WW2 Tankers North Alantic - Page 3 - Ships Nostalgia
08:42

Welcome
Welcome!Welcome to Ships Nostalgia, the world's greatest online community for people worldwide with an interest in ships and shipping. Whether you are crew, ex-crew, ship enthusiasts or cruisers, this is the forum for you. And what's more, it's completely FREE.

Click here to go to the forums home page and find out more.
Click here to join.
Log in
User Name Password

WW2 Tankers North Alantic

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #51  
Old 6th May 2007, 10:43
stan mayes stan mayes is offline  
Senior Member
Active: 1936 - 1986
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 9,354
Hello Bernard,
I have checked my Account of Wages for various ships and as you state it is War Risk Money,but only on my ships during the war. Postwar I have SAMPEP Oct to Dec 1945 ..Extras - War Bonus......DALLINGTON COURT Jan to Nov 1946..Extras - War Bonus ...It seems the danger money was paid long after the war ended,possibly as there was still a danger from mines..
I also checked BRITISH MERIT for VJ Day and found I received £1 and 12 pence bonus....
I joined BRITISH MERIT on 28th June 1946 and we took aboard many drums of BTC colour paint and outward to Corpus Christi we began painting the ship in her company colours -- it was a very pleasant duty after 6 years of crabfat grey..
The day after sailing from Texas homeward,the first atomic bomb devastated Hiroshima...
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 6th May 2007, 11:13
barnsey's Avatar
barnsey barnsey is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Navigation
Active: 1955 - 2005
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
My location
Posts: 2,908
Stan and the others .... thank you very much for those enlightening glimpses of conditions of pay ... sobering information. The lovely bit about painting the ship in company colours seems to "open the windows and let the light in' and I can well imagine everyones excitement and pleasure.

Thank you

barnsey
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 6th May 2007, 12:34
Hugh Ferguson's Avatar
Hugh Ferguson Hugh Ferguson is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
My location
Posts: 5,535
How very nice to see Stan join this interesting thread; not that I need an ally, but one is always welcome especialy one who, unlike me, went through everything from beginning to the bitter end. I'll be back soon.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 6th May 2007, 12:40
stan mayes stan mayes is offline  
Senior Member
Active: 1936 - 1986
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 9,354
Barnsey, Another condition of pay was that we signed Articles and accepted Monthly Pay ie a 30 day month..so shipowners gained 8 unpaid days work during each year ....Am I correct in this ?
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 6th May 2007, 21:12
barnsey's Avatar
barnsey barnsey is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Navigation
Active: 1955 - 2005
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
My location
Posts: 2,908
Stan, Hugh,

Stan I am not too sure how that 30 day month worked so cannot comment. You are talking to a youngster here. I was born in January 1942.

Hugh please dont think I am your enemy or worse, Bolshy far from it. Just trying to get a more appropriate picture of the Battle of the Atlantic through the mists of myth and propaganda of both sides now classified information is published and analised into decent stastics which show the whole canvas.

You debate extremely well. I appreciate your time, patience and memories we need them.

