Battle of Jutland

Discussion in 'Full Scale' started by Gascan, Sep 12, 2009.

  1. Gascan

    Gascan Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2007
    Posts:
    920
    Who won the battle of Jutland, and why? What did this show?
    Knight said that "The Battle of Juttland proves that a heard of lambs lead by a lion will defeat a heard of lions lead by a lamb. The Germans had the better ships, but did not use them to thier advantage."
    Why didn't they use them to their advantage?
    How apt is the description of the British as a "herd of lambs led by a lion?"
     
  2. HorribleHarry

    HorribleHarry Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2008
    Posts:
    77
    I am currently reading all three of these for probably the 5th time...
    1) Jutland an analysis of the fighting by John Campbell
    2) Castles of steel by Robert Massey
    3) Jutland the german perspective by V.E Tarrant
    I hate to use Wikipedia as a source or reference, but the assessment section of the battle is pretty much on the ball.
    I think you will hear opinions for both sides having won form different people. If anything in the overall scheme of things I believe a draw or stalemate was achieved.

    (but in my not so humble opinion, Hipper handed Beatty his a** on a silver plate that day)
     
  3. HorribleHarry

    HorribleHarry Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2008
    Posts:
    77
    I just thought this over... I have a new conclusion.

    I do not know who knight is off the top of my head, but he sounds american or british (if the name was Ritter I'd think differently) Remember history is written by the winner, in the case of WWI the general history was of course anglo/american in nature & I'm appalled by the one sidedness of our memory.
    The lamb/lion descriptions could be more aptly applied to those further up the food chain, but not to the men involved in the action itself, and I would NEVER disrespect the sailors of either side with the moniker sheep. (nor were Jellicoe, Scheer, Beatty or Hipper for that matter) these were brave men doing their duty for their countries not only looking at death by consequences of war but by the unforgiving sea on top of that.
    That being said, lambs lead by a lion did NOT defeat lions lead by a lamb. (which is a ridiculous comment anyways)
    I've been studying this battle for about 15 years, and i just had an epiphany.
    The german fleet was looking to spring a trap on an isolated part of the british navy, not "take complete control of the seas" just whittle away at it bit by bit, (which they did) whereas the Grand fleet's intentions were to more or less destroy the entire German fleet. (which they did not)
    One cannot say "well, Great britain still holds the majority of the seaways, or the british fleet was in better shape the next month, so they won the battle... as that would relate to a post battle situation & an overall strategic outcome that was still 2 years off
    The British ships came home to Jeers & were derided by even the dockworkers for "losing" whereas the German ships came home to rousing parades, marching bands & the adoration of the people. The British were SUPPOSED to win & the Germans were SUPPOSED to lose... this simply did not happen on the eyes of the people in their respective countries. if there were a PR trophy you had to give it to Scheer & Hipper.

    So as far as the BATTLE of Skagerrak or Jutland itself, Tactically... the only conclusion must be that the high seas fleet "won" the contest! With fewer ships lost, lower tonnage lost & much lower casualties. These stats DO NOT LIE.
     
  4. Gascan

    Gascan Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2007
    Posts:
    920
    "Knight" is short for Knight4hire, a member of this forum.

    I think "lamb" refers to the British ships not the men, while "lion" refers to the leader. British ships were not nearly as tough as their German opponents (even discounting the malfunctioning shells and tendency to explode when hit in a turret or barbette), so they might reasonably be called lambs when compared to their opposition. Jellicoe, however, was able to outmaneuver Scheer during the main action. His superior position convinced Scheer to retreat despite the inferior British ships.
     
  5. HorribleHarry

    HorribleHarry Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2008
    Posts:
    77
    The British battleships could withstand a hell of a beating, like Warspite, Barham, Malaya, So could the battlecruisers like Lion & Tiger which took terrific punishment & survived. British ships were also more comfortable for the crew, were fast & handy. It appears that In this particular battle, the better protected more accurately aimed ship had the advantage. If you compare each ship class side by side you will see the qualitative parity of the german ship making up for it's numerical disadvantage. As is often the case though, it was also a war of numbers, the same as in WWII where the "unofficial" way to kill a Tiger or Panther was to take 5 Shermans & swarm it. WWI as well as WWII were both examples of "quantity has a quality all it's own".
    The british shells tended to break up at angles & often did not explode which cost them many damaging blows, just as Lutzow was firing CPC & not APC which would have been devastating in the early part of the battle. This brings up all the "what if's". There were so many in this battle that there is no way to accurately guess what would have happened if things were PERFECT for each side. (although that would be interesting to see!)
    As far as lambs & lions go, I think the only lambs were again the people above both Jellicoe & Scheer. The kaiser was afraid to lose his capital ships & wacky Jackie & winston were expected to "win or don't come home"
    in a nutshell, if I had a choice of what ships "I" would rather be in in a battle, look at my avatar.

