German victory at Jutland

Historical what if discussions, hypothetical operations, battleship vs. battleship engagements, design your own warship, etc.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7603
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Post by RF » Fri Oct 12, 2007 12:44 pm

I have thought of another possible scenario.

If the HSF managed to sink the bulk of the Grand Fleet, could the Germans have followed up by a landing in the Orkney and Shetland Islands and seize Scapa Flow to dent the Allied blockade?
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica
Contact:

Post by Karl Heidenreich » Fri Oct 12, 2007 3:17 pm

Interesting indeed... :!:
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill

User avatar
marcelo_malara
Senior Member
Posts: 1272
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 11:14 pm
Location: buenos aires

Post by marcelo_malara » Fri Oct 12, 2007 4:37 pm

I don´t think a landing was possible, but if the Grand Fleet was sunk the UK may be blockaded herself.

lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3810
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Post by lwd » Fri Oct 12, 2007 4:47 pm

It would depend a lot on how much damage they took in doing so. Not all the British fleet was at Jutland and the Italians, French, and Americans also had BBs.

Attempting to blockade Britain with the High Seas Fleat even if the Britts didn't have a BB left would be an exercise in frustration and futility. British light vessels and submarines could sally at will against the Germans and the sheer area that need to be blockaded is incredible. The British had the advantage that there were two choke points for sea traffic going to Germany. None such exist for British trade with the rest of the world.

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7603
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Post by RF » Wed Oct 17, 2007 12:56 pm

The job of blockading Britain was already given to the U-boats.

My thought was that simply depriving the Allies of the use of Scapa Flow by the Germans seizing it would break the Allied blockade of Germany and help German shipping and surface raiders escape out into the Atlantic...

The main pre-occupation of the British would be to deal with an invasion threat to England's east coast which would occupy the Allies remaining seapower.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

Bgile
Senior Member
Posts: 3658
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:33 pm
Location: Portland, OR, USA

Post by Bgile » Thu Oct 18, 2007 12:53 am

RF wrote:I have thought of another possible scenario.

If the HSF managed to sink the bulk of the Grand Fleet, could the Germans have followed up by a landing in the Orkney and Shetland Islands and seize Scapa Flow to dent the Allied blockade?
Could it be even remotely possible that the British didn't have a strong garrison a their most important naval base?

If the Germans did manage to capture it (how many troops could they transport across?), how long could they hold it? If you think the Germans can blockade the British Isles with their submarine force, how hard could it be for the British to starve out a German force trying to hold on to Scapa Flow? They had submarines too, right?

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7603
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Post by RF » Thu Oct 18, 2007 12:31 pm

Bgile wrote:.

Could it be even remotely possible that the British didn't have a strong garrison a their most important naval base?
There never was ''a strong garrison'' at Scapa Flow in either of the World Wars. The ''base'' is a stretch of water almost encircled by a chain of islands, with little in the way of human habitation apart from the ships and some shore refuelling facilities. Empty desolation is the best desription for this place, it is remote with a capital R. The only meaningful garrison or defence were the ships own guns - no army, no airfields except for the carriers.

Could the Germans have held it, and keep their forces supplied?

Probably not on a long term basis, unless the British capacity to retake it was eliminated by an invasion of eastern England.

Perhaps the nearest comparison would be with Spitzsbergen in WW2, in that neither side could hold these islands in the face of a naval expeditionary force by the other.

And as Prien so spectaculary demonstrated in October 1939 the ''base'' itself was open to submarine infiltration.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica
Contact:

Post by Karl Heidenreich » Thu Oct 18, 2007 3:32 pm

RF:
And as Prien so spectaculary demonstrated in October 1939 the ''base'' itself was open to submarine infiltration.
Prien´s accomplishment is one of those events that the allied common wisdom would deny as possible if brought to this hypotetical scenarios threads. Someone would bring forward a lot of info about how the RN was so strong and had so many destroyers and sonars and whatever they had that a German U-Boat with an unexperienced crew had this or that weaknesses so, at last, it was utterly imposibble for Prien to infiltrate and sink A BATTLESHIP.
Or Pearl Harbor: to have a complete japanese fleet of CV navigate the whole Pacific Ocean in order to attack an invulnerable base without being detected...
Or Bismarck sinking Hood without being touched by a single hit of the British BC...
Or a German BC sinking a British CV at record ranges...
...Or Yamato giving a hard kicking to an unsinkable Iowa...

