Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Page 3 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  SecondFront on Sun 26 Aug 2012 - 20:11

& You've already been told & (given names for said ships), german cargo & warships ships passed right through North sea picket through Giup gap without any trouble. You're fantasies about their interception abilities remain pure fantasy

You've given me a TINY fraction of the names of vessels that tried to run it. Perhaps if you looked round for better numbers.... Wink

Or perhaps - like me - you already have and realised that the numbers do NOT support your contention AT ALL!

The naval operations to support the mine laying did mean that a number of British ships were in Norwegian waters on 8 April, as the invasion fleet took up its place. This led to two clashes between British and German ships.

The first clash was between the British destroyer Glowworm and the German cruiser Hipper....

As noted, this encounter took place nearly 70 miles OUTSIDE Norwegian territorial waters. I'm afraid wishful thinking and "thin" internet references doesn't change the geographical reality! Razz

The second came early on the morning of 9 April. Having escorted ten destroyers to Narvik, the battlecruisers Scharnhorst and Gneisenau moved north west, to take up their patrol positions. At 3.37am they were sighted by the British battlecruiser Renown. She was at sea to protect the forces that had been laying mines off Narvik. A short battle followed, fought in heavy seas and amongst snow storms, with poor visibility.

....and THIS encounter took place at 67-22N, 09-36E - again some 60-65 miles to the west of the Lofoten Islands I.E. at least 60 miles outside Norwegian waters Razz

You've once again demonstrated you don't know anything of any relative value to the subject matter

I leave THAT aspect of lack of knowledge to you. You've demonstrated (once again!) you're 're far better at it than me

SecondFront

Posts : 130
Join date : 2011-09-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  Black Hornet on Tue 28 Aug 2012 - 1:14

& the mining of Norwegian Fjords was done by magic perhaps? Aliens gave the Royal Navy anti gravity technology to stay 10 feet above the water while dropping the mines at Port & Fjord entrances?? Do tell us how this magic was done.

Late on 7 April the British naval force approached the Vestfjord, and in the early morning of 8 April the mines were laid.
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/operation_wilfred.html



Altmark incident also prior to the German invasion. 16 February 1940
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altmark_Incident
The Norwegians were angered that their neutrality had been infringed.



Yes, only mentioned a tiny fraction of the vessels that made it, the actual number much higher. 18 went to Murmansk in a very short time after war was declared. Scheer, Bismark, Atlantic, Scharnhorst & Gneisenau, Hipper, & Prinz Eugen also made it through, thats basically "ALL" the warships that made the attempt. Graf Spee before that.

the Graf Spee and the Deutschland had sailed between 21 and 24 August and were now loose on the high seas having evaded the Northern Patrol, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade_of_Germany_(1939%E2%80%931945)

Black Hornet

Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  Black Hornet on Tue 28 Aug 2012 - 1:49

The British Supreme War Council met in London on 28 March to discuss ways to intensify the blockade.

Chamberlain also indicated that steps were being taken to stop the Swedish iron ore trade, and a few days later ""the Norwegian coast was mined""



Churchill called the Norwegian Corridor) between the shoreline and the Skjaergaard (Skjærgård), a continuous chain of some 50,000 glacially formed skerries (small uninhabited islands), sea stacks and rocks running the entire 1,600 km length of the west coast. As in WW1, the Germans used the Norwegian Corridor to travel inside the 3-nautical-mile (5.6 km)-wide neutral waters where the Royal Navy and RAF were unable to attack them. Churchill considered this to be the 'greatest impediment to the blockade', and continually pressed for the mining of the Skjaergaard to force the German ships to come out into the open seas where Contraband Control could deal with them



The ships allocated to the individual operations were as follows.

Force WV (Mouth of Vestfjord)

Renown – Renown-class battlecruiser
Glowworm – "G"-class destroyer
Greyhound – "G"-class destroyer
Impulsive - minelaying destroyer
Esk - minelaying destroyer
Icarus - minelaying destroyer
Ivanhoe - minelaying destroyer
Hardy - escort destroyer
Havock - escort destroyer
Hotspur - escort destroyer
Hunter - escort destroyer
Force WB – (Bud headland)

Birmingham – Town"-class light cruiser
Hyperion - "H"-class minelaying destroyer. Initially part of Renown escort screen
Hero – "H"-class minelaying destroyer. Initially part of Renown escort screen
Force WS (Off Stadtlandet)

Teviot Bank - 5,087 ton auxiliary minelayer
Inglefield - "I"-class minelaying destroyer leader
Imogen – "I"-class minelaying destroyer
Ilex - "I"-class minelaying destroyer
Isis - "I"-class minelaying destroyer


Thats quite a load of ships, ( mostly Destroyers doing the actual mining), for mining these coastal Norwegian territorial waters. And all prior to German invasion ships entering Norwegian waters.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Wilfred

Black Hornet

Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  SecondFront on Tue 28 Aug 2012 - 2:28

& the mining of Norwegian Fjords was done by magic perhaps?

Altmark incident also prior to the German invasion. 16 February 1940

Ahem...I DID say some many posts ago that these were the only instances of the RN breeching Norwegian territorial waters BEFORE the Germans arrived... Rolling Eyes No cigar.

HERE'S an interesting list...

Scheer, Bismark, Atlantic, Scharnhorst & Gneisenau, Hipper, & Prinz Eugen also made it through

Let's see - Bismarck and Prinz Eugen INTERCEPTED by the Northern Patrol? Yep...

Scharnhorst and Gneisenau INTERCEPTED by Home Fleet? Yep...

The point is they were observed and intercepted.

THIS one, However, I REALLY love... Laughing Laughing Laughing

the Graf Spee and the Deutschland had sailed between 21 and 24 August and were now loose on the high seas having evaded the Northern Patrol, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade_of_Germany_(1939%E2%80%931945)

You really SHOULD check any material in Wiki, you know...

The Northern patrol wasn't constituted UNTIL THE 7TH OF SEPTEMBER! They didn't "evade" it - it didn't exist then they entered the Atlantic! Razz Razz Razz Razz Razz

As for your NEXT post....

Thats quite a load of ships, ( mostly Destroyers doing the actual mining), for mining these coastal Norwegian territorial waters.

You're really NOT doing your research, are you Razz

Only the minelaying destroyers actually went inshore and laid mines...and even then not all of them BEFORE the Germans arrived! The rest of the flotillas stood out to sea to cover them! At Vestfjord, for example only three destroyers - Esk, Icarus and Ivanhoe - intruded on Norwegian waters at that time Rolling Eyes

Oh, and a P.S. - PLEASE, as I've advised before...read your own references to make sure they actually support what you claim....and don't actually support what *I'M* saying! Laughing Here's a perfect example of your foot-shooting...

Churchill called the Norwegian Corridor) between the shoreline and the Skjaergaard (Skjærgård), a continuous chain of some 50,000 glacially formed skerries (small uninhabited islands), sea stacks and rocks running the entire 1,600 km length of the west coast. As in WW1, the Germans used the Norwegian Corridor to travel inside the 3-nautical-mile (5.6 km)-wide neutral waters where the Royal Navy and RAF were unable to attack them. Churchill considered this to be the 'greatest impediment to the blockade', and continually pressed for the mining of the Skjaergaard to force the German ships to come out into the open seas where Contraband Control could deal with them

..which IS after all what I've been saying for some time now! Razz

"Must do better"

SecondFront

Posts : 130
Join date : 2011-09-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  Black Hornet on Thu 30 Aug 2012 - 2:33

No, you said this section of ocean "closed off" to RN, which is rubbish.

Scharnhorst & Gneisenau sailed into Atlanic & sunk many merchant ships, plus they avoided as was previously mentioned the North sea picket south if Iceland. Other raiders that evaded North sea picket were Orion, Widder, Thor, & Pinguin.

& remember, it doesn't really metter so much that it was easy for these ships to evade North Sea picket as cargo ships sent to Iceland avoid the patrol zones, ( try & remember that this time), plus the germans read British/Norwegian radio traffic April 1940 & knew where & when the RN would send men in ships to their specific destinations. Armed with this intelligence, it would be child's play to avoid RN ships.


