АСМ написал:

#1017309
Имелись ли ПУТС на подводных лодках ВМФ Франции, Италии и Японии в годы Второй мировой войны?

Наверняка, но у меня не хватало информации, для того, чтобы включить их в статью.

АСМ написал:

#1017413
Особенно, если учесть, что у итальянских и японских подводников были на счету потопленные авианосцы, крейсера и эсминцы

А на наших театрах такое плавало только в порядке исключения, так что не будем столь строги и однозначны.

lupodimare89 написал:

#1017045
Oh... Fugas-class minesweepers?

No, there were 253L-type minesweepers.

lupodimare89 написал:

#1017045
Um... there was no nearby field of M-26 mines close? (and who laid them?)

This field probably was laid after U-679 loss.

lupodimare89 написал:

#1017045
It's not possible that damage was amplified by spare torpedoes? (especially if it was on the bow).

I think, no. In the ocassion when spare torpedoes exploded all bow became demolished in small peacies. In this occassion whole bow part laid close to the wreck.

Oh... Fugas-class minesweepers?
No, there were 253L-type minesweepers.

Oh ok...
But it's not know exactly which units/ships aid it?
(sorry to repeat the question, I wanted to write exactly the ships that laid it..   ex: "T-351, T-352" etc... not just the class, even if it's a list of multiple units involved).

This field probably was laid after U-679 loss.
I think, no. In the ocassion when spare torpedoes exploded all bow became demolished in small peacies. In this occassion whole bow part laid close to the wreck.

In  the end option of  "own German drifting mine" (EMC) is your favourite choice at this point?

Отредактированно lupodimare89 (19.12.2015 16:57:06)

As additional consideration (reading the side note) the paper also say that on day 9 January were laid the of "KB" type, and they have a larger amount of explosive (230kg, if I am right).
Maybe submarine simply sunk on one of these just-laid mines?





Additional Note: I've just made some checks with Google Earth and the grid squares: if submarine still met in U-745 in AO0264, and then was sunk around AO0268, this meant she sailed to south-east... (so not returning home).
Additionally, checking the route she basically crossed the whole area then mined by the minesweepers.

Knowledge of exact coordinates of the wreck are still kept secret?

Because IF sinking place of the submarine was "close" the old data of MO-4 attack (50°26'N, 24°7'E) and especially if the actual sinking place was into a more north-western position, the most closer line of mines should be exactly the one laid on 9 January: including the more powerful "KB" mines.



It is just a theory...but maybe the submarine spotted the minesweeper on the previous days waiting for a possible attack?
Minesweeper did not reported or possible torpedo launches or even explosion during the missions?

Отредактированно lupodimare89 (19.12.2015 16:55:52)

Thank you for your replies...

Re-checking it seemed such a good possibility, if not for this case of the amount of damage on the hull...
Even giving as loose coordinates 59°30'00"N, 023°30'00"E   (south-estern corner of grid-square), the place is very close on the line of mines... (and I guess the real is still close...)

It is ... just a bit a pity to see year-by-year all the old assumed or possible successes on submarine by Soviet laid mines being denied.
Before this recently revealed case of U-679 we had the one of  U-479, finally found and here again assumed as primary cause German drifting mine..


And before them also U-745 and U-676, both of them previously described as generally sunk by mine (even possibly soviets), and now both reported as lost on newly Finnish laid mines.


Generally speaking, considering all the above cases, there is one or some you view as still possible soviet mines success?
U-479 was even more weak possibility than U-679 I think...

And I've no knowledge of details of U-745 and U-676, apart that Finnish reported it sunk on their mines.

Отредактированно lupodimare89 (20.12.2015 13:10:05)

Уважаемый Мирослав Эдуардович!
Вот тут: http://sergiovillaggio.livejournal.com/305271.html наш общий знакомый выложил "карточные" обозначения финских торпедных катеров. Нет ли у Вас аналогичной информации по румынским эсминцам? Они вроде тоже тузами метились.

Happy Christmas and happy holidays to all russian users (one day delay, sorry ^^)


After some delay, here some works for other mines-related losses. I may also say that I've gained interesting material (online) for further research for this 2016, especially some views and opinions related to Black Sea, but for now, I will focus on concluding some of poorly-described cases in Baltic.

Just the month of January 1945 is rich of interesting events.

British aerial mines laid at Kolberg should be responsable both for "Berlin" and  "Lütehorn" on 3 and 4 January. While loss of patrol Vs-344 on 7 January in Danzig Bay, I've seen it corrected as a navigation accident. Also loss of Vs-130 on 13 January occurred on Danish waters.


However I've seen some interesting cases:
1)  Loss of M-3144 on 9 January 1945 occurred on Irben Straits. It could be possibly the result of Soviet air-dropped mine?


2)  Even more interesting the loss of M-59, occurred on 11 January 1945 close Tallin.
I've seen these coordinates: 59°45′N 24°47′E.
That is quite in the middle of the axis Helsinki-Tallin.
It could be a mine drifting from "Nashorn" field (a bit more west) or maybe some new laid mine?


Last interesting one is:
3) Loss of "Steinburg" (1319 grt) on 17 January 1945.
Ship was usually, and wrongly, associated with attack from sub. ShCh-207, however she is reported sunk at Libau by mine.
What could have sunk this ship?
The closer field from Soviet submarines was the one of L-3 laid on that month at Ventspils, but it was too late also (26 January).
There was activity of Soviet aircraft air-dropping mines?

Thanks for the replies!

What is this? I only know the soviet sub with such number, which sunk in 1941 on Black sea.

I was suspecting something of weird  around this claim found online, and just this morning I've actually found the solution.
It is actually the Soviet minesweeper/guardship "T-33",  "Korall", previously "n°76", previously "Korall",  previously "Zadornyy", fomer Lithuanian escort ship "Primunas", previously "Prezidento", previously "Prezidentas Smetona", former German minesweeper M-59.
((all this name changed according Navypedia)).


I just could not stop myself from listing all the name this ship changed before being sunk by U-745.
And quite awesome how someone had to track back the EIGHT previous name of this ship, messing up things...
An old site that reported this was warship.eu, and some genious reported it again...

So problem solved (actually it has been fun). I will be back with something, hopefully more real...

Before  going on with the many minor or less known losses, I would have liked to receive some clarification about the more famous cases of U-745 and U-676

I've  checked the videos you linked (I've first already the first one), my question is: if the exact point of the wreck location is currently known, the loss of both submarine is fully creditable to the mines laid by Ruotsinsalmi and Louhi on 12 January and Ruotsinsalmi alone on 28 January?
I know soviet MO boats provided additional escort, there was also additional soviet minelaying operations there?

maslopoop написал:

#1028201
ЕМНИП, Вы писали, что до войны Щ-215 в столкновении  с кем-то ломала клыки..

Не помню, чтобы такое писал. Так же у меня нет данных, что на Щ-215 устанавливались сетепрорезатели, Киреев так не считает.

maslopoop написал:

#1028201
у Вас нет даты демонтажа у неё сетепрорезателя?

С уцелевших лодок они снимались во второй половине 42-го - начале 43-го годов.

lupodimare89 написал:

#1026028
efore  going on with the many minor or less known losses, I would have liked to receive some clarification about the more famous cases of U-745 and U-676

I've  checked the videos you linked (I've first already the first one), my question is: if the exact point of the wreck location is currently known, the loss of both submarine is fully creditable to the mines laid by Ruotsinsalmi and Louhi on 12 January and Ruotsinsalmi alone on 28 January?
I know soviet MO boats provided additional escort, there was also additional soviet minelaying operations there?

This was the soviet minelaying operation, but the Finnish field.

However, apart to thank you again for your reply. I break a bit with the mines search for a recent entry I found on igor's blog.

http://igor-ktb.livejournal.com/17835.html

If I translate correctly it seems an interesting case.
This motorboat "Shchuka" (46 tons and cargo of food), with 6 men on board was grounded on German-controlled shore on 15 April 1943
They claimed to be deserter and Germans unloaded the cargo.
Five days later, MO-123 and MO-133 shelled her with 3 direct hits and destroyed her.

I think that regardless the fact "Shchuka" was actually a defector ship, or just sailed there by accident (engine's fault?) the fact she had briefly fall in the hand of the Germans make this a small but neat artillery-surface victory scored by Soviets in Arctic (rare event, excluding Motor torpedo boats).


My translation/understanding of the event is good? There are other additional known info-corrections?