Seelöwe - realistic transport capacity of barges

Discussions on WW2 in Western Europe & the Atlantic.
Post Reply
Andreas
Member
Posts: 6938
Joined: 10 Nov 2002, 15:12
Location: Europe

#16

Post by Andreas » 25 Apr 2007, 10:42

RichTO90 wrote:Overall, I was generous in estimating them as two-thirds of their DWt. By using their dimensions and converting it to GRT (1 GRT - 2.83 cubic meters) you get 158 GRT for the Spitzen and 292 GRT for the Kempenaar, which given their hull form is probably high, probably about 85-90 percent of that may be close to the actual value.
Kieser is indicating that you are right (about being generous). He states that the Prähme could carry 70-150 soldiers with their platoon vehicles. I'll look up pure vehicle carrying capacity later.

Regarding speed, he indicates that a roundtrip would take well over a day:

1.5 hours to load
13 hours crossing
?? unload and pushing off (how do you get an unpowered barge off the beach?)
13 hours return

This would mean that whoever was dumped on English soil would have to hold on for almost two full days before they would be reinforced/resupplied.

No wonder the planners expected 50-80% losses of the first wave.

All the best

Andreas

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8618
Joined: 21 Sep 2005, 22:46
Location: Michigan

#17

Post by LWD » 25 Apr 2007, 14:08

It turns out that 1 cubic meter of water masses aproximatly 1 metric ton (unless I've messed up my math) (IE there are 1,000,000 cc per cm and each cc weighs 1 gm). This is what I used for the freeboard calculations earlier. I did assume a rechtangular sold for that portion of the barge. In this case it is somewhat conservative. What it does show is that the barges become near on to useless for transporting bulk dense cargo if you have to have 2 meters of freeboard.


Andreas
Member
Posts: 6938
Joined: 10 Nov 2002, 15:12
Location: Europe

#18

Post by Andreas » 25 Apr 2007, 16:04

And start uparmouring them with cement, steel, sand, and iron. In any case, I don't doubt that the German planners did their numbers right on what they could load on the barges for the first wave. But the indication in Kieser is that it was not a lot of material/troops that was considered to be taken along on a per vessel basis.

All the best

Andreas

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8618
Joined: 21 Sep 2005, 22:46
Location: Michigan

#19

Post by LWD » 25 Apr 2007, 17:05

Also consider the impact of arming them and putting engines on them.

There is also something of a dicotomy concerning test and success.
From:
http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/ww ... rlord.aspx
Only one training exercise was conducted. The results are quite revealing. Off Boulogne, in good weather and good visibility, with no navigation hazards or enemy defenses to contend with, of fifty vessels committed less than half managed to land their troops at H Hour. One tug lost its tow. One barge overturned when too many soldiers crowded on one side. Several barges broached in the surf and landed broad side to, unable to lower their ramps. The results of the fifty-barge exercise did not bode well for a 1277 barge assault on England.
This is somewhat at odds with the impresion derived from other quotes on this thread. Perhaps it has to do with the difference betweeen "excersie" and test.
Note however that one of the barges above was "overturned" (I've also seen the discription "swamped") because the passengers crowded to one side. This has some serious implications with regards to sea worthiness. Also consider that this exercise was considered a success. Makes one wonder what a failure would be. It would be interesting to find more details.

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8618
Joined: 21 Sep 2005, 22:46
Location: Michigan

#20

Post by LWD » 26 Apr 2007, 19:05

This site:
http://www.battleofbritain.net/0043.html
gives some weather info up to the end of September. I looked through the pages for August and September. the 6th and 22 of August and the 4 th of September are the only ones listed with strong winds (gale force on 22 August). Unfortunatly not a lot of detail beyond that. However it does bring up the question of just when the barges were tested vs the wind forces listed.

