Oktober 1942

[TW]

http://www.historisches-marinearchiv.de/projekte/asa/ausgabe.php?where_value=1155
Ein nicht näher bekannter Konvoi meldet am 25.10. einen Torpedoangriff vor Utö. Rohwer schreibt, dass möglicherweise SC-308 den Angriff führte. Wir haben wieder einen Fall, bei dem beide Seiten unklar sind.
Wir sollten unbedingt versuchen, den Konvoi zu finden, der die Meldung abgab; ansonsten ist eigentlich jede Spekulation über den möglichen Angreifer gegenstandslos.

SC-308 operierte ab 17.9. zwischen Utö und Hanko und meldete am 20.10. per Funkspruch, es habe drei Schiffe mit 16.000 BRT versenkt. Das Unterseeboot wurde am 27.10. vor Kap Ristna (Utö) von dem finnischen U-Boot IKU-TURSO versenkt.

Schönen Gruß von Thomas

[igor]

http://www.historisches-marinearchiv.de/projekte/asa/ausgabe.php?where_value=1155
Ein nicht näher bekannter Konvoi meldet am 25.10. einen Torpedoangriff vor Utö. Rohwer schreibt, dass möglicherweise SC-308 den Angriff führte. Wir haben wieder einen Fall, bei dem beide Seiten unklar sind.
Wir sollten unbedingt versuchen, den Konvoi zu finden, der die Meldung abgab; ansonsten ist eigentlich jede Spekulation über den möglichen Angreifer gegenstandslos.

SC-308 operierte ab 17.9. zwischen Utö und Hanko und meldete am 20.10. per Funkspruch, es habe drei Schiffe mit 16.000 BRT versenkt. Das Unterseeboot wurde am 27.10. vor Kap Ristna (Utö) von dem finnischen U-Boot IKU-TURSO versenkt.

Schönen Gruß von Thomas

I think, this is error. There was convoy Uto-Neufahtwasser om this day: V.303/311/313/305/1707/1708, 4 transports, 1 hospital ship and 1 "sicherungschiff". It made no reports about attack.
3 attacks of Sc-308 was headed against VANDA on 2.10, RUGEN on 7.10, SCHIFF 47 on 19.10.
Btw, SC-308 wasn't sunk by IKU TURSO on 27.10, because this attack was conducted against SC-307, which escaped both torpedoes and returned home.

[TW]

Btw, SC-308 wasn't sunk by IKU TURSO on 27.10, because this attack was conducted against SC-307, which escaped both torpedoes and returned home.

Dear Boris:
Have a look at http://kotisivut.fonet.fi/~aromaa/Navygallery/Submarines/submarines-cont.htm#2610
SC-307 was attacked on 26.10. by VETEHINEN. Thereafter IKU TURSO attacked another submarine, which was thought to be SC-320. Monakov and Platonov are both of the same opinion, that SC-308 was sunk by IKU TURSO on 27.10. at 00h01. The hunt began after the attack of SC-307 against BETTY H. on 26th October.

[igor]

I'm Igor, not Boris!!
I think we don't need any finnish sites to find out what happend 27.10. Moreover, in link You gave i see no attacks on 26.10, only hydroakustic pursuing and loosing contact.
SC-307 after returning back home described attack of enemy sub almost word in word like IKU-TURSO described it.
If You look at map You can see that I-T attacked in Aland Sea. SC-308 positioned near Uto, far to east from Aland sea. She can't be near IKU-TURSO.
So, Platonov and Monakov are wrong. I wondering how they can do this with all soviets documents??

About 25.10 and convoy near Uto, as i say before - no reports about attacks, Miroslav confirmed. It's another mistake of Rohwer.

[TW]

Sorry for changing your Name, Igor 
Your explanation is convincing - you are right, VETEHINEN made no attack. It was IKU TURSO which attacked, and so the encounter of VETEHINEN as well as the target of IKU TURSO must have been the same submarine: SC-307;
no second Soviet submarine.

The mistakes of Monakov and Platonov may be caused by too many open questions for their overview projects.
That causes, that they could not pay enough time to each single question and did not read slow enough.
It is the task of following researchers to re-ask each single thesis.

Science is never at all task for a single generation.
We are even revising our knowledge about the history of Romanian Imperium in our days - 2000 years after !

I

I'm Igor, not Boris!!
I think we don't need any finnish sites to find out what happend 27.10. Moreover, in link You gave i see no attacks on 26.10, only hydroakustic pursuing and loosing contact.
SC-307 after returning back home described attack of enemy sub almost word in word like IKU-TURSO described it.
If You look at map You can see that I-T attacked in Aland Sea. SC-308 positioned near Uto, far to east from Aland sea. She can't be near IKU-TURSO.
So, Platonov and Monakov are wrong. I wondering how they can do this with all soviets documents??

About 25.10 and convoy near Uto, as i say before - no reports about attacks, Miroslav confirmed. It's another mistake of Rohwer.

[TW]

I think, this is error. There was convoy Uto-Neufahrwasser on this day: V.303/311/313/305/1707/1708, 4 transports, 1 hospital ship and 1 "sicherungschiff". It made no reports about attack.
3 attacks of Sc-308 was headed against VANDA on 2.10, RUGEN on 7.10, SCHIFF 47 on 19.10.

Ich habe die Anmerkung geändert:
SC-308 operierte ab 17.9. zwischen Utö und Hanko und meldete am 20.10. per Funkspruch, es habe drei Schiffe mit 16.000 BRT versenkt. Das Unterseeboot ging am 27.10. vor Kap Ristna (Utö) verloren; daher sind weitere Angriffe dieses U-Bootes reine Spekulation.

