The absolute fate of a submarine and her crew lost in wartime is sometimes something of an enigma. The very nature of submarine operations demands secrecy and stealth. In wartime when a submarine goes missing it may be days before anyone on the surface even knows the boat was lost. Even if there was an action against a submarine positive identification is rare as most submarines do not have their name or number emblazoned on the conning tower. In many war actions there are no survivors from a lost submarine therefore the victim can not be identified. When a kill is made there is usually some evidence, but this is mostly from debris and oil from the lost boat. However just because you find oil and debris that was not always proof that a submarine had been sunk. All navies used various tricks to fool their adversaries into thinking they had scored a victory in the hope that they would end the attack and move off.

There is one other aspect of anti-submarine warfare that must be remembered. The eye does not always reveal the truth. The excitement and fear which one experiences during combat sometimes lends itself to seeing things that are not real. Searching the open ocean looking for a conning tower or periscope is monotonous work and the sea can play tricks on one's eyes. Many a sailor reported seeing a submarine on the surface and it turned out to be a whale or just a dark wave. During combat overanxious captains and pilots claimed a sure kill, when nothing could be further from the truth. For instance, after the war when Japanese documents were examined it was revealed that the Japanese had claimed to have sunk over 150 U.S. submarines. In fact only 52 were lost, and not all of them to the Japanese. Therefore the Japanese overestimated how many submarines they had sunk by more 100. This was true in all navies. I have read hundreds of U.S. Navy reports with dozens of claims of sinking a submarine, but no corresponding loss can be found in records of enemy navies. Even when a submarine is known to have been lost, what really happened to it may take decades to uncover. After two world wars in the last century there is still a large number of submarines which have not been definitively accounted for.

Even when the wreck of a submarine is found and there is a historical account of what happened occasionally it is still unclear as to what really happened. Such is the case for the Kaiser's submarine SMS UB-107. Launched by Blohm & Voss in Hamburg on July 21, 1917 and commissioned into the Kaiserliche Marine on Feb. 16, 1918, UB-107 would only survive a little over a year from the day it was launched. Her first commanding officer was Kapitänleutnant Hans Howaldt, who had been awarded the Pour le Mérite in 1917. Over his career he sank 64 ships for over 94,000 tons, but only one of them was in UB-107. On May 17, 1918 he was relieved by Kapitänleutnant Eberhard von Prittwitz und Gaffron, UB-107 was his one and only command. He sank ten ships for over 24,000 tons, the last two (SS Chloris and SS John Rettig) being sunk on July 27, 1918. These ships were attacked at 53.52N-0010E and 52.53N-00.15E respectively.

At 2100 that same day a submarine was reported to have broken the surface in sight of the Admiralty trawler Calvia. That ship and HMS Vanessa dropped a pattern of depth bombs on the boat. Calvia's soundman, using his primitive equipment, reported that he could still hear propeller noises which caused Vanessa to drop another series of charges. For the next two hours they continued to drop charges on the submerged target until finally oil and air bubbles were seen on the surface. No wreckage or cork was reported to have been found, but to the British crews that marked the end of the submarine. They remained in the area until the following day when a headless corpse wearing a German uniform was discovered on the surface, confirmation to them that the deed was finished.

However at 2335 hrs. the two aforementioned ships (Chloris and John Rittig) were attacked and sunk some 30 to 40 miles away. All German records indicate that the only U-boat in the area was UB-107 and if indeed UB-107 had sunk the two ships there was no possible way that she had been in a fight for her life so far away. If the boat had been at the scene of the depth charge attack at 2100 and had left at that moment it still could not have made the voyage to the site of the sinkings. Furthermore, if oil and air bubbles reported to have been seen at 2300 hrs that would give UB-107 just 35 minutes to sail all those miles, find the targets and launch torpedoes. This is of course impossible. What is known for sure is that those two ships were sunk and UB-107 never returned to Germany. Later when it was determined that UB-107 had sunk the two steamers, her final fate was revised to "possibly sunk by mine." The standard explanation given for vessel lost with no evidence.

Six days later on Aug. 2, 1918 the British steamer Malvina was sunk just about half way between where the depth bomb attack had been made and where the two steamers were sunk on the 27th. For many years it was thought that SMS UB-104 had torpedoed that ship, but research into the KTB for that boat indicates that UB-104 was many miles away at the time Malvina was sunk. It was recorded that Malvina was torpedoed without warning in the official British records. As the war was winding down and after so many ships had been sunk, Malvina was just another war loss and not much was done to determine the real cause of her loss. Of course at the time nobody (except the Germans) really cared what happened to the UB-107, she was just another Hunn submarine destroyed.

Time went by and another world war was fought and still what really happened to UB-107 was unknown. It would take almost 70 years before the wreck was discovered. In the mid 1980's the wreck of UB-107 was positively identified, it was one mile off Flamborough Head resting on the bottom of the North Sea...under the wreck of SS Malvina. A most unusually twist to a story which almost nobody knows.

