Was The Titanic Destroyed By A German Submarine?

Originally posted by FLaKK
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

Dare i say possibly more believable than bloculas ridiculus U-boat theory on this thread.

Your being ridiculous by saying my theory is ridiculous,as far as i am concerned,i am beyond what sank the Titanic and its the why thats the important issue...

The U-17's 6,700 mile range is from a wekipedia link that when i try posting it,doesnt seem to be able to post and i typed into the search engine..."German Submarine U-17 1912 Wikipedia"...en.wikipedia.org...(Germany) < You'll have to clink on the link in this link...SM U-17...

We are looking at and thinking about the capabilities of the U-17 Submarine from a time thats 100 years beyond it,"through a glass darkly",like looking through the wrong end of binoculars,at the time,in early 1912,that submarine was top of the line and the best in the world...

Originally posted by blocula
The U-17's 6,700 mile range is from a wekipedia link that when i try posting it,doesnt seem to be able to post

You would do well if you make an effort to read both Wiki and the thread. The theoretical maximum range, as was noted in both, was quoted for the surface speed of 8 knots.

Distance between Danzig and the point of sinking along the straight line is 3085 miles, i.e. 2680 nautical miles.
Any real course would be 1.5 longer at the very least, as it can't move over dry land found along the straight line, has to get to the Atlantic undetected (which also means it would spend time underwater, cutting into the range). So the figures don't square, as the theoretical range is only 25% over the straight line distance. And it's pretty funny thinking of a sub that's steaming across Atlantic at a royal speed of 8 knots, taking 2 weeks to magically arrive to the precise location of Titanic in total darkness, firing a shot and turning right back along exact same trajectory.

that submarine was top of the line and the best in the world...

...and?

It still wasn't capable of such strike.

reply to post by buddhasystem
How is this not capable?

Career,German Empire...
Name: U-17
Ordered: 6 May 1910
Builder: Kaiserliche Werft, Danzig
Yard number: 11
Laid down: 1 October 1910
Launched: 16 April 1912
Commissioned: 3 November 1912
Struck: 27 January 1919
Fate: Struck 27 January 1919, scrapped at Imperial Dockyard, Kiel. Pressure hull sold to Stinnes, Hamburg on 3 February 1920.
General characteristics...
Class and type: German Type U 17 submarine
Displacement: 564 tons surface, 691 tons submerged.
Length: 62.35 m (204 ft 7 in)
Beam: 6 m (19 ft 8 in)
Height: 7.30 m (23 ft 11 in)
Draught: 3.40 m (11 ft 2 in)
Propulsion: 1 Korting heavy oil engine.
Speed: 14.9 knots (27.6 km/h) surface, 9.5 knots (17.6 km/h) submerged.
Range: 6,700 nautical miles (7,700 mi; 12,400 km) surface, 75 nautical miles (86 mi; 139 km) submerged
Armament: 6 torpedoes.

SM U-17,during the First World War,sank the first British merchant vessel and also sank another nine ships and captured one ship,surviving the war without casualty...


Keep in mind that Military Projects are almost always Secret Projects,some of them are Top Secret and there are even some held Above Top Secret...

As an example from the Imperial German Navy in 1907 clearly shows.The construction of four Nassau class battleships began in 1907 with the greatest possible secrecy....

This U-17's design and construction phase was not disclosed to the public and this Submarines launching date,was its "advertised" launching date.The fact that date,April 16th 1912,was only 4 days after the Titanic went down,is more than a little suspicious to me...

The U-17 could have easily been launched only around a week earlier,which i think it was and could have easily been laying in wait for the Titanics approach,which i think it was,especially when knowing that the Titanics construction,launch,scheduled routes and destinations were all over the newspapers...

The German Navy,the German Military and the German High Command would have kept this as Secret as possible and so much so that 100 years later the majority of people still think they did'nt do it when "We attack the Titanic way out here,with our latest and greatest weapon of war,no one will think we did it"

Even during the first world war, U-boat operations within the naval war zone did not extend beyond coastal waters, coastal approaches, and inland seas. research the positions of all the sinkings. THEY DID NOT HAVE THE RANGE NOR THE ENDURANCE at normal surface cruising speed; to become ocean going vessels.

