The U-boat That Wasn't Where It Was Supposed to Be

0:03
So, Dom, what did you see?
0:06
>> Well, after a little bit of uh uh
0:10
scootering, we uh we got on the sub. One
0:14
of the things I love most about wreck
0:16
diving is solving mysteries.
0:19
Finding something on the seabed is
0:20
exciting, but finding out what it is,
0:23
working through the history, comparing
0:26
what you can actually see underwater
0:28
with records that might be more than a
0:31
hundred years old, and eventually being
0:34
able to put a name to a wreck is for me
0:38
one of the best bits of diving. It's a
0:40
classic thing when the when the shot
0:42
isn't on the wreck, you kind of you look
0:43
for fish. And uh we didn't see any fish.
0:46
We saw a a large octopus.
0:49
>> Oh.
0:49
>> And then after the octopus, we saw some
0:51
fish. And then we came straight onto the
0:53
bow. And obviously the great thing about
0:57
uh submarines is they've got that lovely
0:59
kind of really sharp knifeike bow. So
1:03
that was the first thing that we came on
1:04
to. It was really nice actually,
1:06
especially, you know, cuz we at that
1:08
point weren't overly confident we were
1:10
going to find it. And then and then we
1:13
got on it and we we went along it. Now,
1:16
submarines are particularly interesting
1:19
because unlike merchant ships, there
1:22
were a very finite number of them. We
1:25
know which German Ubot existed. We know
1:28
the fate of actually the vast majority
1:31
of them. And over the past few decades,
1:34
divers, researchers have identified
1:37
almost all the German Ubot lying in the
1:40
English Channel. There really aren't
1:43
many mysteries left, which makes it
1:46
rather special when another one suddenly
1:48
appears. And that's exactly what
1:51
happened in this video. The the channel
1:54
is full of submarine wrecks, both from
1:56
the first first world war and the second
1:57
world war. But due to the efforts of
2:00
scuba divers during the last say 30
2:02
years when scuba diving became very
2:04
popular and the technical means were uh
2:07
giving the opportunity to go down to
2:10
depths which had before unable to to
2:13
reach. So uh most of the wrecks now to
2:18
be located or to be known in the channel
2:20
have been identified.
2:23
>> Now that's Axel Nissle. He spent about
2:26
four decades researching German yubot
2:30
losses and has examined an extraordinary
2:33
number of wartime photographs and
2:35
records. And as you've just heard, there
2:39
are very few new boats left in the
2:41
English Channel that haven't already
2:43
been found and identified.
2:46
So when an unidentified German submarine
2:50
turns up, there simply aren't that many
2:53
possibilities.
2:55
And because of Axel's expertise and
2:57
knowledge, he's one of those people that
2:59
you want looking at the evidence.
3:02
This particular wreck presented a very
3:04
interesting mystery because there was
3:08
one missing Uboat that should have been
3:10
somewhere in this general area. Except
3:14
according to the official records, it
3:16
wasn't. It was nearly 40 nautical miles
3:19
away.
3:22
The story began on the 25th of July,
3:24
2026.
3:26
Ian Taylor and the Skin Deeper team went
3:29
out to investigate a wreck that they
3:32
thought might be an undived steam ship.
3:36
The wreck itself wasn't new. It'd been
3:39
known to the UK hydrographic office for
3:42
years and had been tentatively
3:45
identified as an American sailing vessel
3:48
called the Hildigard, which was lost in
3:51
1917.
3:53
But when Ian and his guys reached the
3:55
bottom, something became immediately
3:58
obvious. This wasn't Hildigard. It
4:01
wasn't even a steam ship. It was a
4:03
submarine. They couldn't establish
4:06
exactly which submarine it was, but they
4:09
believed it was probably German and
4:12
probably from the Second World War. They
4:15
told us what they'd found and were
4:17
really happy for the Gasperados to go
4:20
out and to see if we could identify it.
4:23
As soon as I looked at where the wreck
4:25
was, one particular Yubot came to mind.
4:29
U672.
4:32
The reason was a piece of research I'd
4:35
read some time before.
4:38
Many people will be familiar with Inis
4:40
McCartney. He's one of the most
4:43
well-known yubot researchers probably in
4:46
the world and he's done a huge amount to
4:49
bring together the archaeology of the
4:51
German submarines around the British
4:53
Isles and associate them with the
4:55
wartime records. In his doctoral thesis,
4:59
he went through the official records of
