Martin, CTL = constructive total loss. So badly damaged that she wasn't repairable or worth repairing. Best wishes, Michael
Forum: WWI forum

Chris, One detail I have disagree with. Gerth and Seuffer may very well have known each other. It was not though because "Seuffer would have been well known to Gerth as ‘Rudi’ for they both received command of their UC boats in the Flanders Flotilla in December 1916." Seuffler's UC 50 was originally assigned to the High Sea Fleet's I Flotilla and wasn't reassigned to F
Forum: WWI forum

Chris, There's a lot here. UC 78 would not be the answer. It only arrived in Flanders on January 19, 1918. Her first patrol from Flanders only came on January 25th and was to the English east coast – a standard work-up pattern for new boats to the command. I can't find Schwedrt-Fege in the "Ehrenrangliste," so presumably either an army officer or a misspelled name ( m
Forum: WWI forum

Clint, No and no -- the National Archives microfilms are copies of the original German-language document (U 53's war diary by Kplt. Hans Rose in this case). As far as I am aware, they are not available on the web. Best wishes, Michael
Forum: WWI forum

Lio, Here's what I have for UB 128: #1 3-Aug-18 to 4-Sep-18 -- Transfer trip to Cattaro #2 28-Oct-18 to 29-Nov-18 -- return to Germany Best wishes, Michael
Forum: WWI forum

Lio, Uboat.net's World War I patrol information was generated years ago based upon Spindler's official history before we had access to most U-boat KTBs. The limitation with Spindler is that it only includes patrols primarily aimed at merchant shipping. (A lot of the earlier patrols were in support of teh High Seas Fleet and targeted British warships.) I have U 52's KTB, and have
Forum: WWI forum

Clint, I do have U 53's Kriegstagebuch (KTB, war diary) on microfilm, which contains a description of both incidents. Best wishes, Michael
Forum: WWI forum

Per the 1941 Rangliste, it's Meyn. He was in Crew XII/1939. Best wishes, Michael
Forum: General Discussions

Randall, I’ll send you an e-mail about this. Best wishes, Michael
Forum: WWI forum

Non Anor, UB 21 was the U-boat that shelled Scarborough on September 4, 1917. Best wishes, Michael
Forum: WWI forum

Remy, Good to hear that the wreck of another missing submarine has been located. Best wishes, Michael
Forum: WWI forum

Yes, but in modified form, with an oak leaf Cluster replacing the swastika. Best wishes, Michael
Forum: General Discussions

Neville, The reference is to the supposed sinking of U 34 on November 8/9, 1918. This currently isn't considered a viable sinking claim -- it's just really, really, hard to get U 34 there then. The claim has been discussed before in this thread: Best wishes, Michael
Forum: WWI forum

Freddy, I believe I know what local expert you are talking about. In this case, he’s just wrong in several regards: 1. The Sea King sinking claim actually is for June 12, 1917. 2. The Royal Navy's Naval Staff Monograph Vol 19, pp. 68 - 72, rejects the Sea King sinking claim as requiring an excessively long patrol length. 3. In my own research for a book I'm working on, I r
Forum: General Discussions

Mike, At the moment, the UC 66 is the only confirmed sinking. One more reattribution to an air attack is likely soon -- I just need to pry the location of a wreck from a diver. A third is possible, subject to the details of a different wreck. The RN did attribute some additional U-boat losses to air attack in World War I but their staff work left much to be desired. Many Flanders-based U-b
Forum: General Discussions

Mike, There looks to have been only one U-boat area at that time, UC 34. I have UC 34's KTB and can check to see if was attacked as described, though I suspect that people that hang out on our World War I forum (hint) probably have the information immediately at hand. In any case, this attack did not result in the sinking of a submarine. Best wishes, Michael
Forum: General Discussions

British Monarch was mined, so presumably what you're interested in are the minefield locations. These would be three mines each from: 42°56.8'N, 6°09.5'E to 42°57.?'N, 6°10.2'E 42°57.6'N, 6°10.6'E to 42°57.5'N, 6°11.7'E 42°57.7'N, 6°13.1'E to 42°58.5'N, 6°13.7'E 42°58.2'N, 6°16'E to 42°57.8'N, 6°16.2'E I
Forum: WWI forum

