Battle of Jutland

[mike_864]

100 years ago today the greatest naval battle in history took place off the Danish coast known as the Battle of Jutland, i wonder how WG will mark the occasion? will we get a new ship?

 

To anyone who has H.M.S. Warspite, i am running a competition over on contests where you can win some small plaques that i have made with teak from H.M.S. Valiant ( Warspites sister ship ) where  MrConway has hinted that there will be something going on today..!!

 

Fingers crossed  

 

Mike.

[General_Kunde]

Would be nice if get a commemorative flag like NA... (with the same bonuses of course)

 

Interesting animation/narration someone posted here couple of weeks ago.

 

[mike_864]

Thanks for that.!

 

It was better than many documentaries i have watched over the years, well done to the guy who put it together.

 

A flag would be nice but i was hoping for something more substantial

 

Mike

[ShuggieHamster]

Several articles in the uk press. Didnt know the below....

 

The Royal Navy reached home a few days later to a storm of public protest that it had allowed itself to suffer an ignominious defeat. Dockyard workers booed the ships. Sailors were spat on in the streets for supposedly betraying the Nelsonian tradition.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3613562/Truth-Navy-s-darkest-hour-100-years-ago-6-000-British-sailors-lost-lives-Battle-Jutland-survivors-spat-home.html
 

[mike_864]

At least the press seem to know what day it is..!!

 

Sad but true, railway workers threw pieces of coal at the Warspite as she passed by because they thought she had ran away from the battle

[HMS_Worcester]

To anyone who has H.M.S. Warspite, i am running a competition over on contests where you can win some small plaques that i have made with teak from H.M.S. Valiant ( Warspites sister ship )

 

It is really nice to see someone doing something like this to honour the memory of Jutland and the brave men who fought and died there. Jolly good show sir!

 

It is a real shame that WG-EU seem to think the best way to commemorate Jutland is to flog us a WW2 US Ship that is only famous for sinking....

[mike_864]

 

It is really nice to see someone doing something like this to honour the memory of Jutland and the brave men who fought and died there. Jolly good show sir!

 

It is a real shame that WG-EU seem to think the best way to commemorate Jutland is to flog us a WW2 US Ship that is only famous for sinking....

 

Good morning sir!

 

Glad you like the competition, i hope you will be getting the Warspite out and having a go at it over the coming week.

 

Is the Indianappolis all we are going to get? i hoped for more

 

[PedeNuts]

IRL, a Battle of Jutland memorial is opening in Thyborøn, Jutland tomorrow, to commemorate the 8647 lives lost during the battle. And right next to it is the Sea War Museum Jutland. I might have to take the 3 hour drive soon to check it out.

[Takru]

IRL, a Battle of Jutland memorial is opening in Thyborøn, Jutland tomorrow, to commemorate the 8647 lives lost during the battle. And right next to it is the Sea War Museum Jutland. I might have to take the 3 hour drive soon to check it out.

 

Damn, was in Viborg and Holstebro last October. If only I had known of that museum -.-

[HMS_Worcester]

Is the Indianappolis all we are going to get? i hoped for more

 

Maybe they will do something later, but I'm not holding out much hope.

[mike_864]

IRL, a Battle of Jutland memorial is opening in Thyborøn, Jutland tomorrow, to commemorate the 8647 lives lost during the battle. And right next to it is the Sea War Museum Jutland. I might have to take the 3 hour drive soon to check it out.

 

Nice one,

 

If you go, take some photos and post them here for us all to see.

[Gojuadorai]

It is a real shame that WG-EU seem to think the best way to commemorate Jutland is to flog us a WW2 US Ship that is only famous for sinking....

 

thats sad indeed

 

i hoped for some awesome german ship or  hell ill even stettel for any new ship and or cool mission chains ....

but after the fail of the campbeltown they dont even seem to try...

[MrFingers]

Or this...

[Trigger_Happy_Dad]

100 years ago 249 ships german and british ships clashed in the North Sea....

