Warship forum
A forum for the Allied Warships section.
Re: Four Pipers from Lend Lease
Posted by:
Ken Dunn
()
Date: October 11, 2018 12:20PM
Hi Urs,
U-boats had been sinking merchant ships off our coast since Operation Paukenschlag started in January and the dead bodies of merchant seamen had been washing up on the shores all along the east coast for all those months while no U-boats had been sunk and the navy and the American people wanted revenge. Nobody was in the mood to question the sinking of a U-boat.
The nature of war is to put young men in harm’s way and force them to make life and death decisions under extreme pressure without all the information they need to make the best decision.
If we just look at the result of the sinking of U-85 and the depth charges that killed her crew in the water it would appear to be a war crime.
However the key is why ROPER put those depth charges in the water and there are several different accounts as to why they did it.
Here is the body of the official account (Action Report) filed by ROPER’s commander Lieutenant Commander Hamilton W. Howe:
1. Pursuant to reference (a) the following report of particulars concerning the action between the U.S.S. ROPER and a German submarine in which the latter was destroyed is submitted herewith:
On the night of April 13-14 at 0006 in latitude 35-55 N., longitude 75-13 W., this ship while on course 1820 T. at a speed of 18 knots made a radar contact, 1900 T. - range 2700 yards, which was of a type that could have been a submarine. Decision was made to investigate and the ship was brought to 1950 T. The night was clear, with many stars visible; the sea was very nearly calm, the the water phosphorescent. A wind of force one was blowing from the southeast. Bodie Island Light and Bodie Island Lighted Bell Buoy #8 were discernable to starboard.
2. Very shortly after the radar contact was made the sound operator, who was echo ranging from bow to bow, heard rapidly turning propellers and obtained a range and bearing which coincided with those obtained by the radar operator. Then as the range became 2100 yards the wake of what appeared to be a small vessel running away at high speed was observed. The range was decreasing very slowly so this ship increased speed to 20 knots. The vessel appeared to be a small Coast Guard craft, but her speed made it possible that she actually was a submarine. The crew was called to general quarters and orders given to prepare machine gun, 3" gun, torpedo, and depth charge batteries for immediate action.
3. The unknown vessel commenced changing course successively to port first to about 1750 T., then 1550 T., 135 T., and 1150 T. A position very slightly on the starboard quarter was maintained to avoid possible torpedoes, and when range was about 700 yards the track of a torpedo did pass close aboard down the port side.
4. When the distance had been reduced to 300 yards the vessel cut sharply to starboard. At this instant, using the 24" searchlight, she was finally identified as a large submarine. A camouflage preponderantly light in color was noted. The submarine continued to turn to starboard inside the turning circle of this ship. The searchlight was held on the submarine, and fire was opened first with the machine gun battery and then with the 3" battery. The machine guns, particularly #1, cut down the submarine personnel rushing to man their gun. A direct hit in the conning tower near the water line was made by #5 - 3" gun as the submarine commenced to sink. Orders were given to fire a torpedo at the submarine, but she disappeared before it was fired. The submarine apparently was scuttled inasmuch as she settled slowly and went down stern first. About forty of her crew were on deck and soon sighted in the water.
5. A barrage of eleven depth charges was laid by use of racks, Y-guns, and K-guns, based on an eye estimate of the submarine's location plus an excellent sound contact. The bearing of the submarine remained almost constant and the speed was negligible. Wreckage could not be detected because of the darkness. On two occasions this ship passed near the survivors, but the fact that German submarines frequently work in pairs made the conduct of any rescue work before daylight far too dangerous to risk. Search in the general area was continued until daybreak. At that time the PBY plane commanded by Lieutenant C.V. Horrigan, U.S.N.R., cooperated in an intensive sight search. Suspicious oil slicks and bits of debris were investigated. The plane dropped one charge and this ship dropped two.
.
.
.
.
.
13. It is particularly desired to mention the invaluable service rendered by Commander Stanley C. Norton, U.S.N., Commander Destroyer Division 54, an officer of considerable submarine experience, who was present on the bridge during the entire action and by his helpful suggestions and sound advice contributed greatly to the results obtained.
Additionally I found this in "District Intelligence Office, Firth Naval District report on Sinking of German Submarine U-85, disposition of bodies and effects, report on":
2. Commander Stanley C. NORTON, USN., Commanding Destroyer Division 54, and Lieutenant Commander Hamilton W. HOWE, USN., were interviewed aboard the Roper. At that time a rough draft of the ship's official report of the sinking of the submarine and the recovery of the bodies was obtained. It is set forth herewith and made a part of this report.
