Feldgrau.net

Were there any actions fought between allied and German destroyers during WW2 besides that of the Narvik battles? I have acquired a model of a German destroyer and was wanting to know how active they were during the conflict?

I just picked up this link a few minutes ago but I think it may help http://www.german-navy.de/kriegsmarine/ships/index.html

Yes, but nothing so grand. Jersey was torpedoed by German destroyers.

Hi,

I don't know what you are looking for exactly but did you hear of the lost of the light cruiser HMS Charybdis and the destroyer HMS Limbourne in the Channel in 1943 ? Both sunk by Elbing class destroyers torpedoes, I guess.
Try this :
http://www.divernet.com/wrecks/1201cahrybdis.htm

So long.

Thanks for the links, that is the sort of information i'm after, really just any actions fought by german destroyers that doesn't include operations with the capatial ships.

I have a side question about all those German destroyer losses in Norway.

Were they outmaneuvered/outskippered by the Brits or was there something flawed with German destroyer design? Or did they just have incredibly bad luck?

Patrick wrote:I have a side question about all those German destroyer losses in Norway.

Were they outmaneuvered/outskippered by the Brits or was there something flawed with German destroyer design? Or did they just have incredibly bad luck?

In truth all 3
In the 2nd Battle of Narvik the British cheated, they brought a battleship (HMS Warspite) along with their destroyers.
German destroyer design was possibly the worst of any of the major powers in WW2, while they were heavily armed they were very unseaworthy and their powerplants were highly unreliable.
Also in the 2nd Battle of Narvik they were low on ammo and trapped without room for manoeuvre, when the RN came back for the second round.

It's hard to find an account of a German destroyer action without reports of one ship that failed to sortie due to machinery problems.
At the time of Narvik, German DD would still be suffering from torpedo reliability issues.

I think you have to look a little deeper into the battle(s). Raeder knew that after the initial landings his ships had to get back to Germany asap because once the Brits were alerted they would bring down their superior numbers and anhilate his vessels. During the landing operation the German tanker that was to refuel the KM destroyers was sunk, this led to a delay before they could leave. They already knew that they would most likey be beaten if they stayed in Narvik harbour and had no plans to hang around, but had no choice. Cpt Warburton-Lee attacked with a very "engage the enemy more closely" attitude and while retiring sunk the "Rauenfels" which unfortunaltey for the Germans denied them the chance to resupply their ships with shells and torps, so with no fuel and no ammo the they were up against it really. The second battle just demonstrated what Raeder had predicted, the Brits attacked with superior numbers and fire power and that was that.

Range of the 2411-ton German Type 36 destroyers: 2020nm at 19 knots.
Range of the 1959-ton British "Tribal" class destroyers: 5700nm at 15 knots.
As I recall, one German destroyer was completely immobile during much of the first battle.

Were the DD's in Narvik supplied with the same torps as the submarines sent to the same place? I know that the magnetic firing mechs of the u-boats arm gave them serious problems during the battle either failing to explode or explode prematurly(sp). Or were the DD torps different altogether?

The G7a was the standard torpedo for pretty much all uses at this point in the war, unless I am mistaken. Depth-setting problems and other issues were probably ironed out by this time; as for the magnetic exploders, they were being pulled out completely--not sure of the exact date, but it was in the first half of 1940.

Regurgitating from Doenitz's Memoirs. The u-boats that were deployed to the Norwegian Operations could have made a huge difference to the scale of the losses sustained on both sides. The naval high command was of the opinion that "certain hits must have been obtained in one out of 4 attacks on battleships, 7 out of 12 on crusiers and 7 out of 10 on DD's plus 5 out of 5 on transports. Faulty toprs were to blame for this. As a result of the poor performance of the weapon in Norway (which incedently caused the loss of 4 u-boats) the magnetic pistols were pulled from service in June 1940.

There were also a number of destroyers clashes in the channel in early 1944. I know of two, one in which the Allied lost HMCS Athabascan and one where only German ships were lost (ZH.1 and a few others). The German destroyers were from the 8th Z-flotilla.

Visje wrote:There were also a number of destroyers clashes in the channel in early 1944. I know of two, one in which the Allied lost HMCS Athabascan and one where only German ships were lost (ZH.1 and a few others). The German destroyers were from the 8th Z-flotilla.

The ZH.1 was lost on the 8th June 1944 when 4 German destroyers attempting to attack the landings were intercepted by the Allied 10th Destroyer Flotilla West of Cherbourg. Also in this battle the Z.32 was driven ashore to become a total loss and the Z.24 suffered heavy damage but managed to return to Brest with the other German destroyer