 

 

 

http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/15135-die-seeschlacht-vor-dem-skagerrak-am-31-mai-1916/#topmost (lots of photos, paintings, tactical maps, videos, books, info etc in this german thread)

 

see also:

 

http://www.britishba...pposing-fleets/

http://www.britishba...-31st-may-1916/

 http://www.britishbattles.com/the-battle-of-jutland-part-iii-clash-between-the-british-and-german-battle-fleets-during-the-evening-31st-may-1916/

http://www.britishba...-1st-june-1916/

http://www.britishba...-part-v-annexe/

 

 

 Among the advantages enjoyed by the Germans were better-trained gun crews and more effective main battery ammunition, which allowed them to inflict serious damage early in the engagement. The German gunners also had more favorable conditions in the beginning of the battle. The ships' thicker armor also enabled them to take a heavier beating than their British opponents. Another sometimes overlooked advantage was the shorter distance from the battle area to German ports, compared to the distance to the fleet bases in northern Britain. The severely damaged SMS Seydlitz was able to limp back to Wilhelmshaven; it is questionable as to whether a similarly damaged British ship would have been able to make the longer voyage back to Scapa Flow or Rosyth.

 

 

Despite the design imperfections present in the ships of both forces, the most important difference between the British and German ships, and the primary reason the British suffered greater casualties during the battle, was the difference between the respective sides' propellant charges and gun handling techniques. Despite the thicker armor of SMS Seydlitz and Derfflinger, both ships had gun turrets penetrated by British gunfire. German gun crews generally adhered to stricter munitions handling techniques―a result of the lessons learned at the Battle of Dogger Bank in 1915.36 Coupled with less volatile chemical composition of the German charges and the use of brass cartridges that were resistant to flash fires, the superior precautions aboard the German vessels prevented them from being destroyed by catastrophic explosions. Conversely, the British packed as many shells as possible in the gun turrets and working chambers in an attempt to increase their rate of fire. The nature of the British propellant compounded this dangerous situation; it had a tendency to become increasingly unstable as it aged. Finally, the British powder was stored in silk bags that easily ignited. This doomed the battlecruisers Indefatigable, Queen Mary, and Invincible, and nearly destroyed Beatty's flagship Lion as well.

 

 The British advantage in heavy guns was mitigated to a degree by much heavier armor on the German ships. The strongest armored belt on the British ships was that of Tiger, which was 9 inches thick. All three Lion-class, two Indefatigable-class, and three Invincible-class ships were equipped with armor belts that were only 6 inches thick.44 In comparison, the least protected German battlecruiser, Von der Tann, had an armored belt that was 9.8 inches thick. Moltke's belt was 10.6 inches thick, while both Seydlitz and the two Derfflinger-class ships had 12-inch-thick side armor.45 The difference in armoring was due in large part to the fact that the German ships were designed to be able to fight in the line of battle against an enemy fleet while their British counterparts were not. 46

 

Moltke and Seydlitz were armed with an improved version of the 11-inch guns on the Von der Tann; the primary enhancement was a lengthening of the barrel: 50 calibers in length, compared to 45 calibers in the earlier guns.53 This gave the shell a higher muzzle velocity; 2,887 feet per second versus 2,805 feet per second for the shorter weapons. They fired the same 670-pound armor-piercing shell as in the 45-caliber guns. Moltke carried her guns in turrets that allowed elevation only to 13.5°; the range of these guns was 19,500, significantly lower than Von der Tann. Seydlitz's gun turrets had been modified to increase elevation to 16°, which gave the guns a longer range of 21,000 yards.54 Moltke and Seydlitz carried ten guns in five turrets; the fifth turret in both ships was placed in a superfiring position above the rearmost turret.55 The two ships each had a full broadside weight of 6,700 pounds. As with the shorter guns on Von der Tann, these guns fired at a rate of three shells per minute.