Quote;
the Germans used the Norwegian Corridor to travel inside the 3-nautical-mile (5.6 km)-wide neutral waters where the Royal Navy and RAF were unable to attack them.


C,mon, read man read, this is exactly WHY these waters were mined & RN was able to attack any German ship in this area after deciding "not" to stay out of these waters anymore & WERE IN these waters April 8th.

Black Hornet

Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  SecondFront on Thu 30 Aug 2012 - 21:08

No, you said this section of ocean "closed off" to RN, which is rubbish.

Closed off by themselves, by their own rules of engagement! Except on those two occasions.

Scharnhorst & Gneisenau sailed into Atlanic & sunk many merchant ships, plus they avoided as was previously mentioned the North sea picket south if Iceland.

They did not avoid the Northern Patrol; time to teach you some more history apparently. They were intercepted by the armed mercahnt cruiser HMS Rawalpindi, one of the AMCs that began joining the Northern Patrol in late 1939 to assist the group of light cruisers assigned to Max Horton - they sank her, BUT -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Rawalpindi

While patrolling north of the Faroe Islands on 23 November 1939, she investigated a possible enemy sighting, only to find that she had encountered two of the most powerful German warships, the battleships Scharnhorst and Gneisenau conducting a sweep between Iceland and the Faroes. Rawalpindi was able to signal the German ships' location back to base. Despite being hopelessly outgunned, 60-year old Captain Edward Coverley Kennedy RN of Rawalpindi decided to fight, rather than surrender as demanded by the Germans. He was heard to say "We’ll fight them both, they’ll sink us, and that will be that. Good-bye".

& remember, it doesn't really metter so much that it was easy for these ships to evade North Sea picket as cargo ships sent to Iceland avoid the patrol zones, ( try & remember that this time)

You're right, it's NOT a good example...given that cargo ships will be steaming at some 6-8 knots rather than the 25-30 knots of the Scharnhorst & Gneisenau!

The British began using faster Armed Merchant Cruisers because they were still faster than laden cargo ships and could chase down blockade runners!

the Germans used the Norwegian Corridor to travel inside the 3-nautical-mile (5.6 km)-wide neutral waters where the Royal Navy and RAF were unable to attack them.

C,mon, read man read, this is exactly WHY these waters were mined & RN was able to attack any German ship in this area after deciding "not" to stay out of these waters anymore & WERE IN these waters April 8th.

Ahem....did you miss therefore that the Norwegian Leads had been available to German ships for the previous eight months of the war? They had used them to avoid the many anti-blockade runner sweeps that the RN conducted across the North Sea and North Atlantic in addition to the Northern Patrol line?

SecondFront

Posts : 130
Join date : 2011-09-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  Black Hornet on Thu 6 Sep 2012 - 3:24

Ahem, we weren't discussing the previous 8 months, you said, "during German invasion" this section of North Sea closed off to RN, you were & will always be WRONG.

British chose fast armed merchant cruisers which were faster than German blockade runners & only sunk 2 out of 19 circa 41-42 of Europe to far EAST runners, in other words, still sucked at it.


Quote;
They did not avoid the Northern Patrol; Yes they did, & more than once, Yet again time to teach you basic History.

The Germans' radar detected the British at long range, which allowed Lütjens to avoid the British patrols, with the aid of a squall. By 3 February, the two battleships had evaded the last British cruiser patrol, and had broken into the open Atlantic
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_battleship_Scharnhorst





http://www.hmshood.com/history/timeline4.htm



25 November: Departed Plymouth to intercept ship presumed to be Deutschland (actually Scharnhorst and Gneisenau)

The objective was to patrol the area south of Iceland and possibly intercept the German raiders. The enemy were not sighted. Hood returned to Greenock.




Last edited by Black Hornet on Thu 6 Sep 2012 - 3:36; edited 1 time in total

Black Hornet

Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  Black Hornet on Thu 6 Sep 2012 - 3:34

Phylo wrote;

the RN had accounted for half the KM's destroyers, the Karlsruhe had been sunk, the Blucher had been sunk, the Konigsberg had been sunk

Again time for a History lesson. Blucher was not sunk by the Royal Navy, Norwegian shore batteries sunk it. Konigsberg also was hit by Norwegian batteries which stuck it in place whereby enabling RAF to finish it off, NOT the ROYAL Navy.


Konigsberg...
http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-fornv/germany/gersh-k/konigsb3.htm
engaged the defending Norwegian shore batteries. Königsberg received serious damage in this engagement, which restricted her speed and prevented her from leaving the area with her companions. She was also the target of a British air raid on the 9th, but was not hit. On the following day, 10 April 1940, the cruiser was tied up to a Bergen quay when several British "Skua" dive bombers delivered a deadly attack, making five hits


Blucher...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_cruiser_Bl%C3%BCcher
Two old 28 cm (11 in) coastal guns in the Oscarsborg Fortress engaged the ship at very close range, scoring two hits.[1] Two torpedoes fired by land-based torpedo batteries struck the ship, causing serious damage. A major fire broke out aboard Blücher, which could not be contained. After a magazine explosion, the ship slowly capsized and sank,

Black Hornet

Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  SecondFront on Thu 6 Sep 2012 - 19:34

Yes they did, & more than once, Yet again time to teach you basic History.

The Germans' radar detected the British at long range, which allowed Lütjens to avoid the British patrols, with the aid of a squall. By 3 February, the two battleships had evaded the last British cruiser patrol, and had broken into the open Atlantic
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_battleship_Scharnhorst

http://www.hmshood.com/history/timeline4.htm

25 November: Departed Plymouth to intercept ship presumed to be Deutschland (actually Scharnhorst and Gneisenau)

The objective was to patrol the area south of Iceland and possibly intercept the German raiders. The enemy were not sighted. Hood returned to Greenock.

Oh, I think you can leave the teaching of basic history to me Wink Shall I illustrate,once again??? Let's first see the entire passage...

The two ships were forced to put into port during the storm: Scharnhorst went to Gotenhafen while Gneisenau went to Kiel for repairs. Repairs were quickly completed, and on 22 January 1941, the two ships, under the command of Admiral Günther Lütjens, left port for the North Atlantic. They were detected in the Skagerrak and the heavy units of the British Home Fleet deployed to cover the passage between Iceland and the Faroes. The Germans' radar detected the British at long range, which allowed Lütjens to avoid the British patrols, with the aid of a squall. By 3 February, the two battleships had evaded the last British cruiser patrol, and had broken into the open Atlantic

By THIS date - the only cruisers on the Northern Patrol were the armed merchant cruisers..... Razz Really great job in avoiding those...

P.S. let's not forget that that makes only a 50% success rate at evading the Northern Patrol... Wink

Meanwhile....

Yes they did, & more than once

http://www.hmshood.com/history/timeline4.htm

25 November: Departed Plymouth to intercept ship presumed to be Deutschland (actually Scharnhorst and Gneisenau)

The objective was to patrol the area south of Iceland and possibly intercept the German raiders. The enemy were not sighted. Hood returned to Greenock.

HMS Hood may indeed have patrolled off Iceland in its time...but wasn't on the "Northern Patrol", it was never on its roster or ever under the comamnd of Max Horton nor ever integrated with its patrols.

Oh, and as for VERY basic history....

Again time for a History lesson. Blucher was not sunk by the Royal Navy, Norwegian shore batteries sunk it. Konigsberg also was hit by Norwegian batteries which stuck it in place whereby enabling RAF to finish it off, NOT the ROYAL Navy.


Konigsberg...
http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-fornv/germany/gersh-k/konigsb3.htm
engaged the defending Norwegian shore batteries. Königsberg received serious damage in this engagement, which restricted her speed and prevented her from leaving the area with her companions. She was also the target of a British air raid on the 9th, but was not hit. On the following day, 10 April 1940, the cruiser was tied up to a Bergen quay when several British "Skua" dive bombers delivered a deadly attack, making five hits

1/ the RAF didn't EVER fly Skua divebombers....that was an attack by FLEET AIR ARM, specifically 16 Blackburn Skua dive bombers of the British Fleet Air Arm (7 of 800 Naval Air Squadron and 9 of 803 Naval Air Squadron), launched from RNAS Hatston, Orkney...

