Aruba refinery successfully attacked in 1942?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 1487
  • Start date

Deleted member 1487

my view Operation Neuland was biggest missed opportunity, would have magnified Battle of the Atlantic if fuel scarce, tried to make that point in earlier thread https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/wi-operation-neuland-in-caribbean-a-success.310055/

thought it would have been worth sacrificing one or more HSK, they had larger caliber guns and some up to 300 mines. but that implies sometime in 1941 (maybe June instead of that other thing they were working on?)
The major issue of course is actually getting it there without being recognized.
Edit:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_auxiliary_cruiser_Orion
6x 15cm guns would have done some damage.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
How many direct targets do you see in the top photo? How many of them are more than 25 feet wide (a deck gun isn't a rifle, isn't even a 37mm, where you have tracers and can "walk" your fire to the target)? How many storage tanks do your see in the top photo?

I see some worksheds and some towers that are more open space than scaffolding. What I do not see are visible pumping stations or storage tanks. What I do not see is any sort of reasonable landmark that can be used to adjust fire. What I do not see is anything that will aid a guncrew, firing a manually aimed and trained deck gun find a target and engage it (and, lest we forget, the crew was either so unfamiliar with the weapon, or so poorly trained on the firing drill, that they failed to remove the plug from the barrel prior to firing).

The bottom photo appears to be much more recent than the top, based simply on the additional construction.

There is a reason that subs are not considered to be proper gun platforms. There is a reason that the KM removed the large caliber deck guns from the planned Type VII/42 (and had reduced the caliber of the deck gun on the Type VII to 8.8 cm).
 
The major issue of course is actually getting it there without being recognized.

certainly true and the KM would need different size and type of ship than what they employed elsewhere, not sure the size and profile of the tankers they employed vs. what was normally calling on these refineries? (meaning aside form the huge supply tankers which were quite distinct)
 

Deleted member 1487

How many direct targets do you see in the top photo? How many of them are more than 25 feet wide (a deck gun isn't a rifle, isn't even a 37mm, where you have tracers and can "walk" your fire to the target)? How many storage tanks do your see in the top photo?
It kind of is, it comes with a gunsight even:
http://www.bocn.co.uk/vbforum/threads/92849-WW2-U-Boat-8-8cm-10-5-cm-deck-gun-optical-sight
http://uboat.net/technical/guns.htm
I could only find pictures of the refinery, not the storage tanks. Supposedly they were able to be spotted and directly fired at by AAA guns and were close enough to hit them even with that small of a caliber of weapon. At 800m a 105mm (not to mention an 88mm deck gun) would be point and shoot given the gun sight and muzzle velocity meaning the shells has 1 sec or less to target.

Plus from the OP sourcing:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Aruba
At 03:13, U-156 attacked the Texaco owned tanker SS Arkansas which was berthed at Eagle Beach next to the Arend/Eagle Refinery. Just one of the torpedoes struck Arkansas and partially sank her but the damage was moderate and caused no casualties.[3] 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.



I see some worksheds and some towers that are more open space than scaffolding. What I do not see are visible pumping stations or storage tanks. What I do not see is any sort of reasonable landmark that can be used to adjust fire. What I do not see is anything that will aid a guncrew, firing a manually aimed and trained deck gun find a target and engage it (and, lest we forget, the crew was either so unfamiliar with the weapon, or so poorly trained on the firing drill, that they failed to remove the plug from the barrel prior to firing).
Again the pics are of the refinery, not the storage tank farm, but as I said historically they did hit them with a direct shot from a 37mm gun without night sights. They'd be using a high velocity 105mm gun with gunsight with a muzzle velocity that would mean the shell is to target in 1 sec or less; that's a flat shot without needing to adjust for shell drop. Point and shoot.
The guys were clearly overexcited and wanted to hit the brightly lit target after the boat successfully torpedoed two ships, adrenaline is a hell of a drug.

The bottom photo appears to be much more recent than the top, based simply on the additional construction.
Sure.