 

The Derfflinger-class ships were protected by an even more comprehensive armor arrangement than their predecessors. The belt was thickened to 12 inches and ran from the forward barbette to approximately 10 feet past the rearmost gun turret, a length of roughly 400 feet. The transverse bulkheads that capped the armored belt on either end were thickened somewhat to an even 9 inches.64 The turrets were armored similarly to those aboard Seydlitz, though their roofs were increased to 4.3 inches in thickness.65 Protection for the barbettes was strengthened to 10.25 inches on the exposed areas.66

 

The two Derfflinger class battlecruisers were equipped with eight 12-inch guns in four turrets each. The arrangement of these guns was also greatly superior to that of the earlier ships; all four turrets were mounted on the centerline in two superfiring pairs. This gave the ships a less restricted field of fire on the broadside. These guns were significantly more powerful than the smaller guns mounted on the earlier battlecruisers. They fired 894-pound armor-piercing shells at a muzzle velocity of 2,805 feet per second, up to three shots per minute.62 Elevation in the turrets on these two ships was limited to 13.5°; the range at maximum elevation was 20,500 yards.63 Although the number of guns on each ship had decreased from ten to eight, the broadside weight had been increased to 7,152 pounds.

 

 

In total, all five of the German battlecruisers had a combined broadside weight of 33,064 pounds per salvo. At the maximum rate of fire, this amounted to a broadside weight of 99,192 pounds of armor-piercing ordnance per minute—but only on paper. During the battle, the typical sustained rate of fire—for both the German battlecruisers and battleships—was closer to one shot per gun per minute.67

 

Turning to the British battlecruisers, the six Invincible and Indefatigable class ships each carried eight BL 12-inch Mark X guns, mounted in four twin turrets in an arrangement similar to that of Von der Tann; two staggered wing turrets amidships and two on the centerline, forward and aft of the superstructure. The amidships turrets of the Invincible class were too closely positioned; they were incapable of firing across the deck. As a result, their broadsides were limited to six of their eight guns.68

 

 

The ability to engage the Germans with relative impunity would have been a tremendous advantage. Had they made use of it, the British might have inflicted serious damage on their German opponents at the outset of the battle. Nevertheless, the 12-inch guns of the two Indefatigable class ships were out-ranged by at least 1,000 yards by all of the German main battery guns. By binding to them the longer-ranged 13.5-inch guns aboard his more modern ships, Beatty discarded a critical strength of his battlecruisers and all but ensured the Germans would have the opportunity to open fire first.

 

 The Germans scored more than three times as many hits in the first 12 minutes of the engagement, and this imbalance continued for the rest of the run to the south.

 

 

Queen Mary was hit at least 7 times before it blew up, Tiger was pummeled by 14 large-caliber shells, New Zealand was hit once, and Indefatigable was hit at least 5 times before a magazine explosion destroyed the ship. In response, Lützow was hit only 4 times, Seydlitz and Moltke were hit 5 times apiece, Von der Tann received a mere 3 hits, and Derfflinger emerged completely unscathed. This amounted to 42 hits on British battlecruisers and 17 on German ships, a ratio of nearly 2.5 to 1.

 

 

In the course of the entire engagement, Lützow was hit approximately 24 times by large caliber shells, Derfflinger sustained 21 hits, Seydlitz was hit 22 times by main guns and once by a torpedo, and Moltke and Von der Tann were hit five and four times by heavy guns, respectively.99 On the British side, Lion was hit by 13 large-caliber shells, Tiger was hit 15 times by heavy guns and four times by medium weapons, Princess Royal sustained 9 major hits, Queen Mary was hit seven times, Indefatigable and Invincible were both estimated to have taken five large-caliber hits apiece, and New Zealand was hit once.100
Lützow

 

 The loss of Lützow notwithstanding, their heavier armor allowed the German battlecruisers to endure much more damage than their British contemporaries. A significant portion of the major damage done to the surviving German ships happened during the charge against the British line shortly after 1900. During this period, Derfflinger had taken over the lead position and thus became the primary target; the ship was hit 14 times the span of approximately six minutes.103 It is unlikely that the more lightly armored British battlecruisers would have been able to withstand such a tremendous hammering, even disregarding the tendency of their magazines to explode catastrophically.
102

