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

Post by BIGpanzer » 18 Mar 2007 20:47

Jon G wrote:
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 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?
As I am very limited in time at the moment, just brief info. Yes, Rolf Erikson mentioned correct data. This is interesting subject to discuss. In spring 1942 submarines were used as transport ships for supply Sevastopol. 24 submarines performed 80 transport navigations from Novorossisk and Tuapse to Sevastopol between 17.05.1942 - 01.07.1942 [68 navigations were successful, 12 navigations failed, 2 submarines were lost during transport operations]. 3695 tonns of cargos [shells - 2156 tons, food supplies - 1031 tons, fuel - 508 tons] were delivered to Sevastopol by submarines, also 46 men [signal officers and doctors]. Submarines evecuated 1392 men and 3 t of documents from Sevastopol. Submarines were used as transports because usual steamers couldn't be used under domination of German aviation over Black Sea that time.
Juha wrote:
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?
I don't know exactly. I can assume that some info from logbooks couldn't be officially published in Soviet period for sure. IIRC a lot of German, British and Finnish sources were analyzed carefully in addition to a lot of own data after WWII; but, of course, not all results of investigations during Soviet period were presented to public as they were. The major part was published for administrative use only, or never published.
Juha wrote:
In some countries it was about the same.

Nonsense. It depends not on the country but on technical/detectable character of possible combat mistakes: hydroacoustic detection of explosions or artillery fire during the night time, for example.
Juha wrote:
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.
This is not a "part of actions" during WWII but just a case which probably happened:? But the accident with "Metallist" is very well known in Polish and Russian sources. According to the most common version [which was published even in Soviet times already]: USSR wanted to force Estonia to sign pact of mutual help. So the possible provocation was organized: Soviet transport ship "Metallist" was attacked 27.09.1939 in the Gulf of Narva [59.34'/27.21']. Soviets claimed that "Matallist" was sank by unknown submarine, based in Estonian port. Many modern sources claim that Shch-303 [from 14th submarine division of Baltic Sea Navy] received the order to sank "Metallist" but two torpedos missed, later "Metallist" was ramed by patrol boat. AFAIK Germans knew this info for the first time from deserter Galkin [sergeant-major of Shch-303, we've shortly discussed already], and they used this fact as good anti-Soviet propaganda.
AFAIK quite many well-known Polish and Russian historians discussed the accident with "Metallist" - interesting, that Shch-303 was under repair 27.09.1941, several historians mention that there was no sea-going ship under the name "Metallist" in Baltic Sea steamship company [but it was on Black Sea - transferred to Baltic? - BP], and Polish submarine "Orzel" came to UK without two torpedos [but Poles had no reasons to hide the attack of Soviet ships in September 1939 if such case took place - the possibility that it was Polish subnarine is low - BP]. Also Estonian divers investigated that ship and came to several interesting conclusions about its type/dry-cargo ship and origin/Black Sea [ http://www.diving.ee/article.php?id=135 ]. AFAIK the type of the ship and its photos are disputed by many researches. Russian researchers mention that "Metallist" [or the ship sank there] was not planned to raise after WWII according to the plan from emergency rescue service of Baltic Sea Navy, also the fate of crew is very unclear. "Metallist" was built in UK and had the following names during its career - WEARDALE - SIRIUS - SWANSEA BAY - ÌÀÐÒÈÍ - ÑÂÎÁÎÄÀ - ÌÅÒÀËËÈÑÒ. Some info is here http://crolick.website.pl/orporzel/ Interesting, that another divers mention that there were no things on board which made ship identification easy [crew, probably, knew about operation - BP], also ship was exploded by its crew most probably. Also interesting that ship "Metallist" is mentioned in official [not secret] documents of Baltic Sea Navy as transport ship, participated in evecuation of Hango garrison in 1941 and sank by Finnish coastal artillery. I think this story is very unclear.

