An Attempt to Destroy German U-Boats in Their Pens Was Fraught with Peril and Frustration

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

An Attempt to Destroy German U-Boats in Their Pens Was Fraught with Peril and Frustration Hard By Barrett Tillman Targets AP photo/Terry Ashe An attempt to destroy German U-boats in their pens was fraught with peril and frustration. 80 AIR FORCE Magazine / February 2015 A B-17 (top photo) opens its bomb bay door as it nears the target, the U- boat pens in Tourlon, France (bottom photo). etween October 1942 It was not an easy task. From the was underway at Hamburg and Heli- and October 1943 the start of the European war in September goland. Ever methodical, the Germans US Army Air Forces’ 1939 through the end of 1942, Allied conserved material by designing four Eighth Air Force fl ew forces sank 159 U-boats—merely four types of structures: covers over locks to more than 2,000 sorties a month. Meanwhile, the “gray wolves” protect boats being raised or lowered; against German submarine bases at preyed on Atlantic convoys, typically bunkers for U-boat assembly yards; Lorient, Saint-Nazaire, and Brest, in destroying 36 ships of 180,000 tons per postconstruction or “fi tting out” bunkers France, and against Bremen, Emden, month throughout 1941. The monthly where equipment was installed; and most BKiel, and Wilhelmshaven in Germany. fi gure soared to half-a-million tons for notably pens for deploying submarines The missions accomplished little 1942, when U-boats sank 12 ships for and those under repair. against the massive U-boat shelters, but each sub lost. Most operating pens were on the the effort cost the Eighth 135 bombers Allied navies, led by Britain, made French coast at Bordeaux, Brest, La (including 16 written off), for an unsus- dramatic progress technically, opera- Pallice, Lorient, and Saint-Nazaire. tainable 5.9 percent loss rate. Shock- tionally, and with ASW intelligence Together they consumed 5.7 million ingly, almost 1,200 airmen were killed especially. cubic yards of concrete. Construc- or captured in the 119 missing aircraft. tion was mostly accomplished in 1942 Seven decades later, perspective and A RARE KILL though some facilities remained unfi n- context help explain these frustrating The decisive year was 1943, when ished when the Allies occupied northern and tragic events. escort aircraft carriers closed the deadly France in 1944. As with most segments of the US Atlantic gap that existed in the middle Submarine pens were massive struc- military at the time of Pearl Harbor of the ocean beyond the reach of land- tures largely impervious to conventional in December 1941, the AAF’s anti- based aircraft. bombing. The Saint-Nazaire pen, for submarine warfare (ASW) effort was In the second quarter of 1943 the instance, had walls 11 feet thick with forced to play catch-up. Informally German U-boat command wrote off 73 a 16-foot roof. German engineers cal- organized and poorly equipped, the submarines for only 120 Allied ships culated that the roof could withstand Army ASW mission badly needed long- sunk, and German losses exceeded bombs of 7,000 pounds—more than an range aircraft, notably the Consolidated production. As a result, the path to the American aircraft could typically carry. B-24 Liberator, but had to rely on less Normandy landings of June 1944 led The Todt Organization, a German capable types. across the rolling gray expanse of the construction fi rm, built 14 pens at Unlike the Royal Air Force’s Coastal North Atlantic’s shipping lanes. Saint-Nazaire and 20 at Lorient, mainly Command, the AAF had no ASW fl y- However, sub kills were rare, mainly completed in 1943. Some were immense: ing boats so land-based aircraft were because U-boats were extremely hard Saint-Nazaire’s base measured 945 required. However, the Army was fo- to fi nd. Knowing the locations of their feet by 455, reaching 58 feet high. The cused on strategic bombardment, and lairs, the RAF attacked pens in France nearby Keroman facility at Lorient began with B-24s also going to the British, in early 1942 but soon lost interest building in February 1941, and despite the ASW campaign had to make do for owing to a clear lack of results. All the 200 workers killed in British bombings, months into the war. while, construction of U-boat shelters the fi rst of three pens accepted U-boats Furthermore, Germany’s submarine proceeded apace. that August. operating