Armament of the "SMS Breslau / Midilli"

[Holger Kotthaus]

3 hours ago, stevenbecker said:

Yes this battery is still not solid, as I can find little on it and its stay in Turkey other then a great photos by Gunter.

The two officers mention are as confirmed, but not any other soldier in that unit?

Diesinger    Lt    Arty officer 16th Corps 1915 att Willmer as CO 614th How Bty - Fußartillerie-Batterie 614 (12cm) part 1st Arty Bn at Gallipoli shown commanded the "Ethna Rickmers" during evacuation of Istanbul 1919    1915-19    (not identified) mentioned for his work with Artillery at Kosten Smyrna 5-16 shown in Klaus Wolf's Book

Hammer    Capt / Hptm    Batterieführer Artillery officer commander 614th Art Bn - Fußartillerie-Batterie 614 (Defense Suvla) at Gallipoli    1915-    (not identified)? Battery 614 with 150 German artillery soldiers in Turkey shown in Klaus Wolf's Book

Thats about all I had on it.

Even the Verlustlisten 1. Weltkrieg does not show any soldiers with this unit?

 

 

Klaus Wolf mentioned in the signature of this photos to Gunter Hartnagel: https://www.flickr.com/photos/39631091@N03/3823130077/in/photostream/

"Die Batterie 614 war im Bereich der Suvla-Bucht eingesetzt. Ich habe im Krankenbuch des Feldlazaretts Bighali jede Menge Soldaten der 614 gefunden,
die sich dort krank gemeldet hatten. Die Batterie wurde vermutlich von Lt. Diesinger geführt, der wiederum der 11. ID unterstellt war, die von Obstlt Willmer geführt wurde."

"Battery 614 was deployed in the Suvla Bay area. In the medical records of the Bighali field hospital I found a lot of soldiers from the 614 who had reported sick there.
The battery was probably used by Lt. Diesinger, who in turn was subordinate to the 11th ID, which was led by Obstlt Willmer"

 

But I don´t know which book; - But since you have performed Klaus Wolf several times, you certainly know which book he was referring to.

Victory at Gallipoli: The German–Ottoman Alliance in the First World War by Klaus Wolf
https://www.westernfrontassociation.com/world-war-i-book-reviews/victory-at-gallipoli-the-german-ottoman-alliance-in-the-first-world-war-by-klaus-wolf/

Gallipoli 1915: Das deutsch-türkische Militärbündnis im Ersten Weltkrieg
https://www.amazon.de/Gallipoli-1915-deutsch-türkische-Militärbündnis-Weltkrieg/dp/3932385292

Holger

 

[stevenbecker]

Yes Wolf's book Victory at Gallipoli

Hammer is mentioned by Gunter in his photo's, while he is in Wolf's book, possibly because Gunter mentioned him to Wolf 

So far records show the  Fußartillerie-Batterie 614

formed 20-12-15 from 6Bty Ers.Btl./Fußart.Rgt No 7

arrived in Gallipoli around Feb 1916 and accounts say the Battery left in Oct 1916 to Germany where it was reformed as 

Fußartillerie-Bataillon 150 around Nov 1916

where it went then is unknown

Diesinger appears attached to the 614, early 1916 at Gallipoli and moved to Kosten Smyrna by May 1916, but unknown what Artillery unit he was with at that time.

The only other officer I can find is a;

Rosenberger Hermann    Lt deR (but unknown if with the 614 at Gallipoli?)
 

Edited 13 September by stevenbecker

[Holger Kotthaus]

2 hours ago, stevenbecker said:

Yes Wolf's book Victory at Gallipoli

Hammer is mentioned by Gunter in his photo's, while he is not in Wolf's book, possibly because the Battery arrived after the Campaign.

So far records show the  Fußartillerie-Batterie 614

formed 20-12-15 from 6Bty Ers.Btl./Fußart.Rgt No 7

arrived in Gallipoli around Feb 1916 and accounts say the Battery left in Oct 1916 to Germany where it was reformed as 

Fußartillerie-Bataillon 150 around Nov 1916

where it went then is unknown

Diesinger appears attached to the 614, early 1916 at Gallipoli and moved to Kosten Smyrna by May 1916, but unknown what Artillery unit he was with at that time.

