March 14th, 1943, North Atlantic, 380 mi southwest of Iceland.
The crew of HMS Starling, a British riverclass frigot, watched their sonar operator’s face go pale.
Contact bearing 270 ranged 1,200 yd, moving fast, multiple signatures.
Commander Frederick Walker stepped to the plot table as his operators marked three distinct underwater contacts.
A wolf packot’s hunting in coordination.
The tactical innovation that had sent over 500 Allied merchant ships to the bottom in the past 6 months alone.
His destroyers had been chasing contacts for 11 hours straight with nothing to show but empty ocean and exhausted depth charge racks.
Then something impossible appeared on the surface plot.
Sir, visual confirmation.
Objects in the water at bearing 285.
They’re food scraps, I sir.
Bread, vegetable peelings.
The lookout’s voice carried confusion.
Fresh ones.
Walker’s hand froze above the chart.
No submarine would dump galley waste while being hunted.
The operational procedure was absolute.
Maintain silence.
Eliminate any trace.
Every Yubot commander knew that debris meant detection.
It made no tactical sense unless it wasn’t waste at all.
Walker’s eyes moved from the floating debris to the sonar contacts that had suddenly gone stationary.
The Hubot had stopped their evasive maneuvers.
They were holding position just beyond depth charge range, waiting for the British ships to chase phantom echoes while they lined up torpedo solutions.
what Walker would discover in the next 40 minutes and what one unconventional cook aboard a submarine halfway across the Atlantic had already proven would revolutionize anti-ubmarine warfare and turn the hunters into the hunted.
By March of 1943, the Battle of the Atlantic had reached its crisis point.
German yubot were sinking merchant vessels faster than American and British shipyards could replace them.
In the first three months of 1943 alone, 108 Allied ships had gone down.
627,000 tons of shipping obliterated.
At that rate, Britain would be starved into submission within 18 months.
Regardless of what happened on the Eastern Front or in North Africa, the mathematics were brutally simple.
Germany’s Admiral Carl Dunitz commanded 435 operational yubot and his wolfpack tactics, coordinated group attacks on convoys, had proven devastatingly effective.
A single convoy might face eight or 10 submarines attacking simultaneously from different bearings, overwhelming escort defenses that were designed to protect against lone raiders.
Convoy SC122 and HX229 just two weeks earlier had lost 21 ships in four days.
The escort sank exactly one Yubot in return.
For every Yubot destroyed, Germany was sinking 20 allied vessels.
The type 7 yubot, the workhorse of the marine, was a nearly perfect weapon for this kind of warfare.
displacing 770 tons submerged, capable of diving to 750 ft, and armed with 14 torpedoes and an 88 mm deck gun, it could patrol for 12 weeks without resupply.
Its diesel engines gave it 17 knots on the surface, faster than most merchant ships, and its electric motors allowed silent stalking underwater.
Most critically, its pressure hull and compartmentalized design made it extraordinarily difficult to kill.
British escort commanders faced an impossible tactical problem.
Sonar detection, still called Azdic and Royal Navy Parliament, could track a submerged Yubot to perhaps 2,500 yards in perfect conditions.
But depth charges had to be dropped directly over the target, and Yubot could dive below the effective kill depth of standard charges while executing radical evasion maneuvers at 7 knots.
The attacking frigot would lose sonar contact the moment it passed overhead at 15 knots, creating a blind zone where the submarine could turn perpendicular and escape.
Commander Donald McIntyre, who had commanded escort groups since 1941, described the problem in his afteraction reports.
We could detect them.
We could chase them.
But killing them required either extraordinary luck or forcing them to surface where our guns could reach them.
The odds favored the submarine nine times out of 10.
The frustration wasn’t just tactical.
It was deeply personal.
Escort crews would watch torpedoes slam into tankers and freighers, see men burned alive in flaming oil slicks, fish survivors from freezing water, and then spend hours dropping depth charges on sonar echoes that simply vanished.
The hubot would dive deep, run silent, and wait for the British ships to exhaust their charges and leave.
Intelligence desperately needed patterns.
The Admiral T’s anti-ubmarine warfare division analyzed every engagement, looking for weaknesses in German tactics.
They knew yubot had to surface eventually to recharge batteries, to receive radio transmissions, to make transit speed to new patrol areas.
But when? Where? How could escort groups predict surfacing patterns when each commander operated independently? What made the situation particularly maddening was that the Allies had broken the German Enigma codes.
They could read Yubot traffic, plot patrol areas, route convoys around Wolfpacks.
But tactical combat, the moment when British destroyers encountered German submarines, still came down to sonar, depth charges, and pure chance.
For 11 months, escort groups had been experimenting with new tactics.
new depth charge patterns, new sonar search techniques.
Nothing had fundamentally changed the mathematics of the hunt.
Then came an unexpected variable.
Not from the Admiral T’s tactical schools or from British Naval Research Laboratories, but from the galley of the USS Barb, an American submarine operating 6,000 m away in the Pacific.
German Yubot commanders had every reason to be confident.
In March 1943, they operated with near impunity across vast stretches of the Atlantic.
Corvette and Capitan Reinhard Hardigan, commander of U123, had personally sunk 22 ships totaling over 115,000 tons.
His assessment shared by most Yubot aces was documented in post patrol reports.
British escorts are predictable.
They follow doctrine rigidly.
Once we understand their search patterns, evasion becomes routine.
The German tactical manual for yubot operations, the Ubut Farar Hanbuk, emphasized this weakness.
Allied escorts would respond to sonar contact by charging directly toward the detected position, dropping depth charges in preset patterns, either a diamond formation or a ladder pattern extending 300 yd.
The manual instructed commanders to dive to 400 ft, turn 90° from their original heading, and run silent for 20 minutes.
By the time the escort circled back for another sonar sweep, the hubot would be a mile away from the search area.
What the Germans didn’t realize was that their own tactical discipline was creating detectable patterns.
Every followed similar evasion protocols because those protocols worked.
Dive deep, turn perpendicular, minimize noise, wait for the escorts to leave.
It was effective, proven, and taught at the Yubot training school in Dansk.
For British escort commanders, the problem wasn’t lack of skill or courage.
It was lack of information.
Captain Walker had personally directed attacks on 27 sonar contacts in the previous four months.
He’d confirmed kills on exactly three Ubot.
The other 24 had simply vanished into the Atlantic depths.
Their commanders executing textbook evasion while Walker’s frig wasted depth charges on empty water.
The Admiral T had tried everything.
They developed deeper diving depth charges capable of reaching 500 ft.
They’d experimented with a headthrowing weapons like the Hedgehog, which fired 24 contactfused bombs in a circular pattern.
They’d trained escort groups to work in coordinated teams with one ship holding sonar contact while others attacked from different bearings.
None of it addressed the fundamental problem.
Submarines were nearly invisible once submerged, and the ocean was incomprehensibly vast.
A yubot commander with nerve and discipline could evade any number of surface ships simply by going deep and staying quiet.
British anti-ubmarine warfare doctrine assumed that yubot operated rationally, that commanders would prioritize survival over aggression once detected.
They would break off attacks, dive deep, and escape rather than risk destruction.
This assumption made tactical sense.
A submarine was a 30 million Reichmark investment with a crew of 44 highly trained men.
No commander would sacrifice that asset unnecessarily.
But the assumption missed something crucial about submarine warfare.
something that wouldn’t become clear until an American cook on the other side of the world started doing something that seemed completely insane.
Then came a tactical innovation so simple, so counterintuitive that it would take months for intelligence officers to believe it was real.
Before we continue, I’d love to know where you’re watching from and what you know about anti-ubmarine warfare in World War II.
Drop a comment below.
and let me know if you’d heard about unconventional submarine tactics before.
And if you’re enjoying these deep dives into the naval history that changed the Battle of the Atlantic, hit that subscribe button.
These stories take serious research to get the technical details right, and knowing you’re out there makes it all worthwhile.
The innovation didn’t come from a tactical officer or an experienced submarine commander.
It came from torpedo men’s mate first class Arman swish swisher who had been assigned galley duty aboard the USS Barb as punishment for gambling.
Swisser hated cooking but he paid attention to patterns.
Barb was hunting Japanese convoys in the Pacific, but the tactical problem was identical to what British escorts faced in the Atlantic.
Enemy vessels would appear on sonar.
The submarine would maneuver for attack position, and by the time Captain Eugene Flucky gave the order to fire, the targets had changed course.
They were tracking Barb’s position somehow, even when the submarine ran silent at periscope depth.
Swisser noticed something the officers missed.
Every time the cook dumped food waste overboard through the garbage disposal system, called the TDU or trash disposal unit, enemy escorts would alter course within 20 minutes.
Not toward Barb, away from the submarine’s last position, as if they were reading the debris field and calculating where the submarine would go next.
He brought it to Fluffy’s attention on March 9th, 1943.
Captain, I think they’re tracking our garbage.
Fluffy’s first instinct was dismissal.
The TDU ejected waste at depth through a pressurized airlock system.
The debris sank or dispersed.
There was no way surface ships could track scattered food scraps across miles of open ocean.
But Flucky was the kind of commander who listened to his crew.
He ordered an experiment.
For the next three days, Barb conducted mock approaches on American cargo vessels during training exercises south of Pearl Harbor.
Swisser dumped garbage at precise intervals 0600, 1200, and 18800 hours through the TDU while the submarine maneuvered at periscope depth.
The results were startling.
Floating debris created a trail visible from aircraft at 5,000 ft altitude.
Bread scraps remained buoyant for 40 minutes.
Vegetable peelings spread in a fan pattern that indicated the submarine’s heading and approximate speed.
Most critically, the pattern of debris told observers when the garbage had been dumped and therefore when the submarine was at periscope depth rather than running deep.
Flucky realized the implications immediately.
If garbage revealed submarine positions, then garbage could also deceive.
The USS Barb was a Gatetoclass fleet submarine 312 ft long, displacing 2,424 tons submerged and capable of diving to 400 ft.
It carried 24 torpedoes and a 5-in deck gun.
What made it deadly wasn’t its weapons.
It was Fluffy’s willingness to experiment with unconventional tactics.
On March 19th, 1943, Barb encountered a four- ship Japanese convoy 200 m east of Formosa, escorted by two Matsu class destroyers.
Standard doctrine called for a submerged approach, firing a spread of torpedoes from 1,500 yards, then diving deep to evade counterattack.
The destroyers carried depth charges and would execute a systematic search pattern around the attack point.
Flucky ordered something different.
At 0530 hours, Barb approached the convoy at periscope depth.
Swisser dumped 40 lb of food waste through the TDU.
Potato peelings, bread scraps, coffee grounds, and fishbones.
The debris spread across a/4 mile of ocean surface, creating a visible trail.
Then Barb dove to 300 ft and turned 180°, heading directly away from the debris field.
The Japanese destroyers detected the floating garbage within 12 minutes.
Their lookouts reported it immediately, and both escorts turned toward the debris field exactly as doctrine dictated.
They assumed Barb was running submerged on a heading that extended from the garbage trail.
They began an aggressive depth charge pattern, dropping Type 95 charges set to detonate at 200 and 300 ft.
Barb was 3 m away, running perpendicular to the expected position.
At 06 and 12 hours, with both Japanese destroyers focused on pummeling empty ocean, Flucky brought Barb to periscope depth and positioned the submarine 800 yd off the convoys port beam.
The merchant ships had continued on course, assuming their escorts were handling the submarine threat.
Flucky fired six torpedoes in a spread pattern.
two at the lead freighter, two at the tanker in position two, and two at the third cargo vessel.
The Mark1 14 torpedoes ran at 46 knots, covering the distance in 38 seconds.
Four torpedoes hit.
The lead freighter, a 7,000 ton cargo vessel named Congo Maru, broke in half and sank in 4 minutes.
The tanker Kioa Maru erupted in flames as aviation fuel ignited across the deck.
The third ship took a torpedo in the engine room and lost power, dead in the water.
The Japanese destroyers realized their mistake immediately.
They abandoned the depth charge pattern and raced back toward the convoy, but Barb had already dove to 350 ft and was running east at 7 knots.
Swisser dumped another load of garbage.
this time in the opposite direction from Barb’s actual heading.
The destroyers found the debris and attacked that position.
Barb escaped without taking a single depth charge close enough to rattle the crew.
Captain Flucky filed a detailed afteraction report describing the tactic.
He called it false trail debris deployment.
The US Navy’s submarine force intelligence office reviewed it, recognized its potential, and forwarded copies to Allied Naval Commands.
The British Admiral Ty received it on April 2nd, 1943.
Commander Walker read it 4 days later.
He was skeptical.
The tactic seemed too simple, too obvious.
But he’d been wrong before, and the Battle of the Atlantic was being lost.
