WWI forum
World War One discussions.
Re: U 50
Posted by:
Martin Quigley
()
Date: May 25, 2017 08:17PM
Hi Phil,
Thank you very much for your response. The reason I've asked the question is that wrecksite.eu state the LACONIA was sunk 6 miles NW x W from Fastnet, as if this was the position logged by U 50. They further state the true position of 160 miles was only known with the discovery of the wreck in 2009.
I can't believe U 50 could have got the position wrong by over 150 miles. Further Tennent gave the position as 160 miles and his work was published in 1990. I can only assume his position was taken from the original KTB but somewhere along the line wrecksit.eu picked up an incorrect position.
Thanks again,
Best regards,
Martin
Thank you very much for your response. The reason I've asked the question is that wrecksite.eu state the LACONIA was sunk 6 miles NW x W from Fastnet, as if this was the position logged by U 50. They further state the true position of 160 miles was only known with the discovery of the wreck in 2009.
I can't believe U 50 could have got the position wrong by over 150 miles. Further Tennent gave the position as 160 miles and his work was published in 1990. I can only assume his position was taken from the original KTB but somewhere along the line wrecksit.eu picked up an incorrect position.
Thanks again,
Best regards,
Martin
Subject | Written By | Posted |
---|---|---|
U 50 | Martin Quigley | 05/16/2017 04:39PM |
Re: U 50 | phil morgan | 05/25/2017 07:45AM |
Re: U 50 | Martin Quigley | 05/25/2017 08:17PM |
Re: U 50 | Oliver Lörscher | 05/26/2017 05:30PM |
Re: U 50 | Simon S. | 05/26/2017 06:56PM |
Re: U 50 | Martin Quigley | 05/27/2017 01:53PM |