ABSTRACT
Anti-submarine tactics were designed to exploit the weaknesses in U-boat operations. For their part, U-boat commanders made every effort to capitalize on the submarine’s chief characteristic and strength, which was its invisibility when submerged. They hoped to create surprise and attack from an ambush.1 Such stealthy methods, however, were not conducive to finding targets, and this conundrum was to exercise the enemy throughout the war. For the attack itself, however, the Uboat gained great advantage by remaining undetected until the moment of striking. The U-boat was not only more likely to make an undisturbed, and therefore more accurate, attack but the target stood practically no chance of taking avoiding action. Amidst the mayhem created, it was then hoped that the U-boat could withdraw unmolested. The U-boat was forced to use such stratagems because advances in technology had made anti-submarine forces deadly. There was, Admiral Max Horton, Flag Officer, Submarines, warned, ‘… no margin for mistakes in submarines, you are either alive or dead.’2 The U-boat was not a vehicle well adapted to self-defence and the U-boat’s use of stealth was a matter of necessity for self-preservation, which rather muddied the issue of the legality of unrestricted U-boat warfare.3
