German commando attack on the US, Canada & Alaska

[syscom3]

Ummmm Soren ...... in 1940, the number of people living in the northern reaches of Alaska and the NW territories numbered in the thousands. And considering the size of the area, thats a very low density.

And look at those rivers. Not all of them navigatable. All certeinly frozen most of the year. And then there is the issue of the mountain ranges.

Now tell us all, how these teams are going to cary their rations, supplies, weapons and explosives in some of the most inhospitable terrain in the world, for hundreds of miles in order to instill terror on outposts that have zero military or commercial value.

And that doesnt account for them being tracked down themselves and picked off one by one by the locals.

Stick to an eastern seaboard attack.

[Soren]

Syscom,

The target area in effect needed to hold no more than half a thousand civilians, as the goal of the attack on Alaska was but to cause terror, nothing else. But besides that you could land men in both Fairbanks & Anchorage, both of which housing thousands of people. And as for dealing with the terrain, the German commandoes were trained by the Gebirgsjäger to travel, fight & survive in such terrain.

And as for Canada, look at the map, one can land men in or close to all the major cities there, Quebec, Torronto, Montreal etc etc no problem.

Take a look at the map Syscom.

[Glider]

Originally Posted by Soren

Parsifal you keep claiming that the proof is in the pudding yet you have no sources to back up your claims.

And no you obviously don’t know German Uboats Parsifal, and your weird attempt at comparing them to Japanese boats only verifies this.

The std. type IX could easily accommodate an extra 25 men with no problems what’so’ever , esp. If the number of torps were reduced. A Type IXD could hold over 252 tons of cargo Parsifal!.

I believe the onus is on you Soren to explain why they could carry an additional 25 men without any problems. Parsifal has supported his contention with the example of the Japanese Submarines which were twice the size of a Type IX. I have mentioned that the only other Submarines that carried raiding parties were the thre USA submarines that used their mine hold for soldiers and were 50% bigger than the Type IX. I have been on a submarine similar in size to a Type IX (the Oberon Class) and can promise you that there was no way you could get many exra's on board, if your interested there were four of us.
A type IX D could take 252 tons of cargo but only if all the torpedo tubes and torpedos were taken out and it was converted to transport configuration. This doesn't mean that you could get 25 men on as men already slept in the torpedo rooms.

As for the Abwehr, again no proof or sources from you. Also the Soviets got most of their intel from Western Allied intelligence gathering, the Soviets had nothing to do with it themselves.

I take it you can support the statement that the Soviets got most of their intel from the western allies. I say this as I have a couple of very good books on the intelligence war and assure you that as far as they are concerned, your statement couldn't be more wrong if you tried.

[Soren]

Glider, do you even understand how much space the torpedoes took up alone ??

A Type IX with half the normal torpedo load could easily accommodate another 30 men for transport, heck the nr. of dedicated crew members varied from an extra 5 to 8 men, and this was for entire patrols.

Remember this is no spy landing, and so the nr. of men landed need not be small. Also in this case the Uboat crew will be aware of the purpose of the men aboard.

[Soren]

As for Soviet intelligence, tell me what they achieve Glider.

I suppose you're refering to the Red Orchestra ?

[Glider]

Soren
How many times must I say to you that I have been in a Submarine of the same size as a Type IX and the concept of getting an extra 25+ men inside is impossible. The crew already hot bunk and you are increasing the compliment by around 50%.
Yes I have seen torpedo's have you?

Re the Russian intelligence, let me know what type your interested in. Tactical, Strategic, Economic or Counter Intelligence. I will happily give you examples on any of the above. All I ask is you support your statement that Russia got most of its intel from the Western Allies.

[parsifal]

Originally Posted by Soren

Parsifal you keep claiming that the proof is in the pudding yet you have no sources to back up your claims.

And no you obviously don’t know German Uboats Parsifal, and your weird attempt at comparing them to Japanese boats only verifies this.

The std. type IX could easily accommodate an extra 25 men with no problems what’so’ever , esp. If the number of torps were reduced. A Type IXD could hold over 252 tons of cargo Parsifal!


Hi soren

This is an extract from a magazine article about operation drumbeat. It illustrates the problems of trying to extend the range of a standard Type IX B submarine so as to operate with a 48 man crew off the coast of the US

In U-boat pens all over the coast of western France, German shore personnel and seagoing crews loaded torpedoes and 88mm shells into designated boats. Hardegen’s boat was a long-distance Type IX. Type IX boats would do most of the heavy lifting early in the operation; medium-sized Type VII boats would join in later.
Every inch of space on the cramped U-boats was given over to supplies. One toilet on U-123 was turned into a storage room, leaving only one other for the crew to use. Canned foods were stowed away deep, followed by fresh foods that would be eaten early in the cruise, much of it bearded with mold by the time it was served. The fuel bunkers were filled with diesel fuel, adding to the stench in the boat. Soon there was a medley of noxious odors and deadly fumes—combustion gasses from the diesel engines, body fluids and waste, rotting food, ripe sweat (bathing and shaving were discouraged), and stale air that had not managed to go through the primitive carbon-dioxide scrubbers.
As the men loaded the boats for what obviously would be a long cruise, excitement grew. In time the men were told that Dönitz had ordered that each boat in the force attack shipping in American waters on the same day—January 13, 1942.