bases were beyond the new Submarine pens represented one of U-boat bases in Norway were an obvi- Eighth Air Force’s reach for nearly a the most intensive building programs ous benefi t to Kriegsmarine operations in year. The only option at the time was in the Third Reich. Before the Battle the Arctic Ocean, but the intended pens to kill U-boats at sea. of Britain ended in 1940, construction came to naught. Facilities at Bergen and AIR FORCE Magazine / February 2015 81 P h o t o s by a a Trondheim, begun in 1941, were left That month, German Adm. Karl Doe- effort. U-boat support infrastructure largely incomplete owing to weather and nitz’s 105 U-boats in the North Atlantic was frequently damaged—sometimes a shortage of heavy equipment. and Arctic sank nearly 90 merchant seriously—but the Germans became Airpower wisdom holds that any target vessels of some 585,000 tons—and that masters of repair and improvisation. worth bombing is worth defending. Lori- was only part of the story. Since January ent fit this description, surrounded by 1942, U-boats had sent 779 merchant- A EAR O G CAM AI N 20 naval batteries. Five lesser batteries men to the bottom, not counting other AAF’s yearlong antisubmarine cam- were deployed farther afield. Allied sea losses to aircraft and mines. paign began on Oct. 21, 1942, with an USAAF only established a dedicated For the eventual Allied invasion of Nazi- inauspicious debut at Lorient. Of the antisubmarine command in October occupied France to occur, the sea-lanes four bomb groups committed, only the 1942. Brig. Gen. C. W. Russell, AAF had to be more secure. 97th Bomb Group penetrated heavy coordinator for antisubmarine activity, The new priority was not entirely weather. Consequently, the defenders favored attacks on U-boat production welcomed among airpower strategists. concentrated on Brig. Gen. Joseph facilities and operating bases rather than They recognized the ASW campaign as H. Atkinson’s 21 B-17s, which had emulating RAF Coastal Command’s defensive in nature rather than depriving descended through a convenient hole policy of hunting submarines at sea. the Third Reich of its production base. in the clouds. Luftwaffe radar control- His opinion seemed to have merit—the Nonetheless, the order stuck. lers vectored 36 Focke-Wulf 190s onto RAF had long since abandoned daylight In October, Lt. Gen. Dwight D. the Americans. Three of the rearmost bombing operations as too costly, while Eisenhower responded to Maj. Gen. bombers were hacked down and six accepting nocturnal bombing’s inevi- Carl A. “Tooey” Spaatz’s concerns by shot up. table reduction in accuracy. declaring the U-boat campaign “one of The others pressed ahead, unloading But America’s faith in daylight pre- the basic requirements to the winning their bombs across five sub pens, but cision bombing seemed valid against of the war.” Eisenhower linked bomb- not even their one-ton ordnance made targets such as U-boat shelters versus ing submarine bases to the success of an appreciable dent. the RAF’s aimpoints of city centers. The Operation Torch, the invasion of French Frustrated by poor results, on Nov. power brokers accepted the approach Morocco in November 1942. 9, VIII Bomber Command directed a offered by Russell and others. At the core, Eisenhower was correct: perilously low-level mission against There were practical advantages as Defeat of the U-boats was essential Saint-Nazaire. An RAF deception drew well. The Bay of Biscay, where the bases to D-Day’s eventual success. But his off many German fighters, but the were located, was within easy reach optimism about the efficacy of bomb- antiaircraft gunners were presented a of AAF bases in Britain—London to ing massive submarine pens—shared rare gift: a dozen B-24s at about 18,000 Saint-Nazaire was 300 miles, Brest even by other commanders—proved badly feet with 31 B-17s between 7,500 and less. The entire approach could be made misplaced. 