15in Up Gunned Gneisenau v 1939 Modernized Renown

Historical what if discussions, hypothetical operations, battleship vs. battleship engagements, design your own warship, etc.
User avatar
Dave Saxton
Supporter
Posts: 3148
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Rocky Mountains USA

Re: 15in Up Gunned Gneisenau v 1939 Modernized Renown

Post by Dave Saxton »

Bgile wrote:Well, neither German ship shot very well against Renown, and Scharnhorst didn't shoot very well against DoY.

I don't think anyone in a position to critique gunnery problems at North Cape survived the sinking of Scharnhorst, did they?

I'd be interested in any information you might have that these problems were corrected, but their shooting in bad weather doesn't seem to have been as good as that of their opponents.
I know that is the common wisdom but let us look at the facts. In the second encounter at North Cape the Scharnhorst was on a southwest by west course at 30 knots. This was directly into the teeth of the wind and the seas, and it had to be taking it green over the bows considering the rough sea state. In this combat the Scharnhorst was also without its forward radar, which had been destroyed in the first skirmish. Yet the Scharnhorst out shot it foes in this engagement: “….the first salvoes from our own guns bracketed the targets. I personally saw that after three or four salvoes a raging fire broke out close to the after funnel on one of the cruisers and there was a lot of fire and smoke both forward and aft on another cruiser…..” (Survivor Goedde)

Both the Sheffield and the Norfolk were damaged. One 28cm hit destroyed Norfolk’s X turret. Another 28cm burst below the main deck in an engineering space midships. Both Sheffield and Norfolk had radars put out of action.

Despite the relatively short range and the assistance of radar as well as the cumulative massive rate of fire for the British cruisers, the Scharnhorst escaped unharmed.

During the second to final engagement of North Cape, the Duke of York opened fire at 16:47 hours at 11,000 meters range. It was forced to cease fire at 18:24 hours at about 19,500 meters range because the fall of shot could not be observed with radar. During that period of time it scored about 4-5 known main battery hits. Although it was having problems with its gun mountings, it probably fired at least 275 rounds during this 90 minutes of action.

The Scharnhorst probably fired only a fraction of that value of rounds against Duke of York during the 90 minutes running fight. It appears that Scharnhorst was using the standard procedure of using the first few salvoes to bring the guns up to operating temperature and to confirm the bearing track. According to an officer on DoY:

“ I saw the angry white wink of her first 11-inch salvo, and said to myself,’ she’s fired’…thank God we couldn’t see her shells coming as we could see ours going. The waiting for their arrival was bad enough….. There was a vague flash off our port bow which I caught in the corner of my eye as I gazed through my binoculars and then-crack, crack, crack, sharp like a giant whip, and the drone and the whine of splinters passing somewhere near..” ( Ramsden)

“We hadn’t long to wait before the enemy’s reply came, the shots short at first and then suddenly the most perfect straddle of our forecastle….shortly after that straddle a salvo pitched into the sea just ahead of us…” (Compston)

Scharnhorst then shifted fire to the cruisers to the north before re-engaging Duke of York and Jamaica. For awhile, it could only use turret Caeser, as Anton was knocked out by a direct hit and the forward magazines had been deliberately flooded. After Bruno came back on line Scharnhorst would, according to Fraser’s report, suddenly turn and fire a six gun broadside and then return to its high speed course toward the east. It could not keep up a high rate of fire using this tactic.

Yet as the range increased so did the Scharnhorst’s shooting improve. According to Fraser, particularly from the ranges of 17k out to 21k the Scharnhorst consistently straddled the Duke of York. British accounts atest to the accuracy of these salvoes as they straddled again and again, and the DoY was drenched by shell splashes and shells whistled through the rigging and upper works. Mast stays and radio antennas came crashing down to the deck. Two or three hits were scored all in the upper works. Of course you know this I’m sure. I don’t see how the Scharnhorst’s shooting can be considered poor compared to its opponents in this case.
Entering a night sea battle is an awesome business.The enveloping darkness, hiding the enemy's.. seems a living thing, malignant and oppressive.Swishing water at the bow and stern mark an inexorable advance toward an unknown destiny.
User avatar
Dave Saxton
Supporter
Posts: 3148
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Rocky Mountains USA

