As the war went on the crews became younger, just as the other branches of service. The Wermacht had to draw on younger recruits, and even the Waffen SS had to draw more on men from other countries.  I had read somewhere that the Waffen SS by mid 1944 was over 75%  non German. Even as the close of the war drew closer, the U-boat Service did not lack crews. They lacked boats and fuel to send them out!

Regards,

The problem with younger crews was they lacked the maturity of the earlier, older crewmembers.  A 17 year old is not mature enough to face combat.  Yes, they may be stronger, but strength is not what wins in combat. It is training and coolness under fire.  I have been there.  The training kicks in when the chips are down. 

I agree with your statement. However:

- Military training, and the psychological conditioning contained therein (Especially in modern times more so than WWII) can turn 17-19 year olds into effective combat personnel, and does.

- The demands upon the crewmen of the U-bootwaffe are far different from that of the Landser of the Wehrmacht. The Landser have to be prepared for hand to hand combat; the U-bootwaffe can get away with less mature personnel because of the "mechanical distance" imposed by firing a torpedo at a ship. This causes less psychological revulsion than having to bayonet a man at close range, for example.

- A greater concern than the younger age (As I have suggested above, despite my lack of support for the idea*, the younger personnel can still make effective combatants) is the lessened training in both duration and thoroughness for all ranks.

* - I believe the ideal age to train any military personnel is 19-25. Any younger and they're not sufficiently mature, any older and they generally have a lot more to lose.

I agree with you to a certain point. The Battle of the Atlantic was indeed different than the battle for Europa. What I am trying to say is this, in combat there will always be a high level of stress and fear.  It is no different weather you are in a fire fight on land or in a U-Boot being depth charged.  In combat these levels are always present.  When I was in my first fire-fight I peed my pants  I was so afraid.  Really they say fear is a good thing in combat, it helps you survive and not get your head blown off.  If you are a "Rambo" you will be the first one to die.  When they are shooting at you, you learn to "eat dirt" .  Almost every combat vet will tell you the same thing. If they tell you they were not afraid they are lying!

Regards,

With this I fully agree. My (stupidly forgot to mention it) more pressing point with the last post I made was that the younger personnel of the U-Bootwaffe would be able to perform their primary task: Killing the enemy, despite being less mature, as the "mechanical distance" allows them to disassociate themselves from the killing act.

Fear is always present. Hell, fear is present even in decent simulations of combat scenarios. I've seen people freeze up in games of paintball, or more recently, airsoft! Being depthcharged, especially at great depth, I suppose the fear would be even greater than on land taking fire, as you do not have the ability to run away. At great depth, the only consolation is "At least it will be quick."

Hello,

I think the U-Boat crews knew all to well they were in great danger from the time they left port to the time they returned.  They also knew that there were other men on the ships they were to sink.  We try so much to de-humanize war, but the human element can't be taken out. Even if you only push a button and a trop. goes off, or a round is fired.  My father is keenly aware that men died because he did his job on the U-boat.  I am aware I shot and killed other men who were trying to do the same thing to me. Yes, it was combat, but when you go through it you carry a sense of guilt in the back of your mind for the rest of your life. It is hard to explain  unless you have been there.

Regards,

Hello!

Sounds like an interesting book. I will try to find it. Good talking with you !

Regards,