reply to post by blocula


as you so studiously ignored it : here is my last post on the feasibility of U-17 engaging the titanic

next up - locating a liner ` mid passage ` in the atlantic

the "key " to the OPs claim that a submarine sunk titanic is actually positioning a single submarine at a point she can engage the liner - the OP handwaves this task away as " simple "

but as per usual he is utterly wrong - despite his claim that the " the titanics route was well known " - it was not its starting point and desitination were well known - its route was open to the captains discression and factors of weather and ice

an excelent example is the Mauretania which only a week later navigated further south , precisley to avoid ice

the transatlantic shipping route was not a fixed chanel - akin to a road , but rather a guideline based on great circle navigation to ensure best speed and fuel efficiency

this was however modified further by condition - there was a " winter route " and " summer route " as general courses - then each ship made further modifications due to fog , ice , rough seas etc etc etc

in short - the captain of an alledged sub would have only the vaguest idea where a vessel would be

further - he had no radar , night vision optics , spotter planes or HF/DF [ high frequency direction finding ] to aid him

he somehow had to locate his sub within not only visual range to locate his target - but also intercept range too [ ie steam to a point which will give him a firing solution for torpedo attack - bearing in mind that he has a significant speed disadvantage

the maths get a bit complex - but assuming perfect conditions of visibility which would allow contact at 60 miles range [ a lit ship from an alledged sub ] - PS this range only locates " a ship " - to correctly identify titanic would require range < 20 miles

remember that on the night - both california and carpathia were within 50 miles of titanic

the bottom line is - that in perfect conditions the alledged submarine would have to be within approx 40 miles of titanics course to close the gap and fire - assuming they pick the correct set of lights on the horizon

anyone who wishes to dispute this - please bear in mind the preformance of single u-boats in mid atlantic during WWII - they had to adopt wolf pack strategies - patrolling in formation line abreast to locate convoys -

hunting ships was realativly easy in bottlenecks and outside ports - but on the open seas - an entirely different proposition

address the issues quoted above

reply to post by buddhasystem


i dnot know why you chose danzig as line of departure , emden would be a fairer example - as its the closest


but another point you ommitted , is secrecy - to fullfill the OPs fantasies , the U-17 has to avoid contact with EVERYTHING on the passage , that means avoiding shipping lanes and either evasive manouvers or diving when contact is threatened -

evasive action obviously requires flank speed - increasing fuel consumption - and putting the U_boat further off course

diving is stressfull for the crew , pluss increases fuel consumption [ once surfaced again the the alternators have to be connected to the engine - allowing battery recharge - theis requires horsepower ] - so either speed drops or fuel consumption rises

also notably lacking in the OPs fantasy is the crew - i dont accept the claim of prussian uber-menchen just ` getting on with the mission ` training , moral and discipline are a key component of submarine warfare

and the imperial german navay is essentially starting from scratch to mount such a mission , with no cadre of exoerts or training personel - and no knowledge base of such opertations to consult

the OP handwaves all problems away as " simple " - but of course i has demonstrated again and again utter ignorance of all the disciplines required to mount such a mission

reply to post by FLaKK


and the natural extension of your point is :

if the imperial german navy could conduct a mission requiring a 5000 Nm round trip in 1912 to intercept and destroy a specific ship [ out of the scores in the atlantic ] - why did they limit them selves littitorial waters during WWI ?

increasing the combat radius off your operations exponentially incresases the area your enemies must search / patrol / mine to interdict or engage you

having managed it once - it should be repeatable so why didnt they ?????????????????

Originally posted by FLaKK
Even during the first world war, U-boat operations within the naval war zone did not extend beyond coastal waters, coastal approaches, and inland seas. research the positions of all the sinkings. THEY DID NOT HAVE THE RANGE NOR THE ENDURANCE at normal surface cruising speed; to become ocean going vessels.

If that were true,than why were the Germans designing and building and launching Submarines in 1911-1912 that had surface ranges of...6,700 - 7,700 nautical miles?

A submarine then and now is fully capable of traveling upon the surface for thousands of miles and then diving below when the need presents itself and then resurfacing after the target is eliminated...

Originally posted by blocula
The U-17 could have easily been launched only around a week earlier,which i think it was and could have easily been laying in wait for the Titanics approach,which i think it was,especially when knowing that the Titanics construction,launch,scheduled routes and destinations were all over the newspapers...

Again, you don't read what's being posted in this thread and that's not cool. One week earlier before the official launch is not enough to reach the point of the Titanic sinking and come back. At the speed for what range is quoted, it would take 2 WEEKS EACH WAY.

You also ignored the point that IA made, as well as I -- you can't even remotely assume that the sub was even moving across the straight line. Not only it would hit the dry land, it had to avoid shallow waters and marine traffic.

