By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
110 years to the day, one of the largest naval battles of the modern (post sail) era took place. Jutland. 150 ships, 99 German and 151 British fought the only large scale fleet action of WW1. 14 British ships and 6094 lives were lost including 3 Battlecruisers, Indefatigable, Queen Mary and Invincible. The Germans lost 11 ships and 2551 men, including the new Battlecruiser Lutzow and a pre dreadnought Battleship Pommern. A full description is here.
The Germans claimed victory. The British admitted their losses and returning ships were greeted with abuse and boos. A victory on the scale of Nelson’s Trafalgar had been expected. The Germans got their claims in first. That’s politics and propaganda for you. Nothing changes.
But was it a British defeat? On material actually lost you could argue yes. However that’s a simplistic interpretation. That day, Britain could only lose the war by losing command of the sea. On June 1st, the badly damaged German High Seas Fleet returned to port. They had twice come within minutes of being destroyed by Jellicoe’s Grand Fleet. They knew they couldn’t win and never re-emerged from port. Rusting, crews demoralised and mutinous, the German fleet surrendered to the British in 1918.
Britain ‘held the field’ on 1st June. It was looking to engage the Germans and despite losses the main body of its ships were ready for action that morning. The Germans knew they couldn’t succeed. The result was the alternative to break the blockade. U Boats. This led to America being drawn into the war eventually. The blockade was maintained and Germany starved. Literally. The country rotted inside out.
Jutland is little known or regarded mainly because of confused outcome and scale. Yet it could be argued that this one event played a major role in the outcome of WW1 and subsequently how our world looks now.
7
This day in history on 09:43 - May 31 with 751 views
Indeed. Jellicoe's plan very nearly succeeded - twice. The High Seas Fleet escaped after dark by the skin of its teeth (partly thanks to poor radio communications and lack of inquisitiveness in some quarters about distant sounds of gunfire). The day was a nasty shock for the Germans, who never really attempted to repeat the experiment, until the last days of the war, whereupon the crews mutinied rather than go on what they regarded as a suicide mission.
The Grand Fleet's most significant losses were down to a technical problem with the battlecruisers, relating to ammunition storage and supply* - plus the fact they were not really designed with the armour to go toe-to-toe with other big gun ships.
* A lack of fire doors meant that a hit on a gun turret could allow flames to travel down the ammo supply shafts and into the magazines, potentially leading to a fatal explosion. The Germans had already spotted and corrected the issue after themselves having a very near disaster in a previous engagement.
Indeed. Jellicoe's plan very nearly succeeded - twice. The High Seas Fleet escaped after dark by the skin of its teeth (partly thanks to poor radio communications and lack of inquisitiveness in some quarters about distant sounds of gunfire). The day was a nasty shock for the Germans, who never really attempted to repeat the experiment, until the last days of the war, whereupon the crews mutinied rather than go on what they regarded as a suicide mission.
The Grand Fleet's most significant losses were down to a technical problem with the battlecruisers, relating to ammunition storage and supply* - plus the fact they were not really designed with the armour to go toe-to-toe with other big gun ships.
* A lack of fire doors meant that a hit on a gun turret could allow flames to travel down the ammo supply shafts and into the magazines, potentially leading to a fatal explosion. The Germans had already spotted and corrected the issue after themselves having a very near disaster in a previous engagement.
[Post edited 31 May 10:05]
There were several factors equipment wise.
The German ships were better subdivided because they were designed to fight in the North Sea. Great for survivability, bad for living in.
The German docks/shipyards were newer so wider more stable gun platforms could be built Their optics and rangefinding was generally better and unlike Beatty, Scheer, Hipper and Jellicoe practised live firing
German shells were more penetrative than British lyddite ones which had a habit of bursting in impact actually smothering the hit area in yellow dye.
The High Seas Fleet learned from the near loss of Seydlitz at Dogger Bank and improved its shell and charge handling. Despite nearly losing Lion, this was not improved in British ships until after Jutland.
The maxim of hit first, hit hard, keep on hitting ruled until then. One theory is not just that for speed the British stacked shells and cordite in the turrets, but the propellant itself was more volatile than the Germans meaning that any flash that went through doors and fire curtains would go to the magazines.
