There already was a similar thread some time ago, but since I'm trying to make a redux of all the ships, then I guess the redux of the thread is also appropriate.
1) Never-were submarines
Unfortunately, source materials for the unbuilt pre-war submarines of Poland (the alternative design proposals for them) are very scarce, as a result of war-time mayhem. Number of documents are lost completely, others are sometimes found in unexpected places only by sheer luck. It's particularly acute in regard to things like blueprints attached to the offers (and these were predominantly cutaways, which also brings certain complications to a SB-style drawing, that concentrate on exterior, rather than interior), as technical data itself was sometimes quoted in other documents and could be extracted from these. Perhaps original blueprints still exist in the archives of the shipyards that submitted them (or their successor organizations), but search for these would be a difficult undertaking (certainly more difficult than even most detailed query in Central Military Archive at Rembertów). Therefore at the moment I am able to make drawings of only very few of the offered submarines, though I hope that perhaps in the future more materials will be found and therefore more additions made.
Wilk-class alternative designs
Majority of offers for the submarine minelayer that eventually become
Wilk-class were submitted by French shipyards, but there were also Italian and British offers. Unfortunately nothing is known at the moment about technical details of the Italian design (by consortium of Stabilimenti Navali Ansaldo San Giorgio, Societa di Navigazione Tito Campanella, Societa Commerciale di Navigazione) except for the displacement of 1390/1884 tons and that total price for 3 minelayers and 6 patrol submarines was to be 10,5 million USD including 4,2 mil. paid in natural resources, and also there seems to be conflicting information regarding wether there was a British offer for a minelayer, or only for patrol boats (which seems to be probably the point as there seems to be no data about these minelayers).
Technical data of French offers were as follows:
- Chantiers de la Loire - displacement 975/1220 t, dimensions 76,4 x 6,2 x 4,34 m, speed 14/9 kts, depth 80 m, price without armament 5 236 400 zł, with armament 6 427 200 zł;
- Augustin Normand - displacement 980/1295 t, dimensions 77 x 6,36 x 4,15 m, speed 14/9 kts, depth 80 m, price without armament 4 872 400 zł, with armament 6 157 356 zł;
- Union de Cinq Chantiers - displacement 940/1262 t, dimensions 72 x 6,64 x 3,98 m, speed 14,45/9,23 kts, depth 80 m guaranteed, 100 m maximum, price without armament 4 001 000 zł, with armament 5 336 000 zł;
- Chantiers Navals Francais - displacement 957/1284 t, dimensions 76,2 x 5,95 x 4,15 m, speed 14/9 kts, depth 70 m, price without armament n/a, with armament 5 836 500 zł.
all boats were to be armed with a single 100 mm cannon with 150 shells, single 40 mm AA gun with 1000 shells, 6 550 mm torpedo tubes, including 2 trainable and 30 mines (except offer from Normand with 40 mines), and had a maximum range of ca. 7000 Nm and crew of 46 (4 officers, 8 NCO's, 34 other ranks)
At the moment the only of the losing offers I am able to depict is one of Chantiers de la Loire, which happened to be most criticized one on technical grounds (offer by CNF got worst notes but mostly due to complete lack of experience with making submarines), due to awkward shape of hull that limited its structural strength and location of the mine launchers completely outside the rigid hull (contrary to demands). Also of note is extremely low sail.
Poland, Wilk - Chantiers de la Loire proposal
![[ img ]](https://www.dropbox.com/s/47jdqq66bnh5e2h/m_ss_wilk_pol_loire_1925p.png?raw=1)
Sources:
Bartelski Andrzej S.,
Wszystko, co zawsze chcieliście wiedzieć o pierwszym przetargu na polskie łodzie podwodne, ale baliście się zapytać..., "Morze, Statki i Okręty" 2008, nr 11,
Borowiak Mariusz,
Stalowe drapieżniki. Polskie okręty podwodne 1926-1947, Warszawa 2019.
