1941 convoys in the Central Med & the air battle over Malta

Discussions on WW2 in Africa & the Mediterranean. Hosted by Andy H
Post Reply
User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: 1941 convoys in the Central Med

#16

Post by phylo_roadking » 10 Jun 2009, 04:03

As for the Illustrious - you are quite right, Jon, she WAS hit in Valetta...
...she was hit only TWICE in three hundred sorties over two weeks. On the 16th for example over a hundred aircraft were sent to attack her in Grand Harbour - and scored only a single hit.

As I said near the start of the original thread - Norway had already proved how hard it was for the Luftwaffe to hit RN vessels, and how much effort had to be put in for a very few hits. Events like this proved the rule

User avatar
bf109 emil
Member
Posts: 3627
Joined: 25 Mar 2008, 22:20
Location: Youngstown Alberta Canada

Re: 1941 convoys in the Central Med

#17

Post by bf109 emil » 10 Jun 2009, 08:48

Phylo Roadking wrote'
...she was hit only TWICE in three hundred sorties over two weeks. On the 16th for example over a hundred aircraft were sent to attack her in Grand Harbour - and scored only a single hit.

As I said near the start of the original thread - Norway had already proved how hard it was for the Luftwaffe to hit RN vessels, and how much effort had to be put in for a very few hits. Events like this proved the rule
is there a reason for this lack of performance? i.e. where the planes high level bombers? new crews? as it would seem that qualified and veteran stuka pilots if indeed these where the types of aeroplanes sortied would have had a better result...kind got my curiosity


Jon G.
Member
Posts: 6647
Joined: 17 Feb 2004, 02:12
Location: Europe

Re: 1941 convoys in the Central Med

#18

Post by Jon G. » 10 Jun 2009, 11:53

phylo_roadking wrote:...
So I am afraid THIS - "Didn't happen. Except for TIGER" - is not correct. During Fliegerkorps X's Sicilian deployment - the Royal Navy escorted TWO convoys of armour THROUGH the Central Mediterranean bound for the Eastern Med; TIGER and EXCESS...
Hmm, yes. I confess supremely sloppy reading on my part regarding Excess. It's correct that most of the merchantmen of Excess were destined for Greece when, after Malta, they joined up with convoys M.E.5½ (two fast merchantmen from Malta) simultaneously with the departure of slower merchantmen from Malta in convoy M.E. 6. Both these convoys left Malta on January 10, the same day Fliegerkorps X went into action. So arguably, it falls outside of the timeframe.

In relation to my original point - that the Central Mediterranean was sealed off to British shipping after Fliegerkorps X had initiated operations from Sicily - the pertinent part is that no through-convoys (bar Tiger) were attempted post-Excess. Note how the Northern Prince, which was delayed due to storm damage sustained on Jan 1st, was immediately re-routed round the Cape after the mauling which the Excess' escort had taken west of and at Malta.
Why do you think the Admiralty couldn't refuse Winston when it came to TIGER??? :wink: He had the precedent of a successful transit for EXCESS to use against their arguments.
The eastern part of Excess went smoothly enough because O'Connor had recently captured Cyrenaica from the Italians. By the time Tiger came through, Cyrenaica had been lost again, which actually made Tiger a much riskier proposal, and one which wasn't repeated.
As for the Illustrious - you are quite right, Jon, she WAS hit in Valetta...
...she was hit only TWICE in three hundred sorties over two weeks. On the 16th for example over a hundred aircraft were sent to attack her in Grand Harbour - and scored only a single hit...
That's rather a qualification, no? The Axis air forces weren't just aiming for the carrier; for example the Essex was also hit on the 16th, and the raids on January 18th were concentrated on the Hal Far and Luqa airfields, while the January 19 raid apparently damaged the Illustrious further.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: 1941 convoys in the Central Med

#19

Post by phylo_roadking » 10 Jun 2009, 21:12

Note how the Northern Prince, which was delayed due to storm damage sustained on Jan 1st, was immediately re-routed round the Cape after the mauling which the Excess' escort had taken west of and at Malta.
....or because it was delayed departing - and thus missed Force H for protection, which was merrily steaming through the Central and Eastern Med by the time she departed Gibraltar???
Both these convoys left Malta on January 10, the same day Fliegerkorps X went into action. So arguably, it falls outside of the timeframe.
ONLY the two Malta-departing elements can be argued away this way; the original three-transport convoy MS.6 that passed Malta and dropped off Exsex/Hero went straight through...and encountered Fliergerkorps X on the 10th and 11th resulting in the loss of Southampton and damage to Illustrious - but still made it through all the way with no loss to the transports.

Operation EXCESS was a multi-layered operation with convoys leaving various locations, timed to rendezvous with others down the line - but this doesn't effect the steaming straight through the Central Med of the original convoy MS.6 element heading for Athens.
That's rather a qualification, no?
No. It's one I made right at the start of this discussion...the high sortie rate required to do damage to RN ships - AND made certain other points about the RN's ability to stand off air attack. Remember them?

One of the points I made was their PROVEN ability to avoid fall of shot if they had sea room AND correctly trimmed; on the 11th the Illustrious was hit when steaming in a straight line into the wind to launch aircraft; one of the major hits she took was a 1000lb bomb on her elevator when she was hoisting armed fighters onto the flightdeck. The aircraft actually on the hoist was destroyed without trace, and the blast destroyed aircraft and did damage on the hangar deck.

Interestingly - if I can find my way back to it again - on the raid on the 16th that the Essex was damaged on...there were TWO massed attacks that day, and here's an eyewitness report that would possibly indicate she wasn't hit at all on that day...OR as some accounts have it - the ONLY bomb that ever HIT her in Valetta only scored a "glancing blow" on her quarterbridge with only minimal damage.

Fliergerkorps X did manage to damage her slightly twice - but only actually HIT here once...

Found it - from "Gentleman Cordite" by Lieutenant Commander Warwick of the Perth.
I was on the bridge next morning shortly after breakfast. The time was about 0900. The refitting and unloading continued. You could see the aircraft carrier's guns' crews cleaning their eight barrel pom poms. The sky was very clear. Far too clear.

The dockyard air raid sirens wailed and a red warning "Attack Imminent" was signalled. I pressed the action alarm signal and we went to full Action Stations. So did the carrier and the little submarine. I was smoking my new pipe. Breaking it in. The army and Maltese defences opened fire. The bursts were out to sea but just visible above the rooftops of the houses, behind the dockyard crane and chimney stacks. The barrage increased in ferocity. Hundreds of shell bursts were dotting the sky - tracer from the 40mm Bofors now criss-crossed the sky, the shells later exploding above 4,000 ft. That meant the enemy were coming in low.

The 'Illustrious' opposite suddenly opened fire with every gun she had - 4.5" and 40mm. Right through our wireless aerials. She with four higher decks had seen them. Our wireless aerials came down, shot away by the carrier.

Then we saw them. I counted four groups of five aircraft. 20 Stukas with a high fighter cover of M.E. 109s. They came weaving in over the rooftops kicking rudder bars right and left to put off our aim. Then we opened fire. The din was terrific. Illustrious' red tracer just clear of our masts.

I turned to see the little submarine in dock. Sluice gates open - water flooding around her for some protection. Submarine Captain and guns' crew all exposed waiting for the ship to be floating so they too could fire their one 4" gun. Their twin Lewis guns in action. The mad barrage increased, Illustrious fighting desperately to ward off these vicious dives. All ships were sitting duck targets.

Then the bombs rained down. The shorts in the dockyard. Overs in the water. Enormous crumps, crashes and vibrations. Water spouts in Dockyard Creek. Blast waves. Debris. More targets coming in. All the enemy painted with yellow noses - the "first eleven" Göring Squadron colours. God how they could fly. I saw one come down in flames and blow up on hitting the ground but they came on and on. Then the firing ceased and in the lull we took stock. The submarine dock was now afloat and ready to fire all guns.

From the 'Essex' astern smoke and dust filtered out of a hold. She had been hit. Our Captain sent our Navigator to investigate and report back. So far we were unhit. Our decks were covered with shrapnel and wireless aerials down. The 'Illustrious' had been near missed by at least three 1,000 pounder bombs. The floating crane alongside her was still afloat.

But a marvellous sight to see on the carrier's deck. A sailor in anti-flash hood and tin hat hosing down a pom-pom - it was nearly red hot - so received radical treatment not in any drill book.
Then the island defences opened up afresh and the second attack started.

Wave after wave of them as before. All ships guns cracking. The submarine's 4" gun now joined the chorus. She looked so naked and brave. All alone in a dock. The bombers jinked in the bursting hell around them and the bombs came screaming down. Completely mesmerised I watched one bomb released and with my mouth open saw it fall all the way. It hit the wharf abreast of our after magazine and there was a terrible explosion in the water.

We shook violently, a 6,000 tonne cruiser, as if in an earth tremor. The slack seemed to come off our wire shrouds and mast rigging and the mast vibrated. The ship took half a minute of this crazy shaking and again a lull. The Navigator very white reported back to the Captain. He had been caught on the upper deck of the 'Essex' for the second attack and hurled himself face downwards to find himself huddling a dead body.

The 'Essex' fire was under control and our men were returning. I asked the Commander for the 6" turrets crews to return to their guns. To hell with the port regulations for heavy gunfire. We might get sunk in harbour. The turrets crews closed up and for the third wave we gave the enemy the lot. 6" barrage, 4" barrage, pom-pom and machine gun. But only half our 6" guns would train around. The enormous explosion by our after magazine had jammed the after turrets for training. The rollers had jammed. They could not fire. Bombs again screamed down. More near misses on the aircraft carrier and then all quiet. Our heads ached, we were all deaf and shaken. Decks littered with shrapnel and debris. But we had not been hit.
To this, we can add...
The arrival of such an important ship brought a lot of civilian onlookers who crowded the harbour area. At a quarter past noon on the 16th January an announcement was made over loudspeakers to the civilians to make for air raid shelters on hearing the air raid sirens as a new defence strategy was to be used to protect the harbour & flying shrapnel from exploding shellls falling from the sky would make the area very dangerous. Many civilians at this time would stay above ground to watch the bombing.
At 13.55 the radar picked up a large contact - 'It was the largest that had ever been recorded in Malta till then'. The harbour guns lifted to their fixed positions - light AA, heavy AA, 4·5" guns, pom poms, machine guns & even heavy guns on the fort not used as they could not reach high levels were brought to bear against the lower flying dive bombers.
The bombers from Fligerkorps X were escorted by Messerschitt, Fiat & Macchi fighters. The RAF managed to send up 4 Hurricanes, 3 Fulmars & 2 Gladiators. These were instructed to stay out of the harbour area & pick off stragglers. The attack comprised of 2 seperate attacks - the first by Ju 88's (shallow dive bombers) & the second by Ju 87 (Stuka's). This force amounted to 70 bombers all concentrating on sinking Illustrious.
The harbour guns opened up to a deafening noise described as 'hell let loose'. The ships in harbour including Illustrious fired their guns also.
Despite the bravery of the German airmen only one bomb hit Illustrious this being on the quarterdeck & caused little damage.
Despite the RAF pilots being told not to enter the harbour area a Fulmar chased a Stuka right through the barrage. After the bomber released his bombs he swept off down the harbour so low to the water he had to climb to get over the 15' breakwater. The Fulmar eventually shot it down. This returned to Hal Far where the pilot remarked - 'Don't think much of Malta's bloody barrage'. The plane however was so badly damaged it didn't fly again apparently.
On the 19th a last raid was mounted on Illustrious. To meet them were 6 Hurricanes. 1 Fulmar & 1 Gladiator which shot down 11 aircraft. The AA guns shot down a further 8. This was estimated to be about a quarter of the attacking force. During this raid the ship received no direct hits but near misses exploding on the sea bed caused underwater damage.
A further attack was planned in Sicily but on the night of the 23rd Illustrious sailed out of the harbour bound for the safety of Alexandria. She was able to make 20 knots & moved so fast she missed her escort cruiser squadron which were heavily bombed.
http://www.killifish.f9.co.uk/Malta%20W ... trious.htm

In other words - just sprung plates. And notice the comment about her performance under steam just four days later...
Last edited by phylo_roadking on 10 Jun 2009, 23:02, edited 2 times in total.

Jon G.
Member
Posts: 6647
Joined: 17 Feb 2004, 02:12
Location: Europe

Re: 1941 convoys in the Central Med

#20

Post by Jon G. » 10 Jun 2009, 22:43

phylo_roadking wrote:
Note how the Northern Prince, which was delayed due to storm damage sustained on Jan 1st, was immediately re-routed round the Cape after the mauling which the Excess' escort had taken west of and at Malta.
....or because it was delayed departing - and thus missed Force H for protection, which was merrily steaming through the Central and Eastern Med by the time she departed Gibraltar???
That's not the point Playfair was making. And at any rate, Force H wasn't merrily steaming through the Central and Eastern Med. Force H parted company with the Excess convoy on the evening of the 8th, off Bizerte, and steamed back to Gibraltar.
...
That's rather a qualification, no?
No. It's one I made right at the start of this discussion...the high sortie rate required to do damage to RN ships...


