diesel engines (Daimler- water lost from the cells. The rather low degree of
1958. The first, conforming to instructions, had Benz MB820), each of 600hp, 1,450rpm were cooling of cells that occurs in compartment
four torpedo tubes with reload facilities through a connected to BBC generators. The main electric ventilation is unimportant, as it is in any case
special torpedo hatch, forward hydroplanes, a motor was now positioned directly on the propeller necessary to have a battery-cooling installation for
heavy-duty, three-section battery and a propulsion shaft, and had therefore to be planned as a heavier, large batteries with high rates of charging and
installation that bore some similarity to that of low revving (approximately 25-270rpm) motor. discharging.
Class 202: two fast-running diesel engines geared Although a saving had been effected with the creep- Further improvements in this new submarine
on one shaft, a powerful main electric motor (which speed engine, it was believed initially that the type, compared with the last German V-boat
served as a generator as well as a propulsion unit) weight increase caused by the two generators and designs of the war, consisted of: comprehensive use
and a creep-speed electric motor of 80hp. It was the low-revving main electric motor would be very of automation (automatic diesel cut-out; automatic
necessary to provide two small diesel engines in considerable. However, collaboration between IKL retraction of all extensible equipment on reaching a
place of the originally intended single diesel, and SSW - marked especially by the latter's determined depth; automatic steering and depth
because an appropriate large, fast-running diesel development of a special 1,500hp electric motor - control with also a stationary installation);
was not available at that time. The battery was to made possible the provision of an appropriate comprehensive detection installations (G HG
be fitted with the available lattice-plate Type MAL installation within the intended space and weight (sound-detection), with a large hoof-shaped base
740 made by Varta. The hull was tear-drop shaped requirements. The advantages of this new beneath the torpedo tubes; an active acoustic
to keep resistance to a minimum, and the upper propulsion unit were obvious: simpler operation, detection equipment in the middle frequency range,
works were kept as small as possible. As in Class better noise suppression, better resistance to made by Krupp-Atlas-Elektronik, the base of which
202, the bridge was restricted to a platform, half shock. As the boat was now to be driven by only one could be rotated and inverted and was situated in
the height of the fairing provided abaft it, for the engine, it was essential that an especially reliable the control room superstructure; a sonar-warning
extensible items of equipment. Also as in Class 202, switching method for the propeller engine be device; a radar equipment with a parabolic aerial on
the lateral rudder arrangement consisted of a fm provided. A decision was made against an an extensible mast; a radar warning aerial on an
beneath the propeller with lateral rudders set on its obligatory cam-operated switching, as in V-boat extensible mast); a comprehensive hydraulic
ends. This version was chosen because it was Type XXI, or in the new Class 202. In Class 201, system (for control and activation of the entire
necessary that the boat make very little noise, and the performance switches were activated solely by rudder installation, and all extensible items of
it was desired to use wire-controlled torpedoes. The compressed-air control. In order to keep noise equipment, and the outlet hatches of the torpedo
alternative proposal by IKL for Class 201 inves- emission during schnorkel travel as low as possible, tubes). The periscope was designed to have a fIXed
tigated the maximum number of torpedo tubes that the noise suppressors - as, incidentally, were eyepiece end, which was also an innovation in such
could be accommodated in a boat of this type. The originally planned for V-boat Type XXVI - were a small boat.
accommodation of the maximum number of ready- re-positioned in the pressure-hull. Housed in a large On 10 October 1958, IKL presented the
to-fire torpedo tubes was reminiscent of a request cylinder above each diesel was a combined noise completed design for this Class 201, and it was
from V-boat operational circles in 1943, which led suppressor and exhaust-gas cooler. It was possible inspected and approved by the Federal Defence
initially to the side-tube idea and later to an to dispense with a special exhaust-gas mast during Ministry. Here, V-boat construction was dealt with
arrangement of two quadruple bow tubes in two schnorkel travel, because the unsupercharged by Sub-Department TV (Marine Technology). Vntil
storeys one above the other. Neither possibility was diesel engine had a lower back-pressure sensitivity. the end of the sixties, TV was controlled by Dr.
suitable for a small submarine of only 350 tons. The Exhaust gases left the upper end of the control- Fischer, Dr. Menz and Dr. Waas successively.
IKL solution was to put the eight tubes in the room superstructure and were well-dispersed before Howaldtswerke AG of Kiel was decided upon for
upper half of the hull, arranged 2-2-4. Although entering the water, thus avoiding a strong exhaust the construction. From November 1958, IKL was
torpedo tubes of a larger calibre, suitable for trail. (Exhaust gases are cooled better by a larger working on building instructions for the
torpedoes to be fired from depth, were to be fitted, water column and offer less opportunity for infra- construction.
the closely grouped arrangement of eight tubes was red detection.) The schnorkel mast needed to be Initially, the well-proved V-boat Steel 52 was
possible because the non-ejecting tubes needed designed merely as an air-supply mast. IKL intended for the pressure hull. At a discussion on 14
much less in the way of fittings and tanks than therefore projected a version with an electro- ovember 1958, for the first time, the
ordinary torpedo tubes. pneumatic head valve which is also in use in the comprehensive use of non-magnetic material was
These eight bow tubes made the fore-ship lines Italian submarines of the Enrico Toti class. The demanded. The principal area of operations
bulkier, and the submerged speed dropped by extensible schnorkel mast has, in its submerged envisaged for the new boats was in the shallow
approximately 1 knot for the same power output. part, a streamlined fairing and, in that portion waters of the Baltic, and the possible dangers there
The increase in weight was adjusted by a reduction where it breaks the surface, a knife-edge, and is would be magnetically-activated sea-bed mines and
in the engine installation and battery. A special thus designed to offer the least possible degree of detection equipment that could register magnetic
torpedo hatch was now unnecessary, because the resistance. impulses. A completely non-magnetic submarine
two uppermost torpedo tubes were so high that The battery types were also changed. In place of had never been built before, and it was essential to
they could by used to introduce the torpedoes the German lattice-place types, a small tube consider carefully all aspects of available materials,
without necessity for docking. Instead of battery, made by the Swedish firm Tudor, was and the composition of an electrical installation
conventional forward hydroplanes, as in Class 202, chosen. It has a larger specifiC capacity (more having a very weak magnetic field. The magnetic
304 SVBMARINE DEVELOPMENT IN THE GFR FROM 1955 TO 1974

effect of those ferrous installation components that AM 20 was chosen for the parts that would be Stopgaps: Hai, Hecht and Wilhelm Bauer
were not to be substituted in this way was to be under less stress, i.e., for the outer hull. In order that the training of permanent submarine
largely obviated by a dipole compensation with Additionally, AM 20 was chosen, for production crews and the testing of new equipment and
probe-controlled automatic MES installation. The reasons, for the pressure bulkheads. methods could commence before the delivery of the
fmal decision concerning the use of non-magnetic In March 1959, the Howaldtswerke AG, Kiel fIrst new U-boats, and as the loan of similar types of
steel, and of a building method necessary to (KHW), received the contract for the proposed 12 small boats could not be obtained from the
minimize the magnetic held in Classes 201 and 202 Class 201 U-boats. Yard acceptance of the fIrst associated countries, particularly the United
was made on 13 April 1959. boats was scheduled for July 1960. As KHW did States, an attempt was made to raise and make
After an examination of twelve non-magnetic not have a V-boat construction office, IKL were seaworthy German Type XXIII U-boats that had
kinds of steel. after weighing up all relevant aspects requested by the Federal Defence Minister, on 25 been sunk at the end of the war. The Hamburg
and costings, those offered by the Austrian fIrm of June 1959, to prepare workshop drawings. This salvage fIrm of Beckedorf was given the contract to
Schoeller-Bleckmann Stahlwerke AG of Ternitz, procedure was followed with all subsequent U-boat fmd and raise U2365 and U2367, which were lying at
Lower Austria - non-magnetic steels A3CY (later types. As had been done with the fmal the bottom of the Kattegat and the Great Belt
AM 10) and AMCR 1 (later AM 20) were placed on constructions during the war, section construction respectively. In June and August 1956, both
the short list. Wide-ranging tests, carried out in methods were projected for the Class 201 series U-boats were brought up from a depth of more than
some haste, showed· that AM 10 had better production, and assembly construction was then to 50m. Although they had been rusting at the bottom
strength values, and this steel was chosen for the follow in two special, sinkable construction of the Baltic for eleven years, both boats were still
pressure-hull skin. Through a misinterpretation of pontoons, each of 3,000 tons, a contract for which in astonishingly good condition and, in less than a
test material, it was assumed - wrongly - that had already been given to the Nobiskrug Yard in year, Howaldtswerke, Kiel, had overhauled them
AM 10 possessed better resistance to corrosion. Rendsburg. completely and were able to deliver them almost in
Below: Hai 151701 and Hecht 151711 after being re-commissioned for the Federal German Navy.
their original condition to the Federal Navy. Only
the tip of the bow needed to be changed to receive
new active acoustic detection equipment.
Additionally, both boats were given an anchor
device, which had not been available for Type
XXIII. On 15 August 1957, U2365, renamed Hai
('Shark') and, on 1 October 1957, U2367, renamed
Hecht I'Pike') were commissioned for the second
time.
At fIrst, both boats were handed over to the Ship
Testing Command and were available to different
Command Departments. After the foundation of
the U-Boat Education Group at Neustadt on 31
August 1960, Hai and Hecht became the fIrst
training boats of the new German U-boat arm.
During the years that followed, both boats were to
be twice rebuilt. In 1961 they were given a more
streamlined bridge fairing. In early 1964 at B&V,
their hulls were cut open and increased in length by
1.2m in order to provide space for a new diesel
installation Ithe diesel generator of Class 201). The
boats could only be propelled electrically. At th
same time, the diesel air-mast was cut off above the
~.-.4--l-.
connection with the schnorkel air-mast and wa
closed with a flange. During surface travel, the
diesel engine received its combustion air through
the conning-tower hatch, this being fed through
special shafts into the engine compartment. The
shafts had their outlet in the bilge. Consequently,
the engine-compartment door could remain shut,
but, with this change, it was necessary for th
conning-tower hatch to remain open. Of course, it
was also possible to feed air for the diesel through a
schnorkel air-supply connection in the engin
compartment, but, as the schnorkel was only sealed
with the air-intake socket (flange) when fully
extended, the danger existed that in a very high sea
the opening for the schnorkel shaft, which was only
79cm above the deck, might let water into the boat.
As with Class 201, a special exhaust-gas mast could
be dispensed with. The diesel exhaust gases were
led outside the boat through a ftxed tube and,
during schnorkel travel, left the boat in well
dispersed condition approximately 3m below the
surface. After this conversion, which was to
reproduce similar running and operating conditions
as in Class 201, Hai and H-echt were given the new
designation 'Class 240'.
In the summer of 1957, a large Type XXI U-boat
was also raised in the vicinity of the Flensburg
Lightship where it had been scuttled. This was
U2540 which, being a large vessel, could not really
have played any part in the building-up of th
Federal Navy. It is assumed that the initial idea
Iwith special permission from the WEU) was to us
this boat, which proved to be well preserved, for
training purposes in the same way as the two
previously-raised Type XXI II boats. But, in
addition, this large and most modern U-boat of the
former Navy seemed to be an ideal submarine
vessel for possible tests under operational
conditions.
Howaldtswerke, Kiel, were requested to restore
the boat to its original condition. With very few
constructional background details available, thi~
Top: Hai and Hecht after the 1964 conversion at Blohm & Voss. Middle: Hai (ex-U2365) on manoeuvres after conversion. was a much more diffIcult task for such a large and
Above: The author on the bridge of Wilhelm Bauer (ex-U25401. complicated U-boat than had been the case with

Hai and Hecht. In autumn 1958, work was
interrupted after a decision had been made that Profiles of post-war Type XXI boats.
U2540 was to be used as a special test carrier for the
installations that would be used in the new U-boats.
The design work appropriate to the conversions ~ After 1950 conversion
was handed over to IKL, which carried them out
under the Project No. IK12. A special feature was -~-
that, instead of the previous diesel installation, the Roland Morillot (ex-U25181
diesel generators of Class 201 were incorporated.
The bridge was reshaped and the anti-aircraft
turrets were not restored. The quick-loading
installation and two torpedo tubes were not
replaced, and the bow compartment was converted _1:::lI ---~~
to crew's living quarters. The crew's compartment --L_

abaft the galley was converted to an NCO's Mess, U2513 after conversion in USA
which left more room in the forward living I
compartments for detection and measuring
~--=
installations. Instead of being used as a workshop,
the stern compartment was intended to provide
access for a frogman lock built above it. On 1
September 1960, the boat, renamed Wilhelm Bauer,
- -
_'----"I~
!--_--_-:~
and with the designation 'Class 241', was U3008 after conversion in USA
Ag~m
commissioned and placed at the service of Test
Centre 71 in Eckernforde. During the following
years, the bridge fairing was reconstructed many
times and, in its forward part, was given Class 201 ~ .... ____-===' Cl ~ .•. -.
characteristics (with entry shaft and sonar) and Wilhelm Bauer fex-U25401
then Class 205 characteristics.
Wilhelm Bauer (ex-U25401, 1962. 10 /5 10 m
ii~ ~ ~
~
o c
~ f:j
B A
o
CD =::J
~ c=J [ ,II cF":"T'~

I '---;"I--------L.....:....------...L--

Construction of Class 205
At the beginning of 1960, KHW had begun section
construction for the Class 201 U-boats. The Federal
Office for Defence and Technics Procurement
(Bundesamt fur Wehrtechnik und Beschaffung, or
BWB) in Koblenz had set up an outside department
in fuel specially for V-boat construction, under the
control of Leading Administrative Construction
Director Aschmoneit. Assembly construction could
only begin with delivery of the two specially-
planned building pontoons from the Nobiskrug
Yard - given the names 'Max' and 'Moritz' in
February and April 1961. As a protection against
the elements, these pontoons had removable roofs
which could be pushed aside when it was necessary
to manoeuvre sections with a crane. At the same
time as work was being commenced on the first
Class 201 boats, sea tests of engines and equipment
were being carried out in Wilhelm Bauer, the
resistance to shock of certain parts was being
tested with explosive charges, and pressure-
tightness was being investigated in a specially-built
pressure tank at KHW.
After a building time of approximately eighteen
months, the first new German U-boat, which
according to tradition was designated U1, was
afloat on 21 October 1961 and was commissioned
five months later on 20 March 1962. U2 and U3
followed on 3 May and 10 July 1962. In 1961,
orway had ordered 15 submarines of a similar
type from Rheinstahl Nordseewerke, Emden, and,
until such time as these should be delivered U3 was
lent to the Norwegians. In the presence of the
Commander-in-Chief of the Norwegian Navy, Vice-
Admiral Hostvedts, U3 was named Kobben on 10
July 1962.
Class 201 had been designed with the condition in
mind that the permitted di~t>lacement of up to 350
tons meant the weight of the U-boat in ready-to-
dive condition, without fuel and lubricants, fresh
water, ballast water or solid ballast. On 10 July
1962, the Armament Control Office of the WEU
esta blished precisely the so-called Type
displacement (standard displacement in long
tons=I,OI6kg) with reference to the Washington
Fleet Disarmament Treaty of 1921-22 and the
Anglo-German Fleet Agreeement of 1935; in this,
solid ballast could no longer be discounted. Class
201, now being 395 tons, no longer met the
conditions imposed by the Paris Treaties. On 19
October 1962 therefore, at German request, the Top: UllClass lOll afloat on 21 October 1961. Above: U3 (Class 2011 after its return from the Norwegian Navy.
tonnage limit was raised to 450 tons and the
construction of 6 larger U-boats of up to 1,000 tons
was simultaneously sanctioned. I U11- U12 (improved Class 205l.
Even in the initial construction phase of U1-U3
in 1960, it was requested that these small boats be
fitted with a second sonar equipment of greater
range. The section construction permitted the
necessary enlargement of the boat without great
constructional changes in the hull, so that section-
rings prepared for subsequent boats could still be
used. The central section was increased in length by
1.8m and the bridge superstructure was
considerably enlarged. The forward edge was drawn
upwards to receive the transducer of this new
equipment, and the hitherto-open surface control
positions were moved to a place provided in the
I ~= /-------- ~

bridge superstructure. There it was better
protected from seas breaking over the boat. and
observation from it was also improved. All this
meant that a military requirement had been met.
(The new sonar equipment was also tried out for the
fIrst time in Wilhelm Bauer and, to accommodate
this, the vessel received a new forward section for
the bridge in 1962.) A further change was the
abandoning of rotary transformers in favour of
static Thyristor-alternators, which were more
appropriate for the numerous items of electronic
equipment in that they had greater frequency
constancy and needed less attention. These, too,
were accommodated in the enlarged control room.
The increase in length brought the standard
displacement up to 420 tons, but this was still well
below the new maximum of 450 tons.
It was resolved to incorporate these changes from
U4 onwards. The altered design IKI0W was given
the new designation 'Class 205'. IKL designs for a
so-called 'pure' submarine, with an exclusively-
electric propulsion or a single-drive not dependent
on air, were given the designations 'Class 203' and
'Class 204', but these did not reach the construction
stage. Despite the constructional changes and
redrafting of workshop drawings, delay was
negligible in the delivery of subsequent U-boats up
to U8. U4 was afloat on 22 August and U5 on 20
ovember 1962; with an assembly construction
time of approximately six months, the next two
boats followed, U6 on 22 April and U7 on 20 May
1963 with, fmally, U8 on 11 October 1963.
In the meantime, something unexpected had
become manifest which was to make future
planning uncertain and was to have considerable
effects on new German U-boat production. While,
with the exception of the over-large turning circles,
the travelling and diving tests confIrmed the
predicted offensive qualities of the new boats, , "I
within a few months of the commissioning of Ul, a
, ~
new kind of corrosion was noticed in the non- (
magnetic steel. This took the form of inter-
crystalline corrosion tension cracks, which became
wider and wider and which led, fmally, to the laying-
up of Ul and U2 in the summer of 1963 - a
precautionary measure to enable a thorough
investigation to be made into this corrosion. The
fact that U3 was in commission constantly until 15
September 1967 (under the Norwegian flag until 20
June 1964) shows that, if appropriate measures
were taken with constant surveillance, there was no
direct danger for these boats. Following a
conversion to the after-ship, Ul was recom-
missioned on 4 March 1965 to serve as a test boat
for the firing of wire-controlled torpedoes from
stern tubes.
U4-U8 were given a protective coating of zinc
paint and applications of plastic materials designed
to restrict corrosion, but it was not possible to
achieve a complete inhibition of corrosion where
this had occurred beneath the surface. For reasons
of safety, therefore, the boats were taken down
deep at regular intervals, off the Norwegian coast,
in order to test their pressure-tightness. This was a
rather irrational undertaking, and it was then Top and middle: VI in the dry dock at HDW. Kiel. in early 1965 after its conversion as a test-carrier for firing wire-guided
decided, in line with former Navy practice, to have a torpedoes. The container set-up at the stern of the boat carries the firing mechanism. Above: V7 after its new bridge
pressure-dock constructed at the Lubeck conversion. which was similar to that of improved Class 205.

Flenderwerke and this was to be ready in August
1967.
The total extent of the damage amounted to
millions of marks, and both public and parliament
reacted with great acrimony. Further V-boat
construction was stopped, and deliberations took
place as to what should be done with the remaining
four Class 205 V-boats that had been ordered. As
only non-magnetic materials could be used for
Baltic boats, it was essential to carry out lengthy
tests on new non-magnetic steels. This had not been
done in the case of the first Schoeller-Bleckmann
steels, partly because previous experience of steels
used in ship construction did not suggest that it
was necessary, and partly because when they were
chosen time was of the essence. It was further
resolved that, in place of the decommissioned Ul
and U2, 2 new boats should be built, with the same
designation, but using conventional Steel 52 for the
pressure hull. The still serviceable installations and
engines of Ul and U2 were to be used as far as
possible. Both boats were built according to the
design of Class 205, but with improvements in the
electronic equipment, with elastic bedding of
certain engines and with a newly-altered control-
room superstructure.
The considerably enlarged bridge superstructure
of Class 205 not only increased considerably the
friction resistance, but also brought about
additional shaft resistance at periscope-depth. Now
the upper portion of the superstructure could be
made narrower because the new longer-ranged
sonar equipment was inapplicable. A further
change to the outer ship was a streamlined dome on
the fore-ship which contained additional detection
equipment. The new U2, the first boat of this
improved Class 205 (lK10Wm) was commissioned
on 10 October 1966.
The remaining four boats, U9-U12, were also
built in line with this changed design, but with new
corrosion-resistant, non-magnetic steels. The
intention was to make a thorough test in these
boats of the suitability and strength of these kinds
of steel. Consequently, U9 and U10 were built of the
new Schoeller-Bleckmann Steeel AM 53, un of PN
18 S2 and U12 of Amanox 182 M 9. Delivery of
these followed at considerable intervals, and it was
14 January 1969 before U12, the last boat of the
series decided upon in 1956, was commissioned. In
un and U12, because of the fact that the rudder
'effect was too slight with the rudder blades of the
present arrangement being outside the propeller-
wash (a condition most noticeable in slow
manoeuvring), a return was made to the classic
arrangement of a large balanced rudder abaft the
propeller. U7 was given the new design for the
bridge superstructure: in 1965, an exhaust-gas
explosion made extensive repairs necessary.
Top, far left: UfO (improved Class 205) in the floating dock at
HDW, Kie!. Top, middle: The fast-disappearing bridge fairing
of UfO, which is carrying-out diving manoeuvres. Top right:
The conning tower of U9 (improved Class 205) which, as a
'tradition boat' bears the Iron Cross coat-of-arms. left: UII
(improved Class 205). The photograph on the far left shows it
manoeuvring in front of the Laboe Memorial in the Kiel
Estuary: and, left, being towed from the sunken construction
pontoon, 9 February 1968.
311
In the shadow of the steel fiasco in Classes 201 Classes 206 and 208 passive sonar with a circular base on the fore-ship, a
and 205, construction of the two small Class 202 For a continuation of U-boat construction following new schnorkel, a two-stage rod aerial and a lateral
test U-boats began at the Bremen Atlas-Werke in the first series of 12 Class 201 and 205 boa ts, rudder arrangement as in un and UJ2. The active
1963. As these were likewise to be constructed of studies began in 1962 at I KL on a further acoustic detection installation was also improved.
non-magnetic steel, different concepts concerning development, this being given the designation The boat was fitted with a long-range section-
these boats existed between naval technological Class 206 (lK34). On completion of its panoramic-sonar with search-ray operation and
circles and the Navy, and retrospective changes reconstruction, the U-boat fleet was to total 24 computer-controlled guidance, an equipment that
were requested, which meant that production was small operational boats of up to 450 tons, and six can be adjusted to the changing velocity of noise in
delayed until 1963. The first boat. Hans Techel, larger submarine-hunter boats (Class 208). The fIrst the water by a checking sweep over a measured
with a rudder arrangement as in Class 201, was not research work for this new Class 208 commenced in distance. The fIre-control installation was that
launched by slip-carriage until 15 March 1965, 1966 at IKL; however, these plans were shelved or developed by the Dutch f!I'm Hollandse Signaal-
followed by Friedrich Schurer (with a movable Kort completely abandoned mainly because of the extra apparaten, a new version of their well-tried Series
nozzle) on 10 November 1965. After only a short fmancial outlay occasioned by the steel fIasco (for 118, which enables simultaneous calculations on
period of commission at Test Centre 71 in the rectification of which reconstruction and new different targets to be made. The parabolic radar
Eckernfiirde, both boats were taken out of service constructions were necessary) and by the economic antenna was replaced by a slotted aerial, which
on 15 December 1966 and laid up at the Naval lull at the end of the sixties. allowed for better installation.
Arsenal, Kiel, as the Navy felt that there was no From the very beginning, a standard Safety devices for the crew were also improved. It
area of application for these small U-boats. displacement of 450 tons maximum was established was planned to incorporate a new safety
The year 1966 was also overshadowed I;>y the loss for Class 206. The most important requirement was installation, which caused the automatic expulsion
of the training submarine Hail She was dn her way for an even stronger battery in order to of the safety raft when the interior pressure
to Aberdeen, together with tr"0 other submarines accommodate the demands for an ever-increasing exceeded a certain figure, but this idea was given
and two escort ships from~he Submarine Training range of electronics without the submerged range up. Instead, at several places in the boat, a quick-
Group Neustadt, for a fleet visit, when she ran into suffering. As the fitting-out of the improved Class release mechanism for hatch-opening and ejection
a heavy storm on 14 Septe ber. The sinking of Hai, 205 had already made necessary a standard was built-in. Additionally, an oxygen-helium
with only one survivor, is considered to have been displacement of 420 tons, a signifIcant increase in mixture could be taken from an emergency air-
the result of an accurJulationlof various diverse battery weight could only be achieved at the breathing installation. which was made in the form
incidents. She was travklling oil the surface, and it expense of stability ballast, which, for safety of a ring-duct.
is assumed that over a period of time breakers reasons, had been set at a high figure in the f!I'st In Class 206, for the f!I'st time, a departure from
drove through the air-intake connections of the types. self-controlled to wire-controlled torpedoes was
retracted schnorkel into the engine compartment Further changes as against the present boats made. The question was debated as to whether
bilge. The stern over-heaviness that this caused were, outwardly, a new bridge shape, a large stern tubes would not be more suitable for this
was accentuated by the after diving tanks which
became more and more flooded. Initially, neither of
these effects were noticed in the heavy seas. The
boat sank deeper and deeper and the quantity of
water entering the boat caused a leak into the
engine compartment. Ultimately, the flotation of
the boat became so poor that water was even able to
stream in through the conning-tower hatch.
Obviously, when this occurred, the commander,
Oberleutnant Wiedersheim, thought the boat was
about to sink immediately and he gave the order to
abandon ship. But the boat filled rapidly and sank
with only some of the crew being able to reach the
deck. The fact that no SOS message was sent bears
out this supposition.
On 19 September 1966, Hai was raised from 47m
by the salvage crane Magnus 111 and towed to
Emden for investigation. Two years later, on 3
September 1968, Hecht was taken out of service
and was broken up.
So ended the f!I'st decade of the new German
submarine arm, which had begun with high
expectations and had been marked by considerable
reversals, in that fIve Class 205 boats were only
partly operationally-sound because of corrosion in
their steel construction, so that they had to be
transferred to the U-Boat Training Group; and in
which the First U-Boat Squadron was assembled at
Kiel consisting of 6 boats of the improved Class 205
including Ul and U2 in magnetic steel, and the
clearly indestructible, large, test boat Wilhelm
Bauer.
Friedrich Schiirer and Hans Techel (Class 2021 at the Naval

Arsenal in Kiel after de-commissioning.

application, and during 1963 different projects proof of current functioning of all U-boat on 12 September 1966; the GU could guarant
designated 206H were worked on. Numerous equipment with its own personnel, and would the deliveries would fulfil the prescri
problems were encountered, and these made it establish supply systems for spare parts. When performances. It was agreed, furthermore, that thi
essential that large-scale testing be carried out. To fmally handed over, boats should then be instantly new system would not apply completely
this end, in 1964 the original Ul (no longer in ready for operational use. To the objections of the U13-U24 , the design of which had already been
commission) was rebuilt and subjected to tests at yards that the risk of held-up deliveries was too determined. In April 1969, HDW was designated
KHW. Two years later, this line of research was high or too incalculable, a fmal determination of the General Contractor of the various Class 206 boats.
fmally discontinued, and the well-tried bow mandate and responsibilities of the GU was made The contract was enlarged in the autumn of 1970
torpedo-tube arrangement was retained.
After fmal approval of the new design,
construction planning commenced in the autumn of
1966 and concluded approximately in the summer Class 206.
of 1967. However, it was 1968 before 12 new Class
206 boats were contracted among four yards with,
subsequently, HDW and RNSW being given an
increase of 6 boats each.
In consequence of the diffIculties that had been
experienced following the delivery of the first
boats, from 1967, the Federal Defence Minister had
developed a new concept in the acceptance and
maintenance of submarines. The testing of
individual functions when boats were handed over
to the Navy was no longer adequate in the light of
the complicated and complex weapon systems now
obtaining in U-boats. The Navy also lacked ~
personnel able to cope with the testing and running-
~ C: fE-"~=X .• ' ~ ----..~

in of new boats. This overall undertaking was, in
future, to be handed over to a suitable yard, ......-::::
o
designated 'General Contractor' (Generalunter-
nehmer, or GU), which would take over full
responsibility, even for all subcontractors, provide
Table 67. Summary of U-boats built for the German Federal Navy after 1960
U-boat Class Naw Code Construction No. Construction began Launched Commissioned Decomm..issioned
Ui 201 S 180 H 1150 8 June 1960 21 Oct 1961 20 Mar 1962 22 June 1963
201 II April 1964 1 29 Jan 1965 4 Mar 1965 25 Mar 1965
205 improved H 509 I Feb 1965 17 Feb 1967 26 June 1967
U2 201 S 181 H 1151 1 Sept 1960 25 Jan 1962 3 May 1962 15 Aug 1963
205 improved H 508 1 Sept 1964 15 July 1966 11 Oct 1966
U3 201 S 182 H 1152 12 Oct 1960 7 May 1962 10 July 1962'
10 July 1965 15 Sept 1967
U4 205 S 183 H 1153 1 April 1961 25 Aug 1962 19 Nov 1962 1 Aug 1974
U5 205 S 184 H 1154 1 June 1961 20 Nov 1962 4 July 1963 17 May 1974
U6 205 S 185 H 1155 8 Nov 1961 30 Jan 1963 24 July 1963 23 Aug 1974
U7 205 S 186 H 1156 I Feb 1962 10 April 1963 16 Mar 1964
22 May 1968' 12 July 1974
U8 205 S 187 H 1157 20 Mar 1962 19 June 1963 22 July 1964 9 Oct 1974
U9 205 mproved S 188 H 1158 10 Dec 1964 20 Oct 1966 11 April 1967
UiO 205 mproved S 189 H 1159 15 July 1965 5 June 1967 28 Nov 1967
Uii 205 mproved S 190 H 1160 1 April 1966 9 Feb 1968 21 June 1968
Ui2 205 mproved S 191 H 1161 1 Sept 1966 10 Sept 1968 14 Jan 1969
Ui3 206 S 192 H 31 15 Nov 1969 28 Sept 1971 19 April 1973
Ui4 206 S 193 N 441(32) 1 Mar 1970 1 Feb 1972 19 April 1973
Ui5 206 S 194 H 33 1 June 1970 15 June 1972 17 July 1974
Ui6 206 S 195 N 442(34) 1 Nov 1970 29 Aug 1972 9 Nov 1973
un 206 S 196 H 35 1 Oct 1970 10 Oct 1972 28 Nov 1973
Ui8 206 S 197 N 443(36) 1 April 1971 31 Oct 1972 19 Dec 1973
U19 206 S 198 H 37 5 Jan 1971 15 Dec 1972 9 Nov 1973
U20 206 S 199 N 444(38) 3 Sept 1971 16 Jan 1973 24 May 1974
U2i 206 S 170 H 39 15 April 1971 9 Mar 1973 16 Aug 1974
U22 206 S 171 N 445(40) 18 Nov 1971 27 Mar 1973 26 July 1974
U23 206 S 172 N 450(51) 5 Mar 1973 25 May 1974 2 May 1975
U24 206 S 173 N 446(42) 20 Mar 1972 26 June 1973 16 Oct 1974
U25 206 S 174 H 41 1 July 1971 23 May 1973 14 June 1974
U26 206 S 175 N 447(48) 14 July 1972 20 Nov 1973 13 Mar 1975
U27 206 S 176 H 47 I Oct 1971 21 Aug 1973 16 Oct 1974
U28 206 S 177 N 448(50) 4 Oct 1972 22 Jan 1974 18 Dec 1974
U29 206 S 178 H 49 10 Jan 1972 5 Nov 1973 27 Nov 1974
U30 206 S 179 N 449(52) 5 Dec 1972 4 April 1974 13 Mar 1975
Hans Techel 202 S 172 15 Mar 1965 14 Oct 1965 15 Dec 1966
Friedrich Schiirer 202 S 173 10 Nov 1965 6 April 1966 15 Dec 1966
'Commencement of conversion. 'Kabben. 'After repair and conversion.IYards: H=Howaldtswerke Deutsche Werft AG-Werk, Kiel Sud. N=Rheinstahl Nordseewerke GmbH, Emden.

Left; Two of the German-built Class 206 boats for the February 1972 in Emden. Even with the new GU something that could not adequately be made good
Norwegian Navy. Top, U24 undergoing trials. Below, U14 on system, certain sea tests had still to be carried out by an increase in displacement. It was therefore
yard trials in the summer of 1972. The boat is seen here in
front of the construction yard of NSW Emden. by the yards, and it was not until 18 April 1973 that resolved in 1971 to postpone Class 208 until a
the boats were delivered, although they were now in suitable submerged propulsion unit had been
for a further 6 boats of this class (as replacement a full state of operational readiness. On 2 May 1975, developed. The restrictions imposed by the Paris
for U3-U8): now, HDW was to manufacture 8 and U23, the last boat of this series, was commissioned Treaties with regard to unconventional propulsion
RNSW, as subcontractor of HDW, 10 boats. for the Third U-Boat Squadron. methods had been lifted on 3 October 1968 - with
At the end of 1969, construction work began on Over a period of time many deliberations had the exception of nuclear propulsion.
these U-boats in the newly-built yard, Kiel South, of been made regarding Class 208, and studies carried
HDW. In March 1970, similar work began at out without fmal decisions being taken. A Export submarines: Classes 207 and 209
RNSW in Emden. As they had done previously, considerable increase in size over present Class 201 To secure the defence of the important northern
HDW assembled its boats from fIve sections on and Class 205 boats had been estimated, as a result flank of NATO, it was necessary to supply a small,
pontoons that could be sunk, while RNSW of the even more comprehensive acoustic detection but offensively-effective submarine fleet for
assembled its boats on a flat keel in a building hall. installations and the desired increased submerged Norway. The submarines that were available (of
Here, on completion, the boat was towed from the speed necessary in a submarine-hunter. In order wartime German and British construction) were out
hall over the quay-wall into a floating dock (slipway that nothing should inhibit planning from the of date at the end of the fIfties and needed replacing
tow) and undocked after being named. A similar onset, the WEU had been requested in 1962 to by new boats. The United States was ready to bear
process for putting boats into the water had allow a displacement of up to 1,000 tons for the half the cost of this, and a decision was made in
already been used at the Kaiserliche Werft, Danzig. type, although obviously, efforts would be made to favour of a type of boat being developed in the
(The RSNW had decided on this method because achieve a smaller vessel. Federal Republic at this time; it was relatively
Slipway 1, used hitherto for U-boat construction, In the meantime, improvements in acoustic small, but had good offensive and operational
was not currently available because of recon- detection devices meant that smaller boats were capabilities. A governmental agreement between
struction work.) now suitable for submarine hunting. The principal Norway and the Federal Republic decided that 15
The fust Class 206 boats to be afloat were U13 on disadvantage - lack of speed - as compared with boats suitable for use in Norwegian waters should
18 September 1971 at HDW in Kiel, and U14 on 1 the nuclear submarines of the Great Powers, was be designed and built in the Federal Republic as a
Table 68 Submarines buill for foreign counlries in lhe German Federal Republic aHer 1960
Country Submarine Class Designation Construction No. Construction began Launched Delivery
Norway Kinn 207 S 316 N 351 18 Mar 1963' 30 Nov 1963 8 April 1964
Kya 207 S 317 N 352 26 May 1963' 20 Feb 1964 15 June 1964
Kobben 207 S 318 N 353 9 Dec 1963' 25 April 1964 17 Aug 1964
Kunna 207 S 319 N 354 3 Mar 1964' 16 July 1964 29 Oct 1964
Kaura 207 S 315 N 355 19 May 1964' 16 Oct 1964 5 Feb 1965
Ula 207 S 300 N 356 21 Aug 1964' 19 Dec 1964 7 May 1965
Utsira 207 S 301 N 357 1 Jan 1964 11 Mar 1965 8 July 1965
Utstein 207 S 302 N 358 1 April 1964 19 May 1965 15 Sept 1965
Utuaer 207 S 303 N 359 1 July 1964 30 July 1965 1 Dec 1965
Uthaug 207 S 304 N 360 1 Sept 1964 3 Oct 1965 16 Feb 1966
Sklinna 207 S 305 N 361 20 Dec 1964 21 Jan 1966 27 May 1966
Skolpen 207 S 306 N 362 1 Feb 1965 24 Mar 1966 17 Aug 1966
Stadt 207 S 307 N 363 15 April 1965 10 June 1966 15 Nov 1966
Stord 207 S 308 N 364 1 July 1965 2 Sept 1966 14 Feb 1967
Suenner 207 S 309 N 365 15 Oct 1965 27 Jan 1967 12 June 1967
Greece Olaukos 209 SilO H 1221 1 Sept 1968 15 Sept 1970 6 Sept 1971
Nereus 209 SIll H 1222 15 Jan 1969 7 June 1971 10 Feb 1972
Triton 209 S 112 H 1223 1 June 1969 19 Oct 1971 8 Aug 1972
Proteus 209 S 113 H 1224 1 Oct 1969 1 Feb 1972 23 Nov 1972
Argentina Salta 209 S 31 H 29 30 April 1970 9 Nov 1972 7 Mar 1974
San Luis 209 S 32 H 30 1 Oct 1970 3 April 1973 24 May 1974
Peru Islay 209 S 45 H 53 15 May 1971 II Oct 1973 29 Aug 1974
A rica 209 S 44 H 54 1 Nov 1971 5 April 1974 21 Jan 1975
Colombia Pijao 209 S 28 H 61 1 April 1972 10 April 1974 18 April 1975
TaY'Jona 209 S 29 H 62 1 May 1972 16 July 1974 16 July 1975
Turkey Atilay 209 S 347 H 65 1 Dec 1972 23 Oct 1974 23 July 1975
Saldiray 209 S 348 H 66 2 Jan 1973 14 Feb 1975 21 Oct 1975
Venezuela Sabalo 209 S 21 H 67 2 May 1973 1 July 1975 6 Aug 1976
Caribe 209 S 22 H 68 1 Aug 1973 6 Nov 1975 II Mar 1977
Ecuador Shyri 209 Sll H 91 5 Aug 1974 6 Oct 1976 5 Nov 1977
Huancauilca 209 S 12 H 92 2 Jan 1975 15 Mar 1977 16 Mar 1978
Turkey Batiray 209 S 349 H 95 II June 1975 24 Oct 1977 20 July 1978
Yildiray 209 S 350 H 96 I May 1976 20 July 1977
Greece Poseidon 209 S 350 H 106 15 Jan 1976 21 Mar 1978 21 Mar 1979
Amfrtriti 209 S 350 H 107 26 April 1976 14 June 1978 3 July 1979
Okeanos 209 S 350 H 108 1 Oct 1976 16 Nov 1978 15 Nov 1979
Pontos 209 S 350 H 118 15 Jan 1977 21 Mar 1979
Peru Casma 209 H 131 15 July 1977 31 Aug 1979
Antofagasta 209 H 132 3 Oct 1977 19 Dec 1979
Pisagua 209 H 133 15 Aug 1978
Blume 209 H 134 1 Nov 1978
Indonesia Cakra 209 H 135 25 Nov 1977
Nanggala 209 H 136 14 Mar 1978
'Commencement of assembly in building hall. Yards: H=Howaldtswerke Deutsche Werft AG-Werk, Kiel Sud. N=Rheinstahl Nordseewerke GmbH, Emden.

development of Class 201. On 16 January 1961, last boat Svenner. was lengthened by the distance delivered to Norway, the construction of Class 206
therefore, I KL received a development contract between two frames. in order that a second was postponed indefInitely, and a start on Class 208
from the Norwegian Navy. The proposed new periscope could be accommodated to aid in the was simply not in prospect. Considerable
design was to be based on Class 205 (the improved training of commanders. She was delivered to the developmental design and construction capacity
version of 201) but, instead of using non-magnetic orwegian Navy on 12 June 1967, and was had by now been assembled, so strenuous efforts
teel for the pressure hull, a high-tension steel commissioned on 1 July. only 3V4 years after Kinn. were made to obtain further export orders. The
(HY80), especially suitable for greater diving the fIrst boat of the type. These 15 boats were to small Class 205 being no longer wanted. it seemed
depths, was to be used. The increase in weight prove themselves splendidly in the Norwegian profitable to offer a larger submarine as a
necessitated by greater pressure tightness was Navy, and carried out demanding operations even replacement for obsolescent fleet submarines,
compensated by a rather larger diameter (4.65m under the most diffIcult weather conditions in the especially in those Latin-American countries that
instead of 4.55m). The boat was 90cm longer than -orth Atlantic. had received submarines from the large wartime
Class 205. a consequence of a different lateral fIn Following the delivery and successful tests of the complement of the United States. In other
installation (a simple balanced rudder abaft the ftrst Class 207 boats. Denmark also decided to countries, Britain's Oberon class (Canada,
propeller). The shape of the bridge and certain items acquire two submarines on the lines of Class 205, Australia, Brazil and Chile) and France's Daphne
of equipment were also changed. However. in its but to be built in their own country. The State Yard class (Pakistan, South Africa, Portugal and Spain)
basic features, especially that of drive and at Copenhagen. which had already built submarines were well entrenched.
armament, the new design corresponded to Class for Denmark at an earlier date. acquired the licence The legitimate possibility of building submarines
205. from the Federal Defence Minister to build 2 boats of up to 1,000 tons in the Federal Republic came
The governmental agreement laid down that from the IKL plans for the improved version of when permission was granted by the WEU for 6
orwegian interests. especially in the sphere of Class 205, but in magnetic form. Further changes boats of Class 208. In 1966, IKL in common with
construction supervision. should be looked after by were necessitated by the desire to use Danish items KHW, had already developed a larger electro-boat
the outside office of the BWB (Bundesamt fUr of equipment. for export purposes, which corresponded roughly to
Wehrtechnik und Beschaffung. or Federal Office The construction of these 2 boats, named Class 205 in shape, construction and armament, but
for Defence Technics and Procurement) in Kiel Narhvalen and Nordkaperen, began in 1965. with increased dimensions, much larger battery
(BWB-MS24) with a Norwegian liaison officer with Despite help from KHW. however. deliveries did capacity and a stronger propulsion unit. As with
full powers working in collaboration. The IKL not take place until February and December 1970 - Class 207, the pressure-hull material was planned to
design was submitted to this office in the summer clearly the juxtaposition of Danish equipment with be of the high-tensile, magnetic, special steel HY80.
of May 1961, and was approved after a four-week German designs and specifications created more During the early part of 1967, a design was worked
examination. After confmnatory approval had been diffIculties for Danish yards than had been out to the construction stage and was later
received from the Norwegians. there followed in the originally estimated. Such building by the Danes designated Class 209.
autumn of 1961 the advanced orders for engines could hardly be justified economically. The new design was for an ocean-going submarine
and components that would determine delivery The summer of 1967 looked as if it would be the with a standard displacement not exceeding 1,000
dates. start of a lean period for the German U-boat tons, planned to have a maximum endurance of 50
The design was then offered to three German industry: the last Class 207 submarine was days, but which, on account of its relatively short
yards for construction. and RNSW received the
award. On 21 December 1961, an initial contract
was made with the Nordseewerke and, on 19
January 1962. a fInal construction contract was
concluded. Building instructions were ready in
April 1962. Once again. IKL were entrusted with
the preparation of workshop drawings. At
Norwegian request. the new design (IK29), which
now had the German designation 'Class 201' was
given. despite its section method of construction. a
special diesel assembly hatch - a so-called 'French
hatch' - with a conical top fixed by bolts. This
created further strength problems.
Although certain workshop drawings for Class
207 had to be redrawn. the construction was able to
commence in Emden during the summer of 1962.
As had been the case with Classes 201 and 205,
section construction was chosen, but with assembly
on this occasion at a covered-over building slip. The
speedy construction of all 15 boats was ensured by
the fact that important components had been
ordered in the autumn of 1961. Assembly of the
first boat began on 13 March 1963. and of the
second on 26 May. Assembly time amounted to
eight months, but this was shortened to between
four and five months in the following 13 boats. The
Right: Svenner (Class 207) being launched at NSW Emden on

27 January 1967. The boat was towed from the construction
hangar into a floating dock. Far right: The launching of Stadt
(Class 207) at Rheinstahl Nordseewerke. Emden, on 10 June
1966.
318
length of approximately 54m, could also be
employed successfully in coastal work. As with the
smaller IKL types, good submerged properties Class 207.
were given top priority. The boat was completely
smooth, with the shape of the bridge similar to the
improved version of Class 205. Once again, in place
of the conventional forward hydroplanes, this
design had scoop-shaped fins that could be swung
out. The after rudder installation, however, was
changed and had been assembled with a fm-cross in
front of the screw. The considerably enlarged,
o
submerged propulsion installation was designed to o
provide a maximum submerged speed of 22 knots -
this meant that the boat had a submerged speed .:::::=
that, apart from special designs. had never hitherto
l~p
been achieved by submarines of this displacement Class 209.
with diesel-electric propulsion. The well-tried Key: 1, engine compartment; 2, technical operations control
Daimler-Benz MB820 diesel engines were used and, room; 3, operations control room; 4, communications room; 5,
sick bay; 6. commander's quarters; 7, galley; 8. officers'
to obtain doubled power output, a total of four of quarters; 9. NCOs' quarters; 10. crew's quarters; 11, after
these units were arranged in the spacious engine ballast tanks (water): 12. forward ballast tanks (water); 13,
trimming tanks; 14, torpedo compartmenlS; 15. fuel bunkers;
compartment. It was proposed that two larger 16, baltery compartment; 17, compensating tanks.
diesels be used in later boats.
The boat had two periscopes, but the other
extensible items of equipment were similar to those
in the earlier smaller boats. To assist in the
~
~~[~[__~_~!~~-~11~:;~~~~~~~~
evaluation of RT signals received by the variou
aerials, and in place of the earlier piecemeal --........... , I
arrangement of different items of equipment "
disposed wherever space was available in the radio
compartment, a special communications centre,
from the firm of Collins Radio Co., was installed in
the shape of a single large desk. The larger boats
permitted the accommodation of additional
installations, such as reserve torpedoes, effective
air-conditioning, two WCs and showers, two life- for NATO had been taken up completely by the the British market. The first result of this co·
rafts and other items, made necessary by the construction of the four Greek, and the proposed operation is that, beginning in 1974,3 submarines
enlarged range of operations for which the boat was construction of the two Turkish boats. of IKL Project 540 were built for Israel at Vickers
intended. Consequently, both the Argentinian boats had to Ltd. at Barrow-in-Furness. According to details in
The first four boats of this Class 209 in the IK36 be built in sections at HDW with assembly the fleet handbooks, this was a smaller version of
version were ordered in 1967 by NATO-member following in Argentina (at the Tandanor Yard in Class 209 for warm-water operation, with the
Greece. When military forces took over political Buenos Aires). This unsatisfactory position was following main specifIcations:
power in that country, the contract caused political ended, however, on 27 September 1973, by the Length: 48m.
repercussions in the Federal Republic to the extent WEU decision to permit the Federal Republic of Beam: 4.7m.
that, for some time, there was suggestion that Germany to build submarines up to 1,800 tons. Displacement: approx. 540 tons.
German yards should only build sections, with the In the summer of 1972, an agreement for co· Propulsion: two X 600hp diesel
boats being completed subsequently in Greece. operation was concluded between Vickers Ship- generators.
However, in 1970, assembly began in HDW's building Group (VSG), HDW and IKL for develop- one X 1,800hp SSW electric
floating dock at Kiel. Between November 1971 and ment, design, construction and delivery of sub- motor.
November 1972, the submarines Glavkos, Nereus, marines. At the centre of this agreement was the Armament: eight bow tubes (plus
Triton and Proteus were delivered to the Greek construction under licence of the internationally reserve supplies).
Navy. For all these submarines and the following recognized German submarine designs at the I SLAM rocket missile for
orders, fmancial problems had a special Vickers Yard. These IKL submarines that Vickers six an ti-aircraft rockets
signifIcance, so IKL (development and design) and would offer could be specially equipped with British with a range of 3,000m.
KHWIHDW (construction) collaborated closely weapon systems and thus be more appropriate for Crew: 22.
with the special export company, Ferrostaal Essen
(Sales).
Two additional submarines in improved versions
(56m length) were ordered by each of the following:
1968 Argentina (lK68); 1969 Peru and Colombia
(IK62 and IK78 with 35-man crews); 1970 Turkey
(lK14 with a 33-man crew). For Venezuela, a further
improved version, with a length of 59.5m and a
large detection dome located in the bow (similar to
Class 206) was developed under the IKL
designation IK81. Two boats of this type were
placed in contract at HDW in 1972. Additional
orders followed from Ecuador, Turkey, Greece,
Peru, Indonesia and Iran. There were, therefore, 34
boats of this export Class 209 and its modifIcations
fIrmly ordered.
In view of the very different requirements of
foreign interests, and in order to offer as wide a
range as possible, IKL worked-out a number of
other different designs:
1. With reference to TOURS 170 (page 325) a small
military submarine of 70 tons for genuine coastal
operations, with a length of 18m, a submerged
speed of 11 knots, diving depth of 100m and two
torpedo tubes.
2. A 'warm water' submarine of 380 tons, designed
in 1969 especially to meet Mediterranean
conditions.
3. A submarine of 450 tons, designed from data of
Class 206, but with magnetic steel for the special
requirements of the Turkish Navy.
4. An enlarged version of No.3 above, of 540 tons,
with additional electronic equipment, stronger
propulsion, reserve torpedoes and, for the first
time, the proposed incorporation of the new Vickers
anti-aircraft missile SLAM. One of the boats of IKL Project 540 built at Vickers, Barrow-
5. In 1972, an additional design for a boat of 740 in-Furness. Meanwhile, Nordseewerke, Emden, participate in
tons, with numerous innovations, but with German submarine exports to South America too.
conventional drive, was included in the list of In 1978, they concluded a deal to supply Argentina
possibilities. IKL Project 540. with four 1,750-ton boats and two of 1,400 tons; all,
Built by Vickers
6. Finally, a variation from Class 209 was projected except one of the 1,750-ton boats, to be built in
to serve as a' carrier for a 17-ton midget submarine. Argentina. A further considerable export order for
However, important business with foreign the German submarine industry will be to replace in
countries in the sphere of larger submarines was the next few years the Norwegian Kobben class
inhibited by the restrictive clauses of the Paris (Class 207) by a more modern and larger design,
Treaties. The exception that had been made which is currently in the design stage at IKL under
concerning the building of six 1,000-ton submarines the designation Class 210.

