Causes of cruiser losses

Discussions on every day life in the Weimar Republic, pre-anschluss Austria, Third Reich and the occupied territories. Hosted by Vikki.
User avatar
mescal
Member
Posts: 1415
Joined: 30 Mar 2008 14:46
Location: France, EUR

Causes of cruiser losses

Post by mescal » 12 Dec 2008 15:38

Hello,

The question of the efficiency of aircraft against of WW2 warships was raised in this thread
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 9&t=146856,
so I decided to post here (since it would have been off topic in the first one) some data I have regarding the cruiser losses.

I find 122 cruisers lost to all causes during the war.

A first split by country gives :
AUS : 3
FRA : 10
GBR : 30
GER : 7
GRE : 1
HOL : 2
ITA : 16
JAP : 43
POL : 1
RUS : 2
USA : 7
Among those 122 losses, 11 are non-combat losses (mainly scuttling, plus collision and blew-up)
The breakdown by causes gives us :
Aircrafts : 41
Submarine : 33
Ships : 30
Frogmen : 4
Mines : 2
Shore battery : 1
non combat : 11
The "ship" figure includes HMS Trinidad, who torpedoed herself. It also includes MTB attacks.
Note that it's a tentative classification, because some cuisers where lost because of multiple attacks. I attempted to put each ship under only one category, but I acknowledge I made some debatable choices.

The air power accounts for one third of the total of the losses, the submarine & surface ships being responsible each for one fourth.

A breakdown by year :
1939 : 1
1940 : 8
1941 : 17
1942 : 41 (20 in the Pacific)
1943 : 8 (2 in the Pacific)
1944 : 32 (25 in the Pacific)
1945 : 15 (10 in the Pacific)

Finally, here is the list of ships I used as input :
Effingham,Curlew,Calypso,Southampton,York,Bonaventure,York,Fiji,Gloucester,Calcutta,Dunedin,Galatea,Neptune,
Exeter,Naiad,Cornwall,Dorsetshire,Edinburgh,Trinidad,Hermione,Cairo,Manchester,Coventry,Curacoa,Carlisle,
Charybdis,Spartan,Penelope,Scylla,Delhi,La Tour d'Auvergne,Primauget,Jean de Vienne,La Galissonniere,Foch,
Marseillaise,Colbert,Dupleix,Algerie,Lamotte-Picquet,Karlsruhe,Blucher,Konigsberg,Leipzig,Koln,Emden,
Admiral Hipper,Helle,De Ruyter,Java,Bartolomeo Colleoni,Armando Diaz,Fiume,Zara,Pola,Alberto di Giussano,
Alberico da Barbiano,Giovanni delle Bande,Trento,Muzio Attendolo,Ulpio Traiano,Trieste,Bari,Taranto,Bolzano,
Gorizia,Okinoshima,Mikuma,Kako,Furutaka,Yura,Kinugasa,Tenryu,Jintsu,Sendai,Kuma,Agano,Naka,Katori,Tatsuta,
Yubari,Oi,Nagara,Natori,Ioshima,Maya,Takao,Atago,Aoba,Tama,Chokai,Chikuma,Suzuya,Mogami,Abukuma,Kinu,Noshiro,
Nachi,Kiso,Kumano,Kashii,Yahagi,Isuzu,Haguro,Ashigara,Tone,Aoba,Oyodo,Takao,Dragon,Sydney,Perth,Canberra,
Chervonaya Ukraina,Komintern,Houston,Astoria,Vincennes,Quincy,Chicago,Juneau,Indianapolis,

I would be glad to get any correction or comment.
Olivier

User avatar
Simon K
Member
Posts: 1425
Joined: 19 Jul 2008 19:25
Location: London U.K

Re: Causes of cruiser losses

Post by Simon K » 12 Dec 2008 15:45

I think cause of loss by year would be useful. This would help to establish whether early war air launched AS weaponry became more effective as the war progressed.

User avatar
mescal
Member
Posts: 1415
Joined: 30 Mar 2008 14:46
Location: France, EUR

Re: Causes of cruiser losses

Post by mescal » 12 Dec 2008 16:01

Hello,

You're perfectly right, but I'm having some problem with the pivot tables of a crappy Excel version.

Here's a synthetic vision by year and causes.

Code: Select all

Nombre de ship	Étiquettes de colonnes							
year :  39	 / 40	41/	42/	43/	44/	45/	Total général
accident	1/	/	/	/	/	/		1
air	/	2/	5/	11/	3/	12/	9/	42
collision	/	/	/	1/	/	1/	/	2
frogmen	/	/	/	/	1/	2/	1/	4
mine	/	/	1/	/	/	1/	/	2
MTB	/	/	/	1/	1/	1/	1/	4
scuttled	/	/	/	7/	1/	/	/	8
ship	/	2/	6/	11/	2/	1/	1/	23
shore	/	1/	/	/	/	/	/	1
special	/	/	1/	/	/	/	/	1
sub	/	3/	4/	9/	/	14/	3/	33
torp	/	/	/	1/	/	/	/	1
Total général/	1/	8/	17/	41	8	32	15	122
Olivier

Jon G.
Member
Posts: 6647
Joined: 17 Feb 2004 01:12
Location: Europe

Re: Causes of cruiser losses

Post by Jon G. » 12 Dec 2008 16:27

You're on to something very interesting here, Mescal. Instinctively I think you're using too many categories for causes of loss. Why, for example, do you have a seperate category for torpedoes when many/all losses caused by MTBs, aircraft and submarines potentially were inflicted by torpedoes? Why do 'accident' and 'collision' warrant seperate categories? That also goes for 'frogmen' and 'special' categories in my opinion.

How about these sub-categories instead:

- Enemy aircraft (sub-divided into torpedo and bomber a/c)

- Enemy ships (sub-divided into surface and sub)

- Miscellaneous enemy action (frogmen, mines etc.)

- Accidents

- Scuttled

If you can repost your numbers in the raw (seperating them with / ) and without the code tags, I'll see if I can make your table more readable.

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8618
Joined: 21 Sep 2005 21:46
Location: Michigan

Re: Causes of cruiser losses

Post by LWD » 12 Dec 2008 16:30

Perhaps saving the table as a picture then posting that will keep things lined up.

It might also be interesting to break it down by type of cruiser or size. Afterall there's a big diffeence between say Atlanta and Hipper. Some of the Japanese CLs were also pretty small, old, and weak. On the otherhand a Brooklyn or Clevland is bigger than a lot of heavies...

Thanks for posting what you did by the way. Useful and interesting data.

Is the Blucker (thanks for the correction Ironmachine, I originally stated Hipper) the loss to a shore battery?

*** edited because I mentioned the wrong ship ***
Last edited by LWD on 12 Dec 2008 17:33, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Ironmachine
Member
Posts: 5822
Joined: 07 Jul 2005 10:50
Location: Spain

Re: Causes of cruiser losses

Post by Ironmachine » 12 Dec 2008 17:29

LWD wrote:Is the Hipper the loss to a shore battery?
Admiral Hipper was scuttled in dock on 1945. For a loss to a shore battery, Blücher comes to my mind, but IIRC it was also hit by torpedos, even if they were fired from the shore.

PS: It seems that I edited my post (to add the reference to the torpedoes) while LWD was editing his post. :wink:

JamesL
Member
Posts: 1649
Joined: 28 Oct 2004 00:03
Location: NJ USA

Re: Causes of cruiser losses

Post by JamesL » 12 Dec 2008 17:45

USS NORTHAMPTON CL-26, sunk by torpedoes 30-November-1942.

USS HELENA CL-50, sunk by torpedoes 6-July-1943.

USS ATLANTA CL-51, scuttled 13-November-1942 after being hit by torpedoes and naval gunfire.
Last edited by JamesL on 12 Dec 2008 17:55, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Ironmachine
Member
Posts: 5822
Joined: 07 Jul 2005 10:50
Location: Spain

Re: Causes of cruiser losses

Post by Ironmachine » 12 Dec 2008 17:54

mescal wrote:I would be glad to get any correction or comment.
You mention 7 U.S. cruisers lost to all causes during the war, but apparently there were 10:
Heavy Cruiser (CA)
USS Astoria (CA-34) sunk by gunfire of Japanese warships off Savo, Solomon Islands, 9 August 1942.
USS Chicago (CA-29) sunk after being torpedoed by Japanese aircraft off Rennel, Solomon Islands, 29 - 30 January 1943.
USS Houston (CA-30) sunk by gunfire and torpedoes of Japanese warships in Sunda Strait, Netherlands East Indies, 1 March 1942.
USS Indianapolis (CA-35) sunk after being torpedoed by Japanese submarine I-58 in the Philippine Sea, 29 July 1945.
USS Northampton (CA-26) torpedoed by the Japanese destroyer Oyashio on 30 November 1942 during the Battle of Tassafaronga and sank on 1 December 1942.
USS Quincy (CA-39) sunk by gunfire and torpedoes of Japanese warships off Savo, Solomon Islands, 9 August 1942.
USS Vincennes (CA-44) sunk after being torpedoed by Japanese warships off Savo, Solomon Islands, 9 August 1942.

Light Cruiser (CL)
USS Atlanta (CL-51) scuttled off Lunga Point, Guadalcanal, Solomon Islands, after being damaged by gunfire from Japanese warships during the Battle of Guadalcanal,
13 November 1942.
USS Helena (CL-50) sunk after being torpedoed by Japanese warships during the Battle of Kula Gulf, Solomon Islands, 6 July 1943.
USS Juneau (CL-52) sunk by the Japanese submarine I-26 after being torpedoed during the Battle of Guadalcanal, 13 November 1942.
(From http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq82- ... chor327957)

User avatar
mescal
Member
Posts: 1415
Joined: 30 Mar 2008 14:46
Location: France, EUR

Re: Causes of cruiser losses

Post by mescal » 12 Dec 2008 18:25

Hello,

thanks a lot for the feedback.

I do not know why 3 US ships disappeared, probably some nasty filter in my excel sheet I forgot to remove.
So 3 cruisers lost to ships should be added to the global stats.

Jon,
I will not have time right now, but the pic of a pivot table is a good idea, thank you.



Anyway for those interested, here is the raw data I have (minus a lot of annotation columns which would be a presentation nightmare)

SHIP//YEAR/COUNTRY/ENEMY/ENEMY SERVICE/LOCATION;HARBOR(yes only if true); CTL : contructive total loss
Effingham//40/GBR/ship/GER ? /?/Europe;
Curlew//40/GBR/air/GER/LWF/Europe;
Calypso//40/GBR/sub/ITA/RM/Med;
Southampton//41/GBR/air/GER/LWF/Med;
York//41/GBR/special/GER +ITA/RM + LWF/Med;
Bonaventure//41/GBR/sub/GER/LWF/Med;
York//41/GBR/air/GER +ITA/RM+LWF/Med;Y
Fiji//41/GBR/air/GER/LWF/Med;
Gloucester//41/GBR/air/GER/LWF/Med;
Calcutta//41/GBR/air/GER/LWF/Med;
Dunedin//41/GBR/sub/GER/KM/Atlantic;
Galatea//41/GBR/sub/GER/KM/Med;
Neptune//41/GBR/mine/ITA/RM/Med;
Exeter//42/GBR/ship/JAP/IJN/Pacific;
Naiad//42/GBR/sub/GER/KM/Med;
Cornwall//42/GBR/air/JAP/IJN/Indian;
Dorsetshire//42/GBR/air/JAP/IJN/Indian;
Edinburgh//42/GBR/ship/GER/KM/Europe;
Trinidad//42/GBR/torp/GBR/RN/Europe;
Hermione//42/GBR/sub/GER/KM/Med;
Cairo//42/GBR/sub/ITA/RM/Med;
Manchester//42/GBR/MTB/ITA/RM/Med;
Coventry//42/GBR/air/GER/LWF/Med;
Curacoa//42/GBR/collision/GBR/queen mary/Atlantic;
Carlisle//43/GBR/air/GER/LWF/Med;
Charybdis//43/GBR/MTB/GER/KM/Europe;
Spartan//44/GBR/air/GER/LWF/Med;
Penelope//44/GBR/sub/GER/KM/Med;
Scylla//44/GBR/mine/GER/KM/Europe;
Delhi//45/GBR/MTB/GER/KM/Med;Y;CTL
La Tour d'Auvergne//39/FRA/accident/blew up/MN/Med;Y
Primauget//42/FRA/air/USA/USN/Atlantic;Y
Jean de Vienne//42/FRA/scuttled/FRA/MN/Med;Y
La Galissonniere//42/FRA/scuttled/FRA/MN/Med;Y
Foch//42/FRA/scuttled/FRA/MN/Med;Y
Marseillaise//42/FRA/scuttled/FRA/MN/Med;Y
Colbert//42/FRA/scuttled/FRA/MN/Med;Y
Dupleix//42/FRA/scuttled/FRA/MN/Med;Y
Algerie//42/FRA/scuttled/FRA/MN/Med;Y
Lamotte-Picquet//45/FRA/air/USA/USN/Pacific;Y
Karlsruhe//40/GER/sub/GBR/RN/Europe;
Blucher//40/GER/shore/NOR/Nor Army/Europe;
Konigsberg//40/GER/air/GBR/RN/Europe;Y
Leipzig//44/GER/collision/GER/KM/Europe;CTL
Koln//45/GER/air/USA/USAAF/Europe;Y
Emden//45/GER/air/GBR/RAF/Europe;Y
Admiral Hipper//45/GER/air/GBR/RAF/Europe;Y
Helle//40/GRE/sub/ITA/RM/Med;
De Ruyter//42/HOL/ship/JAP/IJN/Pacific;
Java//42/HOL/ship/JAP/IJN/Pacific;
Bartolomeo Colleoni//40/ITA/ship/AUS/RAN/Med;
Armando Diaz//41/ITA/sub/GBR/RN/Med;
Fiume//41/ITA/ship/GBR/RN/Med;
Zara//41/ITA/ship/GBR/RN/Med;
Pola//41/ITA/ship/GBR/RN/Med;
Alberto di Giussano//41/ITA/ship/GBR/RN/Med;
Alberico da Barbiano//41/ITA/ship/GBR/RN/Med;
Giovanni delle Bande//42/ITA/sub/GBR/RN/Med;
Trento//42/ITA/sub/GBR/RN/Med;
Muzio Attendolo//42/ITA/air/USA/USAAF/Med;
Ulpio Traiano//43/ITA/frogmen/GBR/RN/Med;Y
Trieste//43/ITA/air/USA/USAAF/Med;Y
Bari//43/ITA/air/USA/USAAF/Med;Y
Taranto//43/ITA/scuttled/USA/USAAF/Med;Y
Bolzano//44/ITA/frogmen/GBR/RN/Med;Y
Gorizia//44/ITA/frogmen/GBR/RN/Med;Y
Okinoshima//42/JAP/sub/USA/USN/Pacific;
Mikuma//42/JAP/air/USA/USN/Pacific;
Kako//42/JAP/sub/USA/USN/Pacific;
Furutaka//42/JAP/ship/USA/USN/Pacific;
Yura//42/JAP/air/USA/USN/Pacific;
Kinugasa//42/JAP/air/USA/USN/Pacific;
Tenryu//42/JAP/sub/USA/USN/Pacific;
Jintsu//43/JAP/ship/USA/USN/Pacific;
Sendai//43/JAP/ship/USA/USN/Pacific;
Kuma//44/JAP/sub/USA/USN/Pacific;
Agano//44/JAP/sub/USA/USN/Pacific;
Naka//44/JAP/air/USA/USN/Pacific;
Katori//44/JAP/ship/USA/USN/Pacific;
Tatsuta//44/JAP/sub/USA/USN/Pacific;
Yubari//44/JAP/sub/USA/USN/Pacific;
Oi//44/JAP/sub/USA/USN/Pacific;
Nagara//44/JAP/sub/USA/USN/Pacific;
Natori//44/JAP/sub/USA/USN/Pacific;
Ioshima//44/JAP/sub/USA/USN/Pacific;
Maya//44/JAP/sub/USA/USN/Pacific;
Takao//44/JAP/sub/USA/USN/Pacific;
Atago//44/JAP/sub/USA/USN/Pacific;
Aoba//44/JAP/sub/USA/USN/Pacific;
Tama//44/JAP/sub/USA/USN/Pacific;
Chokai//44/JAP/air/USA/USN/Pacific;
Chikuma//44/JAP/air/USA/USN/Pacific;
Suzuya//44/JAP/air/USA/USN/Pacific;
Mogami//44/JAP/air/USA/USN/Pacific;
Abukuma//44/JAP/air/USA/USN/Pacific;
Kinu//44/JAP/air/USA/USN/Pacific;
Noshiro//44/JAP/air/USA/USN/Pacific;
Nachi//44/JAP/air/USA/USN/Pacific;Y?
Kiso//44/JAP/air/USA/USN/Pacific;
Kumano//44/JAP/air/USA/USN/Pacific;
Kashii//45/JAP/air/USA/USN/Pacific;
Yahagi//45/JAP/air/USA/USN/Pacific;
Isuzu//45/JAP/sub/USA/USN/Pacific;
Haguro//45/JAP/ship/GBR/RN/Pacific;
Ashigara//45/JAP/sub/GBR/RN/Pacific;
Tone//45/JAP/air/USA/USN/Pacific;Y
Aoba//45/JAP/air/USA/USN/Pacific;Y
Oyodo//45/JAP/air/USA/USN/Pacific;Y
Takao//45/JAP/frogmen/GBR/RN/Pacific;Y
Dragon//44/POL/MTB/GER/KM/Europe;
Sydney//41/AUS/ship/GER/KM/Indian;
Perth//42/AUS/ship/JAP/IJN/Pacific;
Canberra//42/AUS/ship/JAP/IJN/Pacific;
Chervonaya Ukraina//42/RUS/air/GER/LWF/Black Sea;Y
Komintern//42/RUS/air/GER/LWF/Black Sea;Y
Houston//42/USA/ship/JAP/IJN/Pacific;
Astoria//42/USA/ship/JAP/IJN/Pacific;
Vincennes//42/USA/ship/JAP/IJN/Pacific;
Quincy//42/USA/ship/JAP/IJN/Pacific;
Atlanta//42/USA/ship/JAP/IJN/Pacific;
Juneau//42/USA/sub/JAP/IJN/Pacific;
Northampton//42/USA/ship/JAP/IJN/Pacific;
Chicago//42/USA/air/JAP/IJN/Pacific;
Helena//42/USA/ship/JAP/IJN/Pacific;
Indianapolis//45/USA/sub/JAP/IJN/Pacific;

regarding the service, I assumed that mines and frogmen are under responsability of the navy.
There may be some doubts on who sank the ships in harbor, esp. the German & Italian : RAF or USAAF ?
Olivier

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8618
Joined: 21 Sep 2005 21:46
Location: Michigan

Re: Causes of cruiser losses

Post by LWD » 12 Dec 2008 19:23

Jon G. wrote:...How about these sub-categories instead:

- Enemy aircraft (sub-divided into torpedo and bomber a/c)

- Enemy ships (sub-divided into surface and sub)

- Miscellaneous enemy action (frogmen, mines etc.)

- Accidents

- Scuttled
....
One problem I can see is the sources were often multiple. For instance scuttleing is often combined with battle damage. Those sunk by aircraft were on occasion hit by both bombs and torpedos and those sunk by surface ships by gunfire and tropedos. Furthermore a lot of US sub kills were ships damaged by either surface ships or aircraft. I guess one way is to have a spread sheet where coulms are checked if damage from that source was present.

User avatar
crolick
Member
Posts: 279
Joined: 25 Oct 2005 20:18
Location: Warszawa, Polska

Re: Causes of cruiser losses

Post by crolick » 12 Dec 2008 22:24

mescal wrote:SHIP//YEAR/COUNTRY/ENEMY/ENEMY SERVICE/LOCATION;HARBOR(yes only if true); CTL : contructive total loss
Dragon//44/POL/MTB/GER/KM/Europe;
Dragon was not sunk by MTB but was damaged (and later considered as a TCL) by German Neger which I would attribute rather to the frogmen then MTB. Further information - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orp_dragon

Hope it helps!

Martti
Member
Posts: 156
Joined: 01 Dec 2005 01:36
Location: Finland

Re: Causes of cruiser losses

Post by Martti » 13 Dec 2008 21:54

The Brasilian light cruiser Bahia was lost on 4.7.1945. The ship was stationed in central Atlantic to act as a radio beacon for trans-Atlantic aircraft transfer flights. The cause of the loss was 20mm shells hitting the depth charge rack during gunnery practice, so this one belongs to the non-combat category.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 30 Apr 2006 23:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Causes of cruiser losses

Post by phylo_roadking » 14 Dec 2008 02:56

Mescal - what about looking that the year of construction or latest refit of each of the lost cruisers? :wink: E.R.Hooton makes the point in his Phoenix Triumphant that the reason why HMS Suffolk was able to survive 82 sorties off Stavanger at the cost of only being hit twice, and although taking water was able to make Scapa Flow without being finished off was her modern armament. Is there any correlation between losses to "conventional" bombing...and the age of vessels???

User avatar
mescal
Member
Posts: 1415
Joined: 30 Mar 2008 14:46
Location: France, EUR

Re: Causes of cruiser losses

Post by mescal » 15 Dec 2008 15:10

I have added the 'missing' ships in my list.
I also modified some descritpions :
- MTB are now under the category 'ship'
- frogmen, mines are under 'misc'
- midget sub is also under 'misc' (the Neger which crippled the polish cruiser Dragon)


Below are a few views of those stats :

1- In this one, the columns are the years and the row are the causes, split between combat (flag "Y") and non combat (flag "N")
pivot_1.jpg
2 -The rows are the countries and services and the number of successes they had. Only combat losses are taken into account.
pivot_2.jpg
the line "GER?" is HMS Effingham
the line GER+ITA is HMS York which is counted twice for an unknown reason.

3 - This table show the losses inflicted by services and location (only combat losses) :
pivot_3.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Olivier

User avatar
mescal
Member
Posts: 1415
Joined: 30 Mar 2008 14:46
Location: France, EUR

Re: Causes of cruiser losses

Post by mescal » 15 Dec 2008 15:16

And a few more stats :
(it looks like I cannot attach more than 3 files per post.)

4 - The rows are the countries which inflicted losses, the columns being the losses suffered (Blue means self inflicted losses)
pivot_4.jpg
5 - Losses detailes by country and source . Only combat losses.
pivot_5.jpg
In all these files, there is a slight mistake as the Italian cruiser Taranto has a flag "Combat loss = Y" whereas it was scuttled.


phylo : that sure would be interesting, but it will take time.
And if we are interested in the survivability of ships, we will have to take into account not only the ships that sank, but also those which survived. That's a bigger data set ....
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Olivier

Return to “Life in the Third Reich & Weimar Republic”