A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on

Gamers can also use this forum to chat about any game related subject, news, rumours etc.

Moderator: maddog986

User avatar
Jagdtiger14
Posts: 1685
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 11:58 pm
Location: Miami Beach

RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on

Post by Jagdtiger14 »

A couple of months after is still after. In the meantime, British construction was going on at a much higher rate. By the end of the war the Germans had just two 15-inch-gunned ships. The British had ten 15-inch dreadnoughts, plus two or three 15-inch battlecruisers.

I highly recommend you read the link from Aurelian....especially Chapter 18. There are other important things besides the caliber of gun (rate of fire, shell, etc...) Also, the Germans employed their secondary guns far more than the British.

Conflict with the unexpected: two qualities are indispensable; first, an intellect which, even in the midst of this obscurity, is not without some traces of inner light which lead to the truth; second, the courage to follow this faint light. KvC
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42111
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on

Post by warspite1 »

As I'm going through the OOB its interesting to see some familiar names - junior officers that would hold higher rank in the next war e.g. Messrs Pound and Tovey and names of German captains and admirals that would have pocket-battleships, cruisers and destroyers named after them e.g. Messrs Scheer, Hipper, Steinbrinck and Ihn.
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
Speedysteve
Posts: 15974
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Reading, England

RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on

Post by Speedysteve »

Canaris was also aboard one of the light cruisers sunk off South America IIRC
WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42111
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: Speedy

Canaris was also aboard one of the light cruisers sunk off South America IIRC
warspite1

He was on the Dresden - she was scuttled later off the coast of Chile and the crew interned there.
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42111
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on

Post by warspite1 »

Royal Navy

The top table below shows the key data for the 28 Battleships that took part in the Battle of Jutland. The bottom table shows the battleships available to the British during WWI but that were unavailable for a variety of reasons. These are shown to give a complete picture of the capital ship position by May 1916.

Image

The next table shows the same information for the battlecruisers that fought at the battle and those unavailable in May 1916.

Image

Source: Conways All The World's Fighting Ships 1906-1921
Attachments
Jutland Br..cruisers.jpg
Jutland Br..cruisers.jpg (65.04 KiB) Viewed 361 times
Jutland Br..tleships.jpg
Jutland Br..tleships.jpg (145.51 KiB) Viewed 361 times
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42111
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on

Post by warspite1 »

One of the (many) great controversies of Jutland surrounds the 5th Battle Squadron (5BS). The 5BS was commanded by Rear-Admiral Hugh Evan-Thomas, who had under his command four ships of the Queen Elizabeth-class - the most powerful ships at Jutland.

HMS Queen Elizabeth was in the dockyard at the time but her sisters Barham, Warspite, Valiant and Malaya (paid for by the colony hence her name) were ready for action.

The squadron had been longingly eyed for some time by Vice-Admiral David Beatty, the commander of the Battlecruiser Fleet (BCF), who wanted this powerful force to supplement his own battlecruisers. He finally got his wish - albeit only temporarily - when the 3rd Battlecruiser Squadron (3BCS) was ordered from her base at Rosyth to Scapa Flow for firing practice. The 5BS was ordered south to replace the 3BCS.

Why the 5BS? Well from Beatty's point of view the reasons were obvious; the ships were designed for 25 knots (although in practice could manage about 23 comfortably) and this made them in theory, ships that could operate with the fast battlecruisers. In addition, their powerful 15-inch guns would provide huge hitting power to Beatty's force.

Jellicoe was reluctant to hand these ships to Beatty because a) their actual top speed, when this became apparent, made them less useful to the BCF than was expected, but also b) Jellicoe feared that with these mighty vessels, Beatty would attempt to take on the German High Seas Fleet (HSF) on his own!

Why is the 5BS surrounded by controversy? Well we will come to that, but in the meantime lets enjoy the sight of these strikingly beautiful warships.....