Postwar single-drive propulsion schemes
While the very successful tests carried out on the 'Walter-Exchange Process'.
Walter-drive and the closed-cycle drive during the
last years of the war brought a new generation of installation layout.
'pure' submarines within measur.eable reach,
neither of these methods of propulsion was Gearing
'--------< Fuel
Electric engine
persevered with after the war. This was partly
~
because of the increased costs involved, and partly l-J. ~H,O,
because of the lack of experience that prejudiced a
worthwhile foreign development of what had been
Coupling
achieved in Germany. It was ten years after the war Thrust bearing
Feed-water pump
before Britain succeeded in commissioning two test
boats of the Walter type, which had been under
construction in Germany in 1945. The United
States fmally by-passed this development phase by
the introduction of nuclear drive, and the other
great sea powers, the Soviet Union, Britain and
ffiIIII]]]J
Ballery
France, followed her example. However, because of
the considerable weight of the reactor shielding,
CO 2 and excess water
this drive was initially feasible only for very large
boats of more than 2,000 tons and, the expense
being so high, was only appropriate for boats of a absence of heat formation, would mean a very high exchanger. Post-war development of heat-
very offensive nature, with missile armament. coefficient of efficiency. The requirements of space exchangers, particularly in the sphere of atomic
For coastal defence of the smaller sea powers travel gave a great impetus to the development of power-stations, has made it possible to work with
especially, the conventional submarine with diesel- this 'fuel cell'. In the still most frequently used lower temperatures of the primary heating gas,
electric drive remained standard. Sweden took the H 2-D 2cell, the production of current is brought which makes the installation safer and cheaper. Th,
initiative in the development of new types of about by a kind of reversal of the water primary cycle can now take place with water
propulsion drives: initially, tests were carried out to disintegration that takes place in electrolysis: both injection in the combustion chamber, as in th
develop further closed-cycle drive for her boats. gases are fed under pressure to two porous direct process. After passing through the heat-
Test-bed experiments with an eight-cylinder diesel electrodes in a potash lye. This causes the gases to exchanger, this injected water is removed from the
engine of approximately 1,500hp, in an exhaust-gas ionise, which has the effect of charging the exhaust-gas mixture into a separator and fed onc,
closed-cycle, using liquid oxygen, were so electrodes. This is, therefore, a 'cold' oxy-hydrogen again into the combustion chamber, so that only
successful that it was decided to convert 6 gas combustion in which, instead of heat, electrical the fuel and Aurol (H 2°2), led into the boat from th
submarines of the U class to closed-cycle drive. The energy results. Water is produced as a residue, and bunkers, leaves the boat again in the form of CO 2
boats were already partly cut up for this when, at this has to be removed constantly from the cell and excess water. As fuel and Aurol material in
the beginning of the 1960s, the plan was suddenly when current is being used. Walter-boats are carried for convenience in exterior
shelved; the Abborren class boats, rebuilt from the The theoretical voltage between the electrodes bunkers, where they are comprehensively
old wartime U-boats U4-U9, were once more given amounts to 1.23 volts. However, under load this compensated by sea water, there is no great
a conventional propulsion installation. At this time, value drops considerably in practice. At trimming problem.
it was believed in Sweden that the fuel cell 100mA/cm 2 related to the outer surface of the While it was necessary, during the last war, to
represented a better solution for the single-drive, electrodes, the voltage amounts to only 0.75-<l.80 use a stowage wheel-pump with a subordinated
for it avoided the disadvantages of the diesel engine volts. For high performance, one would require a mixture regulator for three materials (H 20 2, fuel
(a limited capacity for being regulated and multiplicity of cells connected in parallel. The and water), in the new process it was decided to u
considerable noise) and it seemed, therefore, contract placed by the Swedish Navy to the a displacement pump which could simultaneously
pointless to invest further capital in closed-cycle Allgemen Svenska Elektrizitets Aktiebolaget supply and measure exactly. This had been
experiments. (ASEA) for such a submarine battery called for developed and tried out as early as 1944 for th
A purely electrical propulsion is ideal for a eight fuel-cell groups, each of 25kW. Walter 'Steinwal' torpedo with sea water injection.
submarine in respect of high efficiency and lack of In recent years it has been possible to reduce Although in 1965--ti6 this installation came up to
noise, and because cooling problems are fewer than considerably the original very heavy performance the required performance on the test-bed, and for
in thermal engines. Not so favourable is the weight and performance volume - in the case of a tests of its performance aboard ship th
relatively low energy output provided by the 30kW installation with NaBH. from 125kglkW construction of a third Class 202 boat was already
electric accumulators. In the small-tube, lead (1968) to 45kglkW (1973) and from 80 1lkW (1970) under consideration, no Walter U-boat was built.
accumulators of a modern submarine battery to 46 1/kW (1973) - but there are still difficulties in Also further IKL designs for small submarines with
amount to approximately 20W/hr/kg at a one hour the preparation of fuel. The Swedish installation single drive (Class 203 and 204) remained paper
discharge, or 55W/hr/kg at a 100 hour discharge, as suggests the manufacture of H 2from ammonia and concepts. The factors that called a halt to further
compared with l,730W/hr/kg when fuel (Dekalin) is the obtaining of ° 2 from H 20 2 or from liquid development were, one supposes, the same as in
burned with H 20 2' If silver-zinc batteries were oxygen. Sweden: excessive costs and the prospect of a
used, the theoretical maximum capacity at high At this time, work was also being done in the better solution being supplied by the fuel cell.
discharge would be trebled and at low current usage Federal Republic of Germany in connection with a However, there is no doubt that the amount of tim
doubled, but silver-zinc batteries have only a short single-drive for submarines. Professor Hellmuth needed to develop a suitable high-performance fuel
life and are very expensive. Additionally, they can Walter had offered the Federal Defence Minister a cell for use in a vessel had been considerably
only be charged at relatively low current strengths, further development of his indirect propulsion underestimated, so the heat-exchange Walter-driv
which means a lengthy charging time. At present, method designated 'Walter-Exchange Process' and, was suggested once again in about 1970 for th
therefore l they are used only as primary batteries in 1960, received a contract to build and test a submarine-hunting boats of Class 208. At present it
for torpedoes and midget submarines. 3,000hp installation in a version suitable for small seems to be the only non-nuclear single drive that
It has long been desired to be able to charge boats. The new process differed principally from the offers a sufficiently high output to yield speed
batteries by the direct supply of fuels, which, in the indirect method by using an efficient heat- equalling those of atomic submarines. As in all
SUBMARINE DEVELOPMENT IN THE GFlt FROM 1955 TO 1974 323

turbine propulsion units, it is specially noteworthy realization. Only considerable investment could these aided stability besides providing a surface on
that the efficiency decreases considerably with enable one of the various suggested processes to be which the boat could rest when on the bottom. The
output: hence, in the medium cruising speeds, the brought to the stage of a breakthrough. Although it outer ship consisted mainly of two saddle tanks, a
ranges that can be achieved are too small and too is acknowledged that underwater research is of deck superstructure housing a magnetic et>mpass in
uneconomic. A way round this could be the use of a considerable signifIcance in the ever more acute a nose made of non-magnetic steel, which could be
pre-switched turbine, or the distribution of the unit power and food crises on our 'Spaceship Earth', it read by electrical impulse in the driver's position,
output to several turbines, but this would seems that the acceptable time has still not arrived. and a spindle-shaped after ship with stabilizing fms
necessitate a much greater allocation of space. in the shape of a cross and a tateral rudder at the
Obviously certain problems remain to be solved Non-military submarines end of the vertical fm_
before a Walter-exchange-process can be used, and During the last twenty years, there has been Two propellers were disposed at the sides of the
certain elements of the new Walter-installation do considerable international development of small boat. Each was connected to a 6hp electric
not seem to have been quite suffIciently developed underwater installations and submarines for motor inside the boat, and were given vertical
as yet. Extremely comprehensive tests carried out submerged research, impetus for this being movement by hand operation, which made move-
by IKL have shown that the Walter-drive is hardly supplied especially by the International ment possible in all directions. The electrical
likely to be available any earlier than the variants Geophysical Year 1957/58. The deep-sea diving- installation of the boat was supplied by one battery
that are independent of outside air, and which are boat occupied the centre of the stage - Piccard's with 2 X 58 cells, allowing submerged ranges of 19
being given parallel development. A decisive factor Trieste, for example - in which a depth of 10,916m nautical miles at 5.5 knots (maximum speed) or 60
could well be that there is simply not the same was reached in the Marianas Trench in January nautical miles at 3 knots (cruising speed). For
capacity being applied to Walter development as to 1960, and later the submerged habitats for lengthy special applications, this boat could be fitted with a
the variants - indeed, it seems at present, as if visits on the sea bed of the European continental larger battery and a diesel generator for battery
there is no serious desire to build Class 208 at all, in shelf. In this way began a development period that charging. An air renewing system allowed an unin-
view of the considerable costs that its realization one day - as has already happened with air travel terrupted diving time of 30 hours. Special emphasis
would entail. Very possibly there is speculation as - will shift the emphasis of submerged travel from was laid on the simplest possible operation and
to the development of atomic drives, with lower a military application to a civilian and commercial safety, by simplifIed engines and systems, and by
outp~ and dimensions, involving less cost. This, of one. providing a maximum of life-saving devices: for
course, would represent the best solution of the The spectrum of applications for diving-boats example, automatic blowing of diving cell in the
propulsion problem in smaller submarines. includes submersibles for research, general saddle tanks if the permitted depths were exceeded
At the end of the 1960s, there was discussion on purposes, cargo and tourism. While there could be or if the crew failed to activate the safety controls
the feasibility of the Stirling hot-gas engine made many uses for research and general-purpose in the prescribed manner.
by Philips for submarine propulsion. In this submarines, peacetime cargo submarines would An enlarged version of this basic concept, one
particular engine, external heating and cooling have an application only for passing under the with flve- or six-man crew and which would also be
produces a heat incline in a cylinder, which can be Arctic region - for example, in the transportation suitable for underwater tourism, is available under
used to bring about periodic expansion of a working of crude oil from Alaska - while in the near future, the designation TOURS 73 (8m long, 12.7 tons
gas and can, therefore, be used to drive a piston. because of the considerable technical outlay and the weight). In this design, the propeller is positioned
The uniform combuStion and the possibility of special safety problems involved, the use of at the point of the stern, in a Kort nozzle that
completely balancing the engine enables the small, submarines for tourism is hardly likely to be an functions simultaneously as a lateral rudder and
hot-gas engine to run quietly, without oscillation economic proposition. hydroplane. It is driven by a 16.3hp electric motor,
and in a way that resembles the running of an In Germany at the present time, only the fums of which can be controlled by a Thyristor installation
electric motor. Its coeffIcient of effIciency is very Drager (underwater habitats), IKL (TOURS diving- in both turning directions from 5O-480rpm without
satisfactory in atmospheric combustion, and boats), Bruker-Physik AG (MERMAID diving- intermediate gearing. The radius of action quoted is
approximates to the values of a diesel engine. boat) and Hellmuth Walter GmbH (project for a 20 nautical miles at 6 knots (maximum speed) and
Further advantages are that it can use different deep-sea diving-boat) have done much research or 55 nautical miles at 3 knots (cruising speed). The
fuels, has fewer exhaust-gas problems and is presented plans for underwater installations. The diving tanks, which in TOURS 60 are positioned at
capable of simple performance control by the IKL diving-boat developments and those of the the sides, have been displaced upwards and are
changing of pressure of the working gas. These fum of Walter merit rather more description. incorporated in the deck superstructure, thus
properties, especially that of silent running, could At the end of the 1960s, IKL, following their providing observation for passengers through
make the hot-gas engine of great interest as a considerable success in the fIeld of medium pressure-tight 'bullseyes' in the sides. In the course
charging l.:omponent in schnorkel submarines. submarines, projected a small, robust type of boat, of time, a series'(tfo further designs for small and
(There was, in fact, discussion about the possibility in the hope of filling a gap in the submarine market. midget submarines has followed, as shown in Table
of testing such an installation on the test boat An initial version, designated 'TOURS 60' (Tourist 69. Few of these designs aroused interest, however.
Wilhelm Bauer, but so far as can be ascertained, Observation and Underwater Research Submarine, On the one hand, the lack of fmancial support given
nothing has yet come of this.) length 60dm'l was a two-man submarine with many by the German Federal Government meant that
The hot gas engine would also be very suitable - applications. Its weight was 10 tons, and it was most institutions with small budgets could not
possibly in connection with a Walter-turbine suitable for use in oceanic research, fIsheries acquire such diving-boats for research tasks of
installation - for the 'independent of air' research, underwater archaeology, salvage and limited scope; on the other hand, from a mercantile-
submerged-cruising drive, but there would still be inspection and supervision of underwater profit point of view, the productiveness was a
further problems to be solved involving the heat installations (e.g., dams, quays and pipelines). It doubtful factor.
supply from the combustion chamber to the was developed in three versions, designed for a In 1969. this situation changed when the Kuo
cylinders. In air operation, the high heat level of the diving depth of 100m (TOURS 60/100), 200m Feng Ocean Development Corporation of Taipei,
exhaust gas can be used for pre-warming the (TOURS 60/200) and 300m (TOURS 60/300). The Taiwan. ordered a general-purpose diving-boat
atmospheric combustion air, which facilitates a pressure hull consisted of a steel cylinder with two developed from TOURS 60/300 for the collecting of
high degree of efficiency. This, of course, does not hemispherical pressure bulkheads welded on, plus precious corals, and this vessel was given the new
apply in combustion that is independent of air. an entry shaft on top that served also as a driver's designation TOURS 64. The new type differs from
Further, mainly theoretical, possibilities of cockpit and had five observation windows. The TOURS 60/300 mainly in having a hydraulic grab,
energy production in submarines using so-called forward pressure bulkhead had four extra capable of carrying out six functions and with a
heat accumulators and through chemical heat Plexiglass windows. Two strong keel skids (or maximum reach of 1.9m, and a gyro compass
production are a long way from practical runners) were fastened to the pressure hull, and replaces the planned magnetic compass. The boat

uses the hydraulic system to activate propeller nautical miles at 4.5 knots. The coral is collected in Another diving-boat for the same purpose was
direction, movement of the trimming weights and a freight net. weighing 200kg, beneath the grab; ordered in 1971 by the Sarda Estrazione
use of the outer searchlight. TOURS 64 is rather this net can be released from within. The cost is Lavoratione Prodotta Marini S.p.A., Cagliari. Italy.
larger than TOURS 60. has a length of 6.93m, a quoted at 1.2 million marks. The boat (Construction This two-man submarine was given the type
beam of 3.65m and weighs approximately 14 tons. No. 001) was built in 1970 in the IKL-affiliated designation TOURS 66/300. She is rather larger
The pressure hull consists of 13mm high-tensile factory Maschinenbau Gabler GmbH (MG), than her predecessor. has a length of 7.3m, a beam
steel G 36. An MWM diesel engine D202. of Liibeck. and carried out her trials successfully at of 3.8m and weighs a quoted 14.5 tons: there is.
15kW/3,000rpm charges the 1.9-ton battery. which the end of 1970. She was named Argus J and was therefore, space for a maximum of three persons. In
consists of 120 cells (210Ah at a 5 hour's discharge). despatched to Taiwan in March 1971 by the other respects, she is similar to TOURS 64. Shortly
This gives an enlarged radius of action of 400 Nationalist Chinese freighter Ling Yung. before the tenth anniversary of the founding of MG,
Table 69. Main specifications of TOURS-type projects
Range Range
Diving Weight submerged surfaced
Designation depth Crew Itonnes) Length Inautical miles at knots) Features
48 TDLl200 200m 1+2 8.2 4.8m Dependent upon power L.G.E.UT.R,S
656ft 15.7ft supply of tender
60 DC/300 300m 2+2 9.5 6.4m 8 at 5 L.G.E.UT.R.S
984ft 21ft 15 at 3
64DGKl300 300mm 2 14 6.9m 10 at 5 400 at 4.5 D.M,G,E.UT.R.S
9~U ~6U 21 at 3
66DGKl300 300m 2 14.5 7.3m JO at 5 400 at 4.5 D.M.G.E.UT.R.S
9~U n9U 21 at 3
66DGKl500 500m 2 14.5 7.3m 10 at 5 400 at 4.5 D,M.G.E.UT.R,S
1.640ft 23.9ft 21 at 3
66 BKl100 100m 2/3 14.5 7.3m 17 at 5 M,G,E.UT.R.S
328ft 23.9ft 33 at 3
76 DCD/300 300m 2+2' 20.1 8.6m 8 at 5 400 at 4.5 D.L.M,G.E.UT.R.S
984 ft 28.2ft 20 at 3
76 DCD/500 500m 2+2' 20.1 8.6m 8 at 5 400 at 4.5 D.L.M.G,E.UT.R.S
1.640ft 28.2ft 20 at 3
80 DCD/300 300m 2+2' 19 8.9m 8 at 5 400 at 4.5 D.L.M,G.E.UT.R.S
984ft 29.2ft 20 at 3
80 DCD/500 500m 2+2' 19 8.9m 8 at 5 400 at 4.5 D.L,M.G.E. UT.R.S
1.640ft 29.2ft 20 at 3
731300 300m 2+4 15.5 8m 18 at 3 G.E.UT.R.S
984ft 26.2ft
170 DGKl100 100m 5+8 77 18m 51 at 5' 800 at 4.5 D. L.G. E. UT.R.S
328ft 59ft 61 at 3' Above and below: TOURS 66 boat Antonino Magliulo.
llO/50 50m 2+ 10 32 11.4m 7 at 5 G.E.UT.R.S
164ft 37.4ft 12 at 3
180/50 50m 2+28 57 18.8m II at 5 G.E.UT.R.S
164ft 61.6ft 25 at 3
430/500 500m 8+3/5 690 42.5m ll5 at 5 4000 at 4.5 D.L.M.G.E.UT.R.S
1.640ft 139.4ft 120 at 3
DSWS/300 300m 6+2 107 16.4m Dependent upon power L.M.G.E.UT.R.S
984 ft 53.8ft Supply of buoy
DSWS/600 600m 6+2 225 22.2m Dependent upon power L.M.G.E,UT,R.S
1.968.5ft n.8ft Supply of buoy
Note: One passenger.~ Maximum speed submerged: II knots. Key to features: D. diesel generator; E. echo-sounder; G,
1
gyro-compass; L. driver's lookout; M, manipulator; R, radio; S, searchlight; UT. underwater telegraphy.
TOURS types
~ 48TDLl200 ~~66BK/100 ~ fL!) 73/300
~ 6ODC/300 ro=D66DC/300
c:::::=J
E:r~64 DGK/300 ~68DCD/IOO ~

6
.•• " J) 110/50
~~66DGK/300 ~dJ I:EJJ 70 DCD/300 g:::- OJ 100/50

this boat. Construction No. 002, was put into the
water on 17 July 1972, after a building time of 13
months. The cost is said to have been 1.5 million
marks. Following a pressure test in the HDW
pressure tank to a maximum of 30 atmospheres
overload, she was delivered to her purchaser in the
summer of 1972 and named A ntonino Magliulo. The
construction of these two general-purpose boats
and their great profitability in the coral business
aroused world-wide interest. An option for a further
6 midget submarines of this type is already with
MG.
Another German project. the deep-sea research
diving-boat Stint of Hellmuth Walter GmbH, is still
seeking a corresponding success. She was
developed in about 1967 for the new 'independent of
depth' Walter-exchange system. The stable storage
of H ,0, in plastic bags with appropriate sea-water
pressure makes possible the convenient
accommodation of a large energy supply, adding a
considerable submerged range to a relatively high
submerged speed, which is unusual in a research
submarine. To achieve this, the hull was given a
much more streamlined shape than is usual in deep-
sea submarines. The boat is 9m long with an overall
form displacement of 24 tons. The pressure hull
consists of two spheres, each of 2m diameter,
connected by a cylindrical panel: the forward sphere
contains control and observation positions for both
crew members; the after sphere contains the drive
unit with disintegrator. steam producer (heat-
exchanger), turbo-generator and condenser.
With the propulsion installation giving 50hp. in
the so-called cold process (without combustion of
energy material), approximately 350 nautical miles
at 5 knots or 100 nautical miles at 10 knots
(maximum) can be achieved; in the so-called hot
process (with combustion of fuel-oil), approximately
750 nautical miles at 5 knots or 200 nautical miles
at 10 knots can be obtained. The fIrst of these
Above: Antonino Magliulo on completion. Note the apparatus for breaking off and collecting coral, and the observation alternatives has the advantage that the oxygen
windows. released in the disintegration process can be used in
the operation of the boat. 2kg H ,0, produces 0.8kg
TOURS 64. Deep-sea midget submarine oxygen, 1.2kg fresh water and approximately
Project Stint. 1,200kcal of heat - in other words, all the essential
requirements for a lengthy underwater operation.
A The total 3,000kg of H ,0, is arranged in plastic
~ @
containers above the connecting cylinder. The fuel-
oil is stored in plastic tubes forward and aft of it.
Below the connecting tunnel, a battery is stored as
~~
'-- an energy buffer and to increase stability. Should
the boat be in danger, this, like the keel, can be
cl..-
jettisoned to give the boat the necessary positive
+1- buoyancy to rise immediately.
Passage ~~" In terms of performance, Stint would be matched
. . . . . . ,+, ............. ~
T,----;--;-,~,T'-'
D'sintegrator '"»".< / I
currently by no other two-man submarine.

. ~-l,,,,
-... "',; '/ ~ ~ c» ,\ However, the relatively complicated propulsion
I
" , ~.--.-.- ..1.._-----t-
.:... -ii :t . installation and the use of relatively untried
',' ./h-o~-
', ~'->1"~:./
J
\--=::. processes make her. for the time being. suitable

TurbU"le '''--/ --/.- only for scientific or military applications with
- " I ._ Observer
Pump Fuel tank
A
highly-qualifIed specialist personnel. Despite the
",.. 9,000- "J
undeniably unique qualities of this boat, her very
.V "~
/,(.;:-:'- .. \----~_
..- -'\ considerable development and construction costs
./ i,I,,; , ~ .. i f \ have so far deterred any possible purchaser. It is to
\rl~
,,-._--,.,
\ "
~------
-' "'--_! ./ /
I be hoped that this interesting project will not
remain just the drawing of a model as shown at the
Inter-Ocean Exhibition of 1970 in Dusseldorf.

Appendices
SpecifIcations section Plans section 348 Type XX I, sections 362
U-boat specifications, 1906-1918 328 Type VHB (1940), outboard profile and plan 348 Type XX I, hull form 364
U-boat specifications, 1935-1945 334 Type VHB, inboard profile and deck plan 350 Type XXII I, inboard profile, deck plans and
Midget U-boat specifications, 1944-1945 343 Type VIIC (1944), inboard profile and sections 366
Torpedo types of the Imperial German Navy outboard deck plan 352 Class 240, inboard profile and deck plans 36
at the beginning of the First World War 344 Type VI IC (1944), deck plans 354 Type XXVI, inboard profIle and deck plans 37U
53cm torpedoes up to 1945 344 Type IXD 2 , inboard profile, deck plans and
U-boat specifIcations, 1960-1974 346 sections 356 List of abbreviations 371
Type XVIIG, inboard profile and deck plan 35
Below: A Type IXC boal undergoing trials. Type XXI, inboard profile and deck plan 360 Glossary of German technical terms 372
U-Boat Specifications, 1906-1918
Type: UI U2 U3 U5 U9 UI3 UI6 UI7 UI9 U23 U27 U31 Ms Ms
U[ Project No. GW 7 12 - - - - 20 - - - - 25
development
Builder GW KWD KWD GW KWD KWD GW KWD KWD GW KWD GW KWD GW
Boats ordered U1 U2 U3-4 U5-B U9-12 U13-15 U16 U17-18 U19-22 U23-26 U27-30 U31-41 U43-50 U51-56
Displacement (tons)
Surfaced 238 341 421 505 493 516 489 564 650 669 675 685 725 715
Submerged 283 430 510 636 611 644 627 691 837 864 867 878 940 902
Length (m) 42.4 45.4 51:3 57.3 57.4 57.9 57.8 62.4 64.2 64.7 64.7 64.7 65.0 65.2
Beam (m) 3.8 5.5 5.6 5.6 6.0 6.0 6.0 60 6.1 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.2 6.4
Draught (m) 3.2 3.1 3.1 3.6 3.1 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.6
Propulsion (no. X hpj
Main 2X200 2X300 2X300 4X225 2X300, 2X350. 2X342, 4X350 2X850 2X900 2Xl,000 2X925 2Xl,000 2X 1,200
Kbrting Daimler Kbrting Kbrting 2X225 2X250 2X258 Kbrting MAN GW MAN GW MAN MAIN
Kbrting Kbrting Kbrting
Electric 2X200 2X315 2X515 2X520 2X580 2X600 2X600 2X560 2X600 2X600 2X600 2X600 2X600 2X600
Fuel capacity (tons) 22 46 48 52 52 64 64 74 54+22 53+30 54+44 56+55 57+75 57+46
Speed (knots)
Surfaced 10.8 13.2 11.8 13.4 14.2 14.8 15.6 14.9 15.4 16.7 16.7 16.4 15.2 17.1
Submerged 8.7 9.0 9.4 10.2 8.1 10.7 10.7 9.5 9.5 10.3 9.8 9.7 9.7 9.1
Range (n. miles/kn)
Surfaced 1.500/10 1.600/13 1,800/12 1,900/13 1,800/14 2,000/14 2,100/15 6.700/8 7.600/8 7,620/8 9.770/8 8,790/8 11,400/8 9.400/8
Submerged 50/5 50/5 55/4.5 80/5 80/5 90/5 90/5 75/5 80/5 85/5 85/5 80/5 51/5 55/5
Armament
Bow torpedo tubes 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 2
Stern torpedo tubes - 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Torpedoes carried 3X45cm 6X45cm 6X45cm 6X45cm 6X45cm 6X45cm 6X45cm 6X45cm 6X50cm 6X50cm 6X50cm 6X50cm 8X50cm 8X50cm
Guns - - - - - lX8.8cm 1X8.8cm lX8.8cm 1 X8.8cm 2X8.8cm 2X8.8cm
Mines - - - - - - - - - - -
Crew 12 22 22 29 29 29 29 29 35 35 35 35 36 35
otes Paraffin' fuelled With one additional With one additional Improved
8.8cm gun 8.8cm gun Type U41
"' cl 'LlC
Ar ~
+ ~~.~J
e' ~
0
~\~ ! ,=~~=~§!§D "'Jv-
"'~ -:·fr· I).,,~'A¥D -Jr
~l.4
i E ....
h_ -
. i =; 6
~~ 0"."
i
~
U9-U/2.
o
___1-- :=_:y;;.;::1IC:=>
328 APPENDIX I: U·BOAT SPECIFICATIONS, 1906-1918

6ZC 8161-9061 'SNOLLV:)L>II:)3dS .LVOa-O :1 XIGN3ddV
=_::~~;
v::> - --- -- -- -- -_.- ---------,--- ...- ----------
c::x::r:::- __ L~
':r,; ,, .. .&. . ..l .. _~ .... _ • .1.. • .;_ __ .. I. ......
------7 -·--r-- _
~ ..1 _
c:.:::: .:==-~
DiP'
_-==_-..-J..- .-::.J
--- --,,----- ."}-- ---
t
-t=_~Cln~~~~~.-----
-~----
I
- 0
.·-----r--
,
t
Type: Ms Ms Ms Ms Ms Ms Ms Ms Ms Large Ms Large Ms un UE
U I Project No. - - - 25 43 - - 42 42a GW 38

development
Builder AG Weser AG Weser GW GW KWD GW/Br. Schichau KWD GW/Br. KWD,GW.KWD.AG GW Vulcan.
Vulkan Vulkan AG Weser Weser,B&V KWD
Boats ordered US7-59 U6(}--f;2 U63-65 U81--86 U87-92 U93-9S UJlS-16 Ul58-1S9 U229-246 U13S-138 U213-218 U66-70 U71-72.
Similar: Similar: U263-276 Similar: Similar: Similar: U7S--80
U99-1 04 U96-98, U247-262 UJ27-130, U219-224, Similar:
UJOS-IJ4, UJ31-134 U225-228 U73-74
U16D-172.
U201-212
Displacement (tons)
Surfaced 787 768 810 808 757 838 882 811 908 1.175 1.135 791 755
Submerged 954 956 927 946 998 1.000 1,233 1.034 1,192 1.534 1.830 933 832
Length (m! 67.0 67.0 68.4 70.1 65.8 71.6 72.3 71.2 74.0 83.5 88.1 69.5 56.8
Beam 1m) 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.2 6.3 6.5 6.2 6.7 7.5 7.9 6.3 5.9
Draught (m! 3.8 3.7 4.0 4.0 3.9 3.9 4.0 3.9 4.3 4.3 4.0 3.8 4.9
Propulsion (no. X hpj
Main 2X900 2X 1,200 2X 1,100 2X 1,200 2X 1.200 2XI.200 2X1,200 2XI.200 2X 1.450 2X 1.750, 2X 1.750. 2X 1.150 2X450
MAN MAN GW MAN MAN MAN 2X450gen 2X450gen GW
Electric 2X600 2X600 2X600 2X600 2X600 2X600 2X600 2X600 2X615 2X845 2X845 2X630 2X400
Fuel capacity (tons! 78+41 76+52 78+30 81+38 54+79 47+60 68+65 58+87 71 +67 53+ 138 53+138 47+40 80+10
Speed (knots!
urfaced 14.7 16.5 16.5 16.8 15.6 16.8 16.0 16.0 16.5 17.6 18.0 16.8 10.6
ubmerged 8.4 8.4 9.0 9.1 8.6 8.6 9.0 9.0 9.0 8.1 9.0 10.3 7.9
Range (n. miles/kn)
Surfaced 10.500/8 11.40018 9.170/8 11.220/8 11.380/8 9.020/8 11.470/8 12.370/8 I I .400/8 10.000/8 12.000/8 7,37018 7.880/7
Submerged 55/5 55/5 60/5 56/5 56/5 52/5 50/5 55/5 50/5 50/4.5 90/4.5 115/5 83/4
Armament
Bow torpedo tubes 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 I
Stern torpedo tubes 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 I I
Torpedoes carried 7X50cm 7X50cm 8X50cm 8X50cm 12X50cm 12X50cm 12X50cm 12X50cm 12X50cm 14X50cm 16X50cm 12X45cm 4 X50cm
Guns 2X8.8cm 2X8.8cm 2X8.8cm 2X8.8cm IXI0.5cm IXIO.5cm IXIO.5cm IXIO.5cm IXIO.5cm 2XIO.5cm IXI5cm 2X8.8cm IX8.8cm
Mines - - - - - - - - - - - 34 UEI50
Crew 35 35 35 35 36 36 36 39 39 46 46 36 32
otes Improved Improved Improved Improved Improved - - Improved - - Improved Originally Minelay-
Type U27 Type U27 Type US6 Type U65 Type USO Type U92 Project 42 intended ing U-boat
for Austro-
Hung
Navy
--- --
~
U57.
----~
.---_..J _
---_.-_ . -
~
.:----r-~=
=======::::-:= -
•_.~:::..-- C!l ~ •
U81- U86.
330 APPENDIX I: V-BOAT SPECIFICATIONS. 1906-1918

•
u:e 8161-9061 's OLLYJldlJ3dS .1Y08-0 :1 XIa 3ddY
_.. _-_.-. --- --.
----~-~---_.... _--_._---
'13n adAll oen -lLn
..----11--- ---- ..... - --- ...... - - - - - - -
---- --- --- ... -. -------
--'...
Type: Large
Minelaying
U-boat U-cruiser U-cruiser V-cruiser UBI VBII UBIII UCI UCII UCIII VF
U I Project No. 45 46 46a GW 34 39 44 35a 41 41a 48a

development
Builder Vulcan. GW GW, Vulcan, GW GW.AG B&V, AG B&V.AG Vulcan. AG B&V, Vulcan, KWD, AG Schichau.
B&V AG Weser. Weser Weser Weser. Weser GW, KWD. Weser, B&V Tecklenborg.
B&V Vulcan, GW AG Weser Atlas, Neptun,
Seebeck
Boa ts ordered UlJ7-l2l Ul39-l4l U142-144 Ul5l-l57' UBl-8 UBl8-23 UB48-53 UCl-lO UCl6-24 UC80-86 UFl-92
Similar: Similar: UB9-l7 Similar: Similar: Similar: Similar: Similar:
Ul22-l26 U145-l50, UB24-47 UB54-249 UCil-l5 UC25-79 U87-l52
Ul73-200
Displacement Itons)
Surfaced 1,164 1.930 2,158 1,512 127 263 516 168 417 474 364
Submerged 1,512 2,483 2,785 1,875 142 292 651 183 493 560 381
Length 1m) 81.5 92.0 97.5 65.0 28.1 36.1 55.3 34.0 49.4 56.1 44.6
Beam 1m) 7.4 9.1 9.1 8.9 3.2 4.4 5.8 3.2 5.2 5.5 4.4
Draught (m) 4.2 5.3 5.4 5.3 3.0 3.7 3.7 3.0 3.7 3.8 4.0
Propulsion Ino. X hpj
Main 2X 1.200 2XI,65o- 2X3.000, 2X400 I X60 2X 142 2X550 lX90 2X250 2X300 2X300
1,750, IX450 lX450 gen.
gen.
Electric 2X600 2X845 2X 1,300 2X400 I XI20 2XI40 2X394 IX175 2X230 2X385 2X310
Fuel capacity Itonsl 95+96 103+283 120+330 148+ 137 3.5 22+6 35+36 3.0 41 +15 55+11
peed (knots)
Surfaced 14.7 15.3-15.8 17.5 12.4 6.5 9.2 13.6 6.2 11.6 Il.5 Il.O
Submerged 7.0 7.6 8.5 5.2 5.5 5.8 8.0 5.2 7.0 6.6 7.0
Range (n. mileslkn)
Surfaced 12,500/8 12,630/8 20,000/6 25.000/5.5 1,650/5 6,500/5 8,500/6 750/5 9.430/7 8,400/7 3,500/7
Submerged 35/4.5 53/4.5 70/4.5 65/3 45/4 45/5 55/4 50/4 55/4 40/4.5 64/4
Armament
Bow torpedo tubes 4 4 4 2 2 2 4 2 2 4
Stern torpedo tu bes 0 2 2 0 0 0 I - I I 1
Torpedoes carried 12X50cm 19X50cm 24X50cm 18X50cm 2X45cm 4X50cm 10X50cm - 7X50cm 7X50cm 7X50cm
Guns I X 15cm 2XI5cm 2X15cm 2X 15cm lMG IX5cm lX8.8cm - IX8.8cm IX 10.5cm lX8.8cm
2X8.8cm 2X8.8cm
Mines 42 UC200 - - - - - - 12 UC120 18 UC200 18 UC200
plus 30 mines rn.ines mines mines
in deck
containers
Crew 40 66+20 66+20 56+20 14 22 34 14 26 32 30
otes - - - Converted
cargo U-boats
---
Note: Constructional diving depth: Ul-U4, 30m: Project 42, 42a, 45, 46, 46a, 48a. 75m: others,50m. Key to abbreviations: gen.=generator. 'Ul55 had 6 surface torpedo tubes.
U1/7- UI21IType UEIlI.
-.::t:::.::..:r:~·~~:~·~'!.·_·~ ::~:~~:-:·"77:-;7?' --"'l- _ • • - - - - - - ~---- - -

-.-- -- -:--- -- - - - - - - - --j
______; L 1 L _
=r ±=~, ::>l ~ ",~-U"''''.K''''

g;_7__ ;£Z_?_--~-·-;--4-;--5.~--------"-;~Z
~~- - r-- - - -
~
~ c~ __ ! _ : _ _1. __ L L_~~;;:tooo,
332 APPENDIX I: V·BOAT SPECIFICATIONS. 1906-1918

U142- UI44IProjecl 4601.
- .. - .... --
- - - r -----,---
, ------1
i
- , .
----,-----_._--- __ 1 -
~---' '~~
,
-~--
UBI7 (Type UBI).
-, , ,
'.
, .' "
.-- .
UB4~'
~
u'''~
~am}~ ~)
:--:::
~
.. : V,7 .l .:' ,~' . . -1>- ,
..----
UB4B- UB53IType UBIIiI.
et@I:5 UB 142 - UB 153.
-4-
UC61- UC66 IType UCII).
333
Type: IA IIA lIB IIC lID III IV V
-- --
Boats ordered U25-26 Ul-fi U7-24, U12Q-121 U56-fi3 U137-152 Project Project Project
Displacement (tons!
Surfaced 862 254 279 291 314 1.500 2,500 (max) 300
Submerged 983 303 329 341 364 2.000 320
Length 1m) 72.4 40.9 42.7 43.9 44.0 78 32
Beam 1m! 6.2 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.9 7.4 3.2
Draught (m) 4.3 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.9 5 4
Propulsion
Ino.Xhpltype)
Diesel 2X1.540 MAN 2X350 MWM 2X350 MWM 2X350 MWM 2X350 MWM 2Xl,540 MAN 2X2,400
Electric 2X500 2XI80 2X180 2X205 2X205 2X500 2X3,750c-<:
Fuel capacity (tons! 96 12 21 23 38 100 36 (+74 H,O,)
Speed (knotsl
Surfaced 17.8 13.0 13.0 12.0 12.7 15.5 26
Submerged 8.3 6.9 7.0 7.0 7.4 7 30
Range In. miles/kn!
Surfaced 6.700/12 1.050/12 1.800/12 1,900/12 3,450/12 7,500/10 2,000/15
Submerged 78/4 35/4 43/4 43/4 56/4 500/15
Armament
Bow torpedo tubes 4 3 3 3 3 4 2'
Stern torpedo tu bes 2 - - - - 2
Torpedoes carried 14 6 6 6 6 14
Guns IXIO.5cm lX2cm IX2cm IX2cm lX2cm lXl0.5cm
lX2cm IX2cm
Crew 43 25 25 25 25
Notes To carry 2 small Supply and Walter-boat
MTBs and workshop U-boat
48 TMA mines
Type IA.
------------~".~~~=~~~-~~~~=~~=
C:=:=:::=::.:;I
:
Type liB. Type 110.
Type III.
-- -- - - --'-~=-==-~-=-----=--=-~"'~=---=~=-~-'=-==~"'Y ---1t;~~i~~;[ -io~~~~~~~fg:'
Type VIIB.
Type VilA.
334 APPENDIX II: V-BOAT SPECIFICATIONS, 1935-1945

