Paper 3, Option 37.1: The changing nature of warfare, 1859–1991: perception and reality - 4 The war at sea, 1917–45: the impact of submarines, air power and complex codes — Edexcel A-Level History
Verified courseTeaching note checked against the official specification.
Paper 3, Option 37.1: The changing nature of warfare, 1859–1991: perception and reality - 4 The war at sea, 1917–45: the impact of submarines, air power and complex codes explained
Paper 3, Option 37.1: The changing nature of warfare, 1859–1991: perception and reality - 4 The war at sea, 1917–45: the impact of submarines, air power and complex codes covers 3 specification points, including Initial German triumph; British… and Enigma and counter measures..
Read the full explanation
Open a point below for its explanation and revision guidance.
The impact of submarines, 1917–18: initial German triumph; British counter-measures and eventual success.
This topic examines the impact of submarines in 1917–18, focusing on Germany's initial success, British counter-measures, and the eventual British success. In early 1917, Germany's unrestricted submarine warfare sank Allied merchant ships faster than they could be replaced, bringing Britain close to starvation. Britain responded with convoy escorts, depth charges, hydrophones, mines and aircraft patrols, which reduced shipping losses. By 1918, convoy and improved anti-submarine tactics had largely contained the U-boat threat, allowing supplies to reach Britain. The episode shows how a new technology can dominate initially, but counter-measures and organisation can restore the balance.
The impact of submarines, 1939–45; Dönitz and the Battle of the Atlantic; the significance of May 1943 as a turning point. The importance of naval codes and associated technology: Enigma and counter measures.
Submarines in 1939–45 threatened Britain's Atlantic lifeline. Dönitz's wolf-pack tactics, using surfaced night attacks and radio coordination, caused heavy losses. Allied convoys, escort carriers, Leigh lights, radar, Huff-Duff and long-range aircraft gradually closed the mid-Atlantic gap. May 1943 marked a turning point: U-boat losses rose sharply and Dönitz withdrew from the North Atlantic. Naval codes mattered: Enigma-encrypted messages, broken at Bletchley Park, gave convoy routing intelligence, while German counter measures such as stricter procedures and the four-rotor Enigma complicated decryption. The struggle shows how technology, tactics and intelligence interacted to decide the Battle of the Atlantic.
The impact of airpower: Yamamoto and the planning of the attack on Pearl Harbour 1941; Yamamoto and Nagumo against Nimitz and Spruance at Midway 1942.
Airpower transformed naval war in the Pacific. Yamamoto planned the Pearl Harbour attack of 7 December 1941, using carrier-borne aircraft to cripple the US Pacific Fleet and buy Japan time. The raid succeeded tactically but missed US carriers and galvanised American resolve. At Midway in June 1942, Yamamoto sought to destroy those carriers, but Nimitz, warned by codebreaking, positioned Spruance's carriers to ambush the Japanese. Nagumo's indecision and the timing of strikes left Japanese carriers vulnerable; dive-bombers sank four. Midway showed that airpower, intelligence and command decisions, not battleship gunnery, now decided naval battles.
Your focus
- Explain the initial German submarine triumph in 1917.
- Analyse the British counter-measures used against submarines.
- Evaluate the extent to which British counter-measures achieved eventual success by 1918.
Show all 9 objectives
- Explain how Dönitz's wolf-pack tactics and submarine warfare affected the Battle of the Atlantic between 1939 and 1945.
- Assess the significance of May 1943 as a turning point in the Battle of the Atlantic, using specific evidence.
- Analyse the role of naval codes and associated technology, including Enigma and counter measures, in shaping the outcome of the war at sea.
- Explain Yamamoto's planning and the impact of the attack on Pearl Harbour in 1941.
- Assess the roles of Yamamoto, Nagumo, Nimitz and Spruance in the Battle of Midway in 1942.
- Analyse how airpower and intelligence determined the outcomes of Pearl Harbour and Midway.
Paper 3, Option 37.1: The changing nature of warfare, 1859–1991: perception and reality - 4 The war at sea, 1917–45: the impact of submarines, air power and complex codes exam tips
Marking Points
- Explains the initial German triumph: unrestricted submarine warfare in 1917 sank large numbers of merchant ships, threatening Britain's food and supply imports.
- Analyses British counter-measures: introduction of convoy system, escort vessels, depth charges, hydrophones, mines and air patrols.
- Evaluates the eventual success: convoy reduced losses and by 1918 U-boat effectiveness was significantly curtailed.
- Considers the limits of submarine impact: submarines could not fully blockade Britain once counter-measures were in place.
