Luftwaffe anti-shipping capability

Discussions on all (non-biographical) aspects of the Luftwaffe air units and general discussions on the Luftwaffe.
RichTO90
Member
Posts: 4236
Joined: 22 Dec 2003 18:03

Re: Luftwaffe anti-shipping capability

Postby RichTO90 » 12 Dec 2008 21:31

LWD wrote:Thre's a detailed list of British ships lost at the time of Dunkirk at:
viewtopic.php?f=54&t=121871&start=75
The summary is follows:


A minor correction LWD, that is all vessels of whatever nationality and includes both naval and merchant vessels.

RichTO90
Member
Posts: 4236
Joined: 22 Dec 2003 18:03

Re: Luftwaffe anti-shipping capability

Postby RichTO90 » 12 Dec 2008 21:54

Kurfürst wrote:Armour piercing capabilities of Luftwaffe bombs:


Hi Kurfürst, it's been a while!

I assume those values are at terminal velocity? And at optimum strike angle (60-75 degrees)?

US tests indicated that a 1,600-lb AP AN-MK1 when released at 17,500 feet and striking at 60-75 degrees would penetrate 8 inches of Class-B ("machinable") armor, 7.2-9 inches of "homogenous hard" armor, 4.8-5.6 inches of Class-A (face-hardened) armor, and 10+ inches of mild steel. At 15,00 feet that degraded by about 22 percent, 30 percent at 10,000 feet, and 55 percent at 5,000 feet.

The problem with SAP and HE bombs was found to be that they tended to break up and either fail to detonate or result in a low order detonation when striking.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17478
Joined: 30 Apr 2006 23:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Luftwaffe anti-shipping capability

Postby phylo_roadking » 12 Dec 2008 22:36

...and the Royal Navy lost 29 of its 40 destroyers* (6 sunk, 23 damaged and out of service), mostly at the hands of the Ju 87s.


Let's clarify that a little. The Royal Navy "lost" 6 destroyers...and 19 were damaged, not 23 (Dunkirk, The Men They Left Behind by Sean Longden, Constable and Robinson, 2008 )

Of the six lost, only three were sunk by air attack - Basilisk, Keith, and Grenade. A fourth, Havant was damaged by bombing but actually sunk by BRITISH gunfire as they didn't have the time to take her under tow.

* The Royal Navy actually had 120+ destroyers on the outbreak of war in 1939. By "its 40 destroyers" I'll assume you mean the number of destroyers given over to DYNAMO; actually, there were forty-TWO.

Kurfürst
Member
Posts: 282
Joined: 01 Apr 2005 15:04
Location: Hungary

Re: Luftwaffe anti-shipping capability

Postby Kurfürst » 12 Dec 2008 23:33

RichTO90 wrote:
Kurfürst wrote:Armour piercing capabilities of Luftwaffe bombs:


Hi Kurfürst, it's been a while!

I assume those values are at terminal velocity? And at optimum strike angle (60-75 degrees)?


Hi,

Unfortunately, Hahn does not give any more details than what has been posted. There are of course many variables, ie. bombs released from dive bombers would have higher speed and penetration than those released from level bombers.

At any rate, anything below capital ship class would be vulnerable to these bombs. Even BBs are at a certain level of danger, a while the bombs would be generally unlikely to penetrate the main armoured deck, they could well find their way into the ship's upper works, given the relatively thin armour found at the top, and of course, to hits occurring to the rather sizeable, un-armoured area outside the citadel.

Some more information from Hahn, regarding the rocket-assisted armored piercing anti shipping bomb of the Luftwaffe. These were based on the standard AP bomb designs, and received additional speed boost from an added rocket engine.

PC 500 RS "Pauline". Rocket engine increased impact velocity by 160 m/sec to 345 m/sec, and armor penetration increased to 200 mm armor. When released from level flight at 3500 m, the bomb could still penetrate 190 mm of deck armor.

PC 1000 RS "Pol", produced in large quantities (4000+) as well. Hahn describes the effect on a HMS Dido class cruiser in the MTO, after an impact velocity of 1152 km/h, delayed fuse of 0.065 sec.
The PC 1000 RS that hit the cruiser passed through the entire ship, and detonated 5 meter under the keel.

