Seelöwe - German & British mining operations

[Andreas]

There is some interesting information here:

http://www.mcdoa.org.uk/Development_of_Minewarfare.htm

Some background information in here:

http://aupress.maxwell.af.mil/saas_Thes ... lstrom.pdf

German mine types:

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WAMGER_Mines.htm

However:

NOVEMBER 1939
Magnetic Mines - German seaplanes lay the first magnetic mines off the East Coast and drop one on tidal flats at Shoeburyness in the Thames Estuary. It is defused on the 23rd November and recovered by Lt-Cdr Ouvry (awarded the George Cross), a vital step in the battle against a weapon which is causing heavy losses and long shipping delays. In November alone, 27 ships of 121,000 tons are sunk and for a time the Thames Estuary is virtually closed to shipping.

MARCH 1940
Merchant Shipping War - Since September 1939, 430,000 tons of shipping have been sent to the bottom by mines around the coasts of Britain - a loss rate only second to U-boats. Now the Royal Navy slowly counters magnetic mines with the introduction of ship-degaussing and 'LL' minesweeping gear. Although mines, contact, magnetic and later acoustic remain a threat throughout the war, they never again represent the danger of the first few months

Also: http://pigtrail.uark.edu/people/rcordel ... newar.html

Working from memory (I will attempt to confirm this tonight), the Germans did not figure out very soon (at all) that the magnetic mine had been successfully countered. How many of the mines supposed to be laid during Seelöwe by them were of the magnetic kind?

All the best

Andreas

[LWD]

...
LWD you understands that the reference to "the mines " does not mean that you have to replace the minefield but that some mines started to drift away.
Most minefield sown in 1940 where a theat to shipping years after the war.
....

When you have a thin barrier in the first place and it starts deteriating it becomes ineffctive pretty quickly. When those same mines start drifting across the lanes where you are movine 1,000s of ships it is a serious problem. The German mines would indeed be dangerous for years afterwards but in the face of British mine sweeping and their own spontaneous deteriation I'm not sure they would have been a serious impediment to Anti Sea Lion efforts by the RN. Also consider that the Germans won't know when or which mines start to drift so after a relativly short while if the barrier is to be kept up the field must indeed be replaced (or most likely a second layed parrallel to the first but not close enough to risk loosing mine layers to the old field.

[fredleander]

Not one of the examples above is about German mining activity. The first is about British ships running on a German minefield. The other three are German mining ships displacing.

Rich told you so before. How many more times are you to falsely claim these entries as examples for mining activity?

All the best

Andreas

Of course they are related to mining activity. Not only that but they are directly related to the eventual mining offensive that was to follow a Seelöwe go-ahead. They show KM mining units positioning themselves for this.

[Andreas]

leandros - you said:

Looking in at Rohwer and Hümmelchen one can see that mining was going all the time, also before the period mentioned above:

You then provided, amongs others, the following examples.

http://www.wlb-stuttgart.de/seekrieg/40-09.htm
8.– 11.9.1940
Kanal
Verlegung dt. Minenlegerverbände für das Unternehmen »Seelöwe«. Am 8.9. laufen Schiff 23 / Stier (Kpt.z.S. Bentlage), Königin Luise, Schwerin, Preussen, Hansestadt Danzig und Grille, begleitet von 4 Torpedobooten, von dt. Nordseehäfen aus; am 9.9. vereinigen sie sich vor Rotterdam mit Tannenberg, Cobra, Kaiser, Roland, Togo und 2 Torpedobooten. Hansestadt Danzig und Kaiser laufen in Antwerpen ein. Grille, Königin Luise, Preussen und Roland werden beim Einlaufen in Ostende von Flugzeugen angegriffen, erleiden aber nur Splitterschäden. Die Westgruppe mit Schiff 23, Tannenberg, Cobra, Togo und Schwerin setzt die Fahrt am 10.9. von Calais aus fort, Sicherung übernehmen dazu die Zerstörer Hans Lody (Kpt.z.S. Bey), Karl Galster, Theodor Riedel, Friedrich Eckholdt und Friedrich Ihn, die am 9.9. aus Wilhelmshaven auslaufen. Sie erreichen am 11.9. Cherbourg.