600-ton torpedo submarine
Originally it was intended that 3 submarine minelayers would be accompanied by smaller 6 'conventional' (torpedo-armed patrol) submarines.
Offered were:
- Chantiers de la Loire - displacement 680/845 t, dimensions 66,5 x 5,72 x 3,87 m, speed 14/9,5 kts, range 7000 Nm, armament: 1 x 100 mm, 1 x 40 mm, 8 x 533 mm (4 bow, 2 twin trainable);
- Augustin Normand - displacement 694/935 t, dimensions 68,2 x 6,06 x 3,68 m, speed 14/9,5 kts, range 7000 Nm, armament: 1 x 100 mm, 1 x 40 mm, 8 x 533 mm (4 bow, 2 twin trainable);
- Schneider et Cie. - displacement 710/950 t, dimensions 66,5 x 6,1 x 3,16 m, speed 14/9,5 kts, range 7000 Nm, armament: 1 x 100 mm, 1 x 40 mm, 8 x 533 mm (4 bow, 2 twin trainable);
- Union de Cinq Chantiers - displacement 675/844 t, dimensions 67 x 5,8 x 3,46 m, speed 14/9,75 kts, range 7008 Nm, armament: 1 x 100 mm, 1 x 40 mm, 8 x 533 mm (4 bow, 2 twin trainable)
- Chantiers Navals Francais - displacement 706/941 t, dimensions 61,5 x 5,85 x 3,73 m, speed 14/9,5 kts, range 7000 Nm, armament: 1 x 100 mm, 1 x 40 mm, 8 x 533 mm (4 bow, 2 twin trainable);
- Stabilimenti Navali Ansaldo San Giorgio - displacement 750/993 t, dimensions 70,5 x 6,5 x 3,32 m, speed 16/9 kts, range 5000 Nm, armament 1 x 102 mm L/45, 1 x 40 mm L/39 and 2 variants of torpedo armament: 4 x 533 mm TT forward, 2 aft and twin trainable - or with two launchers at an angle instead of being trainable;
- Armstrong-Whitworth (Naval Yard Newcastle-on-Tyne) - displacement 975/1164 t, dimensions 70 x 7,2 x 4,1 m, speed 16,5/10,5 kts, range 5700 Nm/10 kts, armament 2 x 102 mm, 1 x MG, 6 x 533 mm TT.
At the moment I was able to draw only the Ansaldo design without trainable and stern torpedo launchers and one of the French designs, which I believe is the one from Union de Cinq Chantiers. Word of explanation is needed here - highest-scoring offer was one from Augustin Normand and that was the one intended for purchase, but in the issue of "Morze, Statki i Okręty" 2008/11 a blueprint was published with caption "had the tender with France for submarines was brought to a completion, that's how Poland's first torpedo-armed submarines would look, and a series of 6 of these neat submarines would strenghten the ranks of our fleet". But nowhere in the caption or on the blueprint itself a name of the shipyard can be seen - on the other hand, blueprint has a very prominent caption "projet de sous-marin torpilleur de 675 tonnes" - and only design that had 675 tons was one of the Union de Cinq Chantiers, that came as close second. Also, the offered boat doesn't look particularly similar to other similarly-sized boats made by Normand at that time, namely the
Ariane class, therefore I inferred that it's the UCC design.
Poland, okręt podwodny torpedowy 600 t (600-ton torpedo submarine) - Union de Cinq Chantiers design
![[ img ]](https://www.dropbox.com/s/1zuvbimtviczfol/m_ss_600t_pol_cinqchantiers_p.png?raw=1)
Poland, okręt podwodny torpedowy 600 t (600-ton torpedo submarine) - Ansaldo design
![[ img ]](https://www.dropbox.com/s/fovm6b3quu4nb2f/m_ss_600t_pol_ansaldo_p.png?raw=1)
Sources:
Bartelski Andrzej S.,
Wszystko, co zawsze chcieliście wiedzieć o pierwszym przetargu na polskie łodzie podwodne, ale baliście się zapytać..., "Morze, Statki i Okręty" 2008, nr 11,
Borowiak Mariusz,
Stalowe drapieżniki. Polskie okręty podwodne 1926-1947, Warszawa 2019.