The corridor in which ships moved between Americas and Europe was extremely wide. It's a plain impossibility that a sub would arrive to this exact point at the exact time. It wouldn't even be possible today simply because of unpredictability of currents, winds and other such things.

And of course, Titanic did change course already during the trip, which only makes all of that even less probable.

But you don't care about any of that, right?

Originally posted by blocula

Originally posted by FLaKK
Even during the first world war, U-boat operations within the naval war zone did not extend beyond coastal waters, coastal approaches, and inland seas. research the positions of all the sinkings. THEY DID NOT HAVE THE RANGE NOR THE ENDURANCE at normal surface cruising speed; to become ocean going vessels.

If that were true,than why were the Germans designing and building and launching Submarines in 1911-1912 that had surface ranges of...6,700 - 7,700 nautical miles?

It's a theoretical capacity, not the tested one. My car's fuel tank is good to about 300 miles, but I didn't make a trip that long until much later after the purchase.

reply to post by blocula

Career,German Empire... Name: U-17 Ordered: 6 May 1910 Builder: Kaiserliche Werft, Danzig Yard number: 11 Laid down: 1 October 1910 Launched: 16 April 1912 Commissioned: 3 November 1912 Struck: 27 January 1919 Fate: Struck 27 January 1919, scrapped at Imperial Dockyard, Kiel. Pressure hull sold to Stinnes, Hamburg on 3 February 1920. General characteristics... Class and type: German Type U 17 submarine Displacement: 564 tons surface, 691 tons submerged. Length: 62.35 m (204 ft 7 in) Beam: 6 m (19 ft 8 in) Height: 7.30 m (23 ft 11 in) Draught: 3.40 m (11 ft 2 in) Propulsion: 1 Korting heavy oil engine. Speed: 14.9 knots (27.6 km/h) surface, 9.5 knots (17.6 km/h) submerged. Range: 6,700 nautical miles (7,700 mi; 12,400 km) surface, 75 nautical miles (86 mi; 139 km) submerged Armament: 6 torpedoes.

Here we go quoting data you know absolutely nothing about. 6700nm is a figure you like quoting often but your ignorant to the fact that it is in a straight line without any course alteration at 8 knots surface speed, it is and only ever was a theoretical limit. What's 8 knots about 9mph,.. Your saying a 5000 mile round trip as i recall from one of your previous posts, but the 6700nm quoted is the distance to the outer edge from the centre of a circle in a straight line. How much do you want to add on to this round trip to the Titanics last reported position and back, about 900miles say?. You see you have to manouvre, alter course, avoid detection etc, to get around coastlines and out to the open sea then back.

Now the time factor, so a little maths here blocula i'm afraid, Time = Distance/Speed

Distance we've added 900nm for evasions and other unavoidable coastal manouvering so D= 5900

Speed we know is 9mph so 5900/9 = 656 hours 656/24 = 27.3days,... about a month.

But wait,... with a surface speed of 8 knots to try to conserve fuel, running on your crappy single Korting heavy oil engine (You quoted it btw) Yes it was crap i can give you the abysmal performance on this engine but you wouldn't bother reading it so i won't bother posting it.

The rest of the specifications You quoted are appalling, just over 500 tons displacement and a little over 200 feet in length,pfffff.... a sardine tin! i've not even started on how your going to continuously re-provision your U-boat on this mission with food and more fuel.

Now you want to see a proper ocean going U-boat that could have sunk the Titanic? In 1912 the answer is NONE. However Germany did build 3 ocean going U-cruisers, as they were called, that could have done the job that you keep insisting the coastal boat U-17 did. U-Cruisers were large ocean going submarines, but in WW1 the cost was enormous to build one of these. Germany built 3, and their service history is not really all that impressive from my own personal reference sources.

At this point i hold my hands up and apologise for stating that Germany only ever had coastal U-boats, the data i was using was from the bulk of material i have on the U, the UA, and the UB/ UC classes which were so prolific and important for Germany's U-boat campaign during the war.

The problem is Germany only developed long range U-Cruisers too late to make any difference to the outcome of the war. Now it's a bit like the German Luftwaffe in WW11, they came out with the jet engine and the Messerschmitt Me 262A Jet fighter, but alas far too late to make a difference to the outcome of the war. On a technical note it's the same here. And as i said in my earlier posts, if Germany had the technology to sink the Titanic using a submarine, then this technology would have been carried on in further U-boat construction much earlier, even before the war began, hell Germany would have had U-Cruisers ready for action in 1914 have no fear!

