World Library  
Flag as Inappropriate
Email this Article

Allied submarines in the Pacific War

Article Id: WHEBN0017817870
Reproduction Date:

Title: Allied submarines in the Pacific War  
Author: World Heritage Encyclopedia
Language: English
Subject: Pacific Ocean theatre of World War II, Allied naval bombardments of Japan during World War II, Operation Kita, Convoy, Surrender of Japan
Publisher: World Heritage Encyclopedia

Allied submarines in the Pacific War

Japanese freighter Nittsu Maru sinks after being torpedoed by USS Wahoo on 21 March 1943.

Allied submarines were used extensively during the Pacific War and were a key contributor to the defeat of the Empire of Japan. During the war, submarines of the United States Navy were responsible for 55% of Japan's merchant marine losses; other Allied navies added to the toll.[1] The war against shipping was the single most decisive factor in the collapse of the Japanese economy. Allied submarines also conducted reconnaissance patrols, landed special forces and guerrilla troops and performed search and rescue tasks.[2] The majority of the submarines involved were from the U.S. Navy, with the British Royal Navy committing the second largest amount of boats and the Royal Netherlands Navy contributing smaller numbers of boats.

The Allied submarine campaign is one of the least-publicized feats in military history,[1] due in large part to the efforts of Allied governments to ensure their own submarines' actions were not reported in the media. The U.S. Navy adopted an official policy of unrestricted submarine warfare, and it appears the policy was executed without the knowledge or prior consent of the government.[3] The London Naval Treaty, to which the U.S. was signatory,[4] required submarines to abide by prize rules (commonly known as "cruiser rules"). It did not prohibit arming merchantmen,[5] but arming them, or having them report contact with submarines (or raiders), made them de facto naval auxiliaries and removed the protection of the cruiser rules.[6] This made restrictions on submarines effectively moot.[5]

Strategic implications

Throughout the war, Japan was dependent on sea transport to provide adequate resources, including food, to the home islands and supply its military at garrisons across the Pacific. Before the war, Japan estimated the nation required 5,900,000 long tons (6,000,000 t) of shipping to maintain the domestic economy and military during a major war, which was considerably less than the 6,400,000 long tons (6,500,000 t) of shipping in the Japanese merchant fleet and 1,200,000 long tons (1,200,000 t) of smaller craft at the time of the attack on Pearl Harbor.[7] Despite the awareness that shipping was vital, the Japanese military accorded anti-submarine warfare a low priority and allocated few warships and aircraft to protecting merchant shipping[8] For instance, their destroyers had deficiencies in sonar and radar compared to equivalents of other navies, despite their impressive night fighting capabilities, even though these warships formed the bulk of convoy protection.[9] Moreover, Japanese Navy doctrine in relation to commerce defense was derisively bad.[10] The Japanese also seriously underestimated the threat from Allied submarines, whose ineffectiveness in the early part of the war[11] reinforced Japanese overconfidence.[12]

The size and effectiveness of the Allied submarine force increased greatly during the Pacific War. At the start of the war, a high proportion of the submarines deployed against the Japanese were obsolete, and U.S. boats were hampered by defects in their primary weapon, the Mark 14 torpedo, as well as by poor training (an excessive reliance on sonar, due to an undue fear of destroyers' sonar and aircraft),[13] insufficiently aggressive skippers,[14] poor dispositions (scattered on close surveillance of Japan's major bases),[15] and divided command (which kept submarines out of one of the best hunting areas, the Luzon Strait, for fear of friendly fire).[16] Growing numbers of modern submarines became available from 1942 onwards. The efforts of Admiral Charles A. Lockwood were crucial for the rectification of the Mark 14's problems (which were nevertheless not resolved until September 1943),[11] and for the selection of more aggressive submarine skippers. As a result of all of these developments, assisted by signals intelligence (breaking the "maru code" in January 1943, after a gaffe by U.S. Customs prewar had caused Japan to change it),[17] U.S. submarines inflicted devastating losses on Japanese merchant shipping in 1943 and 1944. In conjunction with attacks by aircraft, including aerial minelaying in Operation Starvation, U.S. submarines had effectively destroyed the Japanese merchant fleet by January 1945.[18] Poor torpedoes claimed at least two U.S. submarines[19] out of 42 lost on patrol.[20]