- Links the naval campaign to broader war effort: shipping losses affected munitions, food and morale.
- Explains Dönitz's wolf-pack tactics: coordinating U-boats by radio to attack convoys at night on the surface, exploiting weaknesses in early radar and escort cover.
- Assesses the impact of submarines on Britain's supply lines, including shipping losses, rationing and the strategic priority given to the Battle of the Atlantic.
- Evaluates May 1943 as a turning point: increased Allied escort carriers, very-long-range aircraft, improved radar and Leigh lights, and the breaking of U-boat codes led to unsustainable U-boat losses.
- Explains the importance of naval codes: Enigma-encrypted German signals and Allied decryption at Bletchley Park provided convoy routing and U-boat position intelligence.
- Analyses counter measures: German changes to Enigma procedures, the four-rotor Enigma, and Allied responses such as Huff-Duff and improved codebreaking techniques.
- Reaches a supported judgement on the relative significance of submarines, Dönitz's leadership, May 1943 and codes in shaping the war at sea.
- Explains Yamamoto's planning for Pearl Harbour: the use of massed carrier airpower, surprise and shallow-water torpedoes to neutralise the US Pacific Fleet.
- Assesses the impact of the Pearl Harbour attack: tactical success but strategic failure because US carriers survived and the USA entered the war.
- Explains the roles of Yamamoto and Nagumo at Midway: Yamamoto's complex plan to lure and destroy US carriers, and Nagumo's command decisions on arming and launching aircraft.
- Explains the roles of Nimitz and Spruance: Nimitz's use of intelligence to set the trap, and Spruance's aggressive carrier handling at the battle.
- Analyses how airpower decided Midway: dive-bombers sank four Japanese fleet carriers, shifting the balance in the Pacific.
- Reaches a supported judgement on the extent to which airpower and intelligence, rather than battleship strength, determined the outcome of Pearl Harbour and Midway.
Examiner Tips
- 💡Use specific figures or examples, such as the peak monthly shipping losses in 1917, to illustrate the initial triumph.
- 💡Explain how each counter-measure worked, not just list them.
- 💡Conclude with a judgement on how and why the balance shifted by 1918.
- 💡Plan your answer around the three strands in the statement: submarine impact, Dönitz and the Battle of the Atlantic, and May 1943 as a turning point, plus codes and counter measures.
- 💡Use precise evidence, such as convoy codes, specific dates or technological names, to support your argument rather than general statements.
- 💡When discussing turning points, weigh May 1943 against other moments and reach a clear judgement about its significance.
- 💡Link naval codes to the wider battle: explain how intelligence affected convoy routing and U-boat hunting, not just that Enigma was broken.
- 💡Structure your answer around the two battles and the named commanders, showing how airpower was used and assessed.
- 💡Use specific evidence, such as dates, ship names or codebreaking, to support your analysis of impact and command decisions.
- 💡Compare the planning and outcomes of Pearl Harbour and Midway to show change over time in the use of airpower.
- 💡When discussing command, weigh the decisions of Yamamoto, Nagumo, Nimitz and Spruance against broader factors such as intelligence and technology.
Common Mistakes
- Assuming the convoy system was immediately accepted; correct by noting initial resistance and its gradual adoption in 1917.
- Overstating submarine success without noting British adaptation; correct by balancing initial German triumph with effective counter-measures.
- Confusing the impact of submarines in 1917–18 with later WWII campaigns; correct by keeping focus on the stated period.
- Treating May 1943 as the sole turning point without considering earlier convoy battles or later U-boat operations; instead, explain why May 1943 was decisive while acknowledging other factors.
- Assuming Enigma was a single machine or that codebreaking alone won the battle; instead, show how Enigma intelligence was one factor among tactics, technology and air cover.
- Confusing Dönitz's wolf-pack tactics with unrestricted submarine warfare of 1917; instead, distinguish the 1939–45 radio-coordinated pack attacks from earlier practices.
- Describing counter measures vaguely without linking them to specific Allied or German actions; instead, name measures such as stricter Enigma procedures or Huff-Duff and explain their effect.
- Treating Pearl Harbour as a total Japanese victory without noting the survival of US carriers and the strategic consequences; instead, explain the mixed outcome.
- Confusing the roles of Yamamoto and Nagumo at Midway; instead, distinguish Yamamoto's overall plan from Nagumo's tactical command of the carrier force.
- Assuming Midway was won solely by luck; instead, show how codebreaking, timing and command decisions shaped the result.
- Overlooking Nimitz and Spruance; instead, explain how Nimitz used intelligence and Spruance executed the carrier ambush.