Halcyon Class Minesweepers HMS Sharpshooter
Attack on U Boat 3.3.43
 
  Back   

 

  

Source: ADM 199/1784 Proceedings of U-boat assessment committee. Attack on U-boat by Sharpshooter

 Précis of Attack by SHARPSHOOTER 

Date:                3.3.43
Time:               2136

Position:           63° 32’ N, 23° 05’ W
Weather:          Wind SW Force 5, Visibility 5 miles

Duty:                Rescue search in company with HMS HAZARD. 

NARRATIVE

At 2030 SHARPSHOOTER, stationed one mile on the port beam of HAZARD steering 234° speed 14 knots, obtained RDF contact bearing 086° 1,800 yards. This contact was lost on turning towards and not regained.

At 2120 another RDF contact was obtained bearing 064° 3,000 yards. At 2134, when the bearing had drawn aft by 40° and the range had been reduced by 1,000 yards, SHARPSHOOTER turned towards and increased to full speed. The contact was held to 1,800 yards and hydrophone effect was heard by the asdic operator who, shortly after, obtained contact bearing 130° 1,600 yards. The contact was then attacked. 

No. of attack

1st

2nd

3rd

Time

2142

2154

2205

Doppler

Closing

Closing

Closing

H E

 

 

HE whistle and rattle effect

Movement of target

Yes

Yes

Yes

Range of losing contact

200 yards

100 yards

500 yards

Time to fire obtained by

Stop watch

Stop watch

Stop watch

No. of D/C’s

2

3

3

Depth settings

500 feet

350 & 500 feet

350 & 500 feet

Remarks

-

Throwers failed due to bad drill

HE at 1,000 yards

It is stated that after original attack (described as a counter attack) difficulty was experienced in maintaining contact due to a defective oscillator. Contact was regained astern after the third attack but lost at 2308. 

SURFACE EVIDENCE

An RDF contact was held to 1,600 yards but the U-boat was not sighted. There was no evidence of damage. 

ASDIC EVIDENCE

No recorder trace has been received and the oscillator is stated to have been giving very weak results. As stated above severe rattling and whistle effect was heard at about 1,000 yards when closing for the third attack. This was thought to mean that the U-boat was temporarily surfaced. 

CO’S OPINION

U-boat probably damaged. No conclusive evidence. 

RAD’s OPINION

No evidence of damage to a U-boat, first attack should have been a deliberate attack and shallower settings used. Depth charge drill seems to have been poor and it is considered that a full pattern should have been used for all attacks. 

DECISION OF U-BOAT ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE

There is no relevant tracking evidence of the presence of a U-boat in this vicinity. On the other hand the phenomena are consistent with the presence of a U-boat and on balance the attack is assessed as ‘U-boat present. Insufficient evidence of damage’. 

5th April 1943

Home

This site was last updated 17 Januar 2012