Re: 15in Up Gunned Gneisenau v 1939 Modernized Renown

Post by Dave Saxton »

Regarding the comparative shooting vs Renown in 1940 there seems to be some confusion about cause and effect. Let us examine the facts of this engagement:

“. In the predawn hours during foul weather and heavy seas, the Gneisenau’s (radar) detected contacts 25km away in the darkness amid heavy snow squalls. Engaging the unknown contact on radar data alone was not an option, even if lobe switching could be activated, because German warships and submarines were required to visually identify the target before engaging at that time. The radar contact was the British battle cruiser HMS Renown, which had 15-inch (38 cm) guns, escorted by nine destroyers. Nine destroyers and their deadly torpedoes alone represented a serious hazard to the German battleships. By the time the contacts came into partial view and the German Admiral; Vice Admiral Guenther Luetjens could ascertain what he had encountered, the range had closed to no more than about 10,000 meters and the Renown had attained the advantage of light. The German battleships were highlighted by the eastern glow of the rising sun, while the British battle group remained mostly hidden in the darkness to the westward. The British held a significant tactical advantage in such a situation and Luetjens prudently sought to break away.

Renown fired first despite the fact that it had no radar. The Scharnhorst’s (radar) was knocked out of service by the concussion of its first salvo from its 28cm heavy gun battery. Nevertheless, the Gneisenau’s (radar) stayed in the fight providing accurate range data and the Gneisenau quickly scored direct hits with its return fire. Then the Gneisenau was hit by a 15-inch projectile from the Renown. The projectile passed through the Gneisenau’s tower foretop without exploding but severing the electrical power to the foretop equipment above including the (radar) apparatus. Now the Germans were at an even greater disadvantage with no functional radar on either battleship, with the British possessing the advantage of light. Nonetheless, the German fast battleships eventually hauled out of range and escaped by using their superior speed despite the rough seas.” (Quoting myself)

It would appear that Gneisenau was out shooting its opponent up until the time it lost the services of its radar set. Here the cause and effect was not the sea state so much as the relative tactical positions and circumstances, the lighting conditions, and the ability to use radar or not. As I understand it the swamping SH’s forward turrets actually happened after the main event, as the battle cruisers pushed on at high speeds during their break away.
Entering a night sea battle is an awesome business.The enveloping darkness, hiding the enemy's.. seems a living thing, malignant and oppressive.Swishing water at the bow and stern mark an inexorable advance toward an unknown destiny.
User avatar
Dave Saxton
Supporter
Posts: 3148
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Rocky Mountains USA

Re: 15in Up Gunned Gneisenau v 1939 Modernized Renown

Post by Dave Saxton »

In my opinion Gneisenau would have held the advantage against Renown in a one on one during WWII, particularly with modern 38cm armament.
Entering a night sea battle is an awesome business.The enveloping darkness, hiding the enemy's.. seems a living thing, malignant and oppressive.Swishing water at the bow and stern mark an inexorable advance toward an unknown destiny.
yellowtail3
Senior Member
Posts: 408
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 5:50 pm
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: 15in Up Gunned Gneisenau v 1939 Modernized Renown

Post by yellowtail3 »

