Amphibious Operations

[Carl Schwamberger]

During WWII the use of amphibious operations by Germany seems limited. Invading Norway, small actions around Greece, on or adjacent to th Crimean penensula. Thats all I am aware of, aside from the aborted attack on Britian.

Conversely several sizeable evacuations were undertaken. The withdrawl from Sicilly, Corsica & Sardinia, and the twin evacuations from the Baltic states and Konigsberg. these demonstrate that the ability to organize large scale sea movements was present.

I am unaware of any significant amphibious offensive operations in the Baltic or Black sea during 1941-44. Wehere there any? It seems to me there were opportunties for sucesfull operations in those two areas, particularly in the Baltic in 1941. If there were none why not?

[lwd]

The Soviets apparently engaged in a fair number of amphibious operations in the Black sea. Not sure of their size. I think there is a thread on it over on the Axis history forum.

[Carl Schwamberger]

I was just thinking of the Germans. They just dont seem to have done much of this in the Baltic.

[phylo_roadking]

Operation Beowulf against the islands of Saaremaa, Hiiumaa and Muhu in 1941, originally given over to the USSR in 1940.

[Carl Schwamberger]

Thats a start. They dont look like very large events. If there were not any larger action then there must have been some reasons. I wonder what they were?

[phylo_roadking]

Although it's on the front end of the site, I'll post this up here for reference;

Operation "Beowulf II" directed the occupation of the Estonian islands through an attack from infantry forces assembled on the western coast of Estonia. The operation was to be handled as if it were a large river crossing excercise. A number of diversionary attacks were to be undertaken in this case. The primary diversionary attack against Soviet positions on the Estonian Islands was codenamed “Södwind”. “Södwind” itself was composed of three elements - Operation “Nau”, a diversionary attack against Koiguste Bay, Operation “Stimmung”, a diversionary attack against Sutu Bay, and Operation “Lel”, a diversionary attack aimed at Kuressaare on Saaremaa Island. A second diversionary attack was to be conducted against the western coast of the Island of Saaremaa; codenamed “Westwind”. “Westwind” was to commence from the port of Liepaja in Latvia. For this, the 2. Torpedobootsflottille and the 2. and 3. Schnellbootsflottille, three transporters, three submarine chasers and three mine sweepers were assembled. Finally, a third diversionary attack was also envisioned. Operation “Nordwind” was to make it appear to the Soviet defenders as if the main German invasion was coming from the Finnish coast and that the first German goal was to attack the Estonian Island of Hiiumaa - not Saaremaa. The Germans wanted to use the Finnish port of Utö for “Nordwind”, but because of hesitance on the part of the Finnish military to support this plan, the Germans had to alter “Nordwind” and go at it alone.

Because the German forces were not able to decisevly defeat the Soviets in the Baltics in the summer of 1941, (the Germans encountered a number of delays as they reached the Estonian border regions); it was decided to implement Beowulf II for the conquest of the Estonian Islands. Elements of the 61. Infantriedivision were withdrawn from the front lines and made available for Beowulf II.

To support the Wehrmacht, the German Kriegsmarine created a special naval command for Beowulf II, the Erprobungsverband Ostsee under the command of Rear-Admiral Schmundt. By 10 September 1941, elements of Erprobungsverband Ostsee were located in the port-cities of Liepaja, Riga, Roja and Ventspils in Latvia. The Erprobungsverband Ostsee contained the following forces:


Cruisers: Emden, Köln and Leipzig
Four heavy floating artillery platforms
Two light floating artillery platforms
Six coastal motor ships outfitted with special Sturmboot launching ramps
16 Kriegsmarine Landing craft (Type AF 46; initially slated for Operation Seelöwe)
18 Wehrmacht Landing craft
20 Auxiliary naval craft (mostly converted civilian types)
The Mothership H-27, the Hospitalship “Pieta” and 20 “Siebel” type Landing Craft

Finnish naval forces consisted of the Coastal Battleships Ilmarinen and Väinämoinen and two Ice Breakers.

For Beowulf II, Infantrieregiment 151 was reinforced with additional troops as was Artillerieabteilung 161. Infantrieregiment 389 (temporarily detached from the 217. Infantriedivision) was responsible for securing the Estonian Island of Vormsi. Estonian ERNA commando’s were to participate in the attack as well, arriving from their bases in Finland. Sonderkommando “Benesch”, a group of Regiment Brandenburg was ordered to neutralize the Soviet long range naval guns on Saaremaa Island. The Luftwaffe established an ad hoc command, “Air Command B”, to provide the Wehrmacht and Kriegsmarine with air support. The 1st and 2nd groups of Kampfgeschwader 77 (primarily JU-88 bombers), the 2nd group of Pursuit Interceptor Group 26 (fighters), the 10. Flakregiment as well as Luftnachrichtenregiment 10. were made available for conquest of the Estonian Islands. German (and Estonian and Latvian) civilian fishing vessels displaying the red cross flag were also made available in case their rescue services would be required at sea.

