- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 100 years ago this week, the Battle of Jutland
Posted on 5/29/16 at 3:58 pm to Jim Rockford
Posted on 5/29/16 at 3:58 pm to Jim Rockford
quote:
The things were so hideously expensive that nations were reluctant to put them at risk after this, and then, they were rendered obsolete by naval aviation.
So you either lose 'em to combat or to obsolescence. Damn the torpedoes ...
Posted on 5/29/16 at 4:01 pm to foshizzle
irony is a bitch, isn't it?
Posted on 5/29/16 at 4:38 pm to RedlandsTiger
quote:
Though Beatty's larger 13.5 in (340 mm) guns out-ranged Hipper's 11 and 12 in (280 and 300 mm) guns by thousands of yards, Beatty held his fire for 10 minutes and closed the German squadron until within range of the Germans' superior gunnery, under lighting conditions that favoured the Germans.[170] Most of the British losses in tonnage occurred in Beatty's force.
Oops.
Posted on 5/30/16 at 6:27 pm to NYNolaguy1
I've done a bit of review on Jutland. Beatty had a very good reason to hold fire until he closed the range. Although his batteries could out-range the German guns, Beatty's guns had no chance to actually HIT anything at those longer ranges.
Beatty's ships' Range-finder devices were only 9 feet long. That was insufficient for accurate shooting at the longest of ranges, that is, ranges of more than 18 kilometers.
So, although Beatty's battlecruisers could fire about 21 kilometers away, they had no capability to be accurately aimed beyond about 18 kilometers.
The British battleships almost all used the same range-finder, so, they would have the same handicap.
The 15 foot rangefinder was superior and more accurate at ranges above 18 kilometers. The German used the 15 foot range finders, and the quality of their rangefinders was superior in other ways.
Beatty's ships' Range-finder devices were only 9 feet long. That was insufficient for accurate shooting at the longest of ranges, that is, ranges of more than 18 kilometers.
So, although Beatty's battlecruisers could fire about 21 kilometers away, they had no capability to be accurately aimed beyond about 18 kilometers.
The British battleships almost all used the same range-finder, so, they would have the same handicap.
The 15 foot rangefinder was superior and more accurate at ranges above 18 kilometers. The German used the 15 foot range finders, and the quality of their rangefinders was superior in other ways.
This post was edited on 5/30/16 at 6:37 pm
Posted on 5/31/16 at 9:37 am to Champagne
Jutland battle 100 years ago today. bump
Posted on 5/31/16 at 9:42 am to Champagne
Just saw your post about the British gunnery limitations due to inferior rangefinders. That's interesting and perfectly explains why Beatty held fire and closed range with the German battle cruisers. Great post.
Posted on 5/31/16 at 9:58 am to stlslick
quote:I visited Arnhem in 1999. Went to the British cemetery, and I was shocked to see the ages of the 1st Airborne soldiers killed at Arnhem. The officers in particular were very young for their ranks. This LINK lists those killed.
Brutal beating the English took, the General(Connery) at end, says he took 10K to the area, and came back with 2.
Posted on 5/31/16 at 1:27 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
Just saw your post about the British gunnery limitations due to inferior rangefinders. That's interesting and perfectly explains why Beatty held fire and closed range with the German battle cruisers. Great post.
Thanks.
Zeiss Optics. That's another edge that the German rangefinders possessed. Zeiss Glass made the optics for all of the German subs and warships in WW1.
Zeiss Glass also made the optics for German tanks, ships and airplanes in WW2.
Zeiss was overrun by the Red Army and enjoyed a new era of Excellence making optics for the post WW2 Soviet Army.
Jellicoe was quite correct in his decision to remain conservative during the course of the battle. Years ago Rumsfeld of the USA spoke about "Knowing what you don't know" and the much more scary "NOT knowing what you don't know."
Nobody on Earth had a clue that the British capital ships at Jutland were going to be blowing up with catastrophic regularity. Jellicoe certainly did NOT know that he didn't know this.
Jellicoe deserves praise for his risk aversion. If Jellicoe had aggressively attacked the German battleships, some of Jellicoe's own battleships would surely have blown up, just as some of Beatty's battlecruisers did.
Both Germans and Brits had propellant charge bags in risky locations in the heat of battle. Both sides lost turrets when penetrations ignited flash fires inside the turret.
The differences were: 1) the British propellant was too volatile. Once ignited it flashed at a speed that created massive overpressure inside the turret. Explosive results.
German propellant was less volatile, burned a bit more slowly when ignited in the gun house by enemy shell, no overpressure no explosion. Turret was still lost but not the whole ship.
2) British armor piercing projectiles tended to explode too early on impact. As such, during the whole battle, only one British heavy shell penetrated and exploded inside a German capital ship at Jutland. Only one out of the thousands fired. Result this hit: turret of German battlecruiser destroyed, but ship did not explode and made it back to base after the battle.
There were many hits on German capital ships by British heavy AP shell, but, all but one exploded outside the German ship structure causing less damage than had they penetrated and exploded inside the enemy ship structure.
This post was edited on 5/31/16 at 1:58 pm
Popular
Back to top


1