Type: VI VilA VIIB VIIC
Boa ts ordered Project U27-36 U45-55, 73-76, U69-72, 77-82, 88-98, 132-136,201-212, 221-232, 235-291, 301-316, 331-1
83-87, 99-102 551-f>86, 701-722, 731-782, 821--828, 901-908, 929-930, 951-994. 1051-1058, /
1101-1106,1131-1132,1161-1162.1191-1210
Displacement (tonsl
Surfaced 850 (max) 626 753 761
Submerged 745 857 865
Length Iml 64.5 66.5 67.1
Beam 1m) 5.8 6.2 6.2
Draught (m) 4.4 4.7 4.8
Propulsion
(no.Xhp/type)
Diesel Single-drive 2X 1,160 2X 1.400 2X 1,400
Schmidt/Hartmann
steam process
Electric 2X375 2X375 2X375
Fuel capacity (tonsl 67 108 113
Speed (knots)
Surfaced 16.0 17.2 17.0
Submerged 8.0 8.0 7.6
Range (n. miles/lml
Surfaced 4.300/12 6,500/12 6,500/12
Submerged 90/4 90/4 80/4
Armament
Bow torpedo tubes 4 4 4
Stern torpedo tubes 1 1 1
Torpedoes carried 11 14 14
Guns lX8.8cm 1X8.8cm lX8.8cm
lX2cm lX2cm lX2cm
Crew 44 44 44
Notes Shape identical to Type lA Guns. from 1944: I X3.7cm. 2Xtwin 2cm
Type: VIIC/41 VIIC/42
Boa ts ordered U292-300, 317-330,687-698, 703-705, 723-730,829--840,909-912,931-936, U699-700, 783-790, 913-918. 937-942. 1069-1080, 1093-1100, 1115-112v.
995-1050,1107-1114, 1133-1146, 1163-1190, 1211-1214. 1271-1285,1301-1312, 1147-1152,1215-1220, 1286-1297. 1313-/318, 1339-1350, 1423-1434,
1331-1338, 1401-1404, 1417-1422, 1435-1439, 1801-1804, 1823-1828 1440-1463.1805-1822, 1901-1904, 2001-2004. 2101-2104, 2301-231
Displacement (tons)
Surfaced 759 999
Submerged 860 1.099
Length (m) 67.2 68.7
Beam Iml 6.2 6.9
Draught (m) 4. 5.1
Propulsion
(no. X hp/type)
Diesel 2X 1.400 2X2.200 MA
Electric 2X375 2X375
Fuel capacity (tons) 113 159
Speed (knotsl
Surfaced 17.0 18.6
Submerged 7.6 7.6
Range (n. mileslkn)
Surfaced 6.500/12 10.000/12
Submerged 0/4 80/4
Armament
Bow torpedo tube 4 4
Stern torpedo tu bes I I
Torpedoes carried 14 16
Guns 1X8.8cm IXquad 2cm
lX2cm 2Xtwin 2cm
Crew 44 45
Notes Guns from 1944: lX3.7cm. 2Xtwin 2cm
Type VIIC/42.
APPENDIX II: V-BOAT SPECIFICATIO

Type: VIID VIlE VIIF VIII IXA IXB IXC IXC/40
--- --
Boats ordered U213-218 Project Ul 059-1 062 Project U37-44 U64-65, 103-111, U66-68, 125-131 U167-170, 183-194
122-124 153-166, 171-176, 526-550, 801-816,
501-525 841-846,853-858.
65-870. 877-882.
89-894.1221-1262
1501-1503
Displacement (tons)
Surfaced 965 1,084 - 1.032 1,051 1,120 I.I44
Submerged ],080 - 1,181 - 1.153 I.I78 1,232 1.257
Length (ml 76.9 - 77.6 - 76.5 76.5 76.8 76.8
Beam Iml 6.4 - 7.3 - 6.5 6.8 6.8 6.9
Draught (ml 5.0 4.9 - 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7
Propulsion Ino.Xhp/typel
Diesel 2X 1,400 2XV-12Deutz 2X 1,400 2X2,200 MAN 2X2.200 MAN 2X2.200 MAN 2X2.200 MAN
two-stroke
Electric 2X375 2 2X375 - 2X500 2X500 2X500 2X500
Fuel capacity (tons) ]69 - ]99 - 154 ]65 208 214
Speed Iknotsl
Surfaced 16.0 - 16.9 - 18.2 ]8.2 ]8.3 18.3
Submerged 7.3 - 7.9 - 7.7 7.3 7.3 7.3
Range In. miles/1m)
Surfaced 8.]00/12 - 9,500/12 - 8,100/12 8,700/12 lJ,000/12 ]] ,400/12
Submerged 69/4 - 75/4 65/4 64/4 63/4 63/4
Armament
Bow torpedo tubes 4 4 - 4 4 4 4
Stern torpedo tubes ] - I - 2 2 2 2
Torpedoes carried 14 - 14+27 22 22 22 22
Guns ]X8.8cm - IX8.8cm lX10.5cm 1 X]0.5cm ]XJO.5cm IX JO.5cm
lX2cm lX2cm 1X3.7cm ]X3.7cm 1X3.7cm lX3.7cm
+15SMA lX2cm ] X 2cm ]X2cm 1X2cm
Crew 44 - 46 - 48 48 48 48
otes Minelayer Test boat Torpedo supply
developed from boat Guns: from 1944, ]X3.7cm. 2Xtwin 2cm
Type VII C to test
new engines
Type VIID.
ij
j 1 _
Type VIIC.
Type IX.
-=..-.-- ...::..--=-
Type IXC
336 APPENDIX II: V-BOAT SPECIFICATIONS, 1935-1945

Type: IXD, IXD 1 converted to IXD, IXD/42 XA XB XI
transport boat
Boats ordered U180; U195 U180; U195 U177-179,181-182, U883--888, 895-900, Project U1l6-1l9,219-220, U113-1l5
196-200,847-852, 1531-1542 233-234
859-864,871-876
Displacement (tonsl
Surfaced 1,610 1,610 1,616 1,616 2,500 1,763 3,140
Submerged 1,799 1,799 1,804 1,804 - 2,177 3,930
Length (ml 87.6 87.6 87.6 87.6 103 89.8 115
Beam (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 9.5 9.2 9.5
Draught (m) 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 4.4 4.7 6.2
Propulsion (no. X hp/typel
Diesel 6Xl,500 2Xl,400 GW 2X2,200 MAN 2X2,200 MAN 2 2X2,100 GW 8X2,200 MWM
Electric 2X500 2X500 2X580 MWM 2X580 MWM gen. 2 2X550 2XUOO
2X500 2X500
Fuel capacity (tons) - 203 442 442 - 368 500
Speed (knotsl
Surfaced 20.8 15.8 19.2 19.2 14 16.4 23.0
Submerged 69 6.9 6.9 6.9 - 7.0 7.0
Range (n. miles/kn)
Surfaced - 9,900/12 23,700/12 23,700/12 14,450/12 15,800/12
Submerged 115/4 57/4 57/4 - 93/4 50/4
Armament
Bow torpedo tubes 4 4 4 4 - 4
Stern torpedo tubes 2 2 2 - 2 2
Torpedoes carried 24 - 24 22 11 12
Guns lXl0.5cm 1X3.7cm lXl0.5cm lX10.5cm lXl0.5cm, lX3.7cm, lXlO.5cm. IX3.7cm, 2Xtwin 12.7cm,
IX3.7cm 2Xtwin 2cm lX3.7cm lX3.7cm lX2cm lX2cm 2X3.7cm, lX2cm
IX2cm IX2cm lX2cm +SMA +66 SMA +Ar231 aircraft
Crew 57 57 57 57 - 52 110
Notes 252 tons of cargo Minelayer Minelayer Artillery boat
Type IXD,.
~~~=~~_~~ __ ~~ __ L
-:':'=!:.:':':J
I
,
I
==-
Type XB.
~~~&.._-.
- -_':'"-_-";':::J
~~it]~Lt~ _LtJ'Jtt 'it _X~t·+·~l·~~·~·~:~I~~~~
Type XI.
~=::J
APPENDIX II: U-BOAT SPECIFICATIONS, 1935-1945 337

Type: XII XIII XIV XIVB XV XVI V80 V300 Wa201
Boats ordered 9 planned Project U459-464, Project Project Project V80 U791 U792, U793
487-500,
2201-2204
Displacement (tons)
Surfaced 2,041 400 approx. 1,688 1,895 2.500 5,000 73 610 277
Submerged - - 1,932 - - - 76 655 294
Length (m) 92.4 - 67.1 70.9 - - 22 52.1 39
Beam (m) 8.5 - 9.4 - - 2.1 4.0 3.3
Draught (m) 5.4 - 6.5 - - 3.2 5.5 4.3
Propulsion (no. X hpltype)
Diesel 2X3,500 GW 2 2X1,400 GW 2Xl.400 GW 2X1,400 2X 1,400 lX2,000 Walter 2X150 MWM 2X210 Deutz
2X2.180 Walter 2X2,500 Walter
Electric 2X840 2 2X375 2X375 2X375 2X375 2X75 lX77
Fuel capacity (tonsl - 203 - - 20 H,O, 34+98 H,O, 18+43 H ,0,
Speed (knots)
Surfaced 22.0 15 14.4 - - 9.3 9.0
Submerged 100 - 6.2 - - - 28 19.0 25.0
Range (n. mileslknl -
Surfaced 20,000/12 - 9,300/12 - - - - 2.330/9
Submerged 55/4 90/4 - - 50/28 205/19 117/20
Armament
Bow torpedo tubes 4 4 - - - 2 2
Stern torpedo tubes 2 - - - - - - -
Torpedoes carried 22 - 4 4 - - - 6 41
Guns IX lO.5cm lX2cm 2X3.7cm J X3.7cm
1 X37cm lX2cm 2Xtwin 2cm
lX2cm
Crew - - 53 53 - - 4 25 12
Notes Fleet boat Fuel supply boat Doubled battery Supply and workshop boats Walter test U793
with 432 tons oil capacity boat only 1 Wal ter
turbine
TypeX'V. ==7' ~f¥#;!JlH3'!', , "'" ',','.s. .. ) W~. ~

~ ;'F·'~
.-- .;""&o&.·=·~Ao;.:,:;;;,·_·-,·;:,--;,:,·
__.;.;-.-::;"",;;::''";==_:;·.:;;;;.::.=.:,;=--=-':;-;;:-'';-I;;~-~;;;;_··-
::- ~
\...L~-~
,
~, l_--
__ -=- _ c._~
~.~.- il
Type XVIIB Type XVIII.
n _ ~_. =_"";..-_-- - .=:.-..::.,.... ,.-_-<=;i: ...-......-.r"."---""---" •..:

.., ...... ~,,-_-= ..._~ _
~._
,,·~~-----'·iiIJ?hhh,. ,J:'~':':~~~~~:':~:':~~:::':~~:~:~:~l~~~~':'~~:'~::~:':.lE~5»t:~J0}I~;\;~B
Type XX.
I I I I I
I t i l I
r I I I 1..J.
UT:~, ~ ~ :... ~ J ... - -~-===-
Right: U129 (Type IXCI in front of the dry bunker at
Lorient on 7 May 1942.
338 APPENDIX II: U,BOAT SPECIFICATIONS, 1935-1945

Type: WK202 XV lIB XVIlE XVIIG XVIIK XVIII XIX XX XXB
Boats ordered U794,795 U1405-1416 Project UJ081-1092 U798 U796; 797 U1601-1615 Project
1701-1715
Displacement (tons)
Surfaced 236 312 340 314 301 1,485 2.000 2.708
Submerged 259 337 - 345 340 1,652 - 2.962
Length (ml 34.6 41.5 43.9 39.5 40.7 71.5 - 77.1
Beam (m) 3.4 3.3 3.3 3.4 3.4 6.2 - 9.2
Draught (m) 4.6 4.3 4.3 4.7 4.9 6.4 - 6.6
Propulsion Ino.Xhp/type)
Diesel 1X210 Deutz lX210 Deutz 1X900 lX210 Deutz IX 1,500 c-c 2X2.000 MWM - 2X 1.400 2X 1.400
2X2.500 Walter 1 X2.500 Walter lX2,500 Walter 2X7,500 Walter
Electric 1 X77 lX77 1Xl.160 lX77 lX68 2X198 - 2X375 2X375
Fuel capacity (tons) 14+40 H,O, 20+55 H,O, 40 19+45H,O, 23+9.20, 124+204 H,O, - 471
Speed Iknots)
Surfaced 9.0 8.5 11.5 8.5 14.0 18.5 - 12.5
Submerged 24.0 21.5 14.5 21.5 16.2 24.0 - 5.8
Range (n. mileslkn)
Surfaced 1.840/9 3,000/8 6.000/8 3.000/8 2.400/12 5.200/12 - 13.100/12
Submerged - 150/20 224/4 114/20 120/16 250/20 - 49/4 88/4
Armament
Bow torpedo tubes 2 2 2 2 - 6
Stern torpedo tu bes - - - - - -
Torpedoes carried 41 41 41 41 23
Guns - - - - - 2Xtwin 3cm - 1X3.7cm lX3.7cm
2Xtwin 2cm 2Xtwin 2cm
Crew 12 19 - 19 18 52 - 58 58
Notes U795 only Closed-cycle test Transport boat Transport boa t
J Walter turbine boat (800 tons cargol (800 tons cargo I
Type: XXI XXIB XXIC XXID XXIV XXIE XXIT XXII
Boats ordered U2501-2762, Project Project Project Project Project Project U1153, 1154
3001-3295,
3501-3695
Displacement (tons)
Surfaced 1,621 1.621 approx. - 1.949 1,621 approx. 2.809 1.621 approx. 15!,)
Submerged 1,819 - - - - -
Length (m) 76.7 76.7 83 76.7 76.7 78 76.7 27.1
Beam (m) 6.6 6.6 6.6 7 6.6 9 approx. 6.6 3.0
Draught (m) 6.3 6.3 6,3 - 6.3 - 6.3 4.2
Diesel 2X2,000 MAN 2X2,000 MAN 2X2,000 MAN 2X2,000 MAN 2X2,000 MAN 2X2,000 MAN 2X2,OOO MAN I X210 Deutz
2X2,500 2X2,500 2X2,500 2X2,500 2X2,500 2X2,500 2X2,500 1X 1,850 Walter
Electric 2X113 S 2X 113 S 2X113 S 2X 113 S 2X113 S 2X 113 S 2X1l3 S lX77
Fuel capacity Itonsl 250 - - - - - - 12+30 H,O,
Speed (knotsl
Surfaced 15,6 15 14 15.3 - 14 15.5 7
Submerged 17.2 - - 15.5 - 10.5 14.5 20.1
Range In. miles/kn)
Surfaced 11,150/12 - - 11,300/10 - 20,000/10 20,000/8 1,550/6.5
Submerged 285/6 - - 155/6 - 7516 135/6 96120
Armament
Bow torpedo tubes 6 6 6 2 2 2 2 2
Stern torpedo tubes - - 1+6 side) - 1+ 12 side) - - - - 1
Torpedoes carried 23 12 18 2 2 2 2 3
Guns 2Xtwin 2cm 2Xtwin 3cm 2Xtwin 3cm 2Xtwin 3cm 2Xtwin 3cm 2Xtwin 3cm 2Xtwin 3cm
Crew 57 - - 46 12
otes Development of Type XXI with Fuel supply boat As Type XXW, Transport boat As Type XXIE
addition of side torpedo tubes with 430 tons oil bu t wi th lesser (665 tons cargo) but with lesser
payload payload'
b
Type XXI. Type XXII.
..... -------------
<:::::iOi&Io
;~::-:::.:.:":.:.:_;.; 2~~~:1~~~~~~ 8
~---~-------------J
, I :
~ - -~-----------_+----~-----r---------+~L{fL~3:::.:~=
Type XXIC. Type XXIII.
-------_._---,---_. ,
__ "!.~ ._ ..,....-.... ~..~----r---------r-----------------_~
Q ----.
r-
~:: n__n !--._.--_..__ ._nn.t.. ~}~~~I~}}~~~~f~ . J~~B
L ~---':.-_--
--------- 1-
Type XXVI.
..:~:: ..
=_...---:..=~.=o:- .,..~-----__ ~
c ~----- __ l~u_j~~~~1~= .-_:::_:F::::-~ ~

340 APPENDIX II: U·BOAT SPECIFICATIONS, 1935-1945
Type: XXIII XXIV XXV XXVIA XXVIB XXVIW XXVII XVIII XXIXA
Hoats ordered U2321-2460, Project Project Project Project U4501-4600 Midget boat Project Project
4701-4891 Isee page 343)
Displacement (tons)
Surfaced 234 1,800 160 950 1.050 842 200 approx. 681
Submerged 258 - - - - 926 - -
Length (m) 34.7 - 28 58 61.3 56.2 32 53.7
Beam (m) 3.0 - 3 6.7 6.7 5.4 - 4.8
Draught Iml 3.7 - 6.5 6.5 5.9 - 5.1
Diesel I X580 MWM 2X 1,000 MWM - IX2.200 Deutz IX2,200 Deutz 1X580 MWM IX250 Walter IX750 MWM
2X7,500 Walter IX100 MAN gen. 1XIOO MAN gen. IX265 MAN gen. 1X265 MAN gen.
IX7,500 Walter I X7,500 Walter I X7 ,500 Walter
Electric 1X580 2XI98 IX 160 I X 1.670 I X I ,670 IX536 IX70 S I X 1.400
IX35 S 2X70 S IX75 S IX75 S IX71 S IX70 S
Fuel capacity (tons) 18 - (H,O,) IH,O,) 65+97 H,O, (H,O,) -
Speed (knots) - 12
Surfaced 9.7 14 - 15.5 14.5 11.0 10 13.8
Submerged 12.5 21 9.0 22.5 21.5 24.0
Range (n. miles/kn)
Surfaced 2,600/8 15,000/10 - - 8,000110 7,300110 - 7,100/10
Submerged 175/4 - 400/6 130/21' 158/24 2.000/6 125/6
Armament
Bow torpedo tubes 2 6 2 6 6 4 4 8
Stern torpedo tubes - - (+8 side) - +6 side +6 side +6 side - -
Torpedoes carried 2 14 2 12 12 10 4 8
Guns - 2Xtwin 3cm - 2Xtwin 3cm 2Xtwin 3cm
Crew 14 - - 35
Notes Development of Type Project for indirect
XV111 with added Walter process
side torpedo tu bes
Type: XXIXB XXIXB2 XXIXC XXIXD XXIXE (XXVI Ell XXIXF XXIXGK
Boats ordered Project Project Project Project Projects Project Project

Displacement Itons)
Surfaced 753 790 825 1,035 785 880 1.000
Submerged - - - - -
Length 1m) 57.5 57 61.3 66.7 60 57 57.
Beam Iml 4.8 4.8 4.8 5.4 5 5.4 6.7
Draught 1m) 5.1 5.6 5.1 5.3 6.4 6.4 6
Propulsion Ino. X hp/type)
Diesel lX750 MWM 1Xl,400 MAN 1X750 MAN IX2,OOO MAN IX1.400 MAN IX750 MWM IX750 MWM
1X265 MAN gen. lX265 MAN gen. lX265 MAN gen. IX265 MAN gen. IX265 MAN gen. IX750 MAN gen. IX750 MWM gen.
Electric 1X2,100 I X2.400 I X2,800 IX2,100 IX2,400 IX2,l00 I X2,800
1X 110 S I X 120 S I X 140 S I X 110 S IX50 S I X 110 S I X 140 S
Fuel capacity (tons)
Speed (knots)
Surfaced 11.9 15.3 11.8 15 13 13.5 12
Submerged 15.4 16.6 16.7 14.8 16 15 16.5
Range (n. miles/knl
Surfaced 7,100/10 7.100110 7,100/10 7,100110 6,000/10 6.500/10 10,000/10
Submerged 175/6 235/6 250/6 150/6 175/6 - 225/6
Armament
Bow torpedo tubes 8 8 8 8 4 4 6
Stern torpedo tubes - - - +4 side 4 +4 side +6 side
Torpedoes carried 8 8 8 12 12 8 16
Guns
Crew - - - - - - 35
otes 'K' Office developments IBG developments
APPENDIX II: U-BOAT SPECIFICATIONS, 1935-1945 341

Type: XXIXH XXIXKl XXIXK2 XXIXK3 XXIXK4 XXXA XXXB
Boats ordered Project Project Project Project Project Project Project

Displacement (tons)
Surfaced 715 915 1,060 930 l.060 1,180 1.170
Submerged - - - - - -
Length (m) 52 57.8 64.5 51.8 64.5 68.9 65.7
Beam 1m) 6.4 - - 5.4 5.4
Draught 1m) 4.7 - - - - 6.2
Propulsion (no. X hp/type)
Diesel lX580 MWM 2X1.100 MWM c·c 4Xl.l00 MWM c·c 4XI,500 DB c·c 2X2,000 MWM c-c lX2,000 MAN IX2,000 MAN
lX580 MWM gen. 1 X265 MAN gen. 1 X265 MAN gen.
Electric IX l.400 I X 110 S I X 127 S I X 127 S IX127 S 1 X2,800 I X2,800
lX70 S I X 140 S IXI40
Fuel capacity (tons) - (0,) (0,) 410, (0,)
peed (knots)
Surfaced 13 16.7 18.0 17.6 - 14.6 14.6
Submerged 15.5 14.8 18.2 21.5 15.6 15.8
Range (n. miles/kn)
Surfaced 9,000/10 7,200/10 7,200110 7,200110 7,200110 15,500/10 15,500/10
Submerged 120/6 694/6 800/6 1,000/6 - 210/6 215/6
Armament
Bow torpedo tubes 6 8 8 8 8 8 8
Stern torpedo tubes 2 2 2 +4 side -
Torpedoes carried 10 18 18 8 18 12 16
Guns
Crew 27
otes Closed-cycle developmen ts
Type: XXXI XXXII XXXIII XXXIV XXXV XXXVI Tiimmler

---
Boats ordered Project Midget boat (see Project Project Project Project Project
page 3143)
Displacement (tons)
Surfaced 1,200 360 90 1,000 approx. 1,000 approx. 200
Submerged - - - 50 approx. 61.2 32
Length 1m) 54 40 23 - 5.4
Beam (m) 6.2 4.0 2.5 6.0
Draught 1m) 7.0 4.2 2.6
Propulsion (no. X hp/type)
Diesel lX2,000 MAN I X580 MWM c-c lXl,500 DB c-e lX2,OOO MWM IX580 MWM lX2,OOO MA
IX265 MAN gen. 1X7,500 Walter 1,265 MAN gen. IX60 gen.
lX7,500 Walter
Electric 1X2,800 lX30 S IXI6 S lX175 S lX536
1 X 140 S lX71 S lX35
Fuel capacity (tons) 24+260, 4+60, 650, (0,) 20
Speed (knots)
Surfaced 14.3 9.5 12
Submerged 16.4 11,5 21 22 22 17.0 Ischnorkel)
Range (n. mileslkn)
Surfaced 15,500110 1,550/9.5 > 1,000/12 7,000/10 7,000/10 3,000/8
Submerged 245/6 1,600/6 80/21 160/22 110/22 40/5
Armament
Bow torpedo tubes 8 4 - 8 4 4
Stern torpedo tubes 4 - - +6 side
Torpedoes carried 24 6 2 12 10 4
Gun
- - - - -
Crew - - 3 - - 6
Notes Closed-cycle developments Oxygen-fuelled
'Torpedoes of 5m length. '160·ton cargo with normal batteries; 275 tons with half batteries. 'Running on electric motor, 160/4. Note: Constructional diving depths (safety factor
2Y,): Type I r 80m; Type VllC/41. Xl and XIV 135m: Type VI IC/42 200m: otherwise, up to Type IX, 100m. The designed diving depths of Types XXI and XXIII later were found to
have been set too large. Key to abbreviations: c-c=closed-cycle: gen.=generator: H ,O,=Hydrogen Peroxide (Auro\) fuel for Walter-turbine; S=silent electric motor; SMA=Sonder-
Mine A, a special anchor mine; Walter=Walter-turbine.
342 APPENDIX II; U-BOAT SPECIFICATIONS, 1935-1945

Midget U-Boat Specifications 1944 -1945
Type: Neger Marder Hai Molch Biber Biber II Biber III XXVII XXV liB XXVIIF XXVIIK
(Hecht)
o. boats delivered 200 approx. 300 approx. 1 383 324 Project Project 53' Project Project Project
Displacement (tons) 2.7 3 3.5 approx. 11.0 6.3 - 12 11.8 15.6 9.2 17.3
Length (ml 7.6 8.3 11 approx. 10.8 9 - 11.8 10.4 10.6 11.2 13.9
Beam (ml 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.8 1.6 - 2.5 1.7 1.7 1.0 1.7
Propulsion (no.Xhpl lX12 ET lX12 ET lX12 ET lX13 ET lX32 Otto lOtto lX60 D lX12 ET lX22 D lX200 WT lXI00D
lX13 ET lX13 ET (40 c-c) lX12ET 180 c-c)
lX8 S
Fuel capacity (tons) - - 0.11 - 1.4+0.30, - - (H,O,) 0.5 (0.65 0,)
Speed (knots)
Surfaced 4 4 - 4.3 6.5 8 - 5.5 - 9.5
Submerged - - - 5.0 5.3 5 6 6.9 22.6 10
Range (n. mileslkn)
Surfaced 48/4 48/4 50/4 130/6 - 1,100/8 - - - 180/9.5
Submerged - - - 50/5 8.6/5 - 100/5 38/4 - - 60/10+34/2
Torpedoes 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2
Crew 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2
Type: XXXII 127 (Seehund) 227 SchwertwaI Seeteufel Delphin I Delphin II
No. boats delivered Project 285' Project 1 1 3 Project

Displacement (tons) 20 approx. 14.9 17.0 11.3 20 2.8 7.5
Length (m) - 11.9 13.6 11.3 13.5 5.5 8.7 approx.
Beam 1m) - 1.7 1.7 2.4 2.8 1.0 1.3
Propulsion (no.Xhp) lX25 E lX60 D lXl00D lX500 WT lX80 Otto lX32 Otto 1X 100 D
lX25 E (80 c-cl lX30 E 132 c-c) (80 c-c)
lX25 E
Fuel capacity (tonsl - 0.5 0.6 (+0.72 0,) 5 H,O,
Speed (knots I
Surfaced - 7.7 8.0 - 10 10
Submerged - 6.0 10.3 26 8 17 18
Range (n. miles/kn)
Surfaced - 300/7 340/8 - 300/10
Submerged - 6313 71/10+ 17/4 108/15+27/22 80/8 300/10 400/l 0
Torpedoes 2 2 2 2 2 1 2
Crew 2 2 2 2 2 1 1
'Allocated numbers: U211l- 2113, 2251-2300. 'Allocated numbers: U5501-fi442. Key to abbreviations: c-c=closed-cycle: D=diesel; E=electric motor; ET=motor from electric-
powered torpedo; Otto=Otto motor; S=silent electric motor; WT= Walter torpedo turbine.
l-m~-~
Type XXVII IHecht) Type XXVIIF.
~ -~-I
'Small U-Boat K' IType XVIIBI. Type 127 IS __hundl.
Schwertwal.
k== r:: I :I -id

APPENDIX III: MIDGET V·BOAT SPECIFICATIONS 1944-1945 343
Torpedo Types of the Imperial German Navy at the beginning of the First World War
Designation: C35/91 C45/91 C45/91 C45/91 C/03 C/03 C/03 D C/06 AV G/06 C/06D G/6AV G/6 AVK G/6 D G/7 H/8
Bronze Steel Steel AV AVK AVK
standard
Diameter (em) 35.55 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 50 50 50 50 60

Length (em) 475.15 511 515 515 515 515 515 565 565 565 600 600 600 702 800
f'ropulsion AV 3-eyl AV 3-eyl AV 3-eyl AV 3-eyl AV 3-eyl AV 3-eyl Steam AV 4-cyl AV 4-cyl Steam AV 4-cyl AV 4-cyl Steam Steam Steam
3-cyl 4-cyl 4-cyl 4-cyl 8-cyl
Fuel Alcohol Alcohol Alcohol Alcohol Alcohol Paraffin Paraffin Alcohol Paraffin Paraffin Alcohol Alcohol Paraffin Paraffin Paraffin
Boiler pressure (psi) 1.371 1,428 1.428 1.428 2,143 2.357 2,143 2,286 2,500 2.286 2,286 2,500 2,286 2,428 2,428
Boiler capacity (\itresl 121.5 200 275 275 300 300 300 396 396 396 540 540 540 635 -
Range (n. mileslknots) 500/27 1,000/27 1.500/27 1.600/27 3,000/26 3.500/27 5,000/27 3.600/27 4,200/27 5,900/27 5.000/27 5.500/27 8.400/27 9.800/27 14.000/27
Charge (kgl 40.5 87.5 129 141 147.5 147.5 147.5 122 122 122 160 160 164 195 210-250
Notes Bronze Bronze Steel Steel - First
torpedo torpedo torpedo torpedo torpedo
with and with
without water
gyro- injection
scopes
Note: C/03 and C/06 in their steam torpedo versions, had sea-water injection; Key to abbreviations: AV=Anwiirm·Vorrichtung (pre-heat devicel; AVK=Anwiirm-
subsequent larger torpedoes had fresh'water injection. The old C35/91 and C45/91 Vorrichtung und erhtihter Kesseldruek (pre-heat device and increased boiler pressure)
torpedoes were allocated at the beginning of 1915 for U-boat commerce raiding. G/6 AV only for war use. but in no circumstances for use in torpedo-boats and U-boats;
torpedoes. adapted specially for U-boat use, were designated K. K I and K II. G/7 was not cyl=cylinder.
used until 1918, H/8 not at all for U-boats. All torpedoes after C/06 had a ±90° angled
shot device. The G and H torpedoes had a so-called double gyroscope which imparted
smoother running qualities.
53cm Torpedoes up to 1945

Designation: '1'1 '1' I Fat I '1' I Lutlll1 '1'11 Tl11 '1' 111 Fat 11 '1' lila Fat 11 TlIla '1' l11b TIlle Tl11d TlIle
LutIl
Lutll
Type G7a G7a G7a G7e G7e G7e G7e G7e G7e G7e G7e G7e
Apparatus No. 12 12 12 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20
Code name - - - - - - - - Dackel Kreuzotter
Intended use - - - - - Marder Seehund Special Seehund
and others operations and others
Diameter (em) 53.34 53.34 53.34 53.46 53.46 53.46 53.46 53.46 53.46 53.46 53.46 53.46
Length (em) 716.3 716.3 716.3 716.3 716.3 716.3 716.3 716.3 716.3 716.3 1.100 716.3
Weight (kgl 1.538 1.538 1,538 1,608 1.608 1,620 1.760 1,760 1.352 1,342 2.220 1,345
Negative buoyancy (%1 21 21 21 21 21 21 32 32 1.5 0.75 1.5 0
Propulsion
Motor 4-cyl 4-cyl 4'cyl E E E E E E E E E
gas/steam gas/steam gas/steam
Battery - - - 2XI3T 2X13T 2XI3T 2XI7T 2XI7T I XI3T IX13T 4X17T lXI3T
special
Output
hp 350 350 350 100 100 100 100 100 30 30 7 approx 32
rpm 1,470 1,470 1.470 1,700 1.700 1.700 1,700 1.700 1,100 1,100 500 approx 1,125
Speed (knotsl 40 40 40 30 30 30 30 30 18.5 18.5 9 20
Range (kml 75 75 75 50 50 50 75 75 40 40 570 approx 75
Warhead I Ka. Kc Ka. Ke Ka. Ke Ka Kb Kb Kb Kb Kb2 Kb 2 Kb 2 Ke I
Charge (kg) 280 280 280 280 280 280 280 280 280 280 280 280
Detonator Pi I or TZ3 Pi I or TZ3 Pi I or TZ3 Pi I Pi 2 Pi 2 Pi 2 Pi 2 TZ 2 with TZ 2 with Pi2 TZ 25 with
with Pi 3 with Pi 3 with Pi 3 Pi 2f Pi 2f Pi 4c
Steering/programme - Fat Lut - - Fat Fat Lut Lut
programme programme programme programme programme programme
Key t" abbreviations: e·e=closed cycle; eyl.=eylinder: E=eleetrie: Fat=Federapparat (spring-loaded): Lut=Lagen unabhiingiger Torpedo (independent torpedo).
Table continues on next page.
344 APPENDIX IV; TORPEDOES

Designation: TIV TV TVa TVb TVI TVII TVIII TIX TX TXI TXII TXIII TXIV
Type G7es G7es G7es G7es G7e G7ut G7ut G5ut G7e G7es G5e G7ut G7a
Apparatus No. 37 45 45 45 20 30 30 26 43 46 20 30 12
Codename Falke ZaunkiinigIZaunkiinigI ZaunkiinigI- Steinbarsch Steinbutt Goldbutt Spinne Zaunkiinig - K-Butt -
Intended use - For MTBs For - - - NYE - - - Seehund
U-boats and others
Diameter (cm) 53.46 53.46 53.46 53.46 53.46 53.46 53.46 53.46 53.46 53.46 53.46 53.46 53.34
Length (cml 716.3 716.3 716.3 716.3 716.3 716.3 716.3 550 716.3 716.3 (boiler 52.7)
Weight (kg) 1,400 1,495 1,495 1,495 1,760 1,730 1,730 - 1,620 1,495 550 716.3 716.3
approx. 1,260 1,309 1,352
Negative buoyancy (%) 11 approx. 11 approx. 11 approx. 32 24.4 24.4 - 21 11 approx. 40 approx. 0 1.5
Propulsion
Motor E E E E E Walter Walter Walter E E E Walter 4-cyl gas/
turbine turbine turbine turbine steam
Battery lX13T lX13T 1X 17Tplus 2X 17Tplus 2X 17T - - - 2X13T lX13T lX9 T
special 2 extra 2 extra
troughs troughs
Output
hp 32 55 40 40 100 430 430 390 100 55 100 425 165
rpm 1,125 1,350 1,210 1,210 1,700 1,640 1,640 - 1,700 1,350 1,700 1,590 1.120
Speed (k nots) 20 24 21.5 21.5 30 45 45 45 30 24 30 45 34
Range (km) 75 57 80 80 75 80 80 38 50 57 30 28 25
Warhead I Kd Ke 1 Ke 1 Ke 1 Kf Kb 2, Kf Kb 2, Kf Kb 2 Kb Ke 1 Kb Kb 2 Kc
Charge (kg) 274 274 274 274 300 280 280 - 280 274 280 280 280
Detonator Pi 4a TZ 5 with TZ 5 with TZ 5 with TZ 6 with TZ 2, TZ 6 TZ 2, TZ 6 TZ 2 Pi 2 TZ 5 with TZ 2 with TZ 2 with TZ 3 with
Pi 4c Pi 4d Pi 4c Pi 6 Pi 4c Pi 2 Pi 2 Pi 3
Steering/programme Acoustic Acoustic Acoustic Acoustic Lut Lut Lut - Wire- Acoustic
self- self- self- self- programme programme programme guided self-
steering steering steering steering steering
Designation:
Type G7as G7es G7es G7ut G7ut G7m G7d G7p G7uk G5uR
Apparatus No. 12 47 48 30 30 - - - 29 32
Codename Miiwe Geier Lerche Schildbutt Steinwal - KlippfIsch Hecht
Intended use - - - - - - - - -
Diameter (cm) 53.34 53.46 53.46 53.46 53.46 53.34 53.46 53.46 53.34 53.46
Length (cm) 716.3 716.3 716.3 716.3 716.3 716.3 716.3 716.3 716.3 550
Weight (kg) - - - 1,730 1,730
Negative buoyancy (%)
Propulsion
Motor Further E E Walter Walter c-c motor Walter E G7a piston Rocket
develop- turbine turbine KM8 turbine engine propulsion
ment of with sea- with sea- with pure based on
Zaunkiinig water water oxygen Walter
II for G7a injection injection process
Battery lX13 T lX13 T - - - MG-C - -
special special Primary
battery
Output
hp - 55 55 430 430 425 435 220 - approx. 1,200
rpm - 1,350 1,350 1,640 1,640 4,500 - - - thrusts
Speed (knots) - - - 40 45 40 - 40 40
Range (km) - - - 180 210 120 - - 65
Warhead I - Ke 1 Ke 1
Charge (kg) 274 274
Detonator - - -
Steering/programme Acoustic Active Wire guided Long-range torpedoes with varying
self- acoustic based on positive guidance systems, used by Fasan and Kondor
steering self- acoustic detection
steering by torpedo
I K=Kopf (head)
APPENDIX IV: TORPEDOES 345

Class: 201 202 205 206 207 209 209 209
Boats ordered 3 2 5+6+2 18 15 4 8

Displacement (tonsl
Standard 395 100 419 450 435 960 980 1,000 approx.
Surfaced 433 137 455 approx. 520 485 1,105 1,185 1,285
Length 1m) 42.4 23.1 44.3 48.0 45.2 54.3 56.0 59.5
Beam 1m) 4.6 3.4 4.6 4.7 4.7 6.3 6.3 6.3
Diesel 2X600 lX330 2X600 2X600 MTU 2X600 4X600 MTU 4X600 MTU 4X600 MTU
Daimler Daimler Daimler
Electric 1X 1.500 1X350. 1X 1.500 lXl,500 1 X 1,500 lX2,700 lX2,700 lX2,700
1 X27S
Fuel capacity Itonsl - - 23.5 - 50+14 50
peed Iknots)
Surfaced 10 6 10 10 10 10 10 10
Submerged 17.5 13 17 17 17 22 22 22
Battery wtldisp (%)' 19.2 16.8 19.8 18.8 18.1 22.6 21.7 20
Armament
Bow torpedo tu bes 8 2 8 8 8 8 8 8
Stern torpedo tu bes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Torpedoes ca rried 8 2 8 8 8 14 14 14
Crew 21 6 21 22 17 32 32 33
--- ---
Key to abbreviations: S=silent motor. 1 Derived from Type V [I.
".m. ~
Class 201. Class 205.
,
"
~--: IE::~F::':-:'" 0 ~-.i"·3- :r::E:[__::::=:, c5
~.J ..-.=
Improved Class 205. Class 206.
c:::::j..::'::::::' U::::=:·~:~_:'::":_-=1o
/~ j~
Class 207. IKL Project 540, a smaller version

of Class 209.
e:-:'::~:r:::-:-:'~ 0
.=
Class 209 IG/evkos Class) Class 209 (Seba/o Class)
---::.':::-...------
L:". __ ••'_ • _
CC-:-~-:-::-:-r:.:::·:-.:~I 0 ,r_-.:.:~::::_-.-.DO
r------------·
,,/~ //~
Below, left; UI3 (5192), UI7 and another Class 206 boat at the HDW construction yard, Kiel- Tayrona. In the background, a completed middle section for a Class 209 lies outside the large
Gaarden. Below; The HDW yard at Kiel-5ud, summer 1974. In the foreground are the Class assembly hangar; it is ready for transportation by floating crane to the final assembly point,
206 boats U21 and U27, moored with the Class 209 export boats Islay, Ariea, Pljao and which may be either construction pontoons or a dock.
\ .-.It
\
'l1VJ,3:0 N1 SNV'ld J,V08-0 :11\ XION3:ddV 8J78
//n.ps ~IIIW
-----------
I::: T I
/~IJI ~1I,/IO~J~lun
I" - 0 ~/sOfI I
:;; ;<;
~
""
I
JfDd- Op,cI.IO.1 ~IIIW
<= <= '-' =- =:. = = c:J c:J C
--=-=
---==------==----------~,._;;=;;;;_;=~;;;=::= <=...J ~ = " ~ c:J<=l
. \! !/
r
I
1 'L-1'
.
'.
'ueld pue amOJd pJeoqlno '(OtJ6L) 811A adA.l
.....,
ir-
E... S
r r-- rI
'0
" IZ tJ ,. IS
r--
16 17
---,
18 19
1
.?O In
1
~>'
,.oj
l
'.r
1
00 0 000000000
~
b =~~=~==~~~==~==========~~~==~
~ ~ ~ ~==============
------------ - L-J 1'1:11e To'pedolnh,

I
r:::::~:r 1'1 Torp Roh r , ~I H(lupt~ch.u

LJL:J '
------.:;:::e==::?ST"':'3!==;=:= ~
-- ,--------- ~
~
,
~
~
I BasIs
-'-- 'a
Iflelsohle ,'"
!"1dleSdllll
~
"
APPENDIX VI: V-BOAT PLANS IN DETAIL 349

Type VIIS, inboard profile and deck plan.
~
~
T'lIIcbbuokec? 80
--'-
----=- -~--~-- -- --
I
I
I _ _ _ _ _J£JTnudILore ( ,
I-
7O"rI2bu0/rer 2 SIb
350 APPENDIX Vl: U-BOAT PLANS IN DETAIL

'''1 r;~
~ f
- I=i- _ -----------
i
- - ---- - - - "O>~"""_ ~ 8
-------- ,
7--; - - - - ~-~. '\'}..o-..t"ll ~ .. J+:!?-- ",
[:
,
lILU~
.1 - .--L
r'
- .... ----'7i!a"''''!C:/1l)hb.ualreL- +J1b
Taucbaunker '$?'J
APPENDIX VI: U-BOAT PLA S IN DETAIL 351

'1IVJ,3G N1 S V'1d J,VOtI-fl :1A X1GN3ddV 6£8
oiFir 1Wtn'/~ '1'P'MJI!IiiOI't
,~
I
-----l--.._=.o.J, =
---~--'~
~~'.R~
,'0 l" W
Ir" '" -...J
r 111 \ ...........
.£V
''""I>
\
8S8 1.[\i.L3G IS \i1.d JN08-0 :IA xra 3dd\i
o 0
I
"'/IIl/4pJ/IJ!v(-",/DH [IE· -I
o,/l,u4nr,.."o l l ( IN
<JJlv"'U~.1Z iI6'IOo,ii/6n f f-----------------;oeo='IIa-----------------t- - _
'-c:::-c:::-:::=t"-------------+I l
~ -'- ..,....,.... oot
"" ...
,(J(W " "
on; J I
"
,.
"
Type vile (1944), deck plans. £nl4Jf/~~hl'la. ~
~
lIt'.!4'l'NH7tog,IIIA /'ZUIUI"~/""'J'
A
Xombvs,nlll~
If!! t<-11I1_h<t> 6m1'1' ~ \ ,lIhJu/II'''''!!9 -

RbJu/<9os, _ w/lungsOlt'U9I
f?,.I~rt', -TO'p'oIo OIw,,~..osJ>.hallu l)~I' ·,qblujl90-u ~ \
-
HtNJpl'lJd"anl,,~h l (Rb14J/i/US.JyVtblT"\ \
~~ C / / ' " ~T ;,_,;,\n'~Qun_n_nFmm

