Ersatz Yorck/Mackenson vs Hoods

Historical what if discussions, hypothetical operations, battleship vs. battleship engagements, design your own warship, etc.
Djoser
Senior Member
Posts: 383
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 6:45 am
Location: Key West Florida USA

Ersatz Yorck/Mackenson vs Hoods

Post by Djoser »

The best of the German vs. the best of the British battlecruisers.

The Hoods have the speed and the tonnage. The German BCs have the amazing ability to take a beating and still blow hell out of the opposition.
User avatar
Ersatz Yorck
Member
Posts: 141
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2011 2:56 pm

Re: Ersatz Yorck/Mackenson vs Hoods

Post by Ersatz Yorck »

The Hood has better armor, heavier armament and more speed. The Hoods ought to win every time. With half again the tonnage of the Mackensens, that is not surprising. The only possible advantage the Mackensens have would be better internal subdivision, pumping capacity, auxiliary generators etc, which would make them more durable ton for ton.
Djoser
Senior Member
Posts: 383
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 6:45 am
Location: Key West Florida USA

Re: Ersatz Yorck/Mackenson vs Hoods

Post by Djoser »

Every time? I'm not convinced. I think they would have some advantage, especially the speed. But that ability to absorb punishment served the German battlecruisers quite well at Jutland. The speed of the British did not serve them nearly as well. And I believe the Hoods were vulnerable to 15" fire.

The Ersatz Yorcks would have had 8 15" guns. Albeit not quite so effective as the SK C/34s that sank Hood so easily, but effective enough to make them tough opponents in a gunnery duel.
User avatar
Ersatz Yorck
Member
Posts: 141
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2011 2:56 pm

Re: Ersatz Yorck/Mackenson vs Hoods

Post by Ersatz Yorck »

Well, "every time" might have been a bit of an exaggeration, especially as we know that British battlecruisers have a tendency to blow up. But still, the much maligned Hood was actually a well protected battlecruiser by WW1 standards.
User avatar
paulcadogan
Senior Member
Posts: 1148
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 4:03 am
Location: Kingston, Jamaica

Re: Ersatz Yorck/Mackenson vs Hoods

Post by paulcadogan »

The big advantage Hood would have had over both Mackensen and Erzatz Yorck would have been gun range. With her 30 degree elevation versus 16 degees on the German ships and with her greater speed (a 4-5 knot advantage) she could dictate range and control the battle. It would have been more challenging to score hits at long ranges though, but not impossible.

Apart from her size, her gun range was one of the features of Hood that made her so fearsome when completed. I suspect there were few ships that could match or outrange her at the time (maybe the US Tennessees?).
Qui invidet minor est - He who envies is the lesser man
User avatar
Ersatz Yorck
Member
Posts: 141
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2011 2:56 pm

Re: Ersatz Yorck/Mackenson vs Hoods

Post by Ersatz Yorck »

paulcadogan wrote:The big advantage Hood would have had over both Mackensen and Erzatz Yorck would have been gun range. With her 30 degree elevation versus 16 degees on the German ships and with her greater speed (a 4-5 knot advantage) she could dictate range and control the battle. It would have been more challenging to score hits at long ranges though, but not impossible.

Apart from her size, her gun range was one of the features of Hood that made her so fearsome when completed. I suspect there were few ships that could match or outrange her at the time (maybe the US Tennessees?).
All true but... that presupposes unlimited visibility and complete freedom of action, and either one of these might be limited, changing the equation completely. In the North Sea, visibility is often limited so that the longer range of Hood is of little consequence.
User avatar
paulcadogan
Senior Member
Posts: 1148
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 4:03 am
Location: Kingston, Jamaica

Re: Ersatz Yorck/Mackenson vs Hoods

Post by paulcadogan »

Ersatz Yorck wrote:All true but... that presupposes unlimited visibility and complete freedom of action, and either one of these might be limited, changing the equation completely. In the North Sea, visibility is often limited so that the longer range of Hood is of little consequence.
Very true too - and just goes to show, it's not just the ships and their capabilities, it's also the conditions under which they fight - wind direction, sea state, spray fogging range finders, the position of the sun etc. etc. Then there's the efficiency of their crews....the list goes on.
Qui invidet minor est - He who envies is the lesser man
Post Reply