5:01
yubot losses and compared what the
5:04
wartime and post-war documents said with
5:07
what divers were actually finding on the
5:09
seabed.
5:11
U672 presented an interesting problem.
5:15
It was supposed to have been lost at 50°
5:19
3 minutes north 2° 30 minutes west.
5:24
That was the position in the Royal Navy
5:27
records associated with an attack from
5:30
July 1944.
5:33
But Inis couldn't find a submarine
5:36
anywhere near that that matched the
5:37
description of U672.
5:40
And he concluded that there must have
5:42
been a simple reversal of two numbers in
5:46
the longitude in the official postwar
5:48
list. So, the intended position wasn't
5:51
2° 30 minutes west. It was 3° 20 minutes
5:57
west.
5:58
That might sound like a small
6:00
transcription error, but it isn't. It
6:03
moves the submarine more than 30
6:06
nautical miles west in the English
6:08
Channel, which means that our
6:11
unidentified German submarine suddenly
6:14
becomes a lot more interesting because
6:17
the wreck that Ian Taylor found was very
6:22
close to that location.
6:25
It was 37 miles from the traditionally
6:28
published loss location of U672,
6:31
but only about five from the revised
6:35
position from the uh reconstructed
6:37
historical records.
6:40
Aligned with that was another piece of
6:42
evidence.
6:43
After U672 was scuttled, her crew were
6:47
recovered in the water. Now the position
6:50
recorded in the Admiral T records for
6:52
those survivors was about 50° 1 minute
6:56
north 3° 20 minutes west
7:01
basically once again very close to the
7:04
corrected area. When these people were
7:07
taken on on board a rescue ship, it
7:10
turned out that they were submariners
7:12
which had um according to their
7:14
statement scuttled their boat. And these
7:17
were the crew, the complete crew of 672.
7:20
And the position they were picked up uh
7:23
was uh somewhat different from the
7:25
position which is in the historical
7:27
records about the submarine the under
7:29
submarine attack. Usually this is a a
7:32
difficult situation because we have one
7:35
minute in in uh in latitude and in
7:38
longitude between the two different
7:40
positions which is in the British
7:42
channel quite a distance. And it's
7:45
almost impossible to assume that a crew
7:48
was floating for some 40 miles during
7:50
the night with with a drift. Um, and
7:54
usually, uh, they they scuttled the boat
7:56
early on the 19th and they were just
7:58
discovered a few hours later. So, a
8:01
position difference in that size is is
8:03
unlikely.
8:04
>> It's almost impossible to explain how 50
8:08
men in small rubber dingies could have
8:10
traveled something like 40 mi west in
8:12
the English Channel. So, it makes far
8:15
more sense that the attack position was
8:18
wrong.
8:19
>> [sighs]
8:19
>> So before we even dive the wreck, I had
8:22
quite a high level of confidence that
8:25
U672
8:26
was a strong possibility.
8:29
But a possibility isn't identification.
8:32
We had to get down there and find some
8:34
evidence. And first we actually had to
8:37
find the wreck. We were diving from
8:40
Integrity operated by Abyss Charters out
8:44
of Plymouth with owner Iva Farrell as
8:47
our skipper. The first attempt was on
8:50
Saturday the 15th of August and we'd
8:52
picked quite a weekend to do it. There
8:55
were big spring tides and in this part
8:58
of the English Channel, well any part of
9:00
the English Channel, that's really
9:02
important.
9:03
The slack water can be very short, so
9:06
the timing has to be right. And if you
9:08
get it wrong, the current can turn what
9:11
should be a relatively straightforward
9:13
wreck dive into uh something that's very
9:16
different. Unfortunately, we got the
9:19
slack wrong. The shot wasn't on the
9:21
wreck. My buddy didn't have a scooter,
9:25
but I did. So, when we got to the bottom
9:28
of the shot and found it wasn't on the
9:29
wreck, I took a distance line and
9:32
started scootering up current following
9:35
the drag marks looking for the wreck. I
9:38
carried on until my reel was empty.
9:41
That's 60 m. But there was absolutely
9:43
nothing there. And at that point, there
9:46
was basically nothing else I could do.
9:49
So I canned the dive, turned around,
9:51
came back up, and that was it really.
9:56
End of the first attempt.
9:58
It was uh an interesting experience, but
10:02
we were all very keen to go and give it
10:05
another go the next day. We knew there
10:07
was a submarine.
10:09
We had a strong feeling that it was
