1st March 1941 part 2

However if the reported positions of the attacks are correct they present some difficulties with this conclusion.

de Neumann states that the attack was at 250 feet and that the bomber lost height following the attack. For Kühn to have reached Melrose Head, he would have had to have flown over much of Aberdeenshire, and over land more than 250 feet high.

Kühn states that they attacked a very low level, and having dropped two bombs they turned away, passing over the steamer. Seconds later they had been hit by tracer fire, and the port engine was on fire. They managed to put out the fire, as he turned eastwards. When Kühn applied power the fire restarted, and he shut down the engine. By this time they were only a few metres above the sea. He managed to climb to 100 metres, but lost so much speed they were in danger of crashing. He had to descend to pick up speed, and trying to use the denser air over the waters surface to retain altitude, but to no avail.

Unable to turn to port due to the loss of that engine, Kühn could also not turn to starboard due to high cliffs ahead. Unable to climb over the high ground ahead, he decided to ditch the aircraft

Kühn in his account never mentions being over land. If he turned eastwards before finally losing the port engine, and was in the area of convoy EN79, he would have been heading over the open sea, away from the east coast of Scotland.

sources :

Luftwaffe Over Scotland by Les Taylor

The Air Attack on Convoys EN79 and WN91, Saturday, 1 March 1941 (mv Atheltemplar , ss Tewkesbury , & ss Forthbank ) by Bernard de Neumann (online)

The Press and Journal 13th August 1977

Admiralty’s War Diary for 1-15th March 1941 (online)

Torpedos Los! (1986) published in German

www.naval-history.net

In 'The Air Attack on Convoys EN79 and WN91, Saturday, 1 March 1941 (mv Atheltemplar , ss Tewkesbury , & ss Forthbank )' , Bernard de Neumann provides a very detailed account of the events on 1st March 1941

Admiralty’s War Diary for 1-15th March 1941 records the attacks on convoys EN79 and WN91, and also the crashing of a German bomber on 1.3.1941.

Hatto Kühn also recounts the events of 1.3.1941 in Torpedos Los! published in 1986

Any additional information or corrections are welcome. contact@banffshirethings.uk

Version 1.3 30.6.26

Kühn states that having made an unsuccessful attack on a steamer, his two bombs having missed, he flew over the steamer and was hit by tracer, which caused a fire in the port engine.

This appears to align with de Neumann's account, where one bomb missed Tewkesbury and whilst the second hit the vessel, it did not explode. The gunner manning the port Hotchkiss machine gun on Tewkesbury hit the bomber, which trailed away losing height and with oily smoke trailing behind.

Atheltemplar which was in the column, parallel to Tewkesbury in convoy EN79 and had been hit in an earlier attack at around 1925 and set on fire.

Atheltemplar's position in de Neumann's account and in the Admiralty’s War Diary was 57° 04′ N, 1° 30′ W. Which is off the coast of Aberdeen.

This attack was about 20 minutes before the one on Tewkesbury.

In Kühn's account the bombs he dropped before taking the hits in the engine were his 'first two', therefore he only attacked one vessel.

In 1976 parts of the wreckage of Kühn's He111H-5 were recovered just offshore at Melrose Head.

Admiralty’s War Diary states that a German plane crashed at 2055 off Melrose Head and the crew captured. de Neumann places that same incident at 1955. It is possible that the differences are due to reporting in Greenwich Mean Time or British Summer Time, which was in effect in March 1941.

de Neumann would appear to be correct in linking the actions of the Tewksbury's gunner and the downing of Kühn's aircraft.

The Press and Journal 13th August 1977 article about Kühn's visit, says quoted him as saying that he had been attacking an Allied convoy east of Troup Head.

With the position of convoy over 50 miles south east of Troup Head, it is difficult to conclude that is what Kühn meant.

Whilst the description of the attack in de B's article and that by K in Torpedos Los! are so close to make the conclusion that they are one and the same compelling, the reported positions at the times of the attacks on EN79 and WN91 and Ks description of his flight, and position of the ditched He 111, make it very difficult to reach that same conclusion. In fact, from those it would seem more likely that K actually attacked convoy WP91, not EN79.

Cropped and annotated from

Ordnance Survey Quarter Inch to the Mile Maps, 4th Edition (Outline), 1936-44

Sheet 5 - The Eastern Highlands Printed: 1941

Reproduced with the permission of the National Library of Scotland (Reuse: CC-BY(NLS))

At the same time convoy EN79 was being attacked , further north, convoy WN91 was also being bombed.

As with EN79, one ship was hit and caught fire, the S.S. Forthbank. Another was also damaged by a near miss, but able to continue.

Admiralty’s War Diary states under 'Enemy Air Activity' on 1.3.1941 that the S.S. Pennington Court in convoy WN91 was damaged but able to continue.

dmiralty’s War Diary also states that convoy WP91 was attacked north on Kinnaird Head. This is east of Troup Head and and flying over water to the eventual crash site of the He 111 is possible.

Turning eastwards and heading past Melrose Head would mean the high ground of Troup Head was directly in front and also high ground off the starboard wing, matching Kühn's desciption.