Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum  

Go Back   Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum > Discussion > Allied and Soviet Air Forces

Allied and Soviet Air Forces Please use this forum to discuss the Air Forces of the Western Allies and the Soviet Union.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 14th January 2014, 11:54
Rainer's Avatar
Rainer Rainer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 175
Rainer is on a distinguished road
Re: Is this a true statement about the B24?

I'm already reading it here, so there is no need to inform uboat.net that you are comparing different numbers. The numbers of shipping losses stated in the Appendix of "The War At Sea" counts losses due to all causes in each theatre, while we on uboat.net only show the ships attacked by German U-boats.

Lets take a closer look on January 1943:
We list 49 ships hit by U-boats, but in fact only 35 merchant ships were sunk by U-boats during that month (subtract the ships that were only damaged, the warships and the small sailing vessels).
15 of these 35 were sunk in the South Atlantic, Caribbean, Freetown area, in the Med or in the Arctic, so 20 merchant ships sunk by U-boats in the North Atlantic during January 1943. Only 9 of these 20 were in a convoy when sunk and 7 alone were from the important tanker convoy TM-1 heading from the Caribbean directly for Gibraltar.

In January 1943 about 270 merchant ships were sent from Canada to the UK in eight HX & SC convoys and the 30+ U-boats trying to intercept them only managed to sink 1 ship in convoy and 5 stragglers while losing 1 U-boat.

Even the Coastal Command wasn't sure about the correct use of the Liberators. Initially they converted all available Liberator Mk.I & Mk.II to VLR, but when the first batches of Mk.IIIA arrived they weren't converted and used to patrol the Bay of Biscay instead. If it was so urgent to get more VLR aircraft, why it still took more than 30 days to convert Liberators to VLR configuration in early 1943?

PS: Roskill is a good source but no longer a definitive one because it was written before the extend of Allied code breaking and its huge impact on the Battle of the Atlantic became known.
__________________
Best regards
Rainer Kolbicz

Crew member of http://uboat.net

Last edited by Rainer; 14th January 2014 at 13:34.
  #32  
Old 14th January 2014, 12:15
Rainer's Avatar
Rainer Rainer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 175
Rainer is on a distinguished road
Re: Is this a true statement about the B24?

By the way, please don't forget that the strategic bombing offensive was the main reason why the type XXI U-boats came too late into service. These submarines were able to remain submerged during the whole patrol and would have rendered the air cover of a convoy ineffective because they were fast enough to get into a favorable attack position while submerged.
__________________
Best regards
Rainer Kolbicz

Crew member of http://uboat.net
  #33  
Old 14th January 2014, 20:08
tcolvin tcolvin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Topsham, England
Posts: 422
tcolvin is on a distinguished road
Re: Is this a true statement about the B24?

Rainer; You say bombing was the main reason for the delay to the Type XXI Elektroboot. You ignore the fixation on the Walther propulsion system and complacency when the war was going well for Germany. It was in 1941 that someone suggested eliminating the Walther engine with its problems and using large electric motors and batteries instead: Project XVIII gave birth to Project XXI. But there was no urgency to get XXI off the drawing board until the defeat of the submarines in May 1943. Then the design was dusted off and rushed to completion in late 1943, having lost two years. There was the main reason for the delay. The second main reason was the choice of sub-contractors by Speer who had no experience of shipbuilding, which meant a large amount of rework, and delays. Wilhelmshaven was bombed heavily throughout the war. The only damage to U-boats on the stocks was by the USAAF, which destroyed two Type VII in one raid, not to be repeated. Wilhelmshaven became a supplier of Type XXI sections which were barged to Vegesack. As far as I know not one was damaged by bombing. Tony
  #34  
Old 14th January 2014, 20:21
tcolvin tcolvin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Topsham, England
Posts: 422
tcolvin is on a distinguished road
Re: Is this a true statement about the B24?

Thank you. Nick. But there is no edit button whereby I can accommodate your wishes. So perhaps you could oblige me by removing the last point. Being snarky is in the eye of the beholder, and beholding it in this thread (posting number 18) I preferred to call it prickly.
Tony
  #35  
Old 14th January 2014, 22:07
John Beaman John Beaman is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Greensboro, North Carolina, USA
Posts: 2,155
John Beaman is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Is this a true statement about the B24?