Jarski Adam,
Francuskie "Orły"?, "Morze, Statki i Okręty" 2018, nr 1-2, 3-4.
Kuna (Spanish A-class, A-2 Cosme Garcia)
The submarine below was not entirely a 'never-were' in the fullest sense of the word, since it was a very real vessel, that enjoyed fairly long service life, although under different (Spanish) flag and with different name. Unfortunately, for many years there were almost no details available regarding its potential purchase for the Polish Navy - to an extent, that it was almost universally believed that it was to be a completely different boat of completely different class!
In February or March 1931 Spanish Navy informed a number of smaller navies (including Polish) of their intent to sell one of their A-class boats (derived from Italian F-class), namely
A-2 Cosme Garcia. Because Polish Navy planned at that time to create a force of 9 submarines (3 of which - large submarine minelayers of the
Wilk class - were already nearing completion, while rest - ultimately cancelled - was to belong to a different, smaller class), opportunity to obtain quickly and relatively cheaply (at little more than a quarter of a price for single
Wilk class submarine) a boat that could serve to train cadres for future boats was extremely tempting. Idea was rushed through various relevant government departments, and even the name for the boat was already chosen, namely
Kuna (Marten). In the meantime, but at unknown date, another offer was received, also from Spain, but from commercial enterprise, the Echevarrieta y Larrinaga shipyard, which ostensibly offered the
E-1 submarine (future Turkish
Gür, and prototype of IA u-boats), that was recently completed in Cádiz. After much bureaucrating pen-pushing, in February 1932 a Polish delegation was sent to Spain, consisting of two officers from Polish supervisory team overseeing construction of
Wilk submarines in French shipyards. Polish officers were warmly greeted at Cartagena naval base where they examined
A-2 both at the pier and on the move, and then proceeded to Cádiz. There, however, they were greeted completely differently - 'offered' submarine had a German crew, which steadfastly refused to let anyone in without authorization from German government! In fact, the shipyard had no right to sell, or even offer the submarine on its own, since the construction was mostly backed by secret German rearmament funds and this was an ill-thought (and odd) attempt to alleviate negative results that fairly recent (April 1931) fall of Spanish monarchy (with which Horacio Echevarrieta had close links) had on company's financial situation. In the end, Polish delegation sent home very positive report regarding state of
A-2, and obviously less positive one regarding incident in Cádiz. Eventually, though, the matter fell through when the Navy bureaucracy finally (after a year) decided to ask for opinion the one person who should be asked at the very beginning: the commander of the Fleet, kmdr Józef Unrug - who, during the Great War served in the Kaiserliche Marine as an u-boot captain and even a chief of half-flotilla. Unrug in response sent on 23 March 1932 a short telegramme "regarding the submarine - I'm against" and the matter fizzled out practically overnight.
Perhaps even equally interesting to the story of the failed purchase of
A-2/Kuna is the story of the confusion regarding the identity of the boat that was to be purchased - which, for many years, was believed to be
E-1!
