Sub Hunter story.

[Ed Majden]

I just received the North Island Weekender, newspaper North Vancouver
Island, and it contains a story honouring a 82 year young WWII Veteran,
former RCAF pilot Ken Moore, recognized for helping sink two German
submarines within 22 minutes on June 7, 1944 in a B24 Liberator. He was
with 224 Coastal Command Squadron based in Cornwall on the English Channel.
Great story but too long to reproduce. He was discharged from the RCAF in
1945 and re-enlisted in 1946 serving for a total of 31 years including a
tour as CO of 407 Maritime Patrol Squadron at CFB Comox. He retired as a
Wing Commander in 1972.

[Ed Majden]

The two subs were U-629 and U-373. Moore's crew were later credited
with a third sub kill and also shooting down two Heinkel fighters. He and
his crew flew 61 combat sorties.

[Gordon]

>Moore's crew were later credited
>with a third sub kill and also shooting down two Heinkel fighters. He and
>his crew flew 61 combat sorties.
>
>
>

Two "Heinkel fighters", eh? Not intending to disparage this fine gent, but I
would bet dollars to donuts that they were not Ernie's fighters, out tangling
with B-24s over the open sea!

v/r
Gordon
PS, thanks for the info - sounds like this was a real professional at sub
hunting!
<====(A+C====>
USN SAR Aircrew

"Got anything on your radar, SENSO?"
"Nothing but my forehead, sir."

[Ed Majden]

"Gordon" >
> Two "Heinkel fighters", eh? Not intending to disparage this fine gent,
but I
> would bet dollars to donuts that they were not Ernie's fighters, out
tangling
> with B-24s over the open sea!

The article didn't say where this action took place. Perhaps not all
missions were over the open sea as you suggest. This could have taken place
on a return from a mission also. The first two subs weren't exactly over
the open sea either but in the English Channel. If I ever meet this fine
gentleman, I'll ask him!

[av8r]

Hi Ed

U-373 was a Type VIIC. It was sunk by F/O Moore's crew while flying a
Consolidated Liberator G.R. Mk.V (aircraft code XB-G) in the Bay of
Biscay west of Brest at position: 48.10N - 05.31W

U-441 was also a Type VIIC. It was sunk in the English Channel by F/O
Moore's crew at position: 48.27N - 05.47W

NOTE. U-629 was previously credited to No. 224 Squadron but was in fact
sunk by a Liberator of No. 53 (GR) Squadron on the 7th of June 1944.

Cheers...Chris

[Ed Majden]

"av8r" > wrote in message
...
> Hi Ed
>
> U-373 was a Type VIIC. It was sunk by F/O Moore's crew while flying a
> Consolidated Liberator G.R. Mk.V (aircraft code XB-G) in the Bay of
> Biscay west of Brest at position: 48.10N - 05.31W
>
> U-441 was also a Type VIIC. It was sunk in the English Channel by F/O
> Moore's crew at position: 48.27N - 05.47W
>
> NOTE. U-629 was previously credited to No. 224 Squadron but was in fact
> sunk by a Liberator of No. 53 (GR) Squadron on the 7th of June 1944.
>
> Cheers...Chris

Chris:
There seems to be a descrepancy here. Moore's English Channel action on
7 June 1944 states that they sunk two subs over a period of 22 minutes. I
don't think anyone would forget that! Perhaps he got the U-boat numbers
wrong. The article states U373 and U629. This happend around 2.15 a.m.
The other sub sunk was not identified or where it was suck. It also states
that 43 crew members were rescued by the Royal Navy from U-373. Could be a
newspaper typo also.
Cheers:
Ed

[Gordon]

Hi, Ed.

My point was that Ernst Heinkel did not build operational day fighters, with
the exception of the He 162 which did not officially score any victories.
Earlier attempts at fielding fighters met with failure on Ernst's part - even
the superlative He 219, which could well have been built as a day 'Zerstroyer'
was only built in small numbers as a nightfighter.

I have little doubt that this gent and his crew destroyed two German fighters -
but I can't see how they could have been Heinkels. The company built many fine
aircraft, but none that would fit into this story.

> The article didn't say where this action took place. Perhaps not all
>missions were over the open sea as you suggest.