Barnsey
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 7th May 2007, 09:37
jim brindley jim brindley is offline  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 177
they took war bonuse away but after rethink kept our wages the same .old pom jim in oz .p.s its along time ago but i think a a.b. was 24 pound a month.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 7th May 2007, 12:42
Hugh Ferguson's Avatar
Hugh Ferguson Hugh Ferguson is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
My location
Posts: 5,535
I've just spent a week searching for a book, which I felt sure rested in my archives, and was beginning to doubt if in fact, it did. But then, as reminiscent of previous occasions, it appeared right under my nose!
It is very relevant to this subject of U.Boats never, even from the beginning, having a chance of blockading Britain, and the troubles they allegedly had with malfunctioning torpedoes.
The book is by Wolfgang Frank and was purchased by me for 15 shillings when new in 1954. Frank was a crew member in U.47 and had access to Prien's diaries. Chapter V is entitled, Failure at Narvik, and only a cursory mention is given to suspected torpedo failure. Most of the "bad luck" attending the failed operation featured two groundings one of which occurred immediately after firing a torpedo, of unstated design, near the sandbank on which the U.47 stranded. That was the torpedo that, not surprisingly, altered course and hit a cliff! Four other torpedoes failed in this unusual environment for a U.Boat to be operating and I don't doubt that Prien made the most of it when he reported to the Admiral. Hitler would no doubt have gone into one of his carpet chewing routines and sent for Raeder & Doenitz, telling them that good German technology must never again be seen to fail, and it wasn't!
In none of the other U.Boat commander's accounts can I find any concern expressed about torpedoes:Werner Muller and his mate Herbert never made any mention to me of such a problem. I think that Blair makes a mountain out of a mole-hill. Two depth bombs dropped on U.47 by a Sunderland failed to explode, so Prien hadn't been entirely unlucky.
Der U.Boote Waffe didn't really pose a great threat until they established bases in La Pallice, St. Nazaire, Bordeaux, Lorient & Brest. There the most amazing efforts were made with the use of thousands in forced labour to construct indistructable bomb shelters for the boats. Not exactly an exercise to be undertaken for a force that had already, allegedly, failed and which went on to sink approximately 4,000 ships. And that was just the German U.Boats; what about the Italians. One of the most devastating salvoes of torpedoes ever fired came from an Italian sub..
As everyone who knows anything at all about the war at sea, the 2nd Happy Time for the U.boats was on the American coast and that resulted from the U.S Navy's analysis of appalling British losses in convoy and their determination not to make the same mistake. They had failed to take into account that we were building escort vessels that were not fast enough to
catch a U.Boat on the surface. I will never forget listening to Bill Holman (in a borrowed U.S. Coastguard cutter on this occasion would you believe) trying to land a shell on a U.Boat fast disappearing over the horizon!
And then of course there were the surface raiders. All of this not a threat to our survival! Tell that to the Marines.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 7th May 2007, 17:53
Keith Adams Keith Adams is offline  
Keith Adams
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Deck
Active: 1951 - 2011
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
My location
Posts: 739
I may have missed someone elses comment on it, but ... the most factual book I have read about U-Boat operations in WWll is Andrew Williams' book The Battle of THe Atlantic which accompanied the BBC Television Series of 2002 Published by BBC Worldwide Ltd, Woodlands, 80 Wood Lane, London W12 OTT ISBN 0 563 53429 X Cost was Pounds 16.99 and a terriffic read ... exclusive interviews and first-hand accounts (much akin to "our" stan mayes), including those given for the first time by members of former U-Boat crews. Trust this info. will be of use to someone. Deepest thanks to all who served. Regards, Snowy
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 8th May 2007, 14:10
barnsey's Avatar
barnsey barnsey is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Navigation
Active: 1955 - 2005
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
My location
Posts: 2,908
Hugh,

I am sorry but I have now quoted to you from Tarrants book which you have and I gave you the page reference. U-boat net who again you quoted at me as being good. Hessler who not only was an ace U-boat commander but was also a senior staff officer of Donitz in U-boat HQ. Hessler's book is an official account commissioned by the Royal Navy and is published by The BRITISH MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, Dan van der Vat "The Atlantic campaign" and also Wolfgang Frank "The Sea Wolves" the story of german U-boats at war, published in English 1955 price 21/- net...... it is now a classic book by the way and I paid NZ$30 or £11.09 so you should make a good profit on it. All make it quite clear that a serious crisis with their torpedos existed causing great concern to high command through until Jan 1942.

You must take into consideration that various auto biographical books take place at different stages. Most of the early U-boat commanders were killed and did not get a chance to relate their stories of the first two years which is when the defects occured. But all in depth books which cover the whole U-boat war relate it in detail.

Blair does not make mountains out of a mole hill ... his two books, of 809 and 909 pages are very serious authorative, cross referenced, detailed analysis of the Battle of the Atlantic using material and relating the story from both the Allied ( that is British, American and Canadian ) and Germans.

To get back right to the subject at the commencement of this thread.

