Historical Ship vs Ship actions.

Discussion in 'Full Scale' started by FirePowerDan, Oct 28, 2008.

  1. NASAAN101

    NASAAN101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2009
    Posts:
    2,504
    Location:
    Pittsburgh PA, USA
    Darren,
    I wasn't trying to get anyone mad at me ok..
    Nikki
     
  2. Kotori87

    Kotori87 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2006
    Posts:
    3,525
    Here's a question. How does Prinz Eugen's fire control compare to the older British battlecruisers? I know the British BCs got upgraded between the wars, but by how much?

    One of the problems with all of us model battlers is that we tend to look only at speed, armor, and guns, and automatically assume that each side has equal odds of hitting. One of the things I've noticed is that wargamers only check the guns and armor long enough to find out if it can inflict damage, then they start comparing fire control. Fire control has a huge effect on a battle, at least equal to the effects of gun size and armor thickness.
     
  3. crzyhawk

    crzyhawk Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    Posts:
    2,306
    Location:
    Alexandria, VA
    Fire control plays a huge part. For example, regarding the Prinz Eugen and my beloved Salt Lake City, if they met up in 1941, I'd say the PE would blow the SLC clean out of the water due to her superior optics. In 1944 when the SLC had radar firecontol though, different story. My money at that point would be on SLC's 10 gun battery nearly guaranteed to hit as soon or before PE could hit, especially if the weather was bad.

    As for the Brit BC's, Renown had top of the line British firecontrol at the beginning of the war. For a good comparison, look at the action vs Scharnhorst and Gneisenau. Renown hit the Gneisenau at least 3 times with her 15". The two Germans only managed 2-3 hits in return between the two of them. Scharnhorst and Gneisenau would have better firecontrol then the Prinz Eugen due to larger rangefinders which were probably mounted higher up as well. Also, the German 11" would have better ballistics then the 8" on PE, and so should be more accurate. Renown was the gunnery champ of the Home Fleet at the time. With Renown, I'd assume that she had better fire control then the PE.

    As for rangefinders, Hood had a 15 foot range finder on top of the conning tower. She had her 2 9 foot rangefinders replaced with 12 foot rangefinders before the war started, which should have led to increased accuracy. IIRC, Repulse had a 20 foot rangefinder on her conning tower and 2 nine footers. I'd guess thier fire control was slightly less effective then that of the PE.

    A primary reason for this, is that the British used a co-incidence range finder and the Germans used a stereoscopic range finder. The German system was more precise, but the operator had to have a higher level of training and would tire quickly. Furthermore, not everyone could operate the German rangefinder. German optical rangefinders were considered the best in the world at the beginning of the war.

    Also contributing to the problem for the British, was their fire control doctrine. They deliberately fire short, then ladder their shots out until they are over. Once they are over, they adjust fire to the target. The Germans assume their first firing solution will be on target and adjust fire from there as necessary. Thus over a long action, German accuracy is more likely to degrade then that of the British, but is more likely to hit first...as Hood found out the hard way. The Germans themselves held the Hood's shooting at Denmark strait to be excellent, even though Hood never scored.

    In short, the PE MAY have had a slight edge over the Hood and Repulse but this is debateable given the Hood and Repulse would have had larger rangefinders and had them mounted higher which would offset the superior quality of the German optics. PE's fire control probably inferior to the Renown. Both Hood and Repulse were excellent shooters with the very, very accurate 15"/42 gun and reputations for being accurate gunnery ships. They were not Beatty's battlecruisers.
     
  4. NASAAN101

    NASAAN101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2009
    Posts:
    2,504
    Location:
    Pittsburgh PA, USA
    guys,
    this is going over my head here, i dont understand all the tech. stuff on all this, so it over my head.. Did any of germany shel have any blasting caps on the or was that only in misslies? Any way, going back to Prinz Eugen, how long are she shells, i know the bore of the shell is 8inches across, but how long are their?
    Nikki
     
  5. crzyhawk

    crzyhawk Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    Posts:
    2,306
    Location:
    Alexandria, VA
    You're probably not looking for a real answer to that but I'll give you one anyway!

    Actual bore diameter was not 8 inches, it was 7.992 inches or 203mm. Shells length is as follows:

    Armor Piercing = 35.2 inches
    High Explosive = 37.6 inches (base fuse)
    High Explosive = 37.5 inches (nose fuse)
    Illumination = 36 inches

    Anything else you might want to know about the German 203mm main guns for the Prinz Eugen can be found at this website:

    http://navweaps.com/Weapons/WNGER_8-60_skc34.htm
     
  6. NASAAN101

    NASAAN101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2009
    Posts:
    2,504
    Location:
    Pittsburgh PA, USA
    Mike,
    Actully, i was! i Had a friend asked me and i didnt know, so that why i asked you guys!
    Nikki
     
  7. NASAAN101

    NASAAN101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2009
    Posts:
    2,504
    Location:
    Pittsburgh PA, USA
    Guys.
    This is away out of left field. If. Bismarck and Bismarck could talk, I wonder what they would have said after Denmark straits. I know sounds stupid, but y have to that :)
    Nikki