10,000 feet. over water, largely avoiding Luftwaffe Some senior airmen saw the potential Plowing through heavy, accurate interceptors. That was a major concern, miscalculation. As early as the end of flak, the lower formation lost three as the Biscay ports lay well beyond the October 1942, Spaatz told Lt. Gen. B-17s while 22 took damage. Despite escort range of RAF Spitfires and would Henry H. “Hap” Arnold, “Whether or the expected greater accuracy, bomb remain beyond that of P-47s when they not these operations will prove too costly plots were disappointing: Only about went operational in mid-1943. for the results obtained remains to be eight struck within 200 yards of either In October 1942, the Eighth received seen. The concrete submarine pens are aimpoint. Nearby rail tracks were hit a new list of priority targets. Topping the hard, maybe impossible nuts to crack.” but easily repaired. menu—above German industry—were He leavened the tart message with the The Eighth’s Lt. Gen. Ira C. Eaker submarine bases, in an effort to support hope that damage to adjacent facilities drew the obvious lesson—subsequent the Battle of the Atlantic. might handicap the German submarine attacks on sub bases were flown from 8 2 AIR FORCE Magazine / February 2015 17,500 to 22,000 feet, encountering chest-pack parachute.
Recommended publications
  • Navy Columbia-Class Ballistic Missile Submarine Program
    Navy Columbia (SSBN-826) Class Ballistic Missile Submarine Program: Background and Issues for Congress Updated September 14, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R41129 Navy Columbia (SSBN-826) Class Ballistic Missile Submarine Program Summary The Navy’s Columbia (SSBN-826) class ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) program is a program to design and build a class of 12 new SSBNs to replace the Navy’s current force of 14 aging Ohio-class SSBNs. Since 2013, the Navy has consistently identified the Columbia-class program as the Navy’s top priority program. The Navy procured the first Columbia-class boat in FY2021 and wants to procure the second boat in the class in FY2024. The Navy’s proposed FY2022 budget requests $3,003.0 (i.e., $3.0 billion) in procurement funding for the first Columbia-class boat and $1,644.0 million (i.e., about $1.6 billion) in advance procurement (AP) funding for the second boat, for a combined FY2022 procurement and AP funding request of $4,647.0 million (i.e., about $4.6 billion). The Navy’s FY2022 budget submission estimates the procurement cost of the first Columbia- class boat at $15,030.5 million (i.e., about $15.0 billion) in then-year dollars, including $6,557.6 million (i.e., about $6.60 billion) in costs for plans, meaning (essentially) the detail design/nonrecurring engineering (DD/NRE) costs for the Columbia class. (It is a long-standing Navy budgetary practice to incorporate the DD/NRE costs for a new class of ship into the total procurement cost of the first ship in the class.) Excluding costs for plans, the estimated hands-on construction cost of the first ship is $8,473.0 million (i.e., about $8.5 billion).
    [Show full text]
  • The German North Sea Ports' Absorption Into Imperial Germany, 1866–1914
    From Unification to Integration: The German North Sea Ports' absorption into Imperial Germany, 1866–1914 Henning Kuhlmann Submitted for the award of Master of Philosophy in History Cardiff University 2016 Summary This thesis concentrates on the economic integration of three principal German North Sea ports – Emden, Bremen and Hamburg – into the Bismarckian nation- state. Prior to the outbreak of the First World War, Emden, Hamburg and Bremen handled a major share of the German Empire’s total overseas trade. However, at the time of the foundation of the Kaiserreich, the cities’ roles within the Empire and the new German nation-state were not yet fully defined. Initially, Hamburg and Bremen insisted upon their traditional role as independent city-states and remained outside the Empire’s customs union. Emden, meanwhile, had welcomed outright annexation by Prussia in 1866. After centuries of economic stagnation, the city had great difficulties competing with Hamburg and Bremen and was hoping for Prussian support. This thesis examines how it was possible to integrate these port cities on an economic and on an underlying level of civic mentalities and local identities. Existing studies have often overlooked the importance that Bismarck attributed to the cultural or indeed the ideological re-alignment of Hamburg and Bremen. Therefore, this study will look at the way the people of Hamburg and Bremen traditionally defined their (liberal) identity and the way this changed during the 1870s and 1880s. It will also investigate the role of the acquisition of colonies during the process of Hamburg and Bremen’s accession. In Hamburg in particular, the agreement to join the customs union had a significant impact on the merchants’ stance on colonialism.
