Why "Minensuchboot 1935" called a Channel Destroye

Discussions on all (non-biographical) aspects of the Kriegsmarine except those dealing with the U-Boat forces.
Paul Lakowski
Member
Posts: 1441
Joined: 30 Apr 2003 05:16
Location: Canada

Why "Minensuchboot 1935" called a Channel Destroye

Post by Paul Lakowski » 16 Nov 2005 02:02

Why was the "Minensuchboot 1935" called a 'Channel Destroyer'?

http://www.german-navy.de/kriegsmarine/ ... /tech.html

I've read references to this as the "Channel Destroyer" what is mean't by this? It has only 4" guns and the Germans didn't even have AP ammo for their warships. The 4"gun was probably at best equal to a basic 88mm AP ammo ,while RN destroyer guns were similar to German 5" guns in penetration. Worse the Minensuchboot 1935 has only 2 x 4"guns while most RN destroyers had 4-8 guns. Also RN destroyers could do > 30Knts while the best Minensuchboot 1935 can do is 18knts.

Any one know where that notion comes from?

User avatar
Mark McShane
Member
Posts: 337
Joined: 10 Sep 2003 03:00
Location: United Kingdom

Post by Mark McShane » 16 Nov 2005 02:45

I'm only guessing here, but the name may have derived from the fact the these vessels were primarily invovled in mining operations around channel ports. many of the KM destroyers were involved in carryiing out mine laying operations during the war.

Any more enlightened responses are welcomed.

Cheers,

Mark

OHara
Member
Posts: 102
Joined: 27 Nov 2004 04:35
Location: San Diego

Post by OHara » 20 Nov 2005 18:30

I'll dip my toes into this one.
They were durable and expendable warships and filled many the destroyer's functions (particularly the defensive functions) in the English Channel and Baltic. They escorted convoys, fought in a large number of surface engagements, even transported troops for commando operations. I think of the name "Channel Destroyer" as a tribute to one of the more versatile and capable classes of warships in the German navy.

Vince

Paul Lakowski
Member
Posts: 1441
Joined: 30 Apr 2003 05:16
Location: Canada

Post by Paul Lakowski » 20 Nov 2005 20:23

Are their any instances where these MB-35/40 where every used to defend convoys from enemy warship attacks? How did they do? It seems like most were destroyed from air attacks. If you look at allied destroyer attacks, Schnell boots had a much better record against DD than MB-35/40...even Torpedoboots did better.

OHara
Member
Posts: 102
Joined: 27 Nov 2004 04:35
Location: San Diego

Post by OHara » 22 Nov 2005 04:12

The Germans ran coastal convoys along all the occupied coasts. M Class minesweepers routinely preformed escort duties and they fought surface actions against destroyer sized (and larger) units as follows:

6 July 41 Baltic against the Russians
28 April 43 Breton coast against the British
10 July 43 Breton coast against the British
5 Feb 44 Breton coast against the British
14 Jun 44 English Channel against the British and Poles
6 Aug 44 Biscay Coast against the British
11 Aug 44 English Channel against the USN
13 Aug 44 English Channel against the British and USN
15 Aug 44 Biscay Coast against the British and Canadians
19 Aug 44 English Channel against the British and ? (more information desired)
12 Nov 44 Norway Coast against British and Canadians
21 Nov 44 Baltic against the Russians
11 Jan 45 Norwary Coast against the British
8 Mar 45 English Channel against the USN (against a 500 ton subchaser, not exactly a destroyer, but worth recording.)

In addition there many more actions involving coastal units (MTBs, MGBs, etc.) The M classes were never designed to fight fleet destroyers, but in fact they did, and on occasion with success.

Vince

Paul Lakowski
Member
Posts: 1441
Joined: 30 Apr 2003 05:16
Location: Canada

Post by Paul Lakowski » 23 Nov 2005 16:58

OHara, good list , do you have any more details on those incidents?

panzerkrieg
Member
Posts: 368
Joined: 11 Dec 2004 06:00
Location: USA

Post by panzerkrieg » 23 Nov 2005 17:10

check out "German Fleet at War" by Vincent OHara for more details
it covers 69 engagements and it is by far the best book on this subject i have ever seen
REVIEWS cut and paste from amazon
Book Description
The realities of naval combat as well as the facts are presented in this authoritative study. Using both a tabular and narrative format, it tells the story of all sixty-nine surface naval actions fought by major warships of the German navy against major warships of the British, French, American, Polish, Soviet, Norwegian, and Greek navies. While focusing on the operational details of these actions, the author also paints a broad overview of the naval war to give each battle context. Vincent O’Hara is the first to provide so much information in a single volume. Most books emphasize the famous actions—like those involving Bismarck and Graf Spee—at the expense of lesser known engagements, and in doing so distort the historical record.
This unusual mix of macro and micro reveals the big picture and helps illustrate how designs, doctrine, and leadership withstood the stress of combat. It also shows that the German navy’s war was far more that a U-boat war, that its surface fleet was much more than a few star-crossed battleships, and that the fleet was more successful in carrying out the tasks allocated to it than is generally acknowledged. Everyone interested in naval history and how ships and men withstand the ultimate test of battle will welcome this priceless resource that is free from the nationalistic bias that sometimes taints works like this. 368 pages. 23 photos. 9 line drawings. Appendices. Notes. Bibliography. Index.

About the author
Vincent P. O’Hara is a business consultant and researcher living in San Diego, California. His work has appeared in Warship and World War II, among other magazines.

Andreas
Member
Posts: 6938
Joined: 10 Nov 2002 14:12
Location: Europe

Post by Andreas » 23 Nov 2005 17:17

Paul Lakowski wrote:OHara, good list , do you have any more details on those incidents?
I guess you have to buy his book for all the gory details, Paul. ;)

All the best

Andreas

User avatar
Mark McShane
Member
Posts: 337
Joined: 10 Sep 2003 03:00
Location: United Kingdom

Post by Mark McShane » 23 Nov 2005 21:14

Andreas wrote:
Paul Lakowski wrote:OHara, good list , do you have any more details on those incidents?
I guess you have to buy his book for all the gory details, Paul. ;)

All the best

Andreas
Andreas,

How are you?

I have Mr. O Hara's book on order and I'm looking forward to it.

Cheers,

Mark

Paul Lakowski
Member
Posts: 1441
Joined: 30 Apr 2003 05:16
Location: Canada

Post by Paul Lakowski » 24 Nov 2005 06:38

Where can I order this fine specimen "German Fleet at War" by Vincent OHara ? How much it costs?

User avatar
Mark McShane
Member
Posts: 337
Joined: 10 Sep 2003 03:00
Location: United Kingdom

Post by Mark McShane » 24 Nov 2005 12:57

Paul Lakowski wrote:Where can I order this fine specimen "German Fleet at War" by Vincent OHara ? How much it costs?

Paul,

I ordered my copy from Amazon.


Cheers,

Mark

Andreas
Member
Posts: 6938
Joined: 10 Nov 2002 14:12
Location: Europe

Post by Andreas » 24 Nov 2005 15:34

Hi Mark

I am well, thank you. I will respond to your PM shortly.

It would be welcome if you purchased the book following this link:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/ ... 37-0946408

Since that means that Amazon will reward Marcus for the sale. It is a no-cost way of contributing to the running of the forum for members.

All the best

Andreas

Paul Lakowski
Member
Posts: 1441
Joined: 30 Apr 2003 05:16
Location: Canada

Post by Paul Lakowski » 25 Nov 2005 02:55

Ok I just ordered the book through the link provided.

Paul Lakowski
Member
Posts: 1441
Joined: 30 Apr 2003 05:16
Location: Canada

Post by Paul Lakowski » 09 Dec 2005 08:32

OK I got Vinces book "The German Fleet At WAR, 1939-1945". Its definately an impressive work and worthy of a lot of study. Excellent details.

How did you determine if the night had 51% moon?

One thing that puzzles me is the gunfire rating of the ships. I realise its only a point of reference , but I was searching from details on NAVWAR site and the figures don't appear to match up for the germans but do appear to match up for the RN weapons I checked. Why where the german figures consistantly underrated?


http://www.navweaps.com/

OHara
Member
Posts: 102
Joined: 27 Nov 2004 04:35
Location: San Diego

Post by OHara » 09 Dec 2005 18:21

Paul,

The moon question is easy. I used moon phase software. You input date, time, latitude and longitude and it returns a value indicating how much of the moon is visible as a percentage of full. Pretty neat.

The gunnery question is harder. I went back and forth whether to include this because trying to reduce such a complicated subject as weapon effectiveness to a simple mathematical formula hides as much as it reveals. Page 268 tells what I considered (weight of shell, rate-of-fire and pound-per-minute) and what I didn't consider (a long list like fire control, morale, training, doctrine, conditions, weather, etc. etc.) But the simple answer to your question is that the German destroyer weapons had a lower EFFECTIVE rate-of-fire compared to their British counterparts. I know NAVWAR gives the 127-mm SK C34 weapon a rate-of-fire of 15-18 rounds per minute, but in combat a sustained rate-of-fire of six to eight rounds per minute was more realistic. I used ten. My forthcoming book deals with the surface naval battles of the USN and IJN. I'm open to suggestions on how to approach the subject of making comparisions between weapon systems that don't get too techinical. These days I've become more interested in factors like reliability of fuzes, quality of ordanance.

Vince

Return to “Kriegsmarine surface ships and Kriegsmarine in general”