If your submarine force is expected to take mind boggling casualties, then it might be better for the boats to have a numerical designation. It lessens the morale blow as the connotations are not that you have lost a named ship and part of your battlefleet, but a disposable tin can.
For example, "We lost U-650, -679 and -1020 this week" would probably be easier to stomach for the public than "We lost USS Growler, Scamp and Albacore"
The shift from fish/sharks to old capital ship names like Dreadnought, Columbia and Virginia for SSNs/SSBNs will amplify this effect
I disagree with the claim that names are harder to hear than random numbers. To further prove my point I'll say that an easy way to prevent this problem is to just not take any casualties stupid idiot
SSBNs are expected to take zero casualties
And yet they will take nearly 100%.
Is this a WW2 scenario?
>Modern subs aren't taking casualties left and right, Anon. I'm not sure if you've been keeping up with the news since WW2.
>WW2 has ended, so we can't go back into the past and change their naming conventions.
I'm sorry you had to find out from me.
If you get to the point you're losing nuclear boomers, then there's a realistic chance that you're losing the actual cities capital ships are typically named after as well
I agree. Also we should stop naming submarine crewmen for the same reason. John Smith was your civilian name, from now on you're U650-C71.
You're just a kraut envious that your grandfathers lacked enough creativity to give ships names. Watch
>I served on the Cachalot!
>Ich haben served und ze U-534
>wat ze scheibe iz dat?
It's probably because they don't the public to be indifferent to losses and would rather the public want payment in blood.
Only an issue if you plan on losing your submarines. Good strategy for krauts that get ACKed in their tin cans daily, but the Chad USN submarine force didn't have such issues.
US Submarine Service had the highest casualty rate of any arm of the US military in WW2 at 20% of personnel and 52/263 submarines that undertook war patrols were lost
Top put that into perspective
8th Air Force 12% (The 8th Air Force alone suffered half the the USAAF's total casualties)
US Marines 3%
US Army 2.5%
Army chads win again
Bomber force and Submarine Service were the guys who got mulched the hardest, though army and marine % are brought down big time by having support troops included who weren't anywhere near the fighting.
Several large American units in the Western Theatre suffered well over 100% casualties, with the overall casualty rate for frontline GIs being around 18%.
Chad tankers were genuinely at the 3% mark and usually from artillery. If you have an option of what to do if you were sent back in time, work in a kitchen or in a sherman.
>You will enjoy superior ergonomics in the Sherman
>You will have larger hatches
>You will have a fast egress
>You will have reduced ammunition cookoff during penetration
>You will get a replacement Sherman the moment yours becomes a write off
>You will get a newer Sherman
>You will not lose your Sherman from the transmission blowing out
>You will have logistics
>You will have a far higher chance of living to the end of the war than any other nationalitys' tankers
The sub fleet were 100% combat veterans. Other branches get their casualty rates watered down by their massive POG structure.
A sub sinking is almost always a 100% chance of death you moron and thats for the entire crew. The other branches have support roles and non combatants that bring down the percentages
>Churchill insisted that submarines be known as names rather than numbers, as a mark of respect to those who lost their lives in the silent service
The RN fleet has used just about every suitable word in the dictionary up until about the letter C, on top of everything else. Until you have a submarine fleet that big, you should take the time and trouble
I'm sure you can come up with 1,000 proper names for your fleet, anon
in Hearts of Iron I usually name all ships bigger than submarine or destroyer, just because the two types being too numerous to name
>runs out of cruiser names in hoi
sounds like overinvestment in dockyards
>can't come up with fifty destroyer names and thirty sub names
I was too busy building infrastructure to Siberia to exploit their natural resources
I loved building 40 light carriers as the German Empire to invade USA with
The fun way is numerical designations + custom crew naming/branding. The boat you posted, for example, is U-47, commonly named "The Bull of Scapa Flow".
One of the top 3 German aces, captained by Gunther Prien
Penetrated Scapa Flow's defences very professionally and torpedoed HMS Royal Oak in 1940 I think
Sunk about a year or so after
>submarine taking casualties
go back to bed, grandpa