Juha wrote:
Swedish/Finnish actress Irina Björklund
Finnish
Yes, but she was born in Sweden :wink:

Regards, BP

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

Post by Jon G. » 19 Mar 2007 08:40

BIGpanzer wrote:... This is interesting subject to discuss. In spring 1942 submarines were used as transport ships for supply Sevastopol. 24 submarines performed 80 transport navigations from Novorossisk and Tuapse to Sevastopol between 17.05.1942 - 01.07.1942 [68 navigations were successful, 12 navigations failed, 2 submarines were lost during transport operations]. 3695 tonns of cargos [shells - 2156 tons, food supplies - 1031 tons, fuel - 508 tons] were delivered to Sevastopol by submarines, also 46 men [signal officers and doctors]. Submarines evecuated 1392 men and 3 t of documents from Sevastopol. Submarines were used as transports because usual steamers couldn't be used under domination of German aviation over Black Sea that time...
Thank you very much for fleshing out the information for me BP! I'm interested in the use of submarines as supply vessels - most WW2 navies did it at one time or another when forced by circumstances: the Royal Navy used subs to resupply Malta on several occasions, the Italians used subs almost routinely on the North African convoy routes, the Germans had their 'milk cow' dedicated supply subs, and I believe the Japanese also used submarines in their attempts to resupply Guadalcanal. But for tonnage divided by timespan, I'm fairly certain that the Soviet effort to resupply Sevastopol comes out as the most substantial.

Do you know if each 'navigation' as you call it covers the full journey - i.e. Caucasus port-Sevastopol and back, or if each 'navigation' only covers one leg of the journey - that is, Caucasus port-Sevastopol or vice versa? In the former case, the average tonnage of goods delivered would come out at about 54 tons; in the latter case it would be in excess of 100 tons average per shipment.

By the way, Erikson also mentions the Metallist affair. In his version, the Shch 303 fired dummy torpedoes at the Metallist while the tanker's crew dropped explosive charges into the sea to give the impression of torpedo hits - the ship crew then proceeded to open the tanker's sea-cocks, abandon ship and then be rescued by the waiting escort ship the Tucha.

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

Post by Janne » 19 Mar 2007 09:56

BIGpanzer wrote:
:
Juha wrote:
Swedish/Finnish actress Irina Björklund
Finnish
Yes, but she was born in Sweden :wink:
Yes, but with no effect whatsoever on either her genetic background, ethnicity or nationality: she is 3/4 of generations old "Finland-Swedish" and 1/4 of solid Finnish stock. (Her looks are probably a happy mixture of the two, but she believes that her thespian talents come from her "ur-Finnish" grandmother.)



I mistakenly got the impression from your post that the Soviet version of the Finnish account of the events of 26-27.10. had the "Iku-Turso" engage the one and the same submarine twice.

Do the Soviet/Russian accounts mention the "SC 307" wilfully leaking oil to fool the captain of "Iku-Turso"? Floating oil and debris wasn't, I believe, no longer - as it was earlier in the war, especially by air crews - considered sufficient evidence of a sinking, but diesel oil from a stationary source was.


BTW I'm the furthest from an expert on the subject, but IIRC it was a characteristic of the torpedoes to sink upon launch before rising to the (pre-determined?) depth and that the miss (in another case) at the very short distance of 250m was due to this.

User avatar
Harri
Member
Posts: 4214
Joined: 24 Jun 2002 11:46
Location: Suomi - Finland

Post by Harri » 19 Mar 2007 11:26

BIGpanzer wrote:Soviets claimed that "Matallist" was sank by unknown submarine, based in Estonian port
What is really interesting that Soviets practised about the similar situation in their naval excercise already IIRC in spring 1939.

-----
Juha Tompuri wrote:
BIGpanzer 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
That is what I think too. Many Finnish claims concerning both aircraft and vessels were confirmed by listening Soviet radio messages (which Finns could occasionally read almost in real time) and also by interrogating captured Soviet soldiers, especially officers. That intelligence information was very important although it is not quite impossible that Soviets could feed also misinformation to Finns (at least Finns "took an interest" on it.).

