Raeder report to Hitler about Bismarck operation

Discussions about the history of the ship, technical details, etc.

Moderator: Bill Jurens

User avatar
José M. Rico
Administrator
Posts: 1008
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:23 am
Location: Madrid, Spain
Contact:

Raeder report to Hitler about Bismarck operation

Post by José M. Rico »

Uploaded the following to the website:
Report of the Commander in Chief of the Kriegsmarine, Admiral Raeder, to the Führer, Adolf Hitler about the Bismarck operation.
Berghof, 6 June 1941.

http://www.kbismarck.com/raeder-berghof-report.html
User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Raeder report to Hitler about Bismarck operation

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

Hi Jose,
thanks for posting in English the official report (most interesting) of the operation ! I had never been able to read it entirely yet.

Especially useful the description of the German formation on 24 morning ("in column"), the open fire (20800 meters) and cease fire (18000) distances, the shells expended by Bismarck (93) and the (unfortunately short) account of the DS battle.


Bye, Alberto
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

"There's always a danger running in the enemy at close range" (Adm.W.F.Wake-Walker)
User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 2471
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: Raeder report to Hitler about Bismarck operation

Post by wadinga »

Hello Jose,

Outstanding! Even more contemporary information freely presented for general study on this peerless website.

Judging by the date, it is almost completely based (uncritically) on Brinkmann's KTB, even before the 5 Bismarck survivors' interrogation was complete, and long before Schmundt, Carls or Schniewind had made their reviews of this report in the light of other information. It is therefore very much an interim report, but of considerable value nonetheless.

I find it interesting (frustrating) that it mentions the potential availability of radar transmission detection equipment, without confirming or denying whether Bismarck had an operational prototype.

I see that you list:
Das Gefecht in der Dänemarkstraße. Artilleriegefechtsbericht "Prinz Eugen" B.Nr. G 2243 vom 12.7.1941.
in the archives. Are you able to comment further, at this time? :D

Thank you once again for the availability of this splendid website.

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Raeder report to Hitler about Bismarck operation

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

@ Wadinga,

you wrote :
Judging by the date, it is almost completely based (uncritically) on Brinkmann's KTB, even before the 5 Bismarck survivors' interrogation was complete, and long before Schmundt, Carls or Schniewind had made their reviews of this report in the light of other information. It is therefore very much an interim report, but of considerable value nonetheless.
The above statement is not correct, because the Oberst Hubert Schmundt was present at the Berghof review.
AH_Berghof_Raeder.jpg
AH_Berghof_Raeder.jpg (61.33 KiB) Viewed 6244 times
In fact :
Oberst is a German word. Spelled with a capital O, "Oberst" is a noun and defines the military rank of colonel or group captain. Spelled with a lower case o, or "oberst", it is an adjective, meaning "top, topmost, uppermost, highest, chief, head, first, principal, or supreme". Both usages derive from the superlative of ober(e), "the upper" or "the uppermost".
If the Commander of the German cruisers ( Oberst ) VizeAdm Hubert Schmundt was there, talking about the Rheinubung operation, it is reasonable from a military stand point to assume that both Adm Carls and Adm Schniewind were on board about everything it was going to be covered with AH on that briefing.

Bye Antonio
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )
User avatar
José M. Rico
Administrator
Posts: 1008
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:23 am
Location: Madrid, Spain
Contact:

Re: Raeder report to Hitler about Bismarck operation

Post by José M. Rico »

Alberto Virtuani wrote: Sun Dec 09, 2018 8:37 amEspecially useful the description of the German formation on 24 morning ("in column"), the open fire (20800 meters) and cease fire (18000) distances, the shells expended by Bismarck (93) and the (unfortunately short) account of the DS battle.
As we already know, all that information originates from Lütjens long message of 25 May.
wadinga wrote: Sun Dec 09, 2018 11:00 am Judging by the date, it is almost completely based (uncritically) on Brinkmann's KTB, even before the 5 Bismarck survivors' interrogation was complete, and long before Schmundt, Carls or Schniewind had made their reviews of this report in the light of other information. It is therefore very much an interim report, but of considerable value nonetheless.
Yes, that's correct. Raeder reported to Hitler only 5 days after the Prinz Eugen arrived in Brest. So, there wasn't really much time to go over every little detail of the operation. They do however seen to have used PG's KTB, messages from Group West, and the reports of the 3 survivors rescued by U-74.
wadinga wrote: Sun Dec 09, 2018 11:00 am
Das Gefecht in der Dänemarkstraße. Artilleriegefechtsbericht "Prinz Eugen" B.Nr. G 2243 vom 12.7.1941.
in the archives. Are you able to comment further, at this time? :D
Not yet. :)

Antonio Bonomi wrote: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:43 pm
The above statement is not correct, because the Oberst Hubert Schmundt was present at the Berghof review.
Oberst is a German word. Spelled with a capital O, "Oberst" is a noun and defines the military rank of colonel or group captain. Spelled with a lower case o, or "oberst", it is an adjective, meaning "top, topmost, uppermost, highest, chief, head, first, principal, or supreme". Both usages derive from the superlative of ober(e), "the upper" or "the uppermost".
If the Commander of the German cruisers ( Oberst ) VizeAdm Hubert Schmundt was there, talking about the Rheinubung operation, it is reasonable from a military stand point to assume that both Adm Carls and Adm Schniewind were on board about everything it was going to be covered with AH on that briefing.
"Oberst" is an Army rank, not Kriegsmarine.
Colonel Rudolf Schmundt (later General) was Hitler's chief adjutant. He was injured during Hitler's assassination attempt in July 1944, and died a couple of months later.

The Commander of Cruisers, was Vizeadmiral Hubert Schmundt (1888-1984) and was not present at the Berghof on 6 June.

All the best,
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Raeder report to Hitler about Bismarck operation

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

@ Jose' Rico,

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

thank Jose'.

Bye Antonio
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )
User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 2471
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: Raeder report to Hitler about Bismarck operation

Post by wadinga »

Hello All,

With so many Schmundts about, it's all too easy to make a complete Puttkamer of yourself. :wink:


Again this splendid website makes the considered comments of the named officers over succeeding months available to all, a terrific contribution to better understanding. :clap: :clap: :clap:



"Not yet". Hmmm, how deliciously tantalising! :cool:


All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Raeder report to Hitler about Bismarck operation

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

@ Wadinga,

I am glad we made you so happy, ... and fast on responding, ... so it will be fairly easy now to answer also on the other thread about the bearings just as Bill Jurens asked you, ... with the same speed and happiness.

Given the above document you can add now also the 20.800 meters open fire distance between Bismarck and the Hood an 05:55, ... which is just an additional evaluation of the correct timing and distance, ... officially written by somebody that was there, ... like Adm Gunther Lutjens was, ... unless you like to wait while hoping that there was another Lutjens sailing the Atlantic ocean on board the Bismarck.

Adm Gunther Lutjens statements ... are more important than VizeAdm Hubert Schmundt ones, ... isnt it ?

So, ... summarizing, ... at 05:55 battle time, ... the distance between the Bismarck and the Hood was 20.800 meters at the German open fire according to Adm Lutjens, ... and you can check it now on my map, ... after having checked the other bearings of course.

We are just waiting your answer now, ...

Bye Antonio
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )
Algonquin-R17
Junior Member
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2018 6:40 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Raeder report to Hitler about Bismarck operation

Post by Algonquin-R17 »

Thank you for the article, it was an enjoyable read. Interesting to see how such reports were presented at the time.

Bob
User avatar
José M. Rico
Administrator
Posts: 1008
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:23 am
Location: Madrid, Spain
Contact:

Re: Raeder report to Hitler about Bismarck operation

Post by José M. Rico »

I have just revised Raeder's report and corrected some typos, added a few links and a map.

http://www.kbismarck.com/raeder-berghof-report.html
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Raeder report to Hitler about Bismarck operation

Post by RF »

What is interesting about the report as detailed in the first post are the questions that the Fuhrer DIDN'T ask.

Lutjens view was to delay Rheinubung until either Tirpitz was ready or to the availability of Scharnhorst and Gneisenau to break out of the Biscay ports back into the Atlantic. That is a point raised in hindsight however Lutjens had put it to Raeder and Raeder rejected it. Captain Topp on Tirpitz had already made the point to Hitler on his visit to the two battleships back in April, so the Fuhrer would have been made aware of the suggestion.

One observation was that if Bismarck had been observed off the Swedish coast, by also the Swedish cruiser Gotland and then by RAF planes over Bergen, then its disappearance from Grimstad fjord would be noticed by the British who would draw the obvious conclusion. So why not have the Bismarck on hold near Jan Mayen island for a couple of weeks and then refuel from the tanker there immediately prior to running south? Indeed why route Bismarck anywhere near the Scandinavian countries prior to break out, instead transferring from Baltic to North Sea via Kiel Canal at night?

Another obvious question to be posed by a person not conversant with naval tactics is why Lutjens on sighting the cruisers fail to launch an all out attack on them and sink them?

And turning to Prinz Eugen - why did that ship go to Brest immediately without, having refuelled at sea, laid low until the British pursuing ships had returned to port and undertaking attacks on unescorted merchantmen?
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Raeder report to Hitler about Bismarck operation

Post by RF »

Going somewhat off topic the SKL summary at point 4 shows some very limited objectives - revealing a lack of real strategic thinking.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Raeder report to Hitler about Bismarck operation

Post by dunmunro »

RF wrote: Tue Mar 12, 2024 2:36 pm What is interesting about the report as detailed in the first post are the questions that the Fuhrer DIDN'T ask.

Lutjens view was to delay Rheinubung until either Tirpitz was ready or to the availability of Scharnhorst and Gneisenau to break out of the Biscay ports back into the Atlantic. That is a point raised in hindsight however Lutjens had put it to Raeder and Raeder rejected it. Captain Topp on Tirpitz had already made the point to Hitler on his visit to the two battleships back in April, so the Fuhrer would have been made aware of the suggestion.

One observation was that if Bismarck had been observed off the Swedish coast, by also the Swedish cruiser Gotland and then by RAF planes over Bergen, then its disappearance from Grimstad fjord would be noticed by the British who would draw the obvious conclusion. So why not have the Bismarck on hold near Jan Mayen island for a couple of weeks and then refuel from the tanker there immediately prior to running south? Indeed why route Bismarck anywhere near the Scandinavian countries prior to break out, instead transferring from Baltic to North Sea via Kiel Canal at night?

Another obvious question to be posed by a person not conversant with naval tactics is why Lutjens on sighting the cruisers fail to launch an all out attack on them and sink them?

And turning to Prinz Eugen - why did that ship go to Brest immediately without, having refuelled at sea, laid low until the British pursuing ships had returned to port and undertaking attacks on unescorted merchantmen?
The timing of of the breakout was dictated by the season ( more daylight and better weather in June) and by the strategic situation caused by the battle for Crete; one of the objectives of Lutjens' raid was to divert RN forces from the MTO.

Lutjens wanted to get into the central Atlantic ASAP because he feared being bottled up at the Denmark Straits and because Prinz Eugen was rapidly running out of fuel and need to rendevous with a tanker once through the Denmark Straits. A pursuit of the shadowing cruisers would cost valuable time and fuel and risked damage to PE from the cruiser's 8in guns. In the past KM raiders had been able to elude RN cruisers due to their lack of radar.

PE was suffering from engine problems and poor cruising endurance and really had little choice but to return to port before being discovered by air or surface ships, especially with Bismarck sunk, thus freeing up considerable RN and Coastal Command assets.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Raeder report to Hitler about Bismarck operation

Post by RF »

Lutjens view, as overuled by Raeder, was to wait until Autumn, when Tirpitz might be available.

Tanker Wiessenburg was stationed by Jan Mayen to provide full refuelling for both ships immediately prior to breakout.

The breakout would be better with longer nights rather than shorter, which would favour Autumn.

With respect to Crete, whilst Force H was diverted into the Atlantic from Gibraltar, the German attack there couldn't have been interdicted any better than it was due to local air superiority. It is also on Italy's doorstep - the naval responsibility would lie with the Regia Marina, especially as Mussolini liked to describe the Med as ''Mare Nostrum''. Whilst Crete was a pyrhic victory for the Luftwaffe, tactically Rheinubung had no direct effect.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Raeder report to Hitler about Bismarck operation

Post by dunmunro »

RF wrote: Wed Mar 13, 2024 5:00 pm Lutjens view, as overuled by Raeder, was to wait until Autumn, when Tirpitz might be available.

Tanker Wiessenburg was stationed by Jan Mayen to provide full refuelling for both ships immediately prior to breakout.

The breakout would be better with longer nights rather than shorter, which would favour Autumn.

With respect to Crete, whilst Force H was diverted into the Atlantic from Gibraltar, the German attack there couldn't have been interdicted any better than it was due to local air superiority. It is also on Italy's doorstep - the naval responsibility would lie with the Regia Marina, especially as Mussolini liked to describe the Med as ''Mare Nostrum''. Whilst Crete was a pyrhic victory for the Luftwaffe, tactically Rheinubung had no direct effect.
Raeder overuled him due to the need launch the operation to divert RN forces away from Crete; that's the facts.

Rendezvous with Weissenburg = Tovey and Holland arriving at Iceland in time to refuel and combine forces to prevent a breakout. Time was of the essence for Lutjens to get through the D. Straits.

I meant that late May was the latest time that Lutjen's could break out and still gain some advantage due to weather and longer nights.
Post Reply