12.– 14.9.1940
Kanal
Weitere Minenleger, Stralsund (Kpt.z.S. Brinkmeier), Skagerrak und Brummer, verlegen unter Sicherung von 4 T-Booten von deutschen Häfen in den Westraum. Brummer geht nach Antwerpen, die zwei anderen nach Le Havre, nachdem sie vor Zeebrügge einen Luftangriff abgewehrt haben.

19.– 20.9.1940
Kanal
Der B.d.Z., Kpt.z.S. Bey, läuft mit den Zerstörern Hans Lody, Friedrich Eckholdt, Karl Galster, Theodor Riedel und Friedrich Ihn von Cherbourg zu einem Vorstoß in das Gebiet zwischen Lizard und Start Point aus, doch wegen der Wetterlage wird das Unternehmen abgeblasen. –– Die Minenleger der Westgruppe, Schiff 23, Tannenberg, Schwerin, Togo und Cobra, verlegen unter Sicherungsgeleit der 5. T-Flottille von Cherbourg nach St. Nazaire.

Not one of these examples is showing what you claim, i.e. that mining was going on all the time. They are moves of mine-layers from one port to the other. Nothing more. Two of these supposed examples refer to the same group of ships moving from one port to another. They do not refer to mining activity. They refer to the positioning of mine layers.

All the best

Andreas

[John T]

However:

NOVEMBER 1939
Magnetic Mines - German seaplanes lay the first magnetic mines off the East Coast and drop one on tidal flats at Shoeburyness in the Thames Estuary. It is defused on the 23rd November and recovered by Lt-Cdr Ouvry (awarded the George Cross), a vital step in the battle against a weapon which is causing heavy losses and long shipping delays. In November alone, 27 ships of 121,000 tons are sunk and for a time the Thames Estuary is virtually closed to shipping.

MARCH 1940
Merchant Shipping War - Since September 1939, 430,000 tons of shipping have been sent to the bottom by mines around the coasts of Britain - a loss rate only second to U-boats. Now the Royal Navy slowly counters magnetic mines with the introduction of ship-degaussing and 'LL' minesweeping gear. Although mines, contact, magnetic and later acoustic remain a threat throughout the war, they never again represent the danger of the first few months

Also: http://pigtrail.uark.edu/people/rcordel ... newar.html

Working from memory (I will attempt to confirm this tonight), the Germans did not figure out very soon (at all) that the magnetic mine had been successfully countered. How many of the mines supposed to be laid during Seelöwe by them were of the magnetic kind?

All the best

Andreas

Dear Andreas
Bronskys first post in this thread gives you the answer.
(There is no reference to EMF in that post)

and the way I interpret english
"Now the Royal Navy slowly counters magnetic mines with the introduction of ship-degaussing and 'LL' minesweeping gear"
Is not the same as "sucessfully countered".

The British had got some sort of counter to Magnetic mines but they where still a bigger challenge than contact mines. During the first months of the war they had been completely defenceless.

Cheers
/John T.

[fredleander]

leandros - you said:

Looking in at Rohwer and Hümmelchen one can see that mining was going all the time, also before the period mentioned above:

You then provided, amongs others, the following examples.

http://www.wlb-stuttgart.de/seekrieg/40-09.htm
8.– 11.9.1940
Kanal
Verlegung dt. Minenlegerverbände für das Unternehmen »Seelöwe«. Am 8.9. laufen Schiff 23 / Stier (Kpt.z.S. Bentlage), Königin Luise, Schwerin, Preussen, Hansestadt Danzig und Grille, begleitet von 4 Torpedobooten, von dt. Nordseehäfen aus; am 9.9. vereinigen sie sich vor Rotterdam mit Tannenberg, Cobra, Kaiser, Roland, Togo und 2 Torpedobooten. Hansestadt Danzig und Kaiser laufen in Antwerpen ein. Grille, Königin Luise, Preussen und Roland werden beim Einlaufen in Ostende von Flugzeugen angegriffen, erleiden aber nur Splitterschäden. Die Westgruppe mit Schiff 23, Tannenberg, Cobra, Togo und Schwerin setzt die Fahrt am 10.9. von Calais aus fort, Sicherung übernehmen dazu die Zerstörer Hans Lody (Kpt.z.S. Bey), Karl Galster, Theodor Riedel, Friedrich Eckholdt und Friedrich Ihn, die am 9.9. aus Wilhelmshaven auslaufen. Sie erreichen am 11.9. Cherbourg.

