Tirpitz shelling New York

Historical what if discussions, hypothetical operations, battleship vs. battleship engagements, design your own warship, etc.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7593
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Tirpitz shelling New York

Post by RF » Mon Jun 27, 2011 1:01 pm

Tiornu wrote:When was Iceland occupied?
Iceland was occupied by the British in April 1940, when the Germans invaded Denmark. Iceland was a Danish possession, along with Greenland. The British occupied another Danish possesion, the Faroe Islands, at the same time.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7593
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Tirpitz shelling New York

Post by RF » Mon Jun 27, 2011 1:05 pm

Tiornu wrote:I'm wondering what air assets were there in May 1941 and then in Feb 1942.
The USA took over the defence of Iceland I believe from August 1941 as part of the deal (Lend Lease)that gave the RN a number of old US destroyers for Atlantic use.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

yellowtail3
Senior Member
Posts: 408
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 5:50 pm
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: Tirpitz shelling New York

Post by yellowtail3 » Wed May 02, 2012 2:16 pm

Feb of 42.... Are the New Mexicos still on the east coast? Because if the tirpitz were to encounter any of them, her seagoing career would likely be much shortened
Shift Colors... underway.

Saltheart
Member
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2011 1:46 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Tirpitz shelling New York

Post by Saltheart » Wed May 02, 2012 11:02 pm

yellowtail3 wrote:Feb of 42.... Are the New Mexicos still on the east coast? Because if the tirpitz were to encounter any of them, her seagoing career would likely be much shortened
I just checked them out and they were really good looking ships. 12x14 inch 50 calibre guns means a lot of trouble for Tirpitz. If it interrupted Tirpitz while the Germans were busy shelling the harbour you can imagine the fury of the gunfight. Tirpitz would have to give New Mexico all her attention or move away at speed. Either way New York port wouldn't be getting shelled anymore. I wonder in fact if the Germans would slug it out or just consider the mision over and leave.

User avatar
Dave Saxton
Supporter
Posts: 3093
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Rocky Mountains USA

Re: Tirpitz shelling New York

Post by Dave Saxton » Wed May 02, 2012 11:18 pm

Of far greater concern to the Germans is air attack and protection from air attack into and out of the area, rather than an old, slow, badly over matched, battlewagon.
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.

Saltheart
Member
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2011 1:46 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Tirpitz shelling New York

Post by Saltheart » Wed May 02, 2012 11:33 pm

Dave Saxton wrote:Of far greater concern to the Germans is air attack and protection from air attack into and out of the area, rather than an old, slow, badly over matched, battlewagon.
Don't hold back on the battlewagon :)
I agree completely about air attack. Whenever I've gone over this raid in my mind I've always thought about aircraft. But that's why I thought the attack might actually be possible because of the lack of dedicated anti-shipping aircraft in the area. I imagine American seaplanes and flying boats carrying out straffing runs and getting shot down. When it comes to vessels I've thought any destroyers in the harbour would be the absolute prime target, followed by cruisers and subs. in fact maybe subs at anchor first. I've always thought of old slow battleships arriving or on their way at the end of the raid and Tirpitz pulling away. But if Tirpitz was in the middle of shelling the port and New Mexico pulled up 20km outside the port it would get very interesting. The Germans would have to switch to AP and "redeploy" while under very intense salvo fire from the enraged Americans.

User avatar
Dave Saxton
Supporter
Posts: 3093
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Rocky Mountains USA

Re: Tirpitz shelling New York

Post by Dave Saxton » Thu May 03, 2012 3:25 am

The Germans would undoubtly do this at night. Dash in and out under cover of darkness and be well on their way by dawn. As far as I know New Mexico had no radar at all in early 1942. Even in day light Tirpitz's radar ranged salvoes with absolutely state of the art fire control are likey going to hit first, far more often, and harder.
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.

alecsandros
Senior Member
Posts: 4349
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:33 pm
Location: Bucharest, Romania

Re: Tirpitz shelling New York

Post by alecsandros » Thu May 03, 2012 8:30 am

But would Tirpitz have enough range ?
After all, he can't be cruising at 19kts all the way. The Germans would have to use high speed at least on the way from Kiel -Denmark Strait - Newfoundland, and the same on the way back.