In other words - yes, the Royal Navy; and...

2/ "Königsberg received serious damage in this engagement, which restricted her speed" REALLY???

Well, looking at Pete Smith's "Dive Bomber!" we can ACTAULLY see that Konigsberg was LIGHTLY damaged by Norwegian fire from Kvarven Fort....the engine failure that kept her in place was due to her own unreliable engines!

the RN had accounted for half the KM's destroyers, the Karlsruhe had been sunk, the Blucher had been sunk, the Konigsberg had been sunk

Again time for a History lesson. Blucher was not sunk by the Royal Navy, Norwegian shore batteries sunk it.

I didn't claim they did in that paragraph Wink

Time it seems for an English Grammar lesson instead! Any phrase deliniated in a sentence by commas has to be able to make a stand-alone sentence of whatever length if removed from that sentence. Ergo that also reads...

The RN had accounted for half the KM's destroyers.
The Karlsruhe had been sunk.
The Blucher had been sunk.
The Konigsberg had been sunk.
The Lutzow had been very badly damaged and out of commission for over a year.
Gneisenau was damaged and required repairs.
Scharnhorst was damaged and required repairs.
Hipper was damaged and required repairs.
Emden was damaged and was retired after Norway.

The point of the entire passage however was not that the Royal Navy did all this....

Get with the REAL HISTORY of April 1940; by the end of the first week of activity off Norway in April 1940 the RN had accounted for half the KM's destroyers, the Karlsruhe had been sunk, the Blucher had been sunk, the Konigsberg had been sunk....the Lutzow had been very badly damaged and out of commission for over a year, Gneisenau was damaged and required repairs, Scharnhorst was damaged and required repairs, Hipper was damaged and required repairs, Emden was damaged and was retired after Norway....

...the point was that it happened in one week; the Kriegsmarine had been crippled for some time in only a week Razz Razz Razz


SecondFront

Posts : 130
Join date : 2011-09-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  AltforNorge on Thu 6 Sep 2012 - 21:31

O M G Sleep

AltforNorge

Posts : 346
Join date : 2008-03-08
Age : 63
Location : Møre og Romsdal

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  Black Hornet on Fri 7 Sep 2012 - 3:25

Yawn. Blackburn Skua sematincs doesn't change anything, the RN surface ships was what you meant, your sidestep isn't clever & doesn't change a thing. Karlsruhe was hit by a submarine torpedo, then sunk by 2 German torpedoes. The captain was criticized as it remained afloat for 2 hours after the sub attack.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_cruiser_Karlsruhe


No on Konigsberg motors, yes to Norwegian shore batteries.

Plus you were also wrong about Schleswig being a coastal vessel. Range: 4,800 nautical miles (9,000 km
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS_Schleswig-Holstein

The training regimen in which Schleswig-Holstein participated followed a similar pattern over the next five years. This included another cruise into the Atlantic,

followed by a summer cruise to Norway.

sailing in October 1936 on a six-month voyage to South America and the Caribbean




Konigsberg...
The damage caused by the bombs did not sink the ship directly, rather it was the inability of her crew to control the fires without the equipment damaged by the Norwegian shore batteries.

The 3.7cm flak batteries amidships of the Königsberg had been destroyed by the Norwegian harbour defences
http://freespace.virgin.net/john.dell/sinking_of_the_konigsberg.htm

Norskies get most of the credit any way you slice it.

Black Hornet

Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  Black Hornet on Fri 7 Sep 2012 - 8:51

Phylo wrote...
HMS Hood may indeed have patrolled off Iceland in its time...but wasn't on the "Northern Patrol", it was never on its roster or ever under the comamnd of Max Horton nor ever integrated with its patrols.

More dingology. So what it wasn't under Hortons command, it WAS engaged in searching for German ships in the area. Yet another completely irrelevant post amongst the endless multitudes.


When war with Germany was declared Hood was operating in the area around Iceland, and she spent the next several months hunting between Iceland and the Norwegian Sea for German commerce raiders and blockade runners.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Hood_(51)

In November 1940 she joined the hunt for Admiral Scheer after the sinking of Jervis Bay

Jervis Bay...
sunk 755 nautical miles (1,398 kilometres) south-southwest of Reykjavík.








Phylo wrote...
"Hipper was damaged and required repairs",

Which took 2 weeks. The damage it recieved did not prevent it from completing its mission.

The collision with Glowworm tore off a 40-meter (130 ft) section of Admiral Hipper's armored belt on the starboard side, as well as the ship's starboard torpedo launcher.[15] Minor flooding caused a four degree list to starboard, though the ship was able to continue with the mission. Admiral Hipper then resumed course toward Trondheim.

After arriving off Trondheim, Admiral Hipper successfully passed herself off as a British warship long enough to steam past the Norwegian coastal artillery batteries. The ship entered the harbor and docked shortly before 05:30 to debark the mountain troops. After the ground troops seized control of the coastal batteries, the ship left Trondheim, bound for Germany. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_cruiser_Admiral_Hipper
"repairs were completed in the span of two weeks".




Phylo wrote... Emden was damaged and was retired after Norway

Emden...
After the ground troops occupied Oslo, Emden entered the port,Emden entered the port to serve as a joint communications center to coordinate Kriegsmarine, Wehrmacht, and Luftwaffe operations. After the conquest of Norway was complete, Emden returned to Germany to serve as a training ship. This lasted until September 1941.[14]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_cruiser_Emden







Nurnberg...
She was under repair until May 1940, and so missed the Norwegian Campaign. From July 1940 through January 1945, Nürnberg served either in and off Norway or in German home waters. At the end of the war the ship was surrendered in Copenhagen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_cruiser_N%C3%BCrnberg

Leipzig
She was recommissioned after repairs on 1 December 1940
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_cruiser_Leipzig



Scheer...
On 27 July 1940, the ship was pronounced ready for service.[17]

[edit] Atlantic sortie
Admiral ScheerAdmiral Scheer sailed in October 1940 on her first combat sortie
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_cruiser_Admiral_Scheer


Prinz Eugen..
In early July 1940, shortly before her commissioning, Prinz Eugen was attacked by British bombers; the ship was struck by only one bomb.[7] She was not seriously damaged, however, and was commissioned into service the following month.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_cruiser_Prinz_Eugen





to sum up..Norway, 3 Cruisers sunk, 10 destroyers... Destroyers crew rescued, & 10 new Destroyers replaced in 41. As to Cruisers, 1941 had Scheer, Scharnhorst, Gneiseau, Hipper, Koln, Prinz Eugen, Emden, Nurnberg, Leipzig & Lutzow available for ops. Stronger than the Cruiser force was in 1940, ( during Wesurubung to be specific), Also the 25 knot, ( modern 11 inch gun), Schleswig-Holstein & Schlesien
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS_Schlesien




Black Hornet

Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  SecondFront on Sat 8 Sep 2012 - 20:06

Yawn. Blackburn Skua sematincs doesn't change anything

Your abject lack of WWII knowledge and inability to read even the simplest of Wiki entries does however Razz You claimed it was the RAF not the RN....that's simply 100% incorrect.

the RN surface ships was what you meant

Nope. If it was what I meant I would have said it. I don't need to fudge.

No on Konigsberg motors, yes to Norwegian shore batteries.

I think I'll go with the reputable historian rather than the Wiki entry Wink

Konigsberg...
The damage caused by the bombs did not sink the ship directly, rather it was the inability of her crew to control the fires without the equipment damaged by the Norwegian shore batteries.

The 3.7cm flak batteries amidships of the Königsberg had been destroyed by the Norwegian harbour defences

Ahem...who dropped the bombs that caused the fires? Laughing

P.S let's see the whole quote, eh?