It´s good for the bold ones their enemies understimate them, in order to write History and live forever in the memories of the future generations as Bismarck did, or Prien, or Nagumo while I don´t believe a 0,01% of the world population (or even the US youth) could name at least two of the Iowa Class "legends"...
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill

lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3810
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Post by lwd » Thu Oct 18, 2007 4:36 pm

Since you can't win a debate you seam to continuously set up strawmen. Lets take a look at the following:
Karl Heidenreich wrote: .... the allied common wisdom would deny as possible if brought to this hypotetical scenarios threads...
I'm not completely sure what you meant by this. "Allied common wisdom" and hypothetical sceario threads seam to have a bit of a disconect. However very few on these boards seem to argue that something is in possible yourself excepted.
... it was utterly imposibble for Prien to infiltrate and sink A BATTLESHIP.
You descirbe someone doing a good job of supporting his argument then inject a stawman ie "utterly impossible".
Or Pearl Harbor: to have a complete japanese fleet of CV navigate the whole Pacific Ocean in order to attack an invulnerable base without being detected...
An attack on PH was considered very possible at the time and had been conducted in US maneuvers. No one considered the base invulnerable. The navigation problem was hardly difficult. (note that it was hardly the whole of the Pacfic Ocean). From analysis of US maneuvers prior to the war arriving undetected was hardly impossible. Most of those on this board are well aware of these facts and even without the PH attack I doubt they would argue that it was impossible. Unlikly perhpas but not impossible.
Or Bismarck sinking Hood without being touched by a single hit of the British BC...
Why would anyone as knowledgeable about naval combat as most poster on this board say something like this was impossible. Less probable possibilities have been mentioned and accepted.
Or a German BC sinking a British CV at record ranges...
dittio
...Or Yamato giving a hard kicking to an unsinkable Iowa...
No one on this board that I've seen has argued that Iowa was unsinkable. Neither have they argued that Yamato couldn't severely damage or Sink Iowa. Please decease with your insulting stawmen.
It´s good for the bold ones their enemies understimate them, in order to write History and live forever in the memories of the future generations as Bismarck did, or Prien, or Nagumo while I don´t believe a 0,01% of the world population (or even the US youth) could name at least two of the Iowa Class "legends"...
I'm not sure what you mean by 'Iowa Class "legends"'. If you think that more people especially "US youth" could tell you who Prien or Nagumo were as opposed to the names or or a couple of famous incidents on the Iowa class BBs I'm pretty sure you are wrong. By the way did you mean 1 out of 100 or 1 out of 10,000 by "0,01"? The way it's written at least by the conventions I'm familiar with would indicate the latter although the US convention would be to write it .01% where the former would be written 1%.

User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica
Contact:

Post by Karl Heidenreich » Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:41 pm

lwd:

Since you can't win a debate you seam to continuously set up strawmen.
As far as I can read the threads you´re the one that didn´t won it. Your last remark was something about Shermans winning over Tigers.
And, at the end, the posibility of a radarless Yamato having an edge on wining over Iowa was stablished so, by having the damm device, would certainly give Yamato the victory.
So don´t be like De Gaulle and stop crying victory when you overunned...
You descirbe someone doing a good job of supporting his argument then inject a stawman ie "utterly impossible".
Go and find a 1939 newspaper...
An attack on PH was considered very possible at the time and had been conducted in US maneuvers. No one considered the base invulnerable. The navigation problem was hardly difficult. (note that it was hardly the whole of the Pacfic Ocean). From analysis of US maneuvers prior to the war arriving undetected was hardly impossible.
Go ask Admiral Kimmel. He was a little bit surprised on December 7th.

Why would anyone as knowledgeable about naval combat as most poster on this board say something like this was impossible. Less probable possibilities have been mentioned and accepted.
As far the hypotethical scenario posts from your "side" only give the Bismarck an edge over Kon Tiki. Hood´s destruction is given the aura of "miracle". It wasn´t unlikely: Hood was in no position to win over Bismarck, technically or tactically whatsover.
No one on this board that I've seen has argued that Iowa was unsinkable. Neither have they argued that Yamato couldn't severely damage or Sink Iowa. Please decease with your insulting stawmen.
I wasn´t the one who runs at the first sight of someone challenging the irrevocable supriority of the Iowas. And, because I´have been insulted endleddly and called names (which I don´t dare to use on others but begining to feel the temptation) by you people I would not stand back. I suggest that being Halloween near you go and look for your strawman.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'Iowa Class "legends"'.
Great combat accomplishement of the Iowas: McArthur speech at Tokio Bay.... Cher singing "If I could bring back time"... the song must should have go: "If I could bring back time I would have fought the Yamato".
If you think that more people especially "US youth" could tell you who Prien or Nagumo were as opposed to the names or or a couple of famous incidents on the Iowa class BBs I'm pretty sure you are wrong.
I believe that even being the US educational standards in their historical low more youths knew about Bismarck than... let´s say USS Wisconsin or Iowa itself.