As a result of 1939 tragedy, large part of the pre-war Navy archives was lost, and what remained was not easily accessible (being either stored at Centralne Archiwum Wojskowe - Central Military Archive - in Rembertów near Warszawa, or on the other side of Iron Curtain, in Instytut Polski i Muzeum imienia Generała Sikorskiego - Polish Institute and General Sikorski Museum in London). First remark regarding Kuna was made in memoirs of kontradm. Włodzimierz Steyer (commander of the Hel Fortified Region in 1939 and commander-in-chief of the Polish Navy 1947-1950) published in 1960 in Wojskowy Przegląd Historyczny (Military Historical Review). Unfortunately, these memoirs - due to being mostly a literal memoirs, written with only limited use of archives - were somewhat vague in places, and the fact that they were published posthumously (Steyer died in 1957) made any further clarifications obviously impossible. In those memoirs Steyer fairly correctly remembered the displacement of
A-2 (which was much smaller from
E-1), but mentioned only one offer, and at the same time mentioned that Polish delegation was warmly welcomed by Spanish Navy (which was the case with
A-2), but also that sale fell, among others, because "the sellers weren't entitled to do it" (which applied to
E-1). Matter was raised again in 1985 by kmdr Czesław Rudzki in his book Polskie okręty podwodne 1926-1969 (Polish submarines 1926-1939), where he implied that it was the
E-1 that was to be bought (without mentioning its name, but referring to its 'displacement slightly smaller than Wilk'). After 1989 a number of historians investigated the matter again, although for absence of solid archival materials (in the military-related archives they were expected to be found), they were bound to use mostly deduction and inferences, and these invariably - but falsely, as it turned out later - led them to conclusion, that the boat offered to Poland was indeed
E-1. Such situation persisted until early 2007, when in Archiwum Akt Nowych (New Documents' Archive) in Warszawa one of researchers - almost by accident - found a report made on 29 February 1932 (it happened to be a leap year) by Polish ambassador to Spain, dr Tadeusz Nieduszyński, to minister of foreign affairs, August Zaleski. This fairly brief document summarizes the visit of Polish delegation both to Cartagena and to Cádiz, and mentions the submarine
A-2 specifically by name, completely overturning the research on the matter made thus far, and its reveal in Andrzej S. Bartelski's article 'Nieoczekiwany suplement do historii ORP Kuna' in 5/2007 edition of Morze, Statki i Okręty was a huge surprise in Polish shiplovers' community.
Poland, Kuna
![[ img ]](https://www.dropbox.com/s/l285nmejnh6xgqr/m_ss_a-class_pol_kuna.png?raw=1)
Sources:
Bartelski Andrzej S.,
Rozwiązanie kwestii niedoszłego ORP Kuna, "Morze, Statki i Okręty" 2005, nr 4.
Bartelski Andrzej S.,
Nieoczekiwany suplement do historii ORP Kuna, "Morze, Statki i Okręty" 2007, nr 5.
Borowiak Mariusz,
Stalowe drapieżniki. Polskie okręty podwodne 1926-1947, Warszawa 2019.
Pollina Paolo M.
I Sommergibili Italiani 1895-1962, Roma 1963.
Rudzki Czesław,
Polskie okręty podwodne 1926-1969, Warszawa 1985.
Twardowski Marek,
Czy PMW mogła zakupić okręt podwodny E-1?, "Morze, Statki i Okręty" 2003, nr 2.
http://www.betasom.it/forum/index.php?/ ... se-f-1915/
http://envisitadecortesia.com/2018/07/1 ... barcelona/
http://en.todocoleccion.net/military-re ... re_el_lote
http://en.todocoleccion.net/military-ph ... x116206439
http://en.todocoleccion.net/military-ph ... ~x88858903
Orzeł - proposed alterations
Little is known of the two 'alternative' versions of
Orzeł presented below. Apparently they were both devised at Polish Navy command around 1938, when work on both submarines was well advanced. One was an idea to install a hangar for a small motor-torpedo boat with a single 450 mm torpedo, but when engineers from De Schelde calculated how much it would delay construction and how much it would cost, the enthusiasm waned very quickly. Second design was an idea to replace the 105 mm gun with a second anti-aircraft Bofors in a waterproof well.