The full account (Action Report) along with other official documents pertaining to the sinking of U-85 can be found at: [www.uboatarchive.net]. I encourage everybody to read all of it.
We will probably never know why Howe incorrectly thought U-boats frequently worked in pairs. It has been speculated that this is why he dropped those depth charges - he wasn't sure if the contact was U-85 or another U-boat but that is just speculation. His reports sounds to me like he knew it was U-85 & thought she had been scuttled.
From the official report it looks like ROPER simply continued to attack U-85 to ensure her complete destruction (which would be legitimate behavior) and the men in the water were simply collateral damage. Additionally, everything ROPER did through item 4 was appropriate and commendable.
If the depth charges were put in the water to kill the survivors it would be a crime but there is no evidence of that. If they were put in the water to insure the complete destruction of U-85 it wouldn’t be a crime and there is some evidence of that. That’s the fog of war.
Additionally, the commander of Destroyer Division 54 was on ROPER's bridge the whole time.
The bottom line is perhaps there should have been a formal inquiry so the exact reason the depth charges were dropped with those men in the water could have been determined and published. It appears there wasn’t or if there was the results weren’t published and to add fuel to the fire ROPER’s commanding officer, Lieutenant Commander Hamilton W. Howe, received the Navy Cross for the sinking of U-85 and he retired in 1956 with the rank of Rear Admiral.
Howe’s account of what happened apparently satisfied his superiors & they saw no need to pursue the matter further.
Regards,
Ken Dunn
U-boats had been sinking merchant ships off our coast since Operation Paukenschlag started in January and the dead bodies of merchant seamen had been washing up on the shores all along the east coast for all those months while no U-boats had been sunk and the navy and the American people wanted revenge. Nobody was in the mood to question the sinking of a U-boat.
The nature of war is to put young men in harm’s way and force them to make life and death decisions under extreme pressure without all the information they need to make the best decision.
If we just look at the result of the sinking of U-85 and the depth charges that killed her crew in the water it would appear to be a war crime.
However the key is why ROPER put those depth charges in the water and there are several different accounts as to why they did it.
Here is the body of the official account (Action Report) filed by ROPER’s commander Lieutenant Commander Hamilton W. Howe:
1. Pursuant to reference (a) the following report of particulars concerning the action between the U.S.S. ROPER and a German submarine in which the latter was destroyed is submitted herewith:
On the night of April 13-14 at 0006 in latitude 35-55 N., longitude 75-13 W., this ship while on course 1820 T. at a speed of 18 knots made a radar contact, 1900 T. - range 2700 yards, which was of a type that could have been a submarine. Decision was made to investigate and the ship was brought to 1950 T. The night was clear, with many stars visible; the sea was very nearly calm, the the water phosphorescent. A wind of force one was blowing from the southeast. Bodie Island Light and Bodie Island Lighted Bell Buoy #8 were discernable to starboard.
2. Very shortly after the radar contact was made the sound operator, who was echo ranging from bow to bow, heard rapidly turning propellers and obtained a range and bearing which coincided with those obtained by the radar operator. Then as the range became 2100 yards the wake of what appeared to be a small vessel running away at high speed was observed. The range was decreasing very slowly so this ship increased speed to 20 knots. The vessel appeared to be a small Coast Guard craft, but her speed made it possible that she actually was a submarine. The crew was called to general quarters and orders given to prepare machine gun, 3" gun, torpedo, and depth charge batteries for immediate action.
3. The unknown vessel commenced changing course successively to port first to about 1750 T., then 1550 T., 135 T., and 1150 T. A position very slightly on the starboard quarter was maintained to avoid possible torpedoes, and when range was about 700 yards the track of a torpedo did pass close aboard down the port side.
4. When the distance had been reduced to 300 yards the vessel cut sharply to starboard. At this instant, using the 24" searchlight, she was finally identified as a large submarine. A camouflage preponderantly light in color was noted. The submarine continued to turn to starboard inside the turning circle of this ship. The searchlight was held on the submarine, and fire was opened first with the machine gun battery and then with the 3" battery. The machine guns, particularly #1, cut down the submarine personnel rushing to man their gun. A direct hit in the conning tower near the water line was made by #5 - 3" gun as the submarine commenced to sink. Orders were given to fire a torpedo at the submarine, but she disappeared before it was fired. The submarine apparently was scuttled inasmuch as she settled slowly and went down stern first. About forty of her crew were on deck and soon sighted in the water.