10:12
U672.
10:13
So the very next day, we uh gave it
10:16
another go. This time I went in with Guy
10:20
Trees and Guy had a scooter. Once we got
10:25
down, unfortunately, the shot wasn't on
10:27
the wreck again, but this time we were
10:29
definitely on slack.
10:32
So Guy and I headed away from the shot
10:36
across what is basically a completely
10:38
featureless sandy seabed.
10:44
And for a while there was nothing. Then
10:48
I saw an angler fish. That's got to be a
10:50
pretty good sign because angler fish eat
10:53
other fish. So there's got to be some
10:54
around and fish by and large inhabit
10:58
wrecks.
10:59
Next thing I saw was an octopus on a bit
11:03
of rope. Once again, both good
11:05
indications that we're somewhere close
11:07
to a wreck. Then I saw fish. A lot of
11:10
fish. And if you do enough wreck diving,
11:14
you know that if you see a lot of marine
11:16
life, there's going to be a wreck
11:17
nearby. And then all of a sudden, out of
11:21
the gloom, the bow appeared. We'd found
11:24
it. And that's a great feeling having
11:27
scooted around on the seabed for quite a
11:29
long time. It was about 40 meters away
11:32
from the shot. It was lying on its port
11:35
side just as Ian had told us.
11:38
>> I depend on the divers. Without the
11:41
divers, I couldn't do anything because I
11:42
wouldn't locate any submarine wrecks on
11:44
the ground. So whenever an an
11:47
unidentified submarine wreck turns up, I
11:50
I really get excited because it's it's
11:52
it's work work to be or a mystery to be
11:56
solved. And this is is I love it.
12:00
We'd laid a distance line from the shot
12:03
to the wreck. So uh the other divers
12:06
could find it. Unfortunately, by the
12:09
time they got down and they they went a
12:12
bit of a way along the distance line,
12:14
none of them had scooters and they were
12:16
all worried about what might happen with
12:18
the currents. So, they aborted their
12:20
dive, got back to the shot, ascended
12:23
safely, which meant that only two of us
12:26
got on the wreck, and therefore the
12:28
responsibility was on us really to get
12:31
as much information about it as we
12:33
possibly could. At 70 mters, you don't
12:37
have a huge amount of time. Maybe 30
12:39
minutes, 30-ish minutes on the bottom,
12:41
and we'd already burnt quite a lot of
12:43
that looking for the wreck. That gave us
12:46
about 20 minutes to go over it, get as
12:49
much as we possibly could. Initially, we
12:52
started at the bow because that's where
12:54
we arrived. We then traveled mainly
12:57
along the port side, which was the side
12:59
closest to the seabed. We were looking
13:01
for everything we possibly could that
13:04
had fallen off it. We then went to the
13:06
stern, had a look at the proper and then
13:10
came back along the starboard side to
13:12
the past the conning tower and then
13:14
headed back to the bow. So, it was a
13:16
pretty quick once round. The first thing
13:20
was really obvious. This was a type 7C.
13:24
I've dived type 7C before boats before,
13:27
including U 1021 off the north coast of
13:30
Cornwall and U 1063, which is relatively
13:34
close to Plymouth. Once you've dived
13:36
these boats, you really recognize the
13:39
features. So, I knew almost instantly
13:43
that this was a type 7C.
13:46
>> Most of them were out in the open
13:48
Atlantic. And there was one other boat
13:51
671
13:53
which was known sunk in a different
13:55
position in the channel. There were just
13:58
five survivors. So always with survivors
14:01
on the on the surface. Uh you you know
14:04
much more about a submarine loss instead
14:07
of when boat went missing or it was sunk
14:10
with all of its crew all hands gone.
14:12
>> But those were the most common German
14:15
submarine of the Second World War. They
14:18
built hundreds of them.
14:20
So knowing the type wasn't conclusive,
14:24
what we needed were additional details.
14:27
And it's worth knowing that although
14:30
they were the they built hundreds of
14:32
type 7C's, each of them was uh slightly
14:36
different.
14:38
U672 was built in Hamburg.
14:41
It was laid down in Christmas Eve 1941,
14:45
launched in February 1943,
14:48
and commissioned in April 1943.
14:53
Throughout the war, it only had one
14:55
commanding officer, Oelu Tenant Zi
14:59
Ulavetsz.
15:01
He was actually born in Copenhagen in
15:03
1916, so was half Danish. Before taking
15:07
command of U672, he'd already gained
15:10
considerable yubot experience as a watch