The only other officer I can find is a;

Rosenberger Hermann    Lt deR (but unknown if with the 614 at Gallipoli?)
 

 

Wolf has given a source in the appendix of his book where he got the Detail data from the 614 battery?

Specifically personal details / Medical records of the Bighali field hospital. I am sure it´s an original German source in a German archive.

 

Depending on which archive (Berlin, Koblenz, Freiburg, München . . . ) I can try to stop and search by the next time.

Holger

[stevenbecker]

Yes I saw that and checked the Verlustlisten 1. Weltkrieg for names, but no luck under the unit 614

But we are getting off the subject. but interesting

Also as for Diesinger, he may have gone when Wilmer and the 11th Ottoman Div moved to the Eastern Front

Its movement details give

Behram'lu 29.04.16

Kesan 23.05.16

Istanbul (Aya Stefanos) 29.05.16

Ma’mûre Stn 05.06.16

Edited 13 September by stevenbecker

[Holger Kotthaus]

18 hours ago, stevenbecker said:

. . . . . But we are getting off the subject. but interesting. . . . .

 

It's a 'wide-ranging topic' from Dardanelles to the Euphrates - from fortress-building
to ship-design - from weapon-technology-details to the fate of individual soldiers.

At this point I would like to come back to this very unusual and interesting photo.
I was also amazed that this time the owner made a very meaningful reference
to the "SMS Breslau" and their guns. Since he usually describes the photos very
carefully, I suspect this explanation is written on the back of the original photo.

My comments refer to the I. Bottom Gun-Carriage and  II. 10.5 cm Gun-Barrel

I. BOTTOM GUN-CARRIAGE
The pictured bottom Gun-Cariage is a typical design of an older Krupp construction
from the end of the 19th century. The only thing that had to be adjusted between the
`old gun carriage´ and the `new barrel´ was subsequently the radial tooth segment
for height adjustment.

Picture_001_"Mixture of old Gun carriage and new 10.5 cm Barrel"

Original Source:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/39631091@N03/3822403193

Further comparison sources:
https://www.festungen.info/content/geschichte-der-panzerfestungen/entwicklung-der-artillerie/19-jahrhundert-entwicklung-der-artillerie/

 

Even this older carriage-design was available for the 10.5 cm caliber as a siege-gun
with a barrel length of L/35. The appearance at Gallipili which was not surprising
given the historical background of Krupp's arms deliveries to the Ottoman Empire.
However, it could also be another field-gun or mortar of the Krupp type, which has
the same bearing details. No other distinguishing features can be seen in the photo.
Here is a detail, which can also compare the wooden spoke wheels on both pictures.

(The original photo was mirrored horizontally to illustrate the comparison of picture
001 & 002 with the bearing of the trunnion of the gun barrel, in a better way.)

Picture_002_ 10.5 cm Krupp-Gun Breach-Loader L/35  M. 1885

Original Source:
https://www.festungen.info/images/pictures/w7e5b11082205000f9239f86fc595df3/erster-weltkrieg/geschuetze/w7e5c13092a0a0009523ebe859b29912/10-5-cm-kanone-l-35-in-belagerungs--und-festungslaffette-mit-hydraulicher-bremse.jpg?w=920

Further comparison source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10.5_cm_Kanone_C/85

 

Edited 13 September by Holger Kotthaus

[Holger Kotthaus]

II. 10.5 cm GUN-BARREL
A 10.5 cm Krupp Naval-Gun barrel can be seen, which is also clear visible by the
proportion of the man behind the gun barrel. The closure and the recoil brakes and
recuberator also indicate a typical Krupp design. This is where things get interesting.

In my opinion, the 001_Picture shows a 10.5 cm QF Krupp L/40 M.1897 and none
10.5 cm QF Krupp L/45 M.1906 , with which the "SMS Breslau" was armed. This
much older type was for example on the "SMS Bremen", SMS Luchs" etc. installed.

The main difference is the missing massive reinforcement ring around the chamber
for the projectile in this 003_Picture, as can be clearly seen in the next 004_Picture.

This was already necessary from the 10.5 cm Krupp L/40 M.1904 model onwards,
as the weight of the HE grenade had increased from 18.0 kg to 25.5 kg and with it,
of course, the pressure of the explosion gases on the chamber the lower piece in
the rear part of the gun barrel. The "SMS Breslau" was even equipped with the
longer successor type, the 10.5 cm QF Krupp L/45 M. 1906. It would be really not
logical that this massive reinforcing ring would then have become unnecessary, as
the longer barrel was also subjected to even greater stress.