The damage caused by the bombs did not sink the ship directly, rather it was the inability of her crew to control the fires without the equipment damaged by the Norwegian shore batteries. Flooding caused by the bombing could not be controlled because the Königsberg's pumps were out of action due to the loss of electrical power.

Norskies get most of the credit any way you slice it.

Really? Not in YOUR source!

The combat reports of the Fleet Air Arm pilots claimed three direct hits amidships of the Königsberg and another near the bow. However German sources suggest that no less than 5 and maybe 6 bombs struck the cruiser with another exploding so close astern as to still do extensive damage. These German reports indicate that a couple of these "hits" may have been bombs that first struck the mole and then bounced sideways through the side of the ship before exploding.


HMS Hood may indeed have patrolled off Iceland in its time...but wasn't on the "Northern Patrol", it was never on its roster or ever under the comamnd of Max Horton nor ever integrated with its patrols.

More dingology. So what it wasn't under Hortons command, it WAS engaged in searching for German ships in the area. Yet another completely irrelevant post amongst the endless multitudes.

The "Northern Patrol" was a specific military formation constituted on the 7th of September 1939 under the command of Adm. Max Horton. Whether you like it or not...you claimed that in avoiding HMS Hood they avoided the "Northern Patrol". Hood was never in that formation.

"Hipper was damaged and required repairs",

Which took 2 weeks. The damage it recieved did not prevent it from completing its mission.

I can't help noticing what you left out of all that about the Hipper from Wiki....

She was escorted by Friedrich Eckoldt; she reached Wilhelmshaven on 12 April, and went into drydock. The dockyard workers discovered the ship had been damaged more severely by the collision with Glowworm than had previously been thought. Nevertheless, repairs were completed in the span of two weeks

No matter how long it took to repair - it means she's not available to support your early April invasion of Iceland.

Phylo wrote... Emden was damaged and was retired after Norway

Emden...
After the ground troops occupied Oslo, Emden entered the port,Emden entered the port to serve as a joint communications center to coordinate Kriegsmarine, Wehrmacht, and Luftwaffe operations. After the conquest of Norway was complete, Emden returned to Germany to serve as a training ship. This lasted until September 1941.[14]

Yes - retired from active service and used as a training vessel.

Nurnberg...
She was under repair until May 1940, and so missed the Norwegian Campaign.

So isn't available to support your April invasion of Iceland.

Leipzig
She was recommissioned after repairs on 1 December 1940

Once again an incomplete and intentionally misleading misquote Razz

Two destroyed boiler rooms were restored as living quarters only and Leipzig was converted into a training ship with a reduced maximum speed of 24 knots. She was recommissioned after repairs on 1 December 1940.

Recommissioned as a training ship.

Scheer...
On 27 July 1940, the ship was pronounced ready for service.[17]

Thus unavailable to support your April invasion of Iceland.

In early July 1940, shortly before her commissioning, Prinz Eugen was attacked by British bombers; the ship was struck by only one bomb.[7] She was not seriously damaged, however, and was commissioned into service the following month.

The ship was laid down in April 1936 and launched August 1938; Prinz Eugen entered service after the outbreak of war, in August 1940.

Thus unavailable to support your April invasion of Iceland.

As to Cruisers, 1941 had Scheer, Scharnhorst, Gneiseau, Hipper, Koln, Prinz Eugen, Emden, Nurnberg, Leipzig & Lutzow available for ops.

So what? You're claiming the Germans could have invaded Iceland in April 1940....NOT 1941! Laughing Laughing Laughing Now THAT is really moving the goalposts Razz

to sum up..Norway, 3 Cruisers sunk, 10 destroyers... Destroyers crew rescued, & 10 new Destroyers replaced in 41.

Destroyer crews rescued, eh?

I wonder - exactly what happened to those rescued destroyer crews at Narvik eh? Wink

SecondFront

Posts : 130
Join date : 2011-09-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  Black Hornet on Tue 11 Sep 2012 - 3:35

Some were machine gunned in the water by British Destroyers, the rest were deployed as troops defending Narvik. 8000 Krag rifles, plus ammo were taken from the local Norwegian army depot.

Yes, 1940, no goal post move.


I can't help noticing what you left out of all that about the Hipper from Wiki....


She was escorted by Friedrich Eckoldt; she reached Wilhelmshaven on 12 April, and went into drydock. The dockyard workers discovered the ship had been damaged more severely by the collision with Glowworm than had previously been thought. Nevertheless, repairs were completed in the span of two weeks

Yes, repaired in 2 weeks.

Black Hornet

Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  Black Hornet on Tue 11 Sep 2012 - 3:40

Quote;
The "Northern Patrol" was a specific military formation constituted on the 7th of September 1939 under the command of Adm. Max Horton. Whether you like it or not...you claimed that in avoiding HMS Hood they avoided the "Northern Patrol". Hood was never in that formation.

Yet Hood WAS engaged in the serach for German ships in the area & in the relevant timeframe, which is the essence of the discussion. Irrelevant that it was not in THAT formation. More nonsensical dingological nonsense.



Norskies get most of the credit any way you slice it.

Really? Not in YOUR source!

Yes, in my source & most any other.


and engaged the defending Norwegian shore batteries. Königsberg received serious damage in this engagement, which restricted her speed and prevented her from leaving the area with her companions.
http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-fornv/germany/gersh-k/konigsb3.htm








Ahem...who dropped the bombs that caused the fires?


Ahem, who made it possible for these bombs to be dropped on the ship? Ahem, ahem.

Black Hornet

Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  SecondFront on Tue 11 Sep 2012 - 22:02

The "Northern Patrol" was a specific military formation constituted on the 7th of September 1939 under the command of Adm. Max Horton. Whether you like it or not...you claimed that in avoiding HMS Hood they avoided the "Northern Patrol". Hood was never in that formation.

Yet Hood WAS engaged in the serach for German ships in the area & in the relevant timeframe, which is the essence of the discussion.

No - the essence of the discussion at that point was the ability of the "Northern Patrol" to intercept German vessels. of which the Hood wasn't a member. That's still trying to widen the goalposts.

I can't help noticing what you left out of all that about the Hipper from Wiki....

She was escorted by Friedrich Eckoldt; she reached Wilhelmshaven on 12 April, and went into drydock. The dockyard workers discovered the ship had been damaged more severely by the collision with Glowworm than had previously been thought. Nevertheless, repairs were completed in the span of two weeks

Yes, repaired in 2 weeks.

So - 12th of April plus two weeks, eh? That means she's unavailable for the rest of April....

So not available to support your putative invasion of Iceland in April.


Yes, in my source & most any other.

and engaged the defending Norwegian shore batteries. Königsberg received serious damage in this engagement, which restricted her speed and prevented her from leaving the area with her companions.
http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-fornv/germany/gersh-k/konigsb3.htm

MORE creative cropping...

The strike force approached Bergen during the early morning of 9 April, offloaded some of their troops to smaller craft and engaged the defending Norwegian shore batteries. Königsberg received serious damage in this engagement, which restricted her speed and prevented her from leaving the area with her companions. She was also the target of a British air raid on the 9th, but was not hit. On the following day, 10 April 1940, the cruiser was tied up to a Bergen quay when several British "Skua" dive bombers delivered a deadly attack, making five hits and one close near miss that set her afire, holed her hull and killed many crewmen.

Actually - THIS -

which restricted her speed and prevented her from leaving the area with her companions.

...although often said, isn't quite correct (there's a suprise!) The reason she couldn't leave with them at that time was she had to be anchored to stop her drifting ashore!


SecondFront

Posts : 130
Join date : 2011-09-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  SecondFront on Tue 11 Sep 2012 - 22:38

By the way...

I can't help noticing what you left out of all that about the Hipper from Wiki....

She was escorted by Friedrich Eckoldt; she reached Wilhelmshaven on 12 April, and went into drydock. The dockyard workers discovered the ship had been damaged more severely by the collision with Glowworm than had previously been thought. Nevertheless, repairs were completed in the span of two weeks

Yes, repaired in 2 weeks.

