"Milk Cow" Resupply subs

JeffF. · Post by **JeffF.** » Sun Apr 04, 2004 8:12 am

Up to what year did these resupply type u-boats operate? I understand they resupplied u-boats at sea with torpedoes, fuel and supplies. I assume that at some point in the Atlantic Campaign they became untenable? Did these supply subs operate in '42 and after?
thanks,
Jeff

Freiritter · Post by **Freiritter** » Sun Apr 04, 2004 11:58 am

I would assume that the milk cows had operated up to at least 1943.

Cordially,

Freiritter

Danny · Post by **Danny** » Sun Apr 04, 2004 6:02 pm

Well the last Milk Cow (U-490 Oblt. Wilhelm Gerlach) was sunk on June 12 1944.

The Milkcows weren´t regarded untenable, but all were sunk (10 Milk Cows).

For more info on the Milk Cows take a look here:

http://www.uboat.net/types/milkcows.htm

Regards

Danny

JeffF. · Post by **JeffF.** » Mon Apr 05, 2004 7:42 am

Danny,

Good article, looks like Allied anti-sub measures made them too dangerous to use from '43 on according to the article.

they must have been huge to support so many subs in one cruise.

thanks for the site,

Jeff

Danny · Post by **Danny** » Mon Apr 05, 2004 9:02 am

Your welcome, I love the site.

The Milk Cows were quite big, I have a book with a picture of both a Milk Cow and a VIIC next to each other (both returning from patrol), the upper deck of the empty Milk Cow is nearly as high as the VIIC´s coning tower.

Just to compare the facts: the total displacement of a VIIC was 1070 tons (total) and of the Milk Cow 2300 tons (total).

Regards

Danny

behblc · Post by **behblc** » Wed Apr 07, 2004 3:59 pm

The film footage of these subs. on station supplying other boats is food for thought , the size does indeed dwarf the smaller VII's and the actual resupply process of fuel torpedos and foodstuffs etc on the open sea must have been quite an undertaking.
What sort of training and preparation of the crews ?
Once tied together by the fuel line the appearance of Allied forces must have been not worth thinking about , total ruin especially if aircraft turned up.

As far as I am aware they were developed and came into service without the knowledge of the Allies.
No small investment , the build time from keel up and the training of the crews ....the loss of all boats must have made Donitz think again that the enigma system was compromised.

Danny · Post by **Danny** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 6:15 am

I don´t know of specific training, but it must have been inevitable.
What I do recall having read, is, that all commanders of the Milk Cows were rather experienced and compared to the average combat U-Boot commander quite old.

The probably most famous Milk Cow commander was:

Georg von Wilamowitz-Moellendorf
Born on 7 Nov, 1893 in Weimar.
Crew IV/12. Korvettenkapitän (1 Jun, 1942)
Died on 24 Jul, 1943, north-west of Cape Ortegal.
Commands:
U-2, U-459

Look at the date of his birth: 1893! If you compare to combat commanders, most of them were born in the 1910s and 1920s.

or

Ebe Schnoor
Born on 22 Jun, 1895.
Kapitänleutnant (1 Jan, 1943)
Died on 4 Oct, 1943, North Atlantic.
Commands:
UA, U-460

(From http://www.uboat.net)

Regards

Danny

Patrick · Post by **Patrick** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 11:10 am

I'd read Doenitz's memoirs many years ago, which were published before the existence of Ultra was released to the public. As I recall, he didn't think that Enigma was compromised but rather that spies were forwarding info to the Allies.

behblc · Post by **behblc** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 11:51 am

Some video footage I have does show the commander of a Milch cow and as you rightly say Danny a much older man than the average commander.

I am relying on memory alone which is often faulty Patrick ( and I am quite happy to be put right !) but I think Donitz did question as to the code security and was told " impossible" , he did as you say look for leaks in other quarters and did really limit the information flow to "need to know only" and cut down staff numbers to the bare minium.

greenhorn · Post by **greenhorn** » Thu Jul 08, 2004 3:42 pm

Didn't the Japanese have humungous resupply subs? Didn't one class a hangar in front of the conning for a seaplane?

sigrun · Post by **sigrun** » Thu Oct 14, 2004 1:08 pm

greenhorn wrote:Didn't the Japanese have humungous resupply subs? Didn't one class a hangar in front of the conning for a seaplane?

Don't know about resupply status, but they certainly had some large subs undoubtedly capable of carrying stores and fuel as well as ordnance.

In May of 1942, the five involved in the offensive raid on Sydney harbour carried not only a reconnaissance seaplane, but several midget submarines which attempted to sink the heavy cruiser USS Chicago at moorage there.

http://www.naa.gov.au/Publications/fact ... fs192.html

tigre · Post by **tigre** » Tue Aug 30, 2022 6:28 am

Hello to all

; after a while...........................

Supply at sea of U 129.

U 129, under Kplt. Hans-Ludwig Witt, left Lorient on May 20, 1942. The U-boat operated in the North Atlantic, the Caribbean and the Greater Antilles. She was supplied on August 3, 1942 by U 463 with 40 m³ of fuel and 2 weeks of provisions. U 129 was able to sink 11 ships with 41,570 GRT in this patrol. After 93 days, sailing some 13,800 nm on the surface and 618 nm submerged, U 129 returned to Lorient on August 21, 1942.

Sources: http://www.ebay.de/itm/U-Boot-U-129-Beg ... 0009.m1982
http://www.ubootarchiv.de/ubootwiki/index.php/U_129

Cheers. Raúl M

.