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

Post by Juha Tompuri » 19 Mar 2007 23:52

BP wrote:
BP wrote:
Juha wrote: Submarine commanders mistaked more often than pilots in my opinion
In some countries it was about the same.
Nonsense. It depends not on the country but on technical/detectable character of possible combat mistakes: hydroacoustic detection of explosions or artillery fire during the night time, for example.
It of course depends also about the individuals, but for instance at USSR it seems that pilots overclaimed more than the sub captains:
During Winter War Soviet pilots claimed ~300 Finnish planes shot down, the reality being ~30 planes.
During the same period of time Soviet subs claimed IIRC 6 ships sunken, the reality being 5 ships.
BP wrote:
Juha wrote: 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.
I think this story is very unclear.
Yes, there are some unclear parts in it, but clear is that the there was no foreing interference at the issue, it was an all Soviet staged action.
BP wrote:Germans knew this info for the first time from deserter Galkin
Finns also interrogated him, as well as a Soviet Naval officer Finns had taken POW, who (also) is mentioned to have been an eye-wittness to the action.

From Galkin, Finns also got additonal info to another Soviet sub ( ShCh-301 ) related case: the shooting down a Finnish pasanger plane over Gulf of Finland 14th June 1941
http://www.sci.fi/~fta/fineka03.htm
http://www.virtualpilots.fi/feature/art ... auskaleva/ ( in finnish )
http://militera.lib.ru/memo/russian/hohlov_pi/01.html (Soviet version, AFAIK)

Regards, Juha
Last edited by Juha Tompuri on 20 Mar 2007 01:10, edited 2 times in total.

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

Post by Juha Tompuri » 20 Mar 2007 00:03

Harri wrote:What is really interesting that Soviets practised about the similar situation in their naval excercise already IIRC in spring 1939.
Yes, thanks for the reminder, thats what I now remember too: a Soviet ship was sunken by an unknown foreign ship/sub.
Wasn't Mainila also mentioned at that exercise as a place of a border conflict too?

