Norm F

Michel, I'm intrigued by your mint tropical cap. It looks very much like the one seen here worn by my father in 1943 as an Oberleutnant in Sardinia. Notice the appearance of the eagle and the cockade. Could you provide some more information about your cap, any markings indicating its manufacture, etc.? Best regards, ---Norm

Looks very nice Nesredep! Best regards, ---Norm

Wow! Excellent info from Rick Research. Justin, your item just got a whole lot more interesting! Congratulations. Best regards, ---Norm

Hi Justin, I'd noticed you bought that item. I think it's fascinating! Wouldn't it be great if you could find out something about its recipient and his subsequent KM career? I assume the holes would be to attach it to a wooden plaque? Glad it's not attached though so you could see the name on the back. Nice addition to your collection. Best regards, ---Norm

This list from Chairman is very interesting but puzzling. In other listings of PFL numbers from other sources, all of the above numbers are listed as 'unknown' whereas here there they are all assigned to various makers, including, I see, Richard Sieper as 115. (I deleted the other non-questioned numbers from the quoted list to highlight the ones in question.) What is the reference for this list? Is there any proof for the above assignments? This would be an important question to clear up. Best regards, ---Norm

Hi Nesredep, Very pretty clasp. My understanding is that all of these with the ribbed fins are post-war 1957 made, and that the few late-wartime ones without the ribbing on the fins are vanishingly rare and highly reproduced. Best regards, ---Norm

Wow! Fascinating Diver's theme collection of original material! Thanks for posting! Best regards, ---Norm

Thanks again Gordon. I can always count on you to steer me in the right direction. Looking further I found this great thread of photos of various types of subs at http://www.subsim.co...ad.php?t=149950 from a gentleman in France. From this it seems that the pattern of vent holes varied considerably, even within a particular model type. The pattern for IIb does in general match best, showing the seven holes like mine, and then 2 smaller holes over from there and a then another 2 fullsize, making around 11 it seems. Much obliged. ---Norm Edit: I spoke too soon! Looking again at the photos on that thread, it now looks these are a better match with the type IIa. The 7 vent holes at the bow and the 12 vent holes at the aft, match my photos even better than the type IIb. I now believe these to be type IIa! Interesting, that means that pre-war, several of these first run of subs were moored at Flensburg near the Naval Academy.

Yes, I just found some photos on the internet at http://www.battleships-cruisers.co.uk/u-boats.htm that illustrate your point about the photo conditions quite nicely. In this photo of type IIb subs from 1937 you can see the step in the group shot, but in the bow shot of the U9 it's almost invisible. I wonder also about the feature I've circled, though. Not knowing anything about how subs function, I assume these are some kind water vents that can be opened and closed? On my previous photo in this area of the bow there are seven rectangular 'holes' whereas in this group photo it looks more like 12. In the bow shot of the U9 however it looks like fewer. I wonder do these open and close, giving different appearances on different shots, and therefore rendering them unreliable as distinguishing trademarks for the different sub models? Regards, ---Norm

Thanks very much Gordon! I studied your model of the IIa with great interest, and looked at other pictures of IIa vs. IIc and you're absolutely right that it appears like a IIc with the flush front to the tower. There's one probem however. I know for a fact that these photos were taken in early 1937 (see the ice breaking up), whereas according to what I read on uboot.net, the Type IIc u-boote were ordered in July, 1937 and built thereafter. Here's a link to a tiny photo of the U1 on uboot.net Although it's rather fuzzy, the front of the tower looks more flush than I would have expected. Maybe the three u-boote in my photos are type IIa or IIb and there are variations in the tower fronts? What do you think? Best regards, ---Norm

And finally, a view of what I assume is the bow. Any ideas on the model, year of production, function, etc.? Best regards, ---Norm

Hi All, Can anyone identify the type of U-boote shown in these photos? These photos are from 1937 in the harbour at Flensburg-Mürwik near the German Naval Academy which can be seen in the background in the upper right corner. I assume they are older training vessels since they don't match diagrams I've seen of wartime U-boots. First, what I assume is a view from the stern?

Thanks Gordon! Always a pleasure to benefit from your extensive knowledge. I see what you mean about the funnels. And now that you point it out, when I look at the diagrams of WW1 class vessels at: http://www.german-na...8mob/index.html I see that on both the 1916Mob and the 1918Mob class, another distinguishing feature is the rear mast being set further back and about half the height of the front mast. In fact the 1918Mob class seems the closest match; although the rear funnel on this model is smaller than the front, the difference in width seems more subtle than on the later models, while the front and back funnels are very close in height and have the horizontal ridges. Also, it would fit with the fact that no 1918Mob examples were finished as warships, thus accounting for the lack of gun turrets on the examples in the photo. I find it fascinating to find photographic evidence of existing variations of this sort in 1937 that are not yet well documented, at least on internet sources. Best regards, ---Norm

Finally, this photo is pretty good view of these two presumed "T-Boote", showing their numbers 7 and 11. So now start the questions. Although these do look very much like the T-boot designs of late WW1 and the Reichsmarine, my understanding is ships of that era were named and had call letters, not numbers. Also I don't see any guns on the fore-decks as I would expect. I was wondering if they could be older ships which have been modifed for training purposes for the Kriegsmarine. Any opinions? Are there any clues here that would identify which ships they are and when they were built? Best regards, ---Norm

Here's a photo closer up to them showing a few details such as the funnel.

Hello all, Does anyone recognize this type of ship in the following photos? Here's the background: These photos are from the harbour (Hafen) in Flensburg-Mürwik in Schleswig-Holstein next to the old Naval Academy from 1937. At the harbour were various ships and U-boots used mainly for training purposes I believe. My father took these photos in 1937 when attending the Marinenachrichtenschule. He referred to the boots in question as Torpedo boats when he labelled them on the back, and another member from Denmark has some similar photos from the same era and location also referring to them as T-boote. However, as you will see these are unusual looking Torpedoboots. First the harbour. Notice the two ships in question, moored side by side at the jetty. You can see the number 11 on bow of the front one. More to follow.

Thanks again Gordon! And finally, with regards to what I've been calling a "curved crane", I believe in English this is called a tube davit, a type of simple swiveling hoist. I think the best German nautical term would be der Ladebaum although nowadays they have also adopted the English term as der Davit. Very similar davits can still be purchased today as seen on this website: Cooney Marine . Interestingly, it seems they can be easily removed which could account for them being absent from that photo showing the view of the whole ship. Best regards, ---Norm

Here's a new development. I was going through some papers of my father's today and found a plastic sheet protector containing two photocopies of photos that someone must have sent him at some time (not one of his originals). One was of a Räumboot (without visible designation markings due to the waves) and the other was this photo which on careful scrutiny looks to be the Von der Groeben! It matches closely my photo of the stern shown earlier. I don't see the curved crane however -- perhaps added at a different time or maybe it's an item that is meant to be removable? The elongated cabin added at the rear, though, matches quite well with respect to the hatches and portholes, and the taffrail is a clear match. Assuming we're correct, this is a good example as to how extensively they would modify an old-style minesweeper for a new role as a tender in the Kriegsmarine, including amongst other things a cut down funnel intermediate in height between the M1916 and the M35 models. Ah, the thrill of discovery! Regards, ---Norm

Very interesting artifact! Thanks for posting. It would be great to see a photo of it after your restoration in a nice display if possible. I'm surprised by the background in your period photos; I never thought one would see all that wooden cabinetry in a U-boot. Best regards, ---Norm

Thanks very much Gordon. Your expert opinion is very much appreciated. Every time I discover something else about my father's Navy career it's quite exciting -- unfortunately I never asked him about the details in the years when he was alive and well. Best regards, ---Norm

Thanks for that! I think I've made another breakthrough, and I'm almost certain now that my photo in post #4 is of the "Von der Groeben" -- almost sure. I was studying further the plans of the M60 that I mentioned above, posted at http://www.dreadnoughtproject.org/plans/SM_M60_1918/. Included there are not only the original plans of the M1916 model Minensuchboot the M60, but also the schematic of its modified version as it was later modified to become the Fleet Tender ship "Hecht". This nicely shows an example of how the Kriegsmarine might modify the old-style minesweepers for other duties. Now, if you look at the back of the "Hecht" you see a style that much more closely resembles my photo. See how now they've added a raised cabin-like area to the rear deck, on which a winch can be seen in profile. This resembles the back of the ship in my photo. The "Hecht" doesn't have the curved crane or rear FlaK gun any more whereas the "Von der Groeben" would have retained these features of the original M107 since it was still functioning as a mine-sweeper and needed the artillery it seems. Now if only we could find another photo of the "Von der Groeben" to clinch this I'd be very happy, but the circustantial evidence so far is pretty strong. Regards, ---Norm

Now we're getting close to my question. I have this photo of my father on watch duty in Cuxhaven from this time, and although I had seen this photo for years, it never occurred to me until recently that the ship in the background could very well be the "Von der Groeben" which is what I'm trying to ascertain. (No easy task!) The arrows mark a curved "crane" and the "rail" at the stern similar to those seen on the previous postings. Other features of this ship don't seem typical for the M1916 Minensuchboote, but as mentioned the ship was modified in Schichau for it's current purpose, and possibly these modifications were extensive. Notably, the shape of the lower stern seems fairly vertical down to the water rather than having the "cut inward" look I'd expect on a M1916, and the funnel doesn't seem as tall, both more resembling an M35 class Minensuchboot, although it doesn't look typical for these either. So if it's not too esoteric a question even for you Navy ship enthusiasts out there, what do you think? Is this in fact the "Von der Groeben", a modified M1916 Minensuchboot, which Funkmeister Franke is guarding so carefully? Please comment freely. Best regards, ---Norm

And here you see the curved "crane" similar to that seen in the schematic of the M1916 class Minensuchboot, as the "Von der Groeben" recovers a British mine from the North Sea for study. (Again anyone know the proper term for this item?)

Now, in this photo aboard the "Von der Groeben", you can see the "rail" at the stern. (Does anyone know the correct term for this part by the way?)

Assuming that Kriegsmarine ships count as "Equipment" I'd like to post here a question regarding the identification of a ship in my photo if I may. First the background: I know that my father served at the beginning of the war as Funkmeister (ROA) aboard the "Von der Groeben", the tender ship for the 3. Räumbootsflottille based in Cuxhaven on the North Sea. I have several photos of his from this time which are unlabelled. I've been trying to link them to the "Von der Groeben". Now, the "Von der Groeben" started life as a 1916 class Minensuchboot, the M107 built in 1917 at the Tecklenborg shipyards in Geestermünde. My understanding is it was later modified in Schichau for use in the Kriegsmarine as an R-boot flotilla escort ship. I don't know the exact nature or extent of these modifications. I've been poring over photos of Minensuchboote from Gordon's excellent "Kriegsmarine Coastal Forces" (Osprey Publishing, 2009) as well as various internet sources to try to identify features on the photos. First off I'd like to show a detail from the schematic of the M60, another Minensuchboot of this same class. (The complete plans can be seen at The Dreadnought Project) Note the areas marked with the arrows: the "rail" (for lack of the proper term) at the stern seen in profile, and the curved "crane" (again for lack of the proper nautical term).