15:13
officer aboard U564.
15:16
Once he took command, he spent the next
15:19
few months preparing it and the crew for
15:21
operational service. Successfully
15:24
completed three war patrols, but must
15:27
have been extremely disappointed that
15:29
they didn't manage to sink a single
15:31
Allied ship. What did happen though was
15:33
they got attacked several times. most
15:36
seriously by a Sunderland flying boat
15:39
from 423 Squadron of the Royal Canadian
15:42
Air Force. It depth charged U672.
15:46
And actually, in a surprising twist, the
15:49
aircraft was very nearly destroyed when
15:52
one of those depth charges detonated
15:54
prematurely.
15:56
U672 limped back into Suzair on the 12th
16:00
of May, 1944.
16:02
It needed repairs from that attack. And
16:04
while it was there, it received
16:06
something that would become one of the
16:08
most important clues on the wreck more
16:11
than 80 years later. It was a snorkel.
16:15
By 1944, the balance of power in the
16:19
submarine war had changed dramatically.
16:22
Allied radar and aircraft had made it
16:25
almost impossible for German submarines
16:27
to spend large periods of time on the
16:30
surface. The snorkel allowed a yubot to
16:34
remain submerged at periscope depth
16:36
while drawing air down into its diesel
16:39
engines. It meant that the yubot could
16:41
recharge its batteries without fully
16:44
surfacing. U672's first attempt to leave
16:48
port after receiving the snorkel wasn't
16:51
a success, and it returned shortly
16:53
afterwards to uh have some repairs done.
16:57
and it then sailed again on the 6th of
16:59
July 1944.
17:01
It was her fourth patrol, but would be
17:04
the last.
17:06
D-Day had taken place about a month
17:09
earlier, and the English Channel was
17:12
packed with Allied shipping and vessels,
17:15
and protecting all of that was an
17:17
enormous anti-ubmarine effort. Aircraft,
17:21
destroyers, frigots, radar, Azdic. For a
17:26
German Ubot trying to operate in the
17:28
channel in the summer of 1944, this was
17:31
an incredibly hostile environment.
17:34
Almost immediately, it was attacked
17:36
north of Roskoff.
17:38
Four depth charges were dropped. It
17:40
survived, but 5 days later, U672's luck
17:45
ran out. I'll come back to that final
17:48
action shortly because first, we need to
17:51
return to the wreck. type seven
17:53
seabboards uh to an normal
17:57
user would look all the same but there
18:00
were differences uh between individual
18:03
building yards and individual building
18:05
batches and what I have done during my
18:08
time in the last four decades I have
18:11
seen about 100,000 photographs of hubot
18:14
of German yubot during the war and I
18:17
compiled lists giving details for
18:20
individual batches or individual
18:22
building yards and that gives me the
18:25
opportunity to distinguish between
18:29
uh the the great mass of submarines or
18:32
type 7C submarines.
18:35
And what I'm always looking for is just
18:38
these details.
18:40
>> So that's really the key to the whole
18:42
identification.
18:43
You might think that two 7C boats are
18:47
identical, but Axel knows the minor
18:50
differences between them. based on where
18:52
they were built, when they were built,
18:54
and all those kind of things. He can use
18:57
the information that we find or we found
19:00
on this wreck. And with those details,
19:03
he can narrow down the identity to a a
19:06
very small number of Ubot, which in
19:09
conjunction with other information
19:11
allows you to identify with a very high
19:14
probability of success.
19:17
And one of the most important things we
19:19
wanted to find underwater was the
19:21
snorkel. We found it. You've already
19:24
seen it. The upper section had broken
19:26
away from its normal position and was
19:28
lying on the seabed. We could also see
19:31
the design of it,
19:34
particularly the distinctive ball float
19:36
arrangement.
19:38
U672 was fitted with her snorkel in the
19:42
spring of 1944 and that meant it had an
19:45
early type of snorkel head. Later
19:48
systems were different. They were better
19:50
basically. So we're looking for an early
19:52
snorkel installation of exactly the type
19:56
that we would expect on U672.
19:59
I focused on the snorkel system because
20:02
uh year 627 was a boat which was fitted
20:05
with a snorkel in spring 1944
20:09
and at that time only a specific type of
20:12
snorkel was in use. the so-called ball
20:15
float snorkel head which is different
20:17