Further comparison source for 10.5 cm QF Krupp L/40 M.1897:
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNGER_41-40_skc00_Bremen_gun_pic.jpg

003_Picture_Closure of 10.5 cm QF Krupp L/40 M.1897 on M.P.L. C/97

Original Source:
https://www.operacional.pt/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/22-Forte-de-Almada-DSC_9342.jpg

Further comparison sources:
https://www.operacional.pt/a-guerra-civil-de-espanha-passou-pelo-tejo-o-forte-de-almada/
http://manuelc2005.blogspot.com/2014/05/13638-6-bateria-costera-raposa-setubal.html

 

The next Photo show the 10,5 cm QL L/40 M.1904 which was installed for example
on the German Light Cruisers "SMS Emden" and "SMS Königsberg".  And the "SMS
Breslau" even had the even longer gun-barrel Type 10,5 cm QL L/45 M.1906. But I
am not aware of any recordings with the gun breech of this version. In my opinion is
no differece bewtween L/40 M.1904 and L/45 M.1906; - only length of the gun barrel.

004_Picture_10.5 cm QF Krupp L/40 M.1904 on M.P.L. C/04

Original Source:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/147661871@N04/50088315838/in/album-72157715012891137/

Further textual background sources:
No.-21-German-Navy-Naval-Guns-Mountings-Sights-and-Table-of-Ordannce-July-1917_Part1-compressed-1 (22.2 MB / 60 pages / pdf)
https://ncisahistory.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/No.-21-German-Navy-Naval-Guns-Mountings-Sights-and-Table-of-Ordannce-July-1917_Part1-compressed-1.pdf

Holger

 

Edited 14 September by Holger Kotthaus

[Holger Kotthaus]

Further Photo with Armament of the "SMS Breslau / Midilli" ?

(Today is Friday; - here weekend and time for some further search and questions)

Below we see a further photo, which may well show the original 10.5 cm QL L/45
M.1906 guns of the "SMS Breslau". The proportions of the people allow at least
some conclusions to be drawn about the caliber size.

In my opinion, three of these weapons can even be seen here with their original
naval shield, which raises the question of whether there was a three-gun battery.
Perhaps there is also a fourth one outside the picture?

Here's the relevant photo from Gunter Hartnagel again for a better comparison:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/39631091@N03/9525330482

And here is another comparison with the different shape of the standard Navy shield
for the 15 cm QF Krupp Gun L/45 (Also to rule out this possibility)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15_cm_SK_L/45#/media/File:German_gun_from_SMS_Bremse_-_geograph.org.uk_-_118942.jpg

Fortified Coastal battery with 10.5 cm QL L/45 M.1906 from "SMS Breslau"?

Part of the Original Source:
https://static.wixstatic.com/media/921bc6_b61370fc5082488d835f993b52ab7726.jpg/v1/fill/w_334,h_583,al_c,q_80,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_auto/921bc6_b61370fc5082488d835f993b52ab7726.jpg

But what alternative would be left to identify these guns? Maybe 10.5 cm field guns
in fortified positions? With these naval shields; - Unknown to me.

The length of the barrel suggests neither a howitzer nor a mortar, but rather a
cannon. The 15 cm QL L/45 of the "SMS Goeben/Yavuz Sultan Selim, had no
protective shields and both the caliber and the associated barrel length would look
different.

Here some smaller photos of the removal from the battle cruiser and transport in
order to also to install it for coastal defense at Gallipoli.

https://static.wixstatic.com/media/921bc6_aabbcf0b494049c884662b818ef52975.jpg/v1/fill/w_334,h_310,al_c,q_80,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_auto/921bc6_aabbcf0b494049c884662b818ef52975.jpg

https://static.wixstatic.com/media/921bc6_17ed413684aa4f1684c7cebc3fe1e4a0.jpg/v1/fill/w_334,h_319,al_c,q_80,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_auto/921bc6_17ed413684aa4f1684c7cebc3fe1e4a0.jpg

https://static.wixstatic.com/media/921bc6_64c32a906ead4e459981a1a49238c8dc.jpg/v1/fill/w_334,h_246,al_c,q_80,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_auto/921bc6_64c32a906ead4e459981a1a49238c8dc.jpg

https://static.wixstatic.com/media/921bc6_fd5f0603b53841aea54fe1050e0f9e3e.jpg/v1/fill/w_334,h_292,al_c,q_80,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_auto/921bc6_fd5f0603b53841aea54fe1050e0f9e3e.jpg