12.– 14.9.1940
Kanal
Weitere Minenleger, Stralsund (Kpt.z.S. Brinkmeier), Skagerrak und Brummer, verlegen unter Sicherung von 4 T-Booten von deutschen Häfen in den Westraum. Brummer geht nach Antwerpen, die zwei anderen nach Le Havre, nachdem sie vor Zeebrügge einen Luftangriff abgewehrt haben.

19.– 20.9.1940
Kanal
Der B.d.Z., Kpt.z.S. Bey, läuft mit den Zerstörern Hans Lody, Friedrich Eckholdt, Karl Galster, Theodor Riedel und Friedrich Ihn von Cherbourg zu einem Vorstoß in das Gebiet zwischen Lizard und Start Point aus, doch wegen der Wetterlage wird das Unternehmen abgeblasen. –– Die Minenleger der Westgruppe, Schiff 23, Tannenberg, Schwerin, Togo und Cobra, verlegen unter Sicherungsgeleit der 5. T-Flottille von Cherbourg nach St. Nazaire.

Not one of these examples is showing what you claim, i.e. that mining was going on all the time. They are moves of mine-layers from one port to the other. Nothing more. Two of these supposed examples refer to the same group of ships moving from one port to another. They do not refer to mining activity. They refer to the positioning of mine layers.

All the best

Andreas

I know....that was what I wanted to show. In addition to the actual mining operations..... .....I do understand German quite well and I suspect many others do as well.....

[RichTO90]

You then provided, amongs others, the following examples.

(snip)
19.– 20.9.1940
Kanal
Der B.d.Z., Kpt.z.S. Bey, läuft mit den Zerstörern Hans Lody, Friedrich Eckholdt, Karl Galster, Theodor Riedel und Friedrich Ihn von Cherbourg zu einem Vorstoß in das Gebiet zwischen Lizard und Start Point aus, doch wegen der Wetterlage wird das Unternehmen abgeblasen. –– Die Minenleger der Westgruppe, Schiff 23, Tannenberg, Schwerin, Togo und Cobra, verlegen unter Sicherungsgeleit der 5. T-Flottille von Cherbourg nach St. Nazaire.

Not one of these examples is showing what you claim, i.e. that mining was going on all the time. They are moves of mine-layers from one port to the other. Nothing more. Two of these supposed examples refer to the same group of ships moving from one port to another. They do not refer to mining activity. They refer to the positioning of mine layers.

I just noticed this, which is curious and perhaps an early indicator of the de facto decision to abandon Seelöwe. Five minelayers of the Westgruppe after being assembled at Cherbourg, where they could actually conduct the operations, were moved to St. Nazaire? Which is a pretty off place to attempt to conduct near round-the-clock minelaying in the Channel well east of a line from Falmouth to Cherbourg? I mean they now have to steam some 500-600 kilometers to reach their area of operatons? That's kind of strange thinking, its probably about 30 hours or more steaming time away.

[John T]

...
LWD you understands that the reference to "the mines " does not mean that you have to replace the minefield but that some mines started to drift away.
Most minefield sown in 1940 where a theat to shipping years after the war.
....

When you have a thin barrier in the first place and it starts deteriating it becomes ineffctive pretty quickly.

Do you have any source that supports your view ?

The only example I have where minefiels explicitly needed to be relaid from natural causes was in the baltic where severe Ice situation displaced and triggered off mines.

Cheers
/John T.

[Andreas]

However:

NOVEMBER 1939
Magnetic Mines - German seaplanes lay the first magnetic mines off the East Coast and drop one on tidal flats at Shoeburyness in the Thames Estuary. It is defused on the 23rd November and recovered by Lt-Cdr Ouvry (awarded the George Cross), a vital step in the battle against a weapon which is causing heavy losses and long shipping delays. In November alone, 27 ships of 121,000 tons are sunk and for a time the Thames Estuary is virtually closed to shipping.

MARCH 1940
Merchant Shipping War - Since September 1939, 430,000 tons of shipping have been sent to the bottom by mines around the coasts of Britain - a loss rate only second to U-boats. Now the Royal Navy slowly counters magnetic mines with the introduction of ship-degaussing and 'LL' minesweeping gear. Although mines, contact, magnetic and later acoustic remain a threat throughout the war, they never again represent the danger of the first few months

Also: http://pigtrail.uark.edu/people/rcordel ... newar.html

Working from memory (I will attempt to confirm this tonight), the Germans did not figure out very soon (at all) that the magnetic mine had been successfully countered. How many of the mines supposed to be laid during Seelöwe by them were of the magnetic kind?