Quote:
Originally Posted by tcolvin View Post
Thank you. Nick. But there is no edit button whereby I can accommodate your wishes. So perhaps you could oblige me by removing the last point. Being snarky is in the eye of the beholder, and beholding it in this thread (posting number 18) I preferred to call it prickly.
Tony
Tony, are you saying that when you view a posting, your own included, that after you actually post it there is no "edit" button in the lower right of your screen or also a "quote" button along with two other buttons? When I view your posts, the buttons are there. Please explain what you see on your screen.

As for being snarky or "prickly", those have no place on this forum.
Be careful.
  #36  
Old 15th January 2014, 12:16
tcolvin tcolvin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Topsham, England
Posts: 422
tcolvin is on a distinguished road
Re: Is this a true statement about the B24?

John, I have logged on and can see no edit button.
There was an edit button at one time because I 'edited' the post twice, but the edits would not save.
There seems to be a time window for editing, and that window appears to be different from the time window for saving.
You and I agree there should be no place for 'snarky' or 'prickly', but also no place for labelling my postings on this thread as 'rubbish' and 'here we go again', which is verbal harrassment and lowers the tone of this site. One rule for everyone posting here is all I have ever requested, and have expected the moderators to enforce.
Tony
  #37  
Old 15th January 2014, 15:24
Rainer's Avatar
Rainer Rainer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 175
Rainer is on a distinguished road
Re: Is this a true statement about the B24?

Tony, I wrote that the strategic bombing was the main reason for the delay to get the type XXI into service - not for the whole project.

The developement of the Walter propulsion had no high priority in the Kriegsmarine and it was in November 1942 when they decided to design the type XVIII to test if the propulsion could be used operational. Its double-hull design inspired two engineers (the same guys that designed the type VII) to replace the fuel tanks for the Walter propulsion with additional batteries, an idea which eventually led to the type XXI. But this took place in January 1943 and not already 1941, the design was finished in June 1943 and presented to Hitler on 8 July 1943. So the development of the XXI came just in time for the Kriegsmarine after their conventional submersibles were defeated in May 1943.

Speer's planning of the production reduced the time to built one type XXI from 18 to 6 months. Of course there were some serious troubles with the sub-contractors initially and the timely delivery of the components to the shipyards where they were assembled until these problems were largely solved in mid 1944, but at that time the strategic bombing campaign began to effect the completion of the new U-boats badly and hampered the training of the crews. At least 60 type XXI under construction were destroyed by Allied bombing raids together with 14 of the 118 U-boats of that type that were commissioned. In fact, only two type XXI had reached operational status when the war ended.
__________________
Best regards
Rainer Kolbicz

Crew member of http://uboat.net
  #38  
Old 15th January 2014, 16:49
tcolvin tcolvin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Topsham, England
Posts: 422
tcolvin is on a distinguished road
Re: Is this a true statement about the B24?

OK, Rainer.
If Doenitz, Raeder and Hitler had listened to Furburger, they would have given the Type XXI priority in 1940, which comes back to my posting that started this thread. Two years was the maximum the Kriegsmarine should have expected the Type VII to remain a viable weapon, and the reason it lasted for two years longer than that was Allied incompetence - lack of support for the RN by Bomber Command as mentioned critically in Richard Overy's latest book 'The Bombing War, and especially the absence of VLR patrolling.
You mention the Fuehrer Conferences. That of May 31, 1943 started with Doenitz's report: The substantial increase of the enemy Air Force is the cause of the present crisis in submarine warfare. By means of sound detection it has been determined that as many planes now pass through the narrows between Iceland and the Faroe Islands , as only recently appeared in the course of a week.
Finally, a question for you. The removal by Doenitz of Type XXI production from the K-Amt and its replacement with Albert Speer's Department of Armament and a fire-truck manufacturing wizard (Otto Merker), was bound to give problems, bombing or no bombing. It is rather too easy to blame bombing when Doenitz turned U-boat manufacturing upside down in 1943, and surely it is not surprising that in the end he got next to nothing as a result.
Tony
  #39  
Old 16th January 2014, 00:51
RodM RodM is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Deep South of New Zealand
Posts: 458
RodM is on a distinguished road
Re: Is this a true statement about the B24?