~ I I ;; 'f'
ili ----~
A&
I
- - - -}::f,
'ii \ hi
I WlP&
- ~ ~ = -,-I... - - ~ - ~ ... .-.RI- ~ (~ \ e:::t""E:;:;;
iii
~
~~~~-~~-~
-r ~ \'Enlj';/lvhg.sAIS!L'Il__ - - - - - - - - - ---
i
_...J __ - - - - --- -- - - - -
0
--- - ... - -- -- - - -
b
......
-L-------- r
TQudu,i!;,
l't~a.KJ;Wt ti!!!~ RU..!J!UJi -oJ L a~hl'''J TO!JutloJuj ../IIiJwJuR ~UJlUng.sonID!JI.. ~ ~
Rb/<,fungI (0 Spl 0'39)

+
r-- 11«.(9('J!'~' und £ /'fa1(h~.nrqLN1J
A'qum f
........ J)~.t.Jmo'OI'Mroum
Rauml
--rJ(omh';J~
IU R3
_ li1luolfiLI#lJ10Vm
liaum3
.....
Hot 0""11111.,86 !'" '-'.L1/1asv.<n-.J. 1".
I:
\
Haqpl E-/"fqsch~
£-v.rd,u,I.,
...~U~\
.•.-.- ....
-
=1 n 1-
F;""""Ij"
l-.{\\\ I > , %
- ··..;;:'v'-; ~.
-....
,rY:YY'fi
1 Houpt
' ~,(.,;;,.
iN' H';J;;:.~
i • _ .
_.~"us,los.£J '~1'~91£'HaJ~ II 1/-:
e
,."".$
Z"oIll
I "'(11 ,,,,.. -Jib
. i; T - -,
II I
!-~,~~1dtIl ull.."'Kfllv , 1!aupl. ~{_____ I
;.14Inbu·
~ -.Il!_I"""'" "1a'.!J .!b('f!:-1:/!..' " ~~::'i1r- ~U X4i1t.LxIt,an4j
oWI.NH...l(£~ !i'J.CJU.~~
n~hOlbun"./
r Ii
I--'·"'~
I
I
I
I
~-~'-~-I
--'- -
~f
n • tf
---
~
r
I •
'Ill:
._r·.-··
A\ £~
.!'~
1f¥vc.hhU/)~ .. 2&1- Sih
~I.IJ>,
• ·m· '0
1
-
li~nlHr
..,- ~'-".taL-
I
tT
1
.-
..
..,.'-'"
~
~~'" M ~'
.. ~~~~
~.j Ir
~ ~.~ ':>O-~~'"
I ~"6t~ ~I -,~
IUIl_,- VI, Oll,~~~
----......-... Cd-::: , l.,-Y '1''1 ~ -
I ~~
( ~ JJuli"""'<i!i-) -LJ~
~.n;-L~
~
354 APPENDIX VI: U-BOAT PLANS IN DETAIL

gg£ 1I\i.13Q IS \i1d .1\i08-0 :IA XIQN3dd\i
, ~ u: .' ! '
'\.. ...,i• ~;-; ~" ~
.JP. ) :;~ : ,
.• :"'i eil l' -.
~~/. I •
, , ,, f
~ I:~;. I
i
~
'L
W~ ~""""'Dg
91S' 9'9 It j'fvnq~{1O.L
'e .J~t'(/"'9/09gJ.1
~P1J!i'J'.J_pn'/u~"i1\
u~t(~r;lJ1I701TJ~nDf''\
loodJ~pnltl~/~'.J.11/.pIOA (-" J ~/tt0.Jf/'01T'TYY1.~l
~"jla"'DH'
({ n J ~ / -;;_rJOI/ -DriTiolrriiiq/l11"7 PlIIl'IXiill'tfiiii]\ -"mo.lf,m7\
UiNJ~ .in (t.P.l0H/
(if f1~ 4) U#~I/Dtliirz;srnol/",.d
". If ~ 114(0INOITT"Y, '¥',dlo)
Ii 1i/C11t~S 9Iu/cJt/
J;16n;1u~lrFl:""tprIV,,.,
~1I'rt,rt'Olllf,ulf
e
JlwnoK
~nCK '-P//VO ~Dd".u~nl//O+'LlDPVOUlUl'O)I-r
U/no/FI!DtpSUt/0J./ pun· oP~d/Olong S WI'10ll- WnI)l/iJ9#.#'1p/<1}nQo pun °fRtr'.//O
L (08- 'A os ;rls 0) .lll6tNl/II/9t/
----:::J"""-~- - - - - -- --
I
If/olt(,rl/D/IU.,IZ t,,/./o/IU.ilZ
/4IOJ'Ix-rfl,,6ut/ fij~otpr/f/ol(tf'S"
"otXfiP""''PS" IIIUDW S •• " I J;1'1.I'lh IIn/~:Nu(] - r6fJn6l, I
MKDf.I#'1l"6vn"·N ,~ Ifl1jnitftl -!"'6-"I()/ou,pr Il"I"z 1~1.I:>IOUI{~
'1TV.L30 V'1d .LVOa-n :11\ xro T3ddV 9£f:
.Q ..
o
o "0
I I ! I
11 • •
t' f
J. ,: :
I I I !
. t.)'
. .--:>)
'suo!pas pue SUeid >pap 'al!~oJd pJeoqU! ,laxi adA.1
LSC '1l\fJ.3a Nl S \f'1d J.\fos-n :[A Ala 3dd\f
~i7f
{-.-
-,..- ....
, i
Type XVIIG, inboard profile and deck plan.
:Jun~6'rs -lierd/cl7/er
-
U Scha/loomp,/er
.
-------
l
~
11i1llere K W L
c~
- ----L_ - --f - - -
I I
I
l1ussel7sp..0nlel7 I· I
j}ruc~koi-per-Spon/en
- ----- i I .. ~ I I I I ,
~s !~6051 ~9S .6.lsl7.~
1--,
00,'f5 i 2,6 9,3S; 10,.£5'1/1.75 II.
5700 0.9 ~.?9 ~6 f~
f-
I
2,0 3/9 S,S7 6JS 8,75 9,95 11./5
I Gasabscheld6'r /(ol7densolous9Ieichsb~
I
ftre;;nRom!!!.eC} I Fonderls~tpumpe
Ti./rbine : I / Zerseizer
: .f!,,!:!pr:,ih -J(ondensa/or.., ,.7 1\ !//lreisto/lp-umR.e
I ~
/' / /
/
/ /' /' / \ \ \ \ '
I
TOuduel/e U /
fj/jTJ.mZB//e.lJ!.n!~v /
/ /./--1r::::
/ I //
7Urbinel}g~lfleb~, _!l'ers/ollreg/~r ,_
I
lTurbine
_wr~s_e!7p"ump~
I
£lruckoelpumpe / . I EtnsplItz-Ko/ldensator
Druck/ager __
?~/!.engelr/e/)e __ / IUfblfie/l- Rau'l __Jp/~sel u. E l10sdJ

.. o 1 2 3 If s 6 7 B 9 10 11 12 13 I
......................... ~-W~ ~ - I
.......L~.
., I
.-,--,"-' I"",.J _ I...J __-,--,"- __
.. 1'--
"
---
t1
tl= F~. ~.- - -:-.J//f _ - - -
TreiiJoe/'Bu;'ker
__ __ o 0
UJ ~ t t _ . ..._.~Sl.s
,/·Bu/lJier ~/. .zefle aU.5seres T~tI,BhlJ.s'h

I
/'t,J5
75
I
1~ 9S 16,15
\ \Kombus~ FU/l/uO'um
----~ - -- .-
f
--.. gi 1.;" I' . I'

~-- ·--fL~z_~::.->""::::~ke!o.,_~·,CJIIfl
I" , -,- -r/j
"Ii'" Il"j .~
'I I
L!!J!_upl :..!!!?!)f...ssc/Jo/tta!.e{ Tauchzelle .3
Z~f'7/ra/~ Bug - Torpedo - RaU/77

'(I
+
-
APPENDIX VI: U-BOAT PL I) I~' I'A II.
'1I\f.L3G NI S \f'1d L\fOa-n :[A XIGN3dd\f 09£
-~/'It""'P'/·Hb;-..v·""""'..I1 I"~ ~n- ~ J'¥IIf"V/~I'1J
"""'IT/WS. ~_JI_iil_"~
I -~~'--S-I""'~1'l -".;;n.
~ffJ 'If"rv-·.J ~·.Oloe.
~Jj"' I""""#~"- ";i~'~;:'~~~ (~J~/~",,-
H,"~i#~fj:;;;;r:;6/¥ii/4i' ~/""'--S-
""~(1e*//1I1n.... 7/"1'7 ",/"'7T
.~#. 7P_~~,,~ _ ~ ...
IHI ....' ........ ./~i4V1",/~nll(J #'("/n('n9~-tIIfJ #VJVutJW 7 -p..7
~~"" ,...r_~m,..
....
~/,jT~ P-I1~/"'~"'V~S"_i·Tlfi/,;;~/N1i~ '"
'd"''''';''/#<.Ii.~.;l"
-p" "i/J'A ~fOWf""O-/II"N
fii..s,ln __ "",-"."...." ......
~ YI- -"}(pip..."
•• ~.> ...'" on"'\
,"'f It ."'• ., uP' ••.• ,
"/r'l O~
~ .cItI"Au'lIi~III'"
¥ _ _ q>"'/O<'f.I/I
'_~_F~'
'7.<I-.lIiI,If_/#"J
I_~
r~,~/"'(f<Of",Ij' ('#>'''/1
T~tJH,..1 M(ii{,I,7iii ("~ /,..,..6""
.s..,,. .. 5J~//,/"I ...lT
("II~...Ji)II'D~JI'" nl".niJoj,6,"ij
l~
'ueld >pap pue al!!oJd pJeoqu! 'IXX adAl.
F"""'JI:1,I" .jIa
~li,1Oor
E.!!
8¥~/I~<!!!!I~
--,.
~"~I"'I"-" ..(~.
,_'61
",-~,
.I!lJufW!'"fl MKNIv/~ ~¢I.II<dtJ>og{"''''f'I('''

I
~ ,DI./t/wr.,FIo"'..../fI .~
'", rr~/JJwrA.,7.
~ /
~"L";~""/'
:,""
.f· ~1.'4_'.-·~ ~/u!/!/ .sc1th1K1IJ.Mllullg/l/!, r!!J,fldllRtNllII

, .1 1-
J~ ... _~
~~ ......
.~
'~,·"~il rl: i'"'l1~ ·-~~_r~.~~

r---- DIHt'~A
?f']l '-- .~
~ra
.H 81J~ r- J
""- t.J8 .. J
u'\
~~;, .. 7?1
H")'_k!..r
I
~
~
"- \
~ •l
:
(;~R"'~
l~,~
o ~~
-+-
'tl
-r---
~~.
t-
uz ...
r'
.~.
.
'62 +.!to +a.a "~I SQ.' Stl
--..
s~o
..
T.L.
Jl,.f
." ... , .'T.:' ,_ • . , . , " ' "
SIJ" sf.{'" u.:. 6/J.:u ,{l.l·1f~~n Pl 6t' '+.4 4.5.:6 u.' 67.2 'tJP '1J1I '(6 JO,t 1'1.l ".D
Bg~u
'"
....-,.---
.s~*hon 6 UbI S,ItIJ.'!.L..!:!' .s.-*1,.,,8 t.~'lSl
tg
_4(;0
!J()I
~I_,. •.,,-
,,,,,,,
/2 DDD
\.!¥l"tNJ (;~/IUtg,P!jIM~' a...~/'_7(~L
..Jl!.Jt".,a.J.llln<St~
~ &~~.J,/"'II" 1(",/~#"...!!!t. E-II~/6unltvN 7a I ~'P.C(l l/Ioll!rlt'~"'~/';r~
1f• .l.'u·.!rP'~ ~-lI R...ul"'.lP<lI'~ ,!£fP." R"ul"u/ ,~
11u'''!~!!.!9I''/''I''''s- I
Y~'''~~9~.f>P.1.
I'lJllC1I.I~.,J '1Nt1lU'," +
$p-ontM/I.
~~Alluito.,;,. . ,·.-S
.'..../~~
~I!"I'''',,,IJI',./IJI><£
---
_
IOAI,
......... ·iM.._
d
-
~~"'P":"
._lNrcllg.-.g
~NJ.-<ItoII.~/
l!i~"II,.~/..I "
I,W-/",-.., 7.
W£...,I.~
~~·,..w,/-.,. . . . . . /Ji!. N.N

~ /Jfu~JW'fl!r~
""""M- 'IS)
...,.", .... 21s}
""""Itt ~Ol
S .. !uo w'''''~_f~t
u.'"O/ <.I'WltwuU/Ol'
..ijoI.M_,.-,,_NS
"'-11# '(51 (lfl'Ol#~.'" /}Pl.,

"'-tltt S o.t~h .... A-,;II.
APPENDIX VI: U·BOAT PLAN

_1-_"'''''10'
¥i Itl ,.".1.J/1
Type XXI. sections. 1#

" "
Iff fl.J
""; '/'I
. . ;:~7:u ~ ;:/I~:~
~-.t_~
!!d~'
"'-0_",,_.
r
Sib.
~ va iJ9
, k ...... ~ ,
Bb.
~
.§~,§
--
r.-Jw_lj
~-<~'!J
p.........
",,,-:;;~"".,1(II1' I.• .§pant 4.Q.
,""W
.§p~,Q .§pant 10.9 .§pant 14,Q ••" .
",_m -ts.-tlf
~l
i
J
I,
!j
~-~
I _ ......W...,
_iMWI W
r:r:i,
.......
_/
-
_/ttJW',
...., ' - '
/ ...- 10+1/
,,-_L"'''/J
I~ ~ll
l_II"
.1I,
~ ~
l
,
t::
"
~
.
~""'I;I"'l
~Ji_
~"""'~S(S}
~~
~
~Q8nt 32.Q '''If~J,1,•

.§Qant 26~ ...,fj,I>OiW'
~.~~ • • ,ft . . . . . . . " ,..I(.. ~I/l
.§Rant 28,~ tJ--~J-""~ l
i. .
r . ,../,....
-t
n •.L
i., 'r-- ' ·if.
__ .J •••
r
§1'8nt 34,4
,r-
~"'J;/""
~;7~~,4;rw7~;~~ ...
1
! .1b04 _ oI'''~~J ~,~
u,,~,.,_,.,.
.,
Sib.
-,
-.- ~
J<_,-...,
,~
~,
-"
,
'-, -
II
': ~NUf__
4
~1'8nt 45.4 ",_.... _ ~I'ant 46,4 Of/;<IftSUooll _

~1'8nt49& ~p8nt 51,~
_ .. -NIoIi.oot'....."
_~'.(J
""""lNwI.~ ... ~~ 00'" ,n."." _ " .... ,.-...~S_jJl
~-~
362 APPENDIX VI: U·BOAT PLANS IN DETAIL

1l!!:K!...~1"f'~
~''''._- ~ ~
r. f .. _.N.,
......
.•.
~
~-
~
..
''''.. ' ''-----' _1./ ~j ~ ~/"" -flU
1~_:1j ! 1'-
I' I ,
~I ~,
q
"i ~ •
~
4 ", !
! 5
"ttl j
il.
r
I
~
,, _ _ _ _10M.
Hilfsschotl19.!! IpoIl""". )".1/.'
Stutzscholl 60mm hinter Spant 22.1 §pant 23,~ ~pant 24& ... '"~
I·.~"'W·II
'--~
.....
~J(I'"
),
'.I~~ _ 1.J6~
$00 _, _ _ $(1#
?P'!.n/ .1,'1
I
:t l , ~I
• I
, I
~P.'ant 40,.!! -HiIfJMIttItt §p.anI41,§ §p.anI44,Q

".C" ..'"IO" ••••"." (JdooN .... ' j
§p.ant 37,!!
..... ....
".., " "."
,
--
l..U'_JolS..,
Bb. lb.
.:~
s
-.
--g--'l'
"'1] __' ,'1
~
-
( Bb.
"
21 ..
_...
1'1'
: \ ~ ~ ~1..
r~J
r
"''"'''--l,
,_t.. _-Moo!
I "'-U' u. ,.,.,.....
110,.. ..._ · .
It 16'.' t,NU: t!
'"'~;.Z;:.:u.' II j••j
~pant ...§l;1 k_'"

.-
~panl~.!!..~
".c....'" ...."."
...... _. §P~.!1
•
".c.. '0'" y... ~."
__
.." . ' too.ol.lU £0.
~, __ §panl 62.~ _.
~'
" .. c..... " ....... " ~ . _

T.-Slulzacholt 67415/
_.............. 6t631
-,. I
1.
APPENDIX VI: U·BOAT PLANS IN DETAIL 363

Type XXI, hull form.
41395
11344
~.
/7(
r noron, r'
° I ) 3
r' r'
,
'""""I
.!""'T'11 / .0
1,' )
$P ...I"".
$P~,.b''''
'0.,0(1,1
7100 Oberdeck
WL 15 n,o,
30,.,
WL 14 ~~~~ +
WL 13
WL 12
r.. ,.,.,," .. ','
','
O<U'-~.MJQjl'·¥ll'l1 U,I
U,)
J ~,I
H.O
Wll1
( /"
$,,10,1
t"O~
WL 10
WL 9
WL.
WL1
I
l"o,'
1. ~IL,: HaUP~'.Chse l4,,4o::'
2918,S
1
"
, .. ( ~orUOkkorpe"C:h.e
~
lfl' \ ,,~~ lillie
-- llltl,$
~~: ~\JtsiJ.!Jj j ==>

.... Hluplwellenlch.e
WL" t,
wL5 ~t
WL4
WL3
I
c
l"OrO$~-" -
,J., ..
WL1 r _. r- " .......
WLl
~ T -~' ~~
', - ', _I :-
B.. ,.O tUKK. I ,CL l "', '"I T
6,4 ~2 8,0 8,8 9,6 10,4 11,2 12,0 12,8 13,6 14,4 1~2 lIo 16,8 17.6 18.4 19.2 20,0 2Q8 2\6 22,4 23,2 24,0 24,8 25,6 26,4 2U 2~0 2as 29.6 30,4 31,2 33,6 34,4 35,2 36,0 361
-0,4 -3,2 -2,4 -1,6 -0,8 ~ M ~ ~ ~2 ~
Spanl -
"
.1 I ---r -t--+- t I
~
r"ilul'l9
~ Seklio . . . 12700 ~, Sekl,on 2 ~ 10 000 ;- Seklion 3·8400 ~ Sekl.on 4·5200
wUllarechl. K"lsohle Spl6.0 - Sptl
IL
19300
~- llnge uber ..,...
$"_..,,,...
~,::':~:';; J.~~\C ~ ~~,
Ii ..' ",'G'
sp.,o·tl,e
WL1
: :
~'r
WL"
"" ~rc" , .
WLS
LR 6,5 (~
,~ .,r__,;j
LR" , ~llllle$.))IOI
'f-:..... .. , , ' , • , • •
-
- -
LR 5
~ -'-~"
.~-~~~.~.
LR • .". "." 1
LR J -,--
LR ,
LR ,
LR 0,5
M~R D,S
LR ,
<t.
g' t - ~_'...:. .,""'..; ..M'.... '-.o
- >-,
16,1
Wll$
11,1 'I_ :1'00 10,' 11' n,. 1J,1 '_,0 '.,' l',tl ltl_ 11.1 11,0
~
30.3',1 310
lu,,,,.~"IU'
311 3H JU J$1
~l
,I..
LR'
LR J
,I ~ -~ --==-
Wl'J-
w~
~
/?
Ir
LR • il "'-:., -=-. .....l.!L

"'UO
LR 5 ~,
, v
LR •
:
LR 6,5
~ L ," ., /;: g ."" ~_0., "" .. " wco \ \
v ·0,.
-V-1.-¢ ~_% nn--
WlJ,l
::::::::;:L_-s;= -:-.
_Wl'
Wl
wU
~
'i. '\ ' "_, ~ S".. 330 ,
---.:-.:...:::: t ~ -'0
w ....,,, .. ,...,, ..... WLO-Wl J,l
--=:1 )< '.
LR 65
LR"
= ~ ~'"
LR S
LR.
:-.---- ~-
- WlI.1
:',~'.,::"~:: -.:~ ~ ,~o ,\.i:( -'-\'-'!-'~;'\O

LR J
LR'
LR 1 ~
~: ~: -~- ft ;;:\1 .y '~i'-"- ~ t~ I?-_ I? ,~,o III ,~,I ". -,.-. '!' '1' '-;;:;- '?-' ~'Xf'. ~3?O 3.~,6_J"'" Jp ~o J!'
~--!-:_- -~
LR'
LR'
.....,1 t ... U .... "'.. ..: t;
LR J
LR'
LR 5 L
LR"
LR 65
i , ,
"'WO,uo'U"1 1'~.'
"'-~"
FRITZ l<OHL
Semp.e"lr.19
SAAABRUCKEN 3
HI.flU geh6rt 61111 2 _"Anllehlen_Rumplrekon.lrukllon·
364 APPENDIX VI: V-BOAT PLANS IN DETAIL

S9S '1I\i .L3"G NI SN\i'1d .L\iOH-[1 :i A XIQN3"dd\i
-:
.
<-s- 'lP- -~='" ~ ~;. _"'8_
- , Olltl ..II."'••••
w' ~
-. - ··."~.'u,,,
-0'.......
-,
~
~~~-
-", ' ~,~;
! ' 1
~I--;- --;- L
'\.ii h., t't~ ,'it Ii, 11'09 0'09 ~.,~ "K
;, -:.-
'f
~\~
----- :
.,,"". • >O"UqO f
0011
"
./' " " . o
o~ Z'LZ dS
"n. f'" ~
"01 ,"8\1
,.
\"~9 ""'Y"~"""'M
... ,.. '" --
C . O~ //
"'"- " -~;r
" ... O~OI -
I
~- "
-_ .-
d,
QJI.'_ _'_ o'Q9 ( ,,,
". ,n
II 1M
t, 'M
."
{'It
,b.
t'rt " u'Od •• ,OOU"l'un ...
"'--==1;;;;;='7 -'~"lI\"1l ~~"J'I
wo' 01-91M
,b .....".'u" ....."'
01
..'
6 ' ....
OOL 9.l
OOS(;I
(O~" OOCil-.
w -. 001>1 9 U0!lllilS 0099 /.. UO!lllilS Ul
'. .~
lIunl I i IluedS'
.'l'
0'" .
- 1 II'~' 0$ _
(11M
PI 1M
SI1M
,'. I
'" "
Type XXIII, inboard profile. deck plans and sections.
S,hn(JrU'lu
.."..
~--
#.IJ.,#/o", • •
----------1
T- - -- .
-::!tJ ., 5' ,. 6J
87)
°1
96~ 'OJ<< 't!f$ :.~ NU
.5t:lfltflnf ~",hon?
..... SeA/Ion 3 S~R:JOn.Ja
Lc=LD-----~-
... -- -- ... = --- ~ y---"T'
£ l1o,Jr/lm,,, oJ O"~","Dlor""">oJm Z."Jrof, BuglOfpldoroum
'(Aj'/U.~'#
----
r",lJoIlJup/t" 2&
20
'ooJ{t1.re.l,. I SlOlNUum ~
1-1-
!II
- ........
,9.
;".0'"
./ "--"JLJI~~Ic:::I:Jk :c ::11:: X :1; -::1
IT ,/
/'0iX1'I1.~4:
2$1lJ
i~ -~

j
I~~
/~-I~" .$(II~ Tim~.IOJJ~ £,,11
~~ ~~P;Of 1"0. -T'. ~"'h,"

'(~ i
Span! 1f254&on hht~n gesehen \ fl.' "'" '0,,"'
:.Jh'g-lJhd To'p.../"alJl1/- -- i.
.~ ·$U~~<;fr;r;W .. ~r;~ ...!!!•.t ,
........- '. I
r-\ / , I
'\1
;I ~-
- '~=I
/ ~ Sponl '.,J ,o~ .orn, ......n.
-00 ------=-I 80sd '~I
Spanl 11,65 /11M hlflleA geuh,n
_ _ _ - TorP-!t.deraum -
330",," lerKSptO
1I0nn",; _nit:
.seh~n
$''''':1//:/1#. ~'''9#'a",.n
Sponl ~3 ron"w/k.' $~.1~n

-E.h'~S('"hl/Jl6'·
~
I
Sponl29.0 lion VOtM ~S('~n
[Jlol
~
I
- ~"
/ i I
Span! +,.9 1"Z:!"'lll'Orne ~.s./)~n .
• S&h/€¥d'tn9{0r u I("(OI/ro,./,-
IJ. tS "017/(0/7/. Spanl 0,

I'()II 1'0/'/7« 9t:J.Mn
APPENDIX VI: V-BOAT PLANS IN DETAIL 367

'IIV'.L3:G NI SNV''Id .LV'Og-n :U, XIa 3:ddV' 898
'-
/
----- - - - - I ...IV>lW1. - - - - \
698 '11'v'.130 N1 SN'v''1d .1'v'Og-[i :11\ X10 3dd'v'
1 .. L;1::±t! ! • r t ! I t I I A t
~~i '1'<---
: : -----_ ~ J'
,
, >T+-
~
f--' II ~Ir r I I~J 1'1- ' r 1- "'"':" ", :'><'
/ ' -------- , : <
I
:,:.. :
, I
.~.
•
-~-----._-- = -l .x v I
I I I. 't r --- ---- - - - ---- --.. .. - .. ~ir
~. ::-..., -~ . "-::- ~ ~- .
- --
--- IA --- --- -- -- - - --
' WpnGJ I ': _---- _.- -..,-
~:I: -L 0: .....:..J. , - ::- ~I ilJ ' -
"~
"-, : : : . ~T-'
... _.~~ '-~ L. .,l L.J .... .J i.. .J t. - -- v
1 __
D~ - -J'L <", d L,,;. v
J -... ;- -
I I I : I I T "T T I i l" 1 i W ,/
- . - - - 0l H'IJrtq}JO/fJjOJ>I /~.--- · - - - l ...... - - - - -
---- .... .----,-----
""'NYO", "fltlM/A,"'e
.t
- ~
~ '! ~
-. 5 i ! .~ i ! :~ ~~ 1 ~ :.. i ~ 1 ...8 ~ ::: ~ 1 ~ ~ ----:r-l i 1- -1--1-t--
• -! • . •
t.9 .. 09 9i ~ .. .. 09 ,
.. .- K
" " " " "" " "
~-
WlZIO ~/u'lPunJ!)
Hlun S/~!)/ S~P ~l/9H
w~ u~P9q
-p U3 U P 6unqI9M~Ul/o
SJMiJ.9'f'(:JnJO S~P ~6Uln
u.oo1" ~IUD'f
-II D JI'i Jno ~1!iJ8 iJ(J9J!)
wrt'9r S~IID J~q(l i6urn
:ua6unssawqoldnDH
Type XXVI. inboard profile and deck plans
l'
~;JII",(HI
('sN'r_€M,
s-nc.t NI~f19!!,I~'!E..
( Sch/o~hbool )
OtUcl#04lllloJb4!/l - .5~II.IU",ailU
(.? 5111 Lv/moet) •
, , T T r T - T T T r I
no
1
\~.. J"
'0 .5e.thon f
~o 15 JOO 1(6 III
S~~hOl1.?
1H fill 176 liJO lOS ll$ i!fO 15.1
SeAl/on)
18 f .Jq$ .1Jl
Sdh"" 4<
Je' t>(i $f'
- ...Jl!!!'H/E ~fI..ro.JUf~~" Sp.'S'oI'O.lU·' ,f.,1It! ~c/lmulUI#I .!iom~/onll J!/1/~fII,~ l'/~ l.-0ffJClf,.la.$Jt!':...
~1t~()t!/~/an" J 1'fo/()f('!>O« i"",IolJlonll ~nltt:1 II Touc/1z,¥,l& u SJb N~/~#IIt: 2 &> u SJb !!'lI1m.ulle J;J r
Wd'~
V"f.slu/laJlt:1
B"NPllomm,f IUI/)fn,n/anr.sloM r,,,,"waJ.I'I· ~.1It:2 lJuglorpedo-Noum lJo/f.r't!·.5c/loIIJ('/?r(N~
!-er,uiLet ~ I'IrI/f..t"t!.UI/~t!n'''3IB£. OI<lGil...!.u//I~ Siouroum rOlpt!at,.,f{t.I.s9kH:nSL.(I'~"'" - ,Torp#do'~914Ic/JJul//~
_ ._..",-- 1a-~ 'ial,~I~/I'O'iF:i" ~<h~<n~, ~/~~~~I~~~1~,~~71~~~iili~i~~;~~-~t~~i~~~i~~T<~·~~h~"'~"J~I~~~_ifJ'_~_~,

~O O!. ','<"hO' .~!§ ~
f1'¥oJ/#'li!'~ '~a,~.s~'!101~
'.? _ ..
. .f-I'1a.JclMLj rf-_. ...J
liJrlJlne(19~Ir'M~- :!!LnIt~l.·LpIIY~N:/IdII!:L/ E-I(omp<us (/l.!'lor"'~L.J K(lIn~i~~au~A!n/lwoJ,S" .l.~ r-J]OI.fl<f:',schall,sch'.:.
TtKbmy' ~rl.JlrDII1-~/f!IIF1~ Rnlo.s~l!!!m_'*!!!!.J TQ/P.dD·~91.,£!!E....,A'.'9.!
rau<I>LO"U-J
}k,slolll!;K"!'<-·
-
".,_I·s..>""'''hS"
_ - ~', iji i:~ =i aq~
--~,f,
.-.'
'
;;;;: rJ~~
~ - ,- -
~
-'<a/kUt '~.~I
.!:!E'orl'ft-o.t.lOlTU!!'lfg~ m ~.!!...
\!!ltnhPu1kl...
J!!'9~
/'1oloun -Or'-S_""ellonlt :!£","ulrl"lll/ --O«.IomJrt.llan~ T Fun.. ·lfal!90....JJ WQSchwo.s.s.IL~ lBunll.r60 r",p- 1i,1 "'.slol,n
.5P~Y'WO.s.st!>' Z.I~
t"!11.1- 1 Sd/HUtF -=-=--~----+--- , S.AI'QlfS

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Abbreviation Full term Translation Abbreviation Full term Translation
A Marinekommandoamt mit aval Command Office OW Deutsche Werft AG.
seinen Unterabteilungen with sub-divisions A I. Hamburg
A I, A II usw. A II etc. DWK Deutsche Werke Kiel AG
AEG Allgemeine ElekLricitats· EAU Erprobungsausschuss fur Test Committee for Sub-
Gesellschaft Unterseeboote marines
AdK Admiral der Kleinkampf· Admiral of Midget Units EGR Erprobungsgruppe fur Test G roup for Su b-
verbande Un terseeboote marines
AFA Accumulatoren- Fabrik Elac ElecLroacustic Kommand-
Aktiengesellschaft. Berlin· itgesellschaft. Kiel
I-Iagen Eto Elektro-Torpedo Electric-torpedo
Agru Front i\usbildungsgruppe fur Training Group for Oper- EVG Europaische VerLeidi- European Defence Com-
Front- Un terseeboote ational U-Boats gungsgemeinschaft munity (EDC)
Asdic Early form of radar Fat Federapparat ITorpedol Spring-loaded (torpedol
(initials for Allied Sub- FdU Fuhrer der Unterseeboote Chief of Submarines
marine Detection Investi- Fla(k) Flugzeuga bwehr-( Kanone) Anti-aircraft Defence
gation Committee) (Gunsl
ASEA Allgemen Svenska Elektri- Flensb.SBG Flensburger Schiffbau-
zitets Aktiebolaget Gesellschaft
Au bzw.AII u Ubootreferat im Marine· U-boat section in the FI.W Flender Werke. Lubeck
kommandoamt Naval Command FKFS Forschungsinstitut fur Research Institute for
AZ Aufschlagzundung Impact fuze Kraftfahrwesen und Fahr- Motor Transport and
13 Allgemeines Marineamt General Naval Office with zeugmotorenbau an der Motor Vehicle Engine
mit den Unterabteilungen sub-divisions 13 St. 13 W. TH Stuttgart Construction at the TH
13 St. BW usw. etc. Stuttgart
13 I. 13 II I Abteilungen des Departments of the Ad- FT Fu nk(en)-Telegraphie Wireless Telegraphy
Admiralstabes (1916-18) miralty Staff (1916-18) FuMB Funkmess- Beobachtungs- Radar Observation Equip-
BV Abteilung fur Torpedo· Department for Torpedo gerat ment
wesen und Funkentele- Affairs and Wireless- FuMO Fu nk mess-OrLu ngsgera t Radar Detection Equip-
graphie (Ubootabteilung) Telegraphy (U·Boat ment
im Werftdepartement 13 des Branch) in Yard DeparL- g/shp/hp grams per shaft horse-
Reichs-Marine-Amtes ment . B' of the Imperial power per hour
Naval Office GB Chem Generalbevollmachtigter
BAK Ballon-Abwehr·Kanone Balloon defence gun (Flak) fur Chemie im Rustungs-
(Flak) ministerium
BBC Brown. Boveri & Cie GBT Gerauschboje T Acoustic Buoy T
BdU Befehlshaber der Unter- Commander-in-Chief of GEMA Gesellschaft fur elektro-
seeboote ubmarines Akustische und mechan-
BKC Bruckner. Kanis & Co ische Apparate
BMdVg Bundesminister der Ver' r-I inister of State for GFK Glasfaserstarkter Kunst- G lass-fibre strengthened
teidigung (Verteidigungs' Defence stoff plastic containers
ministcrium) GHG G ruppen- Horch-Gerat Group Listening Appar-
BN Abteilung Technisches Communication Depart- atus
Nachrichtenwesen von '13' ment of '13' GHH G utehoffnungshutte.
BR Baurat Construction Ad viser Oberhausen
BLV. Bremen Vulkan GU Generalunternehmer General Contractor
BS Seetransportabteilung im Sea-Transport Department GW Germaniawerft. Kiel
Allgemeinen Marineamt in the General Naval HAS Hauptausschuss Schiffbau Main Committee for Ship
Office Construction
BU Ubootabteilung im AIl- U-Boat Department in the hp/hr Horsepower per hour
gemeinen Marineamt 'S' General Naval Office HOW Howaldtswerke Deutsche
B&V Blohm & Voss Werft AG
BW Waffendepartement fur '13' Weapons Department of HSVA Hamburgische Schiffbau- Hamburg Shipbuilding
'I:!' Versuchsanstalt Gmbf Test Institute
BWB Bundesamt fur Wehrtech- Federal Office for Defence I BG Ingenieurburo Gluckauf Engineering Officer.
nik und Beschaffung Technics and Procurement Gluckauf
BWi Amt fur Rustung und '13' Department for Eco- IfS Ingenieurburo fur Schiff- Engineering Office for
Wehrwirtschaft nomics bau. Lubeck Ship Construction. Lubeck
C•.C.. Official German Navy Igewit Ingenieurburo fur Wirt- Engineering Office for
coefficient used to com- chaft und Technik GmbH Economics and Technics.
pare the form/propulsion GmbH {Companyl
efficiency of boats· IKL Ingenieurkontor Lubeck
Danz.W. Danziger Werft AG IvS (I nka vosl Ingenieurskaantor voor Engineering Office for
DB Daimler Benz AG Scheepsbou w Shipbuilding
DE (hochste) Dringlichkeit (highest) Priority Desig- K bzw.K-Amt Konstruktionsamt bzw. Construction Office. or
stufe nation Hauptamt Kriegsschiffbau Head Office for Warship
Dete·Gerat Deutsches Technisches German Technical (Radar) bzw. Amt fur Kriegsschiff- Construction. or Office for
(Funkmess-) Gerat Equipment bau Warship Construction
kg/shp/hr kilograms per shaft horse-
power per hour
• Where 0 represents the form displacement in cubic metres. v the speed in knots. K I U. K II U Ubootabteilungen im U-boat department (sub-
the towed power in horsepower and N. the shaft horsepower. K-Amt divisionsl in the K Office
.=0' .v and C. =0' .v. KdH Kommando der Hochsee- High Seas Fleet Command
N. flotte
APPENDIX VII: LIST OF ABBREV1ATIONS 371

Abbreviation Full term Translation Abbreviation Full term Translation
KHW Kieler Howaldtswerke AG S-Boot Schnellboot Motor torpedo-boat
KLA Kriegsschi ffba ulehra bteil- Warship Construction SE-Aktion Sonder-E inziehungsak tion Special Call-up Process
ung Training Departmem SEM Sch leich- E- Motor Minimum Speed Electric
KM Kriegsmarine avy Motor
KMW Kriegsmarinewerft S-Geriit Sonder-Geriit Ifur aktive Special equipment Ifor
KNM Koniglich Norwegische Royal Norwegian Navy Schallortung) active sound locationl
Marine SKL Seekriegsleitung Naval War Staff; Naval
kp kilopond (9.81 Newtons) Operations Command
KW Kurzwelle Short wave SMA Sonder-Mine A A special anchor-mine for
KW Kaiserliche Werft U-boats
KWD Kaiserliche Werft Danzig SP-Anlage S-Anlage passiv Echo ranging installation,
LFA Lu ftfahnforsch ungsan- Aviation Research I nsti- pa sive
stalt Herman Goring, tute I-Ierman Goring, SSW Siemens Schuckertwerke
Braunschweig Brunswick AG
Lut Lagen unabhangiger Tor- Independent torpedo STG Schiffbautechnische
pedo Gesellschaft
MAN .Iaschinenfabrik Augs- S& H Siemens & Halske
burg-Nurnberg AG TAG Torpedowarn- und-anzeige- Torpedo-warning and
mb millibar geriit indicating equipment
MB Mercedes- Benz TB Technisches Buro IdeI' Technical Office (of the
MBD Marinebaudirektor Naval Construction Direc- Uboot-Inspektionl U-Boat Inspectorate)
tor Tebeg Technische Beratungs- Technical Advisory and
M-Boot Minensuchboot Mines weeper und Beschaffungsgesell- Procurement Company
MBR Marinebaurat Naval Construction schaft mbH
Adviser TEK Torpedoerprobungs- Torpedo Testing Unit
MBZA Zentrales Beschaffungs- Central Procurement and kommando
und Ausnistungsamt del' Supply Office of the Navy 1'1 Torpedo-[ nspektion Torpedo Inspectorate
Marine TMA Torpedo-Ankertaumine Torpedo anchor-mine
MES Magnetischer Eigenschutz Magnetic self-protection TMB or TMC Torpedo-Grundminen Torpedo sea-bed mine
MG Maschinengewehr Machine-gun TMr Inspektion fUr das I nspectorate for Torpedoes
MG Maschinenbau Gabler Torpedo- und Minenwesen and Mines
GmbH TNS Torpedo und Nachrichten- Torpedo and Communica-
MOBR Marineoberbaurat Chief Naval Construction schule tions School at Flensburg-
Adviser Murwik
Moha Motorenwerke Hamburg TOURS Tourist Observation and
Ms- Mobilmachungs- Mobilization- Underwater Research Sub-
MVB Motorenversuchsboot Engine Testing Boat marines
MWa Marinewaffenamt Naval ordnance Office T-Stoff Triebstoff IH 20 21 fUr Fuel IH 20 2) for the
MWM Motoren-Werke Mannheilll Wal tel'- An triebe Walter-drive
MZ-Pi Magnetzu ncking- Pistole Magnetic proximity fuze TVA Torpedoversuchsanstalt Torpedo Test Establish-
NSW Nordseewerke ment
VA Nachrich ten mi ttel versuch- COlllmunications Test U Untersee Underwater
sanstalt Institute UAK Ubootabnahmekommando U-Boat Acceptance Com-
NVK Nachrichtenmittelver- Communications Test mission
suchskolllmando Command UAS Ubootabwehrschule Anti-Submarine School
ObdM Oberbefehlshaber del' Naval C-in-C UI Uboot-] nspektion U-Boat Inspectorate
Marine UIT Bezeichnung fUr ehemals Designation for U-boats
OHL Oberste HeeresIeitung Supreme Army Command italienische Uboote formerly] talian
OKL Oberkommando del' Luft- Air Force High Command UKW Ultra-Kurzwelle Ultra shortwave
waffe UNL Socieda Anonima espaniola
OKM Oberkommando del' Navy High Command Union de Levante
Kriegsmarine US-Boot Untersee-Schnellboot Underwater high-speed boat
OKW Oberkommando del' Wehr- Army High Command USSBS U_S. Strategic Bombing
macht Survey
OM Ottomotor Otto Engine UT Un terwasser-Telegra phie Underwater telegraphy
PTR Physikalisch Technische Imperial Physical-Tech- WAB Wasserauftriebsbombe Water buoyancy bomb
Reichsanstalt nical Institute Wabo Wasserbombe Depth charge
R-Boot Riiumboot Motor Minesweeper W/hr/kg Watts per hour per kilo-
RMA Reichs-Marine-Amt I mperial Naval Office gram
RNSW Rheinstahl Nordseewerke Wumag Waggon- und Maschinen-
GmbH bau AG, Gorlitz
S bzw.SS Sonderstufe IDringlichkeit) Special Stage lof urgency ZBP Zentrale Beschaffungs- Central Procurement
or priorityl planung, Halberstadt Planning
GLOSSARY OF GERMAN TECHNICAL TERMS

Abblaseventil Escape valve Akkumulatorlen) Batterylies) Or Anlasser Starter
Abgas Exhaust gas accumulatorlsl Anlassflaschen Starting air bottles
Abluft Exhaust air Anfahrgetriebeolpumpe Oil pump for starting Antennenmastwinde Winch for aerial masts
Abmessungen Dimensions gear Antennenschacht Sha ft for aerials
Abort W.C. Angriffssehrohr Attack periscope Antrieb Propulsion
Abscheider Separator Anker Anchor Antriebsgestange Propulsion rod
Achse Axis Ankerspill Anchor capstan Arzneischrank Medicine chest
Achter, achtern Abaft, after Anlage Installation Assistentlen) Assistantlsl, Clerks
372 APPENDIX VIII: GLOSSARY OF GERMAN TECHNICAL TERMS

Aufwasch Scullery Fenster in del' Netzab- Porthole(s! in the Kegelrad Bevel wheel
Aufzug Hoist. lift weiserstiitze stanchion supporting Keilriemantrieb Wedge-shaped driving-
Ausbau Extension the net jumping wires. belt
Ausblase Exhaust Flansch Flange Kettenkasten Chain cover
Ausblasekasten Exhaust cases Flasche(n) Bottlels!. air bottle(s!. Kettenrad Sprocket wheel
AusfUhrung Completion, realization cylinders Kiel Keel
Ausgleichstank Compensating tank Flosse Pin Kielsohle Keel bottom
Auspuff Exhaust Flurboden Floor Klampe Clamp
Auspufftiipfe Silencers Flurgrating Floor Grating Klappbar Collapsible. folding
Ausrustung Armament Flutklappe(n) Plooding doors. Klappen Flap
Aussen Exterior flooding hatches Knick Break
Ausstossrohr Exit tube, ejection Plutschlitzen Flooding slits Kojen Berths
tube Freiflutend !pree) floodable Kolben Piston
Austritt Exit Frischluft Fresh air Kombuse Galley
Azetylenflaschen Acetylene cylinder Frischwasser Fresh, Drinking water Kommandoelemente Controls
Back Forecastle Fundament Base. floor Kommandoturmfenster Conning tower port-
Backbord labbr. BB, Port Funk Radio holes
Bb) Punkentelegrafie Wireless telegraphy Kommandoturmluke Conning tower hatch
Behalter Containerls) IW/T) Kondensator Condenser
Bereich Region, range. near Fuss Poot Kontur Contour, outline
Bereitschaftsmunition Ready-use ammunition Gang Passageway. corridor Karpel' Body. casing
Betrieb Operation, plant Gasformig Kraftstoff Fuel
Gaseous
Bilgenwasser, Schmutz- Bilge water Gefechtskopf Warhead Kraftstoffhoch behalter Gravity fuel container
wasser Gefechtspistolen Contact pistol Kreiselkompass Gyro-compass
Blech Sheet metal Gefechtstorpedokopfe Torpedo warheads Kristall-Basisgenit Crystal base-hydro-
Blende Shutter Gerat(e! Equipment(s) (KDB! plane
Bodentank Floor tank Gesehen Looking K. Sehr Main periscope
Bohrmaschine Drilling machine Gestrichelt Linie Painted line K-Spant Constructional frame
Boje Buoy Getriebe Gearing Kuche Galley
Breite Breadth, width Gewehr Gun KuhleI' I'llI' Haupt Coolerls! for main
Bremse Brake Gewicht Weight E-Motoren electric motors
Brennkammer Combustion chamber GHG-Anlage Group listening appal'- Kuhlwasser Cooling water
Brucke Bridge Kupplung Coupling, clutch
atus installation
Brunnen Well Glocke Bell Lade Cargo
Bug Bow Grosste Breite Max. beam Ladeluke Cargo hatch
Bunker Bunker G rasster Durchmesser Max. cross-section Lagerraum Stor'e-room
Deck Deck Grundausrustung Basic fitting-out Lange Length
Deplacement Displacement Grundlinie Base line Lange uber alles ILu.a.) Overall length
Destillatbehalter Distilling chamber Gummischlauchboot Rubber dinghy Liingschnitt Longitudinal section
Dieselmotor 10M) Diesel engine Halle Hall. hangar Lascheln) Pish-plate
Draufsicht View from the top Handrad Handwheel Laterne Lantern
Drehbar Revolving Handrad fUr Betatig- Handwheel for moving Lederzeug Leather equipment
Dreistoffpumpe '3-fuels' pump ung del' Drehtflugel- wing screw Leit. Ing. Chief engineer
Druckbehalter Compression tank schraube Leitung Leading, direction,
Druckfest Pressure tight Handsteuer Hand steering guidance
Druckkarper Pressure hull Haupt Main Lenz Bilge
Drucklager Thrust bearing Hauptkompresso r Main compressor Leuchtboje Light buoy
Druckluft Compressed air Hauptwellenachse Main shaft axle Lichtbildu bertragung Photographic trans-
Druckwasser Pressurized water HD abbrev. for Hoch- mission, Photograph-
D-Spant Pressure-hull frame druck q.v. ically transmitted
Durchfluteter Raum Flooding compartment Hebehaken Lifting hooks Lippe Lip. edge
Durchfluten To flood Heck Stern Lot Sounding
Durchgang Corridor Heizer Stokerls) Lotapparat Depth-sounder, depth-
Echolotbehalter Echo-sounding com- Hilfs- Auxiliary- finder
partment Hilfsluftmast Auxiliary air mast Luft Air
EinfUhrmulde Entry trough Hinten. Hinter After lusually followed LuI'tel' Ventilators
Einrichtungsplan J nstallations layout by nouns i.e. adjec- Lufterneuerungsanlage Air renewal system
Einspritz J njection tival) Luftkuhler Air cooler
Einspritzflaschen Injection bottles HinteresTiefenruder A I' tel' hydroplane Luftpatronen Air cartridges
Einsteige Entry Hinterschiff After body Luftreiniger AiI' pu ri fier
Einsteigeluke Entry hatch Hochdruck IHD) High pressure Luftschacht Air shaft
E-Kompass Electric compass Hohe Elevation, height Luftungsanlage Ventilating system
Elektrizitatsmaschine Electricity supply Holzbelag Wooden sheathing Luftungsmaschinen Ventilation motors
generator Horch- Listening Luftverdichter Air compressor/con-
Elektroherd Electric source Ideeller Hypothetical denser
Elektro-Ma chine IEM) Electric engine Ingenieur Engineer Luftzielsehrohr High-altitude periscope
E-Motor Abbreviation for elec· Innen Interior Luke Hatch
tric (main! motor Kabelbahn Cable path Magnetkompass Magnetic compass
EntlUftung Exhaust Kalipatronen Potash fitter Mannschaft Crew
Entluftungsventil Exhaust valve Kalt Cold Markierungsboje Marker buoy
Entwasserung des Drainage for periscope Kanister Canister/container Maschinengewehr Machine-gun
Sehrohrbocks jack Kammer Chamber Maschinenraum Engine room
Ersatz Reserve Kanone Gun Maschinentelegraf Engine telegraph
Etwa Approximate Kartenspind Map locker Maschinistenstand Engine control plat-
Fahrbuhne Control platform Kartoffel Potato form
Fahrstand Control position Kasten Casing, box Maschinist Engine-room artificer
APPE DIX VIII: GLOSSARY OF GERMAN TECHNICAL TERMS 373