HMS Barham - she was the Flagship of Rear-Admiral Evan-Thomas at Jutland. She mounted eight of the excellent 15-inch guns in four twin turrets.
Image
Attachments
65-Battles..ret-1918.jpg
65-Battles..ret-1918.jpg (47.32 KiB) Viewed 361 times
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42111
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on

Post by warspite1 »

Draft Incomplete

As the Victorian age drew to a close, so the British Empire had pretty much reached its zenith. Oh there was still the odd land grab to come as the "Scramble for Africa" reached its frenzied peak, but in terms of British industrial might and share of the world's output, there were new kids on the block - the USA and Germany chief amongst them - and Britain's industrial lead was being eroded.

However, Britain and its huge empire was still the power and that power was personified by the might of the Royal Navy. The navy had been unchallenged since Trafalgar, and since that stunning victory over the French and Spanish, had both grown in size and been at the forefront of technological change. The Royal Navy did well and truly rule the waves, ensuring its lifeblood - maritime trade - was able to circulate freely.

But then in 1906 along came a warship that suddenly, in one leap, put that numerical superiority in the scrap bin. It was a bold - and risky manoeuvre; yes, with the launching of the battleship HMS Dreadnought the British maintained its technological lead, but other countries were sure to quickly follow - and Britain would then need to work twice as hard (with the associated cost implications) to maintain their numerical lead.

Things became complicated pretty much straight away when Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany decided he wanted a navy to challenge to British....
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42111
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on

Post by warspite1 »

German Navy

The top table below shows the key data for the 16 Battleships that took part in the Battle of Jutland. The bottom table shows the battleships available to the Germans during WWI (The Sachsen-class not included as they were never completed) but that were unavailable at Jutland. These are shown to give a complete picture of the capital ship position by May 1916.

What is readily apparent from these basic details is a) the numerical advantage the British had, and b) their firepower advantage, but c) the Germans were far better armoured.
Image

The next table shows the same information for the battlecruisers that fought at the battle and those unavailable in May 1916 (again I have not included the Mackensen or Ersatz Yorck-classes as these were not completed (and in some cases not even laid down)).
Image

Source: Conways All The World's Fighting Ships 1906-1921
Attachments
jullesII.jpg
jullesII.jpg (80.93 KiB) Viewed 361 times
Juttles.jpg
Juttles.jpg (156.12 KiB) Viewed 361 times
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42111
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on

Post by warspite1 »

One of the decisions that Admiral Scheer made in May 1916, and that leaves him open to criticism today, is the decision to take six pre-dreadnought battleships to sea. The ships, from the Braunschweig and Deutschland classes, formed Rear-Admiral Mauve's 2nd Battle Squadron.

These ships were obsolete even while being built - and were considered so useless by the end of the war that the German Navy was allowed to keep them post Versailles....

More to the point in terms of Jutland was that any advantage they provided (by adding numbers to Scheer's High Seas Fleet) was negated by their slow speed. If the Germans needed to chase the enemy - or more worryingly flea from them - the pre-dreadnoughts would simply be a hindrance to Scheer (and in the latter case a potentially fatal one).


SMS Deutschland with a top speed of only 18 knots, belt armour protection of less than 9-inches and a main armament of only four 11-inch guns (2 x 2) guns....
Image
Attachments
SMS_Deutschland-stbd.jpg
SMS_Deutschland-stbd.jpg (53.23 KiB) Viewed 361 times
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42111
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on

Post by warspite1 »

Draft Incomplete

The naval historian Eric Grove describes the German battlecruisers as "excellent combinations of speed, power and protection. I think when looking at what happened at Jutland one cannot help but agree with that description. German battleships were no different.

The German capital ships sacrificed size of gun and some speed for defensive armour. Water tightness through significant levels of compartmentalisation was another feature; a feature that was to save more than one German ship during the battle.

In his book Jutland: An Unfinished Battle Nick Jellicoe provides a brief paragraph that gives an immediate indication of the defensive effort that German ship designers put into their designs. He compares two contemporary battlecruisers: HMS Queen Mary and Seydlitz.