Holger

 

Edited 15 September by Holger Kotthaus

[michaeldr]

21 hours ago, Holger Kotthaus said:

But what alternative would be left to identify these guns? Maybe 10.5 cm field guns
in fortified positions? With these naval shields; - Unknown to me.

Michael Forrest in his 'The Defence of the Dardanelles' (p.73) mentions that the Turgut Reis (former Weissenburg) was laid up in June 1915 after a shell exploded on deck, adding 

"some of her 105mm guns were removed and sent to add weight to the Dardanelles defences."

NB: not to be confused with the same ship's 280mm guns which were placed on the southern (Asia Minor) coast of the Dardanelles in the 1930s

Edited 16 September by michaeldr

[michaeldr]

21 hours ago, Holger Kotthaus said:

https://static.wixstatic.com/media/921bc6_17ed413684aa4f1684c7cebc3fe1e4a0.jpg/v1/fill/w_334,h_319,al_c,q_80,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_auto/921bc6_17ed413684aa4f1684c7cebc3fe1e4a0.jpg

I'm almost certain that this is a post-evacuation photograph of the Turks dragging a gun across 'V' Beach, Helles.
In the background you can see one of the piers and the two ships (Saghalien & Messena) sunk there by the allies to act as breakwaters
https://www.naval-history.net/WW1Book-RN3-247.jpg 

Edited 16 September by michaeldr

[michaeldr]

12 hours ago, michaeldr said:

the Turgut Reis (former Weissenburg) was laid up in June 1915 after a shell exploded on deck,

5 June 1915: A shell explodes in the forward turret of Torgud Reis , killing four gunners and injuring thirty-two. The battleship returns immediately to Istanbul, and the naval command uses the opportunity to suspend further operations. [from https://archive.org/details/learnislampdfenglishbooktheottomansteamnavy18281923/page/n40/mode/1up?q=Reis&view=theater]

[michaeldr]

When looking for Ottoman/German naval 10.5 guns then the following should also be considered; see https://www.naval-history.net/WW1Book-RN2-P04.jpg 
This map is from the British Naval OH and the table in the top-left-hand corner states that:
'Defences constructed, or altered from older works, between the outbreak of war and the Naval attack on March 18th, 1915 … RED'
See in that same table, under the subheading 'Intermediate Defences' there is listed for the European side;
'6c Suandere (North)    3 – 10.5cm .L/45 Q.F. Naval [3.4 in.]'

Edited 16 September by michaeldr

[Holger Kotthaus]

On 15/09/2023 at 19:54, michaeldr said:

Michael Forrest in his 'The Defence of the Dardanelles' (p.73) mentions that the Turgut Reis (former Weissenburg) was laid up in June 1915 after a shell exploded on deck, adding 

"some of her 105mm guns were removed and sent to add weight to the Dardanelles defences."

NB: not to be confused with the same ship's 280mm guns which were placed on the southern (Asia Minor) coast of the Dardanelles in the 1930s

Michael,

Your information corresponds to Gunter Hartnagel's answers to my comments.

My remarks to his original photo:

Quote

 

"Wonderful and very detailed interesting photo! I suspect that the description ``10.5
cm gun of SMS Breslau´´ was on the back of the photo.

The barrel and carriage come from different types of guns and were a makeshift
construction. Easily recognizable by the typical Krupp design of the bearing and the
wooden spoke wheels, the carriage most likely comes from an old siege gun: 10.5
cm Krupp-Gun Breach-Loader L/35 M. 1885.

The barrel is also, almost certainly, of the following gun type: 10.5 cm QF Krupp L/40
M.1897 and none 10.5 cm QF Krupp L/45 M.1906, with which the "SMS Breslau"
was armed. This much older type was for example on the "SMS Bremen", SMS
Luchs" etc. installed.