From 1939 to the end of 1942 although the losses sustained by the Allies were horrendous the gains from European fleets, other sources such as charters and improved efficiencies in getting damaged ships back to sea and cargos discharged faster the overall tonnage under allied control was maintained.

Because of withdrawals caused by Hitler with his Norwegian campaign and continuing phobia re Norway plus other factors such as damage, weather and lack of U-boat numbers, the steady introduction of Convoy, the gradual building of escorts and improvement in their tactics and weapons the U-boat achievements were blunted thank God or matters although very serious would have been at the brink of the success Donitz had planned.

At the beginning of 1943 the climax of the losses were reached, that they were huge is not denied. But equally the Americans and the allies were now seeing the shipbuilding efforts coming to fruition. May 1943 saw the worst month for U-boats up to that time when some 38 were sunk.

Aircraft, "Jeep" carriers, training, weapons and detection methods were all finding their feet and the U-boats although continuing to sink a large number of ships were doomed.

So it is urged that the "Battle of the Atlantic" is read in depth, across the board and from all angles with the facts as analised with the full information from both sides now to hand. Even in mid 1970's a lot of information was still only just being declassified. There were huge sacrifices and bravery, but everyone rallied around and found different ways of doing things in all walks of life and thanks to Hitlers "Carpet Chewing Rages" as Hugh so aptly puts it things while close were not at the depths of despair that Churchills words depicted. He might have been worried but the staff he had bashed into shape earlier were well in control and managing the situation .... Quality not quantity although Quantity was just around the corner with the Liberties, Victories and our beloved T2's.
I'm off to bed....
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 8th May 2007, 16:21
K urgess K urgess is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
My location
Posts: 83
Ain't hindsight wonderful!
The statistics didn't matter at the time. Germany was vastly superior in arms on all fronts so any success or setback was magnified a thousandfold. Up until 1943 Hitler's "carpet chewing" had led to some remarkable successes and it was only after the "tide turned" that he lost the plot.
Trying to supply a country the size of Britain with materials to fight a war and sustain a population by sea meant that the loss of even one merchant ship was a disaster. Not just because of the material lost but because of the effect on morale. After Dunkirk with the enemy camped on your doorstep this was not a happy country.
Enigma may have helped the allies to fight the enemy but it mustn't be forgotten that they were reading British signals just as fast thanks to the Beobachtungs-Dienst.
Geoffrey Jones in his book "Autumn of the U-boats" states that he checked his statistics and was struck by the fact that, of the 34 U-boats sunk during the period he covers (8th September to 5th October, 1943), U220, U422, U419, U643, U470, U282, U540 and U842 (8 in total) were all sunk on their first patrol and all of them set out from Bergen in Norway. Britain had the same worries about Norway that Hitler had. It was expected that it would become the last bastion of Nazism. Plus any mention of Tripitz had the RN tied up and convoys scattered at the slightest hint of a prospective sortie.
BTW Geoffrey Jones mentions a video of a Canadian film called "K-225" made aboard a Flower Class corvette in 1943. Does anyone know if this is commercially available?
Kris
Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old 8th May 2007, 17:22
Jim MacIntyre Jim MacIntyre is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
My location
Posts: 240
Marconi Sahib
Re : Corvette 'K-225' check with www.downunderdvd.com. I trawled the site for a while unable to specifically locate it but supposedly this movie is available in his classic movie combination collections. At leat you can e-mail him and ask...
Cheers
Jim Mac
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 8th May 2007, 17:26
Jim MacIntyre Jim MacIntyre is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
My location
Posts: 240
Marconi Sahib
Check that last... The movie is listed in his 'Adventure, Mystery and Noir' section Movies A-D
Good luck
Jim Mac
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 8th May 2007, 19:13
K urgess K urgess is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
My location
Posts: 83
Thanks Jim Mac
I hadn't realised it was a movie, thought it might be a documentary made by the RCN
Cheers
Kris
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 9th May 2007, 08:23
barnsey's Avatar
barnsey barnsey is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Navigation
Active: 1955 - 2005
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
My location
Posts: 2,908
Kris,
Thanks for your contribution ... how right you are in all you say .... I have only just got my copy of Autumn of the U-boats... it has a whole bit about a good friend hedley Kett and his sub Ultimatum .. I am desperately trying to confirm his sinking of a u-boat off Toulon.... its a mystery.

