|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.8.1940. |
|
From today the same War Log will be kept for large and small U-boats, as in future they will be used for the same operations. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distribution of U-boats: |
|
|
|
In the Atlantic operations area: U A, U 52, U 56, 57, 58, 59, 99, 102, 122. |
|
|
|
On return passage: U 34 off the Shetlands, U 62 route GRUEN. |
|
|
|
On outward passage: U 60 route I. |
|
|
|
In Kiel:U 46, 47, 48, 51, 61, 101. |
|
|
|
In Lorient: U 30. |
|
|
|
In Bremen: U 124. |
|
|
|
In Wilhelmshaven: U 25, 28, 29, 37, 38, 43, 65. |
|
|
|
In Memel: U 32. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U 25, 37, 38 left Wilhelmshaven, U 46 Kiel. |
|
|
|
They have been ordered to use route I for the following reasons: |
|
|
|
1) |
In the area N. of route BLAU and off the Norwegian Coast English ships have repeatedly appeared, attacked our forces ("LUCHS", U 62, transports) and have been attacked by our own patrol forces and a/c. At least U 1 was definitely torpedoed in this area. |
2) |
The danger in this area is the greater because for some time U-boats have entered and left on this route only. |
3) |
In view of these known dangers on the Northerly route, route I appears to be the safer. Is has not been used for some time. At the time when a change was contemplated, a chart captured from "Seal" showed 2 circles entered in this route, which led F.O. North Sea Defences to suspect that there were enemy minefields within these circles. |
|
Against this however: |
|
a) |
The route was several times used by U-boats after the date of issue of "Seal's" chart, and was check-swept by F.O. North Sea Defences forces. |
|
b) |
2 sample sweeps were made in the route about a fortnight ago. |
|
c) |
Except for the Seal document, which does not give any definite indication of mines, there is no indication at all that the route is fouled. |
4) |
Changes of inward and outward routes, which have always been aimed at and effected, reduces the risk of these routes becoming known. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|