    [Show full text]
  • Bunker Busters: Washington's Drive for New Nuclear Weapons
    BRITISH AMERICAN SECURITY INFORMATION COUNCIL BASIC RESEARCH REPORT Bunker Busters: Washington’s Drive for New Nuclear Weapons Mark Bromley, David Grahame and Christine Kucia Research Report 2002.2 July 2002 B U N K E R B U S T E R S British American Security Information Council The British American Security Information Council (BASIC) is an independent research organisation that analyses international security issues. BASIC works to promote awareness of security issues among the public, policy makers and the media in order to foster informed debate on both sides of the Atlantic. BASIC in the UK is a registered charity no. 1001081 BASIC in the US is a non-profit organization constituted under section 501(c)(3) of the US Internal Revenue Service Code. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the many individuals and organisations whose advice and assistance made this report possible. Special thanks go to David Culp (Friends Committee on National Legislation) and Ian Davis for their guidance on the overall research and writing. The authors would also like to thank Martin Butcher (Physicians for Social Responsibility), Nicola Butler, Aidan Harris, Karel Koster (PENN-Netherlands), Matt Rivers, Paul Rogers (Bradford University), and Dmitry Polikanov (International Committee of the Red Cross) for valuable advice on the report. Support This publication was made possible by grants from the Carnegie Corporation of New York, Colombe Foundation, Compton Foundation, Inc., The Ford Foundation, W. Alton Jones Foundation, Polden Puckham Charitable Trust, Ploughshares Fund, private support from the Rockefeller Family, and the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust. Bunker Busters: Washington’s Drive for New Nuclear Weapons By Mark Bromley, David Grahame and Christine Kucia Published by British American Security Information Council July 2002 Price: $10/£7 ISBN: 1 874533 46 6 2 F O R E W O R D Contents Foreword: Ambassador Jonathan Dean ..............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Family Gender by Club MBR0018
    Summary of Membership Types and Gender by Club as of November, 2013 Club Fam. Unit Fam. Unit Club Ttl. Club Ttl. Student Leo Lion Young Adult District Number Club Name HH's 1/2 Dues Females Male Total Total Total Total District 111NW 21495 CLOPPENBURG 0 0 10 41 0 0 0 51 District 111NW 21496 DELMENHORST 0 0 0 36 0 0 0 36 District 111NW 21498 EMDEN 0 0 1 49 0 0 0 50 District 111NW 21500 MEPPEN-EMSLAND 0 0 0 44 0 0 0 44 District 111NW 21515 JEVER 0 0 0 42 0 0 0 42 District 111NW 21516 LEER 0 0 0 44 0 0 0 44 District 111NW 21520 NORDEN/NORDSEE 0 0 0 47 0 0 0 47 District 111NW 21524 OLDENBURG 0 0 1 48 0 0 0 49 District 111NW 21525 OSNABRUECK 0 0 0 49 0 0 0 49 District 111NW 21526 OSNABRUECKER LAND 0 0 0 35 0 0 0 35 District 111NW 21529 AURICH-OSTFRIESLAND 0 0 0 42 0 0 0 42 District 111NW 21530 PAPENBURG 0 0 0 41 0 0 0 41 District 111NW 21538 WILHELMSHAVEN 0 0 0 35 0 0 0 35 District 111NW 28231 NORDENHAM/ELSFLETH 0 0 0 52 0 0 0 52 District 111NW 28232 WILHELMSHAVEN JADE 0 0 1 39 0 0 0 40 District 111NW 30282 OLDENBURG LAPPAN 0 0 0 56 0 0 0 56 District 111NW 32110 VECHTA 0 0 0 49 0 0 0 49 District 111NW 33446 OLDENBURGER GEEST 0 0 0 34 0 0 0 34 District 111NW 37130 AMMERLAND 0 0 0 37 0 0 0 37 District 111NW 38184 BERSENBRUECKERLAND 0 0 0 23 0 0 0 23 District 111NW 43647 WITTMUND 0 0 10 22 0 0 0 32 District 111NW 43908 DELMENHORST BURGGRAF 0 0 12 25 0 0 0 37 District 111NW 44244 GRAFSCHAFT BENTHEIM 0 0 0 33 0 0 0 33 District 111NW 44655 OSNABRUECK HEGER TOR 0 0 2 38 0 0 0 40 District 111NW 45925 VAREL 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 30 District 111NW 49240 RASTEDE
