Guns on merchant ships

[Des Taff Jenkins]

HI Fred.
Thanks for that, the picture will go into my file. She was still an American ship when on the run from Aus to Borneo, Smithy was taken on as third officer when they were short.
Cheers Desredc.gif

[happy daze john in oz]

As for the issue of merchant ships with guns not coming under the cloak of protection, that it would appear have meant little. Judging by the number of unarmed merchant ships sunk by submarine it made no difference to the enemy.

[j.sabourn]

I think by the written accounts of the first world war, the war at sea was not as ruthless as regards u-boat warfare. We do read of certain U-Boat commanders letting the crew away in boats before sinking the ship with gunfire. Not every sinking was an atrocity and against the rules of warfare at the time. The war at sea in the second world war was going to be won or lost in getting supplies through to the UK. If Hitler had concentrated on his U-Boat fleet instead of his capital ships he would have probably succeeded. Anyone reading about U-Boat numbers will be surprised (unless they already know) at how few servicable U-Boats the Nazi"s had. When you consider the numbers for example of the Russian fleet which is over 10 times the amount Germany had. Any one who went to Murmansk could get an idea of their power in the 60"s without having to spy. JS

[John Arton]

John S
Went to Kalingrad in winter 2000 and at the entrance is a huge Russian Naval base. We had a Danish 2nd mate and he pointed out to me the craft that all the Scandinavian countries most feared. These were huge hovercrafts capable of 60 knots that could land a bull battalion complete with armour on the beaches of Scandinavia before the Scandinavians knew what was happening. There was also rows of missile cruisers but only one capable of being deployed as they were all being kept warm by steam from ashore but there was only sufficient steam to keep one warmed at a time .
Rgds
JA

[DeepSea]

I think by the written accounts of the first world war, the war at sea was not as ruthless as regards u-boat warfare. We do read of certain U-Boat commanders letting the crew away in boats before sinking the ship with gunfire.

At the beginning of WWI most of the Germans followed the rules of war engagement towards Merchant shipping and would first stop a ship allowing the crew to abandon ship before sinking any vessel. This would all change in February 1915 when the German government declared the seas around the British Isles a war zone and any ship found there on or after 18th February faced sinking without warning: unrestricted U-boat warfare began for the first time in history and any neutral flag was considered to be no guarantee for safety. This descision would ultimately see the loss of the passenger liner Lusitania causing the death of American citizens, provoking anger in the USA. The American government brought pressure to bear on Germany after the loss and demanded an end to sinking without warning. On 30th August 1915 Germany prohibited further action of this type. The Germans, in an attempt to reduce further damage to American political pressure, withdrew all U-boats from the English Channel area. 1916 would see this lull come to an end as unrestricted warfare started up once again. On the 24th March 1916 with the sinking of the passenger liner Sussex which again resulted in the loss of US citizens, the Germans were once again pressured into restricting their submarine warfare. By 1917 Germany was becoming desperate, as the British Naval blockade of the North Sea tightened its grip and German supplies and raw materials needed for war became more depleted. In a final attempt to starve Britain into submission and with America likely to become involved in the European war, unrestricted submarine warfare was again declared on the 1st February 1917. Two days later America broke off diplomatic relations with Germany and by April 6th America finally declared war on Germany.

[Louis the Amigo]

Hi shipmates, Hi lou thanks for your reply, I never hear of that book myself? but a few people know I collect all things merchant navy, and was giving a copy last week by a mate who collects Army stuff, I Check on line as far as I know only one for sale in the U.K. but its about our history in pictures good enough to take apart and frame, which I wont do as I dont vandelize old books trying to find out the history of the book and who was giving them? and why? must have cost a bit to make in 1944 colour printing was very expensive in them days. take care and thanks louis

[Ivan Cloherty]

Can one of these guns be trained on the person who keeps altering the site, just as we old fogies are getting used to its format. Yes I know this is in the wrong forum, but cannot find a new one, also don't like the posts disappearing as you've read them. Remember the old adage at sea 'if it ain't broke don't fix it'

[j.sabourn]

#14 Up until the 80's and maybe even now I dont know, but Norway had National Service. France had National Service long after Britain discarded. A young boy who my son went to school with, one of his parents French, the boy never even spoke French, however when he became 18 could not in those days go to France otherwise arrested and put in the French Army or whatever force they thought suitable. I dont know what countries in Europe still have national service if any, I do know however Russian Merchant Seamen that I have sailed with had all a naval background and received a certain amount of naval training. I wouldnt be surprised if China was the same. Cheers John S