For this reason I have 'legitimate doubts' that this construction comes from "SMS
Breslau". But there were also the "SMS Weißenburg"/Torgud Reis and "SMS
Kurfürst Friedrich Wilhelm"/Barbaros Hayreddin, both of which had 10.5 cm Krupp
guns and some of them were used for coastal defense.

As I said; - Very interesting photo; - Thank you very much for showing us."

 

. . . and his detailed answer:

Quote

 

"You are absolutely correct, the caption showed that it was a 10.5 gun of Breslau.
The sea-guns were set into gun carriages which originated from older howitzer.
At Soğanlı, there were 10.5 S.K. L/35 guns used which were taken out of Barbaros
Hayreddin and Torgut Reis and later on Intepe.

Breslau had provided two 10.5 cm SK L/45 to which the photo was referring. They
were installed at Intepe in end of June 1915 within the Yavus battery (1 – 15 cm S.K.
L/45 and the 2 – 10,5 S.K. L/45) under the command of colonel Heinrich Herschel
who had been before second in command of Fort Hamidiye and guided the fire of the
two 35.5 cm guns during the battle of 18th March which possibly hit and sunk
Bouvet. When he was commanded out of the Fort in end of June, he also had the
command of the Usedom-battery (commander Haentjens, consisting of 3 - 8.8 cm
S.K. L/45). The German guns and German-Turkish mixed staff were called "Group
Herschel".

On 29th June, one of the 10.5 guns was destroyed by a barrel burst.
On 6th July the remaining 10.5 gun had to be handed over to the 5th Army and Lt.
Pommeresch lead it until August in the Southern front with a mixed German-Turkish
staff. I had assumed, based on the caption, that the photo was taken in Summer
1915 opposite the French and British lines. Probably in September it was moved to
the Anaforta front. After the evacuation in the North, two 10.5 SK L/45 guns (the
destroyed one was replaced by another Breslau gun) were moved to the Southern
front in December 1915 and remained there until the evacuation in January 1916.

Two 10.5 cm S.K. L/40 were employed in October 1915 along Intepe and originated
from ‚Peik i Schevket‘. Do you assume the caption is wrong and is showing one of
these two guns?"

 

What do you think about that?

Since the topic, Gallipoli and the battle for the Dardanelles, is still relatively new to
me, I first have to familiarize myself with all the geographical positioning information,
names and other background information.

Holger

 

[Holger Kotthaus]

On 15/09/2023 at 19:54, michaeldr said:

Michael Forrest in his 'The Defence of the Dardanelles' (p.73) mentions that the Turgut Reis (former Weissenburg) was laid up in June 1915

after a shell exploded on deck, adding  "some of her 105mm guns were removed and sent to add weight to the Dardanelles defences."

Michael

This is an important note.

Of course, this alternative does not make it any easier to identify the real 10.5 cm
guns of the "SMS Breslau" if details in the various text sources and in the layouts
only refer to 10.5 cm guns.

Holger

 

[Holger Kotthaus]

23 hours ago, michaeldr said:

5 June 1915: A shell explodes in the forward turret of Torgud Reis , killing four gunners and injuring thirty-two. The battleship returns immediately to Istanbul, and the naval command uses the opportunity to suspend further operations. [from https://archive.org/details/learnislampdfenglishbooktheottomansteamnavy18281923/page/n40/mode/1up?q=Reis&view=theater]

Oh yeah; - this is an important source. Many thanks for this link. I have to internalize this page by page.

Holger

[Holger Kotthaus]

23 hours ago, michaeldr said:

When looking for Ottoman/German naval 10.5 guns then the following should also be considered; see https://www.naval-history.net/WW1Book-RN2-P04.jpg 
This map is from the British Naval OH and the table in the top-left-hand corner states that:
'Defences constructed, or altered from older works, between the outbreak of war and the Naval attack on March 18th, 1915 … RED'
See in that same table, under the subheading 'Intermediate Defences' there is listed for the European side;
'6c Suandere (North)    3 – 10.5cm .L/45 Q.F. Naval [3.4 in.]'

Michael

Fantastic! Many thanks for showing us.

In this case, the text source and photo are clearly identical for the first time.

