Talk:Raid on Souda Bay

Rename

This article should be renamed, HMS York was not the only ship sunk that day. Also, various accounts refer to the engagement as the Battle of Souda Bay or simply the Battle of Souda.--$1LENCE D00600D (talk) 04:43, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. Although the title should be "Raid on Souda Bay" or "Souda Bay Raid".--Darius (talk) 11:41, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

MT or MTM

In it's current version, the article speaks of MTM boats participating in the attack and cites Borghese, page 77. However, according to Joseph Caruana, The Battle of Grand Harbour, St. Julians (Malta) 2004, p. 44, there were no MTM boats active before autum 1941. Caruana ascribes the attack to the MT boats, and – rom what I can tell – this seems to be right.--78.53.68.115 (talk) 21:27, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

The full name of the explosive boats in Italian is Motoscafo da Turismo Modificato (Modified Tourism Motorboat), so the right acronym is MTM and yes, that was the type of craft used in Souda. There was never something like "MT"; Caruana probably mistakes the MTM for its torpedo-carrying version, the MTSMA, Motoscafo da Turismo Silurante Modificato Allargato (Italian: Modified and Enlarged Tourism Torpedo Motorboat), which crippled destroyer HMS Eridge off Egypt in 1942.--Darius (talk) 23:59, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Okay, first, please excuse my bad English, I am German. I hope, I will be able to explain what I have learnt during my research on this issue.

However, coming from the German Wikipedia, I know that this ist not right. The Italians started by building one explosive boat prototype in 1935, named M.A. (German WP), which was followd by a second, modified prototype M.A.T. (German WP) in the same year. After these two prototypes, they built 18 boats of the first type M.T. = Motoscafo da Turismo (German WP) – six built in 1939, with additional twelve built in 1940. Already during testing this type, the decided to build an enhanced version, which became operational not until late 1941 and which was called M.T.M. = Motoscafo da Turismo Modificato (German WP) which was followed by the later M.T.R. & M.T.R.M. (German WP). The small special purpose torpedo boats used by the Italians are a totally other thing: the M.T.S and it's successor M.T.S.M., which was on his part followed by the M.T.S.M.A mentioned by you.) Where else should the "Modificato" in the name come from? If there is a M.T.M., then there has to have been a M.T. before it. (Same with the M.T.S.M.A., which was based on the M.T.S.) In the German Wikipedia, a German book by Harald Fock on the naval special fighting vehicles is cited a a source, but I have not read this book (yet). However, I have read Caruana, and his argument is quit convincing. While he writes that both types can be told appart easily because of their appearance (M.T. was a bit smaller and used other planking and a slightly different cockpit), the most striking argument seems to be that – according to Caruana – the first boats of the M.T.M. type were not put into service before autum 1941, maybe around five months after this attack. The only reason their production was accelerated after some delay was because during Operazione Malta Due – attack on Malta on July 26, 1941 – the last 9 boats of the type M.T. where lost, and the Italians simply needed new boats. Since Operazione Malta Due took place four months after the attack on Crete, the boats used here have to have been the older M.T. boats – because they were the only one around at this time.

The German article on the M.T.M. tells a little bit different story, based on the mentioned German book by Fock. According to this, the first M.T.M. was built as early as March 1, 1941, and after testing this boat the Italian navy ordered twelve more M.T.M. boats in late March. However, even if this is closer to reality (Caruana makes a pretty strong point of the M.T.M. not being availible in July 1941, at least not in numbers big enough for the attack on Malta), there is no way six boats of the type M.T.M. could have been produced and put into operational service before March 26.

Furthermore, the German Wikipedia ascribes the attack on HMS York to the type M.T., and since it is based soley on Fock's book, but comes to the same conclusions as Caruana, this seems pretty trustworthy to me.--92.229.201.211 (=78.53.68.115) 18:44, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

So, I have now checked Fock, and, interestingly, he is self-contradictory. Here, for anyone around who speaks German and can fetch a copy: The book is Harald Fock, Marine-Kleinkampfmittel. Bemannte Torpedos, Klein-U-Boote, Klein-Schnellboote, Sprengboote. Gestern – heute – morgen, Herford 1982. On page 116, we find the main entry on the attack on Souda Bay. On this page, he explicitly identifies the boats used as of the M.T. type. Furthermore, he goes into some detail of the operation, pointing out that 3 of the 6 boats did not hit their targets and that this was a specific problem with the M.T. type only, that was eliminated in the type M.T.M. He also supports Caruana's version of the attack on Malta, in respect of no M.T.M.s being operational for Operazione Malta Due.

However, on page 111, in a minor side note, he calls the boats used in March 1941 M.T.M. boats. But this is only a minor side note, in itself refering to the later p. 117 for detailed information. So, all in all, I think that p. 111 is only a typo.--92.229.202.144 (talk) 20:49, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for delaying my response. I am familiar with this issue since my teen years, and I had never read a single line about "MTs". MT (Motoscafo da Turismo in Italian) is just a motorboat, hardly a military asset by itself. I found, however, this book, wrote by Greene and Massiganani, two well-known experts in the Battle of the Mediterranean. They apparently suggest that in 1936 some prototypes were built with a light explosive load in order to test hydrodynamics, and these were, in fact, the "MTs", whose development suffered some delays and was not completed until November 1940. The MTs were almost immediately superseded by the MTMs, which had a stronger hull and a reverse gear. This source seems to confirm Fock's claims that the first operational MTMs were not ready until the autumn of 1941 and that the boats used against HMS York were actually MTs. We have now four authors (Fock, Caruana and Greene & Massignani) for the MTs and only one for the MTMs, so in my opinion the article should be edited accordingly. Thanks for your info, Best Regards.--Darius (talk) 21:55, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Tanky for your research, I appreciate your persistence. I myself have allways thought of Motoscafo da Turismo as a code name to conceal the boat's purpose.--78.53.64.93 (talk) 06:40, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I guess the more simple explanation is the secrecy of the project. Thank you again.--Darius (talk) 16:13, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Infobox pic

@Keith-264: Hi Keith-264, good job with the copyedit. However, I think an actual photo of the aftermath of the Italian assault suits better for the infobox than a generic map of Crete. Regards. Darius (talk) 02:00, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

@FarSouthNavy: I prefer a map to set the scene but i leave it up to you. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 08:29, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

@Keith-264: The image of HMS York with Sirio alongside has been the "front page" of the article for years; feel free, however, to replace it for the pic of York aground, the flying boat and the disabled tanker (btw, it's unclear whether the latter is Pericles or Desmoulea, another tanker hit by the Italian Navy in a previous action, whose condition matches what can be seen in this photo) Thank you! Darius (talk) 12:35, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

@FarSouthNavy: Changed MT to MTM. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 22:27, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

@FarSouthNavy: Do you have a source for the loss of two crew on York? I have blanked it for the moment. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 11:01, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

@Keith-264: Hi, try this link: Royal Navy losses (cruisers). There are plenty of printed sources reporting those casualties anyway. Regards. Darius (talk) 12:10, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

@FarSouthNavy: What are the printed sources? Regards Keith-264 (talk) 16:25, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

@Keith-264: Well, It seems I fell victim to the Mandela effect or something like that... ;) I confused the casualties of HMS Orion during the action of 21 May 1941 (two seamen dead while in action against the "Lupo convoy", possibly by friendly fire), which is mentioned by several authors, with those fallen on HMS York at Souda Bay. The only printed source (originally in English) I found dealing with that is Jenning, Christian (2018) The Third Reich is Listening: Inside German Codebreaking 1939–45 Bloomsbury Publishing, p. 158. ISBN 9781472829511. There are other two authors, the Italians Bagnasco and Borghese, whose works were translated to English, who also reported the British casualties aboard York, and a third historian, the Polish Waldemar Benedyczak in his native tongue (cited in HMS York (90)). BTW, there is another link to naval-history.net detailing the KIAs names: Casualty Lists of the Royal Navy and Dominion Navies, World War 2: 1st - 31st March 1941. Darius (talk) 22:09, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

@FarSouthNavy: Thanks very much, I try to avoid online sources, for the usual reasons but I've found a copy of Jenning. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 22:34, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Expansion

Parachuted in a generic background section from Raid on Grand Harbour. Keith-264 (talk) 12:15, 4 August 2024 (UTC)