For more detail of actual events, go to http://www.feldgrau.com/baltsea.html

[phylo_roadking]

Given that it used what was a significant portion of German naval strength (they never really did make good their surface fleet losses off Norway) those three cruisers make it far more than a raid, together with the deployment of a total of 54 landing craft of all types. Not big in comparison to some of the amphibious ops later in the war by the allies, but certainly far bigger than anything the Germans fronted a hostile shore with before?

[phylo_roadking]

There's also the invasion of Leros in 1943 Operation Taifun/Operation Leopard.

[Jason Pipes]

Don't forget about the invasion of Kos and the invasion of Kefalonia both in 1943, the Channel Islands in 1940, and one of the most facinating in Operation Tanne Ost, the occupation of the Finnish Island of Hogland (Surrsaari) in September of 1944.

Regarding the German attack on the Finnish island of Suursaari:

German naval forces in action against Suursari:

3.M-Flottille
25.M-Flottille
13., 21., 24.Landungsboot-Flottillen
7.Artillerieträger-Flottille
1.R-Flottille, 5.S-Flottille

German landing forces:

Marine-Artillerie-Abteilung 531 (core of the landing troops)
Füsilier-Regiment 68 of the 23.Inf.Division
Sturmboots.Kdo 902
Sturmboots.Kdo 903

The battle lasted only two days and resulted in the death or capture of nearly 1500 German troops - basically everyone landed on the island.

In first wave were 650 men from IR 68, 380 men from MAA 531, 155 men from Sturmboots.Kdo 902. The second wave was 160 men from Sturmboots.Kdo 903, 200 men from Luftwaffe AA and 50 signals men and drivers. Third wave was 200 more men from MAA 531 and 80 sappers. 6 88mm guns, 19 20mm guns, 6 60cm searchlights, 1 towing truck, 2 trucks, bicycles, a radio truck, 4 28mm at-rifles were also transported.

1st wave and almost half of the 2nd wave managed to land. 491 remained in vessels, including all of the 3rd wave.

Finnish statistics place German casualties at 153 KIA and 1231 POW of which 175 were wounded. German statistics place the number at 137 KIA and 29 officers and 1027 men POW, of which 2 officers and 173 men were wounded. 74% of the men who participated were lost. German casualties at sea are difficult to calculate but they must be significant because the following German vessels were lost - 3 landing crafts (F-822, F-866 and F-173), 3 patrol boats (B-1, B-31 and B-35), minesweeper R-29 and tugboat Pernau. Damaged vessels were 3 mine ships, 3 minesweepers and tugboat Polyp.

Kapitän zur See Karl-Conrad Mecke (who received the Knight’s Cross on 11 April 1943 while commanding 22. Marine-Flak-Regiment) was the overall commander of the landing operations. He was captured during the landing operation on Suursaari on Sept 15 and remained a POW in Russia until 1955.

[phylo_roadking]

Does the Channel Islands count as an amphibious operation? The occupying forces may have arrived by sea but...

Since the Germans were ignorant of the fact that the Islands had been demilitarised, they approached the islands with some caution. Reconnaissance flights were inconclusive. On 28 June 1940, they sent a squadron of bombers on a mission over the Islands and bombed the harbours of Guernsey and Jersey. In St Peter Port, what the reconnaissance mistook for troop carriers were actually lines of lorries queued up to load tomatoes for export to England. 44 islanders were killed in the raids.

While the German Army was preparing to land an assault force of two battalions to capture the Islands, a reconnaissance pilot landed in Guernsey on 30 June to whom the Island officially surrendered. Jersey surrendered on 1 July. Alderney, where no one remained, was occupied on 2 July and a small detachment travelled from Guernsey to Sark, which officially surrendered on 4 July

Did said pilot MEAN to land???

[Jason Pipes]

Hey, I never said it was a major invasion, but by all accounts it was a German force occupying by air and by sea a series of foreign held islands.

I'm suprised no one has mentioned Crete, btw. That's one of the bigger air and naval invasions the Germans conducted and it was very successful.

[phylo_roadking]

Crete as an amphibious invasion was a damp squib. The two initial amphibious groups were hit by the Royal Navy, and only the remains of one arrived at the island a week later than intended, when the Commonwealth forces had already decided to evacuate the island.

I think we need to set a clear parameter here - to me an "amphibious operation" is one launched by sea by amphibious landing forces or craft on a shore/at a location NOT designed/intended for landing FROM the sea or cargo/passenger handling. Thus the majority of German landings in Norway can't be described at "amphibious" as they involved landing troops via docks/quays/harbours...the kind of location designed to have cargo/personnel landed at them. That's just..."offensive unloading!" The Germans planned an amphibious landing on the Channel Islands - but didn't carry it out.