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7593
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Tirpitz shelling New York

Post by RF » Thu May 03, 2012 8:47 am

Saltheart wrote: I just checked them out and they were really good looking ships. 12x14 inch 50 calibre guns means a lot of trouble for Tirpitz. If it interrupted Tirpitz while the Germans were busy shelling the harbour you can imagine the fury of the gunfight. Tirpitz would have to give New Mexico all her attention or move away at speed. Either way New York port wouldn't be getting shelled anymore. I wonder in fact if the Germans would slug it out or just consider the mision over and leave.
The Germans would have to leave, not least because of the standing instructions to avoid combat with enemy capital ships if there was a means of getting away. If the American blocked that escape route then Tirpitz has to react fast to retain the initiative.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

yellowtail3
Senior Member
Posts: 408
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 5:50 pm
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: Tirpitz shelling New York

Post by yellowtail3 » Thu May 03, 2012 5:53 pm

alecsandros wrote:But would Tirpitz have enough range ?
After all, he can't be cruising at 19kts all the way. The Germans would have to use high speed at least on the way from Kiel -Denmark Strait - Newfoundland, and the same on the way back.
Have the range? No, not a prayer of it. Maybe if they started off with absolute fully full tanks, came in a straight line at most economical speed, and never had to go around anything - such as.a NM? - and then plodded back home in the same leisurely fashion.
Dave Saxton wrote:Of far greater concern to the Germans is air attack and protection from air attack into and out of the area, rather than an old, slow, badly over matched, battlewagon.
Should tirpitz encounter a NM her best bet would be to use all that horsepower to skedaddle on over the horizon before getting perforated. Let us count the ways in which a NM would be Very Hard on Tirpitz should she choose to fight
...great armor on the NM .. ESP in turrets and Babette's. Deck armor much improved in recent (1933) rebuild, which saw the ship get torpedo protection, deck armor, engines, superstructure, FC gear, and improved guns. At any likely battle range NM guns will penetrate T's turrets and most everything else. All T has is a bigger faster hull and better secopondary. I would expect the NM to shoot as well or better, and she is a lot more dangerous than Hood was.
... And of course, running away will burn all the fuel T needs for her magical voyage home after her fanciful raid in NYCImage
Shift Colors... underway.

User avatar
Dave Saxton
Supporter
Posts: 3093
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Rocky Mountains USA

Re: Tirpitz shelling New York

Post by Dave Saxton » Thu May 03, 2012 8:11 pm

At any likely battle range NM guns will penetrate T's turrets and most everything else.


That doesn't square very well with the fact that TP's designed IZ was 20km to 30km based on its own gun and its own gun was far more powerful than NM's.
I would expect the NM to shoot as well or better,


Without radar and likely at night?
and she is a lot more dangerous than Hood was.
I'm not sure about that. NM is also old but 11 knots slower.
And of course, running away will burn all the fuel T needs
TP was not a short legged warship. Historically its fuel consumption while cruising at 24 knots was impressively economical. Only one one other class of European battleship had greater range than TP, perhaps Vanguard. Of couse there will be re-fueling at sea planned for such a fanciful mission.
after her fanciful raid in NYC
Of course this senario is a little out there and unrealistic. That's why its in the hypothetical section.

What I find that is more fanciful, is the idea of NM easily over matching TP.
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: Tirpitz shelling New York

Post by yellowtail3 » Thu May 03, 2012 8:46 pm

Dave Saxton wrote: What I find that is more fanciful, is the idea of NM easily over matching TP.
I do not think it would 'easily overmatch' but a close look at post-1933 NM indicates it would likely be a very close run thing. Apart from speed, the NM is a more dangerous opponent than Hood! With vastly better armor, more modern FC gear, and comparable armament. Of course T is faster than NM, but if they fight that won't matter, and in a shoot out with TP, a NM is very dangerous. In armament, the two are pretty equal.. NM has Half again as many guns & a Heavier broadside, newly-designed 1500 pound shells with good penetration (somewhat better than brit 14" and 15"guns) esp. against decks waaaay out. NM has very good armor that had been further improved on decks, updated FC gear, and a crew with a lot time time at sea than anyone on Tirpitz. NM might be 'old' but has been modernized.. The 1930s rebuilds were very good, in my view. Again... Tirpitz smart course is 180 away at full throttle, and pray she can find a tanker not yet skuppered by RN... .
Last edited by yellowtail3 on Thu May 03, 2012 9:22 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Shift Colors... underway.

yellowtail3
Senior Member
Posts: 408
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 5:50 pm
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: Tirpitz shelling New York

Post by yellowtail3 » Thu May 03, 2012 9:07 pm

Just to be clear... I understand that TP is a much bigger ship, better subdivided, welded, definitely faster... Clearly superior there... But when it comes to guns and armor and FC equipment, no big advantage over the older but much-updated NM... In an encounter with one of the New Mexicos Tirpitz biggest advantage would be her speed that would enab
E her to flee, don't you think?
Shift Colors... underway.

User avatar
Dave Saxton
Supporter
Posts: 3093
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Rocky Mountains USA

Re: Tirpitz shelling New York

Post by Dave Saxton » Thu May 03, 2012 9:38 pm

But when it comes to guns and armor and FC equipment, no big advantage over the older but much-updated NM...
I disagree. TP holds some significant advantages in those three areas, especially in 1942.
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: Tirpitz shelling New York

Post by yellowtail3 » Thu May 03, 2012 9:54 pm

Dave Saxton wrote:
But when it comes to guns and armor and FC equipment, no big advantage over the older but much-updated NM...
I disagree. TP holds some significant advantages in those three areas, especially in 1942.
How so?
Shift Colors... underway.

Post Reply