Matrose71 wrote:@ @ yellowtail3 What a statement!
I make 'em all the time:
Matrose71 wrote:You even know that SH/GS had the best vertical protection up to 18000-19000m from all BB's ever built?
No, I did not know that!
Matrose71 wrote:Tell me one BB shell that can go through 350mm straight belt 105mm slopes and 45mm torpedoshot at a range from 10000m up to 18000m?
A'ight, I speculate the following could do it:
USN 16"/45 Marks 5 & 8 (Colorados); USN 16"/45 Mark 6 (North Carolinas, South Dakotas); US 16"/50 Mark 7 (Iowas). Then there's the Italian navy's 15/50cal on the Littorios. In the IJN... I'll guess the Nagato/Mutsu's 16.1" gun could do the deed, and there's no doubt Musashi's 18.1" would drilled right on through the Kraut BB. Lastly, I'll bet the 15"/45 onboard Richelieu & Jean Bart could have done the deed. And didn't Duke of York put one in one of Scharnhorst's engine rooms?
there might be others, but those come to mind immediately.
Matrose71 wrote:The major flaw of SH/GS was their weak upper belt, so the ships are vulnerable up from 18000-19000m.
In that case, add the USN's 14"/50s and RN"s 15/42s to the list of guns that will scupper Gneisenau.
Matrose71 wrote:...but KGV was for me the unbalanced design from all BB's because of it's super weak vertical protection against 15 inch guns or heavier.
Hmmm... I didn't know that. Super weak, were they?
Matrose71 wrote:
She'd still have been outclassed by a KGV
What do you mean with outclassed?
I mean, not as good a warship. Duke of York pretty well wrecked the Scharnhorst with her 14" guns, suffering little in return; had Scharnhorst had 15" guns, outcome probably would have been the same.
Matrose71 wrote:SH's radar was put out of action from Norfolk and DoY had the major luck to put the two forward turrents out of action with the first two salvos at a range of 11000m!
Heck, I figured it was just good shootin' on the part of Duke of York's crew...
Last edited by yellowtail3 on Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:37 am, edited 3 times in total.
Shift Colors... underway.
yellowtail3
Senior Member
Posts: 408
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 5:50 pm
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: 15in Up Gunned Gneisenau v 1939 Modernized Renown

Post by yellowtail3 »

ALL THAT SAID... I think Gneisenau w/15" guns would have been superior to Renown - after all, the German ship was a battleship, and the Renown was a battlecruiser.
Shift Colors... underway.
User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica

Re: 15in Up Gunned Gneisenau v 1939 Modernized Renown

Post by Karl Heidenreich »

yellowtail3:
ALL THAT SAID... I think Gneisenau w/15" guns would have been superior to Renown - after all, the German ship was a battleship, and the Renown was a battlecruiser.
You have demostrated that it is the intelectual duty, of any person, to change it´s mind if the evidence shows that the original perception was not correct. You did that and I congratulate you. Many, but many times, I have not been able to do so for which I`m seriously concerned.

Warmest regards,
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: 15in Up Gunned Gneisenau v 1939 Modernized Renown

Post by RF »

Dave Saxton wrote:In my opinion Gneisenau would have held the advantage against Renown in a one on one during WWII, particularly with modern 38cm armament.
I am inclined to agree with this verdict.
''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

Re: 15in Up Gunned Gneisenau v 1939 Modernized Renown

Post by Karl Heidenreich »

RF:
Dave Saxton wrote:
In my opinion Gneisenau would have held the advantage against Renown in a one on one during WWII, particularly with modern 38cm armament.
I am inclined to agree with this verdict.

It seems correct to me: I concur.
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill
lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3822
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Re: 15in Up Gunned Gneisenau v 1939 Modernized Renown

Post by lwd »

yellowtail3 wrote:
Matrose71 wrote: ...Tell me one BB shell that can go through 350mm straight belt 105mm slopes and 45mm torpedoshot at a range from 10000m up to 18000m?
A'ight, I speculate the following could do it:
USN 16"/45 Marks 5 & 8 (Colorados); USN 16"/45 Mark 6 (North Carolinas, South Dakotas); US 16"/50 Mark 7 (Iowas). Then there's the Italian navy's 15/50cal on the Littorios. In the IJN... I'll guess the Nagato/Mutsu's 16.1" gun could do the deed, and there's no doubt Musashi's 18.1" would drilled right on through the Kraut BB. Lastly, I'll bet the 15"/45 onboard Richelieu & Jean Bart could have done the deed. And didn't Duke of York put one in one of Scharnhorst's engine rooms?
there might be others, but those come to mind immediately.
Looking at the stats at http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_12-50_mk8.htm it looks like the guns of the US large cruisers might even be able to do it.