Eigenlich kann ich diesen Datensatz auch auf "gelöscht" setzen. Es ist aber ein ungutes Gefühl dabei:
Rohwer  m u s s  auf eine Angriffsanzeige gestoßen sein. Er hat ja in seinem Buch leider gar keine Konvois dezidiert, sondern nur "Convoy" geschrieben, oder er hat das beobachtende Geleitboot (Escort) eingesetzt. Die 2. Variante hätte uns weiter geholfen. Den Angreifer hat er nur vermutet. Aber ohne sichere Angriffsmeldung brauchen wir uns natürlich auch keine weiteren Gedanken um einen Angreifer zu machen. 

Gruß, Thomas

3 attacks of Sc-308 was headed against VANDA on 2.10, RUGEN on 7.10, SCHIFF 47 on 19.10.

Ich habe die Abweichung (WANDA) zu ASA bemerkt und kümmere mich später darum.

[igor]

Error in date, maybe. ASA say convoy was german, isn't it? No doubt we can read about it in KTB FdM Ost, if so. But there is no signs about attacks. Btw, finnish convoys didn't pass Uto.

[TW]

3 attacks of SC-308 was headed against VANDA on 2.10, RUGEN on 7.10, SCHIFF 47 on 19.10.

Dear Igor.
Let's come to the next case.
Following ASA SC-308 probably attacked RUOTSINSALMI off Hanko on 2.10,
                                                         RÜGEN off Utö on 7.10,
                                                         ORIENT off Simpnäsklub on 13.10.

1) SC-308 attack on RUOTSINSALMI was a mistake by Rohwer, as this minelayer was escorting Finnish WANDA in Åland Sea. The attack was without doubt made by SC-307 on 2 October at 14.14
2) No differences about SC-308 probably attacking RÜGEN on 7. October at 15.22
3) You are obviously refusing SC-308 attack against ORIENT on 13 October. Since long time ago I've been aware that there is no B-time for the torpedo attack of 13. October near Simpnäsklubb.  Another source of doubts is the fact that A-position of SC-307 during attack of 11/1226 does not match with B-Position of ORIENT. Simpnäsklubb is in the area of Stockholm, operation area of SC-307, and not SC-308.
4) No differences about SC-308 probably attacking SCHIFF 47 / WILHELM HUTH on 19. October (no B-time given)
The question is, what was the the first attack of SC-308, besides RÜGEN and SCHIFF 47 ?
With best regards
Thomas

[igor]

Hello Thomas.
Previously Miroslav say to me that attack by SCH-308 on Vanda is possible, but since then all changed. SCH-308 cannot sttack so far on West, so one of sunk vessel from 308's message is still unknow.
It is possible however, that 308's commander thinks that he sunk two vessels in one attack (7 or 19.10).
Attack on VANDA/RUOTSINSALMI was without doubts made by SCH-307, as an attack on ORIENT on 11.1.
Attack on SCHIFF 47 happen on 12.36 in AO2496.
Miroslav thinks, that last attack of SCH-308 was headed on some Uto-convoy, but germans didn't see any torpedoes.

[TW]

OK, Igor, I will analyse your thesis.
But what's your opinion about ORIENT attacks ?

1) WHICH ship was attacked by SC-307 on 11 October at 12.26 h?
2) WHICH submarine made the attack against ORIENT on 11 and 13 October 1942?

Hello Thomas.
Previously Miroslav say to me that attack by SCH-308 on Vanda is possible, but since then all changed. SCH-308 cannot sttack so far on West, so one of sunk vessel from 308's message is still unknow.
It is possible however, that 308's commander thinks that he sunk two vessels in one attack (7 or 19.10).
Attack on VANDA/RUOTSINSALMI was without doubts made by SCH-307, as an attack on ORIENT on 11.1.
Attack on SCHIFF 47 happen on 12.36 in AO2496.
Miroslav thinks, that last attack of SCH-308 was headed on some Uto-convoy, but germans didn't see any torpedoes.

[Urs Heßling]

moin,

dazu gibt´s jetzt einen klärenden thread in warsailors.com

Gruß, Urs

[kgvm]

Wie wär's mit einem Link, ehe man zunächst lange suchen muß, was denn überhaupt der ASA-Datensatz 16618 enthält, und dann noch bei warsailors suchen 

[Urs Heßling]

moin, KG,

Wie wär's mit einem Link, ehe man zunächst lange suchen muß, was denn überhaupt der ASA-Datensatz 16618 enthält, und dann noch bei warsailors suchen 

aber ja doch :  http://warsailors.com/forum/read.php?1,53619,53619#msg-53619

Gruß, Urs

[Darius]

Hallo Thomas,

ich habe hier die folgenden Infos zu
http://www.historisches-marinearchiv.de/projekte/asa/ausgabe.php?where_value=1483

Auszug aus KTB ASM für 11.10.1942:

U-Bootsangriff auf Bagger Sulina ohne Erfolg am 7.10. Baggerarbeiten wegen unzureichender Sicherungsmaßnahmen eingestellt.

KTB Geleitgruppe Sulina:

07.10.1942 12.50 Uhr Bagger vor Sulina-Einfahrt gibt mehrere Schüsse ab und läuft ein. Einwandfrei wurden 2 Torpedofehlschüsse auf den Bagger abgegeben.
Torpedos liefen auf die Mole ohne zu detonieren.

08.10.1942 Beide Torpedos werden eingeholt und lt. M. vom Kdt. "Gh" und beim Hako sichergestellt.

Darius

[Darius]

Hallo TW,

Aus KTB Geleitgruppe Sulina:

15.10.1942 1245 Uhr 45°49`N, 30°20'O "Smeul" sichtet Torpedolaufbahn. Bekämpfung ohne sichtbaren Erfolg.

Da im KTB ASM nichts dazu zu finden ist, gehe ich davon aus, dass es eine Fehlmeldung war.



Darius