(As usual) perhaps you should have done more checking?

http://www.german-navy.de/kriegsmarine/ships/heavycruiser/admiralhipper/operations.html

April - June 1940: Repairs in Wilhelmshaven.

http://www.angelfire.com/ia/totalwar/kmsHipper.html

April through June 1940-Admiral Hipper undergoes repair work in Wilhelmshaven.


http://acepilots.com/ships/admiral-hipper.html

Damaged as she was, Admiral Hipper returned to Wilhelmshaven for repairs, which were completed by June.

http://www.axishistory.com/index.php?id=12317

She returned to Wilhelmshaven on 12 Apr 1940, avoiding the Royal Navy's Home Fleet.

After a port stay and repairs in April and May 1940 the Kreuzer had returned to fleet operations from 04 June 1940 to 10 Jun 1940.

Looks like it's not as simple as "two weeks", eh? Wink

SecondFront

Posts : 130
Join date : 2011-09-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  Black Hornet on Wed 12 Sep 2012 - 3:24

Nope, 2 weeks, like it says. After that standard overhauls, maintenance etc would be in order. Never mentioned Hipper as being part of Iceland invasion BTW.


Actually - THIS -


which restricted her speed and prevented her from leaving the area with her companions.


Yes, Norwegian shore batteries prevented her from leaving area with companions, not RN, or Skuas. You've got it out of sequence.




Quote;
No - the essence of the discussion at that point was the ability of the "Northern Patrol" to intercept German vessels. of which the Hood wasn't a member. That's still trying to widen the goalposts.


No, the essence remains as you put it, RN patrols in GIUP Gap, irrelevant which RN ships are assigned this duty. Still trying to shorten the goalposts.


So we have in recent times... Konigsberg sunk by RN, bunk.

Hood not relevant to search for german ships in Giup gap, bunk.

Schlesien a coastal vessel, bunk.

Norwegian territorial waters "closed off" to RN during German invasion, bunk.

Germans only intercepted British Army radio traffic April 1940, bunk.

Makeshift runways un-doable to Germans, bunk.

Any German ships entering in or around Iceland inevitably sunk by RN patrols, bunk.

Iceland weather make A/C ops hazardous beyond measure. Bergen gets 88 inches of rain per year, Iceland 29.
http://www.bergenfjords.com/facts/city_of_rain_bergen.html







Last edited by Black Hornet on Wed 12 Sep 2012 - 4:55; edited 8 times in total

Black Hornet

Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  Black Hornet on Wed 12 Sep 2012 - 4:10

Phylo wrote... Emden was damaged and was retired after Norway

Emden...
After the ground troops occupied Oslo, Emden entered the port,Emden entered the port to serve as a joint communications center to coordinate Kriegsmarine, Wehrmacht, and Luftwaffe operations. After the conquest of Norway was complete, Emden returned to Germany to serve as a training ship. This lasted until September 1941.[14]

Yes - retired from active service and used as a training vessel.



http://ww2db.com/ship_spec.php?ship_id=167


11 Jun 1941 German heavy cruiser Lützow departed Kiel, Germany for Norway, escorted by light cruisers Emden and Leipzig and six destroyers.

13 Jun 1941 German heavy cruiser Lützow, light cruiser Emden, light cruiser Leipzig, and destroyers passed through the Skagerrak between Denmark and Norway. Despite aerial cover by Bf 110 fighters, a British force of Beaufort torpedo bombers with fighter escort was still able to get through and attack, damaging Lützow with a torpedo hit in the engine room. Lützow was forced to return to Kiel, Germany for repairs.

Not exactly retired from active service.


Black Hornet

Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  SecondFront on Thu 13 Sep 2012 - 19:08

So we have in recent times... Konigsberg sunk by RN, bunk.

Konigsberg sunk by the RN - an indisputable historical fact, the FLEET Air Arm was a Royal Navy service branch, not RAF.

Hood not relevant to search for german ships in Giup gap, bunk.

Hood not releveant to the performance of Max Horton's Nothern Patrol. You're the one used the second attempted breakout by Scharnhorst that got past the Hood without making contact as an example of being able to avoid the "Northern Patrol". However you try to justify it, or widen the goalposts - Hood was never under Horton's command, not was ever rostered as part of the "Northern Patrol". Claiming otherwise is just a lie.

Schlesien a coastal vessel, bunk.

Schleissen a short-range vessel.

Norwegian territorial waters "closed off" to RN during German invasion, bunk.

COMPLETE STARWMAN - is that the best you can do??? I specifically said that once the German invasion began the RN regarded itself as free from legal constraint.

Germans only intercepted British Army radio traffic April 1940, bunk.

Your own source confirms that they didn't intercept RN radio traffic until the start of May.

Makeshift runways un-doable to Germans, bunk.

O that's right! I haven't yet come back and done what I promised to do, have I? Laughing Twisted Evil Twisted Evil Twisted Evil I think it's time...

Any German ships entering in or around Iceland inevitably sunk by RN patrols, bunk.

I see you STILL haven't done any research on the Northern Patrol Wink

http://ww2db.com/ship_spec.php?ship_id=167

11 Jun 1941 German heavy cruiser Lützow departed Kiel, Germany for Norway, escorted by light cruisers Emden and Leipzig and six destroyers.

13 Jun 1941 German heavy cruiser Lützow, light cruiser Emden, light cruiser Leipzig, and destroyers passed through the Skagerrak between Denmark and Norway. Despite aerial cover by Bf 110 fighters, a British force of Beaufort torpedo bombers with fighter escort was still able to get through and attack, damaging Lützow with a torpedo hit in the engine room. Lützow was forced to return to Kiel, Germany for repairs.

Not exactly retired from active service

Hmmmm... that's the entry on the Lutzow....I wonder why you didn't reference the ww2db entry for the Emden itself, eh?

Perhaps for THIS reason???

http://ww2db.com/ship_spec.php?ship_id=C295

On 4 Sep 1939, fourth day of the European War, she was damaged during a British air raid at Wilhelmshaven when a Blenheim bomber crashed into the foreship, killing nine sailors. After repairs, she mined the North Sea and then participated in the invasion of Norway as a member of the fleet that sailed for Oslo. For the remainder of the war, she served in the Baltic Sea, tasked mainly with training duties.

Laughing Laughing Laughing

Nope, 2 weeks, like it says. After that standard overhauls, maintenance etc would be in order.

So you're admitting that the Hipper wasn't operational in two weeks.

Iceland weather make A/C ops hazardous beyond measure. Bergen gets 88 inches of rain per year, Iceland 29.
http://www.bergenfjords.com/facts/city_of_rain_bergen.html

Are you back to posting up random facts like some sort of informational Tourette's? Rolling Eyes

SecondFront

Posts : 130
Join date : 2011-09-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  AltforNorge on Thu 13 Sep 2012 - 22:23

Vom Westen nicht Neues santa

AltforNorge

Posts : 346
Join date : 2008-03-08
Age : 63
Location : Møre og Romsdal

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  Black Hornet on Fri 14 Sep 2012 - 3:02

Your own source confirms that they didn't intercept RN radio traffic until the start of May.


My own source confirms you're wrong & that isn't true re radio April/May.

No randomness, rather a reference to your Kaldarnes thread at Axis History which you incorrectly inferred weather hazardous etc.

Never said Hipper operational in 2 weeks, the specific posit was.. damage repaired in 2 weeks, it was & is correct.

Didn't need to specify other reference to Emden, data available in link presented.

Yes, done plenty research on Northern Patrol, I see you still haven't done sufficient reasearch on it to see how ineffective it was in the timeframe specified. 3 years & you still haven't got it.



Quote;
AND courtesy of its several carriers in home and Atlantic waters interdict every mile of any German surface vessels' voyage to Iceland...from ABOVE as well as below anbd on the surface.

Yet failed entirely to interdict ANY of the converted cargo ships, ( that were not fast warships), that became Raiders sailing right near Iceland, Atlantis, Pinguin, Thor, Widder etc. Plus the Giant liners previously mentioned.




Schleissen a short-range vessel.

Nope, you said it had to stay close to germany, it went all round the world.