(Even if, as far as I know, the 10.5 cm caliber corresponds to the British 4.1 inch, and not 3.1 inch)

 

[michaeldr]

You are right: 4.1-inch is correct (not 3.1)  😏  Sorry I did not spot that.

regards, Michael

[Holger Kotthaus]

On 16/09/2023 at 08:12, michaeldr said:

I'm almost certain that this is a post-evacuation photograph of the Turks dragging a gun across 'V' Beach, Helles.
In the background you can see one of the piers and the two ships (Saghalien & Messena) sunk there by the allies to act as breakwaters
https://www.naval-history.net/WW1Book-RN3-247.jpg 

I am pretty sure that this photo is one of the 15 cm QF L/45 guns of the "SMS
Goeben"/ Yavuz Sultan Selim, simply because of the transport method, the
proportions and the other photos shown in this context .

But your identification about the position of the photo is certainly also an important
detail and an indication of the armament of the "SMS Breslau" and SMS Goeben"

That and the other small photos come from the following homepage:
https://www.gallipoli1915.de/vor-der-daradanellenschlacht (German)
https://www.gallipoli1915.de/info-1-c1t7z (English)

We can only hope that the sub-side will be completed with artillery units.
https://www.gallipoli1915.de/fuartilleriebatterie-614

Holger

 

[Holger Kotthaus]

General question about the designation of individual guns on the "SMS Breslau".

(I don't want to distract or expand the topic unnecessarily, I just want
to try to understand the numbering or alphabetical order of the guns.)

I know from the German battle-cruisers that the turret numbering or alphabetical
designation is `Turm No. A" (On Breslau with No. A?) began at the bow of a ship
and then continued clockwise, i.e. starting on the right/starboard, around the ship.

 

Designation with twelve x 10.5 cm guns
Was the position of Gun No. 3 (C?) on the "SMS Breslau", i.e. right / starboard,
and the opposite, on the left / port side then had the designation, Gun No. 12 (L?)

Many thanks in advance for any assistance.

Holger

 

Edited 17 September by Holger Kotthaus
Wrong explenation

[The Treasurer]

18 hours ago, Holger Kotthaus said:

General question about the designation of individual guns on the "SMS Breslau".

(I don't want to distract or expand the topic unnecessarily, I just want
to try to understand the numbering or alphabetical order of the guns.)

I know from the German battle-cruisers that the turret numbering or alphabetical
designation is `Turm No. A" (On Breslau with No. A?) began at the bow of a ship
and then continued clockwise, i.e. starting on the right/starboard, around the ship.

 

Designation with twelve x 10.5 cm guns
Was the position of Gun No. 3 (C?) on the "SMS Breslau", i.e. right / starboard,
and the opposite, on the left / port side then had the designation, Gun No. 12 (L?)

Many thanks in advance for any assistance.

Holger

 

Holger

Shielded gun positions are in this case simply numbered from bow to stern, so on this ship Port I to VI and Starboard I to VI. Same mechanism used for secondary batteries on the armoured ships. Plans normally use roman numerals for the designations.

 

Confusingly watertight compartments are always numbered from stern to bow!

[Holger Kotthaus]

10 hours ago, The Treasurer said:

Shielded gun positions are in this case simply numbered from bow to stern so on this ship Port I to VI and Starboard I to VI.

The Treasurer,

Sorry; -  but I don´t understand.

Regards Holger

Edited 18 September by Holger Kotthaus

[The Treasurer]

6 hours ago, Holger Kotthaus said:

The Treasurer,

Sorry; -  but I don´t understand.

Regards Holger

The port gun at the bow is Port Number 1. The starboard gun at the bow is starboard number 1. The port gun at the stern is Port Number 6, the starboard gun at the stern is Starboard Number 6.

 

This would also be true for the 15cm batteries on battleships and cruisers. In contrast gun turrets were given individual letter designations in the way you mention above (A, B C etc).

[Holger Kotthaus]

6 hours ago, The Treasurer said:

The port gun at the bow is Port Number 1. The starboard gun at the bow is starboard number 1. The port gun at the stern is Port Number 6, the starboard gun at the stern is Starboard Number 6.

Now I understand it; - was just a simple misunderstanding; - thanks for explanation. (- -)

Holger

[Holger Kotthaus]

In 1916, the first two 10.5 cm “Breslau guns” were transported by rail to the upper
reaches of the Euphrates to Jerbalus in what is now Syria. In 1917, additional guns
and naval crews were brought to the Euphrates and deployed. However, the exact
number is currently still unknown. But there must have been 4 to 6 guns.