from from later uh types and uh there
20:22
was no no radar um radar anti-raider
20:26
mats fitted to the snorkel head which
20:28
were fitted later on. So if the snorkel
20:31
head is without these items, you can
20:34
certainly say that it's an early snorkel
20:36
boat. There was another clue at the bow.
20:39
Or more accurately, there wasn't
20:42
something there that you would have
20:43
expected from a later boat.
20:46
Specifically, dinghy containers.
20:49
They started fitting external rescue
20:51
dinghy to most boats in late 1944, but
20:56
U672 was lost in July before that
21:00
modification became standard. There are
21:02
no dinghy containers on this wreck,
21:05
which is again exactly what we would
21:07
expect.
21:09
I had hoped to look underneath the keel
21:11
for another construction feature that
21:13
could potentially help identify this.
21:16
Unfortunately, the wreck is lying on its
21:19
port side, and that area is buried in
21:21
sand. So, that wasn't going to help us.
21:25
But toward the stern, there's something
21:27
much better. There are a series of
21:29
openings in the outer casing and these
21:33
varied between different yards and
21:35
different production batches.
21:37
On our wreck, there are three
21:39
distinctive rectangular openings
21:41
followed by a smaller circular opening.
21:44
We can compare them with wartime
21:46
photographs of U670 which was built in
21:49
the same yard and is part of the same
21:52
batch as U672.
21:55
When you look at the wartime photograph,
21:57
even from some distance away, you can
22:00
see those same three rectangular
22:01
openings and the smaller circular
22:04
opening at the end. This is a remarkably
22:07
good match, but once again, not absolute
22:10
proof on its own.
22:13
There's another characteristic though
22:15
that puts this wreck in exactly the
22:17
right production group. The propeller is
22:20
steel, and that's consistent with
22:22
wartime German production as shortages
22:25
increasingly forced the use of
22:27
substitute materials.
22:30
Disappointingly, we couldn't see any
22:32
surviving armaments, but pretty much the
22:35
whole outer casing around the conning
22:37
tower has disappeared, so the absence of
22:40
guns today isn't particularly
22:42
surprising. What was surprising was the
22:46
pile of steel pressurized cylinders that
22:49
I found just after the conning tower.
22:53
When I showed them to Axel, he knew
22:55
immediately what they were. They were
22:58
hydrogen cylinders associated with a
23:00
German radar decoy system called
23:02
Aphroditi.
23:05
By 1943, radar had become one of the
23:08
greatest threats facing German hubot.
23:11
Allied aircraft and warships could find
23:13
submarines at distances where visual
23:16
detection would have been impossible.
23:19
So the Germans developed a number of
23:21
devices intended to create false radar
23:24
targets. Aphroditi was remarkably
23:27
simple. You filled a balloon with
23:30
hydrogen. You suspended a load of strips
23:33
of material beneath it and those could
23:36
reflect radar.
23:38
The balloon would then be released to
23:40
create a false target while the
23:42
submarine attempted to escape in a
23:44
completely different direction. The
23:47
hydrogen for those balloons was carried
23:49
in high pressure steel cylinders after
23:52
the conning tower. More than 80 years
23:55
later, they're still there on the
23:57
seabed.
23:59
1943 when radar became the major the
24:02
major problem for the German Ubot when
24:05
uh these boats usually still operated on
24:07
the surface most of the time in the pre-
24:10
snorkel times uh the Germans were
24:14
looking for for solutions to in a way to
24:17
irritate attacking aircraft and that's
24:20
why they developed several kinds of
24:22
decoys and one of them was a decoy named
24:26
in in German Aphrodite which was nothing
24:29
else than a balloon with a line on it.
24:33
And uh to this line they had attached
24:35
aluminium strips. Uh and these aluminium
24:39
strips gave a kind of of radar echo a
24:42
false echo. And these balloons they
24:45
lifted up to 150 meters or so. They
24:48
could be easily discovered both from
24:50
aircraft radar and and ship shipbor
24:52
radar. And the Germans believed that
24:55
these decoys decoys would work to to
24:58
build
25:00
a forest of false echos. And now so the
25:04
real yubot just could escape underneath
25:07
of that.
25:09
There was one other thing about the
25:10
wreck which initially seemed strange to
25:13