If his B-24 was assigned to anti-sub patrol, it rules out its use as a
daylight, over the continent, heavy bomber (which would place it in an area
where short-range shore-based fighters could intercept it): the RN and RAF
didn't use ASW assets that way.

I repeat, I am not disparaging the crew at all - I am just pointing out that we
could probably find out the real German losses for that day and I am certain
they would either be Heinkel bombers (Coastal Command bombers shot down plenty
of Luftwaffe bombers!) or some other company's fighters. If he has a date and
mentions a location within the narrative, we can check the BAMA loss records,
or Tony Woods' online listing of German losses, to find likely candidates for
the lost a/c.

v/r
Gordon

[Walt BJ]

(Gordon) wrote in message >...
> >Moore's crew were later credited
> >with a third sub kill and also shooting down two Heinkel fighters. He and
> >his crew flew 61 combat sorties.
> >
> >
> >
>
> Two "Heinkel fighters", eh? Not intending to disparage this fine gent, but I
> would bet dollars to donuts that they were not Ernie's fighters, out tangling
> with B-24s over the open sea!
>
> v/r
> Gordon
> SNIP -
Might have been JU88s - they were used for anti-anti-sub patrols.

Walt BJ

[Ed Majden]

"Gordon"
> My point was that Ernst Heinkel did not build operational day fighters,
with
> the exception of the He 162 which did not officially score any victories.
> Earlier attempts at fielding fighters met with failure on Ernst's part -
even
> the superlative He 219, which could well have been built as a day
'Zerstroyer'
> was only built in small numbers as a nightfighter.
>
Gordon:
I don't have anymore details other than what was in the paper. I wonder
if the Heinkel that is refered to is not a fighter but a recon type. Wasn't
the He 114 (1939) a sea based recon type? Reporters are notorious for
getting things wrong! If I go to the Air Museum at 19 Wing Comox I'll ask
for more details.
Ed

[Gordon]

>> Two "Heinkel fighters", eh? Not intending to disparage this fine gent, but
>I
>> would bet dollars to donuts that they were not Ernie's fighters, out
>tangling
>> with B-24s over the open sea!
>>
>> v/r
>> Gordon
>> SNIP -
>Might have been JU88s - they were used for anti-anti-sub patrols.

Very likely, Walt. They were used to defend KM U-boats as they arrived in the
Bay of Biscay and if I had to guess, I would say these are the best candidates.

v/r
Gordon
PS, Lex (now 8 going on 30) read his letter from you last night and was
properly impressed!

[Gordon]

>Gordon:
> I don't have anymore details other than what was in the paper. I wonder
>if the Heinkel that is refered to is not a fighter but a recon type. Wasn't
>the He 114 (1939) a sea based recon type?

Now that was a real rarity! I think its possible, but I think Walt pegged it
with his Ju 88 call. These lil biplanes weren't fast enough to catch a
properly motivated B-24. :)

Speaking of which... sad, this. One of my ebay photos arrived, depicting a
B-24 al fuego over the Bay of Biscay, and clearly not going to make it home.
As I have dealt with personal effects of Allied airmen washed ashore after such
events, the photo is particularly poignant. No way to determine who, where,
when, etc., but I really hope they made it out in one piece. The seas are calm
and it allows me to hope.

> Reporters are notorious for
>getting things wrong! If I go to the Air Museum at 19 Wing Comox I'll ask
>for more details.

Much appreciated! And if I can help you track down the 'victims', let me know.

v/r
Gordon
Stormbirds.com/recon

[Steve Hix]

In article >,
"Ed Majden" > wrote:

> "Gordon" >
> > Two "Heinkel fighters", eh? Not intending to disparage this fine gent,
> > but I
> > would bet dollars to donuts that they were not Ernie's fighters, out
> > tangling with B-24s over the open sea!
>
> The article didn't say where this action took place. Perhaps not all
> missions were over the open sea as you suggest. This could have taken place
> on a return from a mission also. The first two subs weren't exactly over
> the open sea either but in the English Channel. If I ever meet this fine
> gentleman, I'll ask him!

The He60 floatplane was in service until 1943, might it have been
what was referred to? The He115, another floatplane type was in
service until 1944 in coast patrol, mining, etc.