    [Show full text]
  • Ebook Download Pocket Battleships of Deutschland Class Pdf Free
    POCKET BATTLESHIPS OF DEUTSCHLAND CLASS PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Gerhard Koop | 224 pages | 28 Feb 2014 | Pen & Sword Books Ltd | 9781848321960 | English | Barnsley, United Kingdom Pocket Battleships of Deutschland Class PDF Book Sign In Don't have an account? The Deustchland, for its part, sank 7, tons and the Scheer , tons. The belt was 4. The Reichsmarine initially intended to lay down the first armored ship in , but the design had not yet been finalized. This wiki. Schlesien remained in service until May , when she struck a mine near Zinnowitz in shallow water, and was scuttled. She was part of the abortive attack on Convoy PQ with the battleship Tirpitz ; the operation was broken off after surprise was lost. The center screw had four blades and measured 4. A further six months in dock followed, after which she was transferred to Norway for operations against convoys in May Deutschland-class cruiser Admiral Scheer at Gibraltar in In the German nomenclature of the time, the ships were designated as Panzerschiffe armoured ships , and given the preliminary names P1 to P Work began under construction number Main article: German cruiser Deutschland. Last Completed:. Post a comment. Known figures include a main armoured deck 2. German heavy cruiser pocket battleship Admiral Graf Spee returning from an Atlantic cruise, October Add to Basket. She was ordered under the contract name Panzerschiff C to replace the battleship Braunschweig. All three vessels served on non-intervention patrols during the Spanish Civil War. Available in the following formats: ePub Paperback Kindle. She was under repair until July, after which she joined the Baltic fleet before being transferred to Norway in May Toggle navigation.
    [Show full text]
  • Shelf List 05/31/2011 Matches 4631
    Shelf List 05/31/2011 Matches 4631 Call# Title Author Subject 000.1 WARBIRD MUSEUMS OF THE WORLD EDITORS OF AIR COMBAT MAG WAR MUSEUMS OF THE WORLD IN MAGAZINE FORM 000.10 FLEET AIR ARM MUSEUM, THE THE FLEET AIR ARM MUSEUM YEOVIL, ENGLAND 000.11 GUIDE TO OVER 900 AIRCRAFT MUSEUMS USA & BLAUGHER, MICHAEL A. EDITOR GUIDE TO AIRCRAFT MUSEUMS CANADA 24TH EDITION 000.2 Museum and Display Aircraft of the World Muth, Stephen Museums 000.3 AIRCRAFT ENGINES IN MUSEUMS AROUND THE US SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION LIST OF MUSEUMS THROUGH OUT THE WORLD WORLD AND PLANES IN THEIR COLLECTION OUT OF DATE 000.4 GREAT AIRCRAFT COLLECTIONS OF THE WORLD OGDEN, BOB MUSEUMS 000.5 VETERAN AND VINTAGE AIRCRAFT HUNT, LESLIE LIST OF COLLECTIONS LOCATION AND AIRPLANES IN THE COLLECTIONS SOMEWHAT DATED 000.6 VETERAN AND VINTAGE AIRCRAFT HUNT, LESLIE AVIATION MUSEUMS WORLD WIDE 000.7 NORTH AMERICAN AIRCRAFT MUSEUM GUIDE STONE, RONALD B. LIST AND INFORMATION FOR AVIATION MUSEUMS 000.8 AVIATION AND SPACE MUSEUMS OF AMERICA ALLEN, JON L. LISTS AVATION MUSEUMS IN THE US OUT OF DATE 000.9 MUSEUM AND DISPLAY AIRCRAFT OF THE UNITED ORRISS, BRUCE WM. GUIDE TO US AVIATION MUSEUM SOME STATES GOOD PHOTOS MUSEUMS 001.1L MILESTONES OF AVIATION GREENWOOD, JOHN T. EDITOR SMITHSONIAN AIRCRAFT 001.2.1 NATIONAL AIR AND SPACE MUSEUM, THE BRYAN, C.D.B. NATIONAL AIR AND SPACE MUSEUM COLLECTION 001.2.2 NATIONAL AIR AND SPACE MUSEUM, THE, SECOND BRYAN,C.D.B. MUSEUM AVIATION HISTORY REFERENCE EDITION Page 1 Call# Title Author Subject 001.3 ON MINIATURE WINGS MODEL AIRCRAFT OF THE DIETZ, THOMAS J.