Hahn also gives some details of the measure of operational success guided, gliding anti shipping bombs of 1400 kg Fritz X and 500 kg HS 293, by II and III Gruppe of KG 100's with Do 217s.

65 missions were flown with 487 sorties in total. Of these 313 made conctact with the enemy and launched its ordonance. Of the 319 gliding bombs launched, the flight of 215 could be observed clearly. These achieved 65 direct hits, 40 near-hits and 71 further away from their targets; the results could not be observed for 38 bombs.

In total the following results were achieved:

Sank
1 Battleship
2 Cruisers
10 destroyers
1 AAA vessel
10 merchantmen (76 000 tons)
3 smaller vessels

Damaged

4 Battleships
6 cruisers
12 destroyers
29 merchantmen (215 000 tons)
1 "Geleitboot" (pilot?)

Regarding the Royal Navy's losses in Dunkerque operations, authors seem to differ in the numbers (ie. I gave figures via Hooton), nevertheless, the results were that the Royal Navy lost apprx. 60% of the destroyer force it committed to the operation within a short timespan, during which it was exposed to the dedicated attention of the Luftwaffe.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17478
Joined: 30 Apr 2006 23:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Luftwaffe anti-shipping capability

Postby phylo_roadking » 13 Dec 2008 00:24

the results were that the Royal Navy lost apprx. 60% of the destroyer force it committed to the operation within a short timespan


They "lost" 2.5% ; vessels undergoing short, medium or longterm repairs after damage are not "lost", just like aircraft, tanks, other vehicles out of action and undergoing repairs are "unserviceable" not "destroyed". "Lost" has a very strict definition with regards to shipping.

within a short timespan


Four days of constant raids. How many sorties were flown by the LW over Dunkirk from the 29th of May to the 1st of June?

Kurfürst
Member
Posts: 282
Joined: 01 Apr 2005 15:04
Location: Hungary

Re: Luftwaffe anti-shipping capability

Postby Kurfürst » 13 Dec 2008 00:34

phylo_roadking wrote:How many sorties were flown by the LW over Dunkirk from the 29th of May to the 1st of June?


More than enough, I think. Bombers flew apprx. 575 sorties against all targets at Dunkirk in the above period, lost 14 (2.4%), dive bombers flew 325 on the first of June, lost two (0.6%).

Image
Last edited by Kurfürst on 13 Dec 2008 00:52, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17478
Joined: 30 Apr 2006 23:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Luftwaffe anti-shipping capability

Postby phylo_roadking » 13 Dec 2008 00:46

More than enough, I think.


...to sink 6 British and 9 French destroyers yes...

...the Luftwaffe flew one thousand one hundred and thirty-five sorties in the Dunkirk area between the 29th of May and the 1st of June. That averages out at 75.6 sorties per ship...81 per ship when you remember the RN sunk the Havant themselves. That's not actually a very impressive performance...

...given that TWO of thos destroyers were sunk and the Havant took its damage when tied up in Dunkirk embarking troops, and thus were static targets.

Kurfürst
Member
Posts: 282
Joined: 01 Apr 2005 15:04
Location: Hungary

Re: Luftwaffe anti-shipping capability

Postby Kurfürst » 13 Dec 2008 00:55

Its very funny to add Bf 109 and Bf 110 sorties into the total. :lol:

Curious handling of facts, too - see Rich's post at LWD's link.:
"Destroyer HAVANT was badly damaged at 0905 in German bombing off Dunkirk and sank under tow five miles from West Buoy. " etc.

Well, continue twisting the story if you wish, I hope you will entertain yourself enough, as I am no longer interested in your show.
Last edited by Kurfürst on 13 Dec 2008 01:07, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17478
Joined: 30 Apr 2006 23:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Luftwaffe anti-shipping capability

Postby phylo_roadking » 13 Dec 2008 01:04

Its very funny to add Bf 109 and Bf 110 sorties into the total.


Good try, but no cigar.