Now, given that the Uboat was hard pressed to find enough space even for the standard crews, how do you propose to fit another 25 men in that space, feed them, arm them, rest them, for a voyage like to be at least twice as long as a standard patrol.

I know that Type IXs could carry more than 14 men, but it was difficult in the subtypes available in 1941, and it was never possible to accommodate that many extra men for 30 days or so.. The numbers you are considering was possible for short journeys only, if the deployment was a mediterranean crossing or shorter, I would say "fine," no problem, but we are talking a 30-60 day cruise here. To accommodate the 14 men I have nominated, the torpedo rooms would need to be empty. Ever served on a submarine Soren???/ I have. Ever tried to squeeze passengers and cargo into a submarine Soren??? I have. I spent a short while serving in Oberon Class Diesel Electrics, and during a number of excercises there were a number of instances where three or four extra commandoes were carried in the sub, for a maximum of a day or two. It was very uncomfortable. And it would have been even more so in a Type IX, where many of the crew were already bunked in the torpedo rooms. So "uncomfortable" in fact, that I doubt your elite commandoes would even be fit for combat at the end of it. Funny what a lack of sleep can do to a person....

So again Parsifal, study the German subs before making blanket statements about them.

I have studied, dont worry. Whilst i do not consider myself an expert, at least I dont go around pointing to types that were not even available in December 1941......

You mentioned something about the Type IX D2s somewhere. They were special long range Type IXs not developed until the latter part of 1942. There were also two Type IX D-1, U180 and U-195, again not available in 1941, which were designed to carry up to 252 tons of cargo. These boats were nearly twice as big as the standard Type IX, and still could not carry large numbers of pesonnel.

Its worth comparing your proposal against the japanese, because they were the only nation to attempt long range reinforcements using submarines. The Italians and the germans used subs to move cargo, but did not use them extensively to move troops. this was because moving troops by Sub is an inherently innefficient excercise. Moving cargo is slightly more efficient, because you can use external cargo spaces like hangars and LCIs lashed to the deck. So I think looking at the Japanese is very relevant because they were the ones who tried to move troops on the scale you are suggesting. There are two other nations that I know of who also used submarines for "large" scale reinforcements....the US used their Narwhals to land Raider detchments, on several occasions, and the Free French used the Sirene to reinforce and arm the resistance on Corsica. But the best people by far to lk at when investigating this issue are the japanese, why, because they did it, unlike the germans (well mostly), who had better, more important thngs to do with their subs

Soren, i do know quite a bit about german submarines. When you start to try to introduce sub types that were not even available in 1941, and which still could not carry the troop numbers you are suggesting, I would suggest that it is yourself who should start checking facts before debating.



As for the Abwehr, again no proof or sources from you. Also the Soviets got most of their intel from Western Allied intelligence gathering, the Soviets had nothing to do with it themselves.


Err, there are numerous exceptions to that thesis, starting with Richard Sorge, who most definately was not a western source. Then of course there is the Lucy Ring, which the Germans never found out about. There are numerous others. Just to dwell on the Lucy issue for a bit there may well have been some allied assistance, but the truth is no one actually knows. Rosselers post war statements dont ring true thats for sure, and the identity of the mole in OKH has never been revealed, It is certainly possible that Philby or his mate working at Bletchely may have been passing secrets to the Russians, but officially at least the Allies did not share ultra secrets directly with the Russians. If you have a source that says differently, by all means bring it forward, but I know that you cant, because the source of the Lucy rings information remains a secret, in the "never to be released category". Unless you are going to say that you have seen those records, you are just blowing hot air i would suggest.

I have suggested some sources incidentally, but we are yet to see the colour of any of your source material. I would very much like to see it if you have any

[Glider]

This might be of interest. A type IX submarine torpedo room with only one spare torpedo, bunks already in the torpedo room and you want to put another 25+ men in there for weeks.
Museum of Science and Industry | What's Here | Exhibits | U-505 | The Exhibit | On-Board Tour

[parsifal]

Originally Posted by Glider

I believe the onus is on you Soren to explain why they could carry an additional 25 men without any problems. Parsifal has supported his contention with the example of the Japanese Submarines which were twice the size of a Type IX. I have mentioned that the only other Submarines that carried raiding parties were the thre USA submarines that used their mine hold for soldiers and were 50% bigger than the Type IX. I have been on a submarine similar in size to a Type IX (the Oberon Class) and can promise you that there was no way you could get many exra's on board, if your interested there were four of us.A type IX D could take 252 tons of cargo but only if all the torpedo tubes and torpedos were taken out and it was converted to transport configuration. This doesn't mean that you could get 25 men on as men already slept in the torpedo rooms.



