WWI forum
World War One discussions.
Re: ANTINOUS 2 Sept 1916
Posted by:
Michael Lowrey
()
Date: September 12, 2018 01:29PM
Joe,
I've had a look at U 38's KTB, and based upon what's in there, there isn't enough evidence to credit U 38 with damaging ANTINOUS. (A listing in the ships damaged section of "Lloyd's War Losses" isn't enough as LWL includes some ships there that weren't actually damaged.)
Based upon the description in the KTB and what's in BVLAS, this apparently is a torpedo miss on September 1, 1916 with U 38 then surfacing and opening fire on an armed steamer. Valentiner soon broke off the action.
U 38 also had a short firefight with an armed steamer the next day.
In neither case did U 38 claim to have to have hit the steamer.
Best wishes,
Michael
I've had a look at U 38's KTB, and based upon what's in there, there isn't enough evidence to credit U 38 with damaging ANTINOUS. (A listing in the ships damaged section of "Lloyd's War Losses" isn't enough as LWL includes some ships there that weren't actually damaged.)
Based upon the description in the KTB and what's in BVLAS, this apparently is a torpedo miss on September 1, 1916 with U 38 then surfacing and opening fire on an armed steamer. Valentiner soon broke off the action.
U 38 also had a short firefight with an armed steamer the next day.
In neither case did U 38 claim to have to have hit the steamer.
Best wishes,
Michael
Subject | Written By | Posted |
---|---|---|
ANTINOUS 2 Sept 1916 | Josephbremez | 08/11/2018 06:47PM |
Re: ANTINOUS 2 Sept 1916 | Michael Lowrey | 09/12/2018 01:29PM |
Re: ANTINOUS 2 Sept 1916 | Josephbremez | 09/12/2018 02:25PM |
Re: ANTINOUS 2 Sept 1916 | Oliver Lörscher | 09/12/2018 06:50PM |
Re: ANTINOUS 2 Sept 1916 | Josephbremez | 09/13/2018 08:55PM |