Well, shouldn't you establish the sortie rate first? At least RA aircraft were under orders only to attack warships and ignore merchantmen, an order which was soon revised, but clearly, with raids also made on Malta's airfields and other ships at Valetta while the Illustrious was docked there.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: 1941 convoys in the Central Med

#21

Post by phylo_roadking » 10 Jun 2009, 23:08

Not to mention the high LOSS rate that the LW experienced on those three days' raids...
On the 16th - 5 aircraft to fighters, 5 to AA
On the 18th - 7 to fighters, 4 to AA
On the 19th - 11 to fighters, 8 to AA

...I make that FORTY Axis aircraft lost for some spring plates and one glancing blow with minimal damage.

Jon G.
Member
Posts: 6647
Joined: 17 Feb 2004, 02:12
Location: Europe

Re: 1941 convoys in the Central Med

#22

Post by Jon G. » 10 Jun 2009, 23:40

phylo_roadking wrote:Not to mention the high LOSS rate that the LW experienced on those three days' raids...
On the 16th - 5 aircraft to fighters, 5 to AA
On the 18th - 7 to fighters, 4 to AA
On the 19th - 11 to fighters, 8 to AA

...I make that FORTY Axis aircraft lost for some spring plates and one glancing blow with minimal damage.
Those numbers can certainly be disputed. Concentrating on the 18th only, RAF Hurricanes and FAA Fulmars indeed claimed seven Ju 87s shot down, one probably and two damaged, while the AA guns claimed a further three Stukas shot down.

However, only two losses were registered by the Luftwaffe for that day -- a Ju 87 of I./St. G 1 over Luqa, and a Ju 88 of 7./LG1 landing in the sea after raiding Hal Far. Another Ju 87 returned with a dead gunner. Escorting aircraft from the RA lost one MC200 - no Bf 109s over Malta at this particular time. See Shores & Cull: Malta: the Hurricane Years, pp 122-123.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: 1941 convoys in the Central Med

#23

Post by phylo_roadking » 10 Jun 2009, 23:42

Have you any detail for the 16th and 19th? Hooton confirms eights Fliegerkorps X aircraft lost in the attacks on the Illustrious alone across the three days of bombing. He doesn't mention or deal with the 18th January interdiction raids on the airfields.

Jon G.
Member
Posts: 6647
Joined: 17 Feb 2004, 02:12
Location: Europe

Re: 1941 convoys in the Central Med

#24

Post by Jon G. » 11 Jun 2009, 00:09

Where did you get the forty aircraft lost figure from? Don't you think it is odd that they clash with Hooton's number? Specifically, with Hooton's number at your fingertips, who did you choose to post different figures?

Shores list only one LW loss over Malta on the 16th - a Ju 88 of LG 1. Losses for the 19th, according to Shores, were three Ju 87s, two Ju 88s, and in addition the Italians lost a CR 42 which may in fact have been shot down by a Bf 110.

...the total indeed neatly comes out as eight Luftwaffe aircraft lost in combat over Malta when we add the two aircraft shot down on the 18th, just as Hooton says. Which isn't so strange, for he sources this figure to Shores.

Shores' book isn't necessarily the bible, but he has done the bother and checked both RAF/FAA claims and held them against recorded LW and RA losses.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: 1941 convoys in the Central Med

#25

Post by phylo_roadking » 11 Jun 2009, 00:35

Where did you get the forty aircraft lost figure from?


You'll note the sources for the article I cited are Siege Malta 1940 - 1943., Ernli Bradford and Malta Convoys, David A. Thomas. From what I can remember of the latter, the numbers used in the article come from there.
Don't you think it is odd that they clash with Hooton's number?
Not odd; understandable if they are conflations of CLAIMS...and given that Hooton only mentions losses attacking the Illustrious and doesn't make clear if the aircraft lost are bombers or fighter escort or both. Given the syntax of his sentence - regarding bombing sorties on the Illustrious only - I was inclined to bombers only.

AND of course Hooton has no interest in ITALIAN losses...and you'll note I said
Axis aircraft lost
Specifically, with Hooton's number at your fingertips, who did you choose to post different figures?
See above. Given Hooton's highly restricted area of interest, and lack of a breakdown, his figure was only safe to use for a limited a set of parameters.

I haven't had a chance to see Shore&Cull&Malizia yet, but could give you a more precise reference from Thomas than that online article if my ex-RN uncle wouldn't mind returning it after five years...despite me holding HIS author-signed copy of "During the War and Other Encounters" hostage...

Jon G.
Member
Posts: 6647
Joined: 17 Feb 2004, 02:12
Location: Europe

Re: 1941 convoys in the Central Med

#26

Post by Jon G. » 11 Jun 2009, 00:50

phylo_roadking wrote:AND of course Hooton has no interest in ITALIAN losses...and you'll note I said
Axis aircraft lost
Yep. Right below where you wrote
...Not to mention the high LOSS rate that the LW experienced on those three days' raids...
Of course, shouldn't you try and establish the number of sorties flown by the Luftwaffe on those three dates before you pass judgement on whether their losses were high, low, average or whatever?

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: 1941 convoys in the Central Med

#27

Post by phylo_roadking » 11 Jun 2009, 01:00

One quick email later...

Thomas cites "THE AIR BATTLE FOR MALTA The Official Account of the RAF in Malta, June 1940 to November 1944", HMSO 1944.
Of course, shouldn't you try and establish the number of sorties flown by the Luftwaffe on those three dates before you pass judgement on whether their losses were high, low, average or whatever?
...and shouldn't you perhaps read back to 08 Jun 2009 23:47 in the original thread where I GAVE that figure previously, from Hooton? 200. As in -
"Illustrious crept into Valetta harbour for emergency repairs and, despite some 200 strike sorties by Geisler with the loss of eight aircraft, she escaped to Aleaxandria..."
So - two hundred sorties - and one hit.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: 1941 convoys in the Central Med

#28

Post by phylo_roadking » 11 Jun 2009, 02:47

As an aside...
...on January 10, the same day Fliegerkorps X went into action...
Not necessarily; nine Ju87s escorted by CR.42 attacked shipping in Marsa Scirocco, the bay at the south-eastern end of the island of Malta, on the 9th of January, the day before :wink: That was Geisler's debut.

As for not going into action against any element of EXCESS before that - the convoy was only spotted on the 9th.

Jon G.
Member
Posts: 6647
Joined: 17 Feb 2004, 02:12
Location: Europe

Re: 1941 convoys in the Central Med

#29

Post by Jon G. » 11 Jun 2009, 10:24

phylo_roadking wrote:
"Illustrious crept into Valetta harbour for emergency repairs and, despite some 200 strike sorties by Geisler with the loss of eight aircraft, she escaped to Aleaxandria..."
So - two hundred sorties - and one hit.
One hit on the Illustrious, yes. Raids on Hal Far and Luqa which destroyed aircraft on the ground, and also the unexploded bomb hitting the Essex - apparently the bomb went right down the ship's funnel! - are all in addition to that.

With Hooton's (via Shores) figures for LW losses over Malta on the three dates we're discussing here, I make that out at 4%. Is that, in your opinion, high Luftwaffe losses?
...on January 10, the same day Fliegerkorps X went into action...
Not necessarily; nine Ju87s escorted by CR.42 attacked shipping in Marsa Scirocco, the bay at the south-eastern end of the island of Malta, on the 9th of January, the day before :wink: That was Geisler's debut.
Nice try, but no cigar. Those Stukas were Italian from the Ju 87-equipped 96 Gruppo.

User avatar
bf109 emil
Member
Posts: 3627
Joined: 25 Mar 2008, 22:20
Location: Youngstown Alberta Canada

Re: 1941 convoys in the Central Med

#30

Post by bf109 emil » 11 Jun 2009, 10:49

Jon G wrote'
With Hooton's (via Shores) figures for LW losses over Malta on the three dates we're discussing here, I make that out at 4%. Is that, in your opinion, high Luftwaffe losses?
this number or percent is similar to Luftwaffe losses in august 13 1940 with 1485 sorties and a loss of 39 or 3.8%...this seems about the norm or lower then typical bomber command raids by the RAF into continental Europe in the later night conflicts of the war...To me it doesn't seem high but unsure if and how Axis Command viewed this and deemed whether it being high or acceptable? To me this would determine in the eyes of the Luftwaffe/RA if said losses where deemed justifiable or excessive. Maybe someone might have info as i am failing or lack this as to whether this mission(s) in the Axis airforce was scene as high/low/acceptable/excessive. I am sure each of us has a differ of view/opinion as whether we would find this either high or low...but was it the view of the Axis that i am interested in. If anyone has a source or read how this was scene please list/state/comment.

TY
Jim

Post Reply

Return to “WW2 in Africa & the Mediterranean”