Mastwinde Mast winch Schalter Switch Transformator Transformer
Matrose(n) Sailor(sl. rating(s) Schanzkleid Bulwark cladding Transportschiene Transport rail
Meerestipfenmesser Depth gauge Schiff Ship Treibiilbunker Fuel-oil bunker
Messe Wardroom Schlauchboot Rubber dinghy Treibiilverbrauchs- Fuel-oil consumption
Mitte Middle Schleichmotor Creep motor bunker bunker
Montage Assembly Schleuse Sluice. lock Treibstoff-Bunker (Motorl fuel bunker
Motor Motor, engine Schlippvorrichtung fOr Device for jettisoning Trimm Trimming
Motor fur Ankerwinde Anchor engine Schlepptrosse towing hauser Trimmpumpe Trimming pump
Mundungsklappen Opening flaps Schmieriil Lubricating oil Trimmtank/Trimmzelle Trimming tank
Munitionsaufzug Ammunition hoist Schmieriiltank Lubricating oil tank Trinkwasser Drinking water
Mutterkompass Master compass Schmieriilverbrauchs- Lubricating oil con- Trinkwasserzelle Drinking water com-
ND, abbrev. for ieder- tank sumption tank partmenLitank
druck q.v. Schmutziil Waste (used) oil Trockenraum Drying room
eben Shunt Schmutz wasser, Bilgen- Bilge water Trog(e) Troughls)
ebenschaltafel Shunt switchboard, wasser T-Stoff Abbr. for hydrogen
switch panel Schneckenantrieb Worm-drive peroxide
Netzabweiser Net protector Schnitt ICrossl section Turbogeblase Turboblower
Niederdruck (NDI Low pressure Schnorchelfahrt Schnorkel traverse Turm Conning tower
Niedergangsluke Companion hatch Schott Bulkhead Turmluk Turret hatch
ische Recess Schrank Locker Ubernahmepumpe Loading (i.e. 'taking-in')
Not Emergency Schraube Propellor pump
Notsteuer Emergency steering Schraubenschutz Propellor protection Ubungskopf Practice (wal'l head
Ober Head Schraubenwelle Propellor shaft Umformer Transformer
Obere Ansicht View from above Schuss Round/section Unteroffizier Petty Officer, NCO
Oberkante A bove the head Schutz Protection Unterteil Lower part, base
OI,Oel Oil Seenot Distress at Sea Untertrieb Negative buoyancy
Oldicht Oil tight Seeriihr(e) Periscope(sl UZO (Uboot-Zieloptik) -boat target optical
Olmotor Oil engine Seerohrfahrstuhl Periscope control seat apparatus
Ortung Position-finding, detec- Seerohrwinde Periscope winch Ventil Valve
tion Seiltrommel fOr Funk- Cable drum for WIT Verdampfer Vaporizer
Patronen Cartridge entelegrafiemast mast Verdichter Compressor
Peiler-funk Radio beam, radar Seitenruder Side rudder Verdrangung Displacement
direction-finding Sicherheitsgewichte Safety weights Verflussiger Liquefier
Peilrahmen OW frame, aerial Signalpatronen Signal cartridges Vergaser Carburettor
Petroleum-Motor (pMI Paraffin engine Signal-Schleuse Signalling lock Verholspill Warping capstan
Petroleu mbu nker Paraffin bunker Sliphaken Slip hooks, hauling Verkleidung Covering. facing
Pistole IPil Pistol hooks Versenkbar Retractable
Platte Sheet (of metal) Spant (abbr. Sp.) Frame Verteiler Distributor
Platz Site, location Spantenriss Frame lines Vertikalruder Vertical rudder
Pressluft Compressed air SP-Gerat Echo-ranging equip- Vertikalrudermaschine Vertical rudder engine
Proviant Stores ment Imotor)
Pumpe Pump Speicher Storage battery Vierstoffregler .4-fuels' regulator
Querschnitt Cross-section Speisewasser Feed water Vorder Forward
Raum Compartment, e.g. Spinde Cupboard Vorderer Trimmtank Forward trimming tank
'Wohnraun1 living- Sprengmunition Explosive ammunition Vorderes Tiefenruder Forward hydroplane
compartment or Stabantenne Dipole Vorn Forward
-quarters Stand Station, position, as at Vorrat. Vorrate Supplies, stores
Rechenstelle Control point Stauungsplan Stowage (layout) Waagerechte Horizontal, level
Regelbunker Compensating fuel Steuer Helm, steering Waschwasser Washing water
tank (water Or fuel) Steuerbord, Abbrev. Starboard Wasserdicht (Wd.) Watertight
Regelzelle Compensating tank Stb. Wasserlinie (WL) Waterline
(water) Steuerstand Control platform Wechselstrom Alternating current
Regenzeug Oilskin Stopfbuchse Piston-rod collar Wellenbremse Shaft brake
Regier Regulator Stoss End, thrust Wellengetriebe Shaft, gearing
Reglertank(s) Regulating tank(s) Strom Current (elec.) Winde Winch
Reibungskupplung Friction clutch Stutzschott Windschutz Windscreen
Support bulkhead
Reinigung Cleansing, purifying Tank Tank Wohnraum Living quarters
Reserve Spare. reserve Tauchbunker Ballast tank (water or Wrasen Vapour
Rettungsbehalter Escape compartment fuel) Zeichnungen Drawing, sketch
Rettungsfloss Recovery float Tauchtank(s) Diving tank(s) Zelleln) Cell(s) (of batteries).
Revolverdrehbank Revolving lathe Tauchzelle Ballast tank (water) tanks
Rohr Tube, usually torpedo Taukluse Hawser hole Zentrale Control room
tube Telefonboje Telephone buoy Zersetzer Disintegrator
Ruder Rudder Tiefenmesser Zielsehrohr Target (attackl peri-
Depth gauge
Rudermaschine. Ruder- Steering motor, Tiefenruder Hydroplane(s) scope
motor steering engine Tiefgang Zu-und Abluftmast Inlet and exhaust air
Draught
Rumpf Hull Tief-Kuhlraum mast
Deep freeze
Runddipol Round dipole Tochterkompass Zugehiirige Accompanying
Repeater compass
Sammeltank Collecting tank Torpedoausstoss- Torpedo-firing car- Zuluft Air intake
Sanitar Hygenic patrone tridge Zusatz Extra, booster
Sauerstoff Oxygen TorpedoausstDssrohr Torpedo tube Zusatzkompresor Booster compressor
Sauerstofflaschen Oxygen bottles Torpedoeinfiihrluke Torpedo loading hatch Zwischen wand Bulkhead
Saule Column. post. pillar Torpedoluk Torpedo ha tch Zwischen welle Main drive shaft
Schacht Shaft Torpedomunitions- Torpedo stowage Zylinder Cylinder
Schalldampfer Silencer behalter
Schaltafel Switch panel Torpedorohr(el (TR) Torpedo tube(s)
374 APPENDIX VIII: GLOSSARY OF GERMAN TECHNICAL TERMS