I also want the other Geoffrey Jones book. Sub verses U-boat....its pricey
I have a film taken aboard HMW Wren and others ... its great I'll get the details...

Barnsey
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 9th May 2007, 18:40
Hugh Ferguson's Avatar
Hugh Ferguson Hugh Ferguson is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
My location
Posts: 5,535
Quote:
Originally Posted by barnsey View Post
Stan, Hugh,

Stan I am not too sure how that 30 day month worked so cannot comment. You are talking to a youngster here. I was born in January 1942.

Hugh please dont think I am your enemy or worse, Bolshy far from it. Just trying to get a more appropriate picture of the Battle of the Atlantic through the mists of myth and propaganda of both sides now classified information is published and analised into decent stastics which show the whole canvas.

You debate extremely well. I appreciate your time, patience and memories we need them.

Barnsey
I would not care to have been a U.Boat threat denier, suggesting to the ships masters at a convoy conference in 1943, that the threat was non-existant. I wonder what they would have thought of that proposition!?
(See GALLERY; Life On Board).

I'm beginning to detect, what I would call, an Anthony Wedgewood Benn syndrome around this re-writing of history-whatever my country does is wrong, or, whatever those ship masters and their crews had to endure was nothing much to be concerned about at all, because the threat from German, Italian and Japanese submarines was just a figment of an over excited imagination.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 9th May 2007, 18:59
stan mayes stan mayes is offline  
Senior Member
Active: 1936 - 1986
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 9,354
Well said Hugh
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 9th May 2007, 23:28
Bernard McIver Bernard McIver is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 176
Barnsey,
I share the view of Hugh and Stan. This debate has degenerated into discussing the technical problems and internal wranglings experienced by the Germans. With respect, the outcome of the Battle of the Atlantic was determined by what COULD BE and WAS done, not what MIGHT HAVE BEEN and WAS NOT done.

Here is as quote from a paper written by Richard M Leighton dealing with the deliberations of the Anglo-American Combined Shipping Adjustment Boards, in which President Roosevelt was personally involved.

ANGLO-AMERICAN SHIPPING COLLABORATION IN 1942:
"The two countries collaborated most closely in the joint use of Merchant Shipping, a sphere in which they nearly achieved a full-fledged pooling of resources. Throughout 1942, however, this collaboration was more of a burden than a help to Britain. Although the amount of American Merchant Shipping in British service almost doubled, British warships were diverted to help protect the sealanes in the western Atlantic, with consequent thinning of protection elsewhere, and Britain also contributed heavily to American shipping services, particularly in troop ships. British shipping losses in 1942 fell just short of 6 million deadweight tons (an increase of a third over those in the year preceding, when Britain had been fighting the war at sea alone); American losses were less than 2.5 million tons. American shipyards, moreover were able in this year to offset U.S. losses to the extent of almost 4 million tons, while Britain, with meagre building capacity, showed a net loss of more than 2 million tons. By the end of March 1943 Britain's dry cargo shipping tonnage had fallen to 18.5 million deadweight tons, almost 3 million tons less than its total on the eve of Pearl Harbor.

The drain of British Merchant Shipping during 1942, which Britain's new ally was not yet able to make good, posed a serious and growing threat to the British War Economy. The heart of that economy lay in the industries and people of the United Kingdom, which depended for their very existence on an uninterrupted flow of imports. These had already declined from a prewar average of more than 50 million deadweight tons to 42 million in 1940 and 31 million in 1941. In 1942, despite desperate efforts to arrest the decline and increased assistance from the United States, they fell to 23 million. Even with drastic curtailment of domestic consumption and services and increased local production of food and munitions, this was far less than what was needed to meet current requirements. Britain had to eat into its stocks, which by the end of the year had fallen an estimated 2.5 million tons to a level dangerously near what the War Cabinet had decided must be regarded as irreducible."

