Ariadne and C29

[Dave Alton]

I’ve though it clearer to continue this as a new topic

The trawler Ariadne and submarine C29 were working together in an attempt to sink German u-boats attacking British fishing vessels. The trawler acted as a decoy, towing the submerged submarine during daylight hours on a 200 yard long tow, which also had a telephone line. The idea was that if a surfaced u-boat approached and attacked the trawler, the sub would be alerted, the tow slipped and the submarine would torpedo the u-boat.

This combination operated from May-October 1915 and was successful on two occasions, on 23 June 1915 the trawler Taranaki and C24 sank the U40 and on 20 July 1915 the trawler Princess Louise and C27 sank the U23. On two other occasions u-boats escaped and there were RN losses also.

Firstly, the C33 disappeared 4-5 August 1915, sometime after slipping her tow from the trawler Malta to return to harbour. it's possible she was mined or lost via accident, AFAIK her wreck has never been found.

On 29 August 1915, the Ariadne was towing the submerged C29 (Lt W R Schofield), when a large underwater explosion destroyed the submarine, it appears that due to navigational errors the trawler towed the submarine into a known German minefield off the Outer Dowsing Lightship (the Outer Dowsing is a shoal about 25 miles SE of the Humber). It was considered that the two vessels having been out of sight of land for several days and become out in their reckoning and in future the trawler/sub combinations were ordered to keep at least 15 miles from any known mine area.

The combination was not successful again after the sinking of U23, as survivors from this u-boat were unwisely mixed with interned German civilians who were repatriated in the late summer of 1915 and alerted the German Admiralty to the trap.

Regards

Dave

[sandyford]

David

That is wonderful information for me about the Ariadne & C29. Where did you find it?

When I heard about this towing of submarines it did occur to me that the trawler would have been responsible for where the submarine went and they were in contact by telephone. From what you say the regulations about this way of operating were changed in 1915, after mixed success. Charles James' DSC was gazetted in September 1915.

In 1914, Charles James Gibbon was with the armed yacht Vagrant. He was 24 in 1915 when the discussed incident happened and was severely wounded. After that he was placed on the books of Victory and then to the Dreel Castle for duty ashore.

He married in 1918 and died of pneumonia, on 29th October 1918. His new wife died, also of pneumonia, two days later on 31st October 1918.

Thank you very much for this information.

Kate

[Dave Alton]

Hi Kate, I'm glad I could help.

The reason for the trawler towing the submarine was to conserve battery power so that the sub could manoeuvre into an attacking position.

The submarine-trawler anti-uboat method is mentioned in quite a few books on WW1 naval history. I got the info on the loss of C29 from the 'Official History Naval Operations vol 3', pg 129 and 'Beneath The Waves - A History of RN Submarine Losses' by AS Evans pg 43.

For info on the idea and the other operations see the above Naval Ops vol pgs 46-48, 'The German Submarine War 1914-18' by RH Gibson and Maurice Prendergast pgs 46-49, 'Find and Destroy - Antisubmarine Warfare in WW1' by Dwight Messimer, pg 35-36. Also Messimer's 'Verschollen - U-boat losses WW1' has details of how the Germans found out about the RN method in his accounts of the sinkings of U23 and U40.

Regards

Dave

[DirtyDick]

The scheme was known as the Tethered Goat for obvious reasons since the trawler was the bait, being too small to bother wasting a torpedo on.

As pointed out, the U40 incident was one of the few successes of this very complex tactic. Its CO was the brother of Werner Furbringer, who later wrote an account of his time in U-boats during the War. He was one of the few to survive the sinking of the U-40 and apparently complained that it was an underhand trick to torpedo a 'defenceless' surfaced U-boat!

Cheers

Richard

[sandyford]

Richard

Thank you.

Do you think that the Sub Commander would be the more senior and would be telling the Ariadne where to take it? When the account said off the Humber, I had imagined that it was in sight of it.

I can't get away from the fact that Charles James may have felt himself responsible for the disaster, DSC or not. Another submarine seems to have had a crew of 38 men. Would that be about how many men were killed?

Also would this area have been mined by the Allies?

Kate

[DirtyDick]

Kate

As Dave Alton points out, towing these vessels both on and under the surface was a common practice; especially for the smaller submarines with far less endurance. Towing a submerged submarine to its patrol area allowed the vessel to immediately begin to hunt since its batteries would be virtually full after having been towed into position. If a U-boat surfaced to molest the seemingly isolated trawler towing the submarine, the British submarine would attempt to engage it.

By 1915 most C-Class submarines were restricted to coastal defence duties or training; they also took part in anti-submarine patrols as described. Relatively junior ranks commanded submarines. Most C-Class COs were lieutenants and those of larger submarines lieutenants or Lt Cdrs.

For example, the CO of C-24 in the U-40 incident depicted off Aberdeen was one Lt F.H. Taylor; whereas the CO of the decoy vessel Taranaki was a Lt. Cdr.

The C-Class boats had a complement of 16; two officers and 14 ratings. This number varies considerably for there were a number of classes of submarine. Coastal boats, such as the C-Class, had smaller crews; the medium sized Overseas boats of the D, E and G classes had around 30 men each; the larger Fleet submarines of the K and J classes had crews of about 60 men.

As to mines: I have no definite WW1 information to hand, but in 1939 a British minefield belt was laid along the East Coast from, approximately, Norfolk to Newcastle, as an anti-invasion measure. It would seem likely that this would have been the case in WW1. Equally, both sides' submarines took part in covert minelaying along natural choke points and trade routes of their enemy.

Cheers

Richard

[sandyford]

Thank you so much David and Richard.

As you say this type of operation seems very cumbersome and hazardous although I can see why it seemed like a good idea.

I don't expect the Ariadne looked very pretty after this incident either. All concerned were in a dangerous situation, navigational errors or not.

I am very pleased with all the details you have given me about this incident.

And now a real challenge. What was the captain of the submarines favourite colour.

Kate

[Dave Alton]

Kate

Being an RN officer I expect it would be dark blue!

The minefield was a German one, a large minefield was laid by the German surface ships near the Outer Dowsing in late August 1914, it's possible this was reinforced by mines laid by German UC type minelaying submarines. The only British defensive contact minefields laid in 1914-15 were in the eastern approaches to the Channel. The RN frequently and deliberately left many German minefields unswept to use them as defensive barriers, because they knew the Germans would not enter the areas of their own minefields, this limited the areas to be patrolled.

Regards

Dave

[sandyford]

Dave

You scored 2/3 for your answer. The top answer was 'sky blue'.

Looking at the service record of Charles James Gibbon in the light of all the information you have given me, I think he got his DSC for an earlier incident. The photocopied service record is quite long and is written in abbreviated sentences. Although there are dates, some of them are written up the sides and above the text and they are not in date order.

This seems to be the relevant part. Sentences are in differing writing.

3:10:14 Trawler Ariadne in command and as Subdivisional Leader 30:4:15

12/7/15 Lt. Temp.Te/ No 595 from AOP- severely wounded in two places

15/9/15 Promoted to the rank of Lieutenant RNR for gallantry in action.

11:7:15 Reapptd. Ariadne in command on promotion (to Lt. RNR)

Awarded DSC for very gallant behaviour in action between Armed Trawler Ariadne11 and a German Submarine 11th July 1915.

Admitted to hospital on 13/9/15

DSC gazetted on 13th September 1915

There is no citation for this DSC, just as I have found with some Army awards.

Thank you for helping me to understand all of this record and the C29 incident more clearly.

Best wishes

Kate

[sandyford]

David and Richard

Felling very heartened by the information you gave me, I typed 'WW1 C29 sub' into a general search and the following site appeared.

http://www.battleships-cruisers.co.uk/c-class1.htm.

It is a Naval Art site. Lo and behold, it had 5 photos of the C29 - one or two with crew members.

Unfortunately, the photographs are quite expensive - £25 +p&p per photo (framed) but I could see the C 29 immediately. I am certainly going to contact Gosport first as I couldn't afford to buy the set from the above site. If there is no joy at Gosport I might be able to afford one of them

There was no photo for the E class submarine which was discussed on the other thread.

Kate

[sandyford]

Being rather self centred and single minded, I forgot to say that there were photos of all kinds of ships by category.

Kate

[DirtyDick]

Kate

The RNSM has photos of every RN submarine, of course there are some covered in more detail than others.

I may have stated on a previous thread, but the RNSM will copy photos to disk for about £5-7 each; they may also be able to make reproductions for you.

Cheers

Richard

[sandyford]

Yes Richard.

You gave me the contact at Gosport in the thread about the E47. It sounds very hopeful.

From what you have said, the cost would be much more reasonable. The document archive you mentioned also sounds very interesting.

Regards

Kate