Select Bibliography
Kurzak, K. H. 'D r Die elmotor mit Sauer toff- Docter, H. 'Geschichte des U-Bootbaues·. Die
UNPUBLISHED SOURCES betrieb·. 29 March 1947. K riegsmarine, 1935.
a. Bundesarchiv- Militararchiv, Freiburg (Federal- Oelfken, H. and Mitarbeiter. 'Ausarbeitungen uber FlUgge, G. 'Die Entwicklung. Bauart. Zweck und
Militarv Archives). Grundsatzund Einzelfragen des deutschen Verwendung der deutschen Unterseeboote·.
Docum~nts in the Reichs-Marine Office and Ubootbau im Zweiten Weltkrieg·. Kressbronn, Schi((bau, 27/28. 1920.
Admiralty (British PG Numbers quoted on 1946-1948. Kuster, J. Das V-Baal als Kriegs- und Handels-
account of incomplete naturel: PG 62026.65314. schiff Klasing, Berlin. 1917.
65877-8, 65981-4. 69292. 69294. 69499-503. Lohmann, W. 'Die Entwicklung de Untersee-
69509. 69511, 69514-5, 69523. 69713. 69714-6, bootes, sein Wesen und seine Verwendung·. Die
77496, 77903. 77907, 78284-5. PUBLISHED WORKS Wehrmachl, 1934/35.
Naval documents with the inventory designation General Rossler, E. 'Die Auslieferung der deutschen
of the Militargeschichtlichen Forschungsamtes Gabler. U. Vnterseebootsbau. Wehr & Wissen, U-Boote nach dem Ersten Weltkrieg und ihre
(MGFA, or Military History Research Office): Darmstadt. 1964. Hintergrunde·. Marine-Rundschau, 1/1979.
II M3. 13, 1411-2.22.23/1-2.27.3411.34/3-4. Groner, E. Die deulschen Kriegsschi((e 1815-1945. Scheer. R. Deulschlands Hochsee(lotte im Well'
34/6-7.62/1-2.90/5.110/2.11123.11217-16, 2 vols., Lehmanns. Munich, 1966/1968. krieg. Scher!. Berlin. 1920.
11219. 112/21-25. 112/27-28. 11230. 1131. Herzog. B. 60 Jahre deulsche Vboole 1906-1966. Schurer, F. 'Deutsche -Boote fur Kustenge-
1135-8.113/11-12.114/4-5.114 -9.11411-13. Lehmanns, Munich. 196 . wasser (B-Klasse)·. Schi((bau. 1 /1919.
11420-26.114/2 -29.116/1. II MIA) 4. III MIA). Jeschke. H. V-Boottaktik. Zur deutschen V-BOOI- Spindler, A. Del' Handelskrieg mil V-Booten. 5
42.111 M(A) 47. III 11513. taklik 1900-1945. Rombach. Freiburg. 1972. vol .. Mittler, Berlin. 1932-1941. and Frankfurt.
Ca e documents from the German Federal Navy: Rossler. E. Geschichte des deulschen Vbootbaus. 1966.
GE 8 9,1504.1510.1522-6.152 . Lehmanns. Munich, 1975. tegemann. B. Die Deutsche Marinepolilik
Documents from the collection of Grand Admiral - Die deulschen V-Boole und ihre Wer(ten. 2 vols., 1916-1918. Duncker & Humblot. Berlin. 1970.
Erich Raeder: 6.12-14.19. Bernard & Graefe, lunich, 1979/19 O. Teche!. I-1. Del' Bau von Vnterseeboolen auf del'
Document from the collection of Grand Admiral Sahlin, Ch .. Ubaten utveckling i typhanseende Germaniawer(t. Verein Deut cher lngenieure.
Karl Donitz: 19 and Bd War Diary. fore under och efter andra varld kriget·. Tidskri(t Berlin, 1922.
Unclassified technical data ldocuments, projects i Sjcivasendet, 511954. - 'Die Entwicklung des nterseebootes bis zum
and sketches) with the provi ional designation TS: Beginn des Weltkrieges·. VDI-Zeilung. 4711937.
TS 1-412. To 1900 - .Die Entwicklung des nterseebootes wahrend
b. Bibliothek (ur Zeitgeschichte (History Library). Bethge, H.-G. Del' Brandlaucher. Ein Tauchbool des Weltkrieges und bis zur Jetztzeit·. VDI-
Stuttgart. - von der1dee zur Wirklichkeil. Hinstorff. Zeitung, 5/1938.
Report from the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey Rostock, 1968. Vogel, H. 'Das moderne Unterseeboot'. VDI-
(USSBS): Report umber 92-100. 1BG and AFA- Busley, C. Die modemen Vnterseeboole. Schiff- Zeitschri(l. 7/9,1911.
Hagen. bautechnischen Gesellschaft Volume 1, 1900. Werner, F. 'Deutsche Unterseeminenleger fUr
Saville. A. W. 'The Development of the German Hauff. L. Die unlerseeische Schi((ahrt. er(unden Kustengewasser IC-Klas e)'. Schi((bau, J/1919.
U-Boat Arm 1919-1935' niversityof und ausge(uhrl von Wilhelm Bauer. C. C. -'Das Hochsee-Minenunterseeboot' . Schi((bau.
Washington, 1963. Buchner. Bamberg, 1859. 3/1919.
c. Archives o( N. V. Nederlandsche Vereenigde Hofmann, F. 'Die unterseei che Schiffahrt und W. German Imperial avy Li t for 1914.
ScheepsbouLl' Bureaux. Dell. Haag. Bauer's Kustenbrander·. Die Garlenlaube. Book
Unclassified documents from the former IvS. 35. 1864. 1918-1935
d. A rchi ves o( 1ngenieurkontor Lu beck If J( L): Lawrenz. I-1.-J. Die Entslehungsgeschichle del' Dulffer, J. Weimar. Hitler und die Marine. Droste.
Miscellaneous plans and data. V-Boote. Lehmanns. Munich. 1968. Dusseldorf. 1973.
e. Vnpublished reports Rohr. A. Wilhelm Bauer. Oldenbourg. unich/ Guth, R. Die Marine des Deulschen Reiches
Aschmoneit. C.' achweis der in der Typenreihe Verein Deutscher Ingenieure Dusseldorf. 1975. 191[}-1939. Bernard & Graefe. Frankfurt. 1972.
der deutschen Kriegsmarine nicht zum Fertigbau Rahn. W. Reichsmarine und Landesverteidigung
gelangten Uboot projekte·. Eckernforde. 1945. 1900-1918 191[}-1928. Bernard & Graefe, Munich, 1976.
-'Ober Kleinst-U-Boote und -Boot-ahnliche Berling, G. Die Entwicklung del' Vnterseeboole Rossler, E. 'Die deutsche U-Bootausbildung und
Kleinkampfmittel der deutschen Kriegsmarine·. und ihrer Hauplmaschinenanlagen. Schiffbautech· ihre Vorbereitung 1925-1945'. Marine-Rundschau.
Eckernforde. 1945. nischen Gesell chaft Yearbook, Volume 14. 1913. /1 971.
Beuter/Diestelmeier.. ' bersicht uber die Entwick- Groner, E. 'UD 1 ( K 50), ein Turbinen-U- - 'Das Projeckt Liliput.· Marine-Rundschau.
lung deutscher Ubootentwurfe·. 21 Sept 1946. Kreuzer'. Marine-Rundschau, 4/1956. 3/1972.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 375
1935-1945 - Die V-Boot-Er[olge del' Achsenmachte Entwurf und Konstruktion von Ubooten·. Schi[[
Aschoff, Y. 'Physikalische Probleme des Unter- 1939-1945. Lehmanns, Munich, 1968. und Ha[en, 911973.
wasserkrieges erliiutert am Beispiel eines zielsuch- - Del' V-Boothrieg und sein Zusammenbruch 1943 Arendt, K. 'Der U-Boots-Bau der Rheinstahl
enden Torpedos·. Wehrtechnische Monatshe[te, In: Entscheidungsschlachten des Zweiten Welt- ordseewerke GmbH, Emden'. Hansa, 7/1976.
6/1961. krieges. Bernard & Graefe, Frankfurt, 1960. Bachmann, H.-G. and Ritterhoff, J. 'Landerpro-
Brennecke, J. Jager - Gejagte ' Deutsche V-Boote - Geleitzugschlachten im Marz 1943. Motorbuch bung der Hauptantriebs- und Hilfsmaschinenan-
1939-45. Kohlers, Jugenheim, 1956. English- Verlag, Stuttgart, 1975. lage der Uboote Klasse 206'. Schi[[ und Ha[en,
language edition The Hunters and the Hunted. Rohwer, J. and Hummelchen. G. Chronik des 9/1973.
Burke, 1958. Seekrieges 1939-1945. Oldenburg, 1968. English- Breyer, S., Koop, G. and Mrva, F. Die Schi[[e und
- Haie im Paradies. Gerdes, Preetz, 1961. language edition Chronology o[ the War at Sea. Fahrzeuge del' deutschen Bundesmarine
Dinechin, G. de 'Technique de Sous-Marin Ian Allan, Shepperton, 1974; Arco, New York, 1956-1976. Bernard & Graefe, Munich, 1976.
pendant la Derniere Guerre·. Revue Maritime, 1975. Buttner, G. 'Stand und Entwicklungsmiiglich-
1949. Rossler, E. V-Boottyp XXi. Lehmanns, Munich, keiten der elektronischen Ausrustungen konven-
Donitz, K. Zehn Jahre und zwanzig Tage. 1967. tionell angetriebener Uboote'. Schi[[ Lind Ha[en,
Atheniium, Frankfurt, 1958. English-language - U-Boottyp XXlli. Lehmanns, Munich, 1967. 9/1973,
edition Ten Years and Tu'enty Days. Weidenfeld - 'Die U-Kreuzerentwurfe des Flottenbaupro- - 'Zwanzig Jahre U-Boot-Entwicklung in Lubeck.
& Nicolson, London, 1959; World Pub. Co., 1959. gramms 1938/39. Marine-Rundschau, 3/1970. Ruckblick und Ausblick·. Marine-Rundschau,
Fahrmbacher. W. and Matthiae, W. Lorient. - 'Entwicklung des U-Boottyps Y 11 C. Marine- 9/1979.
Entstehung und Verteidigung des Marine-Stiltz- Rundschau, 11-1211970. Gabler, U. 'Einhullen- oder Zweihullen-Bauweise
punktes 1940/1945. Prinz-Eugen-Yerlag, Weissen- - 'Erprobung des Walter-U-Bootes U 792'. im Untersee-bootbau?' Marine-Rundschau, 9/1979.
burg, 1956. Marine-Rundschau, 12/1971. Gierschner, N. Tauchboote. Transpress, Berlin,
Fock, H. Marinekleinkamp[mittel. Lehmanns, - 'Die Bauvorbereitungen fUr den Walter-U- 1980.
Munich, 1968. Boottyp XXVI 1944/45'. Marine-Rundschau. Jablonsky, W. 'Ubootbau in der Bundesrepublik
Giessler, E. Del' Marine-Nachrichten- und Ort- 9/1972. Deutschland'. Marine[orum, 5/1974.
ungsdienst. Lehmanns, Munich, 1971. - 'The type XX1I1'. Aviation & Marine Inter- Koldewijn, A. 'Weapon Systems for Submarines'.
Groner, E. Die Schi[[e del' deutschen Kriegs- na tional. Interconair. No.7 (January). 1974. International De[ence Revue, 4/1973.
marine und Lu[twa[[e 1939-45 und ihr Verbleib. - 'Y80. The first Walter submarine'. Aviation & Kayser, P. 'Erfahrungen mit schnellaufenden
Lehmanns, Munich, 1972. Marine InternationaL. September, 1974. Dieselmotoren in Unterwasserfahrzeugen·. Schi[[
Grutzemacher. K. W. 'Der Schnorchel und sein Rossler. E. 'The Legendary XXI·s·. Aviation & und Ha[en, 9/1973.
Einsatz·. Marine-Rundschau, 2/1956. Marine international, JunelJuly, 1976 Kruger, P. 'Einfluf3 des Ubootbaus auf Fahrzeuge
Heggstad, K. M. 'Noen tyske ubats-konstruks- - 'Entwicklung und Erprobung von deutschen und Geriite der Meerestechnik·. Schi[[ und Ha[en,
joner i krigen 1939-45'. Norsk Tidskri[t [or Unterwasser-Schleppkorpern fur den Yersorg- 9/1973.
Soevaesen, 1949. ungseinsatz im Zweiten Weltkrieg·. Marine- Kruska, E. 'Neuzeitliche U-Boots-Antriebe·.
Janssen, G. Das /l1inisterium Speer. Deutschlands Rundschau, 1/1977. Wehrtechnik, 12/1969.
Ril.stung im Krieg Ulistein, Berlin, 1968. - 'Das Walter-Yerfahren·. Marine-RundschaLl, Lawrenz, H.-J. 'Bleiakkumulatoren als Fahr-
Kruska, E. 'Das Walter-Yerfahren, ein Yerfahren 2/1981. batterie im U-Boot'. Marine-Rundschau, 9/1980.
zur Gewinnung von Antriebsenergie·. VD1- Sahlin, Ch. 'Utvecklingen av radar och ohse, L. 'Der Antrieb von Unterseebooten,
Zeitschri[t, 3, 9, 21 and 24. 1955. hogfrekvent radio och deras utnyttjande i kriget augenblicklicher Stand und Entwicklungsrnoglich-
Kruska, E. and Rossler, E. Walter-V-Boote. till sjoss 1939-1945, med siirskild hiinsyn tagen keiten'. Wehrtechnik, 9/1969.
Lehmanns, Munich, 1969. till ubatskriget'. Tidskri[t i Sjoviisendet, 4/1957. - 'The German 1000 ton Export U-Boat'. Inter-
Kurzak, K. H. 'German U-Boat Construction'. Salewski, M. Die deutsche Seekriegsleitung national De[ence Revue, 5/1972.
U.S. aval Institute Proceedings, 4/1955. 1935-1945. 2 vols. Bernard & Graefe, Frankfurt, - 'Entwurf und Konstruktion von Ubooten in der
Kurzak, K. H. and Rossler, E. Vnterseeboote und 1970 and 1975. Bundesrepublik Deutschland nach dem Zweiten
Torpedos mit Kreislau[antrieb. Kiel, 1969. Schade, H. A. 'German Wartime Technical Devel- Weltkrieg', Schi[[ und Ha[en, 9/1973.
Lenton, H. T. German Submarines. 2 vols., opments'. Transactions of the Society of Naval Nohse, L. and Rossler, E, Moderne Kilsten-
Macdonald, London, 1965. Architects and Marine Engineers (SN AM E). 1946. Vboote. Lehmanns, Munich, 1972.
Lohmann W. and Hildebrand. H. H. Die deutsche Spachmann, F. 'Yersuchskommando 456 des Klein- Ramsauer, U. 'Torpedoentwicklung in
Kriegsmarine 1939-1945. Gliederung-Einsatz- kampfverbandes derKriegsmarine und die Deutschland'. Internationale Wehrrevue (inter-
Stellenbesetzung. 3 vols" Podzun. Dorheim. zukunftsweisenden Entwicklungen "Schwertwal" national De[ence Revue). III 976.
1956-1964 und "Seeteufel" mit den dazugehorigen Spezial- Rossler, E. 'U-Bootantriebe heute und morgen'.
Michaux, Th. 'Rohstoffe aus Ostasien. Die waffen sowie dem Tiefsee-Tauchgeriit "Grundhai",' Marine-Rundschau, 4/1970.
Fahrten der Blockadebrecher·. Wehrwissenscha[t- Marine-Rundschau.3/1970. - 'Die neuen U-Boote der griechischen Marine'.
liche Rundschau, 11/1955. - 'Das Projekt "Man ta" des Yersuchs- Marine-Rundschau, 9/1974.
Neuerburg, O. K. W. 'Der Landtransport von kommandos 456'. Marine-Rundschau, 3/1972. Totzek, F. W. 'U-Boote gestern und heute - ein
U-Booten zum Schwarzen Meer. Marine- Speer, A. Erinnerungen. Ulistein, Frankfurt, 1969. Yergleich·. Marine, 9/1969.
Rundschau, 1955. Starks, J. F. 'German U-Boat Design and - 'Die besonderen Beanspruchungen unserer
Popp, F. 'Overland transport of German ships Production'. Paper No.5 from lnst. of Naval U-Bootsbesatzungen·. Truppenpraxis, 13/1970.
during World War It'. U.S. avallnstitute Pro- Architects, 1948. Ude, U. and Nohse, L. 'Die deutschen Kampf-
ceedings, 111955. Trenkle, F. Deutsche Ortungs- und Navigationsan- Uboote der Bundesmarine·. Internationale Wehr-
Price, A. Aircra[t versus Submarine. Kimber, lagen ILand und See 1935-1945). Ausschuf3 fUr revue (international De[ence Review). 3/1968.
London, 1973. Funkortung, Dusseldorf. 1964. Waas, H. Rilckschliige im Ubootbau und die daraus
Reuter, F. Funkmea. Die Entwicklung und del' Wagner, G. Lagevortrage des Oberbe[ehlshabers zu ziehenden Folgerungen. Schiffbautechnischen
Einsatz des RADAR-Ver[ahrens in Deutschland del' Kriegsmarine VOl' Hitler 1939-1945. Gesellschaft Yearbook, Yolume 61, 1967.
bis zum Ende des Zweiten Weltkrieges. Westdeut- Lehmanns, Munich, 1972. Werf, P. H. Die V-Boote del' deutschen Marine.
scher Yerlag. Opladen, 1971. Wehrtechnik Yearbook, 1973.
Rohwer, J. V-Boote. Eine Chronik in Bildern. 1954-1980
Stalling, Oldenburg. 1962. Abels, F. 'Einfluf3 schiffstechnischer Arbeiten auf
376 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Index
3:10: U17:J·UII:I2. 7~. 3n: Ulli,J-U20().
INDEX OF U-BOATS ~o. 3n: U201-U212. ~O. 3:10:
ProJE'ct 50 lor K4-!), armoured
U·tTuiser. 73. 75
16 I. 209. 216. 272: hours expended
on. 140: deliveries planne-d. July 1943.
151. 338: U-boat planmnl( and deliver-
ies. 1943.212.213
U21:J-L'221i. HI. 3:10: /0'229-10'2,6. ~I. ProJect.';1 ITvpe UGI. 8:; 213: specifications of. 335 Type X IVB. see Projects
First generation (to 1918): types 330: L'HI6-L'B17, 40. :1:12: UBI TIN;. Project :)10 (Type- GJ. 91 Type VIIC 43. 1.';4. 160.234 Type X V. see Projects
'1'),,,, VB Wroject :111. :IY. 40. 41. 4'. :;0.332: VIN8-L'B7J. 57, 332: /o'U;2- Project 170. 95 Type VIID, 12i. l.i4. 162. I"": uodor Type X V I. see Projects
-tHo ilO. :}-1. 6;'). r.-I UBI,;. 66. 332: VB. '·VBI02. 76. :In, ProJe<.'t 171. 95 Hestnctl~ Construction Pro~ramnw. T)'pe XVI I. 180. 1~2. I 7. 19~, 214.
'1'.' "e V Ill. ,iO. ;':1. Y:I. :1:J2 UUI/).'J-L'JII17. 76. 3n, UBIIH-L·H}:12. Projl"<.'t 179. 95 125: hours expended on. 140: de\ dop· 216.234.235.237.246
T.'pe VillI. ;'0·;':1. ;'6. ,i7. n. y",. Y7. 76.332: UUJ.1:I·/o'B1611. 7 .332: UH17/}- Project 15. 95 ment. of. 146: specifications of. 336 Type XVI lB. liS, I 7.210.216.2:14.
:122 VH205. ~O. :132: UB206-UB24Y. "I. 332: Project 17. 95 Type V II E. see Projects 23.';. 259. 26 I. 26:1. 280. 2~3: hours
Type VillI I. ;'4. ;;6.66.76. 7". ~O."I. UCI-['Cl5, 44. 3:12: UCl6-UC.·I:I. 5:1. ProJect' 1" t Panzerkreuzer. armoured Type V II P. 161. 162. 206: hours expended on. 140: U-boaL plallnin~
~,i. ~6. ~Y. YO. YI. Y:I. Y7. 121. :1:12
:1:12: UC.·I4-/o·C48. 53. 332: UC4Y-UC,Y. cruis4..'r). 73 expended on. 140: specifications of. and deliveries. 1943.212.213: con'
'I\pl' UC (I'roject a:w), 39. -14, 49. 00. .';3.332: UCIi{)-UCI III. 7H, 332: UCIIY- 336 st.ruction plan. OCLOber 1944. 2f)H:
54. 6;'), ~-l. 91 St'(' Type urI UCI.,2. ~O. :132: UCIS,J-UCl92. HI: Second generation (to 19451: types Type V III. see Projects specifications of. 339
'I\'pe UC I..iO. :1:12 UFI·VF20. ~O. 3:12: UF21-UF:J2. ~O. 'I\pe IA . .';6. 9~. 99. 100. 101. 102. 104. Type IX: mentioned . .';6. 10~. 109. 11:1. T!'pc X V II E. 210: specifications of.
T~ pe UCII, :)0-;-,;3, :,6. ;-'1. 76. 7h. aa~
:132. VF:J:I·U/-:·I?!. ~O. 332: UF:JII·/04·/. 100.109. II.';. II .119.127: com- 114. II.';. 121. 12.';. 126.127. 146. 1.';0, :1:19
T.\pe CllllProJel'l Iial. 76. j~. loiO. ~O. :1:12: /0'/-'4.5. bOo 332: U/-'46-L'F48, ~O. pared with Type- VII. 107. 10 : under 152. I.';.';. 206. 20 . 216. 26:1: den·lop· Type XVIIG. Ii:;. 1~5. 216: hours ex-
HI. ~6. H7. YO. YI. Y7. :1:J2 ~I. 3:12: U/-·4Y-UF.92. ~I. 332 Z·Plan. 116. 117, 119: specifications menL of. 103. 104. 105: under Z·Plan. pended on. 140: U-boat. planmnK and
Type UI). :lY. ;'0. :1:10 of. :1:1·1 116.117.119 deli\'eriE's. 1943. 212. 2 L3: specifica-
T.\pe LJE IProJt'cl ;JHI. 11·17. ;,0. !J-t, First generation: named Type 11.93, 101.11:;.119.126.1.';1. Type IXA. 119: specifications of. 3:36 tions of. 3:19
:1:10 BrulldlOlicher: 10. 12. 14.285: specifi· 26:1: under l-Plan. 116-11i Type IXB. 109. II I. II.';. IIi. 119. 121. Type XVII K. 1'3. 185: construction
T.,pe UI' i1'roject 4"al. 17. "0."1. ~1. cations. 12 Type I IA. 98. 99. 100. 102. 104. 119. 127: under Hestricted Construction plan. OctOber 194 11. 25~: specifica·
",-,. ~6. ~7. 9:1. 90. 97.101. 1.';1. :1:12 J)eulsch{alld Class. 67 127: 'onsidered for use in the Black Programme, 125: consLruction of. 1:32: tions of. 339
TYPl' UG lProject ;j II. ~t;. l:'l6. ~i. 91. /Jelilschiund. cargo U-boat. 67. 205 Sea. I ·12: specifications of. 334 specificaLions of. 336 T)'pe XVIII. Ii~. 1i9. I~O. 1~2. 187.
92. Y7 Ilowaldt. diving-boatlalso known as Type I I fl. 99. 100. 102. 103. 109. 119. Type IXC. 121. 122,12'1. 127. 12~. ",0. 19~. 208. 20Y. 2 I6. 2:15. 2:17. 23~. 240.
Type U I IHOO-lOll minelaying boaU. H6. the' LeI's diving-boal·1. 14-15 127. 19B. 213: considered for use in 104.150.157.161. 162. 1i·1. 200. 206. 242. 246. 2~2: hours expended on.
97 Le IJta!>le A/urin ISeeleu{ell. 12 the Black Sea. 142: specifications of. 209.210.226.278: under Z-Plan. 140: bridge convcrsion for. 194: dl"
K4·1 WIJIJ. 7.'; 334 117: under Hest.ricted Construction liveri£>s planned. 1943.213: speclfica·
First generation: numbered KU.\le"brander. HauE'r's projecL. 13 Tvpe lie. 109. 119.127.210: under Programme. 125. 126: construction tions of. 339
C I (C'onstruClion .\'umbt>f 119), 19. 21. !.eps dl\'JnK-boat 'Construction z· Plan. 116. 117: speCifications of. 3J4 seque-nce- of. 130: hours rxpendE'd on. Type X IX. 20.';. 336
22. n. 24. 26·27. :13. :I~.:l2 : L'2. 21·22. 'umber 3331. 14 Type liD. 119, 122. 127: uoder l-Plan. 141: de-tection de-viccs tried in. 144. Type X X. 205. 238. 239: -boat
2:1.26. 27. 2". :l:J. :I~. :12": 1.;:1. 22. 21. S('(·tell{('/lal.,o calloo IA! IJw!>h' IIfuri"l. 116-117: affected b, the Restncted 145: -boat planning and drli\'erit's. planninR and d£>!iv£>ri£>". 1943.212.
2;'.26. 27. :1:1.:1 . :12": L'4. 22. 2·1. 26. 12 Programme. 125: specifications of. 194:1.212.213: specifications of. 3:16 213: construction plan. OctOber 1944,
27. :J:l. :1". :J2~: [,'.-;.r. '/;.2:1.26.27. :J:I. 'U200', see /)f?lll ...d,la"d Class 334 Type IXC 40.126.127.216: hours ex· 2.) : specifications of. 339
:I". :J2~: U'·L'H. 2:1. 26. n. :1:1. :16. :I". UA. :19. 4~ T!'pe III. see Projects pended on, 1,10: specifications of. 336 Type X X B. see Projects
:l2~: UII. 2:1. 26. 27. :1:1. :16. :I~. :l2H: UIJI. 70. HI Type IV, sre Projects Type IXD. 100. 1;'1.200: under He- T)'pe XXI. 145. 160. 161. 162. 184.
U f(H' 12. 2:1. 20. 26. 27. :1:1. :I~. 32~: T.vpc V. see Project.s strictcd Construction Programme. 194.198.210.214.216.218.220,22'1.
UI.'i·CI.5. 24. 20. 26. 27. 33. 3~. 32~: First generation: projects 'I\pe V I. see Projects 125. 126: U-boat planning and deliver· 2:11. 232. 234. 2:15. 236. 2:17. 238. 239.
UW. 2·1. 26. 27. 2~. 3:1. 36. :I~ . .';7. :12~: Projecl 7 IU21. Ii. 2 I. 32~ T)'pe VII. 100-101. 102. 103. 104. 105. ies.212.213 246.247.250.254.263.276. 2ii. 27~.
U17·[·IH. 2~. 33. 3~. 32~: UIII. 2~. 29. ProjE'cts 1-6. 17 109. I I~. 119. 126. 127. 1.';2.1.';7.216. Type IXDI. 127. 150·101: specifica' 280. 2~2. 2~3. 2~~. 304. 306: develop-
33. 3~. ;;4. :J2": U20.['22. 2"- 29. 3:1. :I~. ProJE'ct ~. Ii 236.263: compared with Type 1/\. tions of. 33i ment of. 208. 209: plannoo deliveries
32". L'2.'I.[ '2";. 2 . 33. 3~. 32~: L'26. 2~. ProjeCl 12I/o':J-L'·/1. 328 107. 10~: under l-Plan. 116. Iii. 119. Type IXD2. 126. lZi. 1.';0-1.';1. 206. 09431. 212. 213. 2 I9: section construc·
33. 3~ . .';4. 32 ': U2'-1.'2H. 2~, 29. :1:1, :I~. Projecl 20 1L'17-Ul I. 328 change of armament in. I 8 2 IO. 26 : hours expended on. 140. tion of. 1 I 7: man-hours expended on.
32~: L'21H ':14,2".3:1,3".32": L':I.;. 2~, Projecl 2:; 1L'4:1-C,5(}1. .';4. 32". 3:10 Type V II A: specifications of. 33;; 219: specifications of. :33i 219: assembly sequcnce- for. 124·231:
:1:1.3'.7.';,32": /O·:I/;.{;4J. 2K 33. :I". Project a I. 35. 4 . :')0. 54 Type VII fl. 10~, 109. 114.115, 119. Type IXD 41. '216: new consLruCLion programme for. 240-245: effects of air
32": /0'4:1.33. .';4. :J2~: L'44-U4.5. 3:1. :12·': Projrct 31a. 3.). 54 121. 126. 127. 14i. I 5: underl-I'lan. plan, October I944. 25~: spffifica- raids on. 252. 253: construction under
U4/;. :I" . .';.1. :l2~: /O'·I7-['SO. 3~ .•1', . .';.1. Projecl :12. 39 116, 117: under Hest.rict.ed onstruc' tions of. 337 final pro!,rrammes. 254. 25:1. 25i. 258.
:l2~: U.51-US6. 3~. :J2~: U.?7-U.511. 3~. -17. Projecl :JoIIType UBII. 40. 3:12 tion Programme. 125: specificalions Type X. 115. 119: specificat.ions, 110 209.260.264. 262. 263. 264: survev of
:l2~: U(j{)-['62. 3~. :1:10: U6:I-U(;.,. 47. PrOjeCl 35a IType UCII. 40. 332 of. :1:1.'; Type XA: specifications of. 110.337 programmes and actual deliveries:
32~: U/;:I-U6.,. 47. 49. 67. :130: U66-U'O. Projecl :I~ IType UEI. 45. 330 '1')'1'0 VIIC. 115. 119. 121. 122. 124. Type Xil. 11,1. 119.122.127.146.147. 265: report on difficult.ies that delayed
39.50.330: U7I. 'I.';. 4~. 07 . .';9. 67. :130: Projecl 391Type UlIllI. 50. :132 126. In 128. 136. 139. 145. 146. 147. 161.162.167.200. 20,i. 206: specifica- operaLional usc. 264: trials with. 272.
U'72·C74. ·15, 57. 59. 67. 330: Ui;'j·L'HO. Projecl 4 I l'I\pe UC III. 50. .';6. 6.';. :1:12 1,;2.1.';4.155.157.159.161. 162. 167. lions. 110,337: under Z·Plan. 116. 273. 275: spE'cifications of. 340
47. 4~ . .';7 . .';9. 67. :1:10: L' 1-['86. ·19. .';0. Projecl 41a IT)'pe UCIIII. 76. 3:12 li4. Ii~. I .193.199.200.204.210. I 17. 119: under Hestricted Construc, Type XX I B. see Projects
330: UIi'-['1I2. ·19. .';0. ,',6. :1:10: L'II:I. 49, Projcct 41 (large :\ls boats). 54. 56. 6;). 216.226.2:1.';.236.237.275. 2ii. 27". tion Programme. 11.): hours expended Type X X IC. see Projects
.';0, .';6. 3:10: /0'114-['11.5. 49. .';0. 3:10: [·Y6. 66. n. i'. 3:10 2~4; under Z·Plan. 116.117: under on. 140: V-boat planning and deli\t'r· Type X X I U. see Projects
49. .';0. 66. 330: /0'11,-[,118. 49. ,iO. :1:10: Project 42a Oargr :\ls boats!. t-.I. 6. HestrJctoo Construction Programme. ies. 212. 213 Type X X ID2. see Projects
UIJ9.L'f()./ . .';0. 3:10: Uf().';-/o-I14. 66. :1:10: :1:10 12;;. 126: con t.ruct.ion srquence- of. Type XI. 112-11:1, 114. II,i. 119. IU. Type X X IE. see Projects
UII";-CII6. .';6. 0.330: UII'. .';9. 66. Project 43 1~ls boatsl. :;6. 59. 6.';. "0. 130: hours expended on. 140. 14 I. 146. l.iO. 1.';2: und,'r l-Plan. 116. Iii. Type XXIT. see Pr jects
76. ~~, I 10. 332: U I Iii . .';9, 66. 76, I 10. 330 119: options for tOrpedo armamenL on 119: con!:it.runion of. 132: specifica· Type X X I V. see Projects
332: UIIY-UI21. 7:1. 76. 110. 3:J2: ProjeCl 4·1 IT.'-pe U B 1111. .';6. 60. 66. 11944). 144: proposed transport boaL tions of. :J37 Type X X II. Iii. 209, 214, 235: p)omll'd
UI22-UI26. 59. 66. 76. 110.332: 332 conversion. 206: under 19 /13 U·boilt Type XIA. 112 deliveries. 1943.212. 2L3: specifica·
UI2'-UI.'iO. 56. 66. iI. 3:10: UI.~/-[,I:I·I. Project 45 (Iargc mincla!'ing boatsl. 59. planning. 212. 213: '1\lberich' cover' Type X I B. I 12 tions of. 340
56.66.7:1. :1:10: UI.~,5-UI.~8 . .';6. 66. 3:10: 6.';.66. 67. ~6. :132 ing suggested for. 263: specifications Type XII. 114. 119. 121. 146. 150. 152: Type XXIII. 146. 1~4. 185. 1~7. 200,
UI:NL'I4I. iI. 73. 332: U142. 73. ~~. Project·16.IU·cruisE'rs). ii, 7'2, i4. 75: of. 3:15 under Z-Plan. 116. 119: specificaLions 216.217.218.224.232, 234. 2:l~. 2:11;.
:132: L'14.1-[;144. 73. 3:12: 10'14.5-['14,. specifications. 73. 332 Typ VIIC 41. 1.';4.1.';5. 1.5i. 159. 160. of. 33~ 237. 238. 252. 253. 254, 2~Y. 27~. 2HO.
73. 7~. 3:J2: U14Ii-UISO. 7:1. 332: Project 46a (U-cruisersl. 71. 75. 7 . ~O. 216.259: hours expended on. 140: de- Type X III. see ProjE'cts 28 I. 283. 288. 302. 303. 30r,. :IOh: d.·,·",·
U/5J-L'/;;4,67, 0.332: U/::''; IformE'r!\ ~ I: spf'cifications. 7;t :132 liveriE's plannoo. July 1943.213: new Tvpe XIV. 127. 1;'4. 161. 162. 167.200. opment of. 209, 210; ('Cli n l,;un LrUt'
J)eul';(·hlandl. 67. 0.331: C/56-L'/;)"i: ProJE"ct 47larmouroo U-cruiserl. 73. 7·1. construnion plan. October 1944. 25b: 205. 23~. 239: under Hestricted Can' tion of. 2) 9-221, dolin-rot fI'II.II. 220.
67. O. :In: UI58·UI.,II. 76. 330: 75: specIfications. 7·1 specifications of. :3:35 struction Programme.>. 125: hea,'" programme for. 2.,.)·2·1 ~ t'nn LrUl,:llun
U I/j/}-I.J I (j,·I. 76. :130: U 1(j4-U 1;2. i". Project 4~a IType U 1'1. ~O. 3:12 Type VIIC 42.14.';,1.';4. 15i. 1:;9. 160. expended on. 140: speCifications of. under final pr0W'ammt· • :l~) I. ~ I~,
377
2;'7. 2;'~. 260. 261. 262. 263. 264. lests 336: V(j(j. 110.166. 167.336: 1..'6,. 110. 167.335: 1..':178. 166. 167.33,,: V,1'Y. 335: U'O'. 166. 335: V708. 335: V'OY. 283.340: V2,S14. 253. 340: V2515. 252.
and trials \\'Ilh. 27:'. 276. 277: spet:ifi· 146. 1;'7. 166. :336: UI;8. 110. 166. 167. 166. 335: 1..':180. 166. 33;': U: I. 166. 166.33;': V7Jli-U7J8. 335: U'IY. 204. 262.340: U2iil(j. 25:3. 264. 340:
cations of. 341 336: V6Y. 110.166.33;': U'II. 110.3:35: 167.335: V:182. 166. 167. :335: 1.:."*,-'1. 335: U'21}L7:10. 335: V7:IJ-V7.12. 167. V251'-L'2.;18. 340: V251Y. 253. 262.
Type X X I\', see Projects 1..',1. 110. 166.335: 1..',2. 110.2;'2.3:3:" 166. 167.335: V:184-L'.'18.5. :3:35: V:186. 335: U,:I:I-V742, 335: V74.1. 204. 335: 264.340: 1..'2.520. 219. 340:
'I\pe X X \'. see ProJel'ls V'.1-U'6. 115.335: 1..'''-("82. 117.3:15: 166. 196. 335: V:I8'-L':194. 3:35: U:I9.;. V'44-U'4S. 33;': V,4(j, 206, 335: V'4'. V2521·U2ii22, 340: V2,;2:1. 252. 340:
T)'pe XXVI. 14;'. 146.224.2;'4.272. 1..'8:1. 11;'.335: 1..'84. 115. 166. 167. :3:3'1. 2;'0. 33;': 1..':1961..'4111. 3:3.0;: 1..'402. 166. 206. 253. 33;': V'48-V'.50, 206. 335: V2's24-V2528. 340: V2,;29. 252. 264.
277. 27~. 2~0. 2~2. 2~3. :304: develop· V8S. 115.335: 1..'86. 115. 166. 167. 3:3r" 167.335. V41A1. 166.335: 1..'404. 161i. V'SI. 166.335: V'S2. 167.33;': V'.i:l. 273. 340: V25:10. 2;'2. 262. 340: V25:1J.
ment of. 235·23H: construction pro- 1..'8,. II;'. 166. 167.33;': 1..'118. 117. 33r" 167.335: V40S. 166. 167. :335: 1..'4116. 166.167.3:3.0;: V,'s4-V,ii,5, 166,335: 340: V2.5.'12, 252. 262. 3,10: V2S.1:J. 3'10:
W31lll11e for, 246: effecls of air raids V8Y. 117. 166. 167.335: VYII. 117.33'" 166. 167. 33r" V40'. 166. 33.0;: Um~. ViS6-V'ii'. 335: V'fiII. 166. 167. I~~. V2';-14. 252.341: V25:J.)-U2,5."I6. 340:
on construction of. 252: construction VYI. 117. 166. 167.335: VY2. 117. 166. :335: V40Y. 166.33;': V4/O. 167.3:35: 33;': V',;9-V'YO. 3:35: V,YI 1\'300i. 172. V2';-1'. 2;'2. 340: V2.5:18-L'2,5:IY. 340:
under final prog-ramnu-s. 2;')4. 2:':), 167.33,,: VY4. 166. 167. :3:35: UY:I-UY,i. U4 II. 166. 33;': V412. :33,,: V41:1. 166. 178. 24~, 33~: V'Y2. 17~. 210. 237. 2,,0. V2';40. 219. 27;'. 340: raised aod
2;'7. 2;'H. 2;'9. 260. 261. 26:3. 264 115. 33;': VY6. II;'. 166. 167. 252. :3:1;': 33;': V414. 166.335: V41.5. 166. 167. 338: trials with. 266. 267. 26~. 269: recommissioned. 306·307: se{' also
Type XXVII\. see ProjPcts VY'. II;'. 33;': VYX. II". 166. 335: 33;': U416-/.,'421. 335: V422. 166.335: firsl voyages. 272: Vi9-'J, 250. 269. 272. enln for it'llhelm Bauer: U2,j·l J. 252.
Typt· XX\'IB. s(>t' Projects V99-CIIXi. 115.33;': L'JOJ. 117.204. V42.H'42'. 33;': /,,·42Ji. 252. 335: L'4:!f1. 33~: U'Y4. 17~. 210. 23;. 266. 339: 340: L·2.542. 252. 253. 340: U2S4.1. :340:
Type XXVI EJ. see Projects 335: V 102. 117. 335: 206. 2;'2. 33;': V4-10. 206. 252. 335: lrials with. 266. 267. 26~. 272: Ui9.1. V2's44-C2.'i48. 252. 340: V2.>4Y. 253.
Type XX\'III'. 2:3;'. 2:16. 2;17. 2:1~. 2·12. UlIXI. II". 161. 166. 167. :3;16: VJO.I. 1..'4:11. 3J;,: 1..'4:12. 166. 33;': V·J:tH· 1:11. 272.339: V'Y6. I 2.339: V'Y'. 1~2. 340: V2/;.-;(). 252, 2;J3. 264. J40: C2/j51,
246: ,"chedule for. 2·17: specifications 336: VIO;. 115. 166. 167. :3:16: VIIXi. 33;': 1..'4:1.5. 167.33;': V4:1(j. 166.33,;: 1~7. 33~: V'III>. 1~7. 2~0. 339: 2;'2,340: 1..'2';52-/.,'2';';4. 340:
of. 341 II;'. 166. 167.336: VJO'. 11;'. 166.204. V4:17. 166.3:35: 1..'4:18. 166, 167.335: V80/·V811;. 336: V821-L'840. 335: U255';·L·2.'i/ii. 2.12. 340: U25.5H-U2i6"2.
Type XXVII. midl(et V-boats. 2~5. 2~7. 336: V /08. 161. 166. 336: V lOY. 115. V4:19. 33;': V,l4(i. 166. 33'" V44/. 19;1. V841·V842. 336: V84:J. 167.206.336: 340: V:J(X)J. 242. 262. 27;'. 340: V:JIXi2.
see also 'Ilecht' 166.336: VIII} VII I. 3:36: V1I2. 117: 3:35: V442. 166. :33;': V44:I-V444. 3;lr" V844·V84(j. :336: V84'. 166.337: 242.340: V.1IXA"I. 253. :340: V:J(X)4. 340:
Type XXVIIJ\. see Projecls VII:I-VJ/.i. 117.337: Villi. 117. 161. V44S. 162. 166.3:3,,: V446-V44'. :3;):" V848·V852, 337: V8.';'·3·U8/ilJ. 336: V:I()()5. 273. 275. :340: V:J(X)(j. 340:
Type XXVI lB. see Projects 167.337: VII,. 117. 166. 167,337: V44i1. 166. 167.335: V44Y. 167.3:3;': V8S9-V8(j(i. 337: V8(j1. 206. 337: V862. V:IOO'. 252. 262. 264. :340: V:J(X!8. 2;'2.
Type X X I' II B5 Seehuod. 2~7: al,o S(',' V118. 117. 166. 167.337: VIIY. 167. V45iJ.L'45:1. 335: V4.>4. 166. 167. :33,;: 198.3:37: V86-1·V864. 337: V86-5-V8(jY. 264, 273. 2~3. 340: U."!O()Y. 219. 252.
T)'pe 127 337: VI21}UI2/. 334: V122. 204. :336: V4S.;. 166.33;': V45(j. 166.335: V4,i'. 336: V8'1I. 252.3:36: V8'1. 337: V8'2. 340: V,10JO·V:I040. 340: U.11)4 I. 263.
Type XXVI I F. see Projects VI2:1. 166. 167.336: UI2·1. 167.336: 335: V4."i8. 166.33;': V45Y. 152. 161. 252. 337: V8,:I-V '(j. 337: V8"-L'H82. 340: V:I042. 252. 264. 340: /.,':104.1.252.
Type X X \' In-2. see Projecls V I2.;. 166. 3:36: 1..'126. 166. 336: V I2,. 162. 161i. 33 : V4(jO. 162. 166. 167. :l:lll: 336: VHiI:J. 337: V8Ii4. 252. 337: U ;. 340: V:IIJ4o/. 340: V:I04.5-L':104(j. 252.
Type X X \' I J K. set> Projects 336: 1..'128. 166.336: 1..'129. 166. 167. V4(j1. 162. 166. 33~: V41i2. 162. 166. 337: U (j. 2;'2. 337: VH8'-L'IIiI8. 337: 340: V,104'. 340: V-1048. 2;'2. 264. 340:
Type XX \' III. see Projects 336: 1..'1:111. 166. 167.3:16: UI:lI. :336: 33: V41;'·I. 162. 166. :3:I~: L'lIi4. 162. UH8Y. 336: U1I9O. 2;'2. 336: V8YI-VIIY4. L':104.9-U.·111'iO. 340: V.1IA;I. 264. 340:
Type XXIX, <;ee Projects 1..'1:12. 166. 33.0;: L' l:t·l. 33.0;: U 1:14-L' 1:I's. 167. :1:3~: 336: V89ii-L'900. 337: UYOI·VYIIi. 33;': V:IO;2. 2;'2. 264. 340: L':!IA;:I. 2;'2. 340:
Type XXIXA. see Projects 166.33;': 1..'1,16.335: VI:I7-("M2. 334: V46-;. 33;'. V4(j(j. 166. 167. 24~. 33;': UY26 ilater K\'aJ. 160: /.,'Y2Y-I.:Y42. 335: V:IO;4-V:IIA5Y. 340: V:II)(j(i, 2,,2. 264.
Typt' XX I X B. see Projects VI,S:I. 3:36: VI,S4. 166.336: VIS,;. 167. V4(j'. :33;'. V46H. 166.335: V4(j9-L'4':I. UY,SI. 167.33';': VY52, 33;': VYS.1. 167. 340: V:I()(jI. 252. :340: V.1()(j2-V,12Y's.
'I\pe XX IX B2. see Projects 336: V IS6. 166. 336: V IS,. 1;'4. 155. 335: V474. 248. 33;': Vo/,t"V479. 335: 193.204.33;': V9,S4. 167.335: 340: V:1501. 241. 262. :140: U:I';02. 25:3.
Type XX I XC. see Projects 336: 1..'1.';8. 336: V I,SY. 166. 336: 1..'1611. V480. 146.33;': U48/-V484. 3;35: I/.9SS-(/Y6Y. :13,,: V.9'O. 1'14.33,,: 340: V:I.5IA·I. 273. 340: V:3';O·I. 262. 3'10:
Type XX I X D, see Projl'Cls 166. 167.3:36: 1..'161. 166. 196.336: V48/i-V48(j. 2;'0. 33;': V48" 162. 167. Vg'I·VY'2. 33;': VY,:I, 193,335: V:1.50.;. 253, :340: V:I.)()(j-V:J';O;-. 273.
Type XX I X E. see Projt.'clS 1..'162. 336: V I 6:1· U 164. 166. 3:36: 33~: Vo/H8. 167.338: V48Y. 162. 167. UY'4·VY". 33;': VY'8. 204. 335: VY,Y. 27;'.3,10: V.1,5iJH. 252. 262. 340:
Type XX I X F. see PrOjt.'Cls VI6,S-('/(iI;. 336: VIIi,. 3:36: VI6H. 166. 33~: VO/YO. 162. 167. 204. 33~: V4YI. 204.33'" VY81}VYXI. 33;': VYX2. 253. V.1.;(f.~V:JS/I. 340: V,15 12. 2,,3. 340:
Type XXIXGK. see Projecls 167. :336: L'16Y. 336: 1..'1,11. 166. 167. 162. 338: V4Y2-V4Y:I. 162. 2;'0. 33H: 33;': VY8."I. 33;': V9H4. 204. 3:35: C:I.5I:J-L':t;25. :340: V.1526-L".1S42. 261.
Type X X I X II. see ProjeCls 3:36: V17J.L'1'2. 166. 167.336: V494-V,;IXi. 338: V50l, 336: VS02. 166. /,,'9IJ.;·VII'.J4. 33;': V99,S. 335: L'Y96. 250. 340: V:1.54.'1-U:l695. 340: L'4,SOI. 246.
:I>pes ;X:X,I~K~-K4. see ProJecls UI':I·L"/'4. 166.336: UI'.;. 167. 3:lli: 336: L'.'i0:1. 336: U504. 162. 166.336: 335: V99'. 33;': V99h. 204. 335: 247.252.261. 341: U4';02-L'4,S0'i. 247.
I ype XXX. 27, 1..'1,6.166.336: VI". 337: VI'h. 201i. V,S06. 166. 336: V506. 166. 167. 3:36: /.,'Y99-L'JOJO. 335: VIOl 1-/'1012.2;'0. 341: U4SiXi-L'4(jIX). 3·11: C4'OI-L"4'02.
Type XXXA. see PrOjeClS 337: VI'Y. 337: I.: 1M. 20-1. 206. 337: V,S07. 166. 336: V508. 166. 336: L'SOY. 33;': VJOI.H'JOI ,33;': L'IOI9-L"J022. 2;';'.341. U4'1A"3. 2;'5. 276. 341: 1..'4,04,
Type XXX n, see Projecls 1..'181-("1112.337: 1..'18:1. 166.167.3:36: 166. 167.336: V,SJO. 166. 167.206.3:36: 204.335. VIIY2:/-VJ024. 204. 335: 2.)5. 341; L'47(J.5. 255. 276. 341:
Type X X X I, see Proje<.·ls 1..'184. :3:36: VI8,S. 167.3:36: L'I (j. 166. V.;II-U.5/.1. 166.336: VS!4. 167.336: VJ02's-VW'iO, 335: VI051. 204. 249. L:4706·L'4i07. 255. 341. l/..J70X. 253.
Type XXXI I. see Projecls 336: 1..'18,. :336: V IH8. 206. :1:36: V.; 15. 166.336: V51(j. 166. 167.336: 33;': VI0,52. 335: VIOSI-L'/OS4. 204. 341: V4'0Y. 146.26:3.341:
Types XXXIII-XXXVI. seeProjecls VI89-VIYO. 336: VIYI. 204. :3:36: VIY2. V,SI" 336: V5IS. 166. 167.336: U.;IY. 335: V JO'i,5-L' 10.';8. 33,,: V4'Ili-V4'12. 255. 341: V4'1:1. 255.
Type V80: spccificalions of. 3;H~ 336: VIY.1. 166. 167.3:36: V/Y4. 336: 167.336: V520. 336: V.521·V52.;. 166. VIO.'i9-VII)(jO, 206. 24~, :336: VI{)(jI. 261.341: V4'14. 255. 264. 341:
Type 127. 1~7. 25~. 2~7. 343: also S('e VIYS. 167.204.206.337: VIY6-VIY8. 336: V52(j·V52'. 166. 336: V52i1-V52Y. 206. 2'1~. 249. 336: V 1{)(j2, 206. 24~. V4'J's-V4'48. 2;';'. 341: L'4,4Y-V48Y/.
Seehund 3:37: VI.9Y. 167.337: V2IXi. 337: 1..'2111. 336: V5.1(i. 167.204.336: V5.1'. 336: 249. 336: V 1{)(j.1-V106ii. 335: 341: V51H8-U5IYO. 29;': L'S.;OI·C'6442.
Type 2:l7, see Seehund. c1ost'd-cyclt.' 166.335: 1..'202. 166. 167.33;': V21X1. V';:12. 166.206.336: VS:J:J·V5:14. 336: VI {)(j9-L'1080. 159.335: VI08/-VII)92. 343: Flak V·boats. 193.
Tummler. St't' ProJecls 166.167. :3:35: V204-V2JO. :33;': 1..'21 I. V,S:!.;·V,;:3,. 167.336: VS:18-US42. 3:36: 339: VII)9.1-UII20. 335: VII:IJ. 2,,:1.
VA. 204 166.167. 193.335: /.,'212. 335: L'2/:I. V.)4:I. 167.204.336: V.;44·US4(j. 336: 33;': VI 1:l2·L·/ 1,;2.335: UII,S:J. 21:1. Second generation; projects
'\'00' 170. 172. 174.2 ;, 147.336: 1..'214. 167.3:36: L·21.;. 3:16: V's4'. 204. 336: V54/i-VS.)(). 3:36: V's;il. 340: VII,S4. 340: VII(jI·L'1I(j2. 206. G7l-i71Ui981. lr;7
T)pe \':100 II.."YII. 172. 174. 17 .179: L'216. 166. 167.336: L'21'. 166. 167. 335: U's,;2. 166. 335: V,55:3. 18 . 335: 335: 1..'116-1. 335: V 1I(j4. 2;' I. 335: lle5il(n ~1\'1l1'11. 102
spt"Clfic3lions of. 338 336: 1..'218. 166.336: V2IY. 167.206. V.;.)4·Viiii'. 335: Vii,'ib. 166. 167.33;': V 1I(j:;-/'" II (jl;. 33;': V 1I(j'. 253. 335: Pr476. 179
V301.17~ 337: 1..'220. 167.337. U221. 166. 167. V,S,S9-Vii6-1. 335: V564. 166. 167.33;': VI 16H-L'12IXi. 335: V/201. 2;'3. 33;': Pr477 (11'a2011. 179
T)'pe II·a201. 174. 17;', 177. 170. 179: 335: 1..'222.335: 1..'22:1. 166. :335: C22·1. V';6-;. 33,,: VS(j(j. 166. 167.335: VI202-L'/220. 335: V/221. 253.3:36: Type III. 100·101.104. 110: speclfica·
included in II AS planninJ.{. l\lay HJ.I:!. 166. 33;': V22S. 166. 3:35: 1..'226. 166. V567·V56H. 335: V56Y. 166. 167.335: VI222-UI22i;. 336: VI22'. 253. 336: tions of. 33·1
212: :-'IWt'ificalions of. :J3~ 335: 1..'22,. :33;': 1..'228. 166. 167. 335: V';70. 33,,: V,57J-U.572. 166. 167.335: VI228-VI2(j2. :336: VI2'I-U/2Y'. 3:35: Project. I V (supply and workshop boat).
Type 11'1<201. 174 V22Y. :3:3;': 1..'2.10. 166. :J:J5: 1..'2:11. :1:lr" V,5':I-V5'4. 3:1,,: V,57.S. 166.204.3:3": V 1:/01-1..' I:IJII. 335: V 1,1.1I-V l:JiiO. 33r" 104
'J\pe WK202. 175. 177: hours l'xp('ndt'd 1..'2:12.167.335: 1..'2:/:1,167.337: U2:14. V5'6. 166.335: V577-V.';8I. 3J;,: V,';82. VI401-V/41)4. 3:35: V/40.;. 3:19: VI4{)(j, Type I\'. 100·101: speci fica lions of. 3:34
on. 140: Included in II/\S planning. 167.206.249.337: V2:t;. 199.204.249. 166. 167. 335: V58-1. 335: V,';84. 166. 2~3. 339: VI40'. 283. 3:39: VI408·VI4OY. Type \' (Walter's hil{h·speed boaL). I iO
~la~' H:l4:3. 212: sp('cificallon!' of. 3:)9 335: 1..'2:16. 199.204.249. :3:3;': 1..'2:17. 167.335: V. 5-V,';89. 335: V,590-V';YI. 339: VI4JO. 1~7. 339: VI4/1·L'141(j. Type \'. 100·10 I: specificalions of. 334
204.247.3:35: L'UiI. 3:15: L'2:19. 251. 166. 167. 33;': V,S92. 335: V,5Y:I. 248. 3:39: VI417·('1422. 335: VI42:1. 159. Type \'1. 100·101: specifications of. :J:~i)
Second generation: numbered 33;': 1..'240. 335: 1..'24/. 20,1. 335: 335: V,5Y4. 166.335: V.;Y.;. 33;': 335: L'J424-L 14:14.335: UJ4:J.)-L"J4.'IY. Oe5il(I1 Vile 42A. 1.;9
I..'I-C:I. 10:3. :334: 1..'4. 10:3.323.334. L',;. U242-U24.1. 33;': V244. 249. 33;': V.;96-V.5Y'. 166.335: VSY'. 33;': /.,'.;91<. 1;'9. 33;': V 1441} V 146-1. 335: V I.)()I- Oe5il(l1 \'lle 42B. 159
103.323.334: 1..'6. 103.323.334: U'. U24.H'246. 33;': 1..'24,. 24~. 33;': 166. 167.335: V599. 167.335: V(j(XI. L'ISIXI. 336: VI,';'11-V/iYI2. 337: Ullj()J· Type \' II E: specificalions of. 336
103. 110.32:3.334: 1..'8. 103. 110.32;1. U248-U2.';';. :335: V2S6. 193. :3:3;': U2.;'. 166.335: V(j0/·U(j02. 335: I.:(jOH'(j()4. V 1(jIS. 339: L'I ,Ol-L'I 'IA1. T)'pe 1'111.119. :336
334: L'Y. 103. 110. 1'12.323.334: L'11i. 167.335: 1..'2.';8. 166. 167.335: 1..'2->9. 166. 167.335. V(j();i, 335: U(j{)(j-V(j(JH. 239. 339: V 1704-U1,1,5. :3:19: Projecls'X and ·XA·. 110
103.110.3:34: 1..'11.103.110.146.334: 335: 1..'260. 166. 167. :3:35: V261-V262. 166. 167.33;': V(jOY. 33;': V(jIl}V(jIl. VIIIOI·L'/828. 335: V2201·V220·;. 3:3~: T~'pt' X III. I i) I; specificalions of. 33~
1..'12-1..'1,.103.110.3:34: 1..'18. 103. 110. 33;': 1..'26-1,193.335: V264. 166. 167. 166.335: V(j12-V(jI.1. 335: V(j14-V(j16. VI901·VIYO-I. 335: V2()()f.L'2IXJ4. :33;': Type X I I' H. 239: specifications of. 3:3~
142.334: VIY. 103. 110. 1'12.334: 1..'211. 200. 204. 3:3r" V261i. 166. 335: V2(j'. 166. 167.335: V(jJ7. 335: V(j18. 166. V210/·V2IM. 335: V21 I I-V211:1. 34:3: Type X V, 154. 162: specifications of,
103. 110. 142.334: 1..'21·1..'22. 103. 110. 166. 335: V2(jil. 335: V26Y. 204. 3:15: 167.335: V(jIY. 335: V(j20, 166.335: V225/·V2:3IXi. :34:3: V2:J()J·V2:1J1I. :3:35: 33~
334: 1..'2-"1.103.142.143.334: 1..'24.103. V270. 167. 335: V271. 193. 335: V(j21. 166. 193.335: V(j22. 33;': V(j2:1. V2:32/. 246. 262. 276. 277. 341: V2:122. Type X V I. 154. 162. 338
110.142.334: V2,S. 103. 10;'. 110.3;14: U2'2-V2'4. 33;': V2'S. 204. :33.0;: 166.335: V(j24. 167.33;': V(j2ii-V62'. 262. 341: V2,12:1. 252. 341: V2:J24. 262. Project XVIIA. 235. 2;17
1..'26. 103. 105. 110.204.334: compared 1..'2,6-1..'286. 33;': 1..'28,. 2'19. 335: V2H8. 33;': V(j2Ji. 166. 167.335: V(j2Y. 335: 275.341: V2:J2,S. 262. 341. V2:126.262. Type XXIl, 23h, 339
with 1..'.1:1. 107: 1..'2,. 103. 110.33;': 1..'28. 250. :13;': V289-L'2YI. 3:3;': V2Y2-V29-1. U6-10. 167.33;': V6-11. 166.335: U6-·12. 276. 341: U2:12'. 262. :341: V2.12Ji. 262. T)'pe X X 112. 2:1~
103. 110.3:35: 1..'29. 103. 110.204.33;'. 335: 1..'295.249.333: 1..'296 L':102. 33;': 166.33;': V(j:1.1. 33;': V(j.14. 167.335: 341: U2:129. 262. 341: V2:1.10. 276. 277. Type XX I B. 234. 23;'. 3,10
1..':1(}. L':II. 103. 110. 335: U:32. 103. I 10. 1..':10"1. 166.335: 1..':104.335: V.10;. 166. U(j:16- V6-"I7. 335: V6-18. 167. 33;': 341: L'2:t·lJ. 262. 277. 341. Type XX Ie. 234. 23;'. 2;19. specifica-
204.3;3;': L':I:I. 103. 10;'. 110.33;': 335: u,1{)(j. 166. 167. 335: 1.::10'-V:12h. U(j:I9-V(j40. 335: V(j41. 166. 167.3:1;': V2:t·12-C2:1:14. 341: V2.1:J.)-U2:~"I6. 262. lions of. 3-10
compared wllh 1..'26. 107: U:14·:l6. 103. 335: 1..'.129, 252, 33;': V:I-1I1. 335: 1..':1:11. V(j42. 166, 167.204.3:3,,: UM:J-L'(j44. 341: V2.1:/'·/.,'2:1:19. 341: V2:J40. 2;'3. Project XXII). see Type XXI 0
110.335: 1..':17. 102. 103. 104. 10;'. 110. 33;': V:t12. 166. 33;': 1..':1:/.'1. 166. 33;': 33;': VM,S. 166.33;': V(j46-V(j4'. 335: 262, 3'11: V2:14 I. 341: V2:142. 262. 341. Type X X 11)2. 239
119. ;336: 1..',18. 102. 103. 104. 105. 110. V:1:14-V-1-1S. 33;': 1..':1:16. 166. 167.3:1;': VM8. 166. 33;': V(j49. 33;': V(j50. 166. V2:14.H '2,160. 341: V2:16-;. 276. 277: T)'pe X X II). 2;19: specificalions of. :140
119.1·15.336: 1..':19·1..'42.102.103.10'1. 1..':1:1,. :33;': U:I:I8. 166.33;': V:I:I9-U.144. 167.335: V(j,SI·V(j52. 33,,: V65:J. 166. raised and recommissioned, 305·306: Type X X II':. 239: specificalloos of. 340
IOfl. 110. 119.336: 1..'4:1.102.103.104. :3:35: V:/4S. 250. 335: V:14Ii·V:14'. :33,,: 167.335: V654. 166.3:35: V(jii.5·V(j,5'. see also enl!'\' for 1Iai: U2:J67. 276: Project XXn:2. 239
lOr•. 110. 119. 166. 167.204. :1;16: 1'44. 1..'.148.253.335: V:14Y. 33r" V:lSII.3;15: 335: V6-';8. 166. 33;': V6-;9, 167. 33;': raised and recommissioned. 305-306: Type XX IT, 2:J9: specificaLions of. 340
102.103.104.10;'.110.119.336: 1..':1.51. :335: V:I,S2. 166. :l:l;,: U.1.;:1- V(j(j(). 33,,: V(j(jl. 166.33;': V(j(j2. 166. seea!soentrv forllecht: U2501. 219. Type XXI \'.239: specificalions of. 340
V4.H·46. 102. 103. 109. 110.33;': U4'. V:1.5;i. 3:35: V:I.5(j. 166. 167.33;': 167.335: V(j6-·I. 166.33;': V(j64. 166. 241. 262. 340: V2S02. 219. 262. 264. 'I';-pe XXII'. 2:34. 23.0;. 2~2: specifica-
102.103.109.110.14;'.:3:3:" 1..'4.102. V:I's'. 335: U:I: .166. 167.33;': U:I.;Y. 33;': V(j6-5. 335: V(j(j(j. 166. 167. 335: 340: U2SIXI. 219. 252. 262. 340: V2,S04. lions of.:H I
10:3. 109. 110.335: V4Y. 10:3. 109. 110. 167.3:35: 1.:.160.335: 1.::16/. 24K :3:35: /"'6(j'. 204. 335: V(j6H-V(j'2. J3;,: V(j':I. 219. 262. 340. V250.5. 219. 252. 340: T~'pe XX\'. 2:J4: spet.:ifl(·allons of. J·n
335: V.;OU,SI. 109. 110.3:3:" V,S2-[".';';. U:162. 193.335: V:I6-1. 335: U:I64. 240. 19:3.33;': V(j,4-V(j7(j, 33;': V6". 253. V2S06. 219. 262. 264. 273. 340: /.,'2.'iO'. 'I\pe X X \' IA. 235, 2J(1; "'pt'cificalions
110. 119.335: 1..'.;6. 110. 119,334. 335: V:I6-;. 335: V.1(j(j. 240. 335: 1..':16,. 335: V(j'S-U68I. 33;': U682. 253. 335: 219. 340: V2S08. 219. 262. 340: C2'sOY. of. 341
1..',>7-1..': '. 110. 119. 199.334: V59-L'I;'·I. 33;': 1..':31;8. 24~. 33;': L':169-L ':172. 33;'. V6IJ.1-V6H(j. 33;': V68'·V'O·I. 335: V'li4. 219. 2;'3. 340: V2,SJO, 219. 340: V2.51 /. Type X X I' I H. 2:35. 2:36. 2:37. 23~: sp,'<:i·
110. 119.3:34: 1..'64-1..'(;,). 109. 110. 119. 1..':3,.1. 166.335: L':1'4·(":176. 33;': V:I". 166.33;': V706. 33;': V'{)(j. 166. 167. 262.264.273.340: V2.;/2. 340: V2,51:1. fications of. :341
378 INDEX
Type XXVI 10,238
Type XX V I E I. 238, 277: see Type
Irenamed Kabbenl. 308. 309. 3 I3. 3 I7:
U4·U6. 309. 3 I3. 317: U7. 309. 31 I.
Ech21 see EI
E:cuador. 317. 322
GENERAL INDEX . Bali' (FuM B29), radar observation
equipment. 196
XXIXE: 313.317: UB. 309. 313. 317: U!i· U 10. Estonia. 93 Barbarigo. Il.,alian submarine. 206
Design XX V I E2, 238 31 I. 313: U/I·UI2. 31 1.312.313: Fij 304 (Bin'ndei Inorwl. 90. 9] A .Barbarossa·. Operation, 126. 127
Desib'll XXVI IA IHechtl, 285 UI3·UI4. 313. 317: UI5-U22. 313: U23. Fij 305 (ikindci Inanul. 90 A bd·UI-Hamid. early Swedish sub· Barber. US escort. 167
Type XXVI 113,287.343 313.317: U24. 313: U25·U30. 313 Finland. 9 I. 93. 95 marine. 14 Bartel. Oberleutnant. 91
Type XXV II F. 299. 300. 301. 343 Friedrich ScJwrer, 312. 313 Abelson. Dr.. 283 Banels. Korvettenkapitan, 290
Project XXVIIF2. 300 Third generation: named Type GIEII. 94 Accumulatoren-Fabrik Aktiengesell- Bartenbach. Kapitan Karl. 80. 88. 91.
'I';'pe XX V II K, 294. 343 Arltonino Mag/ill/o. deep-sea diving- Glal·kas. 317.322 schaft IAFA!. 22. 250. 25,1. 260. 263 93.97. 100. 103. 108
T~'pe XXVIII. 234: specifications of. Greece. 36. 3 I 7.322 Ackerman. Professor. 143 Bases. foreign: Antwerp. 40: Bergen.
boat. 326
34 I Huoncol'ilca.317 'Ackerman \"'ake·Homer·, special 231: Bordeaux. 231: Brest. 231:
flai lex-U23651. 276. 277. 305. 306. 307.
T)'pe XXIX. 277·278 3 I2 11-13. German-designed hoats for guidance system. 143 Constanza. 142: Den Helder. 290:
T~'pe XX IXA, 277: specifications of. Japan. 88 'Adam' ('Bunte boat'!. 290 F'ecamp. 290: Hoboken. 40: Ijmuiden.
lions Techel. 3 I 2. 3 I3
34 I 121-124. German·designed boals for Agatz and Bock. 231 288: Kristiansand. 264: La Pallice.
flecht lex·U2367). 276. 305. 306. 307.
Type XXIXB. 277. 280: specifications 312 Japan. 88 A I. see Marschall 231: Linz. 1l 12: Lorient. 231:
of. 34 I Stint, deep-sea diving-boat. 326 Ikindci Inonu lFij 305). 90 Aigrette. early French submarine: Marseilles. 231: Pola. 40. 44:
Type XXIXB2. 277. 280: specifications I Iiu-Tursa ICV7041. 91 mentioned, 16: specifications of. 15 St, Nazaire. 231: St.avanger, 264:
Wilhelm Bauer lex-U25401. 275. 307.
of. 34 I Indonesia. 317.322 'Alberich' skin. 145. 146. 157. 261: Toulon. 252: Trondheim. 231
308. 309. 3 I 2. 324
'I\pe XX IXC. 277: specifications of. Iran. 322 boats to be covered with. 262. 263 Batirav. 161: also see VA
341 Third generation: projects Islav.317 Albert. Prince Consort. 12 Batte~ies. U-boal.,: comparison between
Type XXIXD. 277. 27H: ~pel:ifil:alion~ Israel. 322 Allgemeine Elektricitats-Gesellschaft those in V i-V 16'. 27: dt:!livery problems
Design 11<6. 302 IAEGI.89. 116. 143. 159. 185.220.
of. 34 I Design I K 10. 304 Italy. 28. 35. 88. 89 with. 263
Type XX IXE: specifications of. 341 Japan. 88 245.250.26.5 Battleships: under lhe Z·Plan. 116. 117
Design I K I OW IClass 2051. 309 Allgemen Svenska Elektrizitet.s Aktie-
T~'pe XXIXF'. 277. 27~: specifications Kambala. 17. 18. 19.25 Bauer. Lieutenant.·Colonel. 76. 85
Design I K I OW m (improved Class 205), bolaget lASE AI. 323
of. 341 311 Karas. 17. 18. 19.25 Bauer. Professor. 256
Type XXIXG. 277. 278 Karp. 17, 18. 19.25 Allied Commission. 88 Bauer. \oVilhelm. German submarine
Project I K I 2. 307 Amag·Hilpert. pump manufact.urer,
Type XXIXGK. 341 Karp class (Consl.,ruct.ion numbers 109, engineer. 14,285: career, 10-14: de·
Design I K 14. 322 157
Type XXIXII. 277. 278: specifications I 10 and I I II. 17 sign for Brandtallcher. 10. 12: builds
Design IK29. 318 Ambi-Budd, Berlin. coach-building
of. 342 Design IK34. 312 Kaura. 317 further version. 12: builds Seetellfe/,
T~'pes XXIXKI-K4. 2HO; specifications Kinn. 317. 318 factorv. 297. 299 12: uses 'camels' to great effecl., in
Desib'll I K36. 322 American Electric Boal Company.
of. 342 Design I K62. 322 Kobben IA 1), German-buill boal., for Trieste. 13: works on Kusfenbrander.
Project XXIXKS. 280 Norwegian Navy. 23. 35 American shipbuilding firm. 89 13: proposes t.o use internal·com-
Design I K68. 322 'Amsel', codename for guidance
Type XXXA. 277. 27H: specifications Kabben Iformerly V:II. 308. 3 I3. 3 I 7 bustion engine. 13: invents an under-
Design I K78. 322 system. 143
of. 342 Design I K8 I. 322 Kabben class. 322 water gun. 14
T!'pe XXX H. 277. 27H: specifications of. KUlinG. 317 Aml.sgruppe Ubootwesen SK L-U Baumgart.en, Karl, German engineer.
I K L Projecl 540. 322 (U·Boat Deparl.,menL). 155
3'12 Design Project 20 J. 304 Kva.317 142
Type XXX I: development of. 277·278: LflIiput projecl. see CV70i Ansaldo. Genoa. shipbuilding firm. 220 8eckedorf, German salvage firm. 305
Projects 20611. 3 I3 Anschutz-Kaempfe. Gennan compass
specifications of. 34'2 NanKgolo.317 Bc<::ker. Professor G .. 144
Type XXXII. 292.343 Nereus. 317. 321 manufacturers. 23 Bccker. constru<::tion official. 256
Type XX X III: development of. 280· Midget U-boats Norway. 35. 36. 38. 39. 308. 309. 317. 'Anton'. floating crane. 226 Behr. Oberleutnant. 95
2H L specifications of. 342 Hiber. Midgel U·boat, 290. 291. 292. 318 Antwerp. submarine assembly point. Behrmann, Georg. 89
Design XXXIIJIl. 281 297.343 Okeano,';.317 40 Benz. German engineer. 13
T,"'pe XXXIV: development of. 2HI- Biber II. Midget U·boat t)·pe. 296. 343 Peru. 3 I 7.322 'Aphrodite'. codenClme for decoy. 196 Berlin II (FuM084). detection equipment.
2HZ: specifications of. 342 Hiber II I. M idgel U·boal type. 296. Ptjao.317 Aquila boats. 206 198
Type XXXV. 2HZ: specifications of. 342 297.343 PisaKliCI, 317 Arabic. American liner. 50 Berling. Gustav, German naval
Type XXXVI. 2Wl: specifications of. Delphin I. Midget U·boat t)'pe. 2~3. Pontos.317 Argentine i\'a\"y. 88 engineer. 17. 19. 21. 12. 23. 28. 32
342 297.298.299.343 Poseidon. 317 ArKollout. early American submarine. I3cthge. Ilans-Georg. engineer. I ~
Type 227. 295. 343: also see Seehund. Delphin II. see Projects Proteus. 317. 322 1'1 Bethmann Iiollweg. Theobald von.
closed-cycle, under t\lidget U·boats lIai. ~Iidget U-boallype. 291. 343 Pu4.89 Armament. improved AA, 188-195 German Chancellor, 75
Delphin J I. midget U-boat project. Hechl. Midgel U·boat lype. 285. 287. Pu7.89 Arp, Caplain, German submariner. 15 Beuchelt & Co.. Grunberg. 218, 247
299. 343 288.290.291.292.297.3·13 Pu22.93 Arthusberg. 13 B l. see German Navv
i\lanla. high-spel'd midget submarinl'. i\lanta. see Projects Pu23.93 Aschmoneit. Construction Director. 97. Bindseil. Kapitan Er·nst. 93
301 ~Iarder. ~Iidget U·boat type. 291. :143 l'u26.93 103. 114.157.198.273.277.280,308 13in'ndci i"orlll. 90. 91
Seetellfel. midget U-boat. 292.294, 3-1:J ~Iolch Ifonnerly Thomas I Ii. ~Iidget Pu46.90 Asdic IAllicd Submarine ))el.,ection 'Biscay Cross'. radar-detector aerial.
Tummler, schnorkel project: 178: spl'ci- U·boat lype. 291. 292. 297. 343 Pu53.89 Investigation Committee). 116. 145. 196
fications of. 3-12 Neger. Midget U·boat type. 291. 292. Pu78/79.93 146. 157 Bismarck. 122. 161. 210
'Ursel'. underwater missile, 145 297.343 PuR9. 9 I. 93. 97 Ash. J .. 14 BKC-Turbine Factorv. Dresden, 269
Schwertwal. ~Iidget U·boat. 301. 343 Pu109.93 Assmann. F'regaLtenkapitan Kurt. 91. Black Sea. German o'perations in. 142
Third generation: types Seehund IType 1271. Midget U·boat Pu 110 ISaukkol. 93. 95. 97. 142 93.97 'Blaukoppel' Depot. Lubeck. 29,1
Class 202. 312. 3 I3. 346: development type. 234. 251. 254. 255. 258. 261. l'ulll. 92 ASV (Air to Surface Vessel) radar. LJlock island. US escort-carrier, 167
of. 302·305. 323 278. 287. 2~8. 292. 343: c1osed·cvcle Itussia. 35 British. 196 Blohm. Hermann. 85
Class 201. 306. 307. 308. 312. 313. 317. IType 2271. 294. 295. 296. 297. 299. Sabala. 3 I i .Alhos lFu~1 13351. direction·finder. 196 Blohm. Rudolf. State Counsellor. 129.
3 I8. 346: development of. 302·305 :343 Saldirav.317 'Atlantic Stem'. 157 1'10.159.219.285
Class 203. 309. 323 ."·eetelJfe/, see Projects Salta. :i 17 At/antis. German auxiliarv cruiser. 161 Blohm. Waller. head of B & V ship-
Class 20,1. 309. 323 San Luis. 317 Atlas. elect.ronics finn. 143. 145,304 vard.256
Class 205. 307. 309. 31 I. 312. 313. 31i. Projects for foreign countries Saukko IPul 101. 93.142: trials with. Atlas Werke. Bremen: mentioned. 67, Blohm & Voss. Hamburg: mentioned.
318.346 A 1 see Kobben 95.97 302: delivery timetable for 1919.84. 48.59.78.81.89.97.98. 118.140.
Class 205. improved. 31 I. 3 I 2. 3 I3. 3 I9 A2-A5.36 Shvri.317 Building allocat.ions. first. generation: 160.177.204,216,218.226.240.241.
Class 206. 346: development of. 3 I 2. A bborren class. 323 skiiruw.317 Uf:nVI-':J8. 80: VI-'7.1-VI-'76. 81:under 247,261. 263. 266. 283: rep0rlon
313.317.318.322 Amfitn'ti.317 Skalpen.317 Scheer Programme. 86: cont.racted for U·boat production 119181. 80: delivery
Class 207. 322, 346: development of. AlltofoKasta.317 Spain. 89. 9 I·93. 97 Class 202. 303. 312 timetable for 1919.84: and Enlarged
317.318 Argentina. 88. 89. 317. 322 Stadt. 317 'Au' (Anti U·80at Defence Questions), U·Boat ConSl.,ru<::tion Prograrnme
Class 208. 323: development of. 3 I 1. ArKlis I. deep-sea diving-boat. 325 Stard.317 clandestine U-boat department. 90 119391.124: contracts for Type VIIC.
317.318 Arico. 317 St'ermer. 317. 318 'Aurol', codename for 11202 for ship September to December 1939. 125:
Class 209. 3 I7.318.322.346 Atilav.317 Sweden. 88 propulsion units. 170. 283: require- role in HAS future planning. 129:
Class 2 I O. 322 Atropo. diesel submarine. 2H. 33. 35 Taiwan. 325 ment for Type XXV I programme. section construction at.. 136. 139:
Class 240. 306 Aust.ria-I lungary. 13. 35. 40 To\'rona.317 246: in Walter·boats. 267. 272. 277: boats allocated in HAS planning of
Class 24 I. 307 lJotiro\'.317 Trieste. 324 operation of. 282 May 19 l 13. 212: planned deliveries.
'~lermaid' diving-boat. 31·1 fjin'nd~i Inorlll lFij 304), 90, 91 Triton. 317. 321 Allsdaller. salvage ship, 253 July 1943.212.213: opinion on
TOUHS-type lTourist Observation and Blume. 317 Turkey. 36. 89. 90. 91.124.317.322 Austria Yard. Trieste. HI section const.ruction. 214, 215. 216:
Underwater Research Submarine) ('okra, 317 Vb.1-Ub1. 23 Austro-Hungarian Navy: mentioned. planned deliveries of T~'pe X X I and
boats. 48. 325: 60. 324. 325: 64. 324. Carib£'. 317 VBI-VBI5.40 65: boats ordered from German ship- man-hours spent. 219: air-raids on,
325: 66. 325: 73. 324. 325: 76. 325: 80. Casma.317 Vla.317 yards by. 36. 38. 39. 40 248. 250. 253. 253: reports on pro·
325: 110.325: 170.322.325: 180.325: China. 124 UthallJ(,317 A viat.ion Hesearch Inst.itute see Luft· duction schedules. 256: Type XX I
DWS/300. 325: 430: 325: ml's 600. Colombia. 3 I 7.322 Utsira.317 fahrLforschungsanstall., '1lerman programme and. 257. 262. 263. 264:
325 CV702 IVetehinenl. 91. 93. 97 Utstein. 317 Goring Braunschweig' ILFA) Type XXVI programme and, 257,
T)'pe 55 lIater Class 20 II. 30~ CV703 IVesihiisil. 91. 93 Utl'oer.317 258, 264. 265: use of women workers.
Tvpe 126K. 280 CV704 I/ku·Tursal. 91 Venezuela. 317. 322 B 257: construction plan for Type VIIH.
CV707 IVesikkul. 93. 98. 99.101: trials Vesihiisi ICV7031. 91. 93 Baader. Joseph von. 10 258: at. the end of the war. 264: labour
Third generation: numbered with. 95. 97 Vesikka ICV7071. 97. 9~. 99 Bachem net. anti-dect.enion device, 196 shortage at. 272
UI. 308. 309. 31 I. 313: Ullimprovedl. Denmark. 318 Vetehinen ICV7021. 91. 93. 95. 97 Baden. I\lax von. German Chancellor, Building allocations. first generat.ion:
31 I. 312. 313: U2. 308. 309. 31 1.313: E I. 91·93. 94. 95. 97. 98. 99 Vetehi"en class. 93. 95. 97 87 VBI8-VB2.1. 50: UB.1().UB41. 50:
U2 lil11provedl. 3 I I. 3 I 2. 3 I3: U.1 10 I lype. 97. 98, 118 Yildirav.317 Hagnolini. Italian submarine, 206 VB48·UB5.1. 57. 66: UB75·VB79. 66:
INDEX 379
UBI0.1·UI3//7. 76: UCI6·UC24. 53: Cantiere Navale. Monfalcone. It.ay~n 213: Type X X III construction. 220. Elac, electronics firm. 143. 145 Programme and. 86: Enlarged i\lobil-
UC'14-UC:19. 53: UC63·UC7-1. 53: shipyard. 81 255.257.258.261. 262. 263: shelter . Elbe 11'. U·boat shelter. 225. 231. 232. izaLion Programme (1939) and. 122:
UC90-UCI18. 78: UCII9-UCI-1-1. 80: Cantiere Iliuniti. Monfalconc. Italian built at. 231; report on shortages. 240. 247.25,1. 257 cont.racts for Type V II C Septcmber
UCI5-1-UCI92. 81: UI22·UI26. 59. 66: shipyard. 220 241: Type XXV I programme and. 246. 'Elbe XVII'. U·boat shelter. 234 to December 1939. 125: r61e in HAS
UI81·UI82. 78: UI91·UI94. 80: U22.5- Capelle. Admiral von. Secretary of 247; air raids on. 253: reports on pro- Elbe. Hi ver. 14 future planning. 129: boats allocated
U228. 81: under Scheer Programme. State in the RMA. 53 duct.ion schedule. 256. 257: use women Electro-boats. 208·210 in HAS planning of May 1943,212:
86: second generation: U792. 178: Cappel/ini. Italian submarine. 206 workers, 257; Type XXI programme 'Ellira '. automatic welding machilw. planned deliveries. July 1943.213;
U1410. 187: UI42-1. 159: U250i-U2SI0. Card. US escort.-carrier. 166. 167 and. 262 225 and T!'pe VIICI41 const.ruction. 216.
219: U2520. 219: U2540. 219 Carls. Admiral. 210 DeuLsche vVerke. Gotenhafen: men- Engel. Chief Naval Construction 258: air raids on. 2<18
Projects: UC III (Project 41 al. 76: Cartels: with Austrian yards. 81 tioned. 218. 219. 261; reports on Adviser. 35 'Fliege·. dipole aerial. 196
Wa201. 174. 175. 177. 178. 179 Celebes. German steamship. 261 production schedule. 256 Engelmann high-speed boat (VS51. 120. Flohr. German indust.rialist. 85
Also see Specifications section. pages Collins Radio Co.. 319 Deutsche Werke Kiel iDWKI. Kiel 121.183.285 Forelle. early French submarine. 14.
328·332 Coin. German light cruiser. 78 (formerly Kaiserliche Werft Kid. and Engine/moLOr manufacturers: A EG 16.17.19. '93
Hlomberg. Field Marshal Werner von. Constance. Lake. 13. 145 Heichs\\:erft. Kiel. and. later. Kieler IAllgemeine Elektricitats Gesel· Forschungsinst.itut fur Kraft.fahrwesen
97.98 Const.anza. operational base at. 142 HowaldLswerk AG and HOW Werkl: Ischaft. 208. 209. 210. 218. 220. 265. und Fahrzeug-t\lot.orenbau an dN
Hlum. KorvetLcnkapitan Ulrich. 35. 89 ConstrucLion. U-boat: assemblv of mentioned. 98. 99.100.109.119.142. 285.287; Brown 130verie & Cie (BBCl. 'I'll Stuttgart lor FK FSI. 182. 183.
13oKue, US escort-carrier. 167 Type XX I. 22'1-231; construction 161. 162.204.216.218.219.225.232. 218.265.282: Bussing. 287. 295. 296: 184. 185. 187.287.296.297
Bollm. Admiral Ilermann. 121 sequence of a U-boat. 130·140: 238.261. 264: and Z·Plan. 116: and Daimler-Benz. 21. 22. 50.183.184. Forst.er, Gauleiter of Danzig. 263
