(The Japanese news agency, DOMEI, claimed that the ship, Rantaupandjang, had been sunk by a German raider named Tokyo Maru. I can't help but believe that there was some confusion in translation as no German ship would carry the name Maru. The Rantaupandjang was sunk by the German cruiser Admiral Scheer on Feb. 23rd.)

(Some American experts were advising the British how to keep their ships safe. The experts, apparently had not done much in the way of analyzing the date from the Great War or the data up to this point in the Second World War. All analysis of the convoy system, during the war and post war, indicate that the convoy system was by far the best way to get ships across the Atlantic in wartime. While there had been some spectacular attacks on convoys recently and there would continue to be more attacks, it was far easier to direct and defend a group of ships as opposed to single ships sailing across the ocean. When a single ship was attacked, it almost never got away, but when a convoy was attacked, many times the U-boats did not get away. A recent example can be found in the reports of the attack on convoy OB-293, which lost three ships, but it cost the Germans two U-boats, with a third so badly damaged it had to return to port. Killing U-boats would get easier, but like any endeavor, people had to learn how to accomplish the task. They also needed better weapons and detection equipment, both would come in time.

The experts suggested a "lane of destroyers" be established across the Atlantic. Their plan was to have 50 destroyers assigned to patrol the 2,000-mile route. They also state that 40 would be on patrol at all times while 10 would be in port refueling or en route to or from the patrol zone. An is an overly optimistic assessment. The Germans learned that the number of U-boats in commission had to be divided by three, one third on patrol, one third en route to or from their patrol area and one third in port refueling and repairing.

Having 40 destroyers on patrol would mean one destroyer for every 50 miles of ocean, and every time a ship sent an S.O.S. the destroyers would scramble to and fro chasing U-boats which had already left the area because they knew a destroyer would be along soon. It should be pointed out that the Germans would soon figure out the patrol schedule and would be able to work around it. It's also worth pointing out that putting the ships in a "protected lane" would make it easier for the Germans to locate the ships, which was the exact argument being used against the convoy system. The convoys could be routed north or south of known U-boats, and the U-boats had to search the whole ocean for the convoys. But, if the ships were confined to a single lane, the U-boats could focus on that lane rather than range all over the wide ocean.

While we will never know if such a tactic would have been more effective, it is unlikely that it could have been effectively deployed and maintained. It should also be noted that successful anti-submarine tactics usually involved more than one ship, and it is likely that a single destroyer would not have been as effective against the U-boats. It is also likely that single destroyers would have been much easier for the U-boat captains to find and sink.)

(Montana Democrat Senator Burton Wheeler, wants to know where the report of German submarines operating off the U.S. coast came from. He suspects it's British propaganda, and he was exactly correct.)

(The German press announced the promotion of Günther Prien to Commander (Korvettenkapitän) as of March 1st. His promotion came just days before Prien and U-47 were lost on Mar. 7th.)

(Hull bombed all night.)

(With strong Luftwaffe forces against England.)

(England's world insurance exposes the British Admiralty.)

(1,245 ships insured by Lloyds alone admitted as lost.)