Battle of Jutland

Trunks · **Battle of Jutland -** 11-05-2005, 09:24 AM

For those who want some more info on the battle, I advise you to check out this link. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_jutland
Basically, I like to look at battles and analyze them, and this one has been bothering me. Both of the fleets were huge, and although this battle was signifigant, it was nowhere near as infuential as it could have been. What stuns me is Scheers actions. I cant understand what the hell he thought he was doing. He crossed the british T twice, he had his forces advance on the british fleet in a line formation i believe, which doesnt make sense to me at all. If the german imperial navy drew up to the royal navy and then had its ships make a 90 degree turn so that the entire fleet could fire "broadside" and engage the british fleet it quite possible that they would have won the battle, as their ships were, according to multiple sources, more heavily armored. Yet, neither commander seemed to seek out a decisive battle, and wats worse is like I said, what Scheer did makes absolutely no sense to me. Would anybody care to enlighten me? I know some of you here are interested in this kind of stuff, and/or have served in the amred forces.

Jin-Roh · 11-05-2005, 12:03 PM

I've never been unable to fully understand how Naval warfare works. Join the Navy! biggrin:

Short Hand · 11-06-2005, 02:12 PM

It makes perfect sense according to the article, The British ships were much more numerous, and had a whole ton of ammo, so going face to face would have been insane, the plan was to out manuver (germans = good cordination) and cripple the fleet from the side on an eqaul basis. (British doctrine according to this at the time was to volley out as much fire as possible.)

Few problems =

-Poor British communication

-to much cordite onboard = boom

-defective shells which would explode outside of the german armour.

-Seems the British QE class = extremely bad design, not enough safe ammo storage, mixed with lower end guns, which just could not compete with the Germans.

-THE only saving graces for the British in this battle were their overwhelming numbers, the Dreadnaught's, and the signal interception which told them the Gemrans fleet was there, so they never fell for the trap.

The Germans suffered more from the effects of a smaller fleet. Other then that, their ships generally had better armour and decent guns. + superior communication.

Trunks · 11-06-2005, 02:55 PM

exactly...and since the germans had better ships, better guns, and better communication, instead of advancing and retreating on the british line TWICE, Scheer should have sought out to wipe out the british, but he didnt, and the British commander, was too cautious, IMO, he had a chance to finish the germans off but he let them retreat TWICE. lol, i just dont get what the commanders were thinking about. If you let the enemy escape they will live to fight another day...

EDIT: Basically my point is although they imperial german navy was at a disdvantage numerically, the fact that their ships were more heavily armored, crews more accurate, and communication more percise has got to stand for something.

Short Hand · 11-06-2005, 06:34 PM

They couldn't touch the dreadnoughts, thats why. They sunk 6 cruisers though. IF they had gone face to face, it would have been the complete anihilation of the German Navy. Scheer did do well though.

imported_Fluffy_Bunny · 11-07-2005, 05:24 AM

If the British had lost then the war would be over for them in one afternoon. Britain depended largely on imported goods & trade to survive & the early U-boats were already causing many problems. As far as numbers go, the Germans won the battle because they sunk the most ships. But as far as tactical points go, the British won as they remained in control of the seas. The German Navy also stayed in port for the rest of the war which allowed the Royal Navy to put a blockade on German sea imported goods.

elstatec · 11-08-2005, 05:31 PM

you know there is only one man left alive from this battle?

[quote:27023]
WW1 Veterans

At 109, Henry Allingham is the country's oldest veteran of the war. He is also the last survivor of the Battle of Jutland and the last surviving founder member of the Royal Air Force.[/quote:27023]

[img]http://static.sky.com/images/pictures/1348360.jpg[/img]

Only 9 British soldiers from the whole of WW1 left, sad to hear

imported_Fluffy_Bunny · 11-09-2005, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elstatec

you know there is only one man left alive from this battle?

[quote:f0454]
WW1 Veterans

At 109, Henry Allingham is the country's oldest veteran of the war. He is also the last survivor of the Battle of Jutland and the last surviving founder member of the Royal Air Force.

[img]http://static.sky.com/images/pictures/1348360.jpg[/img]

Only 9 British soldiers from the whole of WW1 left, sad to hear[/quote:f0454]

Ya thats crazy, sort of puts it into perspective... If we were around at the time of the Battle of Jutland this guy would be a veteran of Trafalgar. ed: Imagine that, some guy fighting with Nelson dance:

Trunks · 11-09-2005, 12:58 PM

[quote="Fluffy_Bunny":09905]

Quote:

Originally Posted by elstatec

you know there is only one man left alive from this battle?

[quote:09905]
WW1 Veterans

At 109, Henry Allingham is the country's oldest veteran of the war. He is also the last survivor of the Battle of Jutland and the last surviving founder member of the Royal Air Force.

[img]http://static.sky.com/images/pictures/1348360.jpg[/img]

Only 9 British soldiers from the whole of WW1 left, sad to hear[/quote:09905]

Ya thats crazy, sort of puts it into perspective... If we were around at the time of the Battle of Jutland this guy would be a veteran of Trafalgar. ed: Imagine that, some guy fighting with Nelson dance:[/quote:09905]woa thats crazy....id love to get the chance to speak with him...I like speaking to war veterans...its shocking wat some of the have been through.

Jin-Roh · 11-09-2005, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trunks

its shocking wat some of the have been through.

'specially from those cookey Vietnam veterans. Unless you are talking about pre-50s. biggrin:

duncey · 11-09-2005, 04:22 PM

[quote="Jin-Roh":0bd43]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trunks

its shocking wat some of the have been through.

'specially from those cookey Vietnam veterans. Unless you are talking about pre-50s. biggrin:[/quote:0bd43]

War vets are wicked cool to talk to. There's a substitute teacher at my school; Mr. Dicessa. He's the best. He's like 75+ years old, still going strong. Surprising to see him still working, especially for what he's been through.