Poland, Orzeł (proposed alterations)
![[ img ]](https://www.dropbox.com/s/9jwz4eqm5xts8u5/m_ss_orzel_pol_orzel_1938p1.png?raw=1)
![[ img ]](https://www.dropbox.com/s/1bdxe9bxfbff8gq/m_ss_orzel_pol_orzel_1938p2.png?raw=1)
Sources (in addition to basic ones for Orzeł):
Komuda Leszek,
Kioski polskich okrętów podwodnych w latach 1931-1945, "Morza, Statki i Okręty" 1996, nr 2.
https://www.graptolite.net/sous-marins/ ... rowka.html
so-called "Orzeł-type submarine" a.k.a. "modified Orzeł"
Polish 6-year fleet development plan of 1936 included purchase of 7 new submarines (besides the already ordered
Orzeł and
Sęp) and this time - largely for politico-financial reasons, primarily French shipyards were to be involved. First contract was to include 3 submarines and proposals were sent from Ateliers et Chantiers de la Loire, Chantiers et Ateliers Augustin Normand and Schneider et Cie, with Normand's offer being chosen, although eventually only 2 submarines were ordered. In the literature these boats are often - erroneously - described as
"modified Orzeł"-class (or some similar term), but (as Adam Jarski described in 2018) in fact they had technically nothing to do with actual Dutch-made
Orzeł submarines, except for being made to broadly similar specifications. In fact, actual navy documents never described them as being any sort of "modification" or actual "follow-on" and the term "Orzeł-type" is used there only as description of their general configuration, in opposition to "Wilk-type"
minelayer submarines (which were the only other class of submarines then in service in the Polish navy), pretty much like the term "dreadnought" is used to describe certain kind of battleships without implying they are exact copies of actual HMS Dreadnoght. Indeed, besides the rather obvious visual differences between both types, French-built submarines were much more conservative designs (with riveted hulls, as French shipyards hadn't quite yet mastered welding of so large submarines) and in fact Dutch expressly declined to allow French engineers to even see any parts of the technical documentation.
Several design versions were made, ranging from
Projet 5751 with a standard displacement of 1149 tons, armed with 12 550 mm torpedo tubes (4 bow, 4 aft and 2 pairs trainable), 105 mm cannon and twin 40 mm Bofors in waterproof well in the sail, through intermediate one with 1163 ton displacement, the
Projet 5751B with displacement of 1166 tons and two Bofors sets in separate wells, and finally the chosen
Projet 5751C with a displacement of 1175 tons, maximum length of 86,87 meters, 2 diesel engines of 5400 hp and 2 electric engines of 1800 hp, speed of 20 knots on the surface and 9 submerged, range 3800 NM on the surface, depth of 80 meters and armed with 12 torpedo tubes and 2 twin AA Bofors sets.
Contract on 2 submarines was signed on 7 August 1938, with a total price was set on 137 330 926 French Francs plus 10 820 000 Polish Złotys for equipment purchased directly by Polish Navy. Planned delivery date was 33 months for the 1st and 35 months for the 2nd boat after the ratification of the deal (4 January 1939). When the war broke out, construction work on both submarines slowed considerably and eventually then never progressed beyond some 5%, when in the Summer of 1940 both were destroyed.
Poland, "okręt podwodny typu Orzeł" (Orzeł-type submarine a.k.a. modified Orzeł)
![[ img ]](https://www.dropbox.com/s/vng57d6xaorck8k/m_ss_1100t_pol_p5751_p.png?raw=1)
![[ img ]](https://www.dropbox.com/s/balpx8c14mk92eu/m_ss_1100t_pol_p5751b_p.png?raw=1)
![[ img ]](https://www.dropbox.com/s/i2jkhcrxoundfai/m_ss_1100t_pol_p5751c_p.png?raw=1)
Sources:
Bartelski Andrzej S.,
Dywizjon i Grupa Okrętów Podwodnych 1932-1945, "Morze, Statki i Okręty" 2012, nr 5.
Borowiak Mariusz,
Stalowe drapieżniki. Polskie okręty podwodne 1926-1947, Warszawa 2019.
Jarski Adam,
Francuskie "Orły"?, "Morze, Statki i Okręty" 2018, nr 1-2, 3-4.
Komuda Leszek,
Kioski polskich okrętów podwodnych w latach 1931-1945, "Morza, Statki i Okręty" 1996, nr 2.
Opaliński Radosław,
Koncepcje rozwoju PMW 1919-1939. W teorii, ...bez praktyki, "Okręty Wojenne" 2008, nr 3.
Trubitsyn S.,
Podvodnye lodki tipa "Ozhel", "Morskaya Kollektsiya" 2012, nr 1.
"Polish U-boot"
Finally, unfortunately without a drawing (as the matter didn't proceeded that far) it might be of some interest to mention a very curious late-1950s idea to strenghen our submarine force without Soviet assistance.
Raising, refurbishing and recomissioning of 3 wartime u-boats into the Bundesmarine (single XXI type:
Wilhelm Bauer, ex-
U-2540 and two XXIII type:
Hai, ex-
U-2365 and
Hecht, ex-
U-2367) greatly interested chief of staff of the Polish Navy, kontradm. Jan Wiśniewski (who was also acting commander-in-chief, as the nominal head of the service, kontradm. Zdzisław Studziński was attending higher command course in Leningrad) who initiated in March 1959 a search for German submarine wrecks in Polish territorial waters, with intention to also raise and repair them for service in the Polish Navy. One of the main reasons for that were bad experiences with obtaining the Pr. 96 (Malyutka) submarines from the Soviet Union and desire to achieve some degree of technical independence from the "Big Brother From the East" (generally late 1950s/early 1960s were a period of relatively most independent-from-the-USSR thinking in the Polish Armed Forces between 1944 and 1989). Polish intelligence operatives in West Germany managed to gain access to relevant information from the wartime Oberkommando der Marine records, and based on that, naval ships began searching the seabed. In the process wrecks of several significant surface ships were located (
Wilhelm Gustloff, General von Steuben, Goya, Franken and
Hans Albrecht Wedel), but when it comes to submarines (one each of IIA, IIB and XXIII types and 11 of VIIC type) the locations happened to be either completely erroneous, or the wrecks were beyond any chance of repair, or they were already salvaged for scrap (for example the
U-2342 of XXIII Type in 1954). After several months it was obvious that whole operation is a failure and so was brought to an end - together with kontradm. Wiśniewski's military career. In November he was removed from his post as Navy Chief of Staff and few months later named as undersecretary of state in the Ministry of Shipping (despite of the illusion of "being member of the government" it was hardly a promotion), while at the same time he lost his parliamentary seat (it was a norm in Eastern-Bloc countries that top military commanders - senior service chiefs, heads of military districts etc. were also members of - rather rubber-stamp - legislatures) and in 1966 was sent as an ambassador to Egypt (such diplomatic postings of once-important officials were usually clear mark of their total and irreversible fall from power) where he died of heart attack in 1969, aged just 44.
Of course, wether the idea was technically feasible given technical limitations of Polish shipbuilding industry that never built a submarine and had very little experience with making components (for
Orzeł class - but that was before the war that destroyed these industries and either killed or spread around the world much of their skilled personnel) is another matter - and it can be said with near-total certainty that even if a "repairable" submarine were found, they would struggle to make anything useful out of it - but it's certainly an original story.
Sources:
Pasek Witold,
U-Booty zamiast Whiskey. Kulisy tajnej operacji, która miała doprowadzić do wcielenia pod koniec lat 50. U-bootów do polskiej Marynarki Wojennej, "Okręty Wojenne" 2013, nr 1.
Quick links
FAQ
Register
Login![[Post Reply]](./styles/legacy/theme/en/button_topic_reply.gif "Post a reply"){kind=small}
![[*]](./styles/legacy/theme/images/button_topic_tools.gif){kind=small}
![[Profile]](./styles/legacy/theme/en/icon_user_profile.gif "Profile: eswube"){kind=icon}
![[Quote]](./styles/legacy/theme/en/icon_post_quote.gif "Reply with quote"){kind=icon}
![[ img ]](http://shipbucket.com/wiki/images/7/76/Ci%C4%99%C5%BCki_Monitor_1931.png)
![[ img ]](https://www.dropbox.com/s/5ugjuu1buu9k3pn/sub-preview-3.png?raw=1)