The U.S. had the largest and most powerful submarine force of all the Allied countries in the Pacific at the outbreak of war. Pre-war U.S. Navy doctrine—like that of all major navies—specified the main role of submarines was to support the surface fleet by conducting reconnaissance and attacking large enemy warships. Merchant ships were regarded as secondary targets, and the circumstances in which they could be attacked were greatly limited by prize rules set out in the London Naval Treaty, to which the U.S. was a signatory. In order to meet their role with the surface fleet the U.S. Navy built large submarines which boasted long range, a relatively fast cruising speed and a heavy armament of torpedos. United States submarine habitability was greatly enhanced by air conditioning (which German U-boats, for instance, lacked) and water distilleries, and were more comfortable, hence better suited to long patrols in the tropics, than those of the other major powers. The submarines' commanders and crewmen were considered elite and enjoyed a strong esprit.[21] On 7 December 1941, the USN had 55 fleet- and 18 medium-sized submarines (S-boats) in the Pacific, 38 submarines elsewhere, and 73 under construction.[22] (By war's end, the U.S. had completed 228 submarines.)[23]

While Ceylon, both flotillas and all their submarines were withdrawn in mid-1940 to reinforce the Mediterranean Fleet.[24]

The Netherlands also maintained a submarine force in the Far East in order to protect the Netherlands East Indies (NEI). In December 1941, this force comprised 15 boats based at Surabaya, most of which were obsolete.[25][26]

Countering the Japanese offensive

Torpedoed Japanese destroyer Yamakaze photographed through the periscope of American submarine USS Nautilus on 25 June 1942.

In a break with pre-war doctrine (which, like Japan's, had presumed a rush across the Pacific and a "decisive battle" between battleships),[27] with the London Naval Treaty, and with long-standing U.S. defense of freedom of the seas, U.S. naval commanders in the Pacific were ordered by the U.S. Navy Chief of Staff to "execute unrestricted air and submarine warfare against Japan" on the afternoon of 7 December 1941, six hours after the Japanese attack.[28] This order authorized all U.S. submarines in the Pacific to attack and sink any warship, commercial vessel, or civilian passenger ship flying the Japanese flag, without warning. Hart—on his own initiative (but knowing Stark intended to do so)—issued the same order at 03:45 Manila time (09:15 in Hawaii, 14:45 in DC).[29] The Pacific Fleet submarine force had emerged unscathed from the attack on Pearl Harbor and USS Gudgeon departed on the fleet's first offensive war patrol on 11 December. The Asiatic Fleet's 27 submarines (including more fleet boats than at Pearl Harbor)[30] also went into action on the first day of the war, beginning war patrols in the waters around the Philippines and Indochina.[31] Due to inadequate prewar planning, which made no provision for defensive minelaying,[32] nor for placing submarines on station around the Philippines,[33] nor off enemy harbors,[34] the Asiatic Fleet's efforts to counter the Japanese invasion of the Philippines were unsuccessful and the fleet's surviving submarines were forced to withdraw to Surabaya in the Dutch East Indies (DEI).[35]

British, Dutch, and U.S. submarines took part in the unsuccessful defense of British Malaya and the DEI in late 1941 and early 1942. In December 1941, five Dutch submarines attacked the Japanese invasion fleet off Malaya. These submarines sank two Japanese merchant ships and damaged four others, but three of the attackers were sunk. The two surviving Dutch submarines were withdrawn to defend the DEI where they were assisted by two British submarines, which had been transferred from the Mediterranean Fleet, and several U.S. boats.[36] The U.S. Asiatic Fleet's submarine force left Surabaya for Fremantle, Western Australia, on 1 March. (They would remain in Australia, on the most hazardous and unproductive stations for U.S. submarines, for the duration.)[30] By this date, the Asiatic Fleet's 27 submarines had sunk 12 Japanese ships for the loss of four U.S. boats.[37] Following the fall of the DEI, only a handful of British and Dutch submarines were based in the Indian Ocean, and these had little impact on Japanese forces in the area.[38]

War of attrition

After the Battle of Coral Sea, the U.S. Navy detached eight submarines to finish off the damaged aircraft carrier Shōkaku, but she evaded all of them. At the Battle of Midway, although the attack on the battleship Kirishima by USS Nautilus had been unsuccessful, it drew the destroyer Arashi temporarily away from the main fleet to drop depth charges, and the destroyer's return was traced by USS Enterprise's VB-6 to the Japanese task force, where the dive bombers promptly sank four fleet carriers.[39][40][41] Overall in 1942, U.S. submarines had managed to sink the heavy cruiser Kako and the light cruiser Tenryū.