For the British, they were maintaining an empire so the ships were multi purpose even if the Grand Fleet remained in the North Sea most of the war
HMS Dreadnought (1906), created from Fisher’s idea was soon superseded by bigger and better and had a quiet war. Ship design continued at a rapid rate. Indefatigable and Invincible were early designs and it showed. Queen Mary was not but it’s noticeable that HMS Tiger, based on Lion, QM, Princess Royal was a much better, balanced version that survived many hits
The best ships in the Grand Fleet were the super-dreadnoughts Warspite, Valiant, Barham, Malaya were superb. They survived numerous hits and the new 15 inch guns proved very effective. It was a shame Beatty so misused them and his subordinate Evan-Thomas who commanded them used little initiative.
It is noticeable that no British Battleships were lost during the action, only Warspite coming close.
The actions of the commanders is interesting. Jellicoe was superb. It’s debatable as to whether anyone else could have handled the fleet the way he did. He crossed the T twice. Remarkable. He was criticised for turning away from torpedo attacks (you combed the tracks one way or the other) but he was aware that the first priority was not to lose and dare not take the risk of being drawn over a minefield.
Both Hipper and fleet commander Scheer didn’t get much wrong with the information they had. Beatty on the other hand made mistakes. However, he was married to an heiress, highly popular, brave, dashing, stylish as opposed to Jellicoe who was quiet, studious and looked like an accountant. After Jutland, Jellicoe got the blame and the boot and Beatty made Admiral of the Fleet and is the one appearing on souvenirs at the end of the war. Politics.
0
This day in history on 14:17 - May 31 with 563 views
This day in history on 10:37 - May 31 by Churchman
There were several factors equipment wise.
The German ships were better subdivided because they were designed to fight in the North Sea. Great for survivability, bad for living in.
The German docks/shipyards were newer so wider more stable gun platforms could be built Their optics and rangefinding was generally better and unlike Beatty, Scheer, Hipper and Jellicoe practised live firing
German shells were more penetrative than British lyddite ones which had a habit of bursting in impact actually smothering the hit area in yellow dye.
The High Seas Fleet learned from the near loss of Seydlitz at Dogger Bank and improved its shell and charge handling. Despite nearly losing Lion, this was not improved in British ships until after Jutland.
The maxim of hit first, hit hard, keep on hitting ruled until then. One theory is not just that for speed the British stacked shells and cordite in the turrets, but the propellant itself was more volatile than the Germans meaning that any flash that went through doors and fire curtains would go to the magazines.
For the British, they were maintaining an empire so the ships were multi purpose even if the Grand Fleet remained in the North Sea most of the war
HMS Dreadnought (1906), created from Fisher’s idea was soon superseded by bigger and better and had a quiet war. Ship design continued at a rapid rate. Indefatigable and Invincible were early designs and it showed. Queen Mary was not but it’s noticeable that HMS Tiger, based on Lion, QM, Princess Royal was a much better, balanced version that survived many hits
The best ships in the Grand Fleet were the super-dreadnoughts Warspite, Valiant, Barham, Malaya were superb. They survived numerous hits and the new 15 inch guns proved very effective. It was a shame Beatty so misused them and his subordinate Evan-Thomas who commanded them used little initiative.
It is noticeable that no British Battleships were lost during the action, only Warspite coming close.
The actions of the commanders is interesting. Jellicoe was superb. It’s debatable as to whether anyone else could have handled the fleet the way he did. He crossed the T twice. Remarkable. He was criticised for turning away from torpedo attacks (you combed the tracks one way or the other) but he was aware that the first priority was not to lose and dare not take the risk of being drawn over a minefield.
Both Hipper and fleet commander Scheer didn’t get much wrong with the information they had. Beatty on the other hand made mistakes. However, he was married to an heiress, highly popular, brave, dashing, stylish as opposed to Jellicoe who was quiet, studious and looked like an accountant. After Jutland, Jellicoe got the blame and the boot and Beatty made Admiral of the Fleet and is the one appearing on souvenirs at the end of the war. Politics.