RichTO90
Member
Posts: 4238
Joined: 22 Dec 2003, 19:03

#21

Post by RichTO90 » 26 Apr 2007, 20:01

LWD wrote:This site:
http://www.battleofbritain.net/0043.html
gives some weather info up to the end of September. I looked through the pages for August and September. the 6th and 22 of August and the 4 th of September are the only ones listed with strong winds (gale force on 22 August). Unfortunatly not a lot of detail beyond that. However it does bring up the question of just when the barges were tested vs the wind forces listed.
KM S-Boote operations in the Channel were effectively at a standstill from 12 to 21 September according to Chronik Seekrieg. It is unlikely that if they could not operate that towed barges and pleasure craft could. :D

Also if we can locate the weather reports for that period we can get an idea of what conditions the KM actually considered unfavorable for operations as opposed to what the vessels were rated for.

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8618
Joined: 21 Sep 2005, 22:46
Location: Michigan

#22

Post by LWD » 26 Apr 2007, 20:32

I think I found a site where you can get the data but you have to pay for it. No luck yet finding a free sight. I've heard that it's in the back of Richard Cox's book on Sealion but haven't seen it yet so don't know the detail.

Andreas
Member
Posts: 6938
Joined: 10 Nov 2002, 15:12
Location: Europe

#23

Post by Andreas » 26 Apr 2007, 21:06

Weather info is in the abominable Cox. On the 20th/21st, no barge operations would have been possible for most of the day, since sea state was 4. For the following two-three days, sea-state 3 was observed, the maximum at which the barges could still operate, according to Cox.

I'll post the rest later.

All the best

Andreas

Andreas
Member
Posts: 6938
Joined: 10 Nov 2002, 15:12
Location: Europe

#24

Post by Andreas » 26 Apr 2007, 22:12

The list could be further broken down in observations at 0700, 1300, 1800.

Code: Select all

Day      - weather         - visibility        - wind        - force    - sea
19      Cloudy/Squalls          Good             WSW          4-7        3-4
20      Cloudy/Squalls          Good             WSW          4-7        3-4
21      Overcast                Poor/Good        W-NE         0-2        0-2
22      Cloudy                  Good/Mod         SSW          2-4        1-3
23      Cloudy                  Good               W          4          3
24      Cloudy                  Good            NW-N          2          2
25      Blue Sky/Cloudy         Poor/Good       NNW/NNE       2-4        1-3
26      Cloudy/Overcast         Mod              N            2-4        1-3
27      Cloudy/Overcast         Poor/Mod        WSW/WNW       3-5        2-3
28      Cloudy/Squalls          Good            NW/NNE        2-5        2-3
All the best

Andreas

John T
Member
Posts: 1206
Joined: 31 Jan 2003, 23:38
Location: Stockholm,Sweden

#25

Post by John T » 26 Apr 2007, 22:53

Andreas wrote:And start uparmouring them with cement, steel, sand, and iron. In any case, I don't doubt that the German planners did their numbers right on what they could load on the barges for the first wave. But the indication in Kieser is that it was not a lot of material/troops that was considered to be taken along on a per vessel basis.

All the best

Andreas
Makes sense from at least two perspectives.

1. unloading is the bottle neck, so only load as much as you could unload quickly.

2. the density of military equipment isn't anything close of the density of typical bulk loads these barges where designed to carry, like coal. (as Rich already pointed out)

I must admit that I know more about Warsaw pact 1985 amphibious equipment than German of 1940. Today RoRo tonnage are valued for lane-meters of a certain capacity.
For military planning purpose you simply divide it into Lane meters for tanks and lane meters for other vehicles.

Cheers
/John T.

John T
Member
Posts: 1206
Joined: 31 Jan 2003, 23:38
Location: Stockholm,Sweden

Re: Fighters and Barges

#26

Post by John T » 26 Apr 2007, 23:08

RichTO90 wrote:
John T wrote:What where the average capacity of these barges?
bulk loads of 100-400 tons?
...
I see two tradeoffs,
Center of gravity to aviod that the barge becomes top heavy,
so you have to load 200 tons on sand low and add 50 tons of steel plate on the top and then fill the space between with your infantery company.

And draught, the lighter the barge the closer to land it comes before getting stuck.
There appears to be some real confusion of terms here, which is typical when talking about seagoing vessels. First you have to understand the parameters.