Regards, Juha

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

Post by BIGpanzer » 20 Mar 2007 01:50

Janne wrote:
Do the Soviet/Russian accounts mention the "SC 307" wilfully leaking oil to fool the captain of "Iku-Turso"? BTW I'm the furthest from an expert on the subject, but IIRC it was a characteristic of the torpedoes to sink upon launch before rising to the (pre-determined?) depth and that the miss (in another case) at the very short distance of 250m was due to this
I don't know exactly, never read such info. In principle, Shch-307 could be damaged to some degree by artillery fire [but I don't have any exact info about possible damages at the moment].
As for torpedos - I have a very good collection of different articles about WWII torpedos, but this collection is far away from me at the moment. By memory I don't know for 100% sure as I am not the torpedo expert also :wink: Need to make search when I have enough time for this.
Harri wrote:
That is what I think too. Many Finnish claims concerning both aircraft and vessels were confirmed by listening Soviet radio messages (which Finns could occasionally read almost in real time) and also by interrogating captured Soviet soldiers, especially officers. That intelligence information was very important although it is not quite impossible that Soviets could feed also misinformation to Finns (at least Finns "took an interest" on it.).
This is quite correct, but do you know how many Soviet naval officers [who knew radio codes] were captured by Germans/Finns in 1941? [if such facts really took place in principle]. AFAIK Soviets also intercepted German and Finnish messages, Soviets were informed by intelligence also [for example, Shch-305 sent a message to the base about unsuccessful attack against convoy, that message was intercepted by Finns and "Iku-Turso" and "Vetehinen" were sent to the area; Soviet base immediately informed captain of Shch-305 about this, but the info was ignored by captain because he believed to bad weather].
Juha wrote:
t of course depends also about the individuals, but for instance at USSR it seems that pilots overclaimed more than the sub captains:
During Winter War Soviet pilots claimed ~300 Finnish planes shot down, the reality being ~30 planes.
During the same period of time Soviet subs claimed IIRC 6 ships sunken, the reality being 5 ships.
Soviet pilots [as all pilots] claimed what they really shot down or seems to be shot down (damaged). The amount of "~300" [362 in reality] was claimed by Soviet official propaganda but not pilots [pilots reports were never published and even carefully investigated in 1940s]. The reality being not "~30" but 21 [as Finns officialy recognized after the war - which doesn't mean that this is 100% correct, of course] + several tens [favourite expression of Juha :wink: ] heavily damaged in combats aircrafts [I agree with the most part of researches consider heavily damaged/non repaired aircraft as combat losses in the case of both Finnish and Soviet aircraft, of course]. Finnish historians Stenman & Keskinen gave the number of 74 Finnish aircraft lost [47 combat losses from Soviet fighters and AAA, emergency landings] + 51 aircraft were heavily damaged of different reasons [9 repaired and returned back to their units]. I will provide you with the excellent modern [2005?] Russian article [my translation] under the title "Fairy tales of Finnish forest" which analysed very carefully [based on many sources from both sides] the Soviet and Finnish myths about aircraft losses and the reasons why even modern researches still use myths/wrong info instead of correct info [which is possible to estimate even during comparison of all well-known myths :) ].
As for Soviet submarines victories during Winter war - I didn't see Soviet reports about 6 sank ships, I know only the modern info about 5.
Juha wrote:
Yes, there are some unclear parts in it, but clear is that the there was no foreing interference at the issue, it was an all Soviet staged action.
I would say that much more probably that that was not Polish or Estonian operation. There are not "some" but very many unclear parts [type of ship, its name, reason of explosion, what happened with the crew, ertc.]. One of the most unknown part is the fate of the "Metallist" crewmembers - were they awarded with someting or disappeared in Stalin's camps as eye-witnesses......
Several sites I found about that accident mention that Baltic Navy HQ didn't know about the operation it was planned by NKVD [many archives of which are still secret, so researches can't find any clear details about accident]. Juha, you quite seldom provide me with the exact info :wink: This is not good :? For example, it was mentioned in several online sources [discussions between divers] that transport ship under the name "Metallist" was sank by Finnish artillery during the evacuation of Hango garrison - you info, please!
Juha wrote:
as well as a Soviet Naval officer Finns had taken POW, who (also) is mentioned to have been an eye-wittness to the action.

His name and unit [warship], please. I will try to find additional info.
Jon G. wrote:
Thank you very much for fleshing out the information for me BP! I'm interested in the use of submarines as supply vessels - most WW2 navies did it at one time or another when forced by circumstances: the Royal Navy used subs to resupply Malta on several occasions, the Italians used subs almost routinely on the North African convoy routes, the Germans had their 'milk cow' dedicated supply subs, and I believe the Japanese also used submarines in their attempts to resupply Guadalcanal. But for tonnage divided by timespan, I'm fairly certain that the Soviet effort to resupply Sevastopol comes out as the most substantial.
Do you know if each 'navigation' as you call it covers the full journey - i.e. Caucasus port-Sevastopol and back, or if each 'navigation' only covers one leg of the journey - that is, Caucasus port-Sevastopol or vice versa? In the former case, the average tonnage of goods delivered would come out at about 54 tons; in the latter case it would be in excess of 100 tons average per shipment.
By the way, Erikson also mentions the Metallist affair. In his version, the Shch 303 fired dummy torpedoes at the Metallist while the tanker's crew dropped explosive charges into the sea to give the impression of torpedo hits - the ship crew then proceeded to open the tanker's sea-cocks, abandon ship and then be rescued by the waiting escort ship the Tucha.
Soviet submarines could transport cargos - L-XIII - 95 tons; L-II and D - 60 tons; S - 30 tons; Shch - 20 tons; M - 8 tons only. I will try to find some additional info about transport operations of Soviet submarines. IIRC many navigations [what is the correct name?] covers the full journey. "Metallist" was a dry-cargo ship, not a tanker. Interesting version of events, seems to be possible, but I never heard about it.