'l3ojc', active homing head. 143 affect.ed by short.ages and air raids. enlarged mobilization programme 185.187.294.295.296.297.304.319: Franz Joseph, Emperor of Austria. 12
. Bold " protection against acoustic 240-245: affected by labour shortage. (19391. 122: receives contracts for Deutz. 182.265: Dra!(er. 182. 183: Freitag. construction official. 99
detccl.ioll. 145. 146 257: losses. 261; section const.ruction. Type II D and Type V II C 11939/. 12;;: FIAT. 26. 28.33: GW. 26. 27. 28. 29. Freiwald. Oberleut.nant. 9f). 9B
Bombs: Wasserauftriebsbombe (W A HI. 214·216.217·218.219.224: shelters boats allocated in HAS planning. 129. 33.35.39.50.54. 114: Junkers. 298: French Nan'. 17.283
120: 'Grand Slam'. 253. 254: for. 231-234: see separate ent.ries for 212: planned deliveries from, 213: Klockner·llumboldt·Deutz. 218. 236. Friedeburg. 'Admiral Hans-Georg von,
·Tallboy·. 253. 254 Materials. Labour. Offices and Pro- shelt.er built. at.. 231: work affected bv 288.290: Kortin!(. 16. 19.21.22.23. 245. 264
Bonin. paddle·steamer. t 2 grammes air raids. 240. 250. 251. 253: reports' 25.28.40.50. 53: ~IAi\. 25. 26. 28. Friedrichson. 12
'Boomerang', German codc-name. 263 ConstrucLura Navttle. Cart.agena. on production schedule. 256: T!'pe 29.33.35.38.48.49.50.53.65.71. F'ri4?s-Sohn. Frankfurt.. 218
Borgward. Carl. automobile manufac- Spanish shipyard_ 89 XX I programme and. 262. 265 73.75.76.85.89. 104. 157.209.218. Fri4?se. naval official. 97. 103
turer. 294 Cont.racts, War (JeLLeredl: AA, 75.81: Building allocations. second gener- 265.278: Moha. 265: Mercedes-Hem.. Frost. US des trover escort. 167
'Borkum' IFuMBIOl. radar observation Q. 76: R. 76: S. 78: '1'.78: U. 78: V-Z. ation: Type IIA. 102. 118: 250-ton 280: ~IWM. 95.113.182.210.219. Fuchs. Admiral "Verner. head of 'K'
equipment, 196 80: AB. 81: AC. 81: AD. 81: AE. 81: boats (Type IICI. 109: U56-U6.1. 119: 236.237.246. 278. 282. 325: Ope!. Office. 115. 117. 172. 174. 179.208.
Borne. Kapitsnleutnant Kurt von def 93 AF.81 U459-U462. 152: U796-U797. 182 290. 298: Otto see separate entry; 281
Brake. German tanker, 206 Convoys: J \'\,51 B. 210 Projects: Type XIV. 152: schnorkel Philips. 32'1: SSW. 40. 208. 209. 218. Fuchslocher, Kapitanleutnant. 242. 24.1
Brandes. Chief Naval Construction Cords. head of Work CommiLLee with floating valve. 199 265: Sulzer. 48: Vulcan. 49; Wumag. Fulda. HiveI'. 10
Adviser. 168. 170 UVIIC. 142. 160 Deutz Gas Engine Factory. 31 218.265; also see Specifications FuMB7l·Naxos·1. dctecting receiver.
Brautigam. Kapit..anleut..nant Hoben. Core. US escort-carrier. 162. 167 Diesel. Rudolf. German engineer. 13 section. pages 328-346 196: FuMB9 rZypernl automatic
88.92.97. 103. 107 Cornelius. Professor E. A .. 297 Diestelmeier. Chief Naval Construction Engineering Office for Ship Construc- search receiver. 196; Fut\lBIO
Bremen. cargo U-boat. 67. 205 Coubus. 217 Adviser. 273 tion. see Ingenieurburo fur SchifO)au (' Borkum'j, detector adaptor. 196:
Bremer Vulkan Yard. Vegesack: men- CHD·Monfalcone. shipyard. 288 Dingler Machine Factory. Zweib- 'Enigma'. German cipher machin€'. 197 FuMB261·Tunis'1. sounder. 196:
tioned. 71.85.115.118.119.160.217. Cremer, Kapitanleutnant Peter. 264 rucken. 14 enrico Toti class. Italian submarines. Fut\l 1329 l' Bali '). radar observation
218. 231. 232. 238: deliverv timetable CrichLOn·Vulkan Shipyard_ Abo Dixon. Lieutenant G. E .. American 304 equipment. 196: Fu~IB35 (·'\thos'1.
for 1919.84: and Z-Plan. 1'16. 117:and Building allocat.ions. second gener- submariner, 14 d·l~quevilley-Montjustin. Haymondo direction-finder. 196: FuM B37
t\lobilization Programmes (19J9). ation: CV70i-CV704 I Vetehinerl. lJorwll. German escort. 110 Lorenzo. 15. 16. 18. 23: his stearn ('Leros'), combination of 'Hali' and
122. 124: contracts for T!'pe V IIC. Vesihiisi. Ik,,·Tllrso). 91: 250-ton boat. Donitz. Admiral Karl. 103. 105. 109. caustic-soda drive explained. 32 ·Athos'. 196: Fu~IG200 1·lIohentwiel'i.
September LO December 19J9. 125: 95 122.129.143.150.151. 154. 175. 178. Erbach. Hudolf. German engineer. 67 Luftwaffe ship-detection gear. 197: 198:
role in HAS future planning. 129: Crimean War. 12 179. 180. 182. 205. 206. 208. 209. 212. Erhardt. gunmaking firm. 75 Fu~1029. fixed aerial. 197: Fu~1030.
receives order for Type XX transport Croatan. US escort-carrier. 167 213.216.219.232.234.237.238.241. Erprobungsausschuss fur Untersee- radar detect.ion equipment.. 197;
U·boats. 205: boats allocated in HAS Cruisers. U-, 67-74; deliverv timet.able 246.259.261, 263. 277. 285: favours boote 11·;i\U!. 103. 105. 108 FuM061 ('Hohentwiel U·1. ship·
planning for May 1943.212: planned (1919) for. 8'1: Type XI. 1'12-114: also medium-size Type VII, 107, 108: ideas Ersatz Gneiserw". projecLCd German det.ecLion gear. 197. 198:
deliveries. July 1943. 213: planned sec Specifications section. page 332 on U-boat tactics and defence. 121: battlecruiser.67 FuM065 (·lIohentwiel·l)rauf'l. 198:
deliveries of Type XX I from. 219: air suggestions regarding U-boat tYP4?S Escorts: 1·IV. 110: '1'2-1.110: '1'1.55· FuM084 l' Berlin 11'1. det{'nion equip-
raids on. 249: reports on production o (19391.146: favours Walter's hi!(h- '1'158.110 ment. 198: FuM0391 ('Lessin!('I. de·
schedules. 256: programme for Type D class. Vickers-built design, 89 speed boat. 174: shows interest in Estimates. 33. 10.5: 1936·1938. 102: tection equipment.. 198
XX I construction. 257. 258. 262. 263. 'Dacker. codename for LOrpedo, 291. '''.'aILer·s schnorkel project. 19B. 199: 1936-37. 103: 1936. 105 Furbringer. Kapitanl{'utnant ',Verner.
265 344 replaces .taeder. 210. 211: atLempts to Estonian Navy. 93 90.91. 95. 97. 98.103.154: ideas on
Building allocations. first genNation: Daimler. German engineer. 13 hasten T!'pe XXI const.ruction. 214: Etzbach. Wilhelm. Gcrman U·boat U-boat tactics and def{'nce. 120.121
UIII-UII4. 71: UI6o-UI6:I. 76: U164- Daimler-l:Jenz. German engine manu- issues directive to chang4? LO construc- builder. 91. 99.100 Fuzes. proximity. 1-l3. 144
Ui 72. 78: U201·U212. 80: U24'·U262. facturer. 21. 22 tion of Types X X I and X X III. 216: Europaische Vcneidigungsgemein-
81: Scheer Programme. 86: second Danish Navy: acquires licence to build comment.s on allied air raids. 251. 252. schaft IEVGI. 302 G
generation: U7:-J-Ui6'. 115; Ui7-U82. Class 205 type. 318 253; takes part in ''''alter-bout triah>. Ewerth. ObcrieuLnant. 95. 9A G7a-G7ut. see 'l'orpedoes
117 Danubius Fiume. 81 268·269 Excalibur. British submarine. 283 Gabler. Ulrich. German engineer. 177,
Bridge conversions. 188. 193. 194 Danziger Waggonfabrik. Danzig. 261 .Dora I'. U·boat shelter. 232 Explorer. British submarine. 283 179. 198. 235. 302
Broking. Ministerial Counsellor. 101. Danziger "'erft lOW). Danzig: 217. . Dora II'. U·boat shelter. 232 Gartenlaube. Gcrman journal. 13
103.124.170.172.179.180.200.208 218. 261: and !\Iobilization Pro- Dorsch, Minist.erial Director. 232 F ·Geier·. covername for torpedo type.
Brown. Boverie & Cie IB lOCI. 116. 159. grammes 119391. 122. 124: contraCts Dortmunder Union, Gelsenkirchen. 'Falke '. codename for homing LOrpedo. 143. 144
209. 210. 218. 265. 30,1 for Type VllCand Type IXC. Sept· 160.218.250 143.345 GI;:MA. German manufacturer. 197
Bruker-Physik AG. 324 ember LO December 1939. 125; role in Drager. Dr. Heinrich. 182. 284. 285. .Fasan·. !,'llidance syst.em. 144 Generalbevollmachtigter fur Chemic
'Bruno', U:boat. shelter. 232 1-1 AS future planning. 129: receives 287 Fat I-Fat II. see Torpedoes IG 10 Cheml. 238
I3S. see Seetransponabteilung im contract for Type XX transport Drager Works. Lubeck. 22. 27. 182. F'enselau. Construction Adviser. 120 German Armv. 40. 48.124.128.212:
Allgemeinen Marineamt. . H' U·boats. 205: boats allocated in HAS 183. 184. 185. 187.284.324 Ferrostaal. Essen, 322 Supreme CO~l)mand 1011 L). 75. 76, RD.
BU, see German Navy planning of ~Iay 1943.212: planned Drager system. 25. 157 FIAT-Laurenti Yard. La Spezia. 33. 3R 81. 83. 84. 85. 87: Ordnance Office.
Buff. head of Commit.tee for Ships' deliveries. J lily 1943. 213: reports on Drechsler. German shipyard director, Fijenoord Yard. Hotterdam. 89. 91 183
Elect.ronics. 140 producLion schedule. 256 99 'Fink II'. U-boat shelter. 231. 232. 247. German-Danish War, 13
Buhr. construction official. 99 lJaphne class, French submarine type. Dresden. 12 254.257.263 Germaniawerft lG WI. Kicl: mentioned.
Bundesamt fur \oVehrtechnik und 318 Droeschel. Oberleutnant. 97 Finnish Navv. 9 I. 93. 95. 97. 99 16. 18. 21. 23. 25. 28. 29. 32. 33. 35.
Beschaffung IBWBI. 308. 318 f)(H'id class submarine. first military Drzewiecki. Russian engineer. 14 Fi1lzi. I talia~ submarine. 206 36.40.44. '15. 50. 66. 67. 73. 80. 81.
Bunte. Director of Lubeck F1ender- success achieved with. 14 . Duisberg. construction official. 21 I Fischer. Dr. Karl. 177. 198.235.246. 85.97.98.99. 100. 103. 104. 108. 109.
werke. 256. 290 Deliveries: 1916-17. 76; timet.able for Duppe!. 10 263. 283. 288. 302. 304 110.115.118.119.157.160.162.177.
'Bunte boat'. 290 1919.84: proposed by Scheer Pro· Dust.ernbrock. 15 Flamm. Professor. 206 200.204.216.219.234.238.263.266.
BurJ[enla1ld. German tanker, 206 gramme. 86: schedule for U2.1-U4 J. Oykmann. Minist.erial Counsellor, 142 Flender-Werke. Lubeck: ment.ioned. 272. 280. 283: report by U Ion. 80.
Burgoyne. Alan 1-1 .. 14 28: quotas. 1941-<12. 126-129 119.125.136.17'1. 218. 225. 297.311: deliverv timetable 119191 of. 84: pro-
Busley. Chairman of Schiffbautech- Dellschau. Berlin. 218 E and Z-Plan. 116. 117: and ~Iobiliz· jccts for foreign navies. RR. 89: Z·Plan
nische Gesellschaft. 14. 17 Demag. Bodenwerder. 218 Ebschner. naval architect.. 92, 185 ation Programmes (19391. 122. 124: and. 116. 117: mobilization pro-
Bussing. manufacturer of diesel gen- Desch. construction official. 257.259 Echevarrieta. Don Iloracio. Spanish role in liAS future planning. 129: grammes 119391 and. 122. 124: con-
craLOrs. 278 Deschimag, Bremen. see 'Vesel' industrialist. 89. 91. 92 boats allocated in HAS planning of tracts for Type V II C (19391 125: boats
Busumer Schiffswerft. assembly vard. Detection devices. underwater. 143. Echevarrieta Shipyard see Larrinaga !' May 1943.212: planned deliveries. allocated in 1-1 AS planning. 129. 212:
218 .. 144·146: anti-. 197·198 Echevarrieta July 1943.213: repons on production planned deliveries (1943) from. 212.
Deutsche Ozean- Reederei. 67 Eckernforde. 16.92.144.292.294 schedule. 256: and Type X X I pro- 213: air raids on. 249. 253: reports on
c Deutsche Her'ue (1908). 32 Eckert. German engineer. 183 gramme. 262: develop Biber t.!'pcs. production schedule. 257: TypeXX III
C class submarines. 89 Deut.sche ''''erft.. Hamburg lformerly Eggers. see Stahlbau Eggers 290.296 construct.ion and. 224. 255. 257. 25R.
('ai!,li. Italian submarine. 166.206 Reiherstieg Schiffswerft. for which Ehrenberg. Albrecht. German naval Building allocations. second gencr- 261. 262. 263: const.ruction plans for
Campbell. Andrew. British inventor. 14 see separate entryl; mentioned. 217, architect.. 91. 93 ation: U84·U87. 115: U88-U92. 117 Types XVIIK. XX and 127.258: tests
Canaris. Kapitanleutnant Wilhelm. 89, 218.219.238.255: r61e in liAS Eilers. Hannover. 218. 240 F1ensburger Schiffbaugesellschaft.. on Type XX I at.. 273; receives con-
90.91. 93 planning, 129. 212: planned deliveries. Eisbar Group. 166 Flensburg: mentioned. 67. 136: Scheer tract for midget. protot,\·P4? 287:
380 INDEX
delivery probrralllllle for Seehund. 28~ Kriegschiffbau: KIU. 124. 155. 157. H separate entryl: mentioned. 216. 218, Programme.86: seealso Specifications
Building allocations. first generation: 214: KIIU. 124: Navv StaffiHil. 75. llagenuk. German manufacturer. 196 219: contracts for Type VIIC. Sep· section, pages 328·332
Karp. Kara.<; and Kambala. 17. 18. 19: 80. 1: Operations. 1'10: Shipyard lIague Convention. 66 tember to December 19~9. 12:'): role Projects: U21Project 71. 21: Ub:J·Ub4.
UI. 19: U16. 24: U2.1·U26. 28: U:II- Department. 50. 53. 54. 65. 75. 79: lIalberstadt. 216 in I-I AS future planning. 129: boats 23: Kobben IA I), 23: Project 31. 48.
U41. 28: Alropo. 28. 33: A2-A.5. 36: SK L- . 155: a Transport. 89. 90: Iiali. Commander. 283 allocated in I I AS planning of May 50: Project 41 a. 76
U.5I· U.56. 38: U6.1·U6-5. 47. 49: U66- Technical I' B·I. 17: Torpedo Offiee. Ilambur{,';sche Schiffbau-Versuchsan- 1943.212: planned deliveries. July Kaiserliche \-\'edt. Kiel (later Deutsche
U70. 36. 38·39. 50: U I·US6. 49. 50. 17 : TV 1~larine Technologyl. 30·1: staltIlISVAJ.101.151.174.182.267. 1943.212.213: description of \\'erke Kiel. Kieler Howaldtswerke.
53: U9,'/-U9S. 49. 50: Ulo.5·UJl4. 66: Weapons Office 1~II\'al. 104. 105: 280.283.2 7.292.297.298.301 assemblv work at. 225·226: shelter and 1--1 D\-\' \-\'erke Kiel. for which see
UI27·UI.10. 56. 66. 71: UI:J9-UI41. 71: U·Boat Directorate. 196: U·Boatln- lIannemann & Co.. Lubeck. 217. 225 built ne~r. 231: and Type XXVI pro- separate entries). 28. 75. 81
UI42-UI44. 73: UI7-1-UI76. 7 : UIS:/· spectorate. see ~eparate entry: -Boat Ilanomag. 193 gramme. 247: air raids on. 253: Kaiserliche \-\'edt. \\'ilhelmshaven
UI90. 80: U229·U246. 81: UA. 39: Office. see sCI>arate entry: \\'eapons. lIansa-Programme.21 .260 reports on production schedule. 256: (later Kriegsmarinewerft \\'ilhelms-
UBI· CBS. 40: UB66-UB71, 57. 66: 75 lIapro. 115 and use of women workers. 257: and haven. for which see separate entry):
UBI.1.1·UBI41. 78: UBI 70-UBI 77. 80: Test establishments bodIes: Erpro- Ilarris. Sir Arthur. head of Bomber Type X X I progTamme. 262. 265 mentioned. 67
UC49-UC54. 53: under Scheer Pro· bungsausschuss fur nterseeboote Command. 24 Howaldt Yard. Kiel. see Kriegsmarinc· Kallipke. Kapitanleul.nant Fritz. 264
hrramme. ~6: lsee also Specifications (EAUI. see separate entr~': Experi· lias. ~Iarine Construction Engineer. 35 wedt Kamm. Professor W .. 182
section. pages 328-3321: second gener- mental Command 456. 29·1. 301: lIaug. Dr. K.. 297 Howgate. American designer. 14 Kardorff. von. German Deputy. 17
ation: Type liB. 102: U4.5-U.5/. 109: Generalunternehmer (GUI. 313. 317: lIauptamt Kriegssehiffbau (' K' Officel. Huber. Dr. 1... 182 ·Karlshutte·. iron foundrv. 10
U.52·US.5. 119: U9.1·UWO. 115: UIOI- .\ achrichten m iLtel versuchsa nstal t 90.97.105.108.110.112.113.114. Hulsmann. Kapitanleutnant \"alter. Karsl.agne. German indu~strialist. 85
UJ02. 117: UII6·UJI .117: U21.1· I" \' A). see separate entry: :\achrich- 120.122.124.127.136.151. 160. 161. 91.98. 103 Karsten. G .. German professor. 12
U2IS.147: U791.172: U794.17 : tenmiuelversuchskommando 1;\\'Kt. 170.174.178. 198. 208. 212. 214. 216. Hunley. II. L.. American designer. 14 ·Kaspar'. U·boat shelter. 234
U798. 187: UI069-UI080. 159: U1701· see separate entry: Ship-Testing 234. 235. 23 . 239. 240. 246. 277. 280. Huse. US destroyer eScorL, 167 Kassel. 10
U17o.1. 239: U2:/-12·U2-1-1.1. 255: U4701· Command. 306; Test Centre 71. 28 I. 282. 290. 30 I: midget U·boat pro- Kauffmann. Dr.. 144
U474S. 255: U.5 188-U.5 190. 295 Eckernforde. 307. 312: Torpedo jects. 2H5. 287. 299 Kausch. Johannes. 97
I
ProjC'Ct~: Karp class. 17: U.S-UH. 23: \"ersuchsanstalt rl'V J\l. see separatE' lIaupl3usschuss Schiffbau I HASI. 129. Kawasaki Yard. Kobe: 11-1.1.8
/ . Japanese transport submarine. 206
65·ton boats 119101. 28: Project 31. 35. entry: Towing Test Institute. Vienna. 140.159.160.185.205.206.21 I. 212. 121-/24.88
/29. Japanese transport submarine. 206
48: Project3la. 35. 54: Project 34. 40: 210 214. 216. 220. 231. 238. 240. 241. 246. · K·Butt·. code name for torpedo type.
1.10. Japanese U-cruiser. 204
Project 35a I I ~O-lOn minela~'ing boall. U·Boat training. 306. 312 255. 259. 260. 261. 263. 296 144.301.345
134. Japanese transport submarine 206
10: Project 42. 5·1. 56. 65. 66. 72: U·Flotilias. 1st. 110. 119. 126: 2nd. Hecht. codename for LOrpedo type. 345 Keitel. Field Marshal Wilhelm. 126.
152. Japanese transport submarine. 206
~IVIJVII (I·;·peVIII. 102: \'300.172. 110.119.126: 3rd. 110. 119. 126: 4th. Het'p. lIeinrich. German engineer. Ii7. 127.129.179
110.119.126: ;;th. 110. 119. 126: 6th. /50S. lex·U2191. 167
179: WK201. 174: II'K202. 17;;. 177: 179.198. 20H. 219 '1 bis·. special b'1.lidanc.::e system. 143
Kelle & lIildebrandt. Dresden. 218
'I\pe XVI I K, I H:J-1H7: engine pro- 110.119.126: 7th. 110. 119. 126: 8th. Ileerhartz. Oberleutnant. 92 Kieler Howaldtswerke AG lKIiWI. Kiel
Ictineo, early Spanish submarine. 14
jects. 26. 27. 31. 35. 39. 54.66.168. 110.119.126: 9th. 119. 126: 10th. 119. Ileidebreck. 246 lformerly Kaiserliche \",'erft and
IG-Farbenindustrie. German manufac·
170 126: 11th. 119. 126: 12th. 119. 126: Ilein. Lehmann & Co.. Dusseldorf- Deutsche Werke Kiel. and later H DW
turer. 157. 185.246
Germano-American Petroleum Com- 13th. 119. 126: 14th. 119. 126: 15th. Oberbilk. 218 Werk Kiel. for which see separate
lilies. C.. lIamburg. 89
pan~'. 142 119: 16th. 119: 17th. 119: 18th. 119: Ileinrich. Prussian prince. 16 entriesl. 304. 318. 322: builds Class
Imlnich. German shipyard director. 99.
German Na\'\': 19th. 119: 20th. 119: 21st. 119: 22nd. lIela. 170. 17'1. 272: tests at. 207. 266. 20 I. 305. 308: restores U2:165 and
140. 199
Heichs-~larin('-Al11tlH~lAI16. 19,22. 119: U-boat Squadrons: First. 312; 267.269.277 Inch. US destroyer escort. 167
U2.167. 305: restores U2!540. 306:
23.33.35.36.39.40.45.47.49. Third.317 Ilelil(oland. 33 rebuilds UI. 313
I ngenieurburo f~r Schiffbau (I fS. or
~3. :)4. ~6. :)7, 65. 67. 71. 73. 76. G If II. see GutehoffnungshuttE' Ilellcr. Kapitanleutnant. 268 Engineering Office for Ship Con-
Kienzle AG. Villingen. 183. 185
78.79.80.81. 84. 8;;. h7. 88 U/Uliam. Italian submarine. 206 '1Iertha', cover-name for engine. 20 Kiesewaltpr. Oberleutnant. 154. 155.
struction I. 296. 302
j.larinekorps. 71, 7~. HO. 81 Glassell. Lieutenant \\'. T .. American I lessen. Landgra\'e Karl von. 10 157
ingenieurburo fur Wirtschaft und
:'\a\'al Staff: plans for economic war submariner. 14 lie\'. Erich. constructional adviser, 92. Technik Gmblll·lgewit·l. bogus ·Kilian·. -boat shelter. 224. 231. 232.
against Britain (19 I 61. 63-65 (1IIeisenau. German battleship. 129 93 German firm. 90. 95. 98. 99. 100. 101. 257
Torpedo Inspectorate ITII. SPe Godt. Konteradmiral Eberhard. 2HI lIeve. Vizeadmiral lIellmuth. 287. 292. Kleikamp. Admiral Gustav. 120. 17
102.103. 113
separate entry Goehle. FregaLLcnkapitan 'Ierbert. 90. 294. 297 Klingen. German enbrineer. 10
Ingenieurburo Gluckauf II BGI: 218. 219
'\a\'alll'ar Staff ISKU. 78. hI. 84. 93 lIeyking, Danzig. 218. 247 ·Klippfisch·. codename for torpedo
220.224.23 .242.246.247.255.261.
8;;.86.87.116.122.124.12;;.142. Goldbutt. codename for torpedo. 17.). Ilietalahden Laivatelakka. Ileisingfors: type. 1.1 11, 345
263.273.277.278.28 .295.299: con·
1;;7.193. 196. 197.214 345 Lilliput project IC\'7071. 93 Kiockner-llumboldt·Deutz. Ulm. 25~.
stitution of. 2 I 6. 217: experience pro-
:-':a\'al Directorate. 8h. 89. 90. 91. 95: Goldfi~ch. codename for LOrpedo. 175 Ihpl'. salvage ship. 252 2~~. 290
blems with section construction. 240
desi!,rnation changed to :\a\y lIigh Gollnow Sohn. J .. Stellin. 160.21 lIilgers AG. IIheinbrohl. 218 Klonne. August. Danzig. 218
I ngenieurkontor Lubed: (I K LL 302.
Command 10K Iii. 103 Goring. Generalfeldmarschall Hindenburg. Field ~larshal Paul von Kluge. construction official. 103
304.30;;.307.309.312.318.319.322.
:-':a\'y lIigh Command IOK~11. 103. lIermann. 124.212 Beneckendorff undo 76. I
323.324.325
K~IA. Gotenhafen. 261
10;;. 14-l. 168. 188.212.213 GOubN. Claude. French inventor. 14 lIirth. Kapitan. 92 Knappsackwerke. German manufac·
I ngenieurskaanlOr voor Scheepsbouw
:-':a\'al Command Office. 102. 104. 107. Gouhpt I. earh' French submarinE'. 14 lIitler. Adolf. 98.114.122.124.126. turer.260
IInka\'os or I\'SI. h9. 90. 91. 92. 93.
109.120; requirements for aU-cruiser. Goubet II. ea~lv French submarine. 14 127.12 .129.140.142.179.204.20;;. Knorre. Karl. R9
94.95.97.98.99.100.102.124
112: Issues statement on Germal1\-'s Grof Zpppehn. German aircraft carrier. 206.210.211.212.214.232.251. 252. · K' Office. see Ilauptamt Kriegssc.::hiff·
Inl(o. motor-boat. 170
military. political and strateh';c silua- 122.125.127.129 2;;9.260.262.28;;: and Z·Plan. 116. bau
'1 ngolin·. cover-name for 11202 for tor-
tion 1193;;1. 103 Grauert. German naval architecl. 91 117 Kohnenkarnp. Johann. shipyard
pedo propulsion units. 144. 170.301
Supreme :'\a\-al Command. 121. 122. Great Britain: (,erman plans for econ- ·Hitzler. Lauenburg. 218 director. 25~
IngolsLadl. 10
115. 1·16. 1;;4. 155. 157. 1;;9. 160. 168. omiC war againM 119161. 63-65: block- Iloboken. submarine assembly point. Kohrs. German engineer. 206
I nternal-combustion engine. 13. 31
170.172.174.178.179. I 2.183.184. ade~ Gennanv, 67: Treatv of \'er- 40 'Kondor', guidance system. 144
Inter·Ocean· Exhibition. Dusseldorf.
18;;. I 7.200.204.206.212.213.214. sailles and. ~h: Fleet agr;ement .....ith lIofmann. Dr. Friedrich. 13 · Konrad'. -boat shelter. 22'1. 231. 232.
326
216.219.238.247.269.273.277.287. German~·. 99: seen as potential 'Hohentwiel' iFu~IG2001. ship detec· 234. 257. 2~8
Italian 8V\'. 2R. 20~
292.294.297 enemy. 114. 115: post-war acqui- tion equipment. 197. 19 Konstantin. Hussian prince and
I vS see I ngenieurskaantor "oor
Federal. 302. 306: summan' of boats sitions. 2H3 'lIohentwiel-Drauf' lFu~10651. detec· admiral. 12
Scheepsbou w.89
built for. 313 . Greek Na\'y: negotiations between G\\' tion equipment. 198 Koralle.237
Commissions: ~1idgeL Weapons. 1'14: and, :36: submarines for. 317. :322 'lIohelllwiel U· i1'u~10611. 197. 198 Karl nozzle. 152. 174.288
Planning. 116 Gresse & Co.. Wiuenberg. 217 1I0hlfelder. Dr. 0 .. 14'1 J Korting BroLhers. Ilannover. German
Comlllitu.'es: Naval. 12: Ship Con- Griep. salvage ship. 252 Holland. earl\' American submarine. 14 Janv. construction official. 99. 103 engine manufacturers. 16. 19.21
struction, 260: Steel Construction and Grim. Dr .. Chief i\aval Construction Iiolland boat~. 40 Jaubert. Dr. George Francois. 31 Krafft. Vizeadmiral. Director of Esti·
Electro-Technolog~·. 260: Special Ad\'iser. 161.209.219.273.276.287. Iiolland. John Philip. American in- John [fehder. German tanker, 170 mates Deparl.ment. 79. HO
i':a\,;:ll Equipmenl. 140: for U·Boats. 302 ventor. 14 Jucho. II. J.. Audorf. 218 Kl'ankenhagen. Wilhelm. German
140: see separate entry for Ilauptaus- Grohmann & Frosch. vVittenberg. 21H Iiollandse Signaalapparaten. Dutch Junkers. German manufacturer. 116. naval architect. H8
schuss Schiro,au "IASI. Groner. I':rich, German author, 75 electronics firm. 312 157 Kreuzouer, codename for torpedo. 3'14
Sub-Committees: Coastal and Hiver Groos, Admiral. 9H 1I01ler. Karl. 10 Jutland. Hallie of. 66 Kriegsmarinewerft (or Ilowaldtl. Kiel:
Boats. 140: ~lerchant Ship Construc- Crosse. Leutnant Ilaraid. 92. 95 Iioltzendorff, Admiral von. Ilead of mentioned. 14.23.27.56.114.115.
tion. 140: Ships' Electronics. 140: Grossi. Kapitan zur See. 206 the Naval Staff. 81 K 160.216.218.219.225.232.288:
Ships' Engines and Boilers. 1-10: 'Group 950'. designation. 100 Iionigmann. Moritz. German engineer. K cruisers. 93 Z-Plan and. 116: Enlarged j.lobiliz·
Special Committee for Concrete Gruppen-) lorch-Gerat (Group Listen- 32 . K·. Small U·Boal. 287. 29'1 ation Progn.ll11me 119391 and. 122:
Ships. 140: Special Ships and Am- ing Apparatus or GIIGI. 144. 145 ·lIornisse·. U-boat shelter. 231. 232. Kabelac. head of Commiuee for contracts for Type VII C 11939), 125:
phibious I nstallalions. 140: U \' II C. Grutzmacher. Or.. 143 234.257 Warship Construction. 140. 142.256 II AS planning and. 129. 212: planned
142.160: U IX. 142: U XX. 142: \\'ar- G U (Generalunternehmer), see German Ilostvedts. Vice·Admiral. 308 Kaiserliche II'erftIKII'DI. Danzig: deliveries rom. 212. 213: shelLer built
ship Construction. 140 !a\'v. Test establishments Housatonic. nion sloop. 14 mentioned. 25. 33. 44. 50. 54. 317: at. 231: air raids on. 250. 251. 253:
Offices departments: A I. 102: A Ilu. ·Guppy·. US submarine type. 283 Howaldtswerke Deutsche \l'erft AG report on production problems 0918 reports on production schedule. 256:
90: Armaments. 246. 253: Armaments Guse. Kapitan. 97 1110\1'1. Kiellformerlv Kaiserliche 80-81: deliverv timetable for 1919. 4 Type XX I prob"amme and. 262
Deli\en·. 2,)6: Coastal Command. 196: Gustou' Zedi'. early French submarine. II'erft Kiel. Deutsche \l'erke Kiel and Building allocations. first generation: Kriegsmarinewerft fK~l\"'. Wilhelms-
Constr~ction. 104. 117. 120. 124. 130. 14 Kieler lIowaldtswerke. for which see U-1·U4. 22: U -Ul2. 23: UI-1·liIS. 24: haven (formerlv Kaiserliche \\'erft
133. 136: onstruction Control. 99. Gutehoffnungshune. Oberhausen- separate entries): mentioned. 326: con- UJ7.UIS. 27: UI9-U22. 2 : U27·U-10. Wilhelmsha\'e~. for which see separ-
101: Engineering Office for Ship Con- Sterkrade. 218. 240: IIheinwerfl. tracted to build Class 206 boats. 313. 2 : U4.1·U44. 33. 50: U46-U50. 38. 50. ate entr\'l: mentioned. 92. 97. 118.
struction. I t'l~: General Naval OfficE' II'alsum.2Ih 317: builds for German Federal ~avv. 54: U7.1·U74. 45. 50: US7·U92. 49. 50: 160. 200. 21 . 263: mobilization pro-
- ('In %. 99.101: I'BU·I. 100. 101. Gutjahr. Admiral. Chief of the Torpedo 313: builds for foreign navies. 317.322 U 1.1,5-U I: . 56. 66: U 15S·U159. 76: gramme 119391 and. 122: contracts for
103. 104. 10~. 120: IBII·BI. 308. 31 Office. 178 1I0waidtswerke AG. lIamburg U2/-1·1/2IS. 81: UC5-5-UC66. 53: UC 0- Type V II C. September to December
iBZI. 93: 'K Office'. see Hauptamt C\,mnote. early French submarine. 14 Iformerly Vulcanwerke. for which see UCS6. 7 : Uc/.14-UC/S2. 80: Scheer 1939. 125: r61e in II AS future
DEX 381
planning. 129: boats allocated in liAS 1':let'tro·Technology. 264 101: 111\.9$.99: IIB.99: 111.101: IV. V II C 119:191. I t5: boals allocaled in 126. 12,.12$.129.140.174.179.2:11:
planning of ~hl~' 19·IJ. 212: planned l.fI ... ,(anw, British liner. 50 101: V. 101: VI. 101: VII. 101. 10l II/\S planning 129.212: planned d('- and Z·l'lan. 114. 116. 117. 125.210
dl'liH'ril'<'; ..Julv 19·13.21:3: U·boat !.ut 1·l.ut I I. s€,(.' 'I'orpedOl's . ~Iowe'. codename fur torpedo. 345 li\"erips from 119·t:31. 212. 21:3 Halds. air. 2·1l'l·2:')4
. d ll'ltl'r erl'l'u.,d at. :l:31. 2:3:l: report on 1,1Itz(JlI". (i<.'rman hatllecruiser. :')0 /\10/1('. (;t'rman auxi!lar\" cruiser. 75 \orwegian campaign. 143 Hasl'nack. \'aval Construclion
dl'1U~'l'd constrUCllon, 240: and Type l\!O/1 (' class. 93 ' \'on\"('gian :\a\'.': mel1liOl1t.'d. 160. 30~: Enginet.·r.35
XX\'I programml" 247: reports on M ~Is ('\Iohilizationl boats: 47. 48. 59. 6:'). orders <.,ubmarines frolTl (;erman~'. :3;'). Hei('hs Archi\"es. H~
production probll'm<." 2;');). :l;~)6: and ~laas. Dr.. 14:') 66. 67. 71. i:3. 75. 76: deci~ion to halt :16. :10. :39. 31 $ Heich",·~larine·AlntlH~I;\t.see
u">(' of wonwn wnrkl'rs, 2:17: and 'I\pl' ,\Iacklin. Professor. 12 huilding. 6:>: delivery programme '\o",kt'. (Iusta\. German pollticl3n. l'l~ German \a\"\"
X X I programml'. 262 \Iaerte'ns. Vizeadrmral, head of :\a\'al 0919) for. ~4: discussion on mobiiJz- Heihersti<.'g Schiffswerft. Ilamburg
Kri('gsschlffbaul<,'hrahteilung IK I.AI. Communications. 196 alion planning. 9:t U46-J.:5(). 3 .5-1: o lIater D('utsche \\\'rft A(; \\'erk
t It. tilt. t6:1 \Ia..,,,rus-\\'t:.'rke. Ulm. 21 ..1 U.5/-L'62. 3$: U6/i-V'0. :J9: U6:i·L'6.5. O/!)'02.i. Dutch submannes. 19~ Heiherstieg and" D\\' \\'erk lIam-
Kn"itall·Haslsgl'rat (K DIU, listening ;\/aKnu,; JlI. sal\'age crane'. 312 47: UIiI.c9h. ~9: U9!J.UI04. 50: 026. Dutch 5uhll1arine (later L'JJ41. 146. burg- Heiherslieg. for whl<."h St-'e separ-
dp\ll·l'. II;') ~Iann. \·i/.eadmlral Hiller \"on. ~O. ;') UW5·CI IIJ. 66: VII I-CI 14.66. ,I; 162. 19$ atl' l'ntrtt'<.,): mentioned. i}O. 67
Knstwnsand: dl\ II1g ll'sts off. 27:3 ~lann ~ Ilumml'l. German manufac· (.'/.'II-C/.'I4. 66. 73: UI:JS-c/: .66: 0:21'. Dutch submarine (later £//)';1. 162. Heim<.'r. construt'tion offil'ial. 99. loa
Knt/.ll'r. (;l'rman l'ngll1l'l'r. 16. 19 turt'r. 1~7 ProJt'ct 12..:-'-1. t)6. 66. 72: ProJC'Ct 43. 166.19 Heitz. :\1.1\ al Construction Ad\ iser. 2h.
Kronshagl'n Camp. 297 ~Iannl'smann. Kapitanleutnant. 264 56: U/2,·C/:IO. 66. ,I: UI:iI-CI:N. 7:J: O!Jerelh('. G<.'rrnan IifLing \"E'ssel. 19 :15
Kron<.,tadt: trial<., carrit.'d out b.\ Hauer ~Ian,;et'k. Kapitanl('utnant. 26·1 U 1.- -C /(;.1. ,6: V /64·C /'i2. 70: L·201· Ohl'ring. (;<.'rman eng'II1t.'l'r. II"I;~ Hendshurg. 10
at. J;l '\Ian'hen , gUidanCl' system. 144 U212. ~O: L'21:J·U2:2X. $1: U2:.!9-C2'6. Oheron class. British suhmarine t.'"pt.'. Hepalrs. 211. 2.'>9
Krupp. (;l'rman manufal·tun·r. I:>. 16. \larscl1311 (,\11 Kapitanleutnant. 97. 1"11: under Scheer Programme. 6: sel' :JI Hhein~tahl ,\'ordo.;<''l'werke IH\S\\ I.
6'.09.1,,9.160. In. tlo. 261. :304 10·1. 10',. 100. 121 al ...o Specificallons sC'Ction. pages 32~ Oelfken. .'\a\al Construction f)lrt,(·tor. Emd('n (formerl\ '\ordseewerkl'. for
Krupp. F. ,\ .. 16 ~la<.,chll1l·nbau Gabler (imbll. :.325 a;w 200.209.216. 23H. 277. 2$0 which S('l' <';l'par~te entr~'I: menllolwd.
Krupp ,\(; (;<.'rmaniawl'rfl. <"l'e ~las('hincnfahrik Augsburg-~ urnberg ':-'Iucke·. horn radiator. 196 0111.. ';<.'<.' (;erman Arm\ :lOr.: build<., Clas<., 106 boats. ;31:3. :H 7.
(;Nmanlawl'r t 1\(; I~II\ \1. 25. 21 '. 2~0. 241. 247. \Iugler. Chief :\ a\ al Construction Oksoy. hghthou';l'. :!64 . build<.; for for<.'ign na\ies. ;j I 7. ;j I h.
Kunze. Chief Torpt'do Engineer. 93 24~; ,ur raids on. 2;)0. 2:>1; dt>!iH'n('S Ad\isl'r.3:,) OLEX. typo of paraffin. :1:1 :122
Kuo Fl'ng Oc('an J)p\"('lopment Cor- of ('ngln<.'s for T~'pe XXI. 26:); <"C'e also :-'lull<.'r. Construction Ad\'iser, '25. 3:> Or!(aniZalion Todt 10'1'1. 129. 2:11. 2.'>0 Hhenania. oil rl'fint'n. 2;>2
porallon. Taip('i. :tl4 entr.\ Engine manu eJl"turprs ~lull<.'r. Obl'rll'utnant Albert. 95 Ouen . . er Elsenwerkl' A(;. 160 Hhumspnnge.246 .
KupfmullN. Prof<"ssor Karl. 196 \Iaterial,,: shortages. 12:>. 126.2;')9. ~luller. Kor\"ettl'nkapitan Hans. 27H Otto, ~lkolaus August. (;erman Hiccardi. Admiral. Chid of Italian
Kurzak. Chi<,'f \a\'al Construction 260; supplips carried b~ transport :-'lul1lch. 10 engl neer. 1:3 '\a"al Staff. 206
,\d\'iser. IK;"), 1~7, '2~7. 294. ~m;). 296 U·boat". 204·207: \'a\,\,'s monthl\" '\Iussolini. Benito. 206 Otto l'ngines: c1osed-c~·c1l'. 144. ~97. Hkkmei('r. Edgar, (;prman l;-boat
1\ \'(1 (form<.'r1\' L:Y:2()). 160 quotas of iron and steel. 127. 12r:·. 129 29$: pN rol. 290 huildt.'r.91
K~·esl'r. (;l'rr~1an weapons desigl1t'r, 10 ~Iaurt>l), Pillau. 261 N Bieppel. \ on, H('ichs Coundllor. ~5
K~·nasl. Director. 294 ·.\Iax·. building ponl.oon, 30l'l :\ achrichtpnmittel \'ersuchsanstalt p Hixmunn. Dr. \0\' .. 1~:3
f\laxill1llian II. "ing'. 12 (Communications Test I nstitul.e or ·j1alau'. direction-finding aerial. 196 Bochling. construction official. 211
L f\1111'.1\. Sl'<" Zl'ntnIl('s Beschaffung's, NV/\1. I'I:J PanzerkreuzN. s<.'e U-Cruisers Bohdl;' & Sl·hwart/,. (;erman manufac-
'.abour: ft'Cjuirl'l1lents for constrUCl.ion. und ,\usrllslungsaml del' f\larine Nac hric hl.en ll1i l.Le Iversut' hsko I11ma ndo (armoured) lurer, 196
125.126.211. 212: man-hours ex- i\1cClinlock. Al11crican designer. 1·1 (Communications Test Command or Papenbt>rg. Sl'nior 'a\'al I·:nginet'r. 91, HOlnanzoui. French inventor. 14
pl'ndl'd on 'I'YP(' X X I, 219: shortages 01. ~lt'ckt'J. U-boat officer, 9~ N"K). III;). l·a;, 196. 197 9l. 97. 10:3 Homo/o class. Il.alian transporl
127. '2:)7: U.. . l' of women. 2!)7. 2:)9: diS- .\1t'l'Sl'!. G<.'rl11'l11 l'1ettro-technics /\"ar/lI'alen. Danish submaril1t'. 31~ Papin. Denis. !"rl'nch professor. 10 suhmarines. ~06
trihution of lahour and man-hours at spl'cialist. 92 Nan·ol. earl\' French submarine. I-I. 15 Patin. Berlin. :30 I Hosing. Oberll'utnant Hudolf. 91. 92.
shipyards. :l:,)~ ~ldll'nthll1. Kapltanleutnant \"on. 90. San 'a! c1as~. French submarine t,\'P(-'. PUlll./o("oln. Gl'rman destro\"{'f. 20·1 9$
Ladoga. Lakt" 93 97. III l$:I Paulus. Flt'1d '\larshal Fri('d'rich \"on. . Hout.'rdam·. radar equipment. 2;·):J
Lake. Simon. An1t'rican in\'entor. 14 /\1emel. German t>scorl. 110 ~ATO I:'\orth Atlantic Treaty Organiz- 140 Boyal Air For('e: raids on Gprman ship-
I.an<.,. Kontl'radmlral. 23 Mentor. Gennan picket boal. 2~ alion), 302. 317. 322 Pl'unmw!.l'r. earh Anll'rican sub· \"urds, ~ I~. 249. 2t>0. 2;') 1, 2t):3
Larnnaga y 1':chl'\'arnNa. Cadi/.. '~Irntor Hilanz', bo....rus firm ~('t up b~' :\autical ;\luspum. Berlin 12 marint'o 14 . lim'al \'a\\. 19~. 2H3
Spanish ship~ard. l'l9. 91. 92 HS. 09. 90. 91. 9, ,Voutilu .... earl\' British submarine. 14 Pearl lIarbor. attack on. ~l'l;) Ho~'al ~(,th<,'r1ands ;\1.1\'\. Hi. 19l'l
I.auheu!. ~laxin1t'. French in\'entor. 14, ~lon7. Ilr.. :104 :\a\al/\cadel~1\". Kiel. 12 Pegt'lll'egl'liusl. ~Iagnu'i. (;erman Ho~'al Pru<.;sian COl11mis'sion. I-I
15 ~Ierker. OLIO. 160. 1$5.21,.21$. t20. i\a\'al Arsenal.' Kie!. 200 teal'hl'r. 10 Huge. Vizeadmiral. lwad of 'K' Offin'.
Laudahn. ~llI1lstt'rml A<hlser \\·ilhe!ln. 240. 241. 2~5. 2~6. 262. 26:1. 26~. 2$5. :\a\al Command Office. see German Peln('. Ilugo. (;erman U-boat huildt.'r. 201. 2 2
9:J. 160 296: proposes section construction for ;'\.1.1\ \. '9.91 Hu'ch Canal. 220
Laura. (;l'rman foundr\'. l~. 19 U-boats. 21,1, and production target". \;a\ ai Dln'floratt.'. Sl"t' German \;a\ \. Paol. early Spanish submarillt'. 14 Husche. KOr\'ell<.'nkapltan. 9.')
l.aun..'nll. Italian subm-arinl' huilder. 255.256.25,. l59. 260 :\a\al \\·ar Staff. Sl'l' German :\a\"\ . Pera!' Isaac, Spanish designer. 14 Hus<.,t>II, ,John Sl·ott. na\ 1.11 archiu'cl. 1'l
;3;t also M.'(' 1-'1 \T·Laun.'nti \l('<.,<.,l'r . . chl11idl. ()berleutnant Eber- \"a\.'" Iligh Command. see (Il'rman PPler"'en. Dr . ~;) Husslan a\ \. Bauer commissioned b\ ,
l.ep.... Karl. (il'rman t'nglnt'er. 14 hard. 91 ~a\\" . Pfau . l'on'rnaml' for passi\ l'-acou ... tic 12.1;3: Gl'rr';'an-huilt boats for 17:
·I.t'rclw·. l'on'mamt' for torpedo t.'"pt'. .\letf/(]rtt(, It.'x-£.,' /4(1).2 3 \awa·tzki. (;Nman industrialist. ~:> gUldan<.·t' ... ~stem. 14:3 ('nlarg('d di<"sf.'I·huildlng programme
11:1. :J.l5 . \ 1('lox'. hetero<h ne recei \"er. 196 ',axos" lFu\IH71. detecting rect'i\er. Pf<'>lfft.'r. Kont('radmiraJ. 91 for. 3;'): (;erman IX)st-Second \\ odd
·I.ero,· iFu ~ 1B:17I. 196 .\ 1('tox-(; randin. 'Frrneh manufactUring 196 Pflaum. Dr.. 170. 179 \\ ar Il1fluenn' on. 2 ;3
'Lt'~sing lFu~I();3911. 19 firm. 196 ~l'l'ff. head of Work COmmillt'l' IX. Plening-. Dr.. 170
·1,<.'uchtboJl'· llighthuo.'l. codt'nanw for ~Iichahelles. U-hoat officer. 9 142 PIt'Lzsch. Albert. 16h S
Fore/h-. 16 \lIddendorf. (;l'rman ship~'ard dirrctor. 'eptun Shipyard. Hostock: mentioned. PlI1t!'ich. l-'urst£>l1\\ aide. torpedo·tube Suar. (;<.'rman (·..cort. 110
I.t·uchtenh<.'rg. Duke of. 12 99.199 12.126: deli\l'r\' limNahle for 1919. manufacturer. 99 Saar Plphi<.;l·ltP. 99
I.l1lJput pf()Jl'Cl 1('\'7071. 9:3. 9;') \IldgN U·boats: rl'alized project<.,. 2H-I- l:'l4. rAlt, in liAS futurt' planning. 129: Plaas. Leutnanl. 91 Sabathl'. ph.'"sil'ist. :31
LlI1denau. ~leml'l. ~61 292: proJectl'd designs. 292·30 I: SIX'C!' boats allocated 111 liAS planning of . PleH'n' plan. :l02 Socll,\<,,,. projt'cted (ierman battleship.
l.AlIl( }'UTlj{. ~atlonalist Chines<.' fications of. 343 ~Ia.'" 191;3. 21~: planned deli\"l'ries. Pion. :101 67
frt'ighu'r. :325 .\lJdgt.'t \\'eapons niL. 2H7. 294 Jul~' 194;l. 21:3: production problems 1.Jlun!-wr. carl~ A merican submarine. I-I Sadir. French manufacturing firm. 196
Lllll.cr Schiffbauwl'rft. 220. 2:):; ~Iilch. Field ~Iarshal Erhard. 212 at. 2.-)7 Pola. ,;ubmarine assembly point. 40 ·Samos·. VI I F-hcterod\"l1(' reCl'in-'r. 196
LJunw-trorn. S\\"t'dl~h manufacturing ~lill",all. London. 12 Building allocalions, first genl'ration: l.Jolyp (ex"';uh" /-lel/derl. 170 Sangerhausen. 217 .
compan~', IH:3 .\linela,\'ing U-boats: mentioned. :.39. 40. CF:m·CI·W. $0: UF"·L'FIiIi. $1: POrp01S('. earl.\' Bril.ish submarine. 14 Sarda Estrazione Lavorationt' Pro-
I.odigp, Alois. German engineer. 292 ·I,!. 47. ~9. 50. 5:1. 57. 59. 65. 66. 6,. Scheer Programnw. H6 Potenit7.. 299 dOlta ~Iarini SpA. 325
LOl'wenfpld. I<.apitan. 9:~. 97 ,6. ,$. $,. 9:J. 97.100.101.104.110. Neubrandenburg. torpedo l.ests at. 144 Potsdam War tIoluseum. 12 ·Saroui·. l'U\ l'l"IUJllll' for ad\'anl'l'u
Loflund, Cerman ship~'ard diret'tor. 99. 112. 1,lfi-147: proposed r61e in war Neumann. Kapitanleulnant Karl. 91 Pracl.Orius. J. Chr.. German engll1eer. detection equiprnent. 145
10l against Britain. 64-65: VI 16'. 161: also N(/u' lrorl.~,de,\. American ship of l.he 10 Sauckrl. Fritz. 211
Lohmann & Co.. German firm. 67 see Spt'cifications section. pages :3:lH- line. 14 Prien. Kapit'lI1leul.nant Gunl.her. 14;) Sauro construction official. 2:')6. 2t)7.
Lohmann. Alfred. 67 :132 ·NibelunJ.(. SU apparaLUs. 14:') J-.JririZ ElIJ.!('f1, German heavy cruiser. 259
Lohmann. Kapitan Walter. H9. 90. 91 i\lines: UC 120. -14: UE 150.4:;: Tor- Nohiskrug Yard, ltend::·;!JUrg. 305. ;lOH 122. 129 Schaeffer. Ilein/.. 162
Looff. U-boal officer. 9$ pl'do'l\nkertallmine IT~1 AI. 100. 101. Norddeul.scher Eisenbau. Sande. 217. Prize Ordinann' Hegulations. 66. 67. Sl'hafer. Na\'al Construction i\lasler.
Looschen. U·boat officer. 9H 10-1.110.1·16: Torpedo-(;rundminen 24i 71. 116 7;)
LOrt-'k. Lt.'utnant Ilans. 91. 97 IT~IHI. 100. 10·1. 110: T~IC. see ·DIB. Norddl'utschl' l.Io\'d. 67 Programmes. U·boat Construction Schafl'r. I.udwigshafpn. ~IH
I..or('nz. (iI..'rIlwn lIlanufeu:turer, 197 Sonder-~Iln(' A (S,\lAI. 110. 147. 161. f'l/orden{e!t I \'. ea~l." Swedish sub· (192~1. 97: planning for 1934-19:37. 9l'l. Schaul11hurg-l.ippl'. Count \\'ilhell1l. 10
Lube<"'ker ~Iaschinenbaugesellschaft. 162: 'I\p(' (;rim. '29~. 301 marim'.14 99: 119:151. 102: Z·l'lan. 114·11 $: new Sche(-'r, Admiral. 66. 7r.. 79. 0: aims to
21$ ~Iillol"ahl. Hiesa. 21$ ,\'ordl'nft'lt. Torsten. Swedish in\·enlor. conslrut.'tion plans 1934-19:.39. II . 119: strl'ngLhen -hoat arlll. ~ 1-~3: Sclwer
I.udendorff. (.eneral Erich, ~O. HI. ~;) 1\lltJ.:laff. ~a\'al Construclion 14 \t\'arship Construction Programlnl'. Programme. ~·I-W'i. 93
tudwij{, mali steamer. raised by Bauer. Enginl'('r.3:; j\'ordlsl'h('r Hergungs\erein. German 121.12$: 119,121. 129: 1194:J1210. 211. Scheer. Fregaltl'nkapitan. 10t'l.
I:J ~lohr. Hichard. :\a\al Construction <.,ahagt'compan~. 19 212. 21:J. 21,1. 220: 119441. 254·261. Scheibe. Kon ettenkapitan. ~3
Ludwig:. (;t.'rman (>ngine spt'cialisl. 92. Ad\ ispr. 291 l\·ordJwpen'1/. Danish submarine. 31~ 2$$ Schcringl'r, -hoat officer. 9r.
10:1 .\lol1luriol. :\arci...o. Spanish designer. \"ordmann. Kapitan zur Set'. Chief of Puukammer. Kapitan . .\'a\al St'hickardt. Kon t'ltenkapltan
Ludwig I. KlI1g, 12 1,1 Staff of tho UI.:l5 Adjutant. 179 Hell1rich,97
I.uftfahrtfor,,<,·hungsan~talt '1lerman \100l/.. Korn'uenkapltan Ilermann. 97 . \ord,,'o III'. U·boal sheller. 2:Jl P"thlltl. (;('rman supply ship. 161 Schkhauwerkt.,. I)anzig: mentioned .
(;onng: Braun ..t'hwC'ig II.FA). 174. \loraht. Hoherl. 90 :\'ords(,{,wl'rke I'\S\\)' Emdl'n Hater 12·1.21$.241.2·17.261. 26:3: con-
267, :.301 ·~10nl7.-. buildll1g pontoon. 30~ Hheinstahl \ordseewerke. for which R trarts for T.\ p<.' VIIC. S<.'ptember to
I.uft\\affe. 116.112.1-13.170.197.212. .\luwl. German escorl. 110 see separaw entry): mE'ntioned. 160: Hadar equipment. 196-19H Uecember 1939. 115: role in II AS
2:11. 246. 252 ~lotorel1\'ersuchsboote 11\I\'Bs): men- and Scheer ProJ..,'Tamme, ~6: and Radio teleh'Taphy (HT) II1stalJations. 27 future planl1lng. 129; boats allocat(od
I.unen. 217 tioned. 97. 102 mobilization programmes 119391. 122, Hat'der. Grossadmiral Ench. 9;='. 99. in II,\S planning of t\lay 194:.3.212:
I.u,;chen. lwad of ~tall1 CommiLLet' for '1'."1"'" I. 9$.101: IA. 9$. 99: II. 9 . 124. re<.·cl\es contracts for 'I\pe 10:1.104.105.10$.109.110.121. 122. dl'll\eries planned. July 19.JJ. 21:3:
382 DEX
and Type XXVI programn1E'. 246: Shelters. U·h"al. 2:11·2:J.I Swedish i\'avv. 323 u 4~: U72. 45: U75-UHO. 47. 4~: U1/7·
reports on production schedule. 256: Shlpvard\i: h()ur~ ('xpt.'ndl'<l hy. 1·10. SZ·i\pparaws. echo-sounding eqUip- U class. Sw('dish submarinp type. U121. 59. 66: UJ45-UI47. 73. 7~: U177-
programme for T~'pe XX I construc- 141; ~c.'(' Indl\'lduoll'ntrI('S ment. 145 :32:1 VIiS. 78: under Scheer Programme.
tion. 257. 25~. 261. 262. 265 Shlpyord~. fort'l){n: Aho. 91. 9"')~ UA It'x·Hallra\'l. 124. 161. 167 ~6. Also see Specifications section.
Schichauwerke. Elbing: mentioned. 50. Barrow·IIl-Furl1l'ss. M9. ~t(3. :322; T U·Hoal Offic{'. H4. !'I5: selting·up of. 79. pages 32H·J32. Engine projects. 49
7H. 124.261. 29r,: deliven' timetable Hordt'aux. 20-1. Hre't. 201. Ilut'nos 'I' I-TX I V. ,ee Torpedoes XO: treutis(' on construction pro- Vulkan. German sah-age ship, 25. 27
for 1919: h4: and ~lobiliz~tion Pro- Alre'. :322: ,'ad". 89. 9 I. 92: Car' T2.1. G('rman escorl. 110 ,,-"famme. HI; ord('rs additional to
grammes 119;391. 11l. 124: role in tugenD. M9. Constunllnopll'. 40: TI,j/j-TI,iX. G('rman eSCOrls. 110 Seh('er Programme madt> by. 6. H7; w
liAS future plalll1lng. 129: and con- Copenhal(t'n. 31~: (;t'n"a. 220. 20.;: Tactics. ·boal. 120. 121 dissolution of. HH l\' class. Soviet submarin(' typ('. '2. 3
~truction plan for Type 1'2.7.258: lIel"nKfo". 9:1: lI"rten. 27:1: K"be. Tandanor Yard. Bu('nos Aires. 322 -Boal Trials Commis.!3lon. see Erpro· Waas. Dr.. '.aval Construction
delivery programme for Seehund. 2 ~~: La 1'.llIn'. 204, LlIlz. 220. 200: Ta"K class. US submann('s. 283 hungsausschuss fur Unt('rseebool(' Adviser. 170. li4. 1i '. li9. lRO. 246.
Building allocations. first generation: LOrlent. lO·1, \Ionfakone. ~l. 220. Tankt'rs. U-. 238·239: Types XIV·XVI, -Boat Insp('(·torau' lUll. 29. :1:l. :lfl. :304
1.'://';.('//(;. 56. ~O: UF/·UF20. 80: 205. 2~~: ',k"la.,·e,. 220: Odessa. 210: 101·102. 161. 162 3~. :39. 40. 44. 47. I~. 49. 00. 03. 04. \I' A B. see 'Il"mbs'
U2Ki·L'27(;. ~I: UFlii-1.;F9'2. 81: HOllerdam. ~9. 91; Sl. '.azaire. 20-1: ·Taube·. guidance syst('m. 144 56.57.09. 7 I. 73. 74. 70. 76. 7~. 79. Waddington. British il1\ ('ntor. 14
Scheer Programme. '6 Toulon. 204. 220. 200: Tneste. hi Tazzo/i. Italian submarin('. 206 I'll. U·boat requir('ments 119161 eSli- Wagner. Hichard. 89
Schichau. Konigsberg. 261 ·SieKlinde'. U-hoot prot('ction d('\·ic('. Techel. Dr. lIans. 14. 15. 2:1. ~ .89.99 mat('d by. 6i>: report on production ·\I'al'. torpedo type. 144.301
Schlffbautechnische Ge~ellschaft 146 Technical Hureau Office ITBI. 20. 90: probl('m~ b~. RO: suggest alternative \\·aldegg. Konteradmiral Il('usinger
ISn;l. 17.32 ·Siegmund. U·hoat prot('ction device. organization of 1I9li). 35 d('sign for Type G. H6: dissolution von. 99
'SchildbutL '. codename for torpedo 146 T('chnische Heratungs und Beschaf- of. ~~ Waldenbe rg.246
type. 144. 34i> Si('m('ns. \'izeadmiral. :35. 122 funl(s·gest'llschaft ~Ibll rTebeg·l. 90. bootabnahmekommando ( ·boal Walter. Hellmuth. 101. 16 .170. !'i4.
Schlei EMuarv. tests 10. 170 Siemens Apparatl' und ~Iaschienen 93.97 I\cceptant.:e Commi.,~ion or UAKI. 17b. 179. 209. 283: his Process. 16~·
Schleinitz. Viieadmiral rreiherr \'on. Gmbll. !'i4 T('ckl('nborg Yard. Geestemunde ~h. 127. 136. 19~. 216. 242. 245. 262. 172: his proposal for a schnorkeI. 1%.
32 S,emens IJ.. lIalske. 13. 144 I Br('merhavenl: deliven' timetable for 264.267,27.: t('sting of WaltH-boat 199: reports to Donitz on position
Schieswig·lloistein. war for. 10 Siemens Schuckertw('rke. 120.241. 1919.84 . U7i12.272 re~arding Walter boats. 1944.23 :
Schlick Yard. Dresden. 14 250.201.260.304: see also entn' Building allocations. first generation: Ubootab .....ehrschule (U-boat lJefenc(' his postwar developments. 323
Schmautercr. construc.:tion official. 256. Engin(' manufacturers - UF2I·U/-:·i2. ~O: UF49·U/-,(;O. 81. School or ASI. Kiel-ll·ik. 97. 9~. 99. Walter projects. 1'10. 195: c1osed·cycle.
257 Sietas. J. J .. assembly yard. 160. 21R Sche('r Programme. 6 100. 103 183'1~7: Directlndirt'ct. 170: hil(h·
Schmelter. construction official. 256. Slevoglo Korv(,llenkapitan Kurl. 9R. Telcfunk('n. G('rman manufacturer. Uboot-Zi('!optik (UZOI. optical aiming speed boat. 121. 144. 145. 105. 159.
257 10:1 196 apparatus. 236 160. 16~·172. I ~3. 184: torpedoes.
Schmidt. Oberleutnant Ileinrich. 97 S~II\. see ~Iines TJwn!e.'i class. British submarin('s. UJ).'J. ex-Dutch submarin('. 166 144.323: trials with \·ValtN·boats.
Schmidt. \-Verner von. 9~ Snowdon. US ('seort. 167 114 UiJ41formerly 02(;1.146. 162. 19~ 266-272
Schmitz. Dr.. 257 Socieda Anonima I~spaniola Union de Thannemann. KapitanleuLnanL Karl. UiJ-5lformerl\' 02il. 162. 166. 198 Walter KG. KieI. lIellmuth. 120. 170.
Schnee. Kapitanleutnallt Adalbert. Levante (UJ'.'!.1. 89. 91 91 Uebigau. Dresden. 218 172.177. !'i8. 179. 1~7. 213. 217.
234. 264 Sonderburg. 10 Thedscn. Adn1iral Otto. 245. 26-1 'UF' IFIAT-Laurt'nti boatl. 33 234. :135. 247. 272. 301. :12'1. :126
·Schnecorgel'. designation given to tor- 'Sonderfahn~eug·. special tracked 'Thetis'. deco\'. 196 UIT22 (ex·llagnolinil. 206 '\\'anze' lor ·Zyprrn'). 196
pedo tube arrangenwnt. 234 vessel. 292 Thomas II i1~ter Molchl. midget UI'I'l:J Icx-Giulianil. 206 Warfare: end to unconditional U-boat
Schniewind. Admiral Otto. 122 SP apparatus. det('ction devices. 145 U·boat.291 UIT24 (ex·eappel/illil. 206 warfare 50: plans for economic war
Schnorkel. 146. 219: development of. Spaeter. Carl. Hamburg. 160.218 'l'homsen. blacksmith. 12 UIT2/, (('x·Toreltil. 206 l:Igainst Britain 11916). 63-6!l: dl'c1ar-
19l'l·20·1: Tummler projecl. 27R. 280 Spanish i':a\·~·. 91. 92 Thvssen. ~1 ulh('im. 160 Ullrich. Ileinz. german ('ngineer. 2R3 ation of unn'strined. 7!l: restriction
Schoeller-Hleckmann Stahlwerke AG. Speer. Albert. 12~. 129. 140.211. 212. Ti;p,'z. G('rman baLLleship. 122.210. United Stat('s Air Force: raids on of ·boat activitv 119161. 66: t3nics
Ternitz. 305. 311 214.216.234.246.262.263 2~5 German ship.vards. 249-253 and defenct'. 120: 121
Scholz. Dr .. 140.256. 257 Spindler. KapiLan Arno. 90. 91. 93. 97 Tirpitz. Admiral Alfred von. S('crNary United Statcs Arm\'. 259 \\'assner. Kapitanleutnanl. 121
Scholt('. :'\a\'al ConHruction Adviser Stahlbau Eggers. Ilamburg. 160.21 h. 24 7 " State in the H~IA. 17. 19. 2~. 03 United Stat('s :'\av.~': German post·war Watje. German -boat designl'r. 91
Frlednch. 91. 92. 97 Stapelfeld. Carl. 67 T~li\. s('e nlin('s influ('nce on. 2R3 Watt Storag(' Ballt'ry Factory.
Scholtkv. Oberleutnant lIans. 90. 91. Storti,,)!. 1f~IS. Brilish frigate. 167 T~lH. se(' l\lines nkelbach. Dr.. 144 Zehdenick. 16
93.95.'97.100.10:3 S~egemann. Dr. B.. ~7 T~IC. set' ~Iines N"L. sc(' Socieda <\.nonll11a Espaniola \\'ayss 8... Freitag. construction firm.
Schro('ter. von. U-boat commander. 26·1 ·St('inbarsch·. eodename for torpedo Tool. !Jr. Fntz. ;\IIl1ISter for Arma- nion de Levant(' 231
Schulu-'s.. J A.. (jerman prof('ssor. 10 type. 144. :345 ments and l\lunilions. 127. 140 nderwBter tel('I-,Tfaphy I UT) instal- \\'cddigen. Otto. U·boat command('r.
Schulz. '\aval ConMruction ~Iast('r. 24. 'Stembult . code-name for torpedo type. Topp. Admiral Karl. 91. 241. 204. 260 lations. 2i 36
2~ 114.340 Torelli. Italian submarine. 206 rbach. Dr.. G('rman engin('er. 29 It 'f'lch ,,>pl. G('rman escort. I 10
Schurer. Dr. Friedrich. :35. .90.91. Stell1huder. Lake. 10 Torpedoes. 143-144: Furbringers sug- rs('r. ProJ('ct. und('rwat('r missile. \\ eingartner. U-boat offic('r. 9R
n. 90. 97.101. 103.124.107. In. ·SteinwaJ. codename for torpedo. J23. g('stions for r('motel~·-controlled. 120: 140 \\"elhourn. Lieutenant-Commander. 2 J
!'i9. 2m,. 214 34:; change to wirt'-I-,'l.Iided. 312: sJ)('cifica' ·Ursula·. cover'name for electric motor. \\'elmancraft. Briush midget type. 290
Schwart7kopf. German manufacturl'r. Stenia Yard. Con~LanLJnople. -10 tions of First \\ orld \\'ar. 344: Cjpecifi- 210 \\'cndel. h('ad of Commillee for Special
10 StNtinl'r ~la"c1l1nenbau AG Vulcan. cations of fl:km torp€'dO('s up to 194fl. ·U·shlp·. desil(n for. 206. 207 Ship~ and Amphibious Installations.
s.... hwarzenbat.:h. 263 Stettin: ml."nlloIH:.-d. 12:>. 126: work ;344.345 th('mann. Prin Councillor. 24 140
SdlWt'dt'·Koburg. Gaul('lter of Stellin. on LOwing-conlaml."r. 20i: boats Torpedo·min('s. s{'(' ~lines . -\\ ('ser . construction bureau. 231 \\'('ndling('n. 1 5. IR7
263 allocated in II AS 1,lannlllg. 129. 212 Torpedoes and ~lines (T~IIi. Inspec· ·\I'en7.el·. ·boat shelter. 231. 232. 234
Schwe fel and llowaldl. iron foundn.
10 .
SteLtlller Oderw('rke. St('llin: m('n- torate for. Hh v \\·ern('r. \'aval Construction Ad\·is('r.
tion('d. 126: rol(' in il AS future Torpedo Inspectnrate 1'1'11.17.21. 22. V-I rockt't. 297 2K 3.;. :39. ,10
Schenk. II' .. lIall. 2 planning. 129: boats allocat('d in liAS 23.24.25. 2i. 2R. 51, 75. i : submits V·2 rocket. 207. 297 \\'eser. Ae. Bremen lIater Deschimag
Schw('nkhagen. Professor. 144 planninl( of ~Iay 1943. 212 plan for future U·boat programme. 32. ·Valentin'. -boat shelter. 218. 231. A(i \\'eser): mentioned. 3l. 40. 4fl. 4i.
Seal. British submarine. 162 SlJnnes. ilugo. German industrialist. 33: U-boat arm s('parates from. 33 232.234.254.207.263 4h. 49. 04. 67.73. hI. ~~. 99.100.103.
'Sealion '. Operation. 126. 127 ~4. 85 Torpedo tubt'~. ~idt', development of. 'Valentin II'. U·boat shelter. 234 10~. 114. II~. 200. 209. 216. ~I~. 2~1.
Seeb('ck Yard. Geestelllunde (l-Jremer- Stortf'tJecker. German minesweeper. 234.235 Val('ntiner. Korvellenkapitan ~Iax. 2:12.2·11. 242. 209. 263. 264: proposed
haven): mentioned. 119: contracts for 197 Torp('do und Nachrichtenschule IT:\S). 120 proj(,cl with Argentinian ~av~·. ~H:
Type IXC. eptember to D('cember Stotzel. construction official. 99 F'lensburg-~ll1rwik. 95 Varta. batten' manufacturer. 304 dcliverv timewble 11919). t<--I: Z·J1lan
1939. 125 Strassburl{e r \\·('rft. Strassburg. 21 i Torpedoversuchsanstalt (TV A I: Eckern- Veg('sacker \\·('rft. s('e Bremer·Vulkan and. 116. II i: mobili7.ation pro-
Building allocations. first generation: Strehlow. construction official. 99 forde. 9:1. 1'1'1.291. 292. 294. 297: Veith. German councillor. 1i. 23 g-rammes 11939) and. 122. 124: receive
Ut-'45. ~O: U/-·46-Ut-'48. 80. 81: U/-·61· Strenl(ths (planned. 1939·431. 123 Cotenhafen. 143. 14,1 Verein J)elll,'ii'Jler IIIW"llellre. German COlllral:lS for Type IXC (1939).12:;:
UFi2. 81: Scheer Programme. 86 Stulcken. II. C.. II amburg: m('ntion('d. Torpedowarn·und-anzeigegeratITI\GI. journal. 15 allocmions from Ili\S planning. 129.
Seebeck. Wescrmunde: mentioned. 119. 67.160.217.255: contracts for Type listening device. 1.15 Vickers. British shipbuildt'rs. 89. 2~3. :212: works out constructional details
216.218: deliverv timetable for 1919. V II C. Sep~ember to December 1939. To\\'ing Test I nSlitute. Vienna. 210 322 of Type X X, 205: planned deliveries
H4: and Enlarged ~Iobilization Pro- 125: role in liAS future planning. 129: Transport U·boa~s. 67-69. 204-207. 23~. Victoria. (tueen of Britain. 12 from. 212. 213. 219: Type XXI
gralllme 11939). 122: role in II AS boals allocated in III\S planning-of 239 Vogel. Friedrit.:h Otto. German construction and. 219. 257. 2"')~. 262.
future plannin~. 129: boats allocated ;\Iay 19-1:3.212: deliveri('s planned. Trave. HivE'r. 290 inventor. 14 263. 265: alli('d air raids on. 252. 25·1.
in liAS planning of ~Ia." 1943.212: Jul\' 1943.213 Treaties: Anglo·German Naval Agree' Vog('1. Chief Engine('r Ilans. 11:L 114 263: reports on production schedul('.
deliv('ries planllt'd. ,July 1943.213: StUl~lrncl. Konteradmiral. 196 ment. 99.101.102.103. 104. 10~. 109. Vogl('r. Director (;cneral. H5 2.·)6: use of WOlllen workHs al. 25i:
reports on prOOurLion schedule 256: SU Apparatu,,;. echo·sounding equip· 110.112.110. I !'i. 30~: London :\a\'al Volk('r, h('ad of Committee for Coastal Type IXD/42 and. 25H: position at
and use of WOlllen workers. '1.i>i: and menlo 145.209 Treat \", 103. 109: Paris Treaties. 302. and Hiv('r Boats. 140 th(' end of the war. 264: midget
Type XX J programllw. '1.62 Submarin(' School. 33 30H. 31i. 322: So\'Il'l-French :\'on- VS5. see Engelmann high'~P<'ed boat U-boat construction and. 292
St''E'kri('g'sleitung' (SK 1.1. see (;erman Suchting. shipyard director. 261 AgJ.,Tf('sslon Pacl. 109. 110: \' ersaille~. Vulcan\\'('rk(', Ilamburg (later Ilow- Building allocations. first generation:
'.a\v Sudd('utschen Brems('n AG, ~lunich. h". 9 I. 99. 103: 11·.,hington. 30" aldtsw('rke A(jl: mentioned. 33. 3H. U-S7·U-S9: :18. 47. 4~: U60-U(;2. :18. 4 :
Sct'tr~nsportabteilung1m Allgemein('n 2~7 ·T-Stoff". CO\"f;'r·name for 11202 for air- 4t<-. 50. 59. 6i. 73. Hi>. 97: deliv('r~' U99-UI04. 50: Ui.1J-UI-14. 56. 66:
~Iarinearllt ·H·IHSI. 89. 90 ·Sultan·. TeM Group. 145 craft ('ngin('s. 170 lImetable- for 1919. R4: d('signs sold to Ui41i·UI-SO. 73: Ui79-UlIiO. 78: UI9.'S·
Selberl. A<.;chaffenburg. 21 .240 Supply U-boats: problems encountered Tuck. Josiah II. 1... Anlt'ncan inventor. Japan. tih: l'xp('rimental projects 1.1200. 0: U2i9-U224. ~I: UH9-UH/7.
Seid('1. naval an.. hitffl. 9'1. b~. 161: arl'as of op('ration. 165.166· 14.32 abroad. ~". h9 40: UH24·UB29. 50: UB42-UB47. 50:
Seligmann. Ilugo. ~9. 93 167 Tudor. S\\edish bau('n manufacturer. Building allocations. first generation: UH-S4·UH59. 57. 66: UiJlJO-UBH7. 66:
Serno. German ship~'ard director. 99 Suprem(' '\a\·al Command. s{'(' German 90.30·1 . I.:H(;(~L'H(j,;. 07. 66: UH72·I.':H74. 66: UBi 18·UBJ-12. 76: UBJ42-U81,s,1. 7~:
,",·evdht<. German h('a\ \. cruiser. 122. '.a\\' ·Tummler. schnorkel proj('ct. 2i~. 34l UH ·i.J'ijJ(J2. 76: L'HI.S4-/,je;(;~. 7~: UBi7 ·UHi87. 80: UH2()(j-UH219. hi:
127 - SU.\.H:X. HrilJ~h cross·Channel steamer. 'Tunis IFu~11l261. 196 UHlliIi·UJJ2(~S. 80: UH220-UH249. hi: un I·un-s. 44: Ue46-Ue48. 53:
S-Gerat. sound·d('l('Clion device. 115. 66 Turki,h 'a\\. 90. 91. 99. 322 1.:0·1..'elO. 44. Ue2.s·/,je:~·i. 03: Ue4(J. ue6i·ue(;4. 5:1: U('/37·/,je 9. 7
145 S\ eaOOrg. submann(' memorial at. 97 Type 34. deslroyers. I 12 U('4.S. 53: l.:e74-L'e79. 53: /,j71. 45. under Sch('cr Programme. '6. Also
DEX 383
see Specifications section. pages 328· Westfalische Union. Hamm. 260 \¥inand. Paul. German physicist. 31 homing torpedo, 143. 144,345
332: second generation: U.17-U40, t04, Wichers. Lieutenant-Commander J, J '. \.vinkler. Oberleutnant. 97 Zede. Gustave. French inventor. t4
105: U4/-U44. 109: U64-U65. 109. 119: 198 Witt. carpenter. 12 Zentrale Beschaffungsplanung (ZBPI.
U/OS-UIII. 115: UI12-UII5. 117 Wiedersheim. Oberleutnant. 312 Wolf. Dr .. 256. 257 Halberstadt. 247
Projects: Project 34, 40: Project 35a, Wight. Isle of. 12 vVolfenbutteJ. conference at. 199 Zentrales Beschaffungs·und Ausrust-
40: MVBVlllType VIII. 102: Engel- Wilamowitz-Mollendorf. Korvetten· Wolke. H .. German engineer. 75 ungsallll del' Marine l~lBZA). 21i
mann high-speed boat. 120: Type kapitan. 161 X6·X7. British midget boats. 285 Zeppelin Airship Compan~'. 185
XVII K. 183-187 Wilhelm II. Kaiser. 16. 17.63.75.81. Zetzmann, German industrialist. 85
·Wespe'. U-boat shelter. 232. 234. 257 85 Z Zeve. Admiral. 17.23
\Vesteuropaische Union (\"'EUl. 302, vVillisen. General von. 10 Z-Plan. 114-118. 119. 122 'Z)'pern' (or '\Vanze'). radar obsN-
306.308.317.318.322 Wilson. Vloodrow. U.S. President. 87 'Zaunkonig', codename for sound- vation equipment, 196 Below: VI7 and V18.
Photograph acknowledgments (bottom), 164, 171 (top). 190 (top). 192 (bottoml. 195 (bottom), 200 (top), 299;
Boman, 96 (bottom); Bundesarchiv/Militararchiv, 135 (right), 197; BV- Stegemann, 53.
Fotoarchiv, 138 (top); Claviez, 132 (top left). 245; Deutsches Museum
M unchen, 13, 30, 34, 45 (bottom right); Dressler/Rohwer. 106. 190 (bottom), line drawing acknowledgments
209, 222 (top). 228 (right), 241, 289 (top); Druppel, 22, 45 (top). 62, 82; Friese. Ahme, 38; Boman/Kohl, 348, 352. 354; Bundesarchiv/Militararchiv. 23. 24.
55,306 (centre); Greger, 43 (centre and bottom); Groner. 195 (top); Grutze- 28,29. Ill, 116, 284, 350: BWB MS. 150.277,279.287,288.291: Pock, 79:
macher, 225; HDW, 224 (top), 309 (top). 320 (top right); Hellmuth Walter Groner, 74, 279; IKL, 319, 325, 370: Kohl. 94. 11 3, 118, 1-18. 151. 163, 186,
GmbH, 300 (bottom); Herold, II (top); Imperial War Museum, 229 (top). 289 201, 205, 209,323. 356, 358, 360, 362, 364. 366; Kruska. 295; Kurzak. 368:
(bottom); [llies, 270; Jung, 109, 293; Kohl, 196. 189 (right). 201; Krupp. 138 Lawrenz, 14 (bottom); Marinearsenal Kiel. 14 Icentre); Schurer (DeLi/sehe
(bottom); Kludas, 58, 64; Kurzak. 295; Lawrenz, 11 (bottom). 15 (bottom left V-Boote fur Kiistengewdsser), 41. 50, 51. 56: Techel (Der Bau uon Unlersee-
and right), 95; Lennart Lindberg, 130; Marinearsenal Kiel, 95. 155. 312; booten auf der Germaniawerft), 16, 19. 22. 23, 29, 37. 39. 68. 69, 70; Werner
erlich, 320 (top left); Oelfken, 291; RNSW, 314; Sahlin. 189 (left). 230; (Deutsche Vnterseeminenleger fur Kiislengeu'Qsser. Dos J-Ioehsee-
Selinger, 16. 18 (top), 42 (left). 43 (top), 71, 111, 128, 133 (bottom leftl, 141 MinenunterseeIJ()ut), 44, 46. 47, 52,59.60,77.78.
384 INDEX