    [Show full text]
  • A Kriegsmarine U VII. Osztályú Tengeralattjárói
    Haditechnika-történet Kelecsényi István* – Sárhidai Gyula** Akik majdnem megnyerték az Atlanti csatát – A Kriegsmarine U VII. osztályú tengeralattjárói I. rész 1. ábra. VII. osztályú U-boot bevetésre indul a kikötőből (Festmény) AZ előzmények főleg kereskedelmi hajót süllyesztettek el 199 darabos veszteség ellenében. A német búvárnaszádok a háború Az első világháború után a békefeltételek nem engedték során komoly problémát okoztak az antant hatalmaknak a meg Németországnak a tengeralattjárók hadrendben tartá- nyersanyag utánpótlásában és élelmiszerszállítások bizto- sát. Ennek oka, hogy a Nagy Háborúban több mint 5000, sításában. ÖSSZEFOGLALÁS: A németek közepes méretű tengeralattjáró típusa a VII. ABSTRACT: The Class VII U-boats were the German medium-size submarine osztály volt. A német haditengerészet legnagyobb ászai – Günther Prien type. The greatest aces of the German Navy – Corvette captain Günther Prien, korvettkapitány, Otto Kretschmer fregattkapitány és Joachim Schepke fre- Frigate captain Otto Kretschmer and Frigate captain Joachim Schepke – gattkapitány – ezeken a hajókon szolgáltak. A VII. osztály változatai elsősor- served on these boats. Variants of the Class VII fought mainly in the Atlantic ban az Atlanti-óceánon, a brit utánpótlási vonalak fő hadszínterén harcoltak, Ocean, on the main battlefield of the British supply lines, and between 1941 és 1941 és 1943 között majdnem sikerült kiéheztetniük és térdre kényszerí- and 1943 they almost starved and brought to heels the Great Britain. The teniük Nagy-Britanniát. A németek
    [Show full text]
  • GERMAN NAVY Records, 1854-1944 Reels M291-336A
    AUSTRALIAN JOINT COPYING PROJECT GERMAN NAVY Records, 1854-1944 Reels M291-336A Historical Section The Admiralty Whitehall, London SW1 National Library of Australia State Library of New South Wales Filmed: 1959 CONTENTS Page 3 Historical note 5 Records of the Reichsmarine Amt, 1854-1913 9 Records of the Admiralstab der Marine, Abteilung B, 1880-1917 15 Records of the Oberkommando der Marine, Seekriegsleitung, 1939-44 16 Charts produced by the Reichsmarine, 1940-41 2 HISTORICAL NOTE The Imperial German Navy (Kaiserliche Marine) was created in 1871, succeeding the small navies of the Kingdom of Prussia and the North German Federation (1867-70). Its existence was recognised in the new constitution, but until 1888 it was commanded by generals and its role was mainly limited to coastal defence. In contrast to Chancellor Otto von Bismarck, Emperor Wilhelm II aspired to create a great German maritime empire. He became Grand Admiral of the German Navy and in 1889 made major changes to the organisation of the Admiralty. It was split into the Navy Cabinet, (Marine-Kabinett) responsible for appointments, promotions and issuing orders to naval forces, the Imperial High Command (Kaiserliche Oberkommando der Marine), responsible for ship deployments and strategy, and the Navy Office (Reichsmarine Amt ) responsible for the construction and maintenance of ships and obtaining supplies. The Navy Office was headed by a State Secretary, who was responsible to the Chancellor and who advised the Reichstag on naval matters. In 1899 the Imperial High Command was replaced by the Imperial Admiralty Staff (Admiralstab). Headed by Admiral Alfred von Tirpitz, the Navy Office, which was located in the Leipzigerplatz in Berlin, was the more influential body.