Is this what you call a myth or propaganda?
There is more in a similar vein, but hopefully this is enough to get the debate back on track.
Regards, Bernard

Last edited by Bernard McIver; 10th May 2007 at 00:08..
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 10th May 2007, 10:11
Hugh Ferguson's Avatar
Hugh Ferguson Hugh Ferguson is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
My location
Posts: 5,535
That, Bernard, really goes to the crux. Many thanks! I'd love to know how you found such an extraordinarily obscure, but very relevant, piece of information composed by somebody who really understood the facts.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 11th May 2007, 00:30
Bernard McIver Bernard McIver is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 176
Hello Hugh,
Thanks for your kind comments. The information came from "COMMAND DECISIONS" compiled by the Center of Military History, Department of the Army, Washington, D.C. This covers 23 Major Decisions of WW2.
I have only just found this site and will be burning the midnight oil for many weeks ahead.
Click on this link and go to No.8 U.S. MERCHANT SHIPPING AND THE BRITISH IMPORT CRISIS:
http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/books/70-7_0.htm
Regards,
Bernard

Last edited by Bernard McIver; 11th May 2007 at 00:35..
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 11th May 2007, 10:30
Bernard McIver Bernard McIver is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 176
Hello Stan,
How were you treated by the tax man during the war? For 2 years I was on a Dutch ship sailing out of U.S.A, with a foreign flag allowance, and paid no tax.
My last trip was with the Silver Line, and apart from the drastic change in the food I paid 42% tax on my earnings including the War Risk Money and VJ day bonus. We were in Gibraltar for VJ day, and when we left for Buenos Aires via Casablanca the ship was painted in peacetime colours. I know just how you must have felt after all those years in drab grey. Those were the days!
Kindest Regards,
Bernard
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 11th May 2007, 11:08
barnsey's Avatar
barnsey barnsey is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Navigation
Active: 1955 - 2005
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
My location
Posts: 2,908
WW II Tankers .... Battle of the Atlantic

Of the various statements made in this debate Kris makes a very relevant one …” Ain't hindsight wonderful! The statistics didn't matter at the time.” To which I add “but they do now and in this debate”.

For you Hugh to deny the facts and the story they reveal is not only fooling yourself but more importantly it denigrates the actions of those who fought so valiantly, on both sides in a most terrible battle. This is a statement with which I totally agree …. “I do not to say in the least that the Battle of the Atlantic was not a desperate fight for the Allies or an easy threat for the Germans to mount. To the contrary it was a bitter, pain full struggle for both sides, the most prolonged and arduous naval campaign in all history. It deserves a history written with access to all the official records, uninfluenced by propaganda and to be stripped of mythology.”

I am now going to copy, very nearly verbatim a well reasoned position which was researched in depth and written by an allied submariner come naval historian. Yes, someone who with all “the hindsight” anyone could possibly obtain he started in 1987 to put the facts before the World……………………………

“There is a most curious naval myth built up around the German U-boat…… That the Germans invented the U-boat and consistently built the best submarines in the world. Endowed with a gift for exploiting this murderous weapon German submariners very nearly defeated the Allies in WW 1 and dominated the seas in both world wars.

A Canadian naval historian Michael Hadley writes…. During both wars, and during the inter-war years as well the U-boat was mythologized more than any other weapon of war.

The myth assumed an especially formidable aspect in WW II and afterwards. During the War, the well oiled propaganda machinery of the Third Reich glorified and exaggerated the “successes” of German submariners in the various Axis media. At the same time, Allied propagandists found it advantageous to exaggerate the peril of the U-boats for various reasons. The end result was a distorted picture of the Battle of the Atlantic .

After the war London, Washington and Ottawa clamped a tight embargo on the captured German U-boat records to conceal the secrets of code breaking, which had played an important role in the Battle of the Atlantic. As a result, the first “Histories” of the U-boat war were produced by Third Reich people such as Wolfgang Frank, Hans Jochem Brennecke and Harold Busch and of course Donitz himself, not to mention a host of various U-boat commanders and crew. These “histories”, of course did nothing to diminish the mythology. Hampered by the security embargo on the U-boat and code breaking records and by an apparent unfamiliarity with the technology and the tactical limitations of submarines, the official and semi-official Allied naval historians were unable to write authoratively about German U-boats in the Battle of the Atlantic. Hence for decade after decade no complete and reliable history of the Battle of the Atlantic appeared and the German Mythology prevailed.

