Talk:RMS Laconia (1921)

Polish guards

This page states the following:

"the Italian prisoners tried to rush those that remained. The efforts of the Polish guards were instrumental in controlling the chaotic situation on board and certainly saved many lives."

The actions of the Polish guards can hardly be called heroic. They refused to open the doors for the Italians to reach the lifeboats. In a sinking ship, this is essentially the same as condemning the Italians to death by drowning. When it became clear to the Italians that the only way to survive the sinking was to storm the doors, a number of Italians broke down the doors in a successful attempt to leave the ship.

The Laconia had enough lifeboats for all of the people aboard, including the Italians, but due to the sharp angle that the ship took soon after being torpedoed, it was not possible to launch all the lifeboats.

As per challenges made above (verifiable in secondary sources, which lamentably go as yet uncredited), I have placed a disputed neutrality template on the article. Due to the current NPOV nature of portions of the article, future revisions should be careful to cite sources and refrain from POV commentary. See Laconia incident for a guide to future revision. Ogthor 05:43, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

In the book, The Sinking of the "Laconia": A Tragedy in the Battle of the Atlantic by Frederick Grossmith British eyewitness testimony criticised the actions of some Polish guards both before and during the incident. Acorn897 (talk) 15:54, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Number of Italian POWs

The Laconia incident article states that 1,500 Italians were on the ship.. this one -450. Which is the correct figure? -- maxrspct ping me 17:14, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Who's in charge?

The article says "U.S. command". I understood the bombers were Coastal Command aircraft. Trekphiler (talk) 12:33, 24 March 2008 (UTC) According to The Sinking of the "Laconia": A Tragedy in the Battle of the Atlantic by Frederick Grossmith and a recent TV documentary, it was a US aircraft. Acorn897 (talk) 15:50, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Neutrality Issue

The article says that the US "ignored" the Red Cross flags. However, the Red Cross flags were in contravention of the Geneva Convention, which doesn't permit a ship to switch between military and civilian activities and requires a Red Cross boat to be painted white with a red cross, not merely draped with a flag. The statement of the article makes it look like genuine attack on people abandoning ship, when really it was an attack on a legitimate warship. Not saying it was the best choice in hindsight but you're only painting half the picture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.185.113.125 (talk) 18:40, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

It is true that the conventions don't allow vessels to switch between military and civilian status but the truth is that the naval forces had always helped survivors until this incident. It was the unwritten law that the goal of navies was to destroy ships, not to kill men. All warships had always been taking on survivors; and u-boats, while not having enough room for survivors had always been giving supplies of food and water to them and showing them the course to nearest land or calling other ships to pick them up. This tradition of humanity had always been respected by military sailors. The commander of U-156, Kapitänleutnant(later Korvettenkapitän) Werner Hartenstein, even transmitted an uncoded message to all the allied ships saying that he was willing to hold fire and cooperate with the allies on saving the survivors from RMS Laconia. Not only the U-156 took part in the rescue operations, even U-506 (commanded by Kapitänleutnant Erich Würdemann) and U-507 (commanded by Korvettenkapitän Harro Schacht) joined the rescuing after receiving radio messages from U-156. Kptlt Hartenstein saved 400 people by taking them onboard and by towing several lifeboats behind his u-boat. You can say what you like but the Americans screwed this up and all those people who had been left to die after the Laconia order payed for it with their lives.

Here is a picture of U-156 loaded with survivors: [1] --88.100.44.252 (talk) 17:38, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

So the disputed tag is over three words? Those words are not even sourced, so I will just remove them and the tag. They do not add much to the article anyway, and without a source they are just someones point of view. If anyone can find a reliable source that says any of this then put the three words back, but in the meantime it might be better concentrating on the overall quality of that section, which is poor. Weakopedia (talk) 17:48, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Click this link: http://uboat.net/articles/33.html It will show you an article about the Laconia incident on the uboat.net website. The biggest and probably most popular site about u-boats. The picture I posted before is from there. There you get the source you wanted. --88.100.44.252 (talk) 19:24, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

If, as the article states, the rescue attempt was Red Cross sanctioned, your argument holds no water.     ←   ZScarpia   14:38, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

(From the Subsim.com forum) Years later, when the full facts of this extraordinary incident were published, the American Brigadier General Robert C. RICHARDSON, in charge of the allied air base at Ascension Island, admitted that he had ordered the attack. I had no choice, even though I knew the submarine was showing a Red Cross flag, he said. We didn't know there were British women and children aboard the lifeboats, but even if we had we would still have bombed the U-boat. It was the only decision to make. A simple one and the right one. It was our duty to attack any enemy submarine, no matter what the circumstances. ... Grand Admiral Karl DoenitzZ, the man who controlled the German wolf-pack submarines, accused the Americans of flouting the Geneva Convention, which, he claimed, allowed warships to show the Red Cross flag when in the process of picking up non-combatant survivors.     ←   ZScarpia   02:32, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

According to British and German testimony in The Sinking of the "Laconia": A Tragedy in the Battle of the Atlantic by Frederick Grossmith, not only did the Axis submarines fly Red Cross flags but had a very large one covering the submarines as a canopy.

IOn A recent TV documentary it was discovered that the Allies knew about the rescue but the crew of the Liberator was told to sink the submarines in an attempt to keep the secret of the Liberators based at Ascenscion Island. Acorn897 (talk) 16:01, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Coordinates?

Does anyone know the coordinates of the wreck site? It would be good information to add for the article. --24.21.148.212 (talk) 06:04, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

"SOS SOS 0434 South / 1125 West Laconia torpedoed", "Hocking C., Dictionary of Disasters at Sea during the Age of Steam" or http://www.wrecksite.eu/wreck.aspx?15922. Member only information and I don't want to register. Looks like 3.53 South 7.39 West on the map. Depth = ~3500 meters. Really nice place for scuba diving :) 89.117.244.219 (talk) 20:35, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Laconia webpages

German-uboats.com - The Laconia Incident: Four hours later he sighted another lifeboat and had it attached to the other three already under tow. At 11:25hrs a lookout reported engine noises and a short while later a four-engined plane was spotted making its way towards them, Hartenstein immediately ordered that a previously made red cross flag be draped over the deck gun. As the plane neared them it clearly became identifiable as an American B-24 Liberator, Hartenstein at first ordered his signaller to send a message in Morse and in English, this was followed by another message, this time sent by a British officer from the submarine and was as follows: ‘RAF officer speaking from German submarine, Laconia survivors on board, soldiers, civilians, women, children’. The plane made no response whatsoever but just turned to south westwards and flew off. At this juncture it would be only right and proper to explain exactly who received what message and when, transmitted by Hartenstein of U-156. The en Clair message was reputedly only received by the British Base at Freetown, Sierre Leone but not by the recently opened American USAAF base on Ascension Island. On the 15th of September the British base informed the Americans of Laconia’s sinking but not of the German rescue operation underway. Freetown then asked the Americans for air cover for British ships that were making for Laconia’s last known position, the Americans dispatched a B-24 Liberator to assist the following morning. It begs the obvious question, when the British authorities asked for American assistance why didn’t they inform the Americans of the German offer of help? ... Everyone onboard the submarine was convinced that the plane had in fact turned for base and was in the process of radioing for help. Half an hour later the planes engines were heard again returning in their direction, it was assumed by all onboard that it was either to drop supplies or drugs. As the plane banked and dropped to two hundred and fifty feet, Hartenstein was horrified to see its bomb bay doors open and two bombs released. Fortunately for those onboard, German, Italian and British both bombs exploded some distance from the submarine and as the plane banked for a second run Hartenstein ordered that the towrope to the lifeboats be cut. A third bomb exploded amidst the lifeboats destroying one and a fourth exploded some 200 yards distant. A third run by the Liberator released the final bomb, this time the aim proved rather better and U-156 suffered damage to her hull integrity.

Subsim.com - "Saved By A U-Boat" - The Laconia Incident told from survivors: Years later, when the full facts of this extraordinary incident were published, the American Brigadier General Robert C. RICHARDSON, in charge of the allied air base at Ascension Island, admitted that he had ordered the attack. I had no choice, even though I knew the submarine was showing a Red Cross flag, he said. We didn't know there were British women and children aboard the lifeboats, but even if we had we would still have bombed the U-boat. It was the only decision to make. A simple one and the right one. It was our duty to attack any enemy submarine, no matter what the circumstances.

(Already used as a source in the article) The Guardian - Alan Bleasdale drama sets the record straight on heroic U-boat captain: In a series of urgent telegrams to Nazi high command, the U-boat commander announced his intention to rescue as many as he could. British naval forces distrusted Hartenstein's pleas for help and later, in a terrible miscalculation, US bombers attempted to sink his submarine, the U-156, even though it was laden with survivors and draped with a red cross.

    ←   ZScarpia   03:14, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Refrigerated cargo space

I think the 10,920,060 cubic feet of refrigerated cargo space must be an error, and maybe should be 54,089 cubic feet.

Why? The entire ship is smaller than 10,920,060 cubic feet! The conversion to 309,222 m3 is correct. The entire ship will fit in a box of about 200 x 25 x 25 meter. This amounts to a volume of 125,000 m3. Therefore, this clearly must be wrong.

In the PDF of the reference the 10,920,060 is mentioned, but this is in the column with heading 'Pieds cubes d'air délivrés par heure.', which has something to do with the power of the cooling system, not the capacity. I think the last heading should be used, the 'capcacité' in 'pieds cubes'.

The 54,089 cubic feet rounds off to 1,532 m3. This gives a cubic cargo space of with lengths of about 11.5 m, much more credible than a cubic cargo space with lengths of 67 meter!

Does someone disagree? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.161.16.56 (talk) 23:09, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

A half century has passed since my high school French class; but I believe the larger figure should be translated as the volume of ventilation air per hour rather than a structural volume within the ship. Thewellman (talk) 18:09, 19 October 2013 (UTC)