Hooton, Phoenix Triumphant, P.260, Table 26 "Air Operations in the Dunkirk Pocket 27 May-2June 1940"

SEPARATE colums for "Bombers" "Ju 87" "Hs123" "Bf109" and "Bf110"

Anyone with a copy can do the same addition sum I did from the "Bombers" and "Ju87" columns alone and get the same figure I did :wink:

*IF* I had added in the others - the total THEN would have been 2305 sorties. But I prefer to be accurate.

As you seem to have a copy of Hooton to hand tonight, I'm sure you're aware that THAT was a very clumsy attempt to deflect criticism from the performance of the LW aganst the RN at Dunkirk.

Kurfürst
Member
Posts: 282
Joined: 01 Apr 2005 15:04
Location: Hungary

Re: Luftwaffe anti-shipping capability

Postby Kurfürst » 13 Dec 2008 01:11

phylo_roadking wrote:How many sorties were flown by the LW over Dunkirk from the 29th of May to the 1st of June?


phylo_roadking wrote:...the Luftwaffe flew one thousand one hundred and thirty-five sorties in the Dunkirk area between the 29th of May and the 1st of June.


phylo_roadking wrote:Hooton, Phoenix Triumphant, P.260, Table 26 "Air Operations in the Dunkirk Pocket 27 May-2June 1940"

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17478
Joined: 30 Apr 2006 23:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Luftwaffe anti-shipping capability

Postby phylo_roadking » 13 Dec 2008 01:29

phylo_roadking wrote:
How many sorties were flown by the LW over Dunkirk from the 29th of May to the 1st of June?


phylo_roadking wrote:
...the Luftwaffe flew one thousand one hundred and thirty-five sorties in the Dunkirk area between the 29th of May and the 1st of June.


phylo_roadking wrote:
Hooton, Phoenix Triumphant, P.260, Table 26 "Air Operations in the Dunkirk Pocket 27 May-2June 1940"


...as if to say that I've applied figures from the ENTIRE period 27 May-2 June to my argument? As I'm sure you've checked in Hooton, you'll of course know that the table is divided out in sorties per type by calendar date...

In fact, as you seem to be acusing me of twisting facts and figures to suit my argument...let's SEE the table....

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17478
Joined: 30 Apr 2006 23:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Luftwaffe anti-shipping capability

Postby phylo_roadking » 13 Dec 2008 01:31

Image

If you total the highlighted sortie totals for "Bombers" and "Ju87" for the 29th, 30th, 31st and the 1st...

...the total is as I indicated 1135 for these types and dates ALONE.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17478
Joined: 30 Apr 2006 23:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Luftwaffe anti-shipping capability

Postby phylo_roadking » 13 Dec 2008 01:34

From www.naval-history.net...regarding the sinking of HMS Havant

HM Minesweeper SALTASH attempted tow after embarking troops and ship's company.

Towing operation abandoned and ship sunk by gunfire from HMS SALTASH. in position

51.08N 02.16E


as I said.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17478
Joined: 30 Apr 2006 23:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Luftwaffe anti-shipping capability

Postby phylo_roadking » 13 Dec 2008 01:35

continue twisting the story if you wish


So do I get an apology for your incorrect accusation?

Kurfürst
Member
Posts: 282
Joined: 01 Apr 2005 15:04
Location: Hungary

Re: Luftwaffe anti-shipping capability

Postby Kurfürst » 13 Dec 2008 09:55

phylo_roadking wrote:...given that TWO of thos destroyers were sunk and the Havant took its damage when tied up in Dunkirk embarking troops, and thus were static targets.


From the link supplied by phylo_roadking above:

Embarked 500 troops and after leaving Dunkirk went to assist HM Destroyer IVANHOE which had been damaged in air attacks. Took off some of her passengers.During passage to Dover came under heavy air attack and received three direct hits. HM Minesweeper SALTASH attempted tow after embarking troops and ship's company. Towing operation abandoned and ship sunk by gunfire from HMS SALTASH. in position 51.08N 02.16E.

I wonder if there is connection between the British suddenly deciding to scuttle the ship, and the fact that it had received three direct hits earlier from LW bombers.

Like I said, your general, agitated behaviour and wanton mishandling of the facts made me lost interest replying, or even reading your posts.
Please consider yourself ignored.


Return to “Luftwaffe air units and Luftwaffe in general”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot]