About merchant ship wartime colours

[Aktungbby]

Originally Posted by gap

mmm... I am not sure about the camo patterrn, those sketches are way too small for us to appreciate such a fine details, but have you noticed the neutrality markings near the bows of the two Swedish freighters (Suecia and Lima)?

FAT lotta good it did them: https://www.konditori100.se/SiWW2/sww2lscs.htm

During World War II Swedish ships sailed for Sweden, the Allies, the Germans, the Red Cross and for some others.
Swedish merchant sailors memorialAround 1,400-1,500 Swedish sailors were killed when Swedish ships were hit by bombs, grenades, mines and/or torpedoes. (Plus or minus some hundreds - I've seen various numbers.)
500-600 Swedish sailors were killed on ships from other nations.
Around 270 Swedish ships were sunk.

[Mister_M]

Why wearing neutrality marks while sailing into an allied convoy ?

[kapuhy]

Originally Posted by Mister_M

Why wearing neutrality marks while sailing into an allied convoy ?

Possibly because you do not intend to stay in the convoy for entire cruise and don't want to have to paint them back on when you separate from it. Plus, there's a small chance that given two equally juicy targets in the periscope, U-Boat will select one that belongs to the enemy nation.

[gap]

Originally Posted by Aktungbby

FAT lotta good it did them: https://www.konditori100.se/SiWW2/sww2lscs.htm

Nice link, well done Aktungbby

Originally Posted by Mister_M

Why wearing neutrality marks while sailing into an allied convoy ?

Originally Posted by kapuhy

Possibly because you do not intend to stay in the convoy for entire cruise and don't want to have to paint them back on when you separate from it. Plus, there's a small chance that given two equally juicy targets in the periscope, U-Boat will select one that belongs to the enemy nation.

Makes sense. We should see the Swedish merchant fleet as a "mercenary fleet" of some sort. They sailed equallity to neutral, Allied and Axis ports, but they couldn't repaint their ships their ships every time they changed destinations. The best way to set up similar nations in game, is having two rosters for each of them, one neutral and the other allied. Ships belonging to the two rosters should be visually identical, but campaign files should call neutral ships to sail to/from neutral or Axis ports, whereas the "enemy" ones should be used within Allied shipping boud to/from England, USA, Canada, USSR, etc.
Probably Vecko has already done something similar for TWoS.

[kapuhy]

Originally Posted by gap

Probably Vecko has already done something similar for TWoS.

That's exactly what "Free XXX" nations are used for.

[gap]

Originally Posted by kapuhy

That's exactly what "Free XXX" nations are used for.

Yes indeed, I know that. I am the one who reworked DesSides.cfg for Open Horizons II back in 2011, when Zedi was still in charge of the mod. With little changes the file is now part of TWoS; I think my exaplanatory notes are still in place btw.

When I created the "Free" nations I had exactly those "ambiguous" diplomatic stances in mind. Nonetheless, more recently, I came to realize that the said nations were poorly implemented in game, or not used at all. I will give you an example. The FreeAmerican nation was created for allowing the implementation of Neutrality Patrols, but I think they were never actually added to the campaign. IIRC, the last time I checked the FreeAmerican roster it was empty.

Several months ago I discussed the topic with Vecko, and I think that the shortcomings were amended at least in part. I say "at least in part" because the last time I offered to cooperate with him on those aspects of the OHII/TWoS campaign he gently refused my proposal, and then he came up with his own changes, so now I am unsure on which features were implemented according to my original idea and which not.

I hope I made myself clearer now

[Mister_M]

Originally Posted by gap

I will give you an example. The FreeAmerican nation was created for allowing the implementation of Neutrality Patrols, but I think they were never actually added to the campaign. IIRC, the last time I checked the FreeAmerican roster it was empty.

Ooooh, ok ! So, despite USA being neutral until Dec 1941, some american escort ships or airplanes could attack us ? (but maybe without bombs and depth charges... )

[kapuhy]

Originally Posted by gap

I hope I made myself clearer now

Yes, sorry for my Captain Obvious moment. Of all people, you know best what these nations were created for

As for things being not / not fully implemented, the more I look into campaign files the more I see how much it could be still improved regarding historical accuracy. A pity there's not nearly enough modders interested in SH5 to do it all.

[iambecomelife]

Originally Posted by kapuhy

Possibly because you do not intend to stay in the convoy for entire cruise and don't want to have to paint them back on when you separate from it. Plus, there's a small chance that given two equally juicy targets in the periscope, U-Boat will select one that belongs to the enemy nation.

Yep - that's correct. I read a book called "Night of the U-Boats" that talked about the problem created by mixed nationality convoys - the author says UK sailors hated neutral ships; the giant flags & bright colors could give away a convoy's location. In HX-79 British tanker "Sitala" was sailing near the neutral Swedish tanker "Janus" on a moonlit night - both got sunk because the bright paint on "Janus" helped submarines find their convoy:

https://www.uboat.net/allies/merchants/ship/641.html

https://www.uboat.net/allies/merchants/ship/638.html

[Mister_M]

Good info !

Originally Posted by iambecomelife

both got sunk because the bright paint on "Janus" helped submarines find their convoy:

Is this clearly stated by the U-boats' captains themselves ?

[iambecomelife]

Originally Posted by Mister_M

Good info !



Is this clearly stated by the U-boats' captains themselves ?