U-Boat (The Evolution and Technical History of German Submarines)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

U-Boat (The Evolution and Technical History of German Submarines)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

U-Boat (The Evolution and Technical History of German Submarines)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Eberhard Rossler

T e evolution and technic I history of German submari es

3: Foundations of the new U-boat arm, 6: The development of single-drive

The geography of U-boat construction

10 ORIGI S OF THE V-BOAT

ORIGINS OF THE V-BOAT 11

12 ORIGI S OF THE V-BOAT

ORIGINS OF THE U-BOAT 13

The Howaldt diving-boat

14 ORIGINS OF THE U·BOAT

ORIGI S OF THE V-BOAT 15

16 ORIGINS OF THE V-BOAT

ORIGI S OF THE U-BOAT 17

18 ORIGI S OF THE V-BOAT

ORIGINS OF THE U-BOAT 19

2. It has paraffm-burning engine . Our defence

U-boat development and construction,

ORIGI IS OF THE V-BOAT 21

pitch propellers was abandoned and replaced by a Key: a, paraHin container;

22 ORIGINS OF THE V-BOAT

stern torpedo tube above the waterline in addition I ... nKII'l.

ORIGI S OF THE V-BOAT 23

ORIGI S OF THE V-BOAT 25

U1-U16 compared Table 1. Pressure hulls, VI-VI2

According to the Imperial Navy's Ul U2 U3-U4 U5-UB U9-Ul2

26 ORIGINS OF THE V-BOAT

ORIGI S OF THE V-BOAT 27

U-boat development. Only the four-stroke MAN

2 ORIGI S OF THE U-BOAT

ucceeded in producing operationally-ready diesel

U31·U37 (similar to U23-U26 and U38-U41l.

ORIGI S OF THE U-BOAT 29

Left: U-boat construction at GW, Kiel, in the summer of

ORlGI S OF THE U-BOAT 31

Engine layout of the d'Equevilley system.

tmOd~~~ ~ [F[] r:l

32 ORIGI S OF THE V-BOAT

ORIGINS OF THE V-BOAT 33

r----:----TB. 11 ...., ,-- TB. 111 ----,

ORIGINS OF THE V-BOAT 35

36 ORIGINS OF THE U-BOAT

tr Diving tank 6"-<.PT""_

• Iow: Atropo undergoing trials"

ORIGI S OF THE U·BOAT 37

---- ------ ------------------------- ------ --------- ----- ------------ ---- ----V

38 U-BOAT CONSTRUCTION DURING THE FIRST WORLD WAR

achieve the high speeds of almost 17 knots on the

U-BOAT CONSTRUCTION DURING THE FIRST WORLD WAR 39

40 U-BOAT CONSTRUCTION DURING THE FIRST WORLD WAR

Frame 17, looking forward

U·BOAT CONSTRUCTION DURI G THE FIRST WORLD WAR 41

Frame 11 Frame 16 Frame 29

Key: A, switch panels; B, trimming tank;

44 U-BOAT CONSTRUCTION DURING THE FIRST WORLD WAR

U-BOAT CO STRUCTIO DURI G THE FIRST WORLD WAR 45

Frame 20 Frame 24 Frame 28

Frame 48 Frame 51 Frame 54 Frame 57

46 U-BOAT CONSTRUCTIO DURI G THE FIRST WORLD WAR

V-BOAT CONSTRVCTION DVRING THE FIRST WORLD WAR 47