5. A barrage of eleven depth charges was laid by use of racks, Y-guns, and K-guns, based on an eye estimate of the submarine's location plus an excellent sound contact. The bearing of the submarine remained almost constant and the speed was negligible. Wreckage could not be detected because of the darkness. On two occasions this ship passed near the survivors, but the fact that German submarines frequently work in pairs made the conduct of any rescue work before daylight far too dangerous to risk. Search in the general area was continued until daybreak. At that time the PBY plane commanded by Lieutenant C.V. Horrigan, U.S.N.R., cooperated in an intensive sight search. Suspicious oil slicks and bits of debris were investigated. The plane dropped one charge and this ship dropped two.
.
.
.
.
.
13. It is particularly desired to mention the invaluable service rendered by Commander Stanley C. Norton, U.S.N., Commander Destroyer Division 54, an officer of considerable submarine experience, who was present on the bridge during the entire action and by his helpful suggestions and sound advice contributed greatly to the results obtained.
Additionally I found this in "District Intelligence Office, Firth Naval District report on Sinking of German Submarine U-85, disposition of bodies and effects, report on":
2. Commander Stanley C. NORTON, USN., Commanding Destroyer Division 54, and Lieutenant Commander Hamilton W. HOWE, USN., were interviewed aboard the Roper. At that time a rough draft of the ship's official report of the sinking of the submarine and the recovery of the bodies was obtained. It is set forth herewith and made a part of this report.
The full account (Action Report) along with other official documents pertaining to the sinking of U-85 can be found at: [www.uboatarchive.net]. I encourage everybody to read all of it.
We will probably never know why Howe incorrectly thought U-boats frequently worked in pairs. It has been speculated that this is why he dropped those depth charges - he wasn't sure if the contact was U-85 or another U-boat but that is just speculation. His reports sounds to me like he knew it was U-85 & thought she had been scuttled.
From the official report it looks like ROPER simply continued to attack U-85 to ensure her complete destruction (which would be legitimate behavior) and the men in the water were simply collateral damage. Additionally, everything ROPER did through item 4 was appropriate and commendable.
If the depth charges were put in the water to kill the survivors it would be a crime but there is no evidence of that. If they were put in the water to insure the complete destruction of U-85 it wouldn’t be a crime and there is some evidence of that. That’s the fog of war.
Additionally, the commander of Destroyer Division 54 was on ROPER's bridge the whole time.
The bottom line is perhaps there should have been a formal inquiry so the exact reason the depth charges were dropped with those men in the water could have been determined and published. It appears there wasn’t or if there was the results weren’t published and to add fuel to the fire ROPER’s commanding officer, Lieutenant Commander Hamilton W. Howe, received the Navy Cross for the sinking of U-85 and he retired in 1956 with the rank of Rear Admiral.
Howe’s account of what happened apparently satisfied his superiors & they saw no need to pursue the matter further.
Regards,
Ken Dunn
Subject | Written By | Posted |
---|---|---|
Four Pipers from Lend Lease | Battleship Russ | 10/05/2018 06:43AM |
Re: Four Pipers from Lend Lease | Ken Dunn | 10/07/2018 11:47AM |
Re: Four Pipers from Lend Lease | phil morgan | 10/08/2018 12:20PM |
Re: Four Pipers from Lend Lease | Battleship Russ | 10/19/2018 10:52PM |
Re: Four Pipers from Lend Lease | Ken Dunn | 10/09/2018 02:40PM |
Re: Four Pipers from Lend Lease | Urs Heßling | 10/10/2018 06:08PM |
Re: Four Pipers from Lend Lease | Ken Dunn | 10/11/2018 12:20PM |
Re: Four Pipers from Lend Lease | Urs Heßling | 10/12/2018 01:07PM |
Re: Four Pipers from Lend Lease | Ken Dunn | 10/12/2018 05:15PM |
Re: Four Pipers from Lend Lease | Urs Heßling | 10/20/2018 04:46PM |
Re: Four Pipers from Lend Lease | Ken Dunn | 10/20/2018 07:57PM |
Re: Four Pipers from Lend Lease | Urs Heßling | 10/21/2018 01:51PM |
Re: Four Pipers from Lend Lease | Battleship Russ | 10/19/2018 10:54PM |
Re: Four Pipers from Lend Lease | John Henshaw | 05/09/2019 04:44AM |