Aruba refinery successfully attacked in 1942?

[Deleted member 1487]

In another discussion the topic of the Aruban oil refinery came up and in looking into it it seems there was an attempted bombardment of the refinery, the biggest Avgas refinery in the world at the time. Apparently the Germans submarine trying to hit it forgot to remove the barrel plug and the 105mm artillery gun blew up, killing 1 and severely wounding another crew member and pretty much ending any chance of a successful attack. What if the gunners had been more mindful and didn't make the mistake with the gun plug, successfully bombarding the refinery and setting it ablaze? What impact would it have had on the war and how long would the damage take to repair?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Aruba

The Dutch island of Aruba had two major oil installations. The production of aviation fuel had been expanded to supply British requirements prior to the American entry into the war. It was the largest such refinery in the world and a strategic target.

Commander Hartenstein then steamed further around Aruba and directed his men to take to the deck guns and prepare for a naval bombardment of the large oil tank in view. The crew of the 105 mm (4.1 in) gun forgot to remove the water cap from the barrel, so when Hartenstein ordered them to fire, the gun blew up in the faces of the two gunners. Gunnery Officer Dietrich von dem Borne was wounded badly, one foot having been severed. His comrade and trigger man Heinrich Büssinger was badly wounded as well and died several hours after the attack. Hartenstein ordered the 37 mm (1.46 in) flak gun to continue the attack. Sixteen rounds from the 37mm AA gun were fired, but only two hits were found by the Allies: a dent in an oil storage tank and a hole in a house. In disgust Hartenstein ordered a cease-fire, and set his course toward the other end of the island.

http://www.historiadiaruba.aw/index.php?Itemid=26&id=12&option=com_content&task=view&lang=en

This fatal error spared Lago almost total destruction, because after the loss of this cannon, the U-boat only had a much lighter gun on board. That was used to shoot at the refinery and at the surrounding buildings but the damage was only minor. So Aruba escaped that night and not only because the bombardment of Lago failed: there also was a ship, loaded with 3000 tons of TNT (dynamite), in the harbor. The Henry Gibbons just had not yet set sail when the torpedo attack started. The crew still wanted to have a cup of coffee before taking to see……. . If it had been a direct hit, the devastation on Aruba would have been unimaginable.

http://www.bevrijdingintercultureel.nl/bi/eng/antillen.html

As early as 1939 the refineries on the two islands supplied 43% of the British and French oil requirements, and about 80% of those of the British Royal Air Force (kerosene). The American invasion in Northern Africa (1942-1943) was fuelled for 100%, and the battle in the Pacific (1944-1945) for 75%, by oil from the Antillles.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lago_Oil_and_Transport_Company

Then in 1938 Standard Oil of New Jersey obtained a contract to supply Britain with 100 octane Aviation Gasoline. However, because of the isolationism that was prevalent in the United States, the contract states that the Aviation gasoline had to be produced outside the United States. Thus the Lago refinery becomes an important asset by providing the place outside the United States where the Aviation gasoline would be produced. The size of the Lago refinery expanded to produce Aviation gasoline for the British Government long before the United States entered World War II.

Wartime
With the United States entry into World War II in 1942 the demand for Aviation gasoline further increased and considerable expansion was done at the Lago Refinery soon after the United States entered the war. With this expansion, Lago became one of the largest refineries in the world, only bested by Royal Dutch Shell refinery on Dutch-owned Curaçao, and a major producer of petroleum products for the Allied war efforts.

The importance of the Lago refinery was well known to the German High Command and on February 16, 1942 the Lago refinery was attacked by the German Submarine U-156. The submarine's deck gun exploded due to mistakes by the German deck gunner, and the refinery was not damaged. However, three of the lake tankers that carried the crude oil from Lake Maracaibo were torpedoed.

Postwar
When demand for gasoline was high after World War II the Lago Refinery was running at full capacity and employed over 10,000 personnel.

 

[Theoretical_TJ]

Wow, that's quite a production facility, and I'm surprised there weren't other U-Boat attacks during either "Happy Time." That's pretty much the British Ploesti (sp?).

 

[Deleted member 1487]

Wow, that's quite a production facility, and I'm surprised there weren't other U-Boat attacks during either "Happy Time." That's pretty much the British Ploesti (sp?).

Exactly to all the above.