'Tonnage’ is actually a number of different things in respect to shipping:
Since we talk army supply and I'm an metric european I always means metric ton when not further specified. :P
RichTO90 wrote:
The vessels in question were the Prähme – un-powered barges, over 2,000 of which were confiscated in Belgium, Holland, France, and Germany for use in the operation. There were generally two types the Spitsen or pinnace (typically 38.5 x 5.05 x 2.3 meters, 360 DWT or about 240 GRT) and the larger Kempenaars (or French Campinois, typically 50.0 x 6.6 x 2.5 meters, 620 DWT or about 413 GRT).
OT but fun to know, what locks made these sizes - ought to be similar to PanamMax?
RichTO90 wrote: So overall we could expect that the Spitsen could probably accommodate the men and equipment of an infantry company, without the vehicles, horses, and other baggage of the Troß. The Kempenaars would easily accomodate an infantry company, possibly including the Troß. Either could accomodate motor vehicles, probably 5 or so in the Spitsen and 7 or 8 in the Kempenaar. One efficiency would be that they at least could be embarked loaded with cargoes on the order of 2-5 tons per vehicle would be about average. Perhaps 2 or 3 armored vehicles could be loaded per Spitsen and myeb double that for the Kempenaar. Finally, probably two or more Spitsen would be required for a typical 4-gun artillery battery with its crew, prime movers and other vehicles. It is possible, but unlikely, that an entire battery could fit into a Kempenaar.
So it is reasonable to add some weight for "armour" - sandbags or whatever you find.
Given the German mastery of Field conversions I expect some creativity in uparmouring your barge ;)

Cheers
/John T.

RichTO90
Member
Posts: 4238
Joined: 22 Dec 2003, 19:03

Re: Fighters and Barges

#27

Post by RichTO90 » 26 Apr 2007, 23:37

John T wrote:So it is reasonable to add some weight for "armour" - sandbags or whatever you find.
Given the German mastery of Field conversions I expect some creativity in uparmouring your barge ;)

Cheers
/John T.
Maybe, maybe not. A little further exploration yields some additional comparisons. Somewhere in one of these now split threads I thought I posted a comparison between the Prähme and their equivalent, the LCT? And one problem found in NEPTUNE when converting LCT IV to LCT (A) (i.e., armored) was that when even lightweight plastic and sheet metal 'armor' was added to the pilot houses it tended to badly effect the stability of the LCT. Then, when they added the ramps to allow the two forward tanks (Shermans or Centaurs) to fire over the bow ramps, things got very exciting indeed. And essentilly that was only raising the load line for two of three embarked 30-ton tanks by about two feet. The problem of course is the shallow draft again, which the Prähme shared. And I have to think back again to the Schenk/leandros talk about tacking le.F.H. and whatnot on top to shoot up RN destroyers and Brighton Beach cabanas with.

Paul Lakowski
Member
Posts: 1441
Joined: 30 Apr 2003, 06:16
Location: Canada

#28

Post by Paul Lakowski » 28 Apr 2007, 09:37

Schenk "Invasion of England 1940" pp 168-169


Rotterdam 49 transports and 308 barges listed from 24/9 to 2/10 when the barge total drops to 300.

Antwerp Transports listed at 48 and 300 barges from 24/9 to 7/10

Ostend lists
196 barges and no transports on 12/9 and 89 barges plus 13 transports on 14/9. When did the air attacks happen? 16th through 24th sept they list 89-76 barges and 15 transports.

Nieuport lists 24 transports through out Sept

Dunkirk lists 127 barges on 12 th building to 136 on 16th through 19th and 163 from the 24-28 reaching 201 on 2nd Oct 1940.

Gravelines lists 39-40 barges from 16th through into Oct 1940

Calais lists 138 on 12th 157 on 14th 163 on 16th and 202-204 from 17-19th Sept. On 24th through early Oct they list 214-217 barges.

Boulogne lists 88 barges on the 12th ; 111 on the 14th ; 146 on the 16th and 236 on the 17-19th Sept.That increases from 245 to 260 through early Oct.