Regards, BP

PS. Lets focus on losses of Soviet submarine on Baltic now [as there are several "gaps" in the exact fates of several submarines even according to the most detailed sources I can use].

PS2. Additional info about raising of Shch-406 by Finns 11.10.1943, please.

Regards, BP
Last edited by BIGpanzer on 20 Mar 2007 16:34, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Harri
Member
Posts: 4214
Joined: 24 Jun 2002 11:46
Location: Suomi - Finland

Post by Harri » 20 Mar 2007 13:53

Juha Tompuri wrote:
Harri wrote:What is really interesting that Soviets practised about the similar situation in their naval excercise already IIRC in spring 1939.
Yes, thanks for the reminder, thats what I now remember too: a Soviet ship was sunken by an unknown foreign ship/sub.
Wasn't Mainila also mentioned at that exercise as a place of a border conflict too?
Actually yes.
BIGpanzer wrote:
Harri wrote:That is what I think too. Many Finnish claims concerning both aircraft and vessels were confirmed by listening Soviet radio messages (which Finns could occasionally read almost in real time) and also by interrogating captured Soviet soldiers, especially officers. That intelligence information was very important although it is not quite impossible that Soviets could feed also misinformation to Finns (at least Finns "took an interest" on it.).
This is quite correct, but do you know how many Soviet naval officers [who knew radio codes] were captured by Germans/Finns in 1941? [if such facts really took place in principle].
Some of the Soviet codes were first solved by Estonians in autumn 1939. Decrypted messages were then given to Finns. Later this work continued in Finland together with Estonian and Finnish experts. The ability to decrypt different Soviet codes varied during the war from the nearly 100% to nil although certain codes could not be broken.

Finns co-operated at least with Japanese (loads of crypted Soviet code material from the far east which appeared to be the same used on the Finnish front helped solving Soviet code), Polish, Hungarian, Swedish and German intelligences (in different times.). Only a little bit of this secret work is although known because these archives were moved to Sweden after the war and probably destroyed there. We only know what certain persons have told about, for example Col. R. Hallamaa.

I think the information Finns got from captured officers concerned to persons, tactics, technical information and operations. The best information for solving encrypted messages Finns got from the Soviet soldiers who unintentionally "misused" their codes.
BIGpanzer wrote:AFAIK Soviets also intercepted German and Finnish messages, Soviets were informed by intelligence also [for example, Shch-305 sent a message to the base about unsuccessful attack against convoy, that message was intercepted by Finns and "Iku-Turso" and "Vetehinen" were sent to the area; Soviet base immediately informed captain of Shch-305 about this, but the info was ignored by captain because he believed to bad weather].
Without doubt Soviets had effective radio intelligence as well. Finns used methods which were hard or impossible to break but alone bearing of sending radios can give important information. Finnish codes were often "individual" and the same same code table was used in one case only (Erkki Pale for example tells about a messages which started like this: AAAAA AAAAA AAAAA..., can you solve it?). Also "cover words" were used both in encrypted and not encrypted messages as well as Swedish words and dialects which made solving more difficult.

A good topic for another discussion. Let's get back to submarines...

