Did KG 26 hit the cruiser Molotov in 1942?

[Nick Beale]

This from Rohwer's Chronik des Seekrieges 1939–45:

Auf dem Rückmarsch Angriffe von dt. Torpedoflugzeugen (6./KG.26, Oblt. Wilhelm Kleemann) und ital. MAS 568 und MAS 573. Kreuzer Molotov erhält Torpedotreffer im Vorschiff, 20 m abgerissen.

= "During the withdrawal, attacks by German torpedo aircraft (6./KG 26. Oblt. Wilhelm Kleeman) and Italian MAS 568 and 573. Cruiser Molotov sustains torpedo hit(s) in bows, 20 m torn away."

Rohwer's book came out in 1968 so it's unlikely to be the last word on the subject.

In a vivid account, Rudi Schmidt's »Achtung, Torpedos Los!« says about 10 aircraft took part with two crews lost and that two or three hits were observed "partly on [escorting] destroyers, partly on the cruiser." No mention of Kleeman there or in the book's index. He does say that this was the first and last concerted daylight torpedo attack on the Red Navy.

While Schmitt served with 6./KG 26, quite of a lot of his book seems to be based on memories rather than archives (it includes an entirely imaginary attack on the invasion fleet en route from Corsica to the French Riviera in August 1944, for example).

[Juha]

Originally Posted by Nick Beale

This from Rohwer's Chronik des Seekrieges 1939–45:

Auf dem Rückmarsch Angriffe von dt. Torpedoflugzeugen (6./KG.26, Oblt. Wilhelm Kleemann) und ital. MAS 568 und MAS 573. Kreuzer Molotov erhält Torpedotreffer im Vorschiff, 20 m abgerissen.

= "During the withdrawal, attacks by German torpedo aircraft (6./KG 26. Oblt. Wilhelm Kleeman) and Italian MAS 568 and 573. Cruiser Molotov sustains torpedo hit(s) in bows, 20 m torn away."

Rohwer's book came out in 1968 so it's unlikely to be the last word on the subject...

Yes but the internet version has more info than my Second, revised, expanded edition 1992 published by Greenhill Books. So it is based on info from mid-90s at earliest probably even more recent.

Juha

[Andrey Kuznetsov]

Hello Nick,

Originally Posted by Nick Beale

This from Rohwer's Chronik des Seekrieges 1939–45:

Auf dem Rückmarsch Angriffe von dt. Torpedoflugzeugen (6./KG.26, Oblt. Wilhelm Kleemann) und ital. MAS 568 und MAS 573. Kreuzer Molotov erhält Torpedotreffer im Vorschiff, 20 m abgerissen.

= "During the withdrawal, attacks by German torpedo aircraft (6./KG 26. Oblt. Wilhelm Kleeman) and Italian MAS 568 and 573. Cruiser Molotov sustains torpedo hit(s) in bows, 20 m torn away."

I read Rohwer's/Hummelchen's book of course and the web-version too. It isn't very credible source, at least in regard to naval war in East-European waters. For example, torpedo hit was in stern, not in bow. It isn't very significant of course. But sometimes authors even had used Soviet published incorrect data about German actions instead of data from existing Kriegsmarine documents. Or had used incorrect German claims about Soviet losses as real facts.

According to Soviet data, were simultaneous torpedo attacks from MAS-boats and from the air, but maybe evidences were inaccurate due to darkness. The origin of the sole torpedo hit was unclear from the first moment.

According to Kriegsmarine, it was MAS-boats success. More surprising that Fliegerführer Süd (i.e. local Luftwaffe command) after investigation had accepted the Kriegsmarine's conclusion without any mention about KG26 attacks.

Maybe KG26 really took part not as air recce only but by torpedo attacks too, but where are the primary sources about Kleeman's attack?

Best regards,
Andrey

[Paul Thompson]

Originally Posted by Andrey Kuznetsov

According to Kriegsmarine, it was MAS-boats success. More surprising that Fliegerführer Süd (i.e. local Luftwaffe command) after investigation had accepted the Kriegsmarine's conclusion without any mention about KG26 attacks.

Maybe KG26 really took part not as air recce only but by torpedo attacks too, but where are the primary sources about Kleeman's attack?

Perhaps Fliegerführer Süd knew that no aerial torpedoes were used, although it is frustrating if they didn't state it clearly.

I am not sure Kleemann was involved. 6./KG 26 was a famous unit, so perhaps somebody chose to assume that the attack on the Molotov was carried out by them. They could have also found out that Kleemann was the Staffel commander, put 2 and 2 together and got 5

Warm regards,

Paul

[Andrey Kuznetsov]

Interesting what means the record "Ab 22.45 Uhr eigene Torpedo-Flugzeuge an russ.Verband".

Is it means that planes were with torpedoes or simply from Torpedo Staffel?

Originally Posted by Paul Thompson

They could have also found out that Kleemann was the Staffel commander, put 2 and 2 together and got 5

Warm regards,
Andrey

[Paul Thompson]

Originally Posted by Andrey Kuznetsov

Interesting what means the record "Ab 22.45 Uhr eigene Torpedo-Flugzeuge an russ.Verband".

That should mean that the word greifen - "attack" was left out so save space, so the text means "at 22.45 our torpedo aircraft attacked a Russian squadron". However, one can also speculate that the staff clerk knew that a torpedo-bomber unit was operational that night, but did not know that it was not carrying torpedoes on the specific mission in question

Warm regards,

Paul

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by Paul Thompson

That should mean that the word greifen - "attack" was left out so save space, so the text means "at 22.45 our torpedo aircraft attacked a Russian squadron". However, one can also speculate that the staff clerk knew that a torpedo-bomber unit was operational that night, but did not know that it was not carrying torpedoes on the specific mission in question

Warm regards,

Paul

Whilst you could infer the absence of »greifen«, it just looks like the clipped language that armed forces use the world over: "From 22.45 hrs. own torpedo aircraft against Russ. formation."

It's not anything provable but I think that if the clerk wrote "torpedo aircraft", that's likely what they carried. Look at KG 26 in Summer 1944 when the II. Gruppe was converted from torpedo to conventional bombing. This entailed fitting bombsights, bomb shackles and oxygen for the crew (none of which a torpedo machine needed) so switching a Ju 88 from one role to the other wasn't a quick process.

it is a great shame that the card index has either been lost or is yet to be rediscovered.

On the other hand its absence does enable you to read and draw your own conclusions from the material …

[Paul Thompson]

Originally Posted by Nick Beale

Whilst you could infer the absence of »greifen«, it just looks like the clipped language that armed forces use the world over: "From 22.45 hrs. own torpedo aircraft against Russ. formation."

Nick, thank you for a more literal translation of the original German. I agree that the reference to “torpedo aircraft” should be specific, but I am surprised by the absence of further comment, such as “n torpedoes dropped” or “hits observed”. I may be talking out of turn, for Andrey has seen the original document and I have not.

It is an interesting question in and of itself whether a He 111 H-6 LT could be converted back for use as a conventional bomber more easily than a Ju 88 A-4 LT . The pictures at the end of this link would suggest that the Heinkel conversion was relatively extensive, so my original hypothesis about the use of these aircraft as level bombers is probably wrong - https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic...-2#entry412541

I would gladly read through the material, if only I had time. On a further dive into DEFE 3, there does not appear to be any material for these specific days, but there may be something within the great HW forest!

Warm regards,

Paul