Seetakt

[SES (†)]

Hi Jos,
Thank you for this quite correct statement. The concentration of 301/303 in the Trondheim area indicates the presence of a KM UGRUKO - and the associated bunker . Where - now that's a good question.
bregds
SES

[SES (†)]

Hi,
Sorry, but I got to Norway first. Leif if you have difficulties with locations, I'll send scans of maps directly. The source is "German Sea Coast defences".



Mörvik FuMO 303

I have just been advised that this should read Mövik.
bregds
SES

[Alkali]

Hi All,

Very interesting discussion Below my informations about region of Baltic Sea.

Swinoujscie (Swinemünde) - Poland

At beach two W-R socle very near oneself - distance about 25 - 30 of metres.
In vicinity two coastal batteries – „Plantagenbatterie” ( 3 x 20,3 cm S.K. C/34 ) and batterie „Henningsen” ( 4 x 15 cm S.K. C/28 )
W-R probably cooperated from some from these of battery. Question whether two Seeart W-R could be so near oneself

On tower of fort Werk III ( Engelsberg ) radar with antenna of type mattress – probably Flum „Freya” or „Freiburg”. In Swinoujscie existed 3. Marine-Flugmelde-Abteilung.



Rewal ( Westerly Pomerania ) - Poland

One W-R socle and one FuMO. On 100 % radars belonged to Kriegsmarine but In region was not no coastal batteries ! Flum or Seetakt ??

Cape Rozewie - Poland

Two unidentified radars - Information from military documents from end of fortieth years. Lack possibilities of verifying - all ground this military area

Hel - Poland

One W-R socle. More wrote already beaviso. Question - when one introduced Seeart W-R

Naissaar Island near Tallin (Reval) - Estonia.

One W-R socle. Probably Seeart, near was much coastal batteries.

Ontika – Estonia

One W-R socle. Probably Seeart, very near rest of coastal bateries - 4 foundationses, type of guns unknown.

Sillamae – Estonia

One W-R socle. In region was not no coastal batteries. Question - Marine whether Luftwaffe ? Somewhere there was Stellung "Kiebitz".

Temporarily I know only so much.

Regards,
Czarek

[beaviso]

Hi,

I'm a little bit confused. Below I've made a list of known MARINE radar units types. All corrections and suggestions are welcome!


MARINE RADAR UNITS CLASSIFICATION

1. Flugmelde/Flak
unit type: Marine Flugmelde Regiment with asscociated companies
purpose: Detection of enemy a/c over sea (esp. minelayers) and cooperation with Marine Flak Abteilung
radars used:
surveillance - Jagdschloss, Freya/Freiburg
fire directing - small Wuerzburg/Mannheim, Flakleit G

2. FuMO - Seetakt
unit type: ?
purpose: Sea surveillance - detection of seaborne targets
radars used: FuMO 2 / 3 / 4 / 5

3. FuMO - Seeart
unit type: ? (included in MKB?)
purpose: Marine coastal artillery fire directing
radars used: FuMO 11 Renner, FuMO 15 Scheer, FuMO214/215 Wuerzburg(See)-Riese


Please correct me if I got anything wrong.
Also, what's your final opinion on FuMO214/215 application? Only Seeart or maybe Seetakt too? Did Marine-Flugmelde use W-Rs?

brgds,
M.

[beaviso]

According to my post from yesterday and last Czarek's post:
Rewal = Trzesacz (we thought of the same location)

[SES (†)]

Hi,

I'm a little bit confused. Below I've made a list of known MARINE radar units types. All corrections and suggestions are welcome!


MARINE RADAR UNITS

1. Flugmelde/Flak
unit type: Marine Flugmelde Regiment with asscociated companies
purpose: Detection of enemy a/c over sea (esp. minelayers) and cooperation with Marine Flak Abteilung
radars used:
surveillance - Jagdschloss, Freya/Freiburg
fire directing - small Wuerzburg/Mannheim, Flakleit G

2. FuMO - Seetakt
unit type: ?
purpose: Sea surveillance - detection of seaborne targets
radars used: FuMO 2 / 3 / 4 / 5

3. FuMO - Seeart
unit type: ? (included in MKB?)
purpose: Marine coastal artillery fire directing
radars used: FuMO 11 Renner, FuMO 15 Scheer, FuMO214/215 Wuerzburg(See)-Riese


Please correct me if I got anything wrong.
Also, what's your final opinion on FuMO214/215 application? Only Seeart or maybe Seetakt too? Did Marine-Flugmelde use W-Rs?

brgds,
M.

Hi Michal,
You are very close. I only have these comments:

SEETAKT unit type. A Trup from a Funk Mess Kompanie (Fu.M.K.).

SEEART as above or a Trup from Stab Bat./ 1./MAA.

There is GREAT confusion concerning the designation of W-R in KM use. Even Trenkle seems to be a little inconsistent.
FuMO 214 Würzburg-Riese.
FuMO 215 See-Riese. The only difference seems to be the PRF.
FuMO 15 Scheer. Freq 3.3 Ghz, small dipoles at 45 dg.
In Denmark and Norway the W-R was used both as SEETAKT and SEEART. But the radar used a pencil beam, which is not very well suited for surveillance purposes.

One of the W-R in Hanstholm could even be used to direct the 38 cm battery against aircraft. Running into a 38 cm, 800 kg grenade at 25.000 ft could ruin your whole day
bregds
SES

[beaviso]

In Denmark and Norway the W-R was used both as SEETAKT and SEEART. But the radar used a pencil beam, which is not very well suited for surveillance purposes.

That's why I couldn't imagine a Riese as a sea surveillance radar (in analogy to Flugmelde procedures requiring Freya for an initial detection). However, it seems that Riese WAS used also as a Seetakt - there was no strict rules...

Now I'm wondering - was a Riese enough to direct fire at night or in adverse weather? If the seaborne target could have not been "visually" spotted, then it had to be detected by a general surveillance radar. Then the co-working Riese would "intercept" the detected target and give accurate coordinates for firing. An "alone" Riese might have been very inefficient for surveillance and initial detection purpose.

And how about using W-Rs in Marine Flugmelde in co-ops with Freiburg? Was this ever practiced?

Thanks for your help,
Michal "Beaviso"

[Leif]

I do not fully agree with SES. When I was in the navy, we did horizon search with a tracking/FC radar. It was not that bad. But if you do not have enough normal search radars or just as a backup, it is ok.
it was described in "Stegskopfer" that they did this in Puttgarden.

Trenkle wrote:"Dies hatte dazu geführt, daß das OKM ab Mitte 1943 die Einführung von Luftwaffengerät verfügen mußte. An Land wurde das »Würzburg-Riese«-Gerät für Zwecke der Flak, der Seeaufklärung oder der Seeartillerie einzeln oder kombiniert eingesetzt (vgl. weiter unten). (Seite 172)

Not all the WR Foundations are real WR or See-Riese
Trenkle 182: "Das aus dem bereits besprochenen FuMO 15 »Scheer« abgeleitete FuMO 111 »Barbara I« verwendete ebenfalls den Drehstand des »Würzburg- Riesen« und die HF-Teile des »Berlin«-Gerätes, aber zur Erregung des 7,5 m-Parabolspiegels eine »cm- Grille« (rotierender, defokussierter Dipol). Dieses Gerät eignete sich hervorragend zum Artillerieschießen.
Auf der Anzeige war die Ablage von Einschlägen, bzw. der von ihnen verursachten Wassersäulen, so deutlich sichtbar, daß bereits eine einmalige Korrektur zu deckenden Salven führte. Andererseits war die Strahlbündelung so stark, daß für eine schnelle Erfassung des Zieles eine Einweisung durch langwelligere Geräte von Vorteil war (vgl. Einweisung des »Würzburg-Riese« durch ein »Freya«-Gerät bei der Nachtjagd). Für eine spätere Weiterentwicklung des Gerätes = »Barbara II« war eine verbesserte Anzeige (vom »Euklid«-Gerät, kombiniert mit Sternschreiber) und wahlweise auch Sektorpanorama-Suchbetrieb und Rundsuchbetrieb vorgesehen, (...)"

Best regards,
Leif

PS: It will take a while to fill the database, so please be patient

[SES (†)]

Now I'm wondering - was a Riese enough to direct fire at night or in adverse weather? If the seaborne target could have not been "visually" spotted, then it had to be detected by a general surveillance radar. Then the co-working Riese would "intercept" the detected target and give accurate coordinates for firing. An "alone" Riese might have been very inefficient for surveillance and initial detection purpose.

The battery at Hanstholm did some experiments with radar directed fire. The concept was that the radar would give range, bearing and rate of change in these values. They were fed into the corrector as if they originated from a visual rangefinder. It was then hoped that the radar could detect the splash from the grenade. It turned out that this did not work, so data from the radar was used the same way as the data from a visual rangefinder.

And how about using W-Rs in Marine Flugmelde in co-ops with Freiburg? Was this ever practiced?

I have never come across THIS conbination. But a couple of Luftgau Ln-Rgt equipped with Freya used the Würzburg Dora as a height finder.

Thanks for your help,
Michal "Beaviso"

bregds
SES

[SES (†)]

I do not fully agree with SES. When I was in the navy, we did horizon search with a tracking/FC radar. It was not that bad. But if you do not have enough normal search radars or just as a backup, it is ok.
it was described in "Stegskopfer" that they did this in Puttgarden.

Trenkle wrote:"Dies hatte dazu geführt, daß das OKM ab Mitte 1943 die Einführung von Luftwaffengerät verfügen mußte. An Land wurde das »Würzburg-Riese«-Gerät für Zwecke der Flak, der Seeaufklärung oder der Seeartillerie einzeln oder kombiniert eingesetzt (vgl. weiter unten). (Seite 172)

Not all the WR Foundations are real WR or See-Riese
Trenkle 182: "Das aus dem bereits besprochenen FuMO 15 »Scheer« abgeleitete FuMO 111 »Barbara I« verwendete ebenfalls den Drehstand des »Würzburg- Riesen« und die HF-Teile des »Berlin«-Gerätes, aber zur Erregung des 7,5 m-Parabolspiegels eine »cm- Grille« (rotierender, defokussierter Dipol). Dieses Gerät eignete sich hervorragend zum Artillerieschießen.
Auf der Anzeige war die Ablage von Einschlägen, bzw. der von ihnen verursachten Wassersäulen, so deutlich sichtbar, daß bereits eine einmalige Korrektur zu deckenden Salven führte. Andererseits war die Strahlbündelung so stark, daß für eine schnelle Erfassung des Zieles eine Einweisung durch langwelligere Geräte von Vorteil war (vgl. Einweisung des »Würzburg-Riese« durch ein »Freya«-Gerät bei der Nachtjagd). Für eine spätere Weiterentwicklung des Gerätes = »Barbara II« war eine verbesserte Anzeige (vom »Euklid«-Gerät, kombiniert mit Sternschreiber) und wahlweise auch Sektorpanorama-Suchbetrieb und Rundsuchbetrieb vorgesehen, (...)"

Best regards,
Leif

PS: It will take a while to fill the database, so please be patient

Hi Leif,
I quite agree with you. it is not an imposibility that's why i said:
"But the radar used a pencil beam, which is not very well suited for surveillance purposes" And the FuMO 214 had the best detection range of ALL SEETAKTs.
And you raise an interesting point. A number of different types of radar used a W-R foundation.
bregds
SES