General Discussions
This is the place to discuss general issues related to the U-boat war or the war at sea in WWII.
RE: U-134 vs. K-74
Posted by:
Marc Haldimann
()
Date: August 24, 2001 05:06AM
<HTML>Hi folks,
here is the link for the above mentionned site:
[www.goldcoast-railroad.org]
As for the use of the 88 mm gun of an U-boat as an makeshift AA weapon, it is a feasible action. Using an U boat\'s main armament against aircraft was done at least once aboard U-172. Herbert Plottke records that besides shooting with his two 20 mm AA guns, U-172\'s KL Emmermann ordered his gun crews to man and fire with the 105 mm gun to scare away two B 24D from the 1st A/S Sqnadron on 7 April 1943. Though obviously no hits were scored, the trick did work and the B 24D discarded their low level attacks trying instead to bomb from a safer altitude (from 2000 m). This was U-172\'s salvation as it left ample time to outmaneuver the falling bombs. All told, this running battle lasted 2 hours.
Source Plottke, H. (1994), Fächer loos, U 172 im Einsatz, Podzun Pallas Verlag, p. 52. ISBN 3-7909-0510-0.
As for U-134 vs K-74, Kenneth Wynn states that K-74 went down because of \"cannon rents in the fabric\". As U-134 was sunk without survivors on 24 August 1943 on her return trip, we will never know if the 88 mm gun was really used. In my humble retired AA gunner opinion, 20 mm gun fire was fully sufficent to shred a blimp\'s fabric and bring it down.
Source for U-134: Wynn, K. (1997), U boat operations of the second worl war, vol. 1, p. 110. ISBN 1-55750-860-7.
Best regards
Marc</HTML>
here is the link for the above mentionned site:
[www.goldcoast-railroad.org]
As for the use of the 88 mm gun of an U-boat as an makeshift AA weapon, it is a feasible action. Using an U boat\'s main armament against aircraft was done at least once aboard U-172. Herbert Plottke records that besides shooting with his two 20 mm AA guns, U-172\'s KL Emmermann ordered his gun crews to man and fire with the 105 mm gun to scare away two B 24D from the 1st A/S Sqnadron on 7 April 1943. Though obviously no hits were scored, the trick did work and the B 24D discarded their low level attacks trying instead to bomb from a safer altitude (from 2000 m). This was U-172\'s salvation as it left ample time to outmaneuver the falling bombs. All told, this running battle lasted 2 hours.
Source Plottke, H. (1994), Fächer loos, U 172 im Einsatz, Podzun Pallas Verlag, p. 52. ISBN 3-7909-0510-0.
As for U-134 vs K-74, Kenneth Wynn states that K-74 went down because of \"cannon rents in the fabric\". As U-134 was sunk without survivors on 24 August 1943 on her return trip, we will never know if the 88 mm gun was really used. In my humble retired AA gunner opinion, 20 mm gun fire was fully sufficent to shred a blimp\'s fabric and bring it down.
Source for U-134: Wynn, K. (1997), U boat operations of the second worl war, vol. 1, p. 110. ISBN 1-55750-860-7.
Best regards
Marc</HTML>
| Subject | Written By | Posted |
|---|---|---|
U-134 vs. K-74
|
Tim | 08/24/2001 12:57AM |
|
RE: U-134 vs. K-74
|
Joe Brennan | 08/24/2001 04:35AM |
|
RE: U-134 vs. K-74
|
Tim | 08/26/2001 03:41AM |
|
RE: U-134 vs. K-74
|
Marc Haldimann | 08/26/2001 10:21AM |
|
RE: U-134 vs. K-74
|
Tim | 08/27/2001 04:13AM |
|
Re: RE: U-134 vs. K-74
|
TF | 09/22/2015 05:08PM |
|
RE: U-134 vs. K-74
|
Marc Haldimann | 08/24/2001 05:06AM |
|
RE: U-134 vs. K-74
|
Rich Mickle | 08/25/2001 07:08PM |
|
RE: U-134 vs. K-74
|
Joe Brennan | 08/25/2001 10:28PM |
|
RE: U-134 vs. K-74
|
Rich Mickle | 08/26/2001 05:39PM |
|
RE:Battle damage
|
Joe Brennan | 08/27/2001 05:01AM |