    Hochseeflotte Harry
     
  6. Anachronus

    Anachronus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Posts:
    3,085
    Location:
    Natchez, MS
    With the communications of the day the Grand Fleet was hardly led at all. It was simply to big to be manuevered effectively.

    I tend to go for a German Tactical win but a Grand Fleet strategic win.
     
  7. eljefe

    eljefe Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2008
    Posts:
    489
    Location:
    California
    Hard to argue with that. The fact that the German fleet spent essentially the rest of the war in port refusing to engage the British is a pretty significant point.
     
  8. Knight4hire

    Knight4hire Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2008
    Posts:
    963
    My comment about lambs and lions was refering to leadership.
    The German fleet had their "T" crossed not once but twice!

    As for who won, just look at the day after the battle, the Gand Fleet reported for duty, the other fleet did not.
     
  9. Anachronus

    Anachronus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Posts:
    3,085
    Location:
    Natchez, MS
    Back the the shells. Wasn't it either Jellico or Beaty who had been in charge of shell production and had advocated for improved shells before the war?
     
  10. crzyhawk

    crzyhawk Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    Posts:
    2,306
    Location:
    Alexandria, VA
    Jutland was logically a tactical victory for the Germans, but a resounding strategic victory for the British. The ships the British lost had no impact on the tactical employment of the Grand fleet. Sure three BCs are a steep price to pay, but honestly, they were replaced in short order and with better ships

    You might also make the arguement that losing the Lutzow, was proportionally a more significant blow to the fighting power of the 1st scouting group (and the High Seas Fleet) then was Queen Mary, Invincible and Indefatigable to the BCF, not to mention the near loss of Seydlitz. After the battle, 1st scouting group was operationally a shell of itself, where as the BCF could still field 6 fully operational battlecruisers, not counting Lion, Renown or Repulse or the Courageous class large light cruisers (light battlecrusiers) and operate as a powerful force.

    Hipper's 1st scouting group was by far the most useful component of the High Seas Fleet. Jutland decimated it operationally for months. Without it, the High Seas Fleet had nothing it could truly risk as bait to isolate a significant portion of the Grand Fleet. The inability to of the High Seas fleet to isolate smaller portions of the Grand Fleet left the only choice all-or-nothing battle, a fight the High Seas fleet COULD NOT win.
     
  11. Gascan

    Gascan Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2007
    Posts:
    920
    Assuming they fought on British terms, with the wind and and light favoring the British, they would not do very well at all in a stand up, all or nothing battle. However, consider that the British took until 1918 to fix their shells and their ships still had a particular vulnerability to exploding due to cordite. I would say that the High Seas Fleet had a very good chance of taking on the Grand Fleet unless Room 40 came through and allowed the British to get in a much better tactical position.
     
  12. Kotori87

    Kotori87 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2006
    Posts:
    3,522
    I actually don't think the 1st Scouting Group was as badly weakened as you might think, especially if the Germans had re-organized their fleets. The most modern German battleships were significantly faster than the Grand Fleet's warships, and could have been integrated into the 1SG to augment their firepower. This would create a fast, powerful force that could outrun the Grand Fleet, and pummel the BCF. Imagine what Hipper could do with both his battlecruisers and a handful of Koenigs and Kaisers.
     
  13. Knight4hire

    Knight4hire Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2008
    Posts:
    963
    One thing that has not been mentioned here is that the Brit's had broken the German code.

    The German fleet was going in for the kill and the Brits surprised them with a combined fleet of double the size of what the German fleet was expecting to find.

    I still strongly feel that despite this advantage to the Brits, if the German fleet had a better commander, it could have been a decisive victory for the German fleet.
     
