Battleship V Battleship

Discussions on all (non-biographical) aspects of the Kriegsmarine except those dealing with the U-Boat forces.
User avatar
Pips
Member
Posts: 1045
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 08:44
Location: Canberra, ACT, Australia

Battleship V Battleship

Postby Pips » 06 Jul 2017 03:52

Although the above subject isn't just restricted to the Kriegsmarine, I think this is the 'best fit' forum. If not please feel free to move to one more appropriate.

Thought I would list all battleship v battleship actions (however brief) that occurred in WWII - covering all nations. If I have missed any, please feel free to update.

1940
April 1940 - Operation Wesserubung..................Scharnhorst & Gneisenau v Renown
July 1940 - Mers el Kebir................................Hood, Valiant & Resolution v Bretagne, Dunkerque, Strasbourg & Provence
July 1940 - Calabria......................................Warspite & Malaya v Giulio Cesare & Conte di Cavour
Sept 1940 - Dakar.........................................Resolution & Barnham v Richelieu
Nov 1940 - Cape Spartivento............................Ramilles & Renown v Vittorio Veneto

1941
May 1941 - Battle Of Denmark Straight...............Hood & Prince Of Wales v Bismarck
May 1941 - Sinking The Bismarck.......................King George V & Rodney v Bismarck
(always surprised that the British didn't give this battle a name)

1942
Nov 1942 - Casablanca...................................Massachusetts v Jean Bart
Nov 1942 - 2nd Battle Of Guadalcanal.................Washington & South Dakota v Kirishima

1943
Dec 1943 - Battle Of Cape York.........................Duke of Yorck v Scharnhorst

1944
Oct 1944 - Battle Of Surigao Strait.....................West Virginia, Maryland, Mississippi, Tennessee, California & Pennsylvania v Yamashiro

If anyone has details on the ranges involved in the above battles (start and finish), I would greatly appreciate it if they could be posted.

In terms of surface actions generally (against all sea-borne targets) I would think that Warspite and Scharnhorst would have been involved in the most actions. And Scharnhorst probably sank the most ships ie 1 x aircraft carrier, 2 x destroyers, 1 x Armed Merchant Cruiser and 10 merchant ships.

And it just so happens that Warspite and Scharnhorst are my two favourite vessels. :)

User avatar
genstab
Member
Posts: 1495
Joined: 15 Jul 2003 22:50
Location: The Big City on Lake Erie

Re: Battleship V Battleship

Postby genstab » 07 Jul 2017 00:14

Well, in several of these matchups a battleship is pitted against a battlecruiser with lesser armor, making the contest uneven- to wit HMS Hood, Renown and the German Scharnhorst were battlecruisers.

In the battle between HIJMS Kirishima and the two American battleships, really it was one on one as previous to the main event, Japanese destroyers had put some 5 inch shells into USS South Dakota's upper structure, which severed her whole electrical system- radar, fire control, power to turn her main turrets and run the ammunition hoists and radios. She was just a helpless drifting behemoth while Washington made scrap metal out of Kirishima.

In the battle of Surigao Strait, there was a second battleship with HIJMS Yamashiro- her sister Fuso- but the odds were six to two. Both were sunk.
The American task force crossed the Japanese T, which was first done in a modern sea battle by Admiral Togo against the Russian fleet in 1904 at Tsushima, and the results were just as good.

Best regards,
Bill in Cleveland

RandJS
Member
Posts: 207
Joined: 04 Oct 2008 11:36

Re: Battleship V Battleship

Postby RandJS » 07 Jul 2017 01:21

During the Battle of North Cape, Scharnhorst was going up against Duke of York, Heavy Cruiser Nofolk, Light Cruisers Sheffield and Jamaica along with 8 destroyers: Scorpion, Savage, Saumarez, Stord, Matchless, Musketeer, Opportune and Virago. Scharnhorsts main radar was put out of action early and after the Duke of York and cruisers had put most of her guns out of actions, Admiral Fraser sicked the destroyers on her, torpedoing the hull until the Germans scuttled her.

Duke of York opened fire at 12,000 yds, putting Scharnhorst A turret out of action. Jamaica opened fire at 13,000 yds. Scharnhorst opened the range to 18,000 yds. Duke of York received minimal damage, but as far as I remember Norfolk took some major damage and did not leave Russian waters again till the end of the war.

Regards,
Rand

User avatar
genstab
Member
Posts: 1495
Joined: 15 Jul 2003 22:50
Location: The Big City on Lake Erie

Re: Battleship V Battleship

Postby genstab » 17 Jul 2017 12:26

It just would have made better sense for Hitler to okay a large expansion of the U-boat fleet when the war started instead of building any more capital ships. If Germany had 200 U-boats when the war started instead of 57 (and many too small to fight in the Atlantic with its lack of crew space and storage space for torpedoes, food and diesel fuel considering the distance back to Germany) it would have been far different.

Another alternative would have been to build a few aircraft carriers instead of Bismarck and Tirpitz- or turn them into carriers before they were finished in 1940. The US had two large carriers that started out as battlecruisers- Lexington and Saratoga- and large carriers carrying 100 planes and being able to do 33 knots would also have been a game changer against the British navy. They could have made Operation Sea Lion possible. But Goering scotched even equipping the Graf Zepplin by saying everything that flies belonged to his Luftwaffe. It's lucky for the free world that Hitler knew nothing of sea warfare and didn't trust what Admiral Raeder was trying to tell him. No wonder Raeder said when Britain and France declared war on Germany that with what his navy had, all they could do was die gallantly.

Best,
Bill in Cleveland

User avatar
hucks216
Member
Posts: 1352
Joined: 20 Jan 2007 22:49
Location: England

Re: Battleship V Battleship

Postby hucks216 » 17 Jul 2017 12:51

genstab wrote:...
Another alternative would have been to build a few aircraft carriers instead of Bismarck and Tirpitz- or turn them into carriers before they were finished in 1940. The US had two large carriers that started out as battlecruisers- Lexington and Saratoga- and large carriers carrying 100 planes and being able to do 33 knots would also have been a game changer against the British navy. They could have made Operation Sea Lion possible. But Goering scotched even equipping the Graf Zepplin by saying everything that flies belonged to his Luftwaffe. It's lucky for the free world that Hitler knew nothing of sea warfare and didn't trust what Admiral Raeder was trying to tell him. No wonder Raeder said when Britain and France declared war on Germany that with what his navy had, all they could do was die gallantly.

Best,
Bill in Cleveland


But aircraft carriers require escorts which the KM was lacking and for long range deployments they require a logistic fleet, not just for the requirements of the carriers and their aircraft but also for the escorts. I dare say that even if Germany did have an operational carrier then it would of been the primary target of the Royal Navy & RAF and wouldn't of lasted long once it put to sea.

User avatar
T. A. Gardner
Member
Posts: 1247
Joined: 02 Feb 2006 00:23
Location: Arizona

Re: Battleship V Battleship

Postby T. A. Gardner » 22 Jul 2017 02:31



Return to “Kriegsmarine surface ships and Kriegsmarine in general”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot]