Waalhaven Tagesausweis (accespermit) 1941

[Maurice Laarman]

Today I picked up a small piece of paper, testimony to the existence of the Waalhaven airfield. I am not quite sure what went on there in 1941, as I recall it only was a fake airfield, or one with very little use by the Luftwaffe.

More details are welcome!

Kind regards,

Maurice

[Larry D.]

First, we look at the Feldpostnummer:

46620
(1.10.1940-27.2.1941) Luftwaffen-Platzkommandantur Waalhaven,
(8.9.1942-11.3.1943) Flugplatz-Kommando A 1/VI,
(23.4.1944-24.11.1944) 1.6.1944 Fliegerhorst-Kommandantur E 211/XI Flugplatz-Kommando Grimsberghen,
(25.11.1944-8.5.1945) 9.12.1944 gestrichen.

That checks. Then we look at the "Zweck" (purpose) block: he was there for one week to work for the base technical services.

Next, we look at the airfield:

Rotterdam-Waalhaven (NETH) (51 52 35 N – 04 26 45 E)
General: airfield (Flugplatz) in SW Holland on the Rotterdam waterfront (harbor area) 5.7 km SSW of Rotterdam city center. History: opened 18 March 1922 as Rotterdam’s airport with a terminal, hangars and a restaurant. A small military detachment there was expanded in the late 1930s to service elements of a Fokker G.1 fighter regiment. Captured by German paratroops and air-landing troops on 10 May 1940. The Luftwaffe began work on the airfield to transform it into an advanced fighter field in June by extending the landing area from 700 meters to 1,050 meters, improving the condition of the grass and drainage, constructing a number of stone and wooden buildings for workshops, admin offices and stores, a barracks camp with 20 huts, Flak positions and 19 aircraft shelters along the boundaries. The existing civil hangars were all reduced to rubble in the May 1940 fighting and no new hangars were built. The first operational fighter unit arrived at Waalhaven on 26 June 1940 and the airfield played a meaningful role during the air offensive against England, but its importance declined rapidly after June 1941. Landing area dug up and rendered unserviceable in February 1944, turned over to the German Army and abandoned by the Luftwaffe. Captured by Allied troops on 7 May 1945. Dimensions: 1,050 x 730 meters. Runway: grass and heavily camouflaged. Infrastructure: as already stated. Two munitions dumps were later built 1.5 to 2 km off the E boundary. Dispersal: as already stated. Defenses: 2 heavy Flak emplacements and 13 light Flak positions, four of the latter consisting of a total of 12 Flak towers. A large number of additional Flak guns were deployed around the city and the dock area. Remarks: nearly all Allied air attacks were directed against the port facilities.
Operational Units: (go to Google and enter: Rotterdam-Waalhaven site:ww2.dk ).
Station Commands: Fl.H.Kdtr. E 7/I (May 40); Lw.-Platzkommandantur Waalhaven (1940-42); Fl.Pl.Kdo. A 1/VI (1942 - 20 Feb 44).
Station Units (on various dates - not complete): Flak-Waffenwerkstatt (o) 13/VI (1943-44); Bauleitung Waalhaven (Jun 40 - ? ); 1.Kp./Flieger-Rgt. 51 (Dec 43); Ldssch.Zug d.Lw. 346/VI ( ? - Feb 44); Ldssch.Zug d.Lw. 26/XI ( ? - Feb 44).

O.K., so it appears that there was a lot of construction activity at Waalhaven during 1940-41 and probably into 1942. One thing is certain: it was still a very active airfield for fighters in September 1941. It was never classified as a dummy airfield. But this is about as far as most researchers can go, except for a Rotterdamer local. If you want to find out what was going on there during the last week of September 1941, I would check with the Rotterdam city archive. I am guessing that Herr A.K. Dubbeldam was a skilled tradesman, such as an electrician, who was called to the airfield to do some wiring or electrical installation work that was expected to last for one week. Almost all of the construction work done on Luftwaffe airfields during the was was performed by local civilians from that area or country. I do not think you would find anything for this airfield for September 1941 at the Bundesarchiv-Militärarchiv in Freiburg im Breisgau because I have been through almost all of those records.

L.

[Maurice Laarman]

Larry,

Thanks a lot for your extensive reply! You are right by saying that mostly local contractors did these kind of jobs.

The site is also interesting, showing that for example II/JG54 was stationed there from 4.7.40 till 8.8.40 with Bf 109E. Another photo which was sold on Ebay a while ago shows a Ju52.

The local wararchive has a lot of information, but unfortunately not that many German sources. However, I found something else. A map, made by the resistance in january 1944 and which can be found in the collection of the Nationaal Instituut Militaire Historie (national institute military history) shows the following, when we focus on the airfield. The east part was occupied by the Schnellboot base, I left the numbers out in the below text.