 

[Workable Goblin]

I suspect that the impact on the war would have been much smaller than might be expected just looking at how much fuel it produced, given that damage or destruction of similar point targets often had much less impact than might have been expected; Operation Hydra did not stop the Germans from deploying V-1s and V-2s, and the damage done by Operation Chastise was made good relatively quickly, for instance. It will hurt, to be sure, but the Germans are not likely to be able to see the damage it's done. From their perspective, they'll still be fighting a tough bunch of Allies, and if the Allies aren't fighting quite as hard as they otherwise would be thanks to fuel shortages, well, they don't have a cross-timeline machine to see the difference. And since the Germans are unlikely to be able to repeat the attack, there won't really be any problems (aside from the usual ones) faced in repairing the refinery.

Most likely, Allied operations are restricted for a few months to a year or so while they repair Aruba and try to build up production at other refineries, for instance in Texas, then there's no further noticeable effects. Germany might surrender a bit later--or it might not, since after all the Soviets relied on Baku not Aruba for their oil. Japan might linger into 1946. But there's no huge change to the course of the war.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

I suspect that the impact on the war would have been much smaller than might be expected just looking at how much fuel it produced, given that damage or destruction of similar point targets often had much less impact than might have been expected; Operation Hydra did not stop the Germans from deploying V-1s and V-2s, and the damage done by Operation Chastise was made good relatively quickly, for instance.

Neither of those were attacks on oil targets, especially one so concentrated and flammable as the refinery in Aruba.

It will hurt, to be sure, but the Germans are not likely to be able to see the damage it's done. From their perspective, they'll still be fighting a tough bunch of Allies, and if the Allies aren't fighting quite as hard as they otherwise would be thanks to fuel shortages, well, they don't have a cross-timeline machine to see the difference. And since the Germans are unlikely to be able to repeat the attack, there won't really be any problems (aside from the usual ones) faced in repairing the refinery.

Sure, but I'm talking about what effects we would notice in TTL versus OTL. The damage question is how much resulting fire damage happens and how quickly it could be put out and repaired; both the Germans and Brits found out in WW2 that fair damage was at least 10x more effective than HE.
http://www.lago-colony.com/WEB_SITE_DEC_30_2004/LAGO-COLONY/PHOTOS_REF_1927_32_50.htm

After sinking the two lake tankers the U-Boat surfaced, it was now three-quarters of a mile off the reef in front of the Lago Refinery. The artillery attack on the well lit refinery would be over in minutes. The Captain and crew wee ecstatic, the U-Boat had made its first kills and now they were to destroy the world s largest refinery.

Hatches were opened, men were on deck, the cannon was loaded and the order was givne to fire. As soon as the order was given there was an explosion on deck, the deck gunner was killed instantly, the seaman assisting the gunner was thrown against the conning tower, his leg shredded by the explosion. In the excitement, the over eager gunner had failed to remove the plug from the end of the cannon barrel, and the muzzle of the 10.5 cm deck cannon had exploded when the shell was fired.

Without the deck cannon there could be no artillery attack on the refinery.

This attack caused the complete blackout of the refinery and the Colony for the duration of the war.

In 1941 at the time of the attack the Lago Refinery employed forty-seven hundred men and refined two hundred twenty eight thousand barrels of crude a day. By the end of World War II the Lago Refinery employment had reached over seven thousand and the refinery was processing three hundred thousand barrels of crude a day. This works out to half a million gallons of fuel an hour, twenty-four hours a day. The Lago Refinery maintained this production without any down time for over five years.

Had the deck gunner not made an error the refinery could have been destroyed and this production lost.

http://www.lago-colony.com/PHOTOS_REF_1927_32_50.htm

Most likely, Allied operations are restricted for a few months to a year or so while they repair Aruba and try to build up production at other refineries, for instance in Texas, then there's no further noticeable effects. Germany might surrender a bit later--or it might not, since after all the Soviets relied on Baku not Aruba for their oil. Japan might linger into 1946. But there's no huge change to the course of the war.

A few months to a year of lost production AND lost expansion would be pretty heavily restrictive to war efforts, including strategic bombing and Operation Torch. That might well give the Axis a year's reprieve in both areas. While the US certainly could build up Avgas refining in other areas they'd have to do so from scratch and get a lot less than they would from expanding capacity at a well experienced, well laid out facility. Then they'd have to pump it via pipeline to the East Coast from the Gulf considering the threat in the Gulf of Mexico, which is insanely more expensive and really a major hurt to the Allied ability to get sufficient high quality fuel made:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Inch

 

[lionhead]

I suppose the focus of the U-boats was strictly shipping, not coastal bombardments with deck guns. The power of the U-boat wouldn't be fully used that way. Although you might think taking out the source of the oil instead of the transport would be much more efficient. But i suppose the U-boat commanders didn't think that way.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

I suppose the focus of the U-boats was strictly shipping, not coastal bombardments with deck guns. The power of the U-boat wouldn't be fully used that way. Although you might think taking out the source of the oil instead of the transport would be much more efficient. But i suppose the U-boat commanders didn't think that way.

Must not have.
In terms of the deck gun I was looking that up as you posted:
http://navweaps.com/Weapons/WNGER_41-45_skc32.php
15 rounds per minute, probably practically speaking closer to 10 on a Uboat. 24kg shell. 180 shells per Type IXC like the U-156. Say she fires for 5 minutes she'll put 50 rounds or so into the wide open refineries, easily bursting one oil tank with a direct hit. Spread that fire and oil tanks will start lighting up from the heat and the blaze will quickly get out of control. Hit that ship with 3000 tons of TNT in the harbor and you'll destroy the entire facility. If they stay for 10 minutes firing they will be able to get most of their shells into the place and still likely devastate it.

I have no idea why they didn't mass all 5 boats to shell the place together. If they could put 200-300 shells into the place it would be an inferno.

 

[Theoretical_TJ]

It's the opportunity cost that counts. In the case of Chastise, it was a partial success because while the Reich rebuilt the dams and restored electricity and water, it did so at the expense of an enormous amount of Atlantic Wall reinforcement.

What if it's one of the first targets in 1939? That would significantly worsen the British war experience.

 

[Workable Goblin]

It's the opportunity cost that counts. In the case of Chastise, it was a partial success because while the Reich rebuilt the dams and restored electricity and water, it did so at the expense of an enormous amount of Atlantic Wall reinforcement.

Well, yes. This definitely hurts the Allied war effort. But some of the discussions around here lately seem to argue that countries will immediately fall apart from removing their source of something or other important for war IOTL, when the evidence from OTL is that people are pretty creative and often find ways around shortages of apparently critical materials in various ways, allowing them to continue to fight until there's no fight left to give.

That's what I was mostly arguing against; even though it supplied such a large portion of WAllied fuel stocks, the destruction of this refinery would almost certainly not mean that the Allies would suddenly be unable to fight and have to give up. It would hurt the Allied war effort, of course, but they would be able to fight on.

 

[cortz#9]

I suppose the focus of the U-boats was strictly shipping, not coastal bombardments with deck guns. The power of the U-boat wouldn't be fully used that way. Although you might think taking out the source of the oil instead of the transport would be much more efficient. But i suppose the U-boat commanders didn't think that way.

I agree, in the summer of 1942 the Germans conducted successful tests with firing rockets (NebbelWefer rockets) from a submerged U-boat http://dubm.de/en/u-511-and-missiles/ but no one in the higher echelons of the Kreigsmarine apparently saw any promise in this new weapon system.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

It's the opportunity cost that counts. In the case of Chastise, it was a partial success because while the Reich rebuilt the dams and restored electricity and water, it did so at the expense of an enormous amount of Atlantic Wall reinforcement.

Good point. And had they followed up on it the Germans wouldn't have been able to rebuild for a long time.

What if it's one of the first targets in 1939? That would significantly worsen the British war experience.

It should have been, but given that Germany was actively trying to avoid pissing off the US, it probably would have had unacceptable political costs at the time. Also in 1939 it was too far from bases in Germany to even try and get to. Late 1940 is probably the first time they really could have made a go of it, but then it was probably not a wise move for political reasons.
But had they made a special effort in early 1942 to bombard it and Curaçao and done significant damage to both it would have been a crippling blow in terms of refined fuels for the Allies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombardment_of_Curaçao
https://books.google.com/books?id=h5YHyfXixz8C&pg=PA30&lpg=PA30&dq=Bullenbaai+tank&source=bl&ots=r6KGDq93zF&sig=XdqHvROE5XApm4G0g7iJlUVf8FQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjC_vHL-LjSAhUD2oMKHWOHCrIQ6AEIUzAM#v=onepage&q=Bullenbaai tank&f=false

Well, yes. This definitely hurts the Allied war effort. But some of the discussions around here lately seem to argue that countries will immediately fall apart from removing their source of something or other important for war IOTL, when the evidence from OTL is that people are pretty creative and often find ways around shortages of apparently critical materials in various ways, allowing them to continue to fight until there's no fight left to give.

That's what I was mostly arguing against; even though it supplied such a large portion of WAllied fuel stocks, the destruction of this refinery would almost certainly not mean that the Allies would suddenly be unable to fight and have to give up. It would hurt the Allied war effort, of course, but they would be able to fight on.

I'm not arguing that the Allies would fall apart, just that their offensive abilities would be seriously compromised for a long time as a result.

 

[Cockroach]

Must not have.
In terms of the deck gun I was looking that up as you posted:
http://navweaps.com/Weapons/WNGER_41-45_skc32.php
15 rounds per minute, probably practically speaking closer to 10 on a Uboat. 24kg shell. 180 shells per Type IXC like the U-156. Say she fires for 5 minutes she'll put 50 rounds or so into the wide open refineries, easily bursting one oil tank with a direct hit. Spread that fire and oil tanks will start lighting up from the heat and the blaze will quickly get out of control. Hit that ship with 3000 tons of TNT in the harbor and you'll destroy the entire facility. If they stay for 10 minutes firing they will be able to get most of their shells into the place and still likely devastate it.

I have no idea why they didn't mass all 5 boats to shell the place together. If they could put 200-300 shells into the place it would be an inferno.

Okay, first problem... while oil will burn it's usually not that easy to get started, particularly so in the case of crude and diesel fuel. I'd be rather doubtful hot chunks of shrapnel would be reliable ignition source (particularly in the case of a shell bursting within a tank... in which case you've also got the problem of the ignition sources being within the oil and therefore short on oxygen).

Second problem, is the facility actually laid out in a manner where burning oil can easily spread to ignite further tanks? Looking at the photo there appears to be quite a bit of open area and possible earth walls between tanks. Both of these would tend to mitigate against the fire spreading fast (wide area equals dispersal of oil equals less fuel at the edge of the fire, etc.).

TBH, I think the best chance isn't actual destruction of the refinery but a couple of lucky hits hitting some complex components that need months to rebuild or replace.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

Okay, first problem... while oil will burn it's usually not that easy to get started, particularly so in the case of crude and diesel fuel. I'd be rather doubtful hot chunks of shrapnel would be reliable ignition source (particularly in the case of a shell bursting within a tank... in which case you've also got the problem of the ignition sources being within the oil and therefore short on oxygen).

Second problem, is the facility actually laid out in a manner where burning oil can easily spread to ignite further tanks? Looking at the photo there appears to be quite a bit of open area and possible earth walls between tanks. Both of these would tend to mitigate against the fire spreading fast (wide area equals dispersal of oil equals less fuel at the edge of the fire, etc.).

TBH, I think the best chance isn't actual destruction of the refinery but a couple of lucky hits hitting some complex components that need months to rebuild or replace.

It's not just crude, this is a refinery for 100 octane Avgas. It is extremely flammable. Plus there is the potential that the ship containing 3000 tons of TNT might be hit in the harbor and level everything, igniting all the millions of tons of oil at the facility (apparently there was 5-6 million at any one time with another million or so in the harbor on ships). HE should do the trick for even crude. 105mm HE direct hit on an oil tank, especially once with refined fuel products, should start some serious fires. Multiple shell strikes and separate fire ignitions should spread the heat around and spill enough oil to fill the empty space.

 

[CalBear]

Refineries are considerably more resilient that sometimes imagined. They are designed to contain fires caused by damaged tanks or piping (this frequently comes up when the "Pearl Harbor third wave myth" is mentioned).

The "Bombardment of Elmwood" by I-17 on February 23, 1942 is rather illustrative of this. I-17 fired between 12 and 25 rounds from its 14 cm deck gun (sources vary) at the storage facility and cause little more than casual damage. Submarines are a very poor firing platform, it is nearly impossible to correct fire due to lack of a reasonable observation platform. Deck guns are useful when fired at a small ship, usually at a range of 100-150 yards (often less) when the gun crew can directly observe the result of their fire. At 1,200 yard the gun is effectively an indirect fire weapon being fired blind at a target that is higher than the maximum height of any possible observer.

While it is remotely possible that some serious damage would done (even a blind dog occasionally catches a rabbit) it is just as possible that the sub would be sunk with all hands (it is worth noting that IOTL's attack U-156 WAS attacked by a ASW aircraft, the attack failed to damage the boat, as did another attack on U-67 during the same attack, but the aforementioned Rabbit would be in danger).

 

[Deleted member 1487]

Refineries are considerably more resilient that sometimes imagined. They are designed to contain fires caused by damaged tanks or piping (this frequently comes up when the "Pearl Harbor third wave myth" is mentioned).

The refining equipment themselves, not the fuel tanks; plus this wasn't a military facility like PH was where the tanks were hardened against blasts.
http://cdn.loc.gov/master/pnp/habshaer/hi/hi0600/hi0642/data/hi0642data.pdf
The tanks were mostly underground while the above ground ones were hardened against MG rounds and blast damage, while at Aruba they were above ground AFAIK and a civilian facility with none of that protection, as attack was not planned on.

The "Bombardment of Elmwood" by I-17 on February 23, 1942 is rather illustrative of this. I-17 fired between 12 and 25 rounds from its 14 cm deck gun (sources vary) at the storage facility and cause little more than casual damage. Submarines are a very poor firing platform, it is nearly impossible to correct fire due to lack of a reasonable observation platform. Deck guns are useful when fired at a small ship, usually at a range of 100-150 yards (often less) when the gun crew can directly observe the result of their fire. At 1,200 yard the gun is effectively an indirect fire weapon being fired blind at a target that is higher than the maximum height of any possible observer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombardment_of_Ellwood
http://www.militarymuseum.org/Ellwood.html

Three shells struck near the Bankline Co. oil refinery, the apparent target of the shelling. Rigging and pumping equipment at a well about 1,000 yards inland were destroyed but otherwise no damage was caused. One shell overshot the target by three miles and landed on the Tecolote ranch, where it exploded. Another landed on the nearby Staniff ranch, dug a hole five feet deep, but failed to explode. Eleven other shells fell short and dropped into the sea.

They didn't hit anything beyond a derrick in the dark, meanwhile during the attack on Aruba there was no blackout. Plus the Caribbean wasn't nearly as wavy as the open Pacific. From what I read about the Aruba attack the target was well lit up and there wasn't any chop to screw up their aim like the Japanese had to deal with. Plus the facility in Aruba was much larger. And there was hits scored by the 37mm AAA gun on the tanks, but they didn't penetrate.

While it is remotely possible that some serious damage would done (even a blind dog occasionally catches a rabbit) it is just as possible that the sub would be sunk with all hands (it is worth noting that IOTL's attack U-156 WAS attacked by a ASW aircraft, the attack failed to damage the boat, as did another attack on U-67 during the same attack, but the aforementioned Rabbit would be in danger).

En route, U-156 was found and attacked by a Fokker F.XVIII maritime patrol aircraft of the Netherlands West Indies Defence Force which took off from Oranjestad, Aruba at 05.55 hours and dropped a number of 8 kg (18 lb) or 80mm improvised anti-submarine bombs without achieving a hit.[4] The U-boat continued towards Oranjestad harbor and at 09.43 hours torpedoed Arkansas lying at the pier of the Eagle Refinery, after missing with two torpedoes.

Sounds like the ASW aircraft would need a lot more luck than the Uboat to hit their respective targets.

 

[CalBear]

I really do need to learn not to respond to these threads.

The tanks at a civilian refinery/storage facility are not separated because they are expected to survive a few 10.5 cm shells. They are separated so Mr. Murphy can't wipe out the facility. Lightning, hurricanes, and idiots are a vastly more likely, and dangerous threat.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

I really do need to learn not to respond to these threads.

The tanks at a civilian refinery/storage facility are not separated because they are expected to survive a few 10.5 cm shells. They are separated so Mr. Murphy can't wipe out the facility. Lightning, hurricanes, and idiots are a vastly more likely, and dangerous threat.

Sure, but a direct hit by a 105mm shells is going to penetrate them. A 37mm AAA shell could not, but it's only about 22% as powerful as the HE content of a 105mm submarine deck gun. Granted, you're right that a nearby shell explosion is unlikely to penetrate a facility that is well laid out, but Aruba is outside Hurricane Alley in the Caribbean and is actually a dry climate, so I'm not sure how reinforced the tanks were in the early 1940s. Likely they'd need direct hits to actually rupture the tanks and start fires, plus multiple tanks hit and set on fire to cause widespread problems. Or if the ship with TNT onboard was hit then there would be serious problems.
The question is how many direct hits could be scored from direct firing against a lit target from less than 1 mile off shore in calm waters? Plus would stray 105mm HE hits burst civilian pipes and ignite oil in them?

http://www.lago-colony.com/BURSON_LUCKY_LAGO/introduction.htm

While the Colony residents were going to bed, some of them having attended a reception/dance at the Officers’ Club in Sabaneta for the newly arrived troops, Kapitanleutnant Hartenstein was steering the U-156 (on the surface) on an easterly course toward Oranjestad. At 11:30 p.m. he passed Eagle pier where he noted “an illuminated tanker loading.” (Arkansas). He then proceeded to “Nicolas Harbor.”[41]

It was 01:31 on February 16 when the U-156, now on the surface, fired its first torpedo which hit the side of the Pedernales and turned it into an inferno. Two minutes later a second torpedo sank the Oranjestad. The submarine’s deck gun crew then prepared to fire their 10.5 cm cannon at the well-lit refinery. That was when their luck ran out and Lago’s began. The first round exploded in the barrel, putting the gun out of commission, fatally wounding seaman Heinrich Businger and wounding the gun’s crew chief, Oberleutnant Dietrich von dem Borne. The round exploded because the tampion which plugged the muzzle of the gun, protecting it when the sub was submerged, had not been removed. The other gun crew, manning the smaller, 37mm gun, managed to fire 16 rounds, some of them tracers, in the direction of the tank farm before Hartenstein ordered a cease fire and turned the U-156 on a westerly course toward Oranjestad. In his log entry, Hartenstein deplored the fact that the 37mm had not been equipped with "“illuminated night sight-lights.” One shell hit an oil tank (#112), denting its steel plating, a second was reported to have hit a house north of the lower tank farm.

Off Eagle pier he fired three torpedoes at the Arkansas. One hit the empty Texaco tanker; the other two went astray, one coming up on the beach where it would later explode killing four members of a Dutch Marine demolition team.[42]

http://www.lago-colony.com/

This is a photo taken inside the refinery of tanks, there were lots of tank, and lots of pipes, there were an awful lot of pipes in the refinery.

TANK FARM AND SPHEROID TANKS FOR HOLDING MATERIAL UNDER PRESSURE.

 

[Ariosto]

I really do need to learn not to respond to these threads.

Come on, you easily have some of the most insightful knowledge and commentary I've seen on this board, please don't deprive us of that. ​

 

[CalBear]

Sure, but a direct hit by a 105mm shells is going to penetrate them. A 37mm AAA shell could not, but it's only about 22% as powerful as the HE content of a 105mm submarine deck gun. Granted, you're right that a nearby shell explosion is unlikely to penetrate a facility that is well laid out, but Aruba is outside Hurricane Alley in the Caribbean and is actually a dry climate, so I'm not sure how reinforced the tanks were in the early 1940s. Likely they'd need direct hits to actually rupture the tanks and start fires, plus multiple tanks hit and set on fire to cause widespread problems. Or if the ship with TNT onboard was hit then there would be serious problems.
The question is how many direct hits could be scored from direct firing against a lit target from less than 1 mile off shore in calm waters? Plus would stray 105mm HE hits burst civilian pipes and ignite oil in them?

http://www.lago-colony.com/BURSON_LUCKY_LAGO/introduction.htm


http://www.lago-colony.com/

It is worth considering that NONE of these pictures was taken from 800 yards off-shore and 7 feet over the wave tops.

Again, I realize that I am wasting my time here since this isn't meant to be a discussion but a validation of a preconceived notion.

In any case...

 

[Deleted member 1487]

It is worth considering that NONE of these pictures was taken from 800 yards off-shore and 7 feet over the wave tops.

Again, I realize that I am wasting my time here since this isn't meant to be a discussion but a validation of a preconceived notion.

In any case...

Hey I'm open to being convinced, but it seems you're bringing a bunch of preconceived notions based on different circumstances like the Elmwood situation (very different) or Pearl Harbor with it's military spec reinforced tanks and underground storage. Apparently the view was good enough to score a hit at night with a handful of rounds from a non-night sighted AAA on a oil storage tank. Had the 105mm gun not blown up hitting said oil tank and then lighting up the oil tank farms would have been pretty doable.

And lit up at night, of course without the burning tankers they sank during the OTL attack or view of the civilian lights and traffic:

There was no significant waves either, so they used flat bottomed, shallow draft Lake Tankers to bring over crude from Venezeula:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_tanker