Le Havre had 34 transports on the 14th and reached 47 from 16th Sept through mid Oct.
Their barge fleet swell from 52 on 14th Sept to 130 on 17th Sept and 169 to 200 from the 19th Sept to 28th Sept.

So if we crunch the numbers down we have on the 19th Sept roughly 885 barges and by the 24th we have 1549. 1580 barges on the 28th Sept. The assembly plan was to include 1939 Barges when completed , although 300 of these were in reserve.

On the transport capacity of the barges 40 tons was expected per load. In one exercise a transport was unloaded to the beach through 26 barge sortie unloading the following in 14 hours....860 troops ; 360 horses and bicycles ; 144 vehicles & 8 Pak/infantry guns plus 200 tons supplies [although it was realized that enemy action and rough weather could increase this to 2 days]. Schenk pp 94.

It seems the plan was to ferry the barges over being towed by trawlers tugs and the transport ships then leave ~ 400 on each side of the channel to speed up loading and unloading. After the first wave it was only expected that something like 700-800 barges were needed per wave.

With regards to seakeeping Schenk writes.[pp 156]
After rejecting 140 out of 245 barges
"After discussions and consultation with Kapitan zur See Kiederlen and Oberbaurat Driesen from the Design Bureau in which it was agreed to reduce the length to depth ratio of the barges (12-15:1 for ocean going barges as opposed to 25-31:1 for inland ones), thereby improving their seakeeping qualities.However , there were still insufficent barges with a ratio of 19.5:1 or less, and the figure was only lowered to 22:1 for craft in good condition."
If you down load the Springsharp program and fiddle around with building or comparing ships to performance its clear that ship length and beam as well as draft have as much of a baring on seakeeping as freeboard does. Looking at the scale drawing the barges slope from front to back so their is no one freeboard height.

In other areas he notes 2318 barges were converted of these 1336 of the Flemish designed Peniche barges [38.5 x 5.05 x 2.3m cargo capacity 360 tonnes] refered to as Type A1 and 982 of the larger Kempenaar or Type A2 barges [50 x 6.6 x 2.5m , cargo capacity of 620 tonnes]. 860 barges came from Germany 1200 from Netherlands and Belgium and 350 from the Seine region. Approximately 800 of the requistioned barges were motorised. [pp 67].

The biggest problem they had next to motorising the barges was the external ramp. By the fall they had reasonably workable 'ramp tracks' but these had to be manually deployed, so alot of subsquent work went into designing an retractable powered ramp through 1941. To ease this transition the leading waves were to dispatch combat teams through stormboats unloading from the tugs ahead of the beaching to secure the beach.

The first wave was to be done in stages with units landing over a two day period. Each front line infantry division was heavily reinforced with engineers tanks and artillery to help repell enemy counterattacks.

Andreas
Member
Posts: 6938
Joined: 10 Nov 2002, 15:12
Location: Europe

#29

Post by Andreas » 28 Apr 2007, 11:11

Paul Lakowski wrote:If you down load the Springsharp program and fiddle around with building or comparing ships to performance its clear that ship length and beam as well as draft have as much of a baring on seakeeping as freeboard does. Looking at the scale drawing the barges slope from front to back so their is no one freeboard height.
I am not quite sure where you are going with this. I think that if the 2m freeboard requirement posted by LWD earlier was in fact applied, I would logically assume this requirement to be for minimum freeboard, since that would be consistent with a margin of available freeboard across the length of the ship even in conditions where waves are up to 1.25m high (sea state 3). If the barge then has more freeboard towards the bow and stern, so much the better.

All the best

Andreas

Andreas
Member
Posts: 6938
Joined: 10 Nov 2002, 15:12
Location: Europe

#30

Post by Andreas » 28 Apr 2007, 14:33

I have renamed the discussion slightly to allow it to broaden beyond the very narrow 'how much can you get on a barge', into questions such as realistic transport capacity using towed barges. This can include questions such as loading/unloading, movement speed, etc. without getting off-topic.

All the best

Andreas

Post Reply

Return to “WW2 in Western Europe & the Atlantic”