As a result of several key improvements the previous year, U.S. submarines inflicted tremendous losses to the heavy units of the Imperial Japanese Navy in 1944. They destroyed the Japanese fleet carriers Shōkaku and Taihō in the Battle of the Philippine Sea, and sank or disabled three Takao-class cruisers at the start of the Battle of Leyte Gulf. Also sunk that year were the battleship Kongō (being the only Japanese battleship lost to a submarine) and the carrier Shinano, the latter being the largest vessel ever lost to submarine torpedoes.

From 1943, Allied submarines waged an increasingly effective campaign against Japanese merchant shipping and the IJN. By the end of the war in August 1945, the Japanese merchant marine had less than a quarter of the tonnage it had in December 1941. Overall, U.S. Navy submarines sank around 1,300 Japanese merchant ships, as well as roughly 200 warships.[42] Despite the need to maintain sea lanes for its empire, the Japanese never successfully developed a cost-effective destroyer escort better suited for convoy duties, while it also did not have the industrial might to replace the losses of its heavily armed destroyers,[43][44] nor of its ill-protected merchantmen.

In 1943 the U.S. revealed the fact that Japanese depth charges were not set deep enough to destroy U.S. submarines. Japanese anti-submarine warfare grew in effectiveness, particularly after the debut of radar in the IJN.

British and Dutch submarine operations

The British submarine force in the Far East was greatly expanded from August 1943 onward. The British Eastern Fleet was responsible for submarine operations in the Bay of Bengal, Strait of Malacca as far as Singapore, and the western coast of Sumatra to the Equator. Few large Japanese cargo ships operated in this area, and the British submarines' main targets were small craft operating in inshore waters.[45] The submarines were deployed to conduct reconnaissance, interdict Japanese supplies travelling to Burma, and attack U-boats operating from Penang. The Eastern Fleet's submarine force continued to expand during 1944, and by October 1944 had sunk a cruiser, three submarines, six small naval vessels, 40,000 long tons (41,000 t) of merchant ships, and nearly 100 small vessels.[46]

The British submarine force expanded its areas of operation in the last months of the war. In late 1944, the 8th Flotilla—with 11 British and Dutch submarines—was transferred to Fremantle and operated in the Java Sea and surrounding areas under the command of the U.S 7th Fleet. The 4th Flotilla and the newly formed 2nd Flotilla remained at Ceylon. By March 1945, British boats had gained control of the Strait of Malacca, preventing any supplies from reaching the Japanese forces in Burma by sea. By this time, there were few large Japanese ships in the region, and the submarines mainly operated against small ships which they attacked with their deck guns. In April the 8th Flotilla moved to Subic Bay in the Philippines and the 4th Flotilla replaced it at Fremantle. At this time, there were 38 British and Dutch submarines in the theater, and an additional five boats on their way from Europe. The submarine HMS Trenchant torpedoed and sank the heavy cruiser Ashigara in the Bangka Strait, taking down some 1,200 Japanese army troops.

Three British submarines were sunk by the Japanese during the war: HMS Stratagem, HMS Porpoise, and HMS Stonehenge (which was mined.[47]

Merchant shipping losses

As figures for the size of the Japanese merchant marine and its losses differ between different sources, it is impossible to provide a definitive accounting of the state of the merchant marine over the course of the war. The following tables show different assessments of Japanese losses and construction.