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

Post by BIGpanzer » 20 Mar 2007 18:03

Harri wrote:
Some of the Soviet codes were first solved by Estonians in autumn 1939. Decrypted messages were then given to Finns. Later this work continued in Finland together with Estonian and Finnish experts
One of the most important thing in my opinion - capture of code books and many other cryptographic materials by Finns from Soviet consulate in Petsamo [June 1941].
Harii wrote:
Let's get back to submarines...
Sure! I am interested in exact fates of some Soviet submarines. For other types of discussions here I have no time at the moment, unfortunately :(

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

Post by Juha Tompuri » 20 Mar 2007 22:39

BIGpanzer wrote:
Juha wrote:It of course depends also about the individuals, but for instance at USSR it
seems that pilots overclaimed more than the sub captains:
During Winter War Soviet pilots claimed ~300 Finnish planes shot down, the reality being ~30 planes.
During the same period of time Soviet subs claimed IIRC 6 ships sunken, the reality being 5 ships.
Soviet pilots [as all pilots] claimed what they really shot down or seems to be shot down (damaged).
The amount of "~300" [362 in reality] was claimed by Soviet official propaganda but not pilots
Do you have any sources to the emphased part?

BP wrote:As for Soviet submarines victories during Winter war - I didn't see Soviet reports about 6 sank ships, I know only the modern info about 5.
According to the P-O Ekman "Sukellusvenesotaa Itämerellä" (Submarine Warfare at Baltic Sea) at the ShCh-311 Red Banner award is mentioned that it sank three enemy military cargo ships, total 10000 brt during the Winter War. The reality being two ships (775 brt and 484 brt) with no military cargo.
BP about Metallist wrote:the operation it was planned by NKVD
to some degree, most probable.
Of course the order to the action came from high level.
BP wrote: For example, it was mentioned in several online sources [discussions between divers] that transport ship under the name "Metallist" was sank by Finnish artillery during the evacuation of Hango garrison
I don't remember reading that from finnish sources.
Do you know the location where the Metallist should have sunken?
BP wrote:
Juha wrote: as well as a Soviet Naval officer Finns had taken POW, who (also) is mentioned to have been an eye-wittness to the action.

His name and unit [warship], please. I will try to find additional info.
Sorry, but I it's not mentioned at the P-O Ekman "Sukellusvenesotaa Itämerellä", the source of the case. The book mentions him being taken POW at Karelian Isthmus 1941.
BP wrote:PS2. Additional info about raising of Shch-406 by Finns 11.10.1943, please.
Don't remember reading about such case.

Regards, Juha

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

Post by Janne » 21 Mar 2007 08:42

FWIW according to an Estonian page (kindly provided as a first hit by Google), the "Metallist" met its final fate in the port of Hanko on July 26th 1941 when it was sunk by Finnish artillery fire. It appears that it became scrap iron during the war.

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

Post by Rodan Lewarx » 21 Mar 2007 09:35

What said finnish and swedish sources about ShCh-317? Accroding to russian sources that sub sunk 4 transport ships in 1942: "Argo" (finnish) , "Ada Gorton" (swedish), "Rein", "Otto Kords" (german). 1 transport ship ("Orion", dutch) was damaged. ShCh-317 was sunk by swedish destroyer "Stokholm" 12 july 1942.

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

Post by Juha Tompuri » 21 Mar 2007 13:00

Rodan Lewarx wrote:What said finnish and swedish sources about ShCh-317? Accroding to russian sources that sub sunk 4 transport ships in 1942: "Argo" (finnish) , "Ada Gorton" (swedish), "Rein", "Otto Kords" (german). 1 transport ship ("Orion", dutch) was damaged. ShCh-317 was sunk by swedish destroyer "Stokholm" 12 july 1942.
Hi Rodan,

From Finnish sources
P-O Ekholm at his previous mentioned book mentions:
-sinking of S/S Argo SW of Bogskär morning 16th June 1942
-same afternoon torpedo miss of Swedish S/S Anna
-damaged Danish S/S Orion W of Gotska Sandön
-22th June mid day sinking of Swedish Ada Gorthon E of Öland
-4th July a torpedo miss of Swedish Fortuna off Smygehug
8th July sinking of German Otto Kords at coast of Blekingen
10th July ShCh-317 sent a radio message to the Brigade HQ that it had sunk five ships and had started the return trip. It was the last message the boat sent.

German armed trawlers detected the boat when it was passing the Nashorn minefield, and attacked the boat with detphcharges, and caused the boat fuel tanks to leak.
13th July a Finnish Dornier Do-22 plane detected S of Kallbådagrund a fuel trail that was moving eastwards.
Then Finnish planes dropped depthcharges to the trail, but with no visible effect.
Then Finnish minelayer Ruotsinsalmi and a patrolboat VMV6 arrived to the scene.
After 11 dropped depth charges more oil and air bubles began to arise. Five depthcharges, set to explode 60-80m, caused even more oil and air bubles to appear. Also a sailors cap came to surface. Oil kept coming from the same spot for several days.
At Finnish sources the sub is mentioned to have been destroyed 15th July 1942 South of Kallbådagrund.

Regards, Juha

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

Post by BIGpanzer » 21 Mar 2007 19:49

Sorry, guys, no time :(
So the info for Jon G about use of submarines in transport operations on Black Sea.

At first the large submarines of 1st brigade were used for transport raids to Sevastopol: L-4 and D-4 [7 May, 1942 - the first raid]. Since 15.05.1942 - L-5 and L-23. 30.05.1942 - S-31 and S-32. Since 14.07.1942 - almost all submarines based in Caucasian ports were used for transport raids.
L-23 and L-4 also performed 7 transport raids to Sevastopol each; L-5 performed 6 raids; D-4 - 5 raids. S-31 delivered 225 t of ammunition and 45 t of fuel; evecuated 67 men.
L-24 performed 4 raids, M-31, M-118 and A-4 performed 3 raids each. D-5 performed 3 raids to Sevastopol [15.06.1942-01.07.1942] and delivered 127 tons of ammunition, 65 tons of fuel; evacuated 175 men.
Transport raids of submarines were of large importance for the 250-days defense of Sevastopol: 24 submarines [14 from 1st brigade and 10 from 2nd brigade] performed 69 successful raids to Sevastopol, delivered 2323 t of ammunition, 1038 t of food supplies, 573 t of different fuel; evecuated 1392 men.

Losses during transport raids:
S-32 [captain 3rd rank Pavlenko] performed 7 raids Novorossisk-Sevastopol-Novorossisk(Tuapse): delivered 320 t of ammunition + 80 t of food supplies + 80 t of fuel, and evacuated 140 wounded men. 26.06.1942 S-32 was lost during its 8th raid to Sevastopol [transported 40 t of ammunition and 30 t of fuel]: most probably, it was sank by He-111 from 2/KG 100 or exploded on sea mine in the point 44.12'/33.48'; all 55 crewmembers were lost. The well-known version that S-32 was sank by Italian submarine SV-3 is not correct [SV-3 unsuccessfully attacked S-32 15.06.1942].

Shch-214 [captain 3rd rank Vlasov] was lost 19.06.1942, 21.23 during the 2nd transport raid [torpedoed by Italian torpedo boat MAS.571 20 miles from Cape Aitodor after detection from shore observation post], 38(39) men were lost, 2 were captured [mechanic Poltavtsev and electrician Pleshakov].
Shch-214 had following victories [Turkish schooner - 03.11.1941; Italian tanker [3336 brt] - 05.11.1941; Turkish schooner - 01.01.1942; Bulgarian schooner - 29.05.1942; Bulgarian schooner - 31.05.1942; Bulgarian schooner - 02.06.1942].

BP
Last edited by BIGpanzer on 21 Mar 2007 20:01, edited 1 time in total.

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

Post by Jon G. » 21 Mar 2007 19:56

Thank you very much for that, BP :)

Regarding your earlier question, I think I would use the phrase 'mission' rather than 'navigation' to describe the activities of the Soviet subs. I understand that you're translating from a number of Russian language sources. This translator is very good. It even has a Cyrillic keyboard interface.

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