Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"Something's wrong with our bloody ships today"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    "Something's wrong with our bloody ships today"

    It's 100 years since the largest naval battle of WW1, the Battle of Jutland, and the thread title is taken from words attributed to Vice Admiral David Beatty after yet another British battlecruiser exploded after a single hit from a German shell. BBC ran a documentary last night claiming that, contrary to the belief that British ship design was inherently inferior to German, it was in fact the British practice of storing vast quantities of cordite in the vicinity of their ships' cannons, coupled with disregard of safety protocols that were meant to ensure all ship compartments were locked so as to prevent fire spreading, that lead to the British battlecruisers Indefatigable, Queen Mary and Invincible sinking within seconds of being hit. I'm not sure I believe that entirely - their rapid sinking surely still has much to do with the fact that their non-existent deck armour meant plunging shells could easily penetrate and then detonate in the magazine, blowing the ship in half as per what happened to Hood in the Battle of the Denmark Strait 25 years later.

    EDIT: I stand corrected. From the Wiki:

    Whether or not thin deck armour was a potential weakness of British ships, the battle provided no evidence that it was the case. At least amongst the surviving ships, no enemy shell was found to have penetrated deck armour anywhere.
    Anyone else interested in the history of this battle?

    #2
    "Something's wrong with our bloody ships today"

    Also due to the incompetence of the British commanders insisting on a "high rate of fire" rather than waiting for the range-finding computers to determine trajectory and aim, IIRC.

    Comment


      #3
      "Something's wrong with our bloody ships today"

      Oh. And the tactic was deliberately to use Beatty's battle-cruiser group to draw out the Imperial Fleet into an encounter with the Grand Fleet.

      In a sense, they were used as bait.

      (and the Royal Navy was vilified back on the home front, for not having repeated Trafalgar, and annihilated the enemy)

      Comment


        #4
        "Something's wrong with our bloody ships today"

        And how it affected just one community in one British city.

        http://www.grangetown.wales/?p=492

        Comment


          #5
          "Something's wrong with our bloody ships today"

          Lots of detail on this in Peter Padfield's very good "Battleship" (including an apology on the whole Pollen/Dreyer controversy)

          Comment


            #6
            "Something's wrong with our bloody ships today"

            Carniveraux Vulgarry wrote: It's 100 years since the largest naval battle of WW1, the Battle of Jutland, and the thread title is taken from words attributed to Vice Admiral David Beatty after yet another British battlecruiser exploded after a single hit from a German shell. BBC ran a documentary last night claiming that, contrary to the belief that British ship design was inherently inferior to German, it was in fact the British practice of storing vast quantities of cordite in the vicinity of their ships' cannons, coupled with disregard of safety protocols that were meant to ensure all ship compartments were locked so as to prevent fire spreading, that lead to the British battlecruisers Indefatigable, Queen Mary and Invincible sinking within seconds of being hit. I'm not sure I believe that entirely - their rapid sinking surely still has much to do with the fact that their non-existent deck armour meant plunging shells could easily penetrate and then detonate in the magazine, blowing the ship in half as per what happened to Hood in the Battle of the Denmark Strait 25 years later.

            Anyone else interested in the history of this battle?
            It's health and safety gone mad

            Comment


              #7
              "Something's wrong with our bloody ships today"

              Carniveraux Vulgarry wrote:
              Originally posted by Crusoe
              Lots of detail on this in Peter Padfield's very good "Battleship" (including an apology on the whole Pollen/Dreyer controversy)
              What's that?
              I might be a bit hazy on this, but I'll try:

              There were 2 competing gunnery fire control systems being evaluated at the time. One designed by a civilian, Arthur Pollen, one by an officer serving under Jellicoe, Frederick Dreyer. Pollen's was far superior in design but Jellicoe pushed for Dreyer's and had it accepted. There was common belief that Dreyer plagiarised parts of Pollen's design in his. The decision was especially controversial given the perceived gunnery failures at Jutland.

              Padfield revisits and concludes that it may have been a deliberate decision informed by strategy - Jellicoe pushed for Dreyer's system because he had no intention of fighting the Germans at long range (which Pollen's system would have been better at) but instead to close in and fight close-up so as to ensure the German fleet's complete destruction. There's also revision of the accusations of plagiarism in Dreyer's design.

              Comment


                #8
                "Something's wrong with our bloody ships today"

                Note - I'm no expert and not in a position to judge for myself. I just read that book.

                Comment


                  #9
                  "Something's wrong with our bloody ships today"

                  Crusoe wrote:
                  Originally posted by Carniveraux Vulgarry
                  Originally posted by Crusoe
                  Lots of detail on this in Peter Padfield's very good "Battleship" (including an apology on the whole Pollen/Dreyer controversy)
                  What's that?
                  I might be a bit hazy on this, but I'll try:

                  There were 2 competing gunnery fire control systems being evaluated at the time. One designed by a civilian, Arthur Pollen, one by an officer serving under Jellicoe, Frederick Dreyer. Pollen's was far superior in design but Jellicoe pushed for Dreyer's and had it accepted. There was common belief that Dreyer plagiarised parts of Pollen's design in his. The decision was especially controversial given the perceived gunnery failures at Jutland.

                  Padfield revisits and concludes that it may have been a deliberate decision informed by strategy - Jellicoe pushed for Dreyer's system because he had no intention of fighting the Germans at long range (which Pollen's system would have been better at) but instead to close in and fight close-up so as to ensure the German fleet's complete destruction. There's also revision of the accusations of plagiarism in Dreyer's design.
                  But like I said upthread it was irrelevant anyway.

                  Because the dick-head commanders on the ground were obsessed by rate of fire.

                  So they weren't used properly anyway.

                  Also goes some way to explaining why the doors weren't shut.

                  It was more important to fire off the next round, and the fuckers responsible for that should have been court-martialed and shot.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    "Something's wrong with our bloody ships today"

                    I'm out of my depth and am not really disagreeing, but if Jellicoe was really pushing to close in when (I think) the Germans were better at that sort of fighting, it would've been a bloody stupid decision more likely to cost lives.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      "Something's wrong with our bloody ships today"

                      Well, they got an earldom and £100,000 and a viscountry (?) and £50,000 each instead of a court martial.

                      In my first job at HSBC, I was responsible for administering a trust set up by Jellicoe.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X