9 three 2 cm guns, two 2cm guns
10 empty barns
11 hangar
12 airfield
16 search light,bunker, transmitter
17 machine guns
19 4 x 6,7 cm guns
24 five hangars
25 10-12 hangars
26 hangar in which a light courrier plane is always available
27 pillbox

A command post in bunker
B pillbox
C concrete shelter
D concrete shelter
E runways

At the end of the war food is dropped (Manna/Manchow) by mistake at Waalhaven, later other areas are found beter suitable.

Kind regards,

Maurice

[Larry D.]

Thanks for posting the map, Maurice. Very often the resistance groups were the best source of "inside" information on the airfields and bases used by the wartime Luftwaffe. The RAF flew over and took photos, but only the resistance guys really knew what was going on and the true purpose of various buildings.

Waalhaven seems to have been used as a forward airfield for staging and refueling fighters from 1942 to February 1944 when it was evacuated by the Luftwaffe. The fighters were actually based further inland after mid-1941 or so.

L.

[Jaap Woortman]

Maurice,

For a good survey of the wartime history of Waalhaven airfield check "Vliegvelden in oorlogstijd".
I think that the map made by the resistance gives a wrong impression of the airfield.
The figures saying that the have been several hangars are not correct.
There has been only one hangar build at Waalhaven. This was a maintenance hangar at the southside of the airfield.
It was build in the second half of 1940 and was transported to Aalborg in the summer of 1941.
It was a 30x50 meters blister hangar, by the Germans called "Junkerhalle".
The so-called hangars at the map were open "Liegeplätze".
The mines were laid in June 1944.
The so-called "runways" was the pre-war platform of the civil airfield Waalhaven.

So I cannot support Larry's statement that "often the resistance groups were the best source of "inside" information".
In almost all cases they give general information, but for detailed postwar analysis it is useless.

Jaap Woortman

[Larry D.]

Hi Jaap,

I was very careful to use the word "often" in my statement because the airfield information provided by resistance groups varied widely from country-to-country and from airfield-to-airfield within those countries. While the quality of this information for the airfields in The Netherlands may have been poor to non-existent, I have seen just the opposite for selected airfields in France, Norway, Yugoslavia and a few others. Unfortunately, it rapidly became non-existence the further east one goes on the map. For the USSR, there was nothing. What do I base my opinion on? Folder after folder and file after file of wartime resistance reports found in NARA Record Group 226 (OSS records) which contained originals and copies of just about all of the resistance reports that ended up in British and American hands during the war years. There's even more of them in the U.S. Army G-2 records, although many of these are duplicates of those found in RG 226.

Larry

[Jaap Woortman]

Hi Larry,

I think I would have chosen sometimes. I our experience, 20 years of airfield research in the Netherlands, reports of the Underground are seldom accurate. We use them only together with aerial pictures and wartime allied analyses and maps. But I can only speak about the Netherlands.
This discussion about the reliability of Dutch resistance reports will not help Maurice. Interesting is your remark “the airfield played a meaningful role during the air offensive against England”. During the Battle of England the role of the Jagdgeschwader unit in the Netherlands was mainly limited to coastal patrols, intercepting British daylight bombers and resting and training new personnel. And indeed after June 1941 the airfield was not used by operational flying units of the Luftwaffe anymore. This fits quite well with the removal of the maintenance hangar.

Jaap

[Larry D.]

"Interesting is your remark “the airfield played a meaningful role during the air offensive against England”.

Yes, the above was misleading on my part as "the Air Offensive Against England" was the German term (translated) for the Battle of Britain. I should have said "air defense of the West." Your characterization of the role of the Jagdwaffe in The Netherlands was correct.

By the way, Jaap, do you know the date of the order for the withdrawal of operational air units from the coastal airfields in France, Belgium and Holland and rendering their runways unserviceable? The order was probably given by Führungsstab/Ob.d.L. but issued in the West by Luftflotte 3. I'm guessing it was between late fall 1943 and February 1944, but the exact date escapes me.

Larry

[Jaap Woortman]

Larry,

At this moment I cannot check my paper files.
We are till June 9th at vacation at Ameland, one of the Frisian islands.
I will ask my fellow researchers by mail.
As far as I can remember I have never seen the order.
What I do know is that the dates for the airfields are quite different.

Jaap

[Larry D.]

Thanks, Jaap. If you come across anything regarding the order or orders, please let me know. I recall seeing references to a very specific order of this sort concerning the coastal airfields along the Channel coast in northern France. Perhaps it was a Feldluftgau order. I can't recall where I saw it, but it was not on the internet. It may have been in an ULTRA intercept or in a book about USAAF cross-Channel fighter and fighter-bomber attacks on Luftwaffe airfields in early 1944.

Enjoy your holiday/vacation at the beach!

Larry

[Maurice Laarman]

Jaap & Larry, thanks for your reactions!

