Two U-boats damaged in bombing raids

[Michael Lowrey]

Looking for some detail on two U-boats that were damaged during air raids on the Flanders.

 

• U 14 was damaged on the night of February 1/2, 1915 at Zeebgugge. Repairs would take several months. Which unit was responsible for this?

 

• The German submarine UB 20 was damaged on June 17, 1917 in an air attack on Bruges. (It was repaired by July 27, 1917 and then mined while on post-repair sea trials.)  Which units were responsible for the initial June 17, bomb damage to UB 20?

 

Thanks in advance,

Michael

[sdparker]

Hello Michael,

The air raid on 1/2 February 1915 was most likely the work of the Eastchurch Sqdn Royal Naval Air Service led

by the buccaneering Commander Charles Rumney Samson. This unit was despatched from Eastchurch on the

Isle of Sheppey on 27th August 1914 to support the Marine Brigade at Ostende. Things didn't go to plan as the

Germans advanced rapidly, and the Sqdn moved back to Dunkerque ,where Samson obtained permission to

set up and help the French. The Admiralty realised it gave them another base from which they could patrol the

English Channel, and attack Zeppelins and U boats. They were specifically tasked with bombing U boat bases

at Zeebrugge and Bruges.

By the end of 1914 they had mounted several successful bombing raids including targets in Germany itself.

In his memoirs Samson said things went very quiet in January 1915, but bombing operations resumed in

February- which may be a reference to this raid.

The Sqdn was recalled to England, re_designated No 3 Sqdn, at the end of February, and sent to The Dardanelles.

The air raid on Bruges on 17/6/1917 matches a bombing mission by No 5 Sqdn RNAS. In his memoirs a book

called In The Teeth Of The Wind, Sqdn  Leader CPO Bartlett wrote that 4 DH4 bombers attacked the docks at

Bruges, and after dropping one 65lb and 12 16lb bombs, saw many explosions amongst shipping in the western

basin and on the quayside where a wood stack was set ablaze

Hope this gives you something to start with

Regards

Geoff

[Alan Bentley]

No. 3 Squadron or No. 3 Wing?

What is the difference if there is one?

Was 2Wing ever 2 Squadron?

[Terry_Reeves]

Have you tried  uboat.net?

 

https://uboat.net

 

TR

Edited 18 March , 2019 by Terry_Reeves

[sdparker]

Alan

Yes a few corrections to my earlier post.

The Eastchurch Sqdn was re-designated No3 Sqdn on 1/9/1914. as stated it was then transferred to

The Dardanelles and was renamed 3 Wing on 21/6/1915.

No2 Sqdn RNAS was briefly in action in Flanders too, but was brought back to Eastchurch to train up

aircrews.It was re-designated 2 Wing also on 21/6/1915, and was also sent to The Dardanelles.

Samsons Sqdn didn't do bombing raids over Germany- other RNAS Sqdns were responsible for those

Regards

Geoff

[ajsmith]

Harold Rosher who served with 1st squadron RNAS mentions a raid on Zeebruge at around this period in his book which can be read here https://archive.org/details/inroyalnavalairs00roshuoft/page/n1. This seemed to be part of a series of raids by his squadron around this time.

[Michael Lowrey]

3 hours ago, Terry_Reeves said:

Have you tried  uboat.net?

 

https://uboat.net

 

TR

 

Terry,

 

Actually I'm one of the two people that handle the WWI material for uboat.net…

 

And while the incidents are included in Spindler's official history of German submarine operations against merchant shipping, there's no mention of which Allied unit(s) were responsible. As for as I can tell, neither attack is mentioned in the Naval Staff Monograph.

 

Best wishes,

Michael

[michaeldr]

37 minutes ago, Michael Lowrey said:

neither attack is mentioned in the Naval Staff Monograph.

 

It's not just the Naval Staff Monos., it is also missing from The War in the Air by H A Jones (Vol.II)

Referring to a press notice from the Admiralty in Berlin on 4^th February 1915, the history states:

“The German announcement of the submarine blockade led to an immediate concentration of naval aircraft for the bombing of the Belgian bases. Aeroplanes and seaplanes from Hendon, Eastchurch, and the carrier Empress were sent to reinforce those at Dover and Dunkirk for a series of raids timed to begin on the 11^th February.”

Is it possible that the date 1^st/2^nd February is a transcription error?

Perhaps it's meant to read 12th??????

page 342 describes a raid by 12 aeroplanes and 1 seaplane which reached Ostende and Zeebrugge on that date, but mentions only the Mole and power station (not U-Boats) at the latter point

[sdparker]

I have a copy of the book In The Royal Naval Air Service by Harold Rosher, as mentioned in Alan's post above.

In it on pages 49-55, he describes this large co-ordinated attack comprising 34 naval aircraft and seaplanes.

Apparently the attack took place on 11th February, but the weather was so bad , nobody found the target, and

so the attack took place the next day, on the 12th.

The book also includes the Admiralty's official account of the raid.

I tend to agree with Michaeldr that maybe the original date may have been wrongly transcribed

Regards

Geoff

Edited 18 March , 2019 by sdparker
sorry meant post by Tony Smith

[Michael Lowrey]

Spindler clearly states the night of February 1/2, 1915 — U 14 had just arrived from Germany the day before and was tied up at the Zeebrugge Mole when damaged.

 

And while the Naval Staff Monograph doesn't describe the attack, it does contain this (NSM 13, page 68):

 

Quote

The German intercepts afforded the only truly reliable information. On February 1 intelligence was received in this way that U.35 was leaving Heligoland at noon to the south-west and west, and on February 3 it was learned that U. 14 had been damaged by an aeroplane bomb, and was forced to proceed to Ostend for repairs, after which she would proceed home to the Bight. Having made good temporary repairs she left Ostend on February 12, arriving at Schillig Roads in the evening of the 14th, and proceeding the following day to Kiel for repairs.

Unfortunately, I don't have a copy of U 14's KTB. I'll ask around to see if any of my contacts do, so as to confirm the date.