It wasn't the only time Beatty made near disastrous misjudgements. But, as you say, he had a good publicity machine.
It wasn't the only time Beatty made near disastrous misjudgements. But, as you say, he had a good publicity machine.
True. He was credited with the action at Heligoland Bight, yet it was Tywitt and Keyes that devised and implemented it and had Jellicoe not ordered Beatty to reinforce the action would have ended badly.
At Dogger Bank in 1915, HMS Lion was nearly lost when the roof was blown off Q turret. The lesson wasn’t learned. Beatty’s control of his Battlecruisers (signalling) was woeful and instead of his force destroying three German Battlecruisers, they concentrated on and finished with only the destruction of hybrid armoured cruiser Blucher.
It was proclaimed as a victory but it was really a wasted opportunity. I think the pictures of SMS Blucher capsizing and the crew clambering over the hull as it rolled over helped the publicity.
[Post edited 31 May 15:35]
0
This day in history on 16:15 - May 31 with 480 views
This day in history on 14:41 - May 31 by Churchman
True. He was credited with the action at Heligoland Bight, yet it was Tywitt and Keyes that devised and implemented it and had Jellicoe not ordered Beatty to reinforce the action would have ended badly.
At Dogger Bank in 1915, HMS Lion was nearly lost when the roof was blown off Q turret. The lesson wasn’t learned. Beatty’s control of his Battlecruisers (signalling) was woeful and instead of his force destroying three German Battlecruisers, they concentrated on and finished with only the destruction of hybrid armoured cruiser Blucher.
It was proclaimed as a victory but it was really a wasted opportunity. I think the pictures of SMS Blucher capsizing and the crew clambering over the hull as it rolled over helped the publicity.
[Post edited 31 May 15:35]
really interesting stuff fellas..thanks…👍
2
This day in history on 17:23 - May 31 with 438 views
He’s a good presenter Dan Snow. I’ll have a look at it.
As a peculiar statistic, the RNs most battle honoured ship, HMS Warspite not only survived 13 large calibre hits during Jutland but went on to record the equal longest ever hit. Scharnhorst hit HMS Glorious, an aircraft carrier, from 15 miles. Warspite did the same hitting Italian flagship Guilio Cesare in 1940. Both the ships firing and hit were travelling at speed.
The relevance of this? When Warspite was built in 1914 design and protection was influenced by the Japanese Russian action in 1904 at Tsushima which was fought on average at a range of about 5/6 miles. When the Battlecruisers opened fire at Jutland the range was 10 miles. That meant plunging fire while protection on decks and upperworks was generally less.
This was a factor potentially in the loss of the Battlecruisers, though the factors in earlier posts are more important. But it certainly accounted for the destruction of HMS Hood in 1941 as it hadn’t been modernised with greater protection in those areas.
0
This day in history on 18:25 - May 31 with 377 views
This day in history on 18:25 - May 31 by MattinLondon
I understand that this might well be a silly thing to ask so apologies for it in advance.
But do people visit the sites of naval battles in the same way that people visit battle sites on land?
Not silly at all. I don’t think so. Tv crews have, including Dan Snow and I guess rich people can afford to hire submersibles if they wish. The North Sea, as we know, is pretty inhospitable. There has also been a lot of illegal scavenging and scrapping of wrecks, particularly by the Dutch.
Mostly of British ships because the Germans are sensitive about this. This is something that really annoys me. These are war graves, not that these scumbag parasites care.
1000 people died on Invincible. Same number on Indefatigable and 1200 on Queen Mary. Over 800 were lost on the armoured cruiser HMS Defence. Any human bones are just chucked back or kicked aside.
Same with Repulse and Prince of Wales in the Indian Ocean.
A lot of wrecks are too deep to touch or at least dive. Bismarck, Hood and Scharnhorst (WW2) for example. Many are in bits, WW1 Scharnhorst sunk in 1914 in the first Battle of the Falklands being the exception. She sits upright, some guns still pointing out.
Often turrets fall out a bit like a tooth when a ship goes down. They’re only held in by gravity.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