Kind regards,

Maurice

[Jaap Woortman]

Larry,

I have come across an interesting qoute. See below.
I trying to get a copy of page 303 of Gundelachs story.

Jaap

THORSTEN HEBER M.A. DER ATLANTIKWALL 1940 – 1945. Die Befestigung der Küsten West- und Nordeuropas im Spannungsfeld nationalsozialistischer Kriegsführung und Ideologie. Düsseldorf. 2003.

Pag. 469.
Im Rahmen der Vorbereitung der Verlegungen im Falle drohender Gefahr West wurden die infra-strukturellen Voraussetzungen geschaffen. 1944 wurden im Landesinneren Frankreichs vermehrt Flugplätze ausgebaut und einige sogar neu angelegt. Um dem Gegner die Nutzung der Flugplätze in unmittelbarer Nähe der Küste zu verwehren, mußte die Luftwaffe diese Anlagen auf Anforderung des Heeres zerstören oder unbrauchbar machen.(1560)
Als Folge dieser Forderung wurden alle Flugplätze im Bereich von 100 km parallel zur Küste zerstört.(1561)
Minimierten diese Zerstörungen auch die Gefahr von handstreichartigen Übernahmen durch die Alliierten, so hatten die deutschen Jagdverbände nun erheblich verlängerte Anflugwege zur Kanalküste. Dies war insbesondere durch die geringen Reichweiten der deutschen Jagdflugzeuge, sofern nicht mit Zusatztanks ausgestattet, ein begrenzender Faktor. Den Einsatz als Jagdbomber schloß der verlängerte Anflugweg weitgehend aus.(1562)

1560) Vgl. Vergin, a.a.O., S. 9 sowie Zimmer, a.a.O., S. 8.
Das Heer dachte dabei vornehmlich an die Möglichkeit alliierter Luftlandungen bzw. den Einsatz von Fallschirmspringern in bestimmten Räumen und forderte deshalb entweder eine sofortige nachhaltige Zerstörung oder deren vorsorglich vorbereitete Unbrauchbarmachung durch bereitgestellte Hindernisse. Vgl. Gundelach, a.a.O., S. 303.
1561) Vgl. Vergin, a.a.O., S. 10 sowie Gundelach, a.a.O., S. 303.
1562) Vgl. Gundelach, a.a.O., S. 303.
1563) Vgl. Zimmer, a.a.O., S. 9.

Vergin, Joachim: Der Einsatz der deutschen Luftwaffe bei der Invasion in der Normandie
1944. Hamburg 1993. Dokumentations- und Fachinformationszentrum der Bundeswehr
(DOKFIZBW) DOKNR: LL6584

Gundelach, Karl: Drohende Gefahr West. Die deutsche Luftwaffe vor und während der
Invasion 1944. In: Wehrwissenschaftliche Rundschau. Zeitschrift für die Europäische
Sicherheit. Hrsgg. vom Arbeitskreis für Wehrforschung. 9. Jahrgang, 1959, Heft 6, Pg. 299-328.

Zimmer, Volker: Die Führungsorganisation der Deutschen Luftwaffe im Westen 1943 - 1945.
Ein Beitrag zum Problem der Luftherrschaft. Hamburg 1982.Dokumentations- und
Fachinformationszentrum der Bundeswehr (DOKFIZBW) DOKNR: AA 6797, S. 7.

[Larry D.]

Excellent, Jaap! That's documented confirmation of what up to now I had only seen vague reference to. It directly connects the pulling back from the coast, accompanied by the rendering of coastal airfields unserviceable with obstacles or plowed trenches across the runways and landing areas, and the development of more than 100 alternate landing grounds deep in the interior of France. A partial deactivation of coastal airfields, especially in the Pas de Calais area, began in fall 1942 after Dieppe with the proviso that each could be restored to serviceability in 24 hours.

Thanks!

Larry

[Jaap Woortman]

Larry,

Was it in France really an area of 100 km from the coast?
And how about Belgium.
Luftgau Holland became a part of Luftgau Belgien-Nordfrankreich at Jan. 1st, 1944.
In the Netherlands it was only an area of 25-26, maybe 30 km from the coast.
For 100 km only Twente, Eindhoven and Venlo would have escaped.
Volkel and Deelen were just at the limit for 100 km.
Just wondering.

Jaap

[Larry D.]

Hi Jaap,

I don't know yet to what extent the evacuation was carried out or to what distance back from the coast. It certainly was spotty and I do not think there was any compliance past the 40-50 km line. As for Belgium, the same policy seems to have been followed along the coastal area. Here are a few examples:

Abbeville-Drucat:
15 Mar 44: all 3 runways were mined during the preceding month and by 13 June the mines had been detonated and trenches dug across all remaining landing runs.

Calais-Marck:
Early 1944: demoblished and abandoned.

Coxyde:
6 Mar 43: landing area trenched and blocked with portable obstructions.

Larry