These 10.5 cm naval guns were each installed on an unpowered Artillery-Barge
(Geschütz-Leichter) and last took part in the fighting, last on 26. March 1918. The
last two were blown up two days later on 28. March 1918.

A complete 10.5 cm QF (SK) Krupp Navy Gun L/45 on a shielded Navy mount
(M.P.L.) C/04 or C/06 on a Artillery-Barge, mentioned under the name "Falke".

Original Source: https://www.catawiki.com/de/l/73550837-deutsche-post-in-der-turkei-1918-euphrat-flussabteilung-2x-postkarte-selten-dscherablus-mit-beschreibung
(I tried to buy the picture; - But the offer had already been closed; - Too bad.)

In the background you can see the bridge over the Euphrates at Jerbalus, part of the
Baghdad Railway. Although a shot was fired 1-2 seconds earlier, which can be seen
from the cloud of smoke on the right edge of the picture, no gun squad can be seen.

Heading above the next photo: (Unfortunately without date or location)
Indian Sappers salvaging a Tukish Gun-Barge during the mesopotamian campaign
https://c8.alamy.com/comp/2HXM0BM/indian-sappers-salvaging-a-turkish-gun-barge-during-the-mesopotamian-campaign-collection-of-world-war-i-photographs-1914-1918-that-depict-the-military-activities-of-british-and-other-nations-armed-forces-and-personnel-during-world-war-i-2HXM0BM.jpg

The boat design could definitely match the picture above. Maybe one of the Gun-
Barge with 10,5 cm Breslau-Gun? The last two were blown up on 28. March 1918.

Holger

 

Edited 19 September by Holger Kotthaus

[Holger Kotthaus]

PRELIMINARY POSITION-LIST OF THE TWELVE 10.5 cm BRESLAU GUNS___________
I was unable to take into account the original numbering to All on-board guns. The
same applies to the exact time when all guns on the “SMS Breslau” were dismantled.
The exact duration of when a particular gun was set up is also only temporary and
certainly requires detailed additions. At the moment this only serves as a rough
overview and basis for further discussions.

 

I. - THREE GUNS as "Harabkale-Battery" above Sedd-el-Bahr
European side of the Dardanelles
"The only 10.5cm SKL/45 (the calibre and type on Breslau) shown on the map are
two at Harabkale Battery above Sed ul Bahr"
(The Treasure on 18. August 2023)

 

II. - TWO GUNS at Midia at the western entrance to the Bosporus.
Asian side of the Dardanelles
"I did just notice that Lorey Volume 1 (p.297-8) does state that two of the 10.5cm
guns removed from Breslau on rearmament in 1917 were installed at Midia at the
western entrance to the Bosporus."
(The Treasure on 18. August 2023)

 

I GUESS STATEMENTS, II. `Midia´ & III. `Intepe´ ARE IDENTICAL POSITIONS?__________

 

III. - TWO GUNS as part of the "Yavus Battery" at Intepe
Asian side of the Dardanelles
"Breslau had provided two 10.5 cm SK L/45 to which the photo was referring. They
were installed at Intepe in end of June 1915 within the Yavus battery (1 – 15 cm S.K.
L/45 and the 2 – 10,5 S.K. L/45) under the command of colonel Heinrich Herschel
who had been before second in command of Fort Hamidiye and guided the fire of the
two 35.5 cm guns during the battle of 18th March which possibly hit and sunk the
"Bouvet". When he was commanded out of the Fort in end of June, he also had the
command of the Usedom-battery (commander Haentjens, consisting of 3 - 8.8 cm
S.K. L/45). The German guns and German-Turkish mixed staff were called "Group
Herschel".
(Gunter Hartnagel on 15. September 2023)

 

IV. - TWO GUNS as "Baikosh-Battery" not far from Tepe
Asian side of the Dardanelles
"Baikosh Battery (No. 53a), two 10.5 cm. Q.F., May, 1915, for action against Helles.
I have not pin-pointed Baikosh Battery yet, but understand it was on the Asiatic side
not far from In Tepe.- [ ... ] - This crop from a map in the Naval OH shows In Tepe
and 53B - [ ... ] - it is my understanding that the new (May/June 1915) 10.5cm
battery at Baikosh was in this vicinity. North of above old ruined fort. Armament:—
Two 10-5 cm. L 45 Q F. guns (1910) on shielded Naval mountings."
(michaeldr on 10. September 2023)