In 1975 I was prevailed to write a history of the German U-boat war. However, owing to the embargo this was not possible but the idea took root. Over the next dozen years London, Washington and Ottawa gradually released the U-boat and code breaking records. During the same period German naval scholars notably Hurgen Rohwer trawled the German U-boat records and produced valuable and objective technical studies and accounts of some combat actions and related matters.

In 1987 I spent many months culling and copying tens of thousands of pages of documents at various military archives and collecting published works on the Battle and code breaking. In Germany we made contact with the U-boat veterans associations, commanders and crews. We also kept abreast of the spate of scholarly and popular U-boat books and articles about phases or aspects of the war that appeared in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s, much of it first rate.

As I see it there were three separate and distinct phases: the U-boat war against the British Empire, the U-boat war against the Americas and the U-boat war against both.

The Germans were not supermen; the u-boats and torpedo’s were not technical marvels but rather inferior craft and weapons unsuited for the Battle of the Atlantic.

The main contribution the U-boat force made in the war was to present a terror weapon, a sort of “threat in being” which forced the Allies to convoy, delaying the arrival of goods and supplies and to deploy extensive anti submarine counter forces.

The myths notwithstanding only a small percentage of Allied merchant ships actually fell victim to U-boats. Most of all Allied merchant ships in convoy and their goods reached assigned destinations.




Now for some tanker figures for the first phase of the war September 1939-December 1942………………

At the beginning of the War in 1939 the individual tanker fleets of the non- Axis nations were …
British Empire 453
Norway 268
Holland 107
France and other European countries 133
USA and panama 430
Other American 54
Totals 1,445 10,162,000 GRT

In the period Sept 1939 – December 1942 British and American ship yards completed 176 new tankers. British Empire 61 plus American 115 614,000 GRT.

To move to 1942, the rough period mentioned at the start of this thread when losses were huge. The actual tanker losses both on the American seaboard and the Atlantic were a total 213 for 1,667,505 GRT but the shipyards on both sides built 92 for 925,000 GRT

On Jan 1st 1943 the Allied tanker fleet was 1,291 for 9,311,718 GRT a net loss of 154 tankers for 850,282 GRT or about 10% of the fleet since the start of the war.

From this analysis it can be seen that while the U-boat campaign against the combined Allied tanker fleet caused great hardships and inconveniences it failed to achieve a decisive strategic success. The only really serious allied setback occurred in 1942, but was quickly overcome, as was pointed out in an earlier posting in 1943 when ship building increased substantially and losses dropped dramatically.

Although London feared - and often predicted – dire shortages in the British Isles during this period, none really occurred. Hardships and inconveniences, such as civilian petrol and fuel oil rationing resulted not solely from actual tanker losses but also from the drastic slowdown of oil imported due to convoying and of course to the diversion of oil imports to war making purposes.

Hugh and Bernard I am not denigrating either of you or Britain, I am English by birth.

Simply look at the facts now released and laid before us, realise how desperate times lead the political figures of the day and Churchill in particular to make statements to fight the events they were faced with. Thank goodness he did make the speeches and statements he did, they inspired a nation to heroic deeds and sacrifices. But now is the time to realise that the true situation was a tad different and understand how the myths came about and for what reason.

