Victories and losses of Soviet submarines during WWII

Discussions on all aspects of the USSR, from the Russian Civil War till the end of the Great Patriotic War and the war against Japan. Hosted by Art.
Rodan Lewarx
Member
Posts: 261
Joined: 01 Feb 2006 10:56
Location: Moscow, Russia

Post by Rodan Lewarx » 14 Mar 2007 15:48

Do the Soviet sources really date the ShCh -320 lost in 1941?
It's my mistake, submarine was lost in october 1942. Russian sources said about last contact with submarine at 01.10.42. The exact date ShCh-320 was lost is not known.

Regards

User avatar
BIGpanzer
Member
Posts: 2812
Joined: 12 Dec 2004 22:51
Location: Central Europe

Post by BIGpanzer » 14 Mar 2007 19:44

Juha wrote:
Do the Soviet sources really date the ShCh -320 lost in 1941?
If you mean my literature sources [for Rodan I don't know] - they are as much anti-Soviet as you can imagine I would say :lol: [IIRC I've mentioned thir date as 2005 and USSR collapsed in 1991, have you heard about this fact :? ] :lol: "Anti-Soviet" concerning the effectiveness of Soviet submarines.....The author call Soviet submarines as "Reds" with strong negative meaning quite often. Obviously he didn't like Soviet times a lot :) [but the losses analyzed and described in the most possible correct way, nevertheless, without any overestimations in advantage to Germans and other Axis nations]. Submarine losses are the most well documented subject in my opinion.
As for date - of course, October 1942 everywhere in original texts. I misprinted one time and then forgot about it :oops: . I corrected this in all my posts above, thanks for note as I didn't notice this at first.
As for the best general online source - see here: http://sovnavy-ww2.by.ru/submarines/typ_sch.htm#sch65
[ShCh-320 sank transport 05.07.1942, another transport could be sank 26.9.1941 [not confirmed]. ShCh-320 was lost 03.-07.1942 probably because of mine explosion to the north-west from Is. Vaindlo. 23.10.1942 it was awarded with Red Banner Order].
As I've already mentioned quite many sources from the Soviet time period mention that Finnish submarine "Iku-Turso" sank either ShCh-320 or ShCh-308 during battery charging 27.10.1942 indeed.
Also the good online source about all Soviet submarines of WWII [but I found several minor mistakes about several other submarines to say honestly] - about ShCh-320:
http://town.ural.ru/ship/ship/h320.php3
Babel Fish translation:
On the sums of raid victories of "ShCh-320" there was sinking the three transports of enemy (two of 6.000 brt and one of 8.000 brt - [one not confirmed]). The whole crew of submarine was awarded by orders and medals. Commander "ShCh-320" I.M.Vishnevskiy is awarded with the Order of Lenin. On 23 October, 1942, by the Decree of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR submarine "ShCh-320" was awarded with the Order of the Red Banner. About the fact that their ship became Red banner neither commander nor crew of submarine so they did not learn. On 1 October, 1942, "ShCh-320" it left to the position into the region to the West from Island Bornholm. [position number 1]. During the raid "ShCh-320" didn't communicate with radio and its further fate was unknown. Supposedly, submarine perished 3-10 October of 1942 on the mine. Some sources indicate that "ShCh-320" it blew up on the floating mine in the region of battery charging to northwest from Vaindlo island on 3 October, 1942. It is possible that submarine heated the German antisubmarine warfare ships in the evening on 3 October on Gogland island (left simultaneously with "ShCh-320" submarine "ShCh-303" it heard in this direction the explosions of depth charges).. It is sometimes indicated that the submarine became the victim of the torpedo of Finnish submarine "Iku-Turso" in Ute region on 27 October, 1942, that it does not correspond to reality. To "ShCh-320" perished 37 people.
What Finns wrote [the most detailed info I could find in Finnish sources]:
It was dark and visiblity poor due to drizzle. At 19.40 Iku-Turso turned east to enter the seaway, when suddenly a large enemy submarine was seen closing fast only 100 m away. The enemy boat passed Iku-Turso at 30 m distance and Iku-Turso opened fire with 20 mm Madsen gun. About 50 shots were fired. Some hits were seen in enemy tower, but it disappeared into darkness and drizzle. Iku-Turso got again hydrophone contact and followed it easily. Rain had gone and in moonlight visibility was 4-5 miles. At 23.51 a submarine tower was seen in direction given by hydrophone. The enemy boat surfaced and sailed to east with high speed. At 23.58 Iku-Turso shot two torpedoes against the enemy submarine and the victim, Shtsh 320, sank 00.01 at 20 miles west from Marhällan. The distance had again been estimated too short (this time it was actually 4 200 meters instead the estimated 2 000 meters) and five gunshots were fired before one torpedo hit
The detailed history of ShCh-320 [use Babel Fish, sources from 1990 to 2002]
http://www.deepstorm.ru/DeepStorm.files ... Sh-320.htm


The very detailed and interesting report of petty officer/starshina B. Galkin from ShCh-303 [who changed sides and ran to German submarine], he mentioned that "ShCh-320" just lost [most probably, on mine]. But the report itself is very detailed and interesting -
http://submarina.ru/history/b79.shtml It is mentioned that Russian historian K. Strelbitsky [also translator from German], French historian Ñlàduàå Íuàn and Finnish historian Karl Geust analyzed this report and helped in presentation of this info.

Rodan wrote:
As for ShCh-320. The last contact with submarine was at night 01.10.41 so it can't be sunk 27.09.41.

Juha wrote 27.10.1942 and this is common date for old Soviet sources [and for Finnish]
If to analyze the info I know [the best way for discussions].
1. Well, the sounds of explosions which were heard in submarine "ShCh-303" 03.10.1942 in the same region where "ShCh-320" should be, are the additional but not the main proofs of loss of "ShCh-320", of course. German warships could drop depth charges just in case, or some sea mine exploded for some reason. So this is not the good proof, but we take this fact into consideration as possible proof in addition to other facts only.
2. The fact that there were no radio communications with submarine "ShCh-320" till 01.10.1942 [and several attempts nefore 10.10.1942 to communicate with it by radio failed] - also just additional proof that the submarine was lost. May be its radio equipment was damaged so strongly [by depth charges attack?] that crew couldn't repair it. Well, I think this also as not the main but additional proof.
3. But Finns and Soviets [based, probably, on Finnish claims] mentioned that "Iko-Tursu" torpedoed ShCh-320 27.10.1942. So on 27th day [or 28th as some sources mention that the raid started 30.09] of navigation - submarines of "ShCh"-type [X series] had independence in food supplies and fuel only for 20 days usually [see specifications in every book about submarines]! This is the significant proof here in my opinion!

Juha wrote:
Regards, Þõà

Who is this, Þõà? Red Finn among us :lol:
Interesting, I never thought that your name is written on Russian this way. But seems to be very correct :wink: Or Éóõà :) This is question to Rodan as native speaker.

Laurence wrote:
Could someone tell me what type and capabilities did the Red Banner Fleet have on the Pacific coast in regards to submarines in the 1930-1945 era?

I will try to help you later but I have no many info about this subject.


PS. Preserved Soviet WWII-period submarines at the moment [in addition to Juha's links thanks to him]:
1. D-2 "Narodovolets" [Baltic Navy] is a war memorial and branch of Russian Central naval museum in St. Petersburg/Leningrad [AFAIK with original equipment inside, "participated" in several Soviet/Russian war movies about submariners and even in spacemen trainings] -
http://www.ckb-rubin.ru/rus/history/pre ... mg/03a.jpg
2. Red banner medium submarine S-51 [Pacific Navy, later North Navy] is a war memorial in Gremiha [Murmansk region]
3. Red banner Guard medium submarine S-56 [Pacific Navy, later North Navy] is a war memorial and branch of Pacific Navy museum in Vladivostok
http://www.fegi.ru/primorye/GEOGR/flot_1.jpg
4. Red banner large cruiser submarine K-21 [Baltic Navy, later North Navy] is a war memorial and museum in Severomorsk [Murmansk region]
http://photo.murman.ru/www/vcards.nsf/i ... 000113.jpg
5. Red banner mine-layer "Lembit" [ex-Estonian, Baltic Navy] is a museum in Pirita [Estonia]
http://www.geocities.com/glupscherle/lembit-in-1996.jpg

Regards, BP
Commander of ShCh-320 I.M. Vishnevsky knew the full truth for sure... - http://militera.lib.ru/memo/russian/egorov/17.jpg

PS2. AFAIK several Swedish and Russian expeditions were made and are planning to made in order to find the wrecks of sank submarines of all types/nations in the Baltic Sea. Once even our scientific ship found something very similar to submarine with echo-ranging system [200 or 300 m depth, I don't remember exactly] in Baltic, but using deep-sea vehicle is an expensive procedure regulated also by international laws, so we rejected this......
Last edited by BIGpanzer on 14 Mar 2007 20:56, edited 17 times in total.

Laurence Strong
Financial supporter
Posts: 1221
Joined: 16 Jan 2005 06:01
Location: Alberta, Canada

Post by Laurence Strong » 14 Mar 2007 20:01

Thanks BP I appreciate it. looking forward to your answer. :)

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11492
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Post by Juha Tompuri » 14 Mar 2007 21:25

BIGpanzer wrote:submarines of "ShCh"-type [X series] had independence in food supplies and fuel only for 20 days usually [see specifications in every book about submarines]! This is the significant proof here in my opinion![/color]
Here a journey of ShCh-303 May-June 1943 from Stalinin Kiusa - Himmlerin Täi (tease of Stalin - lice of Himmler) by Ohto Manninen
Syvyys = depth
Päivä = day
Kulku = run
Pohjasa = at bottom of the sea
Ankkurissa = anchored
Tuuletus = ventilating
Lataus = charching batteries
Karkuri = deserter (Galkin, JT)

Regards, Juha
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
BIGpanzer
Member
Posts: 2812
Joined: 12 Dec 2004 22:51
Location: Central Europe

Post by BIGpanzer » 15 Mar 2007 03:32

Hi, Juha!
Yes, thanks for the figure, very informative. I know that some "ShCh" submarines performed 30 and even 40 days raid in Baltic. That is why I wrote 20 days as usual [not maximal] independence. Nevertheless, the majority of submarines were equipped with fuel and supply for about 18-20 days of navigation. I still strongly believe to mine explosion variant of ShCh-320 loss :| .

Just for the info - as I've mentioned several old sources mention that "Iku-Turso" could torpedoed ShCh-308, which was lost in 20th October, 1942. That was disproved in such way: Soviet submarine patroled area not very close to the area of Finnish submarine, also Soviet captain received radio message to return back several days before 27.10.1942. [IIRC 20.10.]

Detailed career of Shch-320 [one of the best crew on Baltic in 1942, by the way; but once brought HQ recommendation and performed surface navigation to Lavensari in June 1942, was discovered and bombed; quite heavily damaged but performed the navigation]. Discussions about claimed victories, attacks of enemy anti-submarine vessels during raids and loss of submarine in October 1942 - http://town.ural.ru/ship/ship/h320.php3 [on Russian, Babel Fish you need]
Laurence Strong wrote:
Could someone tell me what type and capabilities did the Red Banner Fleet have on the Pacific coast in regards to submarines in the 1930-1945 era?
Pacific Fleet was awarded with Red Banner order only in 1965. It was called as Sea Forces of Far East [MSDV] till 11.01.1935, and then as Pacific Fleet [TOF].
USSR established diplomatic relations with Japan in 1925 and obliged not to use submarines in Pacific. So when Soviet submarine fleet was established in Far East in 1932, that was done in great secret [small submarines were transported by railroad in one piece, medium submarines were transported by railroad in parts as "agricultural technique"; they assembled in the most far part of Vladivostok harbor; it was strictly prohibited for crewmembers to use any submarine insignia; some submarines were masked as small civil steamers even]. Soviet submarines patrolled waters unofficially, but Japanese knew about them and their destroyers even tried to torpedoed Soviet submarines two times [unsuccessfully]. In 1935 the period of peaceful treaty [signed after Russian-Japanese war in 1905] was expired, and Soviet submarines became official.
Before WWII Japan was considered as the enemy No. 1 for USSR, so TOF submarines participated in all-year active patrols regardless weather conditions, including under-ice navigations and 2.5 days underwater navigations [Shch-103 in 1935]. Some submarines performed 40-102 days navigations instead of usual 20 days, even self-made snorkels were used in 1930s already. TOF submarines performed defense of transports and warships, and active patrols during Soviet-Japanese conflicts in 1938-1939 [Shch-102 stopped Japanese fishing vessel in 1938 as Soviet captain noticed something strange, it was found that in reality Japanese "fishmen" laid mines].
When WWII began TOF had the largest amount of submarines among all other Soviet fleets - 91 submarines, and TOF submariners were much more experienced also. During the whole WWII all TOF submarines participated in active patrols and laid mines to protect Vladivostok from possible Japanese attack [Japanese didn't attack USSR in 1941, but those mines caused a lot of troubles to Soviet ships as hundreds of mines were broken by strong Pacific storms and spreaded all over the sea]. During the whole WWII Soviet submariners performed patrols and recon missions [most recon missions were made in Pacific by submarines not aircraft].
When Soviet-Japanese war began on 9th August 1945 - TOF had 78 submarines [1st, 2nd , 4th brigades, 2nd and 3rd separate divisions(squadrons)]. Submarine bases - Vladivostok, Sovgavan, Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, Nakhodka, harbor Ullis and harbor Vladimir. Japanese couldn't discover all participated "M" submariners. L-17 started the attack of Japanese mine-sweeper 09.08.1945 but dived because of Japanese patrol aircraft. 12.08.1945 Shch-112 discovered Japanese transport near Maoka and fired 3 torpedos [all missed], but Japanese patrol boat dropped 12 depth charges against submarine [unsuccessfully]. 14.08.1945 Shch-127 discovered Japanese warships [1 cruiser and 4 destroyers] which came to prevet Soviet landing in Korean port Seisin [Soviet HQ planned operation against Korean ports in the manner of "fast and easy Winter war" again and again in a great hurry and disorder, so small groups of landed mariners were attacked and stopped by "unexpected" for HQ Japanese troops; Soviet mariners trenched and hold their positions bravely as always but situation became more and more hard], so 2 submarines of "S"-type were sent to attack Japanese sea forces [and 10 more prepared to the raid]. Soon it was realized that both submarines had no time to intercept Japanese warships and the possible fate of bleeding 13th brigade of mariners became completelly black. But finally HQ began to work in the right way and it was decided to send the uncoded message about massive attack of Soviet torpedo bombers and submarines against Japanese warships [coded message asked not to perform any attacks because of absence of time for them]. Japanese believed and changed the course.
19.08.1945 Japanese submarines unsuccessfully attacked L-19 and Shch-122 near Hokkaido.
The commander of submarine brigade captain I rank A. Leonov planed and led the Soviet landing operation against South Sakhalin [Karafuto], this operations prepared much better as Leonov used recon data from his submarines mainly. Captain I rank Leonov personally led several very dangerous attacks of sailors and mariners against Japanese. Maoka port was taken and 21.08.1945 several "ShCh" submarines were moved there.
M-1 and M-5 transported fuel to Otomari [next target in Sakhalin] because of strong storm for transport ships.
During the important and hard operation against Kuril Islands submarines were used quite active - the whole 5th squadron of 1st brigade. Shch-105 performed long-range recon before operation, L-8 guarded transport ships with landing troops during operation.
One more submariner - commander of 2nd squadron Tripolsky received the order to lead airborn(!) landing troops in Port Arthur, and he done this perfect.
L-12 and L-19 [the best TOF submarine] were sent to patrol and recon area near port Rumoi as the invasion to Hokkaido was planned. L-19 was unsuccessfully attacked by Japanese submarine 19.08.1945 [10.38 am]. 18.08.1945 L-11 and L-18 took landing troops [120 marines with four 45mm guns], who had the order to perform demonstration landing far away from main landing near port Rumoi [Hokkaido], but during navigation the operation was rejected by HQ. L-11 went to Maoka under extremelly strong storm and landed troops there, L-18 returned back to base.
23.08.1945 all submarines received the order to stop attacks against Japanese ships, all submarines returned back till 31.08.
28 submarines participated in combat navigations in August 1945, patroling and rescueing waters in the Sea of Japan and Sea of Okhotsk. Submariners discovered enemy ships 13 times, performed 5 torpedo attacks [13 torpedoes], sank 4 Japanese ships. Two submarines [Shch-123 and L-19] were unsuccessfully attacked by Japanese submarines, and two [Shch-119 and L-12] were attacked by depth charges [unsuccessfully].

Missed torpedos:
13.08.1945 [10.12 am] Shch-119 missed 3 torpedos against transport [near port Maioka, S. Sakhalin]
22.08.1945 [05.18 am] L-12 missed 3 torpedos [port Rumoi area, Hokkaido]
Victories [all were achieved 21-22.08.1945]:
*21.08.1945 [04.15 pm] Shch-126 [captain-lieutenant Morozov] sank Japanese small seine-netter by artillery fire from 45mm gun [distance 7 cables, central area of Sea of Japan].
*22.08.1945 [10.57 am] L-13 sank Japanese steamer "Daito Maru" No. 57 by torpedo and artillry fire [Sea of Okhotsk, Hokkaido, near port Abasiri].
*22.08.1945 [11.42 am] L-12 [captain-lieutenant Shelgantsev] sank Japanese steamer 6 miles from Rumoi [3 torpedos missed, submarine attacked transport by artillery and Japanese answered by artillery fire also; 3 more torpedos were fired and at least one hit the steamer]. That was, most probably, transport "Taito Maru" [5950 brt], evecuating Japanese civilians from Korea. The same day L-12 met new transport, escorted by patrol ship and 6 patrol boats, which dropped depth charges and lightly damaged the submarine. L-12 dived at 40 m and stoped to attack transport.
*22.08.1945 [10.00 pm] L-19 [captain 3rd rank Kononenko] sank Japanese cable-laying ship/transport "Tetsugo Maru" [1403 brt] south to Rumoi by artillery fire [cape Bashinotoro, Hokkaido] and met convoy the same day [probably, torpedoed also 8000 brt transport, which is not confirmed by several sources].

During WWII Pacific Fleet had
1. 40 small submarines of "M"-type [series VI, VI-bis, XII]. Three of them participated in the first world's under-ice group navigation in December 1940. Four were transported from Baltic Sea Fleet to Pacific Fleet in August 1939 by railroad, four - from Black Sea Fleet in 1939-40 by railroad also. Ten were transported to Black Sea Fleet in June-August 1944 by railroad.
M-49 was lost between 10-16.08.1941 during patrol [near Vladivostok, Posiet Bay, Sea of Japan], most probably - exploded on mine from Soviet mine field.
M-63 was lost the same time/place [between 10-17.08.1941, Posiet Bay] and because of the same reason - Soviet mine field.
2. 39 medium submarines of "Shch"-type [series V, V-bis, V-bis-2, X, X-bis]. One was transferred from North Fleet in autumn 1940 [navigation along the North sea route]. One was reequipped into underwater mine-layer in 1942. Three were modernized in 1940-42.
Shch-103 "Carp" washed ashore during strong storm [Ussuriisk Bay], was heavily damaged and half-sank 04.11.1935; was raised 28.03.1936 and towed to Vladivostok, scraped.
Shch-118 "Mullet" was heavily damaged [6 crewmembers were killed] during torpedo explosions on Shch-138 nearby [remained off Nikolaevsk-na-Amure harbor] 18.07.1942, submarine half-sank but was raised and repaired soon.
Shch-130 sank after collision with Shch-128 31.08.1943 [America Bay] (2 crewmembers of Shch-130 couldn't be saved in damaged and flooded with fuel and water compartment by divers, they courageously died in 5 hours because of absence of air but asked before death by telephone to accept them as communists), submarine was raised in two days and repaired soon.
Shch-138 exploded in Nikolaevsk-na-Amure harbor 18.07.1942 [four own torpedoes exploded because of possible Japanese diversion, 34 crewmembers were killed], submarine was raised immediately and sank during tow because of strong storm next day, was raised again 11.07.1943 and scraped later.
Shch-139 sank 25.04.1945 [North Bay] because of own torpedo explosion, was raised 07.05.1945 and repaired.
3. 6 medium submarines of "S"-type [series IX-bis]. Four were transferred to North Fleet in 1942 through Panama Canal and under very stormy conditions [Germans knew about these navigation of four Soviet submarines and tried to sink them several times during that 17000 miles navigation, but unsuccessfully (four "S" avoided near 10 torpedos), but German radio claimed the losses of Soviet submarines several times]. Those submarines achieved successes in North Fleet, but I have no time to describe this.
4. 13 large submarines-minelayers of "L"-type [series XI, XIII]. One was transferred to North Fleet in 1942 [navigation through Panama Canal, repair in Iceland and Scotland].
L-16 was torpedoed [all crewmembers were lost] by Japanese submarine I-25 as possible US submarine [800 miles north-west from San Francisco] 11.10.1942 during its transfer with L-15 to North Fleet through Panama Canal. Artillerymen of L-15 fired five 45mm shells against visible enemy periscope and received a message from exploded L-16 "we are dying because.....". Another version [also very possible] - that L-16 was torpedoed by 2 torpedos [3rd torpedo missed] from US submarine S-31 by mistake.
L-19 exploded on Japanese mine 23.08.1945 [La Perouse Strait, on the way to Otomari, last radio message from board: "Began to overcome mine field..."] - the last submarine, lost during WWII.

Laurence - a dozen of beer bottles from you as I am very tired to find, translate and post the info according to your request from 22.00 till 04.00.................. :lol: Only 2.5 hours for sleep this night.......What I could find concerning the subject.......

Regards, BP

Laurence Strong
Financial supporter
Posts: 1221
Joined: 16 Jan 2005 06:01
Location: Alberta, Canada

Post by Laurence Strong » 15 Mar 2007 04:29

BP

If I could reach across the ocean I would kiss you......well maybe not :lol: , but I would buy you all the beer you want. Thank you very much. :)

Rodan Lewarx
Member
Posts: 261
Joined: 01 Feb 2006 10:56
Location: Moscow, Russia

Post by Rodan Lewarx » 15 Mar 2007 10:10

Who is this, Юха? Red Finn among us
Interesting, I never thought that your name is written on Russian this way. But seems to be very correct Or Йуха This is question to Rodan as native speaker.
Phonetically both variants are correct. AFAIK, traditionly translation Юха is used.

User avatar
BIGpanzer
Member
Posts: 2812
Joined: 12 Dec 2004 22:51
Location: Central Europe

Post by BIGpanzer » 15 Mar 2007 19:52

Rodan wrote:
Phonetically both variants are correct. AFAIK, traditionly translation Þõà is used.
Do Russians have a long tradition in transliteration this name [as me seems not among the most popular in Russia]? :lol:
Laurence wrote:
BP
If I could reach across the ocean I would kiss you......well maybe not , but I would buy you all the beer you want.
Beer is preferable :lol:

As for L-16 which was torpedoed by Japanese I-25 [or US S-31] by mistake 800 miles north-west from San Francisco, 11.10.1942.
http://sovnavy-ww2.by.ru/submarines/pic/l16.jpg [photo of submarine]
http://www.kamchatsky-krai.ru/photograf ... 26_l16.jpg
http://www.kamchatsky-krai.ru/photograf ... i/l-16.jpg
[monument to the crew of L-16 in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatski, Pacific] with the inscription: "We will not forget their bravery, we will not excuse their death". May be I say very wrong words, but L-16 didn't participate in direct combat [nevertheless, its incomplete 17000 miles navigation from Pacific to the North was very dangerous indeed] and it was torpedoed by mistake, there were a lot of more honored and lost submarines in Soviet navy that time, but no memorials for most of them....

PS to Juha.
Here is the info from the very detailed site about careers of all Soviet submarines. This is about Shch-307 "Treska"/""Codfish" [with list of references]: http://www.deepstorm.ru/DeepStorm.files ... Sh-307.htm
What are you thinking about this info [one of the raids of Shch-307 in Baltic]? :wink: :
-23.09.1942 [21.10] - check point Norchepingsk bay [position No. 11], escorted by 5 mine-sweepers [No. 210, 211, 215, 217, 218] and 3 patrol boats till East Gogland broad.
-24.09.1942 [05.29] - check point [diving point] at East Gogland broad.
-27.09.1942 [00.08] - finished crossing the Gulf of Finland, [22.30] - check point (position) near lighthouse Õóâóäøåð [exact name?].
-28.09.1942 - patrol in the area near lighthouse Landsort, didn't attack convoy because of shallow depth.
-30.09.1942 - Swedish submarine was detected in the morning.
-01.10.1942 - night, received the order from the base to go to the position in Aland sea [position No. 6]
-02.10.1942 [02.31] - reported about arrival to the area of island Arnholm. [14.14] - underwater torpedo attack against convoy [3 transports, 1 mine-sweeper] (15000 t and 7000 t, 2 torpedos, distance - 15 cables, 2 explosions in 2 min) - Finnish transport "Vanda" and mine-layer "Ruotsinsalmi" were attacked unsuccessfully. [14.25-14.52] anti-submarine ships dropped 11 depth charges without any success.
-03.10.1942 - detected single mine-sweeper and convoy, but torpedo attacks were canceled because of large off-bow angle.
-07.10.1942 - detected convoy, torpedo attack was cancelled.
-08.10.1942 - detected two convoys, torpedo attacks were cancelled.
-09.10.1942 - detected Finnish submarine during the daytime, began torpedo attack, but Finnish submarine dived.
-10.10.1942 - detected convoy, torpedo attack was cancelled because of anti-submarine vessels barrier.
-11.10.1942 - detected convoy (3 transports, 3 mine-sweepers, 4 patrol boats), [12.26] began underwater torpedo attack in the point 59.58/19.39 - [transport 7000 t, 2 torpedos, distance - 15 cables, 1 explosion] - Finnish transport "Orient" and German transport "Hiddensee" were attacked unsuccessfully. Aircraft and patrol ships dropped 7 depth charges without any success.
-12.10.1942 - detected convoy, daytime, attack was cancelled because of long distance.
-13.10.1942 - detected convoy and single mine-sweeper, attacks were cancelled because of reaction of anti-submarine vessels.
-16.10.1942 - detected two convoys, attacks were cancelled because of long distances and bad off-bow angle.
-21.10.1942 - underwater torpedo attack [15.36] against convoy (6 transports, 2 patrol ships, 2 mine-sweepers, 2 patrol boats) - (tanker 10.000 t, 2 torpedos, distance 7-12 cables, torpedos missed because of tanker manoeuvre), Shch-307 broke surface after torpedo salvo; enemy patrol ships didn't attack.
-23-24.10.1942 - moved to the south area of the position.
-26.10.1942 - underwater torpedo attack [12.07] against convoy (5 transports, 4 patrol ships) - [transport - 10000 t, distance 6 cabels, 2 torpedos, strong explosion after 55 sec]. Finnish transport "Betty H." (2478 brt, pyrites on board, 12 men were lost) was sank in the point 59.54/19.36. Aircraft and patrol ships dropped 10 depth charges without any success. [15.50] Two Finnish submarines were detected ["Vetehinen" and "Iku-Turso"], but commander of Shch-307 decided not to attack them - believed that were Swedish submarines. [20.44] crossed with "Iku-Turso" on counter-courses, distance 20 m; Finns made near 50 shots from 20mm gun without any damages.
-27.10.1942 - [01.00] Shch-307 was detected and unsuccessfully attacked by "Iku-Turso", artillery fire from Finnish submarine, 2 Finnish torpedos missed. Shch-307 crash dived, received the order to return back to base

-28.10.1942 - [04.10.] began to cross Gulf of Finland.
-31.10.1942 - daytime, two times touched mine anchor lines south-west from island Small Tuters.
-01.11.1942 - [10.05] met with Soviet patrol boats. [12.46] arrived to Norre-Kappellaht (exact name?) bay.
-06.11.1942 [17.00] - 07.11.1942 [00.55] moved to Kronshtadt, escort - 5 mine-sweepers [No. 207, 210, 211, 217, 218], 2 patrol boats.
From http://sovnavy-ww2.by.ru/submarines/typ_sch.htm [the database of all Soviet warships of WWII, not so detailed about careers, nevertheless].
27.10.1942 was attacked by Finnish submarine "Iku-Turso", but, despite the report of Finnish captain, remained undamaged.....
Victories of Shch-307 during 4 navigations of WWII period:
German submarine U-144 [09.08.1941]
Finnish transport "Betty H" [2478 brt, 26.10.1942]
German transport "Henriette Schulte" or "Steinburg" [1923 brt/1319 brt; 16.01.1945]
Doubt victories:
German transport "Skrunda" [2141 brt, 03.11.1944]
German transport "Marie Ferdinand" [1757 brt, 09.01.1945]
From my post above:
The most detailed info I could find in Finnish sources:
It was dark and visiblity poor due to drizzle. At 19.40 Iku-Turso turned east to enter the seaway, when suddenly a large enemy submarine was seen closing fast only 100 m away. The enemy boat passed Iku-Turso at 30 m distance and Iku-Turso opened fire with 20 mm Madsen gun. About 50 shots were fired. Some hits were seen in enemy tower, but it disappeared into darkness and drizzle. Iku-Turso got again hydrophone contact and followed it easily. Rain had gone and in moonlight visibility was 4-5 miles. At 23.51 a submarine tower was seen in direction given by hydrophone. The enemy boat surfaced and sailed to east with high speed. At 23.58 Iku-Turso shot two torpedoes against the enemy submarine and the victim, Shtsh 320, sank 00.01 at 20 miles west from Marhällan. The distance had again been estimated too short (this time it was actually 4 200 meters instead the estimated 2 000 meters) and five gunshots were fired before one torpedo hit
:) - seems to be that Finnish captain became a fairy tale writer after the war :lol:

Noch einmal - according to the best sources Finnish submarines sank 2 Soviet submarines only:
1. S-7 was torpedoed in surface by "Vesihiisi" 21.10.1942 [20.43] near Aland Islands [59.50'7/19.32'2], 4 men were captured [captain S.P. Lisin, sailors V.S. Subbotin, A.K. Olenin, V.I. Kunitsa], 43 men were lost.
http://uboat.net/allies/warships/photos ... sr_s-7.jpg [S-7]
http://www.abc.se/~pa/mar/img/sture/s7profil.jpg [S-7 was located by Swedish divers in July 1998 with side scan sonar on 40-45 m depth off Söderarm in the Stockholm archipelago]
2. Shch-305 was ramed by "Vetehinen" 05.11.1942 [23.55] near Aland Islands after 2 torpedos miss from 1.5 cables. My sources describe this in such way: Shch-305 attacked convoy during the daytime and was discovered/attacked by Finnish patrol boat "Uisko", so Shch-305 sent a message about this [20.00]. The message was intercepted by Finns who sent "Iku-Turso" and "Vetehinen" to the area. Commander of Shch-305 was informed about possible presence of Finnish submarines, but thought that bad weather protected him, so he charged a battery at full diesel speed. "Vetehinen" used electro engines and detected/lost Shch-305 two times. Finnish captain A. Leino attacked [23.55] Shch-305 with 2 torpedos from the very close distance [1.5 cables] but missed both torpedos so he ordered to open fire from 76mm gun and flash blinded Finnish submariners on the bridge; in 30 sec "Vetehinen" [at 6 knots speed] and Shch-305 [during crash dive] collided unexpectedly for both crews. The left side of Shch-305 behind nose diving planes was damaged, and its 1st and 2nd compartments were flooded; as Shch-305 dived that time damages caused additional trim which prevented close bulkhead doors and organization of damage control. In 2 min Shch-305 sank in the point 60.03'3/19.12'5. "Vetehinen" was seriously damaged but listened water during 2.5 hours trying to detect Shch-305 ones more. 38 men were lost.

-+3. Shch-301 in surface exploded on mine 27.08.1941 near cape Juminda, 13 men were resqued.
Many sources mentioned that it was exploded on submarine mine, but according to the most detailed sources that could be mine from F.18 field [mine-layers "Ruotsin-salmi" and "Riilahti"] or D.22 field [German mine-sweepers from 5th flotilla] only. Shch-301 exploded on the way Tallinn-Kronshtadt 27.08.1941 [21.15] in the point [59.52'/25.16' according to logbook or 59.52'/25.21' according to Russian historian Kireev]. Shch-301 remained afloat, commander [captain-lieutenant I.V. Grachev] closed conning tower hatch and investigated damages: tail shafts were bent, 6th compartment destroyed [2 sailors could get out on the deck], tail torpedo tubes damaged, 5th and 4th compartments began to flood. Grachev realized that damage control was impossible. Shch-301 sank in 15 min. Soviet patrol boat rescued 14 crewmembers but 1 died on board soon, all survivors were transferred to transport "Vironia" which exploded on mine soon [28.08.], so only captain Grachev and hold mechanic Pivovarov could reach Kronshtadt. Total losses - 36 men.


Shch-307 [the real enemy of "Iku-Turso" :wink: 8-) ] survived the war and was scrapped in 1957. Its deck-house was placed in Moscow museum of Great Patriotic War in 1995 [before it located in Liepaja submarine base] - http://www.toride.com/~roshiashi/parkp89.JPG

Regards, BP

Rodan Lewarx
Member
Posts: 261
Joined: 01 Feb 2006 10:56
Location: Moscow, Russia

Post by Rodan Lewarx » 16 Mar 2007 08:45

Do Russians have a long tradition in transliteration this name [as me seems not among the most popular in Russia]?
I am not a translator so I can't answer that question. I interested in history of Winter War, Continuation War and civil war in Karelia so finnish names in russian transcriotion are not unknown to me. Due to that facts my answer is you can find litarature in russian with finnish names if you want. :)

Jon G.
Member
Posts: 6647
Joined: 17 Feb 2004 01:12
Location: Europe

Post by Jon G. » 16 Mar 2007 09:07

BP, may I ask which is the source you allude to? I've been searching up and down on this thread but I don't think you're naming your source in the clear anywhere. My only source for Soviet sub operations in WW2 is Rolf Erikson's essay in this unfortunately very expensive book. You certainly can't accuse Erikson of any pro-Soviet bias :) Anyhow, I've tried referencing the data which Erikson gives in his summary tables. They correspond well with yours but are less detailed. Erikson sources his tables to 1950s/1960s works by authors Emelyanov and Motseev et al. which may somewhat reduce the value of his essay.

Anyhow, Erikson spends a single brief paragraph on the use of Soviet submarines for resupply and evacuation missions for the besieged Sevastopol garrison in 1942:
Rolf Erikson wrote:...In all, thirty submarines successfully completed seventy-five missions and aborted seven due to damage or Axis opposition, with the loss of two vessels: Shch-214, lost to the Italian MTB MAS-571 on 19 June; and S-32, to German aircraft a week later. Although the transport of gasoline in ballast tanks caused at least four explosions and fires, the submarines transported 4,000 tons of material to the besieged city and evacuated about 1,400 wounded women and children to Caucasus ports...
...which has piqued my interest. At a glance, the tonnage of supplies delivered and the number of civilians evacuated seem impressive. Do you know where to verify and flesh out these numbers?

Janne
Member
Posts: 473
Joined: 15 Feb 2006 11:53
Location: Helsinki

Post by Janne » 16 Mar 2007 09:18

BP, according to the Per-Olof Ekman who wrote (in 1983, i.e. with access to the published Soviet literature up to 1981) what has been considered the classic of submarine warfare in the Baltic, the first enemy sub sighted and engaged by "Iku-Turso" was indeed "SC 307" and the second sub, sighted and engaged 3-4 hours later was "SC 320". Unfortunately, Ekman doesn't tell his readers how and when the subs were identified.

In any case, considering accounts on both sides, engagements appear to have really taken place. As regards the assumed or alleged result, Ekman writes (in my clumsy translation): "...one of the torpedoes hit the target right behind the tower. A flash of flamelight and an explosion followed by a 40-meter high pillar of water was seen. When it had collapset, the sea was empty...then the moon disappeared in the clouds and the spot was difficult to find. When the day had dawned, a large glittering carpet of oil was found and a steady stream of diesel oil bubbled up." A conclusion erring on the optimistic side or a case of a fairytale - the reader must judge.

(BTW "SC 308" is described as missing in early October, probably due to a mine, as are "SC 304" and "SC 306".)

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11492
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Post by Juha Tompuri » 16 Mar 2007 12:12

Hi BP,
BP about ShCh-320 sinking by Iku-Turso wrote:Modern Russian sources don't support this [interesting, that old Soviets did -
Where were the "old Soviet" sources based at? What "new" info there has been "found" at Russian era that has changed the older info?

I wonder when it was for the first time mentioned in USSR/Russia that Iku-Turso attacked (/and sank)
ShCh-320 ?
ShCh-308 ?
ShCh-307 ?
...and has there been any other canditates?

Also to where the back line of 10th October 1942 at the Russian estimations about the sinking date of the ShCh-320 is based at?

BIGpanzer wrote:PS to Juha.
Here is the info from the very detailed site about careers of all Soviet submarines. This is about Shch-307 "Treska"/""Codfish"[/color] [with list of references]: http://www.deepstorm.ru/DeepStorm.files ... Sh-307.htm
What are you thinking about this info [one of the raids of Shch-307 in Baltic]? ...
...-26.10.1942 - underwater torpedo attack [12.07] against convoy (5 transports, 4 patrol ships) - [transport - 10000 t, distance 6 cabels, 2 torpedos, strong explosion after 55 sec]. Finnish transport "Betty H." (2478 brt, pyrites on board, 12 men were lost) was sank in the point 59.54/19.36. Aircraft and patrol ships dropped 10 depth charges without any success. [15.50] Two Finnish submarines were detected ["Vetehinen" and "Iku-Turso"], but commander of Shch-307 decided not to attack them - believed that were Swedish submarines. [20.44] crossed with "Iku-Turso" on counter-courses, distance 20 m; Finns made near 50 shots from 20mm gun without any damages.
-27.10.1942 - [01.00] Shch-307 was detected and unsuccessfully attacked by "Iku-Turso", artillery fire from Finnish submarine, 2 Finnish torpedos missed. Shch-307 crash dived, received the order to return back to base
Seems to be info from Finnish sources, added some extra (sources?), and sub name changed.
BP wrote:
From http://sovnavy-ww2.by.ru/submarines/typ_sch.htm [the database of all Soviet warships of WWII, not so detailed about careers, nevertheless].
27.10.1942 was attacked by Finnish submarine "Iku-Turso", but, despite the report of Finnish captain, remained undamaged.....
Victories of Shch-307 during 4 navigations of WWII period:
German submarine U-144 [09.08.1941]
Finnish transport "Betty H" [2478 brt, 26.10.1942]
German transport "Henriette Schulte" or "Steinburg" [1923 brt/1319 brt; 16.01.1945]
Doubt victories:
German transport "Skrunda" [2141 brt, 03.11.1944]
German transport "Marie Ferdinand" [1757 brt, 09.01.1945]
AFAIK the two first victories are real, do you have truthful info about the 1944-1945 claims?
BP wrote:- seems to be that Finnish captain became a fairy tale writer after the war :lol:
I don't know about the procedure at other navies, but here the reports ( to which the Finnish info is based at) were written during the war.
BP wrote: Shch-301 in surface exploded on mine 27.08.1941 near cape Juminda, 13 men were resqued.
Many sources mentioned that it was exploded on submarine mine, but according to the most detailed sources that could be mine from F.18 field [mine-layers "Ruotsin-salmi" and "Riilahti"] or D.22 field [German mine-sweepers from 5th flotilla] only
What might the "most detailed sources" be and to what they are based at?


Regards, Juha

User avatar
BIGpanzer
Member
Posts: 2812
Joined: 12 Dec 2004 22:51
Location: Central Europe

Post by BIGpanzer » 17 Mar 2007 18:12

To Jon.G
Anyhow, I've tried referencing the data which Erikson gives in his summary tables. They correspond well with yours but are less detailed.
The literature sources about Soviet submarines [on Russian]:
1. A.E. Taras "Submarines of World War Two 1939-1945", Minsk, Harvest, 2004. A huge book about all WWII submarines one by one [photos, specifications, fates] of all world's navies Latin American. But it was hard to translate the info from it :roll: This is volume 3rd from six books of Taras about world's submarines of all periods.
http://www.centrmag.ru/catalog/4381.jpg
2. A. Shirokorad "Warships and boats of Soviet Fleet 1939-1945", Minsk, Harvest, 2002.
942 pages book with short descriptions of fates of all warships.
Quite similar to this site: http://sovnavy-ww2.by.ru/
3. The most detailed and most correct Russian on-line source about Soviet submarines [checked and improved often in addition to the main sited sources, forum inside, the internet resource of St. Petersburg club of submariners]. Losses and victories are often discussed inside the text about particular submarine as confirmed/nonconfirmed/wrong according to the newest data and published research articles [with the name of the researcher]. Babel Fish can't translate complicated texts with abbreviations of weather conditions, distances, coordinates, etc. :roll: :roll: I did this by myself :roll:
http://www.deepstorm.ru/
The most detailed [hour date, coordinates, descriptions] info was taken from this site as I've mentioned.
Rolf Erikson íàïèñà:
...In all, thirty submarines successfully completed seventy-five missions and aborted seven due to damage or Axis opposition, with the loss of two vessels: Shch-214, lost to the Italian MTB MAS-571 on 19 June; and S-32, to German aircraft a week later. Although the transport of gasoline in ballast tanks caused at least four explosions and fires, the submarines transported 4,000 tons of material to the besieged city and evacuated about 1,400 wounded women and children to Caucasus ports...
...which has piqued my interest. At a glance, the tonnage of supplies delivered and the number of civilians evacuated seem impressive. Do you know where to verify and flesh out these numbers?
From the first point of view seems not wrong. I will try to translate the corresponding info for you, but next week-end, OK?
Shch-214 was lost indeed 19.06.1942, 21.23 [torpedoed by Italian torpedo boat MAS.571 20 miles from Cape Aitodor, Black Sea], 38(39) men were lost, 2 were captured.
S-32 was lost indeed 26.06.1942, 17.50 [transported 40 t of ammunitions and 30 t of car fuel; most probably, it was sank by He111 from 2/KG 100 in the point 44.12'/33.48'; but also explosion on mine was possible or explosion of ammunition the same time].
Janne wrote:
BP, according to the Per-Olof Ekman who wrote (in 1983, i.e. with access to the published Soviet literature up to 1981) what has been considered the classic of submarine warfare in the Baltic, the first enemy sub sighted and engaged by "Iku-Turso" was indeed "SC 307" and the second sub, sighted and engaged 3-4 hours later was "SC 320". Unfortunately, Ekman doesn't tell his readers how and when the subs were identified.
This is very well discussed in the online source above [sorry, on Russian]. Shch-307 detected "Iku-Turso" 5 hours before attack but Soviet captain thought that was Finnish submarine [see my post above].
Janne wrote:
(BTW "SC 308" is described as missing in early October, probably due to a mine, as are "SC 304" and "SC 306".)
Shch-306 - no, last radio message from 11.11.1942 [21.55] - "began to cross Gulf of Finland". After that unsuccesfully attacked Finnish mine-layer "Ruotsinsalmi" [17.45, 19.50 - 12.11; 02.27, 04.45 - 13.11]. Reason of loss - 13.11. exploded on mine [mine fields "Nashorn"] or around 13.11. exploded on mine [mine fields "Uminda" or "Seeigel"]. 38 men were lost.
Shch-304 - no contacts since 29.10.1942. One of the most unknown fate - most probably: explosion on mine the same data and place as Shch-308, but the possibility to navigation till the beginning of December and explosion on the way to base is also discussed.
Shch-308 - discussed in early sources as torpedoed by "Iku-Turso", kater the reason of mine explosion was discussed as the most probable [see above].
Juha wrote:
Where were the "old Soviet" sources based at?
I don't know. I can assume that on Finnish info.
Juha wrote:
I wonder when it was for the first time mentioned in USSR/Russia that Iku-Turso attacked (/and sank)
ShCh-320 ?
ShCh-308 ?
ShCh-307 ?
At first [IIRC in 1957 even] it was mentioned that Shch-308 was attacked/sank, in 1980s - that Shch-320 was attacked/sank. In 2000s - the info that both submarines were exploded on mine fields and unsuccessful attack of "Iku-Turso" against Shch-307.
AFAIK there were no other candidates [but I didn't check all "Shch-info" :roll:].
Juha wrote:
Also to where the back line of 10th October 1942 at the Russian estimations about the sinking date of the ShCh-320 is based at?
Most probably date of loss - 03.10.1942 - 06.10.1942 on mine field.
Why Finns thought about Shch-320 as the target for "Iku-Turso"?
Juha wrote:
Seems to be info from Finnish sources, added some extra (sources?), and sub name changed.
I assume from Finnish/German also, most probably - from submarine logbooks if they returned back to base.
Sources - above [main]. Sub name - just differ :wink: .
Juha wrote:
AFAIK the two first victories are real, do you have truthful info about the 1944-1945 claims?
100% truthful info - eye-witness only [from both sides better!]. We can only discuss the correctnesses of info to some degree. German transport "Henriette Schulte" or "Steinburg" [1923 brt/1319 brt; 16.01.1945] - third loss is in doubt between two ships in convoy in reality. About "Skrunda" - in doubt as I've mentioned [several versions exist, sorry, no time as they are too long to describe], about "Marie Ferdinand" - in doubt as I've mentioned. Many German sources mention V317/Wega as the sank target:
http://www.wlb-stuttgart.de/seekrieg/an ... 5-oasa.htm [basic info].
Juha wrote:
I don't know about the procedure at other navies, but here the reports ( to which the Finnish info is based at) were written during the war.
I strongly believe that general procedure is common for all navies. Submarine commanders mistaked more often than pilots in my opinion :wink:
Juha wrote:
What might the "most detailed sources" be and to what they are based at?
The most detailed [without ""] general source about the fates of all Soviet submarines - http://www.deepstorm.ru/
About particular submarine - I assume that it is possible to find more detailed info somewhere [for example, there are articles about one successful submarine not all of the type].

Best regards, BP

Just for the rest of eyes :roll: :
Video from Russian movie (2005; 3.400.000$ budget) "Pervyy Posle Boga" ["The first after God"] about Soviet submariners. Swedish/Finnish actress Irina Björklund as the woman of Russian captain :) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0430264/
http://www.kinomania.ru/movies/p/Perviy ... ters/5.jpg [Poster]
http://www.kinomania.ru/movies/p/Perviy ... ters/3.jpg [Poster]
http://www.filmkapitan.ru/video/ppb_trl_320x256.avi [video]

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11492
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Post by Juha Tompuri » 17 Mar 2007 20:54

BIGpanzer wrote:
Juha wrote: Where were the "old Soviet" sources based at?
I don't know. I can assume that on Finnish info.
IIRC no.
As the modern Russian info seems to rely on Finnish sources, the earlier Soviet ones were based only on Soviet sources (not on "capitalist propaganda")
BP wrote:
Juha wrote: I wonder when it was for the first time mentioned in USSR/Russia that Iku-Turso attacked (/and sank)
ShCh-320 ?
ShCh-308 ?
ShCh-307 ?
At first [IIRC in 1957 even] it was mentioned that Shch-308 was attacked/sank, in 1980s - that Shch-320 was attacked/sank. In 2000s - the info that both submarines were exploded on mine fields and unsuccessful attack of "Iku-Turso" against Shch-307.
AFAIK there were no other candidates [but I didn't check all "Shch-info
Thanks for the info
BP wrote:
Juha wrote: Also to where the back line of 10th October 1942 at the Russian estimations about the sinking date of the ShCh-320 is based at?
Most probably date of loss - 03.10.1942 - 06.10.1942 on mine field.
Actally that wasn't an answer to my question.
Do you know where the back line of 10th October 1942 at the Russian estimations about the sinking date of the ShCh-320 is based at?
BP wrote:Why Finns thought about Shch-320 as the target for "Iku-Turso"?
IIRC from the Finnish radio intelligence sources, Galkin and Lishin interrogations and from the post war Soviet sources.
As was at the case with Vetehinen sinking ShCh-305 too, IIRC

BP wrote:
Juha wrote: Seems to be info from Finnish sources, added some extra (sources?), and sub name changed.
I assume from Finnish/German also, most probably - from submarine logbooks if they returned back to base.
Sources - above [main]. Sub name - just differ
I wonder what info the Germans had?
Also seems basicly based on Finnish reports.
BP wrote:
Juha wrote: I don't know about the procedure at other navies, but here the reports ( to which the Finnish info is based at) were written during the war.
I strongly believe that general procedure is common for all navies.
So wasn't the submarine logbooks also availlable to the soviet era researchers? Or where the "new" detailled info about the sub (ShCh-307) actions?

BP wrote:Submarine commanders mistaked more often than pilots in my opinion
In some countries it was about the same.
BP wrote:
Juha wrote: What might the "most detailed sources" be and to what they are based at?
The most detailed [without ""] general source about the fates of all Soviet submarines - http://www.deepstorm.ru/
The most detailed or the most detailed general source?
BP wrote:Swedish/Finnish actress Irina Björklund
Finnish

Regards, Juha

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11492
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Post by Juha Tompuri » 17 Mar 2007 22:10

The basic info source of yours also sheds some light to the perhaps lesser known part of the actions of the Soviet subs: trying to sink own ships in order to make that look like an enemy (Polish) sub had done that.
# METALLIST und PIONER wurden angeblich von dem poln U-Boot ORZEL versenkt resp. verfehlt.
In Wirklichkeit wurde METALLIST vom eigenen SC-303 angegriffen und von dem T-Boot TUCHA versenkt,
PIONER wahrscheinlich ebenfalls von einem sowj. U-Boot angegriffen und verfehlt.
http://www.wlb-stuttgart.de/seekrieg/an ... 12-asa.htm ( actually, why a Soviet ship was listed as an allied ship [that time, 1939] there?)

Regads, Juha

Return to “The Soviet Union at War 1917-1945”