 

 

The most important issue that determined the outcome of the battlecruiser actions during the Battle of Jutland was the composition of the propellant charges for the main battery ammunition, and the manner in which it was handled. For the British heavy guns, four separate propellant charges were used for each shell fired. For the German guns, this consisted of a primary charge contained in a large brass cartridge and a smaller fore charge stored in a silk bag.104

 

Meanwhile, in Germany, the Krupp firm experimented with a number of breech blocks starting in the 1850s. Instead of a swinging breech block, a sliding block was adopted in 1859. This fit into a mortise slot cut into the rear of the gun; the block was locked in place by a screw-threaded rod which passed through both the block and the barrel.112 Krupp tested several variations on this system before deciding to use a brass cartridge case to seal the breech. By the 1880s, this system was standardized on all calibers of artillery produced by the firm.113

 

Admiral Alfred von Tirpitz, the architect of the German battle fleet, needed every shred of political support he could muster;116 therefore he could not consider awarding contracts for naval armaments to any firm other than Krupp.

 

Since the de Bange breech completely sealed the breech by itself, the propellant could be packaged in simple silk bags.

 

The British cordite charges were stored two apiece in metal containers in the magazines. The igniters on top of the charges were protected by a thick paper cover that was removed prior to loading. Warrant Officer Grant, who was the Chief Gunner aboard HMS Lion after 1915, recounted in his unpublished memoirs that he found the gun crews to have repeatedly violated established safety regulations. The crews frequently removed the paper padding in the magazines, as opposed to waiting until loading; this allowed grains of propellant to leak out, which left a trail all the way from the gun turrets to the magazines.

 

Conclusion Admiral David Beatty has been both criticized and praised for his handling of the British battlecruiser squadrons at the Battle of Jutland. The battlecruiser force under Beatty's command was severely mauled during the engagement; three of his nine vessels were destroyed by German gunfire, and a fourth—his flagship Lion—nearly exploded as well. Ultimately, to a large extent Beatty can be blamed for the disaster. While the proximate cause of the explosions aboard the British ships was the highly unstable and poorly protected propellant charges—something entirely out of Beatty's control—he failed to ensure safety precautions in the magazine rooms were being followed. Furthermore, his own directives concerning the rate of fire of the main battery were the cause for the discontinuation of many of these safety procedures. The failure to enforce proper handling procedures virtually guaranteed catastrophic magazine explosions would occur. This was clearly demonstrated by the incident aboard his flagship Lion; the fact that the magazine doors had been closed—a practice implemented only on this ship—when the turret was penetrated allowed the crew enough time to flood the magazine, which prevented the ship from being destroyed. Despite the seemingly overwhelming superiority of the British Battlecruiser Squadrons, in terms of numbers of warships and the number, caliber, and weight of shell of their guns, their German opponents emerged from the battle having inflicted much more destruction than they had absorbed. The German battlecruisers did enjoy several advantages over their British rivals; their heavier armor allowed them to stand up to more punishing fire. Their more highly-trained gun crews were on average more capable of dealing damage, even without the aid of a mechanical fire control system comparable to the Dreyer Table or Argo Clock on the British 36 ships. A still-greater advantage was the superior performance of the German armor-piercing shells compared to the British versions. In the end, however, the performance of the ships' armaments and ammunition, fire control, and armor systems was of secondary importance. The deciding factor that led to the loss of three British battlecruisers at the hands of their German rivals was the physical differences in both sides' propellant charges and how they were handled. Both German and British battlecruisers had their turrets and barbettes penetrated and the ammunition inside ignited, though only the British ships suffered catastrophic explosions as a result. This was the direct consequence of the greater vulnerability and much faster burn rate of the British propellant and the unsafe manner in which it was handled. Indefatigable, Queen Mary, and Invincible might very well have survived the battle if their crews had followed the prescribed safety regulations for the handling of cordite.