Last edited by Black Hornet on Fri 14 Sep 2012 - 3:27; edited 1 time in total

Black Hornet

Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  Black Hornet on Fri 14 Sep 2012 - 3:22

Quote;
Doesn't look like 370 vessels to me! Wrong again!

270 plus 100 = 370.
Around 270 ships and 100 smaller trawlers took part in this facet of the invasion.

http://www.feldgrau.com/norwegian.html




Quote
Konigsberg sunk by the RN - an indisputable historical fact, the FLEET Air Arm was a Royal Navy service branch, not RAF.

Factually, mostly due to Norwegian shore batteries, not RN, an undisputable fact. typical British exagerration of war events.



I specifically said that once the German invasion began the RN regarded itself as free from legal constraint.


No, you specifically said "closed off" You never said the above.


Black Hornet

Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  SecondFront on Fri 14 Sep 2012 - 3:34

Yes, done plenty research on Northern Patrol, I see you still haven't done sufficient reasearch on it to see how ineffective it was in the timeframe specified.

So how many German merchant ships did the Northern Patrol intercept, then....if you've done so much research? Wink

No randomness, rather a reference to your Kaldarnes thread at Axis History which you incorrectly inferred weather hazardous etc.

You must live in a very nice part of the world if rain is the only bad weather you suffer from Wink There were (are!) OTHER types of bad weather affecting flying in Iceland...

Never said Hipper operational in 2 weeks, the specific posit was.. damage repaired in 2 weeks, it was & is correct.

So you accept that Hipper wasn't operational again in April 1940.

Nope, you said it had to stay close to germany, it went all round the world.

In peacetime when it could refuel in ANY port Wink

Perhaps a few comparisons for illustration?

The Schlesien's maximum possible range was 5,000 nautical miles...at a very reduced "economy" cruising speed of 10 kts.

The Bismarck for instance had a range of 8,870 miles....at 19 kts! Nearly twice as fast...

The Hipper? - 6,800 miles....at 20 kts! Twice as fast...

The Deutschland/Lutzow? - 10,000 miles...at 20 kts!









SecondFront

Posts : 130
Join date : 2011-09-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  Black Hornet on Fri 14 Sep 2012 - 3:37

& if Iceland invaded, it would be have safe port or 2, d'ya think???

in March 1937 the ship stopped in Halifax, Nova Scotia.[30] Later that year in December, Schlesien stopped in Mar del Plata, Argentina.[31] In 1938, the ship visited Samaná Bay in the Dominican Republic

I accept Hipper repaired in 2 weeks, & you were wrong in your contention to that.

Black Hornet

Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  SecondFront on Fri 14 Sep 2012 - 4:02

I accept Hipper repaired in 2 weeks, & you were wrong in your contention to that

That's not what you were asked; do you accept that it was not operational until the start of June 1940?

& if Iceland invaded, it would be have safe port or 2, d'ya think???

Er...no; how many Icelandic "ports" can accomodate a vessel of that size and draught at its quays for refuelling? How many Icelandic ports would contain 1,540 metric tons of fuel to refuel the Schlesien? How are the Germans supposed to get tens of thousands of tons of fuel to Iceland....

O that's right - back to fuel-carrying Ju52s and tanker submarines and slow-loving tankers all over again! Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing

SecondFront

Posts : 130
Join date : 2011-09-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  Black Hornet on Sat 15 Sep 2012 - 6:14

15 at least, Iceland has 15 deep water major ports. You now admit Schlesien can easily participate in a short distance, ( Norway to Iceland), invasion? It can easily get there & back, no need to refuel at Iceland, but tankers accomodate if neccessary. JU 52 were for air support as you will recall. Subs at Malta were supplied exclusively by other subs, U-boats were specifically earmarked for the same supply ops at Iceland in my scenario.

As an asides, using Schlesien & sister ship for gun platforms against RN at operation Sealion is a major tactical usage. Likely deployed in a similiar way at Iceland. They outgun most RN cruisers. & were uprated & do 25 knots, not 10 as you posited, ( which was a number from its WW 1 timeframe).

A new, modern stem and stern lengthened them, and refurbished boilers increased speed from 19 to nearly 25 knots.
http://www.combinedfleet.com/furashita/schlie_f.htm




There are 57 ports in Iceland for ocean-going vessels, all ice-free year-round and the majority built for fishing vessels. Some 15 ports have appreciable cargo activity http://www.randburg.com/is/index/shipping/


April German radio intercepts... Hint, Harstadt.
on the night of 8 - 9 April it increased to a point of wild confusion. Normal army radio traffic was observed in Sweden. After the platoon's first move to Als on the Kattegat, Norwegian Army messages were also intercepted, as well as traffic between Swedish and Norwegian radio stations. It was not until 24 April, that is, eleven days after the operations had commenced, that the intercept platoon was moved up to Oslo.

they provided clues to the most important debarkation ports of the British Expeditionary Force. In particular, they confirmed the landings near Harstadt, which had hitherto been merely a matter of conjecture. http://www.allworldwars.com/German-Radio-Intelligence-by-Albert-Praun.html


April 15: The 24th British Guards Brigade lands at Harstadt.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Norwegian_Campaign

Black Hornet

Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  Black Hornet on Sat 15 Sep 2012 - 7:01

Interdict...

To confront and halt the activities, advance, or entry of:

6. military to destroy (an enemy's lines of communication) by firepower
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/interdict

Scharnhorst & Gneisenau evaded Northern Patrol & were not halted or destroyed, instead, they sailed into Atlantic, ( twice!), & sunk enemy shipping. in either definition, the Northern Patrol DID NOT interdict these ships.

Black Hornet

Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  SecondFront on Sun 16 Sep 2012 - 19:00

15 at least, Iceland has 15 deep water major ports.

Really? As of 1940? Name them.

P.S. that's PORTS - not fishing harbours Razz

but tankers accomodate if neccessary.

Slow-moving tankers that avoid the RN how exactly? Rolling Eyes

As an asides, using Schlesien & sister ship for gun platforms against RN at operation Sealion is a major tactical usage.

...which was rapidly abandoned as totally unfeasible...

Likely deployed in a similiar way at Iceland.

Really? Perhaps you'd care to identify similar shallows to those off Dover they were to be grounded on?

P.S. it might be a good idea if these were actually somewhere NEAR suitable targets for them to shell Laughing Laughing Laughing

& were uprated & do 25 knots, not 10 as you posited, ( which was a number from its WW 1 timeframe).

A new, modern stem and stern lengthened them, and refurbished boilers increased speed from 19 to nearly 25 knots.
http://www.combinedfleet.com/furashita/schlie_f.htm

Oh dear - ANOTHER strawman! You seem to have not noticed... Razz ...that I said this was the Schlesien's "best economy" speed; travelling at 25 kts, it's range would SHRINK hugely!

There are 57 ports in Iceland for ocean-going vessels, all ice-free year-round and the majority built for fishing vessels. Some 15 ports have appreciable cargo activity http://www.randburg.com/is/index/shipping/

"Some 15 ports have appreciable cargo activity"....NOW! Laughing Are you claiming that were the same in 1940 as they are today???

Perhaps you'd care to illustrate how "...the majority built for fishing vessels" could accomodate Kriegsmarine heavy cruisers and battleships?

April German radio intercepts... Hint, Harstadt.
on the night of 8 - 9 April it increased to a point of wild confusion. Normal army radio traffic was observed in Sweden. After the platoon's first move to Als on the Kattegat, Norwegian Army messages were also intercepted, as well as traffic between Swedish and Norwegian radio stations. It was not until 24 April, that is, eleven days after the operations had commenced, that the intercept platoon was moved up to Oslo.

Hint - NORWEGIAN and NORWEGIAN ARMY!

they provided clues to the most important debarkation ports of the British Expeditionary Force. In particular, they confirmed the landings near Harstadt, which had hitherto been merely a matter of conjecture

Oh dear me Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes MORE "selective" quoting! Laughing Laughing Laughing To unfortunately repeat what I did some time ago...

