Luftwaffe claims for British shipping in November 1940
 

Gentlemen,

in November 1940 the Luftwaffe reverted to attacks on the British coastal shipping in the Channel; JG 53 was frequently employed on escort sorties for the Ju 87 that were detailed to attack convoys and single ships in the Thames estuary and off the southern and southeastern coast of the UK.

It is a well known fact that Luftwaffe claims against allied shipping were often wildly exaggerated, one of the first good examples during the BoB period being the attacks on the convoy CW-08 PEEWIT in early August 1940.

My question concerns four days in November 1940 when parts of JG 53 were active as escort for Ju 87 units attacking British shipping in the Thames Estuary:

November 1st - at 15.30 hrs. Stukas attacked 18 ships in the Thames Estuary claiming to have sunk five totalling 20.000 BRT.

November 7th - at 13.40 hrs. Ju 87 claimed to have scored hits on four freight ships south of Southend; in five attacks on this day a total of 30 to 40.000 BRT of shipping was claimed to have been sunk.

November 8th - at 17.30 hrs. Stukas claimed to have severely damaged two heavy cruisers east of Southend and to have sunk a merchant ship, damaging another.

November 11th - at 13.20 hrs. two coastal convoys were attacked by Ju 87 off Margate and in the Thames Estuary; the overall claims fpr the day were for five ships totalling 37.000 BRT sunk and three more with 13.000 BRT damaged.

Now, there can be no doubt that these claims were by far exaggerated -but what were the true results of these attacks ? I would be very grateful for any detailed information.

Regards

Jochen Prien

Re: Luftwaffe claims for British shipping in November 1940
 

Possible help on this website or in this book.

I've used the book in the past as our local reference library had a copy.

Re: Luftwaffe claims for British shipping in November 1940
 

Merchant Shipping Losses

Nov 1:

Steamship Letchworth (1,317 tons) west of Oaze Buoy - sunk by aircraft.

Nov 7:

Steamship Astrologer (1,673 tons) 51degrees 32 min N, 01degrees 06min E

Nov 8:

Nothing

Nov 11:

Nothing

The above from a cursory look through the loss tables. I need to have another look, but that seems to be all that is listed in 'British Vessels Lost at Sea 1939-45'.

Re: Luftwaffe claims for British shipping in November 1940
 

Hi,

according to this page: http://www.naval-history.net/xDKWW2-4011-24NOV01.htm

November 1:
"Patrol sloop PINTAIL, escorting convoy FS.323 with destroyers WATCHMAN and VERDUN, was badly damaged by German bombing in the Thames Estuary. Her commanding officer Lt Cdr T. H. Hill-Walker, Sub Lt E. C. Hopkins RNVR, eight ratings were killed. Three ratings were wounded.
British steamer LETCHWORTH (1317grt), in convoy FS.22, was sunk by German bombing one cable west by north of Oaze Buoy and one cable south, southwest of Mouse Light Vessel.

One crewman was killed on the British steamer.
Minesweeping trawler TILBURYNESS (279grt, T/Skipper W. S. Hawes RNR) was sunk by German bombing near East Oaze Buoy in the Thames Estuary.

Ten ratings were lost. Anti-aircraft ship ROYAL EAGLE and tug SALVO rescued the survivors.
British drifter TORBAY II (83grt) was sunk by German bombing off Downs".

Robert

Re: Luftwaffe claims for British shipping in November 1940
 

Hi,

as for 7th November it has:
"
German bombers attacked convoy FS.28 in Barrow Deep.

British steamer ASTROLOGER (1673grt) was sunk by German bombing in 51‑32N, 01‑06E.

The entire crew of the steamer was rescued.

Steamer ASTROLOGER was beached on the 7th, but was wrecked in a gale on the 15th.

British steamer DAGO II (1993grt) was damaged by German bombing in 51‑32N, 01‑09E.

British steamer MEDEE (2163grt) was damaged by German bombing 51‑10N, 01‑12E."

Robert

Re: Luftwaffe claims for British shipping in November 1940
 

Dear Nick, Andy and Robert,

many thanks for your quick help on and off board. Your findings confirm that in all four cases here in question the Luftwaffe's claims were widely exaggerated both with respect to the number of ships sank or hit and their respective size. Even under the tense situation of attacking the ships while under fire from their a/a defenses and at least on some occasions harrassed by British fighters, the sheer degree of overclaiming seems quite incomprehensible. ( Yet the same would happen over and over again ).

While the Propaganda jumped on such figures the Navy bore a healthy mistrust against Luftwaffe claims as can be seen from the way these reports were handled / commented on in the War Diary of the Navy High Command ( KTB der Seekreigsleitung ). It would be interesting to know if and to what degree these claims were later checked and corrected on the German side.

Anyway, as usual you have been most helpful. Many thanks again.

Regards

Jochen Prien

Re: Luftwaffe claims for British shipping in November 1940
 

Jochen

Although not so wildly over-claimed in terms of numbers of ships sunk, the Kriegsmarine on the night of 7/8 August 1940 claimed three vessels of CW9 Peewit sunk by the E-Boats of 1.S-Flottille when, in fact, it seems likely they had sunk only two. That said, a third vessel was sunk although the official explanation was that this was through collision whilst avoiding attack, although there is some contradictory evidence that might indicate it was torpedoed. Either way, the 1.S-Flottille claimed 17,000 BRT sunk whereas the actual tonnage of the three small vessels was 2,587.

I did not look for or include the Luftwaffe claims for shipping they had sunk during the later attacks on CW9 Peewit in my recent book "Convoy Peewit" but if you have them, Jochen, I'd be interested - especially if there was a large element of overclaiming. Of course, we know the actual losses of British shipping during attacks aimed against CW9 although, in fact, some of the merchant and RN vessels etc that were sunk or damaged were not officially part of CW9, anyway.

Re: Luftwaffe claims for British shipping in November 1940
 

From years of reading, it seems that airmen's estimates of the sizes reports ships were hardly ever accurate. This seems to apply to reconnaissance crews and to anti-shipping strikes. Naval aviators seem no better than land-based ones either and all countries are as bad.

Re: Luftwaffe claims for British shipping in November 1940