 

V. - ONE GUN replace one destroyed gun in the Asiatic coast batteries.
Asian side of the Dardanelles
"It is also stated on p.168 that the 10.5cm gun removed in July 1915 was specifically
to replace one that had been destroyed in the Asiatic coast batteries."
--> to "Baikosh-Battery" ?
(The Treasure on 18. August 2023)

 

VI. - TWO GUNS transported to Euphrates and used on metal Artillery-Barges
First two Guns arrived Euphrates at 17. February 1917 at Dscherbalus. A total of
four 10.5 cm guns were delivered to the Euphrates and installed on Artillery-Barges.   
"In January 1918, a Euphrates-battle-group of the Imperial German Navy was set up
again with three large River-Gunboats and two Artillery-Barges with heavy guns. On
26. March 1918, the British offensive began against the Turkish units in Mesopotamia,
whereby the boats and Artillery-Barges of the 'Euphrates-River Detachment' had to
endure heavy fighting for the last time. The superiority of the British troops made it
necessary for the Turkish-German troops to withdraw. On 28. March 1918, on the
orders of the Flotilla-Chief, two metal Artillery-Barges were sunk near Anah."
( *** )

 

VII. - TWO GUNS as "Jemal-Pasha-Battery" at Ajar /Syria for Coastal defense
First location on the Euphrates at Dscherbalus; - later to Syrian coast Ajar position
"In October 1917, the "Euphrates-River-Detachment" had to hand over naval-
operating-crews and several of the 10.5 centimeter quick-loading guns to Syria,
where they were positioned near Ajar. This command was called the "Jemal Pasha
Battery" and was intended to provide coastal defense, because there were fears of
British landings in Syria."
( *** )

UP TO HERE; - ARE 12 GUNS LISTED_________________________________________________

 

VIII. - ONE Gun on Artillery-Barge on Lake Genezareth in Palestine ???
First location on the Euphrates at Dscherbalus; - later to Northern Palestine.
Not clear, Artillery-Barge, with or without 10.5 cm Gun?
"A small group of marines were detached from the Euphrates and formed the `Navy
Detachment Sea of Galilee´. They took one of the river gun-boats and a Artillery-
Barge with them. The main task remained guard duty. There was no more fighting
on the Sea of Galilee."
( *** )

( *** ) = Translated German Source:
Türkei Militärmission / Feldpost Jilderim
Die Post der "Tigris-" und "Euphrat-Flußabteilung"

Ausgabe Nr. 67 im Mai 1977 (Seiten 1 - 14)
https://kolonialmarken.de/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/EB_067.pdf

Ausgabe Nr. 68 im Oktober 1977 (Fortsetzung, Seiten 12 - 16)
https://kolonialmarken.de/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/EB_068.pdf

Holger

 

Edited 20 September by Holger Kotthaus

[Holger Kotthaus]

On 10/09/2023 at 09:35, michaeldr said:

The Mitchell Report has the following on p.446
SECTION II.—POLICY AND DEVELOPMENT OF COAST DEFENCES. 
(A) Period, 18th March, 1915, to Evacuation of Gallipoli Peninsula (January, 1916). 

5. The principal developments under (a) to (d) during the period of our occupation of the Gallipoli Peninsula were :—
… … … 
(c) (i) … (ii) … (iii) …
(iv) Baikosh Battery (No. 53a), two 10.5 cm. Q.F., May, 1915, for action against Helles. 

The timing sort of fits.
I have not pin-pointed Baikosh Battery yet, but understand it was on the Asiatic side not far from In Tepe

Michael,

Again thank´s a lot for your many helpfully posts.

I'm currently trying to go through the individual possible positions of the 10.5 cm
guns of the "SMS Breslau"; - battery by battery.

You mentioned: "Baikosh-Battery", which sounds similar to the "Beikusch-Battery"
described on the map below, but was apparently on the European side of the Dardanelles.
 

Furthermore, I didn´t found the Position description 53a (only 53b) on any side.
https://www.naval-history.net/WW1Book-RN2-P04.jpg

Edited 22 September by Holger Kotthaus