General Discussions
This is the place to discuss general issues related to the U-boat war or the war at sea in WWII.
Re: HMS URGE
Posted by:
Platon Alexiades
()
Date: June 08, 2015 12:29PM
Dear Francesco,
Perhaps my knowledge of Italian is limited but the aircraft report which you kindly supplied indicates that the attack on the submarine was "con apparento esito negativo" which I thought meant that the attack had failed. Now if you insist on sinking the submarine in spite of this...
How come this attack was not given much credence at the time?
The report indicates that seven CR 42 aircraft were to patrol off Ras Hilal, one at a time, during daylight hours. That the second airborne aircraft attacked at 0810/29 a submarine but missed by 30 metres. That the next five aircraft dropped each their two 50-kg bombs but without bothering to describe exactly on what and without claiming any hit.
Were CR 42 fighters experienced in antisubmarine warfare? No, to my knowledge this would be the ONLY time one attacked a submarine during the WHOLE war.
The submarine was claiming to have shelled a convoy. However SAN GIUSTO and the five German MFPs are curiously silent about this "attack" and no trace of it can be found in their files. Of course you can claim that their reports may have been lost and this is possible.
Please explain why the five next aircraft took off at roughly regular intervals (0915, 1030, 1130, 1200 and 1400 hours) to conduct their routine patrol instead of being rushed to attack this "submnarine". It seems that even Captain Mancini did not put much faith in this "sighting" or he was very sloppy.
I have three "attacks" by submarine reported on the same day (29/4), two in the Adriatic and one south of Lampedusa, when no British submarines were operating there. If you can explain them then perhaps I will have no doubt about your "attack" at Ras Hilal.
Have you read the report by Captain Simpson (S.10) on the loss of HMS URGE? You can check it in ADM199/1217, TNA. If you can find in it a trace of an order to URGE to go to Ras Hilal with urgency and attack SAN GIUSTO, please let me know as I must have missed it.
Now if we are going to attribute submarine losses to even those who have not claimed it...
Of course you can continue to believe that a CR 42 fighter sank HMS URGE and I have no intention to force you to espouse my views. But permit me to doubt this "sinking".
Finally there is no need for each of us repeating our views in lengthy arguments - which by now should be clear to everyone else in this forum - as we are only wasting our time.
I still enjoy very much our conversations but we should leave this story alone until the wreck off Ras Hilal is positively identified.
Best wishes,
Platon
Perhaps my knowledge of Italian is limited but the aircraft report which you kindly supplied indicates that the attack on the submarine was "con apparento esito negativo" which I thought meant that the attack had failed. Now if you insist on sinking the submarine in spite of this...
How come this attack was not given much credence at the time?
The report indicates that seven CR 42 aircraft were to patrol off Ras Hilal, one at a time, during daylight hours. That the second airborne aircraft attacked at 0810/29 a submarine but missed by 30 metres. That the next five aircraft dropped each their two 50-kg bombs but without bothering to describe exactly on what and without claiming any hit.
Were CR 42 fighters experienced in antisubmarine warfare? No, to my knowledge this would be the ONLY time one attacked a submarine during the WHOLE war.
The submarine was claiming to have shelled a convoy. However SAN GIUSTO and the five German MFPs are curiously silent about this "attack" and no trace of it can be found in their files. Of course you can claim that their reports may have been lost and this is possible.
Please explain why the five next aircraft took off at roughly regular intervals (0915, 1030, 1130, 1200 and 1400 hours) to conduct their routine patrol instead of being rushed to attack this "submnarine". It seems that even Captain Mancini did not put much faith in this "sighting" or he was very sloppy.
I have three "attacks" by submarine reported on the same day (29/4), two in the Adriatic and one south of Lampedusa, when no British submarines were operating there. If you can explain them then perhaps I will have no doubt about your "attack" at Ras Hilal.
Have you read the report by Captain Simpson (S.10) on the loss of HMS URGE? You can check it in ADM199/1217, TNA. If you can find in it a trace of an order to URGE to go to Ras Hilal with urgency and attack SAN GIUSTO, please let me know as I must have missed it.
Now if we are going to attribute submarine losses to even those who have not claimed it...
Of course you can continue to believe that a CR 42 fighter sank HMS URGE and I have no intention to force you to espouse my views. But permit me to doubt this "sinking".
Finally there is no need for each of us repeating our views in lengthy arguments - which by now should be clear to everyone else in this forum - as we are only wasting our time.
I still enjoy very much our conversations but we should leave this story alone until the wreck off Ras Hilal is positively identified.
Best wishes,
Platon
