Talk:Submarine chaser

Fair use rationale for Image:Coast guard flag.gif
Image:Coast guard flag.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:29, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Destroy Japanese submarines in World War I?
United States submarine chasers were designed specifically to destroy German and Japanese submarines in World War I and World War II.

Why would the US want to destroy Japanese submarines in World War I? If I remember my history, Japan was with the Allies in World War I. Respectfully, SamBlob (talk) 06:36, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

EXACTLY my thought SamBlob. That first sentence really jumped out as being poorly worded. Japan was an ally in World War 1. 24.116.149.95 (talk) 17:54, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

110' Chasers in WWII
This is my first attempt at pointing out what I believe to be errors in Wikipedia. I'm not familiar with the protocols for doing this so I ask your patience and help.

The article stated "Submarine chasers were used mostly by the United States Coast Guard in World War II....." As far as I know, the chasers were US Navy ships. A number were transferred to the USCG near the end of the war and it is possible that some Navy chasers had Coast Guard crews, but the chasers were a USN operation. I cannot identify any chaser that was in Coast Guard service during the war.

The article states "By the end of World War II, submarine chasers had sunk around 67 German U-boats." The sources I have found are unanimous in stating that the only confirmed submarine sinking by chasers was the sinking of a Japanese submarine, no sinking of German submarines by chasers were confirmed.

I believe the page needs correcting. Where do I go from here? OldVato (talk) 18:09, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The Coast Guards Active class 125 ft cutters were designated as subchasers (WSCs) during WW2 - this may be part of the confusion.Nigel Ish (talk) 22:33, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

SC fast naval vessel??
i don't think fast is right for a SC


 * In WWII they had 2,500–3,000 bhp and reached 20 knots. That's pretty fast for the day.
 * The target sub is detected by sonar some distance away, and then depth charges are dropped on top of it. To increase the chance of interception, the dropping vessel needs to get to that location quickly, and to have the charges sink quickly. Between the wars the solution to this was fast sub chasers.
 * In WWII, it was realised that this wasn't working. The sub chaser just couldn't get there fast enough and the sub had moved on. There was also a problem that sonar has a blind spot closer than its minimum range (the sent and received pings are too close to tell apart). So the replacement then was a series of mortar weapons like Five Wide Virgins, Hedgehog, Squid and eventually Limbo. These threw the weapon almost instantly onto the target location at that time, without needing to manoeuvre the ship there.
 * Post-WWII, the type disappeared. The Soviets kept them for a while, getting even more powerful. But they too went for a ranged weapon eventually, the RBU-6000 rocket launcher. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:12, 8 August 2019 (UTC)