 

 

Battlecruisers at Jutland: A Comparative Analysis of British and German Warship Design and its Impact on the Naval War

A Senior Honors Thesis

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for graduation with research distinction in the undergraduate colleges of The Ohio State University

by Nathanial G. Ott The Ohio State University July 2010

Project Advisor: Professor John F. Guilmartin, Department of History

 

 

 

 

 

http://forum.worldof...85#entry1057985

 

....

 

 

[Gojuadorai]

verry nice post thank you !

[HMS_Worcester]

 

[Armo1000]

 

http://forum.worldof...85#entry1057985

 

....

 

 

 

Yeah i shut up after reading that but considering they usually let us know about things days before the event this doesn't seem right.

[DexterManley]

100 years ago 249 ships german and british ships clashed in the North Sea....

 

 

 

http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/15135-die-seeschlacht-vor-dem-skagerrak-am-31-mai-1916/#topmost (lots of photos, paintings, tactical maps, videos, books, info etc in this german thread)

 

see also:

 

http://www.britishba...pposing-fleets/

http://www.britishba...-31st-may-1916/

 http://www.britishbattles.com/the-battle-of-jutland-part-iii-clash-between-the-british-and-german-battle-fleets-during-the-evening-31st-may-1916/

http://www.britishba...-1st-june-1916/

http://www.britishba...-part-v-annexe/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Battlecruisers at Jutland: A Comparative Analysis of British and German Warship Design and its Impact on the Naval War

A Senior Honors Thesis

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for graduation with research distinction in the undergraduate colleges of The Ohio State University

by Nathanial G. Ott The Ohio State University July 2010

Project Advisor: Professor John F. Guilmartin, Department of History

 

 

 

 

 

http://forum.worldof...85#entry1057985

 

....

 

 

Battle of Jutland, May 31, 1916 – June 1, 1916

 

You no longer have a couple of days to go.........................In fact you're late..................Disrespectful in my eyes.

[Armo1000]

Im going to leave it till 12 before i make any assumptions. but its still disrespectful  to leave it that late. 

[IamTroublemaker]

Battle of Jutland, May 31, 1916 – June 1, 1916

 

You no longer have a couple of days to go.........................In fact you're late..................Disrespectful in my eyes.

 

Maybe you should have your eyes checked then?

 

We got a 5 week event that is currently ongoing to commemorate all the battles that have happened in this period decades ago.

 

Also, this is a GAME, and they aren't even obligated to give us the events they have given us, so be more grateful instead of acting like a spoiled child.

[cro_pwr]

beautiful video, tnx for sharing.

 

and I cannot believe they had such a poor information sharing during the fights... I mean come on, you aren't sharing information with the rest of your fleet / with your commanders etc???? that made me cringe...

[mike_864]

I see that the USS Indianapolis has arrived in the shop

 

Is that it?

 

Mike.

[Armo1000]

 

Maybe you should have your eyes checked then?

 

We got a 5 week event that is currently ongoing to commemorate all the battles that have happened in this period decades ago.

 

Also, this is a GAME, and they aren't even obligated to give us the events they have given us, so be more grateful instead of acting like a spoiled child.

I said this last tine and i will say it again. 100 years from one of the largest naval battles in history is a bit of an exception and should have extra effort made for it. not just bunch it up with some other event that i personally dont even care about.

[Thirdofherne]

Was rather hoping this would be the perfect opportunity to release a line of British ships.

[HMS_Worcester]

 

Maybe you should have your eyes checked then?

 

We got a 5 week event that is currently ongoing to commemorate all the battles that have happened in this period decades ago.

 

Also, this is a GAME, and they aren't even obligated to give us the events they have given us, so be more grateful instead of acting like a spoiled child.

 

Ahh yes, the great grind fest event with some names of battles loosely tacked on, what a great way of commemorating such important moments in history.....