WWI forum
World War One discussions.
Re: How many WW1 U-boats were sunk by aircraft?
Posted by:
Michael Lowrey
()
Date: March 18, 2015 07:37PM
Sebastian,
Who ever said the flight crews were sure it was a UCI type submarine? The attribution to UC 1 comes later, from Royal Navy staff officers. Here's what's in the RN's ASW summary:
"Seaplane N. 65 and large American seaplanes Noc. 8689 and 8676 sighted a S/m at 0946 about 4 miles off the starboard bow. Seaplane 8689 dropped 2 bombs at 0950 on periscope just as it dipped. Explosion appeared to be about 50 feet in front of periscope. Two more bombs were dropped by N. 65, a few seconds later, 50 and 100 feet in front of previous bombs in direction S/m was heading. Seaplane No. 8676 dropped a bomb few seconds later, which fell rather astern. All the bombs dropped functioned and were of 230-lb. type.
"A large quantity of air bubbles appeared on the surface which continued for almost 3/4 hour. A large patch of oil was seen in this position by two seaplanes on the 24th July."
So it was, it seems, an attack against a submerged submarine. It's a plausible sinking claim, but air and oil by themselves don't necessarily equal a sunk sub. Recall that the original categorization of the attack was "probably seriously damaged."
There's also an attack the previous evening in the same general area (52°05'N, 02°23'E). At that time, three UBIIs (UB 18, UB 27, and UB 35) were engaged in an anti-convoy patrol and were to be steered to targets each morning through radio signals based upon aircraft sighting reports. (I have the order sheet for the U-boats.) The boats' assigned patrol area is rather near where the two air attacks took place. The July 24th attack is maybe 15 miles to the east of where UB 27 was suppose to be each morning.
I'll have to check UB 18 and UB 35's war diary to see if they reported an air attack on the 23rd or 24th. I also need to see if any of the smaller UBIs might have been in the area.
Best wishes,
Michael
Who ever said the flight crews were sure it was a UCI type submarine? The attribution to UC 1 comes later, from Royal Navy staff officers. Here's what's in the RN's ASW summary:
"Seaplane N. 65 and large American seaplanes Noc. 8689 and 8676 sighted a S/m at 0946 about 4 miles off the starboard bow. Seaplane 8689 dropped 2 bombs at 0950 on periscope just as it dipped. Explosion appeared to be about 50 feet in front of periscope. Two more bombs were dropped by N. 65, a few seconds later, 50 and 100 feet in front of previous bombs in direction S/m was heading. Seaplane No. 8676 dropped a bomb few seconds later, which fell rather astern. All the bombs dropped functioned and were of 230-lb. type.
"A large quantity of air bubbles appeared on the surface which continued for almost 3/4 hour. A large patch of oil was seen in this position by two seaplanes on the 24th July."
So it was, it seems, an attack against a submerged submarine. It's a plausible sinking claim, but air and oil by themselves don't necessarily equal a sunk sub. Recall that the original categorization of the attack was "probably seriously damaged."
There's also an attack the previous evening in the same general area (52°05'N, 02°23'E). At that time, three UBIIs (UB 18, UB 27, and UB 35) were engaged in an anti-convoy patrol and were to be steered to targets each morning through radio signals based upon aircraft sighting reports. (I have the order sheet for the U-boats.) The boats' assigned patrol area is rather near where the two air attacks took place. The July 24th attack is maybe 15 miles to the east of where UB 27 was suppose to be each morning.
I'll have to check UB 18 and UB 35's war diary to see if they reported an air attack on the 23rd or 24th. I also need to see if any of the smaller UBIs might have been in the area.
Best wishes,
Michael