Since the discovery of the wrecks divers and researchers have pondered how exactly did these two vessels end up entangled together. Of course there are many theories, one of the most bizarre is that UB-107 was damaged in the depth bomb attack, but not sunk. She was unable to surface, but remained buoyant enough to be carried by the current, underwater, some 18 to 20 miles. To make the story better, somewhere along the way she ran across a moored mine and snagged the chain. The chain broke from the mooring and attached itself to the boat. Without detonating it was carried just under the surface until it came into contact with SS Malvina causing her to sink on top of the submarine. There are several unexplained holes in this theory, not the least of which is why the mine did not explode when it was snagged. Another obvious problem is exactly how did a chain, without a hook, manage to attach itself to the boat and remain in place as the boat moved along. Finally, if the boat was moving with the mine trailing behind, how did Malvina end up on top of the boat when it would have presumably already passed under the ship? Perhaps this might happen in a hollywood action movie, but it is very far fetched to believe this really happened.

As of the writing of this it has been 99 years since UB-107 was lost and over 30 years since the wrecks were discovered and there is still no definitive explanation as to how these vessels came to grief. Even though we know where the wrecks are and the wrecks have been examined, researchers can not say for sure what happened. I think it is most likely that UB-107 fired the torpedo that sank Malvina, then perhaps von Prittwitz, thinking it would take more than one torpedo to sink the ship, decided to move around her to fire from the other side, a common tactic used by U-boat captains. But Malvina sank much quicker than he anticipated and she landed on the boat taking it down with her. The survivors stated Malvina sank in two or three minutes so this does not sound so far fetched. It is also likely that UB-107 hit a mine and sank sometime between July 27 and Aug. 2, then Malvina hit a mine and sank on top of the U-boat. Wrecks known to have happened years apart have been found atop of each other before. One problem with this theory is that I have not been able to confirm that there even was a minefield in that area. There may have been, but I don't have access to the information to confirm it. There is however a known gap in the information, the exact whereabouts of UB-107 between July 27 and Aug. 2. I have not been able to learn where they were and what the they were doing for those six days. Again this is information I don't have access to.

The story of UB-107 is indeed an unusual one. Even though we have all the evidence, we can't say for sure what happened. What we do know is three men, including the Master, were lost in SS Chloris. Fourteen others, including the Master, from Malvina were lost. And finally that all thirty-eight men in UB-107 remain in the wreck of their submarine. Only one body was ever recovered.

© 2017 Michael W. Pocock
MaritimeQuest.com

Brock, William

1st Engineer

Brown, Benjamin

Steward

Campbell, Archibald

Fireman

Ferguson, Samuel

3rd Engineer

Graham, Robert

Deck Boy

Age 17

*

Gray, Gilbert

Able Seaman

Harris, Thomas

Master

Imrie, Richard

Fireman

Laing, David B. R.

Deck Boy

Age 15

McCombie, John F.

Fireman

McDonald, Andrew R. S.

Greaser

Mercer, Robert

Fireman

Oakes, Magnus

Leading Seaman (RNR)

Scullion, Michael

Fireman

*

Body recovered

Burn, Robert

Ordinary Seaman

Lilley, William J.

Able Seaman

Young, John

Master

Ackermann, Heinrich

U-Obermatrose

Alt, Eugen

U-Heizer

Anlauf, Arthur

U-Oberheizer

Böhm, Georg

U-Heizer

Brix, Heinrich

U-Obermaschinistenmaat

Carstensen, Johannes

U-Maschinistenmaat

Damann, Wilhelm

U-Maschinistenmaat

Diehl, Karl

U-Bootsmannsmaat

Diehn, Ernst

U-Oberheizer

Engel, Albert

U-Oberheizer

Ewald, Josef

U-Bootsmannsmaat

Fenkner, Friedrich

Oberleutnant zur See

Filaferra, Andreas

U-Oberheizer

Folprecht, Fritz

U-Maschinistenmaat

Franz, Aldred

Marine Ingenieur

Fröhlich, Wlater

U-Obermatrose

Gäthje, Paul

U-Matrose

Grüneberg, Karl

U-Maschinistenmaat

Hartwich, Alfred

U-Heizer

Hilscher, Georg

U-Obermaschinistenmaat

Kiessling, Hermann

U-Matrose

Krug, August

U-Heizer

Kullenberg, Josef

U-Heizer

Maass, Gustav

U-Matrose

Müller, Paul

U-Heizer

Pagel, Emil

U-Oberbootsmannsmaat

Pollednick, Erwin

U-Obermatrose

von Prittwitz und Gaffron, Eberhard

Kapitänleutnant

Commanding Officer

Richter, Wolfgang H.

Oberleutnant zur See

Schneider, Max

U-F.T.Gast

Schrader, Paul

U-Maschinistenmaat

Schütze, Franz

U-Maschinist d.Seew.I

Sippel, Heinrich

T-Obermaschinistenmaat

Sperling, Richard

U-F.T.Ober Gast

Tuhmann, Hugo

U-Heizer

Übel, Richard

U-Oberbootsmannsmaat

Viehweger, Fritz

U-Obermatrose

Wünsche, Willy

U-Matrose

To submit a photo, biographical information or correction please email the webmaster.