The British ship displaced 27,000 tons. 3,900 tons of which was armour - 14%
The German battlecruiser displaced 24,600 tons. 5,200 of which was devoted to armour protection - 21%

The German navy, effectively starting from scratch, built wider docks that allowed their ships a broader beam which allowed a better armour layout and made them a more stable gun platform. Again taking contemporary battleships and battlecruisers (beam in feet):

Battleships:
Iron Duke - 90
Konig - 97

Battlecruisers
Lion - 88
Derfflinger - 95
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42111
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on

Post by warspite1 »

Draft - incomplete

The build-up to the battle

What were Jellicoe and Scheer trying to achieve at Jutland?

For Admiral Jellicoe the situation was quite straightforward. The British had control of the North Sea and were conducting a "distant" blockade of Germany. The blockade was working, the British had a numerical advantage in dreadnoughts and there was no reason for the British to take any stupid risks that would imperil that position.

Of course, if the Royal Navy could get an opportunity to destroy the enemy fleet then it would be taken; after all why would anyone not want to destroy the enemy fleet and so a) give German morale a huge dent b) give the Royal Navy one less thing to worry about c) freeing up shipping to support operations elsewhere and d) seriously mess with the Kaiser's fragile state of mind when it came to his precious shiny fleet! The caveat being that Jellicoe would not take any unnecessary risks. Indeed Jellicoe, on assuming command of the Grand Fleet from Admiral Callaghan at the start of the war, had told the Admiralty exactly this and this had been accepted by his superiors. What Jellicoe was specifically concerned about was falling foul of enemy submarines, mines and torpedo boats and Jellicoe had said that he would not go charging into such a potential trap with the Grand Fleet.

For Scheer (and his predecessors) the situation was very different. As said, the blockade was working - and was proving a problem at home. Having said no to unrestricted submarine warfare (for fear of bringing the US into the war) the Germans were not going to take the Commonwealth out of the war without victory in the field. This was not going to happen overnight - and so they had to try and end the blockade using the Kaisers surface fleet. Interestingly Norman Friedman states that the breaking of the blockade was NOT the reason for the German actions in the North Sea (and as per the criticisms of the German navy's approach voiced in the German naval history). Instead the German navy's raison d'etre was solely to break British naval superiority.... Fact is, either way, the German approach would likely have needed to be the same.

Because of the differential in size of the fleets, the Germans could not hope to win a head-on clash. What they could hope to do though was to attack isolated squadrons of the Grand Fleet if the opportunity arose and by so doing, whittle away at the British advantage.


Previous attempts to trap isolated British squadrons

Jutland was not the first time that elements of the two fleets had engaged in the North Sea since the outbreak of war in August 1914.

German operations to try and isolate units of the Royal Navy

- Yarmouth Raid (November 1914). The first offensive operation by the German surface fleet came on the 3rd November 1914. The Kaiser had set restrictions on the use of the fleet but Admiral von Ingenohl had got approval for what was ostensibly a minelaying expedition by four German light cruisers off the East Anglian coast. The operation also included a bombardment of the town of Great Yarmouth by three of Hipper's battlecruisers and the armoured cruiser Blucher (although Ingenohl was careful not to tell the Kaiser about this part of the plan). Two squadrons of battleships were to provide support for the retreating ships when the British responded.

The operation proved to be much ado about nothing. The British ordered three submarines to sea after the German ships were sighted, and one of these sank after hitting a mine. But there was no other reaction from the British. The German shells missed the town, hitting the beach instead, and the Admiralty - at that time taking in the news of the defeat at Coronel - ordered no further sorties. To compound the poor return for the Germans, the armoured cruiser Yorck, sailing in home waters, got lost in fog, struck a German mine and promptly sank.

- Scarborough, Whitby and Hartlepool (December 1914) This raid was a more interesting affair altogether. Not least because this month marked the high water mark for the German Navy - in terms of closeness to parity with the RN - in the entire war. The gap remained considerable of course but the reason for the Germans drawing closer was due to a number of factors: the loss from mining of the new battleship Audacious, the removal of three of Beatty's battlecruisers - Invincible, Inflexible and Princess Royal - in order to hunt down the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau in the South Atlantic, and no less than four of Jellicoe's battleships were in the dockyard for refits. The British had also begun reading German naval messages thanks to assistance from the Russians who obtained code books when the cruiser Magdeburg was lost in the Baltic. The codebreakers operated from Room 40 in the Admiralty building and was thus the name given to this operation (more of this when we discuss Jutland).

The operation began at 0300hrs on the morning of 15 December 1914. For this raid Vice-Admiral Hipper would have four battlecruisers - Seydlitz, Moltke, Von der Tann and Derfflinger plus the armoured cruiser Blucher. In support were four light cruisers: Strassburg, Graudenz, Stralsund and Kolberg (which carried mines) and eighteen destroyers. Later that day Admiral Von Ingenohl sailed with the main fleet to an area east of Dogger Bank to await the opportunity of catching an isolated British squadron should they take the bait.

As Hipper approached the English coast the weather remained horrendous and the smaller ships struggled to maintain position. The German admiral took the decision to send his light forces (except the mine carrying Kolberg) back to Germany by way of Ingenohl's main fleet. As it happened - and totally unknown to Hipper, Ingenohl (still fearful of falling foul of the Kaiser's order not to imperil the battlefleet) had already decided to turn for home without telling Hipper....

Hipper divided his forces; Derfflinger, Von der Tann and Kolberg headed first for Scarborough (Kolberg laid her mines off Flamborough Head) and then on to Whitby. The remaining three ships headed for Hartlepool where they discharged their ordnance. However this latter group were themselves attacked - first by four destroyers (one of whom got a torpedo away, although it missed) and also from shore batteries. All three ships were hit and nine men were killed on board Blucher. When Hipper's units had met up ready to head home at around 0930hrs, they left behind 86 dead civilians in Hartlepool and a further 29 in Scarborough and Whitby. A total of 525 civilians were wounded.

But what of Ingenohl's decision? Interestingly had he stayed around the Germans may have achieved the very thing they had hoped for in planning the operation - and proven Jellicoe right in the process....

While the codebreakers of Room 40 had successfully picked up that the battlecruisers were putting to sea, they missed out on a vital piece of intelligence; that Ingenohl was also putting to sea with his battleships. Armed with only half the story, the Admiralty decided that a force should sail south to destroy Hipper's fleet without the need for the entire Grand Fleet to sortie. Instead Jellicoe, who was far from happy at the order, was told on the evening of the 14th December to send the 1st Battlecruiser Squadron (1BCS) and the 2nd Battle Squadron (2BS) to sea. Unsure of exactly where Hipper would strike, he ordered a rendezvous point about 25 miles southeast of the Dogger Bank.

1BCS: Lion (FS Beatty), Queen Mary, Tiger, New Zealand
2BS: King George V (FS Warrender), Ajax, Centurion, Orion, Monarch, Conqueror

The 1st Light Cruiser Squadron (1LCS) Southampton (FS Goodenough), Birmingham, Falmouth, Nottingham and latterly the 3LCS Devonshire (FS Packenham), Antrim, Argyll, Roxburgh were also made available.

Further south, Commodore Tyrwhitt's Harwich Force of 42 destroyers, led by two light cruisers were ordered to sea off the East Anglian coast and eight submarines (and their two controlling destroyers) were sent to the coast of Holland.

Image

In the corridors of the Admiralty the tension, the excitement, the expectation must have been palpable... Jellicoe had chosen the rendezvous point well and the German battlecruisers were caught in a trap - all that was needed was a bit of decent weather and a bit of luck...... Meanwhile for Ingenohl, blissfully unaware of the presence of the British capital ships, all he needed to do was continue on his present course with his 14 dreadnoughts, 8 pre-dreadnoughts and assorted cruisers and destroyers and he would fall upon the equally unsuspecting smaller British force.

And so on the morning of the 16th December, Beatty's four battlecruisers were sailing roughly 5 miles ahead of Warrender's 6 battleships. The two cruiser squadrons were either side - the Goodenough's light cruisers on Beatty's right and Packenham's armoured cruisers to the left.