Back to the original topic. If one looks only at the technical capabilities of the ships shouldn't the twins have an advantage even with 11 guns over the Renowns? Indeed for this particular match up might they be better off armed with the 11" main battery as opposed to the 15" one?
Matrose71
Member
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 2:46 pm

Re: 15in Up Gunned Gneisenau v 1939 Modernized Renown

Post by Matrose71 »

A'ight, I speculate the following could do it:
USN 16"/45 Marks 5 & 8 (Colorados); USN 16"/45 Mark 6 (North Carolinas, South Dakotas); US 16"/50 Mark 7 (Iowas). Then there's the Italian navy's 15/50cal on the Littorios. In the IJN... I'll guess the Nagato/Mutsu's 16.1" gun could do the deed, and there's no doubt Musashi's 18.1" would drilled right on through the Kraut BB. Lastly, I'll bet the 15"/45 onboard Richelieu & Jean Bart could have done the deed.
The vertical protection of SH/GS had 350mm straight main belt inclined slopes 105mm at 22° from the horizontal and last but not least 45mm straight torpedo compartment. A shell must penetrate the main belt and is deadly sure decapped and perhaps structurally damaged, after that are 270mm nominal way through the inclined slopes and last but not least 45mm Torpedo bulkhead. In summary 665mm steel for a shell and a shell that is decapped after the main belt. And that strenght is constant for the range and the angel of fall from 10000m to 18000m. And this arithmetic is only for the machinery rooms because at magazin spaces SH had an inclined main belt of 14° and slopes of 110mm.
No you can look at Navyweapons and a gun with a shell that can strike through this vertical protection. The 18.1 from the japanese perhaps can strike through at 10000m but i don't think so because of the decapped shell after the main belt.
And didn't Duke of York put one in one of Scharnhorst's engine rooms?
That is the hit from DoY up from 18000m I mentioned in my post. But a striking hit was never confirmed from any survivor and I think this hit exploded on the main deck and the shock impact took boiler room 1 out of action. I think it is impossible to repair the machinery of SH at the time of 20min after a striking hit in the boiler room. SH was back to 26kn after this and over 80% of it's best outputperformance.
...but KGV was for me the unbalanced design from all BB's because of it's super weak vertical protection against 15 inch guns or heavier.

Hmmm... I didn't know that. Super weak, were they?
So look at Navyweapons and you will see that every modern WWII 15inch gun can strike through the vertcal protction of KGV till 20000m.
KGV had a straight main belt of 385mm with nothing behind. So KGV was built for long range fights but it's speed wasn't good enough to dictate a fight because all other BB's are faster accept SOD.
Bgile
Senior Member
Posts: 3658
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:33 pm
Location: Portland, OR, USA

Re: 15in Up Gunned Gneisenau v 1939 Modernized Renown

Post by Bgile »

Matrose71 wrote:You even know that SH/GS had the best vertical protection up to 18000-19000m from all BB's ever built?
No, Barbettes and turrets were more vulnerable than many other BBs ever built.
yellowtail3
Senior Member
Posts: 408
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 5:50 pm
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: 15in Up Gunned Gneisenau v 1939 Modernized Renown

Post by yellowtail3 »

lwd wrote:Back to the original topic. If one looks only at the technical capabilities of the ships shouldn't the twins have an advantage even with 11 guns over the Renowns? Indeed for this particular match up might they be better off armed with the 11" main battery as opposed to the 15" one?
I think you're onto something there. The Germans battleships should have been better - they were 20 years newer, and they were battleships, with a LOT more armor than a RN battlecruiser. That they were weakly gunned battleships wouldn't have been as much a handicapp against a battlecruiser; against any battleships of their era, they were definitely inferior. We can talk about 'what if' they'd had 15" guns... but they didn't, and the Germans didn't have the resources to up-gun them, which - to do it properly? - would have been a lot of work, not just a minor yard period. And while 15" guns may have improved them, they still would have been somewhat undergunned against the RN's KGV's, and decisively outgunned by any USN battleship built after the 1920s.

I don't know all that much about this - were the Germans serious in efforts to re-gun Gneisenau? It seems to me that for their role - shooting up merchantment, fighting off light cruisers, fleeing RN batteships - the 11" armament was sufficient.
Shift Colors... underway.
User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica

Re: 15in Up Gunned Gneisenau v 1939 Modernized Renown

Post by Karl Heidenreich »

Matrose71:

The vertical protection of SH/GS had 350mm straight main belt inclined slopes 105mm at 22° from the horizontal and last but not least 45mm straight torpedo compartment. A shell must penetrate the main belt and is deadly sure decapped and perhaps structurally damaged, after that are 270mm nominal way through the inclined slopes and last but not least 45mm Torpedo bulkhead. In summary 665mm steel for a shell and a shell that is decapped after the main belt. And that strenght is constant for the range and the angel of fall from 10000m to 18000m. And this arithmetic is only for the machinery rooms because at magazin spaces SH had an inclined main belt of 14° and slopes of 110mm.
Defeating the belt doesn't matter because its the slope plus the belt is what that matters. I believe that not even Okun say that defeating the belt and slopes of German battleships together was possible at even point blank range, even for 16-inch guns?

