TIMEWATCH

janner

MIA
Book Reviewer
#7
Boat handling and orders given were very inaccurate, four torpedoes fired out of the two forward starboard tubes in the space of 5 minutes.
Capt took charge for the attack with no briefing on current tactical situation.
Periscope on seemed to be left up at all times, no sign of U Boat snorting but diesel engines were running.
 
#8
ok but that was the BBCs version of it, probably didn't have proper advisors, and of course there is artistic licence, but I think it gave a good account of how the blokes must have felt.
 

janner

MIA
Book Reviewer
#9
They had Jeff Tall as an advisor, He is the main man at the Submarine Museum and an ex Boat Captain, maybe they didn't listen to him.
 
#10
I suspect they used Jeff's A boat and were not prepared to pay enough to restore outside telemotor power and get the scope of the pins. As to the dialogue, it wasn't supposed to be a second by second account of the engagement and the interviews with the NO indicated there was in fact a fair ammount of briefing and discussion.

Knowing Jeff I am sure that he gave them chapter and verse and they then excercised their editorial authority and made what they thought was the best they could do for the cash and to satisfy the viewing public.

The non snorting U boat with diesels running was a strange bit, I will have to ask Jeff if I find an excuse to visit him again.
 
#11
yes maxi, but you are seeing it from a submariners perspective. Look at it from someone who is interested in history.

I learnt a lot, I never even realised that you could have sub on sub, one has to accept the artistic inaccuracies I think to make the transmission to the layperson more relevant.

I have no idea what a non snorting U boat is, but I am not sure that it detracted from the story that was being told.

Although I am sure it pained you to see the inaccurancies, just as Judge John Deed pains me!
 
#12
Even as a non submariner I noticed a lot of inaccuracies, also I found the presentation boring. On top of that I can't stand docu-dramas. It seems to me that they would rather keep rubbish actors in work than to take the trouble I searching the archives I find accurate footage. I switched off after 20 minutes and went to bed. Sad old git aren't I?
 

grefs

Lantern Swinger
#13
I think it would have been more interesting just watching the dive on the wreck and the story being told, as they have done in the past with docu's of the same nature.
 
#15
geoffg said:
rosinacarley said:
just as Judge John Deed pains me!
You know him then Rosie?? :roll:

Did notice the diesels running at 40m I think was the depth.
Loooong snort mast!!

"geoffers" :?
Not him personally you understand Geoffers but the concept that a judge would be doing one of his counsel and then seeing her in chambers without opposing counsel.
 

geoffg

Lantern Swinger
#16
Wow Rosie, if I was stood opposite you in a court, I'd have pleaded guilty by now.
I actually thought of Annie Oakley etc when I first read Judge John Deed :oops:
Geoff(ers) :?
 
#17
rosinacarley said:
yes maxi, but you are seeing it from a submariners perspective. Look at it from someone who is interested in history.

I learnt a lot, I never even realised that you could have sub on sub, one has to accept the artistic inaccuracies I think to make the transmission to the layperson more relevant.

I have no idea what a non snorting U boat is, but I am not sure that it detracted from the story that was being told.

Although I am sure it pained you to see the inaccurancies, just as Judge John Deed pains me!
The innacuracies or inconsistancies did not trouble me that much, the interresting bit was one how they got into the right position in the first place, and how they then set about solving a problem no one else had solved before. The chats with the NO were very interesting as was the ability to go and pick bits up with the ROV. I spent a bit of time with a manned submersible picking up torpedos of the sea bottom and that was difficult enough.

I must admit that I have always thought Judge Deed was a trifle far fetched
 
#19
Geoffers, I would not lower myself to watch such trash!

I seem to remember ages ago when the Mitchells kept needing legal advise - commercial conveyancing to purchase the Queen Vic, representation in criminal matters and I think custody of a child, they used the same bloke each time! As if! Tsk! Trash!
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
S The Fleet Air Arm 8
S Submariners 12

Similar threads

Top