At around 0500hrs that morning elements of the two fleets (essentially the German cruiser and destroyer screen and the British destroyer screen) clashed in a series of sporadic engagements in which the out-numbered British destroyers came off worst - but the Germans retreated. Ingenohl's reaction to the news that British destroyers were in this part of the North Sea can only be imagined - a) he assumed that this was a destroyer screen for the Grand Fleet, b) the destroyers would no doubt attempt a massed torpedo attack on his fleet, and c) he was running the risk of endangering the Kaiser's battleships against express orders to the contrary. His response was to make an about turn and he promptly left the scene and headed home - whether he gave Hipper another thought is unknown.

At around 0930hrs reports came in of Hipper's attacks on the three coastal towns. The two British Admirals headed toward home to cut off the Germans - Beatty and Goodenough about 10 miles ahead of Warrender and Packenham. There is a shallow area in the southwest of Dogger Bank that can be dangerous to shipping - Beatty sailed north of this and Warrender the south on their westerly course. The Germans meanwhile were heading east toward home with Hipper's light forces released earlier, some 60 miles ahead - straight into the path of the British.

At around 1100hrs the weather conditions changed dramatically for the worse - just as Goodenough, aboard HMS Southampton, spotted first the Stralsund and her escorting destroyers and then the other two German light cruisers that Hipper had earlier detached. Goodenough's four cruisers were fanned out ahead of Beatty and her sisters turned to assist their flagship as she and Stralsund exchanged fire. Goodenough reported the sighting of the Stralsund to Beatty - but did not make a further report upon seeing the other cruisers. This was the start of a number of errors that led, ultimately, to Hipper and his light forces getting away.

Quite what he thought one German cruiser was doing where she was is impossible to answer, but Beatty - unaware that Southampton had sighted two more cruisers - did not think that maybe Goodenough had sighted Hipper's advance screen. Instead, he got miffed that the other three light cruisers of his screening force were headed off in Southampton's direction and thus leaving Beatty's battlecruisers without a screen.

Enter Beatty's Flag Lieutenant Ralph Seymour (who we shall be hearing a lot more of......). Beatty wanted two of the light cruisers to resume station ahead of the battlecruisers. Unfortunately Seymour instructed the signalling of an ambiguous message that was interpreted as meaning all four ships of the squadron to resume station. Goodenough duly complied with the order of his senior officer and broke off the engagement with Stralsund.

The Germans ships headed south and Goodenough headed straight for a public humiliation from Beatty - although the poor man had simply followed orders. All should not have been lost however. Once the cruisers had resumed station Beatty's force continued west... at least until another report came in, this time from Warrender. Warrender was south of Beatty remember, and reported seeing what Beatty took to be the German cruisers previously seen by Goodenough. Beatty now made a decision that would prove to be Hipper's salvation. Thinking that Hipper must be close behind his screen, and fearing that they could out-run Warrender, Beatty turned his ships east to ensure he kept himself between Hipper and Germany....

We now leave Beatty and turn to Warrender and his second-in-command, Arbuthnot and another inexplicable episode, the type of which, was to be seen again at Jutland. When the men of the battleship Orion saw the German ships the gunnery officer requested permission from Arbuthnot to open fire. Arbuthnot refused. He would not open fire until given a direct order by Warrender. The German ships sailed into the distance...while Arbuthnot waited for the order. Why hadn't the order been given? When Warrender, about King George V sighted the German vessels he too did not fire. Instead he ordered his slow armoured cruisers to chase the German vessel, a chase that was never going to be won by the elderly British ships. Three German light cruisers had been in the sights of the six British battleships....and they were allowed to get away.

As for Hipper, he had been warned by the reports from Stralsund of the presence of the British capital ships and had sharply manoeuvred his ships north and then east to sail clear of the British trap.

There was plenty for the German High Command to be concerned about with their own performance, but on the other hand, the British had wasted a golden opportunity to destroy Hipper's fleet through poor communication and poor initiative, things that would come back to haunt them just over a year later....

The damage could have been worse if all the German ordnance had exploded
Image

- Dogger Bank

- Other operations? Including early 1916

What were the German and British plans for Jutland?

Both the Germans and the British fleets were at sea on the 31st May 1916 thinking that they could catch the other in a trap.

The Germans were not meant to be at sea - at least not on this date and not in this location. They had planned for an operation earlier in the month, centred on another attack against an English East Coast city- this time Sunderland. However, for a number of reasons, one of them being the mining of the battlecruiser Seydlitz the previous month, the operation was postponed and ultimately cancelled. The cancellation - and replacement with the operation that led to Jutland - came about because of a) the U-boats, that had been placed on station in advance of the Sunderland operation, had to return to base by the start of June, and b) continued poor weather conditions meant that Zeppelin reconnaissance missions could not be flown.

As a result of the former an operation needed to be mounted by the end of May, and as a result of the latter, the Germans took the sensible decision to mount such, away from the UK.
Attachments
map-of-bat..915-1922.jpg
map-of-bat..915-1922.jpg (98.03 KiB) Viewed 363 times
3rd-battal..ool-1914.jpg
3rd-battal..ool-1914.jpg (53.44 KiB) Viewed 363 times
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42111
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on

Post by warspite1 »

Draft - incomplete

Starting positions of the fleets prior to the battle.

30th May 1916

Royal Navy (see post 7 for the composition of each force)

The British forces sailed from three bases (see below). Well they actually sailed from a fourth but the light cruisers and destroyers that sailed from Harwich (S.E England) - Commodore Tyrwhitt's Harwich Force - were soon recalled. As we shall see later, this is yet another contentious decision...

Scapa Flow (Orkney Islands) - The Grand Fleet (less the 2nd Battle Squadron (2BS)) and with the 3rd Battlecruiser Squadron (3BCS) attached, sailed from the fleet anchorage.

Cromarty (Scotland) - The 2BS sailed from Cromarty on the Scottish East Coast

Rosyth (Scotland) - The Battlecruiser Fleet (BCF) with the 5BS attached sailed from their base north of Edinburgh. The battlecruisers had been based here in response to the German raids on English East Coast towns to provide better defence against future attack.

Harwich (England) -

Imperial German Navy (see post 8 for the composition of each force)

German U-boat forces

In the build up to, and as an integral part of, the original operation the German navy put to sea a large number of U-boats that would take up station roughly in a line west to east between Edinburgh and Lindesnes (Norway), and if successful, take a toll on the Grand Fleet as they sailed to make any interception attempts.

Ten U-boats were selected - and these sailed from their bases on the 17th/18th May:

U-24
U-32
U-43
U-44
U-47
U-51
U-52
U-63
U-66
U-70

An additional vessel, UB-27 was ordered to try and penetrate the Firth of Forth. UB-21 and UB-22 were also ordered out to watch over the Humber estuary, while the operation was completed by U-46 and U-67 operating off Terschelling.

Additionally, three mine-laying U-boats, U-72, U-74 and U-75, were also ordered to lay minefields off the Firth of Forth, the Moray Firth and to the West of the Orkneys. The results of these mine-laying operations were poor; U-72 had to return to base due to an oil-leak, while U-74 was lost with all hands (reasons for her sinking are unclear). Only U-75 claimed any success - it was one of her mines that claimed the cruiser HMS Hampshire (with Lord Kitchener aboard) on 5th June.

- Additional U-boats operating in the south?

Jade Basin (Germany) - The High Seas Fleet sailed from here preceded by the Reconnaissance Forces of the I and II AG.
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
HighwayStar
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 11:14 pm

RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on

Post by HighwayStar »

- Why did three British battlecruisers blow up (with huge loss of life)?

Indefatigable, Queen Mary, and Invincible all suffered catastrophic magazine explosions. The prevailing theory is that none suffered a penetrating hit in the actual magazine, but rather a flash fire due to a German projectile striking and destroying a main battery turret and then the flash traveling down the ammunition hoists to the magazine. There were flash doors installed to prevent this from happening, however, RN practice at the time placed emphasis on a high rate of fire during an engagement. These doors were generally left open to facilitate a higher rate of fire. Interestingly, the German battlecruiser Seydiltz had almost suffered the same fate at the battle of Dogger Bank (Jan 24, 1915) and the HSF learned their lesson and directed that the doors should not be left open. Beatty's flagship Lion was also hit at Jutland in Q turret and might have been destroyed had not Royal Marine Major Francis Harvey ordered the magazine flooded prior to his death, for which he was awarded the VC. You also had the issue of the shell and propellant being separate in the RN for larger caliber guns (the US Navy followed this practice). Having bags of highly explosive propellant facilitated a flash fire. The HSF used a single brass casing for the shell and the propellant.
Aurelian
Posts: 4073
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:08 pm

RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on

Post by Aurelian »

ORIGINAL: warspite1

As I'm going through the OOB its interesting to see some familiar names - junior officers that would hold higher rank in the next war e.g. Messrs Pound and Tovey and names of German captains and admirals that would have pocket-battleships, cruisers and destroyers named after them e.g. Messrs Scheer, Hipper, Steinbrinck and Ihn.

The future King George VI was there too as a turret officer on HMS Collingwood.
Building a new PC.
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42111
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: HighwayStar

- Why did three British battlecruisers blow up (with huge loss of life)?

Indefatigable, Queen Mary, and Invincible all suffered catastrophic magazine explosions. The prevailing theory is that none suffered a penetrating hit in the actual magazine, but rather a flash fire due to a German projectile striking and destroying a main battery turret and then the flash traveling down the ammunition hoists to the magazine. There were flash doors installed to prevent this from happening, however, RN practice at the time placed emphasis on a high rate of fire during an engagement. These doors were generally left open to facilitate a higher rate of fire. Interestingly, the German battlecruiser Seydiltz had almost suffered the same fate at the battle of Dogger Bank (Jan 24, 1915) and the HSF learned their lesson and directed that the doors should not be left open. Beatty's flagship Lion was also hit at Jutland in Q turret and might have been destroyed had not Royal Marine Major Francis Harvey ordered the magazine flooded prior to his death, for which he was awarded the VC. You also had the issue of the shell and propellant being separate in the RN for larger caliber guns (the US Navy followed this practice). Having bags of highly explosive propellant facilitated a flash fire. The HSF used a single brass casing for the shell and the propellant.
warspite1

I put this down as one of the discussion points because what you describe above is not a universal view. There are still those that believe their tragic loss was caused by a hit on the magazine.
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
HighwayStar
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 11:14 pm

RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on

Post by HighwayStar »

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: HighwayStar

- Why did three British battlecruisers blow up (with huge loss of life)?

Indefatigable, Queen Mary, and Invincible all suffered catastrophic magazine explosions. The prevailing theory is that none suffered a penetrating hit in the actual magazine, but rather a flash fire due to a German projectile striking and destroying a main battery turret and then the flash traveling down the ammunition hoists to the magazine. There were flash doors installed to prevent this from happening, however, RN practice at the time placed emphasis on a high rate of fire during an engagement. These doors were generally left open to facilitate a higher rate of fire. Interestingly, the German battlecruiser Seydiltz had almost suffered the same fate at the battle of Dogger Bank (Jan 24, 1915) and the HSF learned their lesson and directed that the doors should not be left open. Beatty's flagship Lion was also hit at Jutland in Q turret and might have been destroyed had not Royal Marine Major Francis Harvey ordered the magazine flooded prior to his death, for which he was awarded the VC. You also had the issue of the shell and propellant being separate in the RN for larger caliber guns (the US Navy followed this practice). Having bags of highly explosive propellant facilitated a flash fire. The HSF used a single brass casing for the shell and the propellant.
warspite1

I put this down as one of the discussion points because what you describe above is not a universal view. There are still those that believe their tragic loss was caused by a hit on the magazine.
Yes, too true, that's why I said "prevailing theory". The condition of the wrecks prevented any absolute cause from being determined.
HighwayStar
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 11:14 pm

RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on

Post by HighwayStar »

- How were the Germans allowed to pass the British on their way back home without a response from the big guns?

This has generated a lot of discussion over the years. Remember, this phase of the battle took place in the dead of night with visibility limited. Jellicoe had ordered his destroyers and several of the light cruiser squadrons to form up at the rear of the GF. One of the reasons given was to prevent the light forces from being mistaken for the enemy and fired on. But I suspect it was also to provide an obstacle to the HSF should they attempt to get to the east of the heavy units and thus closer to their bases. The British light forces put up a fierce fight, sinking and damaging several German ships but in the confusion, failed to report the situation to Jellicoe. One of the reasons given was they believed that if they could identify the HSF, its location and course, that the senior officers in the Battle Squadrons could too. The communication failures on the British side, here and earlier, had grave consequences.
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42111
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: HighwayStar

- How were the Germans allowed to pass the British on their way back home without a response from the big guns?

This has generated a lot of discussion over the years. Remember, this phase of the battle took place in the dead of night with visibility limited. Jellicoe had ordered his destroyers and several of the light cruiser squadrons to form up at the rear of the GF. One of the reasons given was to prevent the light forces from being mistaken for the enemy and fired on. But I suspect it was also to provide an obstacle to the HSF should they attempt to get to the east of the heavy units and thus closer to their bases. The British light forces put up a fierce fight, sinking and damaging several German ships but in the confusion, failed to report the situation to Jellicoe. One of the reasons given was they believed that if they could identify the HSF, its location and course, that the senior officers in the Battle Squadrons could too. The communication failures on the British side, here and earlier, had grave consequences.
warspite1

Again, will debate this further as we get to that point in the battle, but this was not the reason (from what I have read) that Jellicoe put the destroyers at the rear. Jellicoe made it quite clear he was NOT going to fight a night battle.

This for me is the second most contentious point (from the British side) of the whole battle.
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
loki100
Posts: 11705
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2012 12:38 pm
Location: Utlima Thule

RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on

Post by loki100 »

ORIGINAL: HighwayStar

- Why did three British battlecruisers blow up (with huge loss of life)?

Indefatigable, Queen Mary, and Invincible all suffered catastrophic magazine explosions. The prevailing theory is that none suffered a penetrating hit in the actual magazine, but rather a flash fire due to a German projectile striking and destroying a main battery turret and then the flash traveling down the ammunition hoists to the magazine. There were flash doors installed to prevent this from happening, however, RN practice at the time placed emphasis on a high rate of fire during an engagement. These doors were generally left open to facilitate a higher rate of fire. Interestingly, the German battlecruiser Seydiltz had almost suffered the same fate at the battle of Dogger Bank (Jan 24, 1915) and the HSF learned their lesson and directed that the doors should not be left open. Beatty's flagship Lion was also hit at Jutland in Q turret and might have been destroyed had not Royal Marine Major Francis Harvey ordered the magazine flooded prior to his death, for which he was awarded the VC. You also had the issue of the shell and propellant being separate in the RN for larger caliber guns (the US Navy followed this practice). Having bags of highly explosive propellant facilitated a flash fire. The HSF used a single brass casing for the shell and the propellant.

there is an enduring problem with British naval history of forgetting that ships going into battle should be uncomfortable - by that I mean everything unessential put away. 'Stuff' is easy to set on fire and too much 'stuff' leads to major fires. It seems as if the RN has to relearn this the hard way in every war - including the Falklands Campaign.

great thread btw [;)]
HighwayStar
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 11:14 pm

RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on

Post by HighwayStar »

Again, will debate this further as we get to that point in the battle

Oh, OK, I'm beginning to see the way you are organizing this thread. Mea culpa. I'll be standing by. And thanks for setting this up Warspite (can't imagine where you got that moniker [;)]).
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”