Two cents in this...
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

Re: 15in Up Gunned Gneisenau v 1939 Modernized Renown

Post by Karl Heidenreich »

yellowtail3:
against any battleships of their era, they were definitely inferior. We can talk about 'what if' they'd had 15" guns... but they didn't, and the Germans didn't have the resources to up-gun them, which - to do it properly? - would have been a lot of work, not just a minor yard period.
The Twins were built using 11" guns not due to any technical difficulty on behalf of the Germans, but just because of a political directive from Hitler himself. As a matter of fact the arming of the Twins with 11" was the exception in which Hitler got himself involved in ship design issues. When the war started plans for the refitting were prepared but events made sure that this never happened.

Will ignore the "to do it properly? comment.
And while 15" guns may have improved them, they still would have been somewhat undergunned against the RN's KGV's, and decisively outgunned by any USN battleship built after the 1920s.
The first comment could be true, whilst the KGV were very good proportionate in what armour regards. The second one, regarding the "any" USN battleship built after 1920 could be applied to the Iowas but not to the North Carolinas nor South Dakotas, which present weak characterisitics to resist the 15" plunging shell from the German ships with only a 38 mm upper deck, not strong enough to initialize fuzing (on one hand) or decapping or producing enough yaw for the shell not to penetrate and detonate into the USN battleship vitals. On the other side we have that, at least in the case of the South Dakota Class (and in Iowa also) the internal sloped belt combined with the limited beam affects the defensive integrity of the ship, which is clearly stated by Friedman and then by Raven & Roberts (it´s a shame that I don´t have the book with me but the quotes are in the Bismarck and her Contemporaries thread, just need to look for them later). We must remember that the Treaties affected, seriously, the design scope of the USN and RN. The British come their way with a worthless attempt to have their 35,000 ton battleship with 16" guns with the Rodney Class, and after learning the hard way they produced their much better balanced KGV class. Of course their masterpiece was HMS Vanguard with 15" in four twin turrets. But the USN proceeded with arming their 14" designed BBs with 16", using the escalator clause of the Treaties, but when doing so the overall defensive scheme become compromised. So, again, I could concurr with the KGV issue but certainly not with the USN one.

Warmest regards,
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill
yellowtail3
Senior Member
Posts: 408
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 5:50 pm
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: 15in Up Gunned Gneisenau v 1939 Modernized Renown

Post by yellowtail3 »

Karl Heidenreich wrote:yellowtail3:
against any battleships of their era, they were definitely inferior. We can talk about 'what if' they'd had 15" guns... but they didn't, and the Germans didn't have the resources to up-gun them, which - to do it properly? - would have been a lot of work, not just a minor yard period.
The Twins were built using 11" guns not due to any technical difficulty on behalf of the Germans, but just because of a political directive from Hitler himself. As a matter of fact the arming of the Twins with 11" was the exception in which Hitler got himself involved in ship design issues. When the war started plans for the refitting were prepared but events made sure that this never happened.
Will ignore the "to do it properly? comment.
If they're going to add a heavier main battery, they're going to make already wet ships even wetter... they'll have to add some buoyancy, which isn't going to be quick & easy. that's what i meant.
And while 15" guns may have improved them, they still would have been somewhat undergunned against the RN's KGV's, and decisively outgunned by any USN battleship built after the 1920s.
The first comment could be true, whilst the KGV were very good proportionate in what armour regards. The second one, regarding the "any" USN battleship built after 1920 could be applied to the Iowas but not to the North Carolinas nor South Dakotas...[/quote]

My comment stands and is accurate, Karl - a battleship shooting 9-16" guns w/2700 pound shells is a LOT more dangerous to Gneisenau, than one shooting 10-14" guns w/1600 pound shells. Upon meeting such a ship, Gneisenau's best move would be to go to full throttle in the opposite direction (as she did upon encountering Renown).
Last edited by yellowtail3 on Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Shift Colors... underway.
Post Reply