  14. crzyhawk

    crzyhawk Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    Posts:
    2,306
    Location:
    Alexandria, VA
    Unless of course Beatty gets to keep the 5 QE's to offset the Konigs and Kaisers. You can also throw the 24 knot Canada to the BCF. Lessons learned will improve cordite handling proceedures, so the chance for turret flash is significantly decreased. Shooting will probably be improved. 6 (5 if you discount Warspite due to damage) fast battleships plus the BCF is still more then von Hipper will be able to handle with his 1SG should they attempt to regorganize a fast raiding wing around their 23 knot BBs + the tattered remains of the 1SG.


    Endgame is still the same; the HSF simply did not have the numbers or ships to compete with the Grand Fleet.
     
  15. Gascan

    Gascan Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2007
    Posts:
    920
    Improved cordite handling procedures won't really fix the inherent property of British cordite to burn extremely rapidly and produce a huge overpressure capable of destroying a ship. It's not the handling procedures, and it's not the flash protection. Lion was considered to be "by the book" for handling procedures, yet here Q turret still went off. It's not flash protection because the hatch to the magazine was damaged enough to allow flames through when only a few charges were ignited in Lion's Q turret. Thin sheet metal scuttles would be even more likely to fail than a thick metal hatch. The only reason Lion didn't follow her sisters was her magazine was already flooded, preventing the other cordite from burning when the hatch was breached.

    Still, it sounds like an interesting match. Hipper sortied in August with Motlke, Von Der Tann, Bayern, Markgraf, and Grosser Kurfurst in the Scouting Force. Beatty sortied with Lion (minus Q turret), Princess Royal, Tiger, Australia, New Zealand, Indomitable, and Inflexible. It would be interesting to see what happens if Hipper has the other two Konigs (Konig and Kronprinz) and Beatty gets the QEs.
     
  16. crzyhawk

    crzyhawk Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    Posts:
    2,306
    Location:
    Alexandria, VA
    Actually I read somewhere that the Lion was definitely not "by the book" as far as her handling procedures go. I also seem to recall that the mags weren't already flooded when Q turret was hit, but I don't remember where or when I read it. I'd imagine your knowledge would be better then mine, as WW1 actions are far less interesting to me then WW2 actions and have received much less interest in my reading.
     
  17. Gascan

    Gascan Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2007
    Posts:
    920
    You're correct, Lion's magazines were not flooded when her turret was hit. The magazine was flooded after the hit. A few minutes later, one of the cordite charges fell out of the open breech of the left-hand 13.5" gun and was ignited by a smoldering ember. That can be found in Castles of Steel by Robert Massie on page 592. Unfortunately, the rest of my info is hear-say from another discussion. I believe the source of most of that discussion is Jutland: and Analysis of the Fighting by John Campbell, which I do not have. If anyone has this book, could you check to see what it says about Lion's ammo handling and the explosion of Q turret?

    The other discussion:
    http://forums.gamesquad.com/showthread.php?t=80732
     
  18. crzyhawk

    crzyhawk Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    Posts:
    2,306
    Location:
    Alexandria, VA
    I really wish I could remember where I saw that bit about one of the Lion's (former?) gunnery officers being appalled by the ammunition handling procedures, and predicting that turret flash was likely to happen.
     
  19. Gascan

    Gascan Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2007
    Posts:
    920
    I recall reading about a gunnery officer who was appalled by the handling procedures on certain battle cruisers, but I don't recall which ship, when, or what the source was. It could have been Lion before Dogger Bank. As soon as I get some free time, I'll dig back into Castles of Steel. The problem is calling up facts with no source to back them up.
     
  20. Knight4hire

    Knight4hire Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2008
    Posts:
    963
    I have had to rethink my position. The errors of my ways have been severely pointed out to me.

    The Brits had broken the German code thus set and sprung a trap on the German Fleet.

    Once the German admiral realized that he was up against the entire British fleet, he did his best to get his ships out of there. The British ships were faster and the German Fleet had brought along four old, slow dreadnaughts. (Or were those Pre Dreadnaughts? I do not recall off the top of my head right now.)
    Having his "T" crossed was something that the German Admiral could not avoid.

    Thus I must apologize for how I have thought of the German Leadership all these years, and retract my previous statements about the Admiral. He did the best that could be done in that situation. I stand correct.