Size of the Japanese merchant fleet during World War II (all figures in tons)[48]
Date Additions Losses Net change End of period
12/07/1941 6,384,000 100
12/1941 44,200 51,600 −7,400 6,376,600 99
1942 661,800 1,095,800 −434,000 5,942,600 93
1943 1,067,100 2,065,700 −998,600 4,494,400 77
1944 1,735,100 4,115,100 −2,380,000 2,564,000 40
1/45 – 8/45 465,000 1,562,100 −1,097,100 1,466,900 23
Japanese merchant fleet losses during World War II (all figures in tons, taken from JANAC)[49]
Date Starting tonnage Additions Losses Net change End of period
1942 (including 12/41) 5,975,000 111,000 725,000 −89,000 5,886,000
1943 5,886,000 177,000 1,500,000 −1,323,000 4,963,000
1944 4,963,000 624,000 2,700,000 −2,076,000 2,887,000
1945 2,887,000 ? 415,000 −415,000 2,472,000
end of war 3,903,000 1,983,000

One Japanese reference reports 15,518 civilian ships lost.[50] JANAC reports 2,117 Japanese merchant ships lost with a total tonnage of 7,913,858 long tons (8,040,851 t) and 611 IJN ships lost with a total tonnage of 1,822,210 long tons (1,851,450 t).[51]

Other duties

Photograph of Makin Island taken from USS Nautilus during the raid on the island in August 1942.

Allied submarines served in a range of other duties during the Pacific War. U.S. Navy submarines were often used for surveillance. This included taking photos of areas of interest (such as potential beaches for President of the United States).[55] British and Dutch submarines also landed and supplied special forces troops, rescued airmen, and shelled shore installations on nine occasions.[56]

Britain also deployed a flotilla of midget submarines to the Far East which were used to conduct sabotage raids. The Fourteenth Flotilla, which was equipped with six XE-class submarines, arrived in Australia in April 1945 but was almost disbanded in May as no suitable targets could be found. The Flotilla's fortunes improved in early June, however, when undersea telegraph lines in the South China Sea were identified as being worthwhile targets along with a heavy cruiser at Singapore.[57] On 31 July, XE4 cut the submerged Singapore-Saigon telegraph cable near Cape St. Jacques in French Indochina and XE5 cut the Hong Kong-Saigon cable close to Lamma Island, Hong Kong.[58] At the same time, XE1 and XE3 penetrated the Straits of Johor where they severely damaged the Japanese heavy cruiser Takao with limpet mines.[59]


Allied actions in the Pacific are believed to have been a mitigating factor in reducing the sentence of Großadmiral Karl Dönitz following the Nuremberg Trials, who was accused of similar actions in the Battle of the Atlantic; indeed, Admiral Nimitz provided Dönitz with a statement saying his boats behaved no differently.[60] The official judgment of the International Military Tribunal cited the statement as part of the reason Donitz's sentence was "not assessed on the ground of his breaches of the international law of submarine warfare."[61]

See also


  1. ^ a b
  2. ^ Blair, Clay, Jr. Silent Victory (Bantam, 1947), pp.508, 521–2, 568, 574, 576, 609, 646, 724, 745–6, 784, 806, 818, 825, 827, 829, 842, 865–6, & 868–9.
  3. ^ Holwitt, Joel I. "Execute Against Japan", Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University, 2005, pp.212–217 & 232–249 passim.
  4. ^ Holwitt, passim.
  5. ^ a b Holwitt, p.6.
  6. ^ Dönitz, Karl. Memoirs: Ten Years and Twenty Days; von der Poorten, Edward P. The German Navy in World War II (T. Y. Crowell, 1969); Milner, Marc. North Atlantic run: the Royal Canadian Navy and the battle for the convoys (Vanwell Publishing, 2006)
  7. ^ Parillo (1993), pg 37–38.
  8. ^ Parillo (1993), pg 63–73.
  9. ^ Japanese Destroyers
  10. ^ Parillo; Peattie & Evans, Kaigun.
  11. ^ a b Blair, Silent Victory, p.439.
  12. ^ Parillo.
  13. ^ Blair, Silent Victory, p.156.
  14. ^ Blair, Silent Victory, pp.361, 553, & passim.
  15. ^ Blair, Silent Victory, pp.361 & 551.
  16. ^ Blair, Silent Victory, pp.509 et al..
  17. ^ Blair; Farago, Broken Seal.
  18. ^ Blair, pp.819 & 967ff.
  19. ^ Tullibee to the Mk14, Tang to the Mk18, both from circular runs; given the prevalence of circulars, there were probably others. Blair, Silent Victory.
  20. ^ Not counting those lost to friendly fire, stranding, accidents, and known losses to circular runs, nor those lost in the Atlantic, which account for the rest. Blair, Silent Victory, pp.991–92.
  21. ^ Spector (1984), pp.480–483.
  22. ^ Morison (1949), p.188.
  23. ^ Lenton, H. T. American Submarines (Navies of the Second World War Series; New York: Doubleday, 1973), p.5 table.
  24. ^ Mars (1971), pg 27, 62 and 64.
  25. ^ Mars (1971), pg 212.
  26. ^
  27. ^
  28. ^ Spector (1984), pp.478–479; Blair, Silent Victory, p.106; Holwitt, Joel I. "Execute Against Japan", Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University, 2005.(page needed).
  29. ^ Holwitt, Joel I. "Execute Against Japan", Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University, 2005, pp.212–217 passim.
  30. ^ a b Blair, Silent Victory.
  31. ^ Christley (2006), p.39.
  32. ^ Willmott, H. P. Barrier and the Javelin?
  33. ^ Blair, Silent Victory, pp.157–158.
  34. ^ Blair, Silent Victory, pp.156–8.
  35. ^ Morison (1948), p.303.
  36. ^ Mars (1971), pp.211–213.
  37. ^ Morison (1948), pp.303–305.
  38. ^ Mars (1971), pp.214–215.
  39. ^
  40. ^ Bicheno, Hugh. Midway (Sterling Publishing Company, 2001), p.134.
  41. ^ Lord, Incredible Victory p. 213; Parshall & Tully, Shattered Sword, pp.302–303.
  42. ^ World War 2 Submarines
  43. ^ Long Lancers | Nihon Kaigun
  44. ^ Matsu-class Destroyer | Nihon Kaigun
  45. ^ Mars (1971), p.216.
  46. ^ McCartney (2006), pp.40–42.
  47. ^ McCartney (2006), pp.42–43.
  48. ^ Parillo (1993), pg 242.
  49. ^ Blair, pp.360, 552, 816, 878, 970, 975, 977, 979, 980, & 982.
  50. ^ Axis History Forum • View topic – Questions concerning the IJA merchant fleet
  51. ^ HyperWar: Japanese Naval and Merchant Shipping Losses [Chapter 2]
  52. ^ Adamson, Hans Christian. Guerrilla Submarines
  53. ^ Blair, p.357.
  54. ^ Blair, pp.308–9. This had unintended consequences, drawing Japanese attention to the weak defenses, which were strengthened when the U.S. invaded in November 1943.
  55. ^ Christley (2006), pp.42–44.
  56. ^ McCartney (2006), p.42.
  57. ^ Jones and Nunan (2005), pp.239–242.
  58. ^ McCartney (2006), p.43.
  59. ^ Mars (1971), p.225.
  60. ^ Dönitz, Karl. Memoirs: Ten Years and Twenty Days.
  61. ^ Blair, passim;Judgement: Dönitz the Avalon Project at the Yale Law School.


Further reading

External links

  • Combined Fleet Website
This article was sourced from Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. World Heritage Encyclopedia content is assembled from numerous content providers, Open Access Publishing, and in compliance with The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR), Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Public Library of Science, The Encyclopedia of Life, Open Book Publishers (OBP), PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and, which sources content from all federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government publication portals (.gov, .mil, .edu). Funding for and content contributors is made possible from the U.S. Congress, E-Government Act of 2002.
Crowd sourced content that is contributed to World Heritage Encyclopedia is peer reviewed and edited by our editorial staff to ensure quality scholarly research articles.
By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. World Heritage Encyclopedia™ is a registered trademark of the World Public Library Association, a non-profit organization.

Copyright © World Library Foundation. All rights reserved. eBooks from Hawaii eBook Library are sponsored by the World Library Foundation,
a 501c(4) Member's Support Non-Profit Organization, and is NOT affiliated with any governmental agency or department.