me. Every hatch we could see was closed.
25:17
That's bizarre or was bizarre to me
25:19
because we know that U672 was abandoned
25:23
and deliberately sunk by her crew. So,
25:26
in my view, it was reasonable to expect
25:29
to find open hatches.
25:31
But that isn't how the crew actually
25:34
scuttled her. And to understand that, we
25:36
need to go back to what actually
25:38
happened on the day it was sunk. It was
25:42
submerged in the English Channel when it
25:44
was detected using Azdic by the British
25:47
frigot HMS Balfur.
25:50
Balfur attacked using a weapon called
25:52
Hedgehog, which is very different from
25:55
conventional depth charges. Instead of
25:57
being dropped behind a ship and detonate
26:00
at a preset depth, Hedgehog fires
26:03
forward a pattern of small explosive
26:06
bombs.
26:08
Unlike depth charges, they're contact
26:10
weapons. If they missed the submarine,
26:13
they didn't explode.
26:15
That meant if the attacking ship heard
26:17
detonations, it was a very strong
26:20
indication that something had been hit.
26:23
Balfur fired 24 hedgehog projectiles and
26:26
three of those exploded.
26:29
Inside U672, the crew heard the
26:32
explosions and discovered that the
26:34
submarine was taking on water.
26:37
The damage wasn't enough to destroy the
26:39
boat instantly, but it was serious.
26:42
U672 went down and remained submerged
26:46
while the crew tried to deal with the
26:48
flooding.
26:49
Balfur eventually lost contact, but from
26:52
their perspective, they knew they had
26:54
hit something, but didn't know exactly
26:57
what had happened beneath them. From the
27:00
German perspective, the situation was
27:02
was really bad. The boat was damaged.
27:06
Water was coming in and they knew there
27:08
was no realistic prospect of getting it
27:10
back to France. So the skipper made the
27:13
decision to abandon her. They came back
27:16
to the surface at night. The crew
27:19
launched the lifeboats, got into them,
27:21
and the [snorts] engineering officer
27:23
prepared to sink U672.
27:25
He opened all the flooding vents. All
27:28
the crew got out through the conning
27:30
tower and the engineering officer who
27:32
was the last man out closed the hatch
27:35
behind him.
27:37
That detail matters because we can see
27:40
that on the wreck, we can see all the
27:42
hatches closed. So rather than
27:45
contradicting what we see on the wreck,
27:48
it actually supports it. And then with
27:51
the crew safely clear, U672 disappeared
27:55
beneath the surface.
27:57
Remarkably,
27:59
every man survived and all 52 members of
28:02
them were eventually recovered and
28:04
became prisoners of war. Now, there's
28:07
very, very few submarine wreck stories
28:09
where you can say that. Nobody died with
28:12
U672 and her commander Ulavatz survived
28:16
not only the sinking but the war. He
28:19
lived to the ripe old age of 85, dying
28:23
in Copenhagen in 2002.
28:27
British side it looked totally
28:28
different. The commanding officer of HMS
28:31
B for he got under submarine contact
28:33
which is usually a ping on the AIC uh
28:37
so-called now sonar system and so he
28:40
immediately went into attack. What he
28:43
used in this attack was a a weapon
28:45
called hedgehog which just is being made
28:48
of 24 small rockets which are fired
28:51
forward from the attacking ship and they
28:54
they just explode on contact either with
28:57
a target or with a sea ground
29:00
and uh after some 14 seconds they
29:04
recorded three detonations
29:06
and another mass of detonations a few
29:10
seconds later. So the difference in in
29:12
in these detonations to them uh made
29:17
them believe that the first three hit a
29:19
kind of target which was above sea
29:21
ground and the rest exploded on the sea
29:23
ground. Uh so they searched for the
29:27
submarine or for the contact thereafter
29:28
but they couldn't reestablish any
29:30
contact with with the target and so they
29:34
sooner or later left the area because
29:36
they were under orders to continue their
29:38
operations. However, the commanding
29:40
officer of course was convinced he sent
29:42
a submarine because he said, "Well, we
29:44
have hit something and this could not
29:46
have been anything else like a
29:47
submarine." And so it went off. Usually
29:51
uh without these uh um without these
29:55
survivors being picked up, the
29:57
admirality would have considered this
29:59
attack as a
30:03
well not as a promising attack because
30:05
what was lacking was uh reestablishing