I take it you can support the statement that the Soviets got most of their intel from the western allies. I say this as I have a couple of very good books on the intelligence war and assure you that as far as they are concerned, your statement couldn't be more wrong if you tried.

Glider have you been on the Oberons, I served 9very briefly on such aboat....great boats, but no way could you cram 25 men and keep them alive for a month over and above the needs of the standard crew. Soren needs to get out a bit more i think

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by Soren

Syscom,

The target area in effect needed to hold no more than half a thousand civilians, as the goal of the attack on Alaska was but to cause terror, nothing else. But besides that you could land men in both Fairbanks & Anchorage, both of which housing thousands of people. And as for dealing with the terrain, the German commandoes were trained by the Gebirgsjäger to travel, fight & survive in such terrain.

And as for Canada, look at the map, one can land men in or close to all the major cities there, Quebec, Torronto, Montreal etc etc no problem.

Take a look at the map Syscom.

Soren I suggest you go to Alaska. I have been there, hell I am moving to Alaska next year.

If you are not familiar with the terrain you will not survive in the wilderness. Being trained in mountain terrain and being trained for the kind of wilderness in Alaska can not be compared. I am sorry...


Besides what kind of terror are they going to cause? To a few very small settlements or eskimos. It really is a stupid scenerio.

[Soren]

Parsifal do you even understand what you quote ??!

You have quoted how U-boats meant for long patrols were crammed with food, fuel, ammunition & torpedoes, knowing that they'd be out there a VERY long time, sometimes just laying in wait. However what you don't seem to understand at all is that the goal of the operation not is to go on a long patrol but to transport men from Europe to America. Is that really so hard to understand ? It's no freakin wonder you critize everything I write when you don't even care to read it! Or is it that you just don't know what the difference is and that U-boats were differently equipped depending on what type of task they were to perform??

Now Glider unknowingly demonstrated just how much room a SINGLE torpedo takes up. Take out 10 torpedoes and you've got yourself a very nice amount of room.

Another picture to show just how much room a single Torpedo took up: (Take away that torp and you've got an entire extra row of bed space)


One more:


Now remember that this (Forward torpedo room) is but ONE of the many rooms used as bedrooms by the crew, and even on long patrols where the boat was stuffed with extra food, fuel, ammunition & torpedoes there always was space for all 55 to 63 dedicated crewmembers. So a short tour de tour like the suggested operation would definitely allow an extra 30 men to come along, seeing that only a fraction of the food, ammunition & torpedoes would be needed. Also keep in mind the Type IXD is bigger inside than the boats pictured above.


Adler,

Have you tried travelling by foot in Alaska, or heck even Austria, Norway or Switzerland ? It can be done, I know it can, esp. by men trained to travel, fight and survive in mountainous terrain. It also depends a lot on how long you need to go.

Anyhow I don't even know why you guys think the men would have to travel many miles by foot over the mountains to reach the target area, as at both suggested target places they could be set off right next to it. So why are we even discussing this ???



If you want to critize something atleast read & understand it properly first.

[Soren]

This is the type of terrain the GebirgsJägers trained, lived, travelled & fought in during the war:




The GebirgsJägers









A good read: 6518 - Gebirgsjager - German Mountain Infantry

And today they carry on the tradition:





Heck even during the first world war there were men especially trained to live, travel & fight in mountainous terrain, such as the German alpine troops fighting the Italians. (Below: Austrian Mountain corps):

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Soren do not even try to compare the Alps and Western Europe to the climate and terrain of Alaska. Again before you make a comparison. Go to to both. I have...

[Glider]

Originally Posted by parsifal

Glider have you been on the Oberons, I served 9very briefly on such aboat....great boats, but no way could you cram 25 men and keep them alive for a month over and above the needs of the standard crew. Soren needs to get out a bit more i think

I didn't serve on them. The RN were trying to get people to volunteer for the Submarine service. Our branch which was the fixed wing airframes and engines was being cut and we went on board 'Odin' for three days for a taster.
I stayed with the FAA, but your right there were only four of us but there is no doubt that 25 is impossible.

[Glider]

Soren has missed the point. Those torpedo spaces are empty and the bunks are already in them and are occupied. You want to put 25 men in the room that you see.
I don't know how they stored the spare torps on a Type IX but in a Type VII most of the torpedo's were on the deck with a false floor on to on which people lived and worked. Taking the torpedo's out simply lowered the floor.

As for the photo's of the troops, can I ask if your taking the mules with you?