Question: would Germany have been building the Messerschmitt Me 262 at the outbreak of WW11 to give them a significant advantage in the air war?: Answer: you don't need one.

So here is the link, for what it's worth; blocula this goes out to you for heaven's sake,..... compare the stats of an ocean going type 139 U-cruiser of WW1 to the stats of your U-17 which you were so proud of quoting to us on this thread. I know you won't even bother, but then there is always the chance others reading this thread may like to see the difference between a coastal U-boat and an ocean going U-cruiser.

German type 139 Submarine.

OH my,...there was another thread here somewhere on ATS in which blocula was theorising about Praying Mantis type Insectisoid creatures taking on the role of humans,..can't remember which thread it was but maybe they could have been the crew of the U-17.....well at this point i'm breaking off to partake in a little drink,..i think i need it!

reply to post by FLaKK
Back in 1911 and 1912,what was publicly known,what the Germans told everyone about,even within their own country,about their military technology and what they actually had for technology,were two different things. Just as always in every modern country and just like now,what the USA military has for high-tech and what the public knows they have,are two very different things...

The U-17 had a range of 6,700 miles and thats what was known at the time,whatever else they had,was kept secret then,was not openly discussed and was not known at the time and for anyone now to say that the U-17 did not have that kind of range,when it obviously did,is simply ignoring the facts...

reply to post by buddhasystem
Not exactly,because Reptilians were not publicly reported until 1934 as this link explains and the Titanic sank in 1912,now the Billionaire Industrialists on board could possibly have been Reptilians and the "Nordic" Germans wanted them eliminated and so maybe thats why they sank the Titanic...en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by blocula

The U-17 had a range of 6,700 miles and thats what was known at the time,whatever else they had,was kept secret then,was not openly discussed and was not known at the time and for anyone now to say that the U-17 did not have that kind of range,when it obviously did,is simply ignoring the facts...

I've just sent you a link on the ocean going U-cruiser. Why don't you read it instead of using this fantasy of yours regarding the U-17. What is so special about the U-17? It was a small 'U' type U- boat. Have you even tried to research any of the statistics of the U-17 which you have quoted? probably no because if you did it would destroy your lunatic idea.

reply to post by blocula


Ok If Germany had the technology to sink the Titanic in 1912 explain to us why Germany had no ocean going U-boats at the outbreak of the first world war. Tell us why it wasn't until August 1916 that the ocean going U-cruiser appeared.

Originally posted by blocula
reply to post by FLaKK

 

Back in 1911 and 1912,what was publicly known,what the Germans told everyone about,even within their own country,about their military technology and what they actually had for technology,were two different things.

...and when they were losing the war, they decided to still keep it secret! It's better to lose the war but just keep to yourself your little cool tech! Yay! And the allies that won, and had control over Germany's info and resources, were non the wiser!

reply to post by buddhasystem


amazingly - similar claims are made for german WWII technology :

they had "wonderweapons " - but destroyed them to keep them secret , rather than use them "

what goes around comes around

Here's another question. If the Imperial German Navy did not have submarine tenders then how did U-156 manage to sink the armored cruiser USS San Diego (ACR-6) off of Long Island on July 19th 1918. Obviously they were able to go across the Atlantic Ocean in 1918 ... why not in 1912? Also various Imperial German Navy warships including submarines also operated in the Indian Ocean and off of Africa during World War I ... see the SMS Koeningsberg in modern day Tanzania.

* the USS San Diego was sunk by surface mines laid off Long Island near the entrance to New York Harbor by U-156 not via torpedoes.

Originally posted by ChrisF231
Here's another question. If the Imperial German Navy did not have submarine tenders then how did U-156 manage to sink the armored cruiser USS San Diego (ACR-6) off of Long Island on July 19th 1918. Obviously they were able to go across the Atlantic Ocean in 1918 ... why not in 1912? Also various Imperial German Navy warships including submarines also operated in the Indian Ocean and off of Africa during World War I ... see the SMS Koeningsberg in modern day Tanzania.

* the USS San Diego was sunk by surface mines laid off Long Island near the entrance to New York Harbor by U-156 not via torpedoes.

Why not in 1912? Exactly because there was continuous improvement in technology and rapidly accumulated operational experience. It's an inflection point -- no submarines were used, for example, by the Japanese against the Russians in 1905, but they acquired a few units just after the hostilities and started using them. Similarly, experience with U-17 (launched after the Titanic's demise) led to improved and larger designs a few years later.