Duikboot - Nummern 7851 / 7856 / 30229

[jja60]

Hello,

The source number 39 in Lievonen's article is a rather old book about Finnish Merchant Navy losses during WW II. The chapter about Rigel states that the ship sailed from Mäntyluoto harbour on Friday 27.10. at 05.30. On Saturday the ship had reached Bärösund Sound and a new pilot boarded about at noon. Sailing continued along the inner archipelago lane and Rigel reached Porkkala Obbnäs north mark at 13.15. Then there was an explosion. The engine stopped and both anchors fell to the sea as capstain was damaged. Soon after that on the right side of the ship at about 100 m distance was another explosion. This caused a leak and the ship sank stern first at 14.10. The crew took into boats and rafts, and they were picked up by Finnish tugs Herkules and Rauma II. 

The digital archives of the National Archives of Finland has the War Diary of the Naval Force Office of the General Headquarters. On 28.10. there is a short notice that states: "Naval Forces situation report No 2455 / 28.10. at 18.00. S/s Riegel (note misspelling) sank in the middle of the lane in Porkkala area near Karlshamn".
https://astia.narc.fi/uusiastia/viewer/?fileId=5775700059&aineistoId=2393499746
On 30.10. there is a notice that a magnetic mine has been sweeped in Porkkala area and at the same time another mine exploded 600 m away from the sweeped one.

Best, Jari

[ARANTALES]

Great Jari! 

Thanks for providing the conclusive information: RIGEL hit the mine(s) on the 28th. No more doubt.

Met vriendelijke groeten,
Walter

[Hägar]

Hello

Thanks, Jari, for your kind help with the Finnish sources.
As it seems, Lievonen did not check the time required for the track from Mäntyluoto (leaving 27., 0530) to the sinking position.
The phase of 05:30 through 13:15 would not have been sufficient to make the way of some 200 nm on 27.10.1944.

Looking at the wreck positions given in kyppi.fi and hylyt.net it is a bit strange to see the topographic reference set to Karlshamn/Kallensaari in the Situation Report no. 2455, see attachment.
It seems that Obbnäs would have been a far better reference, wouldn't it?

Anyway, thanks for helping harmonizing the HMA databases.
Regards - Hägar