Hindsight must be learnt from … it’s a great thing … The Battle was huge and terrifying with outstanding courage everywhere. At the end of which some 30,000 merchant seamen and a very near similar number of U-boat crews were dead … 64,000 men …

It is very heartening and touching to read tales and hear of meetings and respect for each other of Allied and U-boat seafarers over the years after the war…

David Barnes
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 11th May 2007, 13:17
K urgess K urgess is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
My location
Posts: 83
Having sat down and read the article that Bernard posted the link to, (something I recommend every one following this thread to do) it all boils down to the fact that it didn't matter how good or bad the U-boats were. The fact that they were out there was all that mattered.
The thread started with remarks about American propaganda and the only conclusion I can come to is that without the provision of American tonnage we could well have lost, not due to U-boats but to an overall lack of tonnage to meet all wartime commitments.
If, at one stage, the U-boats were sinking 4 ships each and every day, the powers that be had no reason to believe that this wouldn't continue to effect their war plans and budgetting for the foreseeable future.
If Churchill was going to Roosevelt to beg for ships he wasn't going to tell him that he was exaggerating.
A very interesting debate with both sides having valid points.
I admit that some myths should be laid to rest but that should not lead to a denial of the conditions prevalent of the time.

Last edited by K urgess; 11th May 2007 at 13:20..
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 11th May 2007, 17:44
stan mayes stan mayes is offline  
Senior Member
Active: 1936 - 1986
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 9,354
Hello Bernard, Re Income Tax paid during WW2.
I have all my Account of Wages for1943 and 1944.I was sailing as AB and my wages were £14 per month plus £10 per month War Risk Money [on 2 ships I received £12 War Risk Money - don't ask why]
CAPE HOWE Lyle's -5 2 43 to 10 5 43 Total wages £84. 4s No tax deducted -I probably received a demand later...Overtime rate was 1shilling and 9 pence an hour.
LARGS BAY Shaw Savill Troopship - 10 6 43 to 5 11 43 ,Wages £126.12s -Tax £17.3s
NERITINA Anglo Saxon tanker - 7 12 43 to 1 5 44, Wages £116.5s - Tax £16.2s.
DOLABELLA Anglo Saxon -Normandy Operations..We were paid weekly,with £1 per week in lieu of overtime..20 5 44 to 24 8 44. Wages £108.8s -Tax £13.11s.
LUCELLUM H.E.Moss tanker - 20 9 44 to 4 11 44 -Wages £36.6s -Tax £5.6s
EMPIRE UNITY ex BISCAYA a captured German tanker -Managers Hunting & sons -14 11 44 to 29 2 45.- Wages £93.13s -Tax £12.8s..
Following my leave from trips I occasionally worked by on ships in Tilbury Docks so I probably earned another £30 during this 2 year period..
So,total earned for 2 years was £600 - one weeks wages for many nowadays!!!! and they go home every night...
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 12th May 2007, 20:00
K urgess K urgess is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
My location
Posts: 83
Attached are 3 cartoons from the popular press in 1943.
They are the only ones dealing with U-boats in any form that I could find in an extensive collection of publications.
Cartoonists at the time were very adept at making political comments and most illustrations were not meant to amuse. The amusing ones were usually confined to innocent subjects in the slapstick style.
These three come from the publication "400 famous Cartoons" by 5 famous cartoonists.
Some wartime cartoonists produced some very disturbing images. My favourite is Armengol but Illingworth is the only one I have been able to find who deals with U-boats, so far.
They may give some insight into the mood of the population at the time.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Illingworth Cartoon 001s.jpg (107.3 KB, 76 views)
File Type: jpg Illingworth Cartoon 002s.jpg (150.4 KB, 73 views)
File Type: jpg Illingworth Cartoon 003s.jpg (133.1 KB, 76 views)
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 12th May 2007, 22:50
Bernard McIver Bernard McIver is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 176
Thank you Kris for bringing some humour into this sombre debate. These cartoons illustrate a British trait which Hitler never understood; the ability to laugh at adversity and oneself. Keep them coming as I feel this debate has a long way to go.
Bernard (one who was there).
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
BP Tankers Lose Anchors HENNEGANOL BP Shipping 26 14th November 2013 11:52
MAERSK TANKERS 1945-1959 [mostly] Rory Tankers 25 1st April 2009 01:56
"Suspect" North Korean ship on the move rushie News and Views from the Shipping World 0 27th October 2006 16:40
Hong Kong detains North Korean ship rushie News and Views from the Shipping World 0 24th October 2006 09:45
9 new tankers on order rushie News and Views from the Shipping World 0 8th August 2006 10:28



Support SN


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.1.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.