In its first operation, which was carried out with the assistance of the Husum Fixed Intercept Station, the platoon intercepted only coastal defense messages in clear text from Denmark concerning ship movements. No army radio traffic was heard. Even these messages ceased on 9 April. Because of the great distance only a few Norwegian coastal stations were heard. Up to 8 April this traffic was normal, but on the night of 8 - 9 April it increased to a point of wild confusion. Normal army radio traffic was observed in Sweden. After the platoon's first move to Als on the Kattegat, Norwegian Army messages were also intercepted, as well as traffic between Swedish and Norwegian radio stations. It was not until 24 April, that is, eleven days after the operations had commenced, that the intercept platoon was moved up to Oslo and thus employed in the vicinity of the German operations staff. (Chart 2)

I.E. it was not until the 24th of April that they could intercept ANYTHING ELSE other than what was stated in that paragraph -

... only coastal defense messages in clear text from Denmark concerning ship movements. No army radio traffic was heard. Even these messages ceased on 9 April. Because of the great distance only a few Norwegian coastal stations were heard....Normal army radio traffic was observed in Sweden. After the platoon's first move to Als on the Kattegat, Norwegian Army messages were also intercepted, as well as traffic between Swedish and Norwegian radio stations. It was not until 24 April, that is, eleven days after the operations had commenced, that the intercept platoon was moved up to Oslo and thus employed in the vicinity of the German operations staff.

Absolutely ZERO mention of BRITISH Army radio traffic or ROYAL NAVY radio traffic. ONLY Swedish, Danish and Norwegian.

AFTER the 24th ONLY...

The Norwegian Army stations usually transmitted in the clear. Radio stations in central and southern Norway were intercepted, but few of the massages were of any tactical value.

Radio messages between Great Britain and Norway were more important. The admiralty station transmitted encrypted orders to the naval officers in command of Harstadt, Andalsnes, and Alesund. Although these messages could not be solved, they provided clues to the most important debarkation ports of the British Expeditionary Force. In particular, they confirmed the landings near Harstadt, which had hitherto been merely a matter of conjecture.

I.E. they ONLY started to intercept these AFTER the unit's move to Oslo! They CONFIRMED the landings at Harstadt HAD occured I.E. AFTER they occured, not ON the 15th Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes

Are we having issues with simple English tenses again???


SecondFront

Posts : 130
Join date : 2011-09-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  Black Hornet on Mon 17 Sep 2012 - 6:35

No mention of only after April 24, plus it specifically mentions the April 15th British Harstadt landing being decoded, & it doesn't say AFTER the landing, ( what good would that do? decoding a landing AFTER it occurred??). My God, let's work on the reading/comprehension skills.

Decoding began earlier in Denmark I think is something you've missed.


Code breaking also enabled the German Navy to know the positions of British ships prior to Germany’s invasion of Norway in 1940.
http://www.armchairgeneral.com/german-intelligence-successes-in-world-war-ii.htm



U-boots also carried out eight transport missions to Trondheim in the critical days
following the Allied landings, bringing aviation fuel, anti-aircraft guns, and supplies.
Stegemann, p. 211.
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a394160.pdf

What was it you said when you poked fun at the idea of U-boats being used for supply ops?




13 Jun 1941 German heavy cruiser Lützow, light cruiser Emden, light cruiser Leipzig, and destroyers passed through the Skagerrak between Denmark and Norway. Despite aerial cover by Bf 110 fighters, a British force of Beaufort torpedo bombers with fighter escort was still able to get through and attack, damaging Lützow with a torpedo hit in the engine room. Lützow was forced to return to Kiel, Germany for repairs.

Now what was it you said about German domination of this stretch of sea? How could this happen? If you were correct?




Hipper WAS operational after Gloworm hit it. Whether they would send it back into action after patching the hole is conjecture/speculation. The fact remains it was operational for some time after encountering Gloworm.

Black Hornet

Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  Black Hornet on Mon 17 Sep 2012 - 7:12

Intercepted radio messages from the British Expeditionary Force enabled the Germans to conclude that the following units had been transferred to the Continent: one army headquarters under the command of General Lord Gort, three corps headquarters, five regular, partly motorized divisions (apparently the British 1st to 5th Divisions),

http://chris-intel-corner.blogspot.com/2011_07_01_archive.html


"These notations were based on intercepted and partially deciphered radio messages".


Reports received by the German intelligence services, particularly the SKL, indicated that the Allies would invade Norway and possibly Sweden even after the conclusion of peace between Finland and the Soviet Union. There were indications, supported by notations in the SKL journal on 15 March, that the peace had postponed but not altered Allied plans. These notations were based on intercepted and partially deciphered radio messages. A message from the British Admiralty to the commander of the Home Fleet on March 14 indicated that a large-scale embarkation of troops had been completed.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/56952870/Hitler-s-Preemptive-War-The-Battle-for-Norway-1940





Task Force 3 Eludes the British Navy

The ships constituting TF 3 were located in three harbors in northern Germany on April 7. The light cruisersKöln,Königsberg , and the auxiliaryBremsewere located in Wilhelmshaven and cleared that harbor before 2340 hours on April 7. The torpedo boatsWolf andLeopard,and the depot shipKarl Petersleft Cuxhaven about the same time.


TF 3 continued towards Bergen at a distance of 12 to 15 miles off the Norwegian coast.

NOT within the 3 mile limit.

Black Hornet

Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  SecondFront on Wed 19 Sep 2012 - 2:14

Wow. And you say *I* need help with comprehansion and understanding??? Rolling Eyes

Intercepted radio messages from the British Expeditionary Force enabled the Germans to conclude that the following units had been transferred to the Continent: one army headquarters under the command of General Lord Gort, three corps headquarters, five regular, partly motorized divisions (apparently the British 1st to 5th Divisions),

http://chris-intel-corner.blogspot.com/2011_07_01_archive.html

ANOTHER everso-slightly edited quote - shall we see the WHOLE paragraph?

Intercepted radio messages from the British Expeditionary Force enabled the Germans to conclude that the following units had been transferred to the Continent: one army headquarters under the command of General Lord Gort, three corps headquarters, five regular, partly motorized divisions (apparently the British 1st to 5th Divisions), one armored division, as well as several divisions of the second and third waves, the exact number and numerical designations of which could not be ascertained.

And why could they not be ascertained? Because they didn't actually break British codes! ALL they did was monitor traffic and see how they fitted into -

...British army documents captured in Norway, which provided all it needed to know about the British order of battle, and partly from the cypher traffic between the French War Ministry and the army groups, armies and home authorities, most of which it read from soon after the outbreak of war until 10 May, the department had a very comprehensive and accurate knowledge of the dispositions and qualities of the Allied forces.

In other words - they only knew about SOME British units in France in MAY 1940...because of capturing documents in Norway in April, and breaking FRENCH codes! Rolling Eyes They didn't break BRITISH codes! Just matched traffic with OOB entries.

Task Force 3 Eludes the British Navy

The ships constituting TF 3 were located in three harbors in northern Germany on April 7. The light cruisersKöln,Königsberg , and the auxiliaryBremsewere located in Wilhelmshaven and cleared that harbor before 2340 hours on April 7. The torpedo boatsWolf andLeopard,and the depot shipKarl Petersleft Cuxhaven about the same time.

TF 3 continued towards Bergen at a distance of 12 to 15 miles off the Norwegian coast.

NOT within the 3 mile limit.

ELUDES the Royal Navy??? The Royal Navy wasn't anywhere near Bergen TO elude on April 7th/8th! Rolling Eyes Laughing

( what good would that do? decoding a landing AFTER it occurred??). My God, let's work on the reading/comprehension skills.

Yes, lets! The Germans only suspected there had been a landing at Harstadt - they didn't KNOW FOR SURE until they started intercepting traffic to and from it after the 24th Rolling Eyes

Code breaking also enabled the German Navy to know the positions of British ships prior to Germany’s invasion of Norway in 1940.
http://www.armchairgeneral.com/german-intelligence-successes-in-world-war-ii.htm

That's WHOLLY unsourced and unreferenced fanwank. Right up there with your long-ago "sourcing" aircraft performance figures from unsourced or referenced model aeroplane sites Razz

U-boots also carried out eight transport missions to Trondheim in the critical days
following the Allied landings, bringing aviation fuel, anti-aircraft guns, and supplies.
Stegemann, p. 211.
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a394160.pdf

What was it you said when you poked fun at the idea of U-boats being used for supply ops?