There is a reason that subs are not considered to be proper gun platforms. There is a reason that the KM removed the large caliber deck guns from the planned Type VII/42 (and had reduced the caliber of the deck gun on the Type VII to 8.8 cm).
At that point survival on the sea surface was pretty dangerous.

HITLER_LOST_3.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Deleted member 1487

How about, for the sake of argument, the Gibbons crew doesn't get a coffee break and as they sail out of the Eagle harbor it catches a torpedo and it's 3000 tons of TNT cargo explodes, wrecking the port, refinery, and break pipelines and blow gaskets all over the area, creating major leaks and fires. With this POD we don't have to have a pissing match over whether a 105mm artillery round can hit a fuel tank or the Uboat can even see it. For the sake of argument the surfaced Uboat is also sunk by the blast of the TNT cargo along with all the ships in the area.
HITLER_LOST_4.jpg


For a comparison of the damage that could be done:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liverpool_Blitz#May_blitz
One incident on 3 May involved the SS Malakand, a ship carrying munitions which was berthed in the Huskisson Dock. Although its eventual explosion is often attributed to a burning barrage balloon, this fire was put out. However flames from dock sheds that had been bombed spread to the Malakand, and this fire could not be contained. Despite valiant efforts by the fire brigade to extinguish the flames, they spread to the ship's cargo of 1,000 tons of bombs, which exploded a few hours after the raid had ended. The entire Huskisson No. 2 dock and the surrounding quays were destroyed and four people were killed. The explosion was so violent that some pieces of the ship's hull plating were blasted into a park over 1 mile (1.6 km) away. It took seventy-four hours for the fire to burn out.[8]

http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/maritime/collections/boa/history/may-blitz.aspx
Damage at Huskisson Branch Dock No.2 after SS Malakand exploded in May 1941. Parts of the wreck of the Malakand can be seen, with the Liverpool Overhead Railway in the background.
Such was the violence of the explosion that a wide area around the vessel was totally devastated. Incredibly, only four people were killed.

The dock was never used again and was eventually filled in.
blitz-bomb-damage-huskisson-dock-malakand.jpg
 
Refineries are built to minimize spread of fire etc. Flow of oil/products will be stopped in any area that is at risk to slow any fuel feeding the fire. Earthen berms isolate areas. Can a bombardment from the U-boat do damage, given the fact that a significant proportion of the shells will land where they do no important damage - yes. Look at the Ploesti raids. A lot more explosive was dropped on the refineries that what the sub could deliver, and yet they were back working relatively quickly. If the sub gets a lot of lucky hits, if that ship full of explosives is in just the right place and is hit and goes up (and that would be an errant shell as they were trying to hit the refinery) the damage could be very severe. It's not ASB but awful unlikely. I expect after the first attempt to shell the refinery an awful of of ASW and coastal defense assets were put in place - this is the sort of thing that works once and once only.
 
easily bursting one oil tank with a direct hit. Spread that fire and oil tanks will start lighting up from the heat

Depends what's in the tank.

Bunker C it hard, AvGas easy.

Ploesti proved that tons of HE wasn't enough. 328 tons didn't do the job in the form of 500 pounders
 
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.

Yeah like others have said i think you are highly overestimating the capabilities of a submarine deck gun. They were not meant for bombardments but as an alternative method to sink a ship besides the torpedos. Of course you can sue them to fire on land but their effectiveness is highly reduced by the lack of proper targeting and range of the weapon.

A U-boat will also become very detectable when firing its gun, making it an easy target for a plane or coastal artillery. The U-boat attacking Curacao did get fired upon, after firing 5 shells on an oil farm that did no damage.

i think you are too focussed on the shell and too little on the gun.
 
If we do suppose the U-Boat bags the ship full of TNT as it exits the harbour, and we suppose the entire thing goes up at once, a 3KT blast yields the following (using Nukemap as a first order guess, dynamics of a conventional explosion might be slightly different)...
Screenshot 2017-03-02 20.47.50.jpg


The green circle is radiation, which given we're actually dealing with a conventional explosion is irrelevant.

So, parts of the refinery lie within the 3rd degree burns circle (people have a very bad day, some risk of fire) and 5psi airblast radius, implying damage to light weight structures and significant risk of fire (per http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/faq/ casualty model figure). Not the speccy everything all blown up Wiking seems to want...

Edit to add:Also looked at the distance from the open ocean to where the tanks seemed to be located in the old photos... about 1.2km. For fire from a stable location (land mount and/or proper ship) with suitable spotting pretty bloody trivial trying to target the general area, for a U-Boat at night in even light seas trying to snipe out single tanks... Not so easy...
 
Last edited:
I would imagine a special forces attack might be a better way to destroy the facility. How large an assault force could a Type IX with just torpedoes in tubes and perhaps with limited crew transport? 30? 50? Of course the force is as good as lost, but would Nazis care? Would the assault force itself even care? "After the attack you will surrender and you will be interned in the Caribbean".
 
If we do suppose the U-Boat bags the ship full of TNT as it exits the harbour, and we suppose the entire thing goes up at once, a 3KT blast yields the following (using Nukemap as a first order guess, dynamics of a conventional explosion might be slightly different)...

The green circle is radiation, which given we're actually dealing with a conventional explosion is irrelevant.

So, parts of the refinery lie within the 3rd degree burns circle (people have a very bad day, some risk of fire) and 5psi airblast radius, implying damage to light weight structures and significant risk of fire (per http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/faq/ casualty model figure). Not the speccy everything all blown up Wiking seems to want...

Edit to add:Also looked at the distance from the open ocean to where the tanks seemed to be located in the old photos... about 1.2km. For fire from a stable location (land mount and/or proper ship) with suitable spotting pretty bloody trivial trying to target the general area, for a U-Boat at night in even light seas trying to snipe out single tanks... Not so easy...

Indeed. i was going to point that out as well. However the harbor will surely be unusable for quite a while.
 

Deleted member 1487

Depends what's in the tank.

Bunker C it hard, AvGas easy.

Ploesti proved that tons of HE wasn't enough. 328 tons didn't do the job in the form of 500 pounders
I don't think many hit the oil tanks, they hit the refining equipment and wrecked 40% of it...the problem is there was spare capacity that was being unused, so it wasn't necessary.
Aruba was an avgas production facility. Diesel was in one of the tanks, which should be ignitable by a direct HE hit.

Yeah like others have said i think you are highly overestimating the capabilities of a submarine deck gun. They were not meant for bombardments but as an alternative method to sink a ship besides the torpedos. Of course you can sue them to fire on land but their effectiveness is highly reduced by the lack of proper targeting and range of the weapon.

A U-boat will also become very detectable when firing its gun, making it an easy target for a plane or coastal artillery. The U-boat attacking Curacao did get fired upon, after firing 5 shells on an oil farm that did no damage.

i think you are too focussed on the shell and too little on the gun.
They have a gun sight:
http://www.bocn.co.uk/vbforum/threads/92849-WW2-U-Boat-8-8cm-10-5-cm-deck-gun-optical-sight
Considering the range it is pretty much a direct hit on visible oil tank targets. They were able to direct fire hit some with a 37mm deck gun without night sights. So you're claiming a direct 105mm deck gun hit isn't going to smash and ignite a tank of refined fuel? Also there were no coastal defenses at the time, no coastal artillery, no spot lights, no one to fire back. Despite the deck gun exploding and firing over a dozen 37mm rounds, plus torpedoing two ships in the harbor not a single shot was fired at the surfaced uboat. Hours later an improvised ASW aircraft tried to bomb it with improvised bombs, but had no luck.
The Curacao situation as different, it had coastal defenses and crew that quickly returned fire. We don't know how many German shells were fired before the Dutch returned fire and I don't have a picture of the oil storage situation, so it might have been a different layout and they were further away so had to range in with a number of shots. The Aruba situation was different because they were closer, not dealing with defenses, and had confirmed hits on a tank with a smaller caliber weapon.


If we do suppose the U-Boat bags the ship full of TNT as it exits the harbour, and we suppose the entire thing goes up at once, a 3KT blast yields the following (using Nukemap as a first order guess, dynamics of a conventional explosion might be slightly different)...
The green circle is radiation, which given we're actually dealing with a conventional explosion is irrelevant.

So, parts of the refinery lie within the 3rd degree burns circle (people have a very bad day, some risk of fire) and 5psi airblast radius, implying damage to light weight structures and significant risk of fire (per http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/faq/ casualty model figure). Not the speccy everything all blown up Wiking seems to want...
Extensive fire would cause a ton of problems especially if the blast pressure ruptures pipelines with the refined fuels and spreads high octane Avgas fires about.

The question though is what are the lower order blast/pressure effects beyond the wrecking buildings entirely? As the article I posted earlier said the pressure effects would damage un-reinforced piping and gaskets at long ranges.

I found a very similar historical explosion with 3000 tons of TNT in a harbor:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halifax_Explosion
At 9:04:35 am, the out-of-control fire aboard Mont-Blanc finally set off her highly explosive cargo.[53] The ship was completely blown apart and a powerful blast wave radiated away from the explosion at more than 1,000 metres (3,300 ft) per second. Temperatures of 5,000 °C (9,030 °F) and pressures of thousands of atmospheres accompanied the moment of detonation at the centre of the explosion.[54][23] White-hot shards of iron fell down upon Halifax and Dartmouth.[55] Mont-Blanc's forward 90 mm gun, its barrel melted away, landed approximately 5.6 kilometres (3.5 mi) north of the explosion site near Albro Lake in Dartmouth, while the shank of her anchor, weighing half a ton, landed 3.2 kilometres (2.0 mi) south at Armdale.[56]

An area of over 160 hectares (400 acres) was completely destroyed by the explosion,[56] while the harbour floor was momentarily exposed by the volume of water that vaporized. A tsunami was formed by water surging in to fill the void;[59] it rose as high as 18 metres (60 ft) above the high-water mark on the Halifax side of the harbour.[60]

Over 1,600 people were killed instantly and 9,000 were injured, more than 300 of whom later died.[23] Every building within a 2.6-kilometre (1.6 mi) radius, over 12,000 in total, was destroyed or badly damaged.[59] Hundreds of people who had been watching the fire from their homes were blinded when the blast wave shattered the windows in front of them.[64] Stoves and lamps overturned by the force of the blast sparked fires throughout Halifax,[65] particularly in the North End, where entire city blocks were caught up in the inferno, trapping residents inside their houses. Firefighter Billy Wells, who was thrown away from the explosion and had his clothes torn from his body, described the devastation survivors faced: "The sight was awful, with people hanging out of windows dead. Some with their heads missing, and some thrown onto the overhead telegraph wires." He was the only member of the eight-man crew of the fire engine "Patricia" to survive.[66]

Large brick and stone factories near Pier 6, such as the Acadia Sugar Refinery, disappeared into unrecognizable heaps of rubble, killing most of their workers.[67] The Nova Scotia cotton mill located 1.5 km (0.93 mile) from the blast was destroyed by fire and the collapse of its concrete floors.[68] The Royal Naval College of Canada building was badly damaged, and several cadets and instructors maimed.[69]

The city's industrial sector was in large part gone, with many workers among the casualties and the dockyard heavily damaged.[105]
The Tsunami that would result from the water vaporization would add to the damage. Plus then of course fire damage that would spread all over the area.

http://www.engr.psu.edu/cde/Short/MPS_course/newpage/Exp-Dam-Ass-1.pdf
6 DEC. 1917:
SHIP COLLISION WITH A FRENCH MUNITIONS CARRIER IN HALIFAX HARBOUR. 2766 T OF VARIOUS EXPLOSIVES. OVER 2.5KM OF HALIFAX'S INDUSTRIAL END WAS TOTALLY LEVELLED. THE BLAST SHATTERED WINDOWS 100 KM AWAY AND WAS HEARD IN PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND.

Edit to add:Also looked at the distance from the open ocean to where the tanks seemed to be located in the old photos... about 1.2km. For fire from a stable location (land mount and/or proper ship) with suitable spotting pretty bloody trivial trying to target the general area, for a U-Boat at night in even light seas trying to snipe out single tanks... Not so easy...
Yet they had a confirmed hit with a 37mm round on a large fuel tank:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Aruba
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.
The submarine commander blamed the lack of hits on not having night-sights for the gun.
That said even igniting a few large fuel tanks of diesel fuel or even Avgas is probably not going to wreck the facility, but it will do significant damage and reduce capacities for a while.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I would imagine a special forces attack might be a better way to destroy the facility. How large an assault force could a Type IX with just torpedoes in tubes and perhaps with limited crew transport? 30? 50? Of course the force is as good as lost, but would Nazis care? Would the assault force itself even care? "After the attack you will surrender and you will be interned in the Caribbean".

everyone has pointed out the hurdles for u-boat only force. my scenario was to use auxiliary raider(s) in tandem with u-boats. (probably any attack has to take place in 1941, although Stier was in Caribbean 1942 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_auxiliary_cruiser_Stier)
 

Deleted member 1487

everyone has pointed out the hurdles for u-boat only force. my scenario was to use auxiliary raider(s) in tandem with u-boats. (probably any attack has to take place in 1941, although Stier was in Caribbean 1942 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_auxiliary_cruiser_Stier)
It didn't launch until May 1942, after this POD. Thor might be an option.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_auxiliary_cruiser_Thor
The only issue is could it really make it into the Caribbean without being caught?
 
everyone has pointed out the hurdles for u-boat only force. my scenario was to use auxiliary raider(s) in tandem with u-boats. (probably any attack has to take place in 1941, although Stier was in Caribbean 1942 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_auxiliary_cruiser_Stier)

It didn't launch until May 1942, after this POD. Thor might be an option.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_auxiliary_cruiser_Thor
The only issue is could it really make it into the Caribbean without being caught?

only cited Stier as example that raiders were still operating in Caribbean through 1942 while my view is the attacks need to happen earlier, not highlighting any particular ship as option.

Stier made it into Caribbean at later date, after US had assumed more defense duties, but you have raised problem of sending solo raider. their web of supply ships, raiders, and tankers was diminishing asset.

my scenario is attack oil facilities with everything possible to pinch British fuel situation.
 

Deleted member 1487

Stier made it into Caribbean at later date, after US had assumed more defense duties, but you have raised problem of sending solo raider. their web of supply ships, raiders, and tankers was diminishing asset.
Where did you see it was in the Caribbean? I'm only seeing South Atlantic
 

Rubicon

Banned
I've always thougth Aruba should have been a prime target to Skorzeny.

Nazi SS-soldiers wading ashore in the night from rubber dingies. The stuff propaganda is made for. Perfect bad guys for a Hollywood 80-ies action flick.
 

Deleted member 1487

"The German auxiliary cruiser Stier was scuttled on 27 September in the Caribbean. This was after Stier sank the American liberty shipSS Stephen Hopkins in a short battle" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Caribbean (my book on auxiliary cruisers is lacking in details, am going by Wiki on this one)
Well, off the coast of Suriname. Technically the edge of the Caribbean, not deep in it like Aruba. She'd have to get through some shipping lanes and avoid the cover of open sea to try that, pretty dangerous stuff. But the risk is worth the reward IMHO.

I've always thougth Aruba should have been a prime target to Skorzeny.

Nazi SS-soldiers wading ashore in the night from rubber dingies. The stuff propaganda is made for. Perfect bad guys for a Hollywood 80-ies action flick.
Agreed, but getting the operation running is probably not viable given the lack of intel about defenses and the abbreviated time frame to run it given the unexpected DoW on the US. Plus any team you put in there is 99% likely lost, dead or captured, with the capture likely compromising operational secrets you can't afford....but then they tried operation Pastorius...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Pastorius
I think a commando operation against the refineries in the Caribbean is more likely to succeed and do strategic damage.

Also forget the SS, the navy had it's own naval commandos.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seebataillon#World_War_II
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top