30:08
contact oil on the surface or at best
30:12
the captain's head. Nothing was present
30:14
at that. So they would have come to the
30:16
result that the attack was could have
30:18
been a submarine w but without any
30:20
result. And this is simply showing the
30:24
difficulty in assessing anti-ubmarine
30:27
contexts correctly because at that time
30:30
you just couldn't dive down there and
30:32
check whether there was a wreck or not.
30:34
You simply did not have the time and the
30:36
the opportunities to do so.
30:39
U672 is also a good example of how our
30:43
understanding of yubot losses has
30:44
changed since the war. At the time, an
30:48
escort might get a contact, attack it,
30:50
hear explosions, and then lose contact.
30:53
Had they sunk a yubot, damaged one, or
30:56
attack something else entirely? After
30:59
the war, intelligence officers had to
31:02
match hundreds of attack reports with
31:04
German records of missing submarines.
31:07
inevitably a lot of them were wrong.
31:10
That changed when people started
31:12
reaching the rerecks. Suddenly you could
31:15
look at what was on the seabed. You
31:17
could compare it with the history and
31:21
that is exactly what people like Axel
31:24
Nissle and Inis McCartney have been
31:26
doing for decades.
31:29
Inis identified an error in the accepted
31:32
position of 672.
31:34
And now we have a type 7 C wreck in
31:37
almost exactly the area his research
31:40
suggested.
31:42
So can we be absolutely certain that
31:44
this is U672?
31:46
The short answer is no. In an ideal
31:49
world, we'd have a set of numbers
31:52
stamped into a bronze screw or prop. We
31:55
don't have that. So, the identification
31:57
of this wreck as U672 doesn't rest on a
32:01
single thing. It's a type 7C. It's got
32:05
the correct snorkel. It doesn't have the
32:08
later dinghy containers. The holes in
32:10
the casing match ones that we know
32:13
similar submarines built in the same
32:15
yard have. The wreck position fits in
32:18
with what we think we know. where the
32:20
survivors were picked up. That error in
32:24
the transcription of the attack report.
32:27
So, it's a load of evidence. We also
32:30
know that there's no other possible u
32:33
votes in this area. When Axel put that
32:36
all together, this was his conclusion.
32:39
>> In this case, we are almost certain with
32:41
90 95% that the identity is correct.
32:44
>> Another great thing was that the
32:46
identification happened remarkably
32:48
quickly. Once our decompression had been
32:51
complete and we were back on board
32:53
integrity, we sent the key images to
32:55
Axle using Starlink and within hours,
32:59
our unidentified submarine had a number
33:02
U672.
33:05
The first dive on the wreck that we
33:07
currently know about was made by Ian
33:08
Taylor and the Skin Deeper team. They
33:11
discovered what they'd thought to be a
33:13
merchant ship was actually a German
33:15
submarine and shared what they'd found
33:17
on social media. They gave us the
33:20
details and the gasperados returned and
33:23
gathered the evidence.
33:31
ating the record of 672 is a major step
33:34
forward in terms of confirming its loss,
33:37
confirming its its wreck position and
33:40
just making way for other discoveries in
33:42
the channel area elsewhere.
33:47
>> So, Dom, what did you see?
33:51
>> Well, after a little bit of uh uh
33:54
scootering, we uh we got on the sub,
33:57
which was really really nice. Uh
34:02
>> it's a classic thing when the when the
34:03
shot isn't on the wreck, you kind of you
34:05
look for fish and uh we didn't see any
34:08
fish. We saw a a large octopus.
34:10
>> Oh.
34:11
>> And then after the octopus, we saw some
34:13
fish and then we came straight onto the
34:15
bow. And obviously the great thing about
34:18
uh submarines is they've got that lovely
34:21
kind of really sharp knifeike bow. So
34:24
that was the first thing that we came on
34:26
to. It was really nice actually,
34:27
especially, you know, cuz we at that
34:30
point weren't overly confident we were
34:32
going to find it. And then uh and then
34:35
we got on it and we we went along it and
34:37
there's actually more of the casing
34:40
there than I thought there was going to
34:41
be. Um on the port side, which is the
34:44
the side that's resting on the seabed,
34:46
we I think I'm I'm pretty certain I
34:49
found the remnants of the uh top of the
34:52
snorkel. So where the um you could see
34:56
where it opened to let the air in and
34:57