I said about the amount they could carry; this quote is actually buried away in a footnote and doesn't just by chance mention how much they were carrying...maybe if you checked THAT it would be a better idea Razz

13 Jun 1941 German heavy cruiser Lützow, light cruiser Emden, light cruiser Leipzig, and destroyers passed through the Skagerrak between Denmark and Norway. Despite aerial cover by Bf 110 fighters, a British force of Beaufort torpedo bombers with fighter escort was still able to get through and attack, damaging Lützow with a torpedo hit in the engine room. Lützow was forced to return to Kiel, Germany for repairs.

Now what was it you said about German domination of this stretch of sea? How could this happen? If you were correct?

Ahem....it says a hell of a lot more about the Luftwaffe's inability to provide protection! Laughing

P.S. I see no mention of the Royal Navy in there, do I?


SecondFront

Posts : 130
Join date : 2011-09-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  Black Hornet on Thu 20 Sep 2012 - 5:16

The admiralty station transmitted encrypted orders to the naval officers in command of Harstadt, Andalsnes, and Alesund. Although these messages could not be solved, they provided clues to the most important debarkation ports of the British Expeditionary Force. In particular, they confirmed the landings near Harstadt, which had hitherto been merely a matter of conjecture.
http://www.allworldwars.com/German-Radio-Intelligence-by-Albert-Praun.html

April 15: The 24th British Guards Brigade lands at Harstad.

April 17: British forces land at Åndalsnes.


April: 27: Allied forces decide to withdraw from Namsos and Åndalsnes

April: 30: Allied evacuations begin at Åndalsnes.


What good would intelligence gathered after the British had already left be?





Ahem, no Royal navy mentioned as it was RAF that hit the ship. Ahem, if it could hit Emden, why not the 370 supply ships??? Ahem. easily the worst performance in the history of naval warfare for the Royal navy, plus a lame show for the RAF.


Your Fanwank that it could interdict German ships round Iceland is easily the biggest fanwank in war history. All 3 of the Ports, Trondheim, Bergen, & Narvik), could have been either blocked or intercepted by Royal navy ships, ( Bergen could have had troops landed 1 day ahead of the Germans), yet in all 3 instances, German ships sailed in unopposed. Only a complete slobbering Fanwank would worship it in the way you do after it's pathetic performance at Norway.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/56952870/Hitler-s-Preemptive-War-The-Battle-for-Norway-1940

Whitworth;
This sudden deterioration in the weather decided me to change my plans, because I felt that the enemy would make little progress and not try to make Vestfjord during the dark, and would probably stand to seaward during the dark hours, so I decided to do the same.

Whitworth completely misjudged his opponents and overestimated the difficulties he faced. His reasoning that the Germans would not enter Vestfjord in poor visibility and in a violent storm was dead wrong. The German Naval Staff’s operational order emphasized that the operation was to be carried out despite navigational problems or bad weather. Captain Bonte displayed both skill and determination as he led his destroyers into the dark and dangerous fjord.

If the eight British destroyers had remained in the vicinity of the minefield as originally planned, they would probably have encountered the ten German destroyers loaded with troops, now separated from the battleships and almost out of fuel, on their way to Narvik.




Black Hornet

Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  Black Hornet on Thu 20 Sep 2012 - 5:37

And more...

The Home Fleet was on a north-north-westerly course away from the Norwegian coast at 1600 hours, slightly north of Trondheim’s latitude. This allowed TF 2 to slip safely into Trondheim during the night.

The ships constituting TF 3 were located in three harbors in northern Germany on April 7. The light cruisers Köln,Königsberg , and the auxiliary Bremse were located in Wilhelmshaven and cleared that harbor before 2340 hours on April 7.


Admiral Huber Schmundt’s assessment of the situation was not very optimistic. He realized that the German groups destined for Narvik, Trondheim,and Bergen were dangerously exposed to British interception and counterattacks. Narvik and Trondheim were located far from British naval bases, butBergen was within eight or nine hours’ sailing distance from Scapa Flow. Much of TF 3’s passage took place in daylight since its speed was limited to 18knots because of the slow moving Bremse and Karl Peter.

Admiral Schmundt received a message from Naval Command West that numerous British warships werelocated between TF 3 and Bergen. This was an accurate report.



The Admiralty now made another unfortunate intervention in tactical operations and the outcome was again harmful to the British and beneficial for the Germans. Worried that the cruiser squadrons off the Norwegian coast, which were about 135 nautical miles from the Home Fleet, could be caughtbetween the German naval forces in the north and the ones reported in the Skagerrak, the Admiralty annulled Admiral Forbes’ plan for a cruiser sweep along the Norwegian coast. Instead it ordered the 1st and 2nd Cruiser Squadrons to join forces about 100 miles off the Norwegian coast and steer towards the Home Fleet. The 18th Cruiser Squadron had received a similar order earlier.The British also failed to have reconnaissance aircraft aloft along the Norwegian coast after the fog lifted late in the afternoon on April 8.Reconnaissance aircraft might have spotted the German ships before the 2nd Cruiser Squadron started towards the Home Fleet and the attack on Bergen could have had a different outcome. As with Narvik and Trondheim, the British left the door to Bergen wide open at the last moment.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/56952870/Hitler-s-Preemptive-War-The-Battle-for-Norway-1940

Entirely pathetic. Add to that the paltry 21 out of 370 supply ships they sunk & one can quadruple at least the pathet-isicty of the performance.

Black Hornet

Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  Black Hornet on Sat 22 Sep 2012 - 23:51

Code breaking also enabled the German Navy to know the positions of British ships prior to Germany’s invasion of Norway in 1940.
http://www.armchairgeneral.com/german-intelligence-successes-in-world-war-ii.htm

That's WHOLLY unsourced and unreferenced fanwank. Right up there with your long-ago "sourcing" aircraft performance figures from unsourced or referenced model aeroplane sites

No, you were given 2 sources, again try & read what is presented. & your BS aircraft assertion is unsourced BS.


Here's the 2nd source. & it didn't specify broken British codes, ( again try & read), it said intercepted & partially deciphered radio messages. British made the mistake, ( which you'd know if you'd been reading), of not always using code in radio messages.

Reports received by the German intelligence services, particularly the SKL, indicated that the Allies would invade Norway and possibly Sweden even after the conclusion of peace between Finland and the Soviet Union. There were indications, supported by notations in the SKL journal on 15 March, that the peace had postponed but not altered Allied plans. These notations were based on intercepted and partially deciphered radio messages. A message from the British Admiralty to the commander of the Home Fleet on March 14 indicated that a large-scale embarkation of troops had been completed.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/56952870/Hitler-s-Preemptive-War-The-Battle-for-Norway-1940




More German makeshift runways...

Egg carton
http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b39/Kjetil_Aakra/photo3-1.jpg

Eierkisten
http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b39/Kjetil_Aakra/30.jpg

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b39/Kjetil_Aakra/748Weisse1vonUffzSiegfriedLsch1JG5_.jpg

Black Hornet

Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  Black Hornet on Sun 30 Sep 2012 - 5:02

In December 1940, German raiders Admiral Scheer and Admiral Hipper put to sea. These warships, together with the two battlecruisers that sortied during the first quarter of 1941, evaded British patrols and sank 47 Allied merchant ships. These actions disrupted British convoy defenses and severely dislocated the flow of shipping across the Atlantic. German U-boats took advantage of the confusion and sank another 138 merchant ships over the same four-month period.




http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/de-kriegsmarine-commerce.htm

Yah boy, that Northern Patrol was real dangerous in the early war years.

Black Hornet

Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sommerfeldt runway Skanland

Post  Sponsored content Today at 20:42


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum