The Scharnhorst

Discussions on all (non-biographical) aspects of the Kriegsmarine except those dealing with the U-Boat forces.
varjag
Financial supporter
Posts: 4431
Joined: 01 May 2002 01:44
Location: Australia

Re: engines

Post by varjag » 05 Jan 2003 11:55

admfisher wrote:The largest problem was that the Kriegsmarine was trying to make light ships under the restrictions of the various treaties.
The engines were a good idea up just before there time. In the long run they saved, space and gave decent power. The Narviks and other german dd's had a good turn of speed.

admfisher admfisher - I don't think the KM was 'trying' for very long to design ships within the treaties. The K-class cruisers, apart from the EMDEN and perhaps the LEIPZIG/NÜRNBERG can be described as being 'within limits'. Everything after - was grossly in excess. I do not regardGerman destroyer designs as intended for much more than the North Sea - as opposite to RN 'Tribals' that were designed for 'anywhere-use'. Apart from that (echoing Cato) I still think Bey should not have detached his destroyers.....varjag
:D

User avatar
Galahad
Member
Posts: 952
Joined: 30 Mar 2002 00:31
Location: Las Vegas

Post by Galahad » 05 Jan 2003 12:20

I'm not sure exactly what the problems were, just that they seemed common to all German ships equipped with them, from destroyers on up.

This entry for the DD Von Arnim, taken from the Kriegsmarine Encyclopedia has a little to say about the matter:

"Their high pressure turbine engines caused many problems during operations, which were limited by the short range of those ships. The idea was to equip the ships with the newly designed high pressure turbines because this system seemed to have several advantages about normal turbine systems - at least on the paper. Test installations
on land were very promising, but when installed on board on the destroyers, the engines rooms got very crowded making maintenance very difficult."

http://www.skovheim.org/arnim2.html

User avatar
admfisher
Member
Posts: 645
Joined: 30 Mar 2002 01:38
Location: Toronto

engines

Post by admfisher » 06 Jan 2003 02:18

Like I tried to say the problem was the small tube boilers. These were much smaller than the english designs and the weight savings was great.

In bigger ships they tried using large diesels. This was a good idea but they proved to be unreliable. It was just that the technolgy had not gotten that far yet.

With the diesels in the PB's it was this that allowed for the large guns. The weight savings again, but there was also extensive welding employed.

admfisher

User avatar
Galahad
Member
Posts: 952
Joined: 30 Mar 2002 00:31
Location: Las Vegas

Post by Galahad » 06 Jan 2003 02:37

But didn't the Bremen and Europa also use small-tube boilers? I thought they did, which is why the problems the German Navy had with their turbine plants had me puzzled.

They should have bought Babcock & Wilson boilers from the US, obviously. <g>

User avatar
admfisher
Member
Posts: 645
Joined: 30 Mar 2002 01:38
Location: Toronto

engines

Post by admfisher » 06 Jan 2003 04:48

The German small tube boilers was a constent problem dispite tests, and yes they could of just as easily used a conventional engine but it was in 28 when the navy was first allowed to start building so to try to get as much as possible out of there ships they had to try radical things.
It was the Germans who made the electric welding so famous. It was one of the big features in Lutzow - Deutchland. As they built more ships they advanced faster than the rest of othe world.

Grant
8)

User avatar
Madsen
Member
Posts: 541
Joined: 24 Jun 2002 22:56
Location: Norway cloose to the Saltstraumen

Post by Madsen » 20 Jan 2003 16:52

1800 yards from Scharnhost, turnig longside and firing torpedoes. when S was firing with everything they had. a miracle that Stord only lost one man.
Paul Lea was washed over board and never seen again

User avatar
admfisher
Member
Posts: 645
Joined: 30 Mar 2002 01:38
Location: Toronto

Re: engines

Post by admfisher » 22 Jan 2003 20:17

varjag wrote:
admfisher wrote:The largest problem was that the Kriegsmarine was trying to make light ships under the restrictions of the various treaties.
The engines were a good idea up just before there time. In the long run they saved, space and gave decent power. The Narviks and other german dd's had a good turn of speed.

admfisher admfisher - I don't think the KM was 'trying' for very long to design ships within the treaties. The K-class cruisers, apart from the EMDEN and perhaps the LEIPZIG/NÜRNBERG can be described as being 'within limits'. Everything after - was grossly in excess. I do not regardGerman destroyer designs as intended for much more than the North Sea - as opposite to RN 'Tribals' that were designed for 'anywhere-use'. Apart from that (echoing Cato) I still think Bey should not have detached his destroyers.....varjag
:D


The Germans worked very hard under the treaty limitations, the violations do not mean that they were not trying. Take a look at electric welding, that was mainly used to help get the PB's weight down. Then we consider Hitler not wanting larger guns on his S and G, he did not want to upset the RN at the time so another example of treaty limits.
In the destroyers the Germans never designed there destroyers for long distance work, they thought they would be limited to the North Sea. Do not forget the fall of France was a surprise to Germans. So when they gained the Atlantic ports they did not have destroyes for the long distance work.
On Tribal destroyers I have walked Haida's decks ten time now, I have read the history of the ship and all of the other Tribals so I am well versed in them. The book on the Haida refers to the Tribals as Cabillacs of Destroyers.
The major draw back with them was that they were not meant for submarine duty, they were meant to fight surface battles and after the replacement on the Tribals of the X , 4.7 in turret with a 4 in HA/LA gun mount they gained a respectable aa battery.

admfisher

User avatar
Madsen
Member
Posts: 541
Joined: 24 Jun 2002 22:56
Location: Norway cloose to the Saltstraumen

Post by Madsen » 25 Jan 2003 15:09

When Scharnhorst leave Alta Fjord and sail against conwoy JW55B they first meet Adm Fraser's Force 1(Belfast , Norfolk and Sheffield)
Force 1 was able to follow S with help of radar, and manage to hold S away from the convoy. Adm Bey then realized that the escort was too heavy and set course home again. then contact was lost with Scharnhorst's destroyer escort. a short while before the fighting between force one and Scharnhorst a lookout on Duke of York spotted a german reco. plane. im just wandering if Scharnhorst would got away if Adm Bey then got briefing about Fraser's Force 2(Duke of York, Jamaica, and the four "S" destroyers) from that plane. the plane was spotted some time around 10.00 that morning and Adm Bey didn't turn to Norway before 12.30 same day. that would mean that he would have several hours to get away on if he got news about the force that came from Iceland. first at 16.28 that Duke of York got Scharnhorst on radar and it was near 17.00 before the could engage Scharnhorst.The hours between the plane was spotted and Scharnhorst give up the convoy could perhaps bee enough to get close enough to Norway to get help. But this is all guessing now. only 36men survived of a crew of 1900.

User avatar
Madsen
Member
Posts: 541
Joined: 24 Jun 2002 22:56
Location: Norway cloose to the Saltstraumen

Post by Madsen » 25 Feb 2003 23:30

What was the "best" distanse for the secondary artillery of Scharnhorst?
from a biography by Nils Owren i read that KNM STORD was only 1800yards away when they turn and fired torpedoes at S. the secondary artillery started firing at Stord at 7000 yards. that is a long distanse to sail under heavy fire 8)

User avatar
admfisher
Member
Posts: 645
Joined: 30 Mar 2002 01:38
Location: Toronto

5.9

Post by admfisher » 26 Feb 2003 01:39

The WWII version of the 5.9 in L/55 was 22000 at an elavation of 35 degrees.

admfisher

Return to “Kriegsmarine surface ships and Kriegsmarine in general”