    [Show full text]
  • Gao-20-257T, Navy Maintenance
    United States Government Accountability Office Testimony Before the Subcommittees on Seapower and Readiness and Management Support, Committee on Armed Services, U.S. Senate For Release on Delivery Expected at 10:00 a.m. ET Wednesday, December 4, 2019 NAVY MAINTENANCE Persistent and Substantial Ship and Submarine Maintenance Delays Hinder Efforts to Rebuild Readiness Statement of Diana C. Maurer Director Defense Capabilities and Management GAO-20-257T December 4, 2019 NAVY MAINTENANCE Persistent and Substantial Ship and Submarine Maintenance Delays Hinder Efforts to Rebuild Readiness Highlights of GAO-20-257T, a testimony before the Subcommittees on Seapower and Readiness and Management Support, Committee on Armed Services, U.S. Senate Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found The 2018 National Defense Strategy The Navy continues to face persistent and substantial maintenance delays that emphasizes that restoring and retaining affect the majority of its maintenance efforts and hinder its attempts to restore readiness is critical to success in the readiness. From fiscal year 2014 to the end of fiscal year 2019, Navy ships have emerging security environment. The spent over 33,700 more days in maintenance than expected. The Navy was Navy is working to rebuild its readiness unable to complete scheduled ship maintenance on time for about 75 percent of while also growing and modernizing its the maintenance periods conducted during fiscal years 2014 through 2019, with aging fleet of ships. A critical component more than half of the delays in fiscal year 2019 exceeding 90 days. When of rebuilding Navy readiness is maintenance is not completed on time, fewer ships are available for training or implementing sustainable operational operations, which can hinder readiness.
    [Show full text]
  • The Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force in Anti-Submarine Warfare Policy, 1918-1945
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Birmingham Research Archive, E-theses Repository THE ROYAL NAVY AND THE ROYAL AIR FORCE IN ANTI-SUBMARINE WARFARE POLICY, 1918-1945. By JAMES NEATE A thesis submitted to The University of Birmingham for the degree of MASTER OF PHILOSOPHY School of History and Cultures College of Arts and Law The University of Birmingham September 2012 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. ABSTRACT This thesis examines the roles played by the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force in the formulation of Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) policy from 1918 to 1945. Its focus is on policy relating to the use of air power, specifically fixed-wing shore-based aircraft, against submarines. After a period of neglect between the Wars, airborne ASW would be pragmatically prioritised during the Second World War, only to return to a lower priority as the debates which had stymied its earlier development continued. Although the intense rivalry between the RAF and RN was the principal influence on ASW policy, other factors besides Service culture also had significant impacts.
    [Show full text]
  • Cat No Ref Title Author 3170 H3 an Airman's
    Cat Ref Title Author OS Sqdn and other info No 3170 H3 An Airman's Outing "Contact" 1842 B2 History of 607 Sqn R Aux AF, County of 607 Sqn Association 607 RAAF 2898 B4 AAF (Army Air Forces) The Official Guide AAF 1465 G2 British Airship at War 1914-1918 (The) Abbott, P 2504 G2 British Airship at War 1914-1918 (The) Abbott, P 790 B3 Post War Yorkshire Airfields Abraham, Barry 2654 C3 On the Edge of Flight - Development and Absolon, E W Engineering of Aircraft 3307 H1 Looking Up At The Sky. 50 years flying with Adcock, Sid the RAF 1592 F1 Burning Blue: A New History of the Battle of Addison, P/Craig JA Britain (The) 942 F5 History of the German Night Fighter Force Aders, Gerbhard 1917-1945 2392 B1 From the Ground Up Adkin, F 462 A3 Republic P-47 Thunderbolt Aero Publishers' Staff 961 A1 Pictorial Review Aeroplane 1190 J5 Aeroplane 1993 Aeroplane 1191 J5 Aeroplane 1998 Aeroplane 1192 J5 Aeroplane 1992 Aeroplane 1193 J5 Aeroplane 1997 Aeroplane 1194 J5 Aeroplane 1994 Aeroplane 1195 J5 Aeroplane 1990 Aeroplane Cat Ref Title Author OS Sqdn and other info No 1196 J5 Aeroplane 1994 Aeroplane 1197 J5 Aeroplane 1989 Aeroplane 1198 J5 Aeroplane 1991 Aeroplane 1200 J5 Aeroplane 1995 Aeroplane 1201 J5 Aeroplane 1996 Aeroplane 1525 J5 Aeroplane 1974 Aeroplane (Pub.) 1526 J5 Aeroplane 1975 Aeroplane (Pub.) 1527 J5 Aeroplane 1976 Aeroplane (Pub.) 1528 J5 Aeroplane 1977 Aeroplane (Pub.) 1529 J5 Aeroplane 1978 Aeroplane (Pub.) 1530 J5 Aeroplane 1979 Aeroplane (Pub.) 1531 J5 Aeroplane 1980 Aeroplane (Pub.) 1532 J5 Aeroplane 1981 Aeroplane (Pub.) 1533 J5
    [Show full text]
  • Further Improvement in Mood Among Employees
    Media information NO. 438/2019 Further improvement in mood among employees • 2019 Stimmungsbarometer (opinion barometer): Improvements in culture, integrity and cooperation • Kilian: “We are on the right track with our corporate and leadership culture” Wolfsburg, December 11, 2019. Volkswagen employees see the company on the right track as regards cooperation, leadership and integrity. This is the conclusion drawn from the most recent Volkswagen Stimmungsbarometer (opinion barometer), an employee survey that regularly gives employees throughout the company the opportunity to express their views on topics such as leadership, cooperation, integrity and culture while retaining their anonymity. The survey was conducted for the eleventh time in 2019 over a period of several weeks in October and November, and the results for Volkswagen AG’s German plants are now available. Board Member for Human Resources Gunnar Kilian said: “The results of this year’s opinion barometer confirm that Volkswagen employees have embraced our realignment. That encourages us to drive cultural change further forward and maintain the pace at which we are implementing our strategy. In other words: We will continue our intensive efforts to improve, and focus in particular on issues such as integrity and compliance, leadership and cooperation.” Kilian noted that many programs and actions had been initiated in the last two years and the positive effects were now emerging: “I am especially pleased that our employees see improvements in the areas of corporate and leadership culture as well as integrity and cooperation. That is not only excellent testimony, but also an incentive to improve even further.” The survey phase and the presentation of the results are always the first stage in the Volkswagen opinion barometer.
    [Show full text]