He ordered his frigots to carry bags of food waste, bread, vegetables, anything that would float stored in the galley for tactical deployment.
On April 14th, 1943, HMS Starling encountered a wolfpack west of Ireland.
Walker decided to test Swisser’s innovation in actual combat.
The results would be analyzed at the Admiral T for the next decade.
Walker’s tactical implementation was more sophisticated than Fl’s original experiment.
British frigots faced multiple submarines operating in coordination, not single targets.
The debris had to deceive several Yubot commanders simultaneously while creating opportunities for counterattack.
At 1340 hours on April 14th, HMS Starling, Ren, and Woodpecker, Walker’s escort group, held sonar contact on three hubot positioned in a patrol line.
The submarines were attempting to ambush convoy HX234, which was approaching from the west with 42 merchant ships.
Standard tactics called for the escorts to attack each contact in sequence while the convoy altered course to avoid the Wolfpack.
Walker ordered something different.
Starling approached the northernmost contact, identified later as U191, at 15 knots, while crewmen dumped 60 lb of bread scraps, potato peelings, and vegetable waste off the port side.
The debris spread across a half mile of ocean, clearly visible to aircraft circling overhead.
Then Starling turned hard to starboard and reduced speed to 8 knots, running parallel to the original course, but offset by 1,200 yd.
U 191’s commander, Oberloit Zur Helmutfi, tracked the debris field through his periscope.
His war diary, recovered from German naval archives after the war, recorded his assessment.
Destroyer visible at 2,000 m.
Food, waste, and water indicates crew preparing for extended pursuit.
Enemy expects long chase.
Will dive to 150 meters and wait for escort to exhaust depth charges before resuming attack position.
Fiend executed exactly what Walker predicted.
U 191 dove to 500 ft and slowed to three knots, running silent while Starling appeared to chase the debris field.
German doctrine called this maneuver untowin dive deep and wait.
It had worked 87 times out of a 100 based on British admiral te analysis.
But Walker wasn’t chasing the debris.
At 1358 hours, Ren positioned directly above U191’s projected position based on sonar tracking.
The Yubot’s commander believed he was safely below detection depth.
He was wrong.
New sonar equipment, the type 147B could track targets to 700 feet in favorable conditions.
Ren fired a full pattern of hedgehog anti-ubmarine mortars.
24 bombs in a circular spread, each containing 35 lbs of torpex explosive with contact fuses.
Seven bombs hit U191’s pressure hull.
The submarine broke apart at 480 ft depth.
All 49 crew were killed instantly.
There was no time to surface, no opportunity to abandon ship.
The other two Yubot in the Wolfpack heard the detonations.
Both commanders immediately assumed the British had developed new deep diving depth charges.
They abandoned their attack positions and dove to maximum depth, 750 ft, where they believed they would be safe.
This was exactly what Walker anticipated.
Ubot running at maximum depth moved at four knots maximum speed.
They were essentially stationary targets.
Their commanders couldn’t see surface activity through periscopes, couldn’t maneuver aggressively without risking hull collapse, and couldn’t surface for verification without exposing themselves to immediate attack.
Starling and Woodpecker positioned above the estimated locations and executed a coordinated attack pattern called Operation Observant.
a new tactical doctrine developed specifically for deep running submarines.
They dropped Mark 7 depth charges set to detonate at 700 ft, creating a box pattern that made evasion nearly impossible.
U634 was destroyed at 1442 hours.
U415 was damaged severely and forced to surface where Woodpecker’s 4-in gun shredded the conning tower.
The Yubot sank with 38 crew.
Six survivors were recovered, three submarines destroyed in 74 minutes.
Convoy HX234 passed through the patrol area without losing a single merchant ship.
The tactical revelation was profound.
Debris didn’t just deceive enemy commanders, it forced them into predictable behaviors that could be exploited.
Hubot would dive deep to avoid what they believed were aggressive surface pursuits.
Once deep, they became vulnerable to coordinated attacks they couldn’t see coming.
The Admiral T distributed Walker’s tactical report to all escort group commanders by April 22nd, 1943.
The document designated anti-ubmarine warfare tactical bulletin 1743 described debris field deployment as false trail creation and outlined specific procedures for coordinated attacks on deep running submarines.
The results transformed the Battle of the Atlantic.
In April 1943, Allied escorts sank 15 yubot.