Jørn, Also the date on the propeller can be very useful. Best wishes, Michael
Forum: WWI forum

Jørn, Propeller marking style varied by yard, so even if you don't have the boat's number, you should be able to get the yard that built the boat, which can be extremely useful in identifying wrecks. As for the gun, I would compare it to the 8.8cm guns from U 41 and U 51 that are in museums to see how close the part numbers are. You have mail. Best wishes, Michael
Forum: WWI forum

Jørn, British or German? If British, the number on the gun has been used to identify at least one WWI British submarine wreck. Torpedo, no idea if records survive. If German, I've very rarely seen gun numbers given in KTBs and then only for certain HSF boats from mid-1918 on. Torpedoes used with serial number are often listed in HSF KTBs. I'm not aware of a list with torpedoes
Forum: WWI forum

Joern, It certainly is possible that the reloads were carried off by a fishing net. However, given the empty bow tube, I think it's more likely that UC 30 didn't have any reloads on deck when she was lost. Why wouldn't you reload the tube if you had a torpedo available? I'll take a look at some KTBs over the weekend to try to determine the typical number of torpedoes ca
Forum: WWI forum

T: Temporary A: Acting
Forum: _ Forum in deutscher Sprache

Jorn, 18 mines yes, but the number of torpedoes onboard can’t be more than six and it could be lower. The base torpedo count for a UCII was four: a torpedo each in both the external bow tubes, and a torpedo in tube plus a reload for the stern tow. It could grow to be as high as seven by adding more reloads -- for the bow tubes, these would be lashed to the deck, and for the stern tube, inte
Forum: WWI forum

Cyril, Unfortunately, I'm not aware of any surviving data that links parts to a specific World War I U-boat. You could probably narrow it down to a limited number of possibilities by comparing the date to when various boats were laid down and completed, but that’s going to be far from definite. You should be able to obtain your grandfather's service record from The National Archiv
Forum: WWI forum

Guy, This attack didn't sink a submarine, as there are no boat that went missing at that time. I'll have to do a bit of additional research on this one to completely exclude all the German submarines in the area, but the British official history (Naval Staff Monograph, Vol. XVIII, pages 459-460) states that this attack was probably on the British submarine E 44 (!), which survived
Forum: WWI forum

Martin, Per Spindler (Vol. II, p. 257), U 38 (Kplt. Max Valentiner) forced a steamer to stop, with the crew abandoning ship. Before U 38 could sink the steamer, an "armed yacht" arrived on the scene and forced the U-boat to dive. The vessel was actually the armed trawler HMT Spider. The location of this action was 51°10'N, 6°13'W per the Naval Staff Monograph, Vol. XIV, p.8
Forum: WWI forum

Hermes, I do have UC 38's KTB for that time period. What is your specific question? If it's what position is given in UC 38's KTB for the sinking of DORAVORE on February 20, 1917, I can get you that, though it's possible that Simon or Oliver might get you the answer from there files before I get a chance to get down to the library to look at microfilmed copy of the KTB
Forum: WWI forum

As of now, Keeper is a missing ship. There's no really satisfying theory to explain her loss. UC 66 is not the answer. The loss of that submarine has recently been reassessed to being sunk by an air attack on May 27, 1917 north of Round Island Light, Isles of Scilly with a corresponding wreck having been located in recent years. Other U-boat attacks are not likely to have accounted for Ke
Forum: WWI forum

Felix, Thanks for the link. I actually do have a copy of the Ehrenrangliste and the information from it has been incorporated into this site for about a year now. It’s where the data on most 1919 to 1929 promotions and dates when officers left naval service comes from. (The Ehrenrangliste is the standard work on what Kaiserliche Marine officers did during World War I.) It's some of the
Forum: General Discussions

Chris, I'm not exactly sure how UC 61 suffered a shell hit — as you say, conventional accounts don't mention this and it certainly would change the story. There's another possibility: the shell hit could have come some time after UC 61 went aground and was abandoned. Say some patrol vessel sees the wreck later and opens fire only to then realize that it’s an aground, blown up U-
Forum: WWI forum