Best regards,

Ichabod Crane
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill

Bgile
Senior Member
Posts: 3658
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:33 pm
Location: Portland, OR, USA

Post by Bgile » Thu Oct 18, 2007 9:13 pm

Karl, I think what gets you in trouble is not as much your point of view but that you use words like "impossible" and others don't. Someone else might use the word "unlikely". One is absolute, and the other isn't.

A more valid question to US youth would be whether they had heard of USS Missouri. They probably wouldn't have heard of Tirpitz.

I'm not one to defend current US educational curriculum. I learned about WWII in high school, and they probably don't today.

User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica
Contact:

Post by Karl Heidenreich » Thu Oct 18, 2007 10:54 pm

Bgile,

you are a person I learned to respect. I believe you´re right about my use of some absolute words. A problem when you are sure about certain topic. Thanks.

And something else: you know I´m not a US-Hater from latin america because I´m not. I like US (a country which I have visited and lived in many times) a lot but I´m worried about this paradigm that says "everything we do is right just because it´s us". That state of mind kill soldiers and lose wars. It´s better a Nimitz-Midway state of mind: "Maybe they are better than us but we could still beat them with will and guts." Then there is victory.

Best regards.

P.D. Don´t worry about the US educational system. Our country is far worse: if you want your son to be able to write his own name then we have to send it to a private school and pay for what the goverment is supposely to do.
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill

User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica
Contact:

Post by Karl Heidenreich » Thu Oct 18, 2007 11:01 pm

Bgile:

I'm not one to defend current US educational curriculum. I learned about WWII in high school, and they probably don't today.
The other day I came across a twelve year old kid that told me, very seriously, that Yoda was the most important Greek "Scientist" of ancient times... around 1920ies...

I really hope they are not the ones that are gonna take care of me when I become old... :?
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill

lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3810
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Post by lwd » Fri Oct 19, 2007 2:09 pm

Karl Heidenreich wrote: As far as I can read the threads you´re the one that didn´t won it.
That suggest either a problem with logic, reason, or English comprehension.
Your last remark was something about Shermans winning over Tigers.
I don't think I said that. What I did say was that the Sherman was a beter choice for the US Army than the Tiger would have been and I gave a number of good reasons none of which you refuted.
And, at the end, the posibility of a radarless Yamato having an edge on wining over Iowa was stablished so, by having the damm device, would certainly give Yamato the victory.
It has been agreed by most of us that in some cases the historical Yamato would have an edge over Iowa. The converse is also true. So if Yamato has an equal RFC to Iowa her chances improve. In none of the cases is the edge enough to "certainly give" victory to either side.
You describe someone doing a good job of supporting his argument then inject a stawman ie "utterly impossible".
Go and find a 1939 newspaper...
There is a flat earth society as well. Arguing that the uninformed think something is impossible or even improbable hardly makes your case.
...
Go ask Admiral Kimmel. He was a little bit surprised on December 7th.
And your point is? Nagumo was surprised at Midway, the Soviets when the Germans attacked, the list goes on. None of these events were thought to be impossible.
....
As far the hypotethical scenario posts from your "side" only give the Bismarck an edge over Kon Tiki.
Insulting strawman.
Hood´s destruction is given the aura of "miracle". It wasn´t unlikely: Hood was in no position to win over Bismarck, technically or tactically whatsover.
BS. In a one on one Hood would have been at a serious disadvantage at Denmark straights. PW and Hood had a significant advantage over Bismark.
I wasn´t the one who runs at the first sight of someone challenging the irrevocable supriority of the Iowas.
Insulting strawman and murky wording.
And, because I´have been insulted endleddly and called names (which I don´t dare to use on others but begining to feel the temptation) by you people I would not stand back.
How have you been insulted and what names have you been called?
I believe that even being the US educational standards in their historical low more youths knew about Bismarck than... let´s say USS Wisconsin or Iowa itself.
Why? and Why should they? Bismark had a very short carreer at the very beginning of WWII. Iowa served off and on up until the 90s. The Iowa class BBs surely have much more signifigance in US history than the Bismark did. They've also appeared in modern cultural settings more often than Bismark.

User avatar
Terje Langoy
Supporter
Posts: 435
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 4:15 pm
Location: Bergen, Norway

Post by Terje Langoy » Fri Oct 19, 2007 3:18 pm

or a German BC sinking a British CV at record ranges...
Not to interfere with the ongoing discussion but from the top of my head, I think this statement is not correct. From the accounts I've come across the Scharnhorst did place a shell aboard HMS Glorious at record range but she were not the one to finish the job. During the attack, the Scharnhorst switched fire towards HMS Ardent and HMS Acasta while the Gneisenau took care of the burning CV. And the sisters were not playing about at record range during this "target practice". They closed in and completed the job at point blank range.

However, if any of my statements should turn out to be wrong, I trust that this will be corrected. And by the way, my sincerest apologies for bringing this up in a discussion about the High Seas Fleet.

Best regards

Post Reply