It was in a complaint to the Admiralty from an officer on the freighter "Hoyanger", which survived the battle. Not 100% sure that the U-Boat crews confirmed this, but I tend to believe his complaint - he said the "Janus" practically glowed in the moonlight bc of grey and white paint.

Out of curiosity I looked up Janus's shipping company in a WW2 ID book - sure enough the paint scheme for that line was grey and white. They also had bright yellow funnel markings...probably didn't help.

I also read an article on the TM-1 convoy disaster, with 7 of 9 tankers sunk (can't find the web page anymore, sorry) - the destroyers escorting the tankers were painted an inappropriate shade of grey, which the U-Boats used to locate the convoy in the moonlight.

Apparently, certain shades of grey paint made a ship highly visible on a clear night when the moon was out....thus the highly specific regulations about what shade of grey you were supposed to use.

[Mister_M]

Originally Posted by iambecomelife

...the destroyers escorting the tankers were painted an inappropriate shade of grey, which the U-Boats used to locate the convoy in the moonlight.

Apparently, certain shades of grey paint made a ship highly visible on a clear night when the moon was out....thus the highly specific regulations about what shade of grey you were supposed to use.

I think that's why dark/black hulls were not repainted : it was very good to camouflage the ship at night. Only ships with white/bright/saturated colors were repainted with medium/dark grey paint.

To confirm this, it would be useful to find original (peace time) paint sheme of these ships :

Originally Posted by Mister_M

3. Ships with superstructures (probably) repainted in grey : the hull remains very dark (black). HEINA superstructures are perhaps actually white...

 

4. Ships in plain grey (probably a war repaint) : note that there are different shades of grey from ship to ship...

 

[Aktungbby]

Originally Posted by iambecomelife

Yep - that's correct. I read a book called "Night of the U-Boats" that talked about the problem created by mixed nationality convoys - the author says UK sailors hated neutral ships; the giant flags & bright colors could give away a convoy's location. In HX-79 British tanker "Sitala" was sailing near the neutral Swedish tanker "Janus" on a moonlit night - both got sunk because the bright paint on "Janus" helped submarines find their convoy:

https://www.uboat.net/allies/merchants/ship/641.html

https://www.uboat.net/allies/merchants/ship/638.html

THe bright paint is moot on a moonlit night in a two convoy attack:

HX 79 was an east-bound convoy of 50 ships which sailed from Halifax on 8 October 1940 making for Liverpool with war materials. On 19 October, 4 days from landfall, HX 79 was entering the Western Approaches, and had caught up with the position of SC 7, which was under attack.
The escort for the crossing had been meagre, being provided by two armed merchant cruisers against the possibility of attack by a surface raider, but even these had departed when HX 79 was sighted by U-47, commanded by submarine ace Kapitänleutnant Günther Prien.
At this point HX 79 was unescorted; Prien sent a sighting report and set to shadowing the convoy, while Konteradmiral Karl Dönitz ordered the pack to assemble. Those U-boats which had attacked SC 7 and were still able to fight (three had departed to re-arm having expended all their torpedoes) were directed to the scene. Four did so, U-100 (Joachim Schepke), U-46 (Engelbert Endrass), U-48 (Heinrich Bleichrodt) and U-38 (Heinrich Liebe) joining U-47 during the day.
However the Admiralty, concerned by the fate of SC 7 and anticipating an attack, rushed reinforcements to the scene; throughout the day a large escort force of 11 warships also gathered to provide cover.
Action
Undeterred by their presence however, the pack attacked as night fell; using the darkness to cover an approach on the surface, Prien penetrated the escort screen from the south to attack from within the convoy, while Endrass (who had learned his trade as Prien's 1st officer), did the same from the north.
Over the next six hours, 13 ships were torpedoed; 6 by U-47 alone (4 of which were sunk). 10 ships were sunk from the convoy, and 2 stragglers were lost later in the day. These were Shirak, which had been torpedoed in the night, and Loch Lomond, sailing with the convoy as a rescue ship. Another, Athelmonarch, was damaged but was able to make port.
HX 79 had lost 12 ships out of 49, a total tonnage of 75,069 gross register tons (GRT).
None of the attacking U-boats were damaged.

In short the Convoy had happened upon a convoy attack in progress (SC 7) ; was spotted by Prien and shadowed and the other Uboats, all commanded by top aces, closed in to commenced night attacks in moonlight. HX 79 may be considered to have gotten off lightly when compared to SC 7:

SC 7 had lost 20 ships out of 35, of which seven fell to Kretschmer's U-99. The total tonnage lost was 79,592 GRT. The arrival of convoy HX 79 in the vicinity had diverted the U-boats and they went on to sink 12 ships from HX 79 that night. No U-boats were lost in either engagement. The loss of 28 ships in 48 hours made 18 and 19 October the worst two days for shipping losses in the entire Atlantic campaign. The attack on SC 7 was a vindication of the U-boat Arm's wolfpack tactic, and was the most successful U-boat attack of the Atlantic campaign. The convoy escort was ineffective in guarding against the attack. Convoy tactics were rudimentary at this early stage of the war. The escorts' responses were uncoordinated, as the ships were unused to working together with a common battle-plan. Command fell to the senior officer present, and could change as each new ship arrived. The escorts were torn between staying with the convoy, abandoning survivors in the water, as DEMS regulations demanded, and picking them up, leaving the convoy unprotected and risking being torpedoed themselves.

When U say Happy Time BBY, this was the Apogee of the entire Uboat campaign!