All the best

Andreas

Dear Andreas
Bronskys first post in this thread gives you the answer.
(There is no reference to EMF in that post)

and the way I interpret english
"Now the Royal Navy slowly counters magnetic mines with the introduction of ship-degaussing and 'LL' minesweeping gear"
Is not the same as "sucessfully countered".

The British had got some sort of counter to Magnetic mines but they where still a bigger challenge than contact mines. During the first months of the war they had been completely defenceless.

Cheers
/John T.

Thanks. I just checked this while you posted, and it turned out my memory confused the acoustic mine with the magnetic mine. The magnetic mine was successfully countered in that a clearing procedure was established. The Germans knew about this from early 1940 through British press reports. The acoustic mine the British did not know about until October 1940, so this would have been a very serious problem for them in any September operation, and when they managed to deal with it it was not immediately known in Germany. Unfortunately Neitzel, who provides these informations in "Der Einsatz der deutschen Luftwaffe über der Nordsee und dem Atlantik" does spend no time on Seelöwe, and does not give available mines by type.

He does however point out that September was the low point for aerial mining in 1940.

All the best

Andreas

[Andreas]

You then provided, amongs others, the following examples.

(snip)
19.– 20.9.1940
Kanal
Der B.d.Z., Kpt.z.S. Bey, läuft mit den Zerstörern Hans Lody, Friedrich Eckholdt, Karl Galster, Theodor Riedel und Friedrich Ihn von Cherbourg zu einem Vorstoß in das Gebiet zwischen Lizard und Start Point aus, doch wegen der Wetterlage wird das Unternehmen abgeblasen. –– Die Minenleger der Westgruppe, Schiff 23, Tannenberg, Schwerin, Togo und Cobra, verlegen unter Sicherungsgeleit der 5. T-Flottille von Cherbourg nach St. Nazaire.

Not one of these examples is showing what you claim, i.e. that mining was going on all the time. They are moves of mine-layers from one port to the other. Nothing more. Two of these supposed examples refer to the same group of ships moving from one port to another. They do not refer to mining activity. They refer to the positioning of mine layers.

I just noticed this, which is curious and perhaps an early indicator of the de facto decision to abandon Seelöwe. Five minelayers of the Westgruppe after being assembled at Cherbourg, where they could actually conduct the operations, were moved to St. Nazaire? Which is a pretty off place to attempt to conduct near round-the-clock minelaying in the Channel well east of a line from Falmouth to Cherbourg? I mean they now have to steam some 500-600 kilometers to reach their area of operatons? That's kind of strange thinking, its probably about 30 hours or more steaming time away.

Reduces the risk of aerial attack?

All the best

Andreas

[Andreas]

A discussion on the cancellation date of Seelöwe has been split out:

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=121915

All the best

Andreas

[LWD]

.
When you have a thin barrier in the first place and it starts deteriating it becomes ineffctive pretty quickly.

Do you have any source that supports your view ?

The only example I have where minefiels explicitly needed to be relaid from natural causes was in the baltic where severe Ice situation displaced and triggered off mines.

My original post was a direct quote it stated " would need to be replaced". If you are looking at the densities that have been mentioned in this thread if they get much thinner they hardly constitute a field and become more of a few scattered mines. Certainlly they are going to have a hard time stopping a response from the RN to a threatened invasion.

[John T]

[4. Taking the series of "B" fields. Dieppe to Newhaven is 64 nautical miles, let's call it 50. That's 9,260 mines at 10m intervals. In other words, almost the entire German stockpile will be absorbed to do just that very flimsy line.

Yep. Take my rough count of 450 kilometers in total.

As one row that equals 45,000 mines.
As two rows that equals 90,000 mines.
As three rows that equals 135,000 mines.

Divide by the number and capacity of dedicated minelaying ships, be generous and call it 5,000. Assume that it takes a night to lay them, that the vessels can be restocked with mines during the day so that they can turnaround immediately, and that none suffer damage or breakdowns interupting their mission.

