Sub stuff

Adanac's Strategic level World War I grand campaign game designed by Frank Hunter

Moderator: SeanD

hjaco
Posts: 872
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 4:09 pm

RE: Sub stuff

Post by hjaco »

I will buy that too [8D]
Hit them where they aren't
boogada
Posts: 353
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 11:45 pm
Location: Germany

RE: Sub stuff

Post by boogada »

I agree that Battleships (DN and PD) were not designed to raid. Especially not the German ones, because they were built for action in the North Sea with their bases close. Ships ran out of ammo and coal/oil very easily in combat situations.

In WWII the Germans sent the Bismarck out to raid though. And also the other Battleships to intercept the arctic convoys.
SMK-at-work
Posts: 3396
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2000 8:00 am
Location: New Zealand

RE: Sub stuff

Post by SMK-at-work »

Yes but this is not WW2 - we need only consider the situation in WW1........WW2 is another game....I'd like to see Frank "do" WW2 but it's not really on his list [:(]
Meum est propisitum in taberna mori
Shawkhan
Posts: 125
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 6:45 pm

RE: Sub stuff

Post by Shawkhan »

In WWI, battlecruisers and cruisers would/should be the raiders. 
The Bismarck was lost on its attempted raid when it neglected to turn back after minor damage. As I remember it, there was a small fuel leak that led British naval aviation to the German BB.
SMK-at-work
Posts: 3396
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2000 8:00 am
Location: New Zealand

RE: Sub stuff

Post by SMK-at-work »

In WW2 Scharnhorst and Gneisenau did a successful raid in the Atlantic in early 1941 (22 January - 22 March), sinking about 115,000 tons of merchant ships.  That was the reason the Bismark was sent - to try and repeat the feat.
 
The allies lost 69 British, Allied and neutral ships of 317,000 tons in the Atlantic from all causes in February, and 63 ships of 365,000 tons in March - so the 2 big ships contributed about 17% of the total - significant, but almost certainly not worth what was paid for them!
 
IMO it is significant that the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau didn't try to do it again from Brest - the British were certainly afraid they would do so, hence constant attack from air on the 2 ships + the Prinz Eugen in port.  Again it was hte prestige of het ships that stopped them from being used - Hitler didn't want them destroyed - the "fleet in being" was seen as more important.
 
 
Meum est propisitum in taberna mori
hjaco
Posts: 872
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 4:09 pm

RE: Sub stuff

Post by hjaco »

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

IMO it is significant that the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau didn't try to do it again from Brest - the British were certainly afraid they would do so, hence constant attack from air on the 2 ships + the Prinz Eugen in port. Again it was hte prestige of het ships that stopped them from being used - Hitler didn't want them destroyed - the "fleet in being" was seen as more important.

In the important years they or their support ships constantly suffered damage by air attacks so they never really got another shot when it was important. Later in the war it was irrelevant sending them into the Atlantic and as you say the prestige element was substantial.

Still they broke through the channel in a daring dash because they were needed in Norway to attack the Murmansk Convoys.

In any case i agree that the German surface fleet was worth more as a fleet in being which forced RN to both keep a naval reserve out of proportion as well to escort convoys with cruisers/battleships.
All in all that meant that RN didn't have enough strength to use substantial offensive forces against neither Japan nor (more importantly) Italy until rather late in the war.
Hit them where they aren't
Post Reply

Return to “Guns of August 1914 - 1918”