everything.
34:58
>> Yeah.
34:58
>> Um my understanding is that will be
35:00
really useful for identifying it.
35:03
>> So so uh that was good. From there I
35:05
kind of went back on the seabed and was
35:08
looking for some sort of gun. There's no
35:10
deck gun. I couldn't see any sort of
35:13
anti-aircraft gun, but what there were
35:14
was these really interesting tubes. Um
35:17
and I've got some good video of those.
35:19
And once again, I'm hoping that Michael
35:21
and Axel will be able to give us some
35:23
information on what they are, and maybe
35:25
they'll be helpful. Uh, we then went to
35:27
the stern, had a look at the prop. I did
35:30
have a bit of a go at scraping some of
35:32
the prop with my knife, but um, might be
35:35
wrong, but they they almost look as
35:37
though they are iron the props. Okay.
35:40
Uh, which which was interesting. Um, and
35:42
then came back along the top of it. Um,
35:45
looking for bits and pieces. Uh, one of
35:48
the things that was interesting is all
35:49
the hatches are closed as far as I could
35:52
tell. I had a particular look at the one
35:54
on the top of the uh the fin on the
35:55
conning tower closed. Um,
35:58
>> life rafts.
35:59
>> Uh, I did look at for life rafts in the
36:01
bow. Didn't see any life rafts. So, it
36:03
does look as though they've gone. I
36:04
mean, if this is use 672, u it would
36:08
appear to me that they've they've got
36:09
off they've got out they've closed all
36:11
the hatches and maybe that's in order to
36:14
prevent anybody getting back in it or,
36:16
you know, maybe prevent divers getting
36:18
in it or something like that. I don't
36:20
know. But um and then from there, yeah,
36:22
went back um scooted back to the shop,
36:24
came up and uh I mean, I'm guessing
36:27
nobody else got on it, which is which is
36:29
pretty disappointing, but you know, I
36:31
guess at least we did. So hopefully
36:32
we've got enough to idea.
36:34
>> Great stuff. Get out your suit and have
36:35
a look at your video.
36:37
>> Thanks. What a fantastic result and some
36:40
great teamwork in an area of diving
36:42
where frankly that isn't often the case.
36:46
Lots of people, different disciplines,
36:49
different information bringing it
36:51
together to get one success.
36:55
U672
36:56
successfully completed three patrols at
37:00
a time of the war when that was far from
37:02
given. It never sank an Allied ship,
37:06
which a lot of people might consider to
37:08
be extremely unsuccessful. On the plus
37:11
side, and I'm sure they felt this way,
37:13
all the crew survived, and that was
37:16
definitely something that didn't happen
37:18
very often. For more than 80 years,
37:21
history had recorded it as being in the
37:24
wrong place.
37:26
While the wreck itself had been mistaken
37:28
for a sailing ship, now we know what it
37:31
is. And for me, that's one of the best
37:34
things about wreck diving. Finding the
37:36
clues, going back into history, and
37:39
occasionally, not often as I would like,
37:42
but occasionally solving a mystery that
37:45
has been sat on the seabed for decades.
37:48
There's very few unidentified German
37:50
Ubot left in the English Channel. What I
37:53
can absolutely say is that U672 is no
37:57
longer one of them. Thanks very much as
38:00
always for listening. I hope you've
38:02
enjoyed this story. I'm Dom Robinson,
38:05
Deep Wreck Diver, and I'll look forward
38:07
to seeing you on the next one.
38:38
Heat up here.

The U-boat That Wasn't Where It Was Supposed to Be

Deep Wreck Diver

USCG Tampa FOUND: America's Deadliest Coast Guard Disaster

HMS Victory 1737 - the Royal Navy's Forgotten Flagship

Shipwreck Mystery SOLVED After 154 Years

The Sinking That Flipped a Warship Upside Down – SMS Kronprinz Wilhelm Explored

154 Years Missing: How We Finally Identified SS The Greek

We Tried to Identify a Mystery WW2 U Boat at 55 Metres!

SIX Years to Identify A 70 Metre Deep WW2 Submarine - Here's What They Found

SS Cuvier Wreck: Is This Britain's Perfect Dive?

We Found This Forgotten Shipwreck While Searching for Tampa

A Century-Old Secret Revealed, HMS Negro

Forgotten Shipwreck Tragedy FOUND After 50 Years

The SS Express Mystery | Finally Identified on the Seabed

Lost US Navy Destroyer Discovered in the Ocean After 100 Years #shipwreck #naval #history

SS Burdigala - The Best Shipwreck Dive You've Never Heard Of

We Found a MYSTERY 100 Year Old Shipwreck

Up next in 10

The U-boat That Wasn't Where It Was Supposed to Be

Deep Wreck Diver