That means that laying a single row as a minimum will take 9 days.
Two rows will take 18 days.
Three rows will take 27 days.

You must further assume that the British will not notice this operation and thus will take no countermeasures, such as sending their considerable fleet assets to disrupt these missions or their considerable mineclearing assets (over 20 fleet minesweepers and 250 minesweeping trawlers in home waters, plus about 20 destroyers rigged for sweeping) to clear the barriers simultaneously with the Germans attempting to lay them.

You must also assume that all the barriers will be laid and plotted accurately, so that they will not be as great a threat to the Germans as to the British (blue-on-blue mine losses were actually failry common, mostly due to mislaid fields or to 'drifters' coming loose from their moorings).

In other words, this is pie in the sky silliness.

Do you have any source supporting that they would lay one mine every ten meter?

Could you please explain what will happen to a minefield where there is just 10 meters between the mines and one mine explodes?
(The display when the whole mine line goes off would be spectacular, as each exploding mine trigger the next.)

Cheers
/John T.

[RichTO90]

[Do you have any source supporting that they would lay one mine every ten meter?

Dear me, who are you asking John? Me? Bronsky?

Or perhaps WW, who came up with that figure?

Could you please explain what will happen to a minefield where there is just 10 meters between the mines and one mine explodes?

Again, I know....but perhaps you need to ask the impenetrable barrier guys?

(The display when the whole mine line goes off would be spectacular, as each exploding mine trigger the next.)

Cheers
/John T.

It might not propagate down the entire line, but I wouldn't want to take my chances with that.

[Andreas]

[4. Taking the series of "B" fields. Dieppe to Newhaven is 64 nautical miles, let's call it 50. That's 9,260 mines at 10m intervals. In other words, almost the entire German stockpile will be absorbed to do just that very flimsy line.

Yep. Take my rough count of 450 kilometers in total.

As one row that equals 45,000 mines.
As two rows that equals 90,000 mines.
As three rows that equals 135,000 mines.

Divide by the number and capacity of dedicated minelaying ships, be generous and call it 5,000. Assume that it takes a night to lay them, that the vessels can be restocked with mines during the day so that they can turnaround immediately, and that none suffer damage or breakdowns interupting their mission.

That means that laying a single row as a minimum will take 9 days.
Two rows will take 18 days.
Three rows will take 27 days.

You must further assume that the British will not notice this operation and thus will take no countermeasures, such as sending their considerable fleet assets to disrupt these missions or their considerable mineclearing assets (over 20 fleet minesweepers and 250 minesweeping trawlers in home waters, plus about 20 destroyers rigged for sweeping) to clear the barriers simultaneously with the Germans attempting to lay them.

You must also assume that all the barriers will be laid and plotted accurately, so that they will not be as great a threat to the Germans as to the British (blue-on-blue mine losses were actually failry common, mostly due to mislaid fields or to 'drifters' coming loose from their moorings).

In other words, this is pie in the sky silliness.

Do you have any source supporting that they would lay one mine every ten meter?

Could you please explain what will happen to a minefield where there is just 10 meters between the mines and one mine explodes?
(The display when the whole mine line goes off would be spectacular, as each exploding mine trigger the next.)

Cheers
/John T.

John

It is this post in which W_W came up with the 10m interval (where he got that from, I have no clue). Further use of that figure by Bronsky and Rich served merely to question it.

You guys really have no clue as to the use of the "Mine Barriers". do you?

There were to have been "Mine Fields" layed at each end of the approaches to the channel granted, but these "Mine Barriers" were to form the lanes in which the Invasion Craft were to "Drive Through" for lack of a better term & if I remember correctly (Man I Hate Abbreviations) the mines in the "Mine Barriers" were to be placed at 10 meter intervals. (Wish I knew what that distance is in feet).

There were to be if I remember correctly 2 rows of mines in the "Mine Barriers" that formed the lanes on each side of each lane.

2 rows of mines..................................................................

Invasion Craft in the middle.................................................

2 rows of mines.................................................................

Invasion Craft in the middle................................................

2 rows of mines................................................................

Invasion Craft in the middle...............................................

2 rows of mines..............................................................

Etc,..............................................................................

I suggest that it would be pointless to follow this any further. It is an unsourced figure provided by someone who is no longer able to answer the question. Better focus on more productive questions.

All the best

Andreas