It's a bit like being clear in the difference between an "aerial attack" or an "airlanded" attack - the combat drops by the FJ by parachute and glider on locations in Holland, Kos, Leros, Corinth, Crete etc. are different from the airlanding of forces by plane at Norwegian airfields, or at Maleme (eventually). remember, the LW had a very clear definition of role between the FJ and the airlanding regiments.

[Jason Pipes]

I'd disagree with your assment Phylo. In my book an amphibious invasion is one in which an attack is made over water/sea to a foreign shore against an enemy. If they happen to be going in Utah Beach style, great, but if not that doesn't in my view make it any less of an amphibious invasion.

The 5.Gebirgs-Division was landed on Crete (as well as airlanded) and it fought long and hard agains the Allies on the island (and the natives as well). I also believe that a unit of Italians was landed on the island.

If you want hard core beach assault landings though you can't beat Leros in 1943 and the Baltic Sea islands in 1941 as they all involved that sort of operation.

[phylo_roadking]

The vast majority of Ringel's troops were airlanded, with only some limited armour of the 31st Pz.Reg. and troops finally arriving at Kastelli Kissamou in the west of the island on the 28th after the port was taken there. The Italians made an unopposed landing at Siteia on the same date in the far east of the island, a section that hadn't been defended. There's never very much written about the landing of the Siena Division here under Carta, but I believe it would have made a dock unloading at Siteia, especially as it landed armour.

If you check chapter 13 of Beevor, you'll see the two earlier amphibious operations were failures. Just briefly from Wiki, the first on the 21st, 36 hours after the first air landings...

Before midnight, Force D of the Royal Navy intercepted a flotilla of reinforcements, escorted by an Italian small destroyer, the Lupo, successfully preventing their landing. The convoy, comprising around 20 caiques, was fiercely defended by the Regia Marina unit. Some ten boats and 2,000 German troops were saved due to the skillfull maneuvers conducted by the Italian commander, Francesco Mimbelli, against an overwhelming superior force. About 300 Germans soldiers and two Italian seamen died in action, as well as two British from HMS Orion

It was the regrouped forces from this flotilla that finally arrived in kastelli Kissamou SEVEN days later and seven days late.

The second, on the following night...

Admiral Andrew Cunningham, determined that no German troop transports should reach Crete, sent Admiral King's Force C (three cruisers and four destroyers) into the Aegean through the Kaso Strait, to attack a second flotilla of transports escorted by the Italian torpedo boat Sagittario. The cruiser sank a caique separated from the main flotilla at 8.30am thus saving it from an air attack that struck HMS Naiad at this time. The pilots were trying to avoid killing their troops in the water. King's squadron, still under constant air attack and running short of anti-aircraft ammunition, then steamed on toward Milos sighting the Sagittario at ten o'clock. King made the difficult decision not to attack, despite his overpowering advantage, due to the shortage of ammunition and a torpedo charge executed by the Italian warship. He had succeeded, however, in forcing the Germans to abort this seaborne operation

...with just ONE caique from the second ever making landfall on the island.

It was the airlanded reinforcements that turned the battle after the initial failure of the first seaborne wave.

_________________________________________________________

I'd regard "amphibious" as NOT being carried OVER the sea to landfall, as amphibious as a scientific term means more a transit fron water to dry land...thus in military terms a landing from the sea in battle order onto a defended shore is very different from simply disembarking at a port or harbour taken by other means. That's just transporting your forces by sea, noone ever swung a tank out of a freighter's hold onto the quayside by derrick with its gun firing

The Wiki definition is "delivering troops unto non-contiguous enemy-held terrain." Ports/harbours/quays etc. are contiguous terrain. That kind of facility is designed to facilitate the transfer of men and materiel from water to land. Amphibious ops are therefore where this facilitation is not present. Thus the Dunkirk BEACH evacuation is an amphibious operation - but the evacuation from the port of Dunkirk is not.

[Jason Pipes]

I take "non-contiguous" to mean not connected.

The definition of contiguous is: being in actual contact : touching along a boundary or at a point : touching or connected throughout in an unbroken sequence.

Therefore being non-contiguous would mean to not be in actual contact, not touching along a boundary or at a point, and not connected throughout in an unbroken sequence.

Since Crete wasn't connected to Germany or any other land mass, the definition of it being non-contiguous seems to apply, as does the meaning of being invaded by amphibious means (even if limited). I don't see any reason to assume non-contiguous has anything to do with ports or quays or harbors. The British assault on Saint-Nazaire was every bit an amphibious assault even though it was directly against a port facility.