Hi Tony,

by way of example, following are some paraphrased translations of Luftwaffe situation reports and civil defence reports relating to damage from Allied air attacks. These are just what I have on-hand and the Luftwaffe source of the translations was comprehensive for the period Feb-Apr 1945 (i.e. it is only possible to quote from those German/Luftwaffe sources that survived the wholesale destruction of records prior to the capitulation):

24 February 1945 - Bremen
A U-boat was sunk at the A.G. Weser works of Deschimag

11 March 1945 - Bremen
The Weser AG was most seriously damaged....it was not possible to estimate the decrease of production at the time of the report

30 March 1945 - Bremen
At the A.G. Weser most severe damage was reported to buildings and material. Seven U-boats were sunk and another severely damaged.

17 January 1945 - Hamburg
Severe damage was caused to the following firms:
Blohm & Voss, Steinwaerder...destroyed No 7 Ship Construction workshop and electrical crane installations, Heavy damage was caused to a number of workshops etc etc

7-8 March 1945 - Hamburg
At Blohm & Voss a 75 ton floating crane was sunk and severe damage was caused to a number of workshops and plant.

11 March 1945 - Hamburg
Blohm & Voss was hit...destroying...a tools store, a 250 ton crane, and a 3000 cu. metre. gas container. A number of workshops and the oxygen and hydrogen plant were severely damaged and 3 U-boats were also damaged. A number of ships in the dock at the Howaldt Works were sunk, including a U-boat and lifting tackle which capsized.

20 March 1945 - Hamburg
Blohm & Voss suffered severe damage. In the harbour a mine-sweeper and 2 other vessels were sunk and 2 U-boats damaged.

30 March 1945 - Hamburg
Blohm & Voss and the Deutsche Werft were the chief targets hit...two U-boats were sunk and 4 capsized.

8-9 April 1945 - Hamburg
Among the targets hit were Thenania-Ossag, Blohm & Voss, Deutsche Werft etc, etc. At Blohm & Voss...serious damage to all parts of the yard and dock installations and a salvage vessel. Several boats were sunk, including 3 U-boats and a further 5 were damaged. The shipyards of Howaldt A.G. were hit...and widespread damage was caused to various departments. One U-boat was severely damaged and two capsized while two floating docks were sunk. The U-boat bunker was also severely damaged.

9 April 1945 - Hamburg
The U-boat pens Nos 1, 2 & 5 at the Deutsche Werft in Finkenwaeder were pierced by several H.E. bombs.

I have no pretence in understanding how these quoted reports affected production of the Elektroboote, and due to my limited knowledge on the subject of Elektroboote production have only included info on the prime shipbuilders and not sub-contracted component manufacturers. Compilations of similar sourced and translated German reports for bombing in the years 1943 and 1944 are available as AHB translations from TNA, Kew. These translations are limited to major raids only (i.e. were the number of participating aircraft and/or bomb load carried was significant enough for inclusion in the compilations).

regards

Rod







Quote:
Originally Posted by tcolvin View Post
The only damage to U-boats on the stocks was by the USAAF, which destroyed two Type VII in one raid, not to be repeated. Wilhelmshaven became a supplier of Type XXI sections which were barged to Vegesack. As far as I know not one was damaged by bombing. Tony
  #40  
Old 16th January 2014, 00:59
Nick Beale's Avatar
Nick Beale Nick Beale is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Exeter, England
Posts: 5,781
Nick Beale has a spectacular aura aboutNick Beale has a spectacular aura aboutNick Beale has a spectacular aura about
Re: Is this a true statement about the B24?

It's worth taking a look at "The Wages of Destruction: The Making and Breaking of the Nazi Economy" by Adam Tooze. He discusses some of what went wrong with the production of the Type XXI. IIRC there were cases where the prefabricated hull sections didn't match up.
__________________
Nick Beale
http://www.ghostbombers.com
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Russian B24 photo thanks to Ed West & eBay Alex Smart Allied and Soviet Air Forces 13 8th February 2012 20:58
Brooke-Popham statement. Birgir Thorisson Allied and Soviet Air Forces 0 31st October 2009 17:15
B24 Lady Be Good Brian Bines Allied and Soviet Air Forces 0 28th March 2009 17:42
Maj. Gilbert B24 pilot alain charpentier Allied and Soviet Air Forces 3 14th February 2009 00:49
109 pilot claim ? for B24 on 25/3/1945 Alex Smart Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces 9 16th May 2006 17:03


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 02:52.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2018, 12oclockhigh.net