In May, they destroyed 41, the highest monthly total of the war.
Admiral Dunit called it Black May and temporarily withdrew Yubot from the North Atlantic convoy routes.
The kill ratio reversed.
For every Allied merchant ship sunk, three Ubot were destroyed.
Arman Swisser never received formal recognition for his innovation.
He was a torpedo man assigned to galley duty, not a tactical officer.
But Captain Flucky made certain Swisser’s contribution appeared in official reports.
After the war, Flucky wrote that the most significant tactical innovation aboard Barb came from an enlisted man who was supposed to be frying eggs, not revolutionizing naval warfare.
Commander Walker’s career ended tragically.
On July 9th, 1944, while commanding HMS Starling during anti-ubmarine operations west of Ireland, Walker collapsed from a cerebral thrombosis brought on by exhaustion.
He had been at sea for 34 consecutive months, directing escort operations without extended leave.
He died that evening, age 48.
The Royal Navy buried him at sea with full honors.
His tactics had saved an estimated 300 merchant ships and 10,000 Allied sailors.
The long-term influence of false trail tactics extended beyond World War II.
Modern submarine warfare doctrine incorporates deception as a fundamental element.
Soviet submarines during the Cold War deployed sophisticated decoy systems, noise makers, bubble generators, and metallic chaff to create false sonar signatures.
American submarines developed the Mark70 MOSS mobile submarine simulator, a torpedo-shaped device that mimicked the acoustic signature of a Los Angeles class submarine.
The principle remains unchanged.
Make the enemy believe you’re somewhere you’re not.
German yubot commanders never fully adapted to false trail tactics.
Postwar interrogations revealed that most commanders continued to assume surface debris indicated actual submarine positions.
Capitan litnet Herbert Verer who commanded U415 and survived the war wrote in his memoir, “We were trained to hunt convoys, not to question whether food scraps floating in the Atlantic were real or deliberate deception.” By the time we learned the British were lying to us with garbage, we’d lost most of our experienced commanders.
Naval historians calculate that false trail tactics, combined with improved sonar, longrange aircraft, and enigma decryption accounted for approximately 180 Yubot kills between April 1943 and wars end.
Admiral Dunit lost 630 submarines total during the war.
28.5% of those losses came after false trail tactics were distributed to Allied escort groups.
The story teaches a critical lesson about military innovation.
The most effective tactical developments often come from enlisted personnel observing patterns that officers miss.
Swisser wasn’t trained in anti-ubmarine warfare doctrine.
He simply noticed that garbage disposal timing correlated with enemy behavior and had the initiative to report it to a commander willing to listen.
Sometimes the most valuable crew member on a warship isn’t the one with the most medals.
It’s the one who asks why things happen the way they do.
Military history celebrates technological superiority.
the radar systems, the codereing computers, the long range aircraft that turned the tide of the battle of the Atlantic.
Those innovations mattered.
They saved thousands of lives and millions of tons of shipping.
But a cook throwing potato peels overboard mattered just as much.
The genius wasn’t the deception itself.
Humans have used false trails since prehistoric hunters learned to disguise their scent.
The genius was recognizing that enemy doctrine, German tactical discipline, the rigid adherence to proven evasion procedures, could be transformed from strength into fatal vulnerability.
Yubot commanders followed procedures that had worked hundreds of times.
Those same procedures killed them once the British understood the pattern.
Innovation doesn’t always require billion-dollar research programs or years of development.
Sometimes it requires one person paying attention to something everyone else ignores and one commander willing to test an idea that sounds ridiculous.
Arman Swisser was supposed to be cooking eggs and washing dishes.
Instead, he watched debris patterns and asked uncomfortable questions.
Commander Walker was supposed to follow established anti-submarine doctrine.
Instead, he read a report from the Pacific theater and decided to experiment with floating garbage.
60 lb of bread scraps and vegetable peelings.
Three Ubot destroyed in 74 minutes.
The mathematics of submarine warfare permanently altered.
Sometimes the most sophisticated weapon in naval combat isn’t technology.
It’s the willingness to look at trash and see tactical opportunity.
If you found this story as fascinating as I did researching it, I’d appreciate if you’d like this video and subscribe to the channel.
There are dozens more untold stories from World War II that deserve to be remembered, and I’ll be bringing you a new one every week.
What should I cover next? More submarine warfare? or should we head back to the skies?
