Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.


Discussion in 'Convoys and Troopships' started by gusord, Sep 11, 2011.

  1. gusord

    gusord Member

    Sep 4, 2011
    Likes Received:
    I have seen photos of escorts in the north atlantic in ww 2 refueling astern of the oiler with

    the refueling hose off the stern of the oiler and onto the bow of the escort. As far as I know and

    have experienced the US NAVY refuels running parallel with the hose running across from the oiler

    to the ship being refueled. To me either way both the oiler and the ship being refueled have to be

    carefull of their speed and their course however with the astern method there maybe a little error

    allowed. I know from working on the DDGs for US NAVY there are port/starboard refueling stations

    amidships and 2 port/starboard forward behind the 5 inch gun mount on the 02 level.

    Any experts on refueling at sea out there.

  2. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member Patron   WW2|ORG Editor

    Jun 5, 2008
    Likes Received:
  3. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Apr 27, 2010
    Likes Received:
    Reading, PA
    I believe this, Grey Steel and Black Oil: Fast Tankers and Replenishment at Sea in the U. S. Navy, 1912 - 1995 HyperWar: Gray Steel and Black Oil: Fast Tankers and Replenishment at Sea in the U.S. Navy, 1912-1992
    is more to the point of answering gusord's quandary. The USN's tests involving he "over he stern" method of refueling is in Chapter Three.
    USN refueling procedure from August, 1942 Researcher@Large - US Navy Refueling at Sea Instructions - August, 1942

    The Japanese only really began conducting underway refueling shortly before Pearl Harbor, prior to this they had only experimented with underway refueling. The Japanese began using the "over the stern" method, but quickly switched to the "stirrup"/"side-by-side" method. Whereas, the British tenaciously clung to the "over the stern" method throughout most of the war, and it was not until the British Pacific Fleet began operating with US units that the switched to side-by-side. Unfortunately, my knowledge of German underway refueling is very limited, but I believe they used mostly the "over the stern" method.
  4. scrounger

    scrounger Member

    Mar 19, 2011
    Likes Received:
    View attachment 14907 This photo was taken from H M C S Uganda refueling from a tanker and astern is a British ship I believe it is H M S Howe , a King George V class Battleship while they were part of The British Pacific Fleet .

    Attached Files:

  5. Carronade

    Carronade Ace

    Feb 17, 2010
    Likes Received:
    As gusord said, and I've experienced myself, refueling alongside is more demanding in terms of seamanship and constant attention, but it has the key advantage of being able to put multiple lines across, including on both sides of the oiler. This speeds up the process, and for aircraft carriers it allowed simultaneous replenishment of fuel oil and aviation gas. You can also replenish multiple commodities, although in WWII there were usually separate supply ships for oil/gas, ammunition, and dry stores.

    It was an evolutionary process; when there was no refueling at sea at all, the astern method was a major advance, then they stepped up to the alongside method.

    When the Russians sent their Baltic Fleet halfway around the world to fight the Japanese, they experimented with at-sea replenishment of coal. This was done by a battleship towing a collier, with a separate line to winch sacks of coal between ships. It worked but was too slow for large-scale use, so they did most of their fueling anchored in out-of-the-way harbors. At that point the winch was on the battleship, but it has since become common practice for replenishment equipment to be on the supply ships.

    OSCSSW Member

    Oct 19, 2010
    Likes Received:
    I saw Soviet Mediterranean Eskadra (AKA 5th Eskadra) doing unrep by the stern method in Sept '73.

    That was a pretty inetnse time for the 6th Fleet, especially when we got into October.
    There was a lot of talk about the battle of the first salvo but I am pretty sure that "Eskadra"
    would have had a very short, highly intense time of it before Naval Air sank them all.
    Why? Naval air had a much longer arm than did soviet SSMs and our Fighter Cap would have shredded any attempt
    by Sovier Naval aviation bombers to get within strike range.

    The soviet subs were another story. As long as the FDR and her escorts operated at high speed and had plenty of
    S2/P2/P3 support those noisy soviet Nukes would have been dead meat and their diesel electrics would not be able to close.
    They would have taken longer to sink but, in the end, they would have died too.

    At that time the Med was a Nato Lake.

    God alone knows what the political/international repercussions would ahve been.

Share This Page