Michael Jung and Wikipedia on Kampfschwimmer

Discussions on all (non-biographical) aspects of the Kriegsmarine except those dealing with the U-Boat forces.
JKernwerk
Member
Posts: 1135
Joined: 23 Dec 2010 17:43

Michael Jung and Wikipedia on Kampfschwimmer

Post by JKernwerk » 08 Dec 2019 12:36

On Wikipedia this is being recalled as a deed of Kampfschwimmer:
"1944, night of September 28–29: By now the Allies had taken intact a road bridge at Nijmegen and a railway bridge at Moerdijk, and had immediately installed a strong anti-aircraft defence there. Three groups of four German frogmen set off from 10 km upstream from the bridges. They were to place explosives under the bridges and then to continue with the river current 24 km further to return to their lines. The railway bridge was blown up. The road bridge was only slightly damaged because the mine had been badly placed. Of the 12 men, three were killed, seven were captured, and two returned to their lines.[8]"

This information come according to Wikipedia from a book written by Michael Jung.
Could this be true?
The bridges at Moerdijk were demolished after the retreit of the German army from Brabant and not captured intact.
Maybe the bridges were not demolished well enough, but they were not captured intact and no attack was possible during the war.
The Hollands Diep was to stay the frontline for the rest of the war.

Has anyone read the book German Combat Divers in World War Two by Michael Jung?
How well is it or is it just plain bad.
Did the writer of the Wikipedia page misread the book or is it really in Jung's book?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kommando_ ... fte_Marine
Greetings Jack

User avatar
Natter
Member
Posts: 1215
Joined: 19 Feb 2007 21:43
Location: Bergen, Norway

Re: Michael Jung and Wikipedia on Kampfschwimmer

Post by Natter » 08 Dec 2019 13:06

The article seems to be an accurate abstract from the chapter in question of the english version of Jungs book.
In my opinion the book is very good. Jung has also used footnotes throughout, referring to his sources (including arcive-materials), so it appears to be well researched.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

JKernwerk
Member
Posts: 1135
Joined: 23 Dec 2010 17:43

Re: Michael Jung and Wikipedia on Kampfschwimmer

Post by JKernwerk » 08 Dec 2019 14:50

But he is defenedly wrong that the Allies caprured the bridges intact.
I tried to search for him on Facebook so i could ask him where he got the information, but i was not able to find the right Micheal Jung.
But it is good to know the book is well researched, there is a line that the Kampfschwimmer also demolished the Vasouy Battery (South of Honfleur (F), so I can go on with the idea he is right, we always wondered why one of the bunkers was blown up, could be it was done by them.
Sometimes one foult in a book makes you wonder about the other information in it.
JK

User avatar
Natter
Member
Posts: 1215
Joined: 19 Feb 2007 21:43
Location: Bergen, Norway

Re: Michael Jung and Wikipedia on Kampfschwimmer

Post by Natter » 08 Dec 2019 16:04

JKernwerk wrote:
08 Dec 2019 14:50
But he is defenedly wrong that the Allies caprured the bridges intact.
I don't know about that - it only say the germans failed to demolish the bridges.
I noticed that the english language seems a bit "off" in this book, so perhaps there's been an error during translation? Unfortunately, my german is rubbish so I'm not able to verify any alternations from the original german text.

According to the book, the railway bridge was successfully blown up by one of the four-man group of kampfschwimmers, while the two other groups failed to blow up the railroad bridge. It would seem that the germans intended to destroy both bridges, indicating that they - at least - might not have been sure that the state of the railwaybridge wasn't beside the scope of being repaired?

I would probably also consider checking out Jungs second book on the topic (published in 2006), where the operation is covered in more detail (I can't tell by the content due to the langauge barrier, but the chapter has about twice as many pages and he has included even more references from US, british and german archives).
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Natter
Member
Posts: 1215
Joined: 19 Feb 2007 21:43
Location: Bergen, Norway

Re: Michael Jung and Wikipedia on Kampfschwimmer

Post by Natter » 08 Dec 2019 16:15

JKernwerk wrote:
08 Dec 2019 14:50
there is a line that the Kampfschwimmer also demolished the Vasouy Battery (South of Honfleur (F)
There's a section covering this attack, but it's a bit confusing: Initially, Jung says the operation was carried out by MEK 60, but later on specify seven kampfschwimmers (presumably they were part of the MEK 60?).

User avatar
bettika
Member
Posts: 70
Joined: 20 Oct 2015 18:24
Location: Flensburg, Germany

Re: Michael Jung and Wikipedia on Kampfschwimmer

Post by bettika » 08 Dec 2019 17:10

JKernwerk wrote:
08 Dec 2019 14:50

I tried to search for him on Facebook so i could ask him where he got the information, but i was not able to find the right Micheal Jung.
Try this contact
https://www.hans-hass.org/kontakt-impre ... tenschutz/

Brgds
Beate

User avatar
bettika
Member
Posts: 70
Joined: 20 Oct 2015 18:24
Location: Flensburg, Germany

Re: Michael Jung and Wikipedia on Kampfschwimmer

Post by bettika » 09 Dec 2019 14:01

JKernwerk wrote:
08 Dec 2019 12:36
On Wikipedia this is being recalled as a deed of Kampfschwimmer:
"1944, night of September 28–29: By now the Allies had taken intact a road bridge at Nijmegen and a railway bridge at Moerdijk, and had immediately installed a strong anti-aircraft defence there. Three groups of four German frogmen set off from 10 km upstream from the bridges. They were to place explosives under the bridges and then to continue with the river current 24 km further to return to their lines. The railway bridge was blown up. The road bridge was only slightly damaged because the mine had been badly placed. Of the 12 men, three were killed, seven were captured, and two returned to their lines.[8]"

This information come according to Wikipedia from a book written by Michael Jung.
Could this be true?
Hi Jack,
the mistake is the bridge.
The railway bridge, that was destroyed from the Kampfschwimmer was the Nijmegen railway bridge
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nijmegen_railway_bridge

I think the railway bridge at Moerdij is quite another bridge https://www.tracesofwar.com/sights